ABSTRACT
[Bentham's preoccupation with what he was later to call anarchical fallacies goes at least as far back as 1776. Referring to the American Declaration of Independence he then wrote: 'This they "hold to be" a "truth self-evident". At the same time to secure these rights they are satisfied that government should be instituted. They see not ... that nothing that was ever called Government ever was or ever could be exercised but at the expense of one or other of those rights, that ... some one or other of those pretended inalienable rights is alienated ... In those tenets they have outdone the extravagance of all former fanatics.' (Cited in Mary Mack, Jeremy Bentham: An Odyssey of Ideas, 1748–1792, Heinemann, 1962, p. 186.) Continuing to feel that 'the only effectual antidote against the fascinations of political enthusiasm' lay in a 'sober and accurate apprehension' of the import of fundamental words, Bentham later worked out a careful critique of the French declarations of rights. (Mss. UCL, Box 69, p. 62.) In his letter of 30th June 1801 he unsuccessfully offered his critique, entitled Pestilential Nonsense Unmasked, to Cobbett for publication, suggesting that if unsuitable for his purpose, he could pass it on to the editor of the Anti-Jacobin (Mss, Box 146, pp. 239–240.) Several years later in 1816 it was finally published by Dumont in French. In 1819 when the question of publishing it in English came up again, Bentham decided against it on the ground that he had changed his views on the subject. Professor Burns is right to wonder if this was Bentham's real reason and to suggest that, having turned radical, Bentham was perhaps anxious not to alienate radicals. See his essay in Jeremy Bentham: Ten Critical Essays, op cit.
