The Sun.
London, England, 1853-06-15 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, JUNE 15, 185 3.

cal influence, and having vote by ballot in the Senate, the
senators elected four individuals to those offices in oppo-
sition to the candidates proposed by the Government. It
was quite clear that if the Senate had not had the ballot
they would have been intimidated by the Government.
(Hear, hear.) The case which had occurred Florence
was this : Prince Lichtenstein proposed, as a member of
some club or reunion, a member of the Windischgratz
family ; hut as in Italy Austrians were naturally enough
hated, the young member was blackballed. Prince Licht-
enstein was, of course, furious at this result. He called
out the military, occupied all the most impo ant posts of
the city, and threatened to interfere with the public
amusements. He then called a meeting of the club, and
" Gentlemen, the ballot is all nonsense ; let us have
puJiicity of voting." The consequence was that, with the
sword hanging over the heads of the electors, the candidate
who was in the first instance blackballed was unanimously
elected. (Laughter.) Now, these were two remarkable
cases, and afforded striking proofs of the efficiency of the
ballot. (Hear, hear.) He had heard the other night, with
the greatest possible surprise, the noble lord the member
for London say that her Majesty's Ministers were not going.
to govern the country by checking the progress of demo-
cracy, but that they were going to make democracy Con-
servative. Now he confessed that to endeavour to make
democracy Conservative in a country where aristocratic
eminence had had dominion for 160 years did appear to
him a monstrous proposition. (Laughter.) He remem-
bered some time ago having heard the ex-Chancellor of the
-Exchequer (Mr. Disraeli) tell the noble lord that he was a
subordinate of a subordinate. Now, he (Sir R. Peel)
begged to correct the right hon. gentleman. He assured
him that the noble lord was nothing whatever of the
kind. He had the distinguished authority of Lord Aber-
deen for stating--(laughter)—that he had no subordinates
at all. (Hear, hear.) Now, really, when the Prini.
Minister of the country stated that he had no subordinates,

he must have a very moderate estimate of his politica:
position. (Hear, bear.) The noble lord had the other
night also attacked the religious sympathies and in-
sulted the loyalty of the Roman Catholics of Ireland ;
and then the house was told that these were only his own
private opinions. And yet the noble lord was the leader of
the House of Commons. (Hear.) When questioned in that
house on the subject, what did he do ? He quoted a very
sensible opinion of Lord Melbourne's, which he evidently
meant to throw in the teeth of Lord Aberdeen—(laughter•
—that if the members of the Government were only agree,.
about the course which they pursued, it was of no conse-
quence whether they were all agreed with regard to th,
grounds by whichthey arrived at that course. One would
think, from this, that the noble lord and the members of the
Government were all of the same opinion with regard te
public questions. He begged the house just to look at th,
opinions of the Cabinet upon this very question of th,
ballot. There was the right hon. gentleman the member.
for Southwark (Sir W. Molesworth)—the glorious Radical
of Southwark—(laughter)—who looked at the ballot as the
anchor of the salvation of this country ; aud he (Sir R. Peel)
thought he was perfectly right. Then there was the right
hon. gentleman the member for Carlisle (Sir J. Graham).
who was then sitting with great complacency under th,
gentle breezes which fanned the Admiralty flag. (Renewed
laughter.) That right hon. gentleman looked upon the
,ballot as the Cape Horn of politics—as the Ultima Thult
of political navigation. (Continued laughter.) With re-
gard to those few hon. gentlemen whom the country re-
gretted to see so much separated from their legitimate con-
nexions—now that there was no longer any necessity for
their separation—he did not know how they were to vote.
But there was one hon. gentleman upon whose vote he could
with certainty rely, and that was the hon. and gallant cap-
tain, the eccentric member for Middlesex—(loud laughter)
—the hon. and gallant captain, the eccentric member for
Middlesex, would, he believed, with the most unrestricted

