The Sun.
London, England, 1848-08-09 00:00:00

JAMAICA AND TRINIDAD.

Mr. BAILEY inquired if dispatches had been re-
ceived by the last packet from Sir Charles Grey, the
Governor of Jamaica, and Lord Harris, the Governor of
Trinidad, with reference to the state of the colonies.

Mr. LABOUCHERE would make inquiries at the
Colonial-office, and it the Under-Secretary was not pre-
sent to-morrow, he would take care to reply to the
question.
Lord J. RUSSELL said a dispatch had been received
from Lord Harris ; he could not then say whether it
could be laid on the table.

ESTATES IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY

(IRELAND).
Mr. MONSELL asked whether it was the intention
of the Government to introduce a measure early next
session for the improvement of estates under the care of
the Court of Chancery ?—(Hear, hear.)
Sir W. SOMERVILLE said a Bill for that purpose
had received the consent of the Lord Chancellor of Ire-
hod, but the late period of the session precluded its
being brought forward until the ensuing session. He
trusted it would be in his power to bring in the Bill at
au early period of the next session.
WEDNESDAY SITTINGS.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that he had given notice
yesterday of his intenti3n to-day to propose to alter the
course of proceeding with respect to the sittings of the
House on Wednesday. As must be well known to Hon.
Members, there were at present many votes in Supply
yet to be taken, and he hoped the House
would forward the desires of the Government
to get those votes passed through. He
should, therefore, if it met will the approbation of
the House, propose to go into Committee of Supply to-
morrow at five o'clock, and on the Friday, Monday,
and Wednesday following. The Noble Lord concluded
by moving the suspension of the standing orders
relative to the House sitting on Wednesday.
Lord G. BENTINCK wished to know if the Noble
Lord was prepared to state what course he intended to
pursue with respect to the other business, especially the
sugar duties ?
Lord J. RUSSELL said that his Right Hon. Friend,
the President of the Board of Trade would, on Thurs.

day, move the Committee on the navigation-laws, with
a view of postponing them to another session. After
that he proposed to take the Corrupt Practices at
Elections Bill, and after that the sugar duties. _ _

Colonel SIBTHORY protested against this novel mode
of proceeding of the Noble Lord. Formerly they never
sat on Wednesdays at all, afterwards only till six
o'clock. He thought it was the incompetency and lazi-
ness of the present Government that had caused the
present state of the House, and the Noble Lord now
took the present mode of making up for that incom-
petency and laziness.
Mr. V. smirn had no objection to the present
motion, but he was anxious t., know what course the
Natile Lord intended to adopt with respect to the mo-
tion of the Hon. Member fur Southwark on colonial
expenditure.
Mr. BRO MERTON said, under the peculiar circum-
stances of the time, he did not intend to oppose the mo
tion, but he hoped the Noble Lord would agree with him
that the Wednesday sittings from twelve to six had
worked well. A great deal of good business had
been done on a Wednesday. It had been a
great advantage to Merribt,rs, for it gave them
an opportunity for making arrangements for • the
evening.—(Hear, hear, and Laughter.) He had al.
lowed the sitting on other nights to extend to a greater
length than he should have done, because he knew that
in the middle of the week there was no evening
sitting. He had made a comparison of the Wednesday
sittings under the old and the Wednesday sittings
under the present system, and he found that in
welve Wednesdays' sittings under the old system they
sat 35 hours, while in twelve Wednesdays' sittings under
the present system they sat 70 hours.—(Hear, hear.)
An HON. MEMBER—WeII, and what have wo done ?
Mr. BROTHERION regretted that they had only
had a good deal of talk, but they had done
very little business, and he for one confessed
he had been greatly disappointed and annoyed at the
length to which some Hon. Members had carried their
speeches. He hoped, however, that next session some
amendment would be made in that respect, but he
trusted nothing would be done to disturb tfteir Wednes-
day day sittings.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. COBDEN rose in consequence of what had
fallen from the Hon. Member for Northampton to
state that, at the request of his Hon. Friend the
Member for Southwark, he had taken charge
of the motion on colonial expenditure, but as the
Government had already acquiesced in it, he thought it
was disposed of, so far us the House was concerned.
Should the House arrive at the motion to-night, he
should propose to resume the debate, but not for the
purpose of making a speech.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. THORNELY said the Noble Lord had stated that
he intended to proceed with the navigation-laws on
Thursday. He wished to know whether it was the in-
tention of the Government to bring in a Bill on the
subject.
Government proposed
resolutions on the navigation-iaws. If the House agreed
Mr. LABOUCIIERE said thatreason
stohne
,gtraheneed circu-
lated in the country.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said there was no objection
wasin Housep ri exactlynttoe printed,
to them the Bill would btoe absrkoutghhet
on the part of the Government
proposed by the Hon. Member to the resolution
for Southwark (Sir
W. lVlolesworth) respecting the colonies. He was himself
disposed to move the resolution, but the Honour-
able Member for the West Riding (Mr. Cobden)
had stated that be would move the resumption of
the debate. The Honourable Member for Southwark
had made a very able speech, in the sentiments of which
he (Lord John Russell) entirely concurred, and
as the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies
had also made a very able statement to the
House, he did not think it necessary to take any fur-
ther part in the debate. With respect to the observa-
tion of the Hon. Member for Salford (Mr. Brotherton),
he had to state that he proposed to continue the sittings
of the House on Wednesday evening at five, as this was
the second week in August, and the Government were
desirous of going into a Committee of Supply.
Mr. HUME said the Noble Lord had two propositions
on the paper to make:
Lord J. RUSSELL said be wished to explain that he
did not intend to propose the second notion 'on the
paper, for the House to adjourn at three on 'Wednesday.
Mr. HUME objected to continuing the sittings on
Wednesday after twelve o'clock, but did not persevere
in linking an amendment.
After a short discussion the motion of the Noble Lord
was agreed to.

