The Sun.
London, England, 1864-10-03 00:00:00

haps whether.they shall skedaddle and transfer their
allegiance to the British Crown, or whether it will
not be better to stand the chance of the draught,
and trust to the fears or the liberality of the wealthy
to purchase substitutes for them. Several regiments
have been ordered to the West to heap to preserve
the peace of Ohio, Illinois, and Indiana; and a gen-
tleman who arrived yesterday at Clifton-house from
Nashville, in Tennessee, relates that he had to wait
two days before he could secure a passage by the
railway, the trains being wholly occupied by soldiers
of General Sherman's army proceeding westward.
The number who had been sent off during the week
prior to his departure amounted to 15,000. Many
of these were supposed to be hundred-day volun-
teers, whose term of service had expired ; but the
larger number, it was believed, was destined for
service somewhere else than iv Atlanta or the army
of General Sherman. A telegraplic despatch from
Indianopolis, dated the 15th inst., and published in

the Cincinnati Inquirer, may perhaps serve to car.
roborate the traveller's statement. The despatch
says—" The Fremont men are bolding an enthusi-
astic meeting here tonight. The principal speaker
is an original Itepulilican, but is terrifically severe
on Lincoln. I understand from military men that
the remnants of 30 regiments are to be quartered
here in Indiana, and to remain during the ensuing
two months. What for ? " The writer does no.:
attempt an answer to the inquiry, but will proba-
bly be able to reply to it before the day of the Pre.
sidential election, especially if the feeling against
Mr Lincoln is very strong in the district, and there
should be no chance of carrying the State of Indiana
peaceably in his favour.
The influx of Southern refugees from Kentucky
and elsewhere into Canada continues as great as ever.
As the Clifton-house is but a summer hotel, and not
adapted for winter residence in this climate, the
stream of travel sets in other directions, and the
exiles distribute themselves over the cities of Toronto,
Montreal, and Quebec, or, if they have been fortu-
nate enough to rescue any portion of their ready
cash, or other available means, from the greedy
hands of the brigadier-generals who do Mr Lincoln's
bidding in their decimated and groaning lands, they
betake themselves, after short sojourn, to Europe,
via Halifax or St Jahn's, and strive to forget in
Paris or Naples the miseries of their country.

Vote by Ballot and Extended Suffrage.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN,

Sir,—Whenever the proposal for vote by ballot is dis-
cussed in the House of Commons, there is continually
brought forward as an objection that secret voting is some-
thing un-English, and that the elective franchise being a
public trust the exercise of it has ever been and ought to
be attended with the greatest publicity. In Mr Foster's
valuable new work, "The Biography of Sir John Eliot,"
there is a striking exemplification of the contrary fact, and
that, so far from secret voting being a novel proposal, it was
practised and recognised by Parliament more than 230 years
ago. In the Parliamentary session of 1628, a very few days
after the opening, an inquiry was instituted into the pro-
ceedings in certain boroughs and counties during the then
recent general election. The election for the county of York
furnished one of the cases specially investigated, resulting
in a very striking decision, thus related in Mr Foster's

work :
" The point settled by the Yorkshire election had wider
significance. Wentworth had carried this return not only
against his old enemies, the Saviles, but against the influ-
ence of the Crown ; and the principal question started was,
whether claiman s to vote who refused to declare their
names were not thereby disabled to be electors. It appeared
that during ithe days of the election men presented them-
selves at York who, having braved the displeasure of the
officers of the Northern presidency in refusing to vote for
the Saviles, had, at the polling booths, after offering proof
of their possession of 40s, freeholds, of their residency, and
of their not having before polled, refused to declare their
names. Their votes were nevertheless held good, on the
ground that as it might be inconvenient to them to set down
their names, ' because notice might be taken of them to
their prejudice,' it was not necessary to insert the names in
the indenture."

And the biographer shows that this was confirmed by a
decision of the House of Commons, and stands on record as
a precedent, and a judicial declaration in the journal of the
proceedings of that house :
" Resolved,—That if an elector or freeholder being, by the
sheriff upon the polls demanded his name, shall refuse it, he
is not disabled to be an elector."— ComnzonsJournal, April 17.
This mode of obtaining secrecy and consequent security
for the elector Mr Foster acknowledges to be a clumsy ca•
pedient or sorry substitute for the ballot, but he adds—

