No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
THE ISSUE OF FREE BANKING DURING THE BULLIONIST CONTROVERSY
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 March 2019
Abstract
The discussions of the Bullionist Controversy were closely related to the effects of inconvertibility on prices and exchange rates. However, during their discussions, economists had a need to address other important questions such as the convenience of free banking. In this paper, we will study the perspective of the different schools involved in the debate on this issue: we will show that their positions were wholly coherent with their underlying assumptions on the nature of monetary assets. The economists who viewed gold and banknotes as perfect substitutes, such as the radical bullionists, tended to favor a ban on free banking. On the contrary, the economists who viewed banknotes and gold as imperfect substitutes, such as the moderate bullionists and antibullionists, were inclined to favor free banking.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The History of Economics Society 2019
References
REFERENCES
Arnon, Arie. 1987. “Banking Between the Invisible and Visible Hands: A Reinterpretation of Ricardo’s Place within the Classical School.” Oxford Economic Papers 39 (2): 268–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnon, Arie. 2009. “Re-examination of Thornton’s Innovative Monetary Analysis: The Bullion Debate during the Restriction Once Again.” History of Political Economy 41 (3): 545–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnon, Arie. 2011. Monetary Theory and Policy from Hume and Smith to Wicksell. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Boase, Henry. 1804. A letter to the Right Hon. Lord King, in defence of the conduct of the directors of the banks of England and Ireland. London: W. Bulmer for G. and W. Nicol.Google Scholar
Boase, Henry. 1811. Remarks on the New Doctrine Concerning the Supposed Depreciation of Our Currency. London: Bulmer and Co. Cleveland-Row.Google Scholar
Brown, Richard 1991. Society and Economy in Modern Britain 1700–1850. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bosanquet, Charles. 1810. Practical Observations on the Report of the Bullion Committee. London: J. M. Richardson.Google Scholar
Boyd, Walter. 1801. A letter to the Right Honourable William Pitt: on the influence of the stoppage of issues in specie at the Bank of England. London: T. Gillet.Google Scholar
Bullion Committee. 1810. Report, Together with, Minutes of Evidence, and Accounts, from the Select Committee on the High Price of Bullion. London: J. Johnson and Co.Google Scholar
Chadha, Jagjit, and Newby, Elisa. 2013. “Midas, Transmuting All, into Paper: The Bank of England and the Banque de France During the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars.” Bank of Finland Research Discussion Paper 20/2013.Google Scholar
Eliot, Francis Perceval. 1811. Observations on the Fallacy of the Supposed Depreciation of the Paper Currency of the Kingdom with Reasons for Dissenting from the Report of the Bullion Committee. London: J. J. Stockdale.Google Scholar
Friedman, Milton. 1956. “The Quantity Theory of Money—A Restatement.” In Friedman, Milton, ed., Studies in the Quantity Theory of Money. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 3–21.Google Scholar
Glasner, David. 1992. “The Real-Bills Doctrine in the Light of the Law of Reflux.” History of Political Economy 24 (2): 867–894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glasner, David. 2015. “Monetary Disequilibrium and the Demand for Money in Ricardo and Thornton.” In Sato, Yuji and Takenaga, Susumu, eds., Ricardo on Money and Finance. Abingdon: Taylor & Francis, pp. 15–29.Google Scholar
Hayek, Friedrich. 1945. “The Use of Knowledge in Society.” American Economic Review 35 (4): 519–530.Google Scholar
Horner, Francis 1803. “Review of Lord King: ‘Thoughts on the Restriction of Payments in Specie at the Banks of England and Ireland.’” Edinburgh Review II (IV): 402–421.Google Scholar
Huskisson, William. 1810. The Question Concerning the Depreciation of Our Currency Stated and Examined. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Huskisson, William. 1831. The Speeches of the Right Honourable William Huskisson. Volume II. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
King, Peter [Lord]. 1804. Thoughts on the Effects of the Bank Restrictions. London: Cadell and Davies.Google Scholar
Laidler, David. 2000. Highlights of the Bullionist Controversy. Stockholm School of Economics, Research Report #13. Stockholm: Institute for Research in Economic History.Google Scholar
Le Maux, Laurent. 2012. “The Banking School and the Law of Reflux in General.” History of Political Economy 44 (4): 595–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loyd, Samuel Jones [Lord Overstone]. 1837. Further Reflections on the State of the Currency and the Action of the Bank of England. London: Pelham Richardson.Google Scholar
Mints, Lloyd. 1945. A History of Banking Theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Murphy, Antoin, 2003, “Paper Credit and the Multi-Personae Mr. Henry Thornton.” European Journal of the History of Economic Thought 10 (3): 429–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neal, Larry. 1998. “The Financial Crisis of 1825 and the Restructuring of the British Financial System.” Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Review 80 (3): 53–76.Google Scholar
Norman, George Warde. 1838. Remarks upon Some Prevalent Errors, with Respect to Currency and Banking and Suggestion to the Legislature and the Public as to the Improvement of the Monetary System. London: Pelham Richardson.Google Scholar
Perlman, Morris. 1986. “The Bullionist Controversy Revisited.” Journal of Political Economy 94 (4): 745–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pressnell, Leslie. 1956. Country Banking in the Industrial Revolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ricardo, David. 1810. The High Price of Bullion: A Proof of the Depreciation of Bank Notes. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Ricardo, David. 1811. Reply to Mr. Bosanquet’s Practical Observations on the Report of the Bullion Committee. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Ricardo, David. 1817. On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Ricardo, David. 1824. Plan for the Establishment of a National Bank. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Rist, Charles. 1940. History of Monetary and Credit Theory: From John Law to the Present Day. London: The Macmillan Company.Google Scholar
Skaggs, Neil. 2005. “Treating Schizophrenia: A Comment on Antoin Murphy’s Diagnosis of Henry Thornton’s Theoretical Condition.” European Journal of the History of Economic Thought 12 (2): 321–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
The Earl of Rosse. 1811. Observations on the Present State of the Currency of England. London: J. J. Stockdale.Google Scholar
Thornton, Henry. [1797, 1802] 1965. “The Evidence Given by Henry Thornton before the Committees of the Two Houses of Parliament on the Bank of England.” In Thornton, Henry, An Enquiry into the Nature and Effects of the Paper Credit of Great Britain. New York: Augustus M. Kelley, pp. 277–310.Google Scholar
Thornton, Henry. [1802] 1965. An Enquiry into the Nature and Effects of the Paper Credit of Great Britain. New York: Augustus M. Kelley.Google Scholar
Tooke, Thomas. 1844. An Inquiry into the Currency Principle. London: Longman, Brown, Green, and Longmans.Google Scholar
Vansittart, Nicholas. 1811. Substance of the Two Speeches Made by the Right Honorable Nicholas Vansittart. London: J. Hatchard.Google Scholar
Viner, Jacob. 1937. Studies in the Theory of International Trade. New York: Harper and Brothers Publishers.Google Scholar
Wheatley, John. 1807. An Essay on the Theory of Money and Principles of Commerce. London: Candell and Davies.Google Scholar
White, Lawrence. 1995. Free Banking in Britain. London: The Institute of Economics Affairs.Google Scholar
White, Lawrence. 1999. The Theory of Monetary Institutions. New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar