The Press. — London, England, 1854-06-17 00:00:00

JUNE 17, 1854. Sir J. FITZGERALD pointed to the disgraceful scenes which had occurred at many Irish elections, and especially on the occasion of his own return, in proof of the necessity of providing protection to the Toter. Mr. BRIGHT remarked that the existence of undue influences at elections was undeniable and universal. In the boroughs there was bribery, the electors having sufficient independence to enable them to sell their votes. In the counties intimidation prevailed, or, rather, the landlords possessed such full control over their tenants as to form practically the sole con stituency. In Irel.r.Rl the predominance was divided Or dispatei beLwce., t.t. Boman Catholic priests and the Protestant landowners. That the ballot would furnish a barrier against these various influences all the constituences of the country were fully convinced. Two hundred of them had returned advocates of the measure to that house, and the rest would have fol lowed the example if their free expression of opinion had not been repressed and thwarted by parties who wielded the very powers which the ballot was de signed to destroy. Adverting to the personal bearings of the question, Mr. Bright then remarked upon the inconsistency between the Ministerial professions of liberalism and their opposition to the ballot. He then alluded by name to many members of the Go vernment who had in former years supported the principle of secret voting by their speeches and 'votes : "I have here," he said, "a list of the opinions of what are called generally subordinate members of the Government. (' Hear,' and a laugh.) I ought to state that one is not a subordinate member, because he sits in the Cabinet. Now, take first the law-officers of the Crown. I have got the name of Cockburn down here—(a laugh)—and the name of liethell—and names more eminent cannot be found in the roll of existing English lawyers. is this a foolish or absurd proposition that we make, that men so distinguished have always been consistently its advocates ? Next there is the member for Kilmarnock (Mr. Bouverie), the Chair man of Ways and Means, who, if he is not a Government official, is at least an eminent officer of this house ; then Colonel Boyle, the Hon. Mr. Fortescue, Mr. Keogh (the Solicitor-General for Ireland), Mr. Osborne—(Hear, hear) --a gentleman who could make an admirable speech on this question if he happened to sit below the gangway— (laughter)—Lord Alfred Paget, Mr. Charles Villiers, and a right honourable gentleman whom, perhaps, I ought not to reckon ; and yet the occurrence which has changed his pition is so recent—l mean the Right Hon. E. Strutt. {Laughter.) Now, it is an unfortunate thing for us who are in favour of the ballot that the noble lord the late member for London, whilst in a very kind manner, as I understood, he invited the late Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster to leave the Government, has taken into it the right honour. able gentleman the late member for Morpeth ( Sir G. Grey), who, when he was member for Devonport, was also an ad vocate of that measure, but who, since he became member for Northumberland and afterwards for Morpeth, has turned round and voted against it. A ballot-man is shut out of the Government, and also a quondam ballot-man ; but one whose inconsistency is glaring is taken in as part of the Cabinet. Then there is the right honourable baronet the member for Southwark ( Sir W. Molesworth ). ( Hear.) I observed that he, in a speech to his constituents, adhered to his ancient opinions in favour ofthe ballot, and he voted last year in support of it ; and I have not the slightest doub. .3 this moment that on all future occasions he will do the same. And when the noble lord the late member for London stands up, and when the noble lord the member for Tiverton gets up—as he has done to-night—and in a very showy manner appeals to honourable gentlemen opposite with whom his sympathies always seem to go, and makes a speech against this pmposition which has the support of 200 members of this side of the house, and almost the unanimous support of the constituencies of the country where they can speak out--I say the right hon. baronet the member for Southwark is a man whose opinion on a ques lion of this nature is as much worth taking as that of any of his colleagues; and I have some confidence that parlia mentary and even official etiquette will not on all occasions prevent his expressing his free and honest opinion to this house." Mr. Bright then commented sarcastically upon the conduct of the Liberal members whose votes had brought over the present Government from the Op position benches, whose support enabled them to re main Ministers, although their policy was essentially more Conservative than that of the late Adminis tration, and who still followed them as leaders even after having been deserted by them on many occa sions when reform measures were in question, and seen them court the votes of their opponents on the Tory side of the house in order to frustrate the en deavours of their friends. For his own part he re pudiated such leadership. The Liberal constituen ties would, he hoped, hereafter make the ballot a test for the representatives they returned, and the Liberal members make it a sine pal non in the Go- Ternment they supported. Mr. WHITESIDE commended the speech of Lord Palmerston, and declared that his arguments bad received no answer from Mr. Bright upon the point that the political franchise was a trust to be exercised for the benefit of the whole community, whose every member had a