Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-jr42d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-20T14:45:57.945Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

WILLIAM MANNING AND THE POLITICAL THEORY OF THE DEPENDENT CLASSES

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2012

ALEX GOUREVITCH*
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, McMaster University E-mail: alexgourevitch@gmail.com

Abstract

This article reappraises the political ideas of William Manning, and through him the trajectory of early modern republicanism. Manning, an early American farmer writing in the 1780s and 1790s, developed the republican distinction between “the idle Few” and “the laboring Many” into a novel “political theory of the dependent classes.” On this theory, it is the dependent, laboring classes who share an interest in social equality. Because of this interest, they are the only ones who can achieve and maintain republican liberty. With this identification of the interests of the dependent classes with the common good, Manning inverted inherited republican ideas, and transformed the language of liberty and virtue into one of the first potent, republican critiques of exploitation. As such, he stands as a key figure for understanding the shift in early modern republicanism from a concern with constitutionalism and the rule of law to the social question.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Nelson, Eric, The Greek Tradition in Republican Thought (Cambridge, 2004), 118, 49–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar; McCormick, John P., “Machiavelli against Republicanism: On the Cambridge School's “Guicciardinian Moments”,” Political Theory 31/5 (2003), 615–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 This conceptual division structures the last two sections of Wood, Gordon S., The Radicalism of the American Revolution (New York, 1992)Google Scholar.

3 See, for instance, Keyssar, Alexander, The Right to Vote: The Contested History of Democracy in the United States (New York, 2000), 352Google Scholar.

4 James Oneal, “An Early Labor Philosopher Part I,” The Call Magazine (The New York Call), 10 June 1923, 1; idem, “An Early Labor Philosopher Part II,” The Call Magazine (The New York Call), 17 June 1923, 2; idem, “An Early Labor Philosopher Part III,” The Call Magazine (The New York Call), 24 June 1923, 2, 8.

5 Merrill, Michael and Wilentz, Sean, “William Manning and the Invention of American Politics,” in Merrill, Michael and Wilentz, Sean, eds., The Key of Liberty: The Life and Writings of William Manning, “A Laborer,” 1747–1814 (Cambridge, MA, 1993), 83Google Scholar.

6 Bogin, Ruth, “Petitioning and the New Moral Economy of Post-Revolutionary America,” William and Mary Quarterly 45/3 (1988), 392425, 411, 417, 421–5Google Scholar.

7 Mercieca, Jennifer R. and Aune, James Arnt, “A Vernacular Republican Rhetoric: William Manning's Key of Libberty,” Quarterly Journal of Speech 91/2 (2005), 119–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

8 Wood, Gordon, “The Enemy Is Us: Democratic Capitalism in the Early Republic,” Journal of the Early Republic 16/2 (1996), 293308, 302CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9 Michael Merrill and Sean Wilentz's lengthy introduction to their edition of his writings remains the best, most in-depth, study. Merrill and Wilentz, “William Manning and the Invention of American Politics.” See also Wood, “The Enemy Is Us.”

10 Various drafts and fragments are available in the William Manning Papers, available at Harvard University's Houghton Library, MS Am 880, vols. 1–4. The less commonly cited edition of Key of Libberty was originally published in 1922 by the Manning Association, and republished in 1956 by Harvard historian Samuel Eliot Morison. Samuel Eliot Morison, “William Manning's Key of Libberty,” William and Mary Quarterly 13/2 (1956). A modernized version of the third draft from 1798 is published in Manning, William, Merrill, Michael, and Wilentz, Sean, The Key of Liberty: The Life and Democratic Writings of William Manning, “A Laborer,” 1747–1814 (Cambridge, MA, 1993)Google Scholar. Merrill and Wilentz's edition is an essential resource because it is the only complete version of Manning's writings, including Some Proposals for Making Restitution to the Original Creditors of Government. However, I keep to the Morison edition of Key of Libberty, which is based on the second draft Manning completed in February 1798—the first draft is incomplete. Manning submitted this second draft to the Independent Chronicle. Merrill and Wilentz use the slightly more moderate third draft of 1799, which is a shortened version Manning edited for resubmission after the Independent Chronicle's editors rejected the second draft. There are legitimate reasons for Merril and Wilentz to consider the third draft a more refined version of Manning's views. However, the second draft involves fewer qualifications, and to my mind a fuller expression, of Manning's views. One reason for preferring the Morison edition is that Manning's edits for the third draft may have been more a response to the hostile climate towards, and subsequent extraordinary repression of, Republican journals and their editors, including the editors of the Independent Chronicle, under the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798. It is also possible that Manning moderated his views in the third draft for the sake of what he perceived as editors’ tastes, rather than as a refinement of his own beliefs. On the persecution of Republican editors, including the Independent Chronicle's Thomas and Abijah Adams, see Stone, Geoffrey R., Perilous Times: Free Speech in Wartime from the Sedition Act of 1798 to the War on Terrorism (New York, 2004), 1678Google Scholar; Merrill and Wilentz, “William Manning and the Invention of American Politics,” 48–49.