miteslhitor,.uoßi
ndAhbPiesH carried
rose to move for leave to bring in a
LEGACY DU rms.
Bill to exempt from legacy duties all charitable bequests, not
to private individuals, but to public bodies. His main object
nweoesu:dtothp7ssatchceispmt tehaesuCreh.ilteHrne
could
din coming into Parliament was to introduce this Bill, and it
Hun-
dreds.—(Laughter.) He implored her Majesty's Govern-
assure the Noble Lord that in doing so he would immorta-
lise himself. The sum at present raised from the duty on
legacies to charities did not exceed 15,000/. per annum, and
he asked the Government, if for such a paltry sum as
that a country like Great Britain ought to maintain such an
impost ?
Lord R. GROSVENOR, in seconding the motion, called
upon the Government to allow the Bill to pass. The legacy
duties in a great many instances were the means of pre-
venting the full devel'pment of some of our finest insti-
tutions.
he consented to the remission of one duty because it was
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that if
small, he would be called upon to give up others on the
same ground. He had already this year given up the copper
duty. He highly appreciated his Honourable Friend's mo-
tives in bring►ng the subject forward, but he could not con-
sent to the concession that was demanded. He doubted if
his Hon. Friend had not underrateA the amount when he
fixed it at 15,000/., but whether the sum was small or large,
while the income was less than the expenditure it was not a
time to ask him to forego any revenue whatever. After all,
character, and those parties who left money to them could
also easily leave money to pay the legacy duty. Some of the
a very large portion of these charities were of a very absurd
charities were not only ridiculous in themselves, but, perhaps,
were prejudicial to the public interest He would not object
to his Hon. Friend laying his Bill on the table, but it must
not be inferred from that be would at all support it. His
Hon. Friend bad given one very strong reason for the oppo-
sition of the Government to the Bill, and that was his an-
nouncement respecting the Chiltern Hundreds. On that
eEn edt hh
keen

