THE GEOMETRICAL METHOD. 559 



that the actions of average rulei-s arc detennined solely by solf-iiitcrest; 

 in the otlicr, that the sense of identity of interest with tlie i^ovcirned, 

 is produced and producil)le by no other cause than lesponsiliiUty. 



Neither of tliese propositions is by any means true; the last is ex- 

 tremely wide of the truth. 



It is not true that tlie actions even of average rulers arc wholly, or 

 anything approaching to wholly, determined by their personal interest, 

 or even by their own opinion tii" their personal interest. I do not Speak 

 of the intluence of a sense t)f duty, or feehngs of phihuithropy, mo- 

 tives never to be exclusively relied on, although (except in countries 

 or during periods of great moral debasement) they inllueiice almost all 

 rulers in some degree, and some rulers in a very great degree. JJut I 

 insist oidy upon what is true of all rulers, viz., that the character and 

 course of their actions is largely influencetl (independ(Mitly of personal 

 calculation) by the habitual sentiments and feelings, the general modes 

 of thinking and acting, which jirevail throughout tlio community of 

 wliich they are members; as well ;ls by the feelings, habits, an.l imnles 

 of thought which characterize the particular class in that comnuinity 

 to which they themselves belong. And no one will undi-rsfand or bo 

 able to decipher their system of conduct, who does not take all these 

 things into account. They are also much influenced by the maxims and 

 traditions which have descended to them from other rulers, their pred- 

 ecessors; and which have been known to maintain, during long pe- 

 riods, a successful struggle in a direction contrary to tlie private 

 interests of the rulers for the time being. I put aside the iiilluence of 

 other less general causes. Although, therefore, the private interest of 

 the rulers or of the ruling class is a very powerful force, constantly in 

 action, and exercising the most important influence upon their con- 

 duct; there is also, in what they do, a large portion whii h thiit ])rivato 

 interest by no means affords a suflicient explanation of: and evin the 

 particulars which constitute the goodness or badness of their govern- 

 ment, are in some, and no small degree, influenced by tliose among 

 the circumstances acting upon them, which caunot, with any propriety, 

 be included in the term self-interest. 



Turning n(nv to the other proposition, that responsibility to the gov- 

 erned is the only cause capable of ])rodu(ing in tlir rulers a sense of 

 identity of interest with the community; this is still li-ss admissible as 

 an universal truth, than even the former. We are not speaking of 

 perfect identity of interest, which is an impracticable chimera; wliich, 

 most assuredly, responsibility to the people does not give. We ^|>eak 

 of identity in essentials; and the essentials aro different at difleronl 

 places and times. There are a large number of cases in which those 

 things which it in most for the interest of the people that thtsir ruler 

 should do, are also those which he is prompted to do by his strongest 

 personal interest, the consolidation of his power. The suppression, 

 for instance, of anarchy and resistance to law — the comj)lete establi«h- 

 ment of the authority r»f the ctrntral g»)vemmetit, in a slate of society 

 like that of L^urojx- in the middle ages — is the strongest int(M-est of the 

 people, and also of the rulers, simply because they aro the rulers; and 

 respoiisil)llity on their part could not strengthen, though in many con- 

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

 this object. During the gr(;ater part of the reign of Queen Elizabeth, 

 and of many other monarchs who might be named, the sense of iJcn- 