11 Bogin, Ruth, “‘Measures So Glareingly Unjust’: A Response to Hamilton's Funding Plan by William Manning,” William and Mary Quarterly 46/2 (1989), 315–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12 Merrill and Wilentz, “William Manning and the Invention of American Politics,” 4.

13 Curti, Merle, The Growth of American Thought, 3rd edn (New Brunswick, 2004Google Scholar; first published 1964), 136. Hofstadter, Richard, Anti-intellectualism in American Life (New York, 1966), 151–53Google Scholar. Wood, “The Enemy Is Us,” 302–8. Bogin, “Petitioning and the New Moral Economy of Post-Revolutionary America,” 421–5.

14 Aune, “A Vernacular Republican Rhetoric,” 135.

15 Manning, William, The Key of Libberty, William and Mary Quarterly 13/2 (1956; first published 1798), 209–54, 219Google Scholar; idem, Some Proposals for Makeing Restitution to the Original Creditors of Government, William & Mary Quarterly 46/2 (1989; first published 1790), 320–31, 329–30.

16 Manning, The Key of Libberty, 209.

17 Ibid., 224–31.

18 Ibid., 227–31. On Manning's contemporaries consider Matthew Lyons. He argued that lawyers and judges conspired to make the law inscrutable so that the common man could not understand it. This made him dependent on lawyers, and made it easier for the wealthy to manipulate the law for their purposes. See Mathew Lyons, “Twelve Reasons against a Free People's Employing Practitioners in the Law, as Legislators,” Farmers’ Library 1, 19 Aug. 1794.

19 Manning, The Key of Libberty, 218.

21 Ibid., 219.

22 Ibid., 220.

23 Ibid., 248.

24 Pocock, J. G. A., The Machiavellian Moment: Florentine Political Thought and the Atlantic Republican Tradition (Princeton, NJ, 2003), 550Google Scholar.

25 See especially Wood, Gordon S., The Creation of the American Republic, 1776–1787 (Chapel Hill, 1998), 4690, 593–615Google Scholar.

26 For example Sandel, Michael J., Democracy's Discontent: America in Search of a Public Philosophy (Cambridge, MA, 1996)Google Scholar; Ackerman, Bruce, We the People: Foundations (Cambridge, MA, 1991)Google Scholar. For two good reviews of the debate see Gibson, Alan, “Ancients, Moderns and Americans: The Republicanism–Liberalism Debate Revisited,” History of Political Thought XXI/2 (2000), 261307Google Scholar; Rodgers, Daniel T., “Republicanism: The Career of a Concept,” Journal of American History 79/1 (1992), 1138CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

27 See especially McCoy, Drew, The Elusive Republic: Political Economy in Jeffersonian America (Chapel Hill, 1980), 6785Google Scholar.

28 Skinner, Quentin, “The Republican Ideal of Political Liberty,” in Skinner, Quentin, Bock, Gisela, and Viroli, Maurizio, eds., Machiavelli and Republicanism (Cambridge, 1990), 292309, esp. 302Google Scholar.

