It Might Be Plausibly Maintained, That In

So Long As We Do Not Harm Others We Should Be Free To Think, Speak, Act, & Live As We See Fit, Without Molestation From Individuals, Law, Or Gov't.

It Is Useful That While Mankind Are Imperfect There Should Be Different Opinions, So Is It That There Should Be Different Experiments Of Living; That Free Scope Should Be Given To Varieties Of Character, Short Of Injury To Others.

We Have Hitherto Considered Only Two Possibilities: That The Received Opinion May Be False, And Some Other Opinion, Consequently, True; Or That, The Received Opinion Being True, A Conflict With The Opposite Error Is Essential To A Clear Apprehension And Deep Feeling Of Its Truth. But There Is A Commoner Case Than Either Of These; When The Conflicting Doctrines, Instead Of Being One True And The Other False, Share The Truth Between Them.

A Person Should Be Free To Do As He Likes In His Own Concerns; But He Ought Not To Be Free To Do As He Likes In Acting For Another, Under The Pretext That The Affairs Of The Other Are His Own Affairs.

When The Land Is Cultivated Entirely By The Spade And No Horses Are Kept, A Cow Is Kept For Every Three Acres Of Land.