Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This paper responds to an article by Maltby (1998) which, in part, challenges the Jones and Aiken (1995) (British Accounting Review, Vol.27, No.1) analysis of social and political influences on the development of nineteenth century companies legislation. Maltby asserts that the laissez-faire/collectivist framework proposed by J&A provides an insufficient basis for evaluating legislation of the period. She presents evidence of an alternative hypothesis, claiming, among other things, that large investors played a more significant role in the shaping of companies legislation. The analyses and rationales underlying Maltby's “large investor” hypothesis are critically examined. While there are some noteworthy strengths to Maltby's methodological approach, it is concluded that her findings are, nevertheless, insufficient to reject the laissez-faire thesis.

Keywords

liassez-faire collectivism companies legislation financial disclosure shareholders

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Atiyah, P. , (1979), The Rise and Fall of the Freedom of Contract, Oxford: Oxford University Press .

Brebner, J.B. , (1948), “Laissez-faire and State Intervention in 19th Century Britain” , Journal of Economic History, Supp. VIII, pp. 59-73 .

Crouch, R.L. , (1967), “Laissez-faire in Nineteenth Century Britain: Myth or Reality?” , Manchester School of Economic and Social Studies, Vol.XXXV, pp. 199-215 .

Dicey, A.V. , (1914), Lectures on the Relation Between Law and Public Opinion in England, During the Nineteenth Century, second edition, London: MacMillan (first published 1905).

Guttsman, J. , (1965), The British Political Elite London: MacGibbon and Kee .

Jones, S. and Aiken, M.E. , (1994), "The Significance of the Profit and Loss Account in Nineteenth Century Britain: A Reassessment” , Abacus, Vol.30, No.2, September, pp. 196-230 .

Jones, S. , (1995), “A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Recommendations for Company Financial Disclosure and Auditing by Nineteenth Century Parliamentary Witnesses” , Accounting, Business and Financial History, Vol.5, No.2, September, pp. 159-187 .

Jones, S. and Aiken, M.E. , (1995), “British Companies Legislation and Social and Political Evolution During the Nineteenth Century” , British Accounting Review, Vol 27, No.1, March, pp. 61-82 .

Jones, S. and Aiken, M.E. , (1999), “Laissez-faire, Collectivism and Nineteenth Century Companies Legislation: A Response to Walker (1996)” , British Accounting Review, Vol.31, No.1, pp. 85-96 .

10.

Maltby, J. , “UK Joint Stock Companies Legislation 1844-1900: Accounting Publicity and ‘Mercantile Caution’” , Accounting History, NS Vol.3, No.1, May, pp. 9-32 .

11.

Parker, R.H. , (1990), “Regulating British Corporate Financial Reporting in the Late Nineteenth Century” , Accounting, Business and Financial History, Vol.1, No.1, October, pp. 51-71 .

12.

Parris, H. , (1960), “The Nineteenth Century Revolution in Government: A Reappraisal Reappraised” , Historical Journal, Vol.III, No.2, pp. 17-37 .

13.

Shannon, R. , (1974), The Crisis of Imperialism, 1865-1915 London: Hart Davis MacGibbon .

14.

Taylor, A.J. , (1972), Laissez-faire and State Intervention in Nineteenth Century Britain London: MacMillan .

15.

Walker, S.P. , (1996), “Laissez-faire, Collectivism and Companies Legislation in Nineteenth Century Britain” , British Accounting Review, Vol.28, No.4, December, pp. 305-324 .

16.

Wright, D.G. , (1970), Democracy and Reform: 1815-1885, London: Longmans .

UK companies legislation: accounting publicity and "mercantile caution": a response to Maltby

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References