29 Skinner's landmark reconstruction of the neo-Roman theory is Skinner, Quentin, Liberty before Liberalism (Cambridge and New York, 1998)Google Scholar. See also Viroli, Maurizio, Republicanism (New York, 2002)Google Scholar; Pettit, Philip, Republicanism: A Theory of Freedom and Government (Oxford, 1999), 1750CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

30 Compare, for instance, Sandel's neo-Aristotelian reading of the Jeffersonian political economy of citizenship with Appleby's argument that Jeffersonian republicanism gave birth to modern commerce. Sandel, Democracy's Discontent, 123–316; Appleby, Joyce, Capitalism and a New Social Order: The Republican Vision of the 1790s (New York, 1984)Google Scholar.

31 Appleby, Joyce, “The “Agrarian Myth” in the Early Republic,” in idem, Liberalism and Republicanism in the Historical Imagination (Cambridge, MA, 1992), 253–76Google Scholar.

32 Wood, “The Enemy Is Us.”

33 Cicero, On Duties, trans. E. M. Atkins (Cambridge, 1991), [I.151] 58.

34 Harrington, James, The Commonwealth of Oceana and a System of Politics (Cambridge, 1992CrossRefGoogle Scholar; first published 1656), 33.

35 Ibid., 75.

36 Wood, The Radicalism of the American Revolution, 104–09, 78–81.

37 Besides the well-known discussions by Wood and Pocock, see also Adair, Douglass G., The Intellectual Origins of Jeffersonian Democracy: Republicanism, the Class Struggle, and the Virtuous Farmer (Lanham, MD, 1964Google Scholar; first published 1943).

38 Jefferson, Thomas, Notes on the State of Virginia (New York, 1964), 157Google Scholar.

39 Ibid., 158.

40 Morgan, Edmund, “Slavery and Freedom: The American Paradox,” Journal of American History 59/1 (1972), 529CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also the more extensive analysis in idem, American Slavery, American Freedom (New York, 1975), 293–315. This paradox has been observed as a wider problem in the relationship between classical freedom and slavery. Moses Finley, “Between Slavery and Freedom,” Comparative Studies in Society and History 6/3 (1964), 233–49.

41 Merrill and Wilentz discuss the history of the Key's different drafts in Merrill and Wilentz, “William Manning and the Invention of American Politics,” 48–57.

42 Benjamin Lincoln was an eminent Massachusetts Federalist, whose father figured in the correspondence of persons like Washington and Adams, led the force against the Shay's Rebellion, and ran for lieutenant governor in Massachusetts. Wood, The Radicalism of the American Revolution, 209–10; Merrill and Wilentz, “William Manning and the Invention of American Politics,” 24, 36, 50–51.

43 Lincoln, Benjamin, “Free Republican IX,” Independent Chronicle XVIII/900 (1786), 1Google Scholar.

44 Lincoln, Benjamin, “The Free Republican No. IV,” Independent Chronicle XVII/894 (1785), 12Google Scholar.

45 Cicero, On Duties, II.78. Cicero repeats this thought many times in On Duties, which served as a basic textbook of moral philosophy from the Italian Renaissance through to the nineteenth century.

46 Lincoln, Benjamin, “The Free Republican No. II,” Independent Chronicle XVII/892 (1785), 1Google Scholar.

47 See, for instance, Rorabaugh, W. J., “‘I Thought I Shall Liberate Myself from the Thraldom of Others’: Apprentices, Masters, and the Revolution,” in Young, Alfred F., ed., Beyond the American Revolution: Explorations in the History of American Radicalism (DeKalb, IL, 1993), 185217Google Scholar; Alan Taylor, “Agrarian Independence: Northern Land Rioters after the Revolution,” in ibid., 221–45.

48 Merrill and Wilentz, “William Manning and the Invention of American Politics,” 31–2.

49 Brown, Richard D., “The Emergence of Urban Society in Rural Massachusetts, 1760–1820,” Journal of American History 61/1 (1974), 2951CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

50 Kulikoff, Allan, The Agrarian Origins of American Capitalism (Charlottesville, VA, 1992), 3446, 60–76, 99–150Google Scholar; Joyce Appleby, “The “Agrarian Myth” in the Early Republic,” in idem, Liberalism and Republicanism, 253–76.