" But for want of a better it has the decisive support of
Eliot, who desired at all risks to protect the elector in the
exercise of his vote."—Biography Of A 5 inTohn Eliot, vol. IL,
p. 273.
The protection of the poorer voters from the influences of
the wealthy and powerful, and the extension of the franchise
so as to comprehend all classes, were the main results of the
investigation regarding elections in other places. Thus—
" The same points generally were at issue in the majority
of the disputed borough elections. At Warwick the ques•
tion was whether the mayor and common council, or the
commons in general, should return the member, and the
decision was for the latter. A counter petition had in this

case been got up by the mayor and council, which 200 o
the commons had been induced to sign, disclaiming the
right, but the committee rejected it, resolving upon the
question that the right of election belonged to the common-
alty, and if but one commoner sued for his right they would
hear him."—.7
Jn the Parliaments of our day not merely may one com-
moner, but one million of commoners, sue far the right of
admission within the pale of the constitution, yet the ap-
plication be utterly disregarded I
" At Colchester, the dispute was between the bailiffs,
aldermen, and common council, who, to the number of 42,
met in an upper room, and the much greater number of
the common sort of burgesses, who assembled in the lower
and larger room. The claim cf the first was alleged to be
one of prescription ; but it having been shown, in reply,
that until Richard the First there were no bailiffs, and from
that reign till Edward the Fourth no common council, the
title of prescription was disallowed and the power of election
adjudged to the common sort of burgesses exclusively. At
Lewe3, where neither mayor nor bailiff existed, and the
election had been by a small number of constables, it was
altogether taken from them and given to the inhabitants.
At Coventry, where the return was of two gentlemen of
worth' for whom there had voted a majority of six hundred
of the freemen in whom the right of election was admitted,
to rest, but Where the return was nevertheless disputed on
the ground that the elected were not freemen themselves,
and not even resident within the borough, it was resolved,
upon the statute of Henry the Fifth, that the election was
good. At Bridport the question was whether the election
resided in the commonalty in general or in two bailiffs and
13 capital burgesses claiming by prescription ; and the deci-
sion was in favour of the commonalty, the return being held
void in respect of no warning to them.' At Boston, upon
similar dispute between a select number and the commonalty
it was again decided for the latter ; and further, it was de-
clared that nothing might avail to restrict such rights but
a prescription and constant usage beyond memory. In all
these cases Eliot took earnest share, and never but in be-
half of the more extended franchise."—lbtd.
For proof of these important decisions and resolutions of
the House of Commons reference is made to the Commons
Journals of the respective dates of May 31, March 2S,
March 29, April 29, April 12, and May 7. The decision
and resolution of date April 12 are quoted verbatim :
" Resolved upon question—The commonalty in general
ought to have voice in the election of burgesses for Parlia-
ment. Secondly, the election is void in respect of warning
to the commonalty. A new writ,"
Yes, " the commonalty in general ought to have voice
in the election of burgesses for Parliament," and
the eve of the general election now approaching would be a
fitting time for the commonalty throughout the island to
make themselves heard by demanding their birthright.
Especially in the parliamentary boroughs should "the
commonalty" who do not inhabit ten pound houses, and
those who are qualified to vote, but are not protected from
the undue influences of landlords, employees, creditors, or
customers, raise their voices to render unpopular and by
every justifiable means thwart the election of such candi-
dates who cannot be fully relied upon for assisting to ob-
tain the right of voting for non .voters and protection by
secret voting to those who have, as well as those who
may in future have, votes. The Parliament which is
shown by Mr. Foster, on the evidence of its own journals,
to have declared the right of the elector to be protected
from undue influence by secrecy in giving his vote, and
further that "the communally in general ought to hay
voice iu the election of burgesses for Parliament," was not
Barebones Parliament, nor the Long Parliament, nor any
of the assemblages of questionable authority as precedents.
It was the Parliament which contained the illustrious names
of Coke, Hampden, Seldon, Pym, Phillips, and Eliot—in
deed, a greater number of men of established reputation
and lasting fame than probably any other which has pre
ceded it or succeeded it. Moreover, it is worthy of rota
that all the names which aro held in veneration by poste.
rity are those which identifi3d themselves with the prin-
ciples exemplified in the foregoing extracts. Indeed,•it WAS
the Parliament to which we are indebted for that landmark
in history, the Bill of Rights. Mr Foster's own descrip-
tion of it is that it was
" The greatest of all the Parliaments that England had
seen in her history."—Vol. 11., p. 724. JAMES HILL.
London, August 29.

It is her Majesty's intent on to return to Wind-
sor on the 25th inst., and to remain there until about
19th or 20th Decerubcr. The Court will then leave for Os•
borne to spend the Chr:stinas,—CQui 102f1