JB_126_138.xml

Title: [5 June 1810 + '.1. Influence]

Description: 5 June 1810 + '.1.

Influence

Ch.1. Systems more & less popular

'.1. Systems stated

1

12 May 1814  Confront[?] this with a long chapter having a similar title.

Ch /Ch./ {Theories} Systems as to parliamentary influence -

'.1. The two systems, viz. the more and the less popular, explained.

On the subject of influence, considered as applied to the classes of person here in question, two very different theories, {both} /each/ of them possessing a considerable degree of currency, deserve here to be distinguished.

According to one {and that the more popular}, the difference between {due and} that which is undue and {due} /that which is due/ has no reference to quantity. The subjects to which it is considered as {applying} capable of being applied being in both theories and in all theories the same, what the more popular theory maintains is - that in the Member of Parliament, or his constituent electors considered in the character of the principals with reference to the whole body of the people at large, every particle of influence of will on will that can be exercised is undue: and in the case of that which is thus undue, that which is beyond all comparison the most dangerous and most mischievous is that if any which is exercised either by the King himself, or by any person exercising and applying power derived or expected to be derived from the King to that purpose.

This to avoid the inconvenience resulting from the use of impassioned and inflammatory appellations may be termed the more popular theory respecting influence.

125_005.xml

Title: [5 June 1810 Influence Ch. 1]

Description: 5 June 1810

Influence

Ch. 1.

§.2. Influence, when proper

1. When[?] pernicious[?]

continued

2

1. Question[?] for whom. 2. Stage in which < > over will on will.

{Wherever the application of the power of a Military Commander is proper and due, the application of the influence of a military commander can not be other than proper and due: and so, as throughout the whole field of government, public as well as private.}

{In the cases therefore in which considered as applied to the two /several/ situations here in question viz. that of Member of Parliament, and that of Parliamentary Elector, influence is by any person considered as undue, if so it be, its being so neither is nor with propriety can be considered as being owing either to its being influence in contradistinction to ordinary power, or to say being applied to those respective situations.}

Influence then being but a modification of power, the consequence is that in whatever cases the exercise of power is proper, the exercise of influence is proper: and if in the two situations here in question or either of them it should turn out that the exercise of influence is improper, so it is because in those same cases the exercise of power would be improper, and not because the power so exercised is that which comes under the denomination of influence.

125_001.xml

Title: [8 June 1810 Influence analyzed - Ordo]

Description: 8 June 1810

Influence analyzed - Ordo novus propositus

Prob. I

Ch.1.

§.1. Objects of this work

1. What influence proper what undue

2. Where undue, why & in what proportion

§.2. Influence if understood over understanding, in no case undue?

§.3. Use of the word influence in protecting it where undue

§.4. Where mischievous, influence of will on will why mischievous.

Ch.2 King, influence on Members - whether and why undue /mischievous/

§.1. Existence[?] of a sinister interest on the part of the King supposed by the Constitution.

§.2. the existence real and indisputable.

§.3. Share possessed in it by his servants.

Ch.3. Systems in regard to the influence of the Crown stated and compared.

§.1. The two systems explained

§.2. Provisional preference /adoption/ necessary to be given to the more popular.

§.3. More popular - reason for the preference given to it.

In the open mode of voting the influence of will is exercised on the same person by the same person as d o on understandi g d o on understanding being beneficial as well as unavoidable, protects the sinister[?] from […?]

Sole method of decomposing[?] them, secret voting.

H. of Commons (suppose surrounded[?] with a […?] army[?], subject /devote/ to the King & hostile to the House. This not more mischievous than its existing influence.

 7 May 1811

Give the results in the first chapters.

Effective mischievousness of undue influence circumstances on which it depends viz on the ratio, occasional and habitual of the influenced band to the non-influenced: thence in the proportion between attendant and absentee.

For the effective influence of the undue influence of the Crown no actual declaration of will on the part of the King or of any Minister is necessary.

Therefore no degree of probity on the part of the King is (as parliament is now composed) sufficient to prevent the mischiefs of undue influence.

8 May 1811

Part I

Practical results

Part II

Of influence due and undue.

Part III

Mischief of undue Influence undue dependence.

Part IV

Efficient cause of undue dependence - matter of corruption Gratitude &c (including liberty[?] of Non-Attendance.)

Part I Of Influence proper and undue

Part .II. Of Parliamentary Dependence Independence and Corruption.

Part .III. /II/ Of Corruption in the situation /case/ of Members of Parliament

Part .IV. /III/ Of Corruption in the case of a Parliamentary Elector.

{Part .V. Parliamentary Corruption considered in various points of view.}

N.B. A large portion of Necessity in an abridged form be now engrafted into Influence.

Part V. Systems of corruption and incorruption compared.

Part VI. How to combat