The Sun.
London, England, 1853-06-29 00:00:00

grounds, this was an opportunity which ought not to be
lost of giving a fair trial to tthe ballot, so that both its
advocates and opponents might see its effect in working.
Mr. F. PEEL was sorry that the right hon. gentle-
men who usually occupied the Treasury bench were ab-
sent from the house this evening. As, however, the
noble lord the member for London had stated to him
some of the reasons why he should oppose this bill,
he (Mr. Peel) would trouble the house with a few ob-
servations on this occasion. He certainly thought
that after the full and complete discussion which the
ballot had received during this session, it would not
again have been brought before the house after so
short an interval of time. The hon. gentleman (Mr.
Bonham Carter) said that he brought forward the
question with a view of giving a trial to the
ballot ; but it certainly seemed that a question like
that ought to be disposed of upon broad and general
grounds, and not upon an exceptional piece of legisla-
tion. If the ballot were really calculated to suppress
the anomalies and disorders of the electoral system, it
ought to be applied universally, and not to any particu-
lar district. If on the other hand, although it might
cure evils of one description, it would open a door to
other evils of another class, then what right had the
house to inflict it upon a particular district, and to throw
the miseries of experimental legislation upon one part of
.the country in order to give a lesson to other parts ?
Besides when particular laws wore to be for particular
places, it was usually upon the application of persons
connected with and interested in the locality acting by
the desire of the inhabitants, or at least of a section of
them. No such desire had been put forward in this in-
stance. Nor did the hon. member's proposal give the
ballot a fair trial. It seemed to be pretty generally ad-
' mitted that for cases of bribery and corruption the bal-
lot would not be attended with any very good effect ;
it was rather in those places where intimidation
existed that its exponents hoped that it would prove
useful. But this bill applied it to cases of bribery. The
bill, too, if passed into law, would be inconsistent
with the act to which it referred, for at the very time
that the commission was sitting and endeavouring to
bring to light the corrupt practices attending an election,
another election would be going on in the very same
borough, of which all the proceedings would be shrouded
in the most complete and convenient silence. For these
reasons he trusted that the hon. member would with-
draw his motion.

Mr. H. BERKELEY, though a friend to the ballot,
certainly objected to its introduction in such homeeo-
pa.thic doses. He must deny the statement of the hon.
gentleman (Mr. F. Peel) that the friends of the ballot
were of opinion that it would be ineffectual in putting an
end to bribery ; on the contrary, they believed that in all
constituencies of any respectable size the ballot would
put an end to corruption and bribery.
Mr. FRENCH, who rose amidst great cries for a
division, said that, as her Majesty's ministers were not
in their places this evening, and it was understood that
the house would not sit late, instead of proceeding to
consider this rather important question, he begged to
move that the house do adjourn.
The SPEAKER put the question, which was answered
by an almost unanimous affirmative, and the house ad-
journed.

Lord Burghley has paired for a fortnight with John
Heathcote, Esq., M.P. for Tiverton.

QUEEN'S BENCH—June 28.

•
,THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. MASTERS.
1Z- found the prisoner guilty, and
Lori Campbell sentenced him to be imprisoned in the
House of Correction for two years.