《我的知識之路》第七章 晚年概略

CHAPTER VII General View Of The Remainder Of My Life

第七章 晚年概略

From this time, what is worth relating of my life will come into a very small compass; for I have no further mental changes to tell of, but only, as I hope, a continued mental progress; which does not admit of a consecutive history, and the results of which, if real, will be best found in my writings. I shall, therefore, greatly abridge the chronicle of my subsequent years.

此后，我一生中值得記述的事情就很少了，因為沒有什么更多的思想變化需要說明，只有（正如我所希望的）未曾間斷的思想進步。這種思想進步不可能是連續(xù)的歷史，而且其結果（如果真實的話）最好在我的作品中尋找。所以，隨后幾年的事情我就不一一展開記述了。

The first use I made of the leisure which I gained by disconnecting myself from the Review, was to finish the Logic. In July and August 1838, I had found an interval in which to execute what was still undone of the original draft of the Third Book. In working out the logical theory of those laws of nature which are not laws of Causation, nor corollaries from such laws, I was led to recognise kinds as realities in nature, and not mere distinctions for convenience; a light which I had not obtained when the First Book was written, and which made it necessary for me to modify and enlarge several chapters of that Book. The Book on "Language and Classification", and the chapter on the "Classification of Fallacies", were drafted in the autumn of the same year; the remainder of the work, in the summer and autumn of 1840. From April following, to the end of 1841, my spare time was devoted to a complete rewriting of the book from its commencement. It is in this way that all my books have been composed. They were always written at least twice over; a first draft of the entire work was completed to the very end of the subject, then the whole begun again de novo; but incorporating, in the second writing, all sentences and parts of sentences of the old draft, which appeared as suitable to my purpose as anything which I could write in lieu of them. I have found great advantages in this system of double redaction. It combines, better than any other mode of composition, the freshness and vigour of the first conception, with the superior precision and completeness resulting from prolonged thought. In my own case, moreover, I have found that the patience necessary for a careful elaboration of the details of composition and expression, costs much less effort after the entire subject has been once gone through, and the substance of all that I find to say has in some manner, however imperfect, been got upon paper. The only thing which I am careful, in the first draft, to make as perfect as I am able, is the arrangement. If that is bad, the whole thread on which the ideas string themselves becomes twisted; thoughts placed in a wrong connexion are not expounded in a manner that suits the right, and a first draft with this original vice is next to useless as a foundation for the final treatment.

離開《威斯敏斯特評論》后，我首先利用因此得來的空閑時間完成《邏輯學體系》的寫作。1838年的七、八月份，我抽空寫完了第三卷初稿中未完成的部分。在寫到既不是因果定律，又不是其推論的自然定律的邏輯理論時，我逐漸意識到種類是自然界的真實存在，而不僅僅是為了方便所作的劃分。我在寫第一卷的時候尚未意識到這一點，所以必須對該卷中的幾個章節(jié)進行修改和擴充?！墩Z言與分類》一卷，以及《謬誤的分類》一章也在同年秋天完成了初稿。其余部分也于1840年夏秋完成。從1841年4月至年底，我利用所有業(yè)余時間對這本書從頭到尾進行了徹底的改寫。我的全部作品都是按這種方式寫成的，每一本至少寫作兩遍，每部作品從頭到尾完成初稿，然后再回過頭來重寫一遍。但是在重寫時，我依舊沿用原稿的所有或部分句子，這些句子很合我意，根本不需要重寫。這種雙重編纂的方法優(yōu)點很多，與其他寫作模式相比，這種方法更好地把早期思考的新鮮感和活力與長期思考后的高度縝密性和完整性結合起來。另外，就我的情況而言，我發(fā)現(xiàn)把所有問題處理過一遍之后，對寫作和措詞等細節(jié)進行仔細的闡述所需投注的努力就大大減少了，我要說的全部內容，不論是否完善，都已經(jīng)大體寫了下來。在初稿中唯一需要細加斟酌，力求使其盡善盡美的，就是書的編排。如果做不好，貫穿思想的整個脈絡就會扭曲，被錯誤地聯(lián)系到一起的觀點就不能得到正確的解釋。這種最初的缺陷會令初稿與廢紙無異，最終將被棄置不用。

During the rewriting of the Logic, Dr. Whewell's Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences made its appearance; a circumstance fortunate for me, as it gave me what I greatly desired, a full treatment of the subject by an antagonist, and enabled me to present my ideas with greater clearness and emphasis as well as fuller and more varied development, in defending them against definite objections, and confronting them distinctly with an opposite theory. The controversies with Dr. Whewell, as well as much matter derived from Comte, were first introduced into the book in the course of the re-writing.

在我重寫《邏輯學體系》的那段時間，休厄爾博士的著作《歸納科學的哲學》問世了。這一形勢對我很有利，因為對手會全面論述這一問題，這是我滿心期待的機會，使我在與明確的反對者爭辯，以及清楚地面對相反的理論時，能更明確地提出我的觀點，同時更全面地闡述這些觀點。在重寫時我第一次把與休厄爾博士的這番爭論，以及從孔德那里得到的很多材料寫進書里。

At the end of 1841, the book being ready for press, I offered it to Murray, who kept it until too late for publication that season, and then refused it, for reasons which could just as well have been given at first. But I have had no cause to regret a rejection which led to my offering it to Mr. Parker, by whom it was published in the spring of 1843. My original expectations of success were extremely limited. Archbishop Whately had, indeed, rehabilitated the name of Logic, and the study of the forms, rules, and fallacies of Ratiocination; and Dr. Whewell's writings had begun to excite an interest in the other part of my subject, the theory of Induction. A treatise, however, on a matter so abstract, could not be expected to be popular; it could only be a book for students, and students on such subjects were not only (at least in England) few, but addicted chiefly to the opposite school of metaphysics, the ontological and "innate principles" school. I therefore did not expect that the book would have many readers, or approvers; and looked for little practical effect from it, save that of keeping the tradition unbroken of what I thought a better philosophy. What hopes I had of exciting any immediate attention, were mainly grounded on the polemical propensities of Dr. Whewell; who, I thought, from observation of his conduct in other cases, would probably do something to bring the book into notice, by replying, and that promptly, to the attack on his opinions. He did reply, but not till 1850, just in time for me to answer him in the third edition. How the book came to have, for a work of the kind, so much success, and what sort of persons compose the bulk of those who have bought, I will not venture to say read, it, I have never thoroughly understood. But taken in conjunction with the many proofs which have since been given of a revival of speculation, speculation too of a free kind, in many quarters, and above all (where at one time I should have least expected it) in the Universities, the fact becomes partially intelligible. I have never indulged the illusion that the book had made any considerable impression on philosophical opinion. The German, or à priori view of human knowledge, and of the knowing faculties, is likely for some time longer (though it may be hoped in a diminishing degree) to predominate among those who occupy themselves with such inquiries, both here and on the Continent. But the "System of Logic" supplies what was much wanted, a text-book of the opposite doctrine—that which derives all knowledge from experience, and all moral and intellectual qualities principally from the direction given to the associations. I make as humble an estimate as anybody of what either an analysis of logical processes, or any possible canons of evidence, can do by themselves, towards guiding or rectifying the operations of the understanding. Combined with other requisites, I certainly do think them of great use; but whatever may be the practical value of a true philosophy of these matters, it is hardly possible to exaggerate the mischiefs of a false one. The notion that truths external to the mind may be known by intuition or consciousness, independently of observation and experience, is, I am persuaded, in these times, the great intellectual support of false doctrines and bad institutions. By the aid of this theory, every inveterate belief and every intense feeling, of which the origin is not remembered, is enabled to dispense with the obligation of justifying itself by reason, and is erected into its own all-sufficient voucher and justification. There never was such an instrument devised for consecrating all deep-seated prejudices. And the chief strength of this false philosophy in morals, politics, and religion, lies in the appeal which it is accustomed to make to the evidence of mathematics and of the cognate branches of physical science. To expel it from these, is to drive it from its stronghold: and because this had never been effectually done, the intuitive school, even after what my father had written in his Analysis of the Mind, had in appearance, and as far as published writings were concerned, on the whole the best of the argument. In attempting to clear up the real nature of the evidence of mathematical and physical truths, the "System of Logic" met the intuitive philosophers on ground on which they had previously been deemed unassailable; and gave its own explanation, from experience and association, of that peculiar character of what are called necessary truths, which is adduced as proof that their evidence must come from a deeper source than experience. Whether this has been done effectually, is still sub judice; and even then, to deprive a mode of thought so strongly rooted in human prejudices and partialities, of its mere speculative support, goes but a very little way towards overcoming it; but though only a step, it is a quite indispensable one; for since, after all, prejudice can only be successfully combated by philosophy, no way can really be made against it permanently until it has been shown not to have philosophy on its side.

1841年底，書稿已經(jīng)就緒，我把它交給了默里，但書稿在他那里放了太久，結果錯過了那個出版季，因此他拒絕出版，他給出的理由本來可以一開始就告訴我。但我沒有理由為這次拒絕感到惋惜，之后我把書交給了帕克先生。在他的幫助下，書終于在1843年春天出版了。我最初并沒有對成功抱很大期望。事實上，大主教惠特利已恢復使用了邏輯44這一名稱，重新開始研究推理的方式、原則和謬誤。休厄爾博士的作品也開始引起人們對我另一部分研究課題的興趣，即歸納理論。但一本談論如此抽象主題的專著是不可能暢銷的，它只適合研究者，但研究邏輯學的人不僅少（至少在英國如此），而且他們大都沉迷于與我相反的形而上學學派、本體論學派和先天原則學派。所以我不期待這本書有很多讀者或支持者，也不期望它能產(chǎn)生什么實際效果，只希望我認為更好的哲學傳統(tǒng)能保持完整。我對這本書能立刻引起關注的希望，主要寄托在休厄爾博士慣于爭論的習性上。通過觀察他在其他事情上的做法，我想他應該會做些什么對抨擊他的觀點進行回應，從而讓人們注意到這本書。他的確回應了，但是直到1850年才作出回應，剛好讓我能在第三版中及時回答他的問題。這樣的一本書是如何大獲成功的？哪些人組成了購買大軍（我不敢說他們都讀過了）？這兩個問題我從未徹底弄明白。但聯(lián)系很多思考復興的證據(jù)，也就是在很多地區(qū)，尤其是在大學（我一度最不抱希望的地方）的自由思考，事情就容易理解一些了。我從未幻想這本書會對很多哲學觀點產(chǎn)生深刻影響。有關人類認識和認識能力的德國學派或先驗觀點，有可能在更長的時間里對英國乃至整個歐洲大陸上那些從事這類探索的人起主導作用（雖然人們希望這種主導越來越少）。但《邏輯學體系》卻提供了當時人們迫切需要的相反學說的教科書——這個學說認為所有知識都是通過經(jīng)驗獲得的，所有道德和智力品質主要源于熱衷聯(lián)想的傾向。我像其他人一樣，對邏輯過程的分析或者可能的證據(jù)規(guī)則自我運作以支配和調整認知活動的評價不高。如果與其他必要條件結合起來，我當然認為它們很有用處。但無論這些問題的正確哲學觀點的實用價值是什么，其錯誤哲學觀點的危害絕非危言聳聽。我相信，那種存在于思想外部的真理可以不通過觀察和經(jīng)驗，而是由直覺或意識獲取的觀念，是當下錯誤學說和不良制度的巨大智力支持。在這種理論的幫助下，所有不知來源的根深蒂固的信仰和強烈的感情，就省卻了用理性進行自證，且自身就上升成為充分的證據(jù)和正當理由。之前從沒有人設計過這樣一個工具將所有根深蒂固的偏見奉為神圣。這種偽哲學在道德、政治和宗教上的主要力量就在于它慣于向數(shù)學證據(jù)和自然科學同源學科的證據(jù)求助。把它從這些學科中驅逐出去，就是把它從堡壘中趕走。但因為從未有效地實現(xiàn)這點，所以甚至在我父親寫的《人類心靈現(xiàn)象的分析》問世后，就已出版的作品來說，直覺學派的論述總體上還是最好的。為了澄清數(shù)學和自然科學真理證據(jù)的真正本質，《邏輯學體系》在直覺派哲學家從前認為無懈可擊的問題上和他們會合，從經(jīng)驗和聯(lián)想的角度，對我們所說的必然真理的特點給出自己的解釋，從而證明他們的證據(jù)必須出自比經(jīng)驗更深層的來源。這種做法是否有效還是未知數(shù)，甚至即使這種深深根植于人類偏見和偏好中的思維模式失去了其純粹的理論支持，也只是在戰(zhàn)勝它的道路上邁出了一小步。盡管如此，這一步卻十分必要。因為畢竟只有哲學能夠成功地打敗偏見，在證明偏見沒有哲學支持之前，沒有什么其他方法能真正永久地戰(zhàn)勝它。

Being now released from any active concern in temporary politics, and from any literary occupation involving personal communication with contributors and others, I was enabled to indulge the inclination, natural to thinking persons when the age of boyish vanity is once past, for limiting my own society to a very few persons. General society, as now carried on in England, is so insipid an affair, even to the persons who make it what it is, that it is kept up for any reason rather than the pleasure it affords. All serious discussion on matters on which opinions differ, being considered ill-bred, and the national deficiency in liveliness and sociability having prevented the cultivation of the art of talking agreeably on trifles, in which the French of the last century so much excelled, the sole attraction of what is called society to those who are not at the top of the tree, is the hope of being aided to climb a little higher in it; while to those who are already at the top, it is chiefly a compliance with custom, and with the supposed requirements of their station. To a person of any but a very common order in thought or feeling, such society, unless he has personal objects to serve by it, must be supremely unattractive: and most people, in the present day, of any really high class of intellect, make their contact with it so slight, and at such long intervals, as to be almost considered as retiring from it altogether. Those persons of any mental superiority who do otherwise, are, almost without exception, greatly deteriorated by it. Not to mention loss of time, the tone of their feelings is lowered: they become less in earnest about those of their opinions respecting which they must remain silent in the society they frequent: they come to look upon their most elevated objects as unpractical, or, at least, too remote from realization to be more than a vision, or a theory; and if, more fortunate than most, they retain their higher principles unimpaired, yet with respect to the persons and affairs of their own day they insensibly adopt the modes of feeling and judgment in which they can hope for sympathy from the company they keep. A person of high intellect should never go into unintellectual society unless he can enter it as an apostle; yet he is the only person with high objects who can safely enter it at all. Persons even of intellectual aspirations had much better, if they can, make their habitual associates of at least their equals, and, as far as possible, their superiors, in knowledge, intellect, and elevation of sentiment. Moreover, if the character is formed, and the mind made up, on the few cardinal points of human opinion, agreement of conviction and feeling on these, has been felt in all times to be an essential requisite of anything worthy the name of friendship, in a really earnest mind. All these circumstances united, made the number very small of those whose society, and still more whose intimacy, I now voluntarily sought.

那時我不用積極地關注當下的政治，也不從事文學工作，不用和撰稿人等打交道，因此可以隨意地把我的社交圈子縮小到很少的幾個人，這對那些過了孩子般虛榮年紀而又有思想的人來說是件自然的事。普通社交，就像那時英國的一樣，是件乏味的差事，甚至對那些把社交變成這樣的人來說，他們維持社交的目的不是因為它能提供樂趣，而是另有他因。嚴肅地討論那些有不同見解的事情卻被看作沒有教養(yǎng)，全民缺少活力和社交能力，這妨礙了人們培養(yǎng)愉快地談論瑣事的藝術，而這種藝術是上世紀法國人很擅長的。對那些社會地位不夠高的人來說，社交的唯一魅力就在于希望借此向更高的地位攀爬。而對那些已經(jīng)位居社會頂層的人，社交主要是依從習慣和他們地位的需要。對一個思想或感情十分普通的人，除非他想通過社交達到個人目的，否則社交對他必定毫無吸引力。當今大多真正才智出眾的人很少接觸社交圈，參加社交的次數(shù)也很少，幾乎讓人以為他們完全脫離了這個圈子。而有些思想超凡的人卻恰恰相反，他們幾乎無一例外地受到社交圈的嚴重腐蝕，浪費了時間不說，他們的格調也有所降低。在常去的社交圈中，他們變得不那么認真對待自己的見解，還必須對它們諱莫如深。他們開始視那些最高尚的目標為不切實際，或至少離現(xiàn)實太遠，只不過是幻想或理論。假如比大多數(shù)人幸運的話，他們還會保留較高原則不受損害，但對那個時代的人和事，他們不知不覺地采用了他們同伴的感情和判斷方式，以期博得共鳴。一個高才智的人絕不該踏入沒有才智的社交圈，除非他是作為傳道者加入的。然而只有那些有崇高目標的人才能完全安全地進入這個圈子。如果可以的話，那些追求高才智的人最好與在知識、才智和高尚情操上高出自己很多，或至少與自己相當?shù)娜私?jīng)常交往。另外，如果性格和思想是在人類觀念的幾個基本點之上形成的，那么在一個真正誠懇的人的心中，建立在這些基本點之上的信念和情感的一致，總是稱得上是真正友誼必不可少的條件。所有這些情況統(tǒng)一起來，使得我現(xiàn)在愿意與之交往的人很少，愿意深交的人就更少了。

Among these, by far the principal was the incomparable friend of whom I have already spoken. At this period she lived mostly, with one young daughter, in a quiet part of the country, and only occasionally in town, with her first husband, Mr. Taylor. I visited her equally in both places; and was greatly indebted to the strength of character which enabled her to disregard the false interpretations liable to be put on the frequency of my visits to her while living generally apart from Mr. Taylor, and on our occasionally travelling together, though in all other respects our conduct during those years gave not the slightest ground for any other supposition than the true one, that our relation to each other at that time was one of strong affection and confidential intimacy only. For though we did not consider the ordinances of society binding on a subject so entirely personal, we did feel bound that our conduct should be such as in no degree to bring discredit on her husband, nor therefore on herself.

在這些人當中，至此最重要的一位就是我之前說過的那位無人可比的朋友。這段時間她大都和年幼的女兒一起住在鄉(xiāng)下一個安靜的地方，偶爾去城里和她的第一任丈夫泰勒先生一起住。我經(jīng)常去這兩個地方拜訪她。她和泰勒先生分居時我經(jīng)常去拜訪她，偶爾我們還一起去旅行，這些行為很容易引起誤解，我很感激她性格中有無視種種誤解的力量。然而從其他方面來說，這些年來我們的行為沒有絲毫理由引起別人的猜測，除了真正的原因。我們之間的關系僅僅是一種強烈的愛慕和互相信任的親密友人。雖然我們不認為社會風俗能夠約束這種完全私人的關系，但我們覺得有義務讓我們的行為不至于影響她丈夫和她本人的名聲。

In this third period (as it may be termed) of my mental progress, which now went hand in hand with hers, my opinions gained equally in breadth and depth, I understood more things, and those which I had understood before, I now understood more thoroughly. I had now completely turned back from what there had been of excess in my reaction against Benthamism. I had, at the height of that reaction, certainly become much more indulgent to the common opinions of society and the world, and more willing to be content with seconding the superficial improvement which had begun to take place in those common opinions, than became one whose convictions, on so many points, differed fundamentally from them. I was much more inclined, than I can now approve, to put in abeyance the more decidedly heretical part of my opinions, which I now look upon as almost the only ones, the assertion of which tends in any way to regenerate society. But in addition to this, our opinions were now far more heretical than mine had been in the days of my most extreme Benthamism. In those days I had seen little further than the old school of political economists into the possibilities of fundamental improvement in social arrangements. Private property, as now understood, and inheritance, appeared to me, as to them, the dernier mot of legislation: and I looked no further than to mitigating the inequalities consequent on these institutions, by getting rid of primogeniture and entails1. The notion that it was possible to go further than this in removing the injustice—for injustice it is, whether admitting of a complete remedy or not—involved in the fact that some are born to riches and the vast majority to poverty, I then reckoned chimerical, and only hoped that by universal education, leading to voluntary restraint on population, the portion of the poor might be made more tolerable. In short, I was a democrat, but not the least of a Socialist. We were now much less democrats than I had been, because so long as education continues to be so wretchedly imperfect, we dreaded the ignorance and especially the selfishness and brutality of the mass: but our ideal of ultimate improvement went far beyond Democracy, and would class us decidedly under the general designation of Socialists. While we repudiated with the greatest energy that tyranny of society over the individual which most Socialistic systems are supposed to involve, we yet looked forward to a time when society will no longer be divided into the idle and the industrious; when the rule that they who do not work shall not eat, will be applied not to paupers only, but impartially to all; when the division of the produce of labour, instead of depending, as in so great a degree it now does, on the accident of birth, will be made by concert, on an acknowledged principle of justice; and when it will no longer either be, or be thought to be, impossible for human beings to exert themselves strenuously in procuring benefits which are not to be exclusively their own, but to be shared with the society they belong to. The social problem of the future we considered to be, how to unite the greatest individual liberty of action, with a common ownership in the raw material of the globe, and an equal participation of all in the benefits of combined labour. We had not the presumption to suppose that we could already foresee, by what precise form of institutions these objects could most effectually be attained, or at how near or how distant a period they would become practicable. We saw clearly that to render any such social transformation either possible or desirable, an equivalent change of character must take place both in the uncultivated herd who now compose the labouring masses, and in the immense majority of their employers. Both these classes must learn by practice to labour and combine for generous, or at all events for public and social purposes, and not, as hitherto, solely for narrowly interested ones. But the capacity to do this has always existed in mankind, and is not, nor is ever likely to be, extinct. Education, habit, and the cultivation of the sentiments, will make a common man dig or weave for his country, as readily as fight for his country. True enough, it is only by slow degrees, and a system of culture prolonged through successive generations, that men in general can be brought up to this point. But the hindrance is not in the essential constitution of human nature. Interest in the common good is at present so weak a motive in the generality, not because it can never be otherwise, but because the mind is not accustomed to dwell on it as it dwells from morning till night on things which tend only to personal advantage. When called into activity, as only self-interest now is, by the daily course of life, and spurred from behind by the love of distinction and the fear of shame, it is capable of producing, even in common men, the most strenuous exertions as well as the most heroic sacrifices. The deep-rooted selfishness which forms the general character of the existing state of society, is so deeply rooted, only because the whole course of existing institutions tends to foster it; modern institutions in some respects more than ancient, since the occasions on which the individual is called on to do anything for the public without receiving its pay, are far less frequent in modern life, than in the smaller commonwealths of antiquity. These considerations did not make us overlook the folly of premature attempts to dispense with the inducements of private interest in social affairs, while no substitute for them has been or can be provided: but we regarded all existing institutions and social arrangements as being (in a phrase I once heard from Austin) "merely provisional", and we welcomed with the greatest pleasure and interest all socialistic experiments by select individuals (such as the Co-operative Societies), which, whether they succeeded or failed, could not but operate as a most useful education of those who took part in them, by cultivating their capacity of acting upon motives pointing directly to the general good, or making them aware of the defects which render them and others incapable of doing so.

