The Sun.
London, England, 1833-04-26 00:00:00

who could sound every depth and corner of the human
heart. It was far above the faculties of men like him-
self, or those he addressed, with the grossness and infirtni-
les of earth about them. Certainly if the non-voters were
eaaable of exercising this surveillance with effect, it was
preposterous to say that they were unfit for the elective
iianchitte. He would contend, that not only were they in-
aapable of exercising the control and supervision here as-
signed to them, but that whenever they attempted to exer-
eise it, they occasioned positive and serious mischief. For
how was it that the non electoral population comported
.heanselves whenever they did intermeddle in an election ?
They espoused the cause of some favourable candidate—
hey acted as his partisans, and as the enemies of his oppo•
'tent. They applauded every one who voted for their
tOvourite candidate ; they denounced every man who
voted against him. They exacted a blind submission to
'heir will, without once inquiring into the honesty, or the
eonstience, or the sincere persuasion of the voter. Was
,his the responsibility which they would wish to see pre-
vailing in our various cities and boroughs? In his eyes it
v 39 purely mischievous. Dictation by an assembled
•rowd is no less odious than dictation by a private intlivi
ntal ; for it ended both ways in the same great evil—
spurious anti insincere voting. It was desirous the voter
should not be sheken in his sincere determination either by
he vultus instantis tyranni, or by the civiuna ardor
pray,' jubentium ; aad for that reason he wished that
neither the tyrant nor the crowd should know how he
voted. His conscience was, in his (Mr. Grote's) view, an
august oracle—to be consulted with silent respect—
merely taking care that no force of any kind was put upon
'he priestess, nor any bribes tendered to seduce her.
tie thought he had now shown that this pretended re
possibility of voters to non-voters was, at the best, a
nere nul ity ; that it never could, under any circum-
seances, make men vote honestly, if they were inclined to
vote dishonestly ; anti that, whenever it was attempted to
le enforced, it created the very mischief against which it
it ()leased to guard. Where, then, was the security for
wisest voting? It lay in the will and disposition of the
:otter himse f. If it were not there it was nowhere. It
:he voters were sufficiently numerous to have collectively
he same interests as the whole community, they could
lave no wish except to choose honestly ; and all that the
oegislitture had to do teas, to grant them the proiection of
he ballot, in order to ensure their being left to their own
free will. And he would take leave to remind
•tiem that this was the only ground on which their
late extension of the constituency could for a moment
re vindicated. It they had relied upon the response
inlay of the voter as their guarantee for honest
voting, any extension of the constituency would have
tieen absurd and injurious ; for a small constituency was far
more peintedly responsible than a numerous constituency,
and every step which they took in enlarging the consti-
tuency, was a step in diminution of the responsibility of
each individual elector. Nay, upon this principle, the
eineleheaded constituency of Old Sarum would have been
rae best in the whole kingdom, fur they had there tespon-
sibiliry concentrated to the utmost possible degree; and
as a general rule, nomination would be better than repre-
•entation ; fur there could be no doubt that one or a few
norninetors are much more clearly responsible than one
'Sr two thousand electors. But no, the framers of the
Reform Bill did not contemplate that their now constitu-
ency would be dishonestly inclined—they did not look to
esponsibility of the voter as the proper guarantee for
honest voting. They proceeded upon a wiser and more
righteous principle ; they aimed at giving us a constituency
numerous enough to have no interests opposed to honest
totting. What he asked of them now was, that they would
•-nsure to us a c instituency in fact, where as yet we have
had only a constituency in name—that they would give us
a body, not of mere paper voters, not of lifeless cyphers,
net of voters in waxwork, but of real, self-determining
men ; that they would guard every voter in the exercise
of that free and unembarrassed volition, without which
he was worse than disfranchised.—(Heer.) He had
already trouble I the House at great length ; but there
was yet another argument which he could not omit to
notice. They were often told that the influence of rich
men over voters was a very salutary thing, and that the
ballot was mischievous, as tending to destroy it. Gen-
denten did, indeed, draw a distinction between legitimate
influence and illegitimate influence—tneaning (as far as he
understood) all such influence as the present law did not
fot bid, as contrasted with bribery, which it does forbid.
He himself acknowledged a distinction between legitimate
and illegitimate influence ; but he drew the line through
very different points, and he thought that much of that
influence which the law now tolerated, was incalculably
more pernicious than the bribery which it affected to con-
demn.—(Hear, hear.) How much influence over voters
ought a rich man to have ? As much as he could pur-
chase ? No, certainly; for even the present law forbids
the idea of his purchasing any influence at all. He (Mr.
Grote) said, not as much as he could purchase, hut as
much as he deserved, and as much as unconstrained free-
men were willing to pay him.—(Cheers.) Amongst un-
constrained freemen, the man of recognized superiority,
moral and intellectual, would be sure of obtaining sponta-
neous esteem and deference. These were his just deserts,
and they came to him unbidden and unbespoken—( Hear.)
But they would come to him multiplied tenfold, if,
along with these intrinsic excellencies, he possessed
the extrinsic advantages of fortune—(Hear, heir)—if he
were marked out to the attention of mankind by the con-
spicuous blazon of established opulence and station—and
if he were thus furnished with the means of giving ampler
range and effect to his virtuous dispositions. These were
the p: itnary elements which, when combined in the same
person, raised to its highest pitch the admiration of man-
kind—(Cheers)—and insured their willing obedience;
this was the meed which awaited men of birth and for-
tune, if they employed their faculties industriously, and to
the proper ends. lie did not deity that poorer men might
attain it also; but with them the ascent was toilsome, the
obstructions numerous, anti the success at best uncertain.
