1819 May 26

Disfranchising

§.6. 5.

? *4

Note ( )?

Anti-Reformist. What? is it then your persuasion /notice/ that the interest of the ruling few is on all points in opposition /incompatible/ to that of the subject many – that this oppositeness is fully perceived by them and that therefore /accordingly/ on all /every/ occasions a sacrifice of the universal interest to their own particular interest knowingly is made by them?

Reformist. By no means: not on all points: not on all occasions. But, so numerous are the points to /over/ which this oppositeness extends, that the case and consequent sinister sacrifice of oppositeness may be regarded as the general rule, that of coincidence, only as furnishing exceptions. /composing /constituting/ the exception./

An example may here be of use. Take for this purpose the case of the pecuniary currency. On this one /particular/ part of the field of government the two interests in question coincide. Here then on the part of the ruling few has been and is a sincere desire and consequent endeavour to do what shall be best for the universal interest? Why because their own is included in it On this occasion whatsoever is best for the subject many is so for the ruling few: whatsoever is best for the ruling few is so for the subject many.

On this occasion therefore a good title to a correspondent degree of public confidence at the hands of the people has place. On this occasion therefore my wish is to see confidence reposed: and a correspondent expectation and hope accompanies that wish.

But as on this so on every other occasion, no sooner is any contrariety of interests seen or supposed to take place, than, in my view of the matter, the exception will cease, and the general rule as above take place: the universal and legitimate interest will be sacrificed to the particular and sinister interest.