Misc Writings and Speeches, vol 1 | Page 5

well acquainted with the affairs of our
Eastern Empire, a most valuable servant of the Company, and the
author of a history of India, which, though certainly not free from faults,
is, I think, on the whole, the greatest historical work which has
appeared in our language since that of Gibbon."
Almost immediately upon the appearance of the article in the
Edinburgh Review, an answer was published in the Westminster
Review. It was untruly attributed, in the newspapers of the day, to Mr
Bentham himself. Macaulay's answer to this appeared in the Edinburgh
Review, June, 1829. He wrote the answer under the belief that he was
answering Mr Bentham, and was undeceived in time only to add the
postscript. The author of the article in the Westminster Review had not
perceived that the question raised was not as to the truth or falsehood of
the result at which Mr Mill had arrived, but as to the soundness or
unsoundness of the method which he pursued; a misunderstanding at
which Macaulay, while he supposed the article to be the work of Mr
Bentham, expressed much surprise. The controversy soon became
principally a dispute as to the theory which was commonly known by
the name of The Greatest Happiness Principle. Another article in the
Westminster Review followed; and a surrejoinder by Macaulay in the
Edinburgh Review of October, 1829. Macaulay was irritated at what he
conceived to be either extreme dullness or gross unfairness on the part

of his unknown antagonist, and struck as hard as he could; and he
struck very hard indeed.
The ethical question thus raised was afterwards discussed by Sir James
Mackintosh, in the Dissertation contributed by him to the seventh
edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica, page 284-313 (Whewell's
Edition). Sir James Mackintosh notices the part taken in the
controversy by Macaulay, in the following words: "A writer of
consummate ability, who has failed in little but the respect due to the
abilities and character of his opponents, has given too much
countenance to the abuse and confusion of language exemplified in the
well-known verse of Pope,
'Modes of self-love the Passions we may call.'
'We know,' says he, 'no universal proposition respecting human nature
which is true but one--that men always act from self- interest.'" "It is
manifest from the sequel, that the writer is not the dupe of the
confusion; but many of his readers may be so. If, indeed, the word
"self-interest" could with propriety be used for the gratification of
every prevalent desire, he has clearly shown that this change in the
signification of terms would be of no advantage to the doctrine which
he controverts. It would make as many sorts of self-interest as there are
appetites, and it is irreconcilably at variance with the system of
association proposed by Mr Mill." "The admirable writer whose
language has occasioned this illustration, who at an early age has
mastered every species of composition, will doubtless hold fast to
simplicity, which survives all the fashions of deviation from it, and
which a man of genius so fertile has few temptations to for sake."
When Macaulay selected for publication certain articles of the
Edinburgh Review, he resolved not to publish any of the three essays in
question; for which he assigned the following reason:--
"The author has been strongly urged to insert three papers on the
Utilitarian Philosophy, which, when they first appeared, attracted some
notice, but which are not in the American editions. He has however
determined to omit these papers, not because he is disposed to retract a
single doctrine which they contain, but because he is unwilling to offer
what might be regarded as an affront to the memory of one from whose
opinions he still widely dissents, but to whose talents and virtues he
admits that he formerly did not do justice. Serious as are the faults of

the Essay on Government, a critic, while noticing those faults, should
have abstained from using contemptuous language respecting the
historian of British India. It ought to be known that Mr Mill had the
generosity, not only to forgive, but to forget the unbecoming acrimony
with which he had been assailed, and was, when his valuable life closed,
on terms of cordial friendship with his assailant."
Under these circumstances, considerable doubt has been felt as to the
propriety of republishing the three Essays in the present collection. But
it has been determined, not without much hesitation, that they should
appear. It is felt that no disrespect is shown to the memory of Mr Mill,
when the publication is accompanied by so full an apology for the tone
adopted towards him; and Mr Mill himself would have been the last to
wish for the suppression of opinions on the ground that they were in
express antagonism to his