Why must public men be watched and held to account?

OCR: 1 cited passage(s) are machine-read (OCR) text of old printings; quotations reproduce the stored OCR text, misreadings included.

1. WHAT THEY SAID (the record)

Record ledger

• BELIEF (1698): Trenchard and Gordon ('Cato') believed that public men must be watched and held to account because in a free government, the interest of every one must be considered, and the freedom of the kingdom depends upon the people's choice of the House of Commons, who have the sole power of giving money. This implies the need for accountability to ensure that public men act in the public interest. "The Freedom of this Kingdom depends upon the People's chusing the House of Commons, who are a Part of the Legislature, and have the sole Power of giving Money." [1]
• BELIEF (1698): Trenchard and Gordon ('Cato') believed that public men must be watched and held to account because they are responsible for matters of state and discretion, and their misbehavior can lead to miscarriages that harm both the king and the people. They argued that accountability ensures that those in power are answerable for their actions, preventing them from acting with impunity. "Formerly all Matters of State and Discretion were debated and resolv'd in the Privy Council, where every Man subscrib'd his Opinion, and was answerable for it." [2]
• BELIEF (1719): Trenchard and Gordon ('Cato') believed that if the Crown's power to create peers is taken away, the House of Lords will become a fixed, independent body not accountable like a Ministry or a House of Commons. This lack of accountability could lead to the Lords acting in their own interest, such as imprisoning a disliked Ministry or refusing to work with an offending House of Commons, with no effective recourse for the Crown or the People. "If this prerogative is taken away, the House of Lords will be a fixed independent Body, not to be called to an account like a Ministry, nor to be dissolved or changed like a House of Commons" [3]
• BELIEF (1722): Trenchard and Gordon ('Cato') believed that public men must be watched and held to account because they can cause corruption and dissatisfaction, as seen in the example of those who 'had caused all that Corruption, and all that Dissatisfaction.' "The Argument commonly used by some who had the Presumption to call themselves Whigs... that England was reduced to such a Condition; that our Corruptions were so great, and the Dissatisfaction of the People was so general..." [4]
• BELIEF (1722): Trenchard and Gordon ('Cato') believed that public men must be watched and held to account because corrupt members increase public necessities and worsen the times, and because many ill men would try to enter boroughs to escape the resentment of an injured people. They argued that electors must oppose such men to achieve public justice. "This should be well weighed and considered: And further, if they accept of Bribes, through the Necessity of the Times, this will, in a very short Space, encrease their Necessities, because the Times will inevitably grow worse, by the Management of corrupt Members; and none but corrupt Members will offer them Bribes." [5]
• BELIEF (undated; OCR of an old printing): Trenchard and Gordon ('Cato') believed that public men must be watched and held to account because where bribery is practiced, mischief is intended, and the more bribery, the more mischief. They argue that when the people or their trustees are bribed, it cannot be for their own sakes, and that corrupt ends lead to corrupt means and the abuse of power. [6]
• BELIEF (undated): Trenchard and Gordon ('Cato') believed that public men must be watched and held to account because corrupt men, when entrusted with public duties, are more likely to harm the state than to save it. They argued that those who act for private considerations rather than public duty are presumed ready to act against the public for a reward, and that such venal men can be manipulated to destroy the state. (key quote above) [7]
• BELIEF (undated): Trenchard and Gordon ('Cato') believed that public men must be watched and held to account because those with bad morals, poverty, and unworthiness should not be allowed to act among magistrates and lawgivers, as it is dangerous and disgraceful to the state. They argued that unqualified, corrupt, and venal individuals should not have equal weight with the ablest and upright senators. "It was not thought honourable or safe, that any one with an ill character and no estate, should act and vote amongst Magistrates and Lawgivers... Nor was aught more just, than that they who had the spirit of the worst Plebeians, as well as the poverty, should be reduced into the class of men whom they resembled." [8]
• BELIEF (undated): Trenchard and Gordon ('Cato') believed that what is considered corruption depends on the characters and designs of the individuals involved, and that acts which may sound like corruption may not be corruption if done by those who honestly and usefully apply them. This shows that public men must be watched and held to account because the same act can be corruption or public spirit depending on the actor's intent and character. (key quote above) [9]
• BELIEF (undated): Trenchard and Gordon ('Cato') believed that public men must be watched and held to account because those who are indifferent to the public interest or driven by self-interest are likely to be abhorred by the public and may act in ways that harm the common good. They argued that false patriotism and hypocrisy cannot be concealed for long and that individuals driven by avarice or ambition are prone to justify their self-serving actions as deserved, leading them to grasp for more power or wealth without restraint. "Such as are known not to love their Country, cannot reasonably expect to be safe in it, or that enmity to the Public will not meet with public hate, which is the next step to public revenge..." [10]

