Che Examiner.

“THIS IS TRUE LIBERTY, WHEN FREEBORN MEN—HAVING TO ADVISE THE PUBLIC, MAY SPEAK FREER.” —EuripIDEs.

Vou. IL]

CHARLOTTETOWN, P. E. ISLAND, MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 235, 1848.

[No. 60.

VOTE BY BALLOT,

We announced a few days ago that the British Min- istry were defeated on a motion of Mr. Berkeley, in favour of the Ballot, which the Government were not prepared to adopt. It is true that the House was by no means full whenthe motion was carried—the Bill which will succeed it may be lost, but if Mr. Cobden was correct in cescribing the Ballot as the most popular question in England, then the time when it will be re- gistered on the Statue Book cannot be far distant. The policy of introducing the baliot in the election of mem-

bers of Parliament has long engaged the attention of

eminent public men in England; but its advocacy has been principally confined to the class of politicians call- ed Radical Reformers—the Grotes, Humes, Moles- worths and Roebucks—until within the last two or three

would be a sufficient counterbalance. (Hear.) The small boroughs would not be in a worse state than they now were, and public opinion might operate beneficially upon them. He could not believe that the ballot box would fail to ensure secresy. America had been re- ferred to, but in America there was no reason for con- cealment, for property was generaily diffused and tyran- ny was scarce. In America they had the ballot, and needed it not. Here we needed it, but had it not.

In answer to the allegation that the ballot was un- English, he would refer to the practice of the clubs, where were assembled valour learning, and wealth. These al] sought protection—from what? Perhaps from ill-will, intimidation, or tyranny. No one would ac- cuse these men, members of parliament, and others, of unmanliness. But they sought protection from the bully, from the Sir Lucius O’Trigger of society, who, if excluded from a club, would consider it ‘a very pretty quarre] as it stood.’ (Hear, hear.) But was there not a bully of politics, as well as of society? Undoubtedly ; and he eschewed equal arms, and sought to wound in the

years, As Mr. Berkeley observes, the ballot is one of dark. If the victim was a tradesman, his credit and

that class of questions which always succeeds “ more by the force of its own merits than by the ability of its advocates.” Bribery, intimidation and corruption have been practised to such an unblushing and outrageous extent among the English Constituencies that the people have become ashamed, and are determined to purge the system. Accordingly we find that many men of ‘ mark and likelihood’ Whigs and Conservatives, have of late declared in favour of the ballot. We have now much pleasure in bringing to the notice of our readers copious extracts from Mr. Berkeley’s speech in the Commons on the 8th August, upon introducing his

custom were assailed ; if a tenant, let him look for eject- ment; if aservant, for his discharge. (Hear, hear.) He accused not hon. gentlemen of unmanliness because they adopted the ballot; but he asked them to extend the same protection to others.

But it was said the ballot-box destroyed the legitimate influence of property. ‘To this objection he could not

who, in 1836, said—‘Iassert fearlessly that, under a system of secret voting, the legitimate influence of pro- perty will be preserved unimpaired; nay, more, that it will be even exalted beyond what it is at present. There is only one species of influence which the ballot ‘will withdraw from a rich man—it will take away the power of rewarding or punishing electors according to

motion that the Ballot should be substituted in place of|the manner in which they vote.’ Now, sir, I would

the present mode of exercising the elective franchise. | .Vovascotian. |

Mr. H. Berkeley rose to move, ‘ That it is expedient in the election for members to serve in parliament that the votes of the electors be taken by the way of ballot.’ He observed that, after the able manner in which the pallot had been advocated by Mr. Grote and others, he might, perhaps, be accused of vanity and presumption in meddling with so important a subject, of which it might truly be said, in the language of Cicero—* Ta- hella, vindex, taeite libertatis, But the ballot was one of that class of questions which had always succeeded more by the force of their own merits than by the ability of their advocates ;—and on this ground he trusted for the house’s indulgence fora few moments while he tres- passed on their attention. Since the passing of the Re- form Bill, such had been the onward march of public opinion that the ballot seemed only a very minor ques- tion. From recent concessions made to free trade by

ask, and I hope the question will be plainly answered, whether it be really this power of rewarding or punish- ing electors which gentlemen mean, wher they talk of the legitimate influence of property ? Does the house intend to recognise in any one citizen of this commu- nity, peer or commoner, titled or untitled, a legitimate authority to reward or punish electors for their votes? If we do, Sir, the sooner in all consistency we repeal our statutes against bribery, the better ; the sooner we drop

ward for his vote, in plain and unvarnished English, punishing him for his vote, except a license of intimi- tain that this influence which arises from the power of, and by the constitution. J maintain that a man is no.