--(Hear, hear.) With the rich man the road was
straight and smooth, the willing public met him half-way,
and joyfu'ly hailed the gradual opening of his virtues.—
(Hear, hear, hear.) He was the man to whom they de-
lighted to pay homage, and their idolatrous fancy was
even disposed to forestal and exaggerate his merits.
This was, in his opinion, the legitimate influence of
wealth and station—to serve as the passport, as the ally,
as the handmaid, of superior wisdom and virtue. This
influence was as gentle and kindly as it was lasting and
infallible ; it was self-created and self-operating derived
from the most universal propensities of the human will ;
and it was, moreover, twice blessed; for it blessed
as well as the few who exercised it, as the many over
whom it was exercised.—(Cheers.) If our great and
wealthy men would be content with this legitimate influ-
ence—if they would employ their superior opportunities
in acquiring that mental superiority which really fitted
them to guide and govern their countrymen—then would
their ascendancy he assured beyond all competition, under
arty system of voting, and the business of governing the
mass of the people would be as easy as the management of
a flock by the shepherd.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.)
But it was the curse of our species, both I ere anti else-
where, that the great and wealthy men would seldom or
never pursue this straight and righteous path to dominion.
—(Cheers.) They would insist on governing mankind,
witnout taking the trouble to acquire those qualities
which make mankind willing to be governed by them.
" Diversissimas tee pariter expectant; ignav'ae volupta-
tem et praeinia virtutis." They chose to rule by mere
dint of naked wealth and station, unallied with. those
beneficent ingredients which bestowed upon rulers WI
empire over human hearts as well as over human pets ins,
Then came the strain and tug to make the influence of
weal'b alone, in worthless and ungifted hands, equiva-
lent to that of wealth anti mental excellence united.
Wealth in itself; apart from all personal merit, insured
the power of conferring individual favours, and in-
flicting individual injuries ; it enabled a man to deal
out bribes, open or disguised, with one hand, and brows
with the other. It conld not, indeed, obtain for
him the heartfelt esteem of a willing public ; but it served
as a two-edged sword to steal away the simulated demon-
strations of esteem, and to extort those votes which he
had not virtue enough to earn. This was, in his opinion,
the illegitimate influence of property—when it superseded
and disenthruned the diviner pi dities of the man and the
hero—when the favours and injuries which its possessor
could (feel out were made to stand in the place of talents
and virtues, and to usurp that recompense which the
people delighted to bestow on the glorious compound of
mental superiority with worldly station.—(Loud cheers.)
Now when he was asked whether the ballot would impair
the influence of wealth and of wealthy men, he replied,
that in all these cases whi-re this influence was really le-
gitimate and beneficial, not only it would not be impaired,
but it would be strengthened and exalted. Under open
voting, the influence of wealth was alike in every hand—
alike whether combined with worthlessness anti medium icy,
or with the rarest virtue and ability. Ejection of tenants,
dismissal from employment, or privation of custom, were
engines which the worst man could employ, as well as the
best—nay, the worse he was, the more effectually would
he employ them, since he would be less restrained by
scruples of justice and tenderness. Wbell votes were
given openly, they had the hurtful influence of wealth
stretched to its utmost pitch, while the salutary influence
was
tirelya. btrrondlgdeed a
n drid otecnou.oteßrwtirtrkthede abtaltihote
dleeeesotu,lifosneodt
tehnis-
cchoienlculisceadl
aheap6eu
to.f. goodlt
bana
insdh e
d evil,hro from
with tmli
adexuafcPt
thee" °f
votera

both the hope of private favour and the fear of injury • ,
but that affectionate and willing homage, which wealth ,
combined with mental excellence so infallibly awakened, ,
was left in full empire over his heart, anti became th
determining principle of his vote. Fear not, that the rice
man who employed wealth and leisure as they ought ti
be employed—in elevating his own mental character, ant •
in affording conspicuous evidence of active virtue—fear
not that such a man should lose one particle of influence
by means of the ballot. His standard was planted in the
interior of men's bosoms; his ascendancy was as sure and
operative in the dark as in the light; his admonitions and
recommendations needed no coercive power to insure atten
tion.—(Hear, hear.) And what harm would ensue, if
that coarser and baser influence, which could not exist
without coercive force, were suppressed and extirpated
altogether? What harm, if the worthless and unfurnished •
minds, who now dictated their commends to expectant
and timourous dependants, were compelled to restrict their
ascendancy within the narrower limits of persuasion and
and goodwill ?—(Cheers.) He maintained that not on 1),
no harm would ensue, but very great good, in this, as
well as in other ways; that it would so materially
strengthen the motive for men of wealth and station to
extend their knowledse, and to enlarge their sphere of
active virtue. As matters stood now, a man's influence
was in the ratio of his property.—( Hear ) Whether his
character were good or bed, whether his capacity were
vast or limited in either case his power over the comforts
of others, anti his consequent means of perverting their
votes, was equal. So long as he could thus command
their votes, he had no motive to earn their esteem and
admiration.—(Cheers.) But if their votes were rendered
free instead of servile—genuine instead of simulated—then
he could only hope to obtain them by really deserving
them ; then would he have a powerful motive to attract
to himself those heartfelt sentiments, from whence alone
free spoken votes proceeded ; then would he he stimulated
to enrich his own mind with those comm inding acquire
ments, without which he could scarcely aspire to be use.
