The Sun.
London, England, 1859-08-05 00:00:00

THE WEATHER.-SUN OFFICIE, AUGLST 5.

THERMOMETER, IN THE SHADE.
73--highest since noon yesterday.
60—lowest thie morning and during the night.
70—this day at noon.
BAROMETER-30'09.
WIND, W.N.W.; moderate, with fine cloudy weather.

HIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE.
THIS DAY —Morning, 6h. 17m.—Afternoon, 6h. 38m.
To-Mos-Row-Morning, 7h. lm.—'Afternoon, 7h: 26m.

I?
$
''o7l'''Z..',,
° 7:--

.Q

rbROIT

Dl~ U

THE SUN.

FRIDAY, AUGUST 5, 1859.

Every day is bringing to light fresh reasons for
our legislative acceptance of the Ballot, as the only
rational prevention of Bribery. The reports of the
committees—the withdrawal of petitions—the void-
ing of elections—even for that matter the confirma-
tion of elections—ono and all go clearly to prove the
imperative necessity there is for some such shield
as the Ballot, not only as an regis for the Electors.
but for the very Representatives themselves. Given
the Ballot—and there could no longer be any chance
of imputations of " venality " against the voter, or
of "corruption," either direct or indirect, against
the successful candidate. We should then have
none of these Committees of Inquiry sitting—
coming to painful conclusions—and bringing up re-
ports full of the most discreditable revelations.
There would be no possibility then of any member
finding himself placed in that uncomfortable
dilemma described so very naively by Mr
BRIGHT, of course with an apologetic eye askance
at his immaculate Quaker brother-in-law, the un-
seated M.P. for Wakefield. His fraternal (indireet)
apologist, observing last evening :—" A man comes
into this house—a great many men can hardly
tell how they get here—and he finds that
some friends of his, in their zeal and in the heat of
the contest, have done things which are imprudent."
Observe, " things which are imprudent," says Mr.
BRIGHT—" the grossest bribery," says the obdurate
report of the Committee ! The poor innocent victim
of this overzeal on the part of his friends, in the in-
stance at Wakefield, having, with the purest and
most unimpeachable motives, by the way, written
two or three cheques for six or seven hundred
pounds sterling at a time, on the eve of the late
general election, in his double capacity as a
banker and as a candidate ! This, however, by
the -way. And now, to return to the
distressing dilemma depicted with so much genial
adroitness by Mr. LEATHAM'S imaginative brother-
in-law, the member for Birmingham—that dilemma
-would be impossible to recur under the system of
the Ballot. Even those preposterous persons who
are supposed nowadays to do evil by stealth for
their friends—blushing to find it fame or notoriety,
as the case may be, before some inquisitive Com-
mittee of Inquiry—even those absurd, and really
to ourselves, no less than to Mr. ROEBUCK, scarcely
conceivable individuals, would refrain from still
continuing to squander hundreds and thousands of
pounds in the dark !—for somebody else
beknown," as airs. Ga?np would say, " to that some-
body !"—and themselves quite unconscious, while
thus adroitly squandering their money for some-
body else, whether that somebody else would ever
benefit the value of one straw for the coin thus
squandered ! The Ballot must necessarily put an
end even to such absurdities. It is as incredible
that any man, agent or principal, could spend
money under the utter darkness of the ballot-box.
in the whirl and turmoil of an election—as that
any one in his right senses would, when travelling
express in a night train, throw bank-notes out of
the window of the railway carriage, upon the
chance of their turning up, by the end of his
journey, somehow to his advantage. •
The discussion which took place last evening in
the House of Commons upon Mr. ROEBUCK'S
motion, in regard to the collusive withdrawal of
election petitions—if it tended to prove anything,
certainly tended to prove, and that, moreover,
.to our thinking, with the clearness of a syllogism,
the imperative necessity there is for the Ballot as
a protective talisman at once for the elector, for the
representative, and even for the House of Commons
itself. As to the resolution submitted to the house
by the hon. and learned gentleman the member for
Sheffield, there could hardly be two opinions as to
its reasonableness. That resolution being simply
as follows :—" That in the opinion of this house
any Minister would be guilty of a breach of the pri-
vileges of the house syho would advise the Crown
to confer the Chiltern Hundreds upon any person
charged with corrupt practices at an election ;
and who, for the purpose of evading the juris-
diction of the house, has entered into an agree-
ment to vae:-..te his seat upon the withdrawal
of the petition charging him with such corrupt
practices." To-cl'IT the House. of Commons will
of hearing from the lips of
have an opportunit? - -
Dr. MICHELL hiMSCIfy the member against whom
nE CA was directed,
this startling motion of .11r•
whether there have been Luny grounds whatever for
so serious an imputation. 1
iehon. gentleman is
ordered to be in attendance to-
day—the debate is
adjourned for the purpose of enabling him to have
the advantage of bein g in attendance, before the
house itself arrives at any definite conclusion, one
way or the other, in ti ie matter as brought under
its notice in. Mr. ROE 03tiCK'S resolution. in the
Meantime the sentiments expressed on all
sides in the house yesterday were only, of

." nn-