CORRUPTION IN DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 4, Issue 204, 16 August 1860, Page 4

CORRUPTION IN DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS.

[From the Scotsman, April 20.] In the beginning of March the House of .Representatives at Washington passed the following resolution : “ That a committee of five members be appointed by the Speaker, for the purpose, first, of investigating whether the President of the United Atates, or any officer of the Go vernment has, by money, patronage, or other improper means, sought to influence the passage of any law appertaining to the rights of any statu or territory ; and second, also to inquire into and investigate whether any officer or officers of the Government have, by combination or otherwise, prevented or defeated, or attempted to prevent or defeat, the execution of any law or laws now upon the statute book, and whether the President has failed or refused to compel the execution of any law thereof.”

Among the allegations held to have been proved before this tribunal are several most seriously affecting the Executive, the party leaders, several newspapers, and many constituencies. The'/public "money is declared to have been extensively and systematically employed for bribery at elections and for purchasing the support of newspapers, and to have been so employed with the knowledge of the President, of all his cabinet, and. of the non-official, leaders of his paity. The Attorney ■ General: himself seems to have been particu • lar.v active, as being the fittest man to show

liow Vas most likely to be escapedOne newspaper at Washington, a fierce advocate of democracy and a systematic denouncer of this country, is found to have been iu the receipt of 20,000 dollars a year from the Government; another at Pennsylvania received 11,000 dollars in order to render it more zealous at a certain election ; and it was admitted by numerous witnesses, themselves implicated, that it is the custom of men in office to subscribe large sum 3 to be expended in bribery in those electoral districts where the money seems most “ required.” This is all sworn to by reluctant witnesses belonging to the political party accused—in truth, does not appear to be seriously doubted, nor its disclosure to have excited any surprise, though of course it has produced some excitement. A great deal more, too, it seems universally admitted, is yet to come—the openness of a large portion*of the press and of the constituencies to be corrupted, and the willingness of the party leaders up to the very highest to employ corruption, being, it is painful to observe, coolly assumed on all hands. All this is what our American friends say of themselves ; and, even supposing that they would indulge tlieir exaggerating propensities in the work of self-accusation, it is absolutely certain that no such things could be said of the British press or of British public men with any chance cr claim ( to obtain even the most contemptible amount of belief.

The reply of the President is remarkable both as to its nature and its time. It consists, not of an attempted refutation, though there is, as to himself personally, an indignant denial of the charges, but of a protest, on constitutional grounds, against the claim of the House of Representatives to appoint a committee for such a, purpose,; yet the time at which this profesV‘wa3 nfade was unfortunately not the time of the committee’s appointment, hut some time after its labours had produced the disclosures of corruption. The committee was appointed ; on the sth March ; and we find no trace of the President having protested uniil the 28th of March, when the committee had got a considerable way into its work, and had published the results. In this document the President says, “ I do, in the name of the people of the several States, solemnly protest against these proceedings in the House of Representatives”—he claiming to represent the people more directly than is done by the representatives. Practically, the facts are, that the President is elected for a term of four years by an indirect or filtering process; whilst the House of Representatives is elected every two years by a direct process. The most recent illustration of this system is, that President, Buchanan has for two years (and indeed for longer) been pursuing, a policy antagonistic to that of the House of. Representatives—just as if a Tory Premier in this country werp to go on for years setting at. defiance the rehuffs'and .condemnations of a Radical House of Commons. The effect of such an arrangement is to give to the working of the American Constitution, not slowness and safety, but confusion and strife. Still, though thus wrongly applied, the free working of the Executive within its own province is an essential element in any Constitution; and it is a pity that President Buchanan did not happen to have a better case on hand at the moment when he said, of this troublesome Commiitee—“The whole proceeding justifies the fears of tho e wise and.great men who, before the Constitution was adopted by the States, apprehended that of the Government, was to the aggrandisement of the Legislative at the expense of the Executive and Judicial departments,” ,Su,c e h,There is no doubt, has ..of late years been tlje tendency among ourselves to a greater extent than in the United 6’tates, the House of Commons gradually assuming a virtual administration of all affairs, civil, military, and naval. Tho danger of such a tern deucy is twofold—the Executive is crippled in its properoffices, and the Legislature at once bungles'Executive work and neglects or spoils the performance of its own distinct, and higher function^.