Carl Menger · 1898
Menger’s brief review assesses the first two parts of Johannes Conrad’s economics outline: Nationalökonomie (1896) and Volkswirthschaftspolitik (1897). Its central judgment is that Conrad’s teaching manual also offers scholars a valuable view of his intellectual approach.
Er hat durch diese Publication nicht nur seinen Hörern einen vortrefflichen Grundriss für seine Vorlesungen geboten, sondern auch seinen zahlreichen Verehrern in Gelehrtenkreisen eine überaus erfreuliche Ueberraschung bereitet.
English translation: By this publication he has not only offered his hearers an excellent outline for his lectures, but has also prepared an exceedingly gratifying surprise for his numerous admirers in scholarly circles.
Menger moves from pedagogical usefulness to method, praising Conrad’s impartial consideration of different sides of economic problems and his attention to contemporary practical questions. The review develops this assessment chiefly through the second part, where recent statistical material supports discussions of agriculture, forestry and mining, industry, trade, transport, insurance, population, and poor relief. Menger singles out agricultural policy as the field in which Conrad’s earlier research gives the exposition particular authority:
Dass die Ausführungen über die Ackerbaupolitik, ein Gebiet, auf dem die Wissenschaft dem Verf. die werthvollsten Forschungen und Anregungen verdankt, ein besonderes Interesse in Anspruch nehmen, bedarf nicht der Hervorhebung.
English translation: That the discussions of agricultural policy — a field in which science owes the author the most valuable researches and stimuli — claim a particular interest needs no emphasis.
The closing passage notes Conrad’s plans for further parts on public finance and statistics and anticipates readers among students, teachers, and the wider public. The review’s significance lies in its criteria of commendation: methodological breadth, current empirical evidence, practical relevance, and accessible teaching. Menger offers an appreciative assessment of Conrad’s scholarly practice without developing a separate theoretical argument.
This work was divided into 1 sections when it entered the library's research corpus—an apparatus for search and citation, not necessarily the author's own table of contents. Each title opens its summary.
Put a question to this work; the Librarian answers from its 1 sections and cites the passage.
Ask the Librarian