date

1819 May 30 Defence of | | Ballot
1819 May 30

Defence of | | Ballot

Objection 1. Ought ergo will

3

They ought? the subject many – they /the men of low degree/ ought to sacrifice themselves? Say rather he ought not – the man of the ruling few – ought not thus to call for – thus to compel – the sacrifice.
Similar Items
  • Title: [1819 May 25 Defence of | | Ballot]
    Description: 1819 May 25

    Defence of | | Ballot

    Objection 1. Ought ergo will

    3

    4

    Is not this already enough? look a little closer. More maxims of like wisdom included /behold them/ in this one. No man ought to have any regard for his own interest, therefore no man will have. Every man ought to be ready on every occasion to sacrifice his interest to that of the public: therefore so every man is. Every man ought to be ready on every occasion to sacrifice the interest of himself and family, be it ever so great and certain to the interest of the public be it ever so minute and questionable: therefore so he is. /will be./
  • Title: [1819 May 30 Defence of Ballot against]
    Description: 1819 May 30

    Defence of Ballot against B.

    Objection 3. Terrorism produces interest

    Objection 3. Call the cause terrorism, if you please, still the effect is that it is according to their conception of his own interest that the vote is given: which is all that you desire.
  • Title: [1819 May 25 A. Defence of Ballot]
    Description: 1819 May 25 A.

    Defence of Ballot – III. against B

    Objection 1. Ought ergo will

    1

    After all this argumentation /mass of argument/ In a mass of argument thus celebrated, /In all this/ /the fruit of so much labour /industry/ and that labour /industry/ produced /set to work/ by so strong an interest/ one thing there is that gives /affords/ me real satisfaction: This is /and this/ the not seeing any use made of the two objections neither of which /which neither of them/ ever presented themselves to my eyes or ears without bringing with it real uneasiness: uneasiness produced certainly /assuredly/ not by the idea /sense/ /perception/ of this strength, but by the idea of their /view of their extreme/ weakness

    Considering the pertinacity with which I have seen them clung to by those men from whom I should have expected better things, and from whom on other subjects belonging to the field of reform I have seen and heard so much better things, I am almost ashamed to mention them.

    1. One consists in this argument. Men ought to give out /forth/ their votes in the finest[?] manner: therefore so they will. Men ought not to go afraid to make their votes known: therefore they will not.

    Oh rare logic! all men ought always to do what they ought: therefore so they always will.

    Oh rare logic! If this /it/ be indeed conclusive, what a land is this we live in? what a race /species is this we belong to? The conclusion is it a just /legitimate/ one? Reformists may save their labour This logic will do every thing. Try it upon both Houses, what is /comes to/ the same thing try it upon Ministers who ever they are: or to go to the root and do every thing at a stroke, try it upon the Monarch, whoever he is. If this reasoning be legitimate, all Parliamentary reform, reform in every shape is needless. Try it upon the whole race, Utopia is realised. {Try it /Apply it/ upon all sinners, from sinners they become /start up/ saints: original sin is wasted away.}

    This logic is no dream: at this moment my eyes have it in black and white: my ears have over and over again been assaulted /grated/ by it. +

    In a letter /present letter to myself/ I see this passage: I would not for a good deal though he were to command me I would for a good deal betray the author’s name.

    ☞ Quere 25 May 1819 whether to add a denial of the antecedent?

    + ☞ Quote Northmoors[?] letter