Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-7drxs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-19T17:32:21.684Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Macune's Monopoly: Economic Law and the Legacy of Populism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 March 2014

Sidney A. Rothstein
Sidney A. Rothstein*
Affiliation:
University of Pennsylvania
*
sid.rothstein@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article argues that the Populist legacy is embodied by the constrained conception of democracy underlying the American state, which restricts popular sovereignty from the economic sphere. Charles Macune led the Farmers’ Alliance according to a robust conception of democracy that insisted on subordinating economic law to popular sovereignty. Macune's distinct economic thought marked a departure from previous antimonopoly movements, but his reliance on an inductive, empirical, institutionalist economic methodology was shared by the founders of the American Economic Association. Populism did not fail because it relied on outdated economic theory; it was defeated because it represented a coherent and credible threat to the established order. A successful campaign established the hegemony of the deductive method, which posited that manmade laws must serve the natural, universally valid laws of economics and that popular sovereignty must therefore be restrained from the economic realm. Without the means to conceive an alternative relationship between the state and economy, the path of twentieth-century American political development has been limited to those possibilities available under a constrained conception of democracy. This article articulates Macune's political strategy and highlights its underlying principles in order to present a more robust conception of democracy and illustrate the mechanisms by which it was defeated.

Type
Research Article
Information
Studies in American Political Development , Volume 28 , Issue 1 , April 2014 , pp. 80 - 106
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Rana, Aziz, The Two Faces of American Freedom (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2010), 176–77Google Scholar.

2. Ibid., 211.

3. McVey, Frank, “The Populist Movement,” Economic Studies 1, no. 3 (1896): 206 Google Scholar.

4. Moyen, Eric A., Frank L. McVey and the University of Kentucky: A Progressive President and the Modernization of a Southern University (Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky, 2011), 15 Google Scholar.

5. See, for instance, Bogue, Allan G., Money at Interest: Farm Mortgage on the Middle Border (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1955)Google Scholar; Mayhew, Anne, “A Reappraisal of the Causes of Farm Protest in the United States, 1870–1900,” The Journal of Economic History 32, no. 2 (June 1, 1972): 464–75Google Scholar; North, Douglass C., Growth and Welfare in the American Past: A New Economic History (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1966).Google Scholar

6. Watson, Thomas Edward, The Life and Speeches of Thos. E. Watson (Thos. E. Watson, 1908), 175Google Scholar, quoted in Woodward, C. Vann, Tom Watson: Agrarian Rebel (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1938), 333Google Scholar.

7. Macune, Farmers Alliance (Austin: Unpublished, Center for American History, University of Texas at Austin, 1920), 59Google Scholar.

8. Hofstadter, Richard, The Age of Reform (New York: Vintage, 1955), 108Google Scholar.

9. Ibid.

10. Hicks, John D., Populist Revolt: A History of the Farmers’ Alliance and the People's Party (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1931), 416Google Scholar.

11. Sanders, Elizabeth, Roots of Reform: Farmers, Workers, and the American State, 1877–1917 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999).Google Scholar

12. Prasad, Monica, The Land of Too Much: American Abundance and the Paradox of Poverty (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2012), 87–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

13. Ibid., 254.

14. Sanders, Roots of Reform, 1.

15. Skowronek, Stephen, Building a New American State: The Expansion of National Administrative Capacities, 1877–1920 (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1982), 253–54.Google Scholar

16. James, Scott C., Presidents, Parties, and the State: A Party System Perspective on Democratic Regulatory Choice, 1884–1936 (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 34Google Scholar.

17. Goodwyn, Lawrence, Democratic Promise: The Populist Movement in America (New York: Oxford University Press, 1976), 519Google Scholar.

18. Livingston, James, Origins of the Federal Reserve System: Money, Class, and Corporate Capitalism, 1890–1913 (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1989), 26CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Postel, Charles, The Populist Vision (New York: Oxford University Press, 2007), 280CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

19. Ferkiss, Victor C., “Populist Influences on American Fascism,” The Western Political Quarterly 10, no. 2 (June 1, 1957): 350–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Handlin, Oscar, “American Views of the Jew at the Opening of the Twentieth Century,” Publications of the American Jewish Historical Society (1951)Google Scholar.

20. Hofstadter, The Age of Reform, 5.

21. Pollack, Norman, The Populist Response to Industrial America: Midwestern Populist Thought (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1962), 12Google Scholar.

22. Palmer, Bruce, “Man Over Money”: The Southern Populist Critique of American Capitalism (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1980), xviii, 221Google Scholar; McMath, Robert C., Populist Vanguard: A History of the Southern Farmers’ Alliance (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1975), 157Google Scholar.

23. Goodwyn, Democratic Promise, xxiii; Postel, The Populist Vision, 22; Rana, The Two Faces of American Freedom, 177.

24. Postel, The Populist Vision, 5.

25. For a compelling refutation of this view, see Postel, The Populist Vision.

26. Formisano, Ronald P., For the People: American Populist Movements from the Revolution to the 1850s (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2008), 70Google Scholar.

27. Sellers, Charles, The Market Revolution: Jacksonian America, 1815–1846 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994), 136Google Scholar.

28. Hofstadter, Richard, “William Leggett, Spokesman of Jacksonian Democracy,” Political Science Quarterly 58, no. 4 (1943): 585 Google Scholar; Rifkin, Lester Harvey, “William Leggett: Journalist-Philosopher of Agrarian Democracy in New York,” New York History 32, no. 1 (1951): 45 Google Scholar; Wilentz, Sean, Chants Democratic: New York City and the Rise of the American Working Class, 1788–1850 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1984), 232Google Scholar.

29. Formisano, For the People, 72; Hofstadter, “William Leggett, Spokesman of Jacksonian Democracy,” 586.

30. Benson, Lee, The Concept of Jacksonian Democracy: New York As a Test Case (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1961), 92Google Scholar.

31. Wilentz, Chants Democratic, 220; Wallace, Michael, “Changing Concepts of Party in the United States: New York, 1815–1828,” The American Historical Review 74, no. 2 (December 1, 1968): 453–91Google Scholar; Hofstadter, Richard, The Idea of a Party System, the Rise of Legitimate Opposition in the United States, 1780–1840 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1969).Google Scholar

32. Howe, Daniel Walker, What Hath God Wrought: The Transformation of America, 1815–1848 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009), 376Google Scholar.

33. Thomas E. Skidmore, The Rights of Man to Property!: Being a Proposition to Make It Equal Among the Adults of the Present Generation, and to Provide for Its Equal Transmission to Every Individual of Each Succeeding Generation on Arriving at the Age of Maturity (Printed for the author by A. Ming, 1829); quoted in Sellers, The Market Revolution, 287.

34. Dorfman, Joseph, The Economic Mind in American Civilization, 1606–1865, vol. 2 (New York: Viking Press, 1946), 641–45Google Scholar; Wilentz, Chants Democratic, 189.

35. Working Man's Advocate, January 3, 1835; quoted in Hugins, Walter, Jacksonian Democracy and the Working Class (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1967), 149Google Scholar.

36. Ibid.

37. Formisano, For the People, 86; Gerring, John, “A Chapter in the History of American Party Ideology: The Nineteenth-Century Democratic Party (1828–1892),” Polity (1994): 729–68Google Scholar.

38. Wilentz, Chants Democratic, 235.

39. Benson, The Concept of Jacksonian Democracy, 95; Degler, Carl, “Locofocos: Urban ‘Agrarians,’” Journal of Economic History 16 (1956): 333 Google Scholar; Sellers, The Market Revolution, 352; Wilentz, Chants Democratic, 235.

40. Pessen, Edward, Most Uncommon Jacksonians, the Radical Leaders of the Early Labor Movement (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1967), 169–82Google Scholar; Wilentz, Chants Democratic, 235.

41. Quoted in Formisano, For the People, 143.

42. Degler, “Locofocos: Urban ‘Agrarians,’” 324; Dorfman, The Economic Mind in American Civilization, 1606–1865, vol. 2, 653.

43. Byrdsall, Fitzwilliam, The History of the Loco-Foco or Equal Rights Party (1842), 99, 98Google Scholar.

44. Plaindealer, December 19, 1837; in Leggett, William, Democratick Editorials: Essays in Jacksonian Political Economy, ed. White, Lawrence H. (Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Press, 1984), 100Google Scholar.