在我思想發(fā)展的第三個階段（可以這樣說），我和她的思想齊頭并進，我的觀點在廣度和深度上都取得進展。我懂的東西比以前多，以前懂的東西現(xiàn)在則理解得更透徹。我現(xiàn)在已經(jīng)完全從過分對抗邊沁主義的狀態(tài)中扭轉過來。在那種對抗最強烈的時候，我的確對社會和世界的一般看法變得寬容了許多，而且更愿意滿足于贊成這些看法里逐漸呈現(xiàn)的表面進步，而不愿變成在信仰的許多方面跟他們完全不同的人。我那時更傾向于把我的見解中更異端的部分擱置起來，現(xiàn)在則贊成視之為幾乎唯一的，可以任何方式變革社會的主張。但除此以外，我們現(xiàn)在的見解比我在最極端的邊沁主義時期中的見解異端得多。那段時間，對于根本改進社會結構的可能性，我看得并不比舊政治經(jīng)濟學家們遠多少。和他們一樣，我把現(xiàn)在所理解的私有財產(chǎn)和繼承制視為立法的最終結果。除了通過取消長子繼承權和限定繼承權來減少這種制度帶來的不公正現(xiàn)象，我也想不到其他辦法。有種觀點認為，要消除不公正現(xiàn)象可能還有比這更好的辦法，因為無論是否有可能徹底消除，都包含這樣一個事實，即有些人生來富有，而大部分人則生來貧窮。我那時認為這只是幻想，我只希望通過全民教育使人們自愿限制人口，這樣窮人所占的比例就可以被控制在允許的范圍內。簡單地說，我那時是個民主主義者，而絕不是社會主義者。與那時的我相比，現(xiàn)在的我們已經(jīng)沒那么民主了，因為只要教育繼續(xù)如此極不完善，我們就會對公眾的無知，尤其是他們的自私和野蠻感到擔心。但是，我們對社會最終改良的理想遠遠超過了民主主義，由此可以直接把我們歸類到通常所稱的社會主義者當中去。當我們竭盡全力地批判社會對個人的專制時，這也是大多社會主義制度中應有的內容，我們卻期望有一天社會不再有勤奮之人和懶散之人之分。到那時，不勞動者不得食的原則不僅適用于窮人，而是公正地適用于所有人；到那時，勞動產(chǎn)品的分配將不再像現(xiàn)在這樣很大程度上取決于出身，而是在公認的公正原則的基礎上進行協(xié)商；到那時，人們不再只為自己獲利而努力，而是為了其所在社會共同分享的利益而努力，這將不再是不可能或被認為是不可能的。我們認為將來的社會問題，是怎樣把個人行動的最大自由和全球共有原料及所有人平等分享共同勞動成果結合起來。我們并沒有自以為是地認為，我們已經(jīng)預見到通過怎樣的具體形式可以最有效地實現(xiàn)這些目的，或者距離實現(xiàn)這些目標還有多近或者多遠。我們清楚地看到，若想給社會帶來可能或令人向往的變革，就必須使勞動階層中未受教育的民眾和他們絕大多數(shù)雇主的個性發(fā)生等同的變化。這兩個階級必須在實踐中學會慷慨，或者無論如何為公眾和社會的目的而勞動和聯(lián)合，而不是像目前這樣僅僅為了狹隘的利益。但人類身上一直有這么做的能力，不會也永遠不可能消失。教育、習慣和情感的培養(yǎng)會令一個普通人像時刻準備為祖國而戰(zhàn)那樣，時刻準備為國家耕耘或編織。誠然，只有通過循序漸進的和幾代人長期的系統(tǒng)培養(yǎng)，才能把所有的普通人培養(yǎng)到這一步。但阻力不是人性的主要組成部分。目前，公眾利益在大部分人心里還只是很微弱的動力，并不是因為它永遠如此，而是因為人們還不習慣對它細加考慮，從早到晚只考慮那些可能對自身有利的事。當現(xiàn)在的個人利益受到日常生活的激發(fā)，又受到對榮譽的熱愛和對恥辱的恐懼的推動，即便在最普通的人身上也會產(chǎn)生巨大的力量，作出最英勇的犧牲。形成現(xiàn)存社會一般特點的根深蒂固的利己主義，之所以能深深扎根，只因為現(xiàn)存制度的整體方針助長了這種想法。在某些方面現(xiàn)代制度比古代制度更有這種傾向，因為在現(xiàn)代社會中號召個人無私地為公眾做事的情形要遠遠少于古代較小的聯(lián)邦。這些考慮并未讓我們忽視那些草率地嘗試去除社會事務中個人利益刺激的愚蠢做法，盡管那時沒有或不能提供相應的替代品。但我們認為一切現(xiàn)存制度和社會結構僅僅是臨時的（這個詞語是從奧斯汀那兒聽到的），我們也以最大的樂意和興趣歡迎精英人士做出的社會主義實驗（如合作社會）。無論成功與否，這都是對參加者最有用的教育，培養(yǎng)了他們直接為公眾利益行動的能力，或讓他們意識到自己和其他人無法這么做的缺陷。

In the Principles of Political Economy, these opinions were promulgated, less clearly and fully in the first edition, rather more so in the second, and quite unequivocally in the third. The difference arose partly from the change of times, the first edition having been written and sent to press before the French Revolution of 18482, after which the public mind became more open to the reception of novelties in opinion, and doctrines appeared moderate which would have been thought very startling a short time before. In the first edition the difficulties of socialism were stated so strongly, that the tone was on the whole that of opposition to it. In the year or two which followed, much time was given to the study of the best Socialistic writers on the Continent, and to meditation and discussion on the whole range of topics involved in the controversy: and the result was that most of what had been written on the subject in the first edition was cancelled, and replaced by arguments and reflections which represent a more advanced opinion.

這些觀點在《政治經(jīng)濟學原理》一書中得到了闡述，第一版表達得不夠清晰全面，第二版有所改進，第三版則十分明確了。這種改變部分源于時代的變遷，1848年法國革命以前，第一版寫成并送印，之后公眾在思想上變得更樂于接受新觀點，那些不久之前還讓人吃驚的學說現(xiàn)在看來卻相當溫和。第一版著重論述了社會主義的困難，因而整體基調是反對社會主義的。在接下來的一兩年里，我花了大量時間研究歐洲最優(yōu)秀的社會主義作家，思考和討論爭議中的所有問題，結果是我刪掉了第一版中關于這個問題所寫的大部分內容，取而代之的是代表先進思想的論點和反思。

The Political Economy was far more rapidly executed than the Logic, or indeed than anything of importance which I had previously written. It was commenced in the autumn of 1845, and was ready for the press before the end of 1847. In this period of little more than two years there was an interval of six months during which the work was laid aside, while I was writing articles in the Morning Chronicle (which unexpectedly entered warmly into my purpose) urging the formation of peasant properties on the waste lands of Ireland. This was during the period of the Famine, the winter of 1846—47, when the stern necessities of the time seemed to afford a chance of gaining attention for what appeared to me the only mode of combining relief to immediate destitution with permanent improvement of the social and economical condition of the Irish people. But the idea was new and strange; there was no English precedent for such a proceeding: and the profound ignorance of English politicians and the English public concerning all social phenomena not generally met with in England (however common elsewhere), made my endeavours an entire failure. Instead of a great operation on the waste lands, and the conversion of cottiers into proprietors, Parliament passed a Poor Law for maintaining them as paupers: and if the nation has not since found itself in inextricable difficulties from the joint operation of the old evils and the quack remedy, it is indebted for its deliverance to that most unexpected and surprising fact, the depopulation of Ireland, commenced by famine, and continued by emigration.

《政治經(jīng)濟學原理》完成得比《邏輯學體系》快得多，事實上比我之前寫過的所有重要著作都要快。1845年秋開始寫作，1847年底前準備付印。而在這兩年多一點的時間當中還有六個月的間隔，我把它擱置起來，去為《紀事晨報》撰稿（它意外地和我的目的一致），敦促建立愛爾蘭農(nóng)民對荒地的所有權。當時正值1846年冬季的饑荒期，嚴峻的現(xiàn)實似乎為我提供了一個贏得注意的機會，對我來說唯一的方法就是把救濟眼前危機和長期改善愛爾蘭人民的社會和經(jīng)濟狀況結合起來。但這個想法新奇而陌生，在英國沒有先例。英國政治家們和英國公眾對于英國不普遍社會現(xiàn)象（無論在其他地方多么普遍）的完全無知使我的努力完全失敗。議會沒有大規(guī)模開發(fā)荒地，也沒有使佃戶變成土地所有者，而是通過了一項《濟貧法》，對貧民給予救濟。如果這個國家此后沒有深陷舊的弊病和庸醫(yī)治療雙重作用的困境，那么它應當感激被最出乎意料和令人驚訝的事實解救，即愛爾蘭人口的減少始于饑荒，但繼續(xù)發(fā)展于移民。

The rapid success of the Political Economy showed that the public wanted, and were prepared for such a book. Published early in 1848, an edition of a thousand copies was sold in less than a year. Another similar edition was published in the spring of 1849; and a third, of 1250 copies, early in 1852. It was, from the first, continually cited and referred to as an authority, because it was not a book merely of abstract science, but also of application, and treated Political Economy not as a thing by itself, but as a fragment of a greater whole; a branch of Social Philosophy, so interlinked with all the other branches, that its conclusions, even in its own peculiar province, are only true conditionally, subject to interference and counteraction from causes not directly within its scope: while to the character of a practical guide it has no pretension, apart from other classes of considerations. Political Economy, in truth, has never pretended to give advice to mankind with no lights but its own; though people who knew nothing but political economy (and therefore knew that ill) have taken upon themselves to advise, and could only do so by such lights as they had. But the numerous sentimental enemies of political economy, and its still more numerous interested enemies in sentimental guise, have been very successful in gaining belief for this among other unmerited imputations against it, and the Principles having, in spite of the freedom of many of its opinions, become for the present the most popular treatise on the subject, has helped to disarm the enemies of so important a study. The amount of its worth as an exposition of the science, and the value of the different applications which it suggests, others of course must judge.

《政治經(jīng)濟學原理》的迅速成功說明公眾需要并且準備接受這樣一本書。1848年初出版，不到一年就賣出1000冊。1849年春第二版又印了1000冊，第三版于1852年賣出了1250冊。從一開始它就不斷被作為權威引用，因為它不僅僅是抽象科學，也是應用科學的作品，它將政治經(jīng)濟學看作是更廣泛學科的一部分，而不是孤立的一門學科；它是社會科學的分支，與其他分支相互聯(lián)系，其結論的正確性即便在自己獨特的領域內也是有條件的，受到其他分支各種原因的干擾和牽制。如果離開了其他需要考慮的因素，它就稱不上擁有實際指導的特性。實際上，政治經(jīng)濟學從未自稱單憑自身的理論就能給人以指導。雖然那些只懂政治經(jīng)濟學的人（因此他們對政治經(jīng)濟學的理解也是錯誤的）承擔了引導人類的責任，他們也只能以他們所知道的理論去引導人們。但許多感情用事的政治經(jīng)濟學的敵人和更多偽裝成感情用事借以牟利的敵人，卻非常成功地讓人們相信了這一點以及其他對政治經(jīng)濟學的不正當詆毀?！墩谓?jīng)濟學原理》自由地發(fā)表了很多觀點，成為目前關于這個問題最受歡迎的專著，它有助于解除那些敵視這一重要研究的人的武裝。對于這樣一部科學論述的價值和它提出的各種應用的價值，別人當然會作出評價。

For a considerable time after this, I published no work of magnitude; though I still occasionally wrote in periodicals, and my correspondence (much of it with persons quite unknown to me), on subjects of public interest, swelled to a considerable bulk. During these years I wrote or commenced various Essays, for eventual publication, on some of the fundamental questions of human and social life, with regard to several of which I have already much exceeded the severity of the Horatian precept. I continued to watch with keen interest the progress of public events. But it was not, on the whole, very encouraging to me. The European reaction after 18483, and the success of an unprincipled usurper in December 18514, put an end, as it seemed, to all present hope for freedom or social improvement in France and the Continent. In England, I had seen and continued to see many of the opinions of my youth obtain general recognition, and many of the reforms in institutions, for which I had through life contended, either effected or in course of being so. But these changes had been attended with much less benefit to human well-being than I should formerly have anticipated, because they had produced very little improvement in that which all real amelioration in the lot of mankind depends on, their intellectual and moral state: and it might even be questioned if the various causes of deterioration which had been at work in the meanwhile, had not more than counterbalanced the tendencies to improvement. I had learnt from experience that many false opinions may be exchanged for true ones, without in the least altering the habits of mind of which false opinions are the result. The English public, for example, are quite as raw and undiscerning on subjects of political economy since the nation has been converted to free-trade, as they were before; and are still further from having acquired better habits of thought and feeling, or being in any way better fortified against error, on subjects of a more elevated character. For, though they have thrown off certain errors, the general discipline of their minds, intellectually and morally, is not altered. I am now convinced, that no great improvements in the lot of mankind are possible, until a great change takes place in the fundamental constitution of their modes of thought. The old opinions in religion, morals, and politics, are so much discredited in the more intellectual minds as to have lost the greater part of their efficacy for good, while they have still life enough in them to be a powerful obstacle to the growing up of any better opinions on those subjects. When the philosophic minds of the world can no longer believe its religion, or can only believe it with modifications amounting to an essential change of its character, a transitional period commences, of weak convictions, paralysed intellects, and growing laxity of principle, which cannot terminate until a renovation has been effected in the basis of their belief, leading to the evolution of some faith, whether religious or merely human, which they can really believe: and when things are in this state, all thinking or writing which does not tend to promote such a renovation, is of very little value beyond the moment. Since there was little in the apparent condition of the public mind, indicative of any tendency in this direction, my view of the immediate prospects of human improvement was not sanguine. More recently a spirit of free speculation has sprung up, giving a more encouraging prospect of the gradual mental emancipation of England; and, concurring with the renewal under better auspices, of the movement for political freedom in the rest of Europe, has given to the present condition of human affairs a more hopeful aspect.

在此后相當長的一段時間里，我沒有出版任何重要的作品。但我偶爾也為期刊撰稿，在公共利益的問題上，我通信的數(shù)量非?？捎^（其中很多是寫給不認識的人）。這些年來，我寫了或者著手了很多關于人類和社會生活的一些根本性問題的文章，開始為最終的出版作準備，其中幾篇的嚴厲程度已經(jīng)超過了賀拉斯箴言。我依舊熱切地關注公眾事件的進展。但整體形勢并未使我受到鼓舞。1848年后歐洲的反動和1851年12月無恥篡權者的成功，似乎毀滅了法國和歐洲大陸得到自由或社會進步的一切希望。在英格蘭，我已經(jīng)看到而且繼續(xù)看到很多我年輕時的見解得到普遍認可，很多我一生為之奮斗的制度改革已經(jīng)實現(xiàn)或者正在實現(xiàn)。但這些改變并沒有像我之前所期望的那樣給人們帶來很多益處，因為它們沒有促進人類命運真正改善所依賴的智力和道德狀況，甚至連同時起作用的各種倒退因素是否抵消了改良的趨勢都值得懷疑。我從經(jīng)驗中得知，很多錯誤的觀念可以轉化為正確的觀念，并且絲毫不改變產(chǎn)生錯誤觀念的思維習慣。例如，英國的公眾，自從國家轉型為自由貿(mào)易國之后，對政治經(jīng)濟學問題仍然像之前那樣生疏遲鈍。他們還遠沒有形成更好的思維或感情習慣，也沒有在培養(yǎng)高尚人格問題上更好地加強防范錯誤的能力。這是因為，他們雖然拋棄了一些錯誤，但他們思想中的總體原則，無論智力上還是道德上都沒有改變。我現(xiàn)在深信，只有人類思維模式的基本結構發(fā)生巨大的變化，人類命運才會有巨大的改進。宗教、道德和政治的舊觀念在智力超群的人心中已不足信，大部分好的功效已經(jīng)失去，但這些問題的觀念在他們身上卻有足夠強大的生命力，阻礙更好的觀念的形成。當全世界具有哲學思想的人不再相信宗教，或者只有在宗教性質發(fā)生根本改變之后才相信它時，一個過渡的時代就開始了。在這個時代，人們信念薄弱，思想麻痹，紀律日益渙散，只有他們的信仰基礎發(fā)生革新，使得一些信念，無論是宗教方面的，或僅僅是人類方面的，能發(fā)展到真正讓他們相信的程度，這些現(xiàn)象才會終止。當事情發(fā)展到這一步，所有不能促進這種革新的思想或作品都會毫無價值，瞬間即逝。因為還沒有明顯的跡象表明公眾的思想里出現(xiàn)了這種趨勢，我認為當前實現(xiàn)人類進步的前景并不樂觀。最近，一種自由思考的精神正在逐漸興起，給英國思想逐漸解放的前景帶來了更大的鼓舞。與這種革新同時發(fā)生的，是歐洲其他地方的政治自由運動，這是個更好的兆頭，給當前人類事務的現(xiàn)狀帶來了更有希望的一面。

Between the time of which I have now spoken, and the present, took place the most important events of my private life. The first of these was my marriage, in April, 1851, to the lady whose incomparable worth had made her friendship the greatest source to me both of happiness and of improvement, during many years in which we never expected to be in any closer relation to one another. Ardently as I should have aspired to this complete union of our lives at any time in the course of my existence at which it had been practicable, I, as much as my wife, would far rather have foregone that privilege for ever, than have owed it to the premature death of one for whom I had the sincerest respect, and she the strongest affection. That event however having taken place in July, 1849, it was granted to me to derive from that evil my own greatest good, by adding to the partnership of thought, feeling, and writing which had long existed, a partnership of our entire existence. For seven and a-half years that blessing was mine; for seven and a-half only! I can say nothing which could describe, even in the faintest manner, what that loss was and is. But because I know that she would have wished it, I endeavour to make the best of what life I have left, and to work on for her purposes with such diminished strength as can be derived from thoughts of her, and communion with her memory.

從我剛才提到的那段時間到目前，在我的個人生活中發(fā)生了幾件重大的事。第一件就是我與那位女士于1851年4月結婚。她無可比擬的價值使得我們之間的友誼成為我快樂和進步的最大源泉，那些年，我從未希望彼此的關系還能更親密。我本該在我有生之年無時無刻不熱切地期盼著我們生命的完全結合，但我和我太太寧愿永遠放棄這樣的恩惠，也不愿因為我最尊敬的朋友、她最欣賞的丈夫英年早逝而得到它。但不幸的事還是在1849年7月發(fā)生了，我從這個噩耗中得到的最大好處，就是在我們長期的思想、感情和寫作伙伴關系上增添了一種生活伴侶的關系。我享受了七年半這樣幸福的時光，但是只有七年半！我無法用言語表達這個損失在當時和現(xiàn)在意味著什么，即便是用最模糊的方式也無法表達。但是因為我知道她會希望我這樣，所以我努力充分利用好我的余生，從她的思想和對她回憶的交流中，汲取我已減弱的力量，為她的目標繼續(xù)工作。

During the years which intervened between the commencement of my married life and the catastrophe which closed it, the principal occurrences of my outward existence (unless I count as such a first attack of the family disease, and a consequent journey of more than six months for the recovery of health, in Italy, Sicily, and Greece) had reference to my position in the India House. In 1856 I was promoted to the rank of chief of the office in which I had served for upwards of thirty-three years. The appointment, that of Examiner of India Correspondence, was the highest, next to that of Secretary, in the East India Company's home service, involving the general superintendance of all the correspondence with the Indian Governments, except the military, naval, and financial. I held this office as long as it continued to exist, being a little more than two years; after which it pleased Parliament, in other words Lord Palmerston, to put an end to the East India Company as a branch of the government of India under the Crown, and convert the administration of that country into a thing to be scrambled for by the second and third class of English parliamentary politicians. I was the chief manager of the resistance which the Company made to their own political extinction. To the letters and petitions I wrote for them, and the concluding chapter of my treatise on Representative Government, I must refer for my opinions on the folly and mischief of this ill-considered change. Personally I considered myself a gainer by it, as I had given enough of my life to India, and was not unwilling to retire on the liberal compensation granted. After the change was consummated, Lord Stanley5, the first Secretary of State for India, made me the honorable offer of a seat in the Council, and the proposal was subsequently renewed by the Council itself, on the first occasion of its having to supply a vacancy in its own body. But the conditions of Indian government under the new system made me anticipate nothing but useless vexation and waste of effort from any participation in it: and nothing that has since happened has had any tendency to make me regret my refusal.

從結婚到災難降臨宣告我們婚姻結束的這些歲月里，我的外界生活主要就是任職于東印度公司（除了我提到家族病的第一次發(fā)作以及之后為了康復在意大利、西西里和希臘的六個多月的旅行）。1856年，即我任職的第33個年頭，經(jīng)過多次晉升后，我被提拔為辦事處主任。這個職位，也就是印度通訊審查員，是東印度公司國內部僅次于部長的最高職位，主要監(jiān)督與印度政府除陸軍、海軍和財政之外的所有通訊事宜。之后的兩年多時間里，我一直擔任這個職位，直到它不再存在為止。此后為了取悅議會，換言之為了取悅帕默斯頓勛爵，作為王室之下印度政府的一個分支，東印度公司被取消，這個國家的政府則變成被英國議會二、三流政客爭奪的對象。公司反抗自己政治地位的消失，而我是主要領導者。在我寫給他們的信件和請愿書中，以及我的專著《論代議政治》的結論章節(jié)中，我必須對這個欠考慮的改組的愚蠢性和危害性發(fā)表自己的看法。就我個人而言，我是獲利者，因為我一生為東印度公司作了足夠多的貢獻，很樂意在拿到授予我的豐厚補償金后退休。在改組圓滿完成以后，印度第一位國務大臣斯坦利勛爵邀我在評議會任職，后來評議會為了填補自身的一個職位空缺，再次向我發(fā)出了邀請。但新制度下的印度政府的狀況讓我預感到，加入他們只會給我?guī)頍o謂的煩惱，造成我的精力浪費。之后發(fā)生的一切從未讓我后悔謝絕這一邀請。

During the two years which immediately preceded the cessation of my official life, my wife and I were working together at the Liberty. I had first planned and written it as a short essay, in 1854. It was in mounting the steps of the Capitol6, in January 1855, that the thought first arose of converting it into a volume. None of my writings have been either so carefully composed, or so sedulously corrected as this. After it had been written as usual twice over, we kept it by us, bringing it out from time to time and going through it de novo, reading, weighing and criticizing every sentence. Its final revision was to have been a work of the winter of 1858—59, the first after my retirement, which we had arranged to pass in the South of Europe. That hope and every other were frustrated by the most unexpected and bitter calamity of her death—at Avignon7, on our way to Montpellier, from a sudden attack of pulmonary congestion.

就在我結束公職生涯的前兩年，我太太和我一起寫了《論自由》。1854年，我起初是打算把它寫成一篇短文的。但是1855年1月，當我登上羅馬朱庇特神廟臺階時，我第一次產(chǎn)生了把它寫成一本書的想法。我的作品中沒有哪一部像這本書一樣作了細致的構思和孜孜不倦的修改。像通常那樣寫過兩遍以后，我們就把它帶在身上，時不時地拿出來，從頭翻閱，字斟句酌。本書原定于1858年冬天完稿，那也是我退休后本打算在南歐度過的第一個冬天。但所有的希望都在我太太意外過世的悲痛中破滅了——在阿維尼翁，也就是在我們去蒙彼利埃的途中，她突然肺部充血而病逝。

Since then, I have sought for such alleviation as my state admitted of, by the mode of life which most enabled me to feel her still near me. I bought a cottage as close as possible to the place where she is buried, and there her daughter (my fellow-sufferer and now my chief comfort) and I, live constantly during a great portion of the year. My objects in life are solely those which were hers; my pursuits and occupations those in which she shared, or sympathized, and which are indissolubly associated with her. Her memory is to me a religion, and her approbation the standard by which, summing up as it does all worthiness, I endeavour to regulate my life.

從那以后，在狀況允許的情況下，我為了尋求慰藉，以一種能使自己感覺到她就在身邊的方式活著。我在離她墓地盡可能近的地方買了一棟小屋，和她的女兒（她也忍受著痛苦，現(xiàn)在是我的主要安慰）在那年的大部分時間都住在那里。我生活的目標完全就是她一貫的生活目標；我的追求和事業(yè)就是曾與她分享的或經(jīng)她贊成的追求和事業(yè)，這些與她密不可分。對她的思念于我是一種宗教，她的認可也是我總結出來衡量所有價值的標準，我也努力用它來調節(jié)我的生活。

In resuming my pen some years after closing the preceding narrative, I am influenced by a desire not to leave incomplete the record, for the sake of which chiefly this biographical sketch was undertaken, of the obligations I owe to those who have either contributed essentially to my own mental development or had a direct share in my writings and in whatever else of a public nature I have done. In the preceding pages, this record, so far as it relates to my wife, is not so detailed and precise as it ought to be; and since I lost her, I have had other help, not less deserving and requiring acknowledgment.

