1818 Nov r 9 +

Parl. Reform Bill

Reasons

'.2. Electors Who

Universality

XII. Inequalities[?] tolerated

1

1

The idea attached to the word equality as applied to rights and possessions and rights is apt not to be a clear one: it is apt to give rise to errors: to errors in theory, and thence in practice.

It will be sure to give rise to errors of the relation of it to happiness be ever out of view. The proper /ultimate/ end of government is - not equality but the greatest happiness of the greatest number: equality no otherwise than in so far as it is a means conducive to that ultimate end /in no other character than that of a subordinate end/. If all were equality[ sic] miserable, here would be equality: if all were equally indigent, here too would be equality. But neither the one nor the other is what men mean when they set up equality in the character of an end: of an end to the attainment of which the whole force of government - of man in society - should be directed.

If the greatest happiness of the greatest number be the proper end, there is one end of equality in this extreme and absurd and indefensible sense. For if /suppose/ the government be [...?] that the greatest happiness of the greatest number is the result, then so it is that of the means of happiness each member /individual/ has as large a quantity as the government can cause him to have. But for /to/ this purpose /end/ they must have quantities varying in a scale to which there can not be any determinate limits: for take[?] the degree /quantity/ ever so low, all can not bee at no time can /on no day for two times together can/ all have that same quantity: at no time can the boy who has eat his cake have the same quantity of cake as he who has his cake still in hand: it can no when be that the helpless child shall have /possess/ a quantity equal to that possessed by his its parents who are labouring for its /his/ and their subsistence.