The Sun. — London, England, 1853-06-15 00:00:00

. y '". 10 3. 0. 1- ,,,1 h e OP 110° tO $ it P 4 Price° tre oer iOr k ' ,or OA%. ; . f o ' ae l he ti) , i 1e ltle; MPERIAL PARLIAMENT-. 11 UUSE OF LORDS—(YESTERDAY.) full "le Ro yal Ass en t was given by Commission to the ollewin g b., th e t is :—The Consolidated Fund (4,000,00 01.) ; C„,, a rghs (S cot l and) ; the Sheriff and Commissary ,Merwickshire) ; the County Election Polls (Scot ; the Sale of Bullion ; the Aggravated As -1,4:0;8 ; the Cardiff Waterworks ; the Sheffield Water ; the Liverpool Borough Court ; the Cambridge niversity and Town Waterworks ; the Stockport lin tero7l.elbent ; the Brighton, Hooe, and Preston Water ton, " ; the Edinburgh High -street and Railway Sta.- 1. ; the Scottish Central Railway ; the Midland Rail -I:3'Act Amendment • the Blackburn and Layton, with var briek itild Improvement t ; the `Wolverhampton dir, a ce. n Markets the T , e Lords C ommissioners were—the Lord Chancellor, p h " 'Juke of Argyll d L d Stanle of Alderley. tt"fi,,bel4°lln CriiiNc ' E a Llon took his seat on the woolsack o'clo c k . fr e „ E arl of RODEN presented a number of petitions th ° e - : le c ounties of Tyrone and Monaghan praying for LinsPection of nunneries. tigmbtird CAMPBELL presented a petition from Monaghan tull e the extension of the income tax to Ireland. The th e and learned lord said he dissented entirely from I,Prayer cf the petition. 11 )41 4 Earl of ABERDEEN presented a petition from .fe si gter 'llth in favour of marriage with a deceased wife's 1 11/ . The ."G -1 1 AND THE LATE GOVERNMENT. ane nt Earl'°of E(LINTON said, in allusion to a state (hike bl ade the other night in this house by the noble tuthorisethe head of the Colonial-office, that he wasategUi. by Lord N aas to state that he distinctly and ittith; ; v °oa ily de n i e d ever having offered or having been his politi ea led to offer o ffi ce to Mr. Keogh or any of 4ilt associates. 41' EXTRA -MURAL CEMETERY ASSOCIA TION BILL. Th e - l. p e motion that this bill be read a second time %I a ' 44 of HARROWBY . moved that the bill' ground th atit second time this day six months, on the grou rt ,„ ri w a;a in direct contravention to the general policy less asBe i p d by the Intra-Mural Interment Act of last Th e t . Lo rd 18h °P of LONDON supported the amendment. ew 13EAVMONT thought that if their lordships th e out the bill at this stage they would be . de ea g "hole object of their former-extra-mural interment eislatioa A fter Th e . a few words from several noble lords, lOrciships th en divided— ror the second reading—Contents 37 Thebill WaB then read a Non Contents 36-1 kel(Ntys CARRIAGES (METROPOLIS) re BILL. tari u-, - P °ll of amendments on this bill was hroug o h f t t u h p e . ISt', "ALDEGRAVE moved the omission con ;3lll2e a , us e, which prohibited public carriages from qtte; rerB cls to hospitals who were suffering from any he itftec'tts, contagious, or cutaneous disease. wi th r d a f ew words from Lord STANLEY of Alderley, Th e r ew the clause. LAzi oth er amendments were agreed to. emea Vi " I MPROVEMENT (IRELAND) BILL. eee „ . C ANNING brought up the report of the 4 ; r en ta on this bill. T his E WYCHWOOD FOREST BILL. TII"t ' passed th roug h comm itt ee . Lora b S , LA YE LAW OF SOUTH CAROLINA. Bhe,.A.I.TMONT moved for papers on the subject 'etaini of coloured seamen and others, ing 11 2 th 1 h, aubjects, on their touching in South . Carolina, cal led the a t tent i on o f t h e i r lordships to the , : 411 a Z ./ of CLARENDON expressed his regret that glove gee existed, and that all attempts .to the " nad failed. He assented to the production of 1514 t a e P t er, t hough he feared that it would do little good, re al" Ns ted to renewed remonstrance and to time to 7,e r "",Y th e evil. lordships immediately afterwards adjourned. Ai s t o Th e s C//' COMMONS—(YESTERDAY.) el o , k ?ItAk tit took the chair at a quarter to four l' he PRIVATE BUSINESS. IPlpi°ll°Wing bills were read a third time and passed liit eh 'Y and Braml Road; West Harptry Road ; The a : H e n and Furness Junction Railway. (L"lv a f tL"ling bills were considered, and ordered to be td ,ru time :_.Alston Roads • Birmingham, and ,Nley nnction, Birmingham, Wolverhampton, and b 4 4 , 11 d Great Western Railways ; Edinburgh, Perth, tte Railway ; Limerick and Foy es Railway. nd t a ut Municipal Bndaries bill was read a 0, and orde re d t o be committed. 1, ROYAL COMMISSION. hyi ecu nan Usher of the Black Rod appeared t d at an d summoned the house to attend at the . P `Qat t o . " b ba p eers to he ar th e Royal assent given 7 corn r e - l o le veral public and private acts, for which see rt. tO il a PETITIONS. W -uMSLEY presented a petition in favour o f 1 pi Ltlr 'lot • -- ..4 - ?? ) ?SN presented a similar petition from a 1)1 4 ;• J t— West Riding to the same effect. ANDERSONtq presented a petition f rom a p. ° timid, praying for the inspection of nunneries. I,Pa . i ..,,t_OSSLEY presented a petition from Hall toik4't 11 1 - 1 .‘,.,ne Registration of Assurances Bill. tie, 4 4te t a .WPTlT presented a petition from . the . drawing to ni th at artists of Manchester, complaining that par tll44.l A t Own took advantage of the School of Design Dlr,e'ncati iart ho were well able to pay for tive_the on rt w Aoo P. Boa r d e I:ILLY presented a petition from the Ca torid_qm; ° I Guardians praying that the salaries of ted m edical o ffi cers ma y b e c h arge d on the Con -40 it A . p und. 3[4I,A.TT presented a petition from the me- Illid ky ni nat the opening of the Crystal Palace on t 4 1% tiAv r , ,4,,°1 th e '. ER presented a petition from the inhabi tit,,;* ei: l , ei tY of Wells in favour of the ballot. gittß6, "LEFIELD presented two petitions from tangainst the Registration of Assurances Bill. ii,, ll olt,Z:- 1 S presented a petition to the same effect %Ni b ' 111,/,.. rt , V -4 v AN presented a petition from Kilkenny el% • t tlb • ti ki , nneries G c ; in t. ai d "FIELD presented a petition from the 4 e :nte;, e t rrn ,,ett, and burgesses - of Sheffield against the t a '• n.„ - ' 4 ,l ll cational Bill. 4 ner — ' - '"GE presented a petition from Aberdare, 1 4 ei n t t r e ballot. 441 d Cl—. " ER presented a petition from the atter th%licitors of Warwickshire, praying for the re- I it. .y certificate duty.. N r r ti ,and, i ; " presented several . petitions from places • ~,.favour of tenant right. k'tt • LLER presented a petition from a party r a.nts to ut • „a in favour of ocean penny postage. 414 , 4 i t tY 4 V ia a ti ti.0 1414 presented eight petitions from the against the Nunneries Bill. • -- "--tiLLEY presented a petition from the 51 4 "a , ,, e d tt, or the b on the new Palace at Westminster, inster, UR A rrecinbination of Workmen's URD presented two petitions from e k otla nd in favour of the Nunneries Bill. t r ii, ru iCi le t tt inta of BLANDFORD presented a petition 4 4 enp; e .; against the sale of intoxicating liquors on b. I 'ay. the ,YREYS presented a petition from Mallow and s 44ctl,unneries Bill. NtLynelv-SON presented a petition from Newcastle- Ir el t yolyainst the Registration of Assurances Bill.. d ag a i, NG presented a petition from a place in of 114 N .,1',1t the Nunneries Bill. duty,°nietßii•-"`ES presented:a petition from the attorneys . - e ' P r aying for the repeal of the certificate „k r D NOTICES OF MOTION. MALLth°lll(jZii gave notice that on this day month . he h,_ktemt a motion to the house on the subject of r• Ir tal ' ing a transaction * 1 1 (, e ~,8,90,13 gave notice that on Thursday he should ctien Inell 4.4rnent to the house respect 4tlee.auetted his personal honour. He gave e thi h s e e r ar f l e y r ,olet,in order that the noble lord the m i/t1 `1 . : 11(3 kul the right hon. gentleman the t m he member I L I 4 44 -rth e 88 ex might he in attendance, as - -' thouierjere.onnected with the transaction to y which ,r. ?CUMBERED ESTATES COURT. se ,.`nitl.. PITZGERA.LD wished to ask the . Chief 'en. 141 4 g)r Ireland, whether it is the intention of Go tl:lQt eolletituto introduce a measure, in the present session, k l nt, N „ L .e the Powers of the Encumbered Estates r ,'l v ell will otherwise soon expire. ' l ve ' .OITNG said it was the intention of the introZt leri t to introduce such a bill, and it would be -e ' ed in the House of Lords in a few days. , I , 4lr 11/4„.,,AUSTRA.LASIAN COLONIES. atl*sn„ xLES wished -.” Pre k i wnat was the nature of the postal con kt • -.'" ' to ask the Secretary a nd Kent Gone i ng between her Majesty's Government t.e ,I,4neienrnnunt of New Grenada, in regard to and ve n n f t t io h n e i,'4ttfl,:t letters across the Isthmus of Panama ; very , - `l6l t a, ; i f it be true that under such convention a vee isy ( 1 ' .4 h111 3 Postage (more than five times as much sblGe etoretrhnemGent ):-Zetilitanntiilfethlete terUnsitterdaSnstamt transmitted on on account of a th e e . '4 -44 of l`Tew Grenada, her Maj p es a t y y a ' of Are to t akesteps to render the line to tetPl4nnicatie • such • 0 practically available Auhttriat4h, PubliC . for question n communication with the Ist,.-114,8,ia1i 8010 postal pins Ifttlzretdi° i wAtasSO T lN l T ite l'ai t d ru n e ( the otherwise.statementand thathat th containede convention i in the re. 0 was still in operation. ation. 4, kr F ILET UST OMS' REVENUE. le . , A,m s ' q'th zne glie wilied to ask the Ch t a t n d cel t l o or t.h o e f )4 0 , 18 : 1 Cutitotor : h rt e e n ve t n ia n e e b w ill eu t l o d r h e e gu s la u t h e m t i he e collection The ~,.. l'tee 'IIAINICELL EXCHEQUER Liiir 4r ntie rl or , OR of the the w k , ,c, ' ti t e bill was a considerable , labour, but .0 iip,rl ery nearl 1t d and it would said the be la], the table Y " th p ee ' e next week. ,Si r j „, luatwiert ELECTION. ‘1,11::' r. tjtlto 1%1ACIlelrol:-e writ f make out a ofd t t h h a e t C th re e w pe t a e ker do issue Ptese 4 . or the electing of a burss to serve in this thebo::variloia; n h e a n s t for the borough of Harwich, in Wh o , °l ll of George Montag free. - been determined to be void. Warren. Peacocke,. Esq., 4 lie • SHELLEY moved an amendment that ().,_, conitnitte f g t, as the red eraittee „ eo . ...ve members be appointed by reew,,yi eleetion to inquire into the state of the . • * v " 101 =1 of the borough of Harwich, This THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, JUNE 15, 1853. for though taking cognizance of bribery and open intimi- their speeches, and to see the contrast between them and dation, and physical force leading to a breach of the peace, the miserable futile break-down arguments of Cabinet they passed by this screw. Though its operation came be- Ministers. (Hear, hear.) But he felt bound to meet the fore them as a matter of course, yet as a matter of course latest objections on record to the principle of vote by ballot. they must pass over it, for there was no law which they The members of the present cabinet seemed but too glad to could wield against it. This was remarkably exemplified creep under the gaberdine of the Times for shelter. The in the Clitheroe committee. They referred, in their report ballot, said tho Times, was a question not of philosophy to bribery and physical force intimidation, but said not a but of fact. It would not prove an efficient protection word of that more deadly intimidation which turned the to the voter, because in these days every man's opinions small farmer out of his barn or his house, which ruined the were known. He (Mr. Berkeley) would admit that the tradesmen, or put the debtor in prison. That was passed question was one of fact and not of philosophy. But on by ; coming under the name of the screw, the committee whose side was