It is usual to regard the British industrial revolution as a spontaneous event, and to the extent that the outcome of the first industrial revolution was something which no government could have been expected consciously to contrive it was indeed spontaneous. But it should not be supposed therefore that government's role in the process was entirely passive. On the contrary, then—as now—the ineptitude or competence of governments was an important fact in retarding or accelerating economic growth. Changes in the conditions of supply and demand under which the different industries operated, called for, and produced, changes in economic legislation. Failure to legislate could be as important as new legislation in assisting or hindering the structural change which was essential to effective industrialization.

One of the myths that has grown up about the industrial revolution in England is that it happened in the absence of rather than because of government intervention, that government's role in the process was to efface itself as rapidly as possible in order to allow private enterprise to pursue its beneficent part in generating sustained economic growth. A famous passage by Adam Smith, in a chapter advocating free trade, provided the rationale for this legend by arguing that the maximization of private profit by individuals involves the maximization of national income.