The Sun.
London, England, 1839-06-19 00:00:00

EVENING EDITION

men wretched and miserable, escaped with impunity. No
inquisitorial tribunal could be established to inquire as to
) why a man's lease was not renewed, or why a shoemaker
' or a tailor had been dismissed. Property, in fact, would
cease to be property, if a man could not at will discharge
a tenant er tradesman. Then in what position did the
House stand with respect to an evil against which the
sharpest inflictions of the penal law should be directed?
No remedy had been suggested except the Ballot, and
therein would be found the means of reconciling the right
of property with the rights of the order. In that way
alone could they enable both parties " to do what they will
with their own."—( Hear.) All moral and civil law re-
cognised the principle, that men should so use their own
rights as not to interfere with the rights of others.
The system of open voting had been found ineffec-
tual in reconciling the two great principles of the
rights of property and the liberty of opinion. If any
mode could be suggested of reconciling. these two con-
tradictory principles, should they not readily adopt it. If
the Ballot was found to give perfect protection to the
• voter, if it was in that, and that alone, they found a solu-
tion of the problem, surely no slight objections should
deter them from adopting it. The great difficulty, as it
appeared to him, in the way of the Ballot was the moral
objection that existed to it.—( hear, hear.) Much elo-
quent and ingenious argument had been used against the
Ballot, but it was his belief, that if the moral objection
which existed in the minds of the people to the Ballot
was got over, a single session would not be allowed to
pass without its being carried. The parties, however, who
used the objection, did not well consider the moral evils
which were the result of the present system.—( Hear. )
If it were immoral to tell an untruth, it was equally immoral
to employ the trust the legislature had conferred upon a
party dishonestly to avoid private loss. If it was un-
English to tell a falsehood it was equally so to give a vote
aga.nst the dictates of a man's conscience. Nothing in
his mind could be more un- English—more opposed to the
sturdy honest character of their country than to give a
vote for a man praying all the time that he may be in
the minority,—voting against the party one wishes to see
chaired, and voting for the party whom he hopes
to see ducked.—( Hear and laughter.) At present
many dishonest votes were given—by the Ballot many
honest votes would be given and denied. 'chhich was the
greater cell ?-a( Hear, hear.) God forb!el that he should
extenuate the guilt of falsehood, but why not make the
same allowance for the rich as for the poor man?—( Hear.)
Why should they see the mete in the eye of the 101.
householder, and not see the beam in that of the Baronet
or the Bishop?—(Cheers.) If dishonesty was to be con-
demned they could see enough of it without descending
below their own rank in life. If it were criminal to utter
an untruth for the purpose of guarding a seerst against
prying curiosity, then he would say that they would find
many men cridiinal as well as bakers, and farmers, and
hosiere.—( Hear, hear.) Take, said the Honourable
- gentleman, the case of anonymous writers. It is no-
torious that men of the highest class have written
without their Lames, and have, on being questioned, denied
what they have written. There is one name which
readily suggests itself to us all—not only a man of the
, first-rate geniue, but distinguished for his excellent prin-
ciples, his high honour, and the gentlemanly spirit he al-
ways exhibited, Sir Walter Scott—(Cheers)— who, we all
know, published year after year that admirable series of
novels of which I never think without gratitude, at the
recollection of the innocent delight I have experienced in
their perusal—constantly denying that they were written
by him ; and, at last, when he acknowledged their
authorship, he did to without any feeling of shame ;
nor was it considered as at all reflecting upon his charac-
ter, by all that large circle of friends, containing many
who now hear me—men of the most unblemished honour—
prelates of the strictest sanctity,—not one of them con-
sidered Sir Walter Scott disgraced by the avowal, and all
I btag is this, that we should, in our zeal for truth, think of
other classes as well as those to which we have the honor
to belong—that there should be one weight and one
measure—_that we should extend to time untruths by
which poor men attempt to protect themselves from the
tyranny of gentlemen, the same indulgence which we most
liberally extend to the untruths by which one gentleman
protects himself against the impertinent curiosity of another.
Sir, I pretend not to be a casuist, but assuredly if my
opinion were asked by an elector, under secret voting, I
should advise him to tell the truth, and take the conse-
quences, just as now I should advise him to vote accord-
ing to his conscience, and take the consequences. The
"village Hampden," who now votes conscientiously, will un-
der the Ballot tell the truth ; the man who utters an un-
truth under the Ballot, is the man who is now guilty of
the degradation of voting dishonestly--( Cheers.) The
sane laxity of principle which now snows itself in the dis-
honest vote, will then show itself in the form of an untrue
denial. In thy opinion, the latter is the better of the two._
( Chees.) lam not for any breach of faith, but if there
be men whose virtue is so weak, and whose fears are so
strong, that they will not give a fair vote to his country
tender the eyes of his corrupter, I wish for the system
under which he breaks faith to his corruptor, and keeps it
to his country.--( Cheers.) Thus much, Sir, as to the
moral objection. With regard to the political objections
they resolve themselves—with the exception of such as I
have already adverted to—pretty nearly into this: that you
will not disturb the representative system, as settled by the
Reform Bill, which you assert to have been final. Now
I never conceived that by supporting the Reform
, all, any person gave any pledge whatever with respect
to the Ballet,—( Hear, hear.) And as to the much talked
of " finality," t regard the Reform Bill with reverence,
not superstitious, but rational—(Cheers)—and upon the
principles on which I supported the Reform Bill I think
myself bound, good cause being shown, to amend it.—
(Cheers.) I consider the question whether it should be
amended or not is one which ought to be decided on the
ordinary principles of the public good.—(Hear, hear.)
