THE END OF LAISSEZ-FAIRE

Yet some other ingredients were neededto complete the pudding. First the corrup-tion and incompetence of eighteenth-centurygovernment, many legacies of which survivedinto the nineteenth. The Individualism ofthe political philosophers pointed to laissez-faire. The divine or scientific harmony (asthe case might be) between private interestand public advantage pointed to laissez-faire.But above all, the ineptitude of public adminis-trators strongly prejudiced the practical manin favour of laissez-faire —a sentiment whichhas by no means disappeared. Almost every-thing which the State did in the eighteenthcentury in excess of its minimum functionswas, or seemed, injurious or unsuccessful.

On the other hand, material progressbetween 1750 and 1850 came from individualinitiative, and owed almost nothing to thedirective influence of organised society as awhole. Thus practical experience reinforceda priori reasonings. The philosophers and theeconomists told us that for sundry deepreasons unfettered private enterprise would12