the fact, and on whose side was the phi did not feel authorised to report upon it. To show how the losophy, or rather the sophistry ? (Hear, hear.) " Does screw acted at Clitheroe, he would read a letter of one elec- the ballot (it is asked) prevent a man's opinions from being tion agent, who hired another election agent for the pur- known ?" The concealment of a man's opinions depended pose, and the sole purpose of putting on this election screw. on himself, but the main and material fact was, that the It was a letter from one William Wheeler, the agent of ballot prevented the man's vote from being known. Mr. Matthew Wilson, the sitting member, to Robert Wat (Cheers.) He was speaking in the presence of an assembly ton, a fanner, who it appeared was a gentleman that had that protected themselves from the Sir Lucius O'Triggers great influence with poachers and prizefighters; and he had of society by means of the ballot, and lie put it to them been tampered with to obtain a snob of 300 men to bully to say, if the ballot did not enable them to conceal their and beat the electors, but it seemed ho preferred the ser- votes, and, if they wished it, their opinions also ? (Hear, vice of Mr. Wilson, and altogether rejected these overtures. hear.) Well, but the Sir Lucius O'Triggers of politica That letter was as follows :—" Dear Sir,—We are greatly were more dangerous than the Sir Lucius O'Triggers of obliged to you for your letter of the 28th of June, and for society ; and was it fair or just, ho would ask, in them, your kind exertions on the part of Mr. Wilson. Every with their broad acres and their broad cloth, to seek to vote that we can get will be wanted, and therefore I should conceal their votes and opinions by means of the ballot and be glad to hear of any addition to our etrength. James deny the same protection to men who wore fustian and Watson, of Brownlow, has not yet promised ; and although men who were tenants-at-will? (Hear, hear.) Would they we expect he will vote for Mr. Wilson, still a word from answer that question ? (Hear.) He often put it before, you, will, perhaps, get a definite promise. They are put- but he never yet got an answer. (Hear.) But he denied ting on the screw with their tenants in all directions, and as a mere matter of fact, that the electors could not conceal we must do the same in self-defence. Have you any other their opinions, and that they must necessarily bo known. tenants voters? Mr. Sutcliffe Witham has a Joseph Green (Hear.) It was said that the poor electors were too garru who is all right, and a Tomlinson whom I should like you lens, and that their opinions must be known. Why there to see ; in fact, any one you have any influence over. Of were hundreds of thousands of poor persons in this country course you must charge me with your personal expenses associated together who did keep their secrets inviolate. and loss of time, which I shall be glad to pay. With (Hear, hear.) He was, himself, a member of the Foresters thanks, believe me yours truly, W. WHEELER.—June 30, and Odd Fellows Societies--(laughter)—and he had no 1852, Clitheroe." If these electors were as many buck- doubt many of the members around him were in the same rabbits they could not be spoken of more contemptuously, position. (Hear, hear.) He knew there was a vast number and the mode of handling buck-rabbits was very suggestive of Odd Fellows in the House of Common s . (Muchlaughter.) of the mode in which tile gentlemen dealt with the elec- Now he never knew that the secrets of these societies had tors. (Hear. hear.) They took them by the ears, and trans- been betrayed either from garrulity, or drink, or any ferred them from one side to the other, without any com- misplaced confidence in woman. (Laughter.) He had plaint or resistance from the docile tenants-at-will. heard the wives of Freemasons' declare that there could be (Laughter.) Was this a state of things which an enlightened no secret in freemasonry, because if there was they would nation should suffer without attempting to apply a remedy? be sure to get it out of them in their soft hours. So much But against intimidation they had no remedy whatsoever. for the general habits of the people. (Laughter and He defied the - most astute member of that house to point cheers.) He had been challenged to deal with facts, and out anything like a remedy for it. (Hear, hear.) There he would now produce evidence to show that the political was no remedy but the ballot ; and they knew it. opinions of the electors were not generally known. In (Cheers.) They could make no law to prevent a landlord these days and under the present electoral system, poor from ejecting a tenant-at-will when he pleased. The land- men no more dared to assert their political opinions than lord was not obliged to assign his reason for doing it ; they dared to give their votes contrary to the wishes of and they could not make him assign one. They could their landlords. The tenants-at-will, it was said, had no pass no law to prevent that. They could make no political opinions of their own. They had political opinions law to prevent a customer from changing his tradesman of their own, but they dared not express them. (Hear.) as often as ho pleased ; it was utterly impossible to The tradesmen of this country likewise had their opinions, make a law to prevent that. They could make no law to but they were obliged to conceal them or theirbread would stay the judgment creditor, and prevent him from putting be endangered. (Cheers.) He was sorry to detain the his debtor either into the polling-booth or into prison. house so long, but on this point he begged their attention (Hear, hear.) That was utter impossible. Through to the evidence of Mr. James Mather, given before a com every grade and phase of society they could make no law mittee in 1835: "You have been a land surveyor ?—I to compel the employer to keep on the employed. Then, have. In what counties ?—Brocknock, Shropshiro, York what act could they pass to pr ev ent this intimidation? shire, Oxfordshire, Middlesex ; but my business has called The cases he had referred to were those in which the very mo to many other parts of England. You have had an gist of intimidation consisted. Open voting exposed the opportunity of knowing the opinions of farmers on most voter to the influence of persons who, by the knowledge subjects ?—My business has led me very much among that they so obtained, were able to deal out punishment or re- class of men. I wish you to confine yourself entirely to ward to the elector. The elective franchise was thus their political relations with their landlords, and with a wrested from the class that was legally entitled to it, and view to that part of the subject I ask, among what class of was usurped by others, who had no right to it at all, more par- tenants do you believe most independence is to be found? ticularly by peers of the realm, who were forbidden by Among those who have a leasehold tenure ; but their in law from interfering in elections for members of Perlis- dependence is very much governed by circumstances. ment. (Cheers.) Secret voting was the only mode of What circumstances ?—The length of the lease, for in preventing this evil, and he should not trouble the house stance. I have always remarked that farmers are more on the subject of intimidation, further than to add two inclined to assert their political opinions at the commence pithy sentences—one by the best authority of the olden meat of their tenure than at its conclusion. (Cheers.) I time, the other by the first authority of modern days, presume you mean in cases where they disagree in politics " There is no way to stop this evil, it is so engrained in with their landlords ?—Yes ; and especially if the landlord the people, but by the way of balloting," said Daniel be a strong politician. There are some landlords who do De Foe. " There is no way of stopping intimidation, but not interfere. Is that, in your opinion, a large class I—No, by making intimidation mechanically impossible," ex- on the contrary, for if tholandlord have no strong political claimed George Grote. (Cheers.) His complaint was that, bias of his own, in nine cases out of ten he interferes with though intimidation was raging through the land like an his tenantry from the instigation of some neighbour who epidemic, and though they had as certain a remedy for it has. Do you consider that politics are liable to breed ill as vaccination was for the small-pox, they denied to the will between landlord and tenant ?—I do, especially when country the cure. (Hear, hear.) One feature was re- the tenants have leases. How? Where they are tenants markable in all the speeches of the present Ministry, from at-will ?—Much less so, because tenants-at-will have no will Lord Aberdeen downwards,— the admission of the deplor- as far as politics are concerned ; they know they must vote able faults of our electoral system. This admission was as their landlords please, and make up their minds to do so. made at the eleventh hour. (Hear, hear.) Up to this (Hear.) Are there not exceptions to the rule ?—There may time almost, those faults had been most audaciously de- be, but you will find themveryrare. Have you found, gene- Med. Lord Aberdeen said—" Some amendment of our re- rally, that tenants-at-will are contented to ho thus go presentative system is necessary • and unquestionably the verned ?—I have observed that the most intelligent among result of the last election has not been calculated to render that class, consequently the best agriculturists are by no any man more enamoured of the present system." His means contented ; but they cannot help themselves ; while lordship used that strong expression before the recent die- those men, whose families have held their farms without closures in the committees : What would he say now? being disturbed from generation to generation, are just as (Hear, hear.) When Lord John Russell appeared as a can- well satisfied to pay their votes to their landlords as their dictate for the suffrages of the electors of London, the peo- rents, and consider it much the same thing. Do you cou ple called on him to give them the ballot ; and he (Mr. eider this class of men less intelligentl—l do. These are Berkeley) was perfectly ashamed of the imbecility of the the same sort of men who oppose all improvements, and reason which so great a statesman was compelled to resort tell you that their fathers did so before them, and that to. (Hear, hear.) The gist of what he said was that there things went on as well then as they do now. Do you think must be perfect equality in ou r i ns tit u ti o ns ; that we could the tenantry of the country generally would like to vote by not admit of secret voting in one, unless we admitted it in ballot ?—A vast majority would ; but there are a class of all ; and he illustrated that position in a very extraordinary them who, I have no doubt, would have as much horror of manner. He said that as the proceedings of courts of law the ballot as I have known them profess for subsoil, drain were open, so should the proceedings of those who elected age, and the drill plough. You have said that you think members to serve in Parliament. (Hear, hear.) Who in- the majority of farmers would prefer the ballot, how do timidated a judge? Who corrupted a jury ? Who could you account for the fact that fewer petitions have been command, by dint of punishment or reward, the charge of presented by that class of men to the House of Commons a judge or the verdict of a jury ? (Hear, hear.) How than any other in favour of it I—The reason appears to me could the publicity of judicial proceedings injure either pl a in. When you say farmers, I take it for granted you judge or jury? (Hear, hear.) But they knew that Parlia- mean tenants-at-will. Well, then, a tenant-at-will no mentary electors were intimidated, that voters were cor- more dare sign a petition on a political subject than he rupted, that the decision of the elector was governed by the dare vote without the concurrence of his landlord ; and fear of punishment and the hope of reward, and that the the ballot is more dreaded by landlords than any other publicity of the proceedings led to a fraud on the conscience reform whatever. Then you think tenants-at-will dare of the voters. What analogy could there be between those not entertain any political opinions?