'Interpreting Mill's on Liberty, 1831-1900'
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Royal Holloway - Pure ‘Interpreting Mill’s On Liberty, 1831-1900’ Stephanie Conway Royal Holloway, University of London Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 1 I, Stephanie Conway, hereby declare that this thesis and the work presented in it is entirely my own. Where I have consulted the work of others, this is always clearly stated. Signed: S. Conway 2nd May 2019 Date: 2 Acknowledgements I would like to express my sincere appreciation to my supervisor, Professor Gregory Claeys, for his patience, support and commitment throughout my studies at Royal Holloway, UCL and Queen Mary. His attention to detail is second to none and I am indebted to the remarkable academic support I have received. To my parents and my brother for their encouragement, belief and confidence, throughout my PhD and all that I have done. My good friends, Caroline, Roisin, Catherine, Alexandros, Kate, Alexandra, Katie, Siannan, Tommy, Adela, Emily, Conor, Vanessa, Sarah W, Elias, Lakshana, Sarah G, Elle, Joah, Alessandro. You have all been incredibly supportive, understanding and comforting and I am extremely grateful for this. I hope soon to repay the kindness you have all shown me. For references and miscellaneous advice, I would also like to thank Adrian Blau, Justin Champion, Alan Kahan, Quentin Skinner, Gareth Stedman Jones and Georgios Varouxakis. To G., a special companion for much of my life, R. I. P. Finally, to my Nan, thank you for all your love, care and kindness, R.I.P. 3 Abstract Many discussions of On Liberty fail to consider the reception of Mill’s political ideas during the nineteenth-century, which is significant for revising our understanding of Mill, his thoughts and how they have been interpreted. Accordingly, this thesis is a wide-ranging study of the English reception of Mill’s political thought from 1831 to 1900. Throughout this period, Mill’s public image went through incredible changes due to the cumulative effect of almost seventy years of engagement, absorption and dismissal. Bringing together a variety of reactions to Mill’s texts from the 1830s, particularly On Liberty (1859), including periodicals, plays, poems and speeches, this thesis unveils the reactions of his commentators and the development of Mill’s controversial reputation during the nineteenth-century, challenging both the traditional and revisionary view of Mill scholarship. I structure this discussion in accordance with five key aspects which deeply influenced Mill’s thought. The first was discussion concerning a collectivist theory of liberty in the 1830s. The second considers how scandalous On Liberty was, where I propose that Mill’s critics misjudged the significance of this essay. The third concerns the powers of the state in promoting a tolerant society and removing restraints upon liberty. The fourth was the lack of clarity on the state’s prerogatives over the individual. Finally, public support for the family as a model for social progress and the framework for an equal community, one where everyone played a special role and liberty surpassed all distinctions such as the private or public sphere. This thesis critically examines how contemporary responses to On Liberty stepped over the importance of Mill’s reception, which in turn contributes to a fuller understanding of Mill and his political thought. 4 Contents Interpreting Mill’s On Liberty 1831 – 1900 Acknowledgements page 3 Introduction: Mill’s On Liberty and its reception: implications, ambiguities and the major themes of Mill’s On Liberty Introduction 7 Prevailing Understandings: A Spectrum of Interpretation 13 Negative Liberty 14 Positive Liberty 18 Positive Paternalism 23 Critiques and Inconsistencies 26 Ideas in Context 29 Conclusion 33 1. The Calm before the Storm: Reading Mill before On Liberty – 1831-1859 Introduction 34 Earlier Essays ‘The Spirit of the Age’ 1831 36 ‘On Genius’ 1832 41 ‘Bentham’ 1838 45 ‘Coleridge’ 1840 48 Later Publications The System of Logic 1843 51 The Principles of Political Economy 1848 53 Mill’s Reputation in the 1850s 58 2. Reconsidering On Liberty, 1859 – 1869 Introduction 60 Introductory 61 Of the Liberty of Thought and Discussion 65 Individuality as one of the Elements of Well-being 70 Of the Limits to the Authority of Society over the Individual 76 5 Applications 84 Conclusion 85 3. The Limits of Toleration, 1870 - 1880 Introduction 87 Later editions of Mill’s worKs The System of Logic 88 The Principles of Political Economy 90 John Morley and the Limits of Toleration 94 Individualism to Paternalism 99 James Fitzjames Stephen: A response to On Liberty 106 Conclusion 114 4. Mill, the State and the Demise of Individualism, 1880 - 1890 Introduction 