The Sun.
London, England, 1864-06-22 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT

HOUSE OF LORDS—Last Evening,
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack
at five o'clock.

passages for—and to call attention to the statement made
by the noble lord on Friday last. (Cries of " order," and
"move, move.") To put himself in order he wculd move
the adjournment of the house. The hon. gentleman was
proceeding with his remarks, wieen
The SPEAKER reminder hina that the circumPjance of
his moving the adjournin-dnt of the house difi not authorise
him to refer to past debates. (Hear, hear.)
Lord C. PAGET, in replying to the question of the hon.
baronet, said the rAiddle passage was necessarily taken by
vessels going from that portion of the coast of Africa to the
West Indies. This transport would be towed into the
offing, where she would probably meet with the south-east
trade, and by making a western course, she would get into
the south-east trade wind, and in all probability would make
her passage to the West Indies nearly as quickly as a
steamer. Everybody acquainted with that part of the world
knew that in summer-time a ship might run from south-
east into the north-east trade with very little delay, and he
thought the troops would be more comfortable and better
off than they would be in a steamer. In regard to the se-
cond question, he should be very happy to give the number
of the troops on which the original requisition was founded,
and also the number in the subsequent requisition from the
Horse Guards. In the first instance there were 480 men
and a certain number of women and children, and they were
to go from Cape Coast Castle to the West Indies. Subse-
quently the War- office decided to send about 200 men from
Cape Coast Castle to Lagos, where they would relieve a si-
milar number, which would be taken to Sierra Leone.
THE BALLOT.
Mr H. BERKELEY, who spoke from the Opposition
side of the table, and was received with cheers, moved the
following resolution :—" That, as a general election is im-
pending, and it is notorious that our electoral system is
defective and corrupt in practice, and as we have no law
which can put down the intimidation of voters nor prevent
bribery, it is therefore expedient that a fair trial should be
given to the vote by ballot." The hon. member said, in
asking the house to agree to the resolution, he took a dif-
ferent course from that which he had usually taken, because
it appeared to him that the approach of a general election
gave him an opportunity of making some remarks which
were certainly called for, and hon. members might take
them or not. They had heard very much of Lord Russell
climbing an exceeding high mountain, and finding on the
top of that mountain an inscription which advised him to
" rest and be thankful." No doubt he did rest and was
thankful. He could understand the noble lord asking
Reformers to be thankful, and Reformers were thankful to
the noble lord for his brilliant exertions in the cause of
Reform. (Hear, hear.) But when the noble lord asked
the Reformers of that house to rest, it seemed to him to
savour of an absurdity. 'Were there no longer any abuses
to redress—no evils to be got rid of ? Were they become
so perfect and so pure that no reform of their political
system was required? Had they arrived at the Ultima
Thule of reformation ? Had England become "Utopia ?
Was nothing left to be done but to enjoy themselves and
be happy? He thought that an examination of the
existing state of things would prove diametrically the
contrary. Had they an Act of Parliament at the
present moment which interfered with intimidation,
which put down bribery, or prevented treating ? He
would be a bold member of Parliament who would say
they had such an Act. They had an Act called the Cor-
rupt Practises Prevention Act. Did that Act put down
any of those evils ? That Act was laughed at from one
end of the country to the other by every attorney's clerk.
That act, founded on the report of a committee, was laid
hold of by the Home Secretary and converted into an act
of Parliament. That was shortly after an election of more
than ordinary enormity, during Lord Aberdeen's admini-
stration. The committee which produced the report was
composed of Attorney-General and Solicitor-Generals, and
the most experienced men on both sides of the house. After
a short time this committee, which was a kind of enons leg is,
did as other mountains did, fell into labour and produced a
mouse—a most insignificant little vermin—as its offspring.
The Home Secretary took hold of this report, framed it into
a law, and said, "Now, there is an end of all your griev•
antes." In this bill there were certain provisions which
enlisted the sympathies of a great many members of that
house. It did away with processions, ribbons, bands, and
other expenses which fell upon candidates and accordingly
members swallowed the rest of the bill, which from end to
end was inadequate, if not mischievous, because it guarded
candidates at the poil and placed the punishment upon the
electors. To prove the inadequacy of the act the hon. mem-
ber referred to an analysis of it which had been made by
