150 SECTIONAL ADDRESSES. 
as a ‘natural right.’ Violations of natural liberty are therefore inherently 
‘unjust.’ But the conception of inherent individual rights may be repu- 
diated ; and then interference may be condemned simply on the ground 
that it is impolitic from the point of view of social utility. In any case 
the presumption is held to be on the side of ‘liberty.’ The term, first 
‘natural liberty ’ and then ‘ liberty ’ or “ freedom ’ without the adjective, 
could thus be used, without formal argument, as bringing with it a 
whole atmosphere of commendation ; while ‘ interference ’ or ‘ artificial’ 
brought at once, and without attempt at formal proof, a whole atmosphere 
of disapproval. 
3. That society is nothing more than an aggregate collection of indi- 
viduals. Accordingly the wealth, the advantage, the profit of society as a 
whole is but the sum of the wealths, the advantages, the profits of the 
individuals composing it. 
4. That every individual left to himself pursues his own interest his 
own way, and knows it better than anybody else. Accordingly, absence 
of restriction on the individual is the best means of serving the community. 
Social interest is identical with individual interest. 
5. That every country has certain natural advantages. Left to them- 
selves individuals will exert themselves in the directions to which these 
advantages point. It is, therefore, for the benefit of a country or nation 
that they should be left free to do so. 
6. That in each country there is at any moment a certain given 
supply of capital and labour, which cannot be increased by any action of 
the State. Since, left to themselves, they will spontaneously flow into 
the employments most advantageous to themselves and consequently to 
the country, any action of a public authority which directs them towards 
employments to which they would not of themselves go, or keeps them in 
industries which they would otherwise leave, involves loss to the country. 
7. That if another country can supply certain commodities more 
cheaply, it follows that that country must possess advantages which the 
importing country does not enjoy. Since these imports must be paid for 
by exports, they must be paid for by commodities in the production of 
which the importing country has an advantage. Each country thus 
obtains what it wants with the least expenditure of labour or capital, 7.e. 
most cheaply, and benefits by international division of labour. Since the 
advantages in question are of divine appointment, to refuse to take the 
fullest advantage of international division of labour is to fly in the face of 
Providence. If the theistic conception is dropped, and the argument is 
based on utility, the offence is the equally serious one of disregarding 
common sense. 
8. That the national capital and labour can be transferred from one 
occupation to another. If an existing industry cannot be profitably 
carried on owing to foreign competition, the capital and labour involved 
can be transferred to some other manufacture within the country, and must 
inevitably be so transferred in order to provide the additional commodities 
necessary to pay for the imports. That the foreign country will—indeed, 
must—take commodities in return for what it sends, proves that in some 
exportable commodities the home country has an advantage. The destruc- 
tion of a native industry is in itself a proof that it has no economic right 
to exist. 
