Apeople，itappears，maybeprogressiveforacertainlengthoftime，andthenstop：whendoesitstop？Whenitceasestopossessindividuality。IfasimilarchangeshouldbefallthenationsofEurope，itwillnotbeinexactlythesameshape：thedespotismofcustomwithwhichthesenationsarethreatenedisnotpreciselystationariness。Itproscribessingularity，butitdoesnotprecludechange，providedallchangetogether。Wehavediscardedthefixedcostumesofourforefathers;everyonemuststilldresslikeotherpeople，butthefashionmaychangeonceortwiceayear。Wethustakecarethatwhenthereisachange，itshallbeforchange’ssake，andnotfromanyideaofbeautyorconvenience;forthesameideaofbeautyorconveniencewouldnotstrikealltheworldatthesamemoment，andbesimultaneouslythrownasidebyallatanothermoment。Butweareprogressiveaswellaschangeable：wecontinuallymakenewinventionsinmechanicalthings，andkeepthemuntiltheyareagainsupersededbybetter;weareeagerforimprovementinpolitics，ineducation，eveninmorals，thoughinthislastourideaofimprovementchieflyconsistsinpersuadingorforcingotherpeopletobeasgoodasourselves。Itisnotprogressthatweobjectto;onthecontrary，weflatterourselvesthatwearethemostprogressivepeoplewhoeverlived。Itisindividualitythatwewaragainst：weshouldthinkwehaddonewondersifwehadmadeourselvesallalike;forgettingthattheunlikenessofonepersontoanotherisgenerallythefirstthingwhichdrawstheattentionofeithertotheimperfectionofhisowntype，andthesuperiorityofanother，orthepossibility，bycombiningtheadvantagesofboth，ofproducingsomethingbetterthaneither。WehaveawarningexampleinChina—anationofmuchtalent，and，insomerespects，evenwisdom，owingtotheraregoodfortuneofhavingbeenprovidedatanearlyperiodwithaparticularlygoodsetofcustoms，thework，insomemeasure，ofmentowhomeventhemostenlightenedEuropeanmustaccord，undercertainlimitations，thetitleofsagesandphilosophers。Theyareremarkable，too，intheexcellenceoftheirapparatusforimpressing，asfaraspossible，thebestwisdomtheypossessuponeverymindinthecommunity，andsecuringthatthosewhohaveappropriatedmostofitshalloccupythepostsofhonourandpower。Surelythepeoplewhodidthishavediscoveredthesecretofhumanprogressiveness，andmusthavekeptthemselvessteadilyattheheadofthemovementoftheworld。Onthecontrary，theyhavebecomestationary—haveremainedsoforthousandsofyears;andiftheyareevertobefartherimproved，itmustbebyforeigners。TheyhavesucceededbeyondallhopeinwhatEnglishphilanthropistsaresoindustriouslyworkingat—inmakingapeopleallalike，allgoverningtheirthoughtsandconductbythesamemaximsandrules;andthesearethefruits。Themodernregimeofpublicopinionis，inanunorganisedform，whattheChineseeducationalandpoliticalsystemsareinanorganised;andunlessindividualityshallbeablesuccessfullytoassertitselfagainstthisyoke，Europe，notwithstandingitsnobleantecedentsanditsprofessedChristianity，willtendtobecomeanotherChina。
　　WhatisitthathashithertopreservedEuropefromthislot？WhathasmadetheEuropeanfamilyofnationsanimproving，insteadofastationaryportionofmankind？Notanysuperiorexcellenceinthem，which，whenitexists，existsastheeffectnotasthecause;buttheirremarkablediversityofcharacterandculture。Individuals，classes，nations，havebeenextremelyunlikeoneanother：theyhavestruckoutagreatvarietyofpaths，eachleadingtosomethingvaluable;andalthoughateveryperiodthosewhotravelledindifferentpathshavebeenintolerantofoneanother，andeachwouldhavethoughtitanexcellentthingifalltherestcouldhavebeencompelledtotravelhisroad，theirattemptstothwarteachother’sdevelopmenthaverarelyhadanypermanentsuccess，andeachhasintimeenduredtoreceivethegoodwhichtheothershaveoffered。Europeis，inmyjudgment，whollyindebtedtothispluralityofpathsforitsprogressiveandmany—sideddevelopment。Butitalreadybeginstopossessthisbenefitinaconsiderablylessdegree。ItisdecidedlyadvancingtowardstheChineseidealofmakingallpeoplealike。M。
　　deTocqueville，inhislastimportantwork，remarkshowmuchmoretheFrenchmenofthepresentdayresembleoneanotherthandidthoseevenofthelastgeneration。ThesameremarkmightbemadeofEnglishmeninafargreaterdegree。
　　InapassagealreadyquotedfromWilhelmvonHumboldt，hepointsouttwothingsasnecessaryconditionsofhumandevelopment，becausenecessarytorenderpeopleunlikeoneanother;namely，freedom，andvarietyofsituations。Thesecondofthesetwoconditionsisinthiscountryeverydaydiminishing。Thecircumstanceswhichsurrounddifferentclassesandindividuals，andshapetheircharacters，aredailybecomingmoreassimilated。Formerlydifferentranks，differentneighbourhoods，differenttradesandprofessions，livedinwhatmightbecalleddifferentworlds;atpresenttoagreatdegreeinthesame。Comparativelyspeaking，theynowreadthesamethings，listentothesamethings，seethesamethings，gotothesameplaces，havetheirhopesandfearsdirectedtothesameobjects，havethesamerightsandliberties，andthesamemeansofassertingthem。Greatasarethedifferencesofpositionwhichremain，theyarenothingtothosewhichhaveceased。Andtheassimilationisstillproceeding。Allthepoliticalchangesoftheagepromoteit，sincetheyalltendtoraisethelowandtolowerthehigh。Everyextensionofeducationpromotesit，becauseeducationbringspeopleundercommoninfluences，andgivesthemaccesstothegeneralstockoffactsandsentiments。Improvementinthemeansofcommunicationpromotesit，bybringingtheinhabitantsofdistantplacesintopersonalcontact，andkeepinguparapidflowofchangesofresidencebetweenoneplaceandanother。Theincreaseofcommerceandmanufacturespromotesit，bydiffusingmorewidelytheadvantagesofeasycircumstances，andopeningallobjectsofambition，eventhehighest，togeneralcompetition，wherebythedesireofrisingbecomesnolongerthecharacterofaparticularclass，butofallclasses。Amorepowerfulagencythanevenallthese，inbringingaboutageneralsimilarityamongmankind，isthecompleteestablishment，inthisandotherfreecountries，oftheascendancyofpublicopinionintheState。Asthevarioussocialeminenceswhichenabledpersonsentrenchedonthemtodisregardtheopinionofthemultitudegraduallybecomelevelled;astheveryideaofresistingthewillofthepublic，whenitispositivelyknownthattheyhaveawill，disappearsmoreandmorefromthemindsofpracticalpoliticians;
