IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jechis/v25y1965i04p615-638_05.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Quantitative Approach to the Study of the Effects of British Imperial Policy upon Colonial Welfare: Some Preliminary Findings

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas, Robert Paul

Abstract

Historians have long debated whether the American colonies on balance benefited or were hindered by British imperial regulation. George Bancroft thought the regulations worked a definite hardship on the colonies. George L. Beer believed these regulations nicely balanced and that the colonies shared in the general advantages. Lawrence Harper, in a now classic article, actually attempted to calculate the cost and found that British policies “placed a heavy burden upon the colonies.†Oliver Dickerson wrote that “no case can be made … that such laws were economically oppressive,†while Curtis P. Nettels, writing at the same time to the same point, stated: “British policy as it affected the colonies after 1763 was restrictive, injurious, negative.†It is quite evident that a difference of opinion exists among reputable colonial historians over this important historical issue.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas, Robert Paul, 1965. "A Quantitative Approach to the Study of the Effects of British Imperial Policy upon Colonial Welfare: Some Preliminary Findings," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(4), pages 615-638, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jechis:v:25:y:1965:i:04:p:615-638_05
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0022050700058460/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Paul Hallwood, 2011. "Civil War and Willingness to Pay for Independence: The American Revolution," Working papers 2011-15, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    2. Morgan, Horatio M., 2024. "An Integrative Institutional Framework on the Canada-U.S. Business Performance Gap," MPRA Paper 119739, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Travis J. Lybbert, 2010. "The Economic Roots Of The American “Zigzag”: Knives, Forks, And British Mercantilism," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 48(3), pages 810-815, July.
    4. Douglas A. Irwin, 2019. "U.S. Trade Policy in Historical Perspective," NBER Working Papers 26256, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Sebastian Galiani & Gustavo Torrens, 2016. "Why Not Taxation and Representation? A Note on the American Revolution," NBER Working Papers 22724, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Carlo Alberto Magni, 2009. "Opportunity Cost, Excess Profit, and Counterfactual Conditionals," Frontiers in Finance and Economics, SKEMA Business School, vol. 6(1), pages 118-154, April.
    7. Claudia Goldin, 1995. "Cliometrics and the Nobel," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 191-208, Spring.
    8. Bonfatti, Roberto, 2017. "The sustainability of empire in a global perspective: The role of international trade patterns," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 137-156.
    9. F. Stuart Jones, 1984. "The New Economic History and the Industrial Revolution," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 52(2), pages 77-88, June.
    10. Farley Grubb, 2008. "Testing for the Economic Impact of the U.S. Constitution: Purchasing Power Parity across the Colonies versus across the States, 1748-1811," Working Papers 08-11, University of Delaware, Department of Economics.
    11. Maddison, Angus, 2005. "La economía de occidente y la del resto del mundo : una perspectiva milenaria," IFCS - Working Papers in Economic History.WH dilf0501, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Instituto Figuerola.
    12. Galiani, Sebastian & Torrens, Gustavo, 2019. "Why not taxation and representation? British politics and the American revolution," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 28-52.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jechis:v:25:y:1965:i:04:p:615-638_05. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jeh .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.