45. Ibid.

46. Ibid., 97; emphasis in original.

47. Plaindealer, May 13, 1837.

48. Leggett, Democratick Editorials, 381.

49. Leggett, William, A Collection of the Political Writings of William Leggett: Selected and Arranged with a Preface by Theodore Sedgwick, Jr, ed. Sedgwick, Theodore (Taylor & Dodd, 1840), 247Google Scholar.

50. “The law of free competition is the only one which can properly regulate either the size or the quality of bread, as it is the only one which regulates the commodities of other branches of traffick. It is the great natural law which makes the best possible adjustment, in all articles of trade, of the supply to the demand, and of the price to the supply.” Plaindealer, December 24, 1836.

51. Leggett, Democratick Editorials, 121.

52. Hammond, Bray, Sovereignty and an Empty Purse: Banks and Politics in the Civil War (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1970), 20Google Scholar.

53. Palmer, “Man Over Money,” 114.

54. Ibid., xvii, 114–115.

55. Hofstadter, The Age of Reform, 63–64.

56. Berk, Gerald, Alternative Tracks: The Constitution of American Industrial Order, 1865–1917 (Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997), 14Google Scholar.

57. Goebel, Thomas, “The Political Economy of American Populism from Jackson to the New Deal,” Studies in American Political Development 11, no. 1 (1997): 112 Google Scholar.

58. Goebel, “The Political Economy of American Populism,” 148.

59. James, Presidents, Parties, and the State, 30.

60. Ibid., 30–31.

61. Dunning, Nelson A., The Farmers’ Alliance History and Agricultural Digest (Washington, DC: Alliance, 1891), 40Google Scholar.

62. Postel, The Populist Vision, 119; Cleburne Demands (Cleburne, TX, August 6, 1886), in Dunning, The Farmers’ Alliance History and Agricultural Digest, 43.

63. Charles Macune, “Message of the Acting President” (Waco, TX, January 18, 1887), in Dunning, The Farmers’ Alliance History and Agricultural Digest, 49–50.

64. But see James, Presidents, Parties, and the State, 57. Populists may have misrepresented railroads’ actual pricing practices. Recognizing inconsistencies or misrepresentations in Populist thought should not, however, inhibit explicating what that thought was.

65. Goodwyn, Democratic Promise, 114–17.

66. National Economist 2 (January 11, 1890): 267.

67. Cleburne Demands, in Dunning, The Farmers’ Alliance History and Agricultural Digest, 42–43.

68. National Economist 1 (March 30, 1889): 17.

69. Charles Macune, “President's Address to the National Farmers’ Alliance” (Shreveport, LA, October 12, 1887), in Dunning, The Farmers’ Alliance History and Agricultural Digest, 50.

70. Dunning, The Farmers’ Alliance History and Agricultural Digest, 356.

71. Macune, “President's Address to the National Farmers’ Alliance,” in Dunning, The Farmers’ Alliance History and Agricultural Digest, 49.

72. Dunning, The Farmers’ Alliance History and Agricultural Digest, 357.

73. Ibid.

74. Charles Macune, “Address to the National Farmers’ Alliance” (St. Louis, MO, December 3, 1889), in Dunning, The Farmers’ Alliance History and Agricultural Digest, 110.

75. Postel, The Populist Vision, 16.

76. Macune, “President's Address to the National Farmers’ Alliance,” in Dunning, The Farmers’ Alliance History and Agricultural Digest, 72.

77. Dunning, The Farmers’ Alliance History and Agricultural Digest, 360.

78. Charles W. Macune, Testimony before House Committee on Agriculture, Fictitious Dealing in Agricultural Products, 52nd Congress (Washington, DC, 1892), 252.

