110
cal school of Roscher and Leslie, on the other the mathematical,deductive, or so-called Austrian school of Jevons, Menger andWalras , while the “orthodox” economists the legitimate successorsof Adam Smith , Ricardo and Mill constitute the central body fromwhich both have split. This cleavage is, however, largely a divisionof the field of research rather than opposed theories or methods onthe same field.
The mathematical economics apparently has its warmest adherentsin Austria, Italy and Denmark . France occupies the next position,while England, America and Germany have their individual enthu-siasts but are still restrained largely by classic traditions. Prof.Pantaleoni thinks “the most active movement in Italian pol.econ. is that of the new school styled rather inexactly the “ Aus-trian,”* while Graziani says that the utility theory of value “ seemsto close the evolutionary cycle of Italian thought.”*
In England , Prof. Edgeworth, noted for his enthusiasm on mathe-matical economics, has recently been elected to the chair of pol.econ. at Oxford, while Prof. Marshall is carrying forward the samemovement at Cambridge.
There has been a great increase in mathematico-economic litera-ture since 1871. JuBt two decades have passed by since Jevons ’epoch-making books appeared. Of the mathematico-economicwritingsf appearing in this period which here come to my notice,the number in the first decade was 30, representing 12 writers,while in the second decade it was 66, representing 23 writers. Fromall apparent evidence the mathematical method has come to stay.
§6.
We can see why this is so if we glance at the work which themathematical method has already accomplished. It is perhaps fairto credit the idea of marginal utility to mathematical method. Thisidea had five independent origins with Dupuit, Gossen, Jevons ,Menger, and Walras. All except Menger presented this idea andpresumably attained it by mathematical methods. No idea has beenmore fruitful in the history of the science. This one achievementis a sufficient vindication of the mathematical method.
* Article on Ecbnomics in Italy , by Prof. Ugo Rabberio, Pol. Sci. Quart., Sept.,1891, pp. 439-473.
f I have not even included here Menger, BOhm-Bawerk and other writers of theAustrian school, who in spite of a mathematical tone have omitted to use math-ematical symbols.