1
results found in
27 ms
Page 1
of 1
[...?...?] 1805
Evidence
Introd.
Ch. False Ends. Judge
' 5. This & bribery
''.5. Comparison between corruption in this form and bribery.
Introduction Cont.
I say in the form and attraction[?] of a bribe. Yet in respect of the degree of force, there is no comparison. In the shape of a bribe, received in that form from a determinate individual, nothing can be received by any man official person, in the station of Judge or any other /man in this station or any other/, without his putting himself completely into the power of the giver of the bribe: exposing himself thus to utter ruin, not only by /from/ the voluntary hostility of the bribe-giver but from his indiscretion as well as a variety of other accidents. In the shape of fees, received, as of right for business really done, whatever is received, especially by a hand thus contracted in power is received in perfect safety.
Under a system of this kind, it may happen, that no bribes are ever taken. Be it so, and what then? the pear /fruit/ has no specks in it: True: yet what is it worth: when it is /if it be/ rotten at the core?
Bribery is a distinct mischief, and an account of the want of confidence the general alarm it would be productive of, if common, might be still worse: but the remedies against it are so effectual, that in comparison of the other deeper-seated principle of corruption is scarce worth thinking of.
If a Judge be discovered to have received a bribe, nobody, not even he himself, has anything to say in his defence: whereas of a system thus rotten in the core, one of the bad effects, is as will be seen is that the more corrupt it is, the less it is thought to be. Shares in the sinister profit of the system being possessed by or hoped for by all who are in a condition to acquire any tolerable insight into it, the more corrupt it is, the more [...?] it is [...?]: the injuries[?] of those who suffer from it, are drowned by the acclamations of those who profit by it. Even the patient who knows so well what he suffers, knows not from what cause. Deceived by theories as industriously circulated as they are false, the poison really administered by the physician is referred by him to the disease. Seeing no individual living on whom blame can fasten itself, he concludes there is none any where. And thence the whole community is divided into two classes: the one composed of imposters, the other of dupes: the imposters, of whom none are so fit for being so duped by others converting others into dupes, as those who have succeeded best in their endeavour to become dupes to be such themselves.
Similar Items
-
Title: [1819 May 29 Defence ag Ed Review]Description: 1819 May 29 Defence ag Ed Review Bribery – excluded in degree 1 First as to bribery Out of gratitude a man who had received a bribe might earn it: might give his vote accordingly: might confer that benefit, in return for the benefit received. This is what might happen, might every now and then happen, not improbably it would for the most part happen, unless in the mind of the receiver some special service might be regarded as rendered to the community either from the contributing to place in the seat some other Candidate, or by contributing to keep out of it the bribing Candidate. But supposing on the part of the receiver an opinion decidedly favourable to the aptitude of another Candidate, or unfavourable to the aptitude of the bribing Candidate, or on any other personal or other private account suppose the briber /bribe-giver/ to be an object of aversion, in that case is it probable that the vote thus endeavoured to be purchased would be delivered accordingly? Surely not: surely so far from probable that, considering how easily any of these states of things might have place without the Candidate knowing of it, it seems not likely that especially for a situation of so short a duration, there are many in whose eyes it would be advisable to bestow so large a sum as would be necessary to the purchasing in this way any considerable chances[?].
-
Title: [1819 May 24 Defence of Ballot]Description: 1819 May 24 Defence of Ballot Under Ballot no secresy 9 As experience advanced, confidence in this as in all other shapes could not but be lessened /decreased/. But while confidence was decreasing, independence was at least not upon the decrease but rather upon the encrease. Of any infractions that took place in this confidence, though the general result might come to be imputed or even known, yet the particulars it seems reasonable to conclude were seldom if ever matter of general notoriety it being the common interest of the Inspectors that they should not be. 1 As to bribery supposing a fund in any instance adequate to the purpose, nothing could be more improbable that in such a conflict of interest the Inspectors whatever even their number should all join and be known beforehand to be determined to join in giving to any one[?] /to a candidate with a bribe in his hand/ that previous assurance of fidelity without which the expence would not be hazarded If the man who accepts your bribe does not vote for you we will tell you so – this is the sort of assurance that would be requisite and this is the /a/ sort of assurance which it seems not at all likely should be given. True it is that for furnishing the information any one /a single person/ out of any number of Co-Inspectors might suffice. But still in the case of this sort of engagement to /in[?]/ the affording of the requisite scrutiny in question three persons at least would have to join – namely the Candidate or his friend or agent by whom the bribe was /is to be/ given, the voter by whom the bribe or a promise of it was to be received, and in the Inspector by whom in case of a breach of the engagement information of it was to be given to the giver of the bribe or promise. On the part of the giver and receiver here would be a transaction opposed with no slight degree of force /energy/ by the united force /power/ of the moral, legal, and religious sanctions; a transact in a word in no slight degree scandalous: and on the part of the Inspector, the violation of this his most special and important trust much more so.
-
Title: [1820 July 30 Emancipation Spanish]Description: 1820 July 30 Emancipation Spanish Summary Corruptive influence To shew, in the detail that would be necessary to a perfectly clear conception, in what precise forms it is that in a mixt monarchy with a representative democracy under it, the poison steals into every vein of the body politic, converting into an instrument of misrule that power which should be and is pretended to be a check upon it, would require more room than can here be spared. One momento however must not be omitted. Of all the modes /shapes/ in which the corruptive influence acts, bribery - direct bribery - is the least pernicious: for this can scarcely have place without a punishable offence by which the giver and the taker of the bribe are each of them put in the power of the other. But by the prospect of a situation in the official establishment for either self or relative, whether in that part of the establishment which has been brought into existence by the dominion in question, or in any other part - neither the expected receiver nor the expected giver will be placed in the power of the other. When you see a man loud in his outcries against corruptive influence in a punishable shape while he is equally loud in his outcries against the only sort of arrangement by which this same pestilential influence can be checked, make sure that it is to the perpetuation and exercise not to the removal of the evil that his real wishes and endeavours are directed.
1
results found.
Page 1
of 1