THE GEOMETRICAL METHOD. 617 



by a concurrence of causes. In the one, it is assumed that the actions of 

 average rulers are determined solely by self-interest ; in the other, that the 

 sense of identity of interest with the governed, is produced and producible 

 by no other cause than responsibility. 



Neither of these propositions is by any means true ; the last is extreme- 

 ly wide of the truth. 



It is not true that the actions even of average rulers are wholly, or any 

 thing approaching to wholly, determined by their personal interest, or even 

 by their own opinion of their personal interest. I do not speak of the in- 

 fluence of a sense of duty, or feelings of philanthropy, motives never to be 

 mainly relied on, though (except in countries or during periods of great 

 moral debaseuient) they influence almost all rulers in some degree, and 

 some rulers in a very greaii degree. But I insist only on what is true of all 

 rulers, viz., that the character and course of their actions is largely influ- 

 enced (independently of personal calculation) by the habitual sentiments 

 and feelings, the general modes of thinking and acting, which prevail 

 throughout the community of which they are members; as well as by the 

 feelings, habits, and modes of thought which characterize the particular class 

 in that community to w^hich they themselves belong. And no one will un- 

 derstand or be able to decipher their system of conduct, who does not take 

 all these things into account. They are also much influenced by the max- 

 ims and traditions which have descended to them from other rulers, their 

 predecessors ; which maxims and traditions have been known to retain an 

 ascendancy during long periods, even in opposition to the private interests 

 of the rulers for the time being. I put aside the influence of other less gen- 

 eral causes. Although, therefore, the private interest of the rulers or of 

 the ruling class is a very powerful force, constantly in action, and exer- 

 cising the most important influence upon their conduct, there is also, in 

 what they do, a large portion which that private interest by no means af- 

 fords a sufficient explanation of ; and even the particulars which constitute 

 the goodness or badness of their government, are in some, and no small 

 degree, influenced by those among the circumstances acting upon them, 

 which can not, with any propriety, be included in the term self-interest. 



Turning now to the other proposition, that responsibility to the govern- 

 ed is the only cause capable of producing in the rulers a sense of identity 

 of interest with the community, this is still less admissible as a universal 

 truth, than even the former, I am not speaking of perfect identity of in- 

 terest, which is an impracticable chimera; which, most assuredly, responsi- 

 bility to the people does not give. I speak of identity in essentials; and 

 the essentials are different at different places and times. There are a large 

 number of cases in which those things which it is most for the general inter- 

 est that the rulers should do, are also those which they are prompted to do 

 by their strongest personal interest, the consolidation of their power. The 

 suppression, for instance, of anarchy and resistance to law — the complete 

 establishment of the authority of the central government, in a state of so- 

 ciety like that of Europe in the Middle Ages — is one of the strongest intei- 

 ests of the people, and also of the rulers simply because they are the rul- 

 ers; and responsibility on their part could not strengthen, though in many 

 conceivable ways it might weaken, the motives prompting them to pursue 

 this object. During the greater part of the reign of Queen Elizabeth, and 

 of many other monarchs who might be named, the sense of identity of in- 

 terest between the sovereign and the majority of the people was probably 

 stronger than it usually is in responsible governments ; every thing that 



