4 Jan 1817 + 1

Necessity Cat

1 o

1. Theory

1. Probity

*4

5

Q. 9. The probity of a man having /bearing/ a part of the government depends you were saying upon the degree of coincidence between his personal interest and his share in the universal interest or what comes to the same thing the /that/ universal interest itself. Is this true in strictness? Does not this suppose that on every occasion the line a man’s conduct will be in exact coincidence with the line pointed out by his own personal interest? and such a supposition does it not moreover involve in it the supposition of universal and consummate[?] prudence[?]?

A. Yes /Doubtless/: and therefore it was only for shortness and as it were for breathing time that the description of the interest in question /object in question/ was so worded. To be perfectly correct the expression should have been a man’s conception of /in relation to/ his own personal interest.

Q. 10 A man’s conception of his own personal /general/ interest is then the proper description of the sort of power or force which on every occasion every man’s conduct is determined by.

A. Yes

Q. 11. The robber, the ravisher, the murderer is it then by the conception entertained by each that on the occasion of the crimes designed[?] by these respective names /such his denominations[?]/ he is governed by? Can it then really /Is it then possible/ in the nature of man to conceive that it can really be his interest to committ any one of these crimes, and in particular under circumstances which leave /render/ impunity hopeless?