IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Reexamination of Thornton's Innovative Monetary Analysis: The Bullion Debate during the Restriction Once Again

Listed author(s):
  • Arie Arnon
Registered author(s):

    The Restriction period that began in England in 1797 marked a crucial turning point for monetary theory and policy. The debates during the Restriction concerning the relationship between inflation, the exchanges and monetary aggregates came to be known as the “Bullion Debate.” The Bullionists were critical of the Bank of England and supported a return to convertibility, whereas the anti-Bullionists defended both the Bank and inconvertibility. This paper re-evaluates Henry Thornton's seminal contribution to monetary theory and argues that Thornton's pathbreaking Paper Credit (1802) presents an innovative and consistent anti-Bullionist position. His views differ from those of the Bank of England and other anti-Bullionists; unlike them, he rejected the Real Bills Doctrine and Smith's monetary thinking in general as it applied to both convertible and inconvertible monetary arrangements. Thornton stressed the discretionary role the Bank played in managing the monetary system under both currency regimes. After 1802 and particularly as a member of the famous Bullion Committee, Thornton played an important role on the side of the Bullionists; later scholars therefore describe him as a “moderate Bullionist.” However, his reserved support for convertibility during this period reflects his disappointment with the Bank directors whose fundamental misunderstanding of the monetary system threatened the stability of the British economy. For this reason, the shift in Thornton's position is better understood as a pragmatic political response to an untenable situation resulting from the directors' mismanagement, not as a reversal of his monetary theory.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Duke University Press in its journal History of Political Economy.

    Volume (Year): 41 (2009)
    Issue (Month): 3 (Fall)
    Pages: 545-574

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:hop:hopeec:v:41:y:2009:i:3:p:545-574
    Contact details of provider: Postal:
    Duke University Press 905 W. Main Street, Suite 18B Durham, NC 27701

    Phone: (919) 660-1800
    Fax: (919) 684-8974
    Web page:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hop:hopeec:v:41:y:2009:i:3:p:545-574. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Center for the History of Political Economy Webmaster)

    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.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.