125_334.xml

Title: [14 Jan y 1817 B Necessity Cat]

Description: 14 Jan y 1817 B

Necessity Cat

1 Theory

§.4. Probity how securable

11

 Quere whether to insert or another this[?] page?

Q. 12. {Is it so clear that} in the case of Monarchs the interest created by the religious sanction is in a peculiar degree inefficient to the purpose of producing a disposition to encrease /raise/ to its maximum the happiness of the community /greatest number/ of those over whom they rule? supposing the effect to have place to what causes is /shall we attribute/ it to be attributed. does it seem to be attributable.

A. As to the cause /causes/ With your leave we will waive[?] for the present the consideration of the causes: it belongs not necessarily to our purpose, and would lead us too wide of it. As to the effect, it is matter of such notoriety, that a […?] /the slightest/ indication will supersede all need of proof.

Among the European Monarchs that have figured most in our times[?] some have had no belief in religion: witness as proved by their published writings Frederic called the great of Prussia and the Ex-Emperor Bonaparte: to whom it is better[?] not to speak of others may be added it is believed as being pretty notorious though not provable by the same sort of evidence Gustavus the third of Sweden father and immediate predecessor to the present Ex-King.

Others, having belief in religion, have by this very belief been engaged in a course of conduct not only not conducive but flagrantly adverse to the end here in question /the abovementioned most comprehensive and important of all ends/. Witness not to speak of the French, the Spanish and Italian Bourbons: witness the indubitably believing son of the supposed infidel King of Sweden, witness the crazy father of the existing Imperial Chief of the Holy Christian League.

JB_111_079.xml

Title: [1818 Aug. 26. Things as they are]

Description: 1818 Aug. 26.

Things as they are

§.5. Matter of Corruption

5

In the case where the power bestowed in this way by the Monarch is in name and shew as above coordinate to his own, he loses /parts with/ nothing by the bestowal of it: it is not at his own expence but at the expence of those who share in it under the same name that it is thus bestowed In the case of the Lords Spiritual, {so called because all of them are by Act of Parliament full of the Holy Spirit otherwise called the Holy Ghost,} the number being by usage limited, it is all profit to him and without loss, as often as the occasion arrives /comes/ for filling it up. In the case of the Lay-Lords, by which is meant those who have not the benefit of being impregnated by any such gas, a loss /an expence/ there is, but among the persons suffering it /on whom it falls/ the Monarch is not to be found: they are the already existing Lords, in whose company the new one is intruded.

By corruption in this shape are kept in subjection all those men, if any such there are, who are not capable of being kept in subjection by money or ribbons: all the Lords themselves with the exception of those who being already on the highest level can not be raised any higher: all those future contingent Lords who under the unassuming name of country Gentlemen, avenging themselves upon their dependants in /for/ the prostration manifested by them towards the Monarch and his acting servants /advisers/, cease not till the sale is completed to boast of that independence which the nature of their situation and their prospects have /designed[?] to/ banished for ever from their hearts.

125_309.xml

Title: [16 Jan y 1817 Necessity Cat]

Description: 16 Jan y 1817

Necessity Cat

1 Theory

§.7. 1. Monarchy 2 Intellect

3. active talent

1

Alexander writes well speaks well meddles with /spoils/ every thing.

§.7. I. Monarchy - how far appropriate intellectual aptitude and appropriate active talent are reasonably to be expected in it.

Question 1 Thus much as to the article of appropriate probity: now as to the other two elements of aptitude intellectual aptitude and active talent: for untill some special reason recurr for separating them, so nearly /closely/ are they allied /connected/ there may be a […?] privilege it should seem in considering them together: and to begin of course with the Monarch himself. What say you in this instance to their endowments - in the situation in question in what degree ought we to expect to se them possessed.

A. Before I attempt any direct answer to this question, I must propose for your consideration a distinction among Monarchs. I mean by those who have been bred in the school of {adversity and} difficulty for example the Ex-Emperor Napoleon, Frederic the Great of Prussia and our own William the third, or if it be your pleasure to go so far back, our own {King} Alfred, and those who have been bred in the ordinary way in that school of luxury and idleness which is situated immediately under the throne. This first group I mention for the purpose of laying them out of the account: for it is evident that in respect of the endowments in question their characters were formed before they became aggregated to the class of Monarchs. Therefore whatsoever it may happen to me to say of Monarchs in relation to either of these points you will consider them as not to be meant to be comprized[?] in it: and in regard to them let it appear /be/ ever so manifestly inapplicable, the inapplicability will not afford /operate as/ any objection so long as it has in place in regard to that ordinary class of /in/ which by far the greater number have been contained.

Between these extremes, by substracting more or less of the difficulty, i.e. of the demand for exertion, you may form to yourself an intermediate class /group/ or any number of groupes, should any occasion for so doing, which is more than I should expect to present itself.