The Sun.
London, England, 1858-06-09 00:00:00

complain that 'Lord Tom Noddies' are pushed into
office, while other men of equal and perhaps better pre-
tensions, but not of such high birth, are excluded. Far
be it from him to endorse that opinion of the hon. mem-
ber for Middlesex, now the bon. member for Dover; and
be doubted if the hon. member for Dover agreed in the
opinion of the hon. number for Middlesex. (Laughter.)
The ballot, like other questions, has suffered from the se-
dative and soporific effects of office. He should be un-
grateful, however, if he had forgotten the able speech of
the lath Sir W. Molesworth when in office in favour of the
ballot. He felt how much he wanted the able aid of Mr.
Cobden and other older supporters of the question when
the name of Gibson was not yet among their ranks. He
bad read the evidence' of Sir A. Cockburn when Mr.
Cockburn ; but when in office he was as silent well he
bad been under the influence of a dose of Morphia.
(Laughter.) Again, where were the dulcet notes of
Bethell—(laughter)—who discoursed such eloquent
music to the men of Aylesbury ? He could only apply to
him the words of the poet, "Cold is Cad wailer s tongue."
(Laughter.) Bat now that the great Whig leader was
overthrown perhaps the time was come when his Liberal
friends might make themselves advantageously known
to their constituents. (Laughter.) It was not his inten-
tion on the present occasion to enter into a theoretical
discussion of the ballot, for the arguments in its favour
had never been answered. Nothing could be more lucid
than the arguments for the ballot ; and nothing more
delusive than the arguments used against it. They, for
the most part, consisted of guesses, loose assertions, and
baseless surmises. He had challenged, and be then chal-
lenged, ally bon. gentleman to show tbat the operation
of the ballot had not been perfectly successful wherever
it has been tried. By the ballot he did not mean a mere
box and polling-booth, but emphatically secret voting.
That veteran refoiriner Gen. Thomp- on, in one of his
able pamphlets on this subject, ridiculed the idea of any-
thing like publicity being introduced where the ballot
was concerned, which he compared to a young girl who
bad no objection to play blind man's buff provided holes
were left for her eyes. Purity of election, peace, order,
and the choice of the moat respectable men invariably
-accompanied the ballot.
Mr. MAINWARING rose to order. He wished to
know whether it was not out of order for the hon. gen-
tleman to read his speech. (Oh, oh.) It was very much
like it. (Oh, ob.)
Mr. BERKELEY said that if tbe bon. gentleman lent
him a pair of glasses he might be able to do that, but
without holding the paper close to his eyes be was not
able to do it. Attempts had been made to show that the
system of voting by ballot had been abused in America,
but he defied any hon. gentleman to point out a State
in the American Union which abandoned that system
for open voting. Mr. Nicholson said that it had been
entirely successful in Australia. He was much struck
by the argument of a working man at a meeting in fa-
vour of the ballot, who said that the working men al-
ways elected persons above themselves in education and
in position of life to fill offices in their clubs and associa•
tions, and that it was rot likely they would do other-
wise if they bad the ballot in respect of political elec-
tions. He would ask hon. gentlemen to compare the 18
Presidents selected by the ballot in the United Staees
with any 18 successive monaraha of England, and be was
sure those who were elected by ballot would not suffer
by the comparison: He was not opposing a hereditary
monarchy, but he was opposing a hereditary ministry.
The Ambessadors of the American Union contrasted fa-
ir curably with the Ambassadors of this country, who
were chosen, not far their merit, but because they were
Cenn favourites, or had influence in the Ucuse of. Lords cr
the House of Commons. The Americon Ambassador
never met our Ambassadors tbat they had not the best
of-if. In gunnery and naval shipbuilding the Americans
were our superiors and models. Why was this ? Because
the people of England were not represented in that house,
which bore the purse of the cation, but au aristocracy
and a moneyed oligarchy ; because our executive was not
filled by men of talent, but by a fat and overweening ne-
potism, which crushed all the inventive power of the
country. The Au.tralian papers, from which he had full
extracts. admitted that the ball )t had been successful
there. fie met an Tri-h gentleman of a Tory family who
had been long resident in Australia, and on inquiring of
him whether any class in Australia were dissatisfied with
the ballot, he replied, "Only one—the Roman Catholic
priests, and they oppose it because it lessens their infla•
ones over the Roman Catholics. (Hear, and laughter.)
He recommended this fact to those gentlemen from Ire-
land who said that if the influence of the landlords was de-
stroyed by the ballot, there would remain nothing to
count( ract the influence of the Roman Catholic priests in
Ireland, as the ballot would not affect spiritual power.
What was the position of the Irish elector ? Oa the one
aide of him there was the spiritual influence of the priest,
and on the otter the material influence of the landlord—
the landlord here, the priest there, the elector between
them—"eull devil, pull baker." (Laughter.) One of the
many quirks and quietles used against the ballot was,
that if you gave the ballot to the electors with the pre
sent qualification they would re fuse any extension of the ,
french:Fe. The noble lord the member for the city of
London yielded to those who used that argument. But
what took rlsce in Australia ? One of the very first acts
-which the billet-elected parliament in Australia did was
to give such an extension of the suffrage as nearly
amounted to universal suffrage. (Hear.) But it would
be said, " Oh, but Australia is a remote colony." It was
a remote colony, but it was peopled by Anglo Saxons,
and your Anglo-Saxons, in whom it was so becoming to
vote openly, adopted the ballot. (Bear) hop d the
exert-Tie <f the Angle-Saxons of Victoria would be fol-
lowed by the Angle-Saxons of the mother-country. One
of the advantages of raising this question of the ballot
was that it afforded an occasion of bringing bef ire the
house and the country practical instances of the tyranny
and nsalvereation which occurred during the year in con-
nection with elections, and that there was no value in
the argument of those who raid that the aristocracy were
becoming politically more virtuoue. He did not know
whether the light hon. geutleman the member for North-
ampton was in the house, but he wished to state, for his
edification and that f the house, what took place at the
last election for North Northernptoeshire. The two can-
didates, Mr. Hunt and Mr. Vernon, addressed the elec-
tors from waggons. (Laughter) Mr. Hunt, according
to the North,qmpton Mercury, &lid "be would go against
the ballot through thick and thin." They perhaps knew
that at the different poll.ng pieces the numbers polled
varied according to the circumstaoces of each locality.
