::--N 
 
 
 «^ 
 
 :^4^^ 
 
 ■y,-/ r 
 
 
 iS^irj^ 'V •- 
 
 ijp. 
 
 ,v..,H^ 
 
 ^'^^i 
 
 
 ^:/M
 
 LIBRA RY 
 
 OF THL 
 
 U N 1 VLR5 ITY 
 
 or I LLl NOIS
 
 nt 
 
 V-
 
 
 -^ 
 
 
 
 ^
 
 IS THE BALLOT A MISTAKE ? 
 
 BV 
 
 S. C. DEN ISO N, ESQ. 
 
 INNER TEMPLE. 
 
 " We know well what secret voting is; 
 and we know that it may be made a com- 
 plete security against external influence in 
 voting for Members of Parliament." 
 
 Westminster Review, vol. xiii, p. 25. 
 
 " All contrivances by Ballot we know 
 experimentally to be vain and childish to 
 prevent a discovery of inclinations. Where 
 they may the best answer the purposes of 
 concealment, they answer to produce suspi- 
 cion, and this is a more mischievous cause of 
 partiality." — Burke's Bejlectuns, p. 370. 
 
 SECOND EDITION CORRECTED THROUGHOUT, 
 
 WITH REMARKS ON THE LATE DEBATE, 
 
 AND AN AUTHENTIC 
 
 ACCOUNT OF AN ELECTION AT NEW-YORK. 
 
 LONDON: 
 JAMES RIDGWAY AND SONS, PICCADILLY; 
 
 AND A. MAXWELL, 32, BELL YARD, LINCOLN'S INN. 
 
 1838.
 
 Id 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 Page 
 Introductory Remarks — Difficulty of handling the 
 
 subject . . . .1,2 
 
 Method to be pursued — to state arguments for the Ballot, 
 
 and examine them . . .3 
 
 Statement of arguments for Ballot . . . 4— -1 1 
 
 I. Positive — will secure independence, lessen expense, &c. 4 — 9 
 
 II. Negative — will affect no just rights, &c. . 9 
 
 III. For immediate adoption-— independence daily dimi- 
 
 nishing, &c. . . . .10 
 
 Remarks previous to examination of foregoing . 11 — 15 
 
 Examination of arguments for Ballot : — 
 I. Positive — based wholly on assumptions . 15 — 58 
 
 1. That the Ballot will ensure secrecy, attempted to 
 
 be proved .... 16 — 17 
 
 ( 1 .) By History — especially America — which proves 
 
 the reverse .... 18 — 35 
 {'2.) By every day facts — E. I. Company, Clubs — 
 
 which prove the reverse . . 36 — 38 
 
 (3.) Metaphysically — Mr. Grote's — whence it seems 
 
 that it cannot ensure secrecy, and must produce 
 
 endless discord, &c. . . . 39 — 57 
 
 (4.) Physically — the construction of a box — argu- 
 
 mentum ab urnd 
 
 2. That secrecy will prevent : 
 (I.) Intimidation — which at best will only be re- 
 moved a step 
 
 (2.) Bribery — which it has always increased — 
 Athens — Rome 
 
 57, 
 
 58 
 
 59 
 
 
 60, 
 
 61 
 
 62- 
 
 -71
 
 IV 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 3. That the Ballot will elevate the moral condition of 
 
 the community .... 71 — 80 
 (1.) Of the lower classes — by increasing (pardonable !) 
 
 falsehood . . . .71—77 
 
 (2.) Of the upper — by supplying (what is now wholly 
 
 wanting !) motives to virtue — Prophecy of the 
 
 Westminster Review . . • 78 — 80 
 
 4. On some further arguments, as those : 
 
 (1.) From the theory of the Constitution — loyalty 
 
 of Westminster Reviewer . . 80 — 83 
 
 (2,) From the practice of the Constitution — Lord 
 
 Nugent's Jurors . . . 84 — 87 
 
 (3.) From the practice of Clubs — Mr. Grote's ap- 
 peals — ad misericordiam — ad verecundiam . 87 — 90 
 
 II. Nf.gative — mostly answered already — further con- 
 
 sidered by effects of Ballot . . 91—99 
 
 1 . On individuals — voters' — candidates — Pecuniary and 
 
 Intellectual Bribery . . . 91 — 95 
 
 2. On the community , . . 95*— 97 
 
 3. In tendency — at first favourable to rich, afterwards 
 
 leading to low mob-rule . . . 97 — 98 
 
 4. Impossibility of settling disputed elections . 98 — 99 
 
 III. As to increased demand for Ballot — no necessary argu- 
 
 ment for its adoption — how it came about . 99 — i 1 
 
 Conclusion . . • . 102 
 Remarks on the Debate in the House of Commons, Feb. 
 
 15, 1838 .... 103 
 Appendix: — 
 
 A. Working of the Ballot in America . . 113 
 
 B. Working of the Ballot in France . . 1 26 
 
 C. Lord Nugent's reasonings on the word Un- 
 
 English . . . .128 
 
 D. Arts used to raise a cry for the Ballot . 1 30 
 
 E. Authorities against the Ballot . . 131 
 
 F. Mr. Lytton Bui wer's arguments from the Classics 133 
 
 G. Mr. Brougham's Speech against the Ballot . 135 

 
 ERRATA. 
 
 Page 77, ii. 1 13, for Appendix D, read C. 
 » 1 10, n. 15G,/or a'lpuOoi, read mpiiaBai. 
 „ 110, u. \i:)ij,for TrdTvaQ,rcad Travra^.
 
 IS THE BALLOT A MISTAKE ? 
 
 The imperfection of language as an instrument 
 of thought has been regretted by all philosophers. 
 History shows us that politicians have even greater 
 reason to make the same complaint. For as good 
 government is nothing more than the just applica- 
 tion of right political principles, it is most important 
 that those principles should be clearly understood 
 and accurately stated. Now principles of this sort 
 are from their very nature capable of being ex- 
 pressed only in general abstract terms ; which terms 
 must involve or at least lead to ideas of a very com- 
 plex nature. And so it happens (as one might 
 expect) that many persons mistake and misapply 
 them; while many, who seem fully masters of them, 
 yet act more from memory than judgment, and are 
 right or wrong, merely as they chance to fall in 
 with good or bad guides. *' If any one should a 
 little catechise the greatest part of the partisans of 
 most of the sects in the world, he would not find, 
 concerning those matters they are so zealous for, 
 that they have any opinions of their own, much 
 less would he have reason to think that they took 
 them upon the examination of arguments and ap- 
 pearance of probability. They are resolved to stick 
 
 B
 
 to a party, tliat education or interest has engaged 
 tliem in ; and there, like tlie common soldiers of an 
 army, shew their courage and warmth as their leaders 
 direct, without ever examining or so much as know- 
 ing the cause they contend for. Thus men become 
 the professors of, and combatants for, those opinions 
 they never were convinced of, nor proselytes to : 
 nor ever had so much as floating in their minds."^ 
 
 These remarks may be applied in all their force 
 to the question of the Ballot. It is a question that 
 involves great philosophical principles; and these 
 principles involve very many and very complex 
 ideas. It took its rise from a particular school of 
 thinkers. It conveys to the mind very vague no- 
 tions of its true character. The practical working 
 of the system can scarcely be estimated. Yet it 
 is eagerly demanded by many persons, whose 
 amount of leisure and education would seem hardly 
 sufficient to entitle their judgment to much consi- 
 deration, did they not happen to coincide in opinion 
 with some few men of acknowledged ability. 
 
 In order then to arrive at any true conclusions 
 on this subject, we must at once set aside all the 
 arguments which are daily urged in favour of this 
 measure from the alleged demand that is made for 
 it by particular parties in the state. Popular de- 
 mand may render a measure inevitable ; but it can 
 have nothing whatever to do with an explanation of 
 its true character and effects. They are quite dis- 
 tinct things, and ought to be studiously kept apart. 
 
 * Locke's Essay, ii. 295.
 
 It is not easy to advance much that is new upon 
 a subject that has been so often discussed : but as 
 many of the arguments are only to be found in 
 works that are not generally accessible, and no sin- 
 gle work exhibits both sides of the question, it may 
 not be wholly useless to collect together the differ- 
 ent opinions that have hitherto been expressed, and 
 extricating the question from the confusion of party 
 strife, to lay it before the public in a clear tangible 
 form. 
 
 The advocates of the Ballot will probably admit 
 that the article in the 13th volume of the Westmin- 
 ster Review, entitled " the Ballot," with the different 
 speeches of Mr. Grote and other Members of Par- 
 liament who agree with him, may fairly be taken 
 as text books on the subject, so far as their view of 
 the question is concerned. If therefore all the ar- 
 guments that are to be drawn from those sources, 
 be fully and fairly arrayed against all the objections 
 that may be opposed to them, the public will have 
 the necessary premisses from which it may form its 
 own conclusions. 
 
 Let us see then what these arguments are. They 
 seem to arrange themselves under the two classes of 
 positive and negative ; under which will be com- 
 prised all direct arguments in favour of the Ballot, 
 prior to any objections to it : and when to these are 
 added the answers to such objections, we shall have 
 
 all the evidence on that side of the case. 
 
 B 2
 
 4 
 
 The Positive Arguments are — 
 
 I. It irill secure the independence of the Voter. 
 
 II. It will diminish the expenses of the Candidate. 
 
 III. It ivill elevate the moral condition oftlie Upper 
 as well as of the Lower Classes of the community. 
 
 I. It will secure the independence of the Voter. 
 
 *' The necessary effect of voting in secrecy is the 
 ensuring' an independent vote."^ " When Cicero 
 calls the Ballot — Tabella vindex tacitfe libertatis,^ 
 the upholder of silent liberty, he says nothing 
 more of it than what is accurately and emphatically 
 true."^ 
 
 This independence is at present utterly extinguished : 
 first — by Intimidation — owing to the immoral influ- 
 ence of property. There is a moral and there is 
 
 2 Westminster Review, vol. 13, p. 27. 
 
 ** Cic. de Leg. Agr. Orat. II''*^. §. 4. Mr. Grote seems to quote 
 Cicero as an advocate for the Ballot, and Mr. Lytton Bulwer has 
 not hesitated to do so ! But Cicero's real opinion is to be found in 
 his Dialogue de Legibus, where he says to his brother Quintus — 'Ego 
 in ista sum sententia, qua te fuisse semper scio, nihil ut fuerit 
 in suffragiis voce melius ' — * I hold the same opinion that I 
 know you have always entertained, that in voting nothing can he 
 better than vjord of mouth,' III. §. 33. : further on however 
 §. 38, 39, for the sake of conciliation, he proposes a sort of half mea- 
 sure; for, on condition of laws de ambitu being made effectual, he 
 allows the Ballot, as being a supposed guardian of liberty (^quasi 
 vindicem libertatis). But still insists that all who wished might 
 have the liberty of voting openly: which provision would clearly 
 make the whole thing nugatory, and bring it very nearly to the 
 American system. See Appendix F. 
 
 4 Mr. Grote's Speech of June 23,-1836.
 
 an immoral influence of property ; the immoral in- 
 fluence of property is seen in the arbitrary and 
 tyrannical control exerted by landlords over their 
 tenants — by masters over their servants — in short 
 by employers generally, over the employed — and 
 in the system of exclusive dealing. Secondly — hy 
 Bribery ; i. e. the corruption of the voters by the 
 wealth of the Candidate or of his friends, in what- 
 ever shape that corruption may be disguised. 
 
 The Ballot will put an end to both of these evils. 
 **The specific agency of the Ballot is against Intimi- 
 dation : but its effects will be important and power- 
 ful in checking Bribery. It will entirely suppress 
 Bribery, according to the modes at present prac- 
 tised ; it will greatly hamper and discourage Bri- 
 bery, under any conceivable form or process. It 
 will render the attempt to bribe voters even under 
 the most favourable circumstances more uncertain, 
 more costly, more difficult, more hazardous. When 
 the suffrage becomes secret, you cannot buy an 
 elector's vote individually and separately ; for he 
 cannot sell the certainty of his vote ; he can only 
 sell the probability of it : this is the best which he 
 has to offer. He may certainly offer this contin- 
 gency for sale, if any one will buy it : but what 
 man in his senses will pay down the purchase 
 money for a commodity, of which there is to be no 
 assured or ostensible delivery?"^ — *' But the great 
 object is to protect honest voters from Intimida- 
 5 Mr. Grote, June 23. 1836.
 
 tion."® — ** If the Ballot is adopted, what man will 
 commence the work of impotent intimidation with 
 the certainty, not only of failure in his object, but 
 of aggravated bitterness on the part of those whom 
 he idly endeavours to overawe ? It is not in nature 
 that such things should be. When the process of 
 Intimidation is forbidden to be consummated, it 
 wdll no longer be begun — the trade will be at an 
 end — a landlord will no more think of trying to 
 coerce his tenant, than he now thinks of coercing 
 any neighbouring gentleman, when the Ballot 
 shall have rendered the vote of the one as inde- 
 pendent as the vote of the other." — " That which 
 enables the man, who holds the votes in depend- 
 ence, to suborn the votes, is their knowing how the 
 vote is to be given. Render it impossible for them 
 to know how any vote is given and their power over 
 it is gone. The power either of rewarding a pros- 
 titute vote, or punishing an honest one, is useless, 
 whenever it has been made impossible to be known 
 whether the prostitute or the honest vote has been 
 given. Effect this impossibility, take away the 
 power of knowing how the man who votes for a 
 Member of Parliament has bestowed his vote, and 
 see the consequences. You give effectual securities 
 to the Public that the affairs of the Public will be 
 manaered for their interest, not sacrificed to the in- 
 terest of their rulers : you take away at the same 
 time one of the most terrible engines of moral de- 
 6 Mr. Grote, June 23, 1836.
 
 pravation, which ever was wielded for the pollution 
 or degradation of any portion of mankind. Are 
 not these important effects to be derived from so 
 simple a cause ; and is not the cause which pro- 
 duces such effects the more to be cherished and 
 esteemed because of its simplicity ?"^ — " There are 
 two (universally acknowledged) blemishes in our 
 representative system — these are — expense of elec- 
 tions; and bribery in corrupt boroughs. * * * 
 With regard to bribery, who would go to the ex- 
 pense of paying any man for a vote, when for aught 
 he knew, it was given against himself; as money 
 for votes rendered in secret can have no effect 
 whatever to secure the vote for which it was given, 
 the man would be mad who w^ould throw it away 
 in that manner."^ • 
 
 II. It will diminish the expenses of the Candidate. 
 
 ** Let us next attend to the cost incurred at 
 Elections, without regarding what it consists in ; 
 expenses of conveying distant voters, entertain- 
 ments, or favours of other description, money, or 
 money's worth ; the Ballot would put an end to it 
 all. Men will not incur expense for the attain- 
 ment of an object, when it is clear that such ex- 
 pense can have no effect whatever in procuring the 
 object. This is most indubitably the case with 
 money spent on account of a vote given in such 
 secrecy, that whether it is given for you or against 
 you, you can never know ; under such a system 
 
 7 Westminster Review, vol. 13. p. 16. ^ Ibid. p. jg.
 
 8 -• -^ 
 
 the practical consequences would be, that only 
 those men would vote who could do so free of 
 expense, or were willing to defray their own 
 charges. "° 
 
 III. It ivill elevate the moral condition of the 
 Upper as well as of the Lower Classes of the com- 
 munity. 
 
 # # * c< ^QY would this be the only moral effect 
 of secret voting: it would have others of the greatest 
 extent and importance. Take away from the men of 
 property the power of obtaining the suffrages of the 
 people by improper means, and you may deem it 
 certain that they will immediately apply themselves 
 to the obtaining them by proper means. It is 
 impossible not to be delighted with the idea of the 
 consequences which would result from such a 
 change. * * * It would supply to the rich a 
 motive for the attainment of those qualities which 
 fit men for the duties of legislation ; of v/hich 
 motive they are at present nearly destitute • =* * * 
 and it would immediately become the interest of 
 the rich to employ their endeavours to raise the 
 intellects and morals of the people to the highest 
 pitch. * * * What delightful consequences would 
 ensue ! we should then have a community through 
 which wisdom and virtue would be universally dif- 
 fused, and of which the different classes would be 
 knit together by the ties of mutual benefaction. 
 
 Westminster Review, vol. 13. p. 18.
 
 * 9 
 
 In those circumstances the order and harmony of 
 society would be perfect. "^^ 
 
 The Negative Arguments are — 
 
 I. The Ballot will neither affect nor interfere with 
 any just rights, 
 
 II. It will leave the right, moral influence of pro- 
 perty exactly where it found it,^^ 
 
 III. It will he accompanied by no evils at all to be 
 compared with the advantages that it must confer, 
 
 " We reason thus: — If it be proved that any- 
 where an enormous amount of evil exists ; that 
 an agency may be applied v^hich will remove, if 
 not the whole, a great part of all this evil ; and 
 to this agency no hurtful consequences can be 
 attached, which can be reputed an equivalent for 
 one of the millions of evil, which it will remove, 
 the argument for its application seems to be as 
 complete as demonstration in moral subjects can 
 be."^^ 
 
 IV. If it brought no good at all — if it failed, the 
 old system could be revived without the smallest injury 
 having resulted from it}^ 
 
 Arguments for its immediate adoption. 
 
