The Sun. — London, England, 1858-06-09 00:00:00

1' complain that 'Lord Tom Noddies' are pushed into office, while other me n of equal and perhaps better pre tensions, but not of such high birth , are excluded. Far be it from him to endorse that opinion of the hon. mem ber for Middlesex, now the bon. member for Dover; and be doubted if the hon. member for Dover agreed in the opinion of the hon. number for Middlesex. (Laughter.) The ballot, like other questions, has suffered from the se dative and soporific effects of office. He should be un grateful, however, if he had forgotten the able speech of the lath Sir W. Molesworth when in office in favour of the ballot. He felt how much he wanted the able aid of Mr. Cobden and other older supporters of the question when the name of Gibson was not yet among their ranks. He bad read the evidence' of Sir A. Cockburn when Mr. Cockburn ; but when in office he was as silent well he bad been under the influence of a dose of Morphia. (Laughter.) Again, where were the dulcet notes of Bethell—(laughter)—who discoursed such eloquent music to the men of Aylesbury ? He could only apply to him the words of the poet, "Cold is Cad wailer s tongue." (Laughter.) Bat now that the great Whig leader was overthrown perhaps the time was come when his Liberal friends might make themselves advantageously known to their constituents. (Laughter.) It was not his inten tion on the present occasion to enter into a theoretical discussion of the ballot, for the arguments in its favour had never been answered. Nothing could be more lucid than the arguments for the ballot ; and nothing more delusive than the arguments used against it. They, for the most part, consisted of guesses, loose assertions, and baseless surmises. He had challenged, and be then chal lenged, ally bon. gentleman to show tbat the operation of the ballot had not been perfectly successful wherever it has been tried. By the ballot he did not mean a mer e box and polling-booth, but emphatically secret vo ting. That veteran refo i riner Gen. Thomp- on, in one of his able pamphlets on this subject, ridiculed the idea of any thing like publicity being introduced where the ballot was concerned, which he compared to a young girl who bad no objection to play blind man's buff provided holes were left for her eyes. Purity of election, peace, order, and the choice of the moat respectable men invariably -accompanied the ballot. Mr. MAINWARING rose to order. He wished to know whether it was not out of order for the hon. gen tleman to read his speech. (Oh, oh.) It was very much like it. (Oh, ob.) Mr. BERKELEY said that if tbe bon. gentleman lent him a pair of glasses he might be able to do that, but without holding the paper close to his eyes be was not able to do it. Attempts had been made to show that the system of voting by ballot had been abused in America, but he defied any hon. gentleman to point out a State in the American Union which abandoned that system for open voting. Mr. Nicholson said that it had been entirely successful in Australia. He was much struck by the argument of a working man at a meeting in fa vour of the ballot, who said that the working men al ways elected persons above themselves in education and in position of life to fill offices in their clubs and associa• tions, and that it was rot likely they would do other wise if they bad the ballot in respect of political elec tions. He would ask hon. gentlemen to compare the 18 Presidents selected by the ballot in the United Staees with any 18 successive monaraha of England, and be was sure those who were elected by ballot would not suffer by the comparison: He was not opposing a hereditary monarchy, but he was opposing a hereditary ministry. The Ambessadors of the American Union contrasted fa ir curably with the Ambassadors of this country, who were chosen, not far their merit, but because they were Cenn favourites, or had influence in the Ucuse of . Lords cr the House of Commons. Th e A mer i con Ambassador never met our Ambassadors tbat they had not the best of - if. In gunnery and naval shipbuilding the Americans were our superiors and models. Why was this ? Because the people of England were not represented in that house, which bore the purse of the cation, but au aristocracy and a moneyed oligarchy ; because our executive was not filled by men of talent, but by a fat and overweening ne potism, which crushed all the inventive power of the country. The Au.tralian papers, from which he had full extracts. admitted that the ball )t had been successful there. fie met an Tri-h gentleman of a Tory family who had been long resident in Australia, and on inquiring of him whether any class in Australia were dissatisfied with the ballot, he replied, "Only one—the Roman Catholic priests, and they oppose it because it lessens their infla• ones over the Roman Catholics. (Hear, and laughter.) He recommended this f ac t t o those gentlemen from Ire land who said that if the influence of the landlords was de stroyed by the ballot, there would remain nothing to count( ract the influence of the Roman Catholic priests in Ireland, as the ballot would not affect spiritual power. What was the position of the Irish elector ? Oa the one aide of him there was the spiritual influence of the priest, and on the otter the material influence of the landlord— the landlord here, the priest there, the elector between them—" e ull devil, pull baker." (Laughter.) One of the many quirks and quietles used against the ballot was, that if you gave the ballot to the electors with the pre sent qualification they would re fuse any extension of the , french:Fe. The noble lord the member for the city of London yielded to those who used that argument. But what took rlsce in Australia ? One of the very first acts - which the billet-elected parliament in Australia did was to give such an extension of the suffrage as nearly amounted to universal suffrage. (Hear.) But it would be said, " Oh, but Australia is a remote colony." It was a remote colony, but it was peopled by Anglo Saxons, and your Anglo-Sa xons , in whom it wa s s o b ecom i ng t o vote openly, a d o pt e d the ballot. (Bear) hop d the exert-Tie <f the Angle-Saxons of Victoria would be fol lowed by the Angle-Saxons of the mother-country. One of the advantages of raising this question of the ballot was that it afforded an occasion of bringing bef ire the house and the country practical instances of the tyranny and nsalvereation which occurred during the year in con nection with elections, and that there was no value in the argument of those who raid that the aristocracy were becoming politically more virtuoue. He did not know whether the light hon. geutleman the member for North ampton was in the house, but he wished to st a t e , f or hi s edification an d that f the house, what took place at the last election for North Northernptoeshire. The two can didates, Mr. Hunt and Mr. Vernon, addressed the elec tors from waggons. (Laughter) Mr. Hunt, according to the North,qmpton Mercury, &lid "be would go against the ballot through thick and thin." They perhaps knew that at the different poll.ng pieces the numbers polled varied according to the circumstaoces of each locality. In the Peterborough di trict 316 votes were recorded for his opponent, and 161 for him (Mr. Hunt) ; but he knew that be had 316 go , d wishes beside the 161 votes. In Wellinborongb, Mr. Vernon had 392 votes to his 251; but they knew the sort of screw which was put upon the people there, and that there was in that neigbbourhood a l arge l ance d rroprietor who would put on a screw for a W hig. (L aughter.) He (Mr. Hunt) knew of his own knowledge that the screw was worked. [A. Voice in the crowd—. Beca u se you put it on yourself.']" Much laugh ter.) S much for Mr. Hunt. Then Mr. Vernon re se, and said " that the present election had thrown more light on the necessity for the ballot than anything that bad recently taken place." Now Mr. Fitzpatrick Vernon bad two brothers-in-law in the house who voted against the tall. t ; his father voted against it, and his fathei iw, who was the hereditary owner of two rotten. . pocket boroughs. (Laughter.) The house would not for- get the pompous seesicnal order which was passed by them to prevent peers from interfering with the election of members of the House of Commons. When they in sisted on that order being printed, was it not like the ease of Dogberry when he insisted on bcirg recorded in a particular manner? (Laughter.) It was a pharisaical pretence which was never intended to be acted upon. It was notorious that one-third of the members of that house 'were returned by peers who concerned themselves in elections to that house. Tne peers laughed at them, ridi culed them, and, if he might venture to use such an ex i'r"ci"fl, "took a sight" of them. (Laughter.) He held an his hand a letter from Lord Lilford to Mr. Hunt, and lltt more remark a bl e d ocument ; one more unconstitu oon:l, or s h owing more conteiupt for the order of the AP _ so of Commons, he never read. H e sa y s , " Y ou w ill also forgive me for saying that neither by property nor position should I think you quaified to represent it (the counly) in Parliament. Holding this opinion, without any disrespect towards yourself —(laughter)—l must re quest that my tenantry may not be c anvasse d f or their votes in your favour. " (Laughter.) He did not know in millet manner the hen. member (Mr. Hunt) acted, but be (Mr. Berkeley) if in his place, would have canvassed every one of Lord Lilfurd's tenantry. But let the house not suppose that Mr, Hunt was without a screw on his side. (Laughter.) If Mr. Vernon bad Lis lofty Lilford, Mr. Hunt had his hold Buc clench. (Laughter.) The address of his grace was not so insolent or dictatorial in mahner as the communica tion from Lord Lilford, but it was plain enough. It was addressed by his grace's steward to the tenantry, and was as follows : "Mr. Payne will be obliged by Mr. So and-so attending the election on Monday next. Mr. Bunt has his good wieheit.” (Much laughter.) Who would take proceedings against Lord Lilford for what he bad done ? If he had been seen standing at the poll• ing booth and doing what his steward was doing no no tice would be taken of it, notwithstanding the standing order of the house. Perhaps it might be said, why not the hon. member for Bristol take proceedings. (Hear.) His answer to that was that he was taking proceedings. (Hear.) Ile wan pointing out the proper and constitu tioual way in which Lord Lilfurd's voting machines might be freed from his lordship's power—be was pointing out to them the mode by ;Thiel), instead of passing a phari (Weed order which meant nothing, they could do a great act of jiict!ce to the people and of credit to themselves. (Hear, bear.) He had usually been in the habit of referring to recent elections, and quoting from the se'esches' of the various candidates who had given opinions