我不希望讓記錄變得不完整，在這種想法的影響下，在結束前邊故事后的幾年，我又拿起了筆，主要是因為要寫這本自傳的草稿，這是我對那些曾經(jīng)對我思想進步作出貢獻的人，或者直接參與到我的寫作以及其他我做過的有公眾性質事情的人的義務。這個記錄的前面幾頁談到了我太太，但并沒有應有的那樣細致和精確。而自從我失去她以后，我還得到了別人的幫助，同樣值得和需要感謝。

When two persons have their thoughts and speculations completely in common; when all subjects of intellectual or moral interest are discussed between them in daily life, and probed to much greater depths than are usually or conveniently sounded in writings intended for general readers; when they set out from the same principles, and arrive at their conclusions by processes pursued jointly, it is of little consequence in respect to the question of originality, which of them holds the pen; the one who contributes least to the composition may contribute most to the thought; the writings which result are the joint product of both, and it must often be impossible to disentangle their respective parts, and affirm that this belongs to one and that to the other. In this wide sense, not only during the years of our married life, but during many of the years of confidential friendship which preceded, all my published writings were as much her work as mine; her share in them constantly increasing as years advanced. But in certain cases, what belongs to her can be distinguished, and specially identified. Over and above the general influence which her mind had over mine, the most valuable ideas and features in these joint productions—those which have been most fruitful of important results, and have contributed most to the success and reputation of the works themselves—originated with her; were emanations from her mind, my part in them being no greater than in any of the thoughts which I found in previous writers, and made my own only by incorporating them with my own system of thought. During the greater part of my literary life I have performed the office in relation to her, which from a rather early period I had considered as the most useful part that I was qualified to take in the domain of thought, that of an interpreter of original thinkers, and mediator between them and the public; for I had always a humble opinion of my own powers as an original thinker, except in abstract science (logic, metaphysics, and the theoretic principles of political economy and politics), but thought myself much superior to most of my contemporaries in willingness and ability to learn from everybody; as I found hardly any one who made such a point of examining what was said in defence of all opinions, however new or however old, in the conviction that even if they were errors there might be a substratum of truth underneath them, and that in any case the discovery of what it was that made them plausible, would be a benefit to truth. I had, in consequence, marked out this as a sphere of usefulness in which I was under a special obligation to make myself active: the more so, as the acquaintance I had formed with the ideas of the Coleridgians, of the German thinkers, and of Carlyle, all of them fiercely opposed to the mode of thought in which I had been brought up, had convinced me that along with much error they possessed much truth, which was veiled from minds otherwise capable of receiving it by the transcendental and mystical phraseology in which they were accustomed to shut it up and from which they neither cared, nor knew how, to disengage it; and I did not despair of separating the truth from the error and expressing it in terms which would be intelligible and not repulsive to those on my own side in philosophy. Thus prepared, it will easily be believed that when I came into close intellectual communion with a person of the most eminent faculties, whose genius, as it grew and unfolded itself in thought, continually struck out truths far in advance of me, but in which I could not, as I had done in those others, detect any mixture of error, the greatest part of my mental growth consisted in the assimilation of those truths, and the most valuable part of my intellectual work was in building the bridges and clearing the paths which connected them with my general system of thought.

當兩個人有完全一致的思想時；當他們在日常生活中討論所有有關智力或道德趣味的問題，探討的深度遠遠超過平時或傳統(tǒng)意義上供普通讀者閱讀的作品時；當他們有相同的出發(fā)點，通過共同尋求的過程得出他們的結論時，最后對于由誰執(zhí)筆的原創(chuàng)性問題就變得不那么重要了。對寫作貢獻最小的人，可能對文章思想的貢獻最大。寫出的作品是兩個人共同努力的結果，想?yún)^(qū)分出各自的作用，確定這部分是你的，那部分是我的，這通常是不可能的。從廣義上來說，我們婚后的作品，甚至當我們還是親密友人時出版的作品都是我們所共同擁有的。她在作品中所占的比重隨時間不斷增長。但有幾本書，屬于她的部分是可以辨別的，并且被專門標注出來。除了她的思想對我的總體影響之外，這些合作作品中最有價值的思想和特征——這些是重要成果中最有成效的部分，對作品本身的成功和聲譽貢獻最大——都是她創(chuàng)作的，是她的思想的流露，其中我發(fā)揮的作用并不比以前作家的思想好很多，我只是把它們合并到我自己的思想體系中來了。在我寫作生涯的大部分時間里，我的工作都與她有關，我從很早就認為這段時間是使我有資格進入思想領域的最有用的一段，那時的我是原創(chuàng)思想者的闡釋者，將他們和公眾聯(lián)系起來。因為一直以來，除了在抽象科學領域（邏輯、形而上學、政治經(jīng)濟學和政治學的理論原則），我認為自己作為原創(chuàng)思想者的力量還不夠大，但在向其他人學習的意愿和能力方面，我認為自己比大多數(shù)同時代人更勝一籌。因為我很少看到有人懷著這樣一種看法審視所有為或新或舊的觀點所做的辯護，即便它們是錯誤的觀點，也可能有真理埋藏于其下，而發(fā)掘是什么讓它們看起來合理的這個過程也有助于得出真理。因此，我把這段作為有用的部分劃分出來，在這兒我有特別的義務讓自己積極起來，尤其是當我了解了柯爾律治追隨者、德國思想家和卡萊爾的思想時更是這樣。他們都激烈地反對我從小形成的思想方式，這讓我相信，他們帶來許多錯誤的同時，也擁有很多真理，真理隱藏在思想的后面，否則其帶有先驗主義和神秘主義色彩的措詞會令大腦在接收它時習慣性地關閉，既不關心也不知道如何擺脫掉它。我不急于將真理從謬誤中分離出來，并用和我有相同哲學看法的人理解和不反感的話表達出來。做好了這樣的準備，人們就很容易相信，當我和一個擁有最杰出能力的人有密切的思想交流時，她的天賦不斷發(fā)展并且在思想方面展現(xiàn)出來，不斷尋求真理，遠超于我，但我卻沒有像在其他人身上那樣發(fā)現(xiàn)她的真理里也混雜著謬誤，我思想上的進步很大一部分在于吸收了這些真理，而我的智力工作中最有價值的一部分就是在真理和總體的思想體系間建立了橋梁，掃清了道路。

The first of my books in which her share was conspicuous was the Principles of Political Economy. The System of Logic owed little to her except in the minuter matters of composition, in which respect my writings, both great and small, have largely benefitted by her accurate and clear-sighted criticism. The chapter of the Political Economy which has had a greater influence on opinion than all the rest, that on "the Probable Future of the Labouring Classes", is entirely due to her: in the first draft of the book, that chapter did not exist. She pointed out the need of such a chapter, and the extreme imperfection of the book without it: she was the cause of my writing it; and the more general part of the chapter, the statement and discussion of the two opposite theories respecting the proper condition of the labouring classes, was wholly an exposition of her thoughts, often in words taken from her own lips. The purely scientific part of the Political Economy I did not learn from her; but it was chiefly her influence that gave to the book that general tone by which it is distinguished from all previous expositions of Political Economy that had any pretension to being scientific, and which has made it so useful in conciliating minds which those previous expositions had repelled. This tone consisted chiefly in making the proper distinction between the laws of the Production of Wealth, which are real laws of nature, dependent on the properties of objects, and the modes of its Distribution, which, subject to certain conditions, depend on human will. The common run of political economists confuse these together, under the designation of economic laws, which they deem incapable of being defeated or modified by human effort; ascribing the same necessity to things dependent on the unchangeable conditions of our earthly existence, and to those which, being but the necessary consequences of particular social arrangements, are merely coextensive with these: given certain institutions and customs, wages, profits, and rent will be determined by certain causes; but this class of political economists drop the indispensable presupposition, and argue that these causes must, by an inherent necessity, against which no human means can avail, determine the shares which fall, in the division of the produce, to labourers, capitalists, and landlords. The Principles of Political Economy yielded to none of its predecessors in aiming at the scientific appreciation of the action of these causes, under the conditions which they presuppose; but it set the example of not treating those conditions as final. The economic generalisations which depend, not on necessities of nature but on those combined with the existing arrangements of society, it deals with only as provisional, and as liable to be much altered by the progress of social improvement. I had indeed partially learnt this view of things from the thoughts awakened in me by the speculations of the Saint- Simonians8; but it was made a living principle pervading and animating the book by my wife's promptings. This example illustrates well the general character of what she contributed to my writings. What was abstract and purely scientific was generally mine; the properly human element came from her: in all that concerned the application of philosophy to the exigencies of human society and progress, I was her pupil, alike in boldness of speculation and cautiousness of practical judgment. For, on the one hand, she was much more courageous and far-sighted than without her I should have been, in anticipations of an order of things to come, in which many of the limited generalizations now so often confounded with universal principles will cease to be applicable. Those parts of my writings, and especially of the Political Economy which contemplate possibilities in the future such as, when affirmed by socialists, have in general been fiercely denied by political economists, would, but for her, either have been absent, or the suggestions would have been made much more timidly and in a more qualified form. But while she thus rendered me bolder in speculation on human affairs, her practical turn of mind, and her almost unerring estimate of practical obstacles, repressed in me all tendencies that were really visionary. Her mind invested all ideas in a concrete shape, and formed to itself a conception of how they would actually work: and her knowledge of the existing feelings and conduct of mankind was so seldom at fault, that the weak point in any unworkable suggestion seldom escaped her.

在我的作品中，第一本包含她的突出貢獻的書就是《政治經(jīng)濟學原理》。而對于《邏輯學體系》，除了精心地安排了文章的結構外，她所作的貢獻并不多，但正是在文章的結構方面，我的作品，無論長短，都從她精確和銳利的批評中受益良多。《政治經(jīng)濟學原理》中有一章是關于“勞動階級可能的未來”的，它對觀念產(chǎn)生的影響最大，這完全是她的功勞。初稿中并沒有這一章，她指出有必要把這一章加進去，否則的話這本書就會十分不完美。因為她，我才著手寫這一章，其中大部分是關于勞動階級固有地位的兩種對立理論的陳述和討論，這完全是她思想的表達，經(jīng)常由她親自口述?！墩谓?jīng)濟學原理》里的純科學部分，我并不是從她那兒學來的，但主要還是她的影響給整本書定下了基調，使之不同于原來那些自稱為科學的政治經(jīng)濟學論文，也有效地爭取到了那些曾被這些論文排斥的人。這個基調的精髓在于正確區(qū)分了財富創(chuàng)造的定律和財富分配的模式，前者是真正的自然定律，取決于物的屬性，后者受特定條件限制，取決于人的意志。一般的政治經(jīng)濟學家用經(jīng)濟學定律的名義將這些統(tǒng)統(tǒng)拒之門外，他們認為這些定律是無法通過人類努力來修改或戰(zhàn)勝的。他們把相同的必然性歸因于那些依賴塵世生活恒定條件的東西，也歸因于那些在特定社會結構下唯一必然的結果，這兩者僅僅是與之同等延伸的。在特定的慣例和習俗下，工資、利潤和租金是由特定的原因決定的。但這批政治經(jīng)濟學家陷入了無法避免的假想當中，主張這些原因有一種內在的必然性，任何人力都起不了作用，也必然決定了在生產(chǎn)分工中，勞動者、資本家和地主所占的份額在減少?！墩谓?jīng)濟學原理》不同意前人在他們假定的前提下針對這些原因的作用進行科學認定。但這個例子告訴我們，不要將條件視為決定性的。經(jīng)濟學的歸納不取決于自然的必然性，而取決于必然性和現(xiàn)有社會結構的結合，歸納僅僅是暫時的，容易被社會發(fā)展的進程所改變。實際上，我看問題的這種方法部分來自于圣西門主義者理論的激發(fā)，但卻是因為我太太的提示，我的想法才變成賦予全書生命的通行的現(xiàn)實準則。這個例子很好地說明了她對我的作品所作貢獻的一般特點。那些抽象的和純科學的內容基本上由我負責，而她提出的是恰當?shù)娜祟愐兀壕拖裎覍W習她大膽地思考和謹慎地作出實際判斷一樣，在所有涉及將哲學應用到人類社會和發(fā)展的迫切需要的方面，我也是她的學生。因為，一方面有了她我才在預見未來的規(guī)則上變得比原來更勇敢，更有遠見，現(xiàn)在很多有限的歸納經(jīng)常和普通的原則相混淆，從而失去了適用性。若不是她，我作品中的這些部分，尤其是《政治經(jīng)濟學原理》中那些被社會主義者肯定卻被大部分政治經(jīng)濟學家強烈否定的對未來可能性的思考，要么不會出現(xiàn)，要么就是以一種更怯懦或更受限制的形式被提出。然而當她讓我更大膽地思考人類事務時，她務實的思想方法，以及對實際困難的正確估計打消了我所有的空想傾向。她頭腦中的想法具體有形，自身形成了如何實際操作的概念，而且她對現(xiàn)存的人類情感和行為的認識很少出錯，所有不切實際的建議中的缺點幾乎都逃不過她的眼睛。

The Liberty was more directly and literally our joint production than anything else which bears my name, for there was not a sentence of it that was not several times gone through by us together, turned over in many ways, and carefully weeded of any faults, either in thought or expression, that we detected in it. It is in consequence of this that, although it never underwent her final revision, it far surpasses, as a mere specimen of composition, anything which has proceeded from me either before or since. With regard to the thoughts, it is difficult to identify any particular part or element as being more hers than all the rest. The whole mode of thinking of which the book was the expression, was emphatically hers. But I also was so thoroughly imbued with it that the same thoughts naturally occurred to us both. That I was thus penetrated with it, however, I owe in a great degree to her. There was a moment in my mental progress when I might easily have fallen into a tendency towards over-government, both social and political; as there was also a moment when, by reaction from a contrary excess, I might have become a less thorough radical and democrat than I am. In both these points as in many others, she benefitted me as much by keeping me right where I was right, as by leading me to new truths and ridding me of errors. My great readiness and eagerness to learn from everybody, and to make room in my opinions for every new acquisition by adjusting the old and the new to one another, might, but for her steadying influence, have seduced me into modifying my early opinions too much. She was in nothing more valuable to my mental development than by her just measure of the relative importance of different considerations, which often protected me from allowing to truths I had only recently learnt to see, a more important place in my thoughts than was properly their due.

與其他我署名的作品相比，《論自由》是我們合作最直接的作品，因為里邊的每一句話都經(jīng)過了我們多次認真的思考和反復的推敲，我們細心地去除了所發(fā)現(xiàn)的所有思想上或表達上的錯誤。正因為如此，這本書雖然沒有經(jīng)過她最終的修正，但僅僅從文章的結構來看，就遠遠超過了我之前或之后創(chuàng)作的所有作品。在思想方面，很難辨別哪個特別的部分或要素更屬于她。此書表達的整個思維方式顯然都是她的。但我也完全受到這種思維的影響，所以我們自然會產(chǎn)生相同的想法。但我能看得這么透徹，很大程度上要歸功于她。在我思想發(fā)展的一段時間中，我在社會和政治上的想法很容易陷入政府過多干預的傾向。還有一段時間我有可能矯枉過正，變得不像現(xiàn)在這么徹底的激進和民主。在這兩方面和其他很多方面一樣，她不僅幫助我保持正確的觀點，而且引導我擺脫錯誤，走上新的真理之路。我熱切而且很樂于向任何人學習，并修正舊觀點，融合新觀點以騰出空間接受新的見解，若不是她一貫的影響，這有可能誘使我過多地修改我早期的見解。她對我思想發(fā)展最有價值的幫助在于她適當?shù)睾饬扛鞣N見解的相對重要性，經(jīng)常使我避免將剛剛明白的真理放在思想中高于它們應有的重要地位。

The Liberty is likely to survive longer than anything else that I have written (with the possible exception of the Logic), because the conjunction of her mind with mine has rendered it a kind of philosophic text-book of a single truth, which the changes progressively taking place in modern society tend to bring out into ever stronger relief: the importance, to man and society, of a large variety in types of character, and of giving full freedom to human nature to expand itself in innumerable and conflicting directions. Nothing can better show how deep are the foundations of this truth, than the great impression made by the exposition of it at a time which, to superficial observation, did not seem to stand much in need of such a lesson. The fears we expressed lest the inevitable growth of social equality and of the government of public opinion should impose on mankind an oppressive yoke of uniformity in opinion and practice, might easily have appeared chimerical to those who looked more at present facts than at tendencies; for the gradual revolution that is taking place in society and institutions has thus far been decidedly favourable to the development of new opinions, and has procured for them a much more unprejudiced hearing than they previously met with. But this is a feature belonging to periods of transition, when old notions and feelings have been unsettled and no new doctrines have yet succeeded to their ascendancy. At such times people of any mental activity, having given up many of their old beliefs, and not feeling quite sure that those they still retain can stand unmodified, listen eagerly to new opinions. But this state of things is necessarily transitory: some particular body of doctrine in time rallies the majority round it, organizes social institutions and modes of action conformably to itself, education impresses this new creed upon the new generations without the mental processes that have led to it, and by degrees it acquires the very same power of compression, so long exercised by the creeds of which it has taken the place. Whether this noxious power will be exercised depends on whether mankind have by that time become aware that it cannot be exercised without stunting and dwarfing human nature. It is then that the teachings of the Liberty will have their greatest value. And it is to be feared that they will retain that value a long time.

《論自由》可能比我的其他作品（或許《邏輯學體系》除外）更有生命力，因為我和她思想的結合讓這本書成為某種單一真理的哲學教材，這個真理隨著現(xiàn)代社會不斷發(fā)生的變革變得更加突出：說明了性格類型多樣化對人類和社會的重要性，給人性向無數(shù)的、相沖突的方向發(fā)展以充分的自由。這本書的論述所形成的深刻印象比其他任何事物都更好地說明了這個真理的基礎有多深厚，盡管當時從表面看來似乎沒有必要上這樣一課。我們擔心社會公正和代表輿論的政府不可避免的發(fā)展會給人類套上言論和行動一致的枷鎖，對那些只看目前現(xiàn)實而忽視未來趨勢的人來說，這種擔心看起來似乎只是空想。因為在社會和制度中逐漸發(fā)生的變革還遠未對新見解的發(fā)展絕對有利，使這些新見解獲得比從前更多的公正的傾聽。但這是屬于過渡期的一個特點，此時的舊觀念和舊情感已經(jīng)動搖，而新學說還沒有取得優(yōu)勢。在這樣的時刻，所有有思想活動的人放棄了舊的信仰，還不確定他們所保留的東西是否會改變，所以他們迫切地傾聽新的見解。但這種狀態(tài)必定是暫時的：某個特定學說體系會適時地得到周圍大多數(shù)人的支持，建立與之相符的社會制度和行為方式，通過教育使新一代人牢記新的教條，而不用告訴他們得出這個新教條的思想過程，漸漸地這個教條取得了與它所取代的教條相同的壓制力。這種有害的力量是否會發(fā)揮作用取決于人類在那時是否意識到它會阻礙人性的發(fā)展。只有到那時，《論自由》的教導才會有最大的價值。令人擔心的是，這些教導在很長時間都會保留這種價值。

As regards originality, it has of course no other than that which every thoughtful mind gives to its own mode of conceiving and expressing truths which are common property. The leading thought of the book is one which, though in many ages confined to insulated thinkers, mankind have probably at no time since the beginning of civilisation been entirely without. To speak only of the last few generations, it is distinctly contained in the vein of important thought respecting education and culture spread through the European mind by the labours and genius of Pestalozzi9. The unqualified championship of it by Wilhelm von Humboldt10 is referred to in the book; but he by no means stood alone in his own country. During the early part of the present century, the doctrine of the rights of individuality, and the claim of the moral nature to develope itself in its own way, was pushed by a whole school of German authors even to exaggeration; and the writings of Goethe, the most celebrated of all German authors, though not belonging to that or to any other school, are penetrated throughout by views of morals and of conduct in life, often in my opinion not defensible, but which are incessantly seeking whatever defence they admit of in the theory of the right and duty of self-development. In our own country, before the book On Liberty was written, the doctrine of Individuality had been enthusiastically asserted, in a stile of vigorous declamation sometimes reminding one of Fichte, by Mr. William Maccall, in a series of writings of which the most elaborate is entitled Elements of Individualism. And a remarkable American, Mr. Warren11, had framed a System of Society, on the foundation of the Sovereignty of the Individual, had obtained a number of followers, and had actually commenced the formation of a Village Community (whether it now exists I know not) which, though bearing a superficial resemblance to some of the projects of Socialists, is diametrically opposite to them in principle, since it recognises no authority whatever in Society over the individual, except to enforce equal freedom of development for all individualities. As the book which bears my name claimed no originality for any of its doctrines, and was not intended to write their history, the only author who had preceded me in their assertion, of whom I thought it appropriate to say anything, was Humboldt, who furnished the motto to the work; although in one passage I borrowed from the Warrenites their phrase, the sovereignty of the individual. It is hardly necessary here to remark that there are abundant differences in detail, between the conception of the doctrine by any of the predecessors I have mentioned, and that set forth in the book.

至于原創(chuàng)性問題，當然它正是每個有思想的人以自己的方式來構想和表達屬于人類共同屬性的真理。這本書的主導思想是，雖然在很多時代只有孤立的思想家才有這種思想，但它自人類文明開始以來就很可能已經(jīng)存在了。僅僅拿最近幾代人來說，這種思想明顯地存在于與教育、文化相關的重要思想中，并通過裴斯泰洛齊的努力傳播到歐洲人的心中。書中提到威廉·馮·洪堡無條件地支持這種思想，他在自己的國家絕不是孤立無援。在本世紀初，個人權利學說以及道德應自行發(fā)展的主張被德國作家的整個流派推廣到了夸張的地步。德國最著名的作家歌德的作品雖然不屬于任何一個學派，但卻滲透著人生的道德觀和處事觀，我認為雖然不應當擁護，但它在不停地為自我發(fā)展的權利和義務的理論尋求自身可容許的各種辯護。在我們自己的國家，在《論自由》寫完之前，威廉·麥考爾先生在一系列作品中以雄辯的方式狂熱地維護個人主義理論，讓人想起了菲希特，其中最詳盡的一部題為《個人主義的要素》。另外，一位杰出的美國人沃倫先生以個人主權為基礎建構了一種社會體系，贏得了許多追隨者，并著手將建立村莊團體付諸行動（我不知道它現(xiàn)在是否存在），雖然這表面上和社會主義者的一些計劃相似，但在原則上與他們完全相反，因為除了推行所有個人具有平等的發(fā)展自由，它不承認社會對個人有任何權威。我對自己署名的《論自由》一書中的學說沒有原創(chuàng)權，也不打算書寫它們的歷史，在我之前唯一值得一提的堅持這些理論的作家是洪堡特。他為此書題了詞，雖然書中有一段中的詞語個人主權是我從沃倫派那里借用的。我提到的前人對這個學說的概念在細節(jié)上與我書中提到的概念有天壤之別，在這里沒必要贅述。

After my irreparable loss one of my earliest cares was to print and publish the treatise, so much of which was the work of her whom I had lost, and consecrate it to her memory. I have made no alteration or addition to it, nor shall I ever. Though it wants the last touch of her hand, no substitute for that touch shall ever be attempted by mine.

在我遭受了這個無法彌補的損失后，我最先關心的就是《論自由》的印刷和出版，其中大部分是她寫的，我以此書來祭奠她，作為對她的懷念。我沒有更改或補充其中的內容，以后也不會改動。雖然沒有經(jīng)過她最終潤色，但我從沒想過替代她做這項工作。

The political circumstances of the time induced me shortly after to complete and publish a pamphlet (Thoughts on Parliamentary Reform), part of which had been written some years previously on the occasion of one of the abortive Reform Bills and had at the time been approved and revised by her. Its principal features were, hostility to the Ballot (a change of opinion in both of us, in which she rather preceded me) and a claim of representation for minorities; not however at that time going beyond the cumulative vote proposed by Mr. Garth Marshall12. In finishing the pamphlet for publication with a view to the discussions on the Reform Bill of Lord Derby's and Mr. Disraeli13's Government in 1859. I added a third feature, a plurality of votes, to be given, not to property, but to proved superiority of education. This recommended itself to me, as a means of reconciling the irresistible claim of every man or woman to be consulted, and to be allowed a voice, in the regulation of affairs which vitally concern them, with the superiority of weight justly due to opinions grounded on superiority of knowledge. The suggestion, however, was one which I had never discussed with my almost infallible counsellor, and I have no evidence that she would have concurred in it. As far as I have been able to observe, it has found favour with nobody; all who desire any sort of inequality in the electoral vote, desiring it in favour of property and not of intelligence or knowledge. If it ever overcomes the strong feeling which exists against it, this will only be after the establishment of a systematic National Education by which the various grades of politically valuable acquirement may be accurately defined and authenticated. Without this it will always remain liable to strong, possibly conclusive, objections; and with this, it would perhaps not be needed.

