The Sun.
London, England, 1831-02-11 00:00:00

SHEFFIELD POLITICAL UNION.

MEETING OF THE POLITICAL UNION
ON THE BALLOT.
(From the Sheffield Iris of Tuesday. )
__ _ - - -

Yesterday, at noon, a meeting of the members of the
Sheffield Political Union was held at the Town Hall, for
the purpose of considering the propriety of petitioning
Parliament to allow of voting by ballot, in the election of
Members of Parliament.

T. A. WARD, Esq. en beirg called to the chair, re-
minded the meeting that they were met together on a very
important business, namely, to consider the mode by which
Members of Parliament might be the most properly re-
turned. On the question of the ballot it was well known
that different persons entertained different opinions. The
system of open voting, which had so long been practised,
had its adherents, from whom, however, others differed
very materially; both paties might be honest in their
convictions, and therefore it was not necessary to impugn
one another's motives, as neither considered themselves
as infallible. As preliminary to the business, he should
just give them an illustration of the present system, by
shewing how it work. d in connection with open voting.
A Minister whose wishes are well known, and who seeks
to m.intain his influence, has at his disposal a consider-
able event of crown lands: these be transfers on a long
lease and on easy terms to some noblemen whose fidelity
can he depended upon ; the latter in his turn, relets
these lands to a number of individuals at short, or yearly
takes, and whom he manages by this dependent relation,
to turn exactly to his own purpose and that of his
patron. Should any one of these tenants happen to be-
come refractory, and wish to vote for any candidate not
introduced by his landlord, he either well knows, or soon
learns, that the price of such an exercise of his own judg-
ment will be, in all probability, that dismissal or rain, to
which so many offenders in like cases have been devoted.
Many objections, however, have been brought against the
system of voting by ballot, and amongst the foremost of
these objections, it is said to be un-English. Now almost
every body had beard of the extent and the working of
the rotten borough systetn—this, at all events, was not
un-English ; for certainly there was nothing like it out of
this country : but were the objectors to the vote by ballot
prepared to go the length of defending the truly English
corruptiap that exists in connexion with these boroughs ?
The ballot might he un-English, but ought we, therefore,
to neglect to avail out selves of it if good and desirable?
Ought we not rather to go all over the world for what-
ever will improve our present plans? If America and
France have the ballot, and if it be evident that it is of
great and manifest advantage in those countries, and likely
to become so in this country, let us rather adopt it, in
order to give to the British Constitution the utmost per-
f:ction of which it is susceptible, and thus adding to
its fabric by drawing the materials of improvement and
stability from every possible source, shall we make it in
reality what it is justly considered, the envy of all sur-
rounding nations.
Mr. S. BAILEY, in rising to propose the first resolu-
tion, was sure it was one of the principles upon as hich
the Sheffield Political Unitin bad been formed, that they
should do nothing by force, but every thing by reason.
The first step necessary to be taken in reference to any
public measure, was clearly to ascertain the end and object
proposed. The object which ought principally to be had
in view, in taking the votes at an election, was most
simple and obvious ; it was to obtain the real sense of the
electors as to the fittest person to be sent to represent them
and their interests in Parliament. This was the great
object that should be sought by all parties, and just in so
far as this object is attained, does any system, for its at•
tainment, approach towards perfection ; and, on the other
hand, in the degree, that any method falls short of that
end, must be considered to be defective. Votes might be
taken either secretly or openly, both methods were prac-
tised, and each had its advocates : now it might be de-
sirable to try the reierits of these different methods, by re-
ferring to what might fairly be supposed to take place.
It is manifest, that if an elector can be enabled to give
his vote secretly ; if no one need know bow he votes he
must at the same time be. free flow all apprehension of
consequences : he will nether fear, that in consequence of
his honesty, himself or his family will be ruined : in fact,
that neither bribery nor sinister influence of any kind
could be exercised upon him. Such an elector would of
course give his vote according to his own wishes. If
such he the case with one elector, it may be fairly assumed
to be the case with all under like circumstances; so that,
in fact, that candidate would he returned who in realit:,
had the largest amount of real suffrage in his favour.--:.
Now let us see what takes place under a system of open
voting, exposing, at it does, the individual exercising his
right as an English freeman to all the influence of a greedy
and grasping ambition. Let us suppose that the indivi-
dual who has to give his vote openly is one of the electors
of Newark, and that he is wishful to give his vote to a
candidate who is not a nominee of the Duke of New-
castle ; what is the consequence ? Why, if he be a
tradesman, or at all dependent upon others who differ
from him, he knows what will be the consequence,
and feels himself compelled to give his vote contrary

