¹ Schumpeter, Joseph A., History of Economic Analysis (Oxford, 1994; first published 1954), 472–3, 494, 540–41, 668Google Scholar.

² Ibid., 472, 494, 569–70.

³ Pocock, J. G. A., “Political Thought in the English-Speaking Atlantic, 1760–1790. Part 2: Empire, Revolution and the End of Early Modernity,” in Pocock, J. G. A., Schochet, Gordon J., and Schwoerer, Lois G., eds., The Varieties of British Political Thought, 1500–1800 (Cambridge, 1993), 283–318, at 302Google Scholar.

⁴ Klein, Lawrence and La Vopa, Anthony J., eds., Enthusiasm and Enlightenment in Europe, 1650–1850 (San Marino, 1998)Google Scholar.

⁵ Burke, Edmund, Reflections on the Revolution in France (1790), in Burke, Revolutionary Writings:Reflections on the Revolution in France and the First Letter on a Regicide Peace, ed. Hampsher-Monk, Iain (Cambridge, 2014), 1–250Google Scholar.

⁶ Pocock, J. G. A., “Perceptions of Modernity in Early Modern Historical Thinking,” Intellectual History Review, 17/1 (2007), 79–92, at 59CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁷ For a synthesis of this research see Heyd, Michael, “ Be Sober and Reasonable”: The Critique of Enthusiasm in the Seventeenth and Early Eighteenth Centuries (Leiden, 1995)Google Scholar.

⁸ John Mee, “Anxieties of Enthusiasm: Coleridge, Prophecy, and Popular Politics in the 1790s,” in Klein and La Vopa, Enthusiasm and Enlightenment in Europe, 179–203; J. G. A. Pocock, “Enthusiasm: The Antiself of Enlightenment,” in Klein and La Vopa, Enthusiasm and Enlightenment in Europe, 1650–1850, 7–28.

⁹ Stewart, Dugald, Elements of the Philosophy of the Human Mind (1792), in The Collected Works of Dugald Stewart, ed. Hamilton, W., vol. 2 (Edinburgh, 1854), p. 220Google Scholar.

¹⁰ Stewart, Elements of the Philosophy of the Human Mind, 220.

¹¹ Ibid.

¹² Pocock, J. G. A., Virtue, Commerce, and History: Essays on Political Thought and History, Chiefly in the Eighteenth Century (Cambridge, 1985), 14CrossRefGoogle Scholar. I am also indebted to Quentin Skinner's notion of an appraisive vocabulary; see his “The Idea of a Cultural Lexicon,” in Skinner, Visions of Politics, vol. 1 (Cambridge, 2002), 158–74.

¹³ See Guttridge, G. H., “Thomas Pownall's The Administration of the Colonies: The Six Editions,” William and Mary Quarterly, 26/1 (1969), 31–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁴ Pownall, Thomas, “A Letter from Governor Pownall to Adam Smith,” in Glasgow Edition of the Works and Correspondence of Adam Smith, 6 vols. (Oxford, 1976–87), 6: 337–76, at 337Google Scholar.

¹⁵ Ibid., 337, original emphasis.

¹⁶ Ibid., 340, original emphasis.

¹⁷ Ibid., 347, original emphasis.

¹⁸ Ibid., 348, original emphasis.

¹⁹ Ibid., 339–40.

²⁰ Ibid., 349.

²¹ Both suggestions are made in the editorial footnote to Smith, Adam, “The Theory of Moral Sentiments,” in Glasgow Edition of the Works and Correspondence of Adam Smith, 1: 231 n. 6Google Scholar.

²² Ibid., 227–8.

²³ Ibid., 231.

²⁴ Ibid., 232.

²⁵ Ibid., 232–3.

²⁶ Burke, Reflections on the Revolution in France, 187.

²⁷ Ibid., 188.

²⁸ Ibid., 59.

²⁹ Malthus, Thomas Robert, An Essay on the Principle of Population (1798), in The Works of Thomas Robert Malthus, ed. Wrigley, E. A. and Souden, D., 8 vols. (London, 1986), 1: 6Google Scholar.

³⁰ Ibid., 6.

³¹ Ibid., 6–7.

³² Ibid., 8.

³³ Stewart, Elements of the Philosophy of the Human Mind, 208–9. This discussion is influenced by the treatment of Stewart's Elements and his lectures on political economy in Collini, Stefan, Winch, Donald and Burrow, John, That Noble Science of Politics: A Study in Nineteenth-century Intellectual History (Cambridge, 1983), 23–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

³⁴ Stewart, Elements of the Philosophy of the Human Mind, 209.

³⁵ Ibid., 178–9.

³⁶ Ibid., 214.

³⁷ Ibid., 214.

³⁸ Ibid., 222.