 I. The Independence of the Elector is diminishing 
 every day, 
 
 '* I see strong ground for anticipating that undue 
 power over the liberty of the voter will be exercised 
 
 10 Westminster Review, p. 39. 
 
 ** Ibid, and Mr. Grote's Speeches, /?aism. 
 
 ^* Westminster Review, p. 15. ^^ Mr. Grote, June 23» 1836.
 
 10 
 
 henceforward more vigorously and audaciously 
 than ever. * * * In an article in the Ed. Review, 
 January, 1833, universally attributed to Lord 
 Brongham, and written, I may add, in direct hos- 
 tility to the Ballot, the extent of intimidation at 
 elections is written in language which it is impos- 
 sible to surpass. * * * Here are distinguished tes- 
 timonies,^^ such as can neither be eluded nor denied 
 respecting the actual state of the electoral world : 
 be it remarked too that they demonstrate this im- 
 portant fact —that intimidation of voters has become 
 greater and more notorious since the passing of the 
 Reform Act. * * * The threats of expulsion of 
 tenants, realised in the awful sentence — hsec mea 
 sunt * * * veteres migrate coloni — the resolutions 
 of exclusive dealing are more rife and more violent 
 than ever."*^ 
 
 II. There can he no good government until the Bal- 
 lot is brought into operation. 
 
 '* We affirm, and upon grounds which seem im- 
 pregnable — 1. That voting may be rendered per- 
 fectly secret. 2. That secret voting is a perfect 
 security for independent voting. 3. That without 
 independent voting all hope of good government is 
 vain. 4. That in England there cannot be inde- 
 
 14 Lords Brougham and Melbourne. Mr. Grote had before 
 quoted an extract from a speech of Lord Melbourne's, expressive of 
 his disgust and abhorrence of the system of intimidation, that pre 
 vailed so generally at elections. 
 
 J5 Mr. Grotc, March 7, 1837.
 
 11 
 
 pendent voting without secret voting. If so, we 
 have a pretty complete argument for the Ballot.' 
 
 »16 
 
 The writer of these pages hopes and believes that 
 he has given the arguments in favour of the Ballot 
 as fairly and fully as any condensed statement of 
 such matters can be.*^ The objections to them are 
 so numerous, and so various, and often so com- 
 plicated in their nature, that they must of course 
 occupy a far greater space. Now, before entering 
 upon these objections, it will be necessary to make 
 a few preliminary remarks upon the nature of the 
 question itself. 
 
 First : — It is most important to observe that the 
 advocates of the Ballot have what to a common ob- 
 server must seem by far the best cause. A mere un- 
 learned by-stander would think it impossible to refuse 
 them a verdict. For the commonest understanding 
 can appreciate to the fullest extent and to the most 
 minute fraction all the reasonings that can be ad- 
 duced on that side, whereas it requires no trifling 
 knowledge of history and human nature, and some 
 
 16 Westminster Review, p. 30. 
 
 ^"^ Since the greater part of this pamphlet was written, the author 
 has seen a discussion of the subject by Lord Nugent, which forcibly 
 reminds him of the account given of some learned writer in the dark 
 ages — ' that he had said some things new and some things true ; but 
 the things that were new were not true, and the things that were 
 true were not new.' Occasional notice will hereafter be taken of 
 the former class of statements.
 
 12 
 
 coolness of judgment, and freedom from prejudice, 
 and patient thought, to collect and follow and duly 
 estimate the several arguments that ought to be 
 brought forward on the other side. Hence, no 
 subject was ever less fitted for popular discussion.^® 
 
 Secondly : — It affords great scope for hidden falla- 
 cies, appeals to the feelings, and popular declama- 
 tion. The evils of Intimidation and Bribery are so 
 great and so flagrant, and the practice of them so 
 revolting to feeling, common indeed, to all men, 
 but which Englishmen are apt to think peculiarly 
 their own, that it is scarcely possible to keep the 
 political question — which is in truth the sole point 
 at issue — distinct from the moral one, upon which 
 no issue at all is raised ; that is to say, men are 
 apt to forget that the real matter in dispute is 
 — whether the Ballot, without itself producing 
 greater evils, will put an end to mischiefs on all 
 hands acknowledged to exist; and, unawares, to 
 substitute instead of that matter, quite a different 
 one — namely, whether these acknowledged evils 
 should not be got rid of — without any reference 
 whatever to the consequences of getting rid of them 
 in this particular manner.^^ The one is a difficult 
 
 ^® See Burke's Works, vol. i. p. 5. * It is an observation which 
 I think Isocrates makes in one of his orations against the Sophists, 
 that it is far more easy to maintain a wrong cause and to support pa- 
 radoxical opinions to the satisfaction of a common auditory, than to 
 establish a doubtful truth by solid and conclusive arguments.' 
 
 »o See Burke's Works, vol. 2. p. 297:— ''The laws of this 
 country are for the most part constituted, and wisely so, for the
 
 13 
 
 question of evidence, involving abstruse political 
 calculations ; the other is in reality no question at 
 all, unless that further consideration be at the same 
 time borne in mind. And yet it is this question 
 alone — which (strictly speaking) is no question at 
 all — that the majority of those who demand the 
 Ballot either care to think about, or are capable of 
 judging of. The former, the true one, is quite 
 beyond their powers ; and all their feelings incline 
 them to regard it solely in one point of view. 
 
 Thirdly : — The arguments for the Ballot seem 
 capable of being stated in a strictly scientific form ; 
 they have the air of geometrical accuracy ; each 
 deduction appears rigorously accurate ; and the 
 whole statement to be clear, complete and conclu- 
 sive. This, in itself, has a charm about it, that 
 fascinates the intellect, and almost compels acqui- 
 escence.^^ To many, even of the ablest minds, the 
 spell is often irresistible.^^ It is painful to think 
 
 general ends of government rather than for the preservation of our 
 particular liberties^* 
 
 20 < The Ptolemaic system was not demonstrably inconsistent with 
 any phenomena known in the 16th century; and consequently 
 the presumption for the new hypothesis did not arise from its exclu- 
 sive coincidence with the facts, but from the simplicity and beauty 
 which it possessed as a theory.' — D. Stewart's Phil, of the Human 
 Mind, vol. ii. p. 446. 
 
 '-^1 Professor Sedgwick in his eloquent discourse on the studies of 
 the University of Cambridge makes the following remark on the 
 writings of Paley : — * Speaking for myself, I cannot describe in 
 terms too strong the dehght .1 once experienced In studying his 
 moral philosophy ; where truth after truth seemed to flash on the
 
 14 
 
 that this dazzling beauty must wither and decay 
 nnderthe consumptive influence of historical truth.** 
 Indeed, the form of the argument seems unexcep- 
 tionable, solely because the substance of it is so 
 incorrect. It is a curious instance of " the sloven- 
 liness of thinking which is often concealed beneath 
 a peculiar ostentation of logical neatness.'' As soon 
 as the premisses are cut down to their legitimate 
 size, the gaps in the argument yawn so that its 
 framer must be appalled. And the upholders of 
 secret voting must glean in other fields than those 
 of history, if they wish to replace the vast quantity 
 of matter that they will have to yield up to the 
 rightful claimants. 
 
 Fourthly : — Matters that have very little to do 
 with the question have often had an undue promi- 
 
 mind with all the force of demonstration — on questions too, which in 
 other hands seemed only involved in mystery and doubt. On this 
 account, if there be a defective principle in his system, it ought the 
 more boldly to be combated, lest the influence of his name, and the 
 charm of his philosophic manner, lead us only the further from the 
 truth.' p. 57. 
 
 22 << The fact is that when men in treating of things which cannot 
 be circumscribed by precise definitions, adopt this mode of reasoning, 
 when once they begin to talk of power, happiness, misery, pain, plea- 
 sure, motives, objects of desire, as they talk of lines and numbers, there 
 is no end to the absurdities and contradictions into which they fall. 
 Tliere is no proposition so monstrously untrue in morals or politics that 
 we will not undertake to prove it by something which shall sound like 
 a logical demonstration from admitted premisses.'* — See a masterly 
 article on Utilitarian Logic and Politics, Ed. Review, March, 1 829, 
 p. 160; and comp. Warburton's Introd. to Julian, p. 14, foil.
 
 15 
 
 nence assigned to them. For instance — it is said 
 that the parti zans of the Ballot increase in num- 
 bers, therefore this is a strong argument in its 
 favour. Now, it is true that in matters of fact, 
 numbers, qua numbers, carry with them great 
 weight. There is certainly more ground for think- 
 ing that a particular event has taken place, if 
 thirty men say it has, than if only ten say so. But 
 in difficult matters of speculation (such as the Bal- 
 lot) numbers, qua numbers, carry with them very 
 much less weight. It must first be seen what are 
 the elements of which those numbers are composed, 
 and what may be the motives of their conduct. It 
 is very possible that some demand the Ballot on 
 what they deem to be the solid grounds of reason ; 
 but it is equally possible, and perhaps ,more pro- 
 bable that others join them merely from party 
 spirit : others again solely from disgust at the 
 evils of the present system. And the fair pre- 
 sumption is that the alleged increase is owing to 
 the influence of some such medley of motives as 
 this. If such be the case, the increase of numbers is 
 no better argument for thinking them to be in the 
 right, than if we were to conclude from seeing an 
 angler catch a great many fish with a fly, that the 
 fly must be a real one. It might be a real one : 
 or it might be a good artificial one : or the fish 
 might be hungry, and willing to rise at anything. 
 But the fact of many fish being caught would not 
 prove that it was a real one : indeed it would
 
 16 
 
 scarcely afford any presumption that it was so, un- 
 less we knew that those fish were peculiarly wary, 
 and would seldom take anything else. Therefore, 
 as we are yet to learn that the people of this coun- 
 try are peculiarly wary, and hard to be misled, 
 the increasing demand for the Ballot is no better 
 evidence of the reality of its merits, than the success 
 of the angler is of the reality of his fly. 
 
 Having thus guarded against some of the so- 
 phisms which lurk in every nook and comer of the 
 question, we may now move forward with a bolder 
 and freer step. The most satisfactory course will 
 be to take the several arguments in the order in 
 which they have been stated. 
 
 It is said then in the first place, that the Ballot 
 will secure the independence of the Voter : that it will 
 do so by putting an end to Intimidation and Bribery : 
 and that it will put an end to these two evils by ensur- 
 ing the secrecy of the proceedings. This is the whole 
 substance of the argument upon this branch of the 
 question. To make out this argument, it is essen- 
 tial to prove : first — that the Ballot will ensure 
 secrecy : secondly — that secrecy will be a complete 
 prevention of Intimidation and Bribery. And so, 
 be it observed, the point of secrecy does in fact 
 involve the whole question. 
 
 Now there are two ways in which these positions 
 may be supported. ^^ The one by arguments drawn 
 from the abstract nature of the case : the other, by 
 
 *^ See Preface to Bishop Butler's Sermons, p. 4.
 
 17 
 
 positive matters of fact ; by every day occurrences, 
 and historical precedents. In questions that are of 
 a strictly practical character there can be little 
 doubt that the latter is the most approved method 
 of reasoning : for it has been said by one,^* whose 
 name must be reverenced by speculative reasoners, 
 that ''when a man deliberates concerning his con- 
 duct in any particular affair, and forms schemes in 
 politics, trade, economy, or any business in life, he 
 never ought to draw his arguments too fine or con- 
 nect too long a chain of consequences together ; 
 something is sure to happen to disconcert his rea- 
 soning, and produce an event different from what 
 he expected." Now, if this be so, there arises, at 
 starting, a presumption against the arguments for 
 the Ballot, when we find that they are, all of them, 
 without exception, drawn from the former of the 
 two classes. For it will be shewn, hereafter, that 
 their historical instances are mere bubbles blown 
 by some of the more playful of the party to catch 
 the fancies of those persons whose genius is averse 
 to abstract speculation. Their main strength lies 
 in a confident appeal to certain assumed principles, 
 which wear indeed the garb, and bear the outward 
 semblance of philosophical maxims, but test them 
 by historical truth, and they start up at once in their 
 real shape of palpable fallacies. 
 
 To return. We will now proceed at once to 
 examine the point of Secrecy, on which we have 
 ** See Hume's Essays (on Commerce), vol. i. p. 250. 
 
 C
 
 18 
 
 stated the whole question to rest ; and this will 
 necessarily be done at some length. Will the Bal- 
 lot ensure secrecy ? The Westminster Reviewer 
 says,^^ "The last resource of these controvertists is 
 to deny the possibility of secrecy. How do they 
 make that out? They do not make it out at all. 
 They make out nothing ; nor try to do so. That is 
 not their way; they assert; sometimes more nakedly, 
 sometimes more covertly ; but still, only assert." 
 This, like many other lively sentences in the above 
 article, contains some truth and much error. The 
 opponents of the Ballot do not deny the abstract 
 possibility of secrecy, but only the moral probabi- 
 lity of it ; they say that, as history shews that hi- 
 therto secrecy has not been ensured by the Ballot, 
 it seems fair to presume that it will not be ensured 
 by it hereafter ; and that it would be ludicrous to 
 assert the contrary without adducing some fresh 
 evidence to rebut this manifest presumption. The 
 Advocates of the Ballot pretend to have found 
 such evidence; their constant reply is: Look at 
 America ! 
 
 Now it is curious to observe, both from the posi- 
 tion which America occupies in the argument, 
 and from the extreme tenderness with which so 
 brittle a piece of evidence is handled, that the 
 parties producing this historical proof consider it 
 very doubtful whether they had not better have left 
 it alone. The fact is, that it belongs of right to 
 
 Vol. xiii. p. 30.
 
 19 
 
 tlie otlier side ! The proofs of this sliall be produced 
 a I once. 
 
 First, then, let us hear tlieir own statement of 
 tlje case of America. " When certain persons affirm 
 to us, that the experiment of the Ballot has been 
 unsuccessful in the United States, our reply is, 
 that we do not believe them. Because, when we 
 weigh the evidence which is contained in their as- 
 sertions, and the evidence in opposition to them, 
 w^e find the latter to preponderate. In the first 
 place, in regard to the assertions, we know not 
 how far those who make them do themselves rely 
 upon them. House of Commons morality does not 
 imply the existence of many men who will keep 
 back an assertion useful for their purpose, because 
 they know little or nothing about the evidence on 
 which it rests. In the next place, if we knew that 
 they were sincere, we know not what sort of ob- 
 servers they are, but we know that few observers 
 can be trusted * * * * ^^Q know well, what 
 secret voting is ; and we know that it may be ren- 
 dered a complete security against external influ- 
 ence in voting for Members of Parliament. If the 
 Americans did use it badly, that would be no argu- 
 ment against the thing itself. The Americans have 
 little motive to the accurate use of it, because by 
 the two circumstances of their situation, tlie gene- 
 ral wealth of the people, and the great rarity of 
 large fortunes, the means are wanting of placing 
 more than an insignificant portion of them in de- 
 
 c 2
 
 20 
 
 pendence. There would be no wonder tlien if the 
 Americans were not very nice about the machinery 
 of the Ballot, and cared but little whether it was so 
 used as to work with much or with little accuracy. 
 Their case and ours are, in this respect, diametrically 
 opposite ; they do not depend on the Ballot for in- 
 dependent voting; we cannot possibly obtain it by 
 any other means. But, besides all this, we know 
 upon better evidence than the assertions made in 
 Parliament, that the Americans do esteem the Bal- 
 lot.^^ It is evidence enough that they continue to 
 use it. Why should they, unless they liked it ? 
 The Americans are not in our miserable condition; 
 they cannot have institutions, under which they 
 suffer, fastened upon them for ages in spite of their 
 inclination. What then is the fact? So far from 
 being diminished, the use of the Ballot has been 
 continually extended in America: some of the 
 States in which it originally was not employed, 
 have upon revisions of their constitutions introduced 
 
 20 The Article from which this is an extract, was published in July, 
 1830: and, therefore, previously to Lord Stanley's famous disclosure 
 of the American system of voting, which was made in the Debate of 
 1835. But it is clear that no opinion of Lord Stanley's would have 
 induced the Reviewer to modify this passage, because he thinks that 
 the mere fact of the Ballot existing at all in America, is better evi- 
 dence of its efficiency than any assertions made in the House of Com- 
 mons. Docs not this at once explain and illustrate the remark of 
 the Author of the article above quoted on ' Utilitarian Logic and 
 Politics' — that * a fact irreconcileable with their theory furnishes in 
 their opinion the strongest reason for adhering to the theory ' ! — 
 p. 173.
 
 21 
 
 it, and in not one, in which it has ever been used, 
 has the thought been entertained of discontinuing 
 it. Nothing can be more worthless, therefore, than 
 the pretence that America affords experience 
 against the benefit of secret voting."'^^ 
 
 This is a long extract ; but it could not be cur- 
 tailed, for two reasons. One, lest it should seem 
 that the Reply was not stated fairly: the other, 
 that it is so useful for the rejoinder, that every 
 word of it is precious. 
 