-4 do not say that ; two cases ? Who could forget the speeches made by the but 11 do say that they dare not express them. If a tenant noble lord at Perth and Leeds ?At Perth the noble lord at-will were to express opinions hostile to those of a strong had said that it was true conservatism not to oppose the political landlord—for instance, if he were known to be just demands of the people. Did he not talk of democracy favourable to the ballot, he would be treated es he treats having its rights as well as aristocracy ; and how much a tainted sheep, and be drafted from the flock." (Cheers.) safer it was to yield those rights rather than to wait until If they turned over the 900 pages of evidence contained in they were forced ? What did tho noble lord say at Leeds ? the book from which he quoted, they would find, by the —" I believe that the institutions of this country would testimony of Mr. Wilcox and Mr. Fitzgerald, both of them be entirely impracticable—would entirely fail--would magistrates, and of the late Col. Bruen, who had been a break to pieces in the working if the machinery, if it were member of that house, that the electors of Ireland dared not for the good sense, the moderation, and, I may say, the no more to express their political opinions than the tenants wisdom of the people ; but I believe in that good sense, at-will in England. (Hear, hear.) The only difference that moderation, that wisdom. wo have a security for the was, that the Irish landlords did not disguise or mince the future welfare and prosperity of those institutions." But matter, but openly proclaimed their right to command the the language of the noble lord was very different when in votes of their tenants. (Hear) And he would show that opposition and when a member of the Government, for that feeling was as rampant now in Ireland as it was in what did ho say when ho stood for the City of London? 1835. He would show that coercion of the voter existed Lord J. RUSSELL—AII the addresses, that to the elec- to an extent which was scarcely credible. (Hear, hear.) tors of the City of London included, were delivered in Here was the case of Mr. Henry De Burgh, a landlord opposition. in the county of Monaghan. Mr. De Burgh writes Mr. BERKELEY thought that the address to the elec- to the editor of the Daily Express as follows :—" Bol ters of London was made when the noble lord had joined camp, St. Doulough's, Raheny, August 17, 1852.—Sir, the present cabinet. (Oh, oh.) It did not much matter —Perhaps you will make use of the inclosed corres whether that were so or not, because all he wished to show pondence to suit the purposes of the day. John Murphy was that there was a discrepancy and a change of tone in is a tenant on the lands of Skeborn, in the county of Men the language used by the noble lord on these different occa- aghan. I asked him for his vote. He voted against me. gone. (Hear.) After extolling the good sense, modem- I directed the sub-agent, Mr. Johnson, to enforce all rent tion, and wisdom of the people, the noble lord said, in justly due and payable, without pressure or hardship. fact, to the electors of London, " Oh, but I shall stand by He wrote the letter No. 1 • this morning I received from and see the vote torn from the side of good souse, modern- Murphy the letter No. 2; I wrote my reply No. 3. You tion, and wisdom, and usurped by tyranny, oppression, may make what editorial use of the subject and letters and arbitrary conduct. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord said you please. If the landlords of the country (i.e., the Con that the democracy had its rights, and that they depended servative) would all do likewise, the posts would soon on the good sense of the people for the existence of their be considered by their own flocks as the political institutions ; but when it came to the point he refused to vampires they unquestionably are.—HENRY DE BURGH." give them the free and uncontrolled use of their voices. —" Snow-hill, Monaghan, August 5, 1852. Sir, —I If the noble lord would listen to and hear the language of have this day received instructions from Mr. De Burgh, the people, he would find them saying that in the team of to call on you for all rent and arrears of rent to be reform the noble lord was the best collared horse, but the paid on your holdings up to May, 1852, otherwise to moment he took office, he became restive, he turned "jib- take the necessary proceedings for the recovery of it.— ber," broke his collar, and sat down on his breeching. Your obedient, JOHN JOHNSON.—Mr. John Murphy.— (Loud laughter.) He would now come to the speech P.S. This must be settled next week, J. J."—" Skeborn, which the right hon. gentleman the First Lord of the Ad- Aug. 10, 1852.—Mr. De Burgh,—Sir,—lnclosed I send miralty delivered at Carlisle. The right hon. baronet said, you a note I got from Mr. Johnson, which will, I hope, "No man can view with more disgust than Ido the inti- bear my excuse for troubling you. I hope, sir, you will midation, bribery, and corrupt practices which have pre- not persevere at this unusual season to press for rent. veiled at elections, and even at the last general election in What I would be able to accomplish in two months, with this country. It is cruel when men have a privilege which out doing me any injury, would be a heavy loss to press they ought to exercise freely and independently for either for now, as I have grass taken for two of my cows. I landlords or employers to intimidate th em by threats, or would consequently lose their benefit for the three best for customers to declare to tradesmen that if they do not mon ths, as butter is 3d. per pound better now than in vote in a particular way they shall be deprived of custom. summer. I will be able to pay you in October all demands. It is unworthy of this free country that any man I fondly hope, respected sir, you will be so kind and in should be exposed to what I hold to be such tyranny dulgent as to grant the time I have requested, and I will and oppression." (Hear, hear, and cheers.) The house pray for your welfare. I have to remark I have all rent could imagine the upturned faces of the people when paid up to May, 1851.—1 am, your respected servant, they heard the benign voice of tho right honourable gen- JOHN MURPHY.—Sir,—If you favour me with a reply, man, and that the cry of G ra h am f or e ver" became the direct 'in care Mr. John Leghorn, Clones.'" This was order of the day. (Hear, and laughter.) But though the the respected master's reply :—" St. Doulough's Raheny, right hon. gentleman was ready to put a stop to intirnida- August 16, 1852. Sir,—Yours of the 10th was forwarded tion, he did not believe the ballot would do it. Yet the here. Mr. Johnson has acted strictly according to his right hon. gentleman did not say that anything else would. instructions. You refused your landlord the compliment Ho had recourse to arguments so weak and untenable, that o f your vote. Be it so. Let there be no compliment the right hon. gentleman must be at his wit's end—and between us. Vote as you please ; but pay up your rents that was at a considerable distance—(laughter)—when he to the day they are usually payable, or I shall make you. used them. The right hon. baronet said they could not No doubt but your political supporters will grant you the enact in this free country that every man should give his favour that I refuse, and enable you to pay your year's vote in secret, and that without this the ballot would be rent due on the Ist day of May, 1852.—Your obedient found flagrantly inefficient, for if the voter refused to give servant, HENRY DE BURGH.—Mr. John Murphy, Sauey, his vote openly when asked by his landlord to do so, the Clones." Then he thought Murphy would have been the landlord would assume that his secret vote was given better for the ballot. (Loud cheers.) He thought after against him, and he would act accordingly. But on what what he had quoted, they might come to the conclusion authority did the right hon. gentleman assume that the 9 that the serfdom of the tenant voter was as great in Ire could not pass an act requiring that every vote s h o uld be land as it was in England. (Hear, hear.) It was now taken secretly? (Hear.) What principle of the constitu- twenty-one years since the noble lord made a speech at tion would be violated by enabling a man to exercise the Torquay on this subject, and he hoped some friend might franchise with perfect freedom and absence of control ? (Hear,) Those men who would be most ready to oppress persuade the noble lord to abide by that speech. The noble lord then said—" Great as I apprehend the inconvenience the voter might indeed find their man li n ess a nd feelings of the ballot would be, yet if it come to this, that I must dreadfully shocked, but the electors themselves would re- either adopt such a measure, or see the tenantry of Eng joice exceedingly if such an act were passed. (Hear, hear.) land ranged at elections, contrary to the feelings of them- The second argument of the right hon. gentleman was per fectly "stale, flat, and unprofitable." (Laughter.) No- selves, I should have no doubt ; I should at once renounce my opinion, and at once adopt the vote by ballot." The thing could be more pharasaical. " I believe," said the noble lord, no doubt, passed much of his time in the right hon, gentleman, "that with the ballot you would princely mansion of his brother, the Duke of Bedford, of have Flowkers and Frails — men of quickness and judgment whom ho never heard it insinuated that he ever punished sent down from the Carlton Club t o p urc h ase voters by a tenant for any vote he gave, or that he ever intimidated wholesale in the small constituencies on the principle of no return no pay." He (Mr. Berkeley) would admit that any voter from voting against him. (Cheers.) Conse quently, the noble lord might have some excuse at that for the sake of argument. But, then, what would be done early period for thinking that the tenants would not be on the other side ? Why, that the Coppocks would be ranged at elections contrary to their feelings. But he sent down to oppose th e Flewkers an d Frails. (Hear.) must suppose that the noble lord, like Rip Van Winkle, The Coppocks would no doubt be armed with a good must have slept 20 years, if he was not cognisant of all the h ea vy purse, and the electors, as they did now, would sell evidence that had been thundered into their ears ever themselves to the highest bidder. But the ballot would since; and if he did not see and admit that the tenants- i render the market uncertain , and people would not like to at-will were ranged under their separate leaders risk their money in that way. Her Ma j est y' s Govern- to vote contrary to their own opinions and the good'and led of the ment were pledged to bring in a large measure of reform. community. Was it not notorious that the electors of the That