Mr. PALFAETMAN, in rising to seJond the first resolu-
tion, observed, that after the very clear and lucid state-
ment of the arguments in favour of the ballot made by the
last speaker, he should not think it necessary to do more
than allude to them, since to enlarge upon them would be
to weaken them. He could not, however, let the oppor-
tunity pass of recording his firm conviction of the neces-
sity of the ballot, and of the favourable opportunity which
was now afforded of pressing its importance on Parlia-
ment. The subject was, too, in strict accordance with
the objects of the Political Union ; one of whose first ob-
jects was to promote the cause of Reform, and he knew of
no way in which its true interests could be so well served
as by the adoption of the ballot. That a Reform was
about to take place we had the strongest assurance, and
that the elective franchise would be much extended there
could be little doubt, but, as he had stated on a former oc-
casion, his opinion was, that the fulfillment of the long-
delayed hopes of the reformers would be incomplete without
the ballot formed a part of the plan. The greatest good
may become evil if improperly administered—benefits may
become injuries if wrongly directed—so he thought would
be the case in an extension of the elective franchise, if se-
cret voting did not take place. The true object of all elec-
tions had been stated by the last speaker, namely, to obtain
the real opinion of the electors; and for this object, that
plan was the proper one which protected the voter from
undue influence, prevents bribery or intimidation, and
afforded the party an opportunity of exercising his elec-
tive franchise free from fear or reward, except that which
his own conscience gave him. The open mode of voting
had long been tried. Has it succeeded? Have the true
opinions of the electors' been given? The experience of
any man's life will give a reply. Several objections bad
been raised against the ballot, some of which the last
speaker had not alluded to, be, therefore, should take the
opportunity of doing so. Whoever had witnessed the
opposition made to all improvements, would have remarked
that one of the fixed objects of the opponents was to stigmatise
the desired alteration with some name of reproach, and
raise some popular cry against it—now with respect to the
ballot, the first cry was, it is an innovation. The reply
was easy, does antiquity sanctify abuses, or age render error
praiseworthy. If tbe alteration be an improvement, let
it not be objected to because it is an innovation—allim-
provements are innovation, and therefore all improvements
may be objected to. In medicine and surgery do we re-
fuse, if we require medical or surgical aid, all the most
recent improvements. If amputation be requisite, should
we prefer the limb being dipped in hot pitch to stay the
bleeding, rather than employ the common mode, because
age was in favour of the former ? Do we reject the steam-
engine and all other modern additions and improvements
in the arts because they are innovations ? Yet the argu-
ment was as applicable to one case as the. other, unless
alteration.t ere b so mßeuinherent i principle
always int.ee
n raised by the op-
ponents opposed to
ponents of the ballot when innovations have been really
made on the Constitution ? Was it raised by them when
the Habeas Corpus Act was suspended, and other inroads
made on the laws ? He feared that their conduct then was
not consistent with their present outcry. Another cry
against the ballot was, that it was theoretical and not prac-
tical. It might be said to be so, so far as the election of
English representatives was concerned, but in France it
had been
practised, and in the result it produced against
the measures of the infatuated Charles the Tenth, and the
attempted tyrannies of Polignac, its practical effects were
well displayed. In America it had long been tried and ap.
proved of far the major part of the States. The admir-
able speech of Mr. Parkes, of Birmingham, completely
refuted the assertions which the opponents of the
ballot urged against its use and approval in that country.
After these outcries, the opponents of the ballot have next
recourse to what they please to term moral objections. It
.estroys, say they, manliness of character, and produces
hypocrisy. If the scenes of riot and confusion displayed
at public elections—if the prostitution of principles to
bribes or intimidation—if the lying and tumult then dis-
played, are specimens of manliness of character—and the
giving a vote contrary to true principles because overawed,
be a proof of freedom from hypocrisy, then he (Mr. Pal-
freymen) would admit that the present system possessed
these advantages in great perfection. H. e contended the
ballot would increase, not diminish, manliness of character.
No man ought to suffer for the opinions he held, whether
political or religious ; then why should a voter be exposed
to loss because he voted according to his conscience? The
object of elections is that be should vote freely, not that he
should vote openly—the country is not benefited by his
giving his vote openly, and no advantage can he obtained
by its being known how he votes. Do the instances of
competition at Newark, Liverpool, or Westmoreland, speak
in favour of the present system improving the manliness of
character, when the would-be honest voter is prevented
from giving his free opinion ? Connected with this argu-
ment, it is held that the ballot will occasion mendacity—
that the voter will promise his vote to rar, and after having
received his price, will vote for another candidate. No
doubt such will be often the case, and a few such instances
will cure the briber of paying his money. But is this in-
stance of deceit equal in its effects to the wickedness of
hi n who offers the bribe—who holds out the temptation,
and tries to induce the pour man to sin against his own
conscience? At the most, there is but a change of evils,
and by the ballot, the lesser offence is committed in the
place of the greater. After has ing railed at the ballot, as
as innovation.
and as
theoretical---after stating these moral
objections against it, its opponents then oppose it as inef-
fectual—that
in part,
be avoided. Grant all this, if it de-
creases the evil part, we ought not to reject it because
it does not do so entirely. But he did not see why it
should tilt be effectual; the plans in France were foiled to
be so; and if defects existed in its mode of application in
America, they arose from time little necessity which exists
compared to what exists here, of concealing the vote.--
There the state of society was different; no large over•
whelmieg fortunes had been amassed by a boroughmonger-
ing few. Wealth was more distributed, and consequently
bribery less practicable, and hence less care in the mode of
conducting the ballot. Of a similar character to the last
argument is the objection that it would teive great oppor-
tunities for deception—that the same person would be able
to vote several times without detection. How the ballet
could afford this opportunity more than open voting, he
(Mr. Pelfreyinan) could not conceive. The scrutiny, as
to the party's right to vote would be the same, the secrecy
would be only regard for whom he voted. But he believed
there was scarcely ever an election took place, where such
deceptions were not practised, even under the present
" pure" system. At Preston both parties are said to have
had recourse to it; also at Liverpool frequent attempts
were made ; and at the late election at York an instance
is Stated to have occurred which can never be exceeded:--