 Now, the first portion of this extract is devoted 
 to proving, by assertion, by insinuation, by ab- 
 stract reasoning, and strange to say, by appeals to 
 their own ignorance, that those who differ from 
 them about America are not entitled to credit. The 
 next portion contains neither more nor less, than 
 an ill-disguised admission, that the Ballot is little 
 regarded in America as a means of ensuring se- 
 crecy f^ and the admission is clenched and con- 
 firmed by two very solid, weighty, and satisfactory 
 reasons why it should not be so regarded. Then, 
 thirdly : we have a solemn statement of the 
 grounds on which the Reviewer has formed liis 
 own judgment on the subject. And it must be 
 confessed, that if he had unsphered the spirit of 
 Bolingbroke to unfold what was the best mode of 
 managing an intractable argument, he could have 
 
 ^"^ West. Rev. p. 26. Compare Appendix A. 
 ^ Mr. Ewart and Mr. Leader (Advocates of the Ballot) made 
 similar admissions in the Debate of June 23, 1836.
 
 22 
 
 loariied no new precepts i'roiii tliat groat master of 
 logical subterfuge. The question is — wlietlier the 
 practice of America proves that tlie Ballot ensures 
 secrecy. The Reviewer first puts forward some 
 seeming arguments to puzzle and perplex his ad- 
 versary ; and then, adroitly pushing aside the real 
 question, brings up evidence to prove — what? why, 
 quite another point, namely, that the Americans 
 esteem the Ballot I 
 
 But who ever denied it ? who ever cared a straw 
 whether they esteem it or no ? The question is, 
 luliy do they esteem it ? And unless the Reviewer 
 can show that they esteem it, because it ensures se- 
 crecy, the fact of their esteeming it has nothing 
 whatever to do with the question. It is very pos- 
 sible, that they instituted the Ballot originally with 
 a view to ensure secrecy. They found however (as 
 the Reviewer himself says) that it little mattered 
 in their country whether secrecy was ensured or 
 not. They therefore preserved the form of vote by 
 Ballot, simply because it was an established form : 
 they guarded against the evils that a system of se- 
 crecy cannot fail to produce, by altogether disre- 
 garding any precautions to make that system 
 effectual.'^'^ 
 
 20 See the very able speech of Mr. C. Russell, 1835. ' If Bribery 
 does not prevail in America, we must seek some other reason for it 
 than secrecy: for practically no secrecy whatever prevails. Let any 
 man be at the pains of reading the American newspapers during the 
 period of a contested election. He will find them abounding in all 
 the acrimony and bitterness of electioneering hostility, and in all the
 
 23 
 
 But if the Reviewer's argument is worth anything 
 at all, he must mean that the Americans esteem 
 the Ballot, because it ensures secrecy : and as he is 
 too practised a logician to ohject to seeing his own 
 arguments stated syllogistically, let us exhibit them 
 in that form. The argument will be this : 
 
 All persons who esteem the Ballot, can only 
 esteem it because it ensures secrecy ; 
 
 The Americans esteem the Ballot : 
 
 Therefore in America the Ballot ensures secrecy. 
 
 But (as I have before admitted) in America, the 
 Ballot does not ensure secrecy : 
 
 Therefore in America the Ballot is not esteemed. 
 
 Who will suppose from the above specimen of 
 reasoning, that the Reviewer is regarded by his 
 party as a second Alexander Hales, who 'acquired 
 the formidable title of *' the Irrefragable Doctor." 
 
 But perhaps he will be enabled to see the nature 
 of his own argument more plainly, if we get him 
 away from America, and hold it up to his view 
 under the clearer sky of Attica. Now suppose that 
 one of the Spartan magistrates, finding on his re- 
 turn home after a year's tour in Attica, that some 
 of his countrymen, suddenly stricken with a love 
 of foreign customs, wished to adopt the Ballot, tried 
 to dissuade them by asserting that it was ineffica- 
 
 tricks and mancEUvres of electioneering tactics; and that so far from 
 the Ballot shutting up the sources of fraud, they are full of complaints 
 of the falsification and fabrication of Ballot tickets.' Compare Ap- 
 penuix A.
 
 24 
 
 cious as a means of checking Biibcry at Athens ; 
 that he knew such to be the fact from his own per- 
 sonal observation ; and suppose, that afterwards, 
 some smart clever writer published the following 
 remarks in a fourth rate Lacedemonian Review, 
 written in the terse condensed style peculiar to that 
 people:^" — *'when the magistrate says the Ballot 
 does not destroy Bribery in Athens, we say, we do 
 not believe him. 1st. because he docs not believe 
 it himself. 2ndly. because he is foolish, and can- 
 not judge of these things. 3rdly. because we in- 
 deed know what secret voting is: but the Athe- 
 nians do not : for they use it badly. For indeed 
 the Athenians are well oft'; they have many slaves ; 
 they are independent. Also we know better than 
 this silly man : the Athenians do esteem the Ballot ; 
 for also they use it ; nor are they under a yoke as 
 we, to do what they like not. Also we say that the 
 Ballot does stop bribery at Athens." Now how 
 grievously would this worthy magistrate have been 
 wronged, if it turned out after all that he was right, 
 and the Reviewer wrong ! And it undoubtedly 
 would turn out so, as will be shown by and bye.^^ 
 When a gentleman once denied in Bruce's presence 
 that the Abyssinians ever ate raw flesh, because it 
 
 3® The classical reader will be glad to learn that through the kind- 
 ness of a literary friend, the Author is enabled to quote an original 
 
 fragment of this very Review: oh iriarEvofieg' \p£va)Q yap u 
 
 uvi]Q' kari ^e koI /xCjpoCf TrepiepyaacofXEvoQ, ov^ev tlciotj' rplroy ^f , 
 afjfieQ fiev uicafjLeg to \pa<j)iad£a6ui VfTi iaTif toi ^' 'A-^avalot oi> — — 
 
 31 See p. 63, foil.
 
 25 
 
 was impossible that any human being could do so, 
 Bruce made him swallow a raw beef steak before 
 he left the room, and so disproved the impossi- 
 bility. The Reviewer should at least submit to the 
 milder penalty of eating his own words, however 
 crude and offensive they may be. 
 
 But how comes it then that the use of the Ballot 
 has been continually extended in America? Merely 
 because in the mode in which it is there exercised, 
 it works no practical mischief, and has the charm 
 of theoretical simplicity. The English constitution 
 was not made, but grew : it did not spring forth at 
 once, a creation of perfect prudence ; but ripened 
 into maturity by slow and unseen degrees. The 
 American constitution, was struck out at once, 
 complete in all its parts : It embodies the wisdom 
 and forecast of only one generation of men : It must 
 be regarded rather as an hypothesis, than a theory; 
 and like all other hypotheses, depends on certain 
 principles arbitrarily assumed. Thence it is, that 
 the respect felt by an American for the institutions 
 of his country is made up of a love for hypothetical 
 legislation, moderated and tempered by the con- 
 trolling influence of old associations. Political 
 changes will therefore exhibit something of this 
 national sentiment, and the Ballot might thus have 
 been expected to gain ground in America, from 
 the mere fact of its having been originally esta- 
 blished in so large a proportion of thq States : and 
 this might have been foretold in America with but
 
 2() 
 
 little more hazard of mistake than that the system 
 of open voting in this country would be extended 
 to the new Boroughs created by the Reform Bill. 
 But neither its original establishment, nor its ex- 
 tended use are any proofs whatever that it ensures 
 secrecy in elections. 
 
 The Reviewer next tells us, — '^ that in no one 
 State in which the Ballot has ever been used, has 
 the thouG;ht been entertained of discontinuino; it." 
 To divine the thoughts of States is a very high 
 privilege, and implies great sagacity. But one 
 would have thought that changes might have come 
 over the spirit of trans-Atlantic dreams without the 
 cognizance of the Reviewer: and this presumption 
 is in some measure lessened by finding the follow- 
 ing statement in a work not anonymous, but of 
 known and acknowledged authority.^^ '^ A very 
 few exceptions occur to voting by Ballot, as in 
 Kentucky and Virginia; and in the year 1821, 
 when the constitution of Massachussets was amend- 
 ed, it became a question whether the votes of the 
 people upon the proposed clauses of amendment 
 should be taken in the towns of 4000 inhabitants 
 and under, by Ballot or not. Upon a division 
 in the convention a majority of 185 to 69, was 
 against the Ballot being necessarily the way of 
 taking the votes upon that occasion, which was left 
 to the select men." So it would seem that even 
 the esteem for the Ballot is not so universal as the 
 
 3^ Hinton's Hist, of tlie United States, vol. ii. 330, note.
 
 27 
 
 Reviewer would have us suppose : and that degree 
 of esteem which denotes an attachment to a system 
 in the abstract, but does not extend to it when 
 practically applied, is of almost too subtle and im- 
 palpable a nature to be considered of much weight. 
 If then the Advocates of the Ballot can make no 
 more of the case of America than what we have 
 just seen, we may listen with less distrust to the 
 assertions of its opponents. Let us call a witness, 
 whose veracity and powers of observation, the Re- 
 viewer himself would probably not be disposed to 
 question. 
 
 In the debate upon the Ballot, in the year 1835, 
 Lord Stanley said — " But then w^e are told to look 
 at America, and see how the Ballot works there ! I 
 have been in America; and I confess that what I 
 observed in that country did not lead me to suppose 
 that the Ballot is an effectual protection against 
 Bribery, or provides satisfactorily for the attain- 
 ment of secrecy. At every election in America the 
 votes of the individuals are just as notorious and 
 just as much jobbed as they are in England. I have 
 recently received a letter from a friend of mine, of 
 liberal principles, who is travelling in America : in 
 which he says — " I see here the practical working 
 of the Ballot and universal suffrage — treating, bri- 
 bery, and jobbing are the consequences of the 
 former, and scenes of tumult and violence arise out 
 of the latter. I have not found one eminent lawyer 
 or statesman in this country who does not, as re-
 
 28 
 
 gards England, lean to the Conservative side, more 
 or less. Federalists, Nullifiers, Whigs, and Jack- 
 sonians all agree in saying — * For Heaven's sake, 
 take care of what you are about in England. We 
 know the practical effects of vote by Ballot, univer- 
 sal suff'rage, annual elections, and mob force.' " Ho- 
 nourable members, who approve of the Ballot, say 
 that the voters will have nothing to do but to put 
 their votes into an urn, and no person would know 
 for whom they voted. I admit that secrecy might 
 be maintained if all parties were agreed that votes 
 should remain secret; but you have to contend not 
 only with the secret influence of relations and family 
 connexions, but with the more active influence of 
 Conservative Clubs and Reform Associations, both 
 of which are determined to ascertain the w^ay in 
 which every man in the country is going to vote. 
 If, under such circumstances, I am told that the 
 Ballot will establish secrecy in England any more 
 than it does in America, I laugh the assertion to 
 scorn. I know how elections are conducted in 
 America. In the first place there is a preliminary 
 meeting, for the purpose of ascertaining how every 
 man intends to vote — a proof how much public 
 feeling revolts against the idea of secrecy. This is 
 the first step. What is the next ? An urn is placed 
 in a room, at the door of which stands an agent for 
 each of the candidates — one with a blue, and the 
 other with a green ticket ; one of which the voter 
 takes, to show for which he intends to vote! I have
 
 29 
 
 seen it done a hundred times! I say that this is the 
 practical working of the Ballot in America."^^ 
 
 This piece of evidence speaks for itself. It needs 
 no comment. However the Reviewer, conscious 
 that judgment would be given against him before 
 the tribunal of history, has still a resource left, and 
 boldly lays claim to absolute infallibility. ** We 
 know well," he says,^"* " what secret voting is ; and 
 we know that it may be rendered a complete secu- 
 rity against external influence in voting for Mem- 
 bers of Parliament."^^ The late Mr. Cobbett was 
 of opinion, that if an act was passed to compel all 
 the ^' T^eV to exhibit themselves once a month in 
 Hyde Park, it would be both complimentary to 
 them and satisfactory to the public. And if ever 
 curiosity might be deemed allowable, it surely 
 would be in the present instance, when the public 
 might behold a '^ TFe," concealing under the plain 
 exterior of an English Reviewer, the power of pro- 
 phetic infallibility ! Mr. Burke was content to 
 take experience as a teacher, and to judge of the 
 future by the past. ** All contrivances by Ballot,'' 
 he says, " we know experimentally to be vain and 
 
 33 See Appendix A. 34 Ibid. 
 
 35 This sentence is very cleverly worded. If the Reviewer had 
 said ' had been rendered^ the assertion would have been at variance 
 with known facts ; ' may be renderedy throws us at once upon the 
 Reviewer's prophetic infallibility. Fortunately it is at the same 
 time an admission that the Ballot has not ensured secrecy as yet ! 
 So impossible is it to argue a cause in defiance of irrefragable evi- 
 dence.
 
 30 
 
 cliildisli to prevent a discovery of inclinations." 
 The Reviewer seems to regard facts as mere fetters 
 to the judgment, and to think political speculation 
 degraded by receiving any aids from history. 
 
 But the most considerable historian on that side, 
 by far, is Dr. Bo wring. And as, like his great pre- 
 decessor, the Father of History, he is a travelled 
 man, and ' has seen the manners and cities of many 
 men,' — any thing that falls from him must of course 
 carry with it very great weight. *^ Sir," says the 
 learned doctor,^*' " the Ballot is not a thing of 
 modern invention — it existed in ancient times — we 
 know it was practised among the Greeks and 
 Romans. It was one of their greatest political dis- 
 coveries. Forgotten in days of barbarism, it was 
 reproduced when philosophy and knowledge be- 
 came the handmaids of political emancipation. It 
 seems to accompany every progress in the path of 
 political experience, and to associate as it were of 
 necessity, with popular influence. It was intro- 
 duced into the provinces of the United States one 
 by one, after duly weighing its value and its effi- 
 cacy ; and now it prevails in almost all of them, 
 because it has been found to be successful. It forms 
 a part of the re})resentative code of France ; and it 
 is found — I say so from my own knowledge — practi- 
 cable and efficient there ; and I doubt whether ten 
 men in the Chamber of Deputies would be found 
 to deny its benefit, or whether ten men in the Cham- 
 
 3« Debate of June 2, 1835.
 
 31 
 
 ber of Deputies would be found to deny its practi- 
 cability. It was introduced into Spain with a suf- 
 frage almost universal — into Portugal, and into 
 Italy, and it exists in Belgium." Now here we 
 have a very brilliant array of historical facts. It is 
 true, they are too figuratively and poetically stated 
 to be of much service to the Statistical Society ; but 
 still very useful to prop up a weak argument. 
 However, the important thing to observe is, that the 
 word secrecy never once occurs throughout the 
 whole passage. In Greece and Rome, we are told, 
 it was practised^ and was a great political discovery. 
 But the modern history of the Ballot is plainly 
 that on which the learned doctor has bestowed 
 most pains; and from the minuteness of his account, 
 it would almost seem that he had taken a degree 
 in medicine as well as in laws. We have from him 
 a detailed narrative of its birth, parentage, child- 
 hood, companions, and acquaintance ! What bio- 
 graphy could be more complete ? Its birth was 
 an alarming prodigy ! It was, says the learned 
 doctor, produced by Philosophy and Knowledge, 
 who were at that interesting period two of the 
 Maids of Honour to Political Emancipation ! It 
 was brought up with Political Experience as a Play- 
 mate. It was in more advanced age thrown by the 
 force of circumstances into the Society of Popular 
 Influence : So it seems to have been a Democrat 
 from its earliest years : and hence it followed that 
 its acquaintance became very extensive indeed, and
 
 32 
 
 its influence considerable. We find it, continues 
 the doctor, prevailing in America, adopted in 
 France, introduced to Spain and Italy, presented 
 to Portugal, and now residing in Belgium ! 
 
 Of course the inference that the learned doctor 
 means us to draw is, that in all these countries, 
 ancient and modern, it has been or is, practised 
 with success. And when the real meaning of the 
 words practised with success is cleared out, and 
 ascertained, it may possibly be found that he has 
 only been stating what nobody ever dreamed of 
 denying. Now, * practised with success' cannot 
 mean that it checked bribery : because in Greece 
 and Rome it increased it an hundred fold.^^ It 
 cannot mean that it ensured secrecy : because in 
 America it does nothing of the kind. It cannot 
 mean th3.t it put an end to intimidation : because it 
 will be shewn hereafter by the evidence of its own 
 advocates, that for that purpose it must be utterly 
 inefficacious.^® But the doctor will exclaim — 
 * Stop — stop — this will never do ! If you go on at 
 this rate you will leave me no meaning at all!' 
 Not so, Sir : by this useful process of exhaustion 
 we have arrived at an exact knowledge of your 
 meaning, and guaged its precise measure. That 
 meaning is : that the Ballot is practised in all those 
 States in a particular manner, neither ensuring se- 
 crecy, nor preventing intimidation or bribery, it is 
 true ; but still in such a way, that the bulk of the 
 3' See p. 63, foil. ^s See p. 60, foil.
 
