Three different groups of people have formulated definitions of the term profit. Each has its own point of view. Economists as a rule are interested, first, in explaining why the phenomenon of profit appears in society or why profits are tolerated and second, in deciding what it is that determines who shall receive the benefit of profits. Here profit is considered a social phenomenon associated with problems of the distribution of the proceeds of society's productive activities among factors responsible for that production. Courts have had to pass upon questions of what is profit in connection with income tax matters and dividend declarations or insolvencies. In the latter case, courts have been mainly interested in seeing that the capital fund is not paid out as dividends to the detriment of creditors of limited liability enterprises and consequently are likely to accept as profit available for dividend all of the proprietorship except the original contribution. In tax cases courts are mainly concerned in construing statutes and thus in passing upon the question of whether the matter at issue was or was not profit within the intention of the legislature and not whether the matter was or was not profit in fact. Businessmen, on the other hand, view profits mainly as a measure of accomplishment. They are, of course, interested in the profit legally available for dividends.

The appearance a few years ago of a new English translation of Frater Lucas Paciolo's book "De Computis et Scripturis'" raises the question a new of how much, or how little, the art of bookkeeping has changed in the 434 years since 1494 when bookkeeping's first printed book appeared. But one should not open Paciolo's book with the expectation of finding modern practices completely foreshadowed. Nineteenth and twentieth century conditions have, of course, brought about many modifications of what was originally sound method, and have, in some cases, forced the introduction of practices which are of necessity entirely foreign to fifteenth century conditions. From the very beginning certain basic peculiarities of method and form have been associated with bookkeeping. These fundamental characteristics still persist, and, being peculiar to double-entry bookkeeping, form the principal means of setting it apart from other fact-manipulating systems. Ever since the record-keeping methods of bankers and governments were expanded to suit mercantile affairs, bookkeeping has possessed a characteristic theory, a characteristic form, and a characteristic technology.

The journal entry is all important bookkeeping mechanism which serves as a means of converting a non-technical statement of a transaction into a species of technically-formed, intermediate statistical record. It is, moreover, particularly characteristic of double entry-more characteristic perhaps than the ledger-because it so clearly expresses the inevitable duality which is concealed in all transactions. For this reason, undoubtedly, journalizing has always been a very important element in the teaching of double entry book- keeping, and in some countries it is a legal requirement that all transactions pass through the journal. This last probably is due to the desire to have the facts conveniently assembled for authentication rather than to any wish to give further emphasis to the importance of the journal.