The Sun.
London, England, 1865-06-17 00:00:00

tourers, intimidation by credit, or upon the frightfu

power wielded by attorney; who interfered in the affairs
of every person they could come near, and out of their
knowledge created a screw which they used in a most
Satanic manner. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) if he (Mr.
Berkeley) :thought that the upper classes had become
politically virtuous, and the electoral classes politically
pure, he would not ask the house to give to the electors the
protection of the ballot. But he would show them that from
1835 down to the present time the electors had remained in
precisely the same condition, or, if any change had taken
place, it had been for the worse. The evidence taken before
Mr. Grote's committee in 1835 showed what was the state
of the constituencies at that time ; and Lord Palmerston, at
the nomination at Tiverton, July 25, 1837, said, " My belief,
founded not merely on what I have heard from other; but
On my own observation, is that a system has been exten-
sively pursued to deter the elector; by threats of injury to
themselves, froil electing freely and independently a mem-
ber to represent them in Parliament." From that period to
1847 the election committees presented a series of evidence
which they could not turn away from. In 1848 he first had
the honour of becoming the advocate of the ballot in the
House of Commons. He was quite aware, however, that
the feeling of the house was against the ballot, but he was
not now speaking to the house, but to the people out of
doors. From 1848 up to 1862 nothing could be more deci-
sive than the evidence given before the committees. The.
modern boroughs were just as bad as the old and impeni-
tent ones. (Laughter.) There was not, indeed, a pin to
choose between Wakefield and Gloucester. Lord Aberdeen
had admitted that our electoral system was in such a state
of profligacy that every one ought to be ashamed of it. It
was clear at that time that something must be done, so a
committee was formed of almost all the lawyers in the house,
who set their heads to workand produced the Corrupt Prac-
tices Prevention Bill, which was probably the worst bill
that ever was seen. (Laughter.) Then with regard to elec-
tions which had recently taken place. In East Kent both
candidates united in declaring there had been great in-
timidation on either side ; while at Exeter, both Mr. Cole-
ridge, the Liberal candidate, and the Tory newspaper

testified to the amount of intimidation which had been
practised. At the last-named place a cart was thrown
into the river, and a jackass had its tail cut off. (Loud
laughter.) The people there, who were insolent, con-
temptuous, and metaphorical, said that that was
not the only donkey that would be served so
at the general election. (Renewed laughter.) He
submitted he had pointed out evidence to prove that they
had not at all improved in their electoral morals, and that
they were as bad as ever they were. If this were so, he
wanted to know what had induced Mr. Gladstone, jun.,

and Mr. Mill to turn short round on the ballot. When
both the dominant parties were about to go to the country
in what Mr. Dickens described as an auriferous and malty
shower of sovereigns and beer, were they satisfied that in-
timidation should be practised ? Let them look northward
and ask why five to four was betted upon Milbank against
Merritt. (Laughter.) But the meaning of it was this :
The late Duke of Cleveland was a Tory, and the present
Duke of Cleveland was a Whig, and every man who sup-
ported Mr. Merritt for the last election would vote against
him at the next, for the voting machines called free and
independent voters must do what the Duke of Cleveland
wished them to do. Let them turn next to the southern
division of the county of Durham, and ask themselves why
it is expected that two Liberals will be returned for it.
Simply because it was overshadowed by Baby Castle, and
the free and independent electors must vote according to
the dictates of their landlord. There was the borough of
Ripon ; as long as it was under the influence of Miss
Lawrence, it was a refuge for every destitute Tory. (A
laugh.) But since it came into the hands of Lord de Grey
and Ripon there was not a sounder Whig borough in the
country. He believed Lord de Grey and Ripon would be
glad to have the ballot introduced into the borough of
Ripon. The hon. member next referred.to a speech de-
livered in 1864 by Mr. Mill, in which he spoke of the de-
sire of the vulgar rich who made their money by manufac-
tures and commerce to gain a high social position for
themselves by purchasing the votes of electors at any
price, and threw back the taunt upon Mr. Mill by saying
there was nothing of which the country was more proud
than of the men who raised themselves by manufac-
tures and commerce. He wondered what London, with
her Rethschilds, Crawfords, Goschens, and Dukes, would
think of Mr. Mill's reproach against the men who made
their money by trade and commerce. It was recorded
in the journals of the house that the distinguished
committee who inquired into the election in Yorkshire, in
1828, reported that the votes of the electors, if they so de-
sired it, might be taken anonymously. The hon. member
quoted the report of that committee to show that they
ruled that, because a man refused to have his name recorded
, when he voted, his vote was not thereby invalidated. That
said,answer,heeie ctoowtahrdelyfriuvnomloaunslyas,
osrertuinoeon
unconsti-
tutional. an
cretvoting
was
thtutional. The hon. member next r'elerred to a case which
had occurred at Salford of a voter who, acting on the Prin-
ciple that a vote was a trust, put up a notice in his
shop
window inviting non-electors residing near to come in and
inform him whether he was to vote for Garnett or Brother-

