It means that this includes: crafts, for example. hunting, fishing, etc. etc., - industry, e.g. agriculture, factory production and trade, as well as spiritual activities, for example. people's education, etc. It is impossible, however, not to see that these subjects are included in both statistics and political economy, so that the calculations we borrowed from the “course” of police law and brought into the order of the “course” inevitably raise a new question about from what side or why on earth the subjects examined in Statistics5 and in Political Economy are included in the field of police right? It is clear that Statistics looks at these objects from a tactical point of view and is engaged in describing them, for example. takh or other industries in the country, or a story about the state of this or that branch of industry in Krasnoyarsk, or we calculate the quantities, distribution and productive activities of various educational and scientific institutions of the people, for example. its libraries, colleges, universities, etc., etc. It is also clear that, unlike the view of Statistics, political economy can talk about trades and industry with the purpose of showing the economic conditions and means for the development of these trades, with the known action of capital, labor, nature, etc. So, Statistics will show the present state of industry, and Political Economy will teach us the methods of the greatest development of national industry. What kind of this will remain for the share of that government law, which is called “police law”? Or in other words, what new and special economic operations can these objects be subject to on the part of police law, recognized as one of the parts of political economy? It is not for nothing that the author of the “course” omitted the study of population, and not only into the essays of economic scientists; as he himself says, but he also wrote in TsBlom, “reasonably” asserting that Statistics and Political Evconomy speak about the population of the country. But these same sciences also treat all other questions of the “course,” and consistency would require exclusive
We can also read them from the field of “Police Law,” considered as an integral part of political economy. But the most important thing is the question of popular enlightenment. What do they find economic in folk enlightenment, for example. in religiosity, or in morality, or in the sciences and arts of the country and people? Is it really possible in the fields of views, morality, law, sciences and arts to think about and theory about capital, with its interest, about land with its rent, about work with its back payment - or about credit, banks, shares, exchange rates, stock exchange games? Nah, there’s something wrong here, but how, volume 0 is the author of “Police Law” silent again?