51 The quote is taken from “Book on First Principles of Government” but is exactly same as that found in Rights of Man. Paine, Thomas, Rights of Man (New York, 1991), 61Google Scholar.

52 “Constitution of the United States of America,” in The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States (Washington, DC, 2002; first published 1776), Article I, Section 9.

53 Paine, Rights of Man, 245. See also Jefferson, Thomas, “To James Madison, Paris, September 6, 1789,” in Jefferson: Political Writings, ed. Appleby, Joyce (Cambridge, 1999; first published 1789), 593–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On republicanism and the abolition of primogeniture see Nelson, The Greek Tradition in Republican Thought, 201–13, 30–33.

54 Burke, Martin J., The Conundrum of Class: Public Discourse on the Social Order in America (Chicago, 1995), 32Google Scholar.

55 Hamilton, Alexander, “First Report on the Public Credit,” in The Works of Alexander Hamilton, vol 2, ed. Lodge, Henry Cabot (New York, 1904; first published 1790), 227–90Google Scholar; idem, “Report on Manufactures,” in The Works of Alexander Hamilton, vol. 4, ed. Henry Cabot Lodge (New York, 1904; first published 1791), 70–198.

56 James Madison, “A Republican Distribution of Citizens,” National Gazette, 5 March 1792.

57 There is a huge literature on this subject. Besides Burke, The Conundrum of Class, and Kulikoff, The Agrarian Origins, see McCoy, The Elusive Republic, 166–84; Ernst, Joseph A., “Shays's Rebellion in Long Perspective: The Merchants and the ‘Money Question’,” in Gross, Robert A., ed., In Debt to Shays: The Bicentennial of an Agrarian Rebellion (Charlottesville, 1993), 5780Google Scholar.

58 Merrill and Wilentz, “William Manning and the Invention of American Politics,” 24.

59 Taylor, “Agrarian Independence.”

60 Ernst, “Shays's Rebellion in Long Perspective”; Bushman, Richard L., “Massachusetts Farmers and the Revolution,” in Jellison, Richard M., ed., Society, Freedom, and Conscience: The American Revolution in Virginia, Massachusetts, and New York (New York, 1976), 77124Google Scholar.

61 Bushman, “Massachusetts Farmers and the Revolution.”; Brown, Robert Maxwell, “Back Country Rebellions and the Homestead Ethic in America, 1749–1799,” in Brown, Richard Maxwell and Fehrenbacher, Don, eds., Tradition, Conflict, and Modernization: Perspectives on the American Revolution (New York, 1977), 7399CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Bogin, “Petitioning and the New Moral Economy of Post-Revolutionary America.”

62 Buel, Richard, “The Public Creditor Interest in Massachusetts Politics, 1780–86,” in Gross, In Debt to Shays, 47–56, 51Google Scholar.

63 Ernst, “Shays's Rebellion in Long Perspective,” 72–3.

64 Hamilton, “First Report on the Public Credit.” See discussion in McCoy, The Elusive Republic, 166–84; Buel, “The Public Creditor Interest in Massachusetts Politics.”

65 For the history of the text, see the introductions by Bogin, and by Wilentz and Merrill, to their versions of the text. Bogin, “Measures So Glareingly Unjust,” 315–20; Merrill and Wilentz, “William Manning and the Invention of American Politics,” 32–5.

66 Manning, Some Proposals for Makeing Restitution to the Original Creditors of Government.

67 On the role of credit and smaller currency notes in dividing small, inland producers from and large, urban producers see Buel, “The Public Creditor Interest in Massachusetts Politics”; Ernst, “Shays's Rebellion in Long Perspective.”

68 Wood, The Radicalism of the American Revolution, 271–86.

69 Ibid., 278.

70 Wood, “The Enemy Is Us,” 305.

71 Ibid., 306.

72 Wood follows Pocock in the view that the conflict between stable, landed property and mobile, financial property represents a fundamental conflict between republican virtue and modern commerce. See Pocock, The Machiavellian Moment, 486.

