IntheBenthamformula，itcanhave’nosinisterinterest。’Itcannotdesireitsownmisery。Thoughthecommunitycannotactasawhole，itcanactthroughrepresentatives。Itisnecessarytointrustpowertoagoverningbody；butthatbodycanbepreventedbyadequatechecksfrommisusingitspowers。Indeed，thecommontheoryoftheBritishConstitutionwaspreciselythattheHouseofCommonswas’thecheckingbody。’15ThewholeproblemistosecureabodywhichshalleffectivelydischargethefunctionthusattributedintheorytotheHouseofCommons。Thatwillbedonewhenthebodyischoseinsuchawaythatitsinterestsarenecessarilycoincidentwiththoseofthecommunityatlarge。Hencethereisofcoursenodifficultyindeducingtheactualdemandsofreformers。Withoutdefiningpreciselimits，heshowsthatrepresentativesmustbeelectedforbriefperiods，andthattherighttoavotemustatleastbewideenoughtopreventtheelectoralbodyfromformingaclasswith’sinisterinterests。’Hemakessomeremarkablequalifications，withtheviewapparentlyofnotstartlinghisreaderstoomuchbyabsoluteandimpracticableclaims。Hethinksthatthenecessaryidentityofinterestwouldstillbesecuredifclasseswereunrepresentedwhoseinterestsare’indisputablyincludedinthoseofothers。’Children’sinterestsareinvolvedinthoseoftheirparents，andtheinterestsof’almostallwomen’inthoseoftheirfathersorhusbands。16Again，allmenunderfortymightbeomittedwithoutmischief，for’thegreatmajorityofoldmenhavesonswhoseintereststheyregardasallessentialpartoftheirown。Thisisalawofhumannature。’17Therewould，heobserves，benodangerthatmenabovefortywouldtrytoreducethe’restofthecommunitytothestateofabjectslaves。’Mill，ashissontellsus，18disownedanyintentionofpositivelyadvocatingtheseexclusions。Heonlymeanttosaythattheywerenotcondemnedbyhisgeneralprinciple。Thedoctrine，however，aboutwomen，evenasthusunderstood，scandalisedhisyoungerfollowers。
　　Millproceedstoargueatsomelengththatafavouriteschemeofsomemoderatereformers，fortherepresentationofclasses，couldonlyleadto’amotleyaristocracy，’andthenanswerstwoobjections。ThefirstisthathisschemewouldleadtotheabolitionofthemonarchyandtheHouseofLords。Thereplyissimpleandsignificant。ItwouldonlyleadtothatresultifamonarchyoraHouseofLordswerefavourabletobadgovernment。Hedoesnotinquirewhethertheyaresoinfact。Thesecondobjectionisthatthepeopledonotunderstandtheirowninterest，andtothishisanswerismoreremarkable。Ifthedoctrinebetrue，hesays，weareina’deplorable’position：wehavetochoosebetweenevilswhichwillbedesignedlyproducedbythosewhohaveboththepowertooppressandaninterestinoppression；andtheevilswhichwillbeaccidentallyproducedbymenwhowouldactwelliftheyrecognisedtheirowninterests。19Nowthefirstevilisinanycasetheworst，foritsupposesan’invariable’evil；whileintheothercase，menmayatleastactwellbyaccident。Agoverningclass，thatiswithinterestsseparatefromthoseofthegovernment，mustbebad。Iftheinterestsbeidentical，thegovernmentmaybebad。Itwillbebadifignorant，butignoranceiscurable。Hereheappealsforoncetoahistoricalcase。ThepriesthoodattheReformationarguedonbehalfoftheirownpowerfromthedangerthatthepeoplewouldmakeabaduseoftheBible。TheBibleshouldthereforebekeptforthesacredcaste。Theyhad，Millthinks，astrongercaseinappearancethantheTories，andyettheeffectofallowingthepeopletojudgeforthemselvesinreligiousmattershasbeenproductiveofgoodeffects’toadegreewhichhastotallyalteredtheconditionofhumannature。’20Whyshouldnotthepeoplebetrustedtojudgeforthemselvesinpolitics?