on the ballot. He appealed to the house whe ther he had ever done this in a party spirit, or treated it as a party question, or even raised the question with villein he acted, at the expense of those he opposed. (Ho ua) There had recently been several elections con etqueut on the accession of Lord Derby's Government, and he had been enabled to get the opinions of a few hapbers o f th e Government on the subject. The right gentle man the Chancellor of the Exchequer had been akeel several questions • be, however, felt no diffi iccoel,t! nuerehaintatdhee aA (declaration call ' generalising the .sub ration which, corning from the leader of the Tory party ,he (‘Zr , Berkeley) had no rea son to object to. Il e ii-rid oppose the measure, because it would tend to diminis h y the jaet influence of property. In that sentence was contained the real es ; ence o f the opposition to the I:new-use—they dreaded to lose their fluence. That l anguage of the right hon. gentleman did very well addressed to countrymen and faro:terse but, if he repeated it there h e would be asked what were, his vie ws as to the d ue and consti tn. ion al in- Aluepee of property. That i▪ nfluence he (Mr. Berk,lee) ;swished to ail tein. It was only the undue and u 'l'l4 ,4uenee he wished to dimini▪ sh. From the speech the na he turned to that of a noble lord r itas. ll 2.7 ".g l e4l. lff ie e" w all saske d whether ho would ohjtct to s a 44, e. r. , t- • 3 - king of the ballot U egtei into an inquiry into the wor king Australia. He said he would not. That was a remerkable speech foia,Tory. (A. laugh) He saw no difference between the noble lord and many who sat around him. I The noble lord continued to say that in Australia the supporters of the ballot were the men who lived in the towns; the landholders—the squatters, as thty were called—were opposed to it. That statement of the noble lord be (Mr. Berkeley) could unequivocally contradict. Mr. Nicholson, the founder of the ballot in Australia, had answered the noble lord, and stated that be had been returned by a rural district, the county of North Berke, containing 8,000 electors. There was only one other argument to which he would refer that had been used by a member of the Government, for whom he and the whole house bad the highest respect, he meant the President of the Poor Law Board. In a speech addressed to the electors of North Wilts, Mr. Sotheron-Eatcourt had opposed the ballot on a rather new ground, the pre valence of original sin. (Great laughter.) The right hon. gentleman said, "The reason why the ballot in my eyes is offensive and to be deprecated is this—there is in the heart of every single one of us such an element of wickedness, and such a proneness to act contrary to whatever is good and worthy of approbation, that for the due and proper discharge of every trust we find that publicity is the very best possible guarantee." That was the doctrine of original sin ; every one of them at their birth inherited the fallen nature of Adam, they had not the fear of God before their eyes, but, moved and insti gated by the devil, they delighted in everything that was bad, and abhorred everything that was good ; ergo, says the right hon. gentleman, they must have open voting. (A laugh.) He could not admit that was good logic. If they were all of them miserable sinners, elec tors and non-electors, how could the supervision of 30,000 non electoral sinners have any good effect on 1,000 electoral scamps ? A flattering picture the right honourable gentleman drew of them. What a set of blackguards they must let into their clubs, and what a set sf mauvais sujete they must admit into the Bank of England. (Laughter.) He was lately at a meeting for the election of a chaplain to Dulwich College. Three hundred clergymen had sent in applica tions. Lord Stanley was in the chair. Like the rest of the nobility he appeared to have a partiality for old bat voting, and took the poll that way. Of course the whole election was tainted with original sin, and instead of electing an orthodox clergyman of the Church of Eng land, they must have got a Papist, or a Puseyite, which meant the same thing. (Laughter.) There had lately been an election of vestrymen in Belgravia, in St. George's Without, of course by ballot. The candidates were Lord Ernest Bruce, Gen. Sir W. Codrington, and Phipps. (Great laughter.) Not Phipps thewarrior, and slayer of men—not th e knight of the Bath—(laughter) —hut a peaceful Phipps, a slayer of sheep, a knight of the cleaver. (Continued laughter.) The result of the election was that Lord Ernest Bruca was at the head of the poll, Phipps was second, Sir W. Codrington lost his election. Now, according to the right hon. gentleman, they should look on Lord Ernest Bruce and Phipps as miserable sinners, elected by original sin, but on Gen. Codrington as a perfect saint. (Laughter.) He had so often answered the argument as to the franchise being a trust that he would not now refer to it • but if hon. gen tlemen used that argument he hoped th ey would tell the house in what did a breach of electoral trust consist. He had only to thank the house for having allowed him to make so long a speech on so hackneyed a subject. (Hear.) It was a subject of great importance, and he trusted his friends would express their opinions on it. (Hear, hear.) The time was approaching in which they were about to enter on their great profligate Saturnalia. The orgies were in preparation. Shabby-genteel men were to be seen about the Carlton. The Whig whippets-in were looking for some respectable gentleman to supply the place of the lamented Mr. Coppock. Men in the moon were pre paring to descend on boroughs in silver moonbeams. In Vie country, the owners of the machinery were oiling the cogs end greasing the wheels for the work. Infleence would again beat work ; intimidation would stalk, and drunkenness stagger through the land. He would ap peal from the House of Commons to the independent electors of Great Britain and Ireland ; at the hustings let them have a Shibboleth for every man—elect those who can pronounce it ; those who cannot whether they come in the guise t f Whig or Tory, reject. Let the Shibboleth be " The Ballot." (Hear, hear.) Mr. P. W. MARTIN seconded the motion, and in doing so hoped that theihouse would not ignominiously reject the resolution as had been previously done. He could not understand how it could possibly happen that the salutary influence of property could be affected in any manner by the adoption of the ballot, although he could readily understand how the abuse of that authority could be checked by a system of secret voting. The hon. member proceeded to refer to a speech delivered in the southern division' of the county of Nottingham by the chairman of the t lection committee, in which it was broadly laid down that it was the duty of the landlords to be down upon any tenant who might happen to change his political opinions after being accepted as a tenant. He had been engaged in at least five contested elections and at four of these it was clearly ,understood to be the rule thet the tenants en an estate were bound to vote according to the opinions and wi.hes of the landlords. (Hear, hear.) The preamble of the bill was verbatim the words of the Chancellor of the Exchequer and Lord Chelmsford, and therefore deserved very serious consi deration on the opposite side of the house. He denied that there was anything un-English in the vote by ballot —it was used at clubs, at municipal elebtions, and an act passed 150 years since, in the reign of Queen Anne, ex pressly enacted that the election of the town councillors bculu be trieLnially and ny ballot. (Flea.) Tlio in Australia at the tact election had caused the Govern ment candidate to be elected over the popular candidate and it was universally declared by the populace that the failure was due to the ballot, with which the populace was thoroughly discontented in purpose. He would sup port any other plan, which would equally secure the in dependence of electors. Si quid novisti rectius istis, Candidus imperti—si non his utere mecum. Mr. HUNT would not follow the hon. member into original sin as he was sitting beside the best au hority on tract sul•ject (Lord Palmerston). (A. laugh.) But he did object to a person dropping a ball into the. btx, and then coming away and telling a lie. Mr. S. ESTCOURT said that society was interested in knowing how the elector performed his functions. Ho was likewise, for publicity, thinking that secrecy under the present circumstances would be productive of mis chief. He might almost say that if they could achieve secrecy, be should approve it. But they could not achieve it—they could not shut up the mouth of the voter himself or bis friends, or his relations. It was impossible for any mau so to exercise his functions in this country as to conceal it from the errs of his neigh bours. He htld that the franchise was a public trust, and be had never hoard it spoken of in any other term:, and the constitution would soon be at an. end if it should ever come to be considered otherwise. He belisved the ballot never could secure secrecy. He based his objec tion to the ballot on this, that the franchise was a trust and that trust ought t be exercised openly. He did not btlieve the ballot could put an end to bribery and cor ruption. The best way of preventing bribery and inti midation was by an alteration in the present electoral districts, The true remedy was not_in a little crotchet like the ballot, but in an alteration in the electoral systetn. _ Sir A. ELTON said, first of all the .ballot would not work, and was therefore a sham. Then they were told that it would work, but that it would degrade the con stitution ; and then they were told that it was a Con servative measure. Now, how were these arguments co-existent with each other ? It bad been said that we were becoming more virtuous, and that bribers was at a discount. He believed such was not the case, but that . members of that house were becoming more skilful in concealing their delinquencies. With regard to the fran chise being a trust, no doubt/it was, but the elector was not answerable to the non-elector, but to his own con science only. It was absolutely essential that there should be no artificial reetra'.nt on the elector. Ile re pudiated the argument that an extension of the fran chise would place it in the bands of those who would de sire to anon all property. He bad confidence in the honour and conscientiousness of his countrymen. H e believed the ballot was the only means by which they could protect the dependent classes. The people of the country would never believe in the truth of the Whigs, unless they supported the ballot. - Mr. BENTINCK could not understand bow any one could support the ballot. He had never heard an argu ment in favour of the ballot. It had been said that the ballot had succeeded in America. He trusted that each success would never_ be. seen in this country, if such scenes as occasionally take place in the AMerican legis lature were to be taken as part of that success. The proper title to a bill for the ballot ought to be a bill for the prevention of the reaction of bribery. Under the ballot it would be impossible to prevent bribery, which would then go on for ever on a wholesale system. (Great laughter.) That was an argument that met the whole ease. Under th e b a ll o t ever y b oroug h wou ld h ave its price, just like an article in a shop ; and the legis lature of the country would have debarred itself from therefore, e we o r f e t t h h a es t aa . iddv T o h ca o t s e e s who supported the 1, it G d e i n d e n ra o l t T d li es O ire ll t P o S S O to N p t b ak all i o n t g , the advocates of the voter'sbal thewl(i mouth. He might proclaim his vote to ali the object i f the ballot was to allow or the o lf v h o e t el; pleased vote ; but secretly tbe if he phased. He trusted that would soon change their views übponn. gentlemen opposite - sub j ect.. The country expected much from . them. Hitherto their ex• peciations had not been met with diaappointment Mr% A. B. HOPE said the hon. gentlemen ;h0 had submitted the motion had at all events shown courage i n appealing to the example of America on the subject. The ballot bad been tried on thirty-five millions of in habitants in France. 