Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-gvh9x Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-18T02:58:24.709Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Benthamism in England and America

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Paul A. Palmer
Paul A. Palmer
Affiliation:
Stanford University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The main purpose of this paper is not so much to measure the impact of utilitarianism on American political thought as to explain why utilitarian influence was so slight. The question I am seeking to answer may be phrased as follows: How did it come about that utilitarianism, the main current in English thought for two or three generations, was little more than a series of ripples, or at most a weak cross-current, on this side of the Atlantic? The problem becomes more puzzling when one reflects that the period of the rise and growth of utilitarianism in England (the first three or four decades of the nineteenth century) was an era in which intellectual relations between the two countries were especially close and one in which movements of political and social reform ran parallel courses. Quite reasonably, too, one might suppose that the qualities of Bentham's thought which contributed to its spread in England would have insured its enthusiastic reception here. A doctrine which contemptuously rejected tradition, preached hard-headed, calculating practicality, conceived of the individual as an isolated atomistic unit, and which in all its aspects and phases appealed to the virtues and limitations of the middle-class man of affairs—such a doctrine, one might think, would have flourished on nineteenth-century American soil.

As preliminary to a direct attack on the problem, some definitions or distinctions are in order. “When I mention religion,” said Parson Thwackum, “I mean the Christian religion; and not only the Christian religion, but the Protestant religion; and not only the Protestant religion, but the Church of England.”

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 35 , Issue 5 , October 1941 , pp. 855 - 871
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1941

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See Halévy, Élie, The Growth of Philosophical Radicalism, English translation by Morris, Mary (New York, 1928), pp. 251–264.Google Scholar

2 See Halévy, op. cit., pp. 522–545 (annotated bibliography by C. W. Everett), and Stephen, Leslie, The English Utilitarians (3 vols., London, 1900), Vol. 1, pp. 319–326.Google Scholar

3 The Fragment forms pp. 221–295 of Vol. 1 of Bowring, J. (ed.), Works of Jeremy Bentham (11 vols., Edinburgh, 1838–1843).Google Scholar

4 In American Law Review, Vol. 7 (1873), p. 579—reprinted in Shriver, Harry C. (ed.), Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes—His Book Notices, Uncollected Letters, and Papers (New York, 1936), pp. 34–35.Google Scholar On the popularity of the Commentaries, see Waterman, Julian S., “Thomas Jefferson and Blackstone's Commentaries,” Illinois Law Review, Vol. 27, pp. 629–659 (Feb., 1933).Google Scholar I owe this latter reference to Professor C. B. Robson, of the University of North Carolina.

5 “Burr said he knew not four persons in America who had read the Principles.” Dumont to Bentham, September 4, 1811. Works of Jeremy Bentham, Vol. 10, p. 463.

6 Works, Vol. 1, p. 154.

7 Tactique des Assemblés législatives, suivie d'un traité des sophismes politiques (ed. Dumont, , 2 vols., Geneva, 1816)Google Scholar; Works, Vol. 2, pp. 489–534.

8 Works, Vol. 2, p. 497.

9 Ibid., p. 497.

10 Ibid., p. 501.

11 Ibid., p. 523.

12 Traités de législation (2nd ed., 3 vols., Paris, 1820), Vol. 1, pp. 128 and 129.

13 See discussion and references below.

14 Works, Vol. 3, p. 446.

15 Ibid., Vol. 10, p. 63.

16 Ibid., Vol. 9, p. 119.

17 “Jeremy Bentham and His Theory of Legislation,” National Quarterly Review, Vol. 3, pp. 51–71 (June, 1861).

18 See Neal, John, Principles of Legislation … (Boston, 1830), p. ivGoogle Scholar (Bentham's theology) and p. 120 ff. (with particular reference to Francis Place's handbills on birth control); and Legaré, Hugh Swinton, “Jeremy Bentham and the Utilitarians,” Southern Review, Vol. 7, pp. 261–296 (Aug., 1831).Google Scholar

19 Southern Review, Vol. 5, pp. 381–426 (May, 1830), at p. 381. Cf. Everett, C. W., Introduction, Anti-Senatica: An Attack on the United States Senate, sent by Jeremy Bentham to Andrew Jackson, in Smith College Studies in History, Vol. 11, pp. 209–267 (July, 1926)Google Scholar, at p. 220: “His [Bentham's] later works are generally consulted only by the determined scholar who will bear with the form for the matter…. Whether Bentham's direct pamphleteering had any effect on America, it is impossible to say without research, but the Anti-Senatica gives some indication as to why it probably did not.”

20 Op. cit., p. 75.

21 Neal, op. cit., p. 111.

22 Works, Vol. 10, p. 433.

23 Horner, F., Memoirs and Correspondence, Vol. 1, p. 464.Google Scholar (letter dated October 27, 1808), quoted in Halévy, Elie, La Formation du radicalisme philosophique (3 vols., Paris, 1901–1904), Vol. 2, p. 364.Google Scholar The English translation of this work, previously cited, does not contain the extensive footnote references in which the passage quoted above will be found.

