or no disadvantage during a state of war provided the army can be
relied upon thoroughly. Further the poet warns against agitation for
the reform of internal abuses lest it might weaken the country in the
presence of a foreign foe. Doubtless both points are well taken so
far as an immediate emergency is concerned. If war is not imminent,
however, that government would certainly be making the best preparation
against future trouble which sought to establish the highest standard
of honesty in both its civil and military services. Thus the Freiherr
vom Stein immeasurably strengthened Prussia for the final conflict with
Napoleon by reforming the rotten boroughs of his country and appealing
on the basis of this reform to the patriotism of the liberal classes of
his fellow citizens. Moreover there would seem to be little real danger
of urging internal reforms so violently during periods of warfare
as to cripple military strength. Of course if a government has been
reduced to the last extremity of unpopularity by past mismanagement,
revolutionists might take advantage of a declaration of war to tear it
to pieces, hailing foreign troops as allies rather than opponents. In
the more advanced countries of the modern world, however, the spirit
of nationality and patriotism is so highly developed that internal
reforms are instantly relegated to the background at the least threat
of foreign embroilment. To such peoples the poet’s adjuration to
“Let your reforms for a moment go”
is hardly needed.
Definite instances of corruption affecting certain spheres or
departments of government particularly may readily be suggested. There
is much that is significant in the corruption of the judicial officials
of China. Ultimately they became so rapacious that merchants feared
to come before them, preferring to leave commercial differences to be
settled by the arbitration of officers of guilds of which the business
men themselves were members. Thus corruption of one social organ may
lead to its atrophy and the corresponding strengthening of another
social organ which takes over the functions of the former. Assuming
that the function is as well performed in the second case, the internal
life of the whole structure in which the transition takes place may be
very little affected except while the change is going on. If, however,
the state is continually weakened by such transfers while at the same
time the functions remaining to it become rotten with corruption it may
finally reach the condition of abject defencelessness which China has
shown in its relations with other nations.
Another very curious case of corruption limited to certain spheres of
government is furnished by Japan. In his authoritative work on that
country,[36] Captain Brinkley expresses the opinion that the higher
and lower official classes are free from corruption while the middle
grade is more or less given over to it. The passage containing this
statement is so germane to the present discussion that it may be quoted
in full:
“There is an old and still undecided controversy among foreign
observers as to bribery in Japan. Many Japanese romancists introduce
the _douceur_ in every drama of life, and historical annals show that
from the seventeenth century downward Japanese rulers legislated
against bribery with a degree of strenuous persistence which seems
to imply conviction of its prevalence. Not only were recipients of
bribes severely punished, but informers also received twice the amount
in question. Japanese social relations, too, are maintained largely
by the giving and taking of presents. Visits to make or renew an
acquaintance are always accompanied by gifts; the four seasons of the
year are similarly marked; even deaths call for a contribution to
funeral expenses; nearly all services are ‘recognised,’ and guests
carry back from their entertainer’s house a box of confectionery
or other edibles in order that the households may not be entirely
excluded from the feast. The uses of such a system evidently verge
constantly on abuses, and prepare the observer to find that if the
normal intercourse of life sanctions these material aids, abnormal
occasions are likely to demand them in much greater profusion. All
evidence thus far obtained goes to prove that Japanese officials of
the highest and lowest classes are incorruptible, but that the middle
ranks are unsound. A Japanese police constable will never take a bribe
nor a Japanese railway _employé a pour boire_, and from Ministers of
State to chiefs of departmental bureaux there is virtual freedom from
corruption. But for the rest nothing can be claimed, and to the case
of tradespeople, inferior agents, foremen of works, contractors, and
so on, the Japanese proverb may probably be applied that ‘even hell’s
penalties are a matter of money.’”
A third illustration of the uneven distribution of corruption
throughout a political structure may be found in our own case. In the
United States, as is well known, the general opinion of the honesty
and efficiency of the federal government is extremely high; state
government enjoys considerably less repute; and municipal government
is pretty commonly and indiscriminately condemned. Even in the case
of the latter, however, it is worth while to observe that in some
cities otherwise considered almost hopelessly bad, certain departments,
notably public schools and fire protection, are recognised as being
managed on a much higher plane than other branches of the municipal
service. In such cases public recognition of the importance of the
departments concerned has led to an insistence on efficiency and
honesty that has proven effective. The conclusion would seem to be well
founded, therefore, that a proper recognition by our city population
of the vital importance of other branches of the service, such as
sanitation, refuse disposal, water supply, building and housing
inspection, letting of contracts, and so on, would go far toward
bringing about much needed improvements.
It would also appear that corruption may be omnipresent and yet not
extremely harmful because of the moderation of its demands. A practical
politician once remarked that “the people will never kick on a ten
per cent rake off.” It is quite possible that the effort to wipe out
so modest a tribute by a reform agitation opposed to the principle of
the thing might cost more in effort or even in campaign expenses than
would be represented by the saving to the municipal treasury or public.