account he should oppose the Bill, rather than run the risk
of losing his Honourable Friend's support to the Govern-
ment.—(Laughter.)
Mr. DUNCAN regretted the decision of the Right Hon.
Gentleman. The Dundee Infirmary, some time ago, had
almost suspended its operation. and would.have done so but
for the timely assistance of a Noble Lord. Since that time
a legacy of 10,0,,i0/. had been left by a Dundee merchant
to the institution ; and cast of that nearly LOCO/. had to be
paid for duty. At the time the institution was greatly in
want of funds, and a memorial was sent to the Treasury on
the subject, but without effect.
Lord G. BENTI.\CK would take leave to ask the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer whether he did not think that
50,000 i. a year would have been better bestowed, had it
been sp ,red in order to relieve cl.arities' from a tax im-
posed up,m them, than 50,00 d/. flung away upon the re-
mission Of the copper duties, .1- io that of the corn duties
whilst Parliament was sitting? The tax evidently operated
as a discouragement to those who wished to benefit cha-
ritable institivions.

Sir DE LACY EVANS supported the Bill. The Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer might as well go to the hospitals and
turn away one or two hundred persons, requiring them to
hand over the proceeds of t heir subscriptions to Groverntnent,
as persist. in levying this tax.
Mr. HUME sail that in Scotland there was a strong feel-
ing in favour of this Bill. No money was better devoted than
that which was applied to the maintenance of institutions for
the relief of those overtaken by disease or violent injury,
against which they c.tild not guard, and he thought it was
but a }tearless proceedkg in the Government to snatch at
the income of such institutions. Why should the devisee of
land pass without a tax, whilst legactes of money or other
prope,ty were subjected to one ? He trusted that the com-
mon sense and feeling of justice of the people would ere long
lead them to see the inequality and injustice of the law, and
that the odious wrong would beredressed.—(Hear.)
After a few wards from Sir C. BURRELL,
Mr. W. P. WOOD thought the provisions of the law as
applied to bequests needed revision. He saw no reason why
unlimited sums of- money should be permitted to be be-
queathed to charitable institutions, whilst persons were pre-
vented from devising a single acre of land by the statutes
of mortmain. He did not see, tur,vever, that this particular
Bill was called for, as he thought it dangerous to carry the
facilities for bequests now allowed any further.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL thought a better plan
plan might be to devote the sum received from the tax to the
support of such charities as might be cut.sidered most bene-
ficial to the country. If the Bill were pressed to a division
he should fact it. his duty to vote aiainst it.
Sir R PEEL would not, by supdortitig this Bill, commit
himselt to the principle that they should encourage parties
to neglect the claims of their tamales in favour of public
charities. The first duty of a moan was to provide for his
own family. He did not say shut there might not be cir-
cumstances in which it might be proper f .r all individu.d to
slight those claims and prefer those of public charity ; hut,
speaking generally, the provision a man male for his own
family was a very unostentatious and unowrusive thing, and
ire did not often get much credit for it; but it might gra-
tify his vanity to be advertised in the public newspapers as
a person who had given 10,0001. to a public charity. - (Hear,
hear.) If these were his motives, he (Sir R. Peel) should
not encourage him in them. He hoped they should not be
committed to this piinciple, by acquiescing in the first read-
ing of tills Bill. Why, he had known public institutions
lett money by will, and he had seen the descendants of those
who left them receiving 100/. from the royal bounty, be-
cause their parents thuught to gratify their vanity by
presenting to the public. what should have constituted the
sources of their subsistence.— (Hear, hear.) He had seen
the descendants of such men come to the public treasury,
saying that they hoped the royal bounty would be exercised
in their favour, as they had been ruined by the misplaced
generosity of their own relatives.—( Hear, hear.)
After a few words from several other lion. Members,
leave was given to bring in the Bill.
NATIONAL LAND COMPANY.

Mr. J. WILLIAMS gave notice that on Friday hewould
ask the Hon. and Learned Member for Nottingham (Mr.
F. O'Connor) whether he meant to proceed with the
Friendly Societies Bill, and the plan for the registration of
the National Land Company.
THE BALLOE.

