1823. June

Constitut. Code

S. Public Opinion Tribunal

1.

Democratical and aristocratical — two sections into which the whole Public Tribunal is, and every local section of it is liable to be divided. Members of the aristocratical, the ruling and the influential few, enemies of the greatest number and its happiness.

2.

Subsections of the Artistocratical section enumerated. See Letters to Toreno

3.

Hence, instead of a security against misrule, this section is author and instrumental of d o. In a non military way, it is to the community what an enemy's army in the heart of the country would be in a military way. Against not by or for these, is the security in demand.

Good government requires — not maximization, but nullification of their influence.

4.

Objection. Suppose the greatest happiness of this smallest number entitled to no regard, thus are they devoted to the destruction.

5.

Answer, no: in so far as the interest of the few coincides with, or is not hostile to d o. of the many it will be protected along with theirs: only in so far as promoted by sacrifice of many's interest, will it be curbed.

6.

On no point is the interest of the many opposite to that of the few, except as to the being protected against depredation & oppression by the few.

7.

By no exercise of depredation or oppression on the few could the many fail to be equally plundered & oppressed.

8.

But in any proportion and with any degree of permanence, are the many liable to be plundered and oppressed by the few. Witness almost universal practice.

9.

Between the few and the many, no line of demarcation can at any point be drawn when by and for the many the first few had been plundered and oppressed, a second few would be fastened up on and treated in the same manner, and so on

10.

At and by the very commencement of such a plan of plunderage, universal destruction of property, thence of subsistence, and existence, would take place. For further details, see other papers.

11.

Objection. Still, even supposing a permanent line of separation between them, same interests must the few have in common with the many. See then to what parts in the field of thought and action, and government the intercommunity extends.

12.

Answer. In duriation & extent, much the same is the interest which the

12 contin'd.

the few have in common with the many, as the interest, which are hostile army, having military possession of the territory of a political community, has in common with the community.

Quere this?

13.

As to wealth, many's interest it is that it be maximized, and kept at disposal of the producers and their assigns and hindered successors. So few's, that it be maximized, but that, as fast as produced, the quantity of it at their disposal & applied to their use, be maximized.

14.

True, so far as regards matter of wealth, it is the interest of ruling few that so much as is necessary to the existence of the producing many be kept at their disposal: because, only in proportion as man exist, can they produce.

15.

No so in the case of factitious dignity. Of the ruling few it is the interest that there be factitious dignity: of the subject many, that there be none at all.

[See the Papers on Factitious Dignity.]