The Debates on the German Zellverein in the First Half of the 19th Century Britain

Kawai Yasuo

doi:10.20624/sehs.52.1_63

Bibliographic Information

Other Title

一九世紀前半のイギリスにおけるドイツ関税同盟論
19世紀前半のイギリスにおけるドイツ関税同盟論
19セイキゼンハンノイギリスニオケルドイツカンゼイドウメイロン

Search this article

Description

During the first half of the 19th century, England tried to force other countries to adopt the free trade policy and to make them exporters of raw products for England. But her attempt didn't always succeed. Because in the same period Germany began to develop her industry and consequently she became a rival industrial state. The purpose of this paper is to clarify how British free traders recognized the German Zollverein and how their recognition changed according to the process of industrialization and the movement for the tariff protection in Germany by analyzing the articles on the German Zollverein written for the contemporary reviews and the views in Parliament. When the Zollverein was formed, some insisted that it was formed in order to retaliate on England and injurious as a whole, but others thought its duties moderate. At this time the Zollverein less interested British free traders than in the early 4O's. From the late 30's many free traders became aware of industrialization in Germany and began to point out the depression of the British textile industry.The so-called Bowring Report, in which Bowring insisted that the Zollverein would reduce its duties reciprocally and estimated the Zollverein highly because of its achievement of the internal free trade, had a great effect on the views on the Zollverein at the time and many reviews welcomed the expansion of the Zollverein. In the mid-40's the movement for the tariff protection in Germany became furious and import duties on British manufactures was raised by the Zollverein. After all British free traders gave up forcing the Zollverein to reduce its duties reciprocally and began to insist that their country should adopt the free trade policy unilaterally.

Journal

SOCIO-ECONOMIC HISTORY

SOCIO-ECONOMIC HISTORY 52 (1), 63-86,147-148, 1986

THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC HISTORY SOCIETY