IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

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


  • Arie Arnon


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.

Suggested Citation

  • Arie Arnon, 2009. "Reexamination of Thornton's Innovative Monetary Analysis: The Bullion Debate during the Restriction Once Again," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 41(3), pages 545-574, Fall.
  • Handle: RePEc:hop:hopeec:v:41:y:2009:i:3:p:545-574

    Download full text from publisher

    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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Richard Layard, 2006. "Happiness and Public Policy: a Challenge to the Profession," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 116(510), pages 24-33, March.
    2. Coase, R H, 1976. "Adam Smith's Views of Man," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 19(3), pages 529-546, October.
    3. N. Emrah Aydinonat, 2006. "Is the Invisible Hand un− Smithian? A Comment on Rothschild," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 2(2), pages 1-9.
    4. Lisa Hill, 2001. "The hidden theology of Adam Smith," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 1-29.
    5. A. M. C. Waterman, 2002. "Economics as Theology: Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 68(4), pages 907-921, April.
    6. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:2:y:2006:i:2:p:1-9 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Brewer, Anthony, 1998. "Luxury and Economic Development: David Hume and Adam Smith," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 45(1), pages 78-98, February.
    8. Anthony Brewer, 1997. "An eighteenth-century view of economic development: Hume and Steuart," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(1), pages 1-22.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    Henry Thorton; Paper Credit; Bullion Committee;


    Access and download statistics


    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: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). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.