ful to hie country at large. The question had been
started, whether an uneducated gentry were not the
gleafest of all national evils? Certainly, if not the
greatest, they were among the greatest, of national evils;
nor was the counterpart of the proposition less true, that
a gentry well educated, and of enlarged sympathies with
the people, were among the foremost of a'l national hlsss
ings. He was sure dint the most eff ctu-il way of assur
ing, and perpetuating to themselves that b essing, would
be to render the vote of an elector inaccessible to all
coercion, and attainable only by those who should have
earned his genuine esteem.—(Hear, hear.) This was
the only prize which could stimulate the listlessness, or
soften the natural pride, of one whose wealth placed him
above the communion of his fellow men ; and by rendering
the suffrage secret, lock this precious prize in a casket,
which could neither be stolen by fraud, nor ravished by
tyranny ; reserved it in the inmost sanctuary, as a free-
will offering to ascertainiel merit, and as a stimulus to all
noble aspirations. If he had no other ground to ask for the
ballot, he would ask it on this—that it was the only
schoolmaster of a frivolous and self-indulgent aristocracy
In conclusion, he would say, that if they possessed the
power of breathing into English voters a new heart and
spirit, so that they should become insensible to all the
threats and temptations of the private seducer, and open
only to the admonitions of those who came to guide their
rational and conscientious preference—it they could ope-
rate this great moral improvement in the bosoms of the
voters themselves, would they not eagerly hasten to do it
without a moment's delay ? He knew that human power
reached not so far as that ; but he knew that tee ballot
would go near to accomplish the same end—not, indeed,
by rectifying all the moral infirmity of the voter, but by
breaking the force of those seductions which would other-
wise overpower it. This was all that they can do with
respect to the frailties and liabilities of our common na-
ture ; they could not altogether eradicate them, but they
might circumscribe their range and counterwork their effi-
c ; they might disarm and beat off those ministers of
evil who strove •o take advantage of them. They could
not render a man invulneratile, but they might at least
enable him to walk unhurt.—(Hear.) It was among the
most important topics to which Legislative attention
could be directed, to calculate accurately the force of
temptation to which every man stood exposed, and to re-
move it altogether, if that could possibly be done—if not,
to diminish it to the utmost practic II extent. The Hon.
Member sat down amidst considerable cheering.
Sir W. INGILBY, having been engaged for six
months canvassing for votes, could speak as to the species
of compulsion to which electors were liable. He believed
they were more afraid of a country attorney, backed by the
steward of the 'Squire, than of the 'Squire and Parson
united—(Hear, hear) ;—for if the attorney could not
gain hie point by astuteness, he would do it by holding
out threats of the pains and penalties of the law. He would
read an extract of a letter which had come into his hands,
written by an attorney, to the effect that he gave notice to
the recipient of the letter, that he could not vote without
having a freehold, under heavy pains and penalties. lie
knsw nothing more likely to tiring the clergy into disrepute
than their interfering at elections; a:..d if it were for no
other reason than that he wished to preserve them from
falling into odium among the people, he should vote in
favour of this motion. He spoke with regret of anything
that was likely to be injurious to the character of the
clergy, being himself almost part and parcel of the Church.
—(A laugh.) He most cordially second d the motion.
The Earl of DARLINGTON said he was surprised
and disappointed to find, that although the representation
was now completely amended—although the people now
really had a voice in that House—yet that there should be
still such a spirit of restlessn• as, that many would not be
satisfied till all the institutions which were old were
brought to an end. The object of this motion was to
throw into the hands of the Democracy a greater degree
of weight, and a degree of power, that was hardly con•
sistent with the wellbeing of other classes in the State.
lie certainly must oppose the views of the Hen. Member
who proposed the motion, as he did not wish the object of
that moron to be attained. If the Reform Act had not
been passed, he might have been in favour of the motion.
So Ling as the firmer state of things continued, there
might be some reason for the Ballot, because the sin illness
of the constituency might enable a powerful individual to
influence them ; but that was no longer the case—the
constituencies now were too numerous and powerful to be
thus influenced. The events of the two last years had
rendered the motion totally unnecessary. He was there•
fore surprised that the Hon. Member should, upon the
very first day of the Session, have given notice of
this motion, before it was possible that he or any
one else could have had any experience of the
composition and character of the Reformed House
of Commons. With the fee ings of an Englishman
he protested against this secret and unmanly mode of
voting. Every change in the institutions of a country was
in itself an evil as a change, and ought not to be adopted
unless there was some accompanying benefit. lie did
not think that any public benefit could arise from this
change. He thought it would not even effect the object
whien was the avowed aim of those who proposed it. In
• his opinion it would be impossible for men to conceal suc-
cessfully the mode in which they bad voted. They would
be sure to intimate by conversation who was their favou-
rite candidate and whom they meant to oppose. But
whether it was effective or not, it would produce a bad
moral effect. It would tend to destroy the honourable
confidence between man and man, and would make all
men look with jealousy upon each other. Besides, he did
not believe it was necessary. He did not deny there
might he a few cases of tyranny, but they were to be
• met not by this scheme of the ballot, but by the remedy
of public opinion ; anti he believed that there was nothing
so corrupt in the framework of society as to render such a
remedy hopeless. But if this motion could be supposed
to be effective in making the voter free from the controul
of his lanclord, would it make him free from that of the
public agitator? However goad the ballot might be in
a republic, he thought it was uttetly incompatible with a
constitutional MOO archy, for a constitutional monarchy
could roc exist at the same time with a perfect equality of
rights, anti he bet eyed that, those who supported the hello-
desired this perfect equa sty. lie had always been a sup-
porter of a constitutional monarchy, and he did not wish
to see the introduction of anything that would tend to de-
stroy it.