　　thereceasestobeanysocialsupportfornonconformity—anysubstantivepowerinsocietywhich，itselfopposedtotheascendancyofnumbers，isinterestedintakingunderitsprotectionopinionsandtendenciesatvariancewiththoseofthepublic。
　　ThecombinationofallthesecausesformssogreatamassofinfluenceshostiletoIndividuality，thatitisnoteasytoseehowitcanstanditsground。Itwilldosowithincreasingdifficulty，unlesstheintelligentpartofthepubliccanbemadetofeelitsvalue—toseethatitisgoodthereshouldbedifferences，eventhoughnotforthebetter，eventhough，asitmayappeartothem，someshouldbefortheworse。IftheclaimsofIndividualityareevertobeasserted，thetimeisnow，whilemuchisstillwantingtocompletetheenforcedassimilation。Itisonlyintheearlierstagesthatanystandcanbesuccessfullymadeagainsttheencroachment。Thedemandthatallotherpeopleshallresembleourselvesgrowsbywhatitfeedson。Ifresistancewaitstilllifeisreducednearlytooneuniformtype，alldeviationsfromthattypewillcometobeconsideredimpious，immoral，evenmonstrousandcontrarytonature。Mankindspeedilybecomeunabletoconceivediversity，whentheyhavebeenforsometimeunaccustomedtoseeit。
　　Chapter4。
　　OftheLimitstotheAuthorityofSocietyovertheIndividual。
　　WHAT，THEN，istherightfullimittothesovereigntyoftheindividualoverhimself？Wheredoestheauthorityofsocietybegin？
　　Howmuchofhumanlifeshouldbeassignedtoindividuality，andhowmuchtosociety？
　　Eachwillreceiveitspropershare，ifeachhasthatwhichmoreparticularlyconcernsit。Toindividualityshouldbelongthepartoflifeinwhichitischieflytheindividualthatisinterested;tosociety，thepartwhichchieflyinterestssociety。
　　Thoughsocietyisnotfoundedonacontract，andthoughnogoodpurposeisansweredbyinventingacontractinordertodeducesocialobligationsfromit，everyonewhoreceivestheprotectionofsocietyowesareturnforthebenefit，andthefactoflivinginsocietyrendersitindispensablethateachshouldbeboundtoobserveacertainlineofconducttowardstherest。Thisconductconsists，first，innotinjuringtheinterestsofoneanother;orrathercertaininterests，which，eitherbyexpresslegalprovisionorbytacitunderstanding，oughttobeconsideredasrights;andsecondly，ineachperson’sbearinghisshare（tobefixedonsomeequitableprinciple）ofthelaboursandsacrificesincurredfordefendingthesocietyoritsmembersfrominjuryandmolestation。
　　Theseconditionssocietyisjustifiedinenforcing，atallcoststothosewhoendeavourtowithholdfulfilment。Noristhisallthatsocietymaydo。Theactsofanindividualmaybehurtfultoothers，orwantingindueconsiderationfortheirwelfare，withoutgoingtothelengthofviolatinganyoftheirconstitutedrights。Theoffendermaythenbejustlypunishedbyopinion，thoughnotbylaw。Assoonasanypartofaperson’sconductaffectsprejudiciallytheinterestsofothers，societyhasjurisdictionoverit，andthequestionwhetherthegeneralwelfarewillorwillnotbepromotedbyinterferingwithit，becomesopentodiscussion。Butthereisnoroomforentertaininganysuchquestionwhenaperson’sconductaffectstheinterestsofnopersonsbesideshimself，orneedsnotaffectthemunlesstheylike（allthepersonsconcernedbeingoffullage，andtheordinaryamountofunderstanding）。Inallsuchcases，thereshouldbeperfectfreedom，legalandsocial，todotheactionandstandtheconsequences。
　　Itwouldbeagreatmisunderstandingofthisdoctrinetosupposethatitisoneofselfishindifference，whichpretendsthathumanbeingshavenobusinesswitheachother’sconductinlife，andthattheyshouldnotconcernthemselvesaboutthewell—doingorwell—beingofoneanother，unlesstheirowninterestisinvolved。
　　Insteadofanydiminution，thereisneedofagreatincreaseofdisinterestedexertiontopromotethegoodofothers。Butdisinterestedbenevolencecanfindotherinstrumentstopersuadepeopletotheirgoodthanwhipsandscourges，eitheroftheliteralorthemetaphoricalsort。Iamthelastpersontoundervaluetheself—regardingvirtues;theyareonlysecondinimportance，ifevensecond，tothesocial。Itisequallythebusinessofeducationtocultivateboth。Buteveneducationworksbyconvictionandpersuasionaswellasbycompulsion，anditisbytheformeronlythat，whentheperiodofeducationispassed，theself—regardingvirtuesshouldbeinculcated。Humanbeingsowetoeachotherhelptodistinguishthebetterfromtheworse，andencouragementtochoosetheformerandavoidthelatter。Theyshouldbeforeverstimulatingeachothertoincreasedexerciseoftheirhigherfaculties，andincreaseddirectionoftheirfeelingsandaimstowardswiseinsteadoffoolish，elevatinginsteadofdegrading，objectsandcontemplations。
　　Butneitheroneperson，noranynumberofpersons，iswarrantedinsayingtoanotherhumancreatureofripeyears，thatheshallnotdowithhislifeforhisownbenefitwhathechoosestodowithit。Heisthepersonmostinterestedinhisownwell—being：theinterestwhichanyotherperson，exceptincasesofstrongpersonalattachment，canhaveinit，istrifling，comparedwiththatwhichhehimselfhas;
　　theinterestwhichsocietyhasinhimindividually（exceptastohisconducttoothers）isfractional，andaltogetherindirect;whilewithrespecttohisownfeelingsandcircumstances，themostordinarymanorwomanhasmeansofknowledgeimmeasurablysurpassingthosethatcanbepossessedbyanyoneelse。Theinterferenceofsocietytooverrulehisjudgmentandpurposesinwhatonlyregardshimselfmustbegroundedongeneralpresumptions;whichmaybealtogetherwrong，andevenifright，areaslikelyasnottobemisappliedtoindividualcases，bypersonsnobetteracquaintedwiththecircumstancesofsuchcasesthanthosearewholookatthemmerelyfromwithout。Inthisdepartment，therefore，ofhumanaffairs，Individualityhasitsproperfieldofaction。Intheconductofhumanbeingstowardsoneanotheritisnecessarythatgeneralrulesshouldforthemostpartbeobserved，inorderthatpeoplemayknowwhattheyhavetoexpect：butineachperson’sownconcernshisindividualspontaneityisentitledtofreeexercise。Considerationstoaidhisjudgment，exhortationstostrengthenhiswill，maybeofferedtohim，evenobtrudedonhim，byothers：buthehimselfisthefinaljudge。Allerrorswhichheislikelytocommitagainstadviceandwarningarefaroutweighedbytheevilofallowingotherstoconstrainhimtowhattheydeemhisgood。
