An inquiry into the permanent causes of the decline and fall of powerful and wealthy nations : $b Designed to shew how the prosperity of the British empire may be prolongedPlayfair, William
Philosophy
An inquiry into the permanent causes of the decline and fall of powerful and wealthy nations : $b Designed to shew how the prosperity of the British empire may be prolonged
Playfair, William
Economics; Great Britain -- Economic conditions; History -- Philosophy
The only administration carried on by delegated authority, that is from
necessity obliged to be executed with unabaiting rigour, is the
department of finance. Money is a thing of such a nature, that strict
rules are absolutely necessary in its administration. There is here a
great distinction between money and other property, or money's
worth. A menial servant, of whose honesty there is no proof, and even
when it may be dubious, is habitually trusted with the care of property
to a considerable amount, and the account rendered is seldom very
rigorous; but, in the case of trusting with money, every precaution is
first taken, as to being trust-worthy. Security is generally demanded,
and neither friendship, confidence, nor the highest respectability, will
supply the place of a strict account, which, when not rendered, leaves
an indelible stain. There are many causes for this, but they are so
generally understood, or, at least, so generally felt, that it is not
necessary to examine them; the consequences are in some cases,
however, not so evident. One of the most important is, that the
accuracy with [end of page #103] which those appointed to collect
taxes are obliged to render their accounts, compels them to a strictness
in doing their duty that appears frequently rigorous to an extreme
degree, and scarcely consistent with justice or humanity.
A king is considered as an unrelenting creditor, and he certainly
appears in that character; but it should be considered why he is
obliged to be so; for, as a master, he is generally the most indulgent in
his dominions.
No duty or service is exacted with less rigour than that belonging to a
civil department under government, when it is not connected with
accountability in money; none so rigorous where money is concerned.
How is this to be accounted for, unless it is by shewing that the nature
of the situation admits of giving way to the feelings of humanity in
one case, and not in the other? A few examples will illustrate this
point, which is very important, very well known, but not well
understood.
A clerk in a public office wants, either for health or private business,
or, perhaps, only for amusement, to absent himself from duty; if his
conduct merits any indulgence, and if his request is any way
reasonable, it is immediately granted, though his salary during his
absence may amount to a considerable sum; but he receives the gift
under the form of time, not of money. If the same clerk is in arrear for
taxes to one-twentieth part of the amount, if he does not pay, his
furniture will be seized, and that perhaps by order of the same superior
from whom he obtained the leave of absence from his duty. {89}
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account