No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Was John Wesley A Political Economist?
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 July 2009
Extract
In 1772 John Wesley wrote a letter to Lloyd's Evening Post which was reprinted in a slightly revised form the following year under the title, Thoughts on the Present Scarcity of Provisions.1 Although intended by Wesley to be an essay exposing the evils of what Thorstein Veblen would later refer to as “conspicuous consumption,” it has been reprinted and cited during the present century primarily as a temperance tract.2 As intended or as adapted it makes for interesting reading but is far more fascinating as a testament of Wesley's economic theories. In terms of length and concern the pamphlet represents, as Wesley's biographer Francis J. McConnell observed “as nearly as anything a statement of his economic views.”3 Undoubtedly it does represent Wesley's most mature (he was in his sixty-ninth year when it was published) and deliberate attempt to express himself in the area of political economics. What does it reveal? Was he a profound theorist? Or did he follow slavishly the current philosophy? In short, was John Wesley a political economist?
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © American Society of Church History 1964
References
1. Printed by B. Hawes, in Lamb Street, London, in 1773. It also appeared in Leeds Mercury, December 29, 1772.
2. See the Christian Advocate (March 18, 1918) and the tract printed by TernPress, 100 Maryland Ave., Washington D.C.
3. McConnell, Francis J., John Wesley (New York, 1939), 250.Google Scholar
4. Ibid.
5. It can hardly be said that Wesley was unfamiliar with mercantile thought. For instance, we know that Mandeville's Fable of the Bees was read by him and the atmosphere of the business community was so permeated with mercantile assumptions that he must have been aware of them. On occasion he used this knowledge. His letter to the Mayor and Corporation of Bristol, all men of business, critical of a new playhouse used sound mercantile reasoning which they as merchants would appreciate. See MacArthur, Kathleen Walker, The Economic Ethics of John Wesley (New York, 1936), 57, 84.Google Scholar
6. McConnell, , John Wesley, 250.Google Scholar
7. Fortrey, Samuel, England's Interest and Improvement (London, 1673)Google Scholar in McCulloch, J. B., Early English Tracts on Commerce, 228Google Scholar; and Postlethwayt, Malachy, Great Britain's Commercial Interest Explained and Improved (London, 1759)Google Scholar, passim.
8. Manley, Thomas, Usury at Six Percent. Examined (London, 1669)Google Scholar, Preface.
9. Quoted by Buck, Philip W., The Politics of Mercantilism (New York, 1942), 54.Google Scholar In his journal Wesley records with disgust a debate he had with a person holding percisely these views. “I had a conversation with an ingenious man who proved to a demonstration that it was the duty of every man that could be ‘clothed in purple and fine linen,’ and to ‘fare sumptuously every day;’ and that he would do abundantly more good hereby than he could do by ‘feeding the hungry and clothing the naked.’ Oh the depth of human understanding! What may not a man believe if he will?” Cyrnock, Nehemia, ed., The Journal of the Rev. John Wesley. A.M., 7 vols. (London 1909), V, 196.Google Scholar
10. Wesley, , Thoughts on the Present Scarcity, 13–14.Google Scholar
11. Professor Buck lists a full page of authors who advocated sumptuary legislation, largely because of the bad example set. Buck, , The Politics of Mercantilism, 214–215.Google Scholar
12. See, among others, Acts passed by the General Assembly of South Carolina, 1700–1735 (MSS., Historical Commission of South Carolina, Columbia), Act of 1711; Acts Passed by the General Assembly in South Carolina (Charles-Town, Printed by PeterTimothy, 1736-1762), 1751, 26Google Scholar; 1753, 11; 1762, 3; Hening, W. W., ed., The Statutes at Large: Being a Collection of all the Laws of Virginia, 13 vols. (Richmond, 1819-1823), III, 395, IV, 76, 428Google Scholar; V, 171; Bacon, Thomas, ed., Laws of Maryland at Large (Annapolis, 1765), VI, 76Google Scholar; and Candler, Allen Daniel, ed., Colonial Records of Georgia, 25 vols. (Atlanta, 1904-1915), XVIII, 218.Google Scholar
13. Wesley, , Thoughts on The Present Scarcity, 15.Google Scholar
14. Ibid., 21.
15. Smith, Adam, An Inquiry Into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (Modern Library Edition, 1937), 18.Google Scholar
16. Ibid., 76.
17. For an interesting and succinct discussion of this principle see Heilbroner, Robert L., The Worldly Philosophers (New York, 1961), 42.Google Scholar
18. Smith, , The Wealth of Nations, 149.Google Scholar
19. Wesley, , Thoughts on the Present Scarcity, 4–5.Google Scholar
20. For the impact of these doctrines on the colonies see the author's article “The Influence of Mercantilism on Social Attitudes in the South, 1700- 1763,” Journal of the History of Ideas, 10–12., 1959, 577–586.Google Scholar
21. Heilbroner, , The Worldly Philosophers, 54.Google Scholar
22. For instance, Wesley preached that “we cannot, consistently with brotherly love, sell our goods below the market prices; we cannot study to ruin our neighbour's trade in order to advance our own …. None can gain by swallowing up his neighbour's substance without gaining the damnation of Hell.” Quoted by Wearmouth, Robert F., Methodism and the Working-Class Movements of England, 1800–1850 (London, 1937, 329.)Google Scholar Wesley used the term “real value” in the same sense as “just price.” “Suppose you were engaged in trade: do you demand, do you receive, no more than real value of what you sell? …. If you do, why does not your heart condemn you?” Wesley, John, Sermons on Several Occasions, Ed. Jackson, Thomas (Loudon, 1823), I, 229.Google Scholar
23. MacArthur, , The Economic Ethics of John Wesley, 123, 139.Google Scholar
24. Ibid. 147.
25. Wesley, , Thoughts on the Present Scarcity, 21–22.Google Scholar