Mr. F. 11. BERKELEY, in rising to bring this subject

under the notice of the House, referred to the progress of
opinion on political subjects since the Reform Act, and
hoped that as they had seen the Right Honourable Baronet
who so long opposed the repeal of the corn-laws, and the
Noble Lord who so ably championed a fixed duty, agreeing
to abjure their errors upon that question, and admit corn
free of any duty at all, they might also witness a similar
change of opinion on this question. Hon. Members were no
doubt aware that the ballot had been carried by that House
in the year 1710, and rejected in the other House by
Godolphin, and that it was contemplated by the Cabinet
at the time of the Reform Bill. The objections generally
made to the ballot were, that it was an innovation, that
it would prevent neither bribery nor intimidation. It
was pretended, also, that the ballot was not necessarily
secret voting, whilst stress was laid on the unmanliness of
secret voting, and its un-English and cowardly character.
The ballot-box was denounced as likely to injure the due
influence of property, and as having a tendency to promote
immorality, lying, and disgrace. The answer to the first
objection was, that when the franchise was first established
as the law of the land, it was free and uncontrolled in its
exercise ; but when the rich and powerful began to grasp
at political power, they attempted to influence the opinions
of those placed within the sphere of their influence. They
who advocated the measure wished not to make any inno •
vation on the electoral system, but to enact a measure for
its protection—a strictly Conservative measure. By grant-
ing the ballot they would conserve to the people a great
national privilege, which they only possessed in name, the
nominal possession of which was to thousands a source or
' mortification, loss, and disgrace. You now gave them a
mere nominis umbra, like the equivocating tiend of the port—
you kept the promise to the ear and broke it to the hope.
It was a great privilege to choose such persons as were tr
make laws to hind a man's lie and property, a privilege not
to be deputed to another. These were the words of oke; rt
was to conserve this privilege that he asked the House to
give the electors the lowllege of the ballot. Next,
as to the assertion that bribery would not be prevented
by it. Would any m-in in his senses pay for are
article the delivery of which was uncertain? Would he
purchase a bale of geods of a shopkeeper, without a fair
prospect that it would be sent home? Would stuns o
money be invested in an uncertainty? In Great Yarmouth
they had found the candidates or their agents expending
great sums, the voters en: ening at one door, receiving a sure
of money, and going out at an opposite door, to vote for
value received. But should he be told that any speculator
in the votes of electors would go down to Great Yarmouth
if the ballot were the law of the land? Would the Duke of
Richmond send down Lord Arthur Lennox to engage in such
a transaction? Would the great colossal speculator, Mr
.Attwood, g to Harwich or Lyme Regis in the hope of
making a profitable stroke of business under such a system?
Bnt it was said that boroughs would be rented wholesale
after the return of the Members. His reply wee, without
admitting or denying the fact, that if it were so, the evil
existing in small boroughs would be fully compensated by
the good effected in counties and large towns. He came now
to the argument that the ballot-box did not ensure secret
voting. Did it not ensure secrecy in clubs?—(Hear)—and i
so, why should it not alas ensure it at borough elections?
It was said that in America, where the ballot existed, it was
always well known how men voted, hut he insi.ted that that
was no argument against the efficacy of the institution. His
Hon. Friend the Member for Middlesex had satisfactorily
disposed of the objection when the matter was last under
discussion. He had stated what every one knew to be the
fact, that the Americans had no object in keeping their
votes secret.—(Hear, hear.) In America there was no oc-
casion for a man's concealing his vote. He had no object
to serve in so doing, and in explanation oC that tact.
which was undeniable, he (Mr. Berkeley) would take leave
to add another fact, namely. that the Americans were cot
blessed with the law of entail, or honoured with the law of
primogeniture, and the consequence being, that property
was diffuse and tyranny scarce, that was another reason
why the Americans had no motive to conceal their votes.
The thing was as obvious as the sun at noon-day. The fact