the late Mr Copapoek, who had been intimately conversant
with election business. In the case of the late Duke of
Newcastle, who had tamed out 70 of his tenants, and claimed
the right to do what he liked with his own, the late Sir R.
Peel, although he did not approve of the propriety of the
act, said it was impossible to prevent it by law. Lord Ma-
caulay expressed a similar opinion when addressing his
constituents at Edinburgh, remarking that to suppose a law
could be made to render it impossible for a man to turn out
a tenant at will, or discharge a servant, was an absolute
eosurdity. As they were approaching a general election
the house would permit him to point out what had been
done, could be done, and would be done again under that
Act. Ho would first sketch the state of a large commercial
or manufacturing borough, and describe a few of the facts
which occurred at a contested election. The first thing to
be done was to secure a certain person, a man from the
moon, known to nobody, who came, and went, and disap-
peered. The man from the moon descended on the borough,
and took up his position in some hotel. The next morning
he paid a visit to some licensed victualler, and said to him,
" On this day week I will require forty breakfasts." Gene-
rally this man from the moon was accompanied by some
person who was well known to the licensed victualler, but
who said nothing. The man in the moon visited every other
licensed victualler in the borough and gave a similar order,
until he ordered breakfast to the aim unt of £4OO or £5OO,
and then he retired from the busy scene. What happened
on the polling day ? In this borough there was a vast num-
ber of establishments employing a great many hands, among
whom were some 20 or 30 voters. On the morning of the
polling day those voters went to breakfast, and from break-
fast they went to the poll where they joined the crowd, or
assisted in bringing up electors to the poll. About the
middle of the day those men proceeded to certain unfinished
houses, where provisions, beer, and spirits had been con-
veyed over night. Everybody knew that those men feasted
at the expense of the candidates, but who could peeve it.
At the end of the week those men received their iull wages
as well for the day they were absent at the 'poll, as when
at their work, The breakfasts were not ',Aid by the same
man in the moon, but by another mae, who descended upon
the borough, and was equally un'eenown ; but he deferred
the payment until the time for presenting petitions against
the return had expired. Let him now suppose the ballot
in operation, and aptly it to the case et the same
borough he had described. In the first place, no man
from the moon. would be needed. No breakfasts would
be require;',, because in giving breakfasts a can-
didate could not tell but that his opponent's voters might be
devo,uring his tea and toast. (Laughter.) In like manner
'do candidate would pay wages for a holiday when he did
not know but his opponent's voters might be enjoying it at
his expense. He contended he had shown how the ballot
would supply defects in the existing law—and all he asked
the house was to give it an opportunity of being tried.
(Hear, and divide.) He knew he should be met by the
contradiction, " But the ballot will not do this." To this he
replied that assertion was no argument. Let them turn to
the Australian colonies, where a perfect reformation had
taken place in the system. When the ballot had first been
introduced in Australia it was met by all the arguments
used in this country. They would also find that the former
opponents of the ballot in Australia were now its warmest
supporters, and that the only class opposed to it were
Roman Catholic priests. In Ireland, on the contrary, the
Roman Catholic priests were to a man in favour of the
ballot, and it had been objected to over and over again as
an araltruent against the; ballot that, although the voters
could conceal how they voted from them, the secret would
be communicated to the priests. The hon. member having
still further reterred to the experience of Australia as
xwrotr i y
riled been practised at recent elec-
t'' evi-
dencing the successful working of the ballot, and having
read
an
Erbkine May's work to prove the
asked the house whether that was a
state of h
which
it ought to rest and be thankful
exteooethralo cht
i
t lions in
things
this
ioosN countyvi
with
The time was fast approaching wheel the great election
all their filthy or Isanttuimrniadlaitaiownouwl do
übled cpelreobdruaceted reign
of terror bribery' would be let loose, and the briber and the bribed 'would be equally demoralised. I,adeed, at the Coming election this state of
ventured things woifid be produced in a form which,
he
yt 'Auld never before been seen in thiscoun-
to sa
any other re-
try. Seeing, then, that they were without
medy, see:ng that the present act of Parliament was a
dead
letter, and that there was no other act on Which they
ccr:al rely, it was not too much for him to ask that a
mode of treating voters which had proved so effectual
elsewhere should be tried in cur country. The hon. rum_
ber concluded by moving the resolution of which he had
given notice.

