lone
principle proceeds upon the supposition, not only that every body knows
his own interest best, or if not, that his freedom of action is of more
importance than his acting wisely, which is often true; but it also goes
on to assume that every body knows and will take just care of the welfare
of others. Push either principle to any great length; and you will find
yourself in the land of confusion and absurdity. In truth, I should
seldom like to say anything about the wisdom, or the folly, of
interference, until I knew exactly what it was about, and how far you
intended to interfere. It is one of those matters in which it is
especially desirable to keep in mind those maxims of prudence, respecting
the application of general rules to moral questions, which Burke has
handled so admirably. "Nothing universal," he observes, "can be
rationally affirmed on any moral, or any political subject. Pure
metaphysical abstraction does not belong to these matters. The lines of
morality are not like ideal lines of mathematicks. They are broad and
deep as well as long. They admit of exceptions; they demand
modifications. These exceptions and modifications are not made by the
process of logic, but by the rules of prudence. Prudence is not only the
first in rank of the virtues political and moral, but she is the
director, the regulator, the standard of them all." To take a particular
instance of legislative interference, namely, the enactments about
building party-walls, can any one doubt that this interference has been
most beneficial? Does any one suppose that, without it, the same good
results would have been gained? Would the prudence of private
individuals ever have accomplished it? Besides, I think it can hardly be
denied that a state should have a degree of providence for the general
body, not to be expected from private individuals, and which might compel
them to do things that would not consort with their interest even upon
the most enlarged views which they could take of it. The financial
affairs of the nation are conducted with no slight apparatus of intrusion
and vexation. We endure this patiently: indeed, in many cases, it is
difficult to see how it could be obviated. Surely we may submit to some
simple sanitary regulations, especially of that kind which may be
compared to indirect taxation, requiring to be attended to only by a
certain class of persons of daily experience in the matter. Such are
regulations