[10] It may be interesting to point out that the like identification of the categories of normality and right gives the dominant note of Mr. Spencer's ethical and social philosophy, and that later economists of the classical line are prone to be Spencerians. [11] "Normal value (called by Adam Smith and Ricardo 'natural value,' and by Mill 'necessary value,' but best expressed, it seems to me, by the term which I have used)." _Leading Principles_ (New York), p. 45. [12] _Leading Principles_, p. 45. [13] _Scope and Method of Political Economy_ (London, 1891), chaps. i and ii. [14] _Character and Logical Method_; _e.g._, Lecture II, especially pp. 53, 54, and 71. [15] _Scope and Method of Political Economy_, chap. iii, particularly p. 97. [16] "Interest" is, of course, here used in the sense which it has in modern psychological discussion. [17] _Scope and Method of Political Economy_, p. 46. [18] _Principles of Economics_, Vol. I, Book I, chap, vi, sect. 6, especially p. 105 (3d edition). [19] See, _e.g._, Professor Marshall's "Reply" to Professor Cunningham in the _Economic Journal_ for 1892, pp. 508-113. [20] This is well illustrated by what Professor Marshall says of the Ricardian law of rent in his "Reply," cited above. [21] See, _e.g._, Marshall, _Principles_, Book I, chap, vi, sect. 6, pp. 105-108. The like dispassionateness is visible in most other modern writers on theory; as, _e.g._, Clark, Cannan, and the Austrians. PROFESSOR CLARK'S ECONOMICS[1] For some time past economists have been looking with lively anticipation for such a comprehensive statement of Mr. Clark's doctrines as is now offered. The leading purpose of the present volume[2] is "to offer a brief and provisional statement of the more general laws of progress"; although it also comprises a more abridged restatement of the laws of "Economic Statics" already set forth in fuller form in his _Distribution of Wealth_. Though brief, this treatise is to be taken as systematically complete, as including in due correlation all the "essentials" of Mr. Clark's theoretical system. As such, its publication is an event of unusual interest and consequence. Mr. Clark's position among this generation of economists is a notable and commanding one. No serious student of economic theory will, or can afford to, forego a pretty full acquaintance with his development of doctrines. Nor will any such student avoid being greatly influenced by the position which Mr. Clark takes on any point of theory on which he may speak, and many look confidently to him for guidance where it is most needed. Very few of those interested in modern theory are under no obligations to him. He has, at the same time, in a singular degree the gift of engaging the affections as well as the attention of students in his field. Yet the critic is required to speak impersonally of Mr. Clark's work as a phase of current economic theory.