date

1819 July 3. Defence of Ballot & Universality
1819 July 3.

Defence of Ballot & Universality against Ed. Review

II Indirect attacks

5

{1. Influence of understanding and will}

3. Judgment self-formed & derivative

Whigs […?] if annoyed by those distinctions

2. Seduction alluring and intimidative – corruption and terrorism

4 Appropriate aptitude.

5. Judica-teipsum principle.

☞ Conclude with the necessity of new names to correct predicature[?]. Instance names of Bills.

6. Terrorism vote-compelling, and competition excluding

Instances of new expressions having for their object the exclusion of misconceptions which it is the interest and thence has been the endeavour, of his Clients[?] to promote {and propagate}.

1. Influence of understanding on understanding – influence of will on will

Applied to the subject in question, (as to every other /not to speak of others/), influence of understanding on understanding is not only salutary but necessary: d o of d o of will on will unnecessary and pernicious. Whigs for the preservation and acquisition of their seats while out of office, and for the means of securing parliamentary votes in the event of their coming into office, having as well as Tories an undispensable demand for the means of exercising influence of will on will, hears[?] in his Defence of the Whigs, Lord Erskine shutting his eyes against this distinction which he might have seen and probably did see brought to view in my book and by these means /expressions/ represented all-influence, influence without distinction or exception as being salutary and necessary.
Similar Items
  • Title: [1819 July 3 Defence of Ballot & Universality]
    Description: 1819 July 3

    Defence of Ballot & Universality ag st Edinburgh Review

    II Indirect attacks

    6

    2. Seduction alluring and intimidative – alias by corruption and by terrorism

    Another distinction this which to all practical purposes is indispensably necessary to be kept in mind: the distinction itself, and consequently some forms of words by which it shall have been expressed /expression shall have been given to it/

    But, in their capacity of seatholders and in perpetual prospect and expectancy Office-holders, {it is the interest of the Whigs as well as Tories} depending for their possessions and their prospects upon the successful exercise and success of sinister and seductive influence in both these shapes, and more especially in that of intimidative or terrific influence, in which shape it is most efficient, and therefore most pernicious it is the interest of Whigs no less than that of Tories, that in both those shapes it should be as much as possible out of sight and mind /escape observation/, but more particularly in that in which as above it is most efficient /effective/.

    Now under the language in the state in which I found it, so it is /has happened/ that whatsoever disapprobation men have been in the habit of bestowing on another influence in any shape has been almost exclusively confined to that in which the words corruption and bribery are wont to be employed in the designation of it: time it is that it has been their interest that whatsoever disapprobation shall unavoidably continue to be bestowed on sinister influence shall as far as possible be confined to this its least efficient and mischievous shape: and therefore that if possible no such ideas as those for the expression of which I have employed the words intimidative influence and terrorism should ever present themselves to the generality of mens minds.

    But if my view of the matter is correct, sinister and seductive influence in that shape in which it has a name by which the whole of the public indignation is in a manner confined to that least mischievous species, is when compared to the other which I found without a name to such a degree innoxious, that if in that shape it were compleatly extirpated, the other species being introduced in the same proportion introduced in the room of it, the state of the representative instead of being all the better would be all the worse.
  • Title: [1819 July 4 Defence of | | against]
    Description: 1819 July 4

    Defence of | | against Ed. gh Review

    II Indirect attacks

    5. Judica-teipsum principle

    1

    5. Judica teipsum principle: alias the self-judging principle.

    In my character of Defender of the people, it was my interest that the abuse thus denominated, and thus for the first time named should be placed /made to stand/ in the clearest and strongest light, and to that end that there should be a name by which it might upon every occasion be spoken of

    But in the character of Defender of the Whigs, and rather than they /than his Clients/ should not be sufficiently defended, Defender of the Tories likewise it was the Reviewers interest that this same abuse together with all other abuses in which the Tories and thence the Whigs find /behold/ their profit, should be locked[?] up /continua[?]/ and kept out of sight as effectually and as long as possible.

    It is by means and virtue of this principle, that in the highest and the most important in name and pretence the most responsible office whatsoever be[?] a man’s misdeeds, impunity is sure: his judges are his confederates /associates in transgression/ men who are bound to /linked with/ him by the ties not only of self regarding interest but of sympathy.

    In the judicial department it has two branches: that by virtue of which a man is judge in a cause actually /particularly and strictly/ his own: and that in virtue of which he who in a cause between others is judge in the first instance, is preceding and leading Judge in the 2 d and last instance.
  • Title: [nd Defence of | | ag st Ed. gh Review]
    Description: nd

    Defence of | | ag st Ed. gh Review

    II. Indirect attacks

    5. Judica-teipsum

    4

    What connection is there /Where is the connection/ between Parliamentary Reform and reform of Law alone[?] was /is/ a question put it is said by a Member to Sir Francis Burdett on the occasion of the mention made of them on the 1 st of July 1819 in his parliamentary reform speech. The gentleman is now answered. If he desires any further answer, he may see it in my Scotch Reform my French Judicial Establishment papers a few copies of which have just been transmitted to the Booksellers, in a printed fragment which I leave[?] at his service on the law of Evidence and in various Manuscript papers remaining always unpublished, because always without hope of notice.

    Judica teipsum in that principle may be seen a plug by which all ears are closed.