'What had been its effect there ? Perhaps the supporters of the ballot did not think there should be freedom of the press in this Country, or i nde. 1 p-.ndence of the courts of law. The effects of the ballot in France had been to suppress the press, raise the army, and abolish the independence of the courts of law. It was in the cause of liberty that he protested against the ballot, and he did so with the example of France pro minently before hie eyes. He believed that the screw had really been placed on the 101. householder employed by the manufacturing intereat'. The ballot would place the working man in the dilemma of either baying to tell - the truth and lose his employment, or tell a lie , and keep it. Another evil consequence would be that the present incitement to vote at all would be wanting, for under a system of open voting each individual in the community Mt a pride in letting his neighbours know that he really possessed political predilections. The ex• periment had signally failed in America, where the cha racter of the individual was not thought of. (Hear.) Sir G. C. LEWIS said that the friends of the ballot contended that under it intimidation would cease. I s opponents, on the other hand, 'maintained that the - erciae of the franchise was a so l emn t rus t. B u t w ould the ballot p ro d uce secrecy ? Reasoning from the opera-. tines of the system i America,itcould - n , he ballot did not secure secrecy. (Hear.) With the ex , caption of one State in the United States, where staled --- r HE SUN, envelopes were employed, every publicity was given to the proceedings of an election. The late Governor of Connecticut had addressed a letter to the Ballot Society, in which he saidthat although many voters so contrived their ballot - papers that they were not.made public, the majority of voters in that State paraded their ballot papers, preferring that the side on which they voted should be known. The general practice of voting in the United States—the country referred to as the model for imitation—the country of native talent—the country of revolvers—(a laugh) —was paraded as the one which ought to be followed. (No, no.) In that country, how ever, as he had shown, the voting was practically open. The mode of voting in the East India House was also extolled by the advocates of the ballot, but the system there employed was really quite as open to analysis as the machinery for taking votes for members of Parlia ment. But was it possible to keep the fact as to which way constituents would vote a secret ? If not, and the ballot were adopted, how could candidates be permitted to canvass ? (Hoar, hear.) If the ballot were to become the law, the whole system of canvassing, the whole of our electoral system, must b 3 given up. • Under a sys tem of optional secrecy the door would be opened to coercion, and upon the supporters of the motion the onus lay to prove that the - ballot would insure secrecy. (Hear, hear, and cries for a division.) Mr. MARSH had every reliance on the character of the Australian colonists, and that it would work out the destiny of the Anglo-Saxon race, but he was firmly con vinced that the ballot had worked injuriously to the colonists of those lands. The source of all freedom was responsibility. (Hear.) According to the hon. memher fcr Bristol, the ballot had insured "respectability" in Australia, but he (Mr. Marsh) had been credibly in formed that one of the first persons elected for the colony of Victoria took his seat in his shirt sleeves. (Laughter.) The honourable member proceeded, in a humorous vein, to read certain proceedings in the Vic toria Legislature, the style of speech of the principal interlocutor causing considerable laughter. A Mr. "G.," in one of his debates, expressed a wish "not only that the typhus fever might sweep away the ministry for the benefit of the colonists (laughter), but that the whole house might share the same fate"—a wish for which the speaker was called to order by the Attorney-General. (Laughter.) The Attorney-General was then told that he might "grin," but that he was " a miserable penny-a-liner," who had condescended to write for some blackguard newspaper, and that he had stolen his (tbe interlocutor's) spoons—language for which the chairman ruled him "out of order." (Laughter.) In another legislature one member wished another " dead," then said he didn't, and deprecated the blandishments of "soft sawder." (Renewed laughter.) Mr. Marsh then continued to speak against the motion of the honourable member for Bristol, stating his belief that bribery and intimidation were daily increasing in this country, which bad set its face against such prac tices. (Hear, hear.) If ever it was proved to him that such practices were on the increase, he would vote fJr the ballot. If ever the ballot was introduced, however, he believed it would be through the wrongdoing of its supporters. AYRTON chimed the indulgence of the house, as neither the noble lord the member for Tiverton, nor the noble lord the member for ,London,, were prepared to grapple with this question. For the last 150 years penal statutes had been passed to secure the freedom of election, and yet Parliament refused to sanction a means of escape which would render all those penalties unnecessary. The system of penal and repressive laws had arrived at . its climax of absurdity (cries of " divide, divide"). The ballot was not, proposed as a principle in itself, but to give to the principle of free election (re newed cries for a division). With what would the ballot do battle ? Primarily with bribery (ob, oh). -What a mockery was it to Fay that bribery was not resorted to, when it was well known that towards the end of an election votes were purchased wholesale. (Oh, oh). The ballot would next deal with intimidation. (Oh, oh). He was well aware that this was a still more tender point with hon. members. (Renewed cries of " oh, oh," and calls for a division). Secret voting would prevent intimidation. (Oh, ob). Balancing the inconvenience at ached to the ballot with those bound up with the present system, there could not be a doubt that the former were insignificant. As the system was practised in Australia, it was utterly impossible to divine the manner in which a man might vote. The plan of the honourable member for Bristol was equally perfect The honourable member, amidst the impatience of the house, which induced him to taunt honourable members with making a noise in order that they might not hear the truth, demurred to the doctrine of a member of the present Ministry, that "Education, Property, and In dependence" were to be the electoral tests. His own election had not been an affair of influences. At that election political questions had been examined by men as intelligent as those whom he now addressed. (Oh, oh, and repeated calls for a division). Lord PALMERSTON—I am anxious to state a few reasons why I cannot agree with my hon. friend, whose speech I allow, with the hon. member for Norfolk, although very humorous, was more deficient in argu ment than any of his former speeches on the same sub ject. The question is whether vote by ballot shall be permissive or compulsory. If permissive, it will be a trap to the timid ; it compulsory, it will be a gag upon the freedom of the voter. Whether they be employers, or customers, or landlords, they will understand why a vote is given in seerst, and the consequence to the voter w 11 be the sArrte whether the vote be given onenly or stcretly. If the secret vote be cotepuieory, it is imp., restrictions upon the liberties of the electors of Eng land quite incompatible with our national feeling and the principles of our constitution. But you must go further; you must make it penal for a voter to state how be has voted—(no, no, and bear)—yoti must pre vent canvassing—(no, no)—as your objet,t is to prevent it being known how a particular individual votes. Take Vie case of a shopkeeper, a tenant, or workman. His vote is asked. Ile says, "I cannot state how I shalt vote. I shall take advantage of the -law, or I eleall act according to the law, and give my vote in secret." Would a person exercising any influence be satisfied with such au answer ? If a person makes a promise and breaks it, it is introducing a system-of falsehood and dis simulation, instead of promoting those objects which are to be promoted by this bill. (No, no.) I defy you by y huinsn lames, by ba'lot'b xor other contrivance, to prevent a person who wireies to know from ascertain ing bow an elector has given his vote. Publicity is an essential principle of the British constitution. Tae elec tor has a trust, or why do you punish him for selling his vote, sires every man has a right to do what he likes with his own ? The principle upon which, bribery is punished is that the vote is a trust, and that the voter has no right to part with the. trust for his own private advantage. All our political functions are exercised in open day, open to all the consequences, and there is no security for the exercise of political functions unless pub lic opinion can be brought to bear upon them. Those who seek for secrecy in one political function ought to extend it to many others to which I am sure they would not be disposed to extend them. Vote by ballot would put au end to party spirit, and party spirit is an essen tial element in the working of the British constitution. Ou former occasions we had the example of the United States given to us to follow. The hon. gentleman went to such a length as to attribute to the ballot