Mr. J. LOCKE, in seconding the motion, said that at no
distant period gentlemen opposite would have anopportu-
nity of experiencing those evils which his hon friend had
so ably described. He thought the thanks of the house
were due to his hon. friend for having afforded to each of
them an opportunity of ascertaining whether or not they
had retrograded on the question of the ballot. It was just
as well, having reference to the day which was not far dis•
taut, that they should register their opinions upon such a
question for the consideration of the British public. (Hear.)
The usual objection to the ballot was its impracticability;
but the hon. member for Pomfret (Mr Childers) had de-
scribed the mode in which it was carried out in Australia,
and had shown that an election scrutiny could take place as
effectually as in a committe-room of the House of Commons.
There was no doubt the ballot did prevent a vast amount of
bribery, intimidation, and drunkenness. He had therefore
much pleasure in seconding the motion. (Hear, hear.)
Lord PALMERSTON—Mr Speaker. I can assure the
house there are many suggestions in the warning hand of
the Block which lead me to be short. But lam anxious to
state in as condensed a form as I can the reasons which
induce as me usual to oppose the motion of
ray hon. friend.
I can only aaY. !is personal to himself, that I hope the result
of his motion will not make my hon. friend feel so comfort-
able in his present situation— [nr Berkeley addressed the
house from the front Opposition bench]—as to induce him

