date

1818 Sept 29 Parl. Reform Bill
1818 Sept 29

Parl. Reform Bill

+ IX

Reasons 3 o

'.2. Electors Who

Universality

II. Intellectuality

1

21

47 Forasmuch as /Seeing then that/ in the scale of appropriate probity representative democracy on the proposed plan of virtually universal suffrage stands alone, neither monarchy nor aristocracy having properly speaking any pretensions to the possession of appropriate aptitude /this endeavour[?]/ in any degree, what remains to be considered is whether in respect of appropriate intellectual aptitude, always with reference /respect/ to the exercise of the power in question, democracy in this shape is in any such degree inferior {in the scale} to these two forms respectively as to render it more for the advantage of the universal interest to lodge in these two authorities respectively, or in both of them together, the faculty of appointing the person who in the assembly in question shall sit and act in the character of the Representative of the people.
Similar Items
  • Title: [1818 Sept. 27 Parl. Reform Bill]
    Description: 1818 Sept. 27

    Parl. Reform Bill

    3 o

    Reasons

    §.2. Electors Who

    2

    I. Probity.

    §.9/ 8/ First element of appropriate aptitude in Electors, probity – what is meant by it its superior importance not

    moral probity – 25, 26

    opposite i.e political unprobity, what. 24

    §.10./ 9/ Political improbity – its effect sacrifice of universal

    to particular interest: this sacrifice under Monarchy and Aristocracy certain: under

    Repreentative Democracy according to the proposed system in the representative body

    preventible in the body of Electors impossible. 29. 30. 31 32. 33.

    34. 35. 36. 37

    By no sympathy can this propensity be stopped.

    {§.10. Effect of this sacrifice on the distribution of money, power and factitious

    dignity – ie. the matter of good in all its shape in the clear forms of government.

    20 21. 22 23.}

    38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46

    II. Intellectuality.

    §.12. Second and last element of appropriate aptitude in the case of Electors,

    intellectual aptitude – sufficiency of the virtually universal suffrage men in

    respect of it. 47. 48 49. 50. 51. See 2

    o

    §.13 – their comparative sufficiency when compared with their above mentioned rivals.

    52.
  • Title: [1818 Sept. 2. Parl. Reform Bill]
    Description: 1818 Sept. 2.

    Parl. Reform Bill

    Reasons ult o

    '.2. Electors Who

    Universality

    2. Intellect 1. Comparative

    11

    3

    11

    Give a vote to every one, (all votes being supposed free) you have, as above, the greatest possible security that the advancement of the universal interest of the interest of all in the instance of any[?] vote that comes[?] to be given will be the object aimed at: exclude /put an exclusion upon/ any vote or votes from being given, then unless so it be that those whose votes are admitted have no interest separate from and adverse to the interest of those whose votes are excluded, the more you exclude the greater the number of those whom you exclude the greater the danger of those whom you exclude the greater the danger that the interest pursued and endeavoured to be promoted will be some interest less extensive than and adverse to the universal interest.

    Appropriate probity being therefore the one thing needful, hence if such were really the case, that in respect of appropriate intellectual aptitude {representative democracy with virtually universal suffrage were ever so decidedly and considerably inferior to} Monarchy and aristocracy respectively were ever so decidedly and considerably superior to representative democracy with virtually universal suffrage still so far from possessing in that same or in any other proportion a /the/ superiority in the aggregate of appropriate aptitude they would not respectively possess any degree of aggregate appropriate aptitude: the greater the quantity of intellectual power, the worse in all points in which the particular and the universal interest were at variance - the worse the government.
  • Title: [1818 Sept. 2. Parl. Reform Bill]
    Description: 1818 Sept. 2.

    Parl. Reform Bill

    Reasons ult o

    '.2. Electors Who

    Universality

    2. Intellectuality comparative

    12

    4

    12

    But in respect of appropriate intellectual aptitude, is there really any sufficient or just ground for the supposition /supposing/ that under a representative democracy with universal suffrage meaning under the English Monarchy with a House of Commons so filled there would on the part of the Electors taken the aggregate in respect of appropriate intellectual aptitude, except any degree of inferiority, {comparison being [...?] with the condition in this respect of the existing set of Electors?} The answer is surely /clearly/ in the negative.

    1. The time in question what is it? It is not the time - the real time - in /at/ which these reasons are pending[?] /is[?] pressed[?]/, but the imagined /supposed/ time at which the here proposed scheme of representation has been already been carried into effect. But it is not in the nature of the case that any such scheme shall have been carried into effect, but in [...?] state of the public mind such that on the part of the whole body of the virtually-universal-suffrage men taken in the aggregate, a degree of appropriate intellectual aptitude higher than at present is to be found at present in a correspondent majority of the best and most extensively instructed classes taken together. From the effect in question, by what cause in the very nature of the case can it have been produced? By no other than this, viz. by the combined pressure of the majority of the people concurring in a demand made of this great and salutary /necessary/ change.