Financial and enterprise historian Robert Hessen died on Monday, April 15 at age 87.
I wrote some reminiscences of him on my Substack website, “I Weblog to Differ.”
Right here I need to hyperlink to his 2 contributions to my Concise Encyclopedia of Economics.
One is his article “Companies.” Listed below are two key paragraphs.
Right here’s a key paragraph:
To distinguish it from a partnership, an organization ought to be outlined as a authorized and contractual mechanism for creating and working a enterprise for revenue, utilizing capital from buyers that might be managed on their behalf by administrators and officers. To legal professionals, nevertheless, the basic definition is Chief Justice John Marshall’s 1819 comment that “an organization is a man-made being, invisible, intangible, and present solely in contemplation of legislation.” However Marshall’s definition is ineffective as a result of it’s a metaphor; it makes an organization a judicial hallucination.
I so usually hear folks say that firms are created by the state. It occurs particularly once I’m on discuss reveals coping with callers. That’s false. I at all times consider how properly Bob Hessen handled the difficulty in his article:
Makes an attempt by economists to outline firms have been equally unsatisfactory. In 1917 Joseph S. Davis wrote: “An organization [is] a gaggle of people approved by legislation to behave as a unit.” This definition is flawed as a result of it additionally matches partnerships and labor unions, which aren’t firms. Economist Jonathan Hughes wrote {that a} company is a “a number of partnership” and that “the privilege of incorporation is the present of the state to collective enterprise ventures.”Economist Robert Heilbroner wrote {that a} company is “an entity created by the state,” granted a constitution that allows it to exist “in its personal proper as a ‘individual’ created by legislation.”
However charters enacted by state legislatures actually ceased to exist within the mid-nineteenth century. The precise process for creating an organization consists of submitting a registration doc with a state official (like recording the usage of a fictitious enterprise title), and the state’s function is solely formal and computerized. To name incorporation a “privilege” implies that people haven’t any proper to create an organization. However why is authorities permission wanted? Who can be wronged if companies adopted company options by contract? Whose rights can be violated if a agency declared itself to be a unit for the needs of suing and being sued or holding and conveying title to property, or that it will proceed in existence regardless of the dying or withdrawal of its officers or buyers, or that its shares are freely transferable, or if it asserted restricted legal responsibility for its debt obligations? (Legal responsibility for torts is a separate difficulty; see Hessen 1979, pp. 18–21.) If potential collectors discover any of those options objectionable, they’ll negotiate to exclude or modify them.
His different entry within the Encyclopedia is “Capitalism.” It’s filled with gems. Right here’s the opening paragraph:
Capitalism,” a time period of disparagement coined by socialists within the mid-nineteenth century, is a misnomer for “financial individualism,” which Adam Smith earlier known as “the plain and easy system of pure liberty” (Wealth of Nations). Financial individualism’s primary premise is that the pursuit of self-interest and the fitting to personal non-public property are morally defensible and legally authentic. Its main corollary is that the state exists to guard particular person rights. Topic to sure restrictions, people (alone or with others) are free to determine the place to speculate, what to provide or promote, and what costs to cost. There isn’t any pure restrict to the vary of their efforts when it comes to property, gross sales, and earnings; or the variety of prospects, staff, and buyers; or whether or not they function in native, regional, nationwide, or worldwide markets.
Right here’s one other nice paragraph:
In early-nineteenth-century England probably the most seen face of capitalism was the textile factories that employed girls and kids. Critics (Richard Oastler and Robert Southey, amongst others) denounced the mill house owners as heartless exploiters and described the working situations—lengthy hours, low pay, monotonous routine—as in the event that they have been unprecedented. Believing that poverty was new, not merely extra seen in crowded cities and villages, critics in contrast up to date occasions unfavorably with earlier centuries. Their claims of accelerating distress, nevertheless, have been primarily based on ignorance of how squalid life really had been earlier. Earlier than kids started incomes cash working in factories, they’d been despatched to stay in parish poorhouses; apprenticed as unpaid family servants; rented out for backbreaking agricultural labor; or grew to become beggars, vagrants, thieves, and prostitutes. The precapitalist “good outdated days” merely by no means existed (see industrial revolution and the usual of residing).
And:
Regardless of these constraints, which labored sporadically and unpredictably, the advantages of capitalism have been extensively subtle. Luxuries rapidly have been remodeled into requirements. At first, the luxuries have been low-cost cotton garments, contemporary meat, and white bread; then stitching machines, bicycles, sporting items, and musical devices; then vehicles, washing machines, garments dryers, and fridges; then telephones, radios, televisions, air conditioners, and freezers; and most just lately, TiVos, digital cameras, DVD gamers, and cell telephones.
That these facilities had change into accessible to most individuals didn’t trigger capitalism’s critics to recant, and even to relent. As a substitute, they ingeniously reversed themselves. Marxist thinker Herbert Marcuse proclaimed that the true evil of capitalism is prosperity, as a result of it seduces employees away from their historic mission—the revolutionary overthrow of capitalism—by supplying them with automobiles and family home equipment, which he known as “instruments of enslavement.” Some critics reject capitalism by extolling “the straightforward life” and labeling prosperity senseless materialism. Within the Nineteen Fifties, critics akin to John Kenneth Galbraith and Vance Packard attacked the legitimacy of client demand, asserting that if items needed to be marketed to be able to promote, they might not be serving any genuine human wants. They charged that buyers are brainwashed by Madison Avenue and crave regardless of the large firms select to provide and promote, and complained that the “public sector” is starved whereas frivolous non-public needs are being happy. And having seen that capitalism diminished poverty as a substitute of intensifying it, critics akin to Gar Alperovitz and Michael Harrington proclaimed equality the very best ethical worth, calling for greater taxes on incomes and inheritances to massively redistribute wealth, not solely nationally but additionally internationally.