was simply this, that in America they had the ballot, and
they wanted it not ; whereas in England they had it not,
but needed it most grievously.-.(Hear.) The next objection
to the ballot was that which had reference to its alleged
unmanliness, and its un-English and cowardly character.
A reference to the clubs was a direct answer to that objec-
tion. The analogy between the club and borough practices
had been repeatedly asserted by the friends of the ballot,
and as repeatedly denied by its adversaries. It was trodden
ground, but he begged to be allowed to past over it once
again, in order to show that, let the antagonists of the mea-
sure say what they might, the analogy was complete. In
those splendid mansions now so rapidly increasing in this
great metropolis—the clubs—were congregated together va-
lour, learning, birth, and wealth, cid all alike sought pro-
tection in the ballot. From what did they seek protection?
From hostility, and animosity, which very possibly
might lead to bloodshed. No man would accuse the members
of those clubs of unmanliness. Those clubs were composed
of English gentlemen, and scores of Members of both Houses
of Parliament belonged to them, and one and all sought
protection in the ballot. From what did they seek protec-
tion? From the bully of society, from the Sir Lucius
O'Triggers of society, who, if you were to refase to admit
them to your companionship, would consider it "a very pretty
quarrel as it stood," and would be very likely to make you
personally answerable for it; but did it never occur to lion.
Members that there was such a character as a bully in politics?
—(Hear, hear.) Most assuredly there was such a character,
and he was much more obnoxious and far more dangerous
to have anything to do with than the bully of society. The
latter met you on equal terms. If he pat your life in danger,
he at all events gave you the satisfaction of knowing that he
at the same time emperilled his own—lie gave you equal
weapons and equal chances; but the political bully acted
quite differently. He sedulously eschewed an equal contest.
No risk did he run. His victim recorded his vote, and with
it recorded his ruin.—(Hear, hear.) The political bully
destraved riot life but the means of life, and where was the
difference?
" You take my house, when you do take the prop
That doth sustain my house; you take my life
When you do take the means whereby I live."
—(Cheers.) If the victim of the political bully be a trades-
an, let him look for the withdrawal of credit and custom—
if a tenant, let him expect summary ejection—it a servant,
let him hope for nothing but discharge.—(Hear, hear.) He
( Mr. Berkeley) did not accuse Honourable Members of that
House, who were also members of clubs, of unmanliness for
protecting themselves from the machinations of persons of
evil dispositions, but he did charge them with it when they
denied to their less f alunate and less opulent fellow-country-
men the same safeguard which they insisted on for them-
selves.—(
Hear, hear.) He would next turn to the oljection
that the ballot-box would destroy the legitimate influence of '
property. He could not better dispose of that assertion than
by quoting what had been said upon it by Mr. Grote.—
[The Honourable Member read a passage from the speech of
Mr. Grote on the ballot in 1836.] Very few m n would
have the hardihood to assert, either in that House or on the
hustings, that those who were gifted with power, station,
and wealth, would be justified in dictating to a freeborn
man in what manner lie should discharge a a ,lemn
duty which he owed to God and to his country,
and which he was bound to discharge conscientiously and to
the best of his ability. Few men would dare to hold such
language, whatever they might think. There were in-
stances, however, in which such language had been held,
and in which the sentiment, however unconstitutional, had
been boldly avowed.—(Hear, hear.) Before proceeding
further, he might here, by way of parenthesis, observe on
another of the fashionable shifts or evasions (for he could
not call them arguments) which were had recourse to by
the enemies of the ballot; namely, that the statements
respecting the depths of demoralization in which the con-
stituencies of England were plunged by the system of open
voting which now prevailed were very much exagge-
rated. He would defy any Honourable Member to come to
any such conclusion who had read the evideuce adduced be-
fore the Committee which was appointed in the year 1835
to examine respecting the intimidation and bribery supposed