man came down from London at the expence of tin
Tory candidate and voted for him—he then appeared it.
• the same booth four times, and gave the same address, ex
cept in one instance, and then only varied his Christian
name, and voted fix the other two candidates—hardened
by his success, he ventured a sixth time, when he was re
fused ; the other five votes, however, stand recorded ; ant
vhat adds to the proof of the case with which the &cep-
don might have been detected is that the man's appearanc.
was very particular being graced with a Bardolphian nose
mil in-other respects easy to be known. Mr. Palfreymar
should only allude to one other objection to the ballot, an
objection put forwards with great parade in a late length}
article in that every sided paper—the Times. It will, sa)
they, destroy the fine public spirit at elections, which is R(I
heneficial to public character. If such displays are beneficial.
why have we not them more frequently? Why not alter sep-
tennial to triennial Parliaments ? But are such displays o!
feeling, where drunkenness gives the voice, and riot the spirit,
re they beneficial to the public? Does not thegreatest treatei
get the greatest praise, rather than the best qualified man ?
But the ballot does not destroy these ebullitions of fedine.
In Boston, in America, on a late occasion, where the ballo
is used, a row took place equal to the wishes of the oldest
electioneeier, for the Sheriff and posse comilatus werr
called out. Under the influence of the ballot, however,
public feeling will be aroused from principle, not from
drunkenness. Believing, therefore, that the objections to
the ballot were answerable—that its effect in the elector
and elreteil would be alike beneficial, in giving to the for-
mer a freedom of acting he did not now possess, and in
convincing the latter, that he must depend on other means
than ill bestowed wealth for his success, and that a full
head, rather than a full pocket, must be his qualification
for being the people's representative—he (Mr. Palfreyman)
had pleasure in seconding Mr. Bailey's motion.
Mr. J. S. BRAMHALL said, that it was only since lie
had entered the room that a resolution had been put into
his hand, and which he had been requested to propose.
He should take up but little of the time of the meeting,
for two or three reasons; in the first place, he had so
doubt but that the minds of all present were already made
up on the subject of the ballot, and he thought the national
mind was made up too. He had lately attended a Reform
meeting at Bristol, where a petition for Reform and vote
by ballot had received upwards of 14,000 signatures; the
ballot was the principal matter of consideration ; and there
be must say, that he was sorry to see a gentleman, a
veteran in the cause of Reform, and one of the Members
for that city, was rejected and not suffered to present the
petition to Parliament, merely because he would not dis-
tinctly pledge himself to support the prayer for the vote
by ballot, although he allowed he had no objection to that
mode of voting. But in Bristol there was a species of
mania existing on this topic: the citizens had suffered so
much from abuses of the old system, that they almost one
and all express themselves as if they would almost rather
be without any Reform at all, than that it should not in •
dude the vote by ballot. Although the extent of the
franchise in that city may be said to he a sort of universal
suffrage, yet it is known that 50,0001. has been spent
during one election. There unfortunately exists in this
country a disposition in every class to dictate to that im-
mediately below them, as if the upper ranks had been
born booted and spurred for the very purpose of taking
their places on the backs of their inferiors. Now, the
design of the ballot is to take off these boots and spurs,
and make all walk with equal steps in the path of duty
towards the public good. " Influence of rank and pro-
perty" are indeed very pretty sounds, but it is a lamentable
fact that they frequently mean neither more nor less than
tyranny T.