　　Idonotmeanthatthefeelingswithwhichapersonisregardedbyothersoughtnottobeinanywayaffectedbyhisself—regardingqualitiesordeficiencies。Thisisneitherpossiblenordesirable。
　　Ifheiseminentinanyofthequalitieswhichconducetohisowngood，heis，sofar，aproperobjectofadmiration。Heissomuchthenearertotheidealperfectionofhumannature。Ifheisgrosslydeficientinthosequalities，asentimenttheoppositeofadmirationwillfollow。Thereisadegreeoffolly，andadegreeofwhatmaybecalled（thoughthephraseisnotunobjectionable）lownessordepravationoftaste，which，thoughitcannotjustifydoingharmtothepersonwhomanifestsit，rendershimnecessarilyandproperlyasubjectofdistaste，or，inextremecases，evenofcontempt：apersoncouldnothavetheoppositequalitiesinduestrengthwithoutentertainingthesefeelings。Thoughdoingnowrongtoanyone，apersonmaysoactastocompelustojudgehim，andfeeltohim，asafool，orasabeingofaninferiororder：andsincethisjudgmentandfeelingareafactwhichhewouldprefertoavoid，itisdoinghimaservicetowarnhimofitbeforehand，asofanyotherdisagreeableconsequencetowhichheexposeshimself。Itwouldbewell，indeed，ifthisgoodofficeweremuchmorefreelyrenderedthanthecommonnotionsofpolitenessatpresentpermit，andifonepersoncouldhonestlypointouttoanotherthathethinkshiminfault，withoutbeingconsideredunmannerlyorpresuming。Wehavearight，also，invariousways，toactuponourunfavourableopinionofanyone，nottotheoppressionofhisindividuality，butintheexerciseofours。
　　Wearenotbound，forexample，toseekhissociety;wehavearighttoavoidit（thoughnottoparadetheavoidance），forwehavearighttochoosethesocietymostacceptabletous。Wehavearight，anditmaybeourduty，tocautionothersagainsthim，ifwethinkhisexampleorconversationlikelytohaveaperniciouseffectonthosewithwhomheassociates。Wemaygiveothersapreferenceoverhiminoptionalgoodoffices，exceptthosewhichtendtohisimprovement。
　　Inthesevariousmodesapersonmaysufferveryseverepenaltiesatthehandsofothersforfaultswhichdirectlyconcernonlyhimself;
　　buthesuffersthesepenaltiesonlyinsofarastheyarethenaturaland，asitwere，thespontaneousconsequencesofthefaultsthemselves，notbecausetheyarepurposelyinflictedonhimforthesakeofpunishment。Apersonwhoshowsrashness，obstinacy，self—conceit—whocannotlivewithinmoderatemeans—whocannotrestrainhimselffromhurtfulindulgences—whopursuesanimalpleasuresattheexpenseofthoseoffeelingandintellect—mustexpecttobeloweredintheopinionofothers，andtohavealessshareoftheirfavourablesentiments;butofthishehasnorighttocomplain，unlesshehasmeritedtheirfavourbyspecialexcellenceinhissocialrelations，andhasthusestablishedatitletotheirgoodoffices，whichisnotaffectedbyhisdemeritstowardshimself。
　　WhatIcontendforis，thattheinconvenienceswhicharestrictlyinseparablefromtheunfavourablejudgmentofothers，aretheonlyonestowhichapersonshouldeverbesubjectedforthatportionofhisconductandcharacterwhichconcernshisowngood，butwhichdoesnotaffecttheinterestofothersintheirrelationswithhim。
　　Actsinjurioustoothersrequireatotallydifferenttreatment。
　　Encroachmentontheirrights;inflictiononthemofanylossordamagenotjustifiedbyhisownrights;falsehoodorduplicityindealingwiththem;unfairorungeneroususeofadvantagesoverthem;evenselfishabstinencefromdefendingthemagainstinjury—thesearefitobjectsofmoralreprobation，and，ingravecases，ofmoralretributionandpunishment。Andnotonlytheseacts，butthedispositionswhichleadtothem，areproperlyimmoral，andfitsubjectsofdisapprobationwhichmayrisetoabhorrence。Crueltyofdisposition;maliceandill—nature;thatmostanti—socialandodiousofallpassions，envy;dissimulationandinsincerity，irascibilityoninsufficientcause，andresentmentdisproportionedtotheprovocation;theloveofdomineeringoverothers;thedesiretoengrossmorethanone’sshareofadvantages（thepleonexiaoftheGreeks）;thepridewhichderivesgratificationfromtheabasementofothers;theegotismwhichthinksselfanditsconcernsmoreimportantthaneverythingelse，anddecidesalldoubtfulquestionsinitsownfavour;—thesearemoralvices，andconstituteabadandodiousmoralcharacter：unliketheself—regardingfaultspreviouslymentioned，whicharenotproperlyimmoralities，andtowhateverpitchtheymaybecarried，donotconstitutewickedness。Theymaybeproofsofanyamountoffolly，orwantofpersonaldignityandself—respect;buttheyareonlyasubjectofmoralreprobationwhentheyinvolveabreachofdutytoothers，forwhosesaketheindividualisboundtohavecareforhimself。Whatarecalleddutiestoourselvesarenotsociallyobligatory，unlesscircumstancesrenderthematthesametimedutiestoothers。Thetermdutytooneself，whenitmeansanythingmorethanprudence，meansself—respectorself—development，andfornoneoftheseisanyoneaccountabletohisfellowcreatures，becausefornoneofthemisitforthegoodofmankindthathebeheldaccountabletothem。
　　Thedistinctionbetweenthelossofconsiderationwhichapersonmayrightlyincurbydefectofprudenceorofpersonaldignity，andthereprobationwhichisduetohimforanoffenceagainsttherightsofothers，isnotamerelynominaldistinction。Itmakesavastdifferencebothinourfeelingsandinourconducttowardshimwhetherhedispleasesusinthingsinwhichwethinkwehavearighttocontrolhim，orinthingsinwhichweknowthatwehavenot。Ifhedispleasesus，wemayexpressourdistaste，andwemaystandalooffromapersonaswellasfromathingthatdispleasesus;butweshallnotthereforefeelcalledontomakehislifeuncomfortable。Weshallreflectthathealreadybears，orwillbear，thewholepenaltyofhiserror;ifhespoilshislifebymismanagement，weshallnot，forthatreason，desiretospoilitstillfurther：insteadofwishingtopunishhim，weshallratherendeavourtoalleviatehispunishment，byshowinghimhowhemayavoidorcuretheevilshisconducttendstobringuponhim。Hemaybetousanobjectofpity，perhapsofdislike，butnotofangerorresentment;weshallnottreathimlikeanenemyofsociety：theworstweshallthinkourselvesjustifiedindoingisleavinghimtohimself，ifwedonotinterferebenevolentlybyshowinginterestorconcernforhim。Itisfarotherwiseifhehasinfringedtherulesnecessaryfortheprotectionofhisfellowcreatures，individuallyorcollectively。Theevilconsequencesofhisactsdonotthenfallonhimself，butonothers;
