FROM THURSDAY APRIL 19, TO THURSDAY APRIL 26, 1711.

_Indignum est in ed civitate, quae legibus continetur, discedi a

legibus._[2]

I[3] have been often considering how it comes to pass, that the dexterity

of mankind in evil, should always outgrow, not only the prudence and

caution of private persons, but the continual expedients of the wisest

laws contrived to prevent it. I cannot imagine a knave to possess a

greater share of natural wit or genius, than an honest man. I have known

very notable sharpers at play, who upon all other occasions, were as

great dunces, as human shape can well allow; and I believe, the same

might be observed among the other knots of thieves and pickpockets, about

this town. The proposition however is certainly true, and to be confirmed

by an hundred instances. A scrivener, an attorney, a stock-jobber, and

many other retailers of fraud, shall not only be able to overreach

others, much wiser than themselves, but find out new inventions, to elude

the force of any law made against them. I suppose, the reason of this

may be, that as the aggressor is said to have generally the advantage of

the defender; so the makers of the law, which is to defend our rights,

have usually not so much industry or vigour, as those whose interest

leads them to attack it. Besides, it rarely happens that men are rewarded

by the public for their justice and virtue; neither do those who act upon

such principles, expect any recompense till the next world: whereas

fraud, where it succeeds, gives present pay; and this is allowed the

greatest spur imaginable both to labour and invention. When a law is made

to stop some growing evil, the wits of those, whose interest it is to

break it with secrecy or impunity, are immediately at work; and even

among those who pretend to fairer characters, many would gladly find

means to avoid, what they would not be thought to violate. They desire to

reap the advantage, if possible, without the shame, or at least, without

the danger. This art is what I take that dexterous race of men, sprung

up soon after the Revolution, to have studied with great application ever

since, and to have arrived at great perfection in it. According to the

doctrine of some Romish casuists, they have found out _quam propè ad

peccatum sine peccato possint accedere_.[3] They can tell how to go

within an inch of an impeachment, and yet come back untouched. They know

what degree of corruption will just forfeit an employment, and whether

the bribe you receive be sufficient to set you right, and put something

in your pocket besides. How much to a penny, you may safely cheat the

Qu[ee]n, whether forty, fifty or sixty _per cent._ according to the

station you are in, and the dispositions of the persons in office, below

and above you. They have computed the price you may securely take or give

for a place, or what part of the salary you ought to reserve. They can

discreetly distribute five hundred pounds in a small borough, without

any danger from the statutes, against bribing elections. They can manage

a bargain for an office, by a third, fourth or fifth hand, so that you

shall not know whom to accuse; and win a thousand guineas at play, in

spite of the dice, and send away the loser satisfied: They can pass the

most exorbitant accounts, overpay the creditor with half his demands, and

sink the rest.

It would be endless to relate, or rather indeed impossible to discover,

the several arts which curious men have found out to enrich themselves,

by defrauding the public, in defiance of the law. The military men, both

by sea and land, have equally cultivated this most useful science:

neither hath it been altogether neglected by the other sex; of which, on

the contrary, I could produce an instance, that would make ours blush to

be so far outdone.

Besides, to confess the truth, our laws themselves are extremely

defective in many articles, which I take to be one ill effect of our best

possession, liberty. Some years ago, the ambassador of a great prince was

arrested,[4] and outrages committed on his person in our streets, without

any possibility of redress from Westminster-Hall, or the prerogative of

the sovereign; and the legislature was forced to provide a remedy against

the like evils in times to come. A commissioner of the stamped paper[5]

was lately discovered to have notoriously cheated the public of great

sums for many years, by counterfeiting the stamps, which the law had made

capital. But the aggravation of his crime, proved to be the cause that

saved his life; and that additional heightening circumstance of betraying

his trust, was found to be a legal defence. I am assured, that the

notorious cheat of the brewers at Portsmouth,[6] detected about two

months ago in Parliament, cannot by any law now in force, be punished in

any degree, equal to the guilt and infamy of it. Nay, what is almost

incredible, had Guiscard survived his detestable attempt upon Mr.

Harley's person, all the inflaming circumstances of the fact, would not

have sufficed, in the opinion of many lawyers, to have punished him with

death;[7] and the public must have lain under this dilemma, either to

condemn him by a law, _ex post facto_ (which would have been of dangerous

consequence, and form an ignominious precedent) or undergo the

mortification to see the greatest villain upon earth escape unpunished,

to the infinite triumph and delight of Popery and faction. But even this

is not to be wondered at, when we consider, that of all the insolences

offered to the Qu[een] since the Act of Indemnity, (at least, that ever

came to my ears) I can hardly instance above two or three, which, by the

letter of the law could amount to high treason.

From these defects in our laws, and the want of some discretionary power

safely lodged, to exert upon emergencies; as well as from the great

acquirements of able men, to elude the penalties of those laws they

break, it is no wonder, the injuries done to the public, are so seldom

redressed. But besides, no individual suffers, by any wrong he does to

the commonwealth, in proportion to the advantage he gains by doing it.