measure of reform was "looming in the distance"— same estate voted for Whig or Tory as it changed into the (laughter)—but it was so far off that it could on l y be s e en hands of landlords of these respective opinions ? (Hear.) by ministerial telescopes. (Laughter.) He w ou ld ass u m e I That was proved in evidence, and Mr. Ward clearly showed that this measure of reform would enlarge the suf fr a ge , I hat the fact was so. (Hear, hear.) Who could be deaf to and thus get rid of the small constituenc ee. ( Hear, h ea r. ) the evidence in the case of the South Notts election, where If that were so, then the argument of the right hon. gen- the tenants were led up to vote like so many vermin ? made a stock in trade of the Flewkers and Frails , the Co Osman had no force whatever. The right hon. gentleman Cop - he deaf to the state of things now existing ? He called (Hear, hear.) Was the noble lord deaf to all this ? Was pocks and Edwardses, et id genus eons. But he regarded upon the noble lord, as an honeet man , to deny, if he these people iu the light of a gas, which, by its escape, dared, his conviction of the truth of the representation gave notice of the presence of a corrupting body. (Hear, which he gave of the existing state of things. (Hear, hear.) Let them get rid of the festering body, and they hear.) If he could not, he called on the noble lord to fulfil would then not suffer from the gas. (Hear, hear.) But they kept a great weltering dunghill of corruption, ' his pledge, and to vote for the ball ot . It was said that the vote by ballot was a measure of democratic tendency. and they found fault with the fungi that grew there ! ' How could that be so, when the noble lord told them that (Hear.) He would now put in bright and pleasing it was to the good sense, the moderation, and the wisdom contrast to these miserable shifts and arguments of i of the people that they owed the cont inuance of their con cabinet mi n i s t ers th e s t ra i g htf orwar d d ec laration of the I R. Bethell). That hon. and learned stitution ? (Hear, hear.) What preternatural power was Solicitor-G enera l (Si r there in the ballot of converting loyal, wise, and moderate gentleman told the electors of Aylesbury that "it was not , men into democrats, socialists, and republicans? Was I within his power to d escr ib e th e c h arac t er or the det a ils t h e pr i v ilege of giving an unfettered vote fr aug ht w ith of the refor m measure which the ministry was a b out to such consequences? (Hear, hear.) The effect of the ballot introduce, but he must say that the first element of such would, in his opinion, be the restoration of au usurped Caesar's." measure ou g ht t o b e the extension of the franchise, and right. Its e ff ec t wou ld b e t o carry ou t th e Christian doe the next the p ossess i on of the ballot for the protection of trine, " Ren d er un t o C aesar th e thi ngs that are C the voter." Whereupon the electors and audience called I As to the ballot converting the English people into socia out " Three cheers for the ballot !" (Hear, hear.) Such • lists and democrats, such a notion appeared to him stark then was the opinion of the hon. and learned gentleman, raving madness. (Cheers.) He should glance at the pro the first counsel in the highest court of judicature in Eng - ceedines of one election in England, and of another in Ire land. (Hear, hear.) fauch was also the opinion of Sir J. 1 , land, for the purpose of showing that the b a ll o t was th e ' Romilly, the present Master o f th e R olls. And such the surest, the most constitutional, protection against violence opinion of Mr. Page Wood, now Vice - Chancellor. (Hear, and corruption, and, as a remedy against intimidation, far hear.) It was pleasant to be able to turn to Hansard for better and more constitutional than surrounding the poll- ing booth with armed soldiers. (Hear, hear.) The'English election which he selected as an illustration was that of Oldham. It appeared from the report that Mr. Fox and Mr. Heald were the candidates for th at borough ; th a t M r . Fox had a majority of the electors in his favour, and that Mr. Heald had a majority of the ruffians. (Laughter.) When a right good agent of the Derby or St. Alban's breed undertook to return a candidate for a given borough, he first of all tried the efficacy of bribery and corruption, and, if those aids failed, he then, in the last resort, hired a snob to thrash the unfriendly electors going to and returning from the poll, and to smash their windows. Now there were certain men who were so unmanly as to object to have their bones broken, so unmanly as to object to the upsetting of carriages, so unmanly and so un-English as to consider the intrusion of a brick-bat on the tea-table of a family party an unwelcome event. (Laughter.) Well, by such aids as these the legitimate majority of Mr. Fox was very nearly converted into a minority ; and his hon. friend whom he was happy to see present, would no doubt bo ready to confirm his statement, that had it not been for the marvellous firmness of his friends he would have been defeated ,by a minority. Nor was that case peculiar. They had it in evidence that Clitheroe and Blackburn were in exactly the same position as Oldham ; in short this was the common rule of English elections. Now for this state of things the ballot was a certain remedy. Nobody would break a man's bones in order to persuade Mn to vote in a particular way ; nobody would upset a e volct wouldcsohoi t fo rnrxetgcr goods, ntb a lalus e solemst:nu btigaoandrinsn:ihdoa:peiolrgniNcudlveoelme;:(nniruaosd( (Hear, O giodeaitevhh, a p osteeer r hf pre vent maintained leaeeteniavetnltretvo tenantryt. ine a :otrti:hee;el man from voting ; nobody In the notl impossible vtthenhhxeeeaatl tfil pollingtrssh catastrophe then,t kpb o el a uclbieoi tell oi n h t wn o o ahga w tlsb avatttni Irelandhhlhtdeehees. p the aid of the military, if the ballot were established, be cause these men might accept their conveyance and then vote in their teeth. (Hear, hear.) No mob would as semble either to rescue a voter from a tyrant landlord, or to ill-use him if he were an opponent, seeing that it would be utterly impossible to know which way he was going to vote. It was contrary to common sense to say that under the ballot the peace of the country would be disturbed its it had been during general elections. (Hear, hear.) He challenged any hon. gentleman to match such places as Old ham and the Six-mile-bridge and Blackburn, or even Cli theroe, in any country where the ballot was established. (Hear, hear.) If they questioned the Belgian, h e wou ld tell them that, though great interest was felt in his national elections, peace and order were the rule, and the opposite the exception. (Hear, hear.) If they questioned the Frenchman, he would tell them that nothing could be more orderly than French elections—(hear)—he would tell them that in the vicinity of the voting inns in France the trades men never closed their shops, that the doors were not closed, nor the windows smashed. Perhaps the French man would tell them, too, that John Bull was so accus tomed to his national luxuries of beer, boxing, and bribery, that he would never part with them. (Laughter.) If, again, they questioned the American, he would tell them that at his national elections peace was the rule, disturbance the exception. He was afraid—he (Mr. Berkeley) did not say it—he was afraid Jonathan would add that John Bull would never get rid of his corrupt electoral system until he had got rid of the corrupting influence of a hereditary peer age. One word, before he concluded, with regard to the boroughs which contained dockyards. The atrocities per petrated in these boroughs, in the shape of punishment and reward, were fully and fairly before the public ; and Chatham had the unenviable notoriety of having never returned a member contrary to the interests of the Go vernment of the day. (Hear, hear.) Now, the only way in which they could prevent the electors of such boroughs from being punished for political virtue and rewarded for political vice, was by giving them security at the poll. Until that was done, never would merit meet with its desert, or the stream of patronage flow in the right chan nel. He should not be doing justice, however, if he admit ted that the dockyard voters of Chatham were more under the influence of others than the tenant-farmers ; and he maintained that if they attempted to disfranchise the elec tors of Chatham, they ought, at the same time, as a mat ter of justice, to disfranchise the tenant-farmers of the county of Kent. (Hear, hear, and cheers.) It was, then, because he objected to the exercise of this tyranny over electors, that he entreated the house to free the country from its pernicious consequences ; it was because he would practically carry out the senti ments of the noble lord, and restore to good sense, wisdom, and moderation the privilege of recording an unfettered vote that he sought to protect those great qualities of the people. (Cheers.) When they heard of democracy, he en treated the house to remember the conduct of the people in 1848, that memorable era, when the democracy were found the prompt protectors of their country. (Cheers.) He would call upon them to remember the conduct of the people at the Great Exhibition, marked as that conduct was by great intelligence and by the love of order—he would call upon them not to forget the conduct of the people at the interment of England's great captain—(hear, hear)—marked as their conduct then was by deep reverence and respect for the mighty dead—the aristocrat who lay in the coffin before them ; and then he told them to get rid of their paltry terrors and their aristocratic tromblings at democracy. (Cheers.) He called upon that newly elected House of Commons to stand forward and prove themselves worthy of the people who had sent them there ; ho called upon them to restore to the people a great privilege, a chartered right, to which they were as much entitled as they were to enjoy the sun that shone in God's firmament or the breezes of spring ; and that they might do this he entreated them most respectfully, but most earnestly, to legislate on this subject. (Loud cheers.) Sir J. V. SHELLEY seconded the motion. Ho said after the speech which had just been delivered, he should not feel justified in detaining the house at any length. If it would be difficult to bring forward any new arguments in favour of the ballot, it would, he thought, be still more difficult to bring forward any new one against it. (Hear.) The arguments in its favour had been strengthened a hundred-fold by the decisions of the recent election com mittees. It was curious to reflect how much time had been wasted in the discussion of this subject. In 1838, in intro ducing this subject, Mr. Grote observed that the necessity for a remedy against bribery and intimidation was con teased on all sides, and on the same occasion the noble lord the member for the city of London observed that when all acknowledged that the evil prevailed to a great extent, they were bound to provide a remedy. Since that time the noble lord had often been strong enough to propose a re medy, but to the only remedy of which the case admitted he had refused his assent. He did not know what remedy the noble lord meant to propose now ; but his (Sir J. V. Shelley's) constituents were strongly impressed with the necessity of being allowed to give their votes by ballot. Some of them, who lived in the fashionable parts of West minster, or in such streets as Regent-street, Bond-street, and Oxford-street, had no wish to be subjected again