the rightness of a State by their own wishes.  His own contempt for the results of reasonable inquiry is a ceaseless lesson in the virtue of consistent scrutiny of our inheritance.  His disregard of popular desire suggests the fatal ease with which we neglect the opinion of those who stand outside the active centre of political conflict.  Above all, his hostility to the Revolution should at least make later generations beware lest novelty of outlook be unduly confounded with erroneous doctrine.

Yet even when such deduction has been made, there is hardly a greater figure in the history of political thought in England.  Without the relentless logic of Hobbes, the acuteness of Hume, the moral insight of T.H.  Green, he has a large part of the faculties of each.  He brought to the political philosophy of his generation a sense of its direction, a lofty vigour of purpose, and a full knowledge of its complexity, such as no other statesman has ever possessed.  His flashes of insight are things that go, as few men have ever gone, into the hidden deeps of political complexity.  Unquestionably, his speculation is rather that of the orator in the tribune than of the thinker in his study.  He never forgot his party, and he wrote always in that House of Commons atmosphere which makes a man unjust to the argument and motives of his opponent.  Yet, when the last word of criticism has been made, the balance of illumination is immense.  He illustrates at its best the value of that party-system the worth of which made so deep an impression on all he wrote.  He showed that government by discussion can be made to illuminate great principles.  He showed also that allegiance to party is never inconsistent with the deeper allegiance to the demand of conscience.  When he came to the House of Commons, the prospects of representative government were very dark; and it is mainly to his emphasis upon its virtues that its victory must be attributed.  Institutional change is likely to be more rapid than in his generation; for we seem to have reached that moment when, as he foresaw, “they who persist in opposing that mighty current will appear rather to resist the decrees of Providence itself than the mere designs of men.”  The principles upon which we proceed are doubtless different from those that he commended; yet his very challenge to their wisdom only gives to his warning a deeper inspiration for our effort.

CHAPTER VII

THE FOUNDATIONS OF ECONOMIC LIBERALISM

I

The Industrial Revolution is hardly less a fundamental change in the habits of English thought than in the technique of commercial production.  Alongside the discoveries of Hargreaves and Crompton, the ideas of Hume and Adam Smith shifted the whole perspective of men’s minds.  The Revolution, indeed, like all great movements, did not originate at any given moment.  There was no sudden invention which