to prevail amongst those constituencies. That Committee
had performed its duty admirably, and had let in light on
all those who did not think proper to remain in darkness.
(Laughter.) The Noble Lord at the head of the Govern-
ment. the Right Hon. Baronet the Member fo- Ripon, and
the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Northampton,
had professed to be sceptics as to the extent of the evil; but
in order that there might not be any further repetition of that
evasive and erratic mode of meeting the question, he would
make a statement from a clever breviate of the proceedings
before the Committee, and would show by a reference to
many instances, which were of very modern occurrence, that
the evils which were proved to have existed in the year
1835 were to be found flourishing in rank luxuriance in the
year 1848, and that whatever remedies the Legislature might
have applied had been total failures.—( Hear.) All their
legislation on the subject of bribery had been addressed, not
to the prevention of bribery or to the counteracting of its
secret influences, but to the prevention of bribery when
discovered—(A laugh)—and it appeared to hint that they
had carried their law of agency. to such as extravagant
pitch, that it was difficult for any .Honourable Member
to hold his seat, or avoid a petition. They had strained in
an unnatural manner, as it appeared to him, the law of
agency, and the grand evil they had left entirely untouched.
In calling attention to the evidence adduced before the Com-
mittee of 1835, he would commence by a reference to the
testimony of Mr. Alexander Edward Cockburn, a gentleman
whose forensic abilities commanded admiration even then,
and fore-shadowed the eminence he had since attained.
Being questioned on this matter by the Comm:tte?, he gave
it as the result of his experience that the public and the
Legislature had no conception to what extent bribery
at elections was carried.---(Hear, hear.) Being asked
whether the great difficulty in detecting. it did not arise
from the imperfect state of the law of evidence, his reply
WAS this—" I can conceive no case, except a case of actual
intatu,,tion, in which, if bribery be tolerably well ma-
naged, conviction would be pos,ible."—( Hear, hear.) Ile
had reason to believe that the opinions upon this point
of the I lonourable and Learned Gentleman, who he was
happy to observe was now a Member of that House, had not
untiergone any change whatever since he gave that evidence
before the Committee. The next testimony to which he