³⁹ Ibid., 224.

⁴⁰ Ibid., 227.

⁴¹ Ibid., 229–30.

⁴² Epstein, James, Radical Expression: Political Language, Ritual, and Symbol in England, 1790–1850 (Oxford, 1994), 23–6Google Scholar.

⁴³ Rothschild, Emma, Economic Sentiments: Adam Smith, Condorcet, and the Enlightenment (Cambridge, MA, 2002), 55Google Scholar. For the legal and social persecutions brought to bear on radicals and reformers see Johnston, Kenneth R., Unusual Suspects: Pitt's Reign of Alarm and the Lost Generation of the 1790s (Oxford, 2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁴⁴ Fetter, Frank Whitson, “The Politics of the Bullion Report,” Economica, 26/102 (1959), 99–120, at 102CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁴⁵ Ibid., 104.

⁴⁶ Fetter, Frank W., Development of British Monetary Orthodoxy, 1797–1875 (Cambridge, MA, 1965), 26–63Google Scholar; Fontana, Biancamaria, Rethinking the Politics of Commercial Society: The Edinburgh Review 1802–1832 (Cambridge, 1985), 118–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁴⁷ Malthus surveyed the debate in 1811 in his “Depreciation of Paper Currency,” published in the Edinburgh Review. He correctly identified Ricardo as coinciding with the report's views regarding the monetary analysis of the issue but then diverging from them by excluding the demand for Britain's goods and services as a factor affecting the exchange. Malthus, Thomas Robert, “Depreciation of Paper Currency,” in The Works of Thomas Malthus, vol. 7, ed. Wrigely, E. A. and Souden, D. (London, 1986), 21–56, at 24–5Google Scholar.

⁴⁸ Fetter, The Politics of the Bullion Report of 1810, 104–6.

⁴⁹ Ibid., 108–11, 118.

⁵⁰ Jackson, Randle, The Speech of Randle Jackson, Esq: Delivered at the General Court of the Bank of England, Held on the 20th of September, 1810, Respecting the Report of the Bullion Committee of the House of Commons: with Notes on the Subject of that Report (London, 1810), 5Google Scholar at *. Ricardo does seem to have treated the bank as a constant political target; see Milgate, Murray and Stimson, Shannon C.’s Ricardian Politics (Princeton, 1991), 67Google Scholar.

⁵¹ Bosanquet, Charles, Practical Observations on the Report of the Bullion Committee (London, 1810)Google Scholar. Sraffa nominated Bosanquet as a serious opponent (Sraffa, Piero, “Note on the Bullion Essays,” in The Works and Correspondence of David Ricardo, ed. Sraffa, Piero, 11 vols. (Indianapolis, 2004; first published 1951–77), 3: 3–12Google Scholar, at 10. Ricardo made the same point (David Ricardo, “Reply to Bosanquet,” in ibid., 3: 159–256, at 159).

⁵² O'Shaughnessy, Andrew J., “Bosanquet, Charles (1769–1850),” Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (Oxford, 2004)Google Scholar; Lee, Grace Lawless, The Story of the Bosanquets (Canterbury, 1966), 80–81Google Scholar.

⁵³ Bosanquet, Practical Observations, 3–48.

⁵⁴ Ibid., 38, 45, 68.

⁵⁵ Ibid., 92–100, 108.

⁵⁶ Bosanquet, Practical Observations, 1; Mushet, Robert, An Enquiry into the Effect produced on the National Currency and Rates of Exchange by the Bank Restriction Bill (London, 1810)Google Scholar.

⁵⁷ Bosanquet, Practical Observations, 1–2. In saying so Bosanquet seems to have inaugurated the tradition of erroneously tracing paternity of the inquiry to Ricardo. On this fallacious tradition see Fetter, Frank W., “The Bullion Report Reexamined,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 56/4 (1942), 655–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁵⁸ Bosanquet, Practical Observations, 1–2.

⁵⁹ Ibid., 3.

⁶⁰ Ibid., 4.

⁶¹ For a discussion of these theoretical issues in historical context see chap. 2 of Frank W. Fetter's Development of British Monetary Orthodoxy.

⁶² Bosanquet, Practical Observations, 10.

⁶³ Ibid., 16.

⁶⁴ Ibid., 17.

⁶⁵ Ibid., 25.

⁶⁶ Ibid., 23.

⁶⁷ See Laslett, Peter, “John Locke, the Great Recoinage, and the Origins of the Board of Trade: 1695–1698,” in Yolton, J., ed., John Locke: Problems and Perspectives, a Collection of New Essays (Cambridge, 1969), 137–64Google Scholar.

⁶⁸ Bosanquet, Practical Observations, 37.

⁶⁹ Ibid., 36.

⁷⁰ Ibid., 47.

