----------------- HES POSTING ----------------- 
 
Replying to Yuri Tulupenko 
 
The problem with this argument is that mercantilism was still pretty much 
fully in place in most countries throughout the 1700s and early 1800s, with 
a few 
exceptions such as Holland, the example that inspired Adam Smith. The full 
argument for free trade was not made by Ricardo until between 1810 and 
1820. 
The Cobden-Chevalier treaty that finally instituted more or less free trade 
between France and Britain did not happen until 1851, or thereabouts. 
 
Thus, when Hamilton argued for infant industry tariffs in 1793, followed by 
List several decades later, this was against free trade arguments that were 
only being developed and were certainly not in place in terms of policy, 
although their arguments differed from the older mercantilist arguments. 
 
The real policy reaction against free trade in the nineteenth century came 
in the 1870s. But this reflected global depression, rather than some new 
development of economic thinking involving eclecticism or anything else. In 
all countries, policy, and thinking about policy, reflected the conditions 
of those countries. Many would argue that free trade arguments emerged in 
Britain because as Britain was the leader of the industrial revolution and 
gained from free trade. Its rising rivals such as Germany and the US wanted 
infant industry protection to help compete with Britain. 
 
Barkley Rosser 
 
------------ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ------------ 
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask]