The Sun.
London, England, 1830-03-06 00:00:00

at all times, and in all places, any attempt to intro-
duce the vote by ballet into our elective system.
Mr. STANLEY said that, although a friend to
Parliamentary Reform to a certain extent, he should
be sorry to see our representation in the same con-
dition as that of America. He believed that even in
America there were great doubts entertained whether
the voting by ballot was a successful experiment. He
hoped that the Hon. and Learned Member for Clare
would not persist in bringing up this crude shadow
of a cleiuse, which, in point of fact, was riot a clause ;
but that he would digest a clause explaining the de-
tails of his system, and would propose it hereafter
as a rider to the Bill.
Lord NUGENT said, that the greatest recom-
mendation of the vote by ballot appeared to him to
be this—that if two knaves met together, one to
tender and the other to receive a bribe, the more
one of them could be encouraged to cheat the other
the better it would be for the public. At the same
time that he announced such to be his opinion, lie
was not prepared to entertain the present clause.
Mr. P. THOMSON trusted that this clause
would be withdrawn.
Sir F. BURDETT complained that the Hon.
and Learned Member for Clare bad not been fairly
treated in this discussion. In proposing to adopt
the vote by ballot at East Retford only, the Hon.
and Learned Member had not so much followed the
bent of his opinions as he had accommodated him-
self to the narrow views of the House. Hon. Mem-
bers were accustomed to talk of the danger which
was to be apprehended from making any sweeping
and general alteration of the mode of election ; and
the Hon. and Learned Member for Clare, to allay
the fears of those who were accustomed to fear,
even where there was no danger, had called upon
the House to try the experiment of vote by ballot,
upon a small scale, where it could produce no dan-
ger. What stage was better suited than the present
for discussing the principle of this clause? Why
should the lion. and Learned Gent. involve himself
in the details of such a measure, when he did not
know whether the principle on which it was founded
would be sanctioned by the House ? He was stir-
' prised that the Right Hon. Secretary had not sup-
ported his objections to this change of system by
better and more numerous arguments than those
which he had advanced. All the arguments on the
other side were prefaced by such qualifying words
as, " I believe," or " I am persuaded, that danger
will arise from adopting such a system." No Gent.
had more than an opinion upon the point,—no
Gent, had more than faith, for which he could give no
good reason, for asserting that there would be more
of corruption, more of hypocrisy, and more of danger,
under the system of voting by ballot than under the
present system. if the great evils of that system
were corruption and intimidation, could any man
doubt whether, if he deprived the corruptor and the
intimidator of the means of knowing whether an act
had been performed to benefit the one and to injure
the other, he should not be conferring a benefit on
the public? He admitted, that if all boroughs had a
numerous body of electors, there would be no need
of introducing the vote by ballot. Make the elec-
tors but numerous and the Parliament short, and
he wanted no other support than the unbiassed ex-
pression of public opinion; but if you will not re-
medy the abuses of Parliament in that way, let such
a remedy as was proposed by the Hon. and Learned
Member for Clare be applied to them, He admitted
that if elections were free, the change would be un-
necessary; but as they were not free, it was an ex-
cellent palliative for their present defective system.
Mr. PEEL said the Hon. Member for Westmin-
ster had no reason to be surprised at the paucity of
the arguments with which he had supported his ob-
jections to this clause, as he had declared most ex-
plicitly to the Committee, that in its present crude
state, he did not intend to argue it. He also re-
minded the Hon. Baronet that the present was a
proposition which they could only argue upon pre-
sumptions, for experience as to its advantages or
disadvantages they had none. As to the allusion
which, the Hon. Baronet had made to the system of
electing jurors by ballot, it bore no analogy and
could have no reference to the system of voting by
ballot. Did the Hon. Baronet know the manner in
which a Jury was appointed under his Bill ? As
he thought that the Hon. Baronet was ignorant of
it, he would inform him that the names of the
Jurors were placed indiscriminately in a box, and
were taken out by chance by the officer of the
court. Now surely the Hon. Baronet did not in- '
tend to propose that the names of the candidates
should be put into a box, and that the candidates
whose names were most frequently taken out by
chance by the electors, should be declared duly
elected.—(Laughter.)—Equally inapplicable to the
election of Members of Parliament was the mode in
which Election Committees were struck in that
House. Leaving, however, those points out of dis-
cussion, as not affecting the real merits of the pro-
position, he would say at once that he had been
ulvreys taught to believe that an Englishman felt
his privileges to be more valuable, because they
were exercised openly and publicly. He had often
been told by the Honourable Baronet that public
opinion was the best check upon every species of
abuse; but in this case you were prohibiting the
expression of public opinion by calling upon Eng-
lishmen to exercise their functions as electors in
secret. As lie was upon his legs, lie would take
the opportunity of denying that the people had
transferred the liberties which they had wrested
from the Crown into the hands of a selfish oligarchy.
The aristocracy did not deserve the opprobrium
which had been cast upon it. In his opinion the
country was under great obligations to the efforts of
the aristocracy in the preservation of its liberties.
Nothing would be more fatal to the liberties and
independence of the country than that there should
not be interposed between the people and the
Crown a powerful aristocracy, who, by their situa-
tion and fortune, were able to despise the menaces
and reject the favours of the Crown.--(Hear.)
Lord ALTHORP was favourable to the prin-
ciple of voting by ballot, but thought that the Hon.
Member for Clare had selected an inconvenient op-
portunity for bringing it under the consideration of
the House.
Mr. G. LAMB had a strong objection to the bal-
lot system : God forbid the time should ever arrive
when a British voter would be obliged to sneak
into a earlier to put his ball into a box, instead of
coming boldly forward-to vote for the man he liked
best.—( Hear.)

Lord-J. RUSSELL had always entertained ap-
prehensions respecting the ballot system, and those
apprehensions had not been diminished by any thing
he had heard that evening.
Mr. MONCK said that since every Act Wtich
Parliament had passed had been found ineffectual
to prevent bribery and corruption, it became the
House to adopt the remedy now proposed.
Mr. O'CONNELL assured the Committee that
it had not been his intention to take them by stir-
and to remove any suspicion of that nature he
would now withdraw his proposition, and give notice
that he would move it on the third reading of the
Bill.

The provisions of the Bill were then agreed to
in Committee, the House resumed, and the Report
was ordered to be received on Monday.
The Exchequer-bills Bill, and the Transfer in
Aids Bill, severally passed through a Committee,
and were ordered to be reported on Monday.
SUBLETTING-ACT AMENDMENT (IRELAND)
BILL.
This Bill was read a second time, after some ob-
servations from Mr. Wallace, Mr. North, Mr. Jeph-
son, and Mr. King.

JURIES IN IRELAND.
Mr. DOHERTY brought in a Bill for the regu-
lation of juries in Ireland ; which was read a first
time, and ordered to be read a second time on the
10th of May.
ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN—IRELAND.
Mr. Dotimay brought in a Bill for the relief
of illegitimate children in Ireland, which was read a
first time, and ordered to be read a second time this
day fortnight.
Sir 11, HARDINGE brought in the annual mutiny