As the first president of the Economic History Society in 1926 William James Ashley, the most original of the English historical economists, warned economic historians: “the theoretical economists are ready to keep us quiet by giving us a little garden plot of our own; and we humble historians are so thankful for a little undisputed territory that we are inclined to leave the economists to their own devices.” Ashley's comment was symbolic of the relationship between economics, economic history, and historical economics. Ashley had set out fifty years earlier not only to promote the study of economic history, but also to replace deductive economic theory with a new historical economics erected on a foundation of inductive research. Ashley was unwilling to acquiesce in the compartmentalization of economic studies into economic theory, applied economics, and economic history. In this study the term “economic history” is used to describe the study of past economic phenomena, that is, it is used primarily to describe a category of history. “Applied economics” is here characterized as the study of contemporary economic issues for the formulation of policy. Finally, the term “economic theory” will be employed to describe the derivation of abstract principles from economic phenomena. Between the 1870s and 1920s, economic theory and economic history began to be recognized as separate, though related, disciplines in British universities. The historical economists were those who began their careers before this division became enshrined in the examinations of the universities. They wrote and taught economic theory, applied economics and economic history. Their ovewhelming emphasis, however, was upon economic history and applied economics.