On this page
-
Text (2)
-
Untitled Article
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
monstrations made by the Tuscans hayenotbeen of a democratic but of a serious and hrtposing character . Warnings both grave and well-intentioned have been made to Government by persons actuated alone by love to their country and well known for their liberal line of principles . One of these warnings was given by letter by the Marchese de £ aiaitico , Don Neri Corsini , who must not be confounded with his elder brother , the Prince Corsini . He distinctly proves , in the language and with the arguments of a true Italian , that it is a necessity for the Tuscan Government to accommodate itself to some extent to the policy of Piedmont , and to the
ideas now so generally prevalent in Europe against Austrian domination in Italy . Another warning was « -iven in a letter written . March' 18 th , to the President of the Council , by a Professor of Pisa , and an ex-senator . lie clearly pointed put the difficulty and danger in which the Government and throne are placed by persisting in a plan of neutrality considered by the public as anti-Italian and Austrian . "To be time to the principle of ¦ neutrality and -calm public agitation , " says the Pisari Professor ,
" Government ought , at least for a time , to remove the Austrian general from the command of the army , and announce in the Official Gazette •—the sole political -journal in the kingdom—the principles by Avhich it intends to regulate affairs . The only answer vouchsafed to these letters was , that they gave signs of revolution , and that if this system were persisted in the Prince would quit Tuscany . General report tends -to confirm this menace . It seems certain that a body of Austrian troops is on . its march to occupy Tuscany and Leghorn .-
Untitled Article
MILL ON POLITICAL SCIENCE . (" sKCOND ARTICXE . ] We have called the public attention to one or two of the eccentric conclusions to which Mr . Mill has been led by the principle of his work , and we shall now refer to the pr inciple . We differ from him with diffidence and regret , for he has deservedly acquired a great name , and his doctrines are much in advance of most other writers . lie alone , as far as we know , has endeavoured to define , with some show of reason , the power of society over
the individual , and we -praise him for making the attempt , though we deem it unsuccessful . lie expounds his views with a sustained -eloquence which captivates the mind , and makes the task of exposing any incorrectness arduous for the present writer and ungrateful to the reader already bound in Mr . . Mill's-flexible chains . This , however , only makes the duty we have undertaken the more imperative , and we shall endeavour fearlessly to fulfil it .
" The tyranny of the majority , " " not restricted to the acts it may do by the hands of its political functionaries , " but " executing its own mandates , " as exemplified by the persecution of individuals in past times and at present , " a social tyranny more formidable than many kinds of political oppression , " is what Mr . Mill chiefly aims to circumscribe and restrain . " This enslaves the soul itself . " " Protection against the tyranny of the magistrate is not enough , " he says ; " there needs protection , also , against the tyranny of the prevailing opinion and
reeling . " "To find the limit to the legitimate interference of collective opinion with individual independence , and maintain it against encroachments , is as indispensable to a good condition of human ailuirs as protection against political despotism . " Hostility to the influence of society , by virtue of its mass , over the individual , as contradistinguished from the power of society ns exercised by virtue of its political organisation , is the distinguishing peculiarity of Mr . Mill ' * book . lie thinks there ia a 'limit to be ascertained , which . ho calls
"legitimate , to the interference of collective opinion , which " enclaves the soul , " with individual independence . How the limit is ascertained to be legitimate we shall afterwards soe . Now we wish the reader only to observe that Mr . Mill starts from the supposition that it is as indispensable , to place restraints on the collffctiva opinion of society , merely an opinion , when it controls the individual , « s on political despotism . This we regard as a fundamental error . , By what moans restraints can bo placed on the collective opinion of aocioty other thnn those suggested by tho opinion itself , or how its influence Over the individual can be limited , ourbod , or ovan modified , Mr . Mill does not inform us .
Practically ,- ' therefore , .. his inquiry is insufficient and unsatisfactory . When the subject is carefully examined we find that collective opinion does not so much enslave as form the soul . Whatever this opinion may be , its influence , unseen and intangible , whether manifested by words or acts , moulds on itself the minds of all the . individuals subject to it . Curious undoubtedly it is , but it is as certain as curious that by far the greater part of our feelings and emotions , and even the mind or soul or intellect of every individual is the result of the opinions and actions of those who were born before him and with whom he lives , than of his own individualism . Every generation accordingly
resembles its predecessor mentally , and the members of every community resemble one another , and differ from the members of other communities . Whatever may be his idiosyncracies , Mi * . Mill is much more an Englishman than lie is either a Frenchman or an Irishman . His mental individualism , and the actions which have their birth in his mind are an extremely small part of his whole being , though his body and his own perceptions of that , and consequently of his bodily identity , except madness intervene , are perfectly individual . Abstract from the mind of Mr . Mill what he derived from a careful and austere father—from , the
mother und brothers and sisters with whom his youth was passed—from the wife whose influence he so heartily acknowledges—from the books he has read and the company he has kept—the information he has derived from his employments , conjoined with the salaries he has honourably earned—abstract from him the knowledge he has derived " from those who lived before him , and those who lire at the same time with himself , and what would he be ? The lowest animal in creation , following its ' -unerring instincts , compared to
Mr . Mill , would be an intellectual being . Mr . Mill appears not to have mastered the fact that man is . born in society , and that each individual is part of a whole . The connexion of the atoms or individuals is not bodily , but mental . Each body is perfectly distinct— -each mind is a small fragment of the general mind ; and collective opinion is the nieaiis of forming the minds of individuals . Like the invisible cement , which unites the atoms of a granrte boulder , it connects one member of society with the other .
