Econlib

The Library

Other Sites

 Front Page arrow Titles (by Subject) arrow Dumont to Bentham. (Translation.) - The Works of Jeremy Bentham, vol. 10 (Memoirs Part I and Correspondence)

Return to Title Page for The Works of Jeremy Bentham, vol. 10 (Memoirs Part I and Correspondence)

Search this Title:

Also in the Library:

Subject Area: Political Theory
Subject Area: Law

Dumont to Bentham. (Translation.) - Jeremy Bentham, The Works of Jeremy Bentham, vol. 10 (Memoirs Part I and Correspondence) [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. 10.

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.


Dumont to Bentham.

(Translation.)

“22d November, 1810.

“Well! I have little to tell you, my dear Bentham; but you tell me I must prattle—and I prattle best in thanking you for your news about A. and F. They have made me shine at a dinner: introducing them dexterously as I did, a beautiful woman thought me in correspondence with the Court.

“The Panopticon article on Brid. Ed. [Bridewell of Edinburgh] is done—for the Philanthropist. You say, remember to write in English. The counsel comes too late. In English, my style is embarrassed—constipated—dull. I can introduce a word or two when I stumble upon a phrase. I will try, however, to translate myself.

“My packages are made up—your MSS. in the bottom. What I had is translated (the individual Codes.) My curiosity is but excited. It is not in the palace—or in the kitchen—but I do find a most piquant originality. Impose partiality on the editors of periodicals! A pretty inheritance for Sidney Smith. How he will chuckle over the Cato journalist! The virtue of a judge required from a trader in paragraphs—and the specimens—I hear my men roaring with laughter—and then—how will Perry balance epigram against epigram? A joke of Jekyll will be reëchoed by two of Canning—or, must an article, in order to be impartial, be as grave as a sermon?

“But joking apart, one of your own universal principles will be opposed to you. Why not trust to the interest of competitors in a question of trade. They know best what suits them. If there are two parties, each will have his paper—each will plead his own cause, and this is the only possible chance of impartiality. After all, the law will be inefficacious; for, if there be no literary tribunal, is not the editor able to reject what he pleases? Who is to judge him?

“I examine: I do not reject. The idea is not Utopian—Cobbett has put it in practice. My doubt is as to the desirableness of making it a law—a general law. If there were a government enlightened, courageous enough to apply it to its official paper, that might serve as a model for the rest. Can that be hoped for? Yes! from a new government—one that is yet pure; and I see no objection to propose it: the solemn engagement is so striking, as to encourage an honourable man to take charge of the enterprise.”

In answer to an inquiry as to the proportion of prize-money paid to the officers of privateers, Brougham writes to Mill.

“My information is, that the proportion of the net proceeds given to the officers and crews of privateers varies,—but that the most usual proportion is one-fourth (net proceeds.) The owners and outfitters of privateers make the best bargains they can with the crews and captains. I know of no case (nor can hear of any) where the prize courts have decided what share should be allowed where the capture was made without any previous agreement.—Indeed, I apprehend the crew would in that case have no claim.

“The above information applies to privateers generally.”

Brougham, in answering inquiries made by Mill, on the subject of the Admiralty Court, says:—

“10th December, 1810.

“I trust Mr B. will consider the great question of Droits of Admiralty, as worthy of his attention. I don’t know if he is aware of what was done in it last session. As I had a principal share in pressing it,—and in threatening to press it more generally this session,—I could explain its situation easily to you, the first time we meet, and give you the documents.”

The topic interested Bentham much, and he replied to Mill:—

“December 13th, 1810.

“But just received yours dated yesterday morning. Concerning Droits, what you tell me is altogether new to me, and the best news possible. I am delighted to see it in such good hands. Oh, yes; get the documents by all means. Those which consist in House of Commons’ papers, printed last session, I have of my own, or, at least, ought to have. But let me have the whole tote, whereupon all that I have of my own, I return instantly,—and the others speedily, that is, as soon as I have done with them, and as much sooner as they are wanted. Not having yet received my Cobbett’s Debates for the last session, I remain in total darkness. I feared it had been in no hands but inept and unpractised ones, such as those of the sea-faring members.”

The following note will give a correct idea of the excellent English which Dumont wrote,—though almost all his letters to Bentham are in French:—

“February 16, 1811.

“The man in the moon takes as much interest in my labour as you do.—I am a working slave,—the whip would not be so afflictive as so much indifference. Massa is a very bad massa. Not one poor visit in the antejentacular perambulations. Read the fable of La Fontaine, ‘L’âne et le jardinier.’ I regret my former master.

“I threaten you with an invasion,—but I give you fair warning,—to-day, if you choose, or Tuesday,—petit regime, remember,—je suis un sage, je ne mange ni ne bois, je travaille, je maigris à vue d’œil, j’ai besoin de causer avec vous avant d’entrer en conference avec l’imprimeur, et je suis impatient de commencer pour être libre, si possible, à la fin de Mai.

“Samedi.

E. D.”

Extract of a letter from