The Sun.
London, England, 1859-08-29 00:00:00

setts, that it was wished, originally, that the Ballot

there should be secret ; that for a longtime it was not
so ; that in 1851 a strenuous endeavour was made
to render it really secret ; that after a trial of two
elections it was given up to secure a pure ballot ;
and that now, secrecy is not compulsory on all, but
optional. That, as the result, hardly 100 secret
votes out of 167,000 were cast at the Presidential
election in 1856.

Now long ago we gave from a well-informed per
son a very different account of the party motives
which overthrew the secrecy of the Ballot in Mas-
sachusetts; let us, however, take the statement of
Mr. DANA, which has every appearance of being
candidly written, and let us see what it amounts to.
He lays down as his axiom that "the purity of the
ballot must be preserved at all hazards." To this
every one will assent ; but of course none of the
hazards must resemble very high revenue duties,
which doubly defeat their own object. The absence
of secrecy may, as many of as suppose, do this.
Mr. DANA, however, remarks that in Massachusetts
to secure purity they had to give up secresy.
He next observes that " the first danger is of
illegal voters ; the second is of illegal votes."
Against the first danger it seems that Massachu-
setts adopts the same means as all representative
institutions do; there is a register of voters, and
the voter presents himself openly when he claims
to vote. " Our security against illegal voters is 7--
requiring the voter to appear in open meeting,
subject to scrutiny and challenge." Thus far, how-
ever, friends and opponents of the Ballot are agreed.
Both parties on the question wish for honest voters
only. '
It is in respect to the second danger that we fail
to perceive how, taking Mr. DANA'S own account,
making the Ballot open was requisite to its purity
—requisite to the preservation of the Ballot-box
from duplicate or triplicate votes. We condense
his description of the course of things in Massa-
chusetts.

To guard against the danger of a voter's deposit-
ing
more than one vote, the practice was, that
each voting paper should be shown to the election
officers to be a single one, by its being deposited
open in such a way that the officers and others pre-
sent could see that it was a single paper. As the dif-
ferent parties provided the electors with ballot-papers
coloured, or distinguished by different emblems, it
was of course perfectly easy for the candidates'
check-clerks to note the name on the register and
the vote which followed it, and the Ballot was not
one in the English and Australian sense of—secret

voting
But in 1851 the attempt was made by means o:
adhesive envelopes to secure secret voting. Politica
parties there assailed it with opprobrious epithets,
as they do here. At first they provided their own
envelopes, but then they easily secured the same
object as was gained by presenting their own
ballot-papers. The Government then provided
them, and it was made penal to counterfeit the
Government envelope, which was furnished to the
voter only at the balloting-booth.
And now what proof follows that this unques-
tionable secrecy had to be given up to secure purity ?
It was given up, but in Mr. DANA'S own statement
the reason is a very different one from that of
purity. He mentions that "it fell into disfavour'
through " the interest which political committees
and the employers have in ascertaining how men
vote—the preference of many, and the willingness
of most to have their votes known—and the incon-
veniences [which he does not specify] of the system
itself." Mr. DANA mentions no other reasons.
The occasional difficulty of stiff-fingered labourers
sealing the envelopes, and the consequent falling
out of the papers, cannot be the inconveniences re-
ferred to, as he mentions that a very simple and
obvious remedy was found for these things.
We have read, naturally, a letter from M r. DANA
with much care as well as interest ; but unless he
has in his mind facts which he does not mention,
we must say that he has not stated one which sup-
ports his second and third and only important con-
cluding inferences, that the purity of the Ballot de-
pends upon what we might term, in Irish, its being
no Ballot ;—on its being " deprived of its secrecy."
The impetuous eagerness of American politicians
to know how the poll is going, their total want of
self-restraint, and the interested motives of em-
ployers. are given as the reason why secrecy is
renounced. Indeed we are told that the reason why
balloting papers are necessary with open voting, is
the large number of persons elected to different
offices, frequently at one time, and by one paper.
Hence printed lists are necessary. But these are
not printed lists of all the candidates, as in Aus-
tralia, from which the voter erases the names he
wishes, but lists printed by the opposing parties,
and given by them to the electors. •
To us, then, Mr. DANA'S letter reads like a con-
tribution to our side of the argument. Like the
oft-alluded-to Judge, he should have given his
opinions without the facts or reasons on which
they are based. Let us add, however, that we cor-
dially welcome contributions in a spirit like those
of Mr. DANA ; let us hear and profit by the obser-
vations of all. The lesson we gain from Massa-
chusetts is that secret voting is quite practicable,
but that hot political partisans find it an obstruc-
tion to their objects. To most Englishmen this is a
great commendation ; and our communications from
all the Australian colonies show that the moral
effect of the Ballot there is one of the results which
most strikes and gratifies the better part of society
in that colony.