ton. By the day of the election he found 57 in favour of
his voting for Brotherton, and only 23 in favour of
Garnett, so he recorded his vote in favour of Brotherton.
If that, said the hon. member, was not giving to the noble
lord (Palmerston) who held that doctrine—the reductio ad
absurdum, he did not know where it was to be found. The
man whom the law invested with the duty of voting dis-
franchised himself and enfranchised men • whom the
law declared to be unfit to vote. (Hear.) If that argu-
ment was worth anything, it was only fit for universal
suffrage ; for if the non-electors were to dictate to the elec-
tors, it would be much better to give them votes and let
them vote themselves. On the great authority of Grote,
" the ballot was the silent defender of liberty." Demos-
thenes, addressing an assemby who voted by ballot, said,
" Your voting is secret ; you have nothing to fear ; for
safety is secured to you by the wisest regulation that your
lawgivers ever made." In pressing the house to agree to
this resolution he would point out to them that by adopt-
ing it they would give practical effect to the words of De-
mosthenes. (Cheers and laughter.).
Lord PALMERSTON—The arguments which my hon.
friend has used are those which ho has often repeated,
and the arguments which I will suggest can only be those
which I have often repeated. My hon. frined has said,
and has often said before, that nothing new is to be
urged against the ballot. Why, nothing new can be put
to truth, and when you have urged the strongest argu-
ments against a proposal, if you are called upon to say
anything new you are called upon to use a weaker argu-
ment than you have used before. My objections to the
ballot are comprised in a very short statement. My hon.
friend to-night has represented a vote as a function con-
fided to the elector for the benefit of the rest of the commu-
nity. (" No," from Mr. BERKELEY.) Very good; then my
hon. friend maintains that the vote is a personal right,
which the individual holding it is entitled to exercise free
from any consequences. If the vote is a personal vote, upon
what ground does my hon. friend punish a man for taking
money for his vote ? If a man has a personal right, he is
entitled to exercise it from pecuniary or whatever other
motives that he pleases. The moment you narrow a vote
by describing it as a personal right, you cut away the
ground upon which you can rest the right to punish a man.
(Cheers.) But I deny that a vote is a personal right. A
vote is a trust. Even if universal suffrage were adopted,
a vote would still be a trust which an individual would have
confided to him for the benefit of the nation of which he is
a member. (Hear.) I say, then, that not only by the
English constitution, but by the common sense of man -
kind, the man who holds a trust for the benefit of others is
bound to manifest to the world, and to those for whom the
trust is held, the manner in which that trust is performed.
Therefore the ballot, the object of which is to screen the
trustee from all consequences as to the manner in which he
may perform his trust, is contrary not only to the principles
of the British constitution, but contrary to common sense,
and contrary to the very nature of things themselves.
(Hear.) But then my honourable friend thinks that the
ballot would exempt a voter from those influences from
which mankind never can be free. He has given us ex-
amples of places and countries where territorial possession
has varied, and with the varying of that possession he
says you vary the political action of those who have votes
in those places. My hon. friend wants to alter the course
of human events. A man must be influenced by feelings
of some sort or other, and it is natural that there should
be harmony between the possessors of land and those who
hold under them. Such relations will continue, whether
it be the influence of territorial possessions, of mercantile
wealth, or of commercial engagements; for you cannot
divest mankind of an influence which is inherent in their
nature. I contend that it is a perfect fallacy to say that
secrecy to the voter would be beneficial. If vote by ballot
existed, the man who wished to influence the voter would
ask him to promise his vote, and he would understand what
a refusal meant. If my hon. friend thinks such a promise
would be a fallacy, and that no man could trust to it, he
pronounced the strongest condemnation upon the voter,
because he declares that in his opinion they were men whose
opinions could not be relied upon—that they would pro-
mise one thing to-day and do a different thing to-morrow.
Ido not believe that. If a voter would not promise a vote
when asked, he would be exposed to the same consequences
as if he voted openly. I think, therefore, that the ballot
would be inconsistent with the principles on which human
society is constituted, and is at variance with the principles
and practice of the British constitution, demoralising in its
effect, and calculated to lower the character of the British
voter ; and, therefore, I must again oppose the motion of
my hon. friend. (Cheers.)