⁷¹ Ibid., 48.

⁷² Ibid., 108.

⁷³ Ibid.

⁷⁴ House of Commons Select Committee on the High Price of Gold Bullion, Report of the Select Committee on the High Price of Gold Bullion (London, 1810), 2.

⁷⁵ Bosanquet, Practical Observations, 108–9.

⁷⁶ Ricardo, “Reply to Bosanquet,” 160.

⁷⁷ Ibid.

⁷⁸ Ibid., 165.

⁷⁹ Ibid., 172.

⁸⁰ Ibid., 190.

⁸¹ Ibid., 218.

⁸² Ibid., 165.

⁸³ That is, as if gold (the standard in England) and silver (the standard in Hamburg) held a constant exchange ratio with one another as bullion.

⁸⁴ Ricardo, “Reply to Bosanquet,” 169–70.

⁸⁵ Ibid., 170–72.

⁸⁶ Ibid., 173–4.

⁸⁷ It was used by Dugald Stewart, and likely disseminated through his students. See Collini, Winch and Burrow, That Noble Science, 33. To take Francis Horner as an example, Depoortère, Christophe, “On Ricardo's Method: The Scottish Connection Considered,” History of Political Economy, 40/1, (2008), 73–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar, finds a link between Stewart and Ricardo via Horner.

⁸⁸ Ricardo, “Reply to Bosanquet,” 181.

⁸⁹ Ibid., 182.

⁹⁰ Ibid., 252.

⁹¹ Ibid., 202–3.

⁹² Smith, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, in Glasgow Edition of the Works and Correspondence of Adam Smith, 1–2: 328–9.

⁹³ Bosanquet, Practical Observations, 86–91.

⁹⁴ Smith's point was that the price of money is determined by its supply and demand; taxes were simply one factor influencing demand.

⁹⁵ Ricardo, “Reply to Bosanquet,” 238.

⁹⁶ Ricardo further claimed that the committee was perfectly amenable to the idea that taxation accounted for part of the rising prices; only 18 per cent was to be attributed to the depreciation of the circulating medium because that was the extent of the divergence between the markets in the mint price of gold. Ibid., 239.

⁹⁷ Ibid., 239.

⁹⁸ Ibid., 195.

⁹⁹ See Tribe, Keith, Land, Labour and Economic Discourse (London, 1978), chap. 6Google Scholar, for a discussion of pamphlets from the same year by Malthus, Torrens and West. I am indebted to Tribe's text and Peach, Terry’s detailed study of Ricardo, Interpreting Ricardo (Cambridge, 1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁰⁰ David Ricardo, An Essay on the Influence of a Low Price of Corn on the Profits of Stock (1815), in Works, 4: 1–42, at 21.

¹⁰¹ David Ricardo, On the Principles of Political Economy, and Taxation (1817), in Works, 1: 1–443, at 5. All references are to the first (1817) edition of Ricardo's Principles, since this was the edition reviewed in the British Review article discussed at length below. Sraffa collated all editions, taking the third edition (1821) as the base text.

¹⁰² Ricardo, On the Principles of Political Economy, and Taxation, 13.

¹⁰³ Peach, Interpreting Ricardo, 150.

¹⁰⁴ For which see ibid., 161–4.

¹⁰⁵ He also homogenized different types of labour for the purposes of analysis—acknowledging the differences in skill and reward but then setting aside this complication. Ricardo, On the Principles of Political Economy, and Taxation, 20–22.

¹⁰⁶ Ricardo, On the Principles of Political Economy, and Taxation, 26–9.

¹⁰⁷ A key mechanism in the Essay carried into the Principles, which allowed Ricardo to generalize effects in agriculture to the entire economy. Ricardo, An Essay on the Influence of a Low Price of Corn on the Profits of Stock 13, 23–6.

¹⁰⁸ Ricardo, On the Principles of Political Economy, and Taxation, 59–60. See Peach's discussion of this in Peach, Interpreting Ricardo, 162–3.

¹⁰⁹ Ricardo, On the Principles of Political Economy, and Taxation, 61, 63.

¹¹⁰ Ibid., 17.

¹¹¹ Pinsent, Joseph, Letters to the Chairman of the Committee of the Hon. the House of Commons on the Agricultural Distresses, Stating the Causes of Those Distresses and Pointing out the Remedies for Them: and to David Ricardo . . . in Answer to his Speech of the 7th of March, 1821, Designed to Demonstrate the Errors of the Theory Which that Gentleman Advocates (London, 1821)Google Scholar, repr. in Peach, Terry, ed., David Ricardo: Critical Responses, vol. 1 (London, 2003), 229–38, at 232Google Scholar.