Mr. PETRE said he had not been able to discover in
the speeches of the Gentlemen who eupp irted the motion
• any reason why the new mode of election was not suffi
ment to secure to the people the benefits of a free repre-
sentation. lie wished to know whether the House of
Commons was not composed of the representatives of the
people ? and whether it did not promise to the people as
,„„en good, practical freedom, and happiness, as any as-
sembly that could be imagined? There was as much
wisdom in knowing whet e to stop as where to begin.
Clad France known that great point in 1789 or 1791,
what misery would have been spared to her and to
Europe ? He looked upon this motion as an attempt to
take away all responsibility from those who voted at dee-
dons, by enabling them to act with secrecy : and he was
the more astonished at its introduction at the present nio-
!tient, as this was especially
the age distinguished by the
universe! call for publicity in all public and political af-
fairs. He did not think that liberty needed the assistance
of the ballot. She did not flourish in darkness, but
would meet and vanquish despotism in the broad anti open
day-light. He did not think that France had been tuts-
rally benefitted by the introduction of the ballot; and in

America, which was the other country most frequently
referred to by the supporters of the ballot, he believed that
canvassing and election contests were carried on with as
warrn a spirit of party feeling as in any other place in tbi
vorll. He believed that, if adopted, the ballot woul
inahle a man to take bribes with more impunity, an
-.eat would be its only effect. If corruption still possesset
a powerful influence, he thought it was to he met, not bt
the secrecy of the ballot, but by extended instruction
among the people, by which alone voters would be made at
once intelligent and independent.
Alt. TAYLEURE observed, that in his opinion the
ballot was necessary, in order to render the Reform Bill
perfect. Wri,o were they that required the protection of
the ballot ? The honest, the industrious, but the poor and
the humble ; and not he that did not need it as a safe-
guard—the ruined and profligate tradesman, who, having
nothing to care for, defied all control. The careful, the
industrious, the frugal tradesman—the man who hoped.
by steady attention to business, to support himself and
family in respectability, was, on account of his family,
checked by the fear of offending his customers, and must
either determine to vote against his conscience, or to ruin
the prosperity of his family. For such a man the ballot
was required ; and who would say that such a man did
not deserve its protection ? He was at a loss to reconcile
the arguments by which this motion was combatted. At one
;foment its opponents said that the ballot would be de-
grading to men, by teaching them to conceal their opi-
nions, while at another they asserted that the ballot
would not enable them to conceal opinions or votes, for that
the utterance of one would betray the others. The great
principle on which he supported the ballot was this, that
it would put an end to flattery on the one side, and to
servility on the other. No man would take the pains of
attempting to influence a vote, when he knew that it could
be given independently of his control, nor any labour to
wring from a voter a promise, the performance of which
he knew be could not enforce. The rich man would cease
to think that be had a right to the vote of the poor man,
ind the poor man that it was his duty to give it at thi-
bidding of his wealthier neighbour. The necessity of the
measure had been amply shown by what took place at
the last election, and he should therefore most cordially
-upport the motion.

Mr. FRANCIS BARING did not know what was
the mighty evil which called for the remedy proposed by
the lion. Member opposite. He wished to ask whether
the present Members of that House were prepared to de-
clare themselves the ❑ominees of influence and
power, or whether, on the contrary, all were not ready
to agree that they had been returned by the free voice of
he people ? Could they then submit to an argument that
took it for granted that that House did not really repre-
sent the people ? If the Hon. Mover of this question ad-
'flitted that this would not put a❑ end to bribery alto-
gether, be admitted enough to show that the motion ought
not to be carried. If justice now was not, as the Hon.
Member admitted, sufficiently quick of foot to catch the
doublings of guilt, it certainly would not be, if this motion
was carried ; for agents would find the means of taroperieg
with clubs, and rendering the attempted secrecy perfectly
useless. But there was one argument which had not been
ttrought of at all, but which was of considerable import.
ance. It was said, that by the operation of the ballot,
the tenant would be enabled to vote independently of the
control of his landlord; but it was not recollected, that it
the landlord had not the means of seeing how the vote
was given, he at least had the means of preventing the
tenant from voting at all ; and if he chose to exercise
his power to that extent, the measure of the Hon. Mem-
ber opposite would be perfectly useless. The system of
open voting was prevalent in some of the States of
North Arnerica, and in them it was said to be bad in its
eff•cts ; in other states where secret voting existed, it was
said to he accompanied with every benefit and political
blessing imaginable; but yet he had never heard of the
difference of effect produced all over the United States,
where both ways of voting were used. He spoke of the
general effect of bath ways of voting. He would come to
a state in which secret voting was employed. In New
York they voted by ballot, which, according to its sup-
porters, is to preclude every species of interference and
intimidation. He would refer to the best evidence upon
the point—to the Governor of New York, who declared,
in an official paper to his Minister, that in elections under
this very ballot system intimidatio❑ did prevail. The Go-
vernor's paper declares that " Government officers were
guilty of bribery and corruption, and that for many years
they had acted improperly with regard to the election
matters." Of course the paper spoke of the officers of
Government in the states where the ballot existed. The
paper went on to mention the different officers who
were influenced in their votes, or who exercised
their influence over others ; namely, those employed
in the Navy Yard, the Custom House, the Post
Office, and in the Judicial Departments. Triose
officers, and all those employed in the several estab-
lishments mentioned, aff trded proofs, that under the
ballot, influence and intimidation might be exercised.
