Whenhedemandedthatagreatershareofinfluenceshouldbegiventothepeople，healwaystookforgrantedthattheirpowerwouldbeusedtodiminishtheactivityofthesovereignpower；thattherewouldbelessgovernmentandthereforelessjobbery，lessinterferencewithfreespeechandfreeaction，andsmallerperquisitestobebestowedinreturnforthenecessaryservices。
Thepeoplewouldusetheirauthoritytotiethehandsoftherulers，andlimitthemstrictlytotheirproperandnarrowfunctions。
Theabsence，again，oftheideaofastateinanyothersenseimpliesanothertendency。The’idea’wasnotrequired，Englishmenwereconcernedratherwithdetailsthanwithfirstprinciples。Satisfied，inageneralway，withtheirconstitution，theydidnotwanttobebotheredwiththeories。
Abstractandabsolutedoctrinesofright，whenimportedfromFrance，fellflatupontheaverageEnglishman。Hewaseagerenoughtodiscusstheutilityofthisorthatpartofthemachinery，butwithoutinquiringintofirstprinciplesofmechanism。Theargumentfrom’utility’dealswithconcretefacts，andpresupposesanacceptanceofsomecommoncriterionoftheuseful。Theconstantdiscussionofpoliticalmattersinparliamentandthepressimpliedatacitacceptanceonallhandsofconstitutionalmethods。Practicalmen，askingwhetherthisorthatpolicyshallbeadoptedinviewofactualevents，nomorewanttogobacktorightreasonand’lawsofnature’thanasurveyortoinvestigatethenatureofgeometricaldemonstration。Veryimportantquestionswereraisedastotherightsofthepress，forexample，orthesystemofrepresentation。Buteverybodyagreedthattherepresentativesystemandfreedomofspeechweregoodthings；andarguedtheimmediatequestionsoffact。Theorder，onlyestablishedbyexperienceandtradition，wasaccepted，subjecttocriticismofdetail，andmenturnedimpatientlyfromabstractargument，andlefttheinquiryinto’socialcontracts’tophilosophers，thatis，tosillypeopleinlibraries。Politicswereproperlyamatterofbusiness，tobediscussedinabusiness-likespirit。Inthissense，’individualism’iscongenialto’empiricism，’becauseitstartsfromfactsandparticularinterests，andresentstheintrusionoffirstprinciples。Thecharacteristicindividualism，again，suggestsoneotherremark。Individualenergyandsenseofresponsibilityaregoodasevenextremesocialistsmayadmit——iftheydonotexcludeasenseofdutiestoothers。Itmaybeaquestionhowfarthestimulationofindividualenterpriseandthevigorousspiritofindustrialcompetitionreallyledtoadisregardoftheinterestsoftheweaker。Butitwouldbeacompletemisunderstandingofthetimeifweinferredthatitmeantadeclineofhumanefeeling。Undoubtedlygreatevilshadgrownup，andsomecontinuedtogrowwhichweretoleratedbytheindifference，orevenstimulatedbytheselfishaims，ofthedominantclasses。But，inthefirstplace，manyofthemostactiveprophetsoftheindividualistspiritwereacting，andactingsincerely，inthenameofhumanity。Theywereattackingasystemwhichtheyheld，andtoagreatextent，Ibelieve，heldrightly，tobeespeciallyinjurioustotheweakestclasses。Possiblytheyexpectedtoomuchfromthesimpleremovalofrestrictions；butcertainlytheydenouncedtherestrictionsasunjusttoall，notsimplyashindrancestothewealthoftherich。AdamSmith’spositionisintelligible：itwas，hethought，aproofofaprovidentialorderthateachman，byhelpinghimself，unintentionallyhelpedhisneighbours。
Themoralsensebaseduponsympathywasthereforenotopposedto，butjustified，theeconomicprinciplesthateachmanshouldfirstattendtohisowninterest。