to the annoyance and discomfort of being visited by fine ladies in carriages, and having the screw put upon them. (Hear, hear.) He would be glad to learn what was the opinion of the country gentlemen on this subject, but he perceived that at present that party was represented solely by the hon. member for Cambridgeshire (Mr. E. Ball). On the occasion to which he had already alluded, that of the debate in 1838, the hon. baronet the member for Herts (Sir B. Lytton), in replying to the argument that the ballot would weaken the influence of property, ob served that there were two kinds of influence, legitimate influence and improper influence ; then when improper in fluence was being used to over-rule the conscience of the voter, the ballot would be a protection, and place the poor and the rich man on equal terms, but that wherever a great proprietor was more beloved than feared, legitimate influence could not be taken away by the ballot. He hoped the opinion of the hon. baronet would now have due weight with the country party, and that they would not pay themselves the bad compliment to conclude that if the ballot existed, the constituents would not select persons of their class. (Hear.) At all events he should vote for the motion with the greatest cordiality. The question that leave be given to introduce the bill having been put, Mr. E. BALL opposed the motion, not believing that the ballot would materially remove existing corruption. Ho twice apologised for being unprepared with a speech, but he favoured Lord J. Russell with a solution of the reform problem, by advising him to give all the county voters votes for the county boroughs, and all borough voters votes for their counties, in addition to the franchise at present respectively enjoyed by both classes. He would let any person who might desire a county vote have it on paying a certain price at a resister office, the money to be divided between the elected members, and he greatly amused the house by declaring how gladly ho would re ceive such money. Mr. J. PHILLIMORE thought that the ballot would be a specific remedy for a specific evil—intimidation. He denied that any earthly power had a right to ask a man why he voted in a particular way. The ballot would re move from a dishonest voter one motive for acting dis honestly, while it would protect an honest one. Needed in England, this protection was still more needed in Ire land. He reminded the Government that the ballot was part of the original Reform Bill, and was laid aside be cause it was thought that the extension of the franchise would render it unnecessary, but as results had shown that this was not the case, the remedy must now be tried, in the absence of any better suggestion. Mr. BRADY advocates the ballot, not as certain to cure all the existing evils, but because the present system was a bad one, and because a constituency of the country was not in a position to make that house a reflex of popular opinion. He cited cases in which tenants in Ireland had been hardly treated on account of their political conduct. Mr. S. HERBERT said, in listening to the speech which the hon. member for Bristol had addressed to the house, he was struck by one peculiarity, namely, that differing in thought from his previous speeches on the subject, ' there was a consciousness on his part that how ever plausible the theory of the ballot might be for the purpose of redressing intimidation, it was powerless with regard to bribery. He made his case with regard to inti midation by going back a very considerable period, and the principal evidence he adduced of the evil of intimidation, to which no man could be more opposed than he (Mr. S. Herbert), was given before a committee which sat not in 1853 but in 1835. He accused the noble lord of having slept the sleep of Rip Van Winkle, while the evils of inti midation had been in operation since the Reform Bill. He (Mr. Berkeley) must have slept the sleep of Rip Van Winkle, in not seeing the effect which public opinion had had since that time in redressing the evil of intimidation. He recollected the time when the late Duke of Newcastle put boldly forward the theory that every man bad a right ' to do as he liked with his own," meaning that every man had a right to do as he liked with the consciences of other people • but now-a-days, depend on it, there was no man alive who would come forward with such a statement or justify such a proceeding. And what was the inference that ho drew from that ? Why, that the state of the public feeling was very much altered on that subject; that a man felt he would shock public opinion and damage his own character if he attempted to put forward such a state ment as that he had a right to interfere in that manner with the franchise of his tenants. He need not give in stances, because hon. gentlemen must be aware of the alte ration which had been effected by the pressure of public opinion on that subject. The hon. member for Cam bridgeshire was a proof that there, at any rate, the tenants exercised their choice, otherwise he would not be a member of that house ; and he saw another hon. gentleman oppo site, the member for Nottinghamshire, who was returned by the tenants in the teeth of the opposition of the land lords.—(A Hon. Member—" Those are exceptions.")—But many exceptions tended to invalidate a rule. He could quote another exception—himself. In the county which he had the honour to r epresent, at the election which took place last summer, a great many of the tenantry voted against bite, and amongst others many cf the tenantry with whom he was connected. Many of them were tenants-at-will, men of substance who would think it a great piece of impertinence on the part of their landlord to interfere with them. Well, then, the hon. gentleman thought that bribery' was an awkward subject to deal with, and actually apologised for it, saying, what was ve ry true, that it was a seductive thing, and that there[were what he called redeeming qualities in it. [Mr. 11. Berkeley made an observation across the table which we did not hear.] The redeeming quality was this, that a man might get money dishonestly provided he put it to a good pur pose. But was it true that intimidation was the gigantic evil of the elective system ? He (Mr. S. Herbert) appealed to every gentleman in the house, whether during the last 20 years intimidation had not been diminishing, and whe ther, unfortunately, bribery had not been increasing. Since the Reform Bill intimidation had decreased. The pressure of public opinion, which was much stronger than acts of Parliament, had had its effect on intimi dation, but on bribery it had had as yet none. Need he ask the house to recollect all the dreadful cases of bri bery they had had this session ? This blot on our electoral system had become more prevalent, and not only candi dates but electors seemed to think it was one of those offences which were venial, provided they were not found out. The hon. gentleman opposite said they wanted the ballot on account of its effect on Ireland, and that Ireland was the great seat of intimidation. Now, would the ballot in Ireland have the effect of preventing intimidation ? The hon. member for Leominster wanted to know what it was they objected to—bribery, intimidation, or the remedy? He (Mr. S. Herbert) objected to all three. He objected to bribery and intimidation, and he said the ballot was not the remedy for them. It was impossible to suppose that the fact of every man giving his vote in secret would necessarily cause it to continue secret. The struggles in Ireland were between the priest and the landlord ; the relation of the tenant with the priest was peculiar, and the relation with the tenant was common. Unless the ballot enabled the tenant to be independent of both their remedy would be useless. In England, with a tyrannical landlord or a tyrannical customer, as the hon. gentleman described, the ballot would lead to a system of espionage, because, supposing the ballot turned out to be a system of perfect secresy, then the political opinions, the political associates of every man would be canvassed, and it would be natural to suppose that he had voted according to his political opinions. He was not afraid of intimidation Joe. cause public opinion would be too strong for it, but be asked, would the ballot be effective in putting down bribery ? A candidate who now went down to a borough might spend a great deal of money uselessly, but have the ballot and it would be a question of play and pay ; the candidate would say, " I pay if I am returned, but not if I am not returned." At present a candidate bribed a man and got merely his vote ; with the ballot ho made the man who was to be bribed his agent, and he made it his inte rest not only to give him his vote, but to make others give theirs ; they would canvass for him, How would this act upon the voter ? Why, the voter, who was sometimes now deterred by the fear of detection, would have this mantle of darkness thrown over all his proceedings, and might be induced to vote in a way which otherwise he would not do. How was it that bribery was generally found out now ? The first thing was that generally a number of men came to the poll about ten minutes before it closed, and gave their votes. The agent or the opposing candidate said, "why here is so and so, who has be , n yellow all his life, voted for blue, or has been blue all his life, and voted for yellow ?" Investigation ensued, and ultimately the bribery was brouglit home to him. But under this system of secresy the imputation of a corrupt motive could not be suggested no one would know how any ono had voted ; no suspicion would be awakened, and there would be no reason for making those inves tigations which resulted in a committee up stairs, and ended sometimes to the great dissatisfaction of honoura ble members. If that were so, they gave the candidate the advantage without the risk of losing his money, and they gave to the voter the possibility of voting without the chance of detection ; and so fax from the ballot tending to diminish the chance of bribery, it would give every in ducement to the candidate to bribe, and enable the voter to be bribed without discovery. The hon. gentleman said why not give this right to the poor man which in clubs the higher classes habitually used. Now, one of these was for political, and the other for social purposes. The object of a ballot in a club was to enable them to act on predileT tions which they might not be able to justify, but which they had a right to exercise, for this reason—that every body had a right to choose the persons that he would asso ciate with. A man had a right to select his associates, without giving any public reason, and without being called on to give any justification for the aversion or prejudice he entertained. But in public functions a man must feel his responsibility. It was nothing to tell him there was no responsibility in giving a vote. Why, to vote for a mem ber of Parliament was to constitute the fountain head of of political power. Talk about the rights of the demo cracy. These wore the duties of the democracy as well as the rights; and if the voters were to exercise the franchise, they must exercise it for the benefit of the public under the responsibility of public opinion. There was no reason in , the world why they should adopt the theory of the hon. gentleman; but it was because the franchise was a public trust, and the source of public power, that he desired to see that it did not tend to vitiate our public system. The hob. gentleman said that some persons confounded demo crexy with the ballot, and that