It is to be regretted that but little is known in England and America of the writings of the recent Italian economists.LuigiCossa's Guida ，which was translated at the suggestion of Jevons，(8)has given us some notion of the character andimportance of their labours.The urgency of questions of finance in Italy since its political renascence has turned theirresearches for the most part into practical channels，and they have produced numerous monographs on statistical andadministrative questions.But they have also dealt ably with the general doctrines of the science.Cossa pronounces AngeloMessedaglia (b.1820)，professor at Padna，to be the foremost of the Italian economists of his time；he has written on publicloans (1850)and on population (i858)，and is regarded as a master of the subjects of money and credit.His pupil FedeleLampertico (b.1833)is author of many writings，among which the most systematic and complete is his Economia dei popolie degli stati (18741884).Marco Miughetti (18181886)，distinguished as a minister，was author，besides other writings，of Economza pubblica e le sue attinenze colla morale e col diritto (1859).Luigi Luzzatti，also known as an able administrator，has by several publications sought to prepare the way for reforms.The Sicilians Vito Cusumano and Giuseppe Ricca Salernohave produced excellent works：the former on the history of political economy in the Middle Ages (1876)，and on theeconomic schools of Germany in their relation to the social question (1875)；the latter on the theories of capital，wages，andpublic loans (187789).G.Toniolo，E.Nazzani，(9)and A.Loria have also ably discussed the theories of rent and profit，aswell as some of the most important practical questions of the day.Cossa，to whom we are indebted for most of theseparticulars，is himself author of several works which have established for him a high reputation，as his Scienza delle Finanze (1875；4th ed.，1887)，and his Primi Elementi di Economia Politica (1875；8th ed.，1888)，which latter has been translatedinto several European languages.
Of greater interest than such an imperfect catalogue of writers is the fact of the appearance in Italy of the economic dualismto which we have referred as characterising our time.There also the two schoolsthe old or so-called orthodox and the newor historicalwith their respective modified forms，are found face to face.Cossa tells us that the instructors of the youngereconomists in northern Italy were publicly denounced in 1874as Germanists，socialists，and corrupters of the Italian youth.
In reply to this charge Luzzatti，Lampertico，and Scialoja convoked in Milan the first congress of economists (1875)withthe object of proclaiming their resistance to the idea which was sought to be imposed on them "that the science was bornand died with Adam Smith and his commentators."M.?mile de Laveleye's interesting Lettres d'Italie (187879)throw lighton the state of economic studies in that country in still more recent years.Minghetti，presiding at the banquet at which M.deLaveleye was entertained by his Italian brethren，spoke of the"two tendencies "which had manifested themselves，andimplied his own inclination to the new views.Carlo Ferraris，a pupil of Wagner，follows the same direction.Formalexpositions and defences of the historical method have been produced by R.Schiattarella (Del metodo in Economia Sociale ，1875)and S.Cognetti de Martiis (Delle attinenze tra l'Economia Sociale e la Storia ，1865).A large measure of acceptancehas also been given to the historical method in learned and judicious monographs by Ricca Salerno (see especially his essay Del metodo in Econ.Pot .，1878).Luzzatti and Forti for some time edited a periodical，the Giornale degli Economisti ，whichwas the organ of the new school，but which，when Cossa wrote，had ceased to appear.Cossa himself，whilst refusing hisadhesion to this school on the ground that it reduces political economy to a mere narrative of facts，an observation which，we must be permitted to say，betrays an entire misconception of its true principles，admits that it has been most useful inseveral ways，and especially as having given the signal for a salutary，though，as he thinks，an excessive，reaction against thedoctrinaire exaggerations of the older theorists.
FRANCE
In France the historical school has not made so strong an impression，partly，no doubt，because the extreme doctrines of theRicardian system never obtained much hold there.It was by his recognition of its ******* from those exaggerations thatJevons was led to declare that"the truth is with the French school，"whilst he pronounced our English economists to havebeen "living in a fool's paradise."National prejudice may also have contributed to the result referred to，the ordinaryFrenchman being at present disposed to ask whether any good thing can come out of Germany.But，as we have shown，thephilosophic doctrines on which the whole proceeding of the historical school is founded were first enunciated by a greatFrench thinker，whose splendid services most of his fellow-countrymen seem，as yet，very inadequately to appreciate.
Perhaps another determining cause is to be looked for in official influences，which in France，by their action on the highereducation，impede the free movement of independent conviction，as was seen notably in the temporary éclat they gave on thewider philosophic stage to the shallow eclecticism of Cousin.The tendency to the historical point of view has appeared inFrance，as elsewhere；but it has shown itself not so much in modifying general doctrine as in leading to a more careful studyof the economic opinions and institutions of the past.