　　andsociety，astheprotectorofallitsmembers，mustretaliateonhim;mustinflictpainonhimfortheexpresspurposeofpunishment，andmusttakecarethatitbesufficientlysevere。Intheonecase，heisanoffenderatourbar，andwearecalledonnotonlytositinjudgmentonhim，but，inoneshapeoranother，toexecuteourownsentence：intheothercase，itisnotourparttoinflictanysufferingonhim，exceptwhatmayincidentallyfollowfromourusingthesamelibertyintheregulationofourownaffairs，whichweallowtohiminhis。
　　Thedistinctionherepointedoutbetweenthepartofaperson’slifewhichconcernsonlyhimself，andthatwhichconcernsothers，manypersonswillrefusetoadmit。How（itmaybeasked）cananypartoftheconductofamemberofsocietybeamatterofindifferencetotheothermembers？Nopersonisanentirelyisolatedbeing;itisimpossibleforapersontodoanythingseriouslyorpermanentlyhurtfultohimself，withoutmischiefreachingatleasttohisnearconnections，andoftenfarbeyondthem。Ifheinjureshisproperty，hedoesharmtothosewhodirectlyorindirectlyderivedsupportfromit，andusuallydiminishes，byagreaterorlessamount，thegeneralresource;ofthecommunity。Ifhedeteriorateshisbodilyormentalfaculties，henotonlybringseviluponallwhodependedonhimforanyportionoftheirhappiness，butdisqualifieshimselfforrenderingtheserviceswhichheowestohisfellowcreaturesgenerally;
　　perhapsbecomesaburthenontheiraffectionorbenevolence;andifsuchconductwereveryfrequent，hardlyanyoffencethatiscommittedwoulddetractmorefromthegeneralsumofgood。Finally，ifbyhisvicesorfolliesapersondoesnodirectharmtoothers，heisnevertheless（itmaybesaid）injuriousbyhisexample;andoughttobecompelledtocontrolhimself，forthesakeofthosewhomthesightorknowledgeofhisconductmightcorruptormislead。
　　Andeven（itwillbeadded）iftheconsequencesofmisconductcouldbeconfinedtotheviciousorthoughtlessindividual，oughtsocietytoabandontotheirownguidancethosewhoaremanifestlyunfitforit？Ifprotectionagainstthemselvesisconfessedlyduetochildrenandpersonsunderage，isnotsocietyequallyboundtoaffordittopersonsofmatureyearswhoareequallyincapableofself—government？Ifgambling，ordrunkenness，orincontinence，oridleness，oruncleanliness，areasinjurioustohappiness，andasgreatahindrancetoimprovement，asmanyormostoftheactsprohibitedbylaw，why（itmaybeasked）shouldnotlaw，sofarasisconsistentwithpracticabilityandsocialconvenience，endeavourtorepressthesealso？Andasasupplementtotheunavoidableimperfectionsoflaw，oughtnotopinionatleasttoorganiseapowerfulpoliceagainstthesevices，andvisitrigidlywithsocialpenaltiesthosewhoareknowntopractisethem？Thereisnoquestionhere（itmaybesaid）aboutrestrictingindividuality，orimpedingthetrialofnewandoriginalexperimentsinliving。Theonlythingsitissoughttopreventarethingswhichhavebeentriedandcondemnedfromthebeginningoftheworlduntilnow;thingswhichexperiencehasshownnottobeusefulorsuitabletoanyperson’sindividuality。
　　Theremustbesomelengthoftimeandamountofexperienceafterwhichamoralorprudentialtruthmayberegardedasestablished：anditismerelydesiredtopreventgenerationaftergenerationfromfallingoverthesameprecipicewhichhasbeenfataltotheirpredecessors。
　　Ifullyadmitthatthemischiefwhichapersondoestohimselfmayseriouslyaffect，boththroughtheirsympathiesandtheirinterests，thosenearlyconnectedwithhimand，inaminordegree，societyatlarge。When，byconductofthissort，apersonisledtoviolateadistinctandassignableobligationtoanyotherpersonorpersons，thecaseistakenoutoftheself—regardingclass，andbecomesamenabletomoraldisapprobationinthepropersenseoftheterm。If，forexample，aman，throughintemperanceorextravagance，becomesunabletopayhisdebts，or，havingundertakenthemoralresponsibilityofafamily，becomesfromthesamecauseincapableofsupportingoreducatingthem，heisdeservedlyreprobated，andmightbejustlypunished;butitisforthebreachofdutytohisfamilyorcreditors，notfortheextravagance。Iftheresourceswhichoughttohavebeendevotedtothem，hadbeendivertedfromthemforthemostprudentinvestment，themoralculpabilitywouldhavebeenthesame。GeorgeBarnwellmurderedhisuncletogetmoneyforhismistress，butifhehaddoneittosethimselfupinbusiness，hewouldequallyhavebeenhanged。
　　Again，inthefrequentcaseofamanwhocausesgrieftohisfamilybyaddictiontobadhabits，hedeservesreproachforhisunkindnessoringratitude;butsohemayforcultivatinghabitsnotinthemselvesvicious，iftheyarepainfultothosewithwhomhepasseshislife，whofrompersonaltiesaredependentonhimfortheircomfort。Whoeverfailsintheconsiderationgenerallyduetotheinterestsandfeelingsofothers，notbeingcompelledbysomemoreimperativeduty，orjustifiedbyallowableself—preference，isasubjectofmoraldisapprobationforthatfailure，butnotforthecauseofit，norfortheerrors，merelypersonaltohimself，whichmayhaveremotelyledtoit。Inlikemanner，whenapersondisableshimself，byconductpurelyself—regarding，fromtheperformanceofsomedefinitedutyincumbentonhimtothepublic，heisguiltyofasocialoffence。
　　Nopersonoughttobepunishedsimplyforbeingdrunk;butasoldierorapolicemanshouldbepunishedforbeingdrunkonduty。Whenever，inshort，thereisadefinitedamage，oradefiniteriskofdamage，eithertoanindividualortothepublic，thecaseistakenoutoftheprovinceofliberty，andplacedinthatofmoralityorlaw。
