Econlib

The Library

Other Sites

Front Page arrow Titles (by Subject) arrow Section 4.: Recognition of its Inutility by Lords and Commons. - The Works of Jeremy Bentham, vol. 5 (Scotch Reform, Real Property, Codification Petitions)

Return to Title Page for The Works of Jeremy Bentham, vol. 5 (Scotch Reform, Real Property, Codification Petitions)

Search this Title:

Also in the Library:

Subject Area: Law

Section 4.: Recognition of its Inutility by Lords and Commons. - Jeremy Bentham, The Works of Jeremy Bentham, vol. 5 (Scotch Reform, Real Property, Codification Petitions) [1843]

Edition used:

The Works of Jeremy Bentham, published under the Superintendence of his Executor, John Bowring (Edinburgh: William Tait, 1838-1843). 11 vols. Vol. 5.

Part of: The Works of Jeremy Bentham, 11 vols.

About Liberty Fund:

Liberty Fund, Inc. is a private, educational foundation established to encourage the study of the ideal of a society of free and responsible individuals.


Section 4.

Recognition of its Inutility by Lords and Commons.

By the House of Commons is exercised,—if, in appearance, relation had to the two other component branches of the sovereignty, no more than a co-equal, or in some respects even inferior—in effect and experience a universally superintending and thereby superior, authority in every department of government. If, in legislation, it possesses but one out of three shares, yet, by the exclusive origination of the measures necessary to the giving to the body politic its daily bread, that share is in effect (corruptive influence apart) rendered little less than the whole.

Over the acts, and thereby over the persons, of the possessors of the several powers belonging to the administrative department, the person of the monarch alone excepted, it possesses that controul and superiority which is constituted by the direct as well as exclusive right of prosecution, and the virtual power of dismission; including, to the extent of the suffering by loss of office and its emolument, the power of punishment: so likewise over the possessors of the powers belonging to judicature, with the exception of the few persons in whose instances the virtual power of dismission requires the concurrence of the House of Lords.

Be this rough outline more or less correct, on the manner more or less fit, in which these several powers are exercised, depends, day by day, not only the well-being, but the very being of the state.

On the correctness and completeness of the conception formed in relation to the several matters of fact, on which the acts done in the exercise of these several powers are grounded, and thence on the correctness and completeness of the mass of evidence, from which in each instance that conception is deduced, depends, in each instance, the propriety or impropriety, the salutariness or the mischievousness, of the exercise given to those powers.

All this while,—in so far as, concerning what a man thinks it right for him to do, any inference can be drawn from what he does,—of all those several operations, on each of which the life of the body politic is no less continually dependent than that of the body natural on respiration, not one is there to which, in the opinion of that assembly, any necessary security against deceptions incorrectness or incompleteness, is by this ceremony afforded—any useful service rendered.

Here then comes the inference—dispute it that man, by whom any the faintest colour of reason to combat it with can be found. Either by both these sets of trustees for the rest of the community, their respective trusts have on every occasion been betrayed;—betrayed by the Commons, by their not assuming this power—by the Lords, by their not conceding it;—or, on every occasion, to the purpose of ascertaining facts by evidence, in the opinion of both these authorities, the ceremony of an oath is needless.

The proceeding for which a ground is to be made—will it be said, that, when it is of comparatively inconsiderable importance, then indeed the fitness of the proceeding does depend upon the goodness of the ground, but in the case where it is of the highest importance, not? This and nothing less must be maintained—maintained by him by whom the justness of the above inference is stated as open to dispute.*

[* ]Question concerning an object to the value of a shilling or a halfpenny—no trial of it without this sacred ceremony. Question, as in the case of the orders in council, between war and peace, between national starvation and life—no such security employed: no decision suspended for want of it. What more need be said?—no thought taken for it.