Hermathena publications

"Whether money is to be considered as having an intrinsic value, or as being a commodity, a standard, a measure, or a pledge, as is variously suggested by writers? And whether the true idea of money, as such, be not altogether that of a ticket or counter?" (Querist, p25, no 23).

In this paper JJ '..detects in Berkeley's monetary philosophy certain elements which occur also in Aristotle, and in the writings of the French economist Boisguilbert...who died in 1714 and published his most important works in 1704... Berkeley visited France in 1713, 1714 and 1720 and...was almost certainly influenced by the work of Malebranche...'.

JJ goes at length into the economic ideas of Aristotle, Boisguilbert and Adam Smith as well as those of Berkeley, and relates them to the then current ideas as expressed by Keynes in the General Theory.

The paper is full of quotable bits, like '..the practical navigator would pay little attention to a science of navigation based on the long-run tendency of the sea to present a flat surface...' and '...take care of consumption and production will take care of itself..'.

This paper could also be a candidate for reproduction in full. In a footnote JJ admits that it was written in 1937. As his Senate role began to dominate in 1938, it is probable that he shelved it, and only resurrected it during the war, when things were at a low ebb.

Royal Irish Academy

The President of the Academy at the time was Eoin MacNeill; Felix Hackett (physics UCD) was Secretary and JJ Nolan (also physics UCD) was Treasurer. I suspect (without having hard evidence) that Eoin MacNeill may have encouraged JJ to apply at this time, during his Presidency, in recognition of his role in support of the Irish cause internationally, via the Albert Kahn Foundation. This aspect is developed elsewhere (particularly in the Garnier correspondence).

The politics of the foundation of the DIAS, on de Valera's initiative, at this time involved the RIA, and was, I understand, somewhat complex. I have heard suggestions that the RIA had been distinctly unhelpful to de Valera in the context, in the late 30s and early 40s, when he required good academic advice. I conjecture that this 1942 Academy recruitment under MacNeill was part of that political process. It may prove feasible to go into this further when we explore the relationship between JJ and de Valera, who in the early 50s nominated JJ to the Senate.

This was the blackest period of the war, and JJ was living near Drogheda. His application was supported by EH Alton (then provost of TCD) and by TG Moorhead from personal knowledge, and by 6 others, three of whom were the 'usual suspects' from the economic community (G A Duncan, George O'Brien, James Meenan), the others being W R Fearon the TCD biochemist, a guy signing himself eccentrically T Percy C Kilpatrick (in the same handwriting so presumably it is one person) and JK Jamieson. I will have to find out about these others, as they will perhaps help to illuminate the politics of the situation. Fearon was the other TCD person in support of Duncan.

In support of his claim to academic distinction JJ listed his 1925 'Groundwork of Economics', his 1934 'Nemesis of Economic Nationalism', his Hermathena papers on 5th century BC managed currency, Irish currency in the 18th century, commercial restriction and monetary deflation in 18th century Ireland, Berkeley and the abortive bank project of 1720-21, the synopsis of Berkeley's monetary philosophy, Locke, Berkeley and Hume as monetary theorists, all of which are listed as his main academic works in the 1930s module.

He also mentions, without detailed reference, papers in '...JHS, Studies, the Economic Journal and the Journal of the Statistical Society(sic) of Ireland. etc., etc.' thereby indicating that he regards these as part of the outreach programme rather than hard-core academic research contributions. This suggests that he was proud of, and stood over, his 'Nemesis' and this therefore gives it a place in the academic stream along with the 'Groundwork', though to my mind both are basically popularising polemical books rather than academic studies.

Other Academic Papers

In his reply JJ homed in on the insuperable obstacle to this apparently excellent proposal, namely the rigging of the internal prices in the British market. The barrier is made greater by the 'seasonality of supply' problem on the Irish side, which is also treated in his 1932 paper on winter milk to the Statistical and Social Inquiry Society.

Here is the text of what JJ wrote, in the September 1946 issue of Studies:

I have read, with very mixed feelings, Mr Shaw's able exposition of the need for replacing our export of beef cattle on the hoof by a properly organised and developed dead meat export trade. If it could be accomplished, nothing could contribute more effectively to the growth of our agricultural prosperity and to the establishment of a sound industrialism closely integrated with our major agricultural activity.

Unfortunately, under the conditions which have existed since 1932 and which which still exist, the thing is impossible. In that year Great Britain began a price policy which stimulates, in fact subsidises, the export of forward stores and discriminates heavily against the export of cattle ready for immediate slaughter. The policy has had different forms at different times, but in substance its effect has always been the same. To take a typical illustration: if the price fixed by the British Ministry of Food for an imported animal ready for immediate slaughter is 60 shillings per cwt live weight, the corresponding price for an animal of equal merit, reared and finished in Great Britain, is of the order of 74 shillings, while the price obtainable for a forward Irish store with two months' expectation of life in Great Britain would be 69 shillings.

During most months of the year the latter price governs the price payable by Irish butchers for beef or near-beef animals. The crucial question is: if we had a dead meat factory processing the type of animal now exported on the hoof, would it get a price for the exported meat no higher than the equivalent of the 6o shilling price now payable for animals exported for immediate slaughter, or what price would it get? On the answer to this question by Mr Strachey depends the feasibility or otherwise of Mr Shaw's very attractive proposition.

It is quite certain that the dead meat factory - if operating under present conditions - would have to pay the 69 shilling price for its cattle. To buy at 69 shillings and sell at 60 shillings would, from the outset, condemn the proposed venture to bankruptcy - or heavy subsidisation by the national government.

There are other difficulties in the way the remedy for which lies in our own hands. Our output of beef is mainly grass-fed, and hence an export surplus only available during late summer, autumn and early winter. In spring and early summer the house-fed quota is barely sufficient for the home market. The excessively seasonal character of our total output would make it extremely difficult for a factory catering for the export trade to have an economic through-put in every month of the year. This is one of the defects of our agricultural economy, which could be remedied by a closer integration of tillage and grass policy, and which ought to be so remedied in our own national interest.

Apparently we now consume about 200,000 cattle per annum, and one factory of economic size requires only 150,000 cattle regularly available throughout the year. It would perhaps be feasible to establish a factory for the home market only - which, of course, would imply the abolition of all private slaughter houses in every important region of the country. But there are many private vested interests involved, and if they feel aggrieved won't they howl?

I appreciate Mr Shaw's quotation from the Majority Report on Agricultural Policy. It was not possible to deal with all the issues so bluntly in that document as it is for Mr Shaw in his article, but I would direct his attention to a sentence in Paragraph 255 which sums up the matter with characteristic restraint: "The export of dead meat instead of fat cattle and sheep would be a great improvement in marketing organisation, but this development cannot take place so long as the British policy of price differentiation in favour of the export of forward stores is maintained."

Some navigational notes:

Copyright Dr Roy Johnston 1999