ÁÁ[lxxxiv. 144]

1822 Feb. 5

Codification Offer

Appendix 4¼o or Separate

?.5. Admission Universal

II Members unapt

Such the constant ”tendency• © only by a particular and transient state of things or conjuncture can the effect of that tendency be suspended.

No man or body of men other than the greatest number themselves ever took for the object of government the greatest happiness of the greatest number or no body of men /rulers/ other than the /that same/ greatest number or if a less number a number actually subject to their effectual influence

Applied to different powers in the same state, the notion of /to different branches of aggregate political power, for the conveyance of which the phrase/ a balance of powers if considered as a means of /an efficient cause of/ production to the greatest happiness of the greatest number is a gross delusion a palpable absurdity a notion /an image /emblem/ altogether inapplicable. /is employed is compleatly misapplied. No sooner is the phrase understood than the notion meant to be conveyed by it is seen to be compleatly erroneous and delusive./

Suppose the equiponderance to have place any one moment the next moment puts an end to it

At the foot of every throne is a fountain of corruptive influence: and that fountain /the stream of it/ a perennial and ever encreasing one

An equiponderance between two interests the universal interest and a particular interest naturally and materially opposite to that same universal interest. Of such a state of things supposing it capable of continuing what is /will be/ the result? that nothing will be done for the advantage of the particular interest that is prejudicial to the universal interest. True: but not less so that nothing will ever be done for the advantage of the universal interest that is prejudicial to its antagonist the particular interest its antagonist

No such conceit could have been entertained by any one in the character of a means for the advancement of the greatest happiness of the greatest number: by the utterance of it sufficient proof is afforded that in the mind of the utterer no such desire as that of giving encrease to the greatest happiness of the greatest number in preference to an equal share of happiness to the several individuals composing the smaller number could with him have place.