all those qualities of inventive powers and all the prosperity which tne Unite I States enjoyed, for unless he went to that length he meant nothing. Setting aside the United States, they now take refuge in the Australian colonise. In the United States there is no secret voting, it i s by ticket voting, because it is customary to elect a num , tier of officers at the same time, and it is convenient to place their names upon one ticket instead of voting several times. They do not pretend to say that their votes are secret. And I say that the feelings of the people of this country would be opposed to secret vot it g. (Hear.) Do you think that the Blues and the Yel lows would go mute and colourless to the poll ? It is not in the nature of Englishmen to do it—(hear)—and if you accomplish your object you wi:l strike a blow at the national spirit of the country. I will take th e example of our North American colonies' neighbours of the United States, and acquainted with the working of the ballot there. Have they adopted it ? No ; they have seen the advantage of our system, and follow it them selves. Your law will not accomplish what you intend it should accomplish. Great frauds will be occasioned, even in the ballot-box, which I defy you to prevent. .11 will not accomplish the secrecy you wish for, and if it did it would strike a great blow at the country; and as it. will not afford the protection you desire, and as it will inflict a great injury upon the public spirit of the people, I cannot recede from the vote which I have always given upon this question. (Cheers.) Mr. BRIGHT said he would endeavour to take up the time of the house for a few minutes only. He had not heard this question discussed for some three years, but during his absence from the house he had formed a rather unfa vourable impression, from reading the reports in the news papers, of the way in which it had been received by the house, who were disposed, he thought, to deal rather un fairly with his hon. friend the member for Bristol. Trey seemed to have treated him somewhat rudely wheni he brought this subject forward, as though it were not large enough to occupy the consideration of the House of Com mons, and he (Mr. Bright) thought ho had observed a little of this feeling to-night in what had fallen from the hen. member for the Tower Hamlets. (Hear.) But he would beg to say that this was not a small subject; it was not one that they could hustle out of the door of the house, and say they would have nothing to do with it, because nobody in the country really cared anything about it. (Hear, hear.) There never was a greater mistake than this conclusion. He admitted that it was rather an unpleasant questions wish to dismissesues if t ß h a a t t w h e e r h e a a d r s e e a e s n o n m w a why y y u t h n e p y l e s a h s o s n a l t d discussed there which had at length come to be welcomed in the house by very large majorities, who had admitted that their previous conduct upon them had been en tirely wrong. If they wanted to know what sort of question it was, let them ask any portion of ttre pspulation of the country who had expressed t a it w e i , ish for Parliamentary reform. Hon. gentlemen oppo site, was a very when they went to their constituents did not see so manyto reformers as those who sat on his (Ur. Bright's) side of . h house, bat they must see quite enough to know that many o ft membershe ho .w u nshoeoof thee ese important question with their constituents and the public, and if they wished to know how far mem bersors e mth i heo n aul f I n 2s u e2 e m3h n oo c a influenced dt membersrh recorded c y ao r d i o t ,e , dow l themfetethtrhee this assembledrs vveo rt a ye s s k H on h u o i tst w oi no ofl a vC k oo e umr t . h m e Wo n nhs oble lorl the member for g Tiverton dictator— (cheers) —and came to this house to support him, had voted e in troduce woo l s D an ythingt go to iii favour of a proposition which h e h ad treated to-night as one which could only be advoc a t e d b y idiots or fanatics. (61 Oh, e h," and cheers.) He wa n t e d to put to the house A t two s t o r r a i t i h a T h pointse was onne now the unwilling t o subject,and 12 into this country which was growing up across the Atlan tic, or on the other side of the Pacific. They required it for their own interests and for their own security, Was there a country in the world in which there was so much colonial wealth by the side of such deep and miserable-po verty as this ? (Hear.) Did not the majority of the people LONDON; WEDNESDAY —whether in the counties or in the boroughs, consist of persons who were struggling in business, and under the pressure of a fierce competition? And was it mot clear from this that this was peculiarly a country in which unfair in- • fluence might be expected at elections; and if a remedy could be suggested, was it not -a subject which the house might be asked, at least, fairly to consider, and, if just, to apply it. i(Cheers.) The noble lord the member for Tiver ton had spoken of the force of party feeling which waline cessary to carry on the Government of the country, and he bad spoken of the manly spirit and great strength of that feeling. But if that party feeling be strong must not the position of men be raised in a correspond ing degree ? Did be not recollect what it was for which they hat b ten contending ? Some ten years ago there was a great question before the country—the question of the corn laws. We were all, continued the hon. member, exasperated upon that question. You com municated your wishes to the public. We charged upon you crimes and•misdemeanonrs which you had not com mitted. But great feeling was excited, and if the election,s on your side were influenced by your endeavours, so they were also by the Anti-Corn Law League. When those struggles were impending mans' feelings were under the apprehension, on your part, that you were going to be ruined, and upon our part that we were going to rid the country of an unjust and iniquitous law. There was exas peration ou both sides ; but when there was so great wealth on one side, and so much struggling poverty, temp tation, and trial on the other, I say that power was brought to bear upon that poverty, and the wealthy and the power ful acted upon the weak and the defenceless. (Cheers.) In thousands and tens of thousands of cases, to my certain knowledge, men went up to the polling-booth, not with a lie in their mouths, but when they were asked how they voted, by what they then and there did they committed themselves in the face of Heaven to a lie as gross as ever wee' uttered in the world. (Cheer..) And look at the great prize for which you were contending the other day, if theca had been a general election, in consequence of the vote of confidence, which did not came off. (Cheers.) Hon. gentlemen who were very anxious to continue in the Government have made a very great struggle to bring themselves back, and a friend or two with them. Thera would have been abundance of party spirit and manly feeling - (ironical and counter cheers)--and what would have been the result ? I don't say you would have fought harder than we should on our side. But the harder the battle the greater the victory—the . richer •the prize the greater would have been the struggle— the greater the temptation to bribery the greater the incentive .to undue influence. (Cheers.) In your elections, what is there that would have enabled the weak to shelter themselves from your power ? Their virtue would have succumbed to the influences brought to bear upon them. (Cheers.) It is not the noble lord the member for Tiverton who wants the ballet. (Cheers.) I never advised the ballot for the sake of the noble lord. I advised the ballot for the poor, the de fenceless, and the weak. It is the shelter whlch`common sense and common morality have afforded in every com munity which has granted to its members the right to ex ercise the elective franchise. (Cheers.) And if we had never seen anything of elections in this country—if we had only studied the question in our closets, from what we have read we should be led to the conclusions to which I have endeavoured to lead the house. I believe it is a' farce to bring any new evidence before the house, because with re gard to the facts of this case every member on this side of the house and the other is equally convinced on the sub ject. But I have here a letter which was handed to me by a gentleman who, while he lived, had a great deal to do with election matters—thelate Mr. Coppock—who, though he was connected with many election operations which I should be very sorry to defend, and which I greatly regret to believe to have taken place in the country of which I am a citieen—•yet in public and in private was always the advocate of any measure which should make it possible to work election's in this country without impurity anti cor ruption ; •and he believed there was no weapon whatever by which you could at all hope to s'rike dowii 'Undue in fluence and corruption at elections like the ballot. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member then read the note, which was dated Portobello, July 23—no year—and addressed to a Mr. Welder ; and was in the following terms: ----" I under stand that you are in doubt which way to vote, and I de sire you to vote for Mr. Fitzgerald. , If you don't do this, yon leave my farm." (Laughter.) That was very laconic; no tenant whatever, however obtuse, could mistake its meaning. That letter was written to a farmer. Mr. Cop. pock also gave him (Mrr Bright) at the same time two or three extracts from letters written by solicitors ftei king to be employed as agents. One was this, "I wish to know whether lam to be retained again for Mr. —. I am offered 25 guineas from the other side ; and if I don't hear from you by two o'clock, I shall accept the offer." Another was—" As every vote is of importance, I drift wish to have or take any retainer ; as in the case of a scrutiny it might be inconvenient; a nd I must rely upon you for pay ment on the same scale as last time." Another solicitor wrote to say that his father-in-law had considerable inte rest-in the borough, and that several of his men had votes which they would give to Mr. A--, but that a retainer would be expected. Other letters went to the same effect —offering services and expecting retainers ; being profes sional men they could not be expected to work for nothing. Now he would ask the house the reason why these solicitors' votes wore worth 25 guineas each ? It was bbCause these men turned the screw ; they knew their influence over the list of . voters, and that A, B, C, and D had small or largo mortgages upon their property, and they knew that many of the voters were under struggling circumstances; in fact, they knew the private affairs of the larger number of elec tors, and before they were so essential to the candidate ; and, therefore, when they