 33 
 
 inhabitants are pretty well satisfied with it : in 
 short, just as the open system of voting is practised 
 in England ; and giving, perhaps, generally speak- 
 ing, not so much, certainly, but still pretty nearly 
 as much satisfaction. And this proposition is true 
 enough : but it obviously is no argument either 
 for its ensuring secrecy, or for the propriety of 
 adopting it in this country. For it does not show 
 that the people, who use it, like it better than we 
 do our system of open voting, any more than the 
 fact of one man eating venison, and another man 
 eating mutton, proves that the one likes his venison 
 more than the other likes his mutton. Venison 
 suits one man : mutton suits another : each of them 
 may sometimes wish to exchange diets by way of 
 making a variety : just as the state of Massachus- 
 sets thought that under particular circumstances, 
 open voting was preferable ; but still, on the whole, 
 each finds his usual mode of living agree best with 
 him, and naturally enough abides by it. 
 
 But the truth is that most of these historical ex- 
 amples are, as was said before, mere bubbles blown 
 by Dr. Bowring to catch the fancy of the unlearned. 
 Who would ever think of going to modern Italy, to 
 Portugal, to Spain, or to Belgium, for models for 
 the British Constitution ? But Projectors in all 
 countries are pretty much alike, though national 
 habits may differ. " There was a most ingenious 
 architect in Laputa, who contrived a new method 
 for building houses by beginning at the roof, and 
 
 u
 
 34 
 
 workincr downwards to the foundation : which he 
 justified by the like practice of those two prudent 
 insects, the bee and the spider."^^ So the learned 
 Doctor would have us make Belgium our bee, and 
 Spain our spider, and turn every thing in England 
 topsy turvy, in order to get a sort of Hispano- 
 Belgic Constitution with all the peacefulness and 
 solvency of the former country, all the uprightness 
 and spirit of the latter ! 
 
 But what says the Member for London? Has 
 Mr. Grote, whose speeches are perfect master-pieces 
 of cool and clear argumentation, though unfortu- 
 nately the premisses of his hobby-horse are too 
 weak to support the enormous conclusions that he 
 puts upon it — has he ever relied on such evidence 
 as this ? Nothing of the kind ! He did in former 
 times, it is true, speak of America and France. But 
 he always left it to Dr. Bo wring to bring home from 
 his travels those other little historical curiosities, to 
 illustrate his metaphorical orations on the Biogra- 
 phy of the Modern Ballot. However, even the 
 Member for London has weighed his own histo- 
 rical evidence in a newer and better scale than he 
 did some years ago. For look to the several 
 debates that there have been upon this question — 
 in 1833-1^5-36-37. And who that is fond of specu- 
 lating on Political Philosophy will not think it a 
 curious and interesting fact that the cry for the 
 Ballot has increased, as the tangible intelligible 
 
 ^ Swift's Works, vol. xi. p. 229.
 
 35 
 
 arguments for it have diminished ! In 1^33 Dr. 
 Bovvring charmed the Senate with his famous * Bio- 
 grapliical Statement,' arraying on his side the 
 united forces of Greece, Rome, America, France, 
 Spain, Portugal, Italy, Belgium ! and even Mr. 
 Grote instanced America and France ! But after 
 having the subject strained clear of all its grits arid 
 sediment, and well scoured in the successive debates 
 of 1835 and 1836, we find all Dr. Bowring's motley 
 force at sixes and sevens — the Greeks and Romans, 
 long since dead, and their bodies sold to the sur- 
 geons of the Conservative army — the Americans, 
 as was natural, in mutiny against their English 
 general — the French, all killed stone dead in one 
 night by Mr. Charles RusselP — the Spaniards, 
 Portuguese, and Belgians, as usual, fled far away 
 long before the battle begun— and the Member for 
 London standing nobly forward without any offen- 
 sive weapons whatever, and only a small wicker 
 shield of metaphysics, very loosely framed, and 
 pierced with many holes, to keep off" the thousand 
 darts that his opponents early in the campaign had 
 taken from his own camp ! Throughout the whole 
 debate of 1837, not one single historical argument 
 of any sort or kind w^as attempted to be brought 
 forward, either by Mr. Grote or any one of his 
 party, to support their view of the question ! 
 
 So far then as the preservation of Secrecy is con- 
 cerned, History proclaims in language not to be 
 
 •*<> See this gentleman's speech in 1835. Compare Appendix B. 
 
 D 2
 
 36 
 
 mistaken, tliat the Ballot is utterly worthless. The 
 other party, tlierefore, abandon their regular jKs/6>- 
 77C«Z ground, and take refuge in every day practice ; 
 flying some to the East India House— some to their 
 Clubs — there to seek for shelter, if they cannot get 
 support. In these two retreats they are furnished 
 with two new arguments ; to be used, one or both 
 of them, as occasion may require. The one is, 
 that in each of those places the system of Ballot- 
 ing prevails, and Secrecy is always preserved. The 
 other is, that it is a piece of scandalous sophistry 
 to denounce the Ballot in Parliamentary elections 
 as un-English and dishonourable, when in all these 
 private associations it is invariably practised : and 
 further, that it is an insult and an injury to the 
 poor to debar them from protecting themselves in 
 public elections by the same means that the rich 
 adopt to protect themselves in private elections. 
 This latter argument will be exposed presently : 
 the former shall be refuted at once. 
 
 Is then Secrecy inviolably preserved in the East 
 India House? '* Nothing of the kind ! In those 
 elections no one hesitates to say for whom he in- 
 tends to vote, or for whom he has voted. "^' — So 
 much for the value of a priori reasoning when op- 
 posed to stubborn matters of fact ! 
 
 But the Clubs !— at all events matters are kept 
 quite secret there. Now, this may be perfectly 
 true, and yet, as an argument, perfectly useless^ 
 
 41 See Mr. C. Russell's Speech, 1835.
 
 37 
 
 Let us examine it. In voting for Candidates at 
 Clubs there are only two parties concerned ; the 
 Candidate and the Electors. There are no Land- 
 lords to intimidate, or Agents to offer Bribes. The 
 Electors may keep their votes secret, or not, just 
 as they please, without any fear whatever : and the 
 Candidate is the last man in the world who would 
 wish to enquire how particular persons voted. If 
 he is black-balled, he cannot get any redress, or 
 avenge himself in any way. He might by diligent 
 inquiry ascertain that some men were ill disposed 
 towards him ; and such is the curiosity of man- 
 kind, that probably such cases constantly occur. 
 But the Candidate obviously has no other tempta- 
 tion to search into the causes of his disaster ; and 
 there is this strong reason to deter him from doing 
 so -.—namely, that the further he pushes his re- 
 searches, the more satisfactorily does he discern 
 that the roots of his unpopularity were more widely 
 spread than he had imagined. Hence it is then, 
 that in Elections at Clubs, secrecy, generally speak- 
 ing, is preserved, because it is the interest of all 
 parties to preserve it : — — But should one of the 
 parties think it is his interest to penetrate the 
 mystery, and ascertain the men to whom he was 
 chiefly obnoxious, the Author believes that he 
 could almost always do so successfully.''^ In Parlia- 
 mentary Elections, on the other hand, there are 
 
 *** It is satisfactory to find that Mr. Grote has never adduced the 
 case of Clubs in proof of the Ballot ensuring secrecy
 
 38 
 
 three parties concerned. The Electors : the rival 
 Candidates: and their friends and ajrents. Of 
 these parties, the Candidates, and their friends and 
 agents are deeply interested in finding out how 
 the electors are going to vote, or have voted. The 
 electors are the only persons whose interest it can 
 be to keep their votes secret. But as the other two 
 parties spare no pains to ascertain the nature of the 
 votes, it may naturally be expected that they will, 
 generally speaking, if not invariably, succeed in 
 doing so. As under similar circumstances the re- 
 jected Candidate might do, after an election at a 
 Club. Thus then the only point of view, in which 
 the two cases bear any resemblance to each other, 
 if it furnishes any argument at all, does so rather 
 to the opponents of the Ballot than to its advocates. 
 But it will be shewn hereafter that the two cases 
 have nothing at all in common. So easy is it to 
 make a mere jingle of words sound like a conclu- 
 sive argument ! 
 
 It seems then that the advocates of the Ballot 
 can neither find countenance abroad, nor support 
 at home. The lean diet of metaphysics is all that 
 remains to them ! Must we deprive them of this 
 also ? Historical Truth demanded Vengeance be- 
 fore — Metaphysical Truth clamours for it now. 
 
 *' Thus hath the course of Justice wheeled about." 
 
 Will the Ballot ensure Secrecy ? It will, say its 
 advocates, because it will place the voter's own
 
 39 
 
 secret absolutely in his own keeping : and his in- 
 terest is to keep it. In dealing with such close 
 reasoners, all the helps of logic must be employed : 
 it will be prudent therefore to make a cautious ana- 
 lysis of this argument, and to exhibit that delicate 
 process in the two following syllogisms. 
 
 1. The only way in which the vote can be 
 ascertained, is by the voter disclosing it 
 himself: 
 
 The voter will not disclose it himself: 
 Therefore the vote will not be ascertained. 
 
 2. No man will do that which he knows to be 
 against his interest : 
 
 If an elector were to disclose which way 
 he voted, he w^ould be doing that which he 
 knows to be against his interest : 
 
 Therefore no elector will disclose which 
 way he voted. 
 
 The major premiss of this second syllogism is 
 the foundation stone of the Ballot : and we thus 
 come at once upon what we have termed the meta- 
 physics of our opponents."*^ As their weapons 
 will henceforward be furnished entirely from this 
 armoury, it will be as well to examine their real 
 strength and temper before we proceed further. 
 
 All political changes are experiments on human 
 
 ^^Thc philosophical reader will at once see that this term is only 
 used in its vague popular sense, conveying the same meaning as is 
 usually attached to the terms * abstract reasoning.'
 
 40 
 
 nature : and in order to succeed, should be based 
 on a right notion of the principles on which man- 
 kind commonly act. If those principles are mis- 
 conceived, the experiment may either simply come 
 to nothing ; as was instanced by the Orders in 
 Council that provided for the shoeing and shaving 
 of the West Indian Negroes : or it may produce in- 
 calculable mischief; as may be proved by the taxa- 
 tion of the American Colonies, and the establish- 
 ment of the worship of reason in France. Now 
 there are certain general principles common to all 
 mankind : and there are other principles, which 
 seem more especially to belong to particular na- 
 tions, and particular classes of men in each nation. 
 These latter grow out of the former ; and are in- 
 deed identical with them in substance : but are 
 modified by certain disturbing forces and arranged 
 in different combinations, so as to exhibit that 
 more complex system of principles and sentiments 
 which is commonly termed national character. Po- 
 liticians have therefore to conduct their experi- 
 ments as well with a due regard to the general na- 
 ture of mankind as to the national character of their 
 countrymen :^* and Legislation, however well in- 
 tended, if it be not conducted on these principles, 
 may chance to be tyranny, or may chance to be 
 folly, according to circumstances. Thus if a wild 
 
 "** * Politics ought to be adjusted not to human reasonings but to 
 human nature ; of which the reason is but a part, and by no means 
 the greatest part.' — Burke's Works, II. 170.
 
 41 
 
 Indian were suddenly required to adapt himself to 
 a system of English liberty, he would think himself 
 enslaved : a Chinese under similar circumstances 
 would feel himself emancipated ; and yet perhaps 
 would be less happy than he was before. 
 
 The advocates of the Ballot seem not to have 
 sufficiently attended to either of these two consi- 
 derations. Throughout all their reasonings there 
 is a prevailing misconception of the general princi- 
 ples of human nature, and an apparent forgetful- 
 ness of the particular character of their own coun- 
 trymen. It has been before stated that the de- 
 mand for the Ballot originated with a particular 
 school of thinkers. This assertion is grounded on a 
 comparison of the tone and character of the writings 
 and speeches of the parties in question, ^ith the 
 philosophy of those persons, whose mode of thought 
 and general maxims the advocates of the Ballot 
 have systematically adopted. Whether it be actu- 
 ally the case that Paley, Bentham and Mill, are 
 the acknowledged founders of this school, or only 
 that they happen to coincide with those distin- 
 guished men in the leading features of their philo- 
 sophy, the writer of these pages does not pretend 
 to decide. But that their tenets are generally speak- 
 ing the same as those of Paley, and their manner 
 of expounding them very similar to that of Ben- 
 tham and Mill, is too obvious to be further in- 
 sisted on.**^ The proposition which forms the major 
 
 ■*5 The writer of the article above quoted on 'Utilitarian Logic and
 
 42 
 
 premiss of the second of the above syllogisms, that 
 ' no man will do that which he knows to be against 
 his interest,' — evidently involves the further propo- 
 sition — * that men always act from self-interest' — 
 and thus we have at once the fundamental maxim 
 of the philosophy of Paley. The basis therefore 
 of the system is the supreme paramount nature of 
 self-interest, as the motive and end of all human 
 action, antecedently to all moral feelings, and in 
 truth not acknowledging their independent exist- 
 ence. It follows then at once from this, that self- 
 interest must be considered as ever present to the 
 mind : an animating, controlling, instigating prin- 
 ciple, authoritative in its influence, unerring in its 
 decisions, and conclusive in its evidence. For as 
 men are supposed always to act from some motive, 
 and as the hypothesis is that they never act con- 
 trary to their interest, it necessarily follows that a 
 regard to that interest must be always before their 
 eyes in the most clear and definite form. One would 
 think that the bare statement of this philosophy 
 would be enough to disprove it. But such is the 
 
 Politics,' says of this school — * we apprehend that many of them are 
 persons who having read little or nothing, are delighted to be rescued 
 from the sense of their own inferiority by some teacher who assures 
 them that the studies which they have neglected are of no value, 
 puts five or six phrases into their mouths, lends them an odd num- 
 ber of the Westminster Review^ and in a month transforms them into 
 Philosophers.' p. 160. As this article has been stamped with the 
 approbatioji of Sir James Mackintosh it may be deemed to have some 
 authority.
 
 43 
 
 tenacity of speculative error, that even the unrivalled 
 powers of Butler, aided hy the keen, clear, con- 
 vincing reasonings of Macintosh, Stewart, and 
 Sedgwick, seem unable to tear away this cleaving 
 curse, that pulls down minds capable of better 
 things, to the degrading level of a low and creeping 
 Utilitarianism. The present writer will not pre- 
 sume to give the arguments of these great men in 
 other words than their own : nor need he enter at 
 length into the controversy. The following remarks 
 of Sir J. Mackintosh will fully explain where the 
 fault in the system lies.'*^ 
 
 " * Virtue, says Paley, is the doing good to man- 
 kind, in obedience to the will of God, and for the 
 sake of everlasting happiness.' These words con- 
 tain a false account of virtue. According- to this 
 doctrine, every action not done for the sake of the 
 agent's happiness is vicious. Now, it is plain, that 
 an act cannot be said to be done for the sake of 
 anything which is not present to the mind of the 
 agent at the moment of action. It is a contradic- 
 tion in terms to affirm that a man acts for the sake 
 of any object, of which, however it may be the 
 necessary consequence of his act, he is not at the 
 time fully aware. The unfelt consequences of his 
 act can no more influence his will, than its unknown 
 consequences. Nay, further, a man is only, with 
 any propriety, said to act for the sake of his chief 
 
 46 See his * Ethical Philosophy,' p. 278.
 
 44 
 
 object; nor can lie with entire correctness be said 
 to act for the sake of anything, but his sole object. 
 So that it is a necessary consequence of Paley's 
 proposition, that every act which flows from gene- 
 rosity or benevolence is a vice. So also is every 
 act of obedience to the will of God, if it arises from 
 any motive, but a desire of the reward which He 
 will bestow. Any act of obedience influenced by 
 gratitude and affection and veneration towards su- 
 preme benevolence and perfection is so far imper- 
 fect ; and if it arises solely from those motives, it 
 becomes a vice. It must be owned, that this excel- 
 lent and most enlightened man has laid the founda- 
 tions of religion and virtue in a more intense and 
 exclusive selfishness than was avowed by the Ca- 
 tholic enemies of Fenelon, when they persecuted 
 him for his doctrine of a pure and disinterested 
 love of God." 
 
 This extract is suflBicient to show that the general 
 proposition 'that men always act from self-interest', 
 is quite untrue. It shows that there are other 
 motives of human action, wholly removed from, 
 and diametrically opposed to any selfish considera- 
 tions whatever. So far then, at all events, this 
 system of philosophy is erroneous : and it is so, 
 because it takes one half of the human character, 
 and reasons on it as though it were the whole. 
 
 But though it may be true that men have other 
 motives of action besides self-interest, is it not true 
 that they never will act contrary to self-interest ;
 
 45 
 
 because if so, this is all that we (the advocates of 
 the Ballot) contend for ? 
 
