John Stuart Mill: A Criticism with Personal Recollections

194 DANGER OF THE POWER OF NUMBERS. 1849-1872.
the suffrage, considered it a part of his calling to set forth all
the possible dangers of placing power in the hands of the ma
jority. He gave his first note of warning on this point,
in the
the topic came up again in his reviews of De
Bentham article ;
Tocqueville, and is treated at length in the Representative
Government. Although, in point of fact, the transfer of power
has gone on, as is usual, through the scramble of parties, by
flukes and leaps in the dark, these warnings are not thrown
away. At our present stage, we have not been able to con
ceive, still less to set up, an ideal minority that shall be more
faithful to our collective interests than an actual majority. All
the governing minorities, hitherto, have looked chiefly to
themselves ; and consequently the greater the extension of the
suffrage, the fewer are the neglected interests. Mill is exceed
ingly sensitive to the welfare of small minorities, who have so
little chance under the government of a majority ; though, of
course, equally ill off under a minority
distinct from them
selves. The great advantage of is democracy that all classes
have votes, and can thus make their influence felt ; minorities
cannot have the absolute rule, but they can club with other
minorities and make terms with the preponderating body, be
fore contributing to place it in power.
That the working class, having the absolute majority of votes,
may band themselves on their class interest, and seize the reins
of power to the exclusion of property and capital, is at the present
moment chimerical. The elder Mill s faith in the influence of
the middle class, which combines wealth and intelligence with
no small numerical force, stands good, so far as we have gone
yet : the government is still upon their shoulders, although
subject to great upper-class control. Nevertheless, we are none
the worse for his son s elaborate examination of the evils that
may possibly arise from the sway of mere numbers.
So much in answer to the question what has Mill done by
way of construction in social philosophy? His constructiveness
in other branches is less ambiguous ; I mention for the last