The Sun.
London, England, 1864-06-23 00:00:00

Liirl

LONDON, THURSDAY, JUNE 23, 1864.

Ir. mrT,TNEFs7 has at all times shown himself
to bs a most energetze politiciin. He is not one of
the 3e laissez alier sort of individuals wkio rest satin.
feed with anythir,g so Long 63 they theroselvs are
left in peace. Whether ha discourses upon the
wrongs or injuries of Poland, or seeks other topics
of interest and importance, ho is always energetic
and enthusiastic. On Tuesday last he had a very
congenial subjfcl on which to descant, and it was
a question also which is closely connected with the
moat vital Interests of his own country, and Should)
therefore, engage the attention of all who are con-
cerned in the legislation of the British Empire.
The state and condition of Ireland have for a long
period been SOUrCC.9 of anxiety and apprehension to
the Cabinet, the Pa:iisment, and the country gene-
rally. Sir RCB2LT P2EI, erapl..atically declared
that " Lel4ad VW his difficull." Succzeding

statesmen have felt the same embarrassment, if they
have not had the candour and courage to own it.
The present Ministry have not been at all happy in
their attempts in this locality, nor did they deserve
to bs successful where so many wiser and greater
men had failed before them, for they seem to have
gone out of their way an many occasions to irritate
and annoy the Irish, and that, too, without any
special cause for interference which could justify
the risk of offending prejudices and provoking ill.
will. The Irish members have often alluded to the
want of courtesy which has been shown to them,
and still the same tactics are displayed, their griev-
ances are treated with derision, and their indigna-
tion meets nothing but contempt. In some C.ISCS,
indeed, the authorities have gone so far that they
have had to draw back from their decisions, as in
the instance of the Galway contract, which was
BO abruptly terminated, and in a manner
that gave so mach offence. They appear, however,
to have gained wisdom from experience in some
degree, for the tone of the debate the other night
was conspicuous for the absence of that ascerbity
and exaggeration so apt to be apparent when Irish
questicns are on the Lapis. Mr. HENNESSY called
particular attention to the condition of Ireland at
the present time, and especially to the serious evils
that arise from the agricultural population leaving
the country. It is unfortunate that the division on
the point was adverse to the proposal of Mr.
HENNESSY; but it does not by any means follow
that no result will ensue therefrom, for the discus-
sion which was raised upon it has drawn attention
to the subject, and at a future period we may mark
the good effects that it has produced. At all events,
no one denied the truth of the hon. member's pre-
mises, if they did not exactly accord with the con-
clusions he drew from them. The fact is that the
unwillingness which is universally felt to making
any changes or alteration in a system is so over-
whelming in its influence, and that unless any epee
cial event or untoward incident calls for steps to be
taken without delay, little or no heed is paid to the
arguments, entreaties, and expostulations of pres-
cient observers or earnest reformers. A private
member can seldom manage to induce the Treasury
benches to listen to him when he proclaims the
wrongs or animadverts upon the injustice which he
has seen, and wh:ch imperatively call far a remedy.
If only a portion of Mr. HENNESSY'S recital were
true there would still exist ample grounds for the
enforcement of some remedial change. The emigra-
tion now taking place is greater than at any period
for ten years, and this in itself is a very telling fact
against the efficacy of existing legislation. It must
produce most disastrous effects, and exercise a deem
riorating influence on the welfare of the country,
for it to be subjected to this constant drain upon its
resources. It has been said—

" ill fares tho land to hastening ills a prey,
Where wealth accumulates, and men decay."
If the former allusion does not 'apply to the prospects
of Ireland, it has the additional drawback of having
to encounter the evil, unmitigated by adventitious
circumstances. The suggestions made by Mr. HEN.
NEM' seem to be worthy of notice. Men will not
stayat home if they see others rushingabroad, unless
some inducements are cffered to them. For this
the proposal to reclaim waste lands is an admirable
one. Sir R. PEEL affirmed that immense quantities
had been appropriated, but there is no reason why
all should not. Another good idea was that public
works should be organised, but this did not seem
to be much thought of. When it is considered,
however, that by ;his means employment would be
given to vast numbers, and that many restless and
diosatihfied persons would become settled and satis.
fled in their own country, it seems a pity that
nothing should be done, Lord PALMERSTON did
not address himself to the subject wi:h so
much cordiality as Sir ROBERT PEEL. He
seemed rather impatient with the whole thing, and
glad to fall back on the resources of his strength to
put down the attempt at interference with legisla-
tion, Lord S. MANNERS very properly said that he
thought the " hon. member for King's County had
met with rather hard measures from the Govern-
ment." The conclusion to be drawn from the
speeches of the Government members who took part
in the debate seems to be that great evils undoubtedly
exist in Irelend, and that it would be well if they
could be rectified, but they also seem to imply that
they are not at present prepared to do anything to
improve the state of affairs, and also do not intend
to assist others in the task of reform. Such a course
of action is hardly in unison with the reauirements
of men in their responsible position, and it is not
thus that they will gain the confidence of Ireland
nor the respect of England. They make the grave
mistake of looking upon the subject as an irksome
task they are glad to shirk, and not as a solemn
duty which they are called upon to perform with
the utmost ability and earnestness.

