PROCEDURE AS TO REWARDS.The province of reward is the last asylum of arbitrary power.In the early stages of society, punishments, pardons,and rewards, were equally lavished without measure and without necessity.The infliction of punishment has already in a measure been subject to regulation: at some future time rules will be laid down for the granting of pardons; and last of all, for the bestowment of rewards.If punishment ought not to be inflicted with out formal proof of the commission of crime, neither ought reward to be conferred without equally formal proof of desert.
It may be allowed, that in point of importance, the difference between the two cases is great; that punishment inflicted without trial excites universal alarm, whilst reward conferred without desert excites no such feelings.But these considerations only prove that the advantage of formal procedure in the distribution of reward is limited to the prevention of prodigality, and of the other abuses by which the value of reward is diminished.
At Rome, if certain travellers may be believed, it is the custom, when a saint is about to be canonized, to allow an advocate, who in familiar language is called the advocate of the devil , to plead against his admission.If this advocate had always been faithful to his client, the calender might not have been so full as at present.Be this as it may, the idea itself it excellent, and might advantageously be borrowed by politics from religion.L'Italico valor non è ancor morto : there are yet some lessons to be learned in the capital of the world.
It is reported of Peter the Great, that when he condescended to pass through every gradation of military rank, from the lowest to the highest in his empire, he took no step without producing regular certificates of his qualifications.We may be allowed to suppose that even with inferior recommendations to those produced by the great prince, he could have succeeded.There was no advocate for the devil to contest the point, and even had there been one his fidelity would have been doubtful: but had the qualifications of the Czar been as imperfect as, according to the history, they were complete, his submitting to produce them would have offered a noble lesson.
In England when a dormant peerage is claimed by any individual, the attorney-general is constituted the advocate for the devil, and charged to examine into and produce everything which can invalidate his title.Wherefore is he not thus employed when it is proposed to create new peers? Why should he not be allowed to urge everything which can be said against the measure? Is it feared that he would be too often successful?
In the distribution of rewards, were it always necessary publicly to assign the reason for their bestowment, a restraint would be imposed upon princes and their ministers, to which they are unwilling to submit.There formerly existed in Sweden a custom, or positive law, obliging the king to insert in the patent conferring a pension or title the reason for the grant.In 1774, this custom was abolished by an express law inserted in the Gazette of that court, declaring that the individuals honoured by the bounty of the king should be idelity would have been doubtful: but had the qualifications of the Czar been as imperfect as, according to the history, they were complete, his submitting to produce them would have offered a noble lesson.
In England, the remuneratory branch of arbitrary power has begun to be pruned.Except in particular cases, the king is not allowed to grant a pension exceeding £300 per annum, without the consent of parliament.Since the passing of the act containing this restriction, the candidates for pensions have been but few.