那時的政治狀況促使我不久之后出版了一本小冊子《議會改革的思考》，其中一部分是幾年前在《改良法案》流產(chǎn)時寫的，當時還得到了她的贊同和修改。它的兩個主要特色是敵視投票制度（我們兩人思想已轉變，她比我還超前一點），以及為少數(shù)派爭取代表權。但是，這些主張在當時沒有超出加思·馬歇爾先生提出的累積投票制的范圍。在這本書準備付印出版時，考慮到1859年德比勛爵和迪斯雷里內閣對《改良法案》的討論，我又加入了第三個特色，即把選票的多數(shù)投給證明受過高等教育的人，而不是投給財產(chǎn)。這個建議本身對我來說是調解以下兩個方面的手段，既考慮到每個男女在管理與自己息息相關的事務時對發(fā)言權不可抗拒的要求，又立足于知識優(yōu)勢決定權力優(yōu)勢的理論。但這個建議我從未與我?guī)缀醪粫稿e的顧問討論過，所以我不能證明她和我的意見是否相同。就我所能觀察的來講，這個建議不被任何人看好，所有希望在選舉投票中謀取這種不平等的人都希望選舉以財產(chǎn)為準，而不以智力或知識為準。如果這個建議能夠克服反對的強烈情緒，那就只能等到系統(tǒng)的國民教育建立以后，通過制度來準確地定義和認定有政治價值的學識等級。否則這個建議將永遠遭到強烈的、可能是決定性的反對。而等有了這種制度，人們也許就不需要它了。

It was soon after the publication of Thoughts on Parliamentary Reform that I became acquainted with Mr. Hare's admirable system of Personal Representation, which, in its present shape, was then for the first time published. I saw in this great practical and philosophical idea, the greatest improvement of which the system of representative government is susceptible; an improvement which, in the most felicitous manner, exactly meets and cures the grand, and what before seemed the inherent, defect of the representative system; that of giving to a numerical majority all power, instead of only a power proportional to its numbers, and enabling the strongest party to exclude all weaker parties from making their opinions heard in the assembly of the nation, except through such opportunity as may be given to them by the accidentally unequal distribution of opinions in different localities. To these great evils nothing more than very imperfect palliatives had seemed possible; but Mr. Hare's system affords a radical cure. This great discovery, for it is no less, in the political art, inspired me, as I believe it has inspired all thoughtful persons who have adopted it, with new and more sanguine hopes respecting the prospects of human society; by freeing the form of political institutions towards which the whole civilized world is manifestly and irresistibly tending, from the chief part of what seemed to qualify, or render doubtful, its ultimate benefits. Minorities, so long as they remain minorities, are, and ought to be, outvoted; but under arrangements which enable any assemblage of voters, amounting to a certain number, to place in the legislature, a representative of its own choice, minorities cannot be suppressed. Independent opinions will force their way into the council of the nation and make themselves heard there, a thing which often cannot happen in the existing forms of representative democracy; and the legislature, instead of being weeded of individual peculiarities and entirely made up of men who simply represent the creed of great political or religious parties, will comprise a large proportion of the most eminent individual minds in the country, placed there, without reference to party, by voters who appreciate their individual eminence. I can understand that persons, otherwise intelligent, should, for want of sufficient examination, be repelled from Mr. Hare's plan by what they think the complex nature of its machinery. But any one who does not feel the want which the scheme is intended to supply; any one who throws it over as a mere theoretical subtlety or crotchet, tending to no valuable purpose, and unworthy of the attention of practical men, may be pronounced an incompetent statesman, unequal to the politics of the future. I mean, unless he is a minister, or aspires to become one: for we are quite accustomed to a minister's continuing to profess unqualified hostility to an improvement almost to the very day when his conscience, or his interest, induces him to take it up as a public measure, and carry it.

《議會改革的思考》出版后不久，我接觸了黑爾先生令人敬佩的《個人代表制》一書，當時還是第一次出版。從這本書中我看到了非常實際和有哲理的思想，以及代議制政府制度所能容許的最大改良。改良以最恰當?shù)姆绞絼偤脧浹a了代議制以前似乎固有的重大缺陷，這種缺陷就是把所有權力賦予多數(shù)派，而不只是按得票數(shù)比例分配權力，使最強大的黨派排除所有較弱小的黨派，不讓他們在全民議會上發(fā)表見解，除非通過不同地區(qū)偶爾不平等分配得到的機會，他們的政見才能得以發(fā)表。對于這些重大缺陷似乎不可能找到很完美的緩和劑，但黑爾先生的制度提供了根治的良方。這個政治藝術上的偉大發(fā)現(xiàn)激勵了我，我也相信它曾經(jīng)激勵了所有接納它的有思想的人，它給人類社會的前景帶來了新的更加樂觀的希望，把整個文明世界顯然勢必遵從的政治制度形式，從看起來限制它或懷疑它的最終利益的主要部分中解放出來。少數(shù)派只要還是少數(shù)派，就會，也應該會在票數(shù)上落后。但規(guī)定投票者的集會達到一定數(shù)量時，可以自己選出一個代表進入立法機關，少數(shù)派就不會被壓制。獨立的見解將強行進入國民議會，讓其他人聽到，這種情況在現(xiàn)有的代議民主制度下不是經(jīng)常發(fā)生的。立法機關不再排除個人特性，不再完全由那些代表強大政黨或宗教派別教義的人組成，而是包含了國內大部分最優(yōu)秀的個人，他們進入立法機關與黨派無關，而是選民欣賞他們的個人才華。我可以理解，那些在其他方面聰明的人由于缺少充分的考察，會被他們所認為的制度復雜的本性排除在黑爾的方案之外。但任何覺得不需要黑爾方案彌補缺陷的人，任何僅僅把它視為理論上的微妙想法或怪念頭的人，任何認為它無助于有價值的目標，不值得引起務實的人注意的人，都可謂是一個不稱職的政治家，不能勝任未來的政治。我的意思是，除非他是大臣，或者向往成為大臣的人。因為我們已經(jīng)習慣于大臣對改良一貫無條件的敵視，幾乎要等到他的良知或利益驅使他采納它作為一項公共措施并且執(zhí)行它的那一天為止。

Had I met with Mr. Hare's system before the publication of my pamphlet, I should have given an account of it there. Not having done so, I wrote an article in Fraser's Magazine (reprinted in my miscellaneous writings) principally for that purpose, though I included in it, along with Mr. Hare's book, a review of two other productions on the question of the day; one of them a pamphlet by my early friend, Mr. John Austin, who had in his old age become an enemy of all further Parliamentary reform; the other an able and ingenious, though partially erroneous work by Mr. Lorimer.

如果我在小冊子出版前讀了黑爾先生的方案，我一定會在里邊細加論述。因為沒能這么做，我在《弗雷澤雜志》上寫了一篇文章（我的雜文集里也有收錄），主要目的也在于此，除了在里邊介紹黑爾先生的書，我還評論了兩本談論時事問題的作品。其中一本是我的老朋友約翰·奧斯汀先生的小冊子，他在晚年變成了議會所有進一步改革的反對者。另一本是洛里默先生有才氣和智慧的作品，但里邊存在部分錯誤。

In the course of the same summer I fulfilled a duty particularly incumbent upon me, that of helping (by an article in the Edinburgh Review) to make known Mr. Bain14's profound treatise on the Mind, just then completed by the publication of its second volume. And I carried through the press a selection of my minor writings, forming the first two volumes of Dissertations and Discussions. The selection had been made during my wife's lifetime, but the revision, in concert with her, with a view to republication, had been barely commenced; and when I had no longer the guidance of her judgment I despaired of pursuing it further, and republished the papers as they were, with the exception of striking out such passages as were no longer in accordance with my opinions. My literary work of the year terminated with an essay in Fraser's Magazine (afterwards republished in the third volume of Dissertations and Discussions) entitled "A Few Words on Non-Intervention”. I was prompted to write this paper by a desire, while vindicating England from the imputations commonly brought against her on the Continent, of a peculiar selfishness in matters of foreign policy, to warn Englishmen of the colour given to this imputation by the low tone in which English statesmen are accustomed to speak of English policy as concerned only with English interests, and by the conduct of Lord Palmerston at that particular time in opposing the Suez Canal. And I took the opportunity of expressing ideas which had long been in my mind (some of them generated by my Indian experience, and others by the international questions which then greatly occupied the European public), respecting the true principles of international morality, and the legitimate modifications made in it by difference of times and circumstances; a subject I had already, to some extent, discussed in the vindication of the French Provisional Government of 1848 against the attacks of Lord Brougham and others, which I published at the time in the Westminster Review, and which is reprinted in the Dissertations.

同年夏天，我完成了一項義不容辭的任務，那就是幫忙（通過《愛丁堡評論》上的一篇文章）介紹貝恩先生一部深奧的專著《論精神》，當時此書剛出版了第二卷。此外，我還完成了短文選集的出版事宜，構成了《論述和討論》的前兩卷。這個選集是在我太太在世時完成的，但為了再版，我和她一起進行的修訂工作才剛剛開始。當我不再擁有她的判斷作指導時，我失去了繼續(xù)修訂的動力，除了刪掉與我見解不相符的段落外，我原封不動地把它交去再版。我那年的文學工作以發(fā)表在《弗雷澤雜志》上的一篇名為《略談不干涉政策》的文章而告終（后來收錄在《論述和討論》的第三卷）。我在這樣一個愿望的促使下寫了這篇文章，歐洲各國普遍指責英國外交政策特別自私，對此我在為英國澄清的同時提醒英國人，英國政治家慣于稱英國的外交政策是關心英國的利益，這一低沉的腔調和當時帕默斯頓勛爵反對開鑿蘇伊士運河的所作所為都給這種指責提供了借口。我借這個機會表達了長久以來心中關于國際道德的正確原則，和根據(jù)不同時間、不同情況合法修改這些原則的想法（有些源自我在印度的經(jīng)歷，另一些來自當時歐洲公眾十分關注的國際問題）。在某種程度上，我已經(jīng)在一篇文章中談到這個問題，該文章為1848年法國臨時政府辯護，反對布魯厄姆勛爵等人的攻擊，它當時發(fā)表在《威斯敏斯特評論》上，并收錄在《論述和討論》中。

I had now settled, as I believed, for the remainder of my existence into a purely literary life; if that can be called literary which continued to be occupied in a pre-eminent degree with politics, and not merely with theoretical, but practical politics, although a great part of the year was spent at a distance of many hundred miles from the chief seat of the politics of my own country, to which, and primarily for which, I wrote. But, in truth, the modern facilities of communication have not only removed all the disadvantages, to a political writer in tolerably easy circumstances, of distance from the scene of political action, but have converted them into advantages. The immediate and regular receipt of newspapers and periodicals keeps him au courant of even the most temporary politics, and gives him a much more correct view of the state and progress of opinion than he could acquire by personal contact with individuals: for every one's social intercourse is more or less limited to particular sets or classes, whose impressions and no others reach him through that channel; and experience has taught me that those who give their time to the absorbing claims of what is called society, not having leisure to keep up a large acquaintance with the organs of opinion, remain much more ignorant of the general state either of the public mind, or of the active and instructed part of it, than a recluse who reads the newspapers need be. There are, no doubt, disadvantages in too long a separation from one's country—in not occasionally renewing one's impressions of the light in which men and things appear when seen from a position in the midst of them; but the deliberate judgment formed at a distance, and undisturbed by inequalities of perspective, is the most to be depended on, even for application to practice. Alternating between the two positions I combined the advantages of both. And, though the inspirer of my best thoughts was no longer with me, I was not alone: she had left a daughter, my step-daughter, Miss Helen Taylor, the inheritor of much of her wisdom, and of all her nobleness of character, whose ever growing and ripening talents from that day to this have been devoted to the same great purposes, and have already made her name better and more widely known than was that of her mother, though far less so than I predict that if she lives, it is destined to become. Of the value of her direct cooperation with me, something will be said hereafter: of what I owe in the way of instruction to her great powers of original thought and soundness of practical judgment, it would be a vain attempt to give an adequate idea. Surely no one ever before was so fortunate, as, after such a loss as mine, to draw another such prize in the lottery of life—another companion, stimulator, adviser, and instructor of the rarest quality. Whoever, either now or hereafter, may think of me and of the work I have done, must never forget that it is the product not of one intellect and conscience but of three, the least considerable of whom, and above all the least original, is the one whose name is attached to it.

我相信那時我已經(jīng)習慣于在純文學的生活中度過我的余生，如果這種在很大程度上一直與理論和實踐政治相關的寫作可以稱作文學生活的話。雖然一年中的大部分時間我都在遠離自己國家政治中心幾百英里外的地方度過，我仍是，而且主要是為自己國家寫作的。但實際上，對一個生活環(huán)境簡單且條件尚可的政治作家來說，現(xiàn)代交通的便捷不僅消除了遠離政治活動現(xiàn)場的所有不利條件，還把這些不利條件變成有利條件。即時、頻繁地接收報刊的信息令他時刻了解當下的政治，并且為他提供比私人接觸更準確的輿論觀點及它們的進展情況。因為每個人的社會交往或多或少局限于特定的集團或階級，通過這個渠道他只能得到這些集團或階級的印象而沒有其他的印象。經(jīng)驗告訴我，那些把時間花在所謂社交中吸引人的索求的人，無暇經(jīng)常了解輿論的喉舌，對輿論的大體情況或其中積極的、有指示作用的部分還不如經(jīng)常讀報的隱居者知道的多。離開自己的國家太久無疑有種種不利：不能經(jīng)常更新自己對所處環(huán)境看到的人和事的印象，但在遠處作出的深思熟慮的判斷不受不公平看法的干擾，所以才是最值得信賴的，甚至可以用于實踐。交替于這兩個位置間，我綜合了兩者的有利條件。雖然能最好地啟發(fā)我思想的人已經(jīng)不在了，但我并不孤單。她留下了一個女兒——我的繼女，海倫·泰勒小姐，她的智慧、高貴和性格的繼承者。從那天起至今，她不斷成長和成熟的才智一直貢獻于同樣偉大的目標，比起母親，泰勒的名字為更多的人所熟知，雖然就我預測，如果泰勒的母親一直活著的話，她的名氣一定會比她女兒大?，F(xiàn)在起要說點有關與她直接合作的價值的事：我感謝她偉大的原創(chuàng)思考能力以及實際判斷的合理性帶給我的指導，否則得出完整的想法只能是徒勞。過去肯定沒有人像我這么幸運，在經(jīng)歷過這樣巨大的損失后，變化莫測的人生卻又賦予了我另一個瑰寶——另一個非凡的同伴、激勵者、顧問和老師?，F(xiàn)在或以后若有人想起我和我的作品，一定不要忘記這不是一個人而是三個人智慧和良心的結晶，其中最不重要的，且原創(chuàng)性最低的就是名字寫在作品上的那個人。

The work of the years 1860 and 1861 consisted chiefly of two treatises, only one of which was intended for immediate publication. This was the Considerations on Representative Government, a connected exposition of what, by the thoughts of many years, I had come to regard as the best form of a popular constitution. Along with as much of the general theory of government as is necessary to support this particular portion of its practice, the volume contains my matured views of the principal questions which occupy the present age, within the province of purely organic institutions, and raises by anticipation, some other questions to which growing necessities will sooner or later compel the attention both of theoretical and of practical politicians. The chief of these last, is the distinction between the function of making laws, for which a numerous popular assembly is radically unfit, and that of getting good laws made, which is its proper duty, and cannot be satisfactorily fulfilled by any other authority: and the consequent need of a Legislative Commission, as a permanent part of the constitution of a free country; consisting of a small number of highly trained political minds, on whom, when Parliament has determined that a law shall be made, the task of making it should be devolved; Parliament retaining the power of passing or rejecting the bill when drawn up, but not of altering it otherwise than by sending proposed amendments to be dealt with by the Commission. The question here raised respecting the most important of all public functions, that of legislation, is a particular case of the great problem of modern political organization, stated, I believe, for the first time in its full extent by Bentham, though in my opinion not always satisfactorily resolved by him; the combination of complete popular control over public affairs, with the greatest attainable perfection of skilled agency.

1860和1861年我的主要作品是兩部專著，其中只有一部是為了立即出版，這就是《代議制政府的思考》。經(jīng)過多年的思考，我認為代議制是最好的民主政體形式，這本著作就與之相關。它不僅包含了實施這種特殊政體所必需的一般理論，還有對純組織制度領域內重大時事的成熟看法。通過預期，我還提出其他早晚都有必要迫使理論上和實踐中的政治家重視的問題。這其中最主要的問題是，區(qū)分制定法律的職能和促使良好法律得以制定的職能。前者大多數(shù)公民大會都不能勝任，后者是公民大會的分內之事，其他機構都不能令人滿意地完成。所以結論是作為一個自由國家的永久組成部分需要建立立法委員會，其中有少數(shù)受過高等訓練有政治頭腦的人，當議會決定制定一項法律時，這個任務應當轉交給委員會。議會保留通過或反對委員會起草法案的權力，但是沒有權力修改，只能將修改建議提交委員會處理。這里提出的有關公共職能中最重要的立法職能問題，也是現(xiàn)代政治組織中重大問題的一個特殊例子，我相信這個問題已由邊沁首次全面地論述過，雖然我并不認為他的解決方案令人滿意。應當把公眾對公共事務的完全監(jiān)督和最完美的專業(yè)機構結合起來。

The other treatise written at this time is the one which was published some years later under the title of "The Subjection of Women". It was written at my daughter's suggestion that there might, in any event, be in existence a written exposition of my opinions on that great question, as full and conclusive as I could make it. The intention was to keep this among other unpublished papers, improving it from time to time if I was able, and to publish it at the time when it should seem likely to be most useful. As ultimately published it was enriched with some important ideas of my daughter's, and passages of her writing. But in what was of my own composition, all that is most striking and profound belongs to my wife; coming from the fund of thought which had been made common to us both, by our innumerable conversations and discussions on a topic which filled so large a place in our minds.

當時寫的另一本專著是幾年后出版的《論婦女的從屬地位》。這本書是我女兒建議我寫的，無論如何，我盡可能全面、有說服力地把對這個重大問題的見解呈現(xiàn)給公眾。我的打算是把它放在其他尚未出版的文章中，盡可能隨時修改，等到它最有可能有用的時候再出版。當它最終出版的時候，里面已經(jīng)加入了我女兒的許多重要想法，其中很多段落是她寫的。但在屬于我的段落當中，最顯著、最深刻的部分是我妻子寫的。對一個在我們心中占據(jù)重要位置的問題，我們進行了無數(shù)次的交談和討論，所以它來自我們共同的思想儲備。

Soon after this time I took from their repository a portion of the unpublished papers which I had written during the last years of our married life, and shaped them, with some additional matter, into the little work entitled Utilitarianism; which was first published in three parts, in successive numbers of Fraser's Magazine, and afterwards reprinted in a volume.

之后不久，我從堆積的手稿里拿走了一部分未出版的文章，都是在我們婚后生活的最后幾年寫成的。經(jīng)過修改，增加了一些內容，最后形成了名為《功利主義》的小書。第一次出版時分為三個部分，在《弗雷澤雜志》連載，后來重印成一卷。

Before this, however, the state of public affairs had become extremely critical, by the commencement of the American civil war. My strongest feelings were engaged in this struggle, which, I felt from the beginning, was destined to be a turning point, for good or evil, of the course of human affairs for an indefinite duration. Having been a deeply interested observer of the slavery quarrel in America, during the many years that preceded the open breach, I knew that it was in all its stages an aggressive enterprise of the slave-owners to extend the territory of slavery; under the combined influences of pecuniary interest, domineering temper, and the fanaticism of a class for its class privileges, influences so fully and powerfully depicted in the admirable work of my friend Professor Cairnes15, The Slave Power. Their success, if they succeeded, would be a victory of the powers of evil which would give courage to the enemies of progress and damp the spirits of its friends all over the civilised world, while it would create a formidable military power, grounded on the worst and most antisocial form of the tyranny of men over men, and, by destroying for a long time the prestige of the great democratic republic, would give to all the privileged classes of Europe a false confidence, probably only to be extinguished in blood. On the other hand, if the spirit of the North was sufficiently roused to carry the war to a successful termination, and if that termination did not come too soon and too easily, I foresaw, from the laws of human nature, and the experience of revolutions, that when it did come it would in all probability be thorough: that the bulk of the Northern population, whose conscience had as yet been awakened only to the point of resisting the further extension of slavery, but whose fidelity to the Constitution of the United States made them disapprove of any attempt by the Federal Government to interfere with slavery in the States where it already existed, would acquire feelings of another kind when the Constitution had been shaken off by armed rebellion, would determine to have done for ever with the accursed thing, and would join their banner with that of the noble body of Abolitionists, of whom Garrison was the courageous and single-minded apostle, Wendell Phillips16 the eloquent orator, and John Brown the voluntary martyr. Then, too, the whole mind of the United States would be let loose from its bonds, no longer corrupted by the supposed necessity of apologising to foreigners for the most flagrant of all possible violations of the free principles of their Constitution; while the tendency of a fixed state of society to stereotype a set of national opinions would be at least temporarily checked, and the national mind would become more open to the recognition of whatever was bad in either the institutions or the customs of the people. These hopes, so far as related to slavery, have been completely, and in other respects are in course of being progressively realized. Foreseeing from the first this double set of consequences from the success or failure of the rebellion, it may be imagined with what feelings I contemplated the rush of nearly the whole upper and middle classes of my own country, even those who passed for Liberals, into a furious pro-Southern partisanship: the working classes, and some of the literary and scientific men, being almost the sole exceptions to the general frenzy. I never before felt so keenly how little permanent improvement had reached the minds of our influential classes, and of what small value were the liberal opinions they had got into the habit of professing. None of the Continental Liberals committed the same frightful mistake. But the generation which had extorted negro emancipation from our West India planters had passed away; another had succeeded which had not learnt by many years of discussion and exposure to feel strongly the enormities of slavery; and the inattention habitual with Englishmen to whatever is going on in the world outside their own island, made them profoundly ignorant of all the antecedents of the struggle, insomuch that it was not generally believed in England, for the first year or two of the war, that the quarrel was one of slavery. There were men of high principle and unquestionable liberality of opinion, who thought it a dispute about tariffs, or assimilated it to the cases in which they were accustomed to sympathise, of a people struggling for independence.

但在此之前，由于美國內戰(zhàn)爆發(fā)，公共事態(tài)就變得十分緊張。我最強烈的感情也投入到這場戰(zhàn)爭中，我從一開始就認為無論結果是好是壞，這在一段不確定時間內將注定是人類歷史的一個轉折點。在南北公開分裂前的那些年，我一直很有興趣地觀察美國的奴隸制之爭，我知道在斗爭的每個階段，奴隸主都咄咄逼人地想要擴大奴隸制的領域，這主要是受到金錢利益、作威作福的特性和追求階級特權的階級狂熱三者的共同影響。我的朋友凱恩斯教授在他的優(yōu)秀作品《奴隸勞力》中充分有力地描述了這種影響。如果奴隸主成功了，那就代表了邪惡力量的勝利，將會助長進步的敵人，壓制整個文明世界中進步精神的朋友，以最壞、最反社會的人壓迫人的專制形式為基礎，形成一股強大的軍事力量，并且在很長時間內毀滅偉大的民主共和制的聲譽，這會給歐洲所有特權階級一個錯誤的信心，這種信心很可能只有在血泊中才會消失。另一種可能是，如果北方的士氣足夠高漲，最后成功贏得戰(zhàn)爭，如果這個勝利來得不是太快且不太容易，從人性的法則和革命經(jīng)驗來看，我預見這種勝利一旦來了就很可能是徹底的。然而北方民眾的良知到那時僅僅止步于意識到抵制奴隸制的進一步擴展。他們對美國憲法的忠誠使他們反對聯(lián)邦政府干涉各個蓄奴州的奴隸制，但當憲法受到武裝叛亂的動搖時，他們又會產(chǎn)生另一種感情，并下決心永遠去除那個可惡的東西，加入到高尚的廢奴主義者麾下，后者認為加里森是勇敢和忠心的傳道者，溫德爾·菲利普斯是雄辯的演說家，約翰·布朗是自發(fā)的殉難者。到那時，所有美國人的思想將從枷鎖中解放出來，不再受到那種假想的必要的腐蝕，以為必須為對其憲法中自由原則最駭人聽聞的違背而向外國人道歉。當一個社會停滯的狀態(tài)趨于墨守成規(guī)時，國民思想至少將暫時阻止這種趨勢，而全民思想將變得更容易認識到制度中或人民習慣中壞的東西。目前關于奴隸制的這些希望已經(jīng)全部實現(xiàn)，在其他方面也在逐步實現(xiàn)。從叛亂的成功或失敗兩種結局的預測中，可以想象當我國幾乎全部中上層階級，甚至那些被認為是“自由派”的人都一窩蜂地成為支持南方派的狂熱伙伴時，我會帶著怎樣的感情來思索。工人階級，還有一些文學、科學領域的人，幾乎成為這場全民狂熱的唯一例外。我之前從未如此強烈地感覺到永久進步在有權階級身上起效多么小，而他們習慣聲稱的那些自由理念的價值又是多么小。歐洲大陸的自由派從未犯過同樣可怕的錯誤。但那個逼迫我們西印度種植園主解放黑人奴隸的一代已經(jīng)一去不復返。其后的一代沒有經(jīng)過多年的討論和揭露，所以不能強烈地感覺到奴隸制的罪大惡極。而英國人習慣于對發(fā)生在他們國土之外的世事不聞不問，這使他們對這場戰(zhàn)爭的前因毫不知情，以至于在戰(zhàn)爭開始的頭一兩年他們還不相信這是一場關于奴隸制的斗爭。那些道德準則高尚，觀點開通的人認為，這場戰(zhàn)爭是關稅之爭，或者把它同化成他們一直同情的民族爭取獨立的戰(zhàn)爭。

It was my obvious duty to be one of the small minority who protested against this perverted state of public opinion. I was not the first to protest. It ought to be remembered to the honour of Mr. Hughes and of Mr. Ludlow, that they, by writings published at the very beginning of the struggle, began the protestation. Mr. Bright17 followed in one of the most powerful of his speeches, followed by others not less striking. I was on the point of adding my words to theirs, when there occurred, towards the end of 1861, the seizure of the Southern envoys on board a British vessel, by an officer of the United States. Even English forgetfulness has not yet had time to lose all remembrance of the explosion of feeling in England which then burst forth, the expectation, which prevailed for some weeks, of war with the United States, and the warlike preparations actually commenced on this side. While this state of things lasted, there was no chance of a hearing for anything favourable to the American cause; and, moreover, I agreed with those who thought the act unjustifiable and such as to require that England should demand its disavowal. When the disavowal came, and the alarm of war was over, I wrote, in January, 1862, the paper, in Fraser's Magazine, entitled "The Contest in America". And I shall always feel grateful to my daughter that her urgency prevailed on me to write it when I did: for we were then on the point of setting out for a journey of some months in Greece and Turkey, and but for her, I should have deferred writing till our return. Written and published when it was, this paper helped to encourage those Liberals who had felt overborne by the tide of illiberal opinion, and to form in favour of the good cause a nucleus of opinion which increased gradually, and, after the success of the North began to seem probable, rapidly. When we returned from our journey I wrote a second article, a review of Professor Cairnes' book, published in the Westminster Review. England is paying the penalty, in many uncomfortable ways, of the durable resentment which her ruling classes stirred up in the United States by their ostentatious wishes for the ruin of America as a nation: they have reason to be thankful that a few, if only a few, known writers and speakers, standing firmly by the Americans in the time of their greatest difficulty, effected a partial diversion of these bitter feelings, and made Great Britain not altogether odious to the Americans.

