The Sun.
London, England, 1833-01-01 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF Tilt PUBLIC JOURNAL:73..

:It is vain to blink the matter ; the question of
ballot, or no ballot, must be set at rest, and
speedily ; but we have reason to suspect that a
decision in the negative will be most in accord-
ance with the feelings of a vast majority of Eng-
►ishmen, in spite of the cla•nour which has been
got up on the subject,—Mat is our serious be-
lief'. Often, perhaps too often, we have lately
felt called upon to state our impressions with re-
gard to the vote by ballot, and once more we
are bound to declare the continued bias of our
judgment against that plausible, but inefficient
and disgraceful, and if not inefficient, most dan-
gerous and immoral measure. Those who ap-
oeal to the late elections as an argument in
favour of introducing the secret vote, ap-
oear to us to have little respect for facts, or
less capacity for the most obvious reasoning.
Attempts at intimidating voters have been com-
plained of in four or five dozen places ; and in
half that number of instances they may have been
successful. But look at the bulk of the new Parlia-
ment. Has its complexion or character, as a
whole, been much affected by the influence of
Tory landlords in counties, or of Ultra-Radical
combinations over the town voters ? Why, the
popular returns are in the proportion of five to
one. Our firm persuasion is, that no sensible
mischief will ever be wrought by the threats or
denunciations of unconstitutional power against
any large portion of the constituents of this
country. If there be any virtue in Parliameit•
tary Reform, it is the faculty imparted by it to
the Government, and to the great body of pro-
prietors and employers, as well as of other
classes, to co-operate for and in favour of the
public interests, as naturally involving their
own. In such a state of general feeling, we
would ask, is it reasonable to conclude, that co-
ercion need or would be exercised to any extent
worth calculating, over the free will of the consti-
tuency ? Cui Bono any such perversion of power ?
Unless we suppose something near a moiety
both of landed property and moneyed capital to
be opposed to the interests of the nation ai
large, it is certain that no sinister exertion of
power by landlords or other affluent individuals
could divert the prevalent course of the repre-
sentation into a vicious channel. Under the
reign of public opinion, secured by a measure
which admits such vast numbers and various de-
scriptions of Englishmen to the elective fran-
chise as the Reform Bill has done, we are at a
loss to comprehend why, generally, the tenant
should have different views from the landlord, or
the journeyman or tradesman from his employer,
so as to create any motive or inducement to the
exercise of an unworthy influence by the latter
over them. If Reform be good for anything, his
for the full direction it affords to the mass of
public sentiment towards any given end. That.
an effectual resistance could be offered under
the Reform Bill by a particular faction, or by
scattered individuals, through the utmost con-
ceivable extravagance of threats or seductions, to
the main current of the national feeling, it is per-
feet madness to suppose. Nor, even admitting
the first class of proprietors composing what is
termed " the oligarchy," to entertain views at
variance with those of the rest of the nation,
would their utmost efforts, in opposition to such
an adversary, be worth a single straw ? The body
of property in the hands of independent, though
not affluent, gentlemen, exceeds at least twenty-
fold the total of that possessed by the high aris-
tocracy and their immediate connexions. The
independent gentry, as contrasted with the aris-
tocracy, are dispersed through the nation and
identified with it. Of the merchants, too, the
men of independent, but moderate means,
have amongst them a far greater mass of
wealth than can be found concentrated in
the coffers of the " moneyed oligarchy." Theo
possibility, therefore, of this kingdom falling
under the dominion of a few great proprietors
or capitalists, we hold to be for all future time
absurd. What remains is neither more nor less
than the nation, constituted of its several trades,
classes, professions, and pursuits, the predo.
minant sense of which, now that the Reform
Bill has cleared away obstructions, will be sure
to show itself in a corresponding majority of the
House of Commons, without resorting to any
irregular and odious expedients for the creation
of such a majority, now that incomparably the
larger portion of the national will is free. We
have applied a phrase to the ballot which to
some may appear uncouth. We have called it
" odious. This expression is employed by us
deliberately. It is not enough to say that the
performance of an honourable duty, the dis-
charge of a solemn trust, and the enjoyment
of a valued privilege, ought, according to the
whole spirit and context of our Constitution,
to be open to the public view: but the
introduction of the ballot would be hateful-
-Ist, to all ranks of voters throughout the king-
dom, who feel conscious of their honest and in-
dependent principles, and exult in the open vin-
dication of them. 2d. And this fact, if new to
many of our readers, is equally striking and
unquestionable, the notion of the ballot is most
odious to the very extensive and growing body
of the non-electors in many parts of England.
This vast numerical majority of our countrymen
regard with jealous vigilance the conduct of
those in whom has been vested the political
power from which themselves (though on well-
considered grounds) are excluded. They look
upon the elective franchise, like the representa-
tive office, to be a " trust," created for the
benefit not of electors only, but of the
whole people, and by consequence for that of
non-electors, the undisputed majority of the
people. They have begun therefore to declare
their anxiety that the elective trust shall be per-
formed in such a manner as to fix an alit:-
tive responsibility upon the trustees—that
responsibility which nothing short of abso
lute openness and publicity can produce!
They are not acute enough to see the enormous
difference insisted on by the balloteers between
the cases of the representative and constituent.
But as the elector has a right to ascertain how
the representative does his duty on a division, so
the non-elector has (in his own judgment) an
equal title to be satisfied that the constituent does
his duty at the poll, and conceives that the
ballot out of doors would be as gross a viola.
tion of the national right of superintendence
over the exercise of the elective franchise, as the
ballot within the walls of Parliament would be

an outrage upon the constituency of the realm.
We have good authority for asserting, that this
language has been used in one of the largest
counties, and openly and extensively in an im-
portant town, which contains the largest con-
stituency in Great Britain. It may here be
stated, that Mr. Spring Rice's argument against
the ballot, at Cambridge, was received with
great approbation by a body of electors, many
be supposed
fromct
lon i circumstances,
u the
erc is e 0 f
their
fotrofaiv‘rice'llo
Igiiusinier.ernigp‘rVohette, again publish sundry lets