The Sun.
London, England, 1852-03-31 00:00:00

gulations complained of were at variance with the stipula-
tions of the treaty, but stated their willingness to make the
two harmonizs. He should be glad to hear what was the
state of tho communications between the two Governments
on this subject at the present mom•:nt, and whether the Por-
tuguese Government had taken any steps towards redeeming
the pledge they had given ?
Mr. HENLEY said that communications on this subject
were at this moment being carried on between the Govern-
ment of this country and that of Portugal; that her Ma-
jesty's Ministers fully appreciated the importance of the
question, and that no pains should be spared to bring it to a
satisfactory conclusion.--(Hear, hear.)
Mr. ANSTEY said he felt obliged to the Chancellor of
the Exchequer for his courtesy, and would so modify his
motion that it should simply be for a " Committee to
inquire into the revenue at present derived from wine
duties."

The motion, in its altered shape, was then agreed to.
THE BALLOT.
Mr. H. BERKELEY then rose to bring forward his mo-
tion in reference to the ballot. He said that they had before
them the prospect of an immediate general election.—(Hear,
hear.) He did not know whether his Hon. Friends cheered
for joy; at all events, it was a prospect full in their view,
and with that election all the glaring faults of their electoral
system would be brought into full play. The electors would
be soon exposed to the realities of those evils which he had
been endeavouring for several years, though fesbly, to por-
tray. He asked the House for permission to bring in a Bill
with a view to alleviate those evils. They had last year a
.great influx of foreigners from every part of the globe visit-
ieg this country, and they found us a quiet steady people
who were very much attached to order. Let the same visit-
ors but come here in .a few months hence and they would find
us in the midst of the most admired disorder. They would
find us engaged in a kind of electoral saturnalia, and
when they witnessed the riot, drunkenness, and debau-
chery that would then exist— that tyrannical intimida-
tion that takes place on such occasions, they might be
induced to fancy that they had got amongst a nation of
madmen. If ever an election bid fair to be marked with
violence, the election that was about to take place would
have that attribute. A rich and powerful party, after a
lapse of several years, had just obtained power—they have
just raised the honied bowl to their lips, and it depended
upon the general election to determine whether they shall
drain it to the dregs, or they shall be obliged to hand
it over to others. A fearful struggle will, no doubt, take
place, and already the note of preparation has gone forth—
already crowds of low attorneys have crept from the police
and bankruptcy courts (where they have been hitherto
engaged wringing their fees from the hands of poverty and
vice), to become electioneering agents in the ranks of the
wealthy and the noble. What was the nature of their
agency? It was a certain inquiry into the lives of the
electors, in sweet to hind out their misfortunes and liabilities;
and the develish ingenuity with writes, they create screws
to force from electors a dishonest and unwilling vote
was almost beyond belief. If such was the agency, what
was the attorney ? Their trade was the elector's coa-
-1 science—their means, the elector's misery—their em-
ployers, the House of Lords—the result, the House of Com-
mons.—(Hear, hear.) If any persons were bold enough to
deny that position, and to take up the cudgels in such a
quarrel, he would refer them to their own knowledge of the
whole community; and beyond that he would refer them to
that excellent little work of Mr. Dod, in which they would
find that there were 96 borough Members of Parliament
elected through the direct intervention Peers —(Hear, hear.)
He would refer them also to their own Committees, and to
their own canvassing-books used at their own elections. And
if they wanted further evidence, he would refer them to the
statements which were made in 1842, when he had the ho-
nour of seconding the motion of Mr. Ward—statements en-
tailing the kind of screws that were used at elections,
and quoted from books of candidates in the different
counties and boroughs. He had before him evidence in
support of those statements. He had the analysis of the
evidence that was taken before the Committee that sat in
1835 to inquire into the malversaticn of the franchise. It
was not the aristocrac alone tat were the gilty prties,
but the democracy was to the full as tyrannical as the aris-
tocracy ; and between the two the electoral interest was
condemned to much suffering. He would only quote one
case from that book—that of a man who was dear to their
Protectionist hearts. It was the case of a regular pet
Tory, and withal that of a very honest man, placed
under the bar of proscription. James Gilbert, is his
examination, stated that he resided in Birmingham, and
was a licensed victualler and wine-merchant, who took
an active part in the election of 1831 for Birmingham.
He said that he canvassed for Richard Spooner, Esq.,
that there was an extensive system of intimidation
practised, by which the votes of the electors were in-
fluenced. He said he was a partisan on the Tory side
—that he had always taken a part in those elections
for a period of 40 years—that he had known instances
within his own knowledge of votes being influenced at
the previous election, and he particularly mentioned three
strong cases. On being asked respecting political unions,
he said he thought that such unions contributed greatly
to the promotion of a system of exclusive dealing, and
that if it were not for such unions Richard Spooner would
never have had a seat in this House. To the question whe-
ther he did not think that many men as strong partisans as
himself would not rather have a system of secret voting, he
said he could not say; he had heard their wives express such
an opinion often; but a good Tory never flinches.—
(Laughter. ) He was then asked whether he thought a good
Whig ever flinched. He said he could not tell, for he never
kept company with such gentry.—(Loud laughter.) He
then went on to say that a Tory never preaches about reform,
for it was no good for them to do so; but he preaches gene-
rally that the Church was in danger.--( Renewed laughter.)
The witness, though most reluctant to speak in favour of the
ballot, which he said would not be kept secret, said he be-
lieved it would be a good thing to many if their votes were
unknown. He himself would never advocate it, because he
said he was brought up a Tory, and would rather go to the
workhouse than change his politics. He further stated, that
if they had a system established at that election by which
nobody could know how the electors voted, Mr. Spooner
would have been at once returned; but, as the case was
otherwise, many persons voted against their own opinions.
In conclusion, the witness said that it was certainly very
hard that an honest man should be injured for conscien-
tiously exercising his privilege. He (Mr. Berkeley) sub-
mitted that that was a tolerably fair account of Birming-
ham, though given nearly twenty years ago. The Right
Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer said, in
the recent debate upon national representation, that " cor-
ruption at elections could not be stopped by law; it must
be done by elevating the tone of the community." It struck
him (Mr. Berkeley) that this was rather a novel position
for the Right Hon. Gentleman to take up, and it would ap-
pear that the Noble Lord the Member for London, and those
Hon. Gentlemen who were endeavouring to legislate against
bribery, have been proceeding in the wrong direction.
Why do they pass those sessional orders against the inter-
ference of Peers at elections if no legislation was to take
place or. the subject? Why should they pass the stringent
Bribery Bill—or why should they occupy themselves in
the futile endeavour to stop the evil it the statement
of the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, that they were all wrong, was correct? But
how were they to elevate the tone of the community? His
Hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham had told them
that out of every election at Birmingham there were 1,000
electors who dared not go to the poll under their present
system. He asked them, in addition to those electors, to
consider how many refused to be on the registry. They
could then form some opinion as to the frightful curtailment
of the franchise which takes place under this system. At
the last election for Bath 430 electors had stated that they
dared not go to the poll, for if they did they should shut
up shop. He now asked the Right. Hon. Gentleman the
Chancellor of the Exchequer to tell them how the tone of the
community was to be elevated. Now it struck him (Mr.
Berkeley) that the only mode by which this was to be done
was by education. But then they saw men whose education
was superior to the same class in any part of the world—
noblemen and gentlemen—lending themselves to depress the
tone of the community by the practices they encouraged at
elections. He said that this talk about elevating the tone
of the community in the face of such difficulties was a mere
farce; and they could not be surprised if these
honest and rough-handed men would reply to them in the
language of Lord Duberly, " fine words butter no parsnips."
He hoped that the Right Hon. Gentleman would be able to
show the advantages of an elevated tone in the community
to those noblemen who at the last South Nottingham elec•
tion hunted the unfortunate electors out of haystacks, and
afterwards sent them like caged rats to the poll. Why, in-
stead of fixing their attention upon isolated places like St.