¹¹² Anonymous, “Causes and Remedies of Agricultural Distress,” Farmer's Magazine, May 1822, 200–22, repr. in Peach, David Ricardo: Critical Responses, 290–311, at 291.

¹¹³ Anonymous, “Review of On Protection to Agriculture,” British Critic, May 1822, 449–68, repr. in Peach, David Ricardo: Critical Responses, 312–28, at 322–3.

¹¹⁴ Ibid., 323.

¹¹⁵ Anonymous, “Review of Des Principes de l'Economie Politique et de L'Impót,” British Critic, Dec. 1819, 561–78, repr. in Peach, David Ricardo: Critical Responses, 130–44, at 136.

¹¹⁶ Ibid., 138–9.

¹¹⁷ Anonymous, “Review of Principles of Political Economy, Part II,” British Critic, Sept. 1820, 275–93, repr. in Peach, David Ricardo: Critical Responses, 193–208, at 198.

¹¹⁸ Ibid., 208.

¹¹⁹ Anonymous, “Review of Principles of Political Economy, Part I,” British Critic, Aug. 1820, 117–38. repr. in Peach, David Ricardo: Critical Responses, 173–92, at 180.

¹²⁰ Ibid. 175–6.

¹²¹ Anonymous, “Article XV. Political Economy and Taxation,” British Review, Nov. 1817, 309–33, at 309.

¹²² Ibid., 309.

¹²³ Ibid., 310.

¹²⁴ Ibid., 318.

¹²⁵ Ibid., 312, 314.

¹²⁶ Ibid., 319.

¹²⁷ Ibid., 310.

¹²⁸ Ibid., 320.

¹²⁹ Ibid, 311–12.

¹³⁰ Ricardo, Works, 7: 219.

¹³¹ Ibid., 222.

¹³² Anonymous, “Article XV. Political Economy and Taxation,” 313–16.

¹³³ Ibid., 315.

¹³⁴ Ricardo, Works, 7: 256.

¹³⁵ Thomas Robert Malthus, Principles of Political Economy (1820), in Works, 5–6: 5.

¹³⁶ Ibid., 7.

¹³⁷ Ibid.

¹³⁸ Ibid., 8.

¹³⁹ Ricardo, David, “Notes on Malthus's Principles of Political Economy,” in Works, 2: 1–452Google Scholar, at 6–7.

¹⁴⁰ David Ricardo, in Works, 8: 184.

¹⁴¹ Anonymous, “Review of On Protection to Agriculture,” 323.

¹⁴² Winch, Donald, “Introduction,” in James Mill: Selected Economic Writings, ed. Winch, Donald (London, 1966), 197–8Google Scholar. Note also Clark's suggestion that by attacking the Corn Laws Ricardo was attacking the existing social order. Clark, J. C. D., English Society 1660–1832: Religion, Ideology and Politics during the Ancien Regime, 2nd edn (Cambridge, 2000), 188–9Google Scholar.

¹⁴³ J. G. A. Pocock, “Political Thought in the English-Speaking Atlantic,” 308.

¹⁴⁴ Tribe, Land, Labour and Economic Discourse, 120, 127, 145.

¹⁴⁵ Pocock, Virtue, Commerce and History, 201–3.

¹⁴⁶ A similar point has been made by Depoortère, “On Ricardo's Method: The Scottish Connection Considered,” 106, who also disputed the justness of characterizing Ricardo as an a priori thinker.

¹⁴⁷ Pownall, “A Letter from Governor Pownall to Adam Smith,” 340.

¹⁴⁸ Stewart, Elements of the Philosophy of the Human Mind, 222.

¹⁴⁹ Torrens, Robert, Essay on the Production of Wealth (London, 1821), ivGoogle Scholar.

¹⁵⁰ See de Marchi, N. B. and Sturges, R. P., “Malthus and Ricardo's Inductivist Critics: Four Letters to William Whewell,” Economica, 40/160 (1973), 379–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hollander, Samuel, “William Whewell and John Stuart Mill on the Methodology of Political Economy,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 14/2 (1983), 127–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Both Whewell and Jones made the allegation of enthusiasm: Jones, Richard, An Essay on the Distribution of Wealth, and on the Sources of Taxation (London, 1831), xiii–xivGoogle Scholar; Whewell, William, Mathematical Exposition of Some of the Leading Doctrines in Mr Ricardo's “Principles of Political Economy and Taxation” (London, 1831), 7Google Scholar.

¹⁵¹ See the essays collected in Lively, Jack and Rees, John, eds., Utilitarian Logic and Politics: James Mill's “Essay on Government,” Macaulay's Critique and the Ensuing Debate (Oxford, 1978)Google Scholar.

¹⁵² Susie I. Tucker, Enthusiasm: A Study in Semantic Change (Cambridge, 1972), 163.