Whatever the future may bring forth faith has not yet been lost in the efficacy of state regulation. It is certainly within the bounds of possibility that some working balance between government and industry may be established through this means which will continue indefinitely. As late as 1870, according to Mr. Dicey, individualistic opinions dominated English law-making thought.[57] Reaction from the doctrine of _laisser faire_ was, if anything, even later in the United States. For a considerable period after the turning point had been passed measures of state regulation were weakened by survivals of old habits of thought. Even to-day the period of construction and extension along the line of state regulation seems far from finished. Certain inevitable errors have required correction, but no major portion of the system has been abandoned. Further progress should be made easier by accumulating experience and precedents. It is significant of the temper of the American people on this question that an increasing number of the great successes of our political life are being made by the men who have shown themselves strongest and most resourceful in correcting the abuses of business. Under present conditions no public man suspected of weakness on this issue has the remotest chance of election to the presidency or to the governorship of any of our larger states. On the purely administrative side of the system of state regulation new and more powerful agencies,—such as the Bureau of Corporations and the various state Public Service Commissions,—have been devised recently to grapple with the situation.