more warranted in employing his legal powers asa landlord for the purpose of seducing and coercing his

the leaders on both sides the house, he was not without! tenants’ votes, than in employing his funded property to

hopes of seeing them come forward as the advocates of this question. The ballot had been already affirmed by this house in 1810, but had been rejected by the upper house. Assuming that the merits of the ballot were fully known to the country at large, he would address himself to some of the more prominent objections. It was said that secret voting would be an innovation on the present electoral system; that it would not prevent bribery, if it prevented intimidation ; that the ballot box would not secure secresy; that it was un-English, and calculated to produce immorality, lying, and deceit. First, as to its being an innovation, he denied that such was thecase. The franchise was originally uncontroll- ed; but persons of influence gradually undertook the control of the opinions of those beneath them, and then bribery and corruption crept in, ‘The ballot wasa most conservative measure, as tending to protect the fran- chise, and convert it from a mere nominis wmnbra, a mockery, a delusion, into a real and a substantial right. At present, the franchise kept the word of promise to the ear and broke it to the hope.

The arguments by which it was contended that the ballot would not prevent bribery were very sophistical. Would any one purchase goods without the certainty that they would be delivered? Look at Great Yarmouth —-see the agents there with bowls of sovereigns | before them; the voter entering at one door, receiving his

distribute among them bribes in hard cash. Itis the ancient doctrine of the constitution that elections ought to be perfectly free; and the ballot can have no other effect than that of realising this strictly constitutional ‘end. But all legitimate influence of property consists fully with freedom of election ; and therefore it consists fully with vote by ballot.

Out of 13,000 registered electors in Westminster, ‘only 4,500 had voted at the preceding election ; and a ‘great number of others avoided being placed on the register. Such was the character of the election in Westminster in 1837. In 1841 the election turned on the question of free trade, and was hotly contested. The exertions of the aristocracy in support of Capt. Rous were most energetic ; there were large bodies of lady-canvassers. (Hear, hear.) One tradesman at the west end of the town, who was strongly in favour of free trade, and had always been a liberal, stated that, on the day before the election, no fewer than six car- riages with coronets successively drew up before his door; from these descended parties of ladies, who so worried him with threats of withdrawal of custom and denouncing him to others, that he consented not to vote. (Hear, hear.) So far from pleasing them by this course, four out of the six families eventually withdrew their custom; and he had suffered a loss of 60/. annually from the exercise of this tyranny. (Hear.) A few

bribe, and going out at the other door, to vote as he| months after, Capt. Rous turned round with his leader,

was expected to do. But would any one invest a sum! heedless of all this wear and tear of the consciences of

of money—would the Duke of Richmond send down | electors, and voted for free trade. ‘What shadows we Lord A. Lennox—or would the monster speculator, Mr.|are, and what shadows we pursue ? (Cheers.) Another Attwood himself, undertake such a traffic if there was|case to which he would call the attention of the house no certainty of the result being obtained? He would) was that of a publican in Westminster, in reference not believe that such would be the case. Even if the|to whom aristocracy and democracy had both combined