　　Butwithregardtothemerelycontingent，or，asitmaybecalled，constructiveinjurywhichapersoncausestosociety，byconductwhichneitherviolatesanyspecificdutytothepublic，noroccasionsperceptiblehurttoanyassignableindividualexcepthimself;theinconvenienceisonewhichsocietycanaffordtobear，forthesakeofthegreatergoodofhumanfreedom。Ifgrownpersonsaretobepunishedfornottakingpropercareofthemselves，Iwouldratheritwerefortheirownsake，thanunderpretenceofpreventingthemfromimpairingtheircapacityorrenderingtosocietybenefitswhichsocietydoesnotpretendithasarighttoexact。ButIcannotconsenttoarguethepointasifsocietyhadnomeansofbringingitsweakermembersuptoitsordinarystandardofrationalconduct，exceptwaitingtilltheydosomethingirrational，andthenpunishingthem，legallyormorally，forit。Societyhashadabsolutepoweroverthemduringalltheearlyportionoftheirexistence：ithashadthewholeperiodofchildhoodandnonageinwhichtotrywhetheritcouldmakethemcapableofrationalconductinlife。Theexistinggenerationismasterbothofthetrainingandtheentirecircumstancesofthegenerationtocome;itcannotindeedmakethemperfectlywiseandgood，becauseitisitselfsolamentablydeficientingoodnessandwisdom;anditsbesteffortsarenotalways，inindividualcases，itsmostsuccessfulones;butitisperfectlywellabletomaketherisinggeneration，asawhole，asgoodas，andalittlebetterthan，itself。Ifsocietyletsanyconsiderablenumberofitsmembersgrowupmerechildren，incapableofbeingactedonbyrationalconsiderationofdistantmotives，societyhasitselftoblamefortheconsequences。Armednotonlywithallthepowersofeducation，butwiththeascendencywhichtheauthorityofareceivedopinionalwaysexercisesoverthemindswhoareleastfittedtojudgeforthemselves;
　　andaidedbythenaturalpenaltieswhichcannotbepreventedfromfallingonthosewhoincurthedistasteorthecontemptofthosewhoknowthem;letnotsocietypretendthatitneeds，besidesallthis，thepowertoissuecommandsandenforceobedienceinthepersonalconcernsofindividuals，inwhich，onallprinciplesofjusticeandpolicy，thedecisionoughttorestwiththosewhoaretoabidetheconsequences。
　　Noristhereanythingwhichtendsmoretodiscreditandfrustratethebettermeansofinfluencingconductthanaresorttotheworse。Iftherebeamongthosewhomitisattemptedtocoerceintoprudenceortemperanceanyofthematerialofwhichvigorousandindependentcharactersaremade，theywillinfalliblyrebelagainsttheyoke。Nosuchpersonwilleverfeelthatothershavearighttocontrolhiminhisconcerns，suchastheyhavetopreventhimfrominjuringthemintheirs;anditeasilycomestobeconsideredamarkofspiritandcouragetoflyinthefaceofsuchusurpedauthority，anddowithostentationtheexactoppositeofwhatitenjoins;asinthefashionofgrossnesswhichsucceeded，inthetimeofCharlesII。，tothefanaticalmoralintoleranceofthePuritans。Withrespecttowhatissaidofthenecessityofprotectingsocietyfromthebadexamplesettoothersbytheviciousortheself—indulgent;itistruethatbadexamplemayhaveaperniciouseffect，especiallytheexampleofdoingwrongtootherswithimpunitytothewrong—doer。Butwearenowspeakingofconductwhich，whileitdoesnowrongtoothers，issupposedtodogreatharmtotheagenthimself：andIdonotseehowthosewhobelievethiscanthinkotherwisethanthattheexample，onthewhole，mustbemoresalutarythanhurtful，since，ifitdisplaysthemisconduct，itdisplaysalsothepainfulordegradingconsequenceswhich，iftheconductisjustlycensured，mustbesupposedtobeinallormostcasesattendantonit。
　　Butthestrongestofalltheargumentsagainsttheinterferenceofthepublicwithpurelypersonalconductisthat，whenitdoesinterfere，theoddsarethatitinterfereswrongly，andinthewrongplace。Onquestionsofsocialmorality，ofdutytoothers，theopinionofthepublic，thatis，ofanoverrulingmajority，thoughofwrong，islikelytobestilloftenerright;becauseonsuchquestionstheyareonlyrequiredtojudgeoftheirowninterests;ofthemannerinwhichsomemodeofconduct，ifallowedtobepractised，wouldeffectthemselves。Buttheopinionofasimilarmajority，imposedasalawontheminority，onquestionsofself—regardingconduct，isquiteaslikelytobewrongasright;forinthesecasespublicopinionmeans，atthebest，somepeople’sopinionofwhatisgoodorbadforotherpeople;whileveryofitdoesnotevenmeanthat;thepublic，withthemostperfectindifference，passingoverthepleasureorconvenienceofthosewhoseconducttheycensure，andconsideringonlytheirownpreference。Therearemanywhoconsiderasaninjurytothemselvesanyconductwhichtheyhaveadistastefor，andresentitasanoutragetotheirfeelings;asareligiousbigot，whenchargedwithdisregardingthereligiousfeelingsofothers，hasbeenknowntoretortthattheydisregardhisfeelings，bypersistingintheirabominableworshiporcreed。Butthereisnoparitybetweenthefeelingofapersonforhisownopinion，andthefeelingofanotherwhoisoffendedathisholdingit;nomorethanbetweenthedesireofathieftotakeapurse，andthedesireoftherightownertokeepit。Andaperson’stasteisasmuchhisownpeculiarconcernashisopinionorhispurse。Itiseasyforanyonetoimagineanidealpublicwhichleavesthefreedomandchoiceofindividualsinalluncertainmattersundisturbed，andonlyrequiresthemtoabstainfrommodesofconductwhichuniversalexperiencehascondemned。Butwherehastherebeenseenapublicwhichsetanysuchlimittoitscensorship？orwhendoesthepublictroubleitselfaboutuniversalexperience？Initsinterferenceswithpersonalconductitisseldomthinkingofanythingbuttheenormityofactingorfeelingdifferentlyfromitself;andthisstandardofjudgment，thinlydisguised，ishelduptomankindasthedictateofreligionandphilosophy，bynine—tenthsofallmoralistsandspeculativewriters。Theseteachthatthingsarerightbecausetheyareright;becausewefeelthemtobeso。Theytellustosearchinourownmindsandheartsforlawsofconductbindingonourselvesandonallothers。Whatcanthepoorpublicdobutapplytheseinstructions，andmaketheirownpersonalfeelingsofgoodandevil，iftheyaretolerablyunanimousinthem，obligatoryonalltheworld？
　　Theevilherepointedoutisnotonewhichexistsonlyintheory;
　　anditmayperhapsbeexpectedthatIshouldspecifytheinstancesinwhichthepublicofthisageandcountryimproperlyinvestsitsownpreferenceswiththecharacterofmorallaws。Iamnotwritinganessayontheaberrationsofexistingmoralfeeling。Thatistooweightyasubjecttobediscussedparenthetically，andbywayofillustration。YetexamplesarenecessarytoshowthattheprincipleImaintainisofseriousandpracticalmoment，andthatIamnotendeavouringtoerectabarrieragainstimaginaryevils。Anditisnotdifficulttoshow，byabundantinstances，thattoextendtheboundsofwhatmaybecalledmoralpolice，untilitencroachesonthemostunquestionablylegitimatelibertyoftheindividual，isoneofthemostuniversalofallhumanpropensities。