eontidence, vote with him in fa;mur of the ballot, and, as the
minds of the public were at present running upon the hos-
tile attitude assumed by Russia towards Turkey, he might
perhaps, in the lobby,
,be able to establish an " entente
cordiale" with the hon. and gallant gentleman on that in-
teresting and important subject. He felt it incumbent
upon him, although occuping a humble position in the
house, to ask the house to consider the present inefficiency
of the system of electoral legislation, and to note the evils
which had for the last 20 years been making such rapid
strides, and which, in his opinion, the ballot could only
curtail. The house would probably recollect that in the
Parliament of 1844 there were eight cases of conviction for
bribery and treating; in the Parliament of 1847 there were
14 similar cases; but, after the last general election, out of
the 16 seats which were attacked by petition, three only
had not been lost, and 13 hon. gentlemen were almost at
once found, by their agents, guilty of bribery. There had
been, since, a great many cases in which the sitting mem-
bers had also been disqualified on account of bribery by,
their agents, but he did not know their exact number ;
but, whatever it might be, it was evident that the evil was
on the increase. There was the borough of Aylesbury,
which had on two occasions been convicted of bribery, but
he could not say whether or not the purity of the borough
had been improved since her Majesty's Solicitor-General
had been connected with it. (Laughter.) Let the house
consider the case of the Wigton Burghs. At the late gene-
ral election Sir J. M`Taggart polled 140 votes, and Mr.
Caird polled 139. Mr. Caird petitioned, but was unable
to withstand the Earl of Stair and 11 lawyers staring at
him. (Loud laughter.) In addition to that he was unable
to bear the expenses of a scrutiny, and it seemed to him a
great proof of the inefficiency of the electoral legislation that
the expense of a scrutiny should be permitted to deprive an
hon. gentleman of a seat who might—he would not say that
he was —have been fairly entitled to it. Blackburn and Chat-
ham had both been found guilty of bribery, but since the
act called "Sir Robert Peel's Act, 'for regulating the consti-
tution of election committees, only St. Albans and Sudbury
had been disfranchised. There was now a chance of urging,
upon Parliament the adoption of the ballot, and he would
ask all those hon. members who were dissatisfied with the
present system to rally round that popular standard ; and,
if any hon. members were waverhing or halting between
the two opinions, he would venture to ask them to con-
cider the inefficiency of the present electoral system, both
as regarded the corrupt practices and the intimidation
prevalent at elections, and as regarded the expenses of
prosecuting a petition before a committee ; but, above all,
to consider the demoralisation which resulted from that
corruption and intimidation, and, weighing well these
considerations, to figure to themselves what would be the
best course to adopt for the purpose of improving the
public mind. (Hear, hear.) He would ask the house to
weigh well these considerations, and he felt convinced
that many hon. members would be inclined to sanction
the measure, as one which, while it acted as a check upon
corruption and intimidation, would not attack the legiti-
mate influence bestowed by the possession of property.
It was a measure, he believed, which, from encouraging
independence of conscience and freedom of opinion, must
tend to promote the interests of all classes of the commu-
nity. But, whether the measure should be successful, or
whether it should be thrown out, the time had passed for
meeting a proposal for the introduction of the ballot with
sneers and illiterate taunts, for the matter had created in-
quiry, and the more its principles had been clearly and
fairly put forward, the more favourable had been the
opinion formed of the views which it advocated. He
would therefore ask Parliament to endeavour, by investi-
gation and inquiry into the present system of electoral
legislation, and into the methods for correction of its
abuses, to recognise the adoption of the ballot as the
safest guarantee for final and complete success. (Cheers.)

The LORD ADVOCATE would limit himself but to a
very few observations. He was opposed to the ballot, not
because of its democratic tendency, his fears were alto-
gether in the other direction. (Oh, oh, and cries of Hear,
hear.) He believed that there was that involved in the.
ballot which was altogether antagonistic to the principle
of freedom of Government. (Loud cries of hear, hear.)
and he was quite sure it was more from caprice and
accident that the question of the ballot had become

identified with the ereed of some of those who pro-
fessed liberal opinions in this country. (Hear, hear.) On,
principle above ad others ought to be made the policy of
our Government—that the influence of public and popular
opinion was the best or rather the only security for the
honest exercise of public duty. And on the contrary, he
felt convinced that the more they probed this question
8 Bret voting to the bottom, more and more it would be