And I airs ready to own that I see strong arguments
against frequent and violent wpanges in the constitution of
this country. The revolution of 1832, for a revolution
it was—(Hear, hear)—and a most formidable and salt•
guise one it would have been, at any other time, and in
all; other country—was effected under legal forms, and
without the shedding of civil blood—but it produced much
exeitement and much danger—which lam not desirous
to renew ; and I will bear with any anomaly, however
f great, which is not also a grievance, rather than open
k any of the grand questions which were then decided.—
] (Cheers.) Nay, I will bear with many grievances rather
, than expose this country to the risk of the complete recon-
struction of our whole representative system.—( Cheers )
But, Sir, if you mean to have the Reform Bill final
f you must look well to it, that it be real—( Loud cheers)
you must suffer no part of it to be a delusion—you must
not suffer the nomination system to be restored in a form
yet more odious—you must not suffer that which ought to
be a franchise to be turned into a mere villein service—
worse than any ever executed in the fourteenth century by
1 the most arbitary laws, and the mess degrading servitude
--(Loud cheers.) It was not for this that in 1832 the
whole nation rose up like one men, that bribes were re-
jected, and threats defied, and the aristocracy defeated on
their own strongholds —( Cheers. ) It ins; not fur this
that in 1832 the Church, and the Peerage, and the Court
. stood owed into submission befor the irresis-
tible force of a united and determined people.
(Renewed- cheers.) The o! jest of thst mighty move
meat was net that ancient abuses might flourish under
new names, and that Gauen and Old Swum might find
tbeit representatives in counties and divisions of shires.
—(Loud cheers.) Of this I am perstradtd, that the day
is not far remote when this great nation, by a -ve ice as
imperial as that which demanded the Reform Bill, will
deemand that the Reform Bill be, to the full extent of its
own principles, the truth.—(Cheers.) And when that most
reasonable demand shall be conceded, as conceded it will
surely be—when the franchise of every British elector shall
be a franchise indeed—you will find, I am convinced, that
s instead of leading to reckless changes and spoliation, and
confusion, you will have maintained truth—strengthened the
law—secured the just rights of property—and (hewn
closer the ties which unite the various orders of society to
each other, and which unite all orders to the Parliament
and to the Throne.—( Loud and reiterated cheering.)
Mr. MILNES was received with great I impatience and
scarcely anything that he said was audible. With 'diffi-
culty we heard him declare that the Ballot would,
like another Reform Bill, speedily be made the signal for
arty strife—the sign and symbol of political delusion.
Sir G. 'STAUNTON rose with Lord J. RUSSELL, and the
shouts for the Noble Lord were so loud and repeated
that we could barely collect from the Honoura-
ble Member that he withdrew his amendment for a limited
experiment of the. Ballot.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL then rose, and began by
declaring that he should on the present, as on all former
occasions, vote against the Ballot.—( Hear, hear, from the
1 alinisterialists, and great cheering from the Oppositim.)
And he wished that his Hon. Friend the Member for Edin-
burgh, before be gave the sanction of his distinguished talents
to the measure, would have waited longer for the results
of that public opinion on which he had formerly been in-
clined to rely, as a remedy fur the existing evils.—( Cheers. )
The great argument against the Ballot was, in fact, that it
did away, in respect to the voters for Members of Parlia-
r.„Aent, with that influence of public opinion from which no
other classes in the country, from which not the Judges,
nor the Houses of Parliament, r,or the Sovereign herself,
were exempt. No doubt there was a degradation in not
daring to vita according to one's conviction, bat that was
ntot to be compared to the moral evil of deceit, which
would be eventually encouraged by the BEllot.—( Loud
cheers.) At first, he was persuaded indeed, that the
efermers and yeomen of this country would not be suffi-
' ciently practised in dissimulation to be able to disguise
the way in which they had voted—and that when John 1
Smith, fur instance, was asked by his landlord, " who did
you vote far—now speak fairly"—that John Smith
would tell the truth honestly.—( Loud cheers. )
But in process of time the great evil of social and political
deception would be spread through the nation.—( Loud
cheering.) The withdrawal of the check of public opi-
nion from the voters, would have a strong tendency to
increase the dissatisfaction of those who were not intrusted
with the franchise.—( Hear, hear.) He did not believe
that really intimidation would be prevented by the Ballot.
—( Hear, hear.) And it was worthy of remark that all
his Hon. Friend (Mr. Macaulay) could say as to bribery
was, that he did not think it would greatly be aggravated
by the Ballot.—( Hear, hear.) They had for a long time
Apure representative Constitution, and had had several of
the Members nominated by individuals, at the same time
many of them were elected by large cons- ituencics. He
believed that fifty years ago the general opinion was that
tenants should vote with their landlords. By the Reform
Bill the franchise bad been greatly extended, and the pos-
sessors thought they had a right to exercise the franchise
freely, while the landlords were still desirous of exercising
their old influence. This produced a collision, and Ballot
was suggested as a remedy ' • be did not think it would pro-
duce that effect, but that if they were to permit this
fermentation to work itself out, the good sense of the
, people would apply the proper remedy. He would riot
enter on the discussion of the question after the defence of
his How. and Inkrned Friend. He had last year endea-
voured to inditce,f4apersonal friends to vote
against the
Ballot, and ilfrooly consequence was that upwards of
200 Members "t:q!re.favour of the Ballet, and after that
be •houtoi pot fe b
mn self justified in pursuing such a
college on the
present occasion.__( Loud cheers.)
Mr. smigi, rei6 amid aloud cries of wQuestion, gises.