Obviously, however, the advisability of an effort for the establishment
of honest government is not to be calculated in financial values only.
The moral effect of a corrupt exaction of ten per cent which no one
thinks it worth while to attack may be worse than the moral effect
of a fifty per cent exaction which is vigorously condemned. A purely
Machiavellian machine leader may also discern a degree of danger
lurking in a government ten per cent corrupt due to the very fact that
the electorate accepts it with quiescence. Under such conditions it
is difficult to convince the more greedy minor politicians that while
they can get ten per cent without a murmur they could not take twenty
or even fifteen per cent without serious trouble. The great expenses
of political management which the leaders are called upon to meet must
also incline them at times to exactions beyond the verge of prudence.
From the point of view of an organisation politician, therefore, the
determination of the limits within which corruption seems safe is a
serious and ever present problem. Certain features of the situation
may be noted as exerting an influence in favour of a moderate policy.
One of these is the contractual nature of many corrupt practices that
are alleged to be common. For example, franchises sought by dishonest
means usually possess a value which is pretty exactly known to the
intending purchasers. The amount which they are actually willing to
pay may be determined only after close bargaining and the allowance of
a large discount owing to the danger inseparable from this method of
acquisition. Immunity to carry on businesses under the ban of the law
is subject to the same rule.
The “Gambling Commission” which was said to exist in New York in
1900-’01, and to have been “composed of a Commissioner who is at the
head of one of the city departments, two State Senators, and the
dictator of the pool-room syndicate of this city,”[37] owed its partial
exposure to a violation of this rule. The “Commission” was alleged to
have established a regular tariff for the various forms of gambling as
follows:—Pool Rooms, $300 per month; Crap Games, and Gambling Houses
(small), $150 per month; Gambling Houses (large), $1000 per month;
Envelope Games, $50 per month. These rates would seem sufficiently
high to provoke complaint from those who had to pay them. Nevertheless
the exposure, which came from the gamblers themselves, was not so
much due to the size of the exactions as to the great increase in the
number of the gambling houses which the “Commission” licensed in order
to secure larger revenues. In the end, as one member of the sporting
fraternity phrased it, “there were not enough suckers to go ’round.”
The whole incident illustrates the principle, if the word can be used
in such an unhallowed connection, that in order to enjoy any permanent
success, corruption must by all means avoid extreme rapacity; it must
endeavour to keep alive that which it feeds on. Castro, for example,
was a highwayman rather than a grafter. He lacked the moderation, the
fine sense of proportion, necessary to qualify one for success in the
latter rôle. To paraphrase a familiar principle of taxation, a part
of income may be taken but corrupt encroachments on capital sums are
dangerous.
Prudential considerations restraining corruption are apt to be much
more keenly felt by a thoroughly organised machine than in cases where
corruption is practised by disorganised groups and individuals each
seeking its or his own advantage regardless of any common interest.
The “cohesive power of public plunder,” as President Cleveland
ponderously phrased it, may thus come to operate as a moderating
force. Notoriously corrupt city governments have not infrequently
distinguished themselves by maintaining extremely low tax rates,
or at least rates which appear to be low. Largely on this basis a
quasi-philosophic defence of corrupt municipal rule was made several
years ago by Daniel G. Thompson.[38] Arguing that some degree of
corruption was inevitable in all political organisations, he held
that they should be regarded by the voter in exactly the same light
as bidders for a contract. Government should simply be handed over
to the organisation making, all things considered, the lowest bid,
which in New York city, Mr. Thompson thought, would usually be Tammany
Hall. The argument is so thoroughly feudal in its conception of
politics that one finds it difficult to believe in the author’s entire
sincerity, although this is flatly asseverated throughout the book.
Moral objections similar to those employed against the doctrine of the
inviolability of a “ten per cent rake-off” thoroughly dispose of any
rational claim it may make to attention. Political experience is also
against it. Reform movements particularly in municipalities may be
laughed at as “spasms,” but these movements, which are usually based
largely on charges of corruption, occur so frequently as to discredit
the belief that purely prudential considerations on the part of
corruptionists will restrain effectively the excesses of their demands.
Supine acceptance by the electorate of the “lowest bidder” theory
would speedily result in the submission of none but extortionately
high bids. In the long run “millions for defence but not one cent for
tribute” is a sentiment quite as justifiable economically as ethically.
To recapitulate the preceding argument,—the structure of society, no
matter how completely evolved and generally beneficial to the highest
human interests, is nevertheless such that when brought into contact
with natural human egoism it offers access at many points to the
onslaughts of corruption. The evil consequences may be extreme, or only
severe, or in time they may be completely overcome. History furnishes
examples of all three eventualities. It also bears witness to the fact
that many gross and threatening forms of corruption that were once
prevalent have been eliminated from the life of civilised nations.