to make it a permanent
extremely sorry +-
.. one. (Laughter.) I should be
now. No
.0 see my hon, friend always where he is
-
ar-
doubt, nothing tan be more honourable to
man than steady adherence to the cause which
he has adopted; and the more that cause is going
down in public opinion—(cheers on the Opposition
benches)—the more honourable is a steady adherence on the
part of its champion. But I think my hon. friend will him-
self confess that the feeling in favour of this motion is not
as strong as it used to be in former times. I object to this
motion because it is founded upon an erroneous assumption.
It deals with the right of voting as if it was a personal
right, which an individual is free to exercise free from any
responsibility; whereas I contend it is a trust to be exercised
under responsibilities to those on whose behalf it is held.
(Hear, hear.) Even if the franchise were ever so extended
it would still only be a trust, because there would be a large
portion of the community, as, for example, women and
minors—whose interests would be affected by the vote thus
given. Our legislation admits that it is a trust, and not a
right. If the franchise were a purely personal right, would
not the voter be entitled to ask upon what principle of justice
you prevent him from exercising that right in a manner
which he chooses for his own individual advantage? But
you attach a penalty to a man who employs that right of
voting in a manner you think at variance with the public
interest—that is, for a bribe or consideration. Then I say
the vote is a trust, and, like every political trust, ought to
be exercised subject to responsibility to public opinion.
The whole political framework of c'vilised nations is founded
upon the principle of trust. The interests of the community
are in various degrees, more or less important, committed
to a selected view, who are charged in regard to those par-
ticular things to act for the welfare of the community at
large; and their action ought to be subject to responsibility
to those whose interests are committed to their charge.
Then I say that the ballot is intended to withdraw the
voter from the exercise of the trust confided to him, and in
that respect it is a political evil. The hon. member has
talked about America, but everybody knows that in Ame-
rica ballot voting is not secret voting—it is what is called
ticket voting, where every man votes for a great number
of candidates at the same time ; and so far from the vote
being concealed. he goes to the poll with his ticket in his hat,
to vote for the governor or other officers who are to be elected.
Therein I say the ballot is founded upon a mistaken prin-
ciple, and is at variance with the fundamental principles on
which our political institutions are based. Then would it
be effectual for the purpose proposed ? I deny it. I main-
tain that in this country men are proud of their party. They
may be thought wrong or right by their neighbours, but a
man who has enlisted under the banners of one candidate or
another is proud of the party to which he belongs ; and, in-
stead of seeking to conceal his vote in the ballot box, he
would tell all his friends what he was going to do, and would
rather be anxious that the whole community with which he
was connected should know how he voted. But if you adopt
this principle you must also prevent canvassing. You must
make it penal for any man to tell beforehand how he is going
to vote. Every man in general has a political bias—a par-
tiaMy for one party rather than another—which makes it
impossible that a majority of voters should vote by ballot
without their votes being known. Who, then, would have
their votes concealed by the ballot ? Why, those whom my
hon. friend describes—men who are afraid of losing their
farms, who are afraid of being turned off by their landlord,
or tradesmen who are afraid of being cast adrift by their
customers. Would that be sot In the first place, the land-
lord or the customer who intended thus to visit his tenant
or his tradesman for giving a vote against his wishes would
canvass him beforehand; he would expect a promise, or he
could apply for a promise, and if that promise were refused,
he would know what was meant, and would act accordingly
—or, if he chose to wait until the election was over, he would
ask the man how he voted, and if he did not wish to tell an
untruth, which would be demoralising, having voted against
the wishes of the landlord or the customer, they would deal
with him just as if voting had been open. Therefore, as far
as the tenant and the tradesman are concerned, I say the ballot
would be totally ineffectual as a protection. Then, with regard
to treating, the hon. member has told us how an election is
conducted—that public-houses are open, that men belonging
to each party go to those houses which are in favour of their
candidate. But would that be prevented by the ballot ?
First of all, ycu would not prevent bribery, because a man
would go to an elector and say " Here is £5 or £lO, and I
will trust to your honour to vote for so and so, but I will
not give it to you unless you make that promise." Well,
