The Sun.
London, England, 1860-10-13 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EvirENING, OCTOBER 13, 1860.

the tine at which they are uttered, expose
their own intrinsic absurdity to the uttermost
degree of derision. It is such a wholly ludicrous
period to have selected for the prophecy of any col-
lective disaster to the Cabinet. Parliament up—the
members of the Lords and Commons in the midst of
their vacation enjoyments—the Colonial Secretary
on the other side of the Atlantic with the Heir to
the Crown—the Foreign Secretary far away in the
opposite direction, in the west of Germany, in
attendance upon the SOVEREIGN—the majority of
their colleagues scattered over the country,
only two or three of them in town—not a
single Question of the smallest importance
pressing heavily upon the Councils of the
Ministers—it is nothing less than actually laugh-
able at such a moment of profound Ministerial
calm and absolute freedom from all " party"
anxieties, to hear those little anti-English
gobemouches over there in Paris talking about the
immediate and inevitable disruption of the PAL-
MERSTON Government. If anything were needed
to strengthen the grasp of her MAJESTY'S present
advisers upon the fasces of the Ministerial autho-
rity, it would be precisely these very predictions
coming from exactly that very source !

Sir JOHN Bow RING has been delivering at Exeter
an excellent speech on the question—"ls the Ballot
a Security for Honest Representation." It is re-
freshing to find an old and hearty Liberal like Sir
JOHN retaining fully his integrity so long; and
retaining it, too, after having been in the service
of Governments whose leading men, unable to
damage the cause of the Ballot by their arguments,
have attempted to do it by jokes or sneers. He
could thus boldly state his present views—the views
of a consistent, and certainly highly intelligent

political life—" Meditating much," he said, "as he
had b$ ealled on much to meditate, on the yeti-,
ous political changes which had been suggested for
the general improvement of our institutions, he had
come to the conclusion that there was none so im-
portant, none for which reasons so cogent and
irresistible could be urged, none which could derive
so much advantage from observation and experience
as that of the Ballot—that instrument by which a
man was protected in the honest exercise of that
political power which his country had confided to
his keeping." Of course we shall heartily accord
with his conclusion ; but we also agree equally with
another and leading representation in his speech.
He had remarked, that while he remained as staunch
a Radical as ever, in the sense of being ready to cut

up all abuses by the roots, he must confess that
t
IZIt was, perhaps, none of the other articles of his
R 1 faith in regard to which he could not feel
the weight of opponents' objections. In candour
he must acknowledge the weight of the argument

against Universal Suffrage, that it was giving vast
power to ignorance. In regard to Annual Parlia-
ments, it was true that they might too often re-
move men from their posts, just as they had learned
their duties ; and even comparatively small consti-
tuencies had something to say on the claim of their
peculiar class to direct representation. "But," added
Sir JOHN, " with respect to the Ballot, he never
heard one argument that was not utterly worth-
less as against the position that if society entrusted
a man with .the discharge of a certain duty, all
temptations should be removed from him that would
induce to betray that trust, and that all punish-
ment should be averted that menaced him if he dis-
charged that trust honestly. Secret suffrage was
the machinery by which society provided that
honest votes should be deposited. It was nothing
beyond that."

Our readers well know that this is pre-
cisely the view on which we have again and
again insisted; and on which the supporters of the
Ballot ought to insist with all candidates who profess
themselves to be reformers. We have always freely
acknowledged that every leading part of the Re•
formers' creed is open to some objections. That,
like most other social ameliorations which can be
proposed, extension of suffrage, equal distribution
of seats, and short Parliaments, have attendant
disadvantages, though the advantages largely pre-
dominate ; but, with Sir JOHN BOWRING, we deny
that real arguments against the Ballot have any
existence. If they had, we should be quite con-
tent to show a preponderance of advantage for sect et
voting ; but we entirely deny the existence of any
disadvantages. Were the whole community so
sensitively virtuous that no one could bring himself
to influence another's vote by appeals to his personal
hopes or fears, we should still like to know what
harm the secrecy of the vote could do. But when
the reverse is too notoriously the case—when the
constitution and labours of election committees is
the first serious work of every new Parliament, and
the concoction of bills to evade the Ballot, by pro-
fessions of preventing bribery and corruption, one
of the great cares of both the great parties—we are
at a loss to comprehend how a professed Liberal
can open his lips against the Ballot without a blush.
Of course all this will be set down at once as
dogmatism, or pure one-sidedness. So it may be.
But uncharitable as it may seem, we must own that
we believe that almost all who from a Liberal
point of view attempt to argue against the Ballot
inwardly think as we do. Tories are, frequently,
more honest, and do not scruple to avow that they
wish to retain the power over electors which open
voting confers on the wealthier classes; the old Whig
party, however—the PALMERSTON and RUSSELL
Whigs—are driven to all kinds of subterfuges, be-
cause their hearts are, on this point, with the
Tories, while their political necessities require them
to hoist the Liberal flag. When we say that these
men think as we do, we mean that they, in their
inner judgments, agree with us on the certain effect
of the Ballot. They think as we do, that it would
be the charter of electoral independence. That, as
the rule, it would indispose candidates to bribe and
threaten, and would deliver electors from such
temptations. We are very sure that secret voting is
opposed by these gentlemen for secret reasons ; and
that what we have just stated is their grand secret
reason. There is no need to publish it either in
the house, or on the hustings. It might go
hard with the man who had audacity enough for
that ; but there is a perfect freemasonry on the
subject amongst the whole class. " All right
enough, but it won't suit us"—is the pass-word
whispered along the benches of corruptors and
intimidators who owe their seats not to their merits,
but to their purse or to their power over tenants at
will.

The fatal objection hitherto to the Ballot is there-
fore the one which is never heard. Members and
candidates, and Ministers of State laugh in their
sleeves, and wink quietly at each other, and across
the table to their Tory friends, as they repeat the
old cant phrases and expressions—" un English"—
" trusteeship for ncn-electors"—" the Ballot won't
keep the vote secret"—" it will keep it too secret
for the unrepresented to know it"—" Look at
France"—" Look at America"—" Look any where
but at Australia," and so forth. We do not won-
der that Mr. BERKELEY is tempted to serve up an
annual dish of banter on the subject. What, how-
ever, we rather need is some one to tell these men
of false pleas the plain truth about themselves ;
some one to bring out their real motives for
opposition with such photographic truth,