The Sun.
London, England, 1866-05-29 00:00:00

LONDON, TUESDAY, MAY 29, 1866.

The debate of last evening certainly did not want
for animation, and if the Government can congra-
tulate themselves on the first evening's discussion
being safely over, they have also to chronicle the
mortification of finding themselves in a minority of
10 in a house of 491 members, including the 4
Tellers and the Speaker. Mr. GLADSTONE has a
troublesome office to perform in getting his bill
through the house, and it is probably none the more
pleasant to him from his own consciousness of the
shortcomings of the measure. Mr. GLADSTONE
cannot bring himself to supportt the Ballot, though
we hope before long to enrol him in the list of dis-
tinguished converts ; but he must be fully sensible,
even without the revelations of the last election,
that bribery is one of the great drawbacks and dis-
graces of our Parliamentary system. It appears
undoubtedly inconsistent to pass a bill for amend-
ing the Representation of the People Bill imme-
diately after such a transaction as the Nottingham
election without making some effort to mitigate
the evil. But the fact is that the antidote is ready
to our hands, and we refuse to take it,
be the poison ever so deadly. Mr. BRIGHT spoke
the truth when he said that he had no belief in the
efficacy of measures of punishment to repress cor-
ruption. " The law is strong enough now as re_
gards punishment, and yet the law seems ineffectual
to suppress bribery." Mr. BRIGHT'S cure is two-
fold—the one as efficacious as the other is illusive.
He says that you can only prevent bribery by hav-
ing constituencies sufficiently large, or by introduc-
ing election by ballot. The experiment of large
constituencies has been tried without success. No
doubt the nomination boroughs are had enough, and
the memorable twelve.persons who returned a mem-
ber in the halcyon days before 1832 were far from
immaculate or independent, but the boroughs of
our large towns cannot boast much either. No one
can pretend to believe that bribery is never prac-
tised in large constituencies ; and Mr. STANILAND'S
suggestion that boroughs should be grouped in such
a manner as to make bribery physically impossible
is quite futile in these days of rapid and easy loco-
motion. Mr. STANILAND said, with great force 1
and justice, that when honourable members in-
veighed against the poor voter who took bribes
they ought to remember that if the temptation
were not placed in his way by hon. members no
bribery would take place. He trusted that when-
_:ver a ranasure was brought forward on this sub-
ject care would be taken that ['WSJ who offered
bribes were subjected to punishment rather than
those who received them. But, in fact, it is this
very consciousness that makes bribery so difficult
to deal with. It is almost absurd for speeches to
be made and bills penned, for grave deliberations
to be held amid an attentive audience, when
all the while va goodly proportion of those tak-
ing part in the proceedings owe their seats to
bribery, corruption, intimidation, and influence
in some of their various forms. Election by ballot
is, as Mr. BRIGHT said, the effectual cure, though
the hon. member for Birmingham need not have
weakened his argument by telling us that " bribery
is unknown in the United States." He would
scarcely get an independent American who knew
anything of the political working of his own system
to support his statement. There is quite enough room
for censure when we can be gravely told in the
House of Commons that in a constituency of
1,000, 700 voters were bribed at an average
cost of £35 per head, a good many of
the remainder receiving £6O, without Mr.
BmGm's indulging in his favourite declamatory
platitudes, and telling us that there is no other
country in the world where there is such gross
bribery charged and admitted at elections.
Vote by ballot itself will not always pro-
tect against despotic power, and it is not ne-
cessary to- bribe where influence and intimidation
can effect the required end, while places and offices
in the States are usually part of the regular machi-
nery employed to secure the return of the American
PRESIDENT. Vote by ballot under our constitution
would be an effectual protection to the voter, and
therefore it would be free from many of the abuses
charged against it. As for its being denounced as
un-English we have only to conclude that the
objectors consider bribery an especial insular
virtue. But the task is an uphill one, for the
majority are against it in their hearts, and so much
heroic indignation has been spent on the proposal
that it is easy to hide the real reason for reluctance
luuder the mask of patriotism and independence.
Mr. BRIGHT, however, made one unlucky mistake,
into which he was betrayed by his hatred of Con-
servatism, when he sneered at the new-found zeal of
the Opposition with regard to purity of elections.
Mr. Disn AELI was at once ready with the very obvious
retort that it was nothis party who need fear Election
Committees. Mr. DISRAELI, indeed, did not
shrink from going back to the revelations of the
last election, when the names of Wakefield and
Huddersfield were ominous in the ears of the Man-
chester School. Very possibly the amiable wish to
embarrass the Government and impede the pro
gress
of the measure had a good deal to do with the for-
midable body of 248, who supported Sir R.
KNIGHTLEY'S amendment, but the principle is one
that commends itself to all parties, and the only plea
that could be advanced against it by the Govern-
ment was that it was advisable to deal with
the question separately. Why does not the Go-
vernment put a bold face on the matter, and deal
with it not only separately but conclusively by pro-
posing the Ballot ? They cannot please mock Re-
formers by any measure of Reform. They are safe
to encounter
fyupnatecirthe opposition of all is hose interests
are affected by any measure of redistribution. They
era
most t mthoednitoo reductiontohkosefowrho tf
he fear f
s t the
thesupeople by even th
not e
Ho franchise.support
tfm ro lithhye
country which
uset? Why not frankly
heir temporising fails
to obtain from the
de-
clare that since all
modes have failed, and
other
the House has declared its
conviction that some-
thing should be done to check the evil, they will
intrcduce vote by ballot Is it because the Liberal
side have really the most to fear from its intoduc.