ABSTRACT
In a paper on the reception of Ricardian economics (1995 [1977]:293-6), I emphasised the influence of Mountifort Longfield on Robert Torrens, and the positive implications of that influence for the longevity of Ricardian theory. However, like other commentators, I failed to recognise that Longfield may have had a similar influence on J.S.Mill, or at the least, that Mill’s justification of Ricardo’s proportionality theorem in the Principles follows similar lines to that of Longfield. And while I do refer to Longfield’s possible influence in my Economics of John Stuart Mill (Hollander 1985:344), I now realise that it was not accurately stated, so that my account distorts the conclusions drawn from the evidence regarding both Mill’s place in the history of classical (Ricardian) economic thought, and his consistency as analyst. This note is designed to correct these inaccuracies.