 There is a fallacy here owing to the ambiguity 
 of the term Self-interest : It may either mean — • 
 general well-being: — or it may mean — the gratifi- 
 cation of any particular desire that happens to be 
 predominant for the time. If it be taken in the lat- 
 ter sense, the proposition is self-evident ; for it is 
 obvious that men will always act upon that motive 
 which to them seems strongest : but it completely 
 destroys their argument. For it is clear that indi- 
 viduals and multitudes often desire what they know 
 to be most inconsistent with their general well-being. 
 Even a whole nation, as much as an individual, 
 sometimes more, may not only mistake its interest, 
 but perceiving it clearly may prefer the gVatifica- 
 tion of a strong passion to it.'*'^ 
 
 But it will be replied — that even granting this 
 to be true, our proposition may still be maintained : 
 for as the voter will have no conceivable tempta- 
 tion to mistake his interest, or to be blinded by 
 passion, it is impossible to suppose that he can dis- 
 close a secret which every circumstance, connected 
 
 47 The author does not pretend to claim these arguments as his 
 own. They also are due nearly word for word to Sir J. Mackintosh. 
 See * Ethical Philosophy,' p. 309. See also Montesquieu, Esprit 
 des Lois, ii. cap. 2, on the effects of the Ballot at Rome. Have 
 the unfortunate Canadians followed their true interests in acting upon 
 the advice of M. Papineau? Did Catiline follow his own true inte- 
 rest in conspiring to ruin his country ?
 
 4G 
 
 with it, instigates liim to keep carefully locked up 
 in his own bosom. 
 
 Now it is certainly true on the one hand, that it 
 will, in some cases, be the voter's interest to keep 
 his vote secret. It is equally true on the other, (for 
 such is the hypothesis) that in the same cases it 
 will be somebody's interest to discover it. The 
 parties concerned will thus be in the situation of 
 two antagonist tacticians. And we have Livy's 
 description of the rival stratagems of Hannibal and 
 Fabius reduced to the scale of private discord, and 
 realised in the petty arena of an English farm- 
 yard. But which will be victorious ? Here, we 
 behold the stout sagacious farmer, hedged in on 
 every side, and guarding against all surprise : 
 there, the subtle active prying agent, keenly in- 
 tent on his own object, and resorting to all the 
 crafty wiles that practised ingenuity can suggest 
 to pluck out the heart of his mystery ! — flatter- 
 ing the wife,"*® coaxing the children, bribing the 
 
 ^^ Sec Sir R. Peel's speech, April 5, 1833. And in that of June 
 23, 1836. Mr. Brodie (unquestionably an impartial witness) said 
 — " I recollect very well at the close of the contested election for 
 Salisbury in the year 1822, asking a poor unfortunate voter, who 
 had been obliged to vote against what he called his principle, whe- 
 ther he thought the Ballot would be any protection to him ? His 
 answer was, * Oh ! no, Sir ; it would come out some how or other 
 how one had voted' — and then he added with a great deal of naivete 
 — ' And you know, Sir, a married man would be sure to tell his 
 wife.' " See also instar omnium Mr. Brougham's speech. Ap- 
 pendix G.
 
 47 
 
 domestics, wheedling the friends, seducing the 
 man himself into a state of semi-intoxication in 
 order to drown his caution and stir up his cou- 
 rage, and then take down his words : converting 
 casual expressions into open avowals, putting 
 the question boldly, and then construing hesita- 
 tion or silence into assent. Such will be the na- 
 ture of the conflict, and who can doubt the re- 
 sult \^^ Fabius was drawn down from his fastnesses 
 by the rashness and folly of his own soldiers : the 
 farmer, if he keeps a guard over his own lips,*** will 
 assuredly be betrayed by some one, whose tongue 
 (to use Lord Brougham's expression) is not * so 
 nicely poised or so securely hung' as his own. 
 
 But the writer well knows that an outcry will be 
 raised against him as taking a mean and almost 
 brutal view of human nature ! hear then the Re- 
 
 49 See Ed. Rev. vol. 56, p. 556, 7 ; and Bacon's Essays, 6 : 
 ** he that will be secret must be a dissembler in some degree ; for 
 men are too cunning to suffer a man to keep an indifferent carriage 
 between both, and to be secret, without swaying the balance on 
 either side. They will so beset a man with questions, and draw him 
 on, and pick it out of him, that without an absurd silence, he must 
 shew an inclination one way ; or if he do not, they will gather as 
 much by his silence as by his speech." 
 
 50 The West. Reviewer's mode of meeting this is amusing and happy. 
 He says (p. 30), * If you say that the man would tell how he votes, 
 we answer that the man may do so as much as he pleases ; but the 
 secrecy of the vote will be just as perfect as ever, since it must for 
 ever be a secret, whether or not he speaks the truth I' — Which shall 
 we admire most — the Reviewer's scrupulous justice, or his cautious 
 incredulity ?
 
 48 
 
 viewer's account of tlie matter. What is liis view 
 of liiiman nature? The above description only ap- 
 plies to some portions of society. The Reviewer's 
 more extended acquaintance with mankind con- 
 vinces him that almost all his countrymen in the 
 upper classes of society are fools or villains. *' What 
 is the object of the Suborner ? to seat himself in 
 Parliament. This may be for a public purpose, or 
 a selfish one. The Public purpose is not that of 
 the majority of Candidates. No man, even a Mem- 
 ber of Parliament, out of the House of Commons, 
 will pretend that it is. No man, w^ho knows his 
 countrymen, will deny that those who go into the 
 House constitute two classes ; those who go in for 
 the vanity of the thing ; and those who go in for 
 plunder ; and that the rest at the highest estimate 
 constitute a miserable exception."^* So much for 
 the Upper classes ! But surely the Electors, the 
 intelligent, thinking, right-minded, reflecting Con- 
 stituency, to whom the destinies of England are 
 entrusted, cannot be open to a like charge. Let 
 us hear the Reviewer's opinion of them. ^' It is a 
 matter of fact, notorious and undisputed, that a 
 great majority of those who vote for Members of 
 Parliament in England, proceed to the hustings 
 under the influence of what they either hope to re- 
 ceive or dread to suffer, and prostitute themselves 
 in the most infamous manner, by voting, not ac- 
 cordino; to the dictates of their own minds, but like 
 
 •''1 West. Rev. p. 12.
 
 49 
 
 crouching slaves, at the will of another. ''^'^ To 
 make the show complete, the Reviewer then pre- 
 sents us with a view of both classes at once/^ 
 '^ There are two parties at an election ; one, that of 
 those, who give prostitute votes ; the other, that of 
 those who suborn them. It is of no use to tell us 
 that there are honest voters at elections ; there 
 might be more than any body will pretend there 
 are, without affecting the truth of our description. 
 The honest votes, taking the country as a whole, 
 are a miserable exception."^"* Surely then if the 
 Reviewer's notion of his countrymen is correct, 
 those who go into the House of Commons solely 
 for plunder, will not be very scrupulous what means 
 they employ to gain their end, or very .much in- 
 clined to shew mercy to those by whom they sus- 
 pect they have been thwarted. And on the other 
 hand ' the crouching slaves' are not likely to keep 
 faith with each other, should tliey chance to become 
 acquainted with their neighbour's secret, or to be 
 very sternly virtuous in resisting the bribes that 
 may be offered to induce them to bring charges 
 against another, which the very system which is to 
 operate as his protection, will render it absolutely 
 impossible for him to disprove in any way what- 
 ever. 
 
 52 p. 20. M p. 32. 
 
 ^* This article appeared before the Reform Act was passed: but 
 as Mr. Grole thinks intimidation has increased since then, the Re- 
 viewer's character of his countrymen cannot be tliought less applica- 
 ble now, than it was at the time of publication. 
 
 E
 
 50 
 
 Butvvlio forasinglc moment will assent to the above 
 description of character as drawn by the Reviewer? 
 Yet such is the genuine fruit of the selfish system 
 of philosophy ; and in truth is the cause of all the 
 evils that spring forth, hundred-headed, from that 
 terrible theory. If the philosopher himself believes 
 his own doctrines, what a monster would he be. 
 Fortunate it is that ' Men are never so bad as their 
 opinions :''^ such as he would be then, he is apt to 
 think other men are now : and from this dark, 
 melancholy, jaundiced view of human nature is 
 woven out a sickly, sad-coloured scheme, grounded 
 on ignorance and misconception, utterly untrue, and 
 miserable in all its parts. The present writer re- 
 gards his countrymen in a wholly different light. 
 And for that reason is much inclined to believe that 
 the intimidation (so justly complained of even in 
 its most limited exercise) is very much over-stated ;^' 
 and he believes for the same reason that the scan- 
 dalous system of espionage, which will be the cer- 
 tain result of the Ballot, will be much less general 
 
 ^^ See Sir J. Mackintosh's Eth. Philosophy, p. 305. 
 
 «o So said Mr. S. Rice, in the Debate of March, 1837 ; and Mr. 
 Poulter reminded the House that the Report of the Intimidation 
 Committee (on which the Advocates of the Ballot grounded their 
 opinions) was drawn up from an ex parte statement — not on oath — 
 and that the witnesses often spoke from mere hearsay : and that thus 
 a single categorical proposition, affirmed by an unsworn witness and 
 based on a mere rumour, was quoted as conclusive evidence on a 
 point which a Court of Law would think it impossible to decide 
 without 40 or .50 distinct trials.
 
 51 
 
 than it would be, were human nature sucli as the 
 Reviewer represents it. But be it recollected he 
 has taken the Reviewer's premisses, in order to 
 draw from them (what it seems to him the Re- 
 viewer has not drawn) namely — the legitimate 
 conclusions. 
 
 If then, this grievous and intolerable system of 
 espionage will take place in England, what may be 
 expected to happen in Ireland? where the agents 
 are more subtle, more skilful, more taught, more 
 practised, possessed of an engine powerful enough 
 to wrench the human mind from its most settled 
 determination, and instigated by every motive of 
 party zeal and religious enthusiasm to try their 
 powers to the utmost. What barriers of human will 
 can avail against such a force as this ? . May it 
 not be feared that tlie elective franchise will soon 
 be deemed a hardship, not a privilege ; a curse, 
 not a blessing ? 
 
 It was said above that the Advocates of the Bal- 
 lot seem to forget the peculiar national character to 
 which their system is to be applied. For as there 
 are such qualities as benevolence, justice, genero- 
 sity, Sec, distinct from selfishness, though they may 
 deny it, so there is such a thing as national charac- 
 ter, however little imbued with it the Reviewer and 
 his party may be. Slaves are usually said to be 
 cunning and deceitful, prone to treachery, and 
 regardless of truth. The philosophy of the matter 
 is plain. Slavery makes them so. The same 
 
 E 2
 
 52 
 
 account may be given of the characteristic qualities 
 of the bulk of the English nation. They are honest, 
 open, trustworthy, perhaps credulous, and liable to 
 be imposed upon for that very reason. The long 
 enjoyment of constitutional freedom has built up in 
 them a character of which these qualities are the 
 chief corner stones. Are then these men, who have 
 been accustomed for centuries to glory in an inde- 
 pendent expression of their likings and dislikings, 
 of their opinions and sentiments, of their wishes 
 and their hopes, as though freedom of speech were 
 an Englishman's birth-right, likely to be converted 
 at once into a nation of silent thinkers,^'^ by the sep- 
 tennial, triennial, or even annual handling of two 
 white and two black balls ? Is this common sense, 
 or is it a mere metaphysical cobweb spun out of the 
 mazes of an ingenious but entangled fancy ? The 
 Ballot is thus obviously un-English : that is to say, 
 directly opposed to the whole tone and spirit of the 
 nation. 
 
 But if we are to think with the Reviewer, that 
 the whole of the community is divided into corrup- 
 
 ^^ This idea is not new. A similar experiment was made in the 
 island of Laputa. We read in the history of that country that '' a 
 scheme was projected for entirely abolishing all words what- 
 soever : * * ^- ^ and this invention would certainly have taken 
 place, to the great ease as well as health of the subject, if the women ^ 
 in conjunction with the vulgar and illiterate^ had not threatened 
 to raise a rebellion, unless they might be allowed the liberty to speak 
 with their tongues after the manner of their forefathers : such con- 
 stant and irreconcileable enemies to science are the common people." 
 Swift's Works, xi. p. 235.
 
 53 
 
 ters and corrupted, into those who cause perjury 
 and those who are perjured^ — into fools and villains 
 on'the one hand, and slaves on the other — Why, the 
 very worst and rudest barharians that can be found 
 anywhere on the earth are less degraded by far 
 than those, of whom a greater than the Reviewer 
 has said, that '' wherever mention is made of coun- 
 tries, manners or men, the English people, among 
 the first that shall be praised, may deserve to be 
 accounted a right pious, right honest, and right 
 hardy nation.'"® 
 
 The foregoing reasoning has been applied only 
 to the case of country tenants. ** But much of it, 
 though not the whole, is equally applicable to the 
 tenants of town houses. In particular, they are far 
 less liable to be watched ; and can more easily turn 
 aside impertinent questions. They have very little 
 intercourse with the landlord and his agents ; and 
 they vote in most cases among a greater number of 
 persons. Although certainly there are some towns 
 or parts of towns, where one landlord holds so many 
 houses, that he may by a resident agent and prac- 
 tised canvasser, and the resources of the spy sys- 
 tem, which would speedily connect itself with the 
 Ballot, set at defiance all attempts at concealment. 
 It may be said that the tenants of such a district 
 
 5® Milton, < Reason of Church Government urged agahist Prelaty/ 
 I. p. III. See also his * Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce/ — *< Let 
 NOT England forget her precedence, of teaching nations 
 HOW to live.*'
 
 54 
 
 would be a match for the landlord, who could never 
 afford to turn out scores of occupiers, and suffer 
 whole streets to go untenanted. But in the first 
 place, this argument is contrary to the supposition, 
 and would go to prove the Ballot unnecessary : in 
 the next place, the process which the landlord would 
 take is manifestly of a different kind, though as 
 effectual : — he would make examples of some to 
 deter others ; and lastly, the threat would operate 
 on all, for though each might know that it would 
 not be universally executed, no one could tell that 
 the vengeance would not fall on him. Upon the 
 whole, it seems clear that though the owner of a few 
 houses would lose his power of intimidation by the 
 Ballot, the great landlord, against whom its protec- 
 tion is mainly wanted, would be as strong as before: 
 and that the tenants here, as in the case of farmers, 
 would find it necessary to protect themselves 
 against the arts of spies, the whispers of informers, 
 the malice of tale-bearers and tale-makers (trades 
 generally united in the same individuals), and the 
 partial counsel of agents : — in a word, would find it 
 necessary to protect themselves by refusing to vote 
 at all, so that here, as in the other case, the Ballot, 
 instead of protecting the voter, would disfranchise 
 him.^^ 
 
 The same argument applies also to a certain 
 
 "''^ Ed. Rev. Vol. 56, p. 554. It had been shown in a previous 
 page that the country tenant would be practically disfranchised by 
 the Ballot.
 
 5-5 
 
 extent, but with materially diminished force to the 
 case of tradesmen in towns ; and in proportion to 
 the size of the town, the force of the argument is 
 impaired. Indeed it is here, if any where, that 
 the Ballot appears capable of affording protection. 
 But if the spirit of the contest runs high, the cus- 
 tomers of the several parties will combine, and 
 effect a scrutiny almost as severe as that of a land- 
 lord among his tenants, or a master among his 
 workmen : and in the degree that the Ballot had 
 rendered it more difficult to ascertain the opinions 
 of the electors, precisely in that degree would the 
 amount of evidence required become less : suspi- 
 cion would take the place of certainty : and by this 
 iniquitous adjustment of the balance the amount of 
 evil would remain just as great as before.^ 
 
 But the honourable member for London may say 
 — " these are the arguments of a certain noble and 
 learned Lord, who now comes regularly to my 
 school : therefore he, at all events, thinks but 
 meanly of them." However, the arguments may 
 be better than the advocate : and there is such a 
 thing as changing one's views of a question without 
 changing one's opinions : and as that noble and 
 learned person has often given his opinion against 
 the Ballot, together with the grounds of that opinion, 
 he of course could not ask his former adherents to 
 
 60 Pq^ ** it is the nature of tyranny and rapacity never to learn 
 moderation from the ill-success of firstoppressions." — Burke's Works, 
 xiii. 320.
 
 56 
 
 keep their judgments riding at single anchor, ready 
 to slip their cables whenever their old captain 
 hoisted a new flag. If the noble and learned Lord 
 has once given his reasons for thinking the Ballot 
 an utter delusion, what weight are we to attach to a 
 declaration on his part of a readiness to adopt and 
 act upon that delusion, without assigning one 
 tolerable reason for the change !^* This would seem 
 more like a freak of fancy than a change of opinion, 
 had we not learned from Shakspeare that * opinion 
 is a plaguy thing! a man may wear it on both sides 
 like a leathern jerkin.' 
 
 Such are the arguments to prove that the Ballot 
 will ensure Secrecy ! History, every day practice, 
 and metaphysical speculations have successively 
 given way under the pressure of calm investigation. 
 
 Horum naturam triplicem, tria corpora, Memmi, 
 Tres species tarn dissimiles, tria talia texta, 
 Una dies dedit exitio." ^^ 
 
 However, there is still one more argument, 
 which is so funny and so whimsical, that it was 
 impossible to range it under any of the foregoing 
 classes. It may be called the argumentum ah 
 urnd. And in the reasonings that arise from it, 
 
 ^' For even now the noble and learned Lord says — '* / still think 
 that the Ballot will not be very efficacious betiveen landlord and 
 tenant^ and 1 am quite certain that in counties it will afford no 
 protection to the voter at all.'' — Debate in the House of Lords, 
 December 2, 1837. 
 
