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

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, JUNE 15, 1853,

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
(Hear,
hue would
)h a vTeh
eb ee
once in
whicht 4i el
ha taedd
obc y thecur G
e d over
n Florencem ent.
was this : Prince Lichtenstein proposed, as a member of
some club or reunion, a member of the Windischgratz
family ; but as in Italy all Austrians were naturally enough
hated, the young member was blackballed. Pi ince Licht-
enstein was, of course, furious at this result. He called
out the military, occupied all the most impo rant posts of
the city, and threatened to interfere with the public
amusements. He then called a meeting of the club, and
said, " Gentlemen, the ballot is all nonsense ; let us have
publicity 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 Loudon say that her Majesty's Ministers were not going
to govern the country by checking the progress of demo-
cracy, but that they wore going to make democracy Con-
servative. Now he confessed that to endeavour to make
democracy Conservative in a country where aristocratic
influence 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 Prime.,
Minister of the country stated that he had no subordinates,
he must have a very moderate estimate of his political
position. (Hear, hear.) 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,l
about the course which they pursued, it was of no conse-
quence whether they were all agreed with regard to the
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 to
public questions. He begged the house just to look at the
opinions of the Cabinet upon this very question of the
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 ; and he (Sir R. Peell
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
IBallot as the Cape Horn of politics—as the Ultima Thule
of political navigation. (Continued laughter.) With re-,
gand 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 foe
Middlesex, would, he believed, with the most unrestricted
confidence, vote with him in favour 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 he, 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 election, ands 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 it,
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 ail 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 of
sacret voting to the bottom, more and more it would be

found that it was not altOgether so uncongenial to the
spirit of such Governments as those of Spain and Tuscany
is some gentlemen seemed to imagine. (Hear.) If it wa,
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 am,
corruption. (Hear, hear.) But, on the other hand, if a
roan held the franchise for the public good, if he had :
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 t,
remedy, and they never looked into the intrinsic merits o
the remedy they proposed. (Hear.) The ballot would no.
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 b 3
means of which the general healthfulness of our consitutioo
had been preserved, and which had made this house the
best exemplification of the representative system that the
world had ever seen. (Loud cries of " hear, hear.") Much
had been said about the use of the ballot in America, bu;
the hon. member for the West Riding knew very well tha,
practically there was no such thing as secret voting it
that country. He believed that the ballot was a wei
pen taken from the armoury of arbitrary power.
Freedom and publicity, of action were the life-blood of ou.
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 war
beyond all power to resuscitate the spirit of a nation once:
it was departed. (Hear, hear.) Let them deal with tht
question as they might • but this should be remembered
they never could succeed in making an honest man of r
knave ; let not matters be so arranged, then, as to make i,
impossible to distinguish between them. (Hear.)

Mr. BRIGHT viewed with satisfaction the increase('
earnestness which had been evinced by the members of th,
Treasury bench with respect to this motion, because h.
gathered from it that they intended either to concede th.
question, or to buckleon their armour and contend against
it, He admitted, as the measure was now proposed by the
hoe. member for Bristol, that the responsibility laid upon
tite supporters of the ballot of showing that there was
case, and that the remedy which they proposed was appli
cable to it. The general arguments by which they were
met might be comprised under three heads—either the
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.) Ho had gone
with some care into the figures to which the hon. baronet.
the member for Tamworth had referred, and he found that
during the present session there had been 16 members of
the house unseated for bribery alone, 4 for treating alone,
7 for bribery and treating combined, 1 for an illee-t1 e:
gagement to pay money, and 2 for intimidation and riot—
making altogether 30 members who had been unseated for
occurrences which they believed the application of th
ballot would very much tend to remove, if it did not re •
move them altogether. At every general since the
Reform Bill there had been an immense number of peti-
tions presented against the returns. In 1833 there were
33 petitions ; in 1835, 30 ; in 1838, 60 ; in 1841, 43 ; in
1847, 40 ; and in 1853, 76. Where there had been
more than one petition for a borough he had reckoner:
them only as one. In all, there had been 315 peti-
tions during those six general elections, or an average of
not less than 47. It needed, ho was sure, no argument
to show that the house stood in a position of con-
siderable humiliation before the public and the world
on account of those proceedings, and it was difficult to say
whether the members of the constituencies had most lost
character. (Hear.) There wore boroughs completely un-
der the control of a patron, like that of Stamford, and
others with a large number of electors under the control
lace the i'rovernment, like that of Chatham. There wore
cities even, such as Westminster, in which a great
nfreonisbe_r,cfl,; e.loec.toors constantly and notoriously abstained
which
;ewsinozli)trichlipoll on account of the extreme pressure
upon them by persons to whom they were
g4tiCril` Metz.) 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 *it 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 had
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
suffered 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•
tions in Ireland, with the view of showing that improper
influence had been used to procure the return of members.
Blayney, a barrister, wrote to John Rooney, his
iiliff, on the 22d of May, 1852 expressing his regret at
:soaring 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
if 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
.nd Mr. Leslie, and I expect the tenants over whom I am
ilaced will have no hesitation in doing so. lam surprised
hat any one should purpose voting for Dr. Gray, a stranger
ro the county." Some of the tenants, on receiving this
•nandate, wrote to Lord Blayney, in London, complaining
iC it, and his lordship wrote a very gentleman-like letter,
in which he repudiated any wish to influence the votes of
its tenants, notwithstanding which the agent persisted in
,•oercing them, in order to make them vote as he wished.
duch was said-about the influence exercised by the Catho-
lic priests in Ireland, but as far as his observation ex-
tended, the priests only exerted themselves to counteract
the pressure put upon the tenants by the landlords of Ire-
land. (Hear, hear.) Protestant clergymen, however,
could interfere in election matters as well as Catholic
priests. The Dean of Ross, the agent of Lord Stratford,
wrote a letter to the Belfast Chronicle, to which he begged
o solicit the attention of the hon. member
.for Warwick-

