they remain in their proper sphere, unbiassed by faction,
undeluded by the tricks of designing men. A body oi
people thus circumstanced cannot be supposed to judge
amiss on any essential points; for if they decide in favour
of themselves, which is extremely natural, their decision
is just, inasmuch as whatever contributes to their benefit
is a general benefit, and advances the real public good."
A commentator adds that this notion of the infallible
perception by the people of their true interest, and their
unerring pursuit of it, was very prevalent in the provinces,
and for a time in the States after the establishment of
American independence.
In spite of their democratic spirit, these communities consented to have their trade regulated and restricted, to their own detriment and the advantage of English merchants. They had protested, but they had ended by yielding. Now Adam Smith says that to prohibit a great people from making all they can of every part of their own produce, or from employing their stock and industry in the way that they judge most advantageous for themselves, is a manifest violation of the most sacred rights of mankind. There was a latent sense of injury which broke out when, in addition to interference with the freedom of trade, England exercised the right of taxation. An American lately wrote: "The real foundation of the discontent which led to the Revolution was the effort of Great Britain, beginning in 1750, to prevent diversity of occupation, to attack the growth of manufactures and the mechanic arts, and the final cause before the attempt to tax without representation was the effort to enforce the navigation laws." When England argued that the hardship of regulation might be greater than the hardship of taxation, and that those who submitted to the one submitted, in principle, to the other, Franklin replied that the Americans had not taken that view, but that, when it was put before them, they would be willing to reject both one and the other. He knew, however, that the ground taken up by his countrymen was too narrow. He wrote to the French economist, Morellet: "Nothing can be
