This seems to be the case with all those offices which, standing alone, are offices of mere burthen , whether the party favoured be the public at large or any individual or class of individuals:
in all cases the labourer is worthy of his hire; and unless it be when every man must labour, no man ought to be made to labour without his hire---the common soldier no more than the general, the common seaman no more than the admiral, the constable no more than the judge.
True it is, that take any man for example, it may with propriety be said, that the public has a right to his services, has a right to command his services, for that the interest of any one man ought to give way to the interest of all.But if this be true as to any one man who happens to be first taken, equally true is it of any other, and so in succession of every man.On the one hand, then, each man is under an obligation to submit to any burthen that shall be proposed; on the other hand, each man has an equal right to see the burthen imposed, not upon himself, but upon some other.If either of these propositions be taken in their full extent, as much may be said in favour of the one of them as of the other.In this case, if there were no middle course to take, things must rest in statu quo, the scale of utility must remain in equilibrium, one man's interest weighing neither more nor less than another's; the burthen would be borne by nobody, and the immunity of each would be the destruction of all.But there is a middle course to take, which is, to divide the burthen, and lay it in equal proportion upon every man.
The principle is indisputable:
the application of it is not free from difficulties.There are many cases in which the individual burthen cannot be divided: an office, the duties of which it requires but one man to perform, cannot be divided amongst a thousand.But a mass of profit may be formed sufficient to counterbalance the inconvenience which a man would sustain by bearing the office.Let the requisite mass of profit be taken from the general fund, and the burthen is distributed proportionably amongst the different members of the community.
An expedient sometimes practised in these cases, is, instead of distributing the burthen of the office, to lay it on entire upon some one person, according to lot.This prevents the injustice there would be in laying it upon any one by design: but it does not correct the inequality.The mischief of partiality and injustice are obviated; but not so the sufferings of him upon whom the unfortunate lot falls.The principle of utility is in this case only partially followed.
It is one of those instances in which the principle of utility would seem to have given occasion to a wrong conclusion.According to this principle, it is said that the interest of the minority ought to be sacrificed to that of the majority.The conclusion is just, if it were impossible to avoid a sacrifice; palpably false, if it is.But to charge this as a defect upon the principle itself, is as reasonable as it would be to maintain that the art of bookkeeping is a mischievous art, because entries may be omitted.
We are now prepared for establishing a comparison between punishment and reward.
1.Punishment is best adapted for restraint or prevention---reward for excitement and production: the one is a bridle, the other, a spur.