Having cited the opinions of the Governor of New
York—that was to say, of a practical man—it was clear
that the working of the ballot was not unattended with
influence and intimidation. It followed, necessarily, that
in America, inhabited by a shrewd people, it was not
thought possible to put the ballot into general execution,
and that it was incompatible with the existence of a free
people. As to the argument of the Hon. Mover of the
present resolution, taken from the rff tits of the working
of the ballot in France since 1820, it was not to be relied
on. Such an argument should not be taken from a short
period of the history of any country. The ballot had
existed in France from the very first time of popular ex-
citement—namely, since 1790, they had voted secretly in
that country. If the Hon. Mover was inclined to state
its blessings since 1820, he would allow him to say that
the calculations were not the most correct in the world.
Its workings since its first establishment should be consi-
dered, and then it would be found, that under it were
elected a Robespierre, a Danton, and a Marat. Conse-
quently, no one should argue as to its good effects from a
particular period of history, but see whether, during the
whole time it had been used, it had produced benefits or
otherwise. When he sat on the other side of the House,
he had uniformly opposed the system of ballot, and he
certainly would still continue in that opposition.
Dr. LUSHINGTON said he would commence by ask-
ing a plain and simple question. Was there any one who
woul I not admit that, if the proposition of the Hon.
Member for the City of London became the law of the
land, that the effect of it would not be to diminish corrup-
tion and bribery, so much and so justly complained of, and
that it would not be the only remedy that any rational
individual could point out ? If there was any motive for
human action, interest was one, and money and pains were
ordinarily bestowed in precisely the same proportion as
that interest could be obtained. To obviate the interested
motives of human actions was most necessary, and the pre-
sent proposition was so founded on the principles of human
nature, that if any measure cool I do it, it certainly would.
But, said the fl!,n. Member for Boston, " I have listened
to the speech of the Hon. Member for London, and I have
seen no proofs of this interested spirit of human nature ; I
have been disappointed that no evidence of the evils for
which a remedy is sought has been laid before us." Now
would anybody, who took a sincere and impartial vietv of

the matter, seriously deny the existence of those evils?—
(Hear.) Could anybody deny that bribery and corruption
did not still exist at elections ?—( Hear, hear.) If tnere

were anybody so wilfully blip 1, or so blinded by prejudice,
as to make such a denial, let him look to the proceedings
of that House during the present session—to the election
committees—to the disgrace which stained the election
for Hertford—( Hear, hear)—and to the evidence that
had been laid on the table of that House. When any
Hun. Member considered all this—and he supposed that
every Hon. Member did, since it was his duty so to do—
how could it be exp-cted that the House would listen to a
detail of evidence upon a subject which was already as
plain as clear day? Undue influence and intimidation
were nut used ! How could any body say so; how could
anybody say that he had not heard of their having been
put in practice? Was their any Hoo. Member of that
House who had stood a contested eh-ction who had not
experienced the effects of intimidation ?--(Hear.) Had
not the Noble Lord who sit on the bench below him, in
his contest for Devonsfjrc, experienced the effects of in•
timidation and undue influence ?—(Hear, hear.) That
both those things existed nobody would deny ; and they
were both a curse to the single individual whom they
forced to viola'e his conscience, and poll for the man he
disliked, and a curse to the country, because they brought
about tie election of persons decidedly inimical to the wel-
nire of the State.—.(Cheers.) That was his opinion, and
i: was not based upon vague theory, but upon unerring
experience. Within the space of three years, he had passed
through the ordeal of two contested elections, the last
of which was for the Tower Halide s. Intimidation had
been extensively practised upon both these occasions, par-
ticularly on the poor of those districts ; and no one could
fully imagine how oppressive and injurious that intimida-
tion was to many individuals. In the Tower Hamlets,
to be considered inimical to the W. et India interest was no
recommendation; indeed, as he would show, it was a
cause fur the exercise of intimidation. Ho could give
many proofs of it, but one specimen, out of a long list,
would be sufficient A well known West India house in
town went to one of its tradesmen, and inquired, " Will
you vote for Captain Marryat ?" The answer was, " Yes.'
" You have two votes ; will you give the second to Or
Lusbiugton ?" The answer again was, " Yes," " Very

well ; since you are prepared to dispose of your second
vote as you say, make out your account, and never expect
to do business with our house again." The tradesman,
though poor, was independent, and was determined to
maintain his opinion. Yet intimidation was used, end the
-radesman told him (Dr. Lushington) of it an hour after
It took place. If the franchise was extended—and it
was by the Reform Bill—protection should be afforded to
the voter in precisely the same degree as the franchise
was extended, in order to rid him completely of the
power of foul oppressors. O❑ what principles was the
Reform Bill founded? Oa the principles he hail always
advocated—those of good government. He had always
contended, that if it was desired to have contentment at
some, and equal justice dealt out to all classes of the coin-
inanity, it would be necessary to have the representatives
of that House chosen by a large body of men. That point
had been acceded to. But was it not a mockery of justice
that open voting should be sill continued, by which the
dependence of voters was perpetuated? It had been re-
aeatedly said that the franchise was a public trust of vast
importance. So it was. Now what was intended by the
vote by ballot? Why, to give to those public trustees the
best way to enable them to execute the trust confided to
them.—(Hear.) The Hon. and Learned Gentleman
concluded with saying, that as the House had been
during the week exhausted with late sittings, he would
•rouble them with no further arguments, but merely
assert, from his own experience, that the vote by ballot
was indispensable to secure the free exercise of the elective
franchise.—( Hear.)