　　ThisimpliesadoctrinewhichhadgreatinfluencewiththeUtilitarians。
　　Intheremarkableessayupon’Education，’whichiscontainedinthevolumeofreprints，MilldiscussesthedoctrineofHelvé；tiusthatallthedifferencesbetweenmenareduetoeducation。Withoutpronouncingpositivelyuponthedifferencesbetweenindividuals，Millobservesthat，atanyrate，theenormousdifferencebetweenclassesofmeniswhollyduetoeducation。21Hetakeseducation，itmustbeobserved，inthewidestpossiblesense，asmeaningwhatwouldnowbecalledthewholeactionofthe’environment’
　　upontheindividual。Thisincludes，asheshowsatlength，domesticeducation，allthevastinfluenceexerciseduponachildinhisfamily，’technicaleducation，’bywhichhemeanstheordinaryschoolteaching，’socialeducation，’
　　thatistheinfluenceswhichweimbibefromthecurrentopinionsofourneighbours，andfinally，’politicaleducation，’whichhecallsthe’keystoneofthearch。’Themeans，heargues，bywhichthe’grandobjectsofdesiremaybeattained，dependalmostwhollyuponthepoliticalmachine。’22Ifthat’machine’besoconstitutedastomakethegrandobjectsofdesirethe’naturalprizesofjustandvirtuousconduct’ofhighservicestomankindandofthegenerousandamiablesentimentsfromwhichgreatendeavoursintheserviceofmankindnaturallyproceed，itisnaturaltoseediffusedamongmankindagenerousardourintheacquisitionofthoseadmirablequalitieswhichprepareamanforadmirableaction，greatintelligence，perfectself-command，andover-rulingbenevolence。’Thecontrarywillbethecasewherethepoliticalmachinepromptstotheflatteryofasmallrulingbody。
　　ThischaracteristicpassagebetraysanenthusiasmwhichreallyburnedunderMill’ssternoutside。Heconfineshimselfhabituallytotheformsofseverelogic，andscornsanythinglikeanappealtosentiment。Thetrammelsofhisscientificmannerimpedehisutterancealittle，evenwhenheisspeakingwithunwontedfervour。
　　YettheprosaicUtilitarianwhohasbeenlayingdownasauniversallawthatthestrongwillalwaysplundertheweak，andthatallrulerswillreducetheirsubjectstoabjectslavery，isabsolutelyconvinced，itseems，ofthepossibilityofsomehowtransmutingselfishnessintopublicspirit，justice，generosity，anddevotiontotruth。Equallycharacteristicisthefaithinthe’politicalmachine。’Millspeaksasifsomebodyhad’discovered’
　　therepresentativesystemasWattmoreorlessdiscoveredthesteamengine；
　　thatto’discover’thesystemisthesamethingastosetittowork；andthat，onceatwork，itwillbeomnipotent。Heisnotlesscertainthatagoodconstitutionwillmakemenvirtuous，thanwasBenthamthathecouldgrindrogueshonestbythePanopticon。TheindefinitemodifiabilityofcharacterwasthegrounduponwhichtheUtilitariansbasedtheirhopesofprogress；anditwasconnectedintheirmindswiththedoctrineofwhichhisessayuponeducationisacontinuousapplication。Thetheoryof’associationofideas’appearedtohimtobeoftheutmostimportanceineducationandinpolitics，becauseitimpliedalmostunlimitedpossibilitiesofmouldinghumankingstofitthemforaneworder。Inpoliticsthisimplied，asJ。
　　S。Millsays，23’unboundedconfidence’intheinfluenceof’reason。’
　　Teachthepeopleandletthemvotefreely，andeverythingwouldfollow。
