date

[clxiv. 118] 1820 June 28 Emancipation
[clxiv. 118]

1820 June 28

Emancipation Spanish

?.8 Corruptive influence

Oh but (say the advocates of masked despotism) the Chief functionary ought not to be - can not be - ought not to be - removable: Remove him - make but the most distant preparation towards removing /the removal of/ him - think what a convulsion! Then you have anarchy civil war, and so forth.

Can not be? O yes, it is just possible: for it was once done. But what a mass of misery had first been produced before it could be done. But, they are passed, those days: gone never to return. Removed now? No; to be sure, that he can not be: and nor would there be any use in his being removed, were any other to take his place: and, this being settled /established/, the ought not to be is not worth enquiring into.

But why is it that /what is the cause why/ he can not be removed? Exactly /But if in this removal there is any such impossibility, what is the cause of it? This and no other/ it is because of the enormous weight of the power that he is suffered to have: Go about removing him you might as well might you go about removing upon wheels the palace in which he is enshrined.

But, in the nature of the case in the general nature of government - is there any thing to prevent the removal of the Chief functionary? Look to America! Look to the Anglo-American United States! Behold there your answer: it has been speaking to you these /above/ forty years, and the louder it has been speaking to you, the more vigorous your exertions in stopping your ears, to every such sound.
Similar Items
  • Title: [[clxiv. 119] 1820 June 28 Emancipation]
    Description: [clxiv. 119]

    1820 June 28

    Emancipation Spanish

    ?.8. Corruptive influence

    So /Just so is it/ again as to exposure to punishment. The Chief functionary - can he be punished? Still further is he from being exposed to punishment than from being exposed to removal - And if he were punished /subjected to punishment/ /made to suffer punishment/ where would be the use of it? Punishment short of death would but produce exasperation without remedy. Punishment by death would produce still /the very/ strongest exasperation, would produce proportionable sympathy for the sufferer, proportionable antipathy towards the authors of the suffering, the next of kin /heir/, how insignificant or worthless or insignificant so ever would be the object /heir to the sympathy/, be seated in the place of the sufferer, and with encreased main /encrease of strength/ tread in his steps, play over again the same part.

    By the death of Charles the first, what did the nation get? Answer Charles the second, and James the second.

    In /Not that in/ the nature of the case, in the general nature of government - is there any thing to prevent the exposure of the Chief functionary to punishment? No: nothing: unless /except/ it be where exposure to removal has place, and the misdoer is not /has not been/ too strong to be removed, the needlessness of it.

    Look back here too look back to the case of the late John Adams President first of Congress; and thereby of the Anglo-American United States. He erred; he erred to the prejudice of the liberty of the Press: that without which all other liberties put together are nothing worth. He erred, and he vanished. What need was there of his being punished? What use could there have been in his being so. He returned to plant his cabbages. For private worth, for public probity, he died respected, as he had lived.
  • Title: [[clxiv. 116] 1820 June 25 Emancipation]
    Description: [clxiv. 116]

    1820 June 25

    Emancipation Spanish

    ?.8. Corruptive influence

    5. Mode of operation

    There are two arrangements, by each of which, restraint may be put upon the power of a functionary or set of functionaries - upon a power, which, but for such restraint would be absolute and despotic: the one is exposure to punishment in case of a misuse of the power appertaining to the situation; the other is - liability to be removed /exposure to removal/ out of it. Of these two arrangements, exposure to punishment may perhaps be necessary to compleat the security, but of itself it is altogether inadequate, and on the supposition that either can suffice without the other may with the least prejudice /inconvenience/ be dispensed with. Liability to be removed /exposure to removal/ is the most obvious, the most simple, the most immediately efficient, the most plainly /manifestly/ apposite remedy. One case however is not less manifest /obvious/ in which it would manifestly be imperfect and inadequate: this is where a functionary who by /according to/ law is exposed to removal refuses to submitt to it.

    According to this so compleatly /undeniably/ glorious, though so far from matchless Constitution of ours - functionaries or sets of functionaries of the three sections between /amongst/ which the supreme operative power of the government - the one the Monarch is exposed neither to punishment nor to removal: the Lords /Members of the Lords House/, so long as they /the majority of the body/ act together as little exposed to either: the Members of the Commons House, in that same case as compleatly exempt from punishment, and that not only in effect, but in form likewise, enjoying avowedly an equal impunity: to removal, at the hands of the people, whose removable Agents they profess themselves to be with one breath while they deny it with the next in effect as little exposed as the Lords.
  • Title: [1818 Aug. 26. Things as they are or]
    Description: 1818 Aug. 26.

    Things as they are or First lines &c.

    §.4. Instruments in Mixt Monarchy - Corruption

    14

    7

    The burthen, corresponding to the quantity of corruptive money without appendages /et cæteras/ as above, which is exacted for this purpose is a burthen which in this impure Monarchy is so much added to the list of those burthens which are as above common to this impure and those pure Monarchies. True this, and undeniable. But though this is literally true, yet not so would be the inference if it were inferred that supposing this burthen removed the people would from such[?] removal derive any ultimate relief. If the standing army remained without encrease, yes. But the standing army would not remain without encrease. In these islands as on the continent, under the new impure /this/ Monarchy as under the existing pure ones, it would receive encrease to a degree correspondent to the utmost capacity of endurance on the part of the people. What the machine called a doll is to a child, the machine called a soldier is to a Monarch: when it is not employed in cutting throats /as an instrument of murder/, it is /serves him for/ a plaything, taken one by one, he amuses himself with dressing them /they are dressed and undressed/: put together, they form a machine indefinitely large and complex, by which figures upon /after/ /ever variable/ figures are described, and explosions, louder and louder explosions […?].