something for which he can find no proper place in his political ideal. Regarding wealth as an instrument to life, and therefore as a means and not as an end, Aristotle rejects the moneymaking life as one that no rational man would choose (Eth. Nic. I. 5, § 8, ó de xpημationsS [sc. Bios], Blaubs Tis éσT, "The money-making life is" either "unnatural" or rather "chosen only under compulsion," ""as a mere necessary -a passage of which the mistranslation, "The money-maker is a violent person," determined the position of the usurers in Dante's Inferno, canto xi.) But is Aristotle quite consistent in holding, as he does, that the city state is "prior | by nature," and so higher in type, than the village community or patriarchal family, and yet condemning as unnatural all the more complex economic conditions of city civilisation? His economic views are really dependent on the ethical principle that conduct (pâğis), and not the production of commodities (Toinois), is the end for man. This and the prejudices of a slaveholding society prevented him, perhaps, from sufficiently understanding the economic structure even of the very society in which he was living.

To return to the original question, his answer is that only the natural kind of χρηματιστική is a part of household management. The other kind is subordinate or subservient (inρETKÝ, Pol. I. 10, § 3); and, because concerned with mere means and instruments of living, both kinds are to be pursued only to a limited degree. Thus those are wrong who identify household management with amassing wealth, and statesmanship with finance.

While thus laying the foundations of a special science of wealth, Aristotle never treats the subject apart from ethical and political considerations. In Eth. Nic. V. 5, he seems to consider that the value of commodities is, in some way, determined by the value of the producers. Fair exchange is reciprocal action regulated by proportion (τὸ ἀντιπεπονθός κατ' draλoylar), e.g. as the farmer to the shoemaker, so must be the quantity of shoes that the farmer receives to the quantity of corn that the shoemaker receives. Money, as already said, makes commensurability and so equalisation possible between such incommensurable quantities. We may perhaps make his idea intelligible to ourselves by thinking of the amounts to be given in exchange as in the inverse ratio to the value of an hour's labour of each producer.

Aristotle was fully alive to the close relation between social or political institutions and economic conditions. In Pol. I. 8, he points out that, just as the food of animals determines their habits as gregarious or solitary, etc., so are men's lives different in the pastoral, the hunting and fishing, and the agricultural stage (or in various combinations of these). The pastoral is here placed first, not as being the rudest, but as

55

that which leaves most leisure. And so in Pol. VI. (VII. in the changed order of St. Hilaire, etc.) 4, when grouping the different types of democracy according to economic conditions, he considers a pastoral democracy less stable than an agricultural, because there is more leisure for political interests; while, again, an industrial population, living in a city, develops the most extreme form of democracy.

COLONIES are referred to as a remedy for overpopulation (VI. 5, § 9). The nature of a MONOPOLY (with the use of this term) is illustrated in I. 11. In criticising Plato's COMMUNISM Aristotle uses the argument, often repeated since, that "the magic of property" is needed to ensure due care of anything. Not abolition of all private property, but equalisation of property among the free citizens, along with the maintenance of a nearly equal population, constitutes his own ideal state on its economic side (Pol. VII. IV. in order of St. Hilaire, etc.)

Most of Aristotle's economic discoveries may be said to have lain dormant, and to have required rediscovery in modern times. His influence, however, was directly exercised as one of the factors in the mediæval abhorrence of usury (cp. Ashley, English Economic History, I. pp. 145, 152. See CANON LAW; USURY).

[Newman, The Politics of Aristotle (Oxf. 1887), i. pp. 125-138; ii. pp. 165-208.-Jowett, The Politics of Aristotle (Oxf. 1885), vol. ii. pp. 24-37, especially p. 35, where will be found a convenient table of the various divisions of ктηTɩký, which we are permitted to reproduce here in English :The art of acquisition (KTηTIKη: but χρηματιστική is sometimes used in this wide sense). 1. Hunting (a) of wild beasts (b) of those who are "by nature slaves."

2. XpημаTIOTIKń (c. 9, § 1), the science or art of wealth.

(1) Natural, including

(a) keeping of cattle, flocks, etc.

(b) agriculture (including cultivation of
fruit trees).

(c) bee-keeping.
(d) keeping of fish.
(e) keeping of birds.
(2) Intermediate,

(a) wood-cutting.
(b) mining.