The house divided—
For the resolution 74
Against it
Majority
The house then passed to the orders of the day, and
The Fortification (Provision for Expenses) Bill and the
Harbours Transfer Bill were severally read a second time.
The report on the navy and army expenditure (1863-4)
was brought up and agreed to; as was also the report on
the Colonial Docks Loans Bill.

The Naval and Marine Pay and Pensions Bill, and the
Navy and Marines (Properties of Deceased) Bill were read
a third time.

The Pier and Harbour Orders Confirmation (No 2) Bill,
and the Pier and Harbour Orders Confirmation (No. 3)
Bill passed through committee.
TURNPIKE ACTS.

Mr. BARING obtained leave to bring in bill to continue
certain Turnpike Acts in Great Britain ; also a bill relating
to turnpike trusts arrangements.

The bills for which leave had been obtained were read a
first time.
The house adjourned at a quarter to one o'clock.

ELECTION INTELLIGENCE.

-~ --

WESTMINSTER.

The following correspondence has passed between
the Attorney. General and Mr. Mill's Committee for
Westminster :

"Lincoln's-inn, Juno H.

" Sir,—l perceive that my name is in the published list
of Mr. Mill's Committee for Westminster. As I have never
authorised, or intended to authorise, any such use of it (in-
deed I am not aware that I have ever, even in private, said
anything from which any person could be likely to infer
that I should be willing to do so), I must reqUest,that it
may be immediately withdrawn, and I shall esteem it a
favour if you will inform me by what authority it has been
so made use of.

"I remain, Sir, your obedient servant,
ROIINDELL PALMER.
" The Chairman of Mr. Mill's Committee,
9a, Bridge-street, Westminster."
"John Stuart Mill's Committee Rooms,
9a, Bridge-st., Westminster, June 16.
" I have caused inquiry to be made respecting the
placing of your name on the committee, and regret to find
that it was done through the inadvertence of one of the
clerks employed in the arrangements for the election. A
return was received signed 'R. Palmer,' which the clerk
entered on the committee list as ' Palmer, R., Esq., 11, New-
square, Lincoln's-inn,' that being the first R. Palmer he
found on the register, This, I suppose, is how it was done,
as the clerk who then had charge of the book has since left
the employ of the committee. Another gentleman employed
here, seeing the address so entered, and knowing that the
place named was your address, altered ' Palmer, R., Esq.,'
into the form in which it has since stood, never for one
moment doubting that authority had been given for the
publication of the name. It has been the earnest wish of
Mr. Mill's committee that no name should appear without
the consent of the party, and I have therefore thus fully
explained the way in which this mistake has occurred. We
have not had more than five or six mistakes in a list of 600
names.

"I trust that you will deem this explanation satisfactory,
and have ordered fresh lists to be printed with your name
omitted, one of which shall be•forwarded to you.
" Apologizing for the trouble that has been given you,
and for the annoyance of having your name thus published,
"I am your obedient servant,
"JAMES BEAL, Hon. Sec.
6' £he Right Hon. Sir R. Palmer."