THE MORALITY OF HAPPIJSfESS. 107 



quires careful attention. We Lave already touched on the effects 

 which would follow if all the members of society in their zeal for the 

 interest of others disregarded the requirements of their ov/n health and 

 well-being, and overlooked the effects of unwise neglect of self on the 

 interests of their descendants, and therefore of the society of which 

 their descendants would form part. Nor, in considering this aspect of 

 the subject, have we been dealing with imaginary evils, seeing that 

 many of the defects of the body social at the present day can be clearly 

 traced to such misdirected, though well-meaning, efforts on the part of 

 the better sort in past ages. 



But, when we consider the mixed nature of all communities, the mis- 

 chief of ill-regulated disinterestedness as compared with far-seeing 

 consideration of the interests of family, race, and nation, becomes 

 more obviously a matter of practical moment. 



If all men sought the good of others before their own, it is obvious 

 that a confusion of interests would arise — other but not less unsatisfac- 

 tory, perhaps, than that which exists in a society where, let their doc- 

 trines be what they may, the greater number seek their own welfare 

 first. If, on the other hand, all men were moved by far-seeing consid- 

 erations and a well-regulated care for the interests of others, no special 

 care would be needed, and few rules would have to be laid down, to 

 insure the progress and happiness of the community. But, as a mat- 

 ter of fact, neither one nor the other state of things exists. The body 

 social as at present existing may be classified, as regards care for oth- 

 ers and self-seeking, into the following principal divisions : 



A. First, there are those who in precept, and as far as they can in 

 practice also, think of others before themselves, who repay injuries by 

 benefits, answer reviling by blessing, and adopt as their rule the prin- 

 ciple that those who injure and hate them are those whom they should 

 chiefly love and toward whose well-being their efforts should be chiefly 

 directed. This class is very small ; it is always losing members, but 

 is probably increased by fresh accessions about as fast as it is dimin- 

 ished by those who leave it. 



B. Secondly, there are those who, having for their chief aim the 

 well-being of those around them and of mankind generally, yet recog- 

 nize as necessary even for the advancement of that object, a due re- 

 gard for the well-being — the health, strength, cheerfulness, and even 

 the material prosperity — of self.* This class, like the first, is small ; 

 but steadily increases in every advancing community. 



* One or two correspondents, whose letters have been handed to me, seem still unable 

 to dissociate the idea of self-regard from the idea of selfishness, and imagine the man who 

 duly cares for his own well-being (as the only effective way of fitting himself to be useful 

 to others) to be necessarily one who really has at heart only his own comfort. It might 

 be shown that the man who selfishly seeks his own comfort really goes the worst possible 

 way to secure his own happiness. But, apart from this, such a man is not the man of 

 whom I am speaking. I am inquiring what the man should do who really wishes to in- 

 crease the happiness of those around him most effectively ; and I show how his care for 



