date

1818 Novr. 24 Official Economy.
1818 Novr. 24

Official Economy.

Ch. Expence minimized

Patriotic Auction.

? Objection - Poor excluded.

1. If by the exclusion thus unavoidably howsoever unintentionally put upon Competitors

whose pecuniry means fall below the proposed Mark, the probability of adequate aptitude

in the shape either of appropriate intellectual aptitude or in that of appropriate

active talent were excluded /to a certain degree diminished/, here indeed would be an

objection the force of which would require to be weighed. But by the supposition no such

diminution has place. For by the supposition pecuniary trustworthiness in the character

of a security of appropriate probity is of the three branches of appropriate probity the

only one for the securing of which any particular provision requires to be made: of the

two other branches respectively no greater measure is required than such as with an

equally well-grounded confidence /assurance/ may be looked for in the one rank in the

scale of affluence as in the other:- in the rank whose station is below the rank in

question as in the rank whose station is above it.
Similar Items
  • Title: [1818 Novr. 24. Official Economy]
    Description: 1818 Novr. 24.

    Official Economy

    Ch. Expence minimized

    Patriotic Auction.

    ? Objection - Poor excluded.

    2. Remain to be considered the interests of individuals separately

    taken, considered in the character of persons capable of entertaining the desire of

    becoming Competitors.

    If the consideration of this interest is to become prevalent, observe

    the practical arrangement the necessity of which is assumed by it and involved in it.

    For the purpose of letting in all individuals without distinction to become

    Competitors for a share in the mass of emolument in question the amount of it must be

    levied by a Tax or mass of taxes: by Taxes the burthen of which must unless an

    acknowledged principle of Taxation be for some unassigned reason departed from be

    imposed in equal proportion upon all individuals alike without distinction on the

    ground of sects or age or any other circumstance.

    But the class of persons to whom upon this supposition the chance of

    benefit would be opened, can never be so extensive as the class of persons on whom on

    this same supposition so many shares in the burthen would be imposed. The result

    would be therefore that for the purpose of affording to the comparatively few a share

    so many shares in a benefit to a given amount a burthen to a correspondent and equal

    amount would be to be imposed on the comparatively many. For example for composing a

    mass of benefit from all participation of which the class of females in a single

    state and the class of non adults would necessarily be included a burthen to an equal

    amount would be imposed - a burthen of which these two classes repectively would be

    subject to their full share.

    Of the proposed arrangement involved in the objection here /thus/

    endeavoured to be answered what was the object or end in view? Answer Equality in the

    distribution of benefits and burthens. But what will be the result? Answer Not

    equality but the reverse.

    Of
  • Title: [1818. Novr. 24. Official Economy]
    Description: 1818. Novr. 24.

    Official Economy

    Ch Expence minimized

    Patriotic auction

    ? Objection - Poor excluded.

    Of the exclusion thus undesignedly applied were peremptory and

    unsurmountable acting as in the case of Hindoo and European feudal Casts upon all

    individuals placed by birth in certain classes, the objection might indeed operate with

    a weight which it has been seen does not belong to it. But the case thus supposed has no

    existence. By whatsoever means acquired, let but a man possess the requisite quantity of

    wealth the bar by which he is excluded is removed. In the very nature of things in so

    far as to the possession of any object the possession of a certain quantity of the

    matter of wealth is necessary all persons not in possession of this necessary quantity

    of the means of purchase, stand excluded from the possession of the subject of purchase.

    But in this case the exclusion is the work of the inexorable nature of things not of any

    unjust or impolitic law: the work of nature not of law. If on the ground of want of

    nobility of birth, or want of conformity to a religion by law established all persons

    thus deficient were excluded by law from the faculty of concluding their repast by pine

    Apples here would be injustice. In point of fact under every European Government with

    the exception of a very few all persons do stand excluded from the faculty of

    participating in so eminently expensive a gratification. But the exclusion being here

    the work not of law but of Nature here is no injustice.
  • Title: [1818 Novr. 24. Official Economy]
    Description: 1818 Novr. 24.

    Official Economy

    Ch. Expence minimized

    ?. Objection - Poor excluded

    ?. Objection to the sale of Official Salaries on Government account,

    Exclusion put upon all but the correspondently affluent - answered.

    To this expedient for minimizing the amount /expence/ of official pay,

    an objection has been heard to be offered: on this plan i.e. an exclusion will be put

    upon all candidates other than those who comparatively and relatively speaking, are in a

    state of affluence.

    Answer - If this objection is to be regarded /acted upon/ as prevalent

    and conclusive, it must be in consideration of one or other of the interests affected by

    the decision /at stake/.

    These interests are 1. The interests of the public in respect of the

    branch in question of the public service whatever it be. 2. The interest of individuals

    considered as capable of entertaining a desire to become Competitors for the masses of

    net advantage in all shapes whatsoever they may be which it may be deemed advisable to

    attach to the respective offices.

    1. As far as concerns the interest of the public taken in the aggregate the question is

    already decided: the difference between the quantity of money and money's worth which

    according to the scheme of frugality in question would be sufficient to be expended on

    the score of pay and the quantity which without the benefit of it would be to be

    expended is so much which in the one case would be saved, in the other case expended in

    Waste unless and in so far as any evil effect can be shown to be produced or good effect

    excluded by the adoption of it.