79. Dunning, The Farmers’ Alliance History and Agricultural Digest, 360.

80. Postel, The Populist Vision, 123.

81. Smith, Ralph A., “‘Macuneism,’ or the Farmers of Texas in Business,” The Journal of Southern History 13, no. 2 (May 1947): 231–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

82. Dunning, The Farmers’ Alliance History and Agricultural Digest, 360.

83. Ibid., 362.

84. Ibid.

85. Postel, The Populist Vision, 123–24.

86. Southern Mercury, October 9, 1888, quoted in Postel, Populist Vision, 118.

87. Postel, Populist Vision, 121.

88. Congressional Record (CR), 51st Congress., 2nd Sess., 1889, 2561. (Hereafter CR, 51–2.)

89. CR, 51–2, 2558.

90. CR, 51–2, 2566.

91. National Economist 1 (April 6, 1889): 34.

92. Macune, Fictitious Dealing, 256.

93. National Economist 2 (February 8, 1890): 328.

94. Kellogg, Edward, Labor and Other Capital: The Rights of Each Secured and the Wrongs of Both Eradicated (New York: published by the author, 1849)Google Scholar; Destler, Chester, “The Influence of Edward Kellogg upon American Radicalism, 1865–96,” Journal of Political Economy 40, no. 3 (June 1, 1932): 338–65Google Scholar; Dorfman, , The Economic Mind in American Civilization, 1606–1865, 678–81Google Scholar; Goodwyn, Democratic Promise, 566–67.

95. Kellogg, Labor and Other Capital, xiii.

96. Ibid., xxxvii.

97. Ibid., xxix.

98. Ibid., 42.

99. Dorfman, The Economic Mind in American Civilization, 1606–1865, vol. 2, 679–80.

100. “Unjust distribution originates in wrong legislation. When monetary laws shall be made equitable, present labor will naturally receive a just proportion of present products, and capital will likewise receive a just reward for its use.” Kellogg, Labor and Other Capital, xxxi.

101. Macune, Fictitious Dealing in Agricultural Products, 252–53.

102. Report of the Committee on the Monetary System (St. Louis, MO, December 7, 1889), in Dunning, The Farmers’ Alliance History and Agricultural Digest, 126. The Committee's report may appear contradictory to modern eyes, given that they seem to argue that currency is both too rigid to account for farmers’ production cycles, yet flexible enough to allow manipulation by capitalists. Regardless of its accuracy, this was the justification given for the subtreasury system. But see, for instance, Bensel, Richard Franklin, Yankee Leviathan: The Origins of Central State Authority in America, 1859–1877 (Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 1991)Google Scholar; Hammond, Sovereignty and an Empty Purse; Unger, Irwin, The Greenback Era: A Social and Political History of American Finance 1865–1879 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1964)Google Scholar.

103. Rana, The Two Faces of American Freedom, 207.

104. Goodwyn, Democratic Promise, 80.

105. Charles Macune, “Address to the National Farmers’ Alliance” (St. Louis, MO, December 3, 1889), in National Economist 2 (December 14, 1889); 197; see also Hicks, John D., “The Sub-Treasury: A Forgotten Plan for the Relief of Agriculture,” The Mississippi Valley Historical Review 15, no. 3 (1928): 361–62Google Scholar.

106. Ibid., 356.

107. Report of the Committee on the Monetary System, in Dunning, The Farmers’ Alliance History and Agricultural Digest, 125.

108. National Economist 3 (May 24, 1890): 146.

109. Report of the Committee on the Monetary System, in Dunning, The Farmers’ Alliance History and Agricultural Digest, 127.

110. Ibid., 128.

111. Goodwyn, Democratic Promise, 568.

112. Substantial evidence suggests that the American state has always been thoroughly and broadly active. This, however, seems not to have dampened, but on the contrary, may have inspired, public arguments for laissez-faire. See Balogh, Brian, A Government Out of Sight: The Mystery of National Authority in Nineteenth-Century America (Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Bensel, Yankee Leviathan, esp. chap. 4; Carpenter, Daniel, The Forging of Bureaucratic Autonomy: Reputations, Networks, and Policy Innovation in Executive Agencies, 1862–1928. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2001)Google Scholar; and, particularly regarding financial policy, see Unger, The Greenback Era.

113. New York Times, March 10, 1890. Cited in National Economist 3 ( March 22, 1890): 1–2. See also Hicks, “The Sub-Treasury,” 366.

114. National Alliance 3 (May 24, 1890): 147.

115. National Economist 3 (March 22, 1890): 2.

116. Report of the Committee on the Monetary System, in Dunning, The Farmers’ Alliance History and Agricultural Digest, 130.

117. “An Abortive Moment,” New York Times, December 10, 1890, cited in Hicks, “The Sub-Treasury,” 366.

118. “An Abortive Moment,” cited in Hicks, “The Sub-Treasury,” 366.

