Mill’S Affirmation of the Classical Wage Fund Doctrine

Mark Donoghue

Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 1997, vol. 44, issue 1, 82-99

Abstract: Commentaries on Mill's1 recantation have variously and loosely interpreted his retraction within an institutional context (Kurer, 1993), as a tract on policy reform (Schwartz, 1972, esp. pp. 68–69, 90–101; West and Hafer, 1978, 1981), as a calculated political act (Forget, 1992), as part of a scientific research programme (Vint, 1994, esp. pp. 1–7, 212–248), or as broadly revisionist (Hollander, 1968a, 1984, 1985, pp. 262–263, 409–417; Ekelund, 1976, 1985; Ekelund and Kordmeier, 1981; Negishi, 1985a, 1985b). Although these writers differ on many points of detail, they all agree that Mill explicitly and unconditionally abandoned the wage fund doctrine. What is striking here is that the ‘recantation interpretation’ has gone entirely unchallenged by historians of economics. In this paper we challenge received opinion on this point and argue that Mill in fact affirmed the doctrine in his Fortnightly Review article.

Date: 1997
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9485.00046

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:scotjp:v:44:y:1997:i:1:p:82-99

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=0036-9292

Access Statistics for this article

Scottish Journal of Political Economy is currently edited by Tim Barmby, Andrew Hughes-Hallett and Campbell Leith

More articles in Scottish Journal of Political Economy from Scottish Economic Society Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().