顯然，我有義務和少數(shù)人一起反對這種反常的輿論。我不是第一個提出抗議的人。應當記住這是休斯先生和勒德洛先生的功勞，通過在斗爭剛開始時發(fā)表作品來提出抗議。緊接著布賴特先生用一篇最強有力的演說表示抗議，后續(xù)者的表現(xiàn)也同樣精彩。臨近1861年年底時，美國的一名軍官在英國的船上抓住了南方的使節(jié)，就在這時我以自己的文章加入了他們的行列。即使健忘的英國人也不會這么快忘記，當時英國迸發(fā)出了一股持續(xù)數(shù)周，期盼與美國并肩作戰(zhàn)的情感洪流，事實上英國這邊還進行了作戰(zhàn)準備。當這種狀態(tài)持續(xù)時，英國人就沒有機會聽到任何有利于美國事業(yè)的聲音，另外，我贊同那些認為這個行動不合理的人，以至于要求英國應當拒絕參戰(zhàn)。后來英國拒絕參戰(zhàn)，戰(zhàn)爭的警報才告解除。我于1862年1月在《弗雷澤雜志》上發(fā)表了一篇文章，題為《美國之爭》。我一直感謝我的女兒敦促我寫成這篇文章，因為我們當時正要出發(fā)去希臘和土耳其旅行幾個月，要不是因為她，我本會推遲到回來后再寫。文章寫成并發(fā)表，它有助于鼓勵那些感覺被狹隘觀點壓制的自由派人士，也有助于形成有利于正義事業(yè)的思想核心，這個核心在慢慢發(fā)展，并會在北方有望勝利后迅速發(fā)展起來。我們旅行回來后，我又寫了另一篇評論凱恩斯教授著作的文章，發(fā)表在《威斯敏斯特評論》上。英國統(tǒng)治階級希望美國這個國家毀滅，這激起了美國長期的怨恨，英國也因此受到了許多令之不快的懲罰。他們有理由感謝那一小部分的——哪怕只有一小部分的——知名作家、演說家在他們最困難的時候堅定地站在美國人這邊，部分轉移了他們的痛恨情緒，使大不列顛在美國人眼中不是完全丑惡的。

This duty having been performed, my principal occupation for the next two years was on subjects not political. The publication of Mr. Austin's Lectures on Jurisprudence after his decease, gave me an opportunity of paying a deserved tribute to his memory, and at the same time expressing some thoughts on a subject on which, in my old days of Benthamism, I had bestowed much study. But the chief product of those years was the Examination of Sir William Hamilton18's Philosophy. His Lectures, published in 1860 and 1861, I had read towards the end of the latter year, with a half-formed intention of giving an account of them in a Review, but I soon found that this would be idle, and that justice could not be done to the subject in less than a volume. I had then to consider whether it would be advisable that I myself should attempt such a performance. On consideration, there seemed to be strong reasons for doing so. I was greatly disappointed with the Lectures. I read them, certainly, with no prejudice against Sir William Hamilton. I had up to that time deferred the study of his Notes to Reid on account of their unfinished state, but I had not neglected his Discussions in Philosophy; and though I knew that his general mode of treating the facts of mental philosophy differed from that of which I most approved, yet his vigorous polemic against the later Transcendentalists, and his strenuous assertion of some important principles, especially the Relativity of human knowledge, gave me many points of sympathy with his opinions, and made me think that genuine psychology had considerably more to gain than to lose by his authority and reputation. His Lectures and the Dissertations on Reid dispelled this illusion: and even the Discussions, read by the light which these threw on them, lost much of their value. I found that the points of apparent agreement between his opinions and mine were more verbal than real; that the important philosophical principles which I had thought he recognised, were so explained away by him as to mean little or nothing, or were continually lost sight of, and doctrines entirely inconsistent with them were taught in nearly every part of his philosophical writings. My estimation of him was therefore so far altered, that instead of regarding him as occupying a kind of intermediate position between the two rival philosophies, holding some of the principles of both, and supplying to both powerful weapons of attack and defence, I now looked upon him as one of the pillars, and in this country from his high philosophical reputation the chief pillar, of that one of the two which seemed to me to be erroneous.

完成了這個義務后，我接下來兩年中的主要工作與政治無關。奧斯汀先生的遺著《法理學演說集》使我有機會向他表示應有的懷念，同時在許多問題上發(fā)表我的想法，之前在我信奉邊沁主義的時候曾經(jīng)對這些問題有過研究。但那些年的主要成果是《威廉·漢密爾頓爵士哲學研究》，他的《演說集》于1860—1861年間出版，我在1861年底讀到這本書時就打算在某期《威斯敏斯特評論》上對這些演說進行闡述，但很快我就發(fā)現(xiàn)這樣是偷懶的做法，要想公正地評價這本書起碼要寫一卷書才行。于是我考慮自己嘗試這樣做是否可取?？紤]過后，我似乎有充分的理由去這樣做。我對《演說集》十分失望，當然我讀它的時候對威廉·漢密爾頓爵士并沒有偏見。在那之前，因為《里德論》還沒有完成，所以我推遲了對它的研究，但我也留意了他的《哲學討論》，雖然我知道他論述精神哲學的總體方式與我最推崇的方式不同，但他反對后期先驗主義者的有力辯論和對一些重要原則的極力支持，尤其是對人類知識相對性的堅持，使我和他在思想上產(chǎn)生共鳴，感到在他的權威和聲譽影響下，真正的心理學得到的比失去的要多。他的《演說集》和《里德論》打破了這樣的幻想：即使是《哲學討論》，如果帶著這種理解來讀，也會失去很多價值。我發(fā)現(xiàn)我和他的觀點明顯一致的地方很多都是在書面上的，在實踐上的卻很少。那些他認同的重要哲學原理已經(jīng)被他解釋得幾乎沒有意義或毫無意義了，或者意義慢慢消失掉了，而與這些原理完全矛盾的學說卻幾乎在他哲學作品中的每個部分都得到了講解。所以到目前為止，我對他的評價改變了，不再認為他占據(jù)了兩個對立哲學的中間位置，掌握兩者的原理并且為相互攻守提供有力的武器。我現(xiàn)在把他視為支柱之一，在這個國家以他的高度哲學聲望來講是一根主要的支柱，而且在我看來是兩根當中錯誤的一根。

Now, the difference between these two schools of philosophy, that of Intuition, and that of Experience and Association, is not a mere matter of abstract speculation; it is full of practical consequences, and lies at the foundation of all the greatest differences of practical opinion in an age of progress. The practical reformer has continually to demand that changes be made in things which are supported by powerful and widely-spread feelings, or to question the apparent necessity and indefeasibleness of established facts; and it is often an indispensable part of his argument to show, how those powerful feelings had their origin, and how those facts came to seem necessary and indefeasible. There is therefore a natural hostility between him and a philosophy which discourages the explanation of feelings and moral facts by circumstances and association, and prefers to treat them as ultimate elements of human nature; a philosophy which is addicted to holding up favourite doctrines as intuitive truths, and deems intuition to be the voice of Nature and of God, speaking with an authority higher than that of our reason. In particular, I have long felt that the prevailing tendency to regard all the marked distinctions of human character as innate, and in the main indelible, and to ignore the irresistible proofs that by far the greater part of those differences, whether between individuals, races, or sexes, are such as not only might but naturally would be produced by differences in circumstances, is one of the chief hindrances to the rational treatment of great social questions and one of the greatest stumbling blocks to human improvement. This tendency has its source in the intuitional metaphysics which characterized the reaction of the nineteenth century against the eighteenth, and it is a tendency so agreeable to human indolence, as well as to conservative interests generally, that unless attacked at the very root, it is sure to be carried to even a greater length than is really justified by the more moderate forms of the intuitional philosophy. That philosophy, not always in its moderate forms, had ruled the thought of Europe for the greater part of a century. My father's Analysis of the Mind, my own Logic, and Professor Bain's great treatise, had attempted to re-introduce a better mode of philosophizing, latterly with quite as much success as could be expected; but I had for some time felt that the mere contrast of the two philosophies was not enough, that there ought to be a hand-to-hand fight between them, that controversial as well as expository writings were needed, and that the time was come when such controversy would be useful. Considering then the writings and fame of Sir W. Hamilton as the great fortress of the intuitional philosophy in this country, a fortress the more formidable from the imposing character, and the in many respects great personal merits and mental endowments, of the man, I thought it might be a real service to philosophy to attempt a thorough examination of all his most important doctrines, and an estimate of his general claims to eminence as a philosopher, and I was confirmed in this resolution by observing that in the writings of at least one, and him one of the ablest, of Sir W. Hamilton's followers, his peculiar doctrines were made the justification of a view of religion which I hold to be profoundly immoral—that it is our duty to bow down in worship before a Being whose moral attributes are affirmed to be unknowable by us, and to be perhaps extremely different from those which, when we are speaking of our fellow creatures, we call by the same names.

現(xiàn)在，哲學兩大學派——直覺派和經(jīng)驗聯(lián)想派之間的區(qū)別不僅僅是抽象思考的問題，而是帶有實際的后果，造成了進步時代中所有實際觀念間的巨大差別。務實的改革者一直堅持在那些有強烈和廣泛感情支撐的事物中進行改革，或者一直質疑既成事實的表面必要性和不可取消性。他的論據(jù)中一個不可缺少的部分就是，這些強大的感情從哪里來，這些事實為何看起來是必要的和不可取消的。因此，在他和哲學之間存在自然的敵對狀態(tài)，因為哲學反對通過環(huán)境和聯(lián)想來解釋感情和道德事實，而將其視為人性的終極要素。哲學堅持支持受歡迎的學說作為直覺真理，認為直覺是大自然和神的聲音，其話語的權威性高于理性。尤其是我早就感覺到一種普遍的傾向，即把所有人性明顯的差異視為天生的，而且基本上是不能消除的，但卻忽略了無可爭議的證據(jù)，那就是到目前為止，無論是個人、種族還是性別間的差異，絕大部分不僅可能是，而且自然是由環(huán)境的不同造成的。這是理性對待重大社會問題的主要障礙，也是人類進步的最大絆腳石之一。這種傾向根源于直覺形而上學，以19世紀對18世紀的抗拒為特征，它總體上符合人類的惰性和保守利益，除非從根源下手，否則它肯定大大超過較溫和形式的直覺哲學能真正證明其為正當?shù)某潭取Ｈ欢軐W的形式不是一直溫和的，它在一個世紀的大部分時間里統(tǒng)治了歐洲的思想。我父親的《人類心靈現(xiàn)象的分析》，我的《邏輯學體系》和貝恩教授的偉大著作都試圖重新介紹一種更好的研究哲學的方式，后來我們取得了預想的成功。但是，有一段時間我認為僅僅對比兩個哲學派別是不夠的，應當讓它們短兵相接，需要有爭議和論述的作品，然后這種爭議方才有用?？紤]到威廉·漢密爾頓爵士的作品和聲譽是這個國家直覺派的重要堡壘，因為他令人印象深刻的性格，和方方面面的突出優(yōu)點，以及思想的天賦令這個堡壘更加堅不可摧。我認為，徹底考察他所有最重要的學說和評估他作為一個哲學家對崇高的一般主張，對哲學或許是一種真正的貢獻。通過觀察威廉·漢密爾頓爵士的追隨者，且是最有才能的追隨者之一的作品，我更堅定了我的想法，他的特殊學說只證明了一個我認為最不道德的宗教觀點的正當性，即在神的面前屈膝朝拜是我們的義務，而神的道德屬性被證明是不可知的，或許完全不同于我們談論人類時用同樣名稱所表示的道德屬性。

As I advanced in my task, the damage to Sir W. Hamilton's reputation became greater than I at first expected, through the almost incredible multitude of inconsistencies which showed themselves on comparing different passages with one another. It was my business, however, to show things exactly as they were, and I did not flinch from it. I endeavoured always to treat the philosopher whom I criticized with the most scrupulous fairness; and I knew that he had abundance of disciples and admirers to correct me if I ever unintentionally did him injustice. Many of them accordingly have answered me, more or less elaborately; and they have pointed out oversights and misunderstandings, though few in number, and mostly very unimportant in substance. Such of those as had (to my knowledge) been pointed out before the publication of the latest edition (at present the third) have been corrected there, and the remainder of the criticisms have been, as far as seemed necessary, replied to. On the whole, the book has done its work: it has shewn the weak side of Sir W. Hamilton, and has reduced his too great philosophical reputation within more moderate bounds; and by some of its discussions, as well as by two expository chapters, on the notions of Matter and of Mind, it has perhaps thrown additional light on some of the disputed questions in the domain of psychology and metaphysics.

隨著我這項工作的進展，對威廉·漢密爾頓爵士名譽的損壞程度超過了我原先的預期。通過對比書中的不同段落，我發(fā)現(xiàn)了大量難以致信的矛盾之處。但我的工作是說明事情的真相，并且毫不退縮。我努力保持用最謹慎的公正態(tài)度批評哲學家，我知道如果我一旦無意中對他不公的話，他的很多信徒和追隨者就會出面糾正我。他們中的許多人都或多或少詳細地回答了我，指出我的疏忽和誤解之處，雖然數(shù)量不多，且大部分內容極不重要。這些疏忽和誤解（就我所知）在最新版本（現(xiàn)在是第三版）出版前得到了糾正，其余的那些批評，只要看起來有必要，我都一一回復了。總體來說，這本書已經(jīng)完成了它的使命。它說明了威廉·漢密爾頓爵士的缺點，將他過高的哲學聲譽降到適中的范圍內。通過一些討論和兩章關于物質概念和精神概念的闡述，它可能使哲學和形而上學領域內一些有爭議的問題更明朗化了。

After the completion of the book on Hamilton, I applied myself to a task which a variety of reasons seemed to render specially incumbent upon me; that of giving an account, and forming an estimate, of the doctrines of Auguste Comte. I had contributed more than any one else to make his speculations known in England. In consequence chiefly of what I had said of him in my Logic, he had readers and admirers among thoughtful men on this side of the Channel at a time when his name had not yet in France, emerged from obscurity. So unknown and unappreciated was he at the time when my Logic was written and published, that to criticise his weak points might well appear superfluous, while it was a duty to give as much publicity as one could to the important contributions he had made to philosophic thought. At the time, however, at which I have now arrived, this state of affairs had entirely changed. His name, at least, was known almost universally, and the general character of his doctrines very widely. He had taken his place in the estimation both of friends and opponents, as one of the conspicuous figures in the thought of the age. The better parts of his speculations had made great progress in working their way into those minds, which, by their previous culture and tendencies, were fitted to receive them: under cover of those better parts those of a worse character, greatly developed and added to in his later writings, had also made some way, having obtained active and enthusiastic adherents, some of them of no inconsiderable personal merit, in England, France, and other countries. These causes not only made it desirable that some one should undertake the task of sifting what is good from what is bad in M. Comte's speculations, but seemed to impose on myself in particular a special obligation to make the attempt. This I accordingly did in two essays, published in successive numbers of the Westminster Review, and reprinted in a small volume under the title "Auguste Comte and Positivism".

寫完了這本評論漢密爾頓的書以后，我又從事了一項有很多理由令我格外義不容辭的工作，那就是解釋和評價奧古斯特·孔德的學說。在讓英國了解他的思想方面，我所作的貢獻比任何人都大。原因是我在《邏輯學體系》中提到他，當他在法國還名不見經(jīng)傳時，在海峽這邊已經(jīng)有很多有思想的人在讀他的書，欽佩他的思想了。我的《邏輯學體系》寫完并出版時，他還那么的默默無聞，不被人欣賞，所以批評他的弱點看起來似乎多此一舉，當時我的責任是盡力宣傳他對哲學思想作出的重要貢獻。但到此時，事態(tài)已經(jīng)完全改變。至少他的名字已經(jīng)家喻戶曉，他理論的一般特點也已傳播得很廣。在他朋友和對手的眼中，他已經(jīng)成為思想史上一個引人注目的人物。他的理論中較好的部分已經(jīng)深入那些原有文化和傾向適合接受他思想的人心中。在這些較好部分的掩蓋下，他后期的作品大量發(fā)展和加入了許多不好的部分，在英國、法國及其他國家也贏得了積極熱情的擁護者，他們中有些還有很高的個人聲譽。這些原因要求必須有人將孔德先生理論中好的部分從壞的部分中篩選出來。我似乎負有特別的義務來做這件事情。為此我寫了兩篇文章，在《威斯敏斯特評論》上連載，后來在名為《奧古斯特·孔德和實證主義》的小冊子上重印。

The writings which I have now mentioned, together with a small number of papers in periodicals which I have not deemed worth preserving, were the whole of the products of my activity as a writer during the years from 1859 to 1865. In the early part of the last-mentioned year, in compliance with a wish frequently expressed to me by working men, I published cheap People's Editions of those of my writings which seemed the most likely to find readers among the working classes; viz. Principles of Political Economy, Liberty, and Representative Government. This was a considerable sacrifice of my pecuniary interest, especially as I resigned all idea of deriving profit from the cheap editions, and after ascertaining from my publishers the lowest price which they thought would remunerate them on the usual terms of an equal division of profits, I gave up my half share to enable the price to be fixed still lower. To the credit of Messrs. Longman they fixed, unasked, a certain number of years after which the copyright and stereotype plates were to revert to me, and a certain number of copies after the sale of which I should receive half of any further profit. This number of copies (which in the case of the Political Economy was 10,000) has for some time been exceeded, and the People's Editions have begun to yield me a small but unexpected pecuniary return, though very far from an equivalent for the diminution of profit from the Library Editions.

我剛才提到的作品，還有一些我認為沒有保存價值的期刊論文就是我在1859—1865年間寫的全部作品。在1865年上半年，按照工人們經(jīng)常向我表達的愿望，我將那些看起來最容易被工人們接受的作品集合成廉價的大眾版出版，如《政治經(jīng)濟學原理》《論自由》和《論代議制政府》。這樣做犧牲了我可觀的經(jīng)濟利益，尤其是在我放棄了從這些廉價版本中獲利的想法，和出版商確認了按照利潤平分的一般條款能保證他們獲利之后，我放棄了我的那份收入，以使價格更低一些。感謝朗文出版社，他們主動提出一定的年限，期滿后此書的版權和鉛版歸我，同時規(guī)定了一定的冊數(shù)，售完后我可以得到那一半的利潤。這個數(shù)量（《政治經(jīng)濟學原理》是一萬冊）有段時間已經(jīng)超過了，大眾版也開始帶給我意想不到的小額收益，雖然還遠遠不能彌補文庫版利潤的減少。

In this summary of my outward life I have now arrived at the period at which my tranquil and retired existence as a writer of books was to be exchanged for the less congenial occupation of a member of the House of Commons. The proposal made to me early in 1865, by some electors of Westminster, did not present the idea to me for the first time. It was not even the first offer I had received, for, more than ten years previous, in consequence of my opinions on the Irish Land Question, Mr. Lucas and Mr. Duffy, in the name of the popular party in Ireland, offered to bring me into Parliament for an Irish county, which they could easily have done: but the incompatibility of a seat in Parliament with the office I then held in the India House precluded even consideration of the proposal. After I had quitted the India House, several of my friends would gladly have seen me a member of Parliament; but there seemed no probability that the idea would ever take any practical shape. I was convinced that no numerous or influential portion of any electoral body, really wished to be represented by a person of my opinions; and that one who possessed no local connexion or popularity, and who did not choose to stand as the mere organ of a party, had small chance of being elected anywhere unless through the expenditure of money. Now it was, and is, my fixed conviction, that a candidate ought not to incur one farthing of expense for undertaking a public duty. Such of the lawful expenses of an election as have no special reference to any particular candidate, ought to be borne as a public charge, either by the State or by the locality. What has to be done by the supporters of each candidate in order to bring his claims properly before the constituency, should be done by unpaid agency, or by voluntary subscription. If members of the electoral body, or others, are willing to subscribe money of their own for the purpose of bringing by lawful means into Parliament some one who they think would be useful there, no one is entitled to object: but that the expense, or any part of it, should fall on the candidate, is fundamentally wrong; because it amounts, in reality, to buying his seat. Even on the most favourable supposition as to the mode in which the money is expended, there is a legitimate suspicion that any one who gives money for leave to undertake a public trust, has other than public ends to promote by it; and (a consideration of the greatest importance) the cost of elections, when borne by the candidates, deprives the nation of the services, as members of Parliament, of all who cannot or will not afford to incur a heavy expense. I do not say that, so long as there is scarcely a chance for an independent candidate to come into Parliament without complying with this vicious practice, it must always be morally wrong in him to spend money, provided that no part of it is either directly or indirectly employed in corruption. But, to justify it, he ought to be very certain that he can be of more use to his country as a member of Parliament than in any other mode which is open to him; and this assurance, in my own case, I did not feel. It was by no means clear to me that I could do more to advance the public objects which had a claim on my exertions, from the benches of the House of Commons, than from the simple position of a writer. I felt, therefore, that I ought not to seek election to Parliament, much less to expend any money in procuring it.

