Adam Smith's 'man of system'.

Adam Smith contrasts the man of humanity and benevolence who uses reason and persuasion so as to promote reforms diminishing the evils of society and “the man of system” who imposes his own “ideal plan of government” on others by force:

The man of system, on the contrary, is apt to be very wise in his own conceit; and is often so enamoured with the supposed beauty of his own ideal plan of government, that he cannot suffer the smallest deviation from any part of it. He goes on to establish it completely and in all its parts, without any regard either to the great interests, or to the strong prejudices which may oppose it.

In other words, he acts like the owner of an enterprise or the patriarch of a family or an absolute Monarch or other official in whose hands the power of the State has been concentrated. 

He seems to imagine that he can arrange the different members of a great society with as much ease as the hand arranges the different pieces upon a chess–board.

No. Either he has the power to hire and fire & elevate or relegate or, ceteris paribus, he is a lunatic. 

He does not consider that the pieces upon the chess–board have no other principle of motion besides that which the hand impresses upon them;

Sure he does. If chess pieces don't do what we want them to do, we put them in the garbage & find other pieces which better suit our purpose. The same is true of human beings who will be sacked or killed if they do what they are told.  

but that, in the great chess–board of human society,

There is no such chess-board because human society isn't a game of chess or backgammon or chequers.  

every single piece has a principle of motion of its own,

None do. If they did, a predator or a parasite could take control of them. True, some people are motivated by money while others want esteem or praise. But there is a stochastic aspect to this. A 'mixed strategy' is better- i.e. it pays to keep the other guy guessing as to what will motivate you in a particular situation. Indeed, it pays for you yourself to be uncertain about what you will do in certain circumstances. 

altogether different from that which the legislature might chuse to impress upon it.

Not if the guy in question knows he might be executed, incarcerated or exiled if he doesn't do what is expected of him.