當本文強調，欲理解亞當史密斯對帝國的態度，必須從兩層背景來加以理解。一是17 世紀出現的海權帝國的觀念及其相關論述，二是英國在英法七年戰爭之後成為西歐海洋強權與帝國的事實。循此，本文建構了英格蘭的貿易與海權帝國的論述。此一現代帝國論述使得政治經濟學擅揚而共和主義退位。史密斯承襲了這套政治經濟學的現代海權帝國觀念以批判征服型帝國。但他另一方面以「自然的」經濟發展邏輯以及正義的帝國統治兩項原則來分析、批評大英帝國近兩百年的海外殖民地發展。本文最後提出，史密斯所追尋的「正義帝國」，是18 世紀晚期以後，關心英國殖民統治的作家與政治人物的重要課題，同時也是最重要的遺產。

This essay emphatically argues that Adam Smith’s attitude toward empire can be better understood in the context of the maritime empire long propagated by the political economists before him. Contesting the revisionist views describing Smith as a pluralist theorist against empire, this essay argues that Smith’s political economy enables him to criticize colonial governments and policies within, but not beyond, the parameter of empire. Distancing itself from republican views of anti-imperial politics, the Smithian political economy brings natural affluence and justice, not sympathy and cultural pluralism, to the forefront. Smith’s critique of empire develops around the concern of how to govern a colony in accordance with the principles of justice. Henceforth, “Is a just empire possible?” becomes an emergent question for British intellects and statesmen concerned with British politics at home and abroad.