At that period of its life-history it can not be said consistently to have worked hardship to the common man; rather the reverse.

And the common man in that time appears to have had no misgivings about the excellence of the scheme or of that article of Natural Rights that underlies it.
This complexion of things, as touches the effectual bearing of the institution of property and the ancient customary rights of ownership, has changed substantially since the time of Adam Smith.

The "competitive system," which he looked to as the economic working-out of that "simple and obvious system of natural liberty" that always engaged his best affections, has in great measure ceased to operate as a routine of natural liberty, in fact; particularly in so far as touches the fortunes of the common man, the impecunious mass of the people.

_De jure_, of course, the competitive system and its inviolable rights of ownership are a citadel of Natural Liberty; but _de facto_ the common man is now, and has for some time been, feeling the pinch of it.

It is law, and doubtless it is good law, grounded in immemorial usage and authenticated with statute and precedent.