¦ To ' suppose that restraints can be put o , n this collective opinion is to suppose a restraining power on the whole mind and moving power of society greater than society itself . No such power exists , except that of the Creator of society , whose own work makes the influence of collective opinion over individuals all powerful . This is nothing artificial , which' can be altered—it is natural , like the influence of the sun over vegetation . We direct our actions by this influence when we know it , and so make it subserve our purposes ; but more we cannot do . Mr . Mill starts , then , from an error in assuming that the opinion of collective society ovor individuals , as opinion , either is or can be a tyranny comparable in £ ny manner or form to political despotism , a small part of society and Like it can be controlled or resisted by some other
power . The collective opinion of society , it must be stated , may be erroneous , like that of individuals . If this be all that Mr . Mill moans , it might have been stated in a few words . All history is full of proofs that society , collectively , as well as individually , has continuall y erred . What we mean by progress-is tho discovery of auoh ciTor . s ¦ and that society , like individuals , should en is tho necessary consequence of man being progressive . All knowledge coir . es first to individuals . Society has no corporate faculties—eyes , ears , ami * understanding - —to gather knowledge , distinct from thb individuals which constitute it ; and consequently nil
improvements , « H discoveries , originate m some one mind . Hence individuals continually arise who diflbr from some part or plmsis of the collective opinion . Society always contains many such individuals , each of whom , in his sphere , influences and modifies , collective opinion . Hut bo it what it may , over '' those who are most sensible 6 f its orronoousness as over others , it lina an ulinost omnipotent power ; it compels thorn in their modes of living and of thinking to conform to its dictates , and produces a common uniformity- in the members of every society . For such a unilonnity thorp tu-u also plainly material onuses , besides Ihu ono material world oouimon to nil as a source of knowlodge—such as tho necessity for tho members of
every community to use similar or the same instruments , railroads and steamboats , wear similar clothing , consume similar food , observe similar festivals and hours , and work in a similar manner . Moreover , uniformity is becoming more feneral . There is now a uniformity common to lurope , as distinguished from a uniformity common to Asia , and , as distinguished from its diversity amongst different nations of Europe . The
collective opinion of Europe , imperfectly as it is ascertained , controls the conduct even of the sovereigns of Europe . From its power there is no escape , and when it is clear and decided it is irresistible . It forms the minds of these sovereigns ; it cannot either be bound , or terrified , or massacred : it may be erroneous : it can only be tyrannical when it dictates acts of violence or arms political functionaries with physical power to enforce erroneous decrees .
Further , Mr . Mill says :- — " All that makes existence valuable to any one depends on the enforcement of restraints upon the actions of other people . Some rules of conduct , therefore , must be imposed by law , in the first place , and by opinion on many things which are not fit subjects for the operation of the law . " Now , the principle by which Mr . Mill would impose restraints , and by which he defines the " limits to the legitimacy of the interference of coU lective opinion , is utility in the largest sense , grounded on the permanent interests of man as a progressive being . ''' " Those interests , I contend , " he says , " authorise the subjection of individual spontaneity to external control only in respect to those actions of each which concern the interest of
other people . " But before we can apply this test we require to ascertain and know the " permanent interests of man as a progressive being . " Can we -ascertain and know these . Have they yet been ascertained ? Were they known to any previous generation ? Is it not , on the contrary , plain that no previous generation had any knowledge of what would be the condition of this . generation ; and is it not equally plain that this generation knows very little or nothing of what will be the condition of future generations ? We know , indeed , that man hi
is progressive ; that progress , dictated by a ; gher lower than man himself ; sets at nought all attempts to hold him back to the past by institutions which ignorance then dictated ; but what his future progress will be we are entirely ignorant . Ignorance may be a good reason with rational reflecting- men for not acting at all , but it does not justify the imposition of a restriction which can only operate on the future , for the present flees into the past while we attempt to bind it . We may admit that the greatest welfare of the greatest number of progressive beings , as the rule for statesmen , is a very
taking theory , while we must say , that to ascertain this welfare as a -fact , a priori , seems one of the hardest and most unsuccessful tasks that men ever engaged in . That the welfare of the whole is the end of society , as individual welfare is the end of life , is a consolatpry theory , but there is in individuals no faculty or means of attaining a knowledge of this general welfare , and we therefore deny the practicability of employing the end , which we presume to be the aim of the Creator , as a rule for the enforcement of restraints on the actions of ofher people . " On this assumption , however , Mr . Mill suggests that restraints , on the collective opinion of society ovor individual spontaneity arc desirable . It is nt the same time true that he is
opposed to many existing restraints , but the , restraints he would enforce by the principle of utility rest on tho assumption—yory strange in this age-r—tluit " all that nudces existence valuable to any ono depends on tho enforcement of restraints upon tho actions of other people . " Where hns Mr . MilUivcd P Whnt journals , vlmf : l > poks hns he road , what public- procoodings . has ho tnk . cn pnrt in , that lit ) has now to loam that only the abolition of restraints has in latter times , made existence for largo masses of men even possible . To abolition wo nro nil at thin time indebted for tho abundance of food wo regularly enjov , nnd for nil the convoiiionocn , luxuries o » i nlM . rnm-liiH of modern Hlu . Only by
huooob-, sivoly getting rid of tho restraints which terrified ig norance , imagined in barbarous times to bo noo-OHsary to protect man against man , or interest airaintJt mtorosf , has modern life bocoiho more " valuable" than ancient life . Now , to assert as a wnoral principle , that tho axistmae of tho mdividuul in only m valuable by tho enforcement
Untitled Article
i ¦ ' ' ' , . . . - . '' ' ¦ ' . ¦ ' ' ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ' afa 474 , Ag « iL 23 , 185 $ , THE tEA ^ EB . SSi
-
-
Citation
-
Leader (1850-1860), April 23, 1859, page 531, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2291/page/19/
-