我的外部生活概述到這里，之后，我寧靜的隱居作家生活轉變成與我趣味不那么相投的下院生活。1865年初，威斯敏斯特的一些選民提議我加入議會，這已經(jīng)不是第一次了，甚至不是我收到的第一份邀請，因為十多年前，由于我對愛爾蘭土地問題的見解，盧卡斯先生和達菲先生以愛爾蘭一個受歡迎政黨的名義，邀請我代表愛爾蘭的一個郡加入議會。這對他們來說很容易辦到，但當時我在東印度公司任職，無法兼任議員，所以我根本都沒有考慮這個提議。后來我離開了東印度公司，很多朋友本可以很高興地看到我成為議員，但這個想法實現(xiàn)的可能性似乎并不存在。我相信沒有任何一個選舉團體的多數(shù)派或實力派真正愿意讓有我這種見解的人當代表。我也深信，一個在當?shù)貨]有任何關系又不受歡迎的人，一個不想成為政黨喉舌的人，除非花費金錢，否則當選的幾率很小。過去和現(xiàn)在我都堅信，一個候選人不應當為了擔任公職而花費分文。這種合法的選舉開支不應當由某個特殊的候選人承擔，而應當由國家或當?shù)氐墓查_支負責。為了使全體選民正確理解候選人的主張，每位候選人的支持者必須做的事應當由不支酬勞的機構，或從自愿捐款中支付。如果選舉機構成員或其他人自愿捐款，通過合法途徑使某個他們認為在議會中有用的人入選議會，沒有人有權反對他們。但是，如果全部或部分的花費都落在候選人頭上，則是完全錯誤的。因為這實際上等同于花錢買席位。即便是對金錢支出作最有利的推測，人們仍可以正當?shù)貞岩赡切┗ㄥX博取公眾信任的人另有企圖。選舉的成本（最重要的因素）如果由候選人承擔，就失去了所有不能或不愿承擔這筆巨額費用的人作為議員為國家服務。我并不是說一個獨立的候選人不遵從這種卑鄙的方式就幾乎沒有希望進入議會，如果他的錢不是直接或間接地用于賄賂，他花錢就不總是道德上的錯誤。但為了證明這一點，他應當十分確定，他當議員比做其他事情對他的國家貢獻更大。就我自己而言，我并沒有感覺到這種自信。我一點也不清楚，我做議員會比單純當一個作家更能促進需要我盡力的公共目標的實現(xiàn)。所以我覺得我不應當參選議員，更不應當花錢來謀取議會的席位。

But the conditions of the question were considerably altered when a body of electors sought me out, and spontaneously offered to bring me forward as their candidate. If it should appear, on explanation, that they persisted in this wish, knowing my opinions, and accepting the only conditions on which I could conscientiously serve, it was questionable whether this was not one of those calls upon a member of the community by his fellow citizens, which he was scarcely justified in rejecting. I therefore put their disposition to the proof by one of the frankest explanations ever tendered, I should think, to an electoral body by a candidate. I wrote, in reply to the offer, a letter for publication, saying that I had no personal wish to be a member of parliament, that I thought a candidate ought neither to canvass nor to incur any expense, and that I could not consent to do either. I said further, that if elected, I could not undertake to give any of my time and labour to their local interests. With respect to general politics, I told them without reserve, what I thought on a number of important subjects on which they had asked my opinion; and one of these being the suffrage, I made known to them, among other things, my conviction (as I was bound to do, since I intended, if elected, to act on it) that women were entitled to representation in Parliament on the same terms with men. It was the first time, doubtless, that such a doctrine had ever been mentioned to electors; and the fact that I was elected after proposing it, gave the start to the movement which has since become so vigorous in favour of women's suffrage. Nothing, at the time, appeared more unlikely than that a candidate (if candidate I could be called) whose professions and conduct set so completely at defiance all ordinary notions of electioneering, should nevertheless be elected. A well-known literary man, who was also a man of society, was heard to say, that the Almighty himself would have no chance of being elected on such a programme. I strictly adhered to it, neither spending money nor canvassing, nor did I take any personal part in the election, until about a week preceding the day of nomination, when I attended a few public meetings to state my principles and give answers to any questions which the electors might exercise their just right of putting to me for their own guidance, answers as plain and unreserved as my Address. On one subject only, my religious opinions, I announced from the beginning that I would answer no questions; a determination which appeared to be completely approved by those who attended the meetings. My frankness on all other subjects on which I was interrogated, evidently, did me far more good than my answers, whatever they might be, did harm. Among the proofs I received of this, one is too remarkable not to be recorded. In the pamphlet Thoughts on Parliamentary Reform I had said, rather bluntly, that the working classes, though differing from those of some other countries in being ashamed of lying, are yet generally liars. This passage some opponent got printed in a placard, which was handed to me at a meeting, chiefly composed of the working classes, and I was asked whether I had written and published it. I at once answered "I did". Scarcely were these two words out of my mouth, when vehement applause resounded through the whole meeting. It was evident that the working people were so accustomed to expect equivocation and evasion from those who sought their suffrages, that when they found, instead of that, a direct avowal of what was likely to be disagreeable to them, instead of being affronted, they concluded at once that this was a person whom they could trust. A more striking instance never came under my notice of what, I believe, is the experience of those who best know the working classes, that the most essential of all recommendations to their favour is that of complete straightforwardness; its presence outweights in their minds very strong objections, while no amount of other qualities will make amends for its apparent absence. The first working man who spoke after the incident I have mentioned (it was Mr. Odger) said, that the working classes had no desire not to be told of their faults; they wanted friends, not flatterers, and felt under obligation to any one who told them of anything in themselves which he sincerely believed to require amendment. And to this the meeting heartily responded.

但當一個選舉團把我推選出來，并且自發(fā)地推舉我做候選人時，情況就完全不同了。假如通過解釋他們了解了我的想法，并接受我提出的讓我按良心辦事的唯一條件后，他們仍堅持這個希望，那么問題就是這是否就是一個選區(qū)的選民邀請一個成員當候選人，而他又幾乎沒有正當理由拒絕的情況。所以我通過一個候選人對他的選舉團體作出的最坦率的解釋之一來檢驗他們的意向。在答復他們的邀請時，我寫了封公開信，說我個人無意做議員，并且認為一個候選人既不該拉選票，也不該承擔任何費用，這兩樣我都不同意做。我又進一步說到，如果我當選了，我不能保證用我的時間和精力為他們謀取任何地方利益。至于一般政治，我毫無保留地告訴他們我對很多重要問題的想法，他們之前曾征詢過我的意見。其中一個是選舉權問題，我告訴他們我深信（我有義務這么做，因為我打算一旦當選就照此行事）女性有權在議會中擔任代表，享有同男性一樣的權利。這對選舉人來說無疑是第一次聽到這樣的說法。提出這個想法后，我當選了議員，這一事實促使主張婦女選舉權運動的蓬勃開展。當時，像我這樣的職業(yè)且行為完全藐視所有正規(guī)選舉活動的候選人（如果可以這樣稱呼的話）仍能當選，似乎沒有什么比這件事更不可能的了。一個著名的文人，同時也是社交圈中的一員曾說過，按照這樣的安排，即便是萬能的上帝自己也沒有機會當選。我堅持既不花錢也不拉選票，我個人也不參加任何選舉活動，一直到提名前的一個星期，我才參加了幾個公眾集會，表明我的立場，并回答了選舉人行使其正當權利將我推舉為咨詢指導所提出的問題，而我的回答和我的演說一樣簡單坦率。只有一個問題，即關于我的宗教見解，我從一開始就宣布不回答任何問題。這個決定似乎得到參會者的完全認可。我回答其他問題的坦率態(tài)度，明顯比我的回答本身更能給我?guī)砗锰?，因為我無論怎樣回答都會造成傷害。在我得到的證據(jù)中，有一個特別值得注意，那就是我曾在《議會改革的思考》中直言不諱地說，（英國的）工人階級雖然不同于其他一些國家的工人階級羞于說謊，但通常還是說謊者。這段話被我的對手印在標語牌上，并在一個主要由工人階級組成的會議上遞給我，問我是否曾寫了并發(fā)表了這段話。我立即回答“是的”。話一出口即刻贏得了會場熱烈的掌聲。顯然工人階級已經(jīng)習慣了從那些尋求他們選票的人口中聽到推諉和借口，所以當他們聽到直接公開承認了可能令他們不滿的話之后，他們并沒有感覺被冒犯，反而立即斷定這是一個他們可以信賴的人。我從未聽說過那些最懂得工人階級的人的經(jīng)歷中有比這更驚人的例子。在他們喜歡的優(yōu)點中最重要的就是徹底的坦誠，坦誠比他們心中十分強烈反對的更重要，沒有其他的品質可以彌補坦誠的缺乏。事后第一個發(fā)言的工人（奧杰先生）說，工人階級并不是不希望有人告訴他們自己的過錯，他們需要的是朋友，不是奉承者，并且他們會對向他們真誠提出身上需要改進之處的人負有義務，會議對這一點反響熱烈。

Had I been defeated in the election, I should still have had no reason to regret the contact it had brought me into with large bodies of my countrymen; which not only gave me much new experience, but enabled me to scatter my political opinions rather widely, and, by making me known in many quarters where I had never before been heard of, increased the number of my readers and the presumable influence of my writings. These latter effects were of course produced in a still greater degree, when, as much to my own surprise as to that of any one, I was returned to Parliament by a majority of some hundreds over my Conservative competitor.

假如我在競選中失利，我也沒有理由后悔，因為它讓我有機會接觸許多同胞。這不僅給我許多新的體驗，并且使我能夠更廣泛地傳播我的政治見解，讓很多以前從未聽過我名字的人認識我，增加了我的讀者和我作品可能的影響。令我和所有人驚訝的是，我以幾百張票的多數(shù)戰(zhàn)勝了保守黨的競爭對手，恢復了議會席位，當然我的讀者和作品的影響隨之增加了不少。

I was a member of the House during the three sessions of the Parliament which passed the Reform Bill; during which time Parliament was necessarily my main occupation, except during the recess. I was a tolerably frequent speaker, sometimes of prepared speeches, sometimes extemporaneously. But my choice of occasions was not such as I should have made if my leading object had been Parliamentary influence. When I had gained the ear of the House, which I did by a successful speech on Mr. Gladstone's Reform Bill, the idea I proceeded on was that when anything was likely to be as well done, or sufficiently well done, by other people, there was no necessity for me to meddle with it. As I therefore, in general, reserved myself for work which no others were likely to do, a great proportion of my appearances were on points on which the bulk of the Liberal party, even the advanced portion of it, either were of a different opinion from mine, or were comparatively indifferent. Several of my speeches, especially one against the motion for the abolition of capital punishment, and another in favour of resuming the right of seizing enemies' goods in neutral vessels, were opposed to what then was, and probably still is, regarded as the advanced liberal opinion. My advocacy of women's suffrage, and of Personal Representation, were at the time looked upon by many as whims of my own; but the great progress since made by those opinions, and especially the zealous response made from almost all parts of the kingdom to the demand for women's suffrage, fully justified the timeliness of those movements, and have made what was undertaken as a moral and social duty, a personal success. Another duty which was particularly incumbent on me as one of the Metropolitan Members, was the attempt to obtain a Municipal Government for the Metropolis: but on that subject the indifference of the House of Commons was such that I found hardly any help or support within its walls. On this subject, however, I was the organ of an active and intelligent body of persons outside, with whom and not with me, the scheme originated, who carried on all the agitation on the subject and drew up the Bills. My part was to bring in Bills already prepared, and to sustain the discussion of them during the short time they were allowed to remain before the House; after having taken an active part in the work of a Committee presided over by Mr. Ayrton, which sat through the greater part of the Session of 1866, to take evidence on the subject. The very different position in which the question now stands 1870 may justly be attributed to the preparation which went on during those years, and which produced but little visible effect at the time; but all questions on which there are strong private interests on one side, and only the public good on the other, have a similar period of incubation to go through.

在議會通過《改良法案》的三屆會期中，我是下院的議員。這期間除了休會期，議會工作就是我的主要工作。我還經(jīng)常發(fā)言，有時是有準備的演講，有時是即興演講。假如我的主要目的是在議會中造成個人影響，我的演說就不會選在這樣的時機。就格萊斯頓先生的《改良法案》我作了一次成功的演講，贏得了下院的注意。之后我想，如果其他人很有可能或者足以做好的事，我就不必加以干涉。因而，既然我通常在別人不可能做好的情況下才出面，所以我大多是在自由黨人甚至是其中的高級分子與我意見出現(xiàn)分歧，或者他們相對不太關心的事情上發(fā)表意見。我的很多次演講，尤其是反對廢除死刑的提議和贊成恢復在中立國家船只上沒收敵人貨物的權利的演說，都違背了當時是，可能現(xiàn)在仍然被認為是先進的自由理念。我支持婦女選舉權和個人代表制，在當時被很多人認為是我自己的怪念頭。但此后這些主張取得的巨大進步，尤其是幾乎整個國家對婦女選舉權要求作出的熱烈反應，充分證明了這些運動的及時性，并且使履行道德和社會義務的事業(yè)變成個人的成功。另外一個我作為大都市中的成員義不容辭的義務是嘗試為大都市建立市政府。但下議院對這個問題漠不關心，令我在下院內幾乎找不到任何幫助或支持。然而，在這個問題上我是一個由議會外活躍聰明的人士組成的團體的喉舌，是他們而不是我想到了這個方案。他們對此進行了一切鼓動宣傳，并起草了法案。我的工作就是把早已準備好的議案呈交，并在議會允許討論該議案的短時間內維持對其的討論。后來我曾積極參與由艾爾頓先生主持的委員會工作，占用了1866年議會期的大部分時間來取得關于這個議案的證據(jù)?，F(xiàn)在（1870年）這個問題所處的位置完全不同，這一點可以公平地歸因于那些年所做的準備工作，但當時卻收效甚微。所有既涉及強大私人利益又只對公眾有利的問題，都同樣要經(jīng)歷一段醞釀期。

The same idea, that the use of my being in Parliament was to do work which others were not able or not willing to do, made me think it my duty to come to the front in defence of advanced Liberalism on occasions when the obloquy to be encountered was such as most of the advanced Liberals in the House, preferred not to incur. My first vote in the House was in support of an amendment in favour of Ireland, moved by an Irish member, and for which only five English and Scotch votes were given, including my own: the other four were Mr. Bright, Mr. McLaren, Mr. T. B. Potter, and Mr. Hadfield. And the second speech I delivered was on the Bill to prolong the suspension of the Habeas Corpus in Ireland. In denouncing, on this occasion, the English mode of governing Ireland, I did no more than the general opinion of England now admits to have been just; but the anger against Fenianism was then in all its freshness; any attack on what Fenians19 attacked was looked upon as an apology for them; and I was so unfavourably received by the House, that more than one of my friends advised me (and my own judgment agreed with the advice) to wait, before speaking again, for the favourable opportunity that would be given by the first great debate on the Reform Bill. During this silence, many flattered themselves that I had turned out a failure, and that they should not be troubled with me any more. Perhaps their uncomplimentary comments may, by the force of reaction, have helped to make my speech on the Reform Bill the success it was. My position in the House was further improved by a speech in which I insisted on the duty of paying off the National Debt before our coal supplies are exhausted, and by an ironical reply to some of the Tory leaders who had quoted against me certain passages of my writings and called me to account for others, especially for one in my Considerations on Representative Government which said that the Conservative party was, by the law of its composition, the stupidest party. They gained nothing by drawing attention to this passage, which up to that time had not excited any notice, but the sobriquet of "the stupid party" stuck to them for a considerable time afterwards. Having now no longer any apprehension of not being listened to, I confined myself, as I have since thought, too much, to occasions on which my services seemed specially needed, and abstained more than enough from speaking on the great party questions. With the exception of Irish questions, and those which concerned the working classes, a single speech on Mr. Disraeli's Reform Bill was nearly all that I contributed to the great decisive debates of the last two of my three sessions.

我在議會所起的作用是做其他人不能或不愿意做的事情，同樣的想法使我想到自己的義務是當先進的自由主義面臨指責而議會中大多數(shù)進步的自由黨人不愿引火燒身時站出來為其辯護。我在議會的第一次投票是支持愛爾蘭議員提出的有利于愛爾蘭的修正案，包括我在內只有五位英格蘭和蘇格蘭議員投了贊成票，其他四個人是布賴特先生、麥克拉倫先生、T.B.波特先生和哈德菲爾德先生。我的第二次演講是關于延長愛爾蘭人身保護令暫停期限的法案。我在演說中譴責英國統(tǒng)治愛爾蘭的方式，我只是做了現(xiàn)在英國輿論普遍承認是公正的事情。但那時反對芬尼亞共和主義的怒潮才剛剛開始，所有攻擊芬尼亞組織成員所攻擊目標的行為都被看作是對他們的辯護。因此我在議會很不受歡迎，所以不止一個朋友建議我（我自己也同意這個建議）等待《改良法案》的第一次大討論給出有利的機會后再發(fā)表第二次演說。在沉默的期間，許多人自鳴得意地以為我以失敗告終，所以不用再因為我而煩惱?；蛟S正是他們貶損的評論所起到的反作用力幫助我對《改良法案》作的演講大獲成功。后來我在一篇演說中堅持認為在我們的煤供應耗盡之前我們有責任還清國債。之后一些托利黨領導人引用了我作品中幾段對我不利的話，要求我解釋另外的幾句話，尤其是《代議政府的思考》中說到從構成規(guī)律來看保守黨是最愚蠢的政黨，對此我作出了譏諷的回復。通過以上這兩件事，我在議院的地位得到了提高。他們并沒有通過讓人們注意到這些話而得到好處，以前沒有人注意這段話，但之后的很長一段時間內“愚蠢政黨”的綽號卻與他們如影隨形?，F(xiàn)在我無需擔心沒有人聽我的演說，我想我過多地限制了自己，只在看起來特別需要我?guī)椭膱龊喜虐l(fā)表演說，避免過多地談論重大的政黨問題。除了愛爾蘭問題和那些涉及工人階級的問題外，唯一一次論迪斯累里先生《改良法案》的演說幾乎是我在三屆會期的后兩屆對于重大決定性辯論所作的全部貢獻。

I have, however, much satisfaction in looking back to the part I took on the two classes of subjects just mentioned. With regard to the working classes, the chief topic of my speech on Mr. Gladstone's Reform Bill was the assertion of their claims to the suffrage. A little later, after the resignation of Lord Russell20's Ministry and the succession of a Tory Government, came the attempt of the working classes to hold a meeting in Hyde Park, their exclusion by the police, and the breaking down of the park railing by the crowd. Though Mr. Beales and the leaders of the working men had retired under protest when this took place, a scuffle ensued in which many innocent persons were maltreated by the police, and the exasperation of the working men was extreme. They showed a determination to make another attempt at a meeting in the Park, to which many of them would probably have come armed; the Government made military preparations to resist the attempt, and something very serious seemed impending. At this crisis I really believe that I was the means of preventing much mischief. I had in my place in Parliament taken the side of the working men, and strongly censured the conduct of the Government. I was invited, with several other Radical members, to a conference with the leading members of the Council of the Reform League; and the task fell chiefly upon myself of persuading them to give up the Hyde Park project, and hold their meeting elsewhere. It was not Mr. Beales and Colonel Dickson who needed persuading; on the contrary, it was evident that those gentlemen had already exerted their influence in the same direction, thus far without success. It was the working men who held out, and so bent were they on their original scheme that I was obliged to have recourse to les grands moyens. I told them that a proceeding which would certainly produce a collision with the military, could only be justifiable on two conditions: if the position of affairs had become such that a revolution was desirable, and if they thought themselves able to accomplish one. To this argument, after considerable discussion, they at last yielded: and I was able to inform Mr. Walpole that their intention was given up. I shall never forget the depth of his relief or the warmth of his expressions of gratitude. After the working men had conceded so much to me, I felt bound to comply with their request that I would attend and speak at their meeting at the Agricultural Hall; the only meeting called by the Reform League which I ever attended. I had always declined being a member of the League, on the avowed ground that I did not agree in its programme of manhood suffrage and the ballot: from the ballot I dissented entirely; and I could not consent to hoist the flag of manhood suffrage, even on the assurance that the exclusion of women was not intended to be implied; since if one goes beyond what can be immediately carried and professes to take one's stand on a principle, one should go the whole length of the principle. I have entered thus particularly into this matter because my conduct on this occasion gave great displeasure to the Tory and Tory-Liberal press, who have charged me ever since with having shown myself, in the trials of public life, intemperate and passionate. I do not know what they expected from me; but they had reason to be thankful to me if they knew from what I had, in all probability, preserved them. And I do not believe it could have been done, at that particular juncture, by any one else. No other person, I believe, had at that moment the necessary influence for restraining the working classes, except Mr. Gladstone and Mr. Bright, neither of whom was available: Mr. Gladstone, for obvious reasons; Mr. Bright, because he was out of town.

然而，回顧我在剛才提到的那兩類問題上所起的作用，我十分滿意。關于工人階級，我在論格萊斯頓先生《改良法案》的演說中的主要觀點就是支持工人對選舉權的要求。之后不久，在羅素勛爵內閣辭職，托利黨政府接任后，工人階級試圖在海德公園舉行集會，卻被警察拒之門外，后來群眾拆除了公園圍欄。雖然比爾斯先生和工人階級領導人之前在抗議中離開了，但隨后發(fā)生了扭打，很多無辜的人受到警察的粗暴對待，令工人階級的憤怒達到頂點。他們決心再次在海德公園集會，而且他們中的很多人可能會帶上武器。政府作好軍事準備以抵御他們的行動，十分嚴重的事情似乎就要發(fā)生。在這個危急時刻，我真的相信我能夠阻止很多災禍的發(fā)生。在議會中我是支持工人階級的一方，并且強烈譴責政府的行為。我與其他幾位激進派成員受邀參加了改革同盟委員會幾個主要成員的會議，勸說他們放棄海德公園計劃，并在其他地方舉行會議的任務主要落在了我的身上。要說服的不是比爾斯先生和迪克森上校，正相反，這兩位紳士顯然已經(jīng)朝相同的方向發(fā)揮了他們的影響力，但還遠沒取得成功。堅持的是那些工人，他們如此堅持原計劃，使我被迫尋求最后的方案。我告訴他們，一次必定與軍方產(chǎn)生沖突的行動只有在兩個前提下才是正當?shù)模旱谝唬绻聭B(tài)已經(jīng)發(fā)展到迫切需要革命的程度；第二，他們確信自己可以取得成功。經(jīng)過相當長時間的討論，他們終于聽從了我的觀點，因此我可以通知沃波爾先生，工人們放棄了計劃。我永遠不會忘記當時他松了一大口氣，向我表示衷心的感謝。在工人階級對我作出如此大的讓步以后，我認為有義務滿足他們的要求，參加他們在農(nóng)業(yè)廳召開的會議并發(fā)言。這是我唯一一次參加由改革同盟會召開的會議。我之前一直謝絕成為同盟會的一員，公開的理由是，我不同意其男子選舉權和無記名投票的綱領，對于后者我完全不贊同。我也不同意他們高舉男子選舉權的大旗，即使他們保證沒有排斥婦女選舉權的意思。因為一旦一個人沒能立即執(zhí)行并公開承認他對一個原則的立場，那么他應該全面遵守這個原則。我之所以特意提到這件事，是因為我那次的行為引起了托利黨和托利黨自由派媒體的極大不滿，后來他們指責我在公眾生活的考驗中表現(xiàn)得過激和狂熱。我不知道他們希望我怎么做，但如果他們知道我所做的事情盡可能地保全了他們，他們就有理由向我表示感謝。我相信在那個特殊的時刻，沒有人能夠做到這點。我也相信在那個時刻，除了格萊斯頓先生和布賴特先生，沒有人有足夠的影響力約束工人階級，但他們都無能為力：格萊斯頓先生的理由很明顯，而布賴特先生當時不在城里。

When, some time later, the Tory Government brought in a bill to prevent public meetings in the Parks, I not only spoke strongly in opposition to it, but formed one of a number of advanced Liberals, who, aided by the very late period of the Session, succeeded in defeating the Bill by what is called talking it out. It has not since been renewed.

一段時間以后，托利黨政府提出了一個禁止在公園集會的議案，我不僅發(fā)言對此表示強烈反對，而且組織了一個由進步自由黨人組成的團體，在會期即將結束的時候，通過所謂討論拖延戰(zhàn)術，成功地擊敗了這個議案。之后再沒有人提起過。

On Irish affairs also I felt bound to take a decided part. I was one of the foremost in the deputation of members of Parliament who prevailed on Lord Derby to spare the life of the condemned Fenian insurgent, General Burke. The Church question was so vigorously handled by the leaders of the party, in the session of 1868, as to require no more from me than an emphatic adhesion; but the land question was by no means in so advanced a position: the superstitions of landlordism had up to that time been little challenged, especially in Parliament, and the backward state of the question, so far as concerned the Parliamentary mind, was evidenced by the extremely mild measure brought in by Lord Russell's Government in 1866, which nevertheless could not be carried. On that bill I delivered one of my most careful speeches, in which I attempted to lay down some of the principles of the subject, in a manner calculated less to stimulate friends, than to conciliate and convince opponents. The engrossing subject of Parliamentary Reform prevented either this bill, or one of a similar character brought in by Lord Derby's Government, from being carried through. They never got beyond the second reading. Meanwhile the signs of Irish disaffection had become much more decided; the demand for complete separation between the two countries had assumed a menacing aspect, and there were few who did not feel that if there was still any chance of reconciling Ireland to British connexion, it could only be by the adoption of much more thorough reforms in the territorial and social relations of the country, than had yet been contemplated. The time seemed to me to have come when it would be useful to speak out my whole mind; and the result was my pamphlet England and Ireland, which was written in the winter of 1867, and published shortly before the commencement of the session of 1868. The leading features of the pamphlet were, on the one hand, an argument to show the undesirableness, for Ireland as well as England, of separation between the countries, and on the other, a proposal for settling the land question by giving to the existing tenants a permanent tenure, at a fixed rent, to be assessed after due enquiry by the State.

