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