were paid 25 guineas they got more at the marrow of the subject than any other man could do, and thus it was that all this machinery of lawyers became apparent; and thus it was that the evidence showed this intolerable working of the screw. (Cheers.) He sail the noble lord the member for Tiverton did not want the ballot. Well, rich people did not want many things that the poor required. Laws were not so much in necessity for the rich as for the poor, and it was for the defence of the poor voters that they asked the house to grant the protec tion of the ballot. Out of doors the subject was much dis cussed, and would au) , wan say that. Llum.., who ad v.ca,'...41 the ballot did not represent an enormous amount of opinion in the country ? (Cheers.) Did they think the poor voters could not batter tell whore the shoe pinched than the noble lord the member for Tiverton? (Cheers.) Of course they could. There was no question which would attract to its banner so many persons as the ballot. They cool t pass n 3 Reform Bill without making it a part. They had been given to un lerstand that something in the shape of a Re form Bill was in the contemplation of the Government ; but he (Mr. Bright) did not place much reliance on the statements. Governments did not live long now-a-days, an I perhaps the Government might not live to next ses sion; and if they did live they might not b 3 able to keep the promise. But he begged to tell the Government ---and they had already exhibited seine good points—that if they should introduce a Reform Bill, and not add to it a clause conferring vote by Latta on the people, they would tint existing constituencies show no enthusiasm for their mea sure. (Cheers.) The great body of the people would regard such a bill as another mode of subjecting them to another species of degradation. (Cheers.) The noble lord the mem ber for London once brought in a Reform Bill, so called— though it was no Reform Bill at all—and subsequently thousands of people, at a meeting at Stockport, declared that the franchise would be of no use to them without the ballot was included with it, because hundreds of these men worked for one particular employer, or one firm of em ployers; and although he (Mr. Bright) did not believe that manufacturers would exercise this power more than dand ier•ls in counties did, yet when they came to a fierce and exciting contest he would not trust any poor or defenceless countryman to the tender mercies of either a landlord or a manufacturer. (Cheers.) There were several members who proposed a reform in Parliament, but he b dieved the noble lord the member for London was the most sincere in his convictions upon the question, though at present he (Mr. Bright) confessed he thought the noble lord felt :.frail of disturbin g o ther things. (R ear , hear.) The noble lord the member for Tiverton hall been paraded through the coun try as a great reformer ; not only was he to settle things abroad, but he was to do everything at home. Well, every thing abroad was loft in confusion, and nothing at home was done by the noble lord— (cheers)—and the noble lord, in answer to the hon. member for Finsbury (Mr. Dun combo), with a frankness which he (Mr. Bright) ad mired, admitted that the Government of which he was the head had not prepared a Reform Bill.' They might have talked about it, but there was no bill ready ; he was in favour of a bill for reform, and if ho had been in office he would have brought one in. He (hlr. Bright) was not going to make a charge against the noble lord for not keeping his promise. (Hear.) Then the right hon. gentleman - opp.osite was in favour of reform, and there were many persons who thought that the bill of the present Government would be a good one. At any rate the present Government wore getting rid of property qualification, and that would be a groat achievement. (Cheers.) lion. mem bers opposite w ere more reasonable than they formerly were, and were not half so frightened as they used to be when he (Mr. Bright) first knew them. (Laughter.) Thus the right hon. gentleman and the two noble lords were going to re deem their promises ; and the right hon. gentleman the member for the University of Oxford (Mr. Gladstone) had agreed to a reform bill when a member of Lord Aberdeen's Government. Bat would the Reform Bill be for the people? They must please that great body of the people who since 1832 had been increasing in loudness and unani mity on this question ; and was it not a fact that every pe tition presented in favour of Parliamentary Reform had asked to have included therein the ballot ? (Cheers.) Was it not a feet also that every public meeting, attended by hundreds and thousands of the people, resolved to have the ballot. (Cheers.) There were men in the country who had thought of this subject a great deal more than the noble lord the member for Tiverton had considered it, and they thought that without exception secret voting should be made the cardinal point in the new Reform Bill. The noble for 1 might get up and say that he hail the argu ments ad nauseam, but the people had not them to that extent. (Cheers.) They were determined to have this measure ; and they knew that if they rapped louder and longer the house would listen to them as they had done on other questions of groat importance to the interests and welfare of this country. (Cheers.) He declared that he had nev er advocated the ballot as a democratic measure. It was, he knew, the charter of freedom to the poor man, b u t if it wore es tablished to - m orrow, ho did not b e li eve it wou ld ver y ma t e rially Lion of mem b ers a t th e oppos it e s id e of the house. Ho ad vocated the ballot not because it was a demo cratic measure but be cause h e b e li eve d it to bo wool and just, and he was persuaded that if Parliament were to p ass a hundred of the bills to reform the representation people, none of c h a nge the posi them would do so much to effect that ob j ect as the little bill of two or three clauses which the h on. g entleman the member for Bristol had invited them to p ass that day. The party with whom he ( Mr. Bright) act ed were in a little difficulty, which he would endeavour to explain. The noble lord the member for Tiverton —(laughter)—.that was not the difficulty--had been Pi ime Minister for three years, and had occupied at s uccessive periods many high offices in the State. He could not avoid showing his con tempt for the cpiniona of the great majority of those who had kept him in office. The noble lord the member fur London had also been Premier and the leader of the great Whig party, but the spoils of office had fallen to his lot to some extent as to - that of the noble lord the member for Tiverton and his colleagues. If the Liber al p art y were to bu I act under leaders as a great party, it stood to reason that there must be some sort of accord betwee n those who led I and those who followed. (Hear.) H ow could the Liberal party follow the noble lords an 1 righ t hon. gentlemen who had no respect for their followers ? He admired the co n. sistency shown by the noble lord th e member for the Cit y of London, bat he had lived long enou g h to see consistenc y advocated with great disadvantage to the country, and in consistency r ce ' tried t attended with grea t advantage. He looked m ep e o r n ely th a e s b a a m llait eh n n o te t ry so fo ne r with advantage in Belgium , in America, in Australia, an d other pieces, and ho was in f avour of trying it here. He did not therefore think, look in g to the ex p erience w hich we had of it in other plac es, that it would be inco nsistent for any hon. member to s a y that as there ' was so much utackhin a:vaotegsr.e alt p ha i d n b i e p e l n unanimity out of doors in favour of this great experiment, 1 he was willing to try it,, although he might think that the good likely to arise from' it was very gravely exag. E - V -- E N I N G, JUNE 9 , geratod. The noble lord the member for Tiverton I could, of course, take any time he pleased, but the action of parties at his (Ur. Bright's) side of the house, under its ancient leaders, would become impossible if the present state of things continued. He therefore asked the noble lord the member for Tiverton, and the noble lord the member for London, as their names had been mentioned as joint or united leaders, whether it was fitting that they should lead a party of 230 or 210 gentlemen who were pledged to their constituencies and to their own convic tions, or whether that party were to give up this great question to follow them ? (Hear, hear,) He wished it to be understood that he did not speak in anger against the noble lord the member for Tiverton. (Laughter.) He had no such sentiments to wards him—(laughter)— for he only sought to advance the question by fair argument. Why, he asked, were hon. gentlemen opposite so much frightened on this subject? Did they not know very well that they had often been terribly frightened before with out cause ? Did not the house remember the awful and solemn predictions of the hon. gentleman the member for Sotnersetshire (Mr. Miles), who had foretold, when the Liberal party was fighting the battle against protection, that the country would go to absolute perdition. (Laugh. ter.) And yet the hon. gentleman was now, no doubt, ready to admit that the enemies of protection had conferred the greatest benefits upon the country in general, and upon Somerset in particular. (Hear, hear.) The ruin of the shipping interest had also been predicted, and yet no such catastrophe had occurred. Why, that very day a bill had been passed which at time excited violent foam but which even the right hon. gentleman the member for the Uni versity of Oxford found the greatest possible difficulty in defending ; he referred to the bill for the abolition of church rates. That measure had been passed by a ma jority of 63, and he believed the unanimous hope of the house now was that it would be dealt with gently in that " other place" to which it had been sent, and that they might hear no more about it. (Hear, hear-) He confessed that he had faith in the people of Eng land, and that he was of opinion that they were enti tled to the consideration of the house. The people now looked forward to the house with greater confidence than at any previous period in the history of Parliament. (Hear, hear.) It had d ins much to relieve them of fiscal burdens and to free their industry, and 'depend upon it they were not insensible of these concessions, or of the im proved conduct of Parliament in reference to popular legis lation. He asked the house to try this great experiment, on the ground that the people deserved it, and because no Reform Bill could succeed in which it was not a feature. He implored them not to be led away by the flimsy argu ments of the noble lord the member for Tiverton. It was not to be expected that the noble lord at his time of life would change his