Amid all the changes and chances which dis-
tinguish one Parliamentary session from another,
some events recur with unvarying pertinacity. Year
by year some subjects are brought up for the mere
sake of reminding the world of their existence.
Year by year they pass through the customary
forms and quietly sink into oblivion for another
twelvemonth. We all know how long this pro..
gramme was followed by Mr. VILLIERS and his
Anti-Corn Law resolutions, and now Mr. BERKE-
LEY in his advocacy of the Ballot seems to be the
champion of as apparently hopeless a cause. Perhaps
indeed the case of the Ballot is even more desperate
than the principles of Free Trade ever were, since
the latter was more of a national question on which
men differed as much from principle and conviction
as from anything else. The Ballot is a personal
matter, and the objection to it, in too many in•a
well-founded misgiving as to
stances, arises from
its effect upon future elections. Of course we are
not charging every member who opposes Mr.
BERKELEY'S motion with being a friend to bribery
and corruption, but there is very often an undefined
idea that matters are best left as they are, and that
any interference with the existing system is need-
lees and undesirable. Yet no one pretends that
by our present course we can boast of securing the
purity of election. No one is sanguine or simple
enough to believe that the whole expense of en
election lies in the regular fees. No one supposes
that no more money changes hands than is abso-
lutely necessary, or that interest and influence,
that patrons,employers, and landlords have no share
in the matter. Pocket boroughs were not all dis-
franchised in 1832, although one of the great
leaders of that day now tolls his followers "to rest
and be thankful." Bat a general who desires his
forces to sit down when the battle is half won,
does not inspire much confidence in his own treops,
nor does he strike much terror into the hearts of
his enemies, especially when a very important part
of the work remained to be done. Mr. BERKELEY,
who, in consideration of the approaching election
broke through hie usual rule and addressed the
House, referred to this famous aphorism. Ha said
the noble lord had a right to call upon them to be
' thankful for his exertions, but when he told all
other reformers to sit still the advice savoured of
absurdity. "Were there, then, asked the hon. mem-
ber, no abuses to redress, no evils to get rid of ? Had
England become Utopian According to the ace
count given by Mr. BERKELEY, which there is no
ream to think ezzggErated, it is very like the

Utopia of Bribery and Treating. The act at present
existing to secure the purity of elections is a mere
dead letter. It compels the candidate to appoint
recognised agents, and any act of bribery, intimida-
tion, or corruption proved against them or against
himself made the election void. But he must be a
very simple mortal who does not see without the
telling, that while one or two immaculate agents
keep strictly within the letter and spirit of the
law, a dcztta unrecognised and unofficial emissaries
may be promising, treating, and feasting to
their heart's content. No one can prevent the
candidate's friends from working on his behalf,
no one but the friends themselves can prove when
the little sum given in recognition of their services
is handed over to them, and if we are to wait until
they are sufficiently frank and disinterested to come
forward with that information, we fear that purity
of elections is yet a long way off. The strongest
opponents of the Ballot do not pretend to say that
our elections are what they should be. Lord PAL-
3IERSTON himself distreetly left that point out of
his very inconclusive arguments. Mr. BERKELEY
said that that all he asked for the Ballot was a fair
trial, and he might have retorted the favourite
accusation of hia adversaries, and have added that
it was " un-English" to refuse it. But in fact, as
the hon. gentleman observed, "assertion is no argu-
ment." It is very easy to declare that the Ballot
would entirely fail to do what it has done in every
country where it has been fairly tried ; to declare
that it would have no effect in stopping
bribery and protecting against intimida-
tion, but if so why not settle the
matter by giving practical proof. Why not let the
supporters of the Ballot be convinced by practice ?
No very great harm could ensue if the experiment
proved a signal failure; it could scarcely make mate
ters worse than they are now. How many of the
members of this very high-minded and honourable
house would like to look too closely into the full
details of their electioneering agents, paid and un-
paid, official and unrecognised ? But the very fact
of the Ballot being so much needed is the greatest
obstacle to its introductiop. Members and chiefs
of parties are afraid to trust to uninflaenced voting,
and Lord PALMERSTON, its open and recognised
enemy, does not attempt to deny that our elections
need reform, but contents himself with assertions
that it would be useless. First, the noble lord says
that it would be necessary to make it penal for a
man to say how he was going to vote; next, he
declares it would be no good to have ballot boxes,
because " it is next to impossible that a majority of
electors should vote by ballot without their votes
being known. He further argued that it would be
no protection against bribery and in timidetion, be-
cause the landlord or customer might go to a man
before or after the election and ask about his vote,
when, if he refused to answer, the landlord or cuss
tomer would know the worst, and that "you might
go to an elector and say, ' Here is £5 or £lO. I

,rust to your honour—you shall have the money

you promise to vote for so end so, but not oth erg
wise." Lord PALMERSTON is of opinion that the
electors would keep their promiee, and thus the
merit of the Ballot is et an end. It is somewhat
surprising that instead of " Hear, hear" following
this declaration we do not read "Laughter." Does
the noble Premier, after his long experience of the
world and its ways, really believe business, espe-
cially dishonest business, to be carried on in this
Quixotic fashion P Certainly there is an old adage
about " honour among thieves" which comes to
mind, but still it must be a somewhat credulous
candidate who would trust so magnanimously to
the good faith of a bribed elector when he could
not even reproach the man for his dishonesty. If
candidates and agents like to waste their money
let them do so, and these very "English" electors
who keep their word so strictly in law breaking
may profit by another old adage about some people
and their money being soon par ed, but the Ballot
has a right to a trial for all that. The man who
takes bribes will neither stop for falsehoods nor
for broken pledges, and so the world at large very
well knows, But since Lord PALMERSTON stands
forward/as the logical annihilator of the Ballot, let
him answer us one question—Why is it exclu-
sively adopted in the clubs?