24 Works, Vol. 10, p. 439.

25 Wendell, Samuel H. and Minnegerode, Meade, Aaron Burr (2 vols., New York and London, 1925), Vol. 2, p. 240.Google Scholar

26 Davis, Matthew L. (ed.), The Private Journal of Aaron Burr (2 vols., New York, 1838), Vol. 1, p. 114.Google Scholar

27 Ibid., p. 231.

28 Halévy, , La formation du radicalisme philosophique, Vol. 2, p. 364.Google Scholar

29 Works of Jeremy Bentham, Vol. 3, p. 468.

30 For the brief reference to the utility principle, see Complete Works of Edward Livingston on Criminal Jurisprudence (2 vols., New York, 1873), Vol. 1, p. 189. On Livingston's indebtedness to Bentham, see Reeves, Jesse S., “Jeremy Bentham and American Jurisprudence,” Report … State Bar Association of Indiana (1906), pp. 212–237Google Scholar; C. W. Everett, op. cit. (introduction to Anti-Senatica); Brosman, Paul, “Edward Livingston and Spousal Testimony in Louisiana,” Tulane Law Review, Vol. 11, pp. 243–265 (Feb., 1937)Google Scholar; Mitchell Franklin, “Concerning the Historic Importance of Edward Livingston,” ibid., pp. 163–212; Pound, Roscoe, The Formative Era of American Law (Boston, 1938), especially pp. 16, 167.Google Scholar The lectures constituting Dean Pound's book “were delivered at the law school of Tulane University on the occasion of the centennial of the death of Edward Livingston.”

31 Elements of Political Economy (Columbia, 1826), pp. 52–53. See Wright, B. F. Jr., American Interpretations of Natural Law (Cambridge, 1931), pp. 308–310Google Scholar; and Kelley, Maurice, “Additional Chapters on Thomas Cooper, University of Maine Studies, 2nd series, No. 15 (Orono, 1930), pp. 5–100, especially p. 80.Google Scholar

32 Quoted in Malone, Dumas, Public Life of Thomas Cooper (New Haven, 1926), p. 370.Google Scholar

33 Neal, John, Principles of Legislation: From the Ms. of Jeremy Bentham … by M. Dumont, Translated from the Second Corrected and Enlarged Edition; with Notes and a Biographical Notice. (Boston, 1830), p. 43.Google Scholar On Neal, see Milton Ellis's account in the Dictionary of American Biography and Richards, Irving T., Life and Works of John Neal (unpublished thesis, Harvard University, 1932).Google Scholar

34 Op. cit., p. 120. The italics are in the original.

35 Letter to Bentham, Mar. 11, 1830, in Richards, op. cit., Appendix B.

36 Ibid., p. 744.

37 Theory of Legislation by Jeremy Bentham translated from the French of Etienne Dumont (Boston, 1840).

38 Op. cit., p. iii.

39 Theory of Morals (Boston, 1844), pp. 183–184; Theory of Politics (New York, 1853), p. 20. With respect to the influence of Benthamism on Hildreth, see Schlesinger, A. M. Jr., “The Problem of Richard Hildreth,” New England Quarterly, Vol. 13, pp. 223–245 (June, 1940)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and on his place in American political thought, see Wright, op. cit., p. 267.

40 In article on Hildreth in Dictionary of American Biography.

41 Ogden, Rollo (ed.), Life and Letters of Edwin Lawrence Godkin (2 vols., New York, 1907), Vol. 1, p. 11.Google Scholar

42 Ibid., pp. 45–49.

45 Reflections and Comments (New York, 1895), pp. 70–71. A good discussion of Godkin's political theory and of its relation to Bentham and Mill will be found in Parrington's, Vernon L.Main Currents in American Thought, Vol. 3 (New York, 1930), pp. 154–168.Google Scholar

44 Emerson, Edward Waldo and Forbes, Waldo Emerson (eds.), Journals of Ralph Waldo Emerson (10 vols., Boston and New York, 1909–1914), Vol. 2, p. 455.Google Scholar

45 Rusk, Ralph L. (ed.), Letters of Ralph Waldo Emerson (6 vols., New York, 1939), Vol. 1, p. 392.Google Scholar

46 Ibid., Vol. 1, p. 450.

47 Writings of Hugh Swinton Legaré (2 vols., Charleston, 1845), Vol. 2, p. 449. The essay first appeared in the Southern Review as cited above. On Legaré's importance in the development of American thought, see Parrington, op. cit., Vol. 2, pp. 114–124.