Sir G. PHILLIPS said, that though be was opposed to
the system of ballot, yet he would admit that an argument
in favour of it had been presented by those who were ad-
verse to it—by the Conservatives as they called themselves,
who exercised over their tenants and dependents a control
as to voting in a manner entirely inconsistent with the
Reform Bill. He thonght, however, that before the
system of election was changed, the House should have
more experience of the working of the Reform Bill. He
did not see how ballot could prevent bribery; indeed, he
thought th it it would only cause double bribery, since it
would enable the voter to delude both parties. Much Lad been
said about the effects of ballot in America. An American
friend of his had told him, that too much importance was
attached to it by both parties—those for it and those
against it. That was what he thought also, and, there•
fore, he wished to put the Conservatives and all parties on
their guard, and to remind them that the ballot might be
employed for good as well as abused for bad purposes. He
contended that publicity was absolutely necessary in all
public elections.—(Question.)
Major FANCOURT considered that a Reformed Parlia-
ment should be tried before ballot was granted, and in
that opinion he was backed by a large majority of his con-
stituents. He therefore contended that the measure was
brought forward prematurely, and that it would be better
to wait and see whether it was really necessary or not.
It had powerful advocates in that House and out of doors,
and a very talented portion of the press was in its favour.
When th at was the case, it was with diffidence that he
expressed an opinion unfavourable to it; but yet he could
not help thinking that the ballot militated against the pre-
sent constituency of the country. It was a characteristic
sign of the times, that great pains were taken to represent
the gentry of the country as a class totally distinct from
the great body of the people. Now lie maintained that
the gentry of England were not a class whose interests
were distinct from those of the people, and that they ware
distinguished above all the Aristocracy of all the other
countries of Europe, and that such a proud distinction
would be destroyed by the influence of the ballot. That
was a circumstance be never wished to see take place. The
baliot was a measure not only unnecessary, but of a revo-
lutionary tendency.—(Hear.) So far from preventing
underhand practices, it would give rise to the most whole-
sale bribery— (Hear)—to a deep, designing and heartless
duplicity, which were not at present the characteristics of
the British nation.—(Hear.) Secret voting would en-
tirely fail of attaining the proposed objects. The right of
franchise was a politically responsible trust; but by secret
voting you would entirely do away with that must im-
portant featuee—the responsibility. Public opinion was
new the greatest hold upon all people, from the highest to
the lowest ; but this restraint would he wholly done away
with in the important step of election by the secret voting.
Great stress had been laid by some Hon. Members, and
by others out of the House, on the following supposed
incontrovertible argument:—Gentleman opposed to the
ballot had this question put to them by its advocates—
" In your clubs you elect members by the ballot; why
then, since experience teaches you that this is the fairest
system for your own purposes, why should it not be applied
to political elections ?" The reason was p 1 iin—because the
election of members for clubs was not a political election, but
a personal one. There was no contest whatever in this
instance; the only question was, whether the candidate is
a fit person for gentlemen to associate with.—(Hear.)
In this case, therefore, the election t eing purely personal,
the system of secret voting did away at once with
any chance of ulterior unpleasant personal feelings,
or results to or towards either party. But in a political
qiust;on the case was wholly different, the candidates
being chosen or rejected on public grounds, not on per-
sonal grounds, as in the former instance—(Hear, hear)—_
therefore, though secret voting was unquestionably the
best system in the one case, it was by means so in the
other.—(Hear.) As to the influence of landlords over
tenants, customers over tradesmen, and so on, which was
so dreadfully complained of, lie decidedly thought such
influence, in most cases, lecitirnate and beneficial to all
parties.—(Hear.) Generally speaking, the interest of
the one was the interest of the other.—(Hear, hear.)
He did not consider the influence of station and property
in general as of an injurious - tendency. He thought it
would be utterly impossible to ba sure of secrecy, particu-
larly in county elections ; or if there were secrecy, it
would inevitably be attended with the grossest duplicity.
A great deal had been said about the alleged advantages
derived from the adoption of the vote by ballot in Ame-
rica and France, but he tholLzht we ought rather to look
to the preservation in all its real purity of our own Con-
stitution, than to be looking abroad, picking and borrow-
ing flow the constitutions of other countries. He consi-
dered that the ballot would tend to produce a fatal dis-
severance of those interests between the richer and poorer
classes, the junction of which constituted the excellence
of our political system ; and he should, therefore, object
to this measure, as he would to all other measures which
he should think calculated to produce such calamitous
results.
Lord ALT HORP observed, that he felt himself placed
in rather an awkward dilemma by the vote which he
should think it his duty to give against this motion. An
Hon. Alettiber on the other side of the House, some ses-
sions ago, had divided the House on a similar question to
the present, and he (Lord Althorp), on that occasion, had
certainly divided in favour of the ballot ; and on every
i other occasion he had expressed himself in favour of the
adoption of this mode of voting; but at the same time he
must be allowed to say that he had never in any instance
urged it as the sine qua non of good representation. He
had been fully aware that there were objections to it ;
• but, o❑ the whole, he had been inclined to prefer it to
other methods. At the time of the discussions on the
Reform Bill, many gentlemen who agreed with him in
this opinion, and some of whom did really consider it an
indispensable measure, had agreed to unite in not pressing
it for the time, but to wait for_ a fitting occasion to bring

it forward ; and he did not feel that be should now he
justified, under the present circumstances of the country,
in giving his vote for this motion.—( Hear.) He had never,
in a single instance, supported any change of reform unless
previously satisfied that great practical inconvenience
would result from not having such change or reform ; he did
not fur a moment mean to deny but that instances of parti-
cular evils and abuses resulted from the system of open
voting—(Hear, hear)—but, as lie before said, it must
fully appear that great public or national evil is the effect
of a certain system, before any one would he authorized
in making so important a change as this.—(Hear, hear.)