Dr. HOLLAND, in rising to second the adoption of the
petition proposed by Mr. Bramhall, said, that the subject
of the ballot had been so clearly and forcibly elucidated by
those who had spoken upon it, that it would be nonce, s-
sary for him to do more than make a very few observa-
tions. The ballot had been objected to as an innovation,
and therefore unworthy of adoption ; but surely, on that
ground at least, it ought rather to be respected : for had
the idea of innovation always deterred the physician or the
agriculturist from making those experiments which the
progress of science and knowledge in either case suggested,
they would certainly have been placed in very different
predicaments, from those in which they now actually
stood, from having taken advantage of whatever was new
and good. But suppose the ballot should not be found
perfect in the first trial,—it would be susceptible of im-
provement, and we should have the advantage of experi-
ment,
fresh movement. Ibti'gthletggreaeths gather Isiktreendgieths'f7ll;
wionUlf(al,,,ualrieoftitlia,et
ballot;
dy
atl)!
expressing l‘ir. A
trnmeunto,fatnhde
partetaseinnttoseapseornfe:wtioen
to what were called the working classes,
though belonging
he thought the opinions of those classes ought net to be
lightly treated by the aristocracy, unless the latter would
themselves pay the taxes, or manifest some disposition to
arrest the progress of the present fiscal system. lie ridi-
culedhissentimentsSMlTH the notion of confinement to any plan, merely be-
cause it bad long been in use ; we ought not to he fettered
by antiquity; we were the people of rail-roads and steam-
power, and live in IS3I. After some other observations
he concluded with the following quotation from Burns :
t, The wretch that wad a tyrant own,
And the wretch his true-born brother,
Who would set the mob aboon the throne,
May they be together !
Who will not sing—God save the King,
Shall hang as high's the steeple ;
But while we sing—God save the King,
ne'er forget the people."
Mr. BRAMLEY spoke as follows:—Mr. Chairman and
Gentlemen, I have been requested to propose a resolution,
but as it merely relates to the presentation of the petition
by certain Members of Parliament, on which probably no
objection will arise, I will take the liberty of making a
few observations on the main question of the ballot, not
for the
purposeand of advancing any new argument—for after
the luminous od comprehensive statements of the preced-
ing
speakers, that is almost impossible—but simply to
testify the sincere conviction I entertain of its merits, and
under the existing circumstances, of its infinite superiority
to the v
epresentr I must candidly confess,
however,
n,d thatis
in mode
ballot appears co me unneces-
sary, only justified by sheer necessity. If the
world were really honest, and men honourable as well in
deed as name, if tyranny, corruption, vice, bribery, and
,eatheory ct f voting.the
intimidation were shadows only, not sad realities; if
honour, purity, benevolence, and forbearance were the pre-
dominant qualities of the human heart, then the ballot
would be unnecessary and pernicious; but so long as human
nature continues what it is, so long as the strong oppress
the weak—the rich, the poor, ballot is a necessary pro-
tecticl. If a man cannot or dare not vote as his own con-
science dictates, but dragged to the hustings, is com-
pelled to prostitute his vote according to the commands of
a rapacious, insolent, tyrannous landlord, such man is no
better than a slave, and slavery of whatever description,
whether of mind or body, of whatever garb or clime—
West Indian or English—is so abominably wicked, that
every good man will pray for its speedy and utter aboli-
tion.—(Applause.) To an attentive observer of the
times, this question is extremely interesting ; it strongly
exemplifies the workings and rapid advance of public
opinion; only a few years ago scarce art advocate for the
ballot could be found, but the mists which hung about
men's eyes have suddenly dissolved, and they now discover
its paramount importance. Conviction, like a ray of
light from Heaven, or like that glorious burst of sun-
shine now pouring into this room, has flashed across
their minds, and one universal cry has arisen, " give us
the ballot." Gentlemen, the boon may be denied for a
time, plots and artifice may stave it off for a season, but
sooner or later the anxious desires of the nation must be
gratified, and then I trust the reign of corruption and
Oppression will pass away
like a cloud, and public good
be the end and aim of every tries-hearted Englishman.**
(Applause.) Gentlemen, I will not detain you longer,
but at came proceed to move the third resolution.
Battx:Eft shortly addressed the meeting, and
alluded to what had on one occasion taken place in Derby
in consequence of the contest for Nottingham between
Lord Rancliffe and Sir R. Arkwright, in which a voter,
when he came up to the hustings, looked one of the can-
didates in the face, and said " I should not have given thee
my vote had I not have been thumbed"—which was un-
derstood to mean that he voted ender compulsion. The
speaker then showed how the merchant might be thumbed
by his banker, and the tradesman by the merchant, and
the workman by the tradesman ; which thumbing, the
ballot was calculated to remove.
The resolutions being disposed of, an individual of the
name of Ironside introduced the topic of universal suf-
bfrraogkee, whichtipa fte
after
voting
iontgi
ng deemedthank
thanks
irregular y
Chairman. tla e Ch airman and
by the principal part of the persons present, the meeting