opinion', and if he (Mr. Bright) had himself been 20 or 30 years of the same opinion, he might possibly call the ballot "an absurdity," and not a great question of public policy. For the sake of morality and tranquillity for the future, he asked the house to give a fair and careiid consideration, and he hoped a favourable vote, to the proposition of his hon. friend the member for Bristol. Mr. WALPOLE said the hon. member for Birmingham had commenced his speech by saying that during his ab sence of three years from the house—an absence which any one who valued great abilities honestly and independently exercised, must deeply regret—there had been an unwil lingness in the house to discuss this question. If the hon. gentleman had been among them he would have known that the reason why the discussion had not commanded so much attention as formerly was, in the first place, that those who supported his views had been unwilling to pro long the discussion—(" no, no," from tho lower Opposition benches)—and, secondly, that the arguments on toe ques t( n had been E 0 exhausted that the house was more or less tired of the subject. The hon. member for Birmingham had delivered a speech of great power, and he (Mr. Wal pole) wished to make a few observations in reply. The hon. member had said, somewhat differently from the hon. member for Bristol, that the q nestion before them was one of political machinery, while the latter hon. gentleman had said that the word " ballot" was to be the Shibboleth of the party opposite when an election should take place. He agreed with the hon. member for Birmingham that this was rather a question of political machinery than of prin ciple. They all desired that elections should be free from the contaminating and corrupting influences which still unfortunately existed, but to make the electors free, the electors must be independent, and when those influences still exist they must be detected and punished. (Hear, hear.) If it was attempted to establish any other principle instead of accomplishin g the object the hon. gentleman had in view, he would find himself failing in attempting to throw his protection around the weak, which he desired to do against the strong. He would ask the hon. gentle man to consider whether or not they were likely, by means of laws established, or which might be established, to pre vent undue influence, that undue influence which it was sought to put down by secret voting. He would ask whether it was not clearly shown that the best means of acting was by calling in public opinion and insisting on individual responsibility? (hear, hear.) By these means corruption and intimidation had been diminished—by the exposure and punishment which an open system of voting enabled them to apply. (Hear, hear.) There was a time when even that house was open to the corruption of foreign Potentates, but the laws of the house, and their interfer ence in punishing the members, together with the force of public opinion, had ended that state of things. Since the Revolution, too, corruption among the electors had reached to a most dangerous extent. Still, the laws which had been passed had diminished corruption and intimidation also, and especially of late, year by year, this hod been the case. They had lately had the measure of the noble lord the member for London, which very much facilitated proof of agency and means of detection. The hon. mem ber for Birmingham argued that they could not protect the weak without having votes taken in secret. He would ask the hon. member if he did not fix his eye too much on the evils aroun I him, knowing them to be in ex istence, without considering the full consequences which would follow from the introduction of another sys tem. Even if votes were taken in secret, every one, from the freedom with which things were discussed in this coun try, would know the opinions of his noiglabours, and in timidation, even iii ire bul:ot. were adopted. could. net be prevented, but would only take a different shape, know ledge being superseded by suspicion. (Hear.) The conse quences flowing from such a system were worse than those which existed at present. He would ask the hon. member for Birmingham if his object was accomplished in the adop tion of the ballot, what means of detection and exposure would ho have against malpractices ? When the hon. mem ber brought charges against a peer for practicing intimida tion at an election, ho must recollect to what measure re course had been had. He moved for a committee of the house to inquire into all the circumstances connected with the election at Peterborough. But could any result have followed if there had been no means of detecting intimi dation? It was the knowledge that the house and the country might obtain on the way in which. votes were given, the passer of tracing intimidation, of following up the wrong to its source, and afterwards punishing it, that furaished the best means of preventing these evils. (dear.) Great as would be the evils of secret voting, they would have to meet till greater if they adopted the ballot, through the means they would lose of detecting and exposing ille gal practices. The principle of public resposibility as to all matters of public concern, and the bringing to bear the control of public opinion upon these matters, was all-im portant. Whatever they did, unless they took care that a roan was made responsible in whatever position he might be, their plan must be faulty. The man who committed a wrong act must be brought into the face of open day, an 1 if they wished to encourage independence and virtue they could best accomplish it by such means as he had in dicated. The system of secret voting might open the way to deceit, treachery, distrust, and all evil passions. He begged to assure the hon. member for Birmingham that on that side of the house they were not afraid of the ballot as tending to diminish their power, but in point of public morality they thought it would bo dist), lvantageous to the country. He felt fully convinced that the power of public opinion must b a brought to bear on the exercise of the franchise throughout the country, which would sus tain men when they were acting rightly, wild when they acted wrongly would visit them with punishment. For these reasons he could not assent to the introduction of the bill. The amount of good prophesied from the adoption of the ballot would, he believed, fail to be obtained, and he preferred to look to public opinion as the best security for the prevention of the evils which called forth com plaint. (Cheers.) Lord J. RUSSELL—The hon. member for Birmingham has alluded so much to me that I will venture to ask the house to listen to a few observations from me. I have ad dressed the house frequently on this subject, and have stated the reasons for my opinion, and with respect to the principle of the b ).11ot I do not feel called upon to make any observation. I agree, however, with the h on . mem ber for Birmingham that this is a change in the machinery of the representation, but I consider it a change for the worse. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) The hon. member dwelt strongly on the evils of the existing system, but when he came to the remedy he seemed to take almost everything for granted. He assumed that the ballot would cure all evils. I very much doubt that, because I cannot but think that the passion imported into questions agitating the public mind would exist as much as ever under the ballot. I do not think that merely saying that a man should giro his vote in secret would cause the evil to cease. I have confidence in the natural candour and truth of the people of England. I object to try a remedy calculated !,to produce mischief, and which, if tried and found to fail, would lead its advocates to contend that, if from being permissive, it were made compulsory, the remedy would be complete. With respect to the small boroughs. I agree with the hon. member for Norfolk, that the adoption of secret voting would open a great means of corruption. I would ask how it is that the hon. mem hers for Bristol and Birmingham have not been able to show us some satisfactory example of a country in which the ballot is established, and which is more free, and has more liberty of discussion than is possessed by the people of England, notwithstanding the corruption and intimidation which exist among us. The ballot has been established in other countries of Europe, and nomi nally in the United States as well as in Victoria and Tas mania, but I cannot help thinking that if this contrivance had succeeded so well, by promoting freedom, without corruption, in the older countries of Europe, and in Ame rica, wo should have had the eases in Australia held up as such splendid examples. It may be well for us to wait for other examples treforo adopting torch a measure. We are far better off than any of those countries. Au hon. geetlemae has spoken of Hampden and Sidney, but I can het forget that thee) men who osteblished our liberties did not r airline or adopt secrecy. (hear) If the hon. meur• bor fir Birmingham will listen for a few minutes I will answer the appeal he made in reference to my Reform Bill. When I brought forward a Reform Bill I said there were certain subjects it did not touch, and one of those was certainly the subject of the ballot, with rspect to which I said many ingenious argumen t s h a d b een a dd uce d, but I hoped it would be always recollected that, while secret ballot would prevent bad influences over the good, it would also prevent good influences over the bad. (Hear, hear.) Since that time, now 21 years ago, I have had many opporqunities of meditating upon add discussing this sub ject; and last year, whsn I reconsidered the whole ques tion, I came to the result als unfevourable to the adoption of such as system as I had come to before. The hen. gentle man says it is the opinion of the great majority of those belonging to the Liberal party that the ballot should adopted. I have never shown I hope, any intolerance on the subject. A late lamented friend bf mine (Sir W. Holsawor th) was an eeeer advocate fir the ballot, and yet I recommended Lord Aberdeen that he should have a seat in the Cabinet, and give us the advantage of his knowlsdge and experience upon important matters. With indeed,regard to these s u bj ec t s , I cons id er i n these times—and, ever since the Reform Bill passed—it is verysifficult together for any pa r ty to f or m a Ministry, or to act without having several questions which are styled_ to open questions of policy. (Hear, hear). With regard the question of church rates, a very distinguished member of the present Ministry voted for their to tal abolition; and I think the noble lord at the head of th e Government and his colleagues were quite right to per mit that diversity of opinion to exist. ,This is a question of fth e machinery of election, a'nd if Men . cannot act