119. McMath, Populist Vanguard, 110–13.

120. Hicks, “The Sub-Treasury,” 372; McMath, Populist Vanguard, 113.

121. Goodwyn, Democratic Promise, 564.

122. Fine, Sidney, Laissez Faire and the General-Welfare State, a Study of Conflict in American Thought, 1865–1901 (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1956), 14Google Scholar.

123. National Economist 1 (March 30, 1889): 18.

124. National Economist 1 (April 20, 1889): 67.

125. National Economist 1 (April 6, 1889): 42.

126. National Economist 1 (April 20, 1889): 66.

127. Armstrong, William M., E. L. Godkin: A Biography (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1978), 9Google Scholar.

128. Skowronek, Building a New American State, 45.

129. Quoted in Fine, Laissez Faire and the General-Welfare State, 5.

130. Ross, Dorothy, The Origins of American Social Science (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 80Google Scholar.

131. Godkin, E. L., “The Economic Man,” The North American Review 153, no. 419 (October 1, 1891): 494 Google Scholar.

132. Ibid.

133. Cohen, Nancy, The Reconstruction of American Liberalism, 1865–1914 (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 2002), 57Google Scholar.

134. E. L. Godkin, “The Difficulties of Economic Discussion,” The Nation, July 22, 1889, 66, cited in Cohen, The Reconstruction of American Liberalism, 1865–1914, 53.

135. E. L. Godkin, “The Future of Capital,” Nation, June 22, 1871, 381, emphasis in original. Cited in Cohen, The Reconstruction of American Liberalism, 1865–1914, 56.

136. Godkin, E. L., Problems of Modern Democracy: Political and Economic Essays (New York: Scribner, 1903), 87Google Scholar.

137. Godkin, E. L., Reflections and Comments, 1865–1895 (New York: C. Scribner's Sons, 1895), 234Google Scholar.

138. Godkin, Problems of Modern Democracy, 94–95.

139. Armstrong, E. L. Godkin, 160; Ross, The Origins of American Social Science, 61.

140. Ross, The Origins of American Social Science, 219.

141. Cohen, The Reconstruction of American Liberalism, 1865–1914, 154.

142. Because my focus is the group of individuals who advocated and articulated the doctrines of deductive economics, the term “Mugwump,” due to its diverse application, proves unhelpful here. Although Cohen's term, “liberal reformer,” picks out a neater group, “deductive economists” cuts no corners, but I must acknowledge considerable overlap with Cohen's “liberal reformers,” as well as Ross's “Mugwumps,” and Skowronek's “political mugwumps” and “economic mugwumps.” See Cohen, The Reconstruction of American Liberalism, 1865–1914, 11–16; Ross, The Origins of American Social Science, 61–71; Skowronek, Building a New American State, 133–34.

143. Fine, Laissez Faire and the General-Welfare State, 49.

144. Cohen, The Reconstruction of American Liberalism, 1865–1914, 12; Furner, Mary O., Advocacy and Objectivity: A Crisis in the Professionalization of American Social Science, 1865–1905 (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 1975), 40Google Scholar.

145. Furner, Advocacy and Objectivity, 60.

146. Cohen, The Reconstruction of American Liberalism, 1865–1914, 156.

147. Grimmer-Solem, Erik, The Rise of Historical Economics and Social Reform in Germany 1864–1894 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2003), 247Google Scholar.

148. Private correspondence between Ely and Seligman, noted by Dorfman, Joseph, “The Seligman Correspondence,” Political Science Quarterly 56 (1941): 281 Google Scholar, quoted in Rodgers, Daniel T., Atlantic Crossings: Social Politics in a Progressive Age (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1998), 102Google Scholar.

149. Ely, Richard T., “Report of the Organization of the American Economic Association,” Publications of the American Economic Association 1 (1886): 7 Google Scholar.

150. For the view that the opposition to laissez-faire was a personal crusade of Ely's, unshared by other members of the AEA, and that Ely inflated the popularity of that doctrine, see Haskell, Thomas L., The Emergence of Professional Social Science: The American Social Science Association and the Nineteenth-Century Crisis of Authority (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1997), 178–89Google Scholar.