56

the mode in which he conducted his economic investigations-a mode which later inquirers have scarcely been able to improve on-thus: "The Method I take to do this, is not yet very usual; for instead of using only comparative and superlative Words, and intellectual Arguments, I have taken the Course (as a Specimen of the Political Arithmetick I have long aimed at) to express myself in Terms of Number, Weight, or Measure; to use only Arguments of Sense, and to consider only such Causes, as have visible Foundations in Nature; leaving those that depend upon the mutable Minds, Opinions, Appetites, and Passions of particular Men, to the Consideration of others: Really professing myself as unable to speak satisfactorily upon those Grounds (if they may be called Grounds,) as to foretell the Cast of a Dye; to play well at Tennis, Billiards, or Bowls (without long Practice,) by Virtue of the most elaborate Conceptions that have ever been written De Projectilibus et Missilibus, or of the Angles of Incidence and Reflection" (p. 98).

Several Essays in Political Arithmetick, by Sir William Petty, London (Fourth edition), 1755.

ARITHMETIC, POLITICAL. HISTORY Of. The name of this mother science, both of statistics and of political economy in England can be traced to Sir William PETTY'S Discourse made before the Royal Society the 26th of November 1674, Concerning the use of duplicate proportions in sundry important particulars, London, 1674 (the Epistle Dedicatory to His Grace William, Lord Duke of Newcastle). "There is," he says, "a political arithmetic and a geometrical justice to be yet further cultivated in the world; the errors and defects whereof neither wit, rhetoric, nor interest can more than palliate, never cure. For falsity, disproportion, and inconsistence cannot be rectified by any sermocinations, though made all of figurate and measured periods, pronounced in tune and cadence, through the most advantageous organs; much less by grandisonous or euphonical nonsence farded with formality; no more than vicious wines can be remedied with brandy and honey, or ill cookery with enormous proportions of spice and sugar: Nam Res nolunt malè administrari." Besides the founder of this new science other eminent British writers laboured on the subject of "political arithmetic," desiring to supply by its means solid arguments in favour of the economical superiority of the nation. They extended the field of investigation to the extent and productiveness of land and population, considering them to be the real sources of national riches. These computations could be no more than estimates of complex facts of political interest, starting from the most typical and calculable instances. Though Adam SMITH confesses not to have great faith in political arithmetic (Wealth of Nations, bk. iv. ch. v.), its conclusions have

often been affirmed by later investigations and its methods followed by modern statists.

This method is exemplified by the Natural and Political Observations mentioned in a following Index and made upon the Bills of Mortality, By John GRAUNT, citizen of London, With Reference to the Government, Religion, Trade, Growth, Ayer, Diseases, and the several changes of the said City. London, 1662. By an ingenious analysis of the bills of mortality (after 1603), Graunt constructed a rude statistical statement of births, deaths, and disease, the very beginnings of vital statistics.

Sir W. Petty used political arithmetic to inquire into the wealth of the nation, taking sometimes the annual consumption, sometimes the poll and other taxes as basis. His followers were Gregory KING (1696), whose name is connected with the laws of prices; Ch. DAVENANT (1656-1714), Erasmus PHILIPS (1725), A. HOOKE (1750), Mitchill (1767), Pulteney (1779), Arthur YOUNG in the second part of his Political Arithmetick (1779), the first being a treatise on agricultural politics (1774), and G. CHALMERS (1783, 1812). Decaying since Davenant, this branch of political arithmetic reached its end with the inquiries founded upon the new income tax [introduced in 1843]; H. BEEKE (1800); W. PLAYFAIR (1801, author of a Breviary showing on a principle entirely new the resources of every state and kingdom in Europe), London, 1801, and P. COLQUHOUN (1815), still professing the old method.

In France VAUBAN, Dixme Royale (1707), and later on QUESNAY and MIRABEAU (1760), LAVOISIER (1791), and LAGRANGE (1796) tried to calculate the production and consumption and revenue of their nation, relying on the doctrines known under the title of AGRICUL TURAL SYSTEMS (q.v.)

To the inquiries into the number of popu lation and its increase, about which numerous controversies had taken place (Hume v. Wallace, Temple v. Bell, Howlett v. Price, and at last Malthus v. Godwin), the census of 1801 put an end. The inquiries on the movement of population were continued and developed in the most remarkable manner by E. HALLEY, An Estimate of the Degrees of Mortality, 1693. He gave the first exact account of the chances of life and hints as to its application to insurances and annuities on lives. His followers in England were Derham (1713), De MOIVRE (1725), SHORT (1750), Simpson (1742), HODGSON (1747), Brakenridge (1755), PRICE (1771), HEYSHAM (1797);—see C. Walford, The Insurance Cyclopædia, vol. i., Annuities on Lives and Bills of Mortality. This branch of political arithmetic, concerning insurance calculations, has survived the others and is sometimes still called by its old name.

