We cannot do more than refer to the essay on taxes，in which，amongst other things，he repudiates the impt unique of thephysiocrats，and to that on public credit，in which he criticises the "new paradox that public encumbrances are of themselvesadvantageous，independent of the necessity of contracting them，"and objects，perhaps too absolutely，to the modernexpedient of raising the money required for national enterprises by way of loan，and so shifting our burdens upon theshoulders of posterity.
The characteristics of Hume，which are most important in the history of economic investigation，are (1)his practice ofbringing economic facts into connection with all the weighty interests of social and political life，and (2)his tendency tointroduce the historical spirit into the study of those facts.He admirably illustrates the mutual action of the several branchesof industry，and the influences of progress in the arts of production and in commerce on general civilisation，exhibits thestriking contrasts of the ancient and modern system of life (see especially the essay On the Populousness of AncientNations )，and considers almost every phenomenon which comes under discussion in its relations to the contemporary stageof social development.It cannot be doubted that Hume exercised a most important influence on Adam Smith，who in the Wealth of Nations (20)calls him "by far the most illustrious philosopher and historian of the present age，"and who esteemedhis character so highly that，after a friendship of many years had been terminated by Hume's decease，he declared him tohave "approached as nearly to the ideal of a perfectly wise and virtuous man as perhaps the nature of human frailty willpermit."
Josiah Tucker，dean of Gloucester (d.1799)，holds a distinguished place among the immediate predecessors of Smith.Mostof his numerous productions had direct reference to contemporary questions，and，though marked by much sagacity andpenetration，are deficient in permanent interest.In some of these he urged the impolicy of restrictions on the trade of Ireland，advocated a union of that country with England，and recommended the recognition of the independence of the United Statesof America.The most important of his general economic views are those relating to international commerce.He is an ardentsupporter of free-trade doctrines，which he bases on the principles that there is between nations no necessary antagonism，but rather a harmony，of interests，and that their several local advantages and different aptitudes naturally prompt them toexchange.He had not，however，got quite clear of mercantilism，and favoured bounties on exported manufactures and theencouragement of population by a tax on celibacy.Dupont，and after him Blanqui，represent Tucker as a follower of thephysiocrats，but there seems to be no ground for this opinion except his agreement with them on the subject of the freedomof trade.Turgot translated into French (1755)，under the title of Questions Importantes sur le Commerce ，a tract by Tuckeron The Expediency of a Law for the Naturalisation of Foreign Protestants .
In 1767was published Sir James Steuart's Inquiry into the Principals of Political Economy.This was one of the mostunfortunate of books.It was the most complete and systematic survey of the science irom the point of view of moderatemercantilism which had appeared in England.Steuart was a man of no ordinary abilities，and had prepared himself for histask by long and serious study.But the time for the mercantile doctrines was past，and the system of natural liberty was inpossession of an intellectual ascendency which foreshadowed its political triumph.Nine years later the Wealth of Nations was given to the world，a work as superior to Steuart's in attractiveness of style as in scientific soundness.Thus the latterwas predestined to fail，and in fact never exercised any considerable theoretic or practical influence.Smith never quotes ormentions it；being acquainted with Steuart，whose conversation he said was better than his book，he probably wished to keepclear of controversy with him.(21)The German economists have examined Steuart's treatise more carefully than Englishwriters have commonly done；and they recognise its high merits，especially in relation to the theory of value and the subjectof population.They have also pointed out that，in the spirit of the best recent research，he has dwelt on the special characterswhich distinguish the economies proper to different nations and different grades in social progress.
Coming now to the great name of Adam Smith (1723-1790)，it is of the highest importance that we should rightlyunderstand his position and justly estimate his claims.It is plainly contrary to fact to represent him，as some have done，asthe creator of political economy.The subject of social wealth had always in some degree，and increasingly in recent times，engaged the attention of philosophic minds.The study had even indisputably assumed a systematic character，and，frombeing an assemblage of fragmentary disquisitions on particular questions of national interest，had taken the form，notably inTurgot's Réflexions ，of an organised body of doctrine.The truth is，that Smith took up the science when it was alreadyconsiderably advanced；and it was this very circumstance which enabled him，by the production of a classical treatise，torender most of his predecessors obsolete.But，whilst all the economic labours of the preceding centuries prepared the wayfor him，they did not anticipate his work.His appearance at an earlier stage，or without those previous labours，would beinconceivable；but he built，on the foundation which had been laid by others，much of his own that was precious andenduring.