在愛爾蘭問題上，我同樣感到有義務在其中起到?jīng)Q定性的作用。我是議員代表團的重要人物之一，說服德比勛爵放過了已被判刑的芬尼亞黨暴動者伯克將軍的性命。1868年會議期間，在教會問題上黨魁們的處理態(tài)度十分積極，我只需要有力附和即可。土地問題從未取得如此大的進展。對地主所有制的盲目崇拜在當時幾乎沒被動搖，尤其是在議會中。而這個問題的滯后狀態(tài)，就議會的思想來說，1866年羅素政府提出的極其溫和的議案就可以證明，但這項議案還是未能通過。我就這個議案發(fā)表了極為謹慎的演說，我試圖制定土地問題的一些原則，這樣做不是為了激勵朋友，而是為了安撫和說服對手。議會改革這個顯赫的主題阻礙了這個議案，或者另一個德比勛爵政府提出的類似議案的通過。它們從未通過二讀。同時，愛爾蘭的不滿跡象越來越明顯，對兩國完全分離的要求已經(jīng)顯現(xiàn)出了威脅性的一面，幾乎所有人都覺得要想恢復愛爾蘭和不列顛之間的關系，只有采納比原來設想的更加徹底的國家領土和社會關系的改革。在我看來時機已經(jīng)到來，現(xiàn)在把我全部想法講出來應該有用。所以，我在1867年冬天寫了小冊子《英格蘭和愛爾蘭》，在1868年議會會期開始前不久出版。這本小冊子的主要特色是，一方面表明兩國分離對英格蘭和愛爾蘭都不合時宜，另一方面提出建議，給現(xiàn)有佃農(nóng)永久的土地使用權來解決土地問題，由國家進行適當?shù)恼{查后確定固定的地租。

The pamphlet was not popular, except in Ireland, as I did not expect it to be. But, if no measure short of that which I proposed would do full justice to Ireland, or afford a prospect of conciliating the mass of the Irish people, the duty of proposing it was imperative; while if, on the other hand, there was any intermediate course which had a claim to a trial, I well knew that to propose something which would be called extreme was the true way not to impede but to facilitate a more moderate experiment. It is most improbable that a measure conceding so much to the tenantry as Mr. Gladstone's Irish Land Bill, would have been proposed by a Government, or could have been carried through Parliament, unless the British public had been led to perceive that a case might be made, and perhaps a party formed, for a measure considerably stronger. It is the character of the British people, or at least of the higher and middle classes who pass muster for the British people, that to induce them to approve of any change, it is necessary that they should look upon it as a middle course: they think every proposal extreme and violent unless they hear of some other proposal going still farther, upon which their antipathy to extreme views may discharge itself. So it proved in the present instance; my proposal was condemned, but any scheme for Irish Land reform, short of mine, came to be thought moderate by comparison. I may observe that the attacks made on my plan usually gave a very incorrect idea of its nature. It was usually discussed as a proposal that the State should buy up the land and become the universal landlord; though in fact it only offered to each individual landlord this as an alternative, if he liked better to sell his estate than to retain it on the new conditions; and I fully anticipated that most landlords would continue to prefer the position of landowners to that of Government annuitants, and would retain their existing relation to their tenants, often on more indulgent terms than the full rents on which the compensation to be given them by Government would have been based. This and many other explanations I gave in a speech on Ireland, in the debate on Mr. Maguire21's Resolution, early in the session of 1868. A corrected report of this speech, together with my speech on Mr. Fortescue's Bill, has been published (not by me, but with my permission) in Ireland.

除了在愛爾蘭，這本小冊子并不受人歡迎，這在我的意料之中。但是如果除了我所建議的方法外，沒有其他方法可以公正地解決愛爾蘭問題，或者有安撫愛爾蘭人民大眾的愿望，那么我提出的建議就是必要的。另一方面，假如有折中的途徑可以嘗試，我很清楚，提出所謂極端的建議不是阻礙，而是促進產(chǎn)生一個更加溫和的實驗的正確途徑。除非英國公眾知道可能會出現(xiàn)一種采取更加強硬方法的情況，或者可能會組成一個更加強硬的政黨，否則一個對佃戶作出如此大讓步的方法，例如格萊斯頓先生的《愛爾蘭土地法案》，不大可能是由政府提出的，或者在議會獲得通過。正是不列顛人的性格，或者至少是符合不列顛人要求的中上層階級的性格，誘使他們同意改革的。而且必要的是，他們應當把它看作是一條中間路線。他們認為每個建議都是極端的，猛烈的，除非他們聽到其他更極端、更猛烈的建議，他們對極端意見的反感才會自行消除。目前的情況證明了這一點，我的建議遭到譴責，但通過比較，其他任何關于愛爾蘭土地改革的方案都被認為是溫和的。我發(fā)現(xiàn)對我計劃的攻擊通常在本質上都是錯誤的觀點。人們通常認為我的建議就是，國家應當買下土地進而成為全國土地的地主。但實際上我的建議只是為每個地主提供一種選擇，假如在新的條件下他更愿意賣掉而不是保留土地。我充分預見到，大多數(shù)地主寧愿繼續(xù)保留土地所有人的地位，而不愿從政府那里每年領取養(yǎng)老金。他們愿意以比全額地租更優(yōu)厚的條件保持與佃戶的現(xiàn)存關系，政府本可以基于這些全額地租給他們補償。我早在1868年會議初期論馬圭爾先生的決議案時，在一篇愛爾蘭問題的演講中說明了這一點，也作了其他的解釋。這篇演說的修改稿，以及我評論福蒂斯丘先生議案的演說稿都已在愛爾蘭出版（并非我自己出版，而是經(jīng)過我允許）。

Another public duty, of a most serious kind, it was my lot to have to perform, both in and out of Parliament, during these years. A disturbance in Jamaica, provoked in the first instance by injustice, and exaggerated by rage and panic into a premeditated rebellion, had been the motive or excuse for taking hundreds of innocent lives by military violence, or by sentence of what were called courts martial, continuing for weeks after the brief disturbance had been put down; with many added atrocities of destruction of property, flogging women as well as men, and a great display of the brutal recklessness which generally prevails when fire and sword are let loose. The perpetrators of those deeds were defended and applauded in England by the same kind of people who had so long upheld negro slavery: and it seemed at first as if the British nation was about to incur the disgrace of letting pass without even a protest, excesses of authority as revolting as any of those for which, when perpetrated by the instruments of other governments, Englishmen can hardly find terms sufficient to express their abhorrence. After a short time, however, an indignant feeling was roused; a voluntary Association formed itself under the name of the Jamaica Committee, to take such deliberation and action as the case might admit of, and adhesions poured in from all parts of the country. I was abroad at the time, but I sent in my name to the Committee as soon as I heard of it, and took an active part in the proceedings from the time of my return. There was much more at stake than only justice to the Negroes, imperative as was that consideration. The question was, whether the British dependencies, and eventually, perhaps, Great Britain itself, were to be under the government of law, or of military license; whether the lives and persons of British subjects are at the mercy of any two or three officers however raw and inexperienced or reckless and brutal, whom a panicstricken Governor or other functionary may assume the right to constitute into a so-called Court Martial. This question could only be decided by an appeal to the tribunals; and such an appeal the Committee determined to make. Their determination led to a change in the Chairmanship of the Committee, as the Chairman, Mr. Charles Buxton22, thought it not unjust indeed, but inexpedient, to prosecute Governor Eyre23 and his principal subordinates in a criminal court: but a numerously attended General meeting of the Association having decided this point against him, Mr. Buxton withdrew from the Committee, though continuing to work in the cause, and I was, quite unexpectedly on my own part, proposed and elected Chairman. It became, in consequence, my duty to represent the Committee in the House of Commons, sometimes by putting questions to the Government, sometimes as the recipient of questions more or less provocative, addressed by individual members to myself; but especially as speaker in the important debate originated in the session of 1866, by Mr. Buxton: and the speech I then delivered is that which I should probably select as the best of my speeches in Parliament. For more than two years we carried on the combat, trying every avenue legally open to us, to the Courts of Criminal Justice. A bench of magistrates in one of the most Tory counties in England dismissed our case: we were more successful before the magistrates at Bow Street; which gave an opportunity to the Lord Chief Justice of the Queen's Bench, Sir Alexander Cockburn24, for delivering his celebrated charge, which settled the law of the question in favour of liberty, as far as it is in the power of a judge's charge to settle it. There, however, our success ended, for the Old Bailey Grand Jury by throwing out our bill prevented the case from coming to trial. It was clear that to bring English functionaries to the bar of a criminal court for abuses of power committed against negroes and mulattoes, was not a popular proceeding with the English middle classes. We had, however, redeemed, so far as lay in us, the character of our country, by showing that there was at any rate a body of persons determined to use all the means which the law afforded to obtain justice for the injured. We had elicited from the highest criminal judge in the nation an authoritative declaration that the law was what we maintained it to be; and we had given an emphatic warning to those who might be tempted to similar guilt hereafter, that, though they might escape the actual sentence of a criminal tribunal, they were not safe against being put to some trouble and expense in order to avoid it. Colonial Governors and other persons in authority will have a considerable motive to stop short of such extremities in future.

這些年還有另一個十分重要的公共職責，是我必須承擔起來的，不管是在議會內還是在議會外。牙買加發(fā)生的騷動一開始是由不公正行為引起的，后來由于憤怒和驚恐被夸大成有蓄謀的叛亂，這成為軍警暴力和所謂軍事法庭判決奪走成百上千條無辜性命的動機或借口。短暫的暴動被鎮(zhèn)壓后，騷亂又持續(xù)了幾個星期，伴有很多毀壞財務、鞭打男女的暴行，到處都是大肆燒殺的野蠻場景。這些犯罪者的行徑受到英國那些長期支持黑奴制的同類人的辯護和喝彩。起初，不列顛民族似乎將要遭受對當局令人作嘔的暴行置之不理，甚至沒有任何反抗的恥辱。如果是被其他政府所利用，那么英國人對它的憎恨確實無以言表。然而不久之后，一種憤慨的情緒被激起，人們自發(fā)組織起了名為牙買加委員會的協(xié)會，他們在形勢允許的范圍內進行商議，采取行動，來自全國各地的支持者蜂擁而入。我當時在國外，但是我一聽到消息就報名申請加入，回國以后積極參加到他們的行動當中。這里有比公正地對待黑人更危急、更有必要考慮的問題。問題是不列顛的屬地，也許最終還有大不列顛本身是在受法律的管理還是軍事特權的管理。不列顛子民的生命和人格是否受到兩三個既沒經(jīng)驗又粗魯?shù)能姽僦?？一個驚慌失措的總督或者其他官吏是否可以行使權利，構建一個所謂的軍事法庭？這個問題只有上訴到法庭才能解決，所以委員會決定上訴。他們的決心引起委員會主席的更換，因為原主席查爾斯·巴克斯頓先生認為向刑事法庭起訴艾爾總督及其主要屬下并非不公正，而是失策的行為。然而，有許多人參加的委員會大會決定反對他的觀點，最終巴克斯頓先生退出了委員會，但繼續(xù)為這項事業(yè)工作。出乎我意料的是，我被提名當選為委員會主席。結果在下院代表這個委員會就成了我的責任。有時向政府提問，有時接受個別議員向我提出的或多或少有些挑釁的問題。特別是，作為1866年會期由巴克斯頓發(fā)起的一場重要辯論的發(fā)言者，我那時的演說也許是我在議會里最好的演說。在這兩年多的時間里，我們一直在進行斗爭，嘗試每一條合法通向刑事法庭的道路。英格蘭一個擁有最多托利黨人的郡的法庭不受理我們的訴訟，但在鮑街法庭我們卻取得了成功，這使王座法院的大法官亞歷山大·科伯恩爵士有機會作出最著名的判決，就法官解決問題的權力來講，他的判決解決了有利于自由的法律問題。但我們的成功就此結束了，因為中央刑事法院大陪審團撤銷了我們的訴訟，使其最終未被受理。顯然，向刑事法庭起訴英國官員對黑人和混血兒濫用職權的罪名并不受英國中層階級的歡迎。但就我們而言，我們挽回了我們國家的聲譽，表明我們在任何時候都有一群人決心利用法律提供的所有手段為受害人伸張正義。我們從國家最高刑事法庭得到權威性的宣言，宣布法律就是我們所堅持的東西。我們已經(jīng)鄭重警告那些以后可能被誘惑去犯類似罪行的人，雖然他們可能一時逃過刑事法庭的實際制裁，但是為了逃脫免不了會陷入麻煩并付出代價。殖民地總督和其他當權人士將來就有十足的理由避免這種困境。

As a matter of curiosity I kept some specimens of the abusive letters, almost all of them anonymous, which I received while these proceedings were going on. They are evidence of the sympathy felt with the brutalities in Jamaica by the brutal part of the population at home. They graduated from coarse jokes, verbal and pictorial, up to threats of assassination.

出于好奇，我收藏了幾封在行動期間收到的辱罵信，大部分是匿名的。這些信是一些國內殘暴人士同情牙買加暴行的證據(jù)，里邊既有粗俗的文字和圖片笑話，也有暗殺恐嚇。

Among other matters of importance in which I took an active part, but which excited little interest in the public, two deserve particular mention. I joined with several other independent Liberals in defeating an Extradition Bill, introduced at the very end of the session of 1866, and by which, though surrender avowedly for political offences was not authorised, political refugees, if charged by a foreign government with acts which are necessarily incident to all attempts at insurrection, would have been surrendered to be dealt with by the criminal courts of the government against which they had rebelled: thus making the British Government an accomplice in the vengeance of foreign despotisms. The defeat of this proposal led to the appointment of a Select Committee (in which I was included) to examine and report on the whole subject of Extradition Treaties; and the result was that in the Extradition Act, which passed through Parliament after I had ceased to be a member, opportunity is given to any one whose extradition is demanded, of being heard before an English Court of justice to prove that the offence with which he is charged, is really political. The cause of European freedom has thus been saved from a serious misfortune, and our own country from a great iniquity. The other subject to be mentioned is the fight kept up by a body of advanced Liberals in the session of 1868, on the Bribery Bill of Mr. Disraeli's Government, in which I took a very active part. I had taken counsel with several of those who had applied their minds most carefully to the details of the subject—Mr. W. D. Christie, Serjeant Pulling, Mr. Chadwick25—as well as bestowed much thought of my own, for the purpose of framing such amendments and additional clauses as might make the Bill really effective against the numerous modes of corruption, direct and indirect, which might otherwise, as there was much reason to fear, be increased instead of diminished by the Reform Act. We also aimed at engrafting on the Bill, measures for diminishing the mischievous burthen of what are called the legitimate expenses of elections. Among our many amendments, was that of Mr. Fawcett26 for making the returning officer's expenses a charge on the rates, instead of on the candidates; another was the prohibition of paid canvassers, and the limitation of paid agents to one for each candidate; a third was the extension of the precautions and penalties against bribery, to municipal elections, which are well known to be not only a preparatory school for bribery at parliamentary elections, but an habitual cover for it. The Conservative Government, however, when once they had carried the leading provision of their Bill (for which I voted and spoke), the transfer of the jurisdiction in elections from the House of Commons to the Judges, made a determined resistance to all other improvements; and after one of our most important proposals, that of Mr. Fawcett, had actually obtained a majority, they summoned the strength of their party and threw out the clause in a subsequent stage. The Liberal party in the House was greatly dishonoured by the conduct of many of its members in giving no help whatever to this attempt to secure the necessary conditions of an honest representation of the people. With their large majority in the House they could have carried all the amendments, or better ones if they had better to propose. But it was late in the Session; members were eager to set about their preparations for the impending General Election: and while some (such as Sir Robert Anstruther27) honourably remained at their post, though rival candidates were already canvassing their constituency, a much greater number placed their electioneering interests before their public duty. Many Liberals also looked with indifference on legislation against bribery, thinking that it merely diverted public interest from the Ballot, which they considered, very mistakenly as I expect it will turn out, to be a sufficient, and the only, remedy. From these causes our fight, though kept up with great vigour for several nights, was wholly unsuccessful, and the practices which we sought to render more difficult, prevailed more widely than ever in the first General Election held under the new electoral law.

在我積極參加卻很少引起公眾興趣的其他重要事情中，有兩件事特別值得一提。我和其他幾個獨立的自由黨人一起擊敗了1866年會期結束前提出的《引渡法案》。法案中規(guī)定，雖然引渡政治犯未得到公開授權，但如果政治避難者被外國政府指控有必然引發(fā)暴動的行為，就要被引渡去他們反叛政府的刑事法庭聽受處分。這使大不列顛政府成為外國專制政府報復的幫兇。這個議案的失敗使得特別委員會（包括我在內）成立，以審查和報告引渡條約的全部內容。結果是在我離開議會以后，議會通過了《引渡法》，使任何被要求引渡的人都有機會在英國法庭前證明他所受的指控是真正政治性的。歐洲的自由事業(yè)由此而免受一場不幸，我們的國家也幸免于一次嚴重的邪惡行為。另外需要提到的是，在1868年的會期中，一批自由黨進步人士堅持就迪斯累里政府提出的《賄賂法案》進行斗爭，我也積極參與其中。我與幾位對這個問題的細節(jié)做過十分認真研究的人——克里斯蒂先生、普林律師和查德威克先生——商議并提出了很多我自己的想法，目的是制定修正案和增加條款，使《法案》真正有效地防范許多直接和間接的賄賂行為，否則我們有充分的理由擔心，賄賂行為可能因《改良法》增加而非減少。我們還致力于在法案中加入其他措施，以減少所謂的競選合法開支這種有害負擔。在許多修正案當中，有一個是由福西特先生提出的，規(guī)定選舉檢察人的費用應當由稅收而非候選人承擔。另外禁止有償拉選票，以及限制每位候選人只有一位帶薪代理人。第三條是將防范和懲罰賄賂行為擴展到市級選舉。眾所周知，市級選舉不但是議會選舉賄賂的預備學校，也一貫是包庇賄賂的地方。然而，保守政府一旦通過了法案中的主要條款（我曾投票支持并發(fā)言），把選舉管轄權從下院移至法院，他們就會堅決反對所有其他的改進。福西特先生提出了一個最重要的提議，實際上已獲得了大多數(shù)人的贊成，之后他們號召黨內力量在下一階段否決這個提議。下院的自由黨人因其許多成員的行為深感恥辱，因為他們對確保人們誠實選舉必要條件的嘗試未曾給過任何幫助。憑他們在下院占有的絕大多數(shù)席位，他們本可以通過所有的修正案，假如有更好的議案也會通過。但會期已晚，議員們已在迫切地準備即將到來的大選。雖然幾位議員（比如羅伯特·安斯特拉瑟爵士）仍令人尊敬地堅守著崗位，而競爭對手已經(jīng)開始游說他們選區(qū)的選民，但他們中的大多數(shù)人把個人選舉的利益放在公共責任之上。很多自由黨人也對反賄賂立法漠然處之，認為它僅僅是將公眾注意從無記名投票轉移過來，他們把無記名投票視為一種充分且唯一的補救方法，我想將來肯定會證明這是十分錯誤的。由于這些原因，我們雖然斗志昂揚地堅持戰(zhàn)斗了幾個晚上，但戰(zhàn)斗還是徹底失敗了。我們曾試圖增加賄賂的難度，而在新選舉法實施后舉行的第一屆大選中，賄賂卻比以前更加猖獗。

In the general debates on Mr. Disraeli's Reform Bill, my participation was limited to the one speech already mentioned; but I made the Bill an occasion for bringing the two greatest improvements which remain to be made in representative government formally before the House and the nation. One of them was Personal, or as it is called with equal propriety, Proportional Representation. I brought this under the consideration of the House, by an expository and argumentative speech on Mr. Hare's plan; and subsequently I was active in support of the very imperfect substitute for that plan, which, in a small number of constituencies, Parliament was induced to adopt. This poor makeshift had scarcely any recommendation, except that it was a partial recognition of the evil which it did so little to remedy. As such however it was attacked by the same fallacies, and required to be defended on the same principles, as a really good measure; and its adoption in a few parliamentary elections, as well as the subsequent introduction of what is called the Cumulative Vote in the elections for the London School Board, have had the good effect of converting the equal claim of all electors to a proportional share in the representation, from a subject of merely speculative discussion, into a question of practical politics, much sooner than would otherwise have been the case.

在對迪斯累里《改良法案》的一般辯論中，我的參與僅僅限于上文提到的那篇演說，但我借機把代議制政府尚需做的兩項重大改進措施正式擺到了下院和全國人民面前。一個是個人代表制，或者同樣可以恰當?shù)胤Q為比例代表制。我通過就黑爾先生的方案發(fā)表闡述性和議論性的演說提出這項措施讓下院考慮。之后我積極支持一項代替黑爾方案但很不完善的方案，這個方案在少數(shù)選區(qū)被議會采納。這個可憐的權宜之計除了部分承認它不能根治的弊病外，幾乎沒有可取之處。但即便如此，它還是受到同樣謬誤的攻擊，需要用同樣的原則保護，就像真正良好的措施那樣。它在一些議會選舉中被采納，同樣倫敦教育委員會選舉中也引進了所謂的累計投票制。它把所有選舉人的平等權利轉變?yōu)榇碇浦械陌幢壤峙涿~，把純粹的理論探討轉變成實際的政治問題，效果很好。如果沒有實施這個方案，就不會產(chǎn)生如此立竿見影的效果。

This assertion of my opinions on Personal Representation cannot be credited with any considerable or visible amount of practical result. It was otherwise with the other motion which I made in the form of an amendment to the Reform Bill, and which was by far the most important, perhaps the only really important public service I performed in the capacity of a Member of Parliament: a motion to strike out the words which were understood to limit the electoral franchise to males, and thereby to admit to the suffrage all women who, as householders or otherwise, possess the qualification required of male electors. For women not to make their claim to the suffrage, at the time when the elective franchise was being largely extended, would have been to abjure the claim altogether; and a movement on the subject was begun in 1866, when I presented a petition for the suffrage, signed by a considerable number of distinguished women. But it was as yet uncertain whether the proposal would obtain more than a few stray votes in the House: and when, after a debate in which the speakers on the contrary side were conspicuous by their feebleness, the votes recorded in favour of the motion amounted to 73—made up by pairs and tellers to above 80—the surprise was general, and the encouragement great: the greater, too, because one of those who voted for the motion was Mr. Bright, a fact which could only be attributed to the impression made on him by the debate, as he had previously made no secret of his non-concurrence in the proposal. The time appeared to my daughter, Miss Helen Taylor, to have come for forming a Society for the extension of the suffrage to women. The existence of the Society is due to my daughter's initiative; its constitution was planned entirely by her, and she was the soul of the movement during its first years, though delicate health and superabundant occupation made her decline to be a member of the Executive Committee. Many distinguished members of parliament, professors, and others, and some of the most eminent women of whom the country can boast, became members of the Society, a large proportion either directly or indirectly through my daughter's influence, she having written the greater number, and all the best, of the letters by which adhesion was obtained, even when those letters bore my signature. In two remarkable instances, those of Miss Nightingale28 and Miss Mary Carpenter29, the reluctance those ladies had at first felt to come forward (for it was not on their part difference of opinion) was overcome by appeals written by my daughter though signed by me. Associations for the same object were formed in various local centres, Manchester, Edinburgh, Birmingham, Bristol, Glasgow, and others which have done much valuable work for the cause. All the Societies take the title of branches of the National Society for Women's Suffrage; but each has its own governing body, and acts in complete independence of the others.