 62 Lucret. V. 94.
 
 57 
 
 we find the Member for London, like Pandora, 
 presenting his party with a box, in which nothing 
 is seen but a small figure of Hope, dressed like the 
 wife of a modern 10/. householder! The whole 
 matter is so mysterious, that by mere common 
 sense no one can hope to understand it. It 
 seems, however, that Mr. Grote, like the wise 
 Jewish monarch of old, has hired cunning artificers 
 from all parts of the kingdom, and constructed a 
 curious box ! Now no one can doubt for a moment 
 that Mr. Grote is a competent judge of a safe 
 retentive Box, and therefore is a very fit person to 
 superintend the making of any such an article. 
 But it never entered into the heads of the oppo- 
 nents of the Ballot to suppose for a moment that 
 the Box would reveal its secrets, or be intimidated, 
 or have its virtue endangered by bribes ! We 
 shall hear next of a dumb waiter betraying the 
 vote of a live waiter for the sake of Conservative 
 gold. The fear is about the mertf not about the box ! 
 and unless Mr. Grote means to provide each of 
 the voters with a safe in which he may keep his 
 tongue, and only take it out occasionally, in order 
 to amuse himself with a monologue, when nobody 
 Fs bye, it is to be feared that the Hon. Member for 
 London has spent a great deal of his valuable time 
 to very little purpose. 
 
 And here the case of Secrecy closes. The 
 probability of ensuring it has been patiently 
 weighed. It lias been sought abroad : It has
 
 58 
 
 been sou2:bt at home : It has been looked for 
 with all the aids of metaphysic light : but it has 
 been looked for in vain. Now if (as we said) the 
 whole question turns on the probability of the 
 Ballot ensuring secrecy, and if experience and 
 reasoning both go to prove that all probability is 
 on the other side, then it would seem to a man 
 of plain sense, that the position itself should be 
 abandoned. The key-stone is gone, and so the 
 whole fabric falls to the ground. 
 
 Consequently, we might at once go on and say, 
 that as secrecy is out of the question, it follows 
 that the Ballot will not prevent Intimidation or 
 Bribery. For the advocates of the Ballot agree, 
 that as long as the landlord can detect, so long- 
 can he intimidate, and they hold that the briber will 
 cease to bribe, only when it becomes impossible to 
 know in what way the bribed give their votes. 
 However we will not take this advantage. For the 
 moment, we will allow that the contrivances to en- 
 sure secrecy may succeed, and then see whether 
 either Intimidation or Bribery will cease. 
 
 We say then that even if secrecy he ensured. Inti- 
 midation will not cease. It can still be exercised ; 
 not indeed exactly in the same way, but at most 
 only one step removed. The Reviewer indeed 
 says : the Ballot will put an end to canvassing,^^ 
 and so of course to Intimidation. But will it put 
 an end to canvassing ? It did not do so in ancient 
 
 63 p. 36.
 
 59 
 
 times f^ it does not do so now. Canvassing is uni- 
 versal in the East India House Elections,*^^ and in 
 those for Clubs. So there is almost a moral cer- 
 tainty that the Ballot will not stop it in the Parlia- 
 mentary Elections. '* If then the voter has been 
 canvassed, he has either stated how he should vote, 
 or refused to give an answer. In the latter case, 
 the landlord will set him down as suspected : in the 
 former, it will depend on his way of answering. 
 But the canvasser has other means than the mere 
 answer, of examining the trustworthiness of the 
 voters. They are known to entertain certain opi- 
 nions, to associate with certain persons, to express 
 themselves for or against the Candidates.^^ It will 
 only be upon due sifting, by all such means, that 
 the farmer can be expected to pass muster, and be 
 suffered to give his vote. If he cannot be trusted, 
 he will either be paired off with some known adver- 
 sary, or at least required to keep at home. The 
 argument for the Ballot all along presupposes two 
 things: — the existence of power in the landlord 
 over the tenant, and the disposition to use it oppres- 
 
 ^^ See p. 6, 7, below. 
 
 «* See Mr. C. Russell's speech, 1835. « Does the Ballot pre- 
 clude the necessity of canvassing ? unquestionably not : a canvass 
 for a seat in the E. I. Direction is just as laborious and almost as 
 expensive as a canvass for a seat in the House of Commons." 
 
 *^^ Lord Nugent says (p. 55^ of his Lordship's pamphlet): *' Se- 
 cret suffrage will rather encourage, than discountenance and check 
 open and free discussion on the qualities of public men and public 
 measures." So that the Ballot will make it still easier, than it is at 
 present, to abcertaiii the general sentiments of the voters.
 
 60 
 
 sively.^^ The farmer will therefore be forced to 
 pair off or stay away, unless the landlord can make 
 sure of his vote, and trust him in the dark."*'*' 
 Further — the Upper Classes are not the sole op- 
 pressors. The many can intimidate at least as 
 much as the few. The violence of the mob is as 
 bad as the tyranny of the rich. If the latter will 
 ruin a voter on suspicion, the former assuredly will 
 do so too. Against this, the Ballot can be no safe- 
 guard whatever. Again : — if the mob suspect that 
 a voter intends to vote against the popular Candi- 
 date, they question him : if he declares his inten- 
 tion, they prevent him voting at all : if he gives no 
 answer, silence is taken for assent, and the same 
 result follows. It happens every election.^^ How 
 will the Ballot prevent this ? a voter may thus be 
 ruined, for being supposed to have voted in a par- 
 
 67 Mr. C. Buller, in the debate of 1835, confessed that " even 
 after the Ballot, they must trust to the forbearance of the landlords." 
 
 68 Ed. Rev. Jan. 1833, p. 553. 
 
 69 See Lord Dalmeny's speech, June 23, 1836. '* How will the 
 Ballot prevent the intimidation that prevents a man from voting at 
 all ? This sort of intimidation is tantamount to a disfranchisement 
 of the voter. In several elections I have had experience of the fact. 
 For when electors have refused to announce which Candidates they 
 preferred, the mob has compelled them to relinquish their vote." — 
 This practice is not peculiar to modern times. At Rome, in the 
 year 66 B.C. one of the Candidates for the Consulship was pre- 
 vented by force from coming forward, and, in endeavouring to do 
 so, had a friend wounded, and a servant killed. In the mean time 
 the rival Candidates were elected. Dr. Arnold's Art. on C. J. 
 Caesar. Enc. Metr. p. 2 16.
 
 61 
 
 ticular manner, when he may very probably have 
 voted quite differently ! But how is he to prove it ? 
 The Ballot is to ensure secrecy. And if it does 
 ensure secrecy, then there can be no evidence but 
 his own assertion. Will that be listened to? 
 
 Secrecy then or no secrecy, the Ballot will not 
 prevent Intimidation. How will it affect Bribery ? 
 
 '* Bribery to pair off or to stay away, it is ad- 
 mitted, cannot be reached by the Ballot : but brib- 
 ing actually to vote, it is contended, may."^*^ This 
 is their case. Let us, as before, first examiile it by 
 facts, and then, from these, learn how to deal with 
 their conjectures. 
 
 We learn from Dr. Bo wring, that " the Ballot 
 was practised among the Greeks and Romans ; and 
 was one of their greatest political discoveries." 
 Now is it not a little remarkable that at Athens — the 
 only Greek state whose political relations are worth 
 considering — the Ballot was not used at all in poli- 
 tical matters V^ Those officers of State, who were 
 concerned in the administration of public business, 
 were chosen, some of them by lot, some by open 
 votes : and the most important of them all invari- 
 ably in the latter way.^^ Even those, who had been 
 elected by lot, were subjected to a sort of second 
 election by open votes in order to have their ap- 
 
 70 Ed. Rev. Jan. 1833. p. 557. 
 
 7^1 Schomann de Comitiis Athen. p. 123. C. F. Hermann Polit. 
 Antiquities of Greece, § 130. 
 
 ^^ Wachsmuth Histor. Antiquities of Greece^ vol. ii. § 57.
 
 62 
 
 pointments confirmed." The use of the Ballot was 
 confined to the Law Courts/"* The system of judi- 
 cial procedure at Athens seems to have been rather 
 singular. Six thousand citizens of above 30 years of 
 age were annually chosen by lot to act as Jurymen. 
 These GOOO seldom met at once : they were formed 
 into 10 divisions ; the complement of each being 
 strictly 500 : and with them the decision of every 
 cause practically rested. After the time of Pericles 
 these Jurymen received a fixed payment from the 
 State, as a fee for each day's attendance/^ After 
 the cause had been argued, they gave their votes 
 at once, without deliberation, by white or black, 
 solid or perforated pebbles.^^ An equality of votes 
 
 ^3 The iTTixsi-poTOviay Hermann ut supra. \ 154. 
 
 '^* Except in one or two unimportant cases, Hermann ut supr. 
 § 130—149. 
 
 "^^ The pay of Pericles was very trifling : it was tripled by Cleon ; 
 and it is worth remarking, that the first alleged instance of bribery 
 in the courts (by Anytus the accuser of Socrates, v. Aristot. Athen. 
 Reipubl. Fragm. XI. ed. Neumann) must have occurred soon after 
 the act of Cleon's, which doubtless verv much increased the attend- 
 ance of Jurymen, especially of those who looked to their own 
 advantage, rather than justice. 
 
 ^® ipfjcpoi : — hence strictly vote by Ballot was ^rjcpi^effdai, in oppo- 
 sition to the open vote, yeigoTovia, Schomann ut supr. In the first 
 edition of this pamphlet it was said, that the Athenians used beans 
 as we do balloting balls. The Author has since found that this is 
 an error : but he hopes it will be deemed a venial one, as (among 
 very many others) so eminent a scholar as Mr, H. N. Coleridge has 
 fallen into the same mistake. (See his Preface to Coleridge's Table 
 Talk.)
 
 63 
 
 was equivalent to an acquittal. From this deci- 
 sion there was, strictly speaking, no appeal/^ Now 
 it might be thought that under such a system as 
 this, the Juries, though they might be incapable, 
 would at all events be incorrupt: and the Advo- 
 cates of the Ballot would say, — that ' as money for 
 votes rendered in secret could have no effect what- 
 ever to secure the votes for which it was given, the 
 man would have been mad who would have thrown 
 it away in that manner.' Yet what was the fact ? 
 The notorious corruption of the courts is one of the 
 most striking points in Athenian history. It was 
 actually proverbial.^® Statutes upon statutes were 
 passed against it, enacting the severest penalties, 
 even death itself.'^ Yet we find all the Athenian 
 orators complaining of these statutes as utterly in- 
 efficient.®" But Bribery was not the only mode of 
 influencing the Juries. Intimidation was resorted 
 to fully as much. Associations were formed, for 
 the avowed object of overawing the Jurymen, and 
 dictating to them their verdicts.®^ Yet all these 
 known historical facts are irreconcileable with the 
 very first principles of our philosophical opponents ! 
 Which are to be believed ? 
 
 ^^ Hermann ut supr. § 134, foil. 
 
 ^^ AvKOv Ukuq was a cant term for a knot of bribed Jurymen ; its 
 origin is doubtful, v, Meier and Schomann Attischer Process, p. 
 150. 
 
 "9 Demosth. p. 1135. 7. 
 
 s'' e. g. Demosth. 1. c. iEschin. p. 12. 25. Isocr. 373. C. 
 
 81 Dr. Arnold on iThueyd. 8. 54.
 
 64 
 
 That a state of things, so ridiculous in theory, 
 and so evil in practice, should have been suffered 
 to continue, will seem less wonderful, when we 
 recollect that these Jurymen, who voted by Ballot 
 and took bribes, were the same persons who made 
 the laws. The majority of those, in whom the 
 legislative power was vested, were possessed of but 
 little property,®^ and therefore seldom felt the ill 
 consequence of a corrupt verdict in a case where 
 much was at stake. Their gains were constant : 
 their losses only contingent : and they were thus 
 enabled to live in comparative idleness on the 
 means that they got by the legalised plunder of 
 the upper classes. 
 
 Let us now turn from Athens to Rome : from a 
 small state, to a vast empire : and see the working 
 of the Ballot on a large scale and in political trans- 
 actions.®^ The subject is discussed in a dialogue be- 
 
 ®2 f« I sold sausages," says Agoracritus, in the Knights of Aristo- 
 phanes, " but I got the best part of my livelihood by judging causes." 
 V. 1239, 1255. " And if the Archon should not order the court to 
 sit," says a boy, in the Wasps, '' bow are we to have victuals ?" — 
 " Alas," answers his father, '* I fear we must go supperless." — 
 V. 309. 
 
 ®^ That the Ballot did not prevent intimidation in the Roman 
 Courts any more than it did in the Athenian, may be learnt from 
 Cic. Orat. p. Red. in Sen. § 19. Conf. Cic. in Csbc. Divin. § 23, 
 24, and Pseudo-Ascon. ad 1., where one of the modes of Intimidation 
 and Bribery commonly practised by Hortensius (who seems to have 
 been a noted corrupter of Judges) is explained. Compare Milo's 
 proceedings — Middleton's Cic. I, 368, 469, and those against him, 
 472.
 
 65 
 
 twecn M. Cicero, and his brother Quintus.®^ The 
 latter gives the following summary of the Laws 
 relating to it, and the characters of their respective 
 authors. *' There are four different laws on this 
 subject. The first — the Gabinian law, — relating to 
 the election of magistrates, was brought in by a 
 low vulgar fellow. Two years after came Cassius' 
 law in public trials: and Cassius was undoubtedly 
 a man of good birth ; but his family must not be 
 angry if I add, that he was no favourite with good 
 men, and one that would catch at any straw to gain 
 popularity. Thirdly — the law of Carbo — on the 
 passing of statutes. The author of that law was a 
 profligate and seditious citizen, who could not, 
 even when he left the bad, find shelter am©ng the 
 good. In one case only was open voting left us : — 
 namely, in trials for murder ; which was spared by 
 a special provision in the law of Cassius. But here 
 too the Ballot was brought in by Ccelius : an act 
 that he lamented as long as he lived ; confessing 
 that he had injured the constitution merely to gra- 
 tify his own hatred of C, Popilius." 
 
 It thus appears that, at Rome, the Ballot pre- 
 vailed in every department of the state. And it is 
 not a little interesting to watch the growth of cor- 
 ruption under a system that was meant to wither it 
 to the roots. The Ballot was introduced b.c. 139,®^ 
 In a period of 217 years before that time, only two 
 
 84 Cic. de Leg. III. § 35, 36. 
 
 85 See Adam's Rom. Ant. p. 85. 
 
 F
 
 66 
 
 laws were passed against Bribery.^^ In the course 
 of 87 years after its adoption, we find six addi- 
 tional laws witli a constantly ascending scale of 
 penalties annexed to the breach of them.®^ Yet so 
 little did these laws avail, that we read in Cicero's 
 time of the two Consuls Autronius and Sylla being 
 deprived of the Consulship, fined, and declared in- 
 capable of holding any office, or of coming into the 
 Senate, in consequence of having been judicially 
 convicted of obtaining their offices by Bribery.^® 
 
 But did the Ballot check canvassing at Rome ? 
 So far from it, that it seems to have been practised 
 far more systematically than in our own country.®^ 
 
 86 LexPsetilia,B.C. 356,Lex Btjebia, B.C. 182. Ad. R. Ant. 104. 
 
 87 Lex Cfpcilia, between B. C. 98 and B. C. 60. Calpurnia, B. 
 C. 67. Tullia, B. C. 63. Aufidia, B. C. 61. Licinia, B. C. 55, 
 Pompeia, B. C. 52. Ad. R. Ant. p. 178 foil. The Lex Calpurnia, 
 among other things, forbad the giving public dinners to the Electors. 
 Cic. pro Muroena § 67. By the Lex Tullia, banishment for ten 
 years was added to the former penalties for Bribery : and it provided 
 that no one should exhibit shows of gladiators for two years before 
 he became Candidate for a public office. Cic. Orat. pro P. Sextio 
 § 133. Orat. in P. Vat. § 37. 
 
 88 Ad. R. Ant. 103. Comp. Ferg. R. Hist. sing. vol. ed.p.217. 
 
 8^ See once for all the pamphlet of Q. Cicero, de petitione Con- 
 sulates : containing advice to his brother Marcus on the best mode of 
 canvassing for the Consulship. It is a complete institute of election- 
 eering trickery. The writer recommends several months' dissimula- 
 tion, till the art of moulding the whole man to the sentiments of the 
 electors has been thoroughly learnt : he then gives rules for manag- 
 ing all the details of a canvass, both small and ejreat : who were to 
 be gained by flattery ; who by feasting ; who by promises ; who by 
 intimidation ; and urges his brother to remember that falsehood, 
 though odious in private life^ was essential in canvassing.
 
 67 
 
 The Candidates of those days had their electioneer- 
 ing Agents^** and Attendants ;°* some of whom were 
 to divide the money among the people;**^ which 
 was done openly, though it was directly contrary 
 to law ; others were to bargain with the electors 
 for their votes :^^ there were others again in whose 
 hands the bribes were to be deposited ;®'* associa- 
 tions too were formed, to aid in and expedite the 
 canvass ; till at length their proceedings became so 
 grievous that they were forbidden by a positive en- 
 actment.^^ 
 
 It would seem then that at Rome the Ballot most 
 assuredly did not destroy Bribery.^" It will here- 
 after be shewn that it at length threw the whole 
 power of the state into the hands of the' mob.^^ 
 
 ^^ Nomenclatores, Horat. Ep. I. 6. 50, note. 
 ®^ Deductores, 2 Cic. de Pet. Cons. c. 9, or Sectatores, Cic. pro 
 Mur. § 70. 
 
