. ▁ ▁They ▁had ▁many ▁critics . ▁D . ▁K . ▁Field house , ▁for ▁example , ▁arg ues ▁that ▁they ▁used ▁super f icial ▁arguments . ▁Field house ▁says ▁that ▁the ▁" ob vious ▁driving ▁force ▁of ▁British ▁expansion ▁since ▁ 1 8 7 0 " ▁came ▁from ▁expl or ers , ▁mission aries , ▁engine ers , ▁and ▁emp ire - mind ed ▁polit icians . ▁They ▁had ▁little ▁interest ▁in ▁financial ▁invest ments . ▁Hob son ' s ▁answer ▁was ▁to ▁say ▁that ▁fac eless ▁financi ers ▁manip ulated ▁everyone ▁else , ▁so ▁that ▁" The ▁final ▁determ ination ▁rest s ▁with ▁the ▁financial ▁power ." ▁Len in ▁believed ▁that ▁capital ism ▁was ▁in ▁its ▁last ▁stages ▁and ▁had ▁been ▁taken ▁over ▁by ▁mon opol ists . ▁They ▁were ▁no ▁longer ▁dynamic ▁and ▁sought ▁to ▁maintain ▁prof its ▁by ▁even ▁more ▁int ensive ▁explo itation ▁of ▁protected ▁mark ets . ▁Field house ▁reject s ▁these ▁arguments ▁as ▁unf ounded ▁spec ulation . ▁ ▁Imperial ism ▁of ▁Free ▁Trade ▁ ▁Histor ians ▁agree ▁that ▁in ▁the ▁ 1 8 4 0 s , ▁Britain ▁adopted ▁a ▁free - tra de ▁policy , ▁meaning ▁open ▁mark ets ▁and ▁no ▁tar iffs ▁throughout ▁the ▁emp ire . ▁▁ ▁The ▁debate ▁among ▁histor ians ▁involves ▁what ▁the ▁imp lications ▁of ▁free ▁trade ▁actually ▁were . ▁" The ▁Imperial ism ▁of ▁Free ▁Trade " ▁is ▁a ▁highly ▁influ ential ▁ 1 9 5 2 ▁article ▁by ▁John ▁Gall ag her ▁and ▁Ron ald ▁Robinson .