REMUNERATION---WHERE HURTFUL.A reward is mischievous when its tendency is to produce offences, or to give birth to noxious dispositions.
To offer a reward to an individual as an inducement to him to commit an act prohibited by law, is to attempt to suborn him:
the offence may be called subornation.Upon the present occasion, this illegal subornation is not the subject of consideration.the rewards of which we are about to speak, have a corruptive tendency, but do not possess the character of crimes; they are authorized by custom, sanctioned by the law, and given and received without disguise, without criminal intention:
the evil is done with a pure conscience, and often with the public approbation.
They are the result of erroneous conceptions, the effects of universal prejudice, or long-established habit , which, as Montaigne says, blunts the acuteness of the judgment.
The present is one of those extremely delicate topics, in respect of which it may be more prudent to put the reader in the path of truth, and leave him to travel by himself in quest of discoveries, than going through the subject in detail, to wound established opinions, or interfere with individual interests.Without restricting myself to any precise order, I shall therefore exhibit some few examples in which the mischievous tendency is too palpable to admit of denial, and I shall being with an incontrovertible maxim, which will furnish the criterion of which we are upon the present occasion in search for distinguishing good from evil:---``Upon all occasions avoid bestowing anything in the shape of reward, which may tend to interfere with the performance of duty.''
According to this rule, a judge ought not to find himself interested in the prolongation of law proceedings---the minister of state in the promotion of wars---the superintendent in promoting expense---the moral preceptor in setting an example of insincerity---the man of letters in maintaining mischievous prejudices at the expense of truth.The more narrowly we scrutinize into the sources of public evils, the more thoroughly shall we be convinced that they ought to be attributed to the neglect of this fundamental rule.
In support of this maxim, it is not necessary to ascribe to men in general all extraordinary proclivity towards corruption:
ordinary prudence and probity are sufficient to enable a mun to resist temptations to crimes, or to lend him to abstain from whatever is reputed dishonourable; but it requires somewhat more than ordinary honesty and prudence to be proof against the seductions of an interest that acts with continual energy, and whose temptations are not opposed either by the fear of legal punishment, or the condemnation of public opinion: to yield to such temptations, it is only necessary for him to follow in the beaten track, in which be will be cheered by the presence of a multitude of fellow-travellers, and encouraged by the example of his superiors.To resist these seductions, he must expose himself to the imputation of singularity---he must proclaim that he is better than others---he must condemn his colleagues and predecessors, and be bold enough to make an exhibition of his probity.Such magnanimity is not altogether unexampled, but we must not reckon upon prodigies.There are even some cases in which, by its secresy, this seductive interest is so much the more mischievous: it operates like a concealed magnet, and produces errors in the moral conduct against which there has been no previous warning.We have said that the legislator ought to endeavour to combine interest with duty; for a still stronger reason ought he to avoid as much as possible everything that yields to the public functionary a certain or a casual, a known or an unknown profit, resulting from the omission or violation of his duties: we now proceed to give a few examples.
In England, the superior judges, beside their ample salaries, which it would be improper to grudge them, receive certain fees which it is impossible not to grudge them; since it is from this source alone that they can generally be considered liable to corruption, and that so much the more easily, since they may be subject to its influence without themselves perceiving it.These fees are multiplied in proportion to the incidents of procedure, the multiplication of which incidents proportionably increases the expense and delay of obtaining justice.In one case, a judge receives nearly £4 for tying, for six months or a year, the hands of justice; and this in one of those cases in which indolence adds her seductions to those of avarice, and the whole is effected in the presence of no other witnesses than such as are urged onward by a still stronger interest to aggravate the abuse.
Another example from among a thousand.Under the Lord Chancellor, there are twelve subordinate judges called Masters in Chancery.When an account is to be taken before them, the following is the mode of procedure: The attorneys on the one side and the other ought to appear before the master, either alone, or in company with counsel, as may be convenient.First summons; nobody appears: second summons; nobody appears: at length, third summons; the parties appear, and the matter is put into train.Care, however, has been taken to allow only half an hour or an hour to each set of suitors.The parties are not always punctual:
the matter is begun, the clock strikes, and then the matter is dismissed.
At the following hearing it is necessary to begin again.All this is matter of etiquette.At each summons, the fees to the judges and the counsel are renewed.All the world must live.Extortion, it is said, is to be banished from the dwellings of finance.At some future day, perhaps, it will not be found a fitting guest for the Temple of Justice---it will be deemed advisable to chase it thence.