73 Wood, “The Enemy Is Us,” 306–07.

74 Appleby, Capitalism and a New Social Order, 104.

75 Manning, Some Proposals for Makeing Restitution to the Original Creditors of Government, 321.

76 Ibid., 322–23.

77 Wood, The Radicalism of the American Revolution, 249.

78 Bogin, “Petitioning and the New Moral Economy of Post-Revolutionary America,” 411, 17, 21–25.

79 Manning, Some Proposals for Makeing Restitution to the Original Creditors of Government, 321.

81 Buel, “The Public Creditor Interest in Massachusetts Politics,” 55–6.

82 Manning, Some Proposals for Makeing Restitution to the Original Creditors of Government, 322.

83 Ibid., 330–31.

84 Manning, The Key of Libberty, 219, emphasis added.

85 Manning states this clearly in Some Proposals for Makeing Restitution to the Original Creditors of Government, 327–31.

86 See, for instance, Paine, Thomas, “Agrarian Justice,” in Thomas Paine: Common Sense and Other Writings, ed. Appleby, Joyce (New York, 2005; first published 1795–6), 323–45Google Scholar; Jefferson, “To James Madison, Paris, September 6, 1789”; idem, “To James Madison, Oct. 28, 1785,” in Thomas Jefferson: Writings, ed. Merill D. Peterson (New York, 1984; first published 1785), 841–2. On the historic role of “agarian laws” and republicanism see Nelson, The Greek Tradition in Republican Thought, 49–126.

87 For a discussion of nineteenth-century labor republicanism see Wilentz, Sean, “Against Exceptionalism: Class Consciousness and the American Labor Movement, 1790–1920,” International Labor and Working Class History 26 (1984), 124CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Montgomery, David, “Labor and the Republic in Industrial America: 1860–1920,” in Georges Haupt parmi nous, Le mouvement social 111 (1980), 201–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar; idem, “William H. Sylvis and the Search for Working-Class Citizenship,” in Warren Van Tine and Melvyn Dubofsky, eds., Labor Leaders in America (Urbana and Chicago, 1987), 3–29; Forbath, William, “The Ambiguities of Free Labor: Labor and the Law in the Gilded Age,” Wisconsin Law Review 1985/4 (1985), 767817Google Scholar; Wilentz, Sean, Chants Democratic: New York City & the Rise of the American Working Class, 1788–1850 (New York, 1984)Google Scholar.

88 McNeill, George E., The Labor Movement: The Problem of To-day (New York, 1892), 456Google Scholar.

89 Jelley, S. M., The Voice of Labor (Chicago, 1887), 203Google Scholar.

90 Benjamin Lincoln, “The Free Republican No. V,” Independent Chronicle, 22 Dec. 1785, 1.

91 Claeys makes a similar point in his discussion of Paine. Claeys, Gregory, “The Origins of the Rights of Labor: Republicanism, Commerce, and the Construction of Modern Social Theory in Britain, 1796–1805,” Journal of Modern History 66/2 (1994), 249–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

92 Merrill and Wilentz, “William Manning and the Invention of American Politics,” 66.

93 Ibid., 83.

94 Ibid., 67.

95 Ibid., 66.

96 Manning, The Key of Libberty, 236–43.

97 Ibid., 213.

98 Lincoln, “The Free Republican No. II,” 1.

99 Manning, The Key of Libberty, 212.

100 Ibid., 213.

101 Ibid., 220.

102 Ibid., 219.

103 Ibid., 220.

104 Ibid..

105 Ibid., 218.

106 Ibid.

107 Ibid., 223–24.

108 Manning, Some Proposals for Makeing Restitution to the Original Creditors of Government, 329.

109 Manning, The Key of Libberty, 218.

110 Ibid., 220.

111 Ibid., 212.

112 Ibid.

113 Austin, Benjamin, Observations on the Pernicious Practice of the Law: As published occasionally in the Independent Chronicle (Boston, 1786), 5Google Scholar.

114 Ibid., 45.

115 Lyons, “Twelve Reasons against a Free People's Employing Practitioners in the Law, as Legislators.”

116 Logan, George, Five Letters Addressed to the Yeomanry of the United States (Philadelphia, 1792)Google Scholar.

117 Manning, The Key of Libberty, 218.

118 See generally Kramer, Larry, The People Themselves: Popular Constitutionalism and Judicial Review (New York, 2004)Google Scholar.