Following this line of inquiry, W. KERSSEBOOM (1777) in Holland, A. DEPARCIEUX (1746) in

France, Wargentin (1754-1767) in Sweden, inquired into the average probabilities of life. The most systematic of this series of writers is John Peter SÜSSMILCH (Göttliche Ordnung, 1741, 4th ed., 1775). Taking the regularity of the phenomena of mortality and conjugal fertility, as well as that of the rarest events of life for a proof of divine interference, his work became the forerunner of MALTHUS's theory of population as well as of QUETELET'S moral statistics.

It is besides worth notice that modern DEMOGRAPHY (q.v.) comprehends nearly the same domain of statistical inquiry which was originally cultivated by political arithmetic; it deals with the numerical apprehension of facts "concerning trade and government, others concerning the air, countries, seasons, fruitfulness, health, diseases, longevity, and the proportions between the sex, of ages of mankind" (John Graunt, Natural and Political Observations, 1662. The Epistle Dedicatory).

[See Davenant, Of the use of Political Arithmetic (1698); Works, vol. i. p. 128.-Melon, Essai politique sur le commerce, 2d. ed. 1736, ch. xxiv.-Egerton Brydges, Censura Literaria, 1805, vol. i. pp. 59-79.-Ingram, History of Political Economy, p. 51.-John, Geschichte der Statistik, pp. 155-273.-Meitzen, Geschichte, Theorie, und Technik der Statistik, pp. 15-181.J. B. Say, Cours complet, part ix. ch. iii.M'Culloch, Literature of Political Economy, pp. 211, 258, 271.-R. Giffen, The Growth of Capital, 1890.-Gabaglio, Storia e teoria generale della statistica, 1880,-H. Westergaard, Die Grundzüge der Theorie der Statistik, 1890, pp. 253-270, Farr, Vital Statistics, 1885.]

S. B.

or

ARITHMETICAL RATIO OR PROGRESSION. Three or more quantities are in arithmetical progression when they increase decrease by a common difference, e.g. 1, 4, 7, 10, where the common difference is 3; 2, 2, 3, 3, where it is; and 25, 21, 17, 13, where it is 4. MALTHUS introduced the term into political economy in comparing the possible increase of food with that of population. He thought that after a country was as fully peopled as Great Britain was in 1798, the addition which could be made in the course of any given period, such as twenty-five years, to the normal annual production of food would actually decrease as the annual production of food grew larger. But for the purpose of argument he was willing to suppose that instead of decreasing, the possible periodical addition might remain the same. Under this supposition, if the annual production of food were always increased as much as possible, it would be represented at the end of successive equal intervals of time by quantities in arithmetical progression, or, as Malthus put it, the production of food would increase in an arithmetical ratio. Population, on the other hand, Malthus described as having the capacity and tendency to increase in a GEOMETRICAL RATIO (q.v.)

57

money paid on initiation of a bargain to secure its fulfilment.

ARMED NEUTRALITY. The right of neutral states to trade with belligerents was one of the most important questions in the 18th century. According to the policy of the MERCANTILE SYSTEM every power tried to monopolise the trade with its own COLONIES. But in time of war such a monopoly was often rendered impossible, and a belligerent found it necessary to relax its restrictions in order to receive colonial produce in neutral ships. England, in its frequent wars with France, endeavoured to prevent this practice, and acted upon the oldestablished principle that "the goods of an enemy found on a neutral ship are liable to seizure." The maritime ascendency of England enabled it to exercise its right of search with an efficiency that was resented by the neutral powers, especially as ports were often declared to be blockaded when there was no sufficient force to close them. In 1780, when France and Spain were supporting the American colonies of Great Britain against the mother country, the northern states, headed by Russia, concluded the Armed Neutrality to protect their interests. The chief principles which they laid down were, that neutral vessels may carry all goods of belligerents which are not contraband of war, and that a BLOCKADE need not be respected unless there are a sufficient number of ships to enforce it. This league was extremely advantageous to the enemies of England, because it protected them from the complete interruption of their commerce which England was endeavouring to bring about. It was only gradually broken up by treaties between England and the various powers (see SEARCH, RIGHT OF).

In

In 1800, during the war with revolutionary France, the northern states concluded a second Armed Neutrality on the same lines as the league of 1780. England still refused to accept the principles thus laid down, but this time she was able to act with more energy than on the previous occasion. Copenhagen was bombarded and the Danish fleet seized. 1801 the death of the Czar Paul broke up the Armed Neutrality, and a convention at St. Petersburg fixed limits to the right of search and agreed that a blockade must be efficient to be respected. But the great questions at issue remained unsettled, and to this day the extent to which a belligerent is entitled to damage the trade of its enemy is a subject of discussion. [Wheaton, International Law.-Lecky, History of England in the 18th Century.—Alison, History of Europe.]

