[Letter] 1828 March 5, [London], East India House [to] John Bowring

    My dear Sir
       I am sorry that we did not come 
to a distinct understanding on the subject 
of Mr George Bentham's book, before the 
article went to press.
       I am extremely surprised to learn 
from you that the Westminster Review is 
to say things which neither the Editor nor 
the writer of the article agree in, merely 
because they will please Mr Bentham. There
are few men whom I should so greatly 
desire to please as Mr Bentham, but I 
always thought that the utmost sacrifice 
which a review ought to make to personal 
feeling, is, not to mention at all, what it 
cannot mention with praise.
       The reason why it is impossible that 
I should write such a notice of Mr George 
Bentham's work, as would be satisfactory 
to the author, must be evident from a mere 
perusal of the book & the article. Mr George 
Bentham's mode of viewing the subject is 
radically different from mine. I cannot 
honestly give him the praise which I allow 
he deserves, & withhold the blame which I 
consider to be deserved likewise. The tone in 
particluar, which he has assumed towards 
Dr Whately, appears to me to be most unwar
rantable; & I will confesss to you that one of 
my chief motives for writing on the subject 
was to prove to Dr. Whately himself, that the 
Westminster Review is not to be confounded 
with such critics.
       As for putting the work at the head of 
the article, that is not to be thought of for 
a moment It is not an article on Logic, 
but, emphatically, an article on Whately's 
book; & the good it does, if it should happen 
to do any, will depend wholly upon its 
being so considered.
       I can have no objection to annex a note 
on Mr George Bentham's book; but it 
will contain, along with the praise, so much
blame, that I am sure Mr Bentham would be 
less displeased by its being omitted altogether.
And your making the alteration will be no 
better. It would leave the evil just when it is 
in regard to the review, & it would not even 
secure me from disgrace, since there are at 
least twenty persons who know that I have 
written a review of Whately, & will hold me 
respensible for its contents.
       You now know the alternative. If it 
will not suit you, I am ready to pay the 
expense which has been incured in printing 
the article, & to withdraw it altogether. This 
cannot be any inconvenience to you, because 
until within a few days, you did not know 
that the article would be ready for this number, 
& because you have so many other articles ready. 
I therefore claim the privilege of withdrawing 
it as a right: and it cannot justly be 
refused me.
            Very truly yours
                   J.S.Mill
East India House
5th March 1828