我支持個人代表制，并不是因為它會產(chǎn)生相當多的或明顯的實際效果。相反，我提出的另一個動議就不同，它是《改良法案》的一個修正案，是我做議員期間履行的最重要的，也許是唯一重要的公職。這項動議去掉了被理解成選舉權僅限于男性的措辭，從而允許所有擁有男性選民資格的婦女，無論是否為戶主，都有選舉權。當選舉權大規(guī)模增加時，不要求選舉權的婦女就相當于完全公開放棄這個權利。這個運動開始于1866年，我呈遞了一份由許多杰出婦女簽名的爭取選舉權的請愿書。但不確定的是這個提議能否獲得下院議員們零星的幾張贊成票。當辯論過后，反對方的發(fā)言顯然軟弱無力，所以贊成動議的票數(shù)達到73票。加上不投票的議員和計票員，總數(shù)達80多票。這在我們意料之外，也因此令人大受鼓舞。更鼓舞我們的是這些投贊成票的人當中有布賴特先生，這只能歸因于這場辯論對他產(chǎn)生的影響，因為他以前毫不掩飾地表示不同意這個提議。這次看來是我的女兒，海倫·泰勒小姐組織了一個社團來擴大婦女選舉權。這個社團是由我女兒創(chuàng)辦的，章程也完全是由她設計的，雖然因為身體孱弱加上工作纏身，她謝絕成為執(zhí)行委員會的一員，但運動的第一年她仍是活動的靈魂。很多尊貴的議員、教授及其他人，還有一些國家引以為傲的出色女性也成為社團成員，這其中很大的一部分是受我女兒直接或間接的影響。她寫了大量的信件，并以此贏得了支持，甚至有些信件上署了我的名字。有兩件事讓我記憶猶新，分別與南丁格爾小姐和瑪麗·卡彭特小姐有關，她們起初都不愿意加入（因為這和她們的意見相左）。后來我女兒以我的名義寫了幾封請求信，才得到她們的同意。其他的一些地區(qū)中心也以相同的目的成立了協(xié)會，包括曼徹斯特、愛丁堡、伯明翰、布里斯托爾、格拉斯哥以及其他一些為這項事業(yè)作出卓著貢獻的城市。所有的社團都取名為“國家婦女選舉權協(xié)會”分會，但每個分會都有自己的管理機構，以完全獨立的方式運作。

I believe I have mentioned all that is worth remembering of my proceedings in the House. But their enumeration, even if complete, would give but an inadequate idea of my occupations during that period, and especially of the time taken up by correspondence. For many years before my election to Parliament, I had been continually receiving letters from strangers, mostly addressed to me as a writer on philosophy, and either propounding difficulties or communicating thoughts on subjects connected with logic or political economy. In common, I suppose, with all who are known as political economists, I was a recipient of all the shallow theories and absurd proposals by which people are perpetually endeavouring to shew the way to universal wealth and happiness by some artful reorganisation of the currency. When there were signs of sufficient intelligence in the writers to make it worth while attempting to put them right, I took the trouble to point out their errors, until the growth of my correspondence made it necessary to dismiss such persons with very brief answers. Many, however, of the communications I received were more worthy of attention than these, and in some, over-sights of detail were pointed out in my writings, which I was thus enabled to correct. Correspondence of this sort naturally multiplied with the multiplication of the subjects on which I wrote, especially those of a metaphysical character. But when I became a member of Parliament, I began to receive letters on private grievances and on every imaginable subject that related to any kind of public affairs, however remote from my knowledge or pursuits. It was not my constituents in Westminster who laid this burthen on me: they kept with remarkable fidelity the understanding on which I had consented to serve. I received, indeed, now and then an application from some ingenuous youth to procure for him a small Government appointment; but these were few, and how simple and ignorant the writers were, was shown by the fact that the applications came in about equally whichever party was in power. My invariable answer was, that it was contrary to the principles on which I was elected to ask favours of any Government. But, on the whole, hardly any part of the country gave me less trouble than my own constituents. The general mass of correspondence, however, swelled into an oppressive burthen. At this time, and thenceforth, a great proportion of all my letters (including many which found their way into the newspapers) were not written by me but by my daughter; at first merely from her willingness to help in disposing of a mass of letters greater than I could get through without assistance, but afterwards because I thought the letters she wrote superior to mine, and more so in proportion to the difficulty and importance of the occasion. Even those which I wrote myself were generally much improved by her, as is also the case with all the more recent of my prepared speeches, of which, and of some of my published writings, not a few passages, and those the most successful, were hers.

我相信我已經(jīng)提到了我在下院期間所有值得回憶的事情。但這些描述即便是完整的，仍然不能讓人們充分了解我那段時期的工作，尤其是通信花去的那段時間。在我入選議會前的那幾年，我經(jīng)常收到陌生人的來信，大多都稱我為哲學方面的作家，他們就邏輯學或者政治經(jīng)濟學方面，要么和我探討些難懂的問題，要么與我交流想法。總的來說，我猜想我和所有著名的政治學家一樣，收到了很多包含膚淺理論和荒謬提議的來信，通過這些來信，人們以巧妙的重組貨幣的方式，不斷努力展示通往全民富裕和幸福的道路。當寫信人表現(xiàn)出足夠的智慧，還有糾正的可能時，我就會不辭辛勞地指出他們的錯誤，直到后來我的通信數(shù)量的增長使我不得不用簡短的話回復這些人。但是我收到的許多來信中很多比這些更值得關注，其中有些指出我作品中忽略的細節(jié)，使我能夠改正。這種通信自然隨著我寫作主題的增加而增加，尤其是那些關于形而上學的主題。但自從我成為議員之后，我開始收到私人的投訴信，以及有關公眾事務能想到的問題的信件，盡管很多與我的知識和追求相去甚遠。帶給我這些負擔的并不是我在威斯敏斯特的選民，他們對我同意效忠的事業(yè)保持著相當?shù)闹艺\。事實上，我不時收到一個天真的年輕人寫來的申請信，要我?guī)退谡兄\得一官半職。無論是哪個政黨執(zhí)政，我都會收到這樣的來信，雖然這種信件很少，但可以表明寫信人是多么的單純無知。我不變的回答是，請求政府的幫助與我當選的原則背道而馳。但總的來說，我自己的選民帶給我的麻煩少于全國其他地區(qū)。然而，越來越多的來信成為我沉重的負擔。那時以及從那以后，我的大部分回信（包括登報回復）都由我的女兒代筆。她的初衷只是幫助我處理大量的超過我個人回復能力的信件，但后來我發(fā)現(xiàn)她回信的水平比我的高，尤其是她能作出與當時的難度和重要性相應的回復。即使我自己寫的信也基本交給她修改，就像我最近準備的演講稿一樣，我的一些出版作品，不僅僅是其中幾段，就連最成功的那部分都是她的杰作。

While I remained in Parliament my work as an author was unavoidably limited to the recess. During that time I wrote (besides the pamphlet on Ireland already mentioned), the Essay on Plato published in the Edinburgh Review, and reprinted in the third volume of Dissertations and Discussions; and the address which conformably to custom I delivered to the University of St. Andrew's, whose students had done me the honour of electing me to the office of Rector. In this Discourse I gave expression to many thoughts and opinions which had been accumulating in me through life, respecting the various studies which belong to a liberal education, their uses and influences, and the mode in which they should be pursued to render those influences most beneficial. The position taken up, vindicating the high educational value alike of the old classic and the new scientific studies, on even stronger grounds than are urged by most of their advocates, and insisting that it is only the stupid inefficiency of the usual teaching which makes those studies be regarded as competitors instead of allies, was, I think, calculated, not only to aid and stimulate the improvement which has happily commenced in the national institutions for higher education, but to diffuse juster ideas than we often find, even in highly educated men, on the conditions of the highest mental cultivation.

在議會工作期間，我的寫作不可避免地被限制在休會期間進行。那段時間我寫了《論柏拉圖》（還有剛才提到的關于愛爾蘭問題的小冊子），發(fā)表在《愛丁堡評論》上，后來收在《論述和討論》的第三卷中。我很榮幸地被圣安德魯斯大學的學生選為校長，并按照慣例發(fā)表了演說。在這篇演說中，我就一生中積累的有關自由教育的許多學科發(fā)表了很多想法和見解，講到了它們的用處和影響，以及為使這些學科發(fā)揮最有益的影響應當采取的方法。為證明舊的古典學科以及新的科學學科有同樣高的教育價值，我采取的立場比大多數(shù)宣傳者極力主張的更加堅實，認為只因平常教導法的愚蠢無能才使得這些學科被人視為競爭者而不是同盟者。我認為這不僅有助于促進在全國高等院校中已順利展開的改革，而且能夠在最崇高思想的培養(yǎng)下，在受過高等教育的人中間傳播比我們平常接觸到的更公正的思想。

During this period also I commenced (and completed soon after I had left Parliament) the performance of a duty to philosophy and to the memory of my father, by preparing and publishing an edition of the Analysis of the Phenomena of the Human Mind, with notes bringing up the doctrines of that admirable book to the latest improvements in science and in speculation. This was a joint undertaking: the psychological notes being furnished in about equal proportions by Mr. Bain and myself, while Mr. Grote supplied some valuable contributions on points in the history of philosophy incidentally raised, and Dr. Andrew Findlater30 supplied the deficiencies in the book which had been occasioned by the imperfect philological knowledge of the time when it was written. Having been originally published at a time when the current of metaphysical speculation ran in a quite opposite direction to the psychology of Experience and Association, the "Analysis" had not obtained the amount of immediate success which it deserved, though it had made a deep impression on many individual minds, and had largely contributed, through those minds, to create that more favourable atmosphere for the Association Psychology of which we now have the benefit. Admirably adapted for a class-book of the Experience Metaphysics, it only required to be enriched, and in some cases corrected, by the results of more recent labours in the same school of thought, to stand, as it now does, in company with Mr. Bain's treatises, at the head of the systematic works on Analytic Psychology.

在這段時間里，我也開始履行我對哲學的責任（這在我離開議會后很快得以完成），也為了紀念我的父親，我準備并出版了《人類心靈現(xiàn)象分析》的一個版本，并作了注釋，使這本出色的作品跟上了科學和理論方面的最新進展。這是一個合作的項目：心理學的注釋由貝恩先生和我平均分擔，格羅特先生對書中附帶提及的哲學歷史問題作出了有價值的貢獻，而安德魯·芬勒特先生彌補了寫書時由于不完善的哲學知識造成的不足。該書第一次發(fā)表時正值形而上學理論的思潮與經(jīng)驗心理學和聯(lián)想心理學背道而馳的時候，所以它沒能立即獲得應有的成功，但還是給很多人留下了深刻的印象，并通過這些人營造出一種更有利于聯(lián)想心理學的氣氛，到現(xiàn)在我們仍從中受益良多。這本書很適合做學習經(jīng)驗形而上學的課本，只需擴充些相同思想流派的最新研究成果，或在某些情況下只需對其加以更正，它就可以像現(xiàn)在這樣，和貝恩先生的專著一起，成為分析心理學系統(tǒng)著作的佼佼者。

In the autumn of 1868 the Parliament which passed the Reform Act was dissolved, and at the new election for Westminster I was thrown out; not to my surprise, nor, I believe, to that of my principal supporters, though in the few days preceding the election they had become more sanguine than before. That I should not have been elected at all would not have required any explanation; what excites curiosity is that I should have been elected the first time, or, having been elected then, should have been defeated afterwards. But the efforts made to defeat me were far greater on the second occasion than on the first. For one thing, the Tory Government was now struggling for existence, and success in any contest was of more importance to them. Then, too, all persons of Tory feelings were far more embittered against me individually than on the previous occasion; many who had at first been either favourable or indifferent, were vehemently opposed to my re-election. As I had shown in my political writings that I was aware of the weak points in democratic opinions, some Conservatives, it seems, had not been without hopes of finding me an opponent of democracy: as I was able to see the Conservative side of the question, they presumed that, like them, I could not see any other side. Yet if they had really read my writings they would have known that after giving full weight to all that appeared to me well grounded in the arguments against democracy, I unhesitatingly decided in its favour, while recommending that it should be accompanied by such institutions as were consistent with its principle and calculated to ward off its inconveniences: one of the chief of these remedies being Proportional Representation, on which scarcely any of the Conservatives gave me any support. Some Tory expectations appear to have been founded on the approbation I had expressed of plural voting, under certain conditions: and it has been surmised that the suggestion of this sort made in one of the resolutions which Mr. Disraeli introduced into the House preparatory to his Reform Bill (a suggestion which meeting with no favour he did not press), may have been occasioned by what I had written on the point: but if so, it was forgotten that I had made it an express condition that the privilege of a plurality of votes should be annexed to education, not to property, and even so, had approved of it only on the supposition of universal suffrage. How utterly inadmissible such plural voting would be under the suffrage given by the present Reform Act, is proved, to any who could otherwise doubt it, by the very small weight which the working classes are found to possess in elections, even under the law which gives no more votes to any one elector than to any other.

1868年秋天，通過《改良法》的議會解散了，在新一屆威斯敏斯特選舉中我競選失利，這并沒讓我吃驚，我相信我的主要支持者們也不會吃驚，雖然在接下來幾天的選舉中他們抱著更大的希望。如果我從未當選也就無需解釋，讓人好奇的是我第一次當選了，或者已經(jīng)當選，但后來又落選了。但是第二次他們?yōu)榱舜驍∥宜鞯呐h遠比第一次多。一方面，托利黨政府正在為繼續(xù)當選努力，在任何競選中的勝利對他們來說都很重要。另外，所有同情托利黨的人對我個人的怨恨也比上一屆多很多。許多原來對我當選不置可否的人，現(xiàn)在都激烈地反對我再次當選。因為我在很多政治作品中表明自己已經(jīng)意識到了民主見解的弱點，一些保守派人士似乎希望把我當作民主制度的敵人，因為我可以從保守黨的角度去看待問題，他們就斷定我像他們一樣看不到其他的方面。但如果他們真的讀過我的作品，他們就會知道在強調了所有我認為有充分證據(jù)支持的反對民主的觀點后，我毫不猶豫地作出了有利于民主的論斷，并且建議民主應當通過符合其原則并能去除其不便的制度來實現(xiàn)。其中一個主要的解決方法就是比例代表制，但保守黨幾乎沒有人支持這個建議。一些托利黨人的期待似乎是建立在我對多選區(qū)投票權認可的前提上的。人們推測，這個建議是迪斯累里在準備他的《改良法案》時向下院提出的決議案中的一個（沒有人支持他的建議，他也沒有施加壓力），這可能是由我就這個問題所寫的文章引起的。但假如是這樣，人們忘記了我的建議還有一個明確的條件，那就是一人多選區(qū)的特權附加的是關于教育程度而不是財產(chǎn)狀況的條件，即便如此，我只是在假定普選權的情況下才同意的。在目前《改良法》規(guī)定的選舉制度下，這種多選區(qū)投票權是不能接受的。懷疑這一點的人，只要看看工人階級在選舉中所占的如此小的分量就會明白，即使法律規(guī)定一人只能投一票。

While I thus was far more obnoxious to the Tory interest, and to many Conservative Liberals than I had formerly been, the course I pursued in Parliament had by no means been such as to make Liberals generally at all enthusiastic in my support. It has already been mentioned, how large a proportion of my prominent appearances had been on questions on which I differed from most of the Liberal party or about which they cared little, and how few occasions there had been on which the line I took was such as could lead them to attach any great value to me as an organ of their opinions. I had moreover done things which had excited, in many minds, a personal prejudice against me. Many were offended by what they called the persecution of Mr. Eyre: and still greater offence was taken at my sending a subscription to the election expenses of Mr. Bradlaugh31. Having refused to be at any expense for my own election, and having had all its expenses defrayed by others, I felt under a peculiar obligation to subscribe in my turn where funds were deficient for candidates whose election was desirable. I accordingly sent subscriptions to nearly all the working class candidates, and among others to Mr. Bradlaugh. He had the support of the working classes; having heard him speak, I knew him to be a man of ability, and he had proved that he was the reverse of a demagogue, by placing himself in strong opposition to the prevailing opinion of the democratic party on two such important subjects as Malthusianism and Personal Representation. Men of this sort, who, while sharing the democratic feelings of the working classes, judged political questions for themselves, and had courage to assert their individual convictions against popular opposition, were needed, as it seemed to me, in Parliament, and I did not think that Mr. Bradlaugh's anti-religious opinions (even though he had been intemperate in the expression of them) ought to exclude him. In subscribing, however, to his election, I did what would have been highly imprudent if I had been at liberty to consider only the interests of my own reelection; and, as might be expected, the utmost possible use, both fair and unfair, was made of this act of mine to stir up the electors of Westminster against me. To these various causes, combined with an unscrupulous use of the usual pecuniary and other influences on the side of my Tory competitor, while none were used on my side, it is to be ascribed that I failed at my second election after having succeeded at the first. No sooner was the result of the election known than I received three or four invitations to become a candidate for other constituencies, chiefly counties; but even if success could have been expected, and this without expense, I was not disposed to deny myself the relief of returning to private life. I had no cause to feel humiliated at my rejection by the electors; and if I had, the feeling would have been far outweighed by the numerous expressions of regret which I received from all sorts of persons and places, and in a most marked degree from those members of the Liberal party in Parliament with whom I had been accustomed to act.

與原來相比，我現(xiàn)在更加危及托利黨人的利益，也更令保守的自由派人士不愉快，我在議會中所追求的事業(yè)絕對不會讓多數(shù)自由派人士熱情地支持我。這之前我已經(jīng)提到，我出色的登臺演講大多是論述與多數(shù)自由派見解不同的觀點或他們極少關心的問題，我采取的方針路線很少能引起他們的重視，并使他們把我當作自己意見的喉舌。另外我做的事情引起了很多人對我的個人偏見。很多人因為他們所謂的迫害艾爾先生的事件而大怒，令他們更加憤怒的是我捐了一些錢作為布雷德洛先生的競選費用。我自己競選時沒有花費任何費用，幾乎都由他人支付，我感到有特殊的義務用捐款來回報那些缺少資金但有望當選的候選人。所以我?guī)缀踅o所有工人階級候選人捐款，尤其是對布雷德洛先生。他受到工人階級的支持，我聽過他的演講，認定他是有能力之人，在馬爾薩斯主義和個人代表制這兩個重要問題上，他強烈反對當時流行的民主黨意見，證明了自己不是蠱惑民心之人。這樣一個既有勞動階級民主情感，自己判斷政治問題，又有勇氣逆流而上主張個人信念的人，在我看來是議會需要的人物。我認為不應當因為布雷德洛反對宗教的見解而把他排除在議會之外（雖然他曾經(jīng)言辭激烈地表達過這樣的見解）。如果我只考慮自己再次當選的利益，那為他的競選捐款是十分魯莽的。不出所料，很多人對我的這個舉動大加利用，無論公正與否，來煽動威斯敏斯特選區(qū)的投票者反對我?；谶@種種原因，加上我的托利黨競爭者大肆利用慣用的金錢手段和其他影響力，而我卻沒有這么做，我在第一次競選勝利后，第二次卻失敗了。競選結果公布后不久，我就收到了三四封信，邀請我做其他選區(qū)的候選人（主要是郡級）。但即便有成功的希望，即便可以不用承擔費用，我也不想摒棄讓自己享受回歸個人生活的輕松。我已沒有理由因為選民對我的反對而感到恥辱。假如我真的有，這種感覺也遠遠不如我從各界人士和各地收到的無數(shù)慰問信重要，尤其是不如收到那些我慣于合作的自由黨議員們的慰問信重要。

Since that time little has occurred which there is need to commemorate in this place. I returned to my old pursuits and to the enjoyment of a country life in the South of Europe, alternating twice a year with a residence of some weeks or months in the neighbourhood of London. I have written various articles in periodicals (chiefly in my friend Mr. Morley's Fortnightly Review), have made a small number of speeches on public occasions, especially at the meetings of the Women's Suffrage Society, have published The Subjection of Women, written some years before, with some additions by my daughter and myself, and have commenced the preparation of matter for future books, of which it will be time to speak more particularly if I live to finish them. Here therefore, for the present, this memoir may close.

從那以后，幾乎沒有發(fā)生什么事情值得我在此記錄。我重拾舊趣，回到歐洲南部享受田園生活，每年輪流兩次在倫敦附近住上幾周或幾個月。我為期刊寫了許多文章（主要發(fā)表在我朋友莫利先生的《雙周評論》上），在公共場合，特別是在婦女投票權協(xié)會的會議上發(fā)表過為數(shù)不多的幾次演說，我女兒和我把幾年前寫的《論婦女的從屬地位》增加了一些內容后出版，并開始為以后出書準備資料。如果我在有生之年能寫完這些新作品的話，那還有機會再作說明。因此，這本自傳到這里可以結束了。

(1)限定繼承權，即對被繼承人生前所欠債務負有限清償責任的繼承權。

(2) 法國“二月革命”，爆發(fā)于1848年2月22日。這次革命是19世紀上半葉法國經(jīng)濟、政治和思想發(fā)展的必然結果，是封建主義與資本主義的矛盾、壓迫民族與被壓迫民族的矛盾尖銳化的必然結果。

(3) 1848年1月，歐洲革命首先爆發(fā)于意大利，接著法國爆發(fā)了二月革命。為了推翻封建統(tǒng)治，實現(xiàn)國家統(tǒng)一，奧地利首都維也納和普魯士首都柏林在3月先后爆發(fā)了革命。在維也納革命的影響下，匈牙利、捷克和羅馬尼亞爆發(fā)了民族獨立運動，革命烈火遍及歐洲。

(4) 1851年12月2日，路易·波拿巴發(fā)動了政變，結束了法蘭西第二共和國，建立了專制體制。它是歐洲除了沙皇制度以外的又一個反動勢力堡壘，成了國際沖突和軍事冒險的政策源地。

(5) 愛德華·喬治·杰弗里·史密斯－斯坦利（1799—1869），英國保守黨領袖和第32、35、38任英國首相。他在1844—1851年間被稱為斯坦利勛爵。

(6) 朱庇特神廟，古羅馬的主神殿。

(7) 阿維尼翁，法國東南部城市，沃克呂茲省首府。在羅訥河畔，南距迪朗斯河和羅訥河匯合處四公里。

(8) 圣西門主義者，主張空想社會主義的人。該學說的創(chuàng)始人是法國哲學家、經(jīng)濟學家圣西門（1760—1825）。

(9) 裴斯泰洛齊（1746—1827），瑞士教育家。

(10) 威廉·馮·洪堡特（1767—1835），德國語言學家、教育改革家。

(11) 喬賽亞·沃倫（1798—1874），美國的個人無政府主義者、發(fā)明家和作家。他被廣泛地視為美國的第一名無政府主義者。

(12) 詹姆斯·加思·馬歇爾（1802—1873），英國政治家。

(13) 本杰明·迪斯累里（1804—1881），英國首相、保守黨領袖、作家，寫過小說和政論作品。

(14) 亞歷山大·貝恩（1818—1903），英國心理學家、哲學家、教育學家。

(15) 約翰·埃利奧特·凱恩斯（1823—1875），英國庸俗經(jīng)濟學家。他在美國南北戰(zhàn)爭時期寫的《奴隸勞力》，揭露了對奴隸殘酷使用和奴隸從事原始勞動的情形，但作為經(jīng)濟學家，他只能描寫表面的現(xiàn)象。

(16) 溫德爾·菲利普斯（1811—1884），美國廢奴主義者、雄辯家。

(17) 約翰·布賴特（1811—1889），英國政界人士、政治經(jīng)濟學家。

(18) 威廉·漢密爾頓爵士（1788—1856），蘇格蘭形而上學者。

(19) 芬尼亞組織，19世紀中葉著名的愛爾蘭反英統(tǒng)治組織。

(20) 約翰·羅素（1792—1878），輝格黨自由改革派的主要人物，曾任英國首相。

(21) 約翰·弗朗西斯·馬圭爾（1815—1872），愛爾蘭政治家、著名的記者。曾任科克市市長，并于1841年創(chuàng)立了《科克考察家報》。

(22) 查爾斯·巴克斯頓（1823—1871），英國啤酒生產(chǎn)商、慈善家、作家和議員。

(23) 愛德華·約翰·艾爾（1815—1901），英國人、澳洲大陸拓荒者、殖民主義者、有爭議的牙買加總督。

(24) 亞歷山大·詹姆斯·埃德蒙·科伯恩爵士（1802—1880），英國政治家、律師、大法官。

(25) 埃德溫·查德威克（1800—1890），英國社會改革家，因改良《濟貧法》而著稱。

(26) 亨利·福西特（1833—1884），英國政治家、經(jīng)濟學家，著有《政治經(jīng)濟學手冊》。

(27) 羅伯特·安斯特拉瑟爵士（1834—1866），蘇格蘭政治家。

(28) 弗洛倫斯·南丁格爾（1820—1910），護理學先驅、護士教育創(chuàng)始人。

(29) 瑪麗·卡彭特（1807—1877），英國著名的教育學家、社會改革家。

(30) 安德魯·芬勒特（1810—1885），蘇格蘭編輯，編纂《錢伯斯百科全書》。

(31) 查爾斯·布雷德洛（1833—1891），19世紀英國著名政治活動家、無神論者，于1866年建立國家世俗協(xié)會。