151. Adams, Henry C., “Economics and Jurisprudence,” Science 8 (1886): 15 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

152. Hadley, Arthur T., “Economic Law and Methods,” Science 8 (1886): 46 Google Scholar.

153. Fine, Laissez Faire and the General-Welfare State, 73.

154. Adams, Henry C., “Another View of Economic Laws and Methods,” Science 8 (1886): 104 Google Scholar.

155. Ibid.

156. Ibid., 104–5.

157. Ross, The Origins of American Social Science, 113.

158. National Economist 3 (April 26, 1890): 90.

159. Adams, Henry C., “Relation of the State to Industrial Action,” Publications of the American Economic Association 1, no. 6 (January 1887): 528 Google Scholar.

160. Ibid.

161. Ibid., 513–14.

162. Hadley, Arthur T., “Private Monopolies and Public Rights,” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 1, no. 1 (October 1, 1886): 40–41, 37Google Scholar.

163. E. L. Godkin, “Political Economy in Germany,” Nation, November 7, 1872, 294.

164. Hadley, “Private Monopolies and Public Rights.”

165. Hadley, Arthur T., Railroad Transportation: Its History and Its Laws (New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1885), 256Google Scholar.

166. Ibid., 135.

167. Godkin's response to Edward F. Adams, “The Wisconsin Method of Railroad Reform: Correspondence,” Nation, August 20, 1874, 122, quoted in Cohen, The Reconstruction of American Liberalism, 1865–1914, 130.

168. Adams, “Relation of the State to Industrial Action,” 529.

169. Dorfman, Joseph, Economic Mind in American Civilization: 1865–1918, vol. 3 (New York: The Viking Press, 1949), 169Google Scholar.

170. Adams, “Relation of the State to Industrial Action,” 529.

171. Adams, “Economics and Jurisprudence,” 18.

172. Fine, Laissez Faire and the General-Welfare State, 302; Ross, The Origins of American Social Science, 99.

173. Cohen, The Reconstruction of American Liberalism, 1865–1914, 16.

174. E. L. Godkin, “The Granger Collapse,” Nation, January 27, 1876, 58,cited in Cohen, The Reconstruction of American Liberalism, 1865–1914, 132.

175. Cohen, The Reconstruction of American Liberalism, 1865–1914, 174; Fink, Leon, Progressive Intellectuals and the Dilemmas of Democratic Commitment (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1997), 58–59 Google Scholar.

176. Cohen, The Reconstruction of American Liberalism, 1865–1914, 168.

177. Ibid., 169; Ross, The Origins of American Social Science, 116–18.

178. Fink, Progressive Intellectuals and the Dilemmas of Democratic Commitment, 63; Furner, Advocacy and Objectivity, 152; Ross, The Origins of American Social Science, 116–23.

179. Cohen, The Reconstruction of American Liberalism, 1865–1914, 171–72; Fink, Progressive Intellectuals and the Dilemmas of Democratic Commitment, 62; Furner, Advocacy and Objectivity, 128; Rodgers, Atlantic Crossings, 104–5.

180. Fink, Progressive Intellectuals and the Dilemmas of Democratic Commitment, 65; Furner, Advocacy and Objectivity, chap. 8.

181. Rodgers, Atlantic Crossings, 105.

182. Godkin, “The Economic Man,” 502.

183. Furner, Advocacy and Objectivity, 161, 184–92; Ross, The Origins of American Social Science, 118.

184. Cohen, The Reconstruction of American Liberalism, 1865–1914, 182–83; Furner, Advocacy and Objectivity, 138, 127.

185. Adams, Henry C., The Science of Finance: An Investigation of Public Expenditures and Public Revenues (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1905), 13–14 Google Scholar.

186. Ibid., 35.

187. Grimmer-Solem, The Rise of Historical Economics and Social Reform in Germany 1864–1894, 106.

188. Adams, The Science of Finance, 35.

189. Ibid.

190. Seligman, Edwin R. A., “Adams's Science of Finance,” Political Science Quarterly 14, no. 1 (March 1, 1899): 133 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

191. Ibid., 137.

192. Ibid., 135.

193. Cohen, The Reconstruction of American Liberalism, 1865–1914, 158.

194. Seligman, “Adams's Science of Finance,” 134.

195. Stromquist, Shelton, Reinventing “The People”: The Progressive Movement, the Class Problem, and the Origins of Modern Liberalism (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2006), 23Google Scholar.