should allude was that of a number of most ieereciabTewit-
nessee, and it had reference to the borough of Westminster.
He toots theirtheir testimony in the aggregate—premising that
there could not anywhere be selected witnesses who were
more competent to speak upon such a subject, and he found
that their joint testimony was to the effect that in the
borough of Westminster great influence was exercised bf
G 'vets-meta oilieses and persons of rank, wealth, and station,
and that the whole current of the evidence want to show that
the instances were numerous where coo.iderations of self-in-
terest iefluenced a class of tradesmen to vote in a particular
way, or to auss.an altogether from voting, who c add not be
directly brihei: like mire venal classes. In attestation of the
truth of I his asset two. reference was made to these facts, that
t folds of the electors, in order not-to offend any party, did
not vo e at all, and that minty of them did not even register.
These were ia,ooo on the register, but nut inure than 4,500,
went to the pod. btica was the state of things that existed
in 1837. Ia toe year 1841 the election at Westminster was
of a strong poltical character, as Houourable Members
would, no doubt, remember; it was when the question of free
trade flourished luxuriantly • the Protectionists worked
heaven and earth to return a ISlember to support the Right
Honourable Baronet the Member for Tamworth, who at that
time was the champion of protection.—(A laugh.) Extraor
(finery exertions were made by the aristocracy to suing°
Captain Rous. The Gallant Gentleman's cause was errs
cially favoured by the tidies, of whom large bodies turtle'
out— (Laughter) —and canvassed in his behalf with 0
much earnestness and vehemence as any paid canvassed
could have done. He would select two cases out of jai
numerable ones which had come to his. knowledge, al
the authenticity of which he could himself attest.
should state them just as they had been detailed to him by
the tradesmen themselves. The first case was that of ;
man at the west end of the town, who had very stroSe
opinions on the subject of free trade. He had been all
life a liberal, and was anxious to vote for the Honourah"
and Gallant Gentleman opposite (Sir De L. Evans).
the course of the day before the election, six carriage
drew up to his door, each bearing a coronet on the panels'
The fair occupants of these carriages entered the trades;
man's shop, and there was no cajoling or threat to whity
they had net recourse, in order to extract from bins
promise that he would vote for Captain Rous. In 0/
word, they worried the unfortunate man to that extent as,
only by menacing to withdraw their own custom, but 'ls
threatening to denounce him to others of their acquaints:lL',
who would do the same, that although he could not
,li;
intimidated to vote against his conscience he was induce
promise promise not to vote at all.—(Hear.) He (Mr. Berkelkiio
had the curiosity to call the following year on that man
ask him whether he had succeeded in pleasing his customer'
but he assured him that he had not.—(Laughter.)- Of thets
families represented by the six coronets, four, with all that
connexions, never set foot again within_ his threshold u,`,o
cause he had refused to vote.—( Hear, hear.) The man, Abe
was a most respectable trader, had requested that his aro
should not be mentioned in the House, but he (Mr. Berkeley.
would take any Member aside and satisfy him as to the Pted
fect authenticity of the statement. The tradesman estimaer
the loss to which he was subjected by that scandalous easy
cise of is ranny as amounting on the whole to not less Ispi
601. per annum.—( Hear, hear.) The case was certainly
to point a moral, if not to adorn a tale.—(Laughter.) goat
the beauty of it was, that a few months after Captain Ali/
turned round, followed his leaders, and, throwing comisle`,l
overboard the persons who suffered all that wear and tear
conscience in his service, voted for free trade.—(Laught'l
How well might the ladies who coerced the unhappy traolee
ife
men exclaitn, " What shadows we are—what shadow,s4,4
pursue!"—(Laughter.) The other case to which he 170 p
to call attention was that of an unhappy nab toe
His case bad a double aspect. It exemplified evil effecSiene
well of democratic as of aristocratic interference. ria
the aristocracy and the democracy were both united in (1,,1t
the wrong thing. The publican was waited upon by a't fps
of high rank, who, having calle 1 at his house and se,a,ysis
film to her carriage, made a strange overture to him. . ie
-rye my house with beer," she said. The publican replied
the affirmative. ..I understand that my servants also to
your house." The publican assented. " Well, continued tos
lady, "I have called upon you to inform you, that if Yost
don't don't vote as I wish, not only shall you lose my customsr
any servant of mine who hereafter sets his foot within i°o
,lour I shall immediately discharge—vote as I wish, and 3SO
shall always have our custom, and I will see what I can
tOr your soil in Cie CuStom Eleuse.'' Frightened by the tis
or allured by the promise, the publican gut up very ear, 'sot
• the morning aid voted for Captain Maus, but he die to
gain !ouch by either on the score of peace of mind itive or
any other sense. It so happened that there were 004 bit
thirteen tailors who held their Saturday night orgies :jigs
house —( Laughter.) They were very formidable t" fel'
quite of the Untidy school.—( Laughter.) Tremendous tie
lows.—( Laughter.) One of them being very entbaa sod
in the cause, went to the poll at a very early hauritstla
having discovered that his host had voted for Captairr JO
he lost no time in communicating the fact to his Nowise
The upshot was, that on the next Saturday night
called for their bill, abused the unfortunate man in of °,
set terms, told him that he was not only a publican ,sisit