wund that it was not altOgether so uncongenial to tht.
spirit of such Governments as those of Spain and Tuscany
as some gentlemen see:sled to imagine. (Hear.) If it was
meant that the voter only held his vote for his own interest
and advantage, he (the Lord Advocate) had no argument
against the ballot, but if he had then no argument against
the ballot he could have no argument against bribery and
corruption. (Hear, hear.) But, on the other hand, if n
man held the franchise for the public good, if he had s
duty to perform towards his country and its institutions,
he could not do so under the ballot. The error of hon.
gentlemen who supported it was here—they had an evil to
remedy, and they never looked into the intrinsic merits of
the remedy they proposed. (Hear.) The ballot would net
prevent bribery—it could not prevent intimidation—and
if it did not do so, it would tend to increase it and the
other evils attendant upon our system. Let them intro-
duce the ballot, and they would unloose those ties by
means of which the general healthfulness of our consitution
had been preserved, and which had made this house th,
best exemplification of the representative system that th
world had ever seen. (Loud cries of " hear, hear.") Much
had been said about the use of the ballot in America, bir
the hon. member for the West Riding knew very well that
practically there was no such thing as secret voting in
that country. He believed that the ballot was a wea
pen taken from the armoury of arbitrary power.
Freedom and publicity of action were the life-blood of out
constitution. They circulated from the lowest to the
highest, and once their course was obstructed there might
remain the empty skeleton of the constitution, but it was
beyond all powor to resuscitate the spirit of a nation once
it was departed. (Hear, hear.) Let them deal with the
question as they might • but this should be remembered.
they never could succeed in making an honest man of
knave ; let not matters be so arranged, then, as to make it
impossible to distinguish between them. (Hear.)

Mr. BRIGHT viewed with satisfaction the increased
earnestness which had been evinced by the members of the
Treasury bench with respect to this motion, because he
gathered from it that they intended either to concede the
question, or to buckle on their armour and contend against
it. He admitted, as the measure was now proposed by tle•
hoi. member for Bristol, that the responsibility laid upou
the supporters of the ballot of showing that there was v
case, and that the remedy which they proposed was appb
cable to it. Tire general arguments by which they were
met might be comprised under three heads—either tin
evil complained of was not so great as they charged it to
to be, or the ballot would not cure it, or, if it did, the
cure would be as bad as the disease. (Hear.) He had gone
with some care into the Sgures to which the hon. baronet
the member for Tamworth had referred, and he found that,
during the present session there had been 16 members o 1
the house unseated for bribery alone, 4 for treating alone,-
7 for 'bribery and treating combined, 1 for an illegal en-
gagement to pay money, and 2 for intimidation and riot—
inalipg altogether 30 members who had been unseated for
occurrences which they believed the application of the
ballot would very much tend to remove, if it (lid not re-
move them altogether. At every general election since the
Re bran Bill there had been an immense number of peti-
tions presented against the returns. In 1833 there wero
33 petitions; in 1833, 30; in 1838, 60; in 1841, 43 ; in
18,17, 40 ; and in 1833, 76. Where there had been
more than one i;setition for a borough he hid reckoned
them only as one. In all. there had beery 315 peti-
tions during those six general. elections, or an average a
not less,. than 47. It needed, he was sure, no argument
to, show that the house stood in a position of con-
siderable humiliation before the public a:111 the world
on account -of those preceedings, and it waf; difficult to say
whether the members of the constituencies had most lost
charaCter. (Hear.) There were boroughs completely un-
la*goeities even, such
der the control of a patron, like that of Stamford, and
others with a large number of electors under the control
of. electors 9,f:the-Government, like that of Chatham. There were
n. ytinber as Westminster, in ~which a great
and noteriouFly abstained
fro
whrlo..are lipontuhn'estn7liftlY' persons to whom they were
wnlas t
the poll on account of the extreme pressure
under obligation. ( ear.) Ireland was, perhaps,

even more notorious still ; and he invited the right hon.
the Secretary at War to go with him to a northern county
in that country, and he would show him that the spirit of
the Duke of Newcastle was not dead, but lived as much'
in the Marquis of Londonderry as ever it -had done in the
Duke of Newcastle. (Hear.) (The hon. member, in il-
lustration, quoted several passages from a correspondence
published in the newspapers about a year ago, between the
Marquis of Londonderry and Mr. David Ker, in which
the noble marquis, in reference to the county of Down,
spoke of "his votes," and of his right in consideration of
his influence, and the money which his forefathers had ex-
pended in the county, to return one member.) The Rev.
Mr. Ford, of the county of Down, was an exile on ac-
count of pecuniary embarrassments, and in his absence
his son and the rector of the parish managed his election.
eering business, and they called the tenants into the farm=
yard and treated them, in order to induce them to break
the promise they had given to vote for the candidates pro-
posed by Sharman Crawford. These extracts ought to
satisfy the right hon. Secretary at War that the spirit of
the Duke of Newcastle was not dead, and, therefore, that
the argument which the right hon. gentleman had founded
on the contrary supposition was untenable.
Lord E. HILL begged to be allowed to inform the house
that the correspondence on which the hon. member bad
commented in such kind terms, had no reference to the
present representation of the county of Down. (Hear.)
Mr. BRIGHT said he was glad that Mr. Ker had not
-uffered himself to be driven from the field, but stood for
the county. The hon. member then proceeded to read
passages from other correspondence relative to other elec.
Lions in Ireland, with the view of showing that improper
aifluence had been used to procure the return of members.
Blayney, a barrister, wrote to John Rooney, his
on the 22d of May, 1852, expressing his regret at
tearing his tenants " were inclined to vote for the mur-
lerers of the tenant league"—(laughter)—and declaring
hat if they should do so, they would be visited by marks
bf his displeasure. In the county of Monaghan the agent
•,f Lord Blayney wrote as follows to that nobleman's
.enantry :—" I wish the tenants to vote for Sir G. Forster
md Mr. Leslie, and I expect the tenants over whom I am
laced will have no hesitation in doing so. lam surprised
,hat any one should purpose voting for Dr. Gray, a stranger
,o the county." Some of the tenants, on receiving this
uandate, wrote to Lord Blayney, in London, complaining
.1 it, and his lordship wrote a very gentleman-like letter,
a which he repudiated any wish to influence the votes of
sus tenants, notwithstanding which the agent persisted in
oercing them, in order to make them vote as he wished.
Inch was said about the influence exercised by the Catho-
ic priests in Ireland, but as far as his observation ex-
anded, the priests only exerted themselves to counteract
he pressure put upon the tenants by the landlords of Ire-
and. (Hear, hear.) Protestant clergymen, however,
:ould interfere in election matters as well as Catholic
priests. The Dean of Ross, the agent of Lord Stratford,
vrote a letter to the Belfast Chronicle, to which he begged
rbo solicit the attention of the hon. member for Warwick-
shire, who was slumbering at the end of one of the opposite
benches. (A laugh.) In this letter the rev, gentleman
" Lord Stratford is most anxious for the return of
Sir. Inglis, and the result of the contest will prove to his
Lordship whom he may regard as his friends in his future
relations with the town." A list had been furnished him
by two gentlemen, named Richardson and Miller, of 27
tenants who voted against the wishes of the noble lord,
and who since received notice to quit, while six had actu-
Illy been evicted. Seven persons, who did not vote at all,
had received notice to quit, and one had been evicted. He
lid not know whether the Secretary at 'War might consi-
der these cases exceptional or exaggerated, but he believed
he hon. members for Ireland could show that they were
'wither the one nor the other. The question was, would
the ballot remedy such evils ? In his opinion, it would ; he
Lid not conceive that Lord Londonderry would have written
the letter he had read, had the 7,000 electors of the county.
of Down gone up to vote by secret ballot ; nor did he be-
deve, had the ballot existed, that the gentlemen of Mona-
ghan would have pursued the course he had described.
Let him take the case of Durham. He knew something
about the city of Durham, for he had fought two contests
there—the fiercest contests known there for many years.
Well, at Durham, Lord Londonderry, who seemed to have
a mania for this sort of power, had more than 100 men em-
ployed in his collieries within seven miles of the city—a
circumstance giving them each a vote—and these men the
aoble lord would bring up in omnibuses and carts to vote
at the elections for the city of Durham for his member,
and then have them taken back again as they came. He
himself had no reason to complain of Lord Londonderry or
his 100 voters, for it so happened that, owing to some dis-
pute at the time between the noble marquis and the church
party at Durham, the noble marquis's men were not quite
in hand, so that many of them voted as they pleased on
that particular occasion. What he complained of was the
system—a system as ruinous to the individuals who sup-
ported it as it was disgraceful to the country in which it
was practised. He would now advert to the United States.
In the United States, as was well known, there were far
more Parliamentary elections than in this country, for, be-
sides the elections to Congrsss, there were the elections to
the 32 or 33 states ; yet such a thing as an election peti-
tion with such a charge as corruption or intimidation or
bribery, was not, he believed, known in the United States.
(Hear, hear.) The Secretary at War, followed by
the Lord Advocate, had endeavoured to make out that
nothing could be so detrimental to morality as the secret
ballot system. Now, if there was a state, or province, or
district in the world in which the whole population was
emphatically well educated, comfortable in their circum-
stances, independent in their character, superior as a body
of men to any equal body of men to be found anywhere in
the world on the same space of ground, that province, that
state, was the State of Massachusetts. (Hear, hear.)
.Now, the State of Massachusetts, the colonists of Boston,
established the ballot so far back as 1634, and the only
time when the ballot was discontinued there was when it
was abolished by Governor Andrew, who was sent there
by James IL in 1688, and who, in his anxiety to destroy
the liberties of Massachusetts, conceived that his first
and most effective step was to overthrow the freedom of
election by ballot. (Hear, hear.) In order to exhibit the
present position of the vote by ballot in Massachusetts the
Lon. member then read portions of two letters from Messrs.
Dawson and Amason Walker, the former now, and the
latter lately, a member of the Massachusetts Legislature,
describing the mode of voting by ballot, and declaring that
the franchise was regarded by the entire population of the
province as the Palladium of their liberties. The ballot
itself was described to be enclosed in a self-sealing en-
velope, so that, while the name of every person voting was
checked as he dropped his envelope into the ballot box,-it
was inapossible.to know how he voted. [The hon. member
here exhibited one of the envelopes bearing the stamp of
the State of Massachusetts, used in voting by ballot in that
State.] There was no possibility of fraud under the system
there practised ; and when he heard gentlemen speak of
the impossibility of securing perfect secresy, he must
Say, we would be the most stupid people in the world
if we could not make some mechanical contrivance to

effect that object. (Hear, hear.) He believed the noble
lord, the member for the city of London, and the house,
were anxious to put an end to the corruption that pre-
vailed, but they would never succeed in doing so un-
less something better than they had hitherto tried was
resorted to. (Hear, hear.) If they found an effectual
system existing in the New England States, it surely was
worth their while to see if they also could not by some
other means than acts against bribery and corruption
secure the object which they all aimed at. (Hear, hoar.)
the dignity and character of that house were damaged
lot merely throughout the country but the world by the
transactions that occurred at some of their elections. Just
a there were men who did not like to go through the un-
pleasantness of a canvass for a seat in the East India
Company, so there were men who did not like to submit
to the humiliation or degradation connected with seeking
a seat in that house. If they were not hypocrites to them-
selves and the country, they were bound to take up this
question in earnest, and not only give leave for the intro-
duction of the present bill, but pass it on to the other
House of Parliament. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. S. KNOX denied some of the allegations made by
the hon. member for Manchester with reference to the
intimidation of electors in Ireland, and observed that the
,hject of the ballot seemed to be that people should pro-
iaise one way and vote ancther. (Hear, hear.)
Lord E. HILL defended the Rev. Mr. Ford from the

imputations cast on him by the hon. member for Man-
chester, which seemed to imply that he had gone away
for some crime or another. [Mr. BRIGHT said, he had.
~nly stated the rumour that he had gone away from pecu-
iiary causes.]—That was nearly the same thing, for it left
he house to infer that he had to fly for some cause that
!Le could not face. Now, he could testify that a more
honourable man, a better landlord, did not exist in the
county of Down. (Hear.) He denied also the inferences
that might be drawn from the hon. gentleman's statement
with reference to his election and that of Mr. Ker. In
Mr. Ker was returned in spite of the Marquis of
i,ondonderry. (Hear, hear.) Then, as to Major Waring,
he was a strong Protestant—indeed known as a King
William man, but that did not suit the hon. member for
Manchester, who preferred a Roman Catholic. The hon.
gentleman had enough to say against the landlords, but
not a word as to the intimidation of the Roman Catholic
clergy. (Hear, hear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL.—My right hon. friend the Secretary
it War, and my right hon. and learned friend the Lord
.%.dvocate, having addressed the house upon this subject, I
should hardly have thought it necessary to say anything
had not my personal conduct been misrepresented—unin-
tentionally, no doubt—by the hon. gentleman who brought
forward glis motion. The hon. gentleman thought fit to
represent that, while I had held very popular language in
apposition, I had, when in office, changed my course and
taken a very different view of the subject. The fact is,
that the speech the hon. gentleman alluded to was made
in the month of July last, previous to my election for the
city of London. I had voted in this house against the
ballot a few weeks before, and when I was asked before a
large meeting in Guildhall what course I should take on
the ballot, I said I should vote against it, and I gave my
reasons to that numerous assembly, which'generally meets
in Guildhall on those occasion?, against the secret voting
the hon. gentleman proposes. It was not, as the hon. gen-
tleman supposed, whonl accepted office; but at that time,
as I had constantly done, I stated my intention to vote,
and I have vote', against this secret mode of voting. It
appears to me--and I stated to my constituents at that

: -
i.me—that the foundation upon which the argument rests
is a foundation entirely contrary to that upon which the
hon. gentleman the member for the West Riding bases his
argument upon this occasion. The hon. member for the
West Riding says that no man has a right to inquire how
another man votes. The principle which I stated was, that
this is a public trust, and that every man who exercises
that public trust exercises it subject to the opinion and
judgment of all his fellow citizens. (Hear, hear.) Be it
remarked that the hon. gentleman who made this motion
has proposed it as a change by itself. My, hon. friend the
member for Montrose proposes it in connexion with some
other measure ; but, be that as it may, the hon. gentleman
proposes that those who have a right to vote should exer-
cise that vote without any of his fellow citizens knowiug
how he votes. This is contrary to the principle which
prevails with regard to all our ?ther institutions, and the
general principles of the Constitution. I have heard it
said and have seen it written, that to say that any person
should have the power of judging how a person who exer-
cised the trust might vote, was saying that that person was
himself qualified to vote. (Hear.) I hold that that
language has no force in it, because we might as well say
that no one should criticise the conduct of a judge or the
verdict of a jury, unless he was qualified to sit as that
judge or give a verdict as a jury. (Hear.) We might as
well say no one should criticise a work unless he was
qualified to write it. It seems to me the people of this
country, unless the suffrage is made to extend to every
man, have a right of exercising their judgment on the
mode in which the votes of individuals are given, and I
hold that that superintendence and that exercise of public
opinion is a most wholesome check upon voters. But I
hold bead% this, that the enactment.of a secret mode of

