Treating schizophrenia: a comment on Antoin Murphy's diagnosis of Henry Thornton's theoretical condition

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size

Notes

‘Dr. A. Smith … has asserted the necessity of a limitation of paper … but he has done this in terms which are inaccurate, and he has given an erroneous and inadequate idea of the evil which may result from a very extended emission’ (Thornton 1802: 245; Murphy 2003: 443).

Thornton's decision not to accuse Smith of adhering to the real bills doctrine is consistent with recent studies by Perlman (1989) and Gherity (1994), both of whom absolve Smith of any attachment to the doctrine promulgated by the anti-bullionists.

And apparently to David Laidler as well; see Murphy 2003: 452, n. 12.

I have argued (in Skaggs 1995, 2003) that Thornton should be viewed as the father of the Banking School.

It hardly needs to be said that Thornton's sense of justice was highly developed compared to most of his contemporaries.