Those which remain to afflict us are the object of vigorous corrective
measures which are constantly being extended and strengthened. Corrupt
practices are found to be limited in some cases to certain branches or
spheres of government with consequences of varying degrees of danger
to the national life. Or they may be limited in amount or percentage
by various prudential considerations on the part of political leaders
who, however, are far from being sufficiently restrained in this way
as social welfare requires. While corruption thus appears to be a
persistent problem of social and political life it is far from being
a hopeless one. In the words of Professor Henry C. Adams,[39] its
solution “is a continuous task, like the cleansing of the streets of a
great city, or the renewing of a right purpose within the human heart.”
FOOTNOTES:
[24] It would, of course, be absurd to assume that every victor in
such contests is free from all taint of corruption. A very large and
powerful state may, although extremely corrupt, succeed in overcoming
a small and weak state which is relatively free from corruption.
Something akin to this occurred when Finnish autonomy was suppressed
by Russia in 1902. On the other hand it is evident that in such a
struggle the honesty of the small state would be in its favour while
the corruption of the great state would be a source of weakness.
[25] Although most of the references to historic forms of corruption
presented in the following pages are taken from the comparatively
recent annals of nations which are still living, it is worth noting
that the subject could also be illustrated abundantly from ancient
history. Even prior to the Christian era Rome suffered from various
kinds of political corruption that exist in very similar forms at the
present day. Readers of the Old Testament find, particularly in the
books of Isaiah and Micah, denunciations of social evils not unlike
those published in contemporary magazines.
[26] Herbert Spencer shows “that from propitiatory presents, voluntary
and exceptional to begin with but becoming as political power
strengthens less voluntary and more general, there eventually grow up
universal and involuntary contributions—established tribute; and that
with the rise of a currency this passes into taxation” (“Principles
of Sociology,” vol. ii, pt. iv, ch. iv, p. 371), and further that
“In our own history the case of Bacon exemplifies not a special and
late practice, but an old and usual one” (p. 372). Bribe giving may,
therefore, be regarded as a lineal descendant of an old practice once
regarded as legitimate, but now fallen under the ban. Given a social
state in which public dues are open, regular, and fixed in amount, and
in which bribery is distinctly reprobated, as contrasted with a social
state in which present giving is common and tolerated or defended by
public opinion, the higher moral standard of the former would seem
beyond question.
[27] _Op. cit._, pp. 44-45.
[28] “The Diary of Samuel Pepys,” edited by Henry B. Wheatley, vol. i,
p. 207, entry of date of August 16, 1660.
[29] _Op. cit._, vol. vii, p. 49, entry dated July 30, 1667.
[30] “Samuel Pepys and the World He Lived In,” by Henry B. Wheatley, p.
62.
[31] _Op. cit._, pp. 161-162, note.
[32] _Ibid._, p. 15.
[33] _Ibid._, p. 42.
[34] _Ibid._, p. 16.
[35] “The Shame of the Cities,” p. 152.
[36] “Japan, Its History, Arts, and Literature,” by Captain F.
Brinkley, vol. iv, p. 250 _et seq._
[37] _New York Times_, March 9, 1900.
[38] “Politics in a Democracy,” New York, 1893.
[39] “Public Debts,” p. 358
CORRUPTION IN THE PROFESSIONS, JOURNALISM, AND THE HIGHER EDUCATION
IV
CORRUPTION IN THE PROFESSIONS, JOURNALISM, AND THE HIGHER EDUCATION
The wisdom of some quasi-philosophic counsellors of ambitious youth
expresses itself in the aphorism that in this world there are as many
doors labelled “pull” as there are labelled “push.” Without admitting
the equality in ratio of the two kinds of avenues to material well
being, it is undeniable that a great many of our social relationships
are very commonly exploited by interests of a more or less directly
personal character. Church membership, for example, may be maintained
chiefly as a stepping stone to business, professional, or social
success. Business men are overrun with solicitations for aid to
church and charitable purposes under circumstances which suggest
the discrete advertisement of their delinquency in case they do not
contribute “according to their means,” and the probable loss of custom
in consequence. The charitable organisations themselves are imposed
upon by unworthy applicants for relief who display a pertinacity and
ingenuity calculated to destroy all faith in any trait of human nature
except universal parasitism. Of course one should not look a gift horse
in the mouth, but in the case of many presentations from inferiors
to superiors or from favour-seekers to men of influence the motives
of the givers, and also at times of the recipients, are certainly not
beyond suspicion. The ethics of the petty tipping system are dubious
at best. Labourers “soldier on their jobs”; clerks appropriate office
supplies as “perquisites”; there are “tricks in all trades.” To avoid
conflicts in the kitchen good housewives frequently send bad servants
away with excellent “characters.” During hard time winters newspapers
maintain free soup stations and publish the harrowing details of the
poverty which they are relieving in such a sensational fashion that
even the most guileless reader finds himself wondering whether any
motive connected with self-advertisement or circulation reinforces
the charitable sentiments of the journalist. On the other hand many a
queer and clever scheme is devised to secure newspaper notoriety for
some presumably deserving person or cause. The ways of authors with
critics, and of critics with authors for that matter, are said at times
to stand in need of criticism themselves. “Dead easy” professors and
“snap” courses (of which, be it said with grief and contrition, every
institution seems to have a few samples) are exploited by college
students whose mental efforts in other directions are hopelessly
inhibited by chronic brain fag. In short every person charged with
administrative duties in connection with any social organisation, be
it a business house, a club, a church, a school, a charity, or what
not, is familiar _ad nauseam_ with the fact that tacit or overt efforts
are constantly being made both by outsiders and insiders to procure
suspensions of the rules or other unwarranted privileges and favours.