 92 Divisores, Q. Cic. de Pet. Cons. c. 14. Ad. R. Ant. p. 79, 
 Cic. pro Plane. § 47. So systematic had Bribery become at Rome, 
 that once, when the Senate made a common purse to enable one of 
 the Candidates for the Consulship to bribe as high as his competitors, 
 even Cato saw no impropriety in such a course, (ne Catone quidem 
 abnuente) Suet. J. Caes. 19. 
 
 93 Interpretes, Ernesti Clav. Cic. in voc. 
 
 9^ Sequestres, Ibid. ^5 L^x Licinia. Ad. R. Ant. 190. 
 
 9^ Repecting Bribery at Rome in Judicial Proceedings, see Cic. 
 ad Att. I. 16. Ibid. 18.3. In Caec. Div. § 23, 24, and Pseudo- 
 Ascon. ad 1. Dr. Arnold's Art. on C. J. Caesar, Enc. Metr. 
 p. 175. With reference to bribing the Senate — see Ibid. p. 214, 
 in the case of Ptolemy, King of Egypt. 
 
 97 See below, p. 97. 
 
 f2
 
 68 
 
 Tlicre was however one kind of Secrecy which it 
 certainly did ensure ; for it rendered it quite im- 
 possible to distinguish the opinions of the educated 
 classes from those of the uneducated. It gave to 
 all an equal value ; and when the deadly mischief 
 of making numbers the sole test of Public opinion be- 
 came manifest, a law was passed^ to compel the 
 different classes of people in each tribe to vote 
 separately, so that the sentiments of every rank 
 mio^ht be known. This law is remarkable. It 
 shows that the Ballot ensured that degree of secrecy 
 which was confessedly pernicious to the state :^ 
 but it does not shew on the other hand that it at all 
 ensured individual secrecy : and the pamphlet of 
 Q. Cicero above referred to, proves beyond all 
 doubt that the opinions of all the voters were known 
 beforehand as well as possible. 
 
 When, therefore, Dr. Bowring tells us that the 
 
 98 LexFusk, B. C. 62. Ad R. Ant. 185. 
 
 ^ Mr. Grote (June 23, 1 836), said — " Now, Sir, perhaps it may 
 be considered as unduly presumptuous, but I challenge any Gentle- 
 man to point out any one good consequence arising from publicity 
 of votes at Parliamentary Elections." " Is then example nothing ? 
 It is everything. Example is the scliool of mankind, and they will 
 learn at no other." — Burke's Works, 8, p. 197. Moreover, the 
 Lex Fusia alone contains a complete answer to this challenge. 
 Again — Open voting prevents all those evils that must result from 
 secret voting. It has therefore both positive and negative advan- 
 tages. And further — does Mr. Grote think that no good conse- 
 quence can result from an election being revised, bad votes struck 
 off, and a return, gained by Intimidation and Bribery, set aside ?
 
 69 
 
 Ballot was one of the greatest political discoveries 
 of the Greeks and Romans, we must necessarily 
 infer one of three things. Either he must think 
 that the invention of a good recipe for national 
 corruption betokens great political genius : or he 
 must hold it a mark of statesmanlike wisdom to 
 place the government in the hands of the mob : or, 
 which is plainly inconceivable, the learned doctor 
 hazarded the assertion without knowing much 
 about the subject. 
 
 The foregoing account of the effects of the Ballot 
 both at Athens and at Rome fully confirms the no- 
 tion above expressed that candidates will bribe, 
 even when the effect of the bribe is uncertain. It 
 is a common principle of human nature ; perhaps 
 a common weakness ; but still it does exist, and 
 has ever operated whenever an opportunity has 
 offered. The ancient practice of suitors in the 
 French courts is exactly in point. ^"® Both parties 
 were accustomed to give presents to the Judges, 
 although it was plain that one of the two must lose 
 by it ; and neither of them at the time of giving 
 the present could tell which way judgment would 
 be given. Similar instances have occurred in the 
 English courts. In the list of charges against 
 Lord Bacon, we find him accused of receiving pre- 
 sents from both parties in a suit, while the cause 
 
 '°® See an extract from Montesquieu in Montagu's life of Bacoi;, 
 note ZZ.
 
 70 
 
 was still pending."^ And in other cases, where only 
 one of the parties gave presents, it fell out strangely 
 enough that the judgment was always given against 
 him.^"* But not only do ancient and modern his- 
 tories unite in exhibiting this common principle of 
 human action, but contemporary history and the 
 actual events of yesterday bear incontrovertible 
 testimony to the present existence of the same 
 habit. At the Ipswich Election in the year 1835, 
 a voter received 20Z. from one of the candidates, 
 though both before and at the time of receiving the 
 money, he declared openly, over and over again, 
 that he should vote against him. Notwithstanding 
 these protestations, the money was given : the elec- 
 tor accepted it ; and then gave his vote against the 
 party who had bribed him.^"^ 
 
 If then, for about the space of 2230 years — from 
 the time of Anytus, b. c. 400 and upwards,^"^ to the 
 time of George Cunnold, a.d. 1835 — this principle 
 has been found to operate, what grounds have we 
 for thinking that in a.d. 1838, it will have quite 
 worked itself out ? The Honourable Member for 
 
 *"* See Montagu's Life, note ZZ. (Egerton v. Egerton. Hol- 
 man v. Young. The Grocer's Company v. the Apothecaries' 
 Company.) 
 
 102 (Trevor v. Ascue. Sir R. Hurdsley's cause. Reynell v. Per- 
 cival.) do. note, ZZ. 
 
 '"•* See George Cunnold's evidence, p. 173, of the Repoit of the 
 proceedings before the Ipswich Election Committee, April, 1835. 
 
 '»^ See note 75.
 
 71 
 
 London must see at once that such a notion would 
 be extremely unphilosophical. 
 
 So much for the first and second positions of the 
 Advocates of the Ballot. And as in defiance of all 
 history, and all experience, they have hazarded two 
 dogmas in favour of the Ballot, the author will be 
 equally candid, and with the concurrence of all 
 history, experience and authority, venture to say — 
 I. That the Ballot will not secure the independence of 
 the Voter, II. That it will not diminish the expenses 
 of the Candidate, 
 
 The third position — " that it will elevate the 
 moral condition of the upper as well as the lower 
 classes of the community," — is in truth already re- 
 futed by the foregoing reasoning. For if the Ballot 
 will leave the voter as dependent as it found him, 
 and will in all probability very much increase bri- 
 bery, it does not seem clear how it is to purge the 
 nation from that ingrained wickedness of which the 
 bare thought throws a heavier gloom than usual 
 over the pages of the Westminster Review, and 
 suggests to my Lord Nugent's delicate fancy the 
 horrors of a surgical operation.^'^^ 
 
 If the Ballot would do no moral harm, it would 
 
 *"^ See his Lordship's Pamphlet, p. 4. ** for want of some guards, 
 as yet unapplied, for the protection of free voting, the provisions of 
 the Reform Bill are exceedingly defective," * * " the deep narrow 
 abscess has been laid wide ; but the disease is still in the system. 
 It presents a more extended and more rankling surface, and requires 
 new remedies, appropriate to the new and increased action of the 
 grievance."
 
 72 
 
 be sufficient for the author's purpose, to show that 
 it would do no good. But as it must from its 
 very nature do a great deal of harm, it will be as 
 well to look into this part of the subject a little more 
 closely. Now nothing can be more certain, than 
 that the Ballot will promote falsehood to an ama- 
 zing extent. The following account of the matter 
 is given us by an eminent living writer. *' In what 
 way can the Ballot protect, or rather in what way 
 does it profess to protect the voter who dreads the 
 displeasure of his landlord, his master, or his cus- 
 tomer ? Simply by enabling him to promise one 
 way and vote another, without being found out. 
 But suppose the new law were to prohibit all can- 
 vassing, so that no one should be called on to de- 
 clare his sentiments — to promise or refuse; and 
 suppose, what is plainly impossible, that it were 
 effectually to prohibit all equivalent proceedings : — 
 such as sounding voters by third parties, asking indi- 
 rect questions, discussing political points bearing on 
 the contest, and so forth : — and suppose the voter 
 without ever having opened his lips upon the mat- 
 ter, or even made any sign by which his intention 
 could be conjectured, gives his secret vote : — is the 
 law further to seal the lips of all men, including 
 the voter, at all moments, and in all companies 
 after the election is over ! This is manifestly im- 
 practicable ; and if it were not, would be a tyranny, 
 worse by a great deal, than any which can now be 
 complained of. Then the voter's whole life must be
 
 73 
 
 so adjusted as to deceive the person whose ven- 
 geance he has reason to dread. Having first deceived 
 him that he might be allowed to vote, he must go 
 on keeping up the deception, that he may not be 
 punished for the double offence, — the disobedience, 
 and the treachery. We really do not see how 
 any man can doubt that such a life of deception 
 would be the lot of the voter whom the Ballot 
 had effectually protected : and still less can we 
 comprehend how such a life would be led with- 
 out utter ruin to the voter's honesty, f It is 
 said, indeed, that slavish obedience ruins a man's 
 character as much. But in what way is slavery 
 fatal to virtue ? Chiefly by eradicating all sense of 
 honour, all love of truth. The great corrupter of 
 the heart is that fear which is at once the ^bitterest 
 and most debasing part of the slave's lot. But it 
 works corruption and debasement, mainly by 
 making falsehood familiar. If then the Ballot 
 familiarises falsehood, it is as bad as oppression ; 
 but it is clear that the oppression we are treating 
 of docs not degrade like other tyranny : — it teaches 
 no falsehood. A voter is compelled, not to vote ac- 
 cording to his conscience, or even to vote contrary 
 to his conscience. His lot is most hard ; the con- 
 duct of his oppressor is execrable ; no epithet is so 
 bad that he has not amply earned it : but still his 
 
 f The Ballot may be defined — ** a scheme to save a man*s con- 
 science by enabling him to tell a lie." And this is Mr. Grote's device 
 to protect honest voters from intimidation !
 
 74 
 
 dependant deceives no one in the vote he gives : he 
 votes avowedly under compulsion. The public is 
 injured no doubt : and by the Ballot this injury is 
 avoided, for the real, though carefully concealed 
 opinion of the voter is fairly represented. But 
 this appears to be a good purchased too dear, when 
 it can only be obtained by the habitual practice of 
 deception on the voter's part."*"^ 
 
 The Advocates of the Ballot attempt to meet this 
 in tw^o different ways. 1st. by arguments drawn 
 from the Utilitarian code of morality — such as — 
 '* men are not entitled to the truth when they 
 would make a bad use of it."^"' 2ndly. by assert- 
 ing that if the Ballot causes false promises at first, 
 it will in the end for that very reason prevent any 
 promises being given at all : since when men find 
 that promises are not to be relied on, they will no 
 longer exact them. In other words, canvassing 
 will cease.***® 
 
 The latter of these arguments has been already 
 examined. The former, being Dr. Paley's, is 
 therefore entitled to consideration, though it would 
 carry more weight with it, had it come from a phi- 
 losopher whose system had been less generally 
 found fault with. Perhaps there never was so sad 
 an instance of unintentional mischief as is afforded 
 by the moral philosophy of this eminent man. 
 
 106 Ed. Rev., Jan. 1833. p. 559. 
 
 »o^ West. Rev. p. 33. Lord Nugent's Pamphlet, p. 1 1. 
 
 i«8 West. Rev. p. 35, 36.
 
 75 
 
 His high character, great talents, and the beautiful 
 clearness of his writings have secured them a wel- 
 come reception and an attentive study, while at 
 the same time they have made the reader unwil- 
 ling, perhaps unable to detect the poison they con- 
 tain. It may be true that particular circumstances 
 justify falsehood : a man may mislead a murderer, 
 whom he knows to be in pursuit of his victim ; a 
 physician may deceive a patient in order to work 
 his cure. In these cases neither the patient, nor 
 the murderer are ' entitled to the truth.' Sup- 
 posing now we go on to grant that an oppressive 
 Landlord is not entitled to the truth — yet even 
 then it must be remembered that the voter will 
 not get the matter over by lying once to his mas- 
 ter : he will have ' to adjust his whole lif^ so as to 
 deceive the person whose vengeance he has reason 
 to dread.' He must have one set of politics for 
 one company ; and another for another : he must 
 be always ready to lie when occasion requires it : 
 he must have a habit of deceit : cunning and false- 
 hood must be woven into his very being: unless 
 this be so, he will be detected :*"^ therefore the Bal- 
 lot, to he of any service, must breathe a lying spirit 
 into the minds of those for whose protection it is ex- 
 pressly provided}^^ Granting then that a voter may 
 
 ^^^ *' It is not the lie that passeth through the mind, but the lie 
 that sinketh and settleth in it that doth the hurt." Bacon's Es- 
 says, I. 
 
 "** The advocates of the Ballot must be content to justify the 
 most odious ottrine with which the world was ever deluged, by a
 
 76 
 
 justly deceive an oppressive master, the objection 
 to the Ballot remains as strong as ever. For the 
 opponents of the Ballot do not deprecate it on the 
 ground of its injuring Landlords, &c. by enabling 
 Tenants, &c. to deceive them ;^^^ but on quite dif- 
 ferent grounds : — namely, because it will induce 
 tenants and others to practise systematic falsehood, 
 till at length they will come to think truth an evil, 
 and straightforwardness a fool's part. For what 
 says the master Philosopher of this school ? ^^ White 
 lies always introduce others of a darker complexion. 
 I have seldom known any one who deserted truth 
 in trifles that could be trusted in matters of im- 
 portance. Nice distinctions are out of the ques- 
 tion upon occasions which like those of speech re- 
 turn every hour. The habit therefore of lying, 
 when once formed is easily extended to serve the 
 designs of malice or interest : like all habits, it 
 
 corrupt and false philosophy — that " private vices are puhlic bene- 
 fits." See Mr, C. Russell's speech, 1835. Compare the senti- 
 ments of Heathen Morality, ** Atqui in talibus rebus aliud utile in- 
 tcrdum, aliud honestum videri solet. Falso : nam eadem utilitatis, 
 quae honestatis est regula. Qui hoc non perviderit, ab hoc nulla 
 fraus aberit, nullum facinus ; sic enim cogitans, Est istuc quidem 
 honestum, verum hoc expedite res a natura copulatas audebit errore 
 divellere; qui fons est fraudium, maleficiorum, scelerum omnium." 
 Cic. de Off. 3. c. 18. See Jer. Taylor, Serm. XXIII. on Christian 
 Simplicity. 
 
 ^^' Lord Nugent has chosen to assume that this is the moral objec- 
 tion to the Ballot; whereas it has little or nothing to do with it. 
 (See his Lordship's pamphlet, p. 42.)
 
 77 
 
 spreads indeed of itself.""* This then is another 
 instance of the un-English character of the Bal- 
 lot. And no epithet can be more fitting : not- 
 withstanding all the awkward ridicule and incon^ 
 gruous illustrations with which Lord Nugent seeks 
 to assail it."^ 
 
 The second of the above arguments rests on the 
 assumption that under the Ballot canvassing would 
 cease. It has been before shewn that there is every 
 reason to expect the contrary. Again — the fact of 
 one candidate, once finding that some promises are 
 broken, will not deter other candidates from exact- 
 ing promises at another time. For promises are 
 broken under the present sytem at every election ; 
 yet promises are still exacted ! How does the 
 Reviewer explain this ? Such curious contradic- 
 tions does the selfish system of philosophy give 
 birth to ! It assumes that prudence is the essential 
 property of human nature ; and starting with this 
 absurdity, it is forced to pile up one blunder upon 
 another in order to keep up some decent outside of 
 uniformity. 
 
 »i2 Paley's Moral Phil. ed. 1824. p. 109. 
 
 1^3 Lord Ho wick, who has unfortunately always argued the ques- 
 tion in detail rather than on principle, said that he quite abandoned 
 all considerations either of the moral influence of property, or of the 
 un-English character of the Ballot I Hear on the other hand Lord 
 Stanley — " My Noble Friend (Lord H.) said that he would tlirow 
 overboard the arguments based upon the influence of property, and 
 the un-English character of the Ballot. Now with deference to my 
 Noble Friend, I will throw overboard neither the one nor the other." 
 Debate 1835. see above p. 52, and Appendix D.
 
