Return to News

The Best of Mike Royko


    To bribe or not to bribe
    -- a Chicago question


    Originally published: Tuesday, February 20, 1990
    Web-posted: Tuesday, April 15, 1997

    he young man was seeking my advice. As Hamlet might have put it: To bribe or not to bribe, that is the question.

    But let's start at the beginning.

    His family is in the restaurant business. Not big time. A neighborhood place. Breakfast, lunch, dinner, and nothing overly fancy.

    They recently sold their old restaurant because the local economy had changed. Less money and more guns. So they went out a few miles and found a peaceful location.

    Not long after they opened, city inspectors came in to check the place out.

    "We thought everything was OK, but they said we had some kind of violation," the young man said. "It has something to do with the plumbing. They said we didn't have the right kind of pipes in the kitchen and they'd have to be taken out and new ones put in.

    "That seems kind of strange to me because they work fine and the restaurant has been there a long time, and if there was something wrong, why didn't they have the previous owner straighten it out?

    "Anyway, there's this guy my father knows. And he told my father that for $600 everything would be OK. He's sort of a go-between, a middleman.

    "My father is the boss. I mean, he's been in the business a long time, so he knows what's going on. He says this isn't the first time something like this has happened, and that this is the way it's always been done.

    "But I don't like it. I work long hours. We all do. And $600 isn't small change to me. But if we hire someone to come in and tear out the plumbing, it'll cost a lot more than $600.

    "What I'd like to be able to do is look in some kind of law book or call someone and find out if there's really something illegal about the plumbing or if we're being shaken down. If it's OK, I don't see why we should have to pay someone off. But I don't know who to ask or how to find out. That's why I'm asking you."

    An interesting question and if I lived in Seattle or Minneapolis or some other goody-goody town, I would have reacted with shock and horror and told the young man: "A bribe? Perish the thought. Why, that's illegal. You must go to the authorities immediately."

    Or I might have played investigative reporter and say: "Great. Let your dad set up the payoff. Then a photographer and I will leap out from behind a curtain and catch the crook in the act and splash it across Page 3."

    But instead, I suggested we be practical and consider the alternatives and possible ramifications:

  • Going to the authorities. Let's assume that the state's attorney's investigators agree that a bribe has been solicited. The next step will be proving it, which isn't easy. The evidence will have to be presented to a grand jury. If the grand jury hands down an indictment, there will have to be a trial. Maybe someone-an inspector or a middleman-will be found guilty. Or maybe not.

    • No matter how it turns out, the young man and/or his father will have spent far more than $600 worth of their time telling their story to investigators, to a grand jury, and sitting in a courtroom.

    If someone is found guilty, chances are that person will be a small-time hustler. Remember, we're not talking about some senator taking a small fortune in "campaign contributions" from an S&L looter. Or a defense contractor slipping serious money to Pentagon insiders. They will have caught a nickel- dime ward heeler.

    It's possible this petty grafter has a family. So the other kids at school might see the news stories and say, "Nyah, nyah, your daddy's a crook, your daddy's a crook." If he goes to jail, his wife and kids will weep. And they will fall on hard times and have to eat meat loaf made mostly of oatmeal. Should the innocent be forced to suffer because pop is a hustler?

  • Not going to the authorities but not paying the $600, either. That means you spend whatever it takes to tear out the allegedly improper plumbing. True, if the work was unnecessary, you will have wasted your money. However, you will have a clear conscience, if that's any consolation. On the other hand, maybe the plumbing really doesn't conform to the city's building code. So if you replace it, you can feel proud. A little poorer, but proud.

  • Not going to the authorities and simply slipping that $600 under the table. It would be journalistically unethical of me to suggest that you do such a thing. A bribe is illegal and wrong, wrong, wrong, even though it is probably the cheapest, most practical way to resolve the situation, since it not only saves you money, but by not involving investigators, a grand jury, prosecutors and a judge, it saves the taxpayers a tidy sum. However, as a law- abiding citizen, I cannot condone the giving or receiving of bribes. (But if you must do it, remember: cash only; never checks, money orders or credit cards.)

  • Don't do anything. Don't pay them, don't beef to the law and don't tear out the plumbing. Chances are that they will read this. If so, I'll ask them a question: Say, guys, you really don't want to become famous, do you?

    © 1997 Chicago Tribune