scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question

Showing papers in "The Economic History Review in 1956"






Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the Africans are put on trial for the murder of the crew but the case becomes the symbol of a nation divided, and Van Buren's will is challenged by former President John Quincy Adams (Anthony Hopkins) who comes out of retirement to fight the Africans' cause in the United States Supreme Court.
Abstract: The Africans are put on trial for the murder of the crew but the case becomes the symbol of a nation divided. The Africans are championed by abolitionists Theodore Joadson (Morgan Freeman) and Lewis Tappan (Stellan Skarsgård) and a young real estate attorney Roger Baldwin (Matthew McConaughey). Seeking reelection, pro-slavery President Martin Van Buren (Nigel Hawthorne) is willing to sacrifice the Africans to appease the South as well as Queen Isabella of Spain (Anna Paquin). However, Van Buren’s will is challenged by former President John Quincy Adams (Anthony Hopkins) who comes out of retirement to fight the Africans’ cause in the United States’ Supreme Court.

57 citations




Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A review of the post-restoration Port Books of Kent can be found in this paper, where it is shown that some legitimate trade, if any, were deliberately omitted from the record; and how many different harbours or landing places had their trade recorded in any one set of books.
Abstract: S INC E they were 'discovered' in i9ii by the Royal Commission on the Public Records, the Port Books have been increasingly used by economic and maritime historians and historical geographers for a variety of purposes, and in particular for the compilation of port statistics of imports and exports. Although historians have shown a general unwillingness to accept the books unquestioningly at their face value,' no specific objections have yet been raised to the assumption that they were kept in a sufficiently uniform manner and with sufficient accuracy to serve as a basis for broad comparisons between one port and another or one period and another. In fact, however, figures compiled from the Port Books can be gravely misleading unless careful consideration is given to two questions: first, what kinds of legitimate trade, if any, were deliberately omitted from the record; secondly, how many different harbours or landing places had their trade recorded in any one set of books. These problems may be briefly illustrated by a review of the post-Restoration Port Books of Kent.2 The purpose of the books was not to furnish trade or shipping statistics, but to prevent the evasion of customs duty. They formed part of a system whereby the authority of a coast cocquet or transire was necessary if goods were to be 'carried forth to the open sea from any port, creek, or member .., to be landed at any other place of this realm'.3 In practice, certain trades appear to have been excluded from this ruling. When a tonnage duty was imposed on coasters in 694, questions were raised as to the liability of vessels carrying certain commodities or employed on certain routes;5 exemption was claimed for, among others, the 'faggot hoys from Milton or Faversham or other places thereabouts', and also for the small boats that supplied London with Kentish cherries.6 Now these trades, whose importance was amply confirmed by Defoe and other contemporary writers, are scarcely mentioned in the whole series of Port Books under review. It seems likely that the fruit and faggot boats were free from both cocquet and transire fees, perhaps in consideration of the smallness of their cargoes and the shortness of their voyages, and that their special position in this regard was held to justify their exemption from tonnage duty. Another Kentish commodity wholly ignored by the books was the stone quarried near Maidstone and exported from Rochester. It is interesting to find that substantial shipments of Kentish fruit and stone were listed in some of the paper 'coast books' surviving from the Interregnum.7 The latter deserve close attention as possibly more comprehensive records of the coasting trade than the Port Books themselves.

50 citations




Journal ArticleDOI
Abstract: The anvatquynhon.xyz is your search engine for PDF files. Resources is a high quality resource for free Kindle books.Here is the websites where you can download eBooks. You have the option to browse by most popular titles, recent reviews, authors, titles, genres, languages and more.With more than 150,000 free e-books at your fingertips, you're bound to find one that interests you here.Site anvatquynhon.xyz has many thousands of free and legal books to download in PDF as well as many other formats. No need to download anything, the stories are readable on their site.



Journal ArticleDOI
John Saville1
TL;DR: In the first half of the 19th century, the appropriateness of the law of partnership to English conditions was discussed only intermittently during the firsthalf of the nineteenth century.
Abstract: LTV H E appropriateness of the law of partnership to English conditions was discussed only intermittently during the first half of the nineteenth century.2 Much of the comment was the product of exceptional circumstances; boom years and their aftermaths of failures and frauds provoked controversy about the nature of speculation, and the ways in which, by curbing it, a less erratic growth of society might be promoted.3 What is notable, however, is not the spate of discussion but its relatively limited volume, violent though it was on occasion. There was no sustained movement that attempted to bring Britain into line with commercial law and practice elsewhere, and the majority view which found expression in Bellenden Ker's well-known Report on the Law of Partnership was held to have settled the issue.4 Ker listed the three 'principal evils' of the law of partnership. These were (i) the difficulties of suing and being sued, (ii) the settlement of disputes between partners, and (iii) 'the rule, that any person taking an interest in the profits becomes liable as a partner'. The Select Committee on Joint Stock Companies of i 844 enlarged upon the first of these problems, and theJoint Stock Companies Registration and Regulation Act of the same year,5 making a legislative distinction between a joint stock company and an ordinary partnership, granted certain of the privileges of incorporation in return for compliance with the terms of the Act. Ker's third problem, that of liability, evoked vigorous controversy on several occasions: in i8i8, when an attempt to introduce the society en commandite failed in the Commons ; in i825, when the debates in Parliament and outside threw up most of the arguments that were to be repeated many times during the next three decades; 7 in I 8368 and, to a lesser extent, in the early i840's.9 As in the years immediately following i850, most of the discussion was in terms of the en commandite partnership rather than of general limited liability. But those who argued from assumptions of the uni-