 78 
 
 Having thus seen the moral effects of the Ballot 
 on the lower classes of the community, let us now 
 look to its influence on the upper classes. The 
 Reviewer seems to think that it will only act 
 morally on the former, but on the latter it is to 
 have a religious as well as a moral operation. 
 *' Take away," he says, '* from men of property 
 the power of obtaining the suffrages of the people 
 by improper means, and you may deem it certain 
 that they will immediately apply themselves to the 
 
 obtaining them by proper means the 
 
 moment it was seen that the people gave their 
 suffrages only to those whom they regarded as best 
 endowed with the qualities which fit men for the 
 duties of legislation, the men of property would 
 exert themselves to attain and display those quali- 
 ties. They M^ould then have a motive for their 
 attainment, of which at present they are nearly 
 destitute. . . . If the men of power and influence 
 in the country, along with sufficient motives to take 
 the utmost pains with their own intellect and 
 morals, had the like motives to take the utmost 
 pains with the intellects and morals of the people ; 
 to do whatever could be done for rendering their 
 early education perfect ; to take the utmost care of 
 their morals through life, by a correct use of their 
 approbation and disapprobation, as well as their 
 power of giving and withholding good ; to watch 
 over the instruction given to them ; to take them 
 out of the hands of those who have an interest in
 
 79 
 
 giving them wrong opinions, &c. &c., what delight- 
 ful consequences would ensue 1 We should then 
 have a community through which wisdom and 
 virtue would be universally diffused, and of which 
 the different classes would be knit together by the 
 ties of mutual benefaction. In those circumstances 
 the order and harmony of society would be per- 
 fect/^* .... Nor is there in all this one Utopian 
 idea.^^^ .... The time is coming when it will 
 obtain all the attention which it deserves ; at pre- 
 sent we believe it has little chance. "^^^ 
 
 Thus then the Reviewer thinks that at present 
 there are no adequate motives to induce the 
 upper classes to lead a life of purity and virtue : 
 that Christianity is not only emphatically, but 
 exclusively the religion of the poor : and that 
 the Ballot is to be viewed, not as a mere political 
 
 J14 West. Rev. p. 3G. 
 
 "^ " It may be remarked with respect to the greater part of the plans 
 proposed by Utopian projectors, that they proceed on the supposition 
 of a miraculous reformation in the moral character of a people, to be 
 effected by some new system of education. All such plans, (as Mr 
 Hume has justly observed,) may be safely abandoned as impracti- 
 cable and visionary.' — D. Stewart's Philosophy of the Human 
 Mind, vol. i. p. 253. — Mr. Hume (whose political Philosophy is 
 certainly not less profound than that of the Westminster Reviewer) 
 introduced the Ballot into his f/'^o/;za7i Commonwealth, as being fitted 
 for an Utopian state of things^ and for that state only ! See Es- 
 says, XVI. The Idea of a perfect Commonwealth. 
 
 "® West. Rev. p. 39. — These four last words contain more truth 
 than all the rest of the article.
 
 80 
 
 machine, but as a grand moral and religious 
 engine to supply the wants of the Christian dispen- 
 sation. Bolingbroke has been thought fastidious 
 for being dissatisfied with that model of perfection 
 which the Founder of our Religion has afforded us : 
 the noble sceptic longed to see the image of virtue 
 upon earth, that he might have wherewithal to fill 
 up the pure cravings of his intense and eager spirit."' 
 How thrice happy would he have been could he 
 have seen, with the Reviewer, the true method of 
 attaining excellence, and learn the real motives on 
 which rich men ought to act. Then would he have 
 known that popular applause is to the rich man 
 better than the approving voice of conscience, and 
 that the House of Commons is the rich man's 
 heaven ! 
 
 We may now pass on from these prophetic argu- 
 ments for the Ballot, to other three quite as singular, 
 and not less sound. To the first of these the Re- 
 viewer seems to have an undisputed claim. It is 
 drawn from the theory of the Constitution, and is 
 as follows : '' There is another important argument 
 in favour of the Ballot. Nothing else can render 
 the constitution of England conformable to the con- 
 ception and expectations of its kings. When they, 
 upon some great emergency, have recourse to a new, 
 as a fitter instrument than an old Parliament, they 
 declare that they have recourse to the sense of the 
 people : meaning, of course, that the sense of their 
 
 *^' See the close of his Patriot King.
 
 81 
 
 people is expressed in the choice of members of 
 Parliament. They know not, it seems, that it is 
 not the sense of their people which is so expressed, 
 but the sense of a small number of suborners of 
 voters.""® This passage is perhaps the most amus- 
 ing in the whole article, and is the best sample of 
 the Reviewer's style and mode of argument. After 
 devoting all his energies to pleading the ciuse of 
 popular rights, after expressing his wishes and 
 hopes that the duration of Parliaments may be 
 shortened,"^ he then doubles back upon his old 
 course, and, so far from insisting on the majesty of 
 the people, declaims on the majesty of the Sove- 
 reign. And so unbounded is his loyalty, that he 
 not only would invest Sovereignty with all the 
 attributes that can belong to it, but would make 
 the limits of the Royal conception, or the extra va- 
 
 "8 West. Rev., page 17. 
 
 *^^ On this point the Republican Milton and the Radical Reviewer 
 differ considerably. The former says, " I see not how we can be 
 advantaged by successive and transitory Parliaments ; but that they 
 are much likelier continually to unsettle, rather than to settle, a free 
 Government ; to breed commotions, changes, novelties, and uncer- 
 tainties ; to bring neglect upon present affairs and opportunities, 
 while all minds are in suspense with expectation of a new assembly, 
 and the assembly for a good space taken up with the new-settling of 
 itself. After which, if they find no great work to do, they will 
 make it, by altering or repealing former acts, or making and multi- 
 plying new : that they may seem to see what their predecessors saw 
 not — not to have assembled for nothing: till all law be lost in the 
 multitude of clashing statutes."— T/tc Ready and Easy Way to 
 establish a free Commonwealth^ 413. 
 
 G
 
 82 
 
 gancics of tlie Iloyjil fancy, the measure of the 
 electoral body of the people of England ! For if 
 the Reviewer's argument means anything at all, it 
 must mean that the principles of the constitution 
 are tBver to be sought for in the breast of the Mo- 
 narch. If it does not mean this, what does it mean ? 
 
 '* Achitophel each rank, degree, and age, 
 For various ends neglects not to engage ; 
 The wise and rich for purse and counsel brought ; 
 The fools and beggars for their number sought; 
 Who yet not only on the town depends, 
 For even in Court the faction had its friends. "^'-^^ 
 
 And it is not strange that it should. For we find 
 that the Reviewer defines loyalty to be '' an ardent 
 desire of seeing placed as much as possible of other 
 men's property at the disposal of the King."*'^' 
 
 But still it is plain that the one thing nieedful 
 with the Advocates of the Ballot is to bring the 
 Sovereign into such close connection with the 
 people, that there could be no further question 
 where the sovereignty lay. Hence with this party 
 the Ballot and Universal Suffrage always go hand 
 in hand.*^^ The discontented Butler in the Vicar 
 
 »'^o Dryden's Abs. and Achitophel, 515. 
 
 121 p. 12. 
 
 12'^ Jt is interesting to compare the opinions of the * man of the 
 people,' half a century back, with those of* the men of the people* of 
 the present day. Mr. Fox said — '' My objection to Universal Suf- 
 frage is not distrust of the decision of the majority, but because there 
 is no practical mode of collecting such suffrage, and that by attempt- 
 ing it, what from the operation of hope on some, fear on others, and 
 all the sinister means of influence that will so certainly be exerted,
 
 83 
 
 of Wakefield held precisely the same opinions : 
 when asked by the Vicar, whether he reverenced the 
 King, he replied, * Yes — when he does what we 
 would have him ; but if he goes on as he has done 
 of late, ril never trouble myself more with his 
 matters. I say nothing. I think, only, I could 
 have directed some things better. I don't think 
 there has been a sufficient number of advisers. 
 He should advise with every person willing to give 
 him advice, and then we should have things done 
 in another guess manner. '^^^ Against the opinion 
 of the Butler let us set that of Mr. Burke. " I 
 believe," says this immortal man, " that most sober 
 thinkers on this subject are rather of opinion that 
 our fault is on the other side ; and that it would be 
 more in the spirit of our constitution, and more 
 agreeable to the pattern of our best laws, by lessen- 
 ing the numbers to add to the weight and indepen- 
 dency of our voters."^** To be sure, Mr. Burke only 
 
 fewer individual opinions will be collected than by an appeal to a 
 limited number." May 7, 1793. Again — " With respect to Uni- 
 versal Suffrage, I never had but one opinion on the subject, I have 
 constantly and uniformly considered Universal Suffrage as a wild and 
 ridiculous idea. When my noble relation, the Duke of Richmond, 
 had one day taken pains to explain his ideas on this subject, a learned 
 and ingenious friend said to him, with as much truth as wit, " My 
 Lord, I think the best part of your Grace's plan is its utter imprac- 
 ticability."— May 17, 1794. 
 
 »23 p. 69. 
 
 '2* Works, ii. 1 35. Compare Milton's opinion. — Prose Works, 
 iii. 417. 
 
 G 2
 
 84 
 
 professes to agree with sober thinkers ; now the 
 Butler was drunk, 
 
 Tiie next argument is drawn from the practice 
 of the Constitution, It is Lord Nugent's. His 
 Lordship having discharged repeated vollies of wit 
 upon the term un-English,'^ as applied to the Ballot, 
 moves forward to what he thinks a stronger posi- 
 tion, and brings the heavy artillery of his constitu- 
 tional learning to hear upon the same point. He 
 says : — " I take my stand upon the principle of 
 secret voting on Grand Juries, on the principle of 
 secret voting on Petty Juries, and the principle of 
 secret voting on Coroners' Juries : and I say that, 
 so far from its being in conflict with the spirit and 
 usage of English institutions, it is found to be inse- 
 parable from the most ancient, the purest and most 
 important trusts known to the Constitution or to the 
 Common Law ; and that the principle of the Con- 
 stitution and the Common Law in these trusts is, 
 that the award of the collective body of trustees 
 shall be declared, but not the individual suffrages 
 of the members who compose it. I say, again, 
 apply this to elections."*'^^ 
 
 Now first —it is rather curious that when twelve 
 men after deliberating among themselves, and in 
 secret,'^' on a question of facts, come forward in 
 
 ^■^ Those who wish to encounter them may turn to Appen- 
 dix C. 
 
 '«c p. 36. 
 
 ^^^ Moreover their deliberation is not so uniformly secret. The 
 Jurors dehberate openly in the jury box, as often as not.
 
 85. 
 
 public and declare openly that they are all agreed, 
 that each and all of them think so and so —it does 
 seem rather curious to hear it gravely stated that 
 the individual opinions of these twelve men are 
 quite secret ! They all declare their opinions by 
 their foreman, and yet no single one of their opi- 
 nions is known ! This can only be explained by 
 supposing them to say what they do not think. 
 Yet as his Lordship speaks in the character and with 
 the authority of a juror, he would scarcely be wil- 
 ling to accept this alternative. However, as Grand 
 Juries seem to be the department in which his Lord- 
 ship's legal abilities are chiefly called forth, he is 
 there enabled to discharge his duty with less fear of 
 incurring the criminal's displeasure. For if any 
 determined villain, after undergoing a brief impri- 
 sonment, should wish to wreak his vengeance upon 
 the Grand Jury for finding a true bill, eleven of the 
 Grand Jurors might always escape (if they could 
 persuade their persecutor to believe them) by de- 
 claring that they voted in the minority. But if his 
 Lordship happened to be the twelfth man, and 
 wished (a thing plainly inconceivable) to give this 
 dangerous querist an evasive answer, it would be 
 impossible for him to do so; for he will already have 
 been proved to be one of the obnoxious majority.'^® 
 So awfully dangerous are even those offices that 
 seem, at first sight, safe and peaceful. 
 
 ^^* However as a Grand Jury may consist of only thirteen members, 
 it may fall out some time or other that his Lordship will only have a 
 single chance.
 
 86 
 
 But next — if it is curious that his Lordship should 
 have thought that the unanimous opinion of twelve 
 men might mean that those twelve men all disagreed 
 with each other, it is not less curious that he 
 should have thought that any parallel at all 
 could be drawn between jurors and electors. 
 Lord Mansfield said that *' nothing was more apt to 
 confound than a simile;" and Lord Nugent seems 
 to have verified the Chief Justice's remark, with 
 this difference — that while the latter was thinking 
 of confounding his opponent, Lord Nugent was con- 
 tent with confounding himself. The utter absence 
 of any resemblance between the two cases is so 
 striking, that it is perhaps needless to point out the 
 following differences. A juror may be challenged ; 
 often, without cause assigned, always, if he is under 
 any known bias of interest or ill-will. A voter can- 
 not ; for to hinder an elector from giving his vote 
 is unconstitutional ; moreover — a voter must be 
 interested : for (so his Lordship tells us) ** his vote 
 is vested in him (mainly and primarily at least) for 
 his own benefit."^'^^ A juror should not feel even 
 the moral influence of property : the voter (as even 
 the Advocates for the Ballot allow) should. But, 
 indeed, the question is rather — wherein lies the re- 
 semblance between the two cases, than wherein are 
 the differences ? The only thing to be regretted is 
 that his Lordship in order to make the parallel com- 
 plete did not suggest some scheme for locking up 
 
 i2f> p. 26.
 
 87 
 
 the electors without fire or candle till they had 
 unanimously elected their representatives — a plan 
 that would lead to the two happy effects, of leaving 
 no discontented minority of voters ; and of making 
 his Lordship's illustration in some measure intel- 
 ligible. 
 
 So much for his Lordship's impregnable position ! 
 
 We now turn from the Reviewer and Lord Nu- 
 gent to meet once more a far abler opponent. That 
 part of the argument drawn from the practice of 
 Clubs, which relates to the question of secrecy, has 
 been before adverted to.*''*' The other half of it — 
 namely, that the Ballot cannot be un-English, since 
 it is daily practised in private associations ; — and 
 that it is a cruel hardship on the poor to debar them 
 from those means of protection that are adopted 
 daily by the rich — remains yet to be answered. If 
 these arguments had not been urged by Mr.Grote,'^* 
 they might have been passed over without notice : 
 but such weapons must not be left in the hands of 
 such an opponent. The wonder is that he should 
 have ever thought of using them. First then — 
 the Ballot will be dishonourable and un-English in 
 Parliamentary elections, though it be not so in 
 Clubs. For the Parliamentary franchise is a trust; 
 the right of voting at Clubs is not. The. members 
 of Clubs are irresponsible ; stat pro ratione voluntas 
 is the principle on which Club society is based. 
 All agree to act on this maxim ; therefore its appli- 
 
 »^« See above, p. 37. ^-'^ Debate of June 2, 1 83.5.
 
 88 
 
 cation can neither injure nor deceive any one. 
 With the electors on the contrary, responsibility to 
 the public at large, obligations of duty, to be 
 honestly, calmly, and wisely performed, are the 
 very stuff and substance of which their office is 
 composed. To execute a trust so covertly, that the 
 mode of execution is quite unknown, whether it be 
 done well or whether it be done ill, is quite at vari- 
 ance with the spirit of the British constitution, of 
 the common law, and of the whole system of legal 
 equity: however contrary this doctrine maybe to the 
 legal experience of Lord Nugent. The Ballot, there- 
 fore, is in this sense un-English. When men agree 
 to act on whim or caprice, it would be contrary to 
 the agreement to exact a reason for their actions ; 
 and this is the system at Clubs. But when the 
 social contract, or constitution (which is the same 
 thing as far as concerns the present question), 
 throws upon men a public duty, all who can be 
 affected by the discharge of that duty, have a right 
 to know how it has been performed. The Repre- 
 sentatives^^'^ have a right to know the individual sen- 
 timents of their constituents. They have a right 
 to know whether the balance of wealth, education 
 and talent, is with them or against them ; and they 
 have a right to know who the minority of their 
 constituents are, and of what materials they are 
 composed, for, be it remembered, the minority, 
 who vote against them, are their constituents as 
 
 "2 See Mr. M. Gaskell's Speech, June 2, 1835.
 
 89 
 
 much as the majority who return them. Further, 
 the public at large have a right to know the senti- 
 ments of the wiser, richer, and more respectable 
 portion of the community. Such knowledge is 
 essential to the well-being of a state. The ancient 
 Romans, the modern Americans, have felt and ac- 
 knowledged this simple but important truth. Fur- 
 ther still — those members of the community, whom 
 the constitution has not entrusted with direct power, 
 but has left (as yet at least) in the enjoyment of in- 
 fluence and persuasion — for instance, the gentler sex 
 and the poor — all these have a right to know the 
 opinion of those to whom they are forced to look 
 for protection, advice and support. If the Ballot 
 prevents this, it is not only un-English, and dis- 
 honourable and impolitic, but it is also unjust. 
 
 Secondly : — as to the hardship of depriving the 
 poor of those means of protection, which the rich 
 every day make use of: — There is here a complete 
 misconception of the whole theory of the Club 
 system. The truth of the matter is, that balloting 
 at Clubs is not for the sake of protecting the voter ; 
 for he plainly needs no protection whatever. But 
 it is one of the numberless contrivances that have 
 been devised from time to time to make the wheels 
 of social life run smooth and noiseless, and to lessen 
 the friction of the different parts of the machine. 
 If open voting were substituted at Clubs instead 
 of the Ballot, in the end, just as many candidates 
 would succeed, and just as many be rejected ; for
 
 90 
 
 tliough, at first, there would be a general unwil- 
 lingness to wound