date

15 Jan y 1807 Facienda V. Abolition
15 Jan y 1807

Facienda

V. Abolition of fees

By reward, by hope the spirits are exhilarated /exalted/, the current of ideas quickened, powers of mind as well as body invigorated. By punishment, by fear spirits are deadened /depressed/, current of ideas slackened, powers enfeebled.

Note that though the matter of salary be the matter of reward, yet strictly /properly/ speaking it is not by the force of reward, but by the force of punishment that in the case of salary without fees, the functionary is attached to his duty. The service that salary attaches to in the shape of reward, is not any special service rendered by the functionary in the exercise of his function, but the more general service, performed once for all - the service that consists in taking /charging/ upon him the obligation of rendering the particular service in which the exercise of his function consists /by the rendering of which the functions /several/ are exercised/.

The motive by which the functionary is attached to his functions is of the nature of punishment: fear of discomfort /[...?]/ in whatsoever lesser or greater penalty may be apprehended to be attached in each particular instance to the non-exercise or improper exercise of the function in question - to the violation of the obligations attached to the office.
Similar Items
  • Title: [Jan y 1807 Facienda V. Abolition]
    Description: Jan y 1807

    Facienda

    V. Abolition of fees

    5. Substitution of Salaries to fees

    5. Conversion of fees into Salaries

    5. Abolition of fees or conversion of them into Salaries

     Shall /put[?]/ the mischief of payment in judicature? then go on thus

    If my conception of the matter my Lord be just, the rules of [...?] policy on this subject lie within a narrow compass -

    Particular abuse apart were in not for the abuse which in most cases is so apt to grow out of them, remuneration a given quantity of the matter of reward would be applied /administered/ to most /more/ advantage in the shape of fees than in the shape of salary.

    Why? 1. Because in the shape of fees, you may so connect reward with service, as that some how or other unless the service be performed the reward shall not be received. Whereas when it is administered in the shape of salary the reward is paid whether the service be performed or not performed.

    2. In so far as the goodness of the service of the work in the doing of which the service consists depends upon alacrity, upon the pleasure with which the performance of the work is or is not accomplished fees have a manifest advantage over salary. Reward, does it not sweeten labour? - Yes: but not unless they are served up in the same dish.
  • Title: [15 Jan y 1807 Facienda V. Abolition]
    Description: 15 Jan y 1807

    Facienda

    V. Abolition of fees

    I venture /thus far/ to trouble your Lordship thus far, that it may /it may be seen/ your Lordship may see it is no hastily copied /adopted/ conception no fanatical conceit that is the cause /ground/ of the importance I attach to the utter abolition of fees in every office that has any thing to do with the administration of justice.

    The true and only case, but it is a very extensive one in which salary is preferable to fees, and to such a degree that receipt of fees ought not to be permitted, is - where under the spur of the interest created by the fee it is in the power of the functionary /officer/ to add to the quantity of business done /appearing to be done/ in the execution of the functions /duties/ attached to the office.

    But in this case stands almost every office that has any thing to do with the administration of justice.

    Exception there seems no other than what has place in /is created by/ the business of arrestation. If the officer is paid alike whether the arrest be performed or no, the business being in its own nature attended with hazard as well as uneasiness of various kinds, he will /would/ neither execute it where /were/ a plausible pretence for the non-execution of it could be found.
  • Title: [[clxiv. 264] 1820 Aug. 22 Emancipation]
    Description: [clxiv. 264]

    1820 Aug. 22

    Emancipation Spanish?

    Summary?

    ?.5. Corruptive influence

    Means of reducing

    6. To the occupant the value of a lucrative office of an office with emolument attached to it is as the emolument directly, and as the exertion and time necessary to the exercise of it without reproach, inversely.

    7. Power is of itself so incontestably an object of general desire, that, until it is established that no individual competent to the exercise of the functions of the office will charge himself with them, no emolument ought to be attached to it.

    8. The pleasure attached to the exercise of the functions belonging to an office, is the natural reward appertaining /portion of reward attached by nature/ to that office. Where /To an office, in relation to which/ the natural reward is sufficient, no factitious reward ought to be attached. The Natural reward is received and enjoyed, without any expence at the charge of others: factitious reward can not be received in any shape but at the expence of others.

    To the function exercised by the delivery of those suffrages by which the office of representative of the people in the supreme assembly is filled the reward naturally attached is sufficient. In no instance to the exercise of this function has any factitious reward been ever annexed.

    9. In so far as a liking to the exercise of the function of an office affords presumptive evidence of aptitude in relation to the exercise of those same functions, evidence of such aptitude is afforded by every man who, without factitious reward in any shape is content to charge himself with the obligation attached to it: and if there be two candidates, one of whom is content thus to charge himself gratis, while the other will not unless it has a mass of factitious reward attached to it, and there be no other evidence in favour of either candidate, this presumptive evidence is conclusive.