His present position was, that no evils did exist, to any
such extent as to influence national interests—(Hear,
hear)—and therefore he should net advocate such a
change. It had been stated by the Hon. Mover, that
when his Noble Friend intoduced the Bill or Reform, he
bad stated that it was by no means a final measure...-.
(Hear.) But lie (Lord Althorp) would appeal to all the
Members of the late Parliament, and all who bad attended
to the proceedings, whether those who promoted that
measure did not constantly state that they considered it, as
far as it related to the representation, as a final measure.
—(Hear, hear.) He, for one, most certainly had that
idea throughout. --(Hear.) It might be said that his vote
to night was inc.tnsis.ent with his former vote on the
subject ; but he should be still more inconsistent with the
whole course of his conduct during the progress of this
reform measure, if he gave his vote fur the motion.—
( Hear, hear.) He must here? observe, that if certain
Hon. Members really thought, as they stated, that
aerd a t
iion n a
while mo re
the manlyßeinr way, if
if
they t
had Bill
w„8 going on.—(Hear, hear, hear.) He acknowledged
the Reform Bill would be utterly useless and inefficient
without the vote by ballot, he considered that these
g‘ nh- men would
thisa declaration accit
that there were one or two gentlemen—one, for instance,
the late Member for Preston—(Hear, bear, from Mr.
Warburton)—yes, and the Hon. Member who was cheer-
ing, who always had expressed their intention to have the
-,7
Vote by Ballot. He gave them every credit for their
manliness, but he thought ~it would be much better that

l
certainly thought, however, that both the _OO
efieve • /1'
di
the opponents of this measure had considerably las
they should give the Reformed Parliament f3adirvoello. 113,14
either its benefits or its evils. He did not be
_ssoa
hat it must inevitably destroy the influence of r.
creak
or, on the other hens, wholly prevent bribery'
reit,e4goa
,lered that it would only render bribery too
bet
berr
Tills had always been his expressed opinion' nes oflis
peated that he did not, at present, see that the ern osf
open system were so great as to render the prori ot!
important change necessary. He had trels ;sal; j
long on the attention of the House, in order to e.
brello
reasons for his changed vote on the subsea, and
they would be satisfactory.—( Hear.)
could tell the House a very good story, in ill ,lt.rays
or
the evils of the present system, ten times more o.s;bey
goons to its character than any they had hear.d
of Athlre.pCroOpßosßeEd
sryTstehmad.Ll7Hay!arb,eehneaar,starreidntaouLitisugon.sPtPio
supposed they would not let him.--(Hear, aun.aidf
There ha I been a great deal said about the ballotvia
rice, and one Hon. Member had said this systenasltse,
from general in the United States, but that Hon.. sO.
hail omitted to state one fact, which was, that thoss,s:
where there was no ballot were the Slave Stites ,t
ginias, Carolinas, and Georgias. In all the Free
GSeatiesS'
by ballot was the system of election. II"n• . trjerfelf
too, had been told a story about Government in
being exercised in America—a proof that hab° do)?
sure remedy against corruption ; but the Hots dodo
understand the circumstances of the case, whic
the difference. But the fact was, that the illust7tlll
no reference at all to the general Government of ttbeelt:,
States, but to a number of persons employed i 0
of Gh
yards, &c., of New York, the nominal Governor 0
had been in opposition to, and of a different pa 04'
the President of the United States. He (*.sr eat
was not going to talk to them much fong-t ere
r,
subject, but he would just give them 3 besot,
—(Hear)--to show the working of the present ss
voting. There was the Member for West Stirem;es
hal said that nothing would satisfy him but taore.a/Si
ballot; and could there be found another Mans Isetr„
pendent, more even-minded, more beloved anu,,r,,
for his talents and virtues, than this Gentleinan'sdreo
hear.) This Hon. Member then stated that inaajess„,
evils and hardships resulted from the Iwo sYL
his own instance, he had known many individua'h- feat'
in favour of him, yet who had come to him Wit shoe
their eyes, stating that they were compelled to e°'"fatlal
hire, or that they would lose their bread ; anclea'd°e/ the(
this excellent Gentleman uniformly recounneossleoSl„
under the circumstances, to comply with their "hot'
consciences.bt these
ee sn e people,
obliged
t otHhv though
ut
(eg:lgr:aicn s.attachedt)tkhne
rwa
part
fiaatrinti odgo
fegi athiielt
this
well, and he knew this; statement to be perfea,//1, of •
and that it was but an illustration of the walls sto,
whole system. He knew who were the canvassesst
elections there : not gentlemen themselves'
gatherers and hired overseers, and such like. 00.
Noble Lord could not encourage the existence °st,
system as this ; and yet the only way of puttinglistba;o
it would be the vote by billot—(llear)--tb°sugoollle.
"
never been any very great favourite of his. ' lire;
great questions, triennial parliaments and vote
tiod
they had only been postponed during the dud' Orj
the Reform Bill, not quashed as was represent Ors
then was the wonder that one Hon. Member for
(o°s
should have put down his notice with referen
r)I!