119 Manning, William, “Key of Libberty (Fragment),” in William Manning Papers (Cambridge, MA, 1797), 3Google Scholar.

120 Manning, The Key of Libberty, 227.

121 Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, 157.

122 Manning, “Key of Libberty (Fragment),” 3.

123 Manning, The Key of Libberty, 220.

124 Lincoln, “The Free Republican No. II”; idem, “The Free Republican No. IV”; idem, “The Free Republican No. V.”

125 Manning, The Key of Libberty, 220–21.

126 Ibid., 221.

127 Ibid.

128 Ibid.

129 Ibid.

130 Ibid., 231.

131 Ibid., 222.

132 Appleby, Capitalism and a New Social Order, 64–67; Stone, Perilous Times, 21–47.

133 Washington, George, “Message to the Third Congress 19 November 1794,” in Banning, Lance, ed., Liberty and Order: The First American Party Struggle [1787] (Indianapolis, 1794), available at http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=875&chapter=63931&layout=html&Itemid=27Google Scholar.

134 See the discussion in Foner, Philip S., “The Democratic-Republican Societies: An Introduction,” in idem, ed., The Democratic-Republican Societies, 1790–1800: A Documentary Sourcebook of Constitutions, Declarations, Addresses, Resolutions, and Toasts (Westport, CT, 1976), 351, 27–32Google Scholar.

135 On the debates between Federalists and Republicans over the Alien and Sedition Acts, see Stone, Perilous Times, 25–32.

136 Manning, The Key of Libberty, 222.

137 Also, the Federalists “imploy no printers, but those that will adhear strictly to their vuies & interests, & use all the arts & retrick hell can invent to blackguard the Republican printers.” Ibid., 232.

138 Manning, William, “Key of Libberty (Draft),” in William Manning Papers (Cambridge, MA, 1797), 1Google Scholar.

139 Manning, The Key of Libberty, 248.

140 Hofstadter, Anti-intellectualism in American Life, 151.

141 See Manning's list of this knowledge in The Key of Libberty, 247–8.

142 Ibid., 248.

143 Ibid., 251.

144 Ibid., 248.

145 Such knowledge includes “A Knowledge of Mankind-A Knowledge of the differend interest that influence all ordirs of men-A Knowledge of the prinsaples of the government & Constitution he lives under-A Knowledge of all the laws that immediately consarnes his conduct & interests,” along with knowledge of laws, of the activities of elected officials, of opinions of various citizens, and of announcements of citizen actions. Ibid., 247.

146 Ibid., 250.

147 Manning, William, “Draft Letter to Thomas Addams,” in William Manning Papers (Cambridge, MA, undated)Google Scholar.

148 Manning, The Key of Libberty, 250.

149 Manning, “Key of Libberty (Fragment),” 3.

150 Ibid.

151 Manning, The Key of Libberty, 250.

152 Here Manning equates the Republican Party of Jefferson with republican principles of equality.

153 Manning, The Key of Libberty, 242.

154 Ibid., 253.

155 Ibid., 250.

156 See the discussion in Foner, “The Democratic-Republican Societies,” 31–40.

157 Manning, The Key of Libberty, 223–24.

158 Logan, Five Letters Addressed to the Yeomanry of the United States, 28.

159 Ibid., 12.

160 Manning continued to believe his Laboring Society was necessary even after the Republican victory of 1800. Merrill and Wilentz, “William Manning and the Invention of American Politics,” 77.

161 Zonderman, David A., “Review: The Key of Liberty,” Journal of the Early Republic 13/4 (1993), 553–4, 554CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

162 On the historical role of extra-institutional activities see Bogin, “Petitioning and the New Moral Economy of Post-Revolutionary America,” 421. Wood, The Creation of the American Republic, 306–43.

163 Merrill and Wilentz, “William Manning and the Invention of American Politics,” 66.

164 Manning, William, “Letter to Thomas Addams,” in William Manning Papers (Cambridge, MA, 1799)Google Scholar.