R. L.

ARMSTRONG, CLEMENT (an English writer

the social reformer, it is described as in itself standing neutral between competing social schemes. In other words, a sharp line of distinction is drawn between economic science, and the application of economic science to practice. A very different view is taken by the majority of continental economists, who, generally speaking, make little attempt to separate theoretical and practical problems. Adequately to treat these problems apart from one another is even maintained to be an impossibility, and hence it is denied that political economy can properly be regarded as a purely positive science. Its primary function, according to this view, is to direct conduct to given ends rather than merely to investigate facts of a given kind.

It has been further maintained that English economists are themselves inconsistent, and that, professing to construct a pure science of economics, they do in fact build up an economic art. It is pointed out, for instance, that nearly the whole of the last book of MILL'S political economy is concerned with the discussion of practical questions.

It would not be difficult to explain away this apparent inconsistency, so far as our leading economists are themselves concerned; but at the same time it cannot be maintained that the distinction which they profess to draw between political economy and its applications has ever been clearly grasped beyond what may be called the inner circle of their disciples. One consequence of this has been grave misconception as to the true meaning of many of the laws which they have formulated. They have often been understood to prescribe what ought to be, when their sole intention has been to determine what is. Partly to correct this error, and partly for other reasons, it has been proposed explicitly to recognise the twofold aspect of economic inquiry by definitely formulating an economic art as well as an economic science.

[See, in particular, Sidgwick, Principles of Political Economy, 1887, p. 395. The art is described by Dr. Sidgwick as consisting mainly of the theory of what ought to be done by government to improve production or distribution, and to provide for governmental expenditure.

The latter

A similar division of economic doctrine was indicated by Senior, Political Economy, Introduction, p. 2 et seq., ed. 1854, and the distinction is also put clearly by Professor Cossa. writer describes the art of political economy as studying economic phenomena with the immediate aim of providing safe rules for administration, or of directing economic institutions, so that they may conduce to the general welfare. Compare, further, Keynes' Scope and Method of Political Economy, ch. ii., note B.]

J. N. K.

ARTEL (Russian for "gang,") is used specially of the Russian associations of independent workmen undertaking a job in concert and dividing its gains equally. This primitive form of artél is still to be found (e.g. among the

59

fishermen of Archangel). But the peasants, at least in the less fertile districts, find greater security in working for a contractor; and the

gangs" so working have no co-operative feature, except occasionally the common purchase of provisions. In towns the artél is often simply a trade guild with mutual responsibility; thus that of bank porters is jointly responsible for its several members. Since the Emancipation, 1861, various local councils throughout Russia have tried to establish associations for production, with scant success. The workmen's own attempts have been more fortunate, especially in popular banks. But the new co-operative societies will not be a mere revival of the old artél. The industrial village of Struve & Co., engineers (founded 1885), is on the model of Pullman City, U.S. The communism of the sect called Douchobornians differs both from true co-operation and from the old artél (see BANKS, POPULAR; CO-OPERATION).

[Les Artèles et le Mouvement Co-opératif en Russie, W. Longuinine, (Paris, 1886).—Russia, Mackenzie Wallace, ch. vi. (1877).-Proprietà Capitalista, Loria (1889), vol. ii. pp. 436-7.-Political Science Quarterly (New York), March 1887,-Rabbeno, Le Società Co-operative, Part I. (Milan, 1889). See too the article by W. Stieda in the Jahrbücher für Nationalök. und Statist (Neue Folge), vi. pp. 192230. The Russian authorities include Isajeff,

Kalachoff, Nemiroff, Vreden, Scherbina, and Novoselsky.]

J. B.

ARTICLES OF APPRENTICESHIP. Written agreements by which the master promises to instruct, and the apprentice promises to learn and serve. The master frequently receives a premium, which must be set forth as the consideration of the agreement for the purpose of ascertaining the stamp duty. Seven years were formerly the minimum period of apprenticeship, but there is now no fixed period. The master is entitled to all the apprentice's earnings and has certain other rights under the contract notwithstanding the apprentice's infancy, but he cannot bring an action to enforce the covenants of an infant apprentice, and the apprentice may disaffirm the contract on attaining the age of twenty-one. The master's bankruptcy determines the contract. Disputes between masters and apprentices to the business of a workman may be brought before the justices, who may make an order directing the apprentice to perform his duties under the apprenticeship, or may rescind the instrument of APPRENTICESHIP (q.v.) (38 & 39 Vict. c. 90, §§ 5-7). E. s.

ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION contain the regulations concerning the constitution and management of joint-stock companies registered under the Companies Acts. The first schedule of the Companies Act 1862, Table A, contains a set of regulations which may be adopted wholly or in part, and which in the case of a company limited by shares are deemed to be adopted by the company, if the memorandum