atter reason that he has given us
brief and interesting biographies of those whose influence was
greatest in shaping and directing the movement, illustrating his
narrative by portraits of them as they lived and acted. All these
things help us towards understanding how it comes to pass that
conclusions which seem clear as daylight to earnest thinkers in one
generation may be abandoned by succeeding generations as manifestly
erroneous. The inquiry also shows why, and to what extent, some of the
doctrines that were scientifically propounded by the Utilitarians did
initiate and lead up to an important reformation in the methods of
English government.

'It might be stated as a paradox' (Mr. Stephen observes) 'that,
whereas in France the most palpable evils arose from the excessive
power of the central government, and in England the most palpable
evils arose from the feebleness of the central government, the
French reformers demanded more government, and the English
reformers less government.... The solution seems to be easy. In
France, reformers such as Turgot and the economists were in favour
of an enlightened despotism, because ... it would suppress the
exclusive privileges of a class which, doing nothing in return, had
become a mere burthen, encumbering all social development. But in
England the privileged class was identical with the governing
class.'

The English aristocracy, in fact, were actually doing the country's
business, though they were doing it badly, and paid themselves much
too highly for very indifferent administration. Yet the English nation
acquiesced in the system, because the middle classes were growing rich
and prosperous, and the State interfered very little with their
private affairs. To this general statement of the case we agree; but
we may point out that in terming our aristocracy a privileged class
one material distinction has been passed over. For whereas the French
_noblesse_ constituted a caste partly exempted by birthright from the
general taxation, and vested with certain vexatious rights to which no
duties corresponded, the English aristocracy possessed legally no
privileges at all. It was not an exclusive order, but an upper class
that was constantly recruited, being open to all successful men; and
such a governing body is naturally indifferent to reforms, because it
is very little affected by administrative imperfections or abus