¹ See my ‘The Ideological Backgrounds to Conceptions of Social Justice’, Political Studies, XXII (1974), 387–99Google Scholar; and Social Justice (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1976).Google Scholar

² For an expansion of this contrast, see the works cited in the previous footnote.

³ I do not suggest that this is the only reason for the change in conceptions of social justice, but it has certainly weighed heavily with some liberals, as we shall see later.

⁴ I shall not even consider the exclusion of women, taken for granted by almost all liberals until quite recently, since this raises special problems of its own.

⁵ See, for example, Hamburger, J., Intellectuals in Politics: John Stuart Mill and the Philosophic Radicals (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1961)Google Scholar, Chap. 2 on the philosophical radicals' view of ‘the people’.

⁶ See Woodhouse, A. S. P., ed., Puritanism and Liberty (London: J. M. Dent, 1951)Google Scholar; Macpherson, C. B., The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1962), Chap. 3.Google Scholar

⁷ Macaulay, T. B., Speeches on Politics and Literature (London: J. M. Dent, n.d.), p. 430.Google Scholar

⁸ Spencer, H., ‘Parliamentary Reform: The Dangers and the Safeguards’ in Essays: Scientific, Political and Speculative (London: Williams and Norgate, 1883), Vol. II.Google Scholar

⁹ Woodhouse, , Puritanism and Liberty, p. 58.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Cited in Aulard, F. V. A., The French Revolution (London: Unwin, 1910), Vol. I, p. 181.Google Scholar

¹¹ Woodhouse, , Puritanism and Liberty, p. 82.Google Scholar

¹² Woodhouse, , Puritanism and Liberty, p. 83Google Scholar. There has been a lively dispute both over the Levellers' consistency in excluding various categories of people from the franchise, and over the meaning they attached to the term ‘servant’. See especially Macpherson, , The Political Theory of Possessive IndividualismGoogle Scholar, Chap. 3, and ‘Servants and Labourers in Seventeenth-Century England’ in his Democratic Theory: Essays in Retrieval (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973), 207–23Google Scholar; Laslett, P., ‘Market Society and Political Theory’, Historical Journal, VII (1964), 150–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Thomas, K., ‘The Levellers and the Franchise’ in Aylmer, G. E., ed., The Interregnum: The Quest for Settlement 1646–1660 (London: Macmillan, 1972).Google Scholar

¹³ Cited in Thompson, E., Popular Sovereignty and the French Constituent Assembly 1789–91 (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1952), p. 57Google Scholar. On Barnave more generally, see Miliband, R., ‘Barnave: A Case of Bourgeois Class Consciousness’ in Meszaros, I., ed., Aspects of History and Class Consciousness (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1971), pp. 22–48.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Macaulay, , Speeches, p. 3.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Bagehot, W., ‘Parliamentary Reform’ in The Collected Works of Walter Bagehot (London: The Economist, 1974), Vol. VI, pp. 208–9.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Cited in Aulard, , The French Revolution, Vol. I, p. 181.Google Scholar

¹⁷ Cited in Spiegelberg, H., ‘Accident of Birth: A Non-Utilitarian Motif in J. S. Mill's Philosophy’, Journal of the History of Ideas, XXII (1961), 475–92, p. 489CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Several other relevant passages from Mill are cited in this article.

¹⁸ On the development of Mill's attitude towards democracy, see Burns, J. S., ‘J. S. Mill and Democracy, 1829–61’ in Schneewind, J. B., ed., Mill: A Collection of Critical Essays (London: Macmillan, 1969), pp. 280–328.Google Scholar

¹⁹ See Mill, J. S., Utilitarianism: Liberty: Representative Government (London: J. M. Dent, 1964), pp. 215–17.Google Scholar

²⁰ Mill, J. S., Thoughts on Parliamentary Reform in Himmelfarb, G., ed., Essays on Politics and Culture (New York: Anchor Books, 1963), p. 319.Google Scholar

²¹ Mill, , Utilitarianism, p. 282.Google Scholar

²² On Mill's view of the political role of the classless intelligentsia, see further Duncan, G., Marx and Mill: Two Views of Social Conflict and Social Harmony (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973), Chap. 8.Google Scholar

²³ Mill, , Utilitarianism, p. 283. Note that Mill here uses the analogy between a private business and the state to make his point.Google Scholar

²⁴ Mill, , Utilitarianism, p. 288.Google Scholar

²⁵ Mill, J. S., Autobiography. ed. Stillinger, J. (London: Oxford University Press, 1971), p. 153.Google Scholar

²⁶ Rousseau, J. J., The Social Contract and Discourses (London: J. M. Dent, 1968), p. 42.Google Scholar

²⁷ Plamenatz, J., Man and Society (London: Longmans, 1963), Vol. I, p. 431.Google Scholar

²⁸ Marshall, T. H., ‘Citizenship and Social Class’ in Sociology at the Crossroads and Other Essays (London: Heinemann Educational Books, 1963), p. 87.Google Scholar

²⁹ Rawls, J., A Theory of Justice (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972), pp. 544–5.Google Scholar

³⁰ This is one of the important conditions of preserving self-respect, but it is not by itself sufficient, since self-respect may be undermined by degrading working conditions, racial prejudice and other such factors. Once the value of self-respect is admitted into political argument, it has ramifications that are far wider than at first appears.

³¹ Cf. the position advanced in Campbell, T. D., ‘Humanity Before Justice’, British Journal of Political Science, IV (1974), 1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar. I have discussed Campbell's arguments in a forthcoming paper, ‘Social Justice and the Principle of Need’.

³² For some remarks on the kind of provision for need that is consistent with the ideal of citizenship, see Parker, J., Social Policy and Citizenship (London: Macmillan, 1975), Chap. 9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar