nive　at　proceedings　which　set　law　aside　altogether；　in　cases　where　equal　justice　would　not　be　agreeable　to　popular　feeling。　Such　are　among　the　dangers　of　representative　government；　arising　from　a　constitution　of　the　representation　which　does　not　secure　an　adequate　amount　of　intelligence　and　knowledge　in　the　representative　assembly。
  We　next　proceed　to　the　evils　arising　from　the　prevalence　of　modes　of　action　in　the　representative　body；　dictated　by　sinister　interests　（to　employ　the　useful　phrase　introduced　by　Bentham）；　that　is；　interests　conflicting　more　or　less　with　the　general　good　of　the　community。　　　It　is　universally　admitted　that；　of　the　evils　incident　to　monarchical　and　aristocratic　governments；　a　large　proportion　arise　from　this　cause。　The　interest　of　the　monarch；　or　the　interest　of　the　aristocracy；　either　collective　or　that　of　its　individual　members；　is　promoted；　or　they　themselves　think　that　it　will　be　promoted；　by　conduct　opposed　to　that　which　the　general　interest　of　the　community　requires。　The　interest；　for　example；　of　the　government　is　to　tax　heavily：　that　of　the　community　is　to　be　as　little　taxed　as　the　necessary　expenses　of　good　government　permit。　The　interest　of　the　king；　and　of　the　governing　aristocracy；　is　to　possess；　and　exercise；　unlimited　power　over　the　people；　to　enforce；　on　their　part；　complete　conformity　to　the　will　and　preferences　of　the　rulers。　The　interest　of　the　people　is　to　have　as　little　control　exercised　over　them　in　any　respect　as　is　consistent　with　attaining　the　legitimate　ends　of　government。　The　interest；　or　apparent　and　supposed　interest；　of　the　king　or　aristocracy　is　to　permit　no　censure　of　themselves；　at　least　in　any　form　which　they　may　consider　either　to　threaten　their　power；　or　seriously　to　interfere　with　their　free　agency。　The　interest　of　the　people　is　that　there　should　be　full　liberty　of　censure　on　every　public　officer；　and　on　every　public　act　or　measure。　The　interest　of　a　ruling　class；　whether　in　an　aristocracy　or　an　aristocratic　monarchy；　is　to　assume　to　themselves　an　endless　variety　of　unjust　privileges；　sometimes　benefiting　their　pockets　at　the　expense　of　the　people；　sometimes　merely　tending　to　exalt　them　above　others；　or；　what　is　the　same　thing　in　different　words；　to　degrade　others　below　themselves。　If　the　people　are　disaffected；　which　under　such　a　government　they　are　very　likely　to　be；　it　is　the　interest　of　the　king　or　aristocracy　to　keep　them　at　a　low　level　of　intelligence　and　education；　foment　dissensions　among　them；　and　even　prevent　them　from　being　too　well　off；　lest　they　should　〃wax　fat；　and　kick〃；　agreeably　to　the　maxim　of　Cardinal　Richelieu　in　his　celebrated　Testament　Politique。　All　these　things　are　for　the　interest　of　a　king　or　aristocracy；　in　a　purely　selfish　point　of　view；　unless　a　sufficiently　strong　counter…interest　is　created　by　the　fear　of　provoking　resistance。　All　these　evils　have　been；　and　many　of　them　still　are；　produced　by　the　sinister　interests　of　kings　and　aristocracies；　where　their　power　is　sufficient　to　raise　them　above　the　opinion　of　the　rest　of　the　community；　nor　is　it　rational　to　expect；　as　a　consequence　of　such　a　position；　any　other　conduct。　　　These　things　are　superabundantly　evident　in　the　case　of　a　monarchy　or　an　aristocracy；　but　it　is　sometimes　rather　gratuitously　assumed　that　the　same　kind　of　injurious　influences　do　not　operate　in　a　democracy。　Looking　at　democracy　in　the　way　in　which　it　is　commonly　conceived；　as　the　rule　of　the　numerical　majority；　it　is　surely　possible　that　the　ruling　power　may　be　under　the　dominion　of　sectional　or　class　interests；　pointing　to　conduct　different　from　that　which　would　be　dictated　by　impartial　regard　for　the　interest　of　all。　Suppose　the　majority　to　be　whites；　the　minority　negroes；　or　vice　versa：　is　it　likely　that　the　majority　would　allow　equal　justice　to　the　minority？　Suppose　the　majority　Catholics；　the　minority　Protestants；　or　the　reverse；　will　there　not　be　the　same　danger？　Or　let　the　majority　be　English；　the　minority　Irish；　or　the　contrary：　is　there　not　a　great　probability　of　similar　evil？　In　all　countries　there　is　a　majority　of　poor；　a　minority　who；　in　contradistinction；　may　be　called　rich。　Between　these　two　classes；　on　many　questions；　there　is　complete　opposition　of　apparent　interest。　We　will　suppose　the　majority　sufficiently　intelligent　to　be　aware　that　it　is　not　for　their　advantage　to　weaken　the　security　of　property；　and　that　it　would　be　weakened　by　any　act　of　arbitrary　spoliation。　But　is　there　not　a　considerable　danger　lest　they　should　throw　upon　the　possessors　of　what　is　called　realised　property；　and　upon　the　larger　incomes；　an　unfair　share；　or　even　the　whole；　of　the　burden　of　taxation；　and　having　done　so；　add　to　the　amount　without　scruple；　expending　the　proceeds　in　modes　supposed　to　conduce　to　the　profit　and　advantage　of　the　labouring　class？　Suppose；　again；　a　minority　of　skilled　labourers；　a　majority　of　unskilled：　the　experience　of　many　trade　unions；　unless　they　are　greatly　calumniated；　justifies　the　apprehension　that　equality　of　earnings　might　be　imposed　as　an　obligation；　and　that　piecework；　payment　by　the　hour；　and　all　practices　which　enable　superior　industry　or　abilities　to　gain　a　superior　reward　might　be　put　down。　Legislative　attempts　to　raise　wages；　limitation　of　competition　in　the　labour　market；　taxes　or　restrictions　on　machinery；　and　on　improvements　of　all　kinds　tending　to　dispense　with　any　of　the　existing　labour…　even；　perhaps；　protection　of　the　home　producer　against　foreign　industry　are　very　natural　（I　do　not　venture　to　say　whether　probable）　results　of　a　feeling　of　class　interest　in　a　governing　majority　of　manual　labourers。　　　It　will　be　said　that　none　of　these　things　are　for　the　real　interest　of　the　most　numerous　class：　to　which　I　answer；　that　if　the　conduct　of　human　beings　was　determined　by　no　other　interested　considerations　than　those　which　constitute　their　〃real〃　interest；　neither　monarchy　nor　oligarchy　would　be　such　bad　governments　as　they　are；　for　assuredly　very　strong　arguments　may　be；　and　often　have　been；　adduced　to　show　that　either　a　king　or　a　governing　senate　are　in　much　the　most　enviable　position；　when　ruling　justly　and　vigilantly　over　an　active；　wealthy；　enlightened；　and　high…minded　people。　But　a　king　only　now　and　then；　and　an　oligarchy　in　no　known　instance；　have　taken　this　exalted　view　of　their　self…interest：　and　why　should　we　expect　a　loftier　mode　of　thinking　from　the　labouring　classes？　It　is　not　what　their　interest　is；　but　what　they　suppose　it　to　be；　that　is　the　important　consideration　with　respect　to　their　conduct：　and　it　is　quite　conclusive　against　any　theory　of　government　that　it　assumes　the　numerical　majority　to　do　habitually　what　is　never　done；　nor　expected　to　be　done；　save　in　very　exceptional　cases；　by　any　other　depositaries　of　power…　namely；　to　direct　their　conduct　by　their　real　ultimate　interest；　in　opposition　to　their　immediate　and　apparent　interest。　No　one；　surely；　can　doubt　that　many　of　the　pernicious　measures　above　enumerated；　and　many　others　as　bad；　would　be　for　the　immediate　interest　of　the　general　body　of　unskilled　labourers。　It　is　quite　possible　that　they　would　be　for　the　selfish　interest　of　the　whole　existing　generation　of　the　class。　The　relaxation　of　industry　and　activity；　and　diminished　encouragement　to　saving　which　would　be　their　ultimate　consequence；　might　perhaps　be　little　felt　by　the　class　of　unskilled　labourers　in　the　space　of　a　single　lifetime。　　　Some　of　the　most　fatal　changes　in　human　affairs　have　been；　as　to　their　more　manifest　immediate　effects；　beneficial。　The　establishment　of　the　despotism　of　the　Caesars　was　a　great　benefit　to　the　entire　generation　in　which　it　took　place。　It　put　a　stop　to　civil　war；　abated　a　vast　amount　of　malversation　and　tyranny　by　praetors　and　proconsuls；　it　fostered　many　of　the　graces　of　life；　and　intellectual　cultivation　in　all　departments　not　political；　it　produced　monuments　of　literary　genius　dazzling　to　the　imaginations　of　shallow　readers　of　history；　who　do　not　reflect　that　the　men　to　whom　the　despotism　of　Augustus　（as　well　as　of　Lorenzo　de'　Medici　and　of　Louis　XIV。）　owes　its　brilliancy；　were　all　formed　in　the　generation　preceding。　The　accumulated　riches；　and　the　mental　energy　and　activity；　produced　by　centuries　of　freedom；　remained　for　the　benefit　of　the　first　generation　of　slaves。　Yet　this　was　the　commencement　of　a　regime　by　whose　gradual　operation　all　the　civilisation　which　had　been　gained　insensibly　faded　away；　until　the　Empire；　which　had　conquered　and　embraced　the　world　in　its　grasp；　so　completely　lost　even　its　military　efficiency；　that　invaders　whom　three　or　four　legions　had　always　sufficed　to　coerce　were　able　to　overrun　and　occupy　nearly　the　whole　of　its　vast　territory。　The　fresh　impulse　given　by　Christianity　came　but　just　in　time　to　save　arts　and　letters　from　perishing；　and　the　human　race　from　sinking　back　into　perhaps　endless　night。　　　When　we　talk　of　the　interest　of　a　body　of　men；　or　even　of　an　individual　man；　as　a　principle　determining　their　actions；　the　question　what　would　be　considered　their　interest　by　an　unprejudiced　observer　is　one　of　the　least　important　parts　of　the　whole　matter。　As　Coleridge　observes；　the　man　makes　the　motive；　not　the　motive　the　man。　What　it　is　the　man's　interest　to　do　or　refrain　from　depends　less　on　any　outward　c