it was said you could not hr4ve the one without the other. It was true that if you rlthe ballot, one great argument against universal suff e was lost. (Hear, hear.) The hon. gentleman quoted the case of foreign countries, and said they were arguments arid proofs in favour of the manner in which the ballot would work in this country. He need not have gone so far. That system was not confined to clubs—it was adopted in the parish of Marylebone in the election of vestries under Hobhouse's Act. Elections of that kind in Marylebone differed in nothing from ordinary political elections, and were carried on with the same vehemence, the same acrimony, and party spirit; and there was an entire openness of proceeding, everybody's vote was well known, and if any one was persecuted, or any custom lost, they were acted on in just the same way as if there were open voting. Then with regard to America, Mr. Tremen heero, in his work on America, gave up the notion of secresy in vote by ballot ; and said that the mode of taking votes in the United States was open and ostenta tious ; that the ballot was a good mode of taking rapidly anal easily the votes of a vast population ' • but any no tion of secresy was quite given up, and no attempt was made at concealment of the political predilections of voters. He said that "the term ballot in the United States meant nothing more than a mode of taking votes, which were openly and ostentatiously given." Now, in this country there were scrutineers for the purpose of striking off bad votes, such as the persons who voted had no right to give. Under the ballot how could that be done, how could it be ascertained who had or who had not a right to vote ? That system must be put out of the question. Look at the working of that plan in that re spect in America. It was stated by a writer on the subject, " that there were many false votes given, and in the case of a candidate who had obtained the promise of the votes of half the constituency he was yet beaten by a majority greater than the whole constituency put together." (Hear.) Again, it appeared from the evidence of an American that the system had only changed tho course of corruption, and instead of buying hundreds of _voters, the plan was (and this was an iniprCivement he, Mr. Herbert, did not think we in this country would adopt immediately, for it would require a little time for ingenious men to invent devices of the kind)—the plan was only to buy one or two of the judges with whom the result of the election rested ; and there was no means of detecting them in making false that which could only be done by a scrutiny of the ballot box ; and there was nothing to prevent the abstraction of one kind of tickets and the substitution of others. That then seemed to be the common practice, and that was the sys tem which was said afforded the greatest security to voting. Hq would read an extract from the message of the Gover nor of the Stitte of New York to the Legislature, in 1850, in which he said that" the alarming increase of bribery at elections was a subject worthy of their attention ; that the preservation of their liberties depended on the purity of elective franchise as exercised by the citizens, and he tr4sted they would adopt measures to protect whom--the voters ? not at all ; but effectually to secure the ballot-box from corruption—so that after adopting the system in this country the hon. gentleman the member for Bristol would have to bring on motions not to protect the voter, but the ballot-box, which he himself bad introduced. His (Mr. Hcirbert's impression was, that there was one state in the Union in which there was compulsory secresy in voting. In the United States the ballot was used as a means of rapid voting, but the system of compulsory secresy was so far from being universally adopted that it was, in most cases, considered hateful, and strong arguments were used against its introduction into the other states. The hon. gentleman said that he would have it compulsory. But how was he to do it ? How was he to compel secresy among men proud of their resistance to power and to the blandishments of authority ; how was he to prevent them from going up to the ballot-box and stating for whom they were going to vote. It was not in the nature of the English character for a man to skulk behind a mask when he was doing an act of which he was proud. (Hear, hear.) Sydney Smith, in his admirable pamphlet on the ballot, which he (Mr. Herbert) wished it was consistent with the rules of the hou,se to have read by the clerk at the table—(a laugh)—for it would be better than any speeches or arguments, humorously asked how you were to get an English voter to conceal his opinions ; in that case he must hurrah at the wrong dinner, drink the wrong beer, and break the wrong head. The hen gentleman (Mr. Berkeley) said that the English were not garrulous ; but were they apt at concealing acts of public duty ? He (Mr. Herbert) would say, being half an Irish man, that although on the other side of the Channel taci turnity was not their forte, it was possible they would not divulge the nature of their votes. But for an Englishman to acquire the powers of concealment necessary to this sys tem of voting, he could become such a hypocrite as to make it doubtful whether he would be entitled to exercise the franchise. It could not be kept out of sight what an effect would be wrought on the national character and .institu tions if this system of perfect secresy was obtained. How was public opinion to be formed among the cons tit uenc i es if every mans opinion was concealed ? It 'would go to the root of our whole political system. The case was different in France, although he preferred to take America for the purposes of comparison, because the people came from the same stock, and the operation of certain influencies on them would be more akin to that on the minds of English men. But in France the political system was exactly the opposite of ours. It was a common phrase among French men, faut &rase,. l'individuel." That was not our s 3 s tern ; and we did not put our political system into a state shape. If that was abandoned it would be contrary to the spirit of our free institutions—contrary to the spirit of our Saxon institutions, which were so consonant with liberty ; and if we were to adapt the English character to a system which would render men ready so to abrogate their rights and their duties es to perform them under the veil of secresy, you would demoralise the English character, and sap the very foundation on which our liberties were built. He did not speak thus from any fear of the immediate effect of the ballot in the loss of the influence of wealth, of public virtue, or station. He believed that it would make no very sensible impression on the return of members. He did not object to the system in a party or political point of view, but because he believed it would tend, by destroy ing the self-respect of the constituency, to strike a blow at one of the best qualities of the national character, which was created by the exercise of public functions, whether in high or in humble life, and which required a fearlessness which had been given to the national character—a stability which was inconsistent with a system of concealment. Actuated by these feelings he should vote against the in troduction of the measure. Lord A. LENNOX opposed the .principle of the ballot, denying that secresy would be preserved under such a sys tem. He denied that it would put a stop to bribery, and although he was of opinion that the bribery at the last election was a scandal to the country, and he would be ready to coincide iu any measure that would put a stop to it, yet he did not believe that the ballot would have that effect. An ancestor of his, whom the noble lord opposite, in a re cent work, had called "The reformed Duke of Richmond," had expressed an opinion which he thought was well de serving of attention. He said that the idea of the ballot could only have arisen from a wish to avoid some improper influences ; and he conceived that it was much nobler openly to check such influences than to seek to evade them by concealment and deceit—it was more consistent with the character of Englishmen openly to express their opinions than to indicate in a secret manner those whom they wished to entrust with their suffrages. (Cheers.) There was, in fact, about Englishmen an open and straightfor ward character well suited to the dignity of freedom ; and it would be most unwise and dangerous to public morality to pass a law, the essence of which was meanness anti. ser vility, and whieliwould inculcate a disregard for truth, or, borough stunk in the nostrils of the people, for the members returned for it were unseated at the gene ral election in 1841, 1847, and 1852. This imtnacu fated the borough, for it co:n tamed only 272 electors, and it was nothing less than a h ot bed of corruption. Mr. FERGUSON seem ided the amendment, as a member of the committee w hich had sat on this case. Mr. HEADLAM said bse was chairman of the corn. mittee, and he was bound '.;o say that no ease of exten sive bribery or treating wail made out. Still there could be no doubt that great corruption had existed in Har wich ; but, under the circ unistances he had stated, lie did not think there was sufficient ground for withholding the writ. Sir F. THESIG ER supported the original motion. Mr. AGLIONBY said the house had issued a writ in the Plymouth case, which was parallel to this, and he could see no reason for withholding the writ in the present instance. Mr. T. DUNCO.MBE gave it as his opinion that Harwich was ripe for disfranchisement, and, therefore, he recommended the house to pursue no half measure but disfranchise the borough at once, as it must come to that at last. . _ Mr. MASSEY said it wouT.d be unconstitutional to issue the writ without previouFily inquiring into the cor rupt bargain upon which it wa s alleged the late member was retained for Harwich. _ _ Sir R. H. INGLIS argu , ;(l that the house had no right to withhold the writ, be muse the committee which bad already sat upon the subj ect, had reported that no thing had come out in evidence to justify the suspension of the writ. Lord J. RUSSELL could not agree with his honour able friend that the house had no right to suspend the writ, because the house had exercised such a right since the period of the revolution. However, the question which the house had now to decide was this—ought they to make Harwich an exception to the other cases which the house had disposed of this session. The chairman of the committee which had Flat upon the petition was of opinion that nothing had been proved to justify their withholding the writ, but how was that ? (Hear, hear.) Why, the witnesses who could have proved extensive bribery, absconded, and the inquiry was therefore stifled. That was a strong reason why there should be a further investigation, and he was ready to vote either for that inquiry, or for a bill to disfranchise the borough, which he thought ought to be done for the sake of the character of the house. (Cheers.) In the meantime, however, the writ ought to issue. Mr. WADDINGTON supported the issue of the writ. The house then divided. For the motion 247 Against it lO2 Majority THE BALLOT Mr. M. CHAMBERS presented a petition from Green wich, and Sir J. V. SHELLEY three petitions from West minster, in favour of vote by ballot. Mr. H. BERKELEY said he rose, pursuant to notice, to ask leave to bring in a bill to give to the electors of Great Britain and Ireland the protection of the ballot. When Lord Aberdeen's Ministry announced to the