right to know bow it was discharged. He declared that the c h arges o f intimidation brought against the landlords were much exaggerated, and that public opinion would provide a sufficient check upon their conduct. The ballot would offer no pro. THE PRESS. tection against the priests, as all secrets were revealed at the confessional. He trusted that Lord Palmers ton had expressed the sentiments of the Cabinet, and that his speech had converted even his colleague the right hon. member for Southwark. Sir W. MOLEBWORTH began a prepared speech by some impromptu remarks upon the arguments of the Home Secretary, which he said comprised nothing but the stock in trade of the anti ballot controversy already inflicted upon that house usque ad nauseam, and declared that his own convictions remained un changed upon the subject. He then proceeded to comment upon the evils which they were called upon to cure, and the remedial measures that were professed on different sides. Among these he came at length to the conclusion that the ballot offered the only effectual contrivance. Although, as he confessed, far from perfect, it was nevertheless the best that could be devised. To sustain this position Sir William Moles worth treated the subject logically, dividing corrup tion into its several classes, and pointing out the phases of the disease in which the ballot might be administered successfully, and those in which it was likely to fail : " Positive bribery may be divided into three kinds, ac cording to the period when the payment of the bribe is made. The first kind is when the bribe is paid before the elector votes, on his promising to vote, for the bribery can didate, whom I will call A. The second kind is, when the bribe is paid after the elector has voted, and in consequence of his having voted for candidate A. The third kind is, when the bribe is paid after the return of candidate A, and iu consequence of his return. The first kind of bribery, namely, when the payment of the bribe is contingent only on the promise of the corrupt elector, is rarely and never willingly practised by skilful and experienced agents even with open voting; for, when the bribe has been paid beforehand, the briber has little security that the bribed will fulfil his • dis honourable engagement, and not sell his vote fur a second bribe to the opposite party ; in fact, the briber has no se curity except such as may arise from a feeling of false ho nour on the part of the bribed, or fear of being reproached for not keeping his promise. It is evident that the strength of these feelings would be very much diminished, and in many cases entirely destroyed, by secret suffrage. (Cheers.) With the ballot corrupt electors would when they could take bribes from both sides, and then vote honestly accord ing to their convictions. (Cheers and laughter.) For cor rupt electors frequently have strong political opinions, for which they are willing to make considerable pecuniary sa crifices; and it is a well-known fact that corrupt electors will oftentimes vote for a popular candidate for a less bribe than for an anti-popular one. (Cheers.)" Continuing his analysis, and exhibiting " Candidate A. " as the agent in "or sufferer from " a variety of hypothetical circumstances under the conditicins of open and secret voting respectively, Sir W: Moles worth drew the conclusion that the ballot 'would prove tolerably effectual against all corrupt influences exercised on a small scale and by individuals. For the grander manifestations of corruption or coercion he found in it no hopes of immediate restraint, but argued that under its influence a change in public opinion might gradually be fostered which would purify and assuage the whole system of electoral immorality. Against intimidation, he urged, it would present a more impracticable barrier. Reverting to the address of Lord Palmerston, the right hon. baronet denied that the vote could be considered a trust in any sense which should compel the elector to endure the ordeal of publicity; argued that no analogy existed between the members of the Legis lature and their constituents in the matter of voting; and declared that parliament could not claim to have done its best towards stopping the cry ing evil which threatened to sap the foundation of our representative institutions before it had tried the great experiment of the ballot. Mr. I. BUTT, in opposing the motion, stigmatised the ballot system as novel and unconstitutional, and be lieved that it would destroy the manly spirit of the constituencies. Mr. Paimi remarked that members of clubs, the benchers of inns of courts, and directors of the East India Company, were elected by ballot, and insisted upon the justice of extending the same shield to the voters for members of Parliament. The speech of a Cabinet Minister (Sir W. Molesworth) in its favour marked an era in the question, and gave assurance that however delayed the ballot would eventually be carried. Mr. KENDAII, entered into some details respecting the last election for East Cornwall, to which Sir W. Molesworth had alluded, deducing from the circum stances an inference against the ballot. Mr. H. BERKELEY having replied, Mr. MAOUIRE, amidst impatient calls for a divi sion, interposed a few remarks in support of the motion. Upon a division the motion for leave was thrown out by a majority of 194 to 157-37. BLOCKADE OF RUSSIAN PORTS. Mr. iiORBFALL, on Tuesday, asked whether it was intended to establish an effective blockade of Russian ports in the Baltic, the Black and the White Seas, respectively, or if any distinction was to be made between them ? Sir *hams GWA7[AY would endeavour to make his answer as clear as his sense of duty would allow. Orders had been given 557 some time ago to the admirals, both in the Black Sea and in the Bailie, to institute a strict blockade of Russian ports, and he had every reason to believe that. sin It blockaded had been instituted. With respect to the Danube, the Goveniment had received in formation by telegraph from Admiral DUllligel that the Danube was blockaded, and notification, in consequence, would appear iu the Gazette that evening. They had nut yet received from Sir Charles Napier notification of the details of blockade in the Baltic which would justify any similar notification, but he had no doubt., de facto, that blockades existed. He need hardly state that no distinction would be made lu respect of foreign verse's. With regard to the White Sea, he had already stated that, in conatlitence of counnunioations pending between the French and English Governments, no order had yet been sent to block ade that sea, but he had reason to believe that a reinforcement of the French spinuiron WAS about to be sent, and orders would be sent to institute a blockade in the White Sea also. (Hear.) OXFORD UNIVERSITY BILL. Lord J. BussELL being restored to his place in the House of Commons on Thursday, the Oxford Univer sity Bill was brought forward for recommittal. During the recess the bill had been reprinted, the numerous and important amendments effected in committee upon its earlier clauses were properly inserted in the new copy, and the modified clauses which tiro Government intended to substitute for the latter sec tion of the measure appended at the end. When the bill came on some comments were made upon its new aspect. Mr. WALeoLE spoke in tenni! of approbation of the changes that had beep intro duced. Mr. HORSMAN said that the right hon. mem ber might well be satisfied, since they had mainly been adopted upon his own suggestions. Several ultra-reform advocates complained that the measure had been emasculated, and rendered merely perms-- sive. 1.,0rd J. RUSSELL and the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER confessed that it had become a complete changing from the bill they had intended and tried to carry, but said that the only alternative lay be tween taking it as it stood, or none at all. Parlia mentary majorities had decided upon certain modifi cations, and whatever their private opinions might be they must make the best of them. Sir W. HEATH COTE consented to accept the alterations because he was assured that they rendered the measure more satisfactory to the university itself. Clauses up to 30 bad been already discussed and amended, and were now successively presented, tnerely that the committee might see and approve their own work. They were agreed to with some trifling verbal alterations. Progressing into the undiscussed portion of the bill, the committee were occupied from five o'clock until midnight in getting through two clauses, 81 and 32. When these had been framed into acceptable shape and agreed to the chairman was ordered to report progress. BILLS OF EXCHANGE BILL. This bill passed through committee on Monday night after some strenuous opposition, commenced by Mr. Hume, to the proposal it comprised fot rendering foreign-drawn hills of exchange liable to the stamp duty. The hon. member contended that this new impost on that class of bills would imperil the practical monopoly which England now enjoyed of the monetary business of the trading world. It Would destroy the profits of capitalists, fetter the operations by which capital was made profitable, and ultimately drive the article out of the country to other markets where it was more liberally treated. Much confliction of opinion was manifested on this subject among the representatives of the banking and capitalist interests in the house. Mr. WILSON met the objections argumentatively, and the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER finally threatened to throw the whole bill up if this point were carried against him. He designed, he said, to alleviate the stamp duty on bills drawn upon inland transactions, and could not afford the sacrifice unless reimbursed out of the foreign branches of business. Upon a division the clause was adopted by a large majority, the numbers being—for 173, against 110-03. ROMAN CATHOLIC PRIESTS IN PRISONS. In committee of supply on Monday night a debate turning upon a comparatively insignificant item, but involving questions of great importance, and result ing in a serious defeat of the Government., was inaugurated by Mr. St'oosEn. A vote of 371,0331. was proposed for the maintenance of Government prisons and convict. establishments. The vote in cluded a charge of 5501. for the special services Roman Catholic priests in prisons, and the dis allowance of this item was urged by Mr. Spooner, who observed that the vote was proposed this year for the first time, and that, it contravened the Protestant spirit, of the constitution. He did not dispute the right of allowing Roman Catholic prisoners the ministration of priests of their own faith, but contended that their services should not be recognised as forming a part of the prison system, nor be paid for out of the public revenue. Lord PALMERSTON justified the grant proposed, ob serving that many Roman Catholic convicts were constantly in the prisons, and ought to be furnished with the means of religious instruction and moral reformation. The principle had already been adopted in the Millbank establishment, and it was his object to eztend it through all the convict prisons where it was required.