[Marginal summary sheet[?]]

[Mainly in copyist’s hand]

14 Jan y 1817

Necessity Cat

1 Theory

§ 4. Probity how securable

1

1

§ 4. Probity how securable?

Q 1 - Recapitulation - < > question - By what arrangements < > of the form of government can appropriate probity on the part of the supreme rulers be most effectually secured -

A. Short answer: such by means of which each such ruler shall find it his interest to entertain the destrosetion[?] in question, and constantly to act up to it -

2

Q 2: i e. that in the current phrases it shou’d be his interest should in each coincide with his duty -

A - Yes -

3

Q.3. But under every form of government are the instances of every possessor of supreme power does not interest coincide with duty? - i.e the line of conduct presented by interest coincide with d o. prescribed by duty? Exists there that office bearer who possesses not a share in the universal interest? as great a share as any other can possess? -

A. No. But in addition to that fractional interest every member of the community rulers included has an integral interest, viz. a purely personal interest which being distinct from his share in the universal interest is liable to be opposite to it

A - Yes -

§. 4 Probity how securable

4

Q 4 - This 1 undurable it therefore is that he should never deviate, will any such sinister cource. But then he will not deviate, unless and in so far as his such his private compared with public interest is the strongest: will he? -

A. No - but mostly so it will be. The seperate interest is an integer: his share in the universal interest is but a < > fraction, as one to a number of millions. This sinister interest of his acts in the most < > his public in a highly diluted state

{5}

Ans. In this respect, with no other difference than what depends on the number of the portions, this public is on the footing of a private partnership. Bating the tutelary force of the interest < > political or legal, the /by the/ popular or moral, and the religious sanctions, if by a conduct by which the value of his share as the partnership would be diminished one hundred pound a partner can gain two hundred so he will do -

5

Q 5 - You mean that conduct will be determined by the stronger interest viz - when thereby general happiness will not only not be encreased but diminished.

A. Yes - that in the < > of the powers of government < > to be the supposition acted upon say, as there may be so each had several interests by the stronger body of interest -

7

Q 7 - Teach you then that for example on every occasion in which by sacrificing one pound, a man may gain two he will make the sacrifice?

A - Not exactly so: only for the sale if the explanation said so: if these were really so, no imprudence; nothing but consummate prudence.

What I meant was -

I. On each occasion man’s conduct is determined by what in his own conception of the matter is at the < > most conducive to the aggregate interest corresponding to the < > quantity of happiness expected to be enjoyed by him during life:

2. that for the purpose in question that conception ought to be taken for correct

8

Q. 8. What always notwithstanding the known abundances of of imprudences? -

A. Yes - individuals persons not known nothing known but the general comprehension of names nature[?], and the particular situation of the sort it man in question, such the supposition on what we are induced to act This ground is not a fallacious as it may be seen. Per Adam < >. Bankruptcies are comparatively rare: and of Bankruptcies only a part are produced either by improbity or imprudence. - By the very notice taken of imprudences their rarity is evidenced: only by what is rare is nature attracted.