456 HEREDITY AND SELECTION IN SOCIOLOGY 



tion of the idea of integral liberty. Liberty is not integral, after 

 all, in spite of the rhetoric of Bastiat. The liberty of each indi- 

 vidual is restricted by the liberty of other individuals ; liberty 

 is to be complete, and subject to no restriction but that of not 

 doing injury to others. But this is a restriction ! Here we have 

 a moral element introduced which completely alters the aspect 

 of things. Bastiat declares that " detruire la liberte d'agir 

 c'est . . . tuer I'intelligence, c'est tuer la pensee, c'est tuer 

 I'homme." But the liberte d'agir, once it is restricted by a 

 moral element, however restricted in its turn that moral element 

 may be, is no longer liberie Wagir except within certain weU- 

 deflned limits. Thus, we find Liberal philosophy, through the 

 voice of its most authorised exponents, of Kant and Fichte, of 

 Adam Smith and John Stuart MUl — ^nay, even of Spencer himself, 

 who sees in the development of ever greater altruism the outward 

 sign and token of social progress — declaring that the liberty of 

 every individual is limited by an ethical element — ^namely, by 

 the duty of not infringing the liberty of others. 



But LiberaUsm is also the doctrine of free competition. We 

 have given some specimens of Bastiat's inflamed rhetoric in 

 favour of free and unrestricted competition. The progress of 

 society is directly dependent on competition. " Every restric- 

 tion of it is an evil, and every extension of it is always an 

 ultimate good," declares Mill. It is the lever of social evolution, 

 and the sole duty of the State is to ensure the maximum of 

 individual competition being carried on without let or hindrance. 

 But how reconcile this idea of unfettered and unrestricted 

 competition with the ethical restriction of the liberty of each 

 individual by the liberty of others ? With amazing optimism, 

 Adam Smith and Eicardo declared individual interests and 

 social interests to be identical ; and the former even imagined 

 that the " private interest and passions of men naturally lead 

 them to divide and distribute the stock of every society as nearly 

 as possible in the proportion which is most agreeable to the 