the man being without any particular partiality would be
tempted to make the promise, and he would probably keep
it; because I entertain the opinion of the electors of the
country that generally speaking they do keep their promises.
Then as to your public-houses. It is very easy for a man
in the manner described by the hon. member to make ar-
rangements that these public•houses shall be accessible only
to those who brought signs or emblems by which it could
be known that they intended to vote, or had voted for a
particular candidate. Well, I say that the ballot would be
wrong in principle and that it is adverse to the habits Of
Englishmen. The hon. member takes exception to the
expression I used upon a former occasion—that it is un-
English. Then I will vary that expression, and say that it
is adverse to and inconsistent with the habits of English-
men. Englishmen are proud of their opinions, and are
anxious to manifest them ; and therefore I say that a system
of secrecy is at variance with the opinions, practices, and
habits of the English people. It would be ineffectual too
for its purpose, and for these reasons I shall vote against the
motion of my hon. friend. (Cheers.)
Mr BERKELEY. would not attempt to answer the
noble lord, because such an attempt would involve abun-
dant reference to Hansard. The noble lord had said no-
thing as to the state he had shown his boasted Act of
i?arliament to be in—nothing as to his boasted constituen-
cies—not one word had the noble lord said. (Hear, hear.)
He asked the h' use to support that which the example of
other countries had shown to be a success in preference to
that which failed. In short, there was not one reason which
the noble lord had brought forward which had touched upon
his (Mr Berkeley's) arguments. He should take a division,
with a view of eliciting the expression of opinion of honest
reformers, who were driven to a point, and were prepared to
express that view which was their honest opinion.
The house then divided—
For the motion
Against it
Majority against it.. —B9
Mr D. R. Mills was accidentally shut out from voting in
favour of Mr Berkeley's motion.
EMIGRATION FROM IRELAND.
Mr HENNESSY moved the following resolution:—
`r That this house observes with regret that the agricultural
population of Ireland are rapidly leaving the country; and
that this house trusts that her Majesty's Government will
direct their attention to the subject, with a view of devising
some means by which the Irish agricultural population may
be induced to devote their capital and labour to reproductive
employment at home." He referred to the great extent of
the emigration from Ireland, which was at this moment, he
said, greater than at any period during the last ten years;
to the rapid diminution of the population; to certain theo-
ries as to the effects of this decline of the population, and to
the actual results, in land going out of cultivation, the re-
duction of wages, and the increase of pauperism; and he
showed the quality and inducements of the emigrants and
their condition in the places to which they emigrated. He
suggested that the Government had the choice of three
courses for meeting the evil,—namely, legislative measures
that would restore concord between landlord and tenant in
Ireland ; the employment of public money in public and re•
productive works; and, lastly, the reclamation of waste
lands
Sir R. PEEL, after adverting to the difficulty of nltiperlv
appreciating the causes•of the depressed conditis - -
observed that there had been a wondere:
ai.,st of Ireland,
revival, and pro-
ceeded to reply to Mr Hennessy e
of his motion, namel emi -on the two main points
agricultural populatio oration and the condition of the
Ireland, Mr Her y, e
With regard to emigration from
messy ,
s statement, he said, was not strictly
correct, "fa he gave correct details of its extent, which had
diminished. There was no doubt, he acknow-
-I..eeZt.Y
ed.:l,that there was a great desire on the part of land-
lords in Ireland to facilitate the emigration of the redun-
dant population on their estates, and ha showed that emi-
gration had been regarded by Parliamentary committees as
a relief of the mass of destitution and superabundant labour
by reducing the number of those who consumed more than
they produced. As regarded the other point, the state of
agriculture in Ireland, and the statement of Mr Hennessy
that land was going out of cultivation, he observed that
though there had been a decrease in cereals, there had been
an immense increase in the quantity of land under eultiva •
tion, especially in flax; and with reference to his sugges-
tions, he remarked that an immense quantity of waste land
had been reclaimed, and that he did not believe there re•
mained more than 3,500,000 acres of reclaimable land in the
island, In conclusion, he showed that there had been a
remarkable development of the trade of Ireland ; that its
capital had increased, that its tillage had improved, that
impulse had been given to its industry, and that all this
was owing to the innate energy of the great bulk of the
people.