reply better than in the eloquent words of Mr. Grote,

except bribing him? And what is the privilege of,

rewarding or punishing voters, is repudiated by the law |

“You supply me with beer; my servants are in the habit of using your house. If you give your vote against Capt. Rous, I shall not only witharaw my cus- tom but shall forbid any one of my servants ever again to enter your house; but if you vote for us I will see what can be done for your son in the customs, (Great laughter.) ‘The poor man was overcome by arguments so forcible, and he voted for Capt. Rous. At the house of this same man, twelve tailors, all fierce demo- crats, regular ‘ Cuffeys,’ who were to a man supporters of General Evans, held their weekly orgies. (Laugh- ter.) At the next meeting-night after the election, when they heard how the poor man had voted, they summoned him before their tribunal, denounced him, not only as a publican, but a sinner and an apostate, called for their reckoning, and quitted the house. (* Hear’ and laughter.) These were but two cases out of 50 similar ones which he could adduce. At the election of the noble lord (J. Russell) for the City in 1847, he (Mr. Berkeley) was on his committee for the west-end ; and was continually met with declarations from trades- men that they had no votes; they suffered from having the franchise, and were determined to have it no more, unless accompanied with the protection of the ballot. ( Hear.)

The last objection was that the ballot was productive of lying and deceit. The right hon. member for North- ampton (Mr. V. Smith) had said the ballot would con- vert the habits of the electors into one continued lie. Surely, then, there was something in the present system which encouraged truth. So far from this, he main- tained that the existing electoral system was one vast lie, and might be summed up in that comprehensive term, ‘humbug.’ ({Laughter.) Standing orders were passed every session against the interference of peers at elec- tions; but the most extraordinary illustration of the way in which these orders were attended to was furnished by Mr. Dodd, in his ‘Parliamentry Companion.’ He gave, inatabular and alphabetical form, the list of boroughs in which peers exercised influence in the re- turn of members—in all no fewer than 62,in England and Wales, containing 43,600 inhabitants, and return- ing 98 members, Of these, 75 were returned by the direct influence of the aristocracy. Inall there were 49 ‘peers and 25 wealthy commoners who exercised a direct influence in the return of members of parliament. (Hear, hear.) In the face of such a statement as that

the farce of affecting to condemn intimidation the better.| what a farce were the sessional orders! (Hear, hear.) For what is this privilege of giving to an elector a re-|Under the present so-called open system of voting the

candidate addressed his constituents as free and inde- pendent electors, well knowing that they were all

c ‘pt ni-|slaves, and after having obtained his return by the dation? But I, sir, deny the position entirely. I main-|

pressure of every screw known to unscrupulous agents he thanked the electors for their ‘free and independent suffrages,’ (Cheers.) Then having taken his seat in the house, such a candidate was sure to be foremost in acting the British lion, and in declaiming against the ‘un-English’ practice of secret voting. (Laughter.)

He (Mr. Berkeley) had canvassed a populous parish and had taken every pains to arrive at a correct result’ as to undoubted promises. After the election, however, he ascertained that sixty volunteer promises had been broken. His friends calculated that of these forty had been intimidated and twenty bought. Which, then, was the worse lie—that which was told to the constitu- tional canvasser, or that told to the base suborner of bribery and perjury? With reference to the antiquity of the ballot he might, with all respect, remind the house that the very first Christain election that took place was one by ballot. Between the death of our Saviour and his ascension a vacancy occurred among the Apostles, and the ballot was the mode adopted for filling up the vacancy. Was there not a strong pro- bability that that mode of election had been adopted under divine inspiration? He feared the opposition of the noble lord the member for London; but he prayed that noble lord, who wasa strong advocate of education, to recollect that the more enlightened the people became the more acutely would they feel any unconstitutional coercion respecting the exercise of their franchise. (Hear.) He trusted that the noble lord would in this, as in other cases, discard the doctrine of finality, and look at the question with that care and openness to con- viction which its merits and importance deserved. He did not hope for the support of the chartists, whom he had always looked upon as the propagandists of violence, but he hoped for success from the growing influence of enlightened public opinion. He implored the house to emancipate the constituencies who had sent them

there, and who, by their recent conduct in most excited ‘times, had deserved so well at their hands. (Hear,

hear.) Give the people the ballot, and they would have in their gratitude the best security for the stability and

evil were not cured in small constituencies, the good|in doing what was wrong. Shortly before the election! _..urity of the national institutions. effected in large boroughs and counties, by the ballot,| he was waited upon by a lady, who said to him in effect, | :