together because they differ upon such a question, it seems to me there must be a gieiat deal of InSoleeanee among those who refuse to act together under such circumstances. (Hear, hear). The 1 - 8 5 8. late Sir Robert Peel changed his opinion on a very impor tqnt question, upon which at one time the safety of the country in a great measure depended; but at the same time, although I think his justification was complete, I cannot but. consider that some public mischief has been done by that change. (Hear, hear). I agree with the hon. member for Birmingham that this is not one of those great questions of principle on which you can say the w..01e working of our constitution depends. I do not even think there is anything like unanimity of opinion in the country on this occasion. At public meetings on the subject I have always found that, while many differed with me, many were disposed to coincide with my view. I think it is the opinion of a great number that, unless the suffrage is made almost universal, it is wrong to de prive those who have no votes of that general influence of public opinion over those who exercise public functions. Believing the change is not for the good of the people, I can only give the same vote I have always given against the proposition. (Hear, hear.) Mr. BERKELEY replied. The house then divided. The numbers were— For the motion Against it Majority against the motion The bill was consequently lost. Mr. PAULL moved for leave to bring in a bill to en courage and facilitate the erection and improvement of piers and harbours in Great Britain and Ireland. Sir J. PAKINGTON said the inconvenience of the pre sent mode of legislating in private was so great, that it was the intention of the Admiralty to bring in a bill on the subject with regard to piers and harbours ; but at the same time he would not object to the hon. gentleman' laying his bill on the table. Leave was then granted. EXEMPTION OF GOVERNMENT PROPERTY FROM RATES Sir J. ELPHINSTONE moved for a select committee to inquire into the operation of the law, as it at present stands, by which the property of Government in the boroughs of Greenwich, Portsmouth, Plymouth, Devon port, and elsewhere, is rendered exempt from local rates and taxes. Mr. DUTTON seconded the motion. The question was then put. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the question was a very important one, and ought to be inves tigated by a committee. The right hon. gentleman sug gested a slight modification and assented to the motion. Mr. W. MARTIN expressed his thanks to the Govern ment for the concession they had made, and pointed out some of the anomalies in the present system. The subject ought to be carefully investigated. Mr. WALPOLE thought the inquiry ought to extend to public establishments generally, and suggested an amendment to that effect. . Sir W. CODRINGTON hoped the damage done to parishes by the pulling down of houses for public purposes would not be lost sight of. Sir J, ELPHINSTONE assented to the suggestion of the Home Secretary, and the motion was altered and put accordingly. Agreed to. PUBLIC DEPARTMENTS. Mr. WALPOLE asked Colonel Boldero to postpone his motion in consequenc3 of the absence of the Secretary for War. (The motion was that the report presented to the house from the Committee of Contracts (Public Depart ments) be taken into consideration.) ➢Tr. JACKSON expressed a hope that the hon. and gal lant gentleman would not do so. Aft'r a few words from several hon. members, Colonel BOLDERO postponed the motion till Thursday next. RAILWAY AND CANAL LEGISLATION. Col. W. PATTEN moved for a select committee to in quire into the best mode of securing the public interests and diminishing Parliamentary expenses in reference to railway and canal le.isl .tion. FREEDOM FirOM ARREST (MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT). Mr. HUNT moved for leave to bringlin a bill to abolish freedom from arrest in the case of members of Parliament. LEASES AND SALES OF SETTLED ESTATES AMENDMENT. Mr. ADAMS moved for leave to bring in a bill to amend the Act of 1836, to facilitate leases and sales of settled estates. The clibate on the Galway Freemen Disfranchisement Bill was adjourned till Thursday next. The other orders were then disposed of, and the house adjourned at a quarter past 1. THE CHINA QUESTIOY. One of the qualities which combine to fit an Englishman for .constitutional government is his habit of submission to the will of the majority. A Frenchman, a German, or an Italian always has " an idea : " his notion of liberty is to obtain the liberty of carrying out that idea, and regenerat;ng all mankind by force. There was, a short time ago, a dwindling patty among our own public men, whose borrowed watchword was, "Everything for the people, and nothing by the people," the dogma of a tyrant. Our Constitution is founded upon principles the very contrary to that dogma. It works out in action the celebrated maxim of Plato —" We may endeavour to persuade our fellow citizens, but it is not lawful to force them even to that which is best for them." In Eng land, when the decision of the constituencies has been distinctly given, the public action of the Government must be in accordance with that deci sion, or the Constitution is violated. It appears 'Teller odd that the public man wno stands' most in need of being reminded of these trite constitutional truths should be Lord J. Rus sel!. If ever there was a question upon which the sense of the country was solemnly asked and dis tinctly declare 1 , it was upon the policy to be adopted by this country towards the Empire of China. There could be no mistake about the answer, and there can be no doubt that if the same question were again put the answer would be equally decisive. Now, Lord John R.esell in the speech which be made on this subject on Friday night does not attempt to re-argue the question, does not " code r• your to persuade his fellow-citizens ; but, in a spirit of carping and cavilling, he str;ves to impede the action of the Minister who is giving operation to the national policy in that distant country, and he too evidently is urging the present Government to act in disobedience to the expressed will of the I alloe. The whole tone of his remarks tends to encourage the Government to curtail the discre tionary powers of our ambassador in Chins, and to discourage him in his very difficult task of laying broad foundations for our future commercial opera tiens in that country. But the absence of all accu rate information betrayed by Lord John Rus sell's speech is still more remarkable, and affords melancholy proof how little even our best pub lic men feel the obligation of mastering ques tions of the highest import, when they are out of the ordinary sphere of party warfare, and affect distant countries. Lord John pretended to inform the house of the number of men engaged in the war with China, and he exaggerated it by including those employed on the coast of India, and even the Naval Brigade now serving on the Upper Ganges. He st tted that "it could not be supposed it was for the purpose of settling the clitetion of reparation to individuals for the injuries British subjects had suffered that Lord Elgin had proceeded north ;" but he thus manifested not only an entire unacquaintauce with the only means of bringing any influence to bear upon the Court of Pekin, but a much more unaccountable forgetfulness of what had previously passed in the House of Commons. It has been proved that the Emperor of China cares nothing for the occupation of Canton. That operation was necessary to recover our lost prestige among the people of China, but it has had no effect upon the counsels of the Emperor. The only way by which peace and compensation can be obtained is by di rect communication with the Emperor, and Lord Palmerston has declared over and over again in the House of Commons that the destination of the Elgin Embassy was Pekin. The treaty now in force gives us the right of immediate communica tion with the high officers at Pekin. That com munication has just been formally denied to us. Lord Elgin has gone to exercise in person our treaty rights, and, if he is accompanied by a fleet and an army, it is because the obstinacy of the Chinese Court renders it necessary to sup pert our treaty rights by force. Nothing can be more simple. If Lord John would only afford five minutes to a perusal of the treaty, and clear his head of certain antipathies, he would find it a very plain matter. Unhappily, however, Lord John will not do this. As he states the amount of the force in China without knowing it, so he quotes the treaty without reading it. He says : " We know that there were two articles which were not observed. One article gave us the right to enter the city of Canton as well as four other cities, and that article has been perpetually violated by th e refusal of t h e local g overnment to allow the admission of British subjects into Canton. Another article in a very solemn manner bound US to tradepre of opium with China , and that article of v tl i i %ut tr t e h a e ty has been as notoriously violated as the others. I believe it is au article very difficult to fulfil, and pro bably the Chinese Custom-house officers have been as notoriously e w illing to violate that article as th o s e w h o hv brought opium from India and engaged in th e t ra ffi c of that article. This is the position in which we stand with regard to the treaty. Now, with submission to Lord John, this is not the position in which we stand with re' rd to the treaty. Will it be believed in Rigland that this deliberate statement made by L rd John Russell is a mere figment of his own imagination ? In our treaty wills China, not only is there no such article es that imagined and produced by Lord John Russell to call down the cheers of the House, but in that treaty the wer ! " opium" is never mentioned. L is sedul rusty and even osten tatiously excluded ; for while in the treaty with America opium is inserted as a prohibited article, this word is omitted in the treaty with England. Very evil habits are creeping in among our public men as to the relation between words and facts, but the House of Commons has a tight to more ac curate information than this from men whom that assembly trusts. With the observations made by Mr. Bright, as to the inconvenience possib'e to arise from the joint operation of the four Powers, we are to a certain extent iuolined to concur. No doubt, we have abundant power to - chastise the insolence of half-a-dozen Chinese Emperors, and we are able single-handed, - there or elsewhere, to vindicate our own honour. No doubt, we should have been much better pleased to be left alone to settle our own quarrel. But the nature of the co-operation with our allies seems to be misunderstood. There is no convention, no alliance, no defined common object—unless, perhaps, the published letter of Lord Elgin