117 From Individualist to Collectivist: The Case of John Stuart Mill 118 Herbert Spencer: free from State Control; free from State Supervision 131 Auberon Herbert: The Legitimacy of Compulsion 136 J. H. Levy and the Outcome of Individualism 141 Conclusion 149 5. Later Responses to On Liberty: Mill, the Individual and the Family, 1890 - 1900 Introduction 150 The Sovereignty of the Individual 151 A Progressive Life: Individualism and Family Values 160 On Liberty: Social Responsibility 166 Conclusion 172 Conclusion The Problem at Hand and Mill’s Reputation by 1900 175 Tying up Loose Ends: the Scale of Mill’s elastic anxieties, 1831-1900 177 Ambiguous and Inconsistent: RethinKing On Liberty 178 Mill and On Liberty 188 Glossary 191 Bibliography 196 6 Introduction MILL’S ON LIBERTY AND ITS RECEPTION Implications, ambiguities and the major themes of Mill’s On Liberty On Liberty is known today as the text on freedom and individuality.1 Its author, John Stuart Mill, is consistently described as a man of liberty. The principal argument is disdainful of conformity, passionately drawing attention to the importance of individuals freely enriching themselves through capitalising upon their freedom to pursue their own interests,2 adding diversity of character where freedom of thought and discussion are indispensable for development.3 The text is equally concerned with the struggle between liberty and authority, where Mill defines liberty as ‘protection against the tyranny of the political rulers’4 who are guilty of cultivating character poorly, hindering social freedom and self-governance through maintaining ‘wretched education, and wretched social arrangements’.5 Mill’s one very simple principle was intended to govern the relationship between society and the individual, to enforce a rule6 where the exercise of power over another can only be done in order to prevent harm to others.7 This prompted a number of ongoing discussions regarding the boundaries of interference and the preservation of liberty, which would come to be of paramount importance when discussing On Liberty. 1 For a study revolving around these two terms see C. L. Ten, Mill on Liberty who notes that On Liberty was penned by ‘a consistent liberal, deeply committed to the cause of individual freedom for everyone’ (p. 9). See further Francis Wrigley Hirst, Liberty and Tyranny which claims On Liberty was an ‘epoch-maKing treatise’ spurred into publication by Humboldt’s essay The Sphere and Duties of Government (p. 24). 2 See Fred R. Berger, Happiness, Justice and Freedom, where he argues that individuality is ‘the central thesis of Liberty’ (pp. 235-236). See further Peter Nicholson, ‘The reception and early reputation of Mill’s political thought’, in John SKorupsKi, ed. The Cambridge Companion to Mill, pp. 464-496. Mill moved ‘so cautiously, temperately and decorously in On Liberty’ in addressing individuality so as to present a form of individualism which would appear harmless to society (p. 470). This reception study is brief and uses very few newspapers or periodicals to explore Mill’s political thought, even then, they are not used to address a connection between Mill’s writings and the public reception of him. 3 See John Skorupski, John Stuart Mill. In On Liberty, a ground rule of Mill’s liberalism, which is also characteristic of a liberal state, ‘is that all its citizens have unrestricted access to dialogue’ (p. 384). 4 The Collected works of John Stuart Mill (hereafter ‘CW’), vol. 18, p. 217. (All citations here from this edition have removed the textual variants noted there). 5 CW 10, p. 215. 6 See Henry R. West, ‘Mill’s case for Liberty’, in Ten, ed. Mill’s On Liberty. Mill seeKs a rule that ‘would protect others from interfering on the basis of their paternalistic judgement’ (p. 38). 7 See Joseph Hamburger, On Liberty and Control, particularly pp. 3-17, for a discussion questioning whether Mill ‘establishes grounds for control and restraint’ in his harm principle, specifically concerning another agenda, ‘which concerned “things [society] left alone that it ought to control”’ (p. 7). On Liberty is an ‘advocacy of both liberty and control’ whilst still celebrating individuality (p. 16). 7 Mill’s plea for freedom of discussion stems from a belief that liberty has been increasingly threatened and curbed by an oppressive public opinion, disastrous to both the intellectual and moral development of society. After all, it is a ‘bold, vigorous, independent train of thought’8 which develops intellectual figures with outward characters, the aim of On Liberty was to thwart ‘the “noxious power” of compression’.9 Mill crucially notes however that this applies ‘only to beings in the maturity of their faculties, to personalities, to beings who are capable of being improved