Mr MAGUIRE complimented Sir R., Peel upon the
tone and temper of his speech. He observed that till the
land question was settled, and the tenant was secured a
could
compensation for unexhausted improvements, there never
be prosperity in Ireland. Pass a Landlord and
Tenant Law, give the farmer security, and the rush of
emigration, which showed there was something wrong,
would bo checked.
Mr MONSELL considered that the Irish landed proprie •
+ors were interested in stopping emigration; that if it con-
tinned at its present rate it would lead to disastrous results.
The question, difficult as it was, ought to be faced, and he
suggested measures that would, in his opinion, mitigate the
evil.

Sir P. O'BRTEN agreed that the subject of emigration
w
question, which required a
settlement connected with
in
the
e
interest
o fthe landlords of Ireland.
After some remarks by Mr MAnox,
Lord ATHLUMNEY adverted to the encouragement
given to emigration in 1847 and succeeding years, to the
immense sums sent from America to invite emigration, and
to the little that had been done at homa to detain the emi-
grants there, observing that with so many inducements to
go, and so few to tempt them to stay, emigration could not
be stopped. What was wanted in Ireland was a state of
security, and the manifestation towards the people of a

CITY IMPROVEMENTS.
Mr J. DAV( (principal clerk) read a report from the Im-
provement Committee in answer to several references relat-
ing to improvements in certain portions of the city. They
stated that they had arranged with the Tallow-chandlers
Company to purchase the freehold houses Nos. 71 and 72
Newgate-street, for the sum of £lO,OOO, and they asked the
approval of the Court to the arrangement, and that notice
should be given to the present tenants to quit possession at
Christmas next, in order that the widening of the thorough-
fare might be at once proceeded with. The committee had
further arranged for the purchase of the freehold house, No.
70, Little Britain, for the sum of £5,500, together with the
professional expenses of the vendors. This improvement is
somewhat of an important character, as it will be the means
of opening up a new carriage thorouehfare between New-
gate-street and Smithfield. The committee also reported
the steps they had taken in reference to the proposed im-
provement at the corner of St. Mary Axe and.Leadenhall-
street, in consequence of Certain houses at that spot being
pulled down. After considerable negotiation they had suc-
ceeded in arranging for the rebuilding of the premises upon
an improved line, the ground in front thereof to be laid into
the street, and paved over by the Commission for the sum
of £l,OOO and payment of the expenses of the vendor's sur-
veyor. The committee also reported the steps they had taken
in reference to the several minor improvements.
The whole of the recommendations of the oommittee
were approved by the commissioners.
The principal clerk read letters he had received from the
secretaries of the City, Great Central, and Chattered ti'as
Companies, expressing their regret at the delay which had
arisen in the presentation bf the report of Mr Barlow, upon
the question of the presence of sulphurin the gas. Tem of
these parties enclosed copies of lettere received from Mr
Barlow, in which he stated that his report was nearly ready,
and would have been sent in last week, but be comparing
the results of the experiments made with a '-1,614 of throwing
light upon the circumstances attending its production in coal
gas, he had been struck with some remarkable facts, which
required farther elucidation, and might give a elite to the
source from which it was chiefly derived, and with the view
of determining that point he had made arrangements for
some further experiments, which
might occupy 10 days more.
He consequently asked for a fortnight longer to send in his
report, which the companies
vmteld receive in time to com-
municate to the Commissktners of Sewers at their meeting
on the 6th prolkirce:,.

SANATORY CONDITION OF VIE CITY.
3-2 r LETHBB Y reported on the state of 278 houses that had
be':4l inspected during the week, and he submitted a list of
138 places for sanatory improvements. He reported also 011
the condition of nine roams at 5, Bride-court, Bride-lane,
Fleet-street, where 27 males and 67 females were employed
in bookbinding. The total cubic space allotted to each per-
son was only 204 feet, and in the females workrooms the
space was only 122 cubic feet per head; one of the rooms
was so small as to give but 96 cubic feet per head.
Dr LETHEBY reported that this over-crowding was in-
compatible with healthy respiration, and advised that mea-
sures should be taken at once to abate it. He referred also
to the insufficient closet accommodation, and to the inde-
cency of having but one small closet for so many persons of
both sexes.

In the course of the week two persons have been sum-
moned before the justices for neglecting to carry out the
sanatory improvements required by the Court, and in both
instances the parties were fined and charged with the cost
of the proceedings, the fine in one itudauce being
_

The markets and slaughter houses have been duly in-
spected, and the officers have condemned 2,0811 b of meat as
unfit for human food. •

The mortality returns for the week are a little above the
average for the season. Sixty deaths were registered for
the week, and of these 17 were amongst children of less than
five years of age, and 14 amongst old persons. The chief
causes of death were as follows Phthisis 7, mesenteric
disease 4, hydrocephalus 3, pneumonia 2, bronchitis 6, con-
:—
tinued fever 3, scarlet fever 1, small pox 1, whooping cough
1, measles 3, and infantile diarrhtol 2—making together 14
deaths from tubercular diseases, 8 from inflammatory
affections of the lungs, and 9 from diseases of a zymotic
character,