　　Asafirstinstance，considertheantipathieswhichmencherishonnobettergroundsthanthatpersonswhosereligiousopinionsaredifferentfromtheirsdonotpractisetheirreligiousobservances，especiallytheirreligiousabstinences。Tocitearathertrivialexample，nothinginthecreedorpracticeofChristiansdoesmoretoenvenomthehatredofMahomedansagainstthemthanthefactoftheireatingpork。TherearefewactswhichChristiansandEuropeansregardwithmoreunaffecteddisgustthanMussulmansregardthisparticularmodeofsatisfyinghunger。Itis，inthefirstplace，anoffenceagainsttheirreligion;butthiscircumstancebynomeansexplainseitherthedegreeorthekindoftheirrepugnance;forwinealsoisforbiddenbytheirreligion，andtopartakeofitisbyallMussulmansaccountedwrong，butnotdisgusting。Theiraversiontothefleshofthe"uncleanbeast"is，onthecontrary，ofthatpeculiarcharacter，resemblinganinstinctiveantipathy，whichtheideaofuncleanness，whenonceitthoroughlysinksintothefeelings，seemsalwaystoexciteeveninthosewhosepersonalhabitsareanythingbutscrupulouslycleanly，andofwhichthesentimentofreligiousimpurity，sointenseintheHindoos，isaremarkableexample。
　　Supposenowthatinapeople，ofwhomthemajoritywereMussulmans，thatmajorityshouldinsistuponnotpermittingporktobeeatenwithinthelimitsofthecountry。ThiswouldbenothingnewinMahomedancountries。*Woulditbealegitimateexerciseofthemoralauthorityofpublicopinion？andifnot，whynot？Thepracticeisreallyrevoltingtosuchapublic。TheyalsosincerelythinkthatitisforbiddenandabhorredbytheDeity。Neithercouldtheprohibitionbecensuredasreligiouspersecution。Itmightbereligiousinitsorigin，butitwouldnotbepersecutionforreligion，sincenobody’sreligionmakesitadutytoeatpork。Theonlytenablegroundofcondemnationwouldbethatwiththepersonaltastesandself—regardingconcernsofindividualsthepublichasnobusinesstointerfere。
　　*ThecaseoftheBombayParseesisacuriousinstanceinpoint。
　　Whenthisindustriousandenterprisingtribe，thedescendantsofthePersianfire—worshippers，flyingfromtheirnativecountrybeforetheCaliphs，arrivedinWesternIndia，theywereadmittedtotolerationbytheHindoosovereigns，onconditionofnoteatingbeef。WhenthoseregionsafterwardsfellunderthedominionofMahomedanconquerors，theParseesobtainedfromthemacontinuanceofindulgence，onconditionofrefrainingfrompork。Whatwasatfirstobediencetoauthoritybecameasecondnature，andtheParseestothisdayabstainbothfrombeefandpork。Thoughnotrequiredbytheirreligion，thedoubleabstinencehashadtimetogrowintoacustomoftheirtribe;andcustom，intheEast，isareligion。
　　Tocomesomewhatnearerhome：themajorityofSpaniardsconsideritagrossimpiety，offensiveinthehighestdegreetotheSupremeBeing，toworshiphiminanyothermannerthantheRomanCatholic;andnootherpublicworshipislawfulonSpanishsoil。ThepeopleofallSouthernEuropelookuponamarriedclergyasnotonlyirreligious，butunchaste，indecent，gross，disgusting。WhatdoProtestantsthinkoftheseperfectlysincerefeelings，andoftheattempttoenforcethemagainstnon—Catholics？Yet，ifmankindarejustifiedininterferingwitheachother’slibertyinthingswhichdonotconcerntheinterestsofothers，onwhatprincipleisitpossibleconsistentlytoexcludethesecases？orwhocanblamepeoplefordesiringtosuppresswhattheyregardasascandalinthesightofGodandman？Nostrongercasecanbeshownforprohibitinganythingwhichisregardedasapersonalimmorality，thanismadeoutforsuppressingthesepracticesintheeyesofthosewhoregardthemasimpieties;andunlesswearewillingtoadoptthelogicofpersecutors，andtosaythatwemaypersecuteothersbecauseweareright，andthattheymustnotpersecuteusbecausetheyarewrong，wemustbewareofadmittingaprincipleofwhichweshouldresentasagrossinjusticetheapplicationtoourselves。
　　Theprecedinginstancesmaybeobjectedto，althoughunreasonably，asdrawnfromcontingenciesimpossibleamongus：opinion，inthiscountry，notbeinglikelytoenforceabstinencefrommeats，ortointerferewithpeopleforworshipping，andforeithermarryingornotmarrying，accordingtotheircreedorinclination。Thenextexample，however，shallbetakenfromaninterferencewithlibertywhichwehavebynomeanspassedalldangerof。WhereverthePuritanshavebeensufficientlypowerful，asinNewEngland，andinGreatBritainatthetimeoftheCommonwealth，theyhaveendeavoured，withconsiderablesuccess，toputdownallpublic，andnearlyallprivate，amusements：especiallymusic，dancing，publicgames，orotherassemblagesforpurposesofdiversion，andthetheatre。Therearestillinthiscountrylargebodiesofpersonsbywhosenotionsofmoralityandreligiontheserecreationsarecondemned;andthosepersonsbelongingchieflytothemiddleclass，whoaretheascendantpowerinthepresentsocialandpoliticalconditionofthekingdom，itisbynomeansimpossiblethatpersonsofthesesentimentsmayatsometimeorothercommandamajorityinParliament。HowwilltheremainingportionofthecommunityliketohavetheamusementsthatshallbepermittedtothemregulatedbythereligiousandmoralsentimentsofthestricterCalvinistsandMethodists？Wouldtheynot，withconsiderableperemptoriness，desiretheseintrusivelypiousmembersofsocietytomindtheirownbusiness？
　　Thisispreciselywhatshouldbesaidtoeverygovernmentandeverypublic，whohavethepretensionthatnopersonshallenjoyanypleasurewhichtheythinkwrong。Butiftheprincipleofthepretensionbeadmitted，noonecanreasonablyobjecttoitsbeingactedoninthesenseofthemajority，orotherpreponderatingpowerinthecountry;andallpersonsmustbereadytoconformtotheideaofaChristiancommonwealth，asunderstoodbytheearlysettlersinNewEngland，ifareligiousprofessionsimilartotheirsshouldeversucceedinregainingitslostground，asreligionssupposedtobedeclininghavesooftenbeenknowntodo。
　　Toimagineanothercontingency，perhapsmorelikelytoberealisedthantheonelastmentioned。Thereisconfessedlyastrongtendencyinthemodernworldtowardsademocraticconstitutionofsociety，accompaniedornotbypopularpoliticalinstitutions。Itisaffirmedthatinthecountrywherethistendencyismostcompletelyrealised—
