It has been observed by one of the great statesmen of England, that the broad principles of freedom had been early recognized in that country, and understood by even the citizens of minimum intelligence; for instance, freedom of locomotion, freedom in the disposition of property, freedom of opinion in politics and religion. But that other important features of the same principle were not so quickly and clearly understood. “I refer,” he continues, “to such matters as freedom of commercial intercourse and exchange, freedom of contract in the natural rise and fall of wages and in the condition of labor; freedom of individual taste and expenditure, in the more private concerns of life. In many cases, these were matters which affected the poor and rich alike, but principally the poor, who, in their meagre parliamentary representation, enjoyed few opportunities for effectual protest. One can only account for the continuance of those which materially affected the better classes, who did enjoy representation, to the fact that, not being familiar with the fundamental economic laws, which are now so widely understood, they were not prompted to any practical resistance. It is highly probable, too, that for want of this knowledge, most people rested satisfied with the vague idea that, in some way or other, though not very clear, such restrictive legislation produced some good to somebody.” We pass over those legislative and executive interferences, which present “every possible contrivance for hampering the energies of commerce.” Purely economic questions are not germane to our discussion; such as the numerous and ingenious restraints upon foreign trade; the attempts to regulate the rate of wages and the price of food.