196. Furner, Advocacy and Objectivity, 265; Rodgers, Atlantic Crossings, 106.

197. Cohen, The Reconstruction of American Liberalism, 1865–1914, 176, 183. Due to space constraints, I do not address whether the other synthesis of the era, marginalism, embodies a similar capitulation to the deductive program, but one could reasonably be led to that conclusion. See Dorfman, Economic Mind in American Civilization: 1865–1918, vol. 3, 165–66, 191–92, 200–205; Furner, Advocacy and Objectivity, 184–92; Ross, The Origins of American Social Science, 118–22.

198. Cohen, The Reconstruction of American Liberalism, 1865–1914, 183.

199. Skowronek, Building a New American State, 161.

200. Hadley, Arthur T., “Relation between Economics and Politics,” Yale Law Journal 8, no. 4 (January 1898): 203–4Google Scholar.

201. Dorfman, The Economic Mind in American Civilization, 1606–1865, vol. 2, 263–64; Rana, The Two Faces of American Freedom.

202. Hadley, “Relation between Economics and Politics,” 206.

203. Furner, Advocacy and Objectivity, 273.

204. Rodgers, Atlantic Crossings, 109.

205. Skowronek, Building a New American State, 135–36.

206. Hadley, Railroad Transportation: Its History and Its Laws.

207. Adams, “Relation of the State to Industrial Action.”

208. Berk, Alternative Tracks, 153; Sanders, Roots of Reform, 195–97; Skowronek, Building a New American State, 160. For Adams's lasting influence on public economics, despite frustration with the ICC, see Dorfman, The Economic Mind in American Civilization, 1606–1865, vol. 2, 171–74.

209. For Hadley's influence, see Sklar, Martin, The Corporate Reconstruction of American Capitalism, 1890–1916: The Market, the Law, and Politics (Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 1988), 57–58 Google Scholar.

210. Berk, Alternative Tracks, 179.

211. Ibid., 13; Sklar, The Corporate Reconstruction of American Capitalism, 1890–1916, 33–34; Skowronek, Building a New American State, 135–36.

212. Berk, Alternative Tracks, 157.

213. Ibid., 165; Skowronek, Building a New American State, 268.

214. Skowronek, Building a New American State, 268.

215. Berk, Alternative Tracks, 157.

216. Ibid., 176.

217. This abstracted use of statistics can be contrasted to the German Historical School's use of statistics, which insisted on context and contingency. See Grimmer-Solem, The Rise of Historical Economics and Social Reform in Germany 1864–1894, 155.

218. Henderson, Gerard, “Railway Valuation and the Courts,” Harvard Law Review 33, no. 8 (June 1920): 1031–32Google Scholar, quoted in Berk, Alternative Tracks, 177.

219. Sanders, Roots of Reform, 208.

220. Berk, Alternative Tracks, 167.

221. Skowronek, Building a New American State, 249.

222. Prasad, The Land of Too Much, 188.

223. Skowronek, Building a New American State, 249.

224. Berk, Alternative Tracks, 180.

225. Berk, Gerald, Louis D. Brandeis and the Making of Regulated Competition, 1900–1932 (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2012)Google Scholar.

226. Ibid., 52.

227. Kolko, Gabriel, The Triumph of Conservatism: A Re-Interpretation of American History, 1900–1916 (New York: Free Press, 1977), 305Google Scholar.

228. Stromquist, Reinventing “The People.”

229. Smith, Rogers M., Civic Ideals: Conflicting Visions of Citizenship in U.S. History (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1999), 414Google Scholar.

230. Ibid.

231. Ross, Dorothy, The Origins of American Social Science (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 278Google Scholar.

232. Berk, Alternative Tracks, 4.

233. Stromquist, Reinventing “The People,” 23.

234. Livingston, James, Origins of the Federal Reserve System: Money, Class, and Corporate Capitalism, 1890–1913 (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1989), 206Google Scholar.

235. Ibid., 26.

236. Prasad, The Land of Too Much, 191, 194–95; Skowronek, Building a New American State, 14.

237. Blyth, Mark, Great Transformations: Economic Ideas and Institutional Change in the Twentieth Century (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 49–51, 90–95Google Scholar.