　　wherebothsocietyandthegovernmentaremostdemocratic—theUnitedStates—thefeelingofthemajority，towhomanyappearanceofamoreshowyorcostlystyleoflivingthantheycanhopetorivalisdisagreeable，operatesasatolerablyeffectualsumptuarylaw，andthatinmanypartsoftheUnionitisreallydifficultforapersonpossessingaverylargeincometofindanymodeofspendingitwhichwillnotincurpopulardisapprobation。Thoughsuchstatementsasthesearedoubtlessmuchexaggeratedasarepresentationofexistingfacts，thestateofthingstheydescribeisnotonlyaconceivableandpossible，butaprobableresultofdemocraticfeeling，combinedwiththenotionthatthepublichasarighttoavetoonthemannerinwhichindividualsshallspendtheirincomes。WehaveonlyfurthertosupposeaconsiderablediffusionofSocialistopinions，anditmaybecomeinfamousintheeyesofthemajoritytopossessmorepropertythansomeverysmallamount，oranyincomenotearnedbymanuallabour。Opinionssimilarinprincipletothesealreadyprevailwidelyamongtheartisanclass，andweighoppressivelyonthosewhoareamenabletotheopinionchieflyofthatclass，namely，itsownmembers。Itisknownthatthebadworkmenwhoformthemajorityoftheoperativesinmanybranchesofindustry，aredecidedlyofopinionthatbadworkmenoughttoreceivethesamewagesasgood，andthatnooneoughttobeallowed，throughpieceworkorotherwise，toearnbysuperiorskillorindustrymorethanotherscanwithoutit。Andtheyemployamoralpolice，whichoccasionallybecomesaphysicalone，todeterskilfulworkmenfromreceiving，andemployersfromgiving，alargerremunerationforamoreusefulservice。Ifthepublichaveanyjurisdictionoverprivateconcerns，Icannotseethatthesepeopleareinfault，orthatanyindividual’sparticularpubliccanbeblamedforassertingthesameauthorityoverhisindividualconductwhichthegeneralpublicassertsoverpeopleingeneral。
　　But，withoutdwellinguponsupposititiouscases，thereare，inourownday，grossusurpationsuponthelibertyofprivatelifeactuallypractised，andstillgreateronesthreatenedwithsomeexpectationofsuccess，andopinionspropoundedwhichassertanunlimitedrightinthepublicnotonlytoprohibitbylaweverythingwhichitthinkswrong，but，inordertogetatwhatitthinkswrong，toprohibitanumberofthingswhichitadmitstobeinnocent。
　　Underthenameofpreventingintemperance，thepeopleofoneEnglishcolony，andofnearlyhalftheUnitedStates，havebeeninterdictedbylawfrommakinganyusewhateveroffermenteddrinks，exceptformedicalpurposes：forprohibitionoftheirsaleisinfact，asitisintendedtobe，prohibitionoftheiruse。AndthoughtheimpracticabilityofexecutingthelawhascauseditsrepealinseveraloftheStateswhichhadadoptedit，includingtheonefromwhichitderivesitsname，anattempthasnotwithstandingbeencommenced，andisprosecutedwithconsiderablezealbymanyoftheprofessedphilanthropists，toagitateforasimilarlawinthiscountry。Theassociation，or"Alliance"asittermsitself，whichhasbeenformedforthispurpose，hasacquiredsomenotorietythroughthepublicitygiventoacorrespondencebetweenitssecretaryandoneoftheveryfewEnglishpublicmenwhoholdthatapolitician’sopinionsoughttobefoundedonprinciples。LordStanley’sshareinthiscorrespondenceiscalculatedtostrengthenthehopesalreadybuiltonhim，bythosewhoknowhowraresuchqualitiesasaremanifestedinsomeofhispublicappearancesunhappilyareamongthosewhofigureinpoliticallife。TheorganoftheAlliance，whowould"deeplydeploretherecognitionofanyprinciplewhichcouldbewrestedtojustifybigotryandpersecution，"undertakestopointoutthe"broadandimpassablebarrier"whichdividessuchprinciplesfromthoseoftheassociation。"Allmattersrelatingtothought，opinion，conscience，appeartome，"hesays，"tobewithoutthesphereoflegislation;
　　allpertainingtosocialact，habit，relation，subjectonlytoadiscretionarypowervestedintheStateitself，andnotintheindividual，tobewithinit。"
　　Nomentionismadeofathirdclass，differentfromeitherofthese，viz。，actsandhabitswhicharenotsocial，butindividual;althoughitistothisclass，surely，thattheactofdrinkingfermentedliquorsbelongs。Sellingfermentedliquors，however，istrading，andtradingisasocialact。Buttheinfringementcomplainedofisnotonthelibertyoftheseller，butonthatofthebuyerandconsumer;
　　sincetheStatemightjustaswellforbidhimtodrinkwineaspurposelymakeitimpossibleforhimtoobtainit。Thesecretary，however，says，"Iclaim，asacitizen，arighttolegislatewhenevermysocialrightsareinvadedbythesocialactofanother。"Andnowforthedefinitionofthese"socialrights。""Ifanythinginvadesmysocialrights，certainlythetrafficinstrongdrinkdoes。Itdestroysmyprimaryrightofsecurity，byconstantlycreatingandstimulatingsocialdisorder。Itinvadesmyrightofequality，byderivingaprofitfromthecreationofamiseryIamtaxedtosupport。Itimpedesmyrighttofreemoralandintellectualdevelopment，bysurroundingmypathwithdangers，andbyweakeninganddemoralisingsociety，fromwhichIhavearighttoclaimmutualaidandintercourse。"Atheoryof"socialrights"thelikeofwhichprobablyneverbeforefounditswayintodistinctlanguage：beingnothingshortofthis—thatitistheabsolutesocialrightofeveryindividual，thateveryotherindividualshallactineveryrespectexactlyasheought;thatwhosoeverfailsthereofinthesmallestparticularviolatesmysocialright，andentitlesmetodemandfromthelegislaturetheremovalofthegrievance。Somonstrousaprincipleisfarmoredangerousthananysingleinterferencewithliberty;thereisnoviolationoflibertywhichitwouldnotjustify;itacknowledgesnorighttoanyfreedomwhatever，exceptperhapstothatofholdingopinionsinsecret，withouteverdisclosingthem：for，themomentanopinionwhichI
　　considernoxiouspassesanyone’slips，itinvadesallthe"socialrights"attributedtomebytheAlliance。Thedoctrineascribestoallmankindavestedinterestineachother’smoral，intellectual，andevenphysicalperfection，tobedefinedbyeachclaimantaccordingtohisownstandard。
　　Anotherimportantexampleofillegitimateinterferencewiththerightfullibertyoftheindividual，notsimplythreatened，butlongsincecarriedintotriumphanteffect，isSabbatarianlegislation。