There are seven or eight millions who contribute to the loss, while the

whole gain is sunk among a few. The damage suffered by the public, is not

so immediately or heavily felt by particular persons, and the zeal of

prosecution is apt to drop and be lost among numbers.

But imagine a set of politicians for many years at the head of affairs,

the game visibly their own, and by consequence acting with great

security: may not these be sometimes tempted to forget their caution, by

length of time, by excess of avarice and ambition, by the insolence or

violence of their nature, or perhaps by a mere contempt for their

adversaries? May not such motives as these, put them often upon actions

directly against the law, such as no evasions can be found for, and which

will lay them fully open to the vengeance of a prevailing interest,

whenever they are out of power? It is answered in the affirmative. And

here we cannot refuse the late m[inistr]y their due praises, who

foreseeing a storm, provided for their own safety, by two admirable

expedients, by which, with great prudence, they have escaped the

punishments due to pernicious counsels and corrupt management. The first,

was to procure, under pretences hardly specious, a general Act of

Indemnity,[8] which cuts off all impeachments. The second, was yet more

refined: suppose, for instance, a counsel is to be pursued, which is

necessary to carry on the dangerous designs of a prevailing party, to

preserve them in power, to gratify the immeasurable appetites of a few

leaders, civil and military, though by hazarding the ruin of the whole

nation: this counsel, desperate in itself, unprecedented in the nature of

it, they procure a majority to form into an address,[9] which makes it

look like the sense of the nation. Under that shelter they carry on their

work, and lie secure against after-reckonings.

I must be so free to tell my meaning in this, that among other things, I

understand it of the address made to the Qu[een] about three years ago,

to desire that her M[ajest]y would not consent to a peace, without the

entire restitution of Sp[ai]n.[10] A proceeding, which to people abroad,

must look like the highest strain of temerity, folly, and gasconade. But

we at home, who allow the promoters of that advice to be no fools, can

easily comprehend the depth and mystery of it. They were assured by this

means, to pin down the war upon us, consequently to increase their own

power and wealth, and multiply difficulties on the Qu[een] and kingdom,

till they had fixed their party too firmly to be shaken, whenever they

should find themselves disposed to reverse their address, and give us

leave to wish for a peace.

If any man entertains a more favourable opinion of this monstrous step in

politics; I would ask him what we must do, in case we find it impossible

to recover Spain? Those among the Whigs who believe a God, will confess,

that the events of war lie in His hands; and the rest of them, who

acknowledge no such power, will allow, that Fortune hath too great a

share in the good or ill success of military actions, to let a wise man

reason upon them, as if they were entirely in his power. If Providence

shall think fit to refuse success to our arms, with how ill a grace, with

what shame and confusion, shall we be obliged to recant that precipitate

address, unless the world will be so charitable to consider, that

parliaments among us, differ as much as princes, and that by the fatal

conjunction of many unhappy circumstances, it is very possible for our

island to be represented sometimes by those who have the least

pretensions to it. So little truth or justice there is in what some

pretend to advance, that the actions of former senates, ought always to

be treated with respect by the latter; that those assemblies are all

equally venerable, and no one to be preferred before another: by which

argument, the Parliament that began the rebellion against King Charles

the First, voted his trial, and appointed his murderers, ought to be

remembered with respect.

But to return from this digression; it is very plain, that considering

the defectiveness of our laws, the variety of cases, the weakness of the

prerogative, the power or the cunning of ill-designing men, it is

possible, that many great abuses may be visibly committed, which cannot

be legally punished: especially if we add to this, that some enquiries

might probably involve those, whom upon other accounts, it is not

thought convenient to disturb. Therefore, it is very false reasoning,

especially in the management of public affairs, to argue that men are

innocent, because the law hath not pronounced them guilty.

I am apt to think, it was to supply such defects as these, that satire

was first introduced into the world; whereby those whom neither religion,

nor natural virtue, nor fear of punishment, were able to keep within the

bounds of their duty, might be withheld by the shame of having their

crimes exposed to open view in the strongest colours, and themselves

rendered odious to mankind. Perhaps all this may be little regarded by

such hardened and abandoned natures as I have to deal with; but, next to

taming or binding a savage animal, the best service you can do the

neighbourhood, is to give them warning, either to arm themselves, or not

come in its way.

Could I have hoped for any signs of remorse from the leaders of that

faction, I should very gladly have changed my style, and forgot or passed

by their million of enormities. But they are every day more fond of

discovering their impotent zeal and malice: witness their conduct in the

city about a fortnight ago,[11] which had no other end imaginable, beside

that of perplexing our affairs, and endeavouring to make things

desperate, that themselves may be thought necessary. While they continue

in this frantic mood, I shall not forbear to treat them as they deserve;

that is to say, as the inveterate, irreconcilable enemies to our country

and its constitution.

[Footnote 1: No. 38 in the reprint. [T.S.]]

[Footnote 2: "It is a shameful thing in a state which is governed by

laws, that there should be any departure from them." [T.S.]]

