and he had a clause, besides, specifying | other cases. Surely he should not be the manner in which he should propose to told that ballot would not be a complete have the ballot taken. Two things were preventative of bribery and corruption. necessary-first, to satisfy the House that Under the present system men knew, the principle was good, and next to con- when they had given bribes, whether they vince it that the details for carrying that got value for their money; but under the principle into effect were without objec- system of ballot, the facilities for acquiring tion. It would be idle to enter into the that knowledge would be so diminished, details with those who would not concede that they would hesitate before they the principle; but to those who granted the offered bribes to others over whose votes last, he should be most ready to give way they could possess no control. He did as to the first, and to adopt any of their not mean that the ballot should take useful suggestions. The first question place in the first instance, for he would. was, whether the vote by ballot was likely still retain the nomination and the open to accomplish the object of the Bill before voting by show of hands; but if a poll the House, that object being the pre- were demanded, then he thought balloting vention of bribery and corruption? A ought to commence. By preserving these man who gave his suffrage by ballot parts of the old system, he should not would bestow it according to the dic- take away from the candidates the adtates of his honest judgment, and while it vantage of meeting the voters, nor from left just and proper influence in operation, the voters that of seeing the men who it rendered all other influence impossible. were candidates to represent them; nor If an elector gave his vote in gratitude to should he put an end to that opportunity a good landlord, or out of regard to a which an election now presented, of friend or relative, that might be called a demanding from the candidates pledges just and proper influence, and that was of their future conduct, and means by untouched and unbroken by the plan now which their subsequent demeanour in that proposed. Upon this position he (Mr. House might be compared with their preO'Connell) placed his foot, and defied any vious professions. It was said by some man by argument to remove him from it persons, that the mode of voting by ballot -that election by ballot left a man as was a sneaking thing that ought to be free to vote honestly as if he gave his avoided. Why, who was guilty of sneaksuffrage openly at the hustings. He also ing? Not the man who, by the means of contended, with equal confidence, that vote by ballot, voted as he thought fit, for election by ballot freed the voter also he performed his duty, but he who was from corrupt and improper influence. prevented from performing that duty by Where detection was impossible, terror a system of open voting which made him of a landlord, for instance, could have no the creature of another man's will, in opeffect; and corruption could not operate, position to his own, and by which he was because no man would be so silly as compelled to be at once a hypocrite and a to give a bribe where he could have no slave. On him, and not on the other, security that it would be earned. If, must the charge of hypocrisy rest. The however, a bribe were given, the giver House were about to continue the elective being a fool for his pains, no man would franchise in a place where their own be so ready to break faith as one who votes described it to have been grossly would accept it. These were great ad- abused. What, then, was the process by vantages; and if the House really wished which that abuse was to be prevented in to prevent bribery and corruption at East future? Why, by giving the voter the Retford, here the effectual means were means of voting in future as he pleased. offered to its consideration and acceptance. He had heard it said in that House, that Here they had an opportunity of making it was the right of the landlord to coman experiment, and might bring into im-mand the vote of his tenant. If that mediate play a principle of considerable importance, and try whether it were well founded or not. By so doing, they might not only see whether that principle could be made applicable to this particular borough, but whether the machinery worked well, and could be adopted in

were so, the tenant was but a slave, and he might as well have his face blacked at once and be sent to our colonies, to bear the name of slave, which was his condition if he could be compelled to vote for a person he did not like. It had been said, that if there was influence on the

He

one hand, there were terror, and the force | election shall not be determined on a of violence, and the fear of mobs on the view of the votes of the freemen and other. Supposing that to be true, it others claiming a right to vote at the said shewed the excellence of the ballot; election, but that a poll shall be required, it was a remedy for the latter as well as shall take such poll by ballot in the way for the former; and while it would prevent hereinafter mentioned." the exercise of the influence of the superior, it would at the same time destroy the terror of the mob, who would have no means of knowing how the secret vote had been given. These were the advantages possessed by the plan he proposed [Question was here called]. He knew the lateness of the hour; and he knew, too, that this subject was now brought forward by an insignificant individual, who was now, and was ever likely to remain, unconnected with party; and who was besides a believer in the excellence of Radical Reform. Under these circumstances, it was perhaps little wonderful that the House should be weary of the discussion; but he was in England, in a country which was said to be a land of common sense, and he now proposed a plan which had plain common sense to recommend it. His plan would do away with undue influence, with direct corruption and with all those evils of which complaint was now so often made. It was true, that he who gave money for his seat in that House, might be a philanthropist-he might be a man of most excellent character; there had been such, but they were not always so; and it often happened that they purchased their seats for the advantage of themselves or their families. He had the honour to be the representative of an uncorrupted and unintimidated population of a population that had fearlessly given him their disinterested votes. He did not, therefore, ask the House to adopt the plan of ballot from any personal experience of its absolute necessity. But still he knew how often votes had been influenced in other places, and he called on all the Members of that House to support him, if they wished, as they said they did, that elections should be conducted fairly and incorruptly. He would subjoin the clause he meant to move to that which related to the duties of the returning officer. The hon. and learned Member moved the following clause :-" And be it further enacted, that such proper officer, to whom any writ shall be directed for electing a Burgess for the said Borough, in case the said