　　Withoutdoubt，abstinenceononedayintheweek，sofarastheexigenciesoflifepermit，fromtheusualdailyoccupation，thoughinnorespectreligiouslybindingonanyexceptJews，isahighlybeneficialcustom。Andinasmuchasthiscustomcannotbeobservedwithoutageneralconsenttothateffectamongtheindustriousclasses，therefore，insofarassomepersonsbyworkingmayimposethesamenecessityonothers，itmaybeallowableandrightthatthelawshouldguaranteetoeachtheobservancebyothersofthecustom，bysuspendingthegreateroperationsofindustryonaparticularday。Butthisjustification，groundedonthedirectinterestwhichothershaveineachindividual’sobservanceofthepractice，doesnotapplytotheself—chosenoccupationsinwhichapersonmaythinkfittoemployhisleisure;nordoesitholdgood，inthesmallestdegree，forlegalrestrictionsonamusements。Itistruethattheamusementofsomeistheday’sworkofothers;butthepleasure，nottosaytheusefulrecreation，ofmany，isworththelabourofafew，providedtheoccupationisfreelychosen，andcanbefreelyresigned。TheoperativesareperfectlyrightinthinkingthatifallworkedonSunday，sevendays’workwouldhavetobegivenforsixdays’wages;butsolongasthegreatmassofemploymentsaresuspended，thesmallnumberwhofortheenjoymentofothersmuststillwork，obtainaproportionalincreaseofearnings;andtheyarenotobligedtofollowthoseoccupationsiftheypreferleisuretoemolument。Ifafurtherremedyissought，itmightbefoundintheestablishmentbycustomofaholidayonsomeotherdayoftheweekforthoseparticularclassesofpersons。Theonlyground，therefore，onwhichrestrictionsonSundayamusementscanbedefended，mustbethattheyarereligiouslywrong;amotiveoflegislationwhichcanneverbetooearnestlyprotestedagainst。DeoruminjuriaeDiiscurae。ItremainstobeprovedthatsocietyoranyofitsofficersholdsacommissionfromonhightoavengeanysupposedoffencetoOmnipotence，whichisnotalsoawrongtoourfellowcreatures。Thenotionthatitisoneman’sdutythatanothershouldbereligious，wasthefoundationofallthereligiouspersecutionseverperpetrated，and，ifadmitted，wouldfullyjustifythem。ThoughthefeelingwhichbreaksoutintherepeatedattemptstostoprailwaytravellingonSunday，intheresistancetotheopeningofMuseums，andthelike，hasnotthecrueltyoftheoldpersecutors，thestateofmindindicatedbyitisfundamentallythesame。Itisadeterminationnottotolerateothersindoingwhatispermittedbytheirreligion，becauseitisnotpermittedbythepersecutor’sreligion。ItisabeliefthatGodnotonlyabominatestheactofthemisbeliever，butwillnotholdusguiltlessifweleavehimunmolested。
　　Icannotrefrainfromaddingtotheseexamplesofthelittleaccountcommonlymadeofhumanliberty，thelanguageofdownrightpersecutionwhichbreaksoutfromthepressofthiscountrywheneveritfeelscalledontonoticetheremarkablephenomenonofMormonism。
　　Muchmightbesaidontheunexpectedandinstructivefactthatanallegednewrevelation，andareligionfoundedonit，theproductofpalpableimposture，notevensupportedbytheprestigeofextraordinaryqualitiesinitsfounder，isbelievedbyhundredsofthousands，andhasbeenmadethefoundationofasociety，intheageofnewspapers，railways，andtheelectrictelegraph。Whathereconcernsusis，thatthisreligion，likeotherandbetterreligions，hasitsmartyrs：thatitsprophetandfounderwas，forhisteaching，puttodeathbyamob;thatothersofitsadherentslosttheirlivesbythesamelawlessviolence;thattheywereforciblyexpelled，inabody，fromthecountryinwhichtheyfirstgrewup;while，nowthattheyhavebeenchasedintoasolitaryrecessinthemidstofadesert，manyinthiscountryopenlydeclarethatitwouldberight（onlythatitisnotconvenient）tosendanexpeditionagainstthem，andcompelthembyforcetoconformtotheopinionsofotherpeople。ThearticleoftheMormonitedoctrinewhichisthechiefprovocativetotheantipathywhichthusbreaksthroughtheordinaryrestraintsofreligioustolerance，isitssanctionofpolygamy;which，thoughpermittedtoMahomedans，andHindoos，andChinese，seemstoexciteunquenchableanimositywhenpractisedbypersonswhospeakEnglishandprofesstobeakindofChristians。NoonehasadeeperdisapprobationthanIhaveofthisMormoninstitution;bothforotherreasons，andbecause，farfrombeinginanywaycountenancedbytheprincipleofliberty，itisadirectinfractionofthatprinciple，beingamererivetingofthechainsofonehalfofthecommunity，andanemancipationoftheotherfromreciprocityofobligationtowardsthem。
　　Still，itmustberememberedthatthisrelationisasmuchvoluntaryonthepartofthewomenconcernedinit，andwhomaybedeemedthesufferersbyit，asisthecasewithanyotherformofthemarriageinstitution;andhoweversurprisingthisfactmayappear，ithasitsexplanationinthecommonideasandcustomsoftheworld，whichteachingwomentothinkmarriagetheonethingneedful，makeitintelligiblethatmanywomanshouldpreferbeingoneofseveralwives，tonotbeingawifeatall。Othercountriesarenotaskedtorecognisesuchunions，orreleaseanyportionoftheirinhabitantsfromtheirownlawsonthescoreofMormoniteopinions。Butwhenthedissentientshaveconcededtothehostilesentimentsofothersfarmorethancouldjustlybedemanded;whentheyhaveleftthecountriestowhichtheirdoctrineswereunacceptable，andestablishedthemselvesinaremotecorneroftheearth，whichtheyhavebeenthefirsttorenderhabitabletohumanbeings;itisdifficulttoseeonwhatprinciplesbutthoseoftyrannytheycanbepreventedfromlivingthereunderwhatlawstheyplease，providedtheycommitnoaggressiononothernations，andallowperfectfreedomofdeparturetothosewhoaredissatisfiedwiththeirways。
　　Arecentwriter，insomerespectsofconsiderablemerit，proposes（tousehisownwords）notacrusade，butacivilisade，againstthispolygamouscommunity，toputanendtowhatseemstohimaretrogradestepincivilisation。Italsoappearssotome，butIamnotawarethatanycommunityhasarighttoforceanothertobecivilised。Solongasthesufferersbythebadlawdonotinvokeassistancefromothercommunities，Icannotadmitthatpersonsentirelyunconnectedwiththemoughttostepinandrequirethataconditionofthingswithwhichallwhoaredirectlyinterestedappeartobesatisfied，shouldbeputanendtobecauseitisascandaltopersonssomethousandsofmilesdistant，whohavenopartorconcerninit。Letthemsendmissionaries，iftheyplease，topreachagainstit;andletthem，byanyfairmeans（ofwhichsilencingtheteachersisnotone），opposetheprogressofsimilardoctrinesamongtheirownpeople。Ifcivilisationhasgotthebetterofbarbarismwhenbarbarismhadtheworldtoitself，itistoomuchtoprofesstobeafraidlestbarbarism，afterhavingbeenfairlygotunder，shouldreviveandconquercivilisation。Acivilisationthatcanthussuccumbtoitsvanquishedenemy，mustfirsthavebecomesodegenerate，thatneitheritsappointedpriestsandteachers，noranybodyelse，hasthecapacity，orwilltakethetrouble，tostandupforit。Ifthisbeso，thesoonersuchacivilisationreceivesnoticetoquitthebetter。Itcanonlygoonfrombadtoworse，untildestroyedandregenerated（liketheWesternEmpire）byenergeticbarbarians。