　　ThisgivesMill’sanswertooneobviousobjection。TheConservativewhoansweredhimbydwellingupontheignoranceofthelowerclasseswasinsomerespectspreachingtoaconvert。NobodywasmoreconvincedthanMillofthedepthsofpopularignoranceor，indeed，ofthestupidityofmankindingeneral。ThelabourerswhocheeredOratorHuntatPeterlooweredullenough；butsowerethepeerswhocheeredEldonintheHouseofLords；andthelabourersatleastdesiredgeneralprosperity，whilethepeerswerecontentiftheirownrentswerekeptup。Withgeneraleducation，however，eventhelowerordersofthepeoplewouldbefitforpower，especiallywhenwetakeintoaccountoneotherremarkableconclusion。The’wiseandgood，’hesays，’inanyclassofmendo，forallgeneralpurposes，governtherest。’24Now，theclassinwhichwisdomandvirtuearecommonestisnotthearistocracy，butthemiddlerank。Anothertruthfollows’fromtheprinciplesofhumannatureingeneral。’Thatistherathersurprisingtruththatthelowerorderstaketheiropinionsfromthemiddleclass；applytothemiddleclassforhelpinsicknessandoldage；holdupthesameclassasamodeltobeimitatedbytheirchildren，and’accountitanhonour’toadoptitsopinions。Consequently，howeverfarthefranchisewereextended，itisthisclasswhichhasproducedthemostdistinguishedornamentsofart，science，andevenoflegislation，whichwillultimatelydecideuponpoliticalquestions。’thegreatmajorityofthepeople，’ishisconcludingsentence，’neverceasetobeguidedbythatrank；andwemaywithsomeconfidencechallengetheadversariesofthepeopletoproduceasingleinstancetothecontraryinthehistoryoftheworld。’
　　Thisarticleupon’Government’
　　givestheveryessenceofUtilitarianpolitics。Iamafraidthatitalsosuggeststhatthepoliticaltheorywaschieflyremarkableforasimple-mindedaudacity。Goodpoliticaltreatisesarerare。Theyareapttobepamphletsindisguise，using’generalprinciples’forshowyperorations，ortobeastringofplatitudeswithnodefiniteapplicationtofacts。Theyarefitonlyfortheplatform，oronlyfortheprofessor’slecture-room。Mill’streatise，accordingtohismostfamousantagonist，wasamerebundleofpretentioussophistry。
　　MacaulaycameforthlikeaWhigDavidtoslaytheUtilitarianGoliath。TheEncyclopaediaarticles，finishedin1824，werealreadyin1825，25asMillsays，text-booksoftheyoungmenattheCambridgeUnion。Macaulay，whowonhisTrinityfellowshipin1824，hadtherearguedthequestionswithhisfriendCharlesAustin，oneofBentham’sneophytes。InthenextyearMacaulaymadehisfirstappearanceasanEdinburghReviewer；andin1829hetookthefieldagainstMill。IntheJanuarynumberheattackedtheessayupon’Government’；andintwoarticlesinthesucceedingnumbersoftheReviewrepliedtoadefencemadebysomeUtilitarianintheWestminster。
　　Millhimselfmadenodirectreply；andMacaulayshowedhisgratitudeforMill’sgenerosityinregardtotheIndianappointmentbydecliningtorepublishthearticles。26Heconfessedtohavetreatedhisopponentwithawantofproperrespect，thoughheretractednoneofhiscriticisms。Theoffencehaditsexcuses。Macaulaywasamanunderthirty，inthefullflushofearlysuccess；norwasMill’sowntreatmentofantagonistsconciliatory。