ballot on the first day of the session, or that ari(4beflO,
ber for the city should have put down his notice,' Os'
ing forwird the question of triennial Parlialnen;eP;
same time ? Now this could not have been de 00:
under the clear understanding that tl,e-e quectali°St:
only been postponed during the immediate
the Reform Bill. At any rate, whether t"'',4
were carried or not, it was worth while briasdlucti°Ss
ward, if were only for the hearing the int,rci. teees'
the Hon. 'Member for London, anti the suPPes'oet tra°'
from the Hon. and Learned Member for the I°-:
lets. Some Hon. Members had seemed to geilea'
very excited state, very foolishly, about "leplet!'l,ert;
wanting to have property seized hold of an"; nets
and about the invasion of the rights of propettr, of "s
heard no:hing to warrant him in fearing an',,
direful calamities. There had been something "rlitscif;
the rights of property; bet what had beenis,P,salfs•
insisted on were the duties of property. anosea,l'a
denied that property was entitled to the Prirge°,,,'
those who had no property ; all that had bee° -,bes
that the latter should have the advantage' ',ooaelq
entitled to, in return for the protection of the Id hiei
was all very well that the higher classes sh°ll,,sy'l
bodies of the lower ; all he wanted was, that t"-booli
nut be allowed to hire their souls ; that thlit,
allowed to vote as conscience, not property' f folid
( Hear)—that they should not be deprived O'sta,,
their families for conscience sake. All tin' ote0;,
averted by the vote by ballot. As it wa''diti
attorneys, tax-gatherers, and hired overseers'
work. These were the tools that had put hal',
toe' °,'
in their places, however abhorrent undue it'll° risa/4
appear to them personally. They talked of the aitse:
being the protectors of the people. Yea a" ghee
tel!,,
nature, but are they so in reality ? Unfee'a,ssetas
What could be a more truly gratifying thing " e pP,
nobleman looked up to by a whole parish, or ttcve b re
as their natural protector ! But where 101 deeo/,'
nobleman ? As it was, people did not cocci's theme{
be their natural protec or who transporte"
seven years for killing a hare, and had thrilesrl,
scuffling with his gamekeeper.—(On ob
laugh.) He had never tried to set the po,,d
tecastioanmtoertihtetoio,hveitrnscel
rich—(oh ! oh ! and a laugh)—thougb be d'J al/
opportunities as most people, and though , lee tes:e
thispro
sure that if the aristocracy continued to WO" 9 ifOr
rather inclined to shake it off. ae-sa
himself
—(A
An HON. MEMBER, whose name we ceu,,, lot ' •
opposed the motion, and contended that the u"' ,4'
from acceptable to the majority of the peoPle'b,
Mr. O'CONNELL said, that he would °p;100' tr
House for a few minutes. lie thought that of el/
hers who had spoken against the adoption tstlit;il;
ballot, though they said they were ave—s
brought forward no sound argument againwa's tneka
The question at issue was really this. rsi' it tibia',
belong to the voter or to anybody else ? r 0,19 enat's'oe.
property, or merely the property of those TIP
else an info, nce over him? Those who °,,,,•ittroirai,
vote ought to belong to the voter, should 6°' • 11' ai
ballot ; those who thought that,' nit't
it was ease ,
and that he ought not to have the free °,j sel2
should oppose it. Without vote by ball°el:-00rai'llieL
was impossible that a vote could be a voter:fl foe:
°
was bribery and interference to influence e
There was hope of gain on the one hand, anssitte9;j4
on the other ; and, if there was not actual " 10 te,itt
was at least the expectation of a brihefe
man to vote contrary to his conscience• j,
tie estlis 510'0e,
there were two views in which the
considered. In the first place, ought $ bees 1111;
his own ? and, in the second place, ought "- t ob-se "It
to sell it? It would be conceded that a sstevito:o,o",
be allowed to sell his vote, and the ballot vice 1101/
security against such a sale ; for, if thereby halSo
ballot and secrecy (without which vote .e'r, ;00),
nothing) he was not likely to get a per 01,,e)t
would give money for a vote, when hel,,-(`deba (
ascertaining bow it would be exercise7.'oLe op 1/t
great deal had been said in the course n; ,trae- set
those who opposed the question, of the ueesa /dee',
influence of property which the ballot o,fbe i° to If;
denied that such would be the effect. boel.o
property in the hands of a man who Rano °ll
0
well, would ever remain, and would ever "-sins. esolr
the minds and consciences of those tindesebirbdiool'
I present it was not that kind of iufluenee
bore. No. It was the harsh unforgiv'ss 500, ieOP
had influence now over his treraiblio''.ls svaa her
tenantry. —(Hear.) It had been said tbalitad beef eon
ble to maintain secrecy of ballot, and tilt micas °
forward as an argument against the a°°ruis begv
ballot. But if it were impossible, lie se:si; abes'alt;
what worse situation were they them 'tao,°4ll rete;
present ?—( Cheers. ) But he denied tha josio ideati
g 'rations it would he impossible to ulat won' at 7'
(Cheers.) It had been said that the ball° wog
doe' "1/
a system of hypocrisy,which might be is be 01? , -
effects. But he would ask if there coin oat ,fitlr
more dangerous apt ties of hypocrisy t ran., bis of;
doted a man to give his vote contrarY
,t,st seon4/
(Cheers.) Another effsct of vote by ivirl',°.aoo69,
it would put an end to the syetem 1
°llt to be ttA
situation of puttlic trust, which one of
not for favour, but on account of the miebi es rotrest
chosen._( Hear, hear.) It was iniPd very psi 01;
politic, na refuse the Ballot. TheY seven Die ,
tended the suffrage, but then, by t"i ise ivhsioolj
were admitted to exercise of the franc '
and bY
E cities could not withstand a bribe, e bo
: theY wee tar
ballot and secrecy of voting, Alo-° er
On tbeeeb ,
bonus to bribery and perjury. riss.
e yet
cordially support the motion of the
et,
City of London.—(Cheers.) lion' / ,1
Sir R. PEEL said, that though the
on tioe
g teo
Member for Dublin had not made a 1$ et fpl
was well known that he had longpu:'ery ewe
subject, and as be was a person iv