moreover, it sometimes happens that people are satisfied of the truth of doctrines to which they were led by steps which they have forgotten;that they believe the conclusion without remembering the premises. Now to such persons it may, perhaps, be useful if their attention is recalled to the connexion between their opinions and the assumptions which these involve; and if they are reminded that the positions which they now at once condemn were the parents of many doctrines to which they still steadfastly adhere. To the latter class I would submit that the following remarks are not intended to establish a theory of government, but to investigate and explain the use of political words; and that definitions, laid down for the sake of convenience, and sanctioned by the authority of usage, are not to be treated as positions intended to serve as the basis of a system, and established only for the sake of their results. But above all, I would suggest, that, in drawing conclusions from the statements of others, the reader may fancy that there is a real, because there is a verbal connexion; and may think, without reason, that others necessarily draw from certain premises the same inference as himself. There is no objection to a fair use of indirect reasoning; nor can any writer have just cause of complaint, if it be shewn that the doctrines which he establishes necessarily and legitimately lead him to an absurdity. But no man can so far trace the consequences which the greater ingenuity and wider combinations of others may deduce from his statements, as to be justly held responsible for the errors which he may thus be made to seem indirectly to countenance. "There is (says a distinguished writer) among the worst arts of controversy, no fallacy more reprehensible than this, though, unhappily, scarcely any is more frequent. In some minds, the temptation to this unworthy sophistry seems to increase always in proportion to the importance of the subject on which it is employed, and to the extent of public or of private evil which the misrepresentation is likely to produce. It has, in every case, a direct tendency to discourage all freedom of thought and sincerity of speech."* * Oxford and Locke, by Lord Grenville, p. 75. L But while I guard myself against the cavils of others, it may perhaps be thought that I have myself laboured to disparage the fair fame of many great writers, by minute criticism on insulated passages, without adverting to the general merit of their works, or exhibiting the entire course of their reasonings. To this charge the nature of my inquiries must afford an answer; which did not embrace a view of large treatises or political systems, but were confined to an examination of the usage of certain words by political writers: in which examination, it was necessary to be precise; to be precise, it was necessary to be minute. When, therefore, I may adduce examples of verbal fallacies from the works of celebrated writers, it will not be supposed that they were chosen from a love of detraction, but rather as 66 exempli documenta in illustri posita monumento," and as being blemishes, rendered more apparent by the excellence of the material by which they are surrounded; still less that I entertained the faintest imagination of imputing any thing that could savour of intentional or deliberate deceit. If, in the course of these remarks, I have canvassed with freedom many statements made by writers of deserved reputation and acknowledged usefulness; and if I have not enlisted under the banners of any political party or philosophical sect, let it be remembered that I have only exercised a privilege without which no inquiry can possess an independent value, or bring any sensible contribution to the cause of science. But I would willingly bear the blame of needless precision or over-curious criticism, if the following pages should be found to afford any, the smallest, assistance to the progress of political knowledge or if they might sometimes help to soften the anger and direct the efforts of political disputants, by suggesting an explanation of their differences, and calling their attention to the question really at issue. |