　　ThedogmaticarroganceoftheUtilitarianswasnotunnaturallymetbyanequallyarrogantcountercheck。MacaulayridiculestheUtilitariansfortheirclaimtobethedefendersofthetruepoliticalfaith。Heisafraidnotofthembutofthe’discreditoftheiralliance，’hewishestodrawabroadlinebetweenjudiciousreformersanda’sectwhichhavingderivedallitsinfluencefromthecountenancewhichtheyimprudentlybestoweduponit，hatesthemwiththedeadlyhatredofingratitude。’Noparty，hesays，waseversounpopular。Ithadalreadydisgustedpeoplewithpoliticaleconomy；andwoulddisgustthemwithparliamentaryreform，ifitcouldassociateitselfinpublicopinionwiththecause。27Thiswasindeedtoturnthetables。Thehalf-hearteddisciplewasinsultingthethoroughbredteacherwhohadbornetheheatandburthenoftheday，andfromwhomhehadlearnedhisowndoctrine。Uponthisandotherimpertinences——theassertion，forexample，thatUtilitarianswereasincapableofunderstandinganargumentasany’truebluebaronetafterthethirdbottleataPittClub’——itisneedlesstodwell。Theyillustrate，however，thestrongresentmentwithwhichtheUtilitarianswereregardedbytheclassesfromwhomtheWhigsdrewtheirmostcultivatedsupporters。Macaulay’slineofargumentwillshowwhatwastherealconflictoftheory。
　　Hisviewis，infact，alongamplificationofthechargethatMillwasadoptingapurelyapriorimethod。
　　Mill’sstyleisasdryasEuclid，andhisargumentsarepresentedwithanaffectationoflogicalprecision。Millhasinheritedthe’spiritandstyleoftheSchoolmen。HeisanAristotelianofthefifteenthcentury。’
　　Hewritesaboutgovernmentasthoughhewasunawarethatanyactualgovernmentshadeverexisted。Hededuceshissciencefromasingleassumptionofcertain’propensitiesofhumannature。’28AfterdealingwithMill’sarguments，Macaulaywindsupwithoneofhischaracteristicpurplepatchesaboutthemethodofinduction。HeinvokestheauthorityofBacon——agreatnamewithwhichinthosedayswritersconjuredwithoutaverypreciseconsiderationofitstruesignificance，ByBacon’smethodwearetoconstructintimethe’noblescienceofpolitics，’whichisequallyremovedfromthebarrentheoriesofUtilitariansophistsandthepettycraftofintriguingjobbers。
　　TheUtilitariansareschoolmen，whiletheWhigsarethetruefollowersofBaconandscientificinduction。J。S。Milladmittedwithincertainlimitstherelevancyofthiscriticism，andwasledbythereflectionswhichitstartedtoatheoryofhisown。Meanwhile，heobservesthathisfatheroughttohavejustifiedhimselfbydeclaringthatthebookwasnota’scientifictreatiseonpolitics，’butall’argumentforparliamentaryreform。’29ItisnotquiteeasytoseehowJamesMillcouldhavemadesucha’justification’
　　anddistinguisheditfromarecantation。
　　IfMillreallymeantwhatMacaulaytookhimtomean，itwouldbesuperfluoustoarguethequestiongravely。Thereasoningisonlyfit，likethereasoningofallMacaulay’santagonists，fortheproverbialschoolboy。Mill，accordingtoMacaulay，proposestodiscoverwhatgovernmentsaregood；and，findingthatexperiencegivesnoclearanswer，throwsexperienceasideandappealstoabsolutelawsofhumannature。Onesuch’law’assertsthatthestrongwillplundertheweak。Thereforeallgovernmentsexcepttherepresentativemustbeoppressive，andrulebysheerterror。Mill’sveryreasonforrelyinguponthisargumentispreciselythatthefactscontradictit。Somedespotismsworkwell，andsomedemocracies，ill；thereforewemustprovebylogicthatalldespotismsarebad，andalldemocraciesgood。IsthisreallyMill’scase?
　　AnanswergivenbyMill’schampion，towhichMacaulayrepliesinhislastarticle，suggestssomeexplanationofMill’sposition。Macaulayhadpaidnoattentiontoonehighlyimportantphrase。TheterribleconsequenceswhichMilldeducesfromtheselfishnessofrulerswillfollow，hesays，’ifnothingchecks。’30Supplyingthisqualification，asimpliedthroughout，wemaygiveabettermeaningtoMill’sargument。Asimpleobservationofexperienceisinsufficient。