[Footnote 3: This paper called forth a reply which was printed in two

forms, one with the title: "A Few Words upon the Examiner's Scandalous

Peace" (London, 1711), and the other, "Reflections upon the

Examiner's Scandalous Peace" (London: A. Baldwin, 1711). A careful

comparison of these pamphlets shows that the text corresponds

page for page. The author commences: "Though 'The Examiner' be certainly

the most trifling, scurrilous, and malicious writer that ever appeared,

yet, in spite of all his gross untruths and absurd notions, by assuming

to himself an air of authority, and speaking in the person of one

employed by the ministry, he sometimes gives a kind of weight to what he

says, so as to make impressions of terror upon honest minds." Then, after

quoting several of the Queen's Speeches to Parliament, and the Addresses

in reply, he observes: "The 'Examiner' is resolved to continue so

faithful to his principal quality of speaking untruths, that he has

industriously taken care not to recite truly the very Address he makes it

his business to rail at;" and he points out that it was not the

"restitution of Spain," but the restoration of the Spanish Monarchy to

the House of Austria that was desired. [T.S.]]

[Footnote 3: "How near to sin they can go without actually sinning."

[T.S.]]

[Footnote 4: The Muscovite Ambassador (A.A. Matveof) was arrested and

taken out of his coach by violence. A Bill was brought into the House

of Commons "for preserving the Privileges of Ambassadors," February

7th, 1708/9, and obtained the Royal Assent, April 21st, 1709 (7 Ann.

c. 12).

Matveof, it seemed, was arrested by his creditors, who feared that,

since he had taken leave at Court, they would never be paid. Peter

the Great was angry at the indignity thus offered his representative,

and was only unwillingly pacified by the above Act. [T.S.]]

[Footnote 5: Richard Dyet, J.P., "is discovered to have counterfeited

stamped paper, in which he was a commissioner; and, with his accomplices,

has cheated the Queen of £100,000" (Swift's "Journal to Stella," October

3rd, 1710, vol. ii., p. 20 of present edition). He was tried for felony

at the Old Bailey, January 13th, 1710/1, and was acquitted, because his

offence was only a breach of trust. He was, however, re-committed

for trial on the charge of misdemeanour. [T.S.]]

[Footnote 6: "Some very considerable abuses," the chancellor of the

exchequer informed the House of Commons on January 3rd, 1710/1, "have

been discovered in the victualling." It appears that the seamen in the

navy were allowed seven pints of beer per day, during the time they were

on board. In port, of course the sailors were permitted to go ashore, but

the allowance was still charged to the ship's account; and became a

perquisite of the purser. It often happened that the contractors did not

send in the full amount of beer paid for, but gave the purser money in

exchange for the difference. The scandal was brought to the attention

of the House as stated, and a committee was appointed to inquire into

the abuse. On February 15th the House considered the committee's report,

and it was found that Thomas Ridge, Member for Portsmouth, contracted to

supply 5,513 tons of beer, and had delivered only 3,213. Several other

brewers of Portsmouth had been guilty of the same fraud. Mr. Ridge was

expelled the House the same day. [T.S.]]

[Footnote 7: See Swift's "Journal," quoted in notes to No. 33, _ante_, p.

214. [T.S.]]

[Footnote 8: This Act was passed in 1708. See No. 18, _ante_, and note,

p. 105. [T.S.]]

[Footnote 9: The Address from both Houses, presented to the Queen,

February 18th, 1709/10, prayed that she "would be pleased to order the

Duke of Marlborough's immediate departure for Holland, where his presence

will be equally necessary, to assist at the negotiations of peace, and to

hasten the preparations for an early campaign," etc. [T.S.]]

[Footnote 10: The Address of both Houses to the Queen, presented on

December 23rd, 1707, urged: "That nothing could restore a just balance of

power in Europe, but the reducing the whole Spanish monarchy to the

obedience of the House of Austria; and ... That no peace can be

honourable or safe, for your Majesty or your allies, if Spain, the West

Indies, or any part of the Spanish Monarchy, be suffered to remain under

the power of the House of Bourbon." The resolutions as carried in the

House of Lords on December 19th did not include the words "or any part of

the Spanish Monarchy"; these words were introduced on a motion by Somers

who was in the chair when the Select Committee met on December 20th to

embody the resolutions in proper form. The altered resolution was quickly

hurried through the Lords and agreed to by the Commons, and the Address

as amended was presented to the Queen. By this bold move Somers prolonged

the war indefinitely. See also note at the commencement of this number.

[T.S.]]

[Footnote 11: This refers to the election of the governor and directors

of the Bank of England on April 12th and 13th. All the Whig candidates

were returned, and Sir H. Furnese was on the same day chosen Alderman for

Bridge Within. See also No. 41, _post_, p. 267, [T.S.]]

The Prose Works of Jonathan Swift, D.D. — Volume 09 Contributions to The Tatler, The Examiner, The Spectator, and The Intelligencer · 第 105 / 133 题