<< I should have mentioned that the Wealth of Nations was little read
until
>after people realized that it might be useful in the wake of the French
>Revolution. Only a few libraries at Cambridge University even owned
the
>book before 1900.
>
I'm assuming that either a.) you mean 1800, or b.) it's late and I am
misremembering when the French Revolution happened...
>>
If 1800 is the relevant date, then it's hard to know who would have been interested in Smith at Cambs in 1800. There was of course no economics or social science faculty. Smith was a teacher of jurisprudence, but law, apart from civil law, wasn't a university subject at Cambs or any Brit school till the 1960s (that's not a misprint). Smith would haver fit in best in philosophy, but Cambridge philosophy in 1800 was a pretty sleepy place to be--Russell, Moore, and Wittgenstein were several generations later.
--jks