1819 Aug. 22

Disfranchisement or

Apology for the Borough-mongers

3

To every man /reformist/ who will give the matter a serious consideration, it must now surely be manifest, that it is not /by no means/ matter of indifference, whether in speaking of the evil and its causes such a word as the word terrorist and terrorism and terrorist, or such words as bribery, corruption, corruptionist borough-mongers and borough-mongering, be /are/ most in use. Where the relation considered is the relation between the Member of Parliament on the one hand and the Monarch and his placeable and displaceable instruments on the other, indeed, the terms such as corruption

corrupters and corruptionists venal men and venality are the only ones that bring to view the true nature of the case. I say the only ones: for in this case in the particular mode of corruption designated by the word bribery, corruption never need, and thence probably, considering the danger it is attended with never does take place But where /in so far as/ the relation considered is no other than the relation between the Member of Parliamenton the one hand and the Parliamentary Elector on the other hand, then it is that the more that is said of terrorism and terrorists, and the less that is said of bribery, or corruption, corrupters and corruptionists of borough-mongering and borough-mongerists, the better. Why? because of {the evil being in two shapes} /two evils existing/ the lesser and the greater of all the exertions employed for the removal of it are bestowed upon /confined to {it is} the lesser in that case even supposing the exertions so[?] far[?] successful, the greater part of the evil will remain unremoved. But if in proportion as the lesser evil is thus removed the greater evil is substituted to it, in this case when all is done that has been endeavoured to be done, the sum of the evil, so far from being lessened will have been encreased