voting would, as my learned friend the Lord Advocate has
justly argued, be hostile to the general spirit of liberty in
this country. (Hear.) That spirit of liberty has grown
in this country by the boldness and courage with which
men have stood forward and were ready to suffer sacri-
fices in behalf of those opinions and that free Government
which they wished to establish. (Hear.) From the day
when Sir J. Eliot allowed himself to be imprisoned until
death. to the day when Sydney was willing to be con-
demned with unmoved pulse by the verdict of an adverse
and packed jury—men were ready to make any sacrifice,
and at any cost, to establish the principles of liberty.
But if you depart from those principles—if you say men
are to exercise secretly any of the public trusts of this
community, and that they shall be saved harmless, what-
ever their motives may be, you do much to quench that
spirit, and you produce an opposite spirit, that of skulking
from tho responsibility atttached to such a trust. (Hear. )
I will not now go into arguments with regard to foreign
countries, with one exception, to which the honourable
member for Manchester has alluded, and it is worthy cer-
tainly of remark, because we have usually heard that
the example of the United States of America no
doubt a great and free country was one that ought to
be held forth for our example and worthy of our imitation;
but, if it should appear that some of the United States of
America themselves have great doubts with respect to the
value of secret voting, I think it is an argument for us to
pause, at least, before we adopt a plan which they for a
long while pursued, but upon which they do not seem to
have decided as an advantageous plan. (Hear.) The hon.
gentleman has, I believe, truly related, that in Massachu-
setts the ballot has for a long time been established, but
the law establishing the ballot stated that the name of the
voter was to be written on a paper, open and unfolded—
(hear, hear)—there was no secrecy whatever about the
y te—(hear, hear)—it was a mode of voting different from
ours, but a mode of voting which did not imply secrecy,
which did not practically carry secrecy with it ; and there-
fore in principle resembled our mode of voting, rather than
the secret mode proposed by the hon. gentleman. (Hear,
hear.) It is true that the party who had the majority
stated that there were such abuses, such intimidations,
that it was necessary to establish the secret ballot; a great
party opposed that change, but it was carried. However,
within a year after it was carried there was a majority of,
I believe, 184 to 7 in favour of the repeal of the secret bal-
lot law. The hon. gentleman says there has since been a
convention, and that the majority of that convention are
in favour of secret ballot, and will, make it part of the
constitution. We do not know how that may be, but we
know that after the secret ballot which the honourable
gentleman proposes had been tried for a year in that
noble and free State of Massachusetts it was abandoned
by a large majority, and that majority, I may say, con-
tained some of the most distinguished men, and was
supported by the opinion of some of the most patriotic,
most learned, and most eminent men in the State.
(Hear, hear.) Then all I argue from this is not that the
State of Massachusetts may not finally establish secret bal-
lot, but, at least, it is matter of contention among them ;
and one party, at least, having this year a majority in the
Legislature, refuses to carry on that secret ballot, and de-
cided that it should be repealed. We know, likewise,
that, as my right hon. friend the Secretary at War has
stated that the Government of New York has stated
openly. that bribery and corruption are making great ad-
vance in that State, and was an evil that required to be
checked by a new law. Can any man any longer state that
for bribery and intimidation they have a perfect and infal-
lible remedy when you have such accounts from the United
States of America, where it was said to have been most
successful ? Well, I say, not that America certainly will
finally have recourse to open voting—although an old pa-
triot of America, John Randolph, said that secret voting,
if it did not find a nation scoundrels was sure to make
them so—(laughter)--for it may be that the United States
of America may think it expedient to adopt some course
of secret ballot ; but what I believe is, that they will not
persist in that law, but will prefer the open ballot. If
that is the case—if we, in fact, have no example, either in
ancient or modern times, of this mode of secret voting be-
ing successful (the only example of its success being in the
Republic of Venice, where it established despotism), then
I say, at least let us pause until we have some surer foun-
dation to rest a belief on that this secret voting is a suffi-
cient remedy for the evils complained of ; and let us keep
that mode of voting which has been found consistent and
compatible with all that is noble, with all that is manly,
and with all that is free in our institutions. (Great cheer-
ing.
Lord D. STUART moved the adjournment of the de-
bate. (Loud and general cries of "Oh !")
Lord t. RUSSELL appealed to the noble lord not to
persist in his motion for adjournment.
Mr. IV. WILLIAMS hoped the noble lord would per-
sist in it. (Oh, oh !) The question was of vast importance,
and members representing large constituencies should have
antheir sentiments. (Oh, oh !)
For the adjournment
The
houseopportunity
then of expressingdivide
Against it

Majority against the adjournment 264
The house again divided, on the motion that leave be
given to bring in the bill, when there appeared—
For the motion
Against it 232

Majority against the motion 6O
The motion was accordingly lost.
Mr. AGLIONBY, at the request of Mr. Wilson, post-
poned for a fortnight his motion for an address for certain
returns• relating to the appointments under the Commis-
sioners of Woods and Forests.

On the motion of Mr. BOWYER an address for further
papers regarding the relations of foreign states with the
Court of ome was agreed to.
DURHAM ELECTION.

Mr. BENTINCK moved that the following members
should compose the select committee on the Durham elec-
tion petitions:—Mr.Bentinck, Mr. Biddulph, Mr. Fellowes,
Mr. It. Phillimore, and Mr. I. Butt.

Mr. HUTT objected to the proposed committee, and
moved, as an amendment, that the general committee of
elections should nominate five members to serve, instead of
those proposed by the hon. member.

After a short conversation,
Mr. BENTINCK said that he would not press his
motion.

The motion was then negatived without a division, and
the amendment was agreed to.
Sir J. YOUNG obtained leave to bring in a bill to ex-
tend the remedies for the compensation of malicious in-
juries to property in Ireland; and also a bill to amend the
acts regulating the salaries of resident magistrates in
Ireland.

THE CONVICTED PRISONERS' REMOVAL AND
CONFINEMENT BILL.

This bill was read a third time and passed.
The order of the day for the house resolving itself into a
committee on the soap duties having been read,

An Hon. MEMBER moved that the house be counted.

The house was accordingly counted, and there being but
22 members present, it stood adjourned, at half-past two
o'clock, until twelve o'clock this day.

RAILWAY SHARE MARKETS.

LIVERPOOL, JUNE 14.

STOCK EXCHANGE.—The share market has been firm
to-day. The following are the transactions :—Caledonian,
344 ; Eastern Counties, 13 1-16 ; Lancashire and Yorkshire,
781; London and North Western, 115 E ; Midland, 721;
South Eeastern and Dover, 21g ; York and North Mid-
land, 30i.

STAMP DUTIES.

AMENDED RESOLUTIONS TO BE PROPOSED BY MB. CHAN-
CELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER.
STAMPS.
That from and after the sth day of July, 1853, in lieu•
of the Stamp Duties now payable upon or in respect of the
several instruments, matters, and things hereinafter de-
scribed, there shall be paid the several Stamp Duties here.
inafter described (that is to say)
Upon every indenture, or other instrument
or writing of apprenticeship or clerkship (ex-
cept articles of clerkship to attorneys and others,
in order to admission in any court, or any
office in any court)—
Where no sum of money or value shall be paid,
given, assigned, conveyed, or secured to or
for the use or benefit of the master or mis-

tress, the duty of
And upon or in respect of any assignment or
transfer of any such indenture, instrument,
or writing as aforesaid, where there shall be
no sum of money or value moving to any new
master or mistress, the duty of
Upon articles of clerkship, or any contract
whereby any person shall first become bound to
serve as a clerk in order to his admission as an
vttorney or solicitor in any of her Majesty's
Courts of Westminster, or in Ireland, or any
other Court of Record in England holding pleas
where the debt or damage amounts to 40s. ; or
in order to his admission as a proctor in the
High Court of Admiralty in England, or the
Court of Admiralty in Ireland, or in any of
the Ecclesiastical Courts in Doctors' Commons,
or in IrelAnd, the duty of BO 0 0
Upon or in respect of any certificate to be taken out
yearly by every person admitted as an attorney, solicitor,
or proctor in any court of England or Ireland, or as a
Writer to the Signet, or as a solicitor, agent, attorney, or
procurator in any court in Scotland, and by every person
admitted or enrolled as a notary public in England, Scot-
land, or Ireland—
If he shall reside within the distance of ten
miles from the General Post Office in the City
of London, or within the City or Shire of
Edinburgh., or in the City of Dublin, or with-
in three miles thereof : If he shall have been
admitted for the space of three years or up-
wards 9 0 0
Or if he shall not have been admitted so long 4 10 0
If ho shall reside elsewhere, and if he shall have
been admitted for the space of three years or
upwards
Or if he shall not have been admitted so long ...
Upon or in respect of any certificate to be
taken out yearly by any person being a member
of one of the four inns of court in England,
and by every person in Ireland who, in the
character of conveyancer, special pleader,
draftsman in equity, or otherwise, shall, for or
in expectation of any fee, gain, or reward, draw
or prepare any conveyance of, or deed or instru-
ment relating to, any estate or property, real or
personal, or any other deed or contract what-
ever, or any pleadings or proceedings in any
court of law or equity—
If he shall reside within the distance of ten
miles from the General Post-office in the city
of London, or within the city or shire of
Edinburgh, or in the city of Dublin, or within
three miles thereof
And if he shall reside elsewhere
Upon any policy of assurance or insurance,
or other instrument by whatever name the
same shall be called, whereby any insurance
shall be made upon any life or lives, or upon
any event or contingency relating to or depend-
ing upon any life or lives—
Where the sum insured shall not exceed 0 0 6
And where the same shall exceed 501. and shall
not exceed 5001., then for every 501.
And for any fractional part of 501. over and
above the first, or any multiple of 501., the
further duty of 0 0 6
And where the same shall exceed 5001. and shall
not exceed 10001., then for every 1001 0 1 0
And for every fractional part of 1001. over and
above the first, or any multiple of 1001.,
the further duty of
And where the same shall exceed 10001., then
for every 1,000/.,
And for any fractional part of 1,0001., over
and above the first, or any multiple of 1,0001.,
the further duty of .. 010 0
Upon any receipt or discharge given for or
upon the payment of money amounting to
21. or upwards 0 0 1
For or in respect of any advertisement con-
tained in or published with any gazette or
other newspaper, or any other periodical
paper, or in or with any pamphlet or literary
work

£0 2 6

0 2 6

6 0 0
3 3 0

0 0 6

0 10 0