It would, however, be an unnecessarily harsh judgment to condemn all
actions of the foregoing character as corrupt. If criticism is to be
attempted it must be based on a full knowledge of motives in given
cases, and these are not always apparent. Then, too, customs have grown
up under the influence of which men act without analyzing the real
nature of their conduct. Reflection would show, however, that, with
the exception of conscious evil intent, the elements of corruption are
present not only in the cases cited above, but in many others which are
constantly being encountered in the course of the day’s experiences. It
is certainly an error to assume that all the grafters are engaged in
“big” business or “big” politics. Let us not excuse in the slightest
degree the misdeeds of great corporations, but, on the other hand, let
us not forget that conduct of a precisely similar ethical colour is
sometimes indulged in by labourers, clerks, small retailers, farmers,
and others. The fact that corrupt or “near” corrupt practices are more
common than people are ordinarily inclined to believe is significant
in another way. There is always a direct relationship between the
characteristic petty offences of a people and its characteristic major
crimes. Thus in a country given over to brawling, crimes of violence
will be numerous. Chicane largely prevalent in every day affairs
will certainly breed an atmosphere favourable to the perpetration of
gigantic frauds. For this reason the minor forms of corruption which
occur in the daily life of a people are worthy of much more attention
than they ordinarily receive.
Let us turn now from the petty and dubious manifestations of a corrupt
spirit to those larger and more directly threatening practices
which have become subject to public criticism and in some cases to
repressive legislation. The field thus ventured upon is so extensive
and its features are so involved that no progress can be made in its
discussion without classification. Yet any scheme of classification
that may be attempted must encounter great difficulties. Individual
judgments vary widely regarding the importance or degree of danger to
the public interest of various anti-social developments. Along certain
lines corrupt practices have been exploited by journalistic enterprise
with great pertinacity, while other suspicious areas are still largely
neglected. As a consequence of the very difficulties which embarrass
it, however, there is a certain justification even for a confessedly
imperfect classification. A service of considerable importance may
be rendered merely by bringing together in the form of an outline
all or nearly all the more threatening forms of corruption in such
a way that some of their salient characteristics and interrelations
are more clearly developed. Without therefore claiming finality for
the following arrangement it would seem desirable to distinguish
roughly two great fields of corrupt practices: first, corruption in
professional life generally; and second, corruption in business and
politics. The divisions and subdivisions of these two groups will be
indicated later. Corruption in professional life will be discussed
with some detail in the present study.[40] Business and political
corruption, the interrelations of which are very numerous and close,
will form the subject of the following paper.
Corruption in professional life may be held to involve virtually all
of our social leadership outside of business and politics. Apart
from the specific services rendered by the various professions their
principal practitioners are instinctively looked up to by the community
for guidance. In a broad sense all professional men are teachers.
Corruption in the professions is thus equivalent to the defilement
of the sources of public instruction. Yet precisely on this ground
very sweeping and bitter accusations are made. Law, journalism, and
the higher education are more frequently attacked, but medicine,
philanthropy, and theology also come in for criticism. To cite
specific instances:—editors are accused of wholesale misrepresentation
and suppression of news in behalf of sinister interests; college
professors, assumed to be subtly bribed by munificent endowments, are
reproached as the crafty inventors of philosophic excuses for menacing
public evils; lawyers are denounced as servile hirelings who “justify
the wicked for reward” and who accept crooked corporation or political
work without demur; ministers, philanthropic workers, and other leaders
of thought are said to be purchased by large contributions, gifts of
parks, playgrounds, hospitals, and so on.[41] There are many modern
Micahs who go about saying of our people that “the heads thereof judge
for reward, and the priests thereof teach for hire, and the prophets
thereof divine for money.”