to Yeh may be supposed to create an obligation to retain Canton until the French demands as well as our own are ceded. Each nation has its separate grievance, and has made its separate written demand. It will be probably be found that these State papers agree very nearly in the future securities they demand against the infraction of treaties and the ill-treat' went of foreigners. This concord is probably not quite accidenthl, but surely it is not undesirable. It is in itself a proof that the public opinion and the State policy of all the civilised nations of the word are united upon this point ; and that, in moderation and in justice, we are all led to adopt the same remedies as the only cure for diversified injuries. What would Mr. Bright have bad us do I Would he have divided our squadron into two parts drawing up one part to keep off the French, the Americans, and the Russians, while with the other half he thrashed the Chinese ! Or what would be have done in the subsequent negotiations ? Would he have satisfied himself with introducing Mr. Parkes into Canton, while the French were obtain ing for their countrymen free transit through China? It does so happen that the same remedy will secure the lives of French missionaries, and will further the development of English commerce. France is determined to protect her citizens, and demands that Frenchmen may lawfully travel in China under the protection of the Chinese Government. Does Mr. Bright wish that we should go to war with France to compel her to desist from this demand ; or does he wish that Eaglishmen should be ex cluded from the privileges that Frenchmen are. about to obtain, and which are reasonable in them' selves and quite nece,sary for the security of indi viduals and the peace of nations ?—Times. THE ERUPTION OF VESUVIUS. NAPLES, MAY 31. Since Saturday the eruption bas proceeded with, constantly increasing violence, and has presented, at night a more and more magnificent spectacle. [n my last letter I mentioned that there issued from the great basin of fire in the Atrio a single stream of lava, which, after a tortuous course, was: descending the declivity of the mountain. Th lo stream has continued its course, varying in breadth according to the accidents of the ground, and aeons now to direct itself to a point between Portici arid TOrre del Greco, but much nearer the latter thane the former. It approaches close to the scattered farmhouses which lie above the towns at the W t, of the mountain, many of which it can scarcely fai l to destroy. . _ In the afternoons of Saturday and Sunday tyro other streams of lava broke out of the great bat 3 ie , and are descending the mountains towards the' neighbourhood of Portici. These streams seem t 0 follow the direction of ravines, which rim nearli parallel to the ridge on which the Observatory mo d ' the Hermitage stand. These buildings have been• hitherto saved from submersion by the lava hi their great elevation, the fluid naturally followiog, the direction of the lower ground at either side them. Last night the spectacle was peculiarly • grant and imposing. The lava was poured in increase" quantity along each of the streams already est 3.- Wished, and being in a high state of incandesenc e l presented a peculiarly splendid appearance. At about 8 o'clock an immense torrent of la va broke over the ridge which confines the basin °/ craters, in the direction of the Somma ; it floss' down the declivity of the Somma as an immens e torrent of liquid fire, and with such extraordiel rapidity that in less than an hour it had desceoa e through a considerable portion of the mountai 3 ; Its progress was then retarded, partly by the dial' nished steepness of the ground, and partly 1: 0 : transverse ravines which must be filled before If: fluid can advance. Nothing c ou ld exce ed i splendour of this torrent of liquid fi re , forming es: fourth principal stream of lava ; but the most . traordinary burst of splendour which has been P. seated since the commencement of the eruPtil is took place soon after 9 o'clock, when all the mo lt I seemed to be simultaneously called into viols% action, and to vomit forth such torrents of 10 that the entire mountain seemed one blaze of fire _ the varied colours produced in different parr" owing probably in part to reflection, presentel4 beautiful and striking appearance. The lurid lig u A cliffu,ed from this enormous burning mass rend ers r visible the subjacent country, the town., the coa t ' and the bay. On each night several thousands of persons of all ranks, from the peer to the peasant, urged by C , 1 , 1 ; riosity, repair to the scene of this exeraorcliot; spectacle. The darkness being complete, and ti` route in many parts difficult, each party is far' Dished with a torch, and the view of these hun g dreds of ti robes flitting about between the streswes *of lava is most curious, presenting the appear ° . of multitudes of fireflies. The Hermitage, which is close to the great basil; of craters and rivers of lava, is approached bir tolerably pod carriage road, and, as may he t r i g: posed, hundreds of vehicles of every descriP t ly from the caleche of the millionnaire to the ho__ : lll ii t, coiicolo, are collected there towards old w ,gf el i . e Donkey parties abound, of which ladies do no t to form a part. AIN 1 , 1 ; 0 0 The eruption is splendid ! There are t'" du s streams of lava, which begin just between Ires tl ' 0 and Somma ; we went as near as possible ; ta d climbed to the top of a ridge of lava which so f begun to cool, but it required all the carefule e° l 9o our guides to prevent our burning our feet 0ff.. 40 - our way down we went to the top of the Ob se , ; `a ; t Ty, whence the view of the lava was spleno:vo the middle was flowing as fast as water ; there 00 a rayed reflection in the smoke which was ju Bt t on the Aurora Borealis in Scotland. The eruP,, er e began last Wednesday night ; the lava begins sciP it did in 1855. There were thousands of penP e At the mountain ; it was an extraordinary scene. t he the end of one of the streams of lava, that on os A Castellamare side of the Hermitage, there ri e re ceremony, I suppose to stop the lava. There v i a saint and some priests in attendance. Country Markets. LIVERPOOL, JUNE 8. ro tsP There was a limited attendance of bu y ers this On osr; and, as a consequence, the business was dull, and tb° t kot closed at a reduction from Tuesday last of o b loiiro per bushel on wheat, 6d to is per barrel mid sack U v et ld per bushel on oats, 6d per load on oatmeal , D eath bushel on barley, and about 6d to is per qr on bealA and Indian corn. LEEDS, JUNE 8. cle 16 We have good arrivals of wheat. The flour - 1 s * very dull, and this, with the decline in L o ndon. 0,11,;,0 to slow trade to-day ; there is, therefore, little inclinf"'doil press sales, and the business d one is at about Fr 10100 rates. Barley nominal. Oats, be a ns, and other rtr" as before. NORWICH CATTLE —JUNE 5. fed We hal a large show of Scots, short horn s, and Irish and Devons at market to-day. Trade slow. eis g Fat beasts, 7s Od to 7s 6tl ; prime, 8s Od per stonigiboott about same as last week. Sheep, 30 s to 35s p er boa ,„°, pet good store pigs, 15s to 20s. Fat pork , 6 s to 6e lA' stone of 141bs; trade dull. PROVISION Beef, per lb 6id to 7%d I Mutton, per 1b.... 6d to 7d Lamb, do., Os 8d to Oa 9d Veal, per lb ... 6?,d to Os 7d I Pork, perlb...os :4(1 to 6_d Salmon, per lb ...... Os 0(1 Grouse, per brace.....Os to Os Tallow, p stone, Os to —s 01 MIRICET. • i s 3 . 1 Butter, p pt. is 2a t ° le Eggs, Per 18, Os Od Hens, p pair Os • Od t°L Chickens,do. 48 oa 6i Ducks, do., 4s Gil t ° 6! Ducklings,do2s Oil to 2 ;, Turkeys, oath Os Od .31 1 Potatoes, per BIRTHS. f heS el MAXWELL —On the sth inst , at Brighton, the wife 0 - t Chailes Maxwell, of Wyddiall 4 Berta, of a daughte r !. the W' u , OoiLviu—On the 6th inst., at 2S, Regent-squire, ." ' t wife of R. A. Ogilvie, Esq., of a son. Russut,--On the 6th init., at Edinburgh, Lady ---Ale°- ag Ruesell, of a son i:. fau'' RODNEY—On the 7th inst., at Le Chateau de x• °l/ a 11. 14 '' France, the wife of Captain Mortimer 11. Rodlieh of a daughter. MARRIAGES. O h l BR OWNLOW—BLAIKIE —On the 17th April, at Pesha t i o , t- t , Richmond Brownlow, Esq., Bengal Artillery, to o f Ab e fourth daughter of Sir Thomas Blaikie, Knight, Been. • 10 1 !,: 1. 1 1 4j• , • C. .MPBELL—Donotidu —On the Rth inst., at St. Goc a brothel . of •l e, ovr-quare, Geo Caint, Esq., Arc e hibald Carnph, rge ll, Bart , bell of , Garseube, Dull'blrvt°oll;ll' to M,rgaret, the cldcst daughter of Sir Edwal.' only ob .. DEATHS. . v. iclP Bowan-On the sth inst., at Southborough, roar I PI T: ' wells, Mrs. Sarah Ann Bower, aged 60. fio ro il : EVAN 3 --On the 2d inst., at Salisbury, Mrs. M.,115/t-rcislii" of the:late John Evans, Esq., of the Byletts, klnre- S' aged 97. t ills° r (l GREGORY- On the Sth last., at 25, Theberten square, Islington, Samuel Gregory, Esq., ° f t 11 Mayor's Court Office, Old Jewry, aged 56. „ m ei POWELL-On the sth inst., at Burlington, near Bath, , . ~ . Walter Powell R M aged 78 ..._-C.OIIDON : Printed and Published by MIJEDO Yo •:°' of 1-Te. 112, Strand, Printer, at Tic Sus Ott`',7: o ,;'Y 112, Strand, in the Precinct of the Savor. In thc • of Uiddlesea, Wedneelay, June 9, 18 531 .stree ,lie i Jo Ror I VI R7 ci Cirstio u k B 13 I " takep: J ell 21st, Tick et , Th : 1, 1114 re, „7, htM lt. 111-3 R et 7 ev Adriat„t enio at th e : 1 ( 1 ) Cram er . .„ o e-,1 DR. TIC] 4Ctr RES ' qttOter pas Open b it. XiIINI w APELA to ;- foSnntraenr V u :i ted tha entino at tteateet Cl io ant. 1 ' 4 44 alid latob.. th. en ta kket. NIZSAI tt quar l te z r Lient -14:1:7nY :44:111:1881:e AIV oft° e ti .,, ce .eed of szr nu be held, RS Y Preeise; High tOtors rill be pn I , Z Director -1 • 1 4 in ofne ACOID] Tyr 'CM IS zwatAl De aII e :k t AVELI 4.44...,.§ Poßete k R Q Ue are Co —e I kutionsn sand Total Pi Clai m , Annual d — 'anew e ats, and Ma A to.PP,3, at the ""MY, 7, B 7, gituk Buil Iv oRT E 3 tab .hr.itbEN • Sir • JOI t olicitor %I of 01 froi 11;1; 4 e - tenth% ~e d among th:11 Profit Pc fli,„ re refits of ior 70 1.1 e Uonus 1,„ cent, or 4 10 : — ank T l 4 E b VIVOIi Zt1 1 .2)11( n 2. Renvr Kifl r Pats n.m Elliot • l'r°l444 lor J. Elllo Iftel 4°Nri. Gro 11Z1f 4 leX ( --v. 1860. t Po l , 41,4 1 838 51 11‘41 41 11 145 5' 1 11411 1115 1 I 5; ~r!te folio* — ;,.. t iorial Life I , ll l_e Societ av wo-third! e Years. Its subset-I' o t n e e ir l i i vestr ahnu il a r l A. 4 „ n t ß o en , b ,Por DrospE -444, 1 42, St Stra n Tu 04:ea r‘. ' 4 't Dubl l3l NRLP.' tim o n thi 40 41 ° 1 ), the ..anicious t ea m in lT te d tc ,ark s h pt eries -"nar, !•tionl .Ternberat( ck b aoth eca t e „ Q cue, h } 'ich hay , r et , " and , he' t 1,7 peul ciacs arl3 PhYsh e health %Itlta ed. It id il t ri neime oso tit In t 11 4 , 1tii ti e z ) 4 4 ,, 1 ? be int that ow thi C, there ..e rivrne ahl' 41, slac p 4 l e ineulted e4lcUt 'seer . r eulat tit o— r,