_ 124 MacCulloch_ remarks, that there is an essential difference between the physical and the moral and political sciences in this, that the principles of the former apply in all cases, those of the latter, only in the greater number of cases—a thought very ably developed by _Knies_, loc. cit., _passim_. If, with _Newmarch_, (London Statistical Journal, 1861, p. 460 seq.), we could grant, that there is no “law,” except where it is possible to predict each individual occurrence under it, there would be no such thing even as the “laws” of the probability of life. The word “element,” also, means something very different in Political Economy from what it does in chemistry: a combination which might be broken up, but which that science leaves it to other sciences to do. The “element” of Political Economy is Man. Compare _Pickford_, Einleitung in die politische Œk., 1860, 17. 125 It is in this sense that _Aristotle_ (Polit., I, p. 1, 9 Schn.) says: φανερὸν, ὅτι τῶν φύσει ἡ πόλις ἐστὶ, καὶ ὅτι ἄνθρωπος φύσει πολιτικὸν ζῶον. According to _L. Stein, Lehrbuch der Volkswirthschaft_, 1858, 33, the political economy of a people begins at the point where the overplus of individuals begins. 126 Compare _K. L. von Haller_, Restauration der Staatswissenchaft, I, p. 446 ff. 127 As _Sallust_ characterizes the political apogee of the Romans: _Optimis moribus et maxima concordia egit populus Romanus inter secundum atque postremum bellum Carthaginiense._ See _Augustin_ (Civ. Dei II, 18). _Puchta_ (Institutionen, I, f. 83), with a great deal of good sense, distinguishes in every people their individual character from that which they share in common with all mankind. The latter exists among savage nations, only as a germ buried under the overpowering weight of that which is special to them. The period of the perfect equilibrium of both elements is coincident with that of a people’s real culture. In the further course of development, the latter, more general element becomes gradually over-powerful, destroys the individual, and thus dissolves nationality. 128 Thus formulated, the principles of the two great parties, evidently, no more contradict one another than their ordinary watchwords, “freedom” and “order,” are in contrast with one another. Hence all the great statesmen of the best periods of history have adopted the middle course recommended by Aristotle. 129 See _Lotze_, Allgemeine Pathologie, 1842. _Ruete_, Lehrbuch der allgemeinen Therapie, 1852. These analogies, obviously, should not be pushed too far. One of the most essential differences between the two consists in this, that in the diseases of the body politic, physicians and nurses are themselves part of the diseased organism.