Mr. Hume said, that he seconded the Motion with great pleasure, because no questions had occupied more time, nor any more uselessly, than those in which the House endeavoured to punish individuals for corrupt practices at elections. therefore conceived that any mode which enabled a man to give a vote free from the influence of a superior, or from direct bribery, was very desirable. He thought the plan now proposed would be more likely than any other to effect what he had heard Members in that House again and again desire to see, namely, every voter able to vote as he pleased. It would effect that which repeated Acts of Parliament had been unequal to achieve. Since he had had a seat in that House, he had seen frequent instances of vote by ballot, and what was that done for, except to put an end to influence? but unfortunately from the state of that House it did not answer the end proposed; for lists were prepared and put into the hands of individuals who were obliged to give the names on those lists as of their own choice. In large bodies of voters there would be a different result. The plan of voting by ballot was now almost universal. In the United States 250,000 people voted by ballot, without the slightest confusion, and every officer in the State was elected by ballot. It was said that ballot was a sneaking mode of expressing a man's opinions; but he would ask, whether there was anything in the character of the people of the United States that shewed ballot to be the proof of a sneaking or cowardly spirit? He would say exactly the reverse. Neither did he think that the charge of hypocrisy could be truly brought against this mode of voting, for in that respect the other was much worse. The practice of voting by ballot was adopted by all clubs. If what had been stated by the opponents of the measure was true, it would be more manly in the clubs to vote openly, but they did not; and it should be recollected that the members of the clubs were gentlemen, while electors, in general, were in a different situation, and were by no means so independent in their circumstances. No

to the highest respect, who declared that the ballot system was productive of so many evils in their country, that they wished it could be got rid of, and viva voce voting adopted in its stead. He was a representative of 5,000 or 6,000 voters, who came openly and boldly, and good

member of these clubs had a right to say that the mode of voting by ballot was hypocritical or improper; for he did that which men in much humbler situations ought to be allowed to do, but which he refused them the liberty of doing, upon a pretence of impropriety that was much more applicable to himself. Another ex-humouredly, to the hustings to give their cellent advantage in the plan was, that it would put an end to those scenes of riot and disorder which now disgraced elections. Those who really wished to put an end to these scenes would vote for the plan now proposed. On these grounds, he considered the plan beneficial for the interests of the community, and he could not think that any hon. Member who looked at what had taken place in France would hesitate in believing in the efficacy of the measure.

Sir R. Wilson observed, that every one who looked to the signs of the times must see that the cause of reform had assumed a different aspect from heretofore. The opinion that reform was necessary was no longer a clamour occasioned by temporary distress-it was the settled conviction of intelligent men. The subject deserved, therefore, to be fairly examined by the House. He gave the hon. and learned Member for Clare full credit for sincerity in bringing forward his proposition; and he hoped that hon. Member would give him the same credit for sincere motives in opposing it. The proposition was of a most extensive character. The hon. and learned Member admitted that it was an innovation, and intended as an initiative of a total change in the elective franchise: but there was something in the concealment and muffling up, which the system of ballot proposed, repulsive to his feelings, contrary to the English character, and to that publicity which every elector ought to be desirous of seeking. It was a system suited to a peculiar class of people, and to juniors in the representative system; and an experiment to try how far a nation was adapted to receive such a system. We talked of the march of intellect, but this was a retrograde march, we were going backward; and any foreigner who heard such a proposition would consider that its adoption would be a proof of our degradation. The circumstances of France and of America were totally different from ours; but he had conversed with North Americans, persons whose opinions were entitled

vote, and he never would give a vote which would deprive them of the pleasure they felt at publicly displayin gtheir sentiments. The hon. and learned Gentleman should have his vote for any measure of reform which would not be inconsistent with the constitution.

Mr. Warburton observed, that all political measures should lead to good Government, and the question was, whether this measure would or would not lead to such an object. If he had any objection to the adoption of the ballot in Bassetlaw, it was because the number of voters was not so great as might be wished; for the fittest places for this measure were those where there were great numbers of voters. There was no place where intimidation and influence were carried to a greater pitch than in London; and there the ballot would be beneficial. There were some places, therefore, where the ballot would be proper,- -others where it would be improper. He meant, however, to vote for the Motion of the hon. Member for Clare. [“ Question," Question."]

Mr. D. W. Harvey said, he could assure the tempestuous part of the House, that he would agitate them but for a very few moments. His opinion was generally in favour of reform; and before he voted, he wished to explain the reasons why he did not support the Motion of the hon. and learned Member for Clare. He had listened to the hon. Member, and understood the object of his proposition to be, to check and stifle corruption in individuals. Then was this the best mode? He thought not. He thought that the best and only effectual mode of preventing corruption was, to place the representative in the same situation in that House as the electors at the hustings, and oblige Members to swear at the bar that they had not offered a bribe. This was the only effectual remedy; though he was the only Member the other night who divided with the hon. Member for Beverley (Mr. Stewart) on a Motion for this object. The hon. and learned Member had said