The. Marquis of LONDONDERRY could not help
congratulating himself and their Lordships on the manner
in which the Noble Earl had spoken on this most impor-
tant question. He was satisfied, however popular the sub-
je3t might appear to be, that in reality all the higher order
and middle claws, all the resident gentry, all those who
could be looked up to for good seine or proper influence,
were diametrically opposed to a repeal of the Union. As
an Irishman lie was glad to take that early opportunity of
approving of the manner in which the Lord Lieutenant
had met the atrocious and monstrous pi oceedings which
had been taken to disturb the common tranquillity.
The Duke of BUCKINGHAM had examined one of
the petitions, and, if he could judge by the appearance of
the signatures, there was reason to believe that it was not
fairly got up, as they were all, after the first four or five,
evidently signed by the same hand.
E ,r 1 RADNOR said that though some of the signa-
tures looked suspicious, yet the petition contained intrinsic
evidence that it was not unfairly got up, at least judging
by the construction of the language, for the last paragraph
was certainly of an order not to be written by any man
who was in the habit of managing petitions. The words
he would quote might raise a smile at the expenca of the
petitioners, but they would acquit them of evil intentions.
The words were, " Ireland was the great bulwark of the
Constitution, the rendavcus of Great Britain, and the
granary of Europe."—(Laughing.)
Lord DACRE presorted a petition from a parish in
Essex against negro slavery.

The Earl of WINCHILSEA, in presenting a petition
from New Romney, for Reform and the vote by ballot,
could not consent to the latter, and hoped never to see the
day when an Englishman would be ashamed to express
openly for whom he voted. He then presented petitions
from Sutton Valence, and from a parish in the West Rid-
ing of York, against the Assessed Taxes.