Alban's, he might go through the alphabet of boroughs and
towns in which there were similar practices resorted to. He
might quote Bridport, Bristol, Birmingham, Coventry, Car-
low, Cashel, Clonmel, Denbigh, Exeter, Gloucester, Here-
ford, Halifax, Leicester, Leominster, Lyme Regis. Westmin-
ster, Youghal. There- were also the counties of Cheshire,
Clare, Devon, Denbighshire, Essex, Kerry, Limerick, Water-
ford, Wexford, &c. He should like to know how they were
to improve the electoral system by elevating the tone of
the community in connexion with the course they had re-
cently pursued in reference to Sudbury, St. Alban's, the
Scotch burghs, ,Harwich, and Gloucester? Why, was it
not a patent fact that this system of demoralization was en-
couraged by the best educated men of the land ? He had
now to deal with the speech of his valued Friend the Right
Hon. Gentleman the Member for Perth (Mr. Fox Maule.)
He might have passed him over but that he was patted on
the back by the great leviathan of the press, who quietly
embalmed him his speech in a leading article. His Right
Hon. Friend gave two reasons for his conduct in reference
to the ballot—the one was for the vote he had given in
favour of it ; the other for the part he took against it. The
reason he gave for voting for the ballot was this—that,
although he thought the ballot a bad measure, yet, inasmuch
as there were some ficticious votes in Perth, which he was
unsuccesful in his endeavours to get rid of, he voted for the
ballot by way of a cure. Now that was an extraordinary
mode of legislation. The Right Hon. Gentleman, it
appears, was prepared to give what he considered a
miserably bad measure to Great Britain and Ireland, in order
to cure a little rascality in Perth. The Right Hon.
Gentleman stated his reasons for voting against the ballot
to be these—that it had never been the means
of establishing liberty and protecting the freedom
of the press or of defending and maintaining the law.
Now he (Mr. Berkeley) admitted that the ballot did none
all it did was to enable the elector to give
had in the Carlton and Reform Clnb
box as they
e such a result. The Right
an unbiatssilersu;nfettered vote. He believed that such a
Houses
Gentleman was but raising shadows
Honourable
of knocking them down. Louis
for the purpose
chosen President of France
Napoleon was most secret and solid description. And
under a ballot of a
were considered by some persons
those same deputies, who
obfaltlho ballot e
could secure
then, the working of the ballot in r
as martyrs, were also elected by
favour of the institution.—
(Ironical cheers) He said that con-
stitution as an example highly in ,He claimed,
late
It,heancbeaullnodt.er
tHb
conducted with admirable order, and that
characterised
strong contrast to the riots and disorder which
the elections in this country. Under the French ballot men.
of talent, good conduct, and respectability were elected
the elections TheFyrafnocremwederae
Belgium also afforded a brilliant instance of the working of
the ballot. In the Chambers there, the aristocracy of birth,
of talent, respectability, and landed property were strongly
was perfectly satisfactory- —(014 oh.) The Right Hon. Gen-
tleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with that extra-
ordinary ability and ingenuity which marked all his speeches,
seized upon the facts of a disturbance having taken place
in New York during an election, and quoted a letter
for the purpose of showing that open bribery and in-
timidation had been there practised—that assaults
were committed by the electors, and the ballot-box, Which
he said was the cause of all this, was smashed to pieces. The
Right Hon. Gentleman, with extreme plausibility, lays this
all to the fault of the ballot. Now, having resided for six
years in America, he (Mr. Berkeley) could only say that he
never saw an election conducted there except with the
greatest order and tranquillity, and in speaking to Americans
he had always heard them held this language—" We
scarcely want the ballot here, because there is an absence of
bribery and intimidation. But you want it in England, be-
cause you have the law of primogeniture, and the law of
entail, whereby property is accumulated and lodged in the
hands of a few persons;' consequently the tyranny of certain
classes is felt." He would ask how the statement of the