In the Peterborough di trict 316 votes were recorded
for his opponent, and 161 for him (Mr. Hunt) ; but he
knew that be had 316 go, d wishes beside the 161 votes.
In Wellinborongb, Mr. Vernon had 392 votes to his 251;
but they knew the sort of screw which was put upon the
people there, and that there was in that neigbbourhood
a large lanced rroprietor who would put on a screw for
a Whig. (Laughter.) He (Mr. Hunt) knew of his own
knowledge that the screw was worked. [A. Voice in the
crowd—. Because you put it on yourself.']" Much laugh-
ter.) S much for Mr. Hunt. Then Mr. Vernon re se,
and said " that the present election had thrown more
light on the necessity for the ballot than anything that
bad recently taken place." Now Mr. Fitzpatrick Vernon
bad two brothers-in-law in the house who voted against
the tall. t ; his father voted against it, and his fathei-
iw, who was the hereditary owner of two rotten..
pocket boroughs. (Laughter.) The house would not for-
get the pompous seesicnal order which was passed by
them to prevent peers from interfering with the election
of members of the House of Commons. When they in-
sisted on that order being printed, was it not like the
ease of Dogberry when he insisted on bcirg recorded in
a particular manner? (Laughter.) It was a pharisaical
pretence which was never intended to be acted upon. It
was notorious that one-third of the members of that house
'were returned by peers who concerned themselves in
elections to that house. Tne peers laughed at them, ridi-
culed them, and, if he might venture to use such an ex-
i'r"ci"fl, "took a sight" of them. (Laughter.) He held
an his hand a letter from Lord Lilford to Mr. Hunt, and
lltt more remarkable document; one more unconstitu-
oon:l, or showing more conteiupt for the order of the
AP _ so of Commons, he never read. He says, " You will
also forgive me for saying that neither by property nor
position should I think you quaified to represent it (the
counly) in Parliament. Holding this opinion, without
any disrespect towards yourself —(laughter)—l must re-
quest that my tenantry may not be canvassed for their
votes in your favour." (Laughter.) He did not know
in millet manner the hen. member (Mr. Hunt) acted, but
be (Mr. Berkeley) if in his place, would have canvassed
every one of Lord Lilfurd's tenantry. But let the
house not suppose that Mr, Hunt was without a
screw on his side. (Laughter.) If Mr. Vernon bad
Lis lofty Lilford, Mr. Hunt had his hold Buc-
clench. (Laughter.) The address of his grace was not
so insolent or dictatorial in mahner as the communica
tion from Lord Lilford, but it was plain enough. It was
addressed by his grace's steward to the tenantry, and
was as follows : "Mr. Payne will be obliged by Mr. So-
and-so attending the election on Monday next. Mr.
Bunt has his good wieheit.” (Much laughter.) Who
would take proceedings against Lord Lilford for what
he bad done ? If he had been seen standing at the poll•
ing booth and doing what his steward was doing no no-
tice would be taken of it, notwithstanding the standing
order of the house. Perhaps it might be said, why not
the hon. member for Bristol take proceedings. (Hear.)
His answer to that was that he was taking proceedings.
(Hear.) Ile wan pointing out the proper and constitu
tioual way in which Lord Lilfurd's voting machines might
be freed from his lordship's power—be was pointing out
to them the mode by ;Thiel), instead of passing a phari-
(Weed order which meant nothing, they could do a great
act of jiict!ce to the people and of credit to themselves.
(Hear, bear.) He had usually been in the habit of
referring to recent elections, and quoting from the
se'esches' of the various candidates who had given
opinions on the ballot. He appealed to the house whe-
ther he had ever done this in a party spirit, or treated it
as a party question, or even raised the question with
villein he acted, at the expense of those he opposed.
(Ho ua) There had recently been several elections con-
etqueut on the accession of Lord Derby's Government,
and he had been enabled to get the opinions of a few
hapbers of the Government on the subject. The right
gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer had
been akeel several questions • be, however, felt no diffi-
iccoel,t! nuerehaintatdhee
aA
(declaration
call' generalising the .sub-
ration which, corning from the
leader of the Tory party,he (‘Zr,Berkeley) had no rea-
son to object to. Ile ii-rid oppose the measure,
because it would tend to diminishy
the jaet influence of
property. In that sentence was contained the real es
;ence of the opposition to the I:new-use—they dreaded to
lose their fluence. That language of the
right
hon.
gentleman did very well addressed to countrymen and
faro:terse but, if he repeated it there he would be asked
what were, his views as to the due and consti tn. ion al in-
Aluepee of property.
That i▪
nfluence he (Mr. Berk,lee)
;swished to ail tein. It was only the undue and u
'l'l4
,4uenee he wished to dimini▪
sh. From the speech the
na he turned to that of a noble lord
ritas.ll2.7".gle4l.lffiee" wallsasked whether ho would ohjtct to
s a 44, e. r.,t- •3- king of the ballot U-
egtei into an inquiry into the working
Australia. He said he would not. That was a remerkable
speech foia,Tory. (A. laugh) He saw no difference