The Press.
London, England, 1858-06-12 00:00:00

THE BALLOT.

As these are days in which "progress" is much
tdked4itseenas worth notice that the question
of the Ballot is one which, in Parliament, has
been, for some years, progressing backward. The
divisions in the House of Commons, during the
last four years, have been as follows :
For. Against. Majority.
1854 . . . 157 194 37
1855 . . . 166 218 52
1857 . . . 189 257 68
1858.. . . 197 294 97

Thus the opposing majority has been growing,
year by year; till the proportion is, now, just
three against two, with the tide running strongly
in an adverse direction.

For, in truth, the whole course of the argu-
ment is terribly against the Ballot ; and this is
felt more and more every year. When simplified,
and reduced to the plainest issue, the Ballot is
seen to be nothing without lying. This is de-
monstrable, when we divide the electors into the
three classes of which they are unquestionably
composed. These three classes are,—
The bold and open voter.
The hesitating and doubtful, but honest voter.
The dishonest voter.

Now, of these three classes, the last is the only
one that can benefit by the Ballot. For the two
former classes it does absolutely nothing.

The first class is a large one. It consists of
those who will not conceal their suffrages:—coun-
try gentlemen, who warmly espouse the cause of
a neighbour ; London merchants, who earnestly
desire to return a Lyall or a Masterman ; and
many similar bodies. These men will not tolerate
the idea of secrecy. They are proud of what
they are doing, and they will not have it hidden
in silence. To this numerous class the Ballot
offers nothing desirable. They will simply scoff
at it. They have been used to open and plain
dealing all their lives, and they will not take to
concealment now.

The second class is a still larger one. It con-
sists of men of no very decided political opinions ;*.
men who are gained by a canvass; but who, being.
honest men, cannot bear the idea of flying from
their word. We are accustomed to speak of
"the people of England" as if they did, for the
most part, hold decided views on political and
religious subjects. But this is altogether a mis-
take. Hold an election, in London or West-
minster, without a canvass, and you will find that
not one-third of the electors will appear at the
poll. Of those who voted at the last Contests for
those two cities, one half would confess, if they
were examined, that they so voted mainly to
oblige friends who had asked them. Yet not
one in a hundred would willingly have deceived
those friends, or have given a vote for "John-
eon," when they had promised to vote for
"Smith." The whole of this class, then, of
hesitating, undecided men, who care not much
LATEST EDITION.

which way they vote, but who, having given a
promise, mean to keep it—the whole of this class
would be unaffected by the Ballot. It would do
nothing for them.

The third class consists of the dishonest ; men
who see no difficulty in promising A, and then
promising B, and voting, after all, for C. Of this
class, many, as might reasonably be expected, we
in the habit of selling their votes, and would be
glad of any device which would enable them to
sell their votes three or four times, instead of
only once or twice, at each election. This class
would unquestionably be benefited by the adop-
tion of the Ballot, and it is this class which is
the most clamorous for it. Go into the borough-
towns, where crowded meetings are often held,
and petitions voted, with great enthusiasm, for
the Ballot, and you will generally find that the
mover is some political leader or chief, who, on
the rumour of a general election, hurries up to
town, and brings down some newly-imported
East Indian, from the Reform Club, with a credit
for 2,0001., and power to draw for as much more,
"if need be." If it be asked how a corrupt
electioneering agent can desire the Ballot, the
question only shows the verdant simplicity of the
querist. Intrigues of a corrupt kind are just
those transactions which naturally prefer the
shades of darkness. The Ballot puts an end to
scrutiny, to the investigation of votes, and to
many other inconvenient processes. The ballot-
box once opened, the numbers declared, and the
candidate returned—all will be over. Then,
as to the question how a return is to be insured,
when no man's vote can be known, the reply is
easy. Mr. M'Cleverty, from: Calcutta, or from
Australia, lodges 2,0001. in the local bank, in the
name of a mutual friend, who has injunctions to
give a cheque for the said 2,0001. to the local
COPPOCR, on the day which he, Mr. M'Cleverty,
is declared duly elected. Well, this preliminary
arrangement being made, the local Coppock goes
to work. ,The electors are 600, and it is needful
to make sure of 300. He begins by enlisting a
I respectable Committee. He can perhaps find 50
decent men, "Blues," who will not desire, nor
consent to receive, a bribe. ' Their names are
therefore published, as the decoy-birds of the
party. This done, the Coppock knows where to
find the managers of the tripe-suppers. He gets
the leaders about him, and whispers, "If the
thing is done, I shall be able to give you a five-
pound note for each man, the next morning :
only I must know the names." These leaders of
the club-suppers carry him round ; he canvasses
the needful 250, and books their names. Every
man on his list has a direct interest in winning.
It is, 51. if Mr. MT. comes in, or nothing, if he
does not. They therefore rush to the ballot-box ;
the requisite number of 302 votes is easily ob-
tained, and the candidate is duly elected. Scru-
tiny, or subsequent inquiry, is out of the question.

Nobody can prove how any one man voted at that
election.

Surely, a calm consideration of these things
will sufficiently explain how it is that the Ballot
is constantly losing ground. The position we
have taken is impregnable : Without lying, the
ballot-box effects nothing. It cannot touch the
open and earnest politician, who is willing that
all the world should know what he thinks, and
how he votes. It cannot affect the timid and
hesitating voter, who, having given a positive
promise to his friend, means to keep his word.
It can only answer the purpose of the cheat and
the liar,—the man who has promised to vote for
A, and means to vote for B, and perhaps hopes
to get money or favours from each. Shall a law,
then, be made especially to serve the purpose of
liars ? May we not ask, with SYDNEY Smrva,
what lying has done to deserve such special
favour and support? Why are the other vices
to be left unrewarded and unhonoured,—and our
whole patronage lavished upon treachery and
falsehood?