20 Aug 1809

Parl y Reform

Corruption

'.1. Distinctions

1

1

1 o

 Oct. 12. 1809. Write this again, treating of Influence Corruption & Bribery together - and beginning with the ramifications of Influence - which include the other two

Ch. < > Of {Influence Bribery and} Parliamentary Corruption.

'.1. Divisions and Distinctions and Divisions.

On the subject /Under the head/ of parliamentary corruption subordinate [...?] /objects/ fall /come/ to be considered: - 1. the situations liable to give occasion to the obnoxious practice thus denominated: 2. the parts borne in it by different persons on every occasion in which it has place. 3. {the nature of} the matter of corruption, being the matter by the application of which the effect designated by the word corruption is produced. 4. the effect or tendency of the practice in the different situations in which on the different occasions on which it is liable to have place; and this as well on the welfare of the community in general as on the moral character or rather disposition of the persons concerned in the character of parties. 5. The difference between corruption at large, and corruption in that particular shape in which it has been distinguished by the name of bribery.

There are three situations, three very different situations in regard to which the effects of corruption require to be considered: 1. that of the Member of /Representative in/ Parliament considered as liable to be corrupted by the Minister /servants /adviser/ of the Crown/: 2. that of the same person in his character of candidate, considered as liable to give into the offence / practice/ of corrupting or endeavouring to corrupt his Electors: 3. and that of the Elector himself, considered as liable to be so corrupted.

In all /each of/ these several cases the same term corruption is employed: but wide indeed is /are/ the difference/s/ between the acts /practices/ thus characterized /designated/ /so generally designated/ by the same name.

The difference is matter of prime importance: because corresponding to and dependent on the difference as between these mal- /obnoxious/ practices will be the quality of the means which it will be proper and the quantity which it will be worth while to expend /employ/ in the endeavoured to suppress them.

{In this view let us make the comparison of each to each considered in two points of view: viz. 1. in respect of the /species & degree of the/ mischief to the community: 2. in respect of the indications they afford concerning /respecting/ the dispositions concerning the degree of depravation in the moral /mental/ frame of the individual transgressor.}