country their intention to bring forward a measure of reform, he he had hoped that the ballot might be a component part of their scheme, and that they would have deemed it ne cessary to protect the consciences and the persons, the minds, and the bodies of electors, by the ballot. But having had a distinct intimation in the addresses of Lord John Russell and Sir James Graham to their constituents, that they were determined not to have anything to do with that measure, he, under a strong sense of duty, and by the counsel of friends for whose judgment he enter tained a great respect, had deemed it necessary to ask per mission to legislate on that subject. When he last ad dressed a House of Commons on that question, it was on the eve of a general election. Lord Derby had determined to throw himself on the country ; and perhaps that might have suggested to Mr. Dickens the; strange idea of Lord Coodle throwing himself on the country in the shape of sovereigns and beer. (Great laughter.) The hangers-on of the two factions were on the alert. The springs for moving the constituencies were put in order ; and they had it in evidence that gentlemen high in office—for in stance, the Right Hon. Wm. Beresford—had taken counsel with Mr. Frail, of Derby notoriety, no doubt for the pur. pose of securing the purity of the great Tory party ; at the same time they had ocular demonstration that the Right Hon. Wm. Goodenough Hayter might be seen taking counsel with Mr. Coppock, of St. Albans celebrity, no doubt for the purpose of securing the same laudable result for his party. (Cheers and laughter.) They had evidence that the masquerade shops had been ransacked ; that wigs, spectacles, and disguised had been put in requisition—that aliases and alibis were in vogue—(hear, hear)—and all this to usher in with due solemnity England's great septennial saturnalia, and to do honour to that freedom of election in which her Majesty's Cabinet Ministers would seem so greatly to rejoice. (Cheers and laughter.) At that time he raised his feeble voice to point out to the house the gathering storm. He endeavoured to show that England was about to place herself in a position disgraceful to a Christian country in the eyes of Europe. Two hundred years ago, old John Evelyn had made the same complaint, almost in precisely the same words. He spoke of." the confused, debauched, and riotous manner of electing members qualified to become representatives of a nation," and said that elections more resembled a Pagan bacchanalia than au assembly of sober and Chris tian men. (Hear, hear,) Was it not a disgraceful fact, that after the lapse of 200 years, with the march of intellect, the increase of intelligence, the progress of education, and the ceremony, not to say the mockery of a reform bill, those very evils still formed the earnest com plaint of every honest man, from Dover to Inverness, from the Cove of Cork to the Giant's Causeway? (Hear, hear.) Some 40 years after John Evelyn had made this complaint, another great reformer arose, and attacked the same evils which Evelyn had deplored—Daniel De Foe; and he pointed out the ballot as the remedy. His writings must have taken great effect on the public of that day ; for the House of Commons passed a bill to make the ballot the mode of electing members of Parliament, but it was re jected by the Lords, who of course refused to lay the axe to the root of their own unconstitutional influence. Well, our great Pagan bacchanalia had passed over, and left the nation staggering under its effect. A great struggle bad taken place, in which tyranny with its iron heel had crushed in the dust the liberty of the elector, through means of our existing electoral system; bribery and inti midation had gone hand in hand to complete the work of general demoralisation. When he (Mr. Berkeley) last spoke he warned the house that flocks of low attorneys, the means by which the House of Lords returned their nominees to the House of Commons, were hovering over the land — (cheers)—like the harpies of old, seeking to pounce upon and defile the banquet spread before them. (Cheers.) Those flocks of attorneys were new gorged, sated, rumi nating upon the past enjoyment of unlimited expenditure and untaxed bills—(loud cheers and laughter) —or re pluming themselves for another fight, allured by the pros pect of a hundred teeming election petitions up stairs, involving the outlay of some 200,0001., of which those gentlemen expected, and no doubt would obtain, the lion's share. (Cheers.) Such were some of the consequences of our glorious electoral system, that system of which we were so proud, which was so manly, so English— so es pecially English, that other nations repudiated it. (Cheers.) The honest portion of the electors themselves hated and detested it, for it was to them a system of humiliation and disgrace, and at a general election they suffered under what might be appropriately termed a reign of terror. (Hear.) While they hated and detested this system, a majority of the elected were determined to abide by it ; thus showing to demonstration that they were not elected by the voice of the electors, but by a power which con trolled that voice. The evils of the system were twofold; they consisted in bribery, including treating and intimida tion. That house had made many futile attempts to put down bribery ; all its efforts had been addressed to that point ; no effort had been made to put down intimidation. They compelled their committees to take an anomalous and inconsistent course ; they forced them to turn out of that house members who were perfectly innocent of bribery themselves, because some agent, either through gross cu pidity, or the greatest rascality and treachery, had either given some venal elector a couple of pounds, or had drenched some beast with a gallon of beer. (Laughter.) While thus intent on purity of election, they equally per mitted candidates, candidates' friends, and candidates' agents, to drive their tenants to the poll, there to falsify their consciences and to ogive a dishonest vote. '(Beer, hear.) They permitted customers to compel tradesmen to vote under pain of ruin. (Hear, hear.) They permitted creditors to drive their debtors to the poll or to prison. (Cheers.) They permitted masters to discharge their ser vants ; and they permitted a reign of terror to pervade the country from one end to the other. (Hear, hear.) That, was straining at the gnat and swallowing the camel. Inti midation was the giant malady of our electoral system ; in comparison with it, bribery was but a puny dwarf. The action of bribery was simple ; they purchased a man's con science, and commanded his vote. Though bribery was indefensible, there might be redeeming features in it. He had known a workman redeem from pawn his box of tools through receiving an election bribe. He had known me dical aid furnished to an ailing family through an election bribe. But what redeeming feature was there in intimi dation ? (Hear.) Its action was complex ; its effects were manifold. Its weapons were punishment ; and it worked by that far-famed instrument, wholly and solely English in its invention and application, the election screw. Need he tell the house what the election screw was, and how it worked? (Cheers.) It was a power which the elector could not resist. It commenced with an inquisition into his private affairs, worthy of a Fouche or a Vidocq, carried on by the election agents ; and when, by means of this severe inquisition, his liabilities and misfortunes were laid bare, the power became clear by which he might be acted upon. The working of the system was to twist from the free, manly, and independent Englishman a dishonest vote. (Hear.) Fourteen years ago, in seconding Mr. Grote's mo tion, he had demonstrated at some length on the mischiefs of the election screw, and he would state a few instances which he then gathered from the canvassing book of elec tion agents. These books contained the names of the elec tors, either printed, lithographed, or in manuscript, with their residences and avocations, against which was left a margin for the experienced agent to enter his remarks. The following were some of them : " John So-and-so, publican, votes against us. Mem.—Put the screw on him through Mr. So-and-so, the spirit merchant, with whom he is in arrears." (Cheers and laughter.) " Thomas So-and so, beershop-keeper, refuses to promise. Mem.— Canvass him in company with Mr. So-and-so, the licensing magis trate." (Laughter.) "Peter So-and-so, cheesemonger, splits his vote. Mem.— Put the cheesefactor upon him to make him plump." (Laughter.) " Abel So-and-so, tailor, votes against us. Mem.—Makes Sir Thomas So-and-so's liveries; apply to Sir Themes to compel him to split, or not vote at all." (Laughter.) He could add instances of this kind ad infinitum, with the names of the parties; and, if he were before an election committee, he could call evi dence to prove the existence of that election screw to an extent scarcely credible—certainly not believed by the hon. members who opposed that motion. (Hear.) For one case of bribery, there were 5,000 cases of intimidation. It was ramified through every grade of society ; every man was brought more or less to screw his neighbour. The committees- took a course that appeared anomalous I and ridiculous, if their object was purity of election ; at best, but a regard for the outward semblance of intog rity. (Cheers.) On these grounds he (Lord Lennox) should vote against the motion of his hon. friend. Mr. COBDEN remembered that about nine years ago he brought forward a motion in that house, on which he had bestowed more than usual trouble and attention, and which time and experience had since proved to have been founded in sound and true policy. He remembered that the right hon. the member for Wiltshire, who was then in the Cabi net, and the colleague of older and shrewder heads, was put forward to answer that speech, which was accompanied by some memorable circumstances. Now the right hon. gentleman was a little older, but he had hardly gained much wisdom from experience—(laughter)—for he had done precisely the same office now that he did then for older and more sagacious colleagues. He had now taken up the defence of a question which had been as completely established by reason and argument as free trade had been in 1811 (cheers) —and he ventured to predict that the right hon. gentleman would live to make as manly a disa vowal, after he had seen by experience the results of the ballot, of the opinions ho had expressed that night. (Laughter and cheers.) This question, he (Mr. Cobden) repeated, had been settled by reason and argument ; and if they were discussing the ballot simply as a question affect ing a body of men, all of whom rested upon a social equality, there could not even then be one argument or reason sug gested why it should not be adopted. (Hear, hear.) Hide as they might—conceal it even from themselves,.if they could—the fact was that they opposed the ballot because they festered upon a discussion of it with a latent idea that it was the duty of somebody to know how somebody else voted. (Cheers.) But if a body of men—if 500 individuals were placed in one apartment, and they wished to know honestly the opinion of the majority of those men ; if no ono had right or power, or pretension, to exercise any un due influence whatever, or any mastery over them, except what he derived from argument and reason, they would not find one of those 500 men that could say why the ballot should not b e a d op t e d. (Hear, hear. The right hon. gentleman had given them some arguments with which he (Mr. Cobden) la