sinner—eGr- at laughter)—and gave him to understand,
they would drink no more of his beer, but denounce be
the whole trade.—(Great laughter.) These two cas
had selected from fifty or sixty which had come t:en
knowledge. He seriously put it to the House whet der
was to be tolerated that such a state of things shot-11', 140
tune. Were they not bound in justice and in metstel
give to the victim of such tyranny the protection of
voting ?—(Hear, hear.) In 1847 he was Chairman of ,a 1,4
mittee appointed to carry out the election of the Noble p'
now at the head of the Government, and other Liberal woe
hers. The Committee sat at the west-end of the toWl3'
the object was to enlist the suffrages of west-end tradestiont
who had votes in the city. . The result of his el coal:,
on that Committee, was the conviction that the eves form
plained so much of in 1835, existed in an aggravatetitrole.ne,
in 1847, and that the instances were numerous of
men disfranchising themselves, rather than be subjecgeeri
the terrors and horrors of the worrying system.-- sae-
s
hear.) A common reply to those who asked a tradi reef
i
for his vote was, " Thank God, I have no vote ; when inef
a younger man I had one, but I have suffered taa wies
from the exercise of it of late, and I have become 114 01;
man—l will never vote again." In nine cases out ytolis
they added this saving clause, "unless you get the
for us."— (Hear, hear.) The same system prevailed 1107
the country. Mr. Philipps, a Conservative witness, en's
before the Committee of 1835, attributed the loss :1
Spooner's election to the int.midation of the opposit....ti;
and on being asked if he would not advocate the balswi,,
only replied that be was " too much a Tory for Peilea)
(Hear, hear.) He would not weary the House by la
ing many similar cases to those which he had citedyinf
had occurred in various parts of the country, but hero
beg the House to remember that if the ballot was ye sego(
for Engla-d, it was noubly so for Irelands—(Hear,oollo
There the intimidation of landlords and the intimidatslati
priests vied with one another. The evidence takenro ed
the Committee, in 1835, disclosed some strange 0001
this point. We have the testimony of Mr. Fitspierl:
and Mr. Wilcox—both magistrates of the county TiPolett,;
Those gentlemen took a very singular view of Inv ,to
for, while they entertained no kind of objecto./0S
landlords making their tenants vote as they (the lar!r,ll.
thought fit, but, on the contrary, praised them forli,s
denounced in the strongest manner the interfereneaieric
priests.—( Laughter.) What they felt to be a critlviot
priest, they regarded as a virtue in the landlord. 1 ('sf
deuce of Mr. Wilcox in particular was extraordinalpisss so
gentleman did not scruple to advance such a &Alio/Pia
this, that if he were kind to a tenant who lived undersea el
had, in the event of his ambitioning the honour of I:109
a Member of Parliament, a right to command that osnlfid
vote, " and," he added, "if he refuses to gratify n; Arlie
honour, I think all ties are severed between us. .06 air
laughter.) Colonel Bruin advocated a similar doctll,ooo,
roundly maintained the right of landlords to dischnooB
tenants or servants for not voting as they pleased, 7foSet
tinned instances where he had exercised that poi fit 0t
punishment of the refractory. But not to dwell s,
on that point, he now came to the last accusation otlest
the ballot—namely, that it was productive of lyingt,estid
ceit. If the ballot. were objected to on that isccnat'sitisSle
there ought to be something in the present model° tr'flie
votes remarkable for the encouragement it gave sag
He would meet the assertions by a counter-asser" is s'
present elective system, and especially the system °,osiii
votes, was one vast lie, branching out into all ttat'o,
tions of deceit, delusion, equivocation, and sitl!v,slerV,
they not show the example of deceit in their sesslcaiisolla
with respect to the non-interference of peers at elects et,
(Hear.) In order to show how those orders lase ?sit
and set- at nought, his Hon. Friend the Atembecelo,l 4f
trose, when his motion was under discussion ai Iwsoises
since, referred to a certain gentleman, Mr. Docks' joie psi!
a certain book, "the Parliamentary Compo_ /id
which it appeared that the cases of interferencoes the
were exceedingly numerous. If, in the teeth toed 1,
which he had himself collected, Mr. Dodd proof',
enough to assert that non-interference was V„
and virtue encouraged by the present system,_ ee
ought to be summoned to the bar of that floty,ses, 0,0
ter.) He (Mr. Berkeley) had himself consulte,ao7o.
book, and he found that from an analysis of tamosielft&Fi
collected, this deduction might be extracted, 5,,,e4,05,
there were in England and Wales 62 boroues,h..%;,,or
electors, returning 98 Members all under Wan idtai t!',
kind—that 57 of these boroughs were under
.t.tLesce ,;
the aristocracy, and that five were under the muanteeteefld sei
Government of the day. In 1837, 29 were %shoo 0
1844, 21 only. The gradual and steady increas__
start
futile it was for any independent gentleman.,leuse ssiokty,
candidate for any of those boroughs. Withetttsis>l3
osl
fore them, what a farce it less to put ftrthtblassruttillg4l
touching non-interference with elections sno 01.01,
forth they could scarcely be supposed to.hasoew; chs;:o6
tention but that of damning their free
for sincerity, and they couelondfertanhloesetieeneisisatee:sirgyean::::,
selves from the charge of deceit. _ But hinsu4te,,
did the candidate follow the example amiss; a cseclioiro
House ? The not unt'requeut custom was and
and
_ -
pressedg o down
wio
th t soma
t boroughcha character taegr
publish among his constituents la a;
and * mtetorle
tnt: t ten ut evs;rw,ye
ITu
I",if rcepewand t itnod
be
ep e n
slaves;diesn t:e
time he was issuing this address, Irsoealltikllagabizi
tine its force every screw
.and artifice