Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1880-11-13
THE MORALITY OF BRIBERY.
Earnest Discussion Of Electoral Abuses Il
England.

Earnest Discussion of Electoral Abuses IN
England.
London Spectator.
An accomplished historical student
maintains in another column, that the solo
ground that can be alleged for the immor-
ality of bribe-gi and bribe-taking in
elections is the general immortality of
breaking the law. 1t is wrong, he says,
in moral sense, just so far rs smuggling
is wrong, and no farther. There would be
nothing wrong in introducing French wine
into England without paying duty on it,
did not the law require that you should
pay duty on it, and were it not wrong
in itself, at least in free country, to
transgress the law. 1t is just the same,
he thinks, with accepting 4 bribe for your
vote. That is wrong because the law con-
demns it, and :makes stringent enactments
intended to prevent it. But it is wrong
for no other reason. We had better
quote his exact words: "But apart
from the law of tho land-it may
imply gross insensibitity on my
part, but l really do not see how you can
say that buying Or selling votes is immor-
al in itself at all. would not engage in
such traffic for my own part, nor, think.
would encourage it in others but, looked
at by itself, really do not see that it is 4
bit worse than playing whist for penny or
two-penny points" We think that our
correspondent is right that this opinion,
if he really hold it, and does not rather air
it as sort of intellectual crOtchet worth
the trouble Of overthrowing, does imply
an insensibility on his part which may
fairly be described as gross. No wonder
the electors of Sandwich take bribes if a
writer like Mr.. Gardner can think of them
in this way. What kind Of approximation
to immortality there can be in playing
whist for penny or two-penny points, 80
long as the player can fairly afford to
spend all that lie may presumably lose on
the enjoyment of the hour, it is quite past
our discernment to discover. It seems to
us just as legitimate an expenditure on
amusement as spending the same sum.
without any element of chance at all, On
flowers, or ride, Or any other pleasure
the element of chance being, in the for
mer case, part Of the amusement, but not
less legitimate part that the fragrance
of tho flower, Or the stimulus of the
change of place. Nor is the element of
chance in the case of bribery any part
of the consideration. If the briber
could absolutely ensure. by his bribe, tho
vote he buys, he would be committing
just the same immortality as he is
now, when he tries to buy vote, but may,
nevertheless, fail in obtaining what he pays
for. 1t is not tho gambling element in the
matter which affects the moral question at
all. It is tho wish on the part of the briber,
and the willingness on the part of the
bribcc, to load the scales by which the
political convictions of the country are to
be ascertained. Supposing that men of
science were engaged in a great dispute as
tc any point of practical engineering
say, which Of two modes Of constructing
the Tay bride is the safer for the public,
and the question wero at last submitted to
the vote Of the engineers profession. We
may we'll suppose that many Of that pro-
fession would be entirely without an opin-
ion on the subject, that they would not
understand the issue. and would not care
which of the two sides gained the victory.
But what would be the duty Of any such
members of the profession whe did not
feel that they had any right to . voice in
the matter? Would it not be to abstain
from voting until they had gained some
real opinion on the merits? Could any
thing be baser than to swell the votes on
either side, by voting for the candidate
who paid them most? Could anything be
more disgraceful than for tho honest ad-
vocates Of one side-having agreed to the
arbitration by vote-to swell the number
of their own side by purchasing votes which
would represent, of course, no scientific
judgment at all. Would it not be perfectly
plain that if another train of victims plung-
ed into the Tay in consequence Of a verdict
obtained by such means, every man who had
paid for vote, and every man who had
given his vote for payment would be NOR
ally guilty of that act of wholesale rnur-
der? Now, precisely the same may be
said of b,ibsrs and bribees at an election.
If there be any sane men who hold, with
Mr. Ruskin, that tho contest between par
ties in an English election is nothing more
than competition between rival rat
catchers, all we can say is that it is the
plain duty of those men not to vote. The
tacit assumption of an election in every
parliamentary constitution-the tacit as
sumption Of both sides alike-is that the
nation is to decide for itself whom it trusts
and whom it distrusts. Every vote given
in an election is given as immorally as the
votes of engineers on an engineering qres-
tion delivered not on scientific, but on
wholly selfish grounds, if it is given for
any other reason than because the voter
feels more political trust in the candidate
or party for whom he votes than he feels
in the canpidate Or party against whom he
votes. And it is almost wasting words to
point out that the result may easily be of
infinitely greater moment even to human
life to say nothing of human honor and
the right or wrong judg-