h we MustVilldno ee w rre p e r t oZ t e h e e d t() deal. And in the first p as sumption of the right hon. gentleman that any one who had spoken before him had admitted, that the ballot would be totally inoperative to put downebribery. What, had been admitted by all its advocates was that it was per fect as against intimidation, and that it was a very potent obstacle to bribery. But the right hon. gentleman went further, and said that bribery might be an increasing evil, but that intimidation, owing to the operation of public opinion, was decreasing with the lapse of 'time. He com pared the present period with 1833 ; and said that we had very much improved upon the state of things then, for po pular opinion had to a certain extent put down intimida tion. He (Mr. Cobden) denied that. What had been done was, that the counties, in a vast majority of cases, had so far succumbed to intimidation, and had so far become sub servient to territorial interest, that they had ceased to make any struggle for independence. (Cheers.) Talk of intimidation having diminished ! Was it not the recog nised principle and etiquette in county canvassing, that it, was an insult to large proprietors to canvass their tenants without first obtaining their permission ? (Cheers.) Would anybody deny that ? Why, he had heard of one case, in which there were two proprietors of rival pretensions, where there was a quarrel, and some talk of a duel, in con sequence of their having poached upon each other's manor. The counties, before the Reform Bill, were the strongholds of liberal opinions in this country. There were members for counties who took their stand on that side of the house in defence of all our old constitutional freedom, and it was mainly county members that had carried the Reform Bill itself. (Cheers.) Why, then, had such a complete change taken place ? They could scarcely now point to any county where a contest, however hopeless, had been attempted on liberal and reforming principles. (Hear, hear.) The simple cause was, that they had given the proprietors such power by the control of their tenants' votes, that the free holders, the ancient stronghold of popular rights, had been swamped by a body of men, the most dependent and the most subservient politicians they had in tne country. (Cheers and murmurs.) They had had the experiment tried. In South Northumberland, in North Northumber land, in Hertfordshire, in Herefordshire, and in West Surrey, they had had contests ; and whether or not there heel been any diminution of intimidation, let the right hon. member for Morpeth answer. (Cheers.) He would call Sir George Grey into . the witness-box. [The hon. member then quoted a hustings' speech* of Sir George, in which he complained that the name of those who had ex ercised undue influence over their tenants, against him was " Legion."] But it was the same on the other side. He found in a local paper this statement :—" Lord Ossulstou and Lord Lovaine address the people from the windows of the White Swan." (A laugh.) Lord Ossulston, speaking of the Beaumont and other influence in South Northum berland, said—" Mr. Liddell went up to one of the polling places, where he sat with the patience of Job, for three hours, hearing vote after vote recorded against him. At last a single elector polled for him, and he rose and publicly thanked the voter, to the surprise of all who did not know that he was present. A short time after wards, ono of the voters who had polled against Mr. Liddell, came up to him, and taking him by, the hand, said, " I have been compelled to vote against you, but it is a d—d bad business." (Laughter.) I have given you the man's own language, for I think the profaneness of the expression is redeemed by its honest sincerity.. (Great laughter.) Lord Lovaine also complained that the Green wich Hospital estate was canvassed by his opponent in company with a Government commissioner, and that the tenants had given their votes against him (Lord Lovaine), although they were in his favour'. (Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Cobden) might call attention to the case of Hertford shire i but in every case they would find the same ter rible intimidation practised. Indeed, the counties had ceased to exist for all purposes ,of useful discussion or manly contest. (Loud cheers and murmurs.) Well, i now, let them go to Ireland, where county contests had been renewed. Had they seen any failing anywhere of this horrible intimidation, in Ireland, by the priests on ono side and the landlords on the other? (Hear.) Why he had begun at one time to cut extracts out of the papers giving records of these cases, but he had thrown up the task in sheer despair, for it was all intimidation and violence is Ireland. (Cheers.) So much so, that the United Service Gazette stated that 30,000 soldiers and police had been kept actively employed throughout the late elections, .and that they had visited 182 polling places during the contest. (Hear, hear.) Was that a state of things to be passed over or to be remedied ? (Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentle man said they could not remedy it in Ireland unless they passed such a measure as would protect the people both from the priests and the landlords. But what did they want to protect them against ? They wanted to protect voters against any coercive influences that should compel them to vote against their will. (Hear, hear.) He might be told that the influence of the priests would be exercised in a private manner—in a manner which, whatever it might seem to them, they neither could, nor had they a right, to interfere with. (Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Cobden) did not ask them to protect a man against a voluntary in fluence. He denied their right to prevent any man from taking counsel from those whom he knew, or supposed to be better able to advise him than he was to instruct him self. (Hear.) But this he did say, place a man in such a [ position that he might either follow or disobey, as he pleased, the instructions of those who undertook to guide him, whether they were landlords or priests. They had had, however, on the previous night, an explosion from the honourable member for Enniskillen (Mr. Whiteside) from which it appeared that there were some influences exerted by priests which were not volun tarily submitted to. He (Mr. Cobden) had heard of a Roman Catholic who had voted against the wishes of his priest, and his seat in the chapel had been torn up in consequence. Now that was a species of in timidation calculated to make a man vote against his conscience; and so if they had the ballot it might protect a mail, to some extent, even against the influence of the priests. (Hear, hear.) Therefore, he said, let them try the ballot. (Cheers.) The right: hon. gentleman told them that it would be no remedy against bribery. He stated that bribery would be carried on wholesale—that one of your Parliamentary agents would go down to a town and say to a number of people, " If you can return So-and so I will give you so much to divide amongst you ; but unless he is returned you have nothing." Now his (Mr. Cobden's) answer to that was, in the first instance, that they did not intend to have any of these little manageable boroughs. (Cheers.) It might be perfectly true of such places as Wilton or Shoreham. for instance. But he would put it to the house, could any Parliamentary agent go down to such towns as Birmingham or Manchester, where there were constituencies of 5,000, or 10,000, or 15,000 electors, and buy them up wholesale? (Cheers.) With so large a number to be represented, 26,000,000 persons to be repre sented by 658 members, they would have under the new Reform i3ill—unless it was to be a mere sham and pretence —none but large constituencies ; and he would appeal to the house whether it was possible to buy constituencies of some 8,000 voters each? (Cheers.) It had Lever been done under the open system, and it would certainly not be done under the ballot. (Loud cheers.) The right hon. gentleman had touched upon the ballot at the clubs, buthe had not been very happy in explaining why they were indulged in that luxury while the people were not to have it. (Hear.) It was said that in clubs they dare not vote openly ; but really if any improper person were proposed for the only club in London to which he (Mr. Cobdep) belonged, he should not hesitate to vote against him to-morrow. (Hear, hear.) It might be very inconvenient no doubt to vote openly ; but were they to shield themselves against this slight inconvenience when they would not allow the same privilege to the masses? (Hear, hear.) Nor was the prac tice confined to the clubs. The East India Company voted by ballot, and he did not find any provision in the new bill to prevent them from continuing to do so. Twenty years ago the magistrates for Devonshire adopted it in elections for their chairman, and those of East Sussex in the election of a chief constable. The noble lord opposite said that the ballot would destroy the national character. Did that apply to these magistrates? (Hear, hear.) But he found in a Breconshire newspaper an account of an archery meeting, and in that too he found a ballot for members. In fact, there was no country in the world in which the ballot was so much used. The right hon. gen tleman seemed to think that the secret voting was intended p i t f o h b e e p c ? e l a n e p e u d l , s or y cover b h u i t e when the with t b h i e l I nameas se s e t fa hisvoter favouritein , candidate, or shout it at the top of his voice. All they contemplated was such a provision as should enable every body to vote without anybody else knowing how he voted. (Cheers.) Those who chose to be canvassers, or open and above-board partisans, might do so ; but the number of those who took an open, and prominent, and noisy part in these public discussions and contests was a very small fraction indeed. (Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentleman said that the ballot was not popular in America. He could state, from some little acquaintance with America, that any politician there who proposed to abolish the ballot in any state in which it prevailed, would be considered as little better than a political madman. (Hear, hear.) It was the cardinal article of their political faith • andthere never had been an instance of a s t a t e w hi ch had adopted the ballot having departed from it, b u t th e tendency had been mcoonmsteanuttltyhtehree wereot other way. more tha n n ay. (Hear, one or .) twAet, and those the present slave states— Virginia was one—where the ballot was not tolerated. (Cheers.) Much had been said about the cur ruption of the last election. That was patent to the world, and they all admitted it. It was not merely bribery and corruption in the ordinary sense of the word that they had to deal with ; the great blot and disgrace of our electoral system was the blackguardism and bullying that prevailed at those contests. At Oldham it was stated by Mr. Fox's chairman that his supporters would not have_been able to vote at all, had they not crept down by-roads to the poll ; and some actually went to Manchester and returned by another train that it might not be observed that they were going to vote. At Blackburn there was not merely open violence on the day of election, but for days and weeks afterwards the blackguardism was kept up, people were carried off, and all sorts of violence were committed. In one case a gun wr.s fired, and two shotswere lodged in the face of an individual. Was that an English, was it a desir. 40' 4, gol'4" 1 1 ° 66 7 0 ,1° hi cb i0r .,,5 lv