What cuts against it

• ACTION (1698): Trenchard and Gordon ("Cato") acknowledged that in some cases, corruption might be necessary to counter greater evils, as seen in the example of Cato using bribes to oppose Cæsar. "It was Corruption in Catiline, to bribe Men to promote his Interest against the Interest of the State: But it was public Spirit in Cicero, to gain Men by Money to serve the State against the treasonable Designs of Catiline." [9]

• BELIEF (undated): Trenchard and Gordon ("Cato") stated that men without religion or with false religion should be pitied and exhorted, not condemned, which suggests a more lenient approach to certain moral failings. "Men that have no Religion, or a false one, are intitled to our Pity and Exhortation." [11]

• BELIEF (1698): Trenchard and Gordon ("Cato") argued that government is a "Piece of Clockwork" and that public miscarriages are often attributed to human corruption, but the real issue is the structure of government itself. "Most Men having indigested Ideas of the Nature of it, attribute all public Miscarriages to the Corruption of Mankind." [1]

• ACTION (1722): Trenchard and Gordon ("Cato") suggested that some corruption might be tolerated if it prevents greater harm, such as tyranny. "Sometimes Corruption is boldly charged upon others, by those who are themselves exceedingly corrupt." [12]

2. HOW IT APPLIES (reasoning; inference is marked)

1. Trenchard and Gordon ("Cato") believed that public men must be watched and held to account because corrupt individuals, when entrusted with public duties, are more likely to harm the state than to save it. "A corrupt Man, employed in corrupt Measures, is more likely to apply them to hurt the State, than to save it." [7]

2. They argued that those who act for private considerations rather than public duty are presumed ready to act against the public for a reward. "Whoever will not act for the Public, when his Duty calls him to it, without a Reward, will be presumed ready to act against the Public for a Reward." [7]

3. Trenchard and Gordon ("Cato") emphasized that venal men can be manipulated to destroy the state, as seen in the example of Cæsar. "An able Man, who has gained their Confidence; and purchased their Affections, may so far blind and engage them, that they will, they must, go all and the worst Lengths." [7]

4. They believed that public men must be held to account because they are responsible for matters of state and discretion, and their misbehavior can lead to miscarriages that harm both the king and the people. "Formerly all Matters of State and Discretion were debated and resolv'd in the Privy Council, where every Man subscrib'd his Opinion, and was answerable for it." [2]

5. Trenchard and Gordon ("Cato") argued that the same act can be corruption or public spirit depending on the actor's intent and character. (key quote above) [9] (Inference)

3. THEIR TAKE

Record coverage: DIRECT

Trenchard and Gordon ("Cato") directly addressed the need to watch and hold public men to account, emphasizing the dangers of corruption and the importance of public virtue. They argued that public men must be held to account because their actions directly impact the state, and that corruption can lead to the downfall of a nation.

Extrapolation: Trenchard and Gordon ("Cato") would likely argue that public men must be watched and held to account because their actions have far-reaching consequences for the state, and that unchecked corruption can lead to tyranny and the destruction of liberty.

Competing readings: Some passages suggest that in certain circumstances, corruption might be necessary to counter greater evils, such as tyranny. However, this is presented as a rare exception rather than a general rule. [9]

Confidence: High, based on multiple direct statements and consistent themes across their writings.