48 Ibid., p. 481.

49 Brownson's, Works (20 vols., Detroit, 1882–1887), Vol. 20, p. 354.Google Scholar The best biography is Schlesinger, Arthur M. Jr., Orestes A. Brownson: A Pilgrim's Progress (Boston, 1939).Google Scholar

50 Ibid., Vol. 14, p. 237.

51 “Neither his readings in theology nor his later acquaintance with the critical work of Bentham seems to have shaken his confidence [in Locke's theory of natural rights].” Smith, Abbot E., James Madison, Builder (New York, 1937), p. 95.Google Scholar For the Bentham-Madison correspondence growing out of Bentham's offer to codify American law, see Works of Jeremy Bentham, Vol. 4, pp. 453–507; Hunt, G. (ed.), Writings of James Madison (New York, 1900–1910), Vol. 8, p. 400Google Scholar; and Adams, Charles Francis (ed.), Memoirs of John Quincy Adams (12 vols., Philadelphia, 1874–1877), Vol. 3, pp. 511–512.Google Scholar On Jefferson's lack of familiarity with Bentham's writings, see Julian S. Waterman, loc. cit., p. 648.

52 Principles of Government: A Treatise on Free Institutions (Burlington, 1833), especially pp. 85 and 96.

53 Political Ethics (2 vols., Boston, 1838), Vol. 1, p. 356; On Civil Liberty and Self-Govemment (enlarged ed., Philadelphia, 1859), p. 195.

54 Woolsey, T. D., Political Science (2nd ed., New York, 1889), pp. 1–2Google Scholar (happiness principle) and p. 130 (Austinianism).

55 Cf. note 4 above; and see “Codes and the Arrangement of Law,” American Law Review, Vol. 5, p. 1 (1870), reprinted in Harvard Law Review, Vol. 44, pp. 725–737 (Mar., 1931); “Natural Law,” in Collected Legal Papers (London, 1920), especially pp. 313–314; and cf. the statement by Judge Learned Hand: “Nor again do I suppose that I am asked to discuss … his [Holmes's] understanding of law, so strictly Austinian …” Frankfurter, F. (ed.), Mr. Justice Holmes (New York, 1931), p. 127Google Scholar—quoted in Howe, Mark DeWolfe (ed.), Holmes-Pollock Letters (2 vols., Cambridge, 1941), Vol. 2, p. 263, n. 2.Google Scholar

56 Essays on Government (Boston, 1897), p. 193.

57 Op. cit. (New York, 1896), p. 113.

58 Ibid., p. 166.

59 Growth of Philosophical Radicalism, p. 296.

60 Declaration of Independence (New York, 1922), p. 296.

61 Lectures on the Relation between Law and Public Opinion in England (2nd. ed., London, 1914), p. 171.

62 See Hazen, C. D., Contemporary American Opinion of the French Revolution (Baltimore, 1897).Google Scholar

63 Wright, op. cit., p. 138.

64 Adams, C. F. (ed.), Memoirs of John Quincy Adams (10 vols., Philadelphia, 1874–1877), Vol. 3, pp. 511–512, 537–555, 560–565.Google Scholar See also the letter from Bentham, to Adams, , Works of Jeremy Bentham, Vol. 10, pp. 554–555.Google Scholar

65 Memoirs, Vol. 9, p. 251; quoted, Wright, op. cit., p. 211. Illuminating discussion of the religious basis of the natural rights doctrine as a reason for its perdurance in American thought will be found in Baldwin's, Alice M.New England Clergy and the American Revolution (Durham, 1928).Google Scholar

66 Virginia Convention: Proceedings and Debates (Richmond, 1830), p. 91.

67 Ibid., p. 94.

68 Quoted, Jenkins, William Sumner, Pro-Slavery Thought in the Old South (Chapel Hill, 1935), p. 44.Google Scholar

69 Works, Vol. 2, p. 269. A little further on (p. 274), he qualifies his praise: “slave-purchasing and pertinaceously slave-holding states always excepted.”

70 Ibid., Vol. 9, p. 9.

71 Bassett, John Spencer (ed.), Correspondence of Andrew Jackson (5 vols., Washington, 1926–1931), Vol. 4, p. 46.Google Scholar I am unable to agree with Mr. C. W. Everett's statement (op. cit., pp. 209–218) that Jackson's first message to Congress reflects Bentham's influence in phrasing or in substance. Everett suggests that Bentham's disciple and Jackson's secretary of state, Edward Livingston, may have written the message; but there is in any case no evidence of which I am aware that Livingston was acquainted with Bentham's political, as distinguished from his juristic, theory.

72 Introduction (p. 5) to Lundeen, Hilda G., The Influence of Jeremy Bentham on English Democratic Development (University of Iowa Studies, Vol. 8, No. 3, no date).Google Scholar

73 Ritchie, David G., Natural Rights (3d. ed., London, 1916), p. 249.Google Scholar See also Leslie Stephen, op. cit., Vol. 1, pp. 303–310, for a penetrating comparative analysis of Benthamite and natural-rights individualism.

74 Dicey, op. cit., pp. 303–310. Cf. Cole, G. D. H., Some Relations between Political and Economic Theory (London, 1934), pp. 45–46.Google Scholar

Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.