[171] Professor Clark seems to desire to exclude all phases of social life except the "pure economic," from his static conception, as indicated by the footnote which follows, taken from page 76 of his _Distribution of Wealth_: "The statement made in the foregoing chapters that a static state excludes true entrepreneurs' profits does not deny that a legal monopoly might secure to an entrepreneur a profit that would be as permanent as the law that should create it--and that, too, in a social condition which, at first glance, might appear to be static. The agents, labor and capital, would be prevented from moving into the favored industry, though economic forces, if they had been left unhindered, would have caused them to move to it. This condition, however, is not a true static state, as it has here been defined. Such a genuine static state has been likened to that of a body of tranquil water, which is held motionless solely by an equilibrium of forces. It is not frozen into fixity; but as each particle is impelled in all directions by the same amounts of force, it retains a fixed position. There is a _perfect fluidity, but no flow_; and in like manner the industrial groups are in a truly static state when the industrial agents, labor and capital, show _a perfect mobility, but no motion_. A legal monopoly destroys at a certain point this mobility [so would a law forbidding the manufacture of, say, opium or liquor, or any law or moral force that prevents the individual's using his labor and capital in the manner most advantageous to himself regardless of public consequences], and is to be treated as an element of obstruction or of friction that is so powerful as not merely to retard a movement that an economic force, if unhindered, would cause, but to prevent the movement altogether." This would seem to leave economic forces working _in vacuo_ in Professor Clark's static state--if "unhindered" is to be taken literally. It is probably a juster interpretation, however, to hold that Professor Clark has in mind a constant legal situation, in which absolutely free competition is assured by law. But even in his scheme for an economic dynamics, there is no place for legal or ethical changes. There are five general sets of dynamic changes which Professor Clark mentions, whose operation is to constitute the subject matter of economic dynamics. They are (_Essentials_, p. 131, and _Distribution_, pp. 56 _et seq._): (1) population increases; (2) capital increases; (3) methods of production change; (4) new modes of organizing industry come into vogue; (5) the wants of men change and multiply. These five categories are all, primarily, at least, economic in character. While legal and ethical changes would doubtless influence them, they certainly cannot comprehend the full influence of these legal and ethical changes, especially those affecting the ranking of men, and the distribution of wealth. There seems to be a marked difference between