ABSTRACT OF PAPER
Title: From the Impartial Spectator to the Partial Public Opinion? A Reassessment of the Controversy between Smith and Bentham on Usury Laws
Author: Bréban Laurie, Sigot Nathalie
Our paper deals with the famous controversy between Smith and Bentham regarding usury laws. Despite the notoriety of this controversy, there are only few contributions confronting both authors's views. Most of the literature either focuses on Smith's defense of usury laws (Jadlow, 1977; Stiglitz and Weiss, 1981; Levy, 1987; Paganelli, 2003) or on Bentham's criticism to them (Guidi and Sigot, 2014). Hollander (1999) and Leloup (2000) constitute two notable exceptions. But whereas Hollander (1999) tries to explain the authors' opposition by emphasizing Bentham's incomprehension of Smith's argument, Leloup (2000) argues that the difference between them rests on a divergence concerning the psychology of the actors involved in the credit market (projectors and prudent men). Our paper is rather in the line with Leloup (2000's contribution. However, we do not consider the author's divergence regarding the psychology of the actors as sufficient to account for their opposition on usury laws. According to us, the controversy between Smith and Bentham relies above all on the role that each grants to norms, laws and the interactions between both. ________________________________________________________ References Guidi and Sigot (2014), "Jeremy Bentham et l'efficience économique du droit. Une illustration par l'analyse des règles monétaires", Revue Economique, 65(2), pp. 225-242. Hollander (1999), "Jeremy Bentham and Adam Smith on the usury Laws: a 'Smithian' reply to Bentham and a new problem", European Journal of the Economic Thought, 6(4), pp. 23-551. Jadlow (1977), "Adam Smith on Usury Laws", The Journal of Finance, 32(4), pp. 1195-1200. Leloup (2000), "Pour en finir avec l'usure. L'enjeu de la controverse entre Adam Smith et Jeremy Bentham", Revue Economique, 51(4), pp. 913-936. Levy (1987), "Adam Smith's case for usury laws", History of Political Economy, 19(3), pp. 387-400. Paganelli (2003), "In Medio Stat Virtus: An Alternative View of Usury in Adam Smith's Thinking", History of Political Economy, 35(1), pp. 21-48. Stiglitz, and Weiss (1981). Credit rationing in markets with imperfect information, The American Economic Review, 71(3), pp. 93-410.
Registred web users only can download this paper - Go back
Please note that files available for download have not been checked for viruses. These files have been submitted by authors of the conference to this web site. Conference organisers can't accept any responsibility for damages caused to users by downloading such files.