Adam Smith’s Case against the British Empire

William Coleman ()

History of Economics Review, 2023, vol. 86, issue 1, 30-44

Abstract: The paper articulates Adam Smith’s claim that the British Empire was inimical to Great Britain’s interest. It is argued against Smith that, given the structure of global trade prior to the Industrial Revolution, the mercantilist restrictions on trade and capital movement characterising the British Empire probably increased Britain’s national income. But it is also argued, in agreement with Smith, that the military costs of enforcing these restrictions outweighed any benefit. Smith’s ‘cost of enforcement case’ against the Empire resonated strongly in liberal critiques of Empire in the century after Smith. At the same time, Imperial Federationists of the early twentieth century used Smith’s proposal of a political union in place of the Empire to validate mercantilist sentiments which Smith deplored. Smith’s case against the Empire is of mixed value and had conflicting impacts on its readers.

Date: 2023
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/10370196.2023.2282801 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
Working Paper: Adam Smith's Case Against the British Empire (2023)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:rherxx:v:86:y:2023:i:1:p:30-44

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/rher20

DOI: 10.1080/10370196.2023.2282801

Access Statistics for this article

History of Economics Review is currently edited by John Harry Bloch and John Hawkins

More articles in History of Economics Review from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().