THE END OF LAISSEZ-FAIRE

Quesnay, finds little support in the writingsof this school, though they were, of course,proponents of the essential harmony of socialand individual interests. The phrase laissez-faire is not to be found in the works of AdamSmith, of Ricardo, or of Malthus. Even theidea is not present in a dogmatic form in anyof these authors. Adam Smith, of course, wasa Free Trader and an opponent of manyeighteenth-century restrictions on trade. Buthis attitude towards the Navigation Acts andthe Usury laws shows that he was not dog-matic. Even his famous passage about “theinvisible hand” reflects the philosophy whichwe associate with Paley rather than theeconomic dogma of laissez-faire. As Sidgwick and Cliff Leslie have pointed out, AdamSmith’s advocacy of the “obvious and simplesystem of natural liberty” is derived from histheistic and optimistic view of the order ofthe world, as set forth in his Theory of MoralSentiments , rather than from any propositionof Political Economy proper . 1 The phrase1 Sidgwick , Principles of Political Economy, p. 20.