Journal ArticleDOI
Abstract: De tous les appareils enregistreurs, capables de reveler a l'historien les mouvements pro-fonds de l'economie, les phenomenes monetaires sont sans doute le plus sensible. Mais… ils ont ete et sont, a leur tour, des causes: quelque chose comme un sismographe qui, non content de signaler les tremblements de terre, parfois les provoquerait.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In the early seventeenth century, the government appeared to have become firmly wedded to the idea that the customs revenue should be administered indirectly by farming it out to syndicates of business men as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: O NE of the reasons why the early seventeenth century is of particular interest to students of English government finance is that the government appears at this time to have become firmly wedded to the idea that the customs revenue should be administered indirectly by farming it out to syndicates of business men. The importance of the establishment of the great farm of the customs in i6042 is that it marks the end of a period of experimentation and uncertainty; experimentation in different forms of customs administration, and official uncertainty as to whether the customs revenue was better administered by collectors responsible to the Crown or by private persons for their own profit. The consolidation in one single farm of all those dues not already leased inaugurated a new era in the history of customs administration. Although the numerous new impositions and increases of the period were for the most part administered directly under the Crown,3 throughout the reigns of the first two Stuarts the bulk of the customs revenue was collected by syndicates of business men who paid an annual rent to the Crown in return for the right to appropriate the customs duties to themselves. Critics of this system were many and vociferous,4 but the most sustained, informed and reasoned attack came in the reign of Charles I, from John Harrison, himself for a time a customs farmer, whose criticism was the more telling because it was based on knowledge rather than prejudice. Nevertheless, opponents of the system, even though they were sometimes able to canvass powerful support,5 were little more than voices crying in the wilderness. Why were their proposals not implemented? In the first place, it must be appreciated that the system of farming did to some extent represent the logical extension of the Burleighan conception of the advantages of a settled revenue. Under the early Stuarts a notion which had been tentatively developed under Elizabeth became the idle fixe of successive Lord Treasurers. This was that the certain revenue provided by letting the customs to farm was an advantage which rendered this method of administration preferable to that of control by royal officials. Thus a foreign observer, writing in November i604 about the negotiations then in progress over the establishment of the great farm. remarked truly that one of the king's objects in adopting

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The use of estimates of national income or of its major components to illustrate arguments and analyses bearing on the economic strength or the progress of the nation was fairly common during the nineteenth century as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: T THE use of estimates of national income or of its major components to illustrate arguments and analyses bearing on the economic strength or the progress of the nation was fairly common during the nineteenth century. Sometimes the estimates were the result of elaborate calculations based in part at least on first-hand collections of data: sometimes they were no more than quantitative expressions of a set of rather general opinions: often they contained elements of both types of approach. It is the purpose of this article, which will appear in two parts, to review the principal serious estimates that were mad-2 by contemporaries and to consider whether they are sufficiently consistent with each other to yield estimates of long-term economic growth for the United Kingdom.'




Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, M. Vitorino Magalhaes Godinho, collabo rateur tr?s appr?ci? des Annales, nous offre un nouvel ouvrage1.
Abstract: Historien bien connu des activit?s portugaises d'Outre-Mer, attentif ? suivre les progr?s de l'histoire ?conomique et ? contribuer de la meilleure fa?on ? en acc?l?rer le rythme, M. Vitorino Magalhaes Godinho, collabo rateur tr?s appr?ci? des Annales, nous offre un nouvel ouvrage1. Ayant eu l'occasion de r?unir des s?ries de prix portugais, il a ?t? encourag? par le Centre de Recherches historiques de la 6e section ? ? introduire le cas portugais dans le grand d?bat d'histoire des prix ? qui pr?occupe toujours si fort historiens et ?conomistes. Pr?senter des sources, poser des probl?mes : il se d?fend d'avoir eu pour l'instant d'autres ambitions. Mais le ? cas portugais ? est important. Et la m?thode de M. Godinho est un effort d'?quilibre tr?s int?ressant. Il la d?finit comme se tenant ? ?gale distance des pures descriptions historiques qui cachent sous le m?pris de la th?orie l'acceptation de bien des pr?jug?s a-scientifiques ? et, d'autre part, d'une analyse trop raffin?e qu'il ne conviendrait pas d'appliquer ? des donn?es primaires souvent grossi?res.