from the Corn Laws to Free Trade One case to rule them all: Theoretical synthesis and the repeal of the corn lawsschonhardt-bailey's

Abstract

Schonhardt-Bailey's goal is to explain the repeal of the Corn Laws. This case is of obvious substantive importance. Schonhardt-Bailey also identifies a good historical puzzle in the details of trying to explain legislative voting behavior on Repeal. First, politicians seemed to act against their personal economic and political interests when voting for it. Second, they also acted in a puzzling way when justifying their own behavior. Specifically, Schonhardt-Bailey shows that the politicians voted as delegates of their constituents. Intriguingly, these same politicians justified their votes in terms of a trustee theory of representation in which they acted on behalf of the nation in accordance with their personal best judgment. These votes, though not the justifications, would seem to violate the mandates on which many had been elected, since most had personal mandates and were not sent to the Commons as delegates.

Citation

Pahre, R. (2009), " from the Corn Laws to Free Trade One case to rule them all: Theoretical synthesis and the repeal of the corn lawsschonhardt-bailey's", Samuels, W.J., Biddle, J.E. and Emmett, R.B. (Ed.) A Research Annual (Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology, Vol. 27 Part 1), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Leeds, pp. 277-290. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0743-4154(2009)00027A016