'hire, who was slumbering at the end of one of the opposite
)enches. (A laugh.) In this letter the rev. gentleman
,aid, " Lord Stratford is most anxious for the return of
‘vlr. Inglis, and the result of the contest will prove to his
.ordship whom he may regard as his friends in his future
relations with the town." A list had been furnished him
py two gentlemen, named Richardson and Miller, of 27
enants who voted against the wishes of the noble lord,
`qui who since received notice to quit, while six had actu-
ally been evicted. Seven persons, who did not vote at all,
had received notice to quit, and one had been evicted. He
did not know whether the Secretary at ar might consi-
ler these cases exceptional or exaggerated, but he believed
Lhe hon. members for. Ireland could show that they were
neither the one nor the other. The question was, would
the ballot remedy such evils ? In his opinion, it would ; he
aid 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-
lieve, 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
noble 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 Congress, 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-
-1 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 11. 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
hon. 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 impossible4to 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, hear.)
The dignity and character of that house were damaged
not merely throughout the country but the world by the
transactions that occurred at some of their elections. Just
as 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
object of the ballot seemed to be that people should pro-
mise one way and vote another. (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
oily stated the rumour that he had gone away from pecu-
niary causes.]—That was nearly the same thing, for it left
&he house to infer that he had to fly for some cause that
he 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
tact, Mr. Ker was returned in spite of the Marquis of
Londonderry. (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
at War, and my right hon. and learned friend the Lord
Advocate, having addressed the house upon this subject, I
should hardly have thought it necessary to say anything
oad not my personal conduct been misrepresented—unin-
tentionally, no doubt—by the hon. gentleman who brought
forward this motion. The hon. gentleman thought fit to
represent that, while I had held very popular language in
opposition, 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
i)allot 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 occasions, against the secret voting
the hon. gentleman proposes. It was not, as the hon. gen-
tleman supposed, when I accepted office; but at that time,
as I had constantly done, I stated my intention to vote,
and I have voted, against this secret mode of voting. It
appears to me--and I stated to my constituents at that
time—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 ktlONi'lleg
how he votes. This is contrary to the principle which
prevails with regard to all our other 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 besides 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 the 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
vote—(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, t 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 al 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 adopl, 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 ease—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 Voice, where it established despotiim), 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 fcr 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 J. RUSSELL appealed to the noble lord not to
persist in his notion for adjournment.
Mr. W. 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
an opportunity of expressing their sentiments. (Oh, oh !)
The house then divided.

For the adjournment
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.

AGLIONBY, at the request of Mr. Wilson, post-
poned for a fa-blight 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 Rome was agreed to.

STAMP DUTIES.

AMENDED RESOLUTIONS TO BE PROPOSED BY MR. 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
attorney 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 he 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 50/ 0 0
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 1,0001.,
And for any fractional part of 1,0001., over
and above the first, or any multiple of 1,000/.,
the further duty of
Upon any receipt or discharge given for or
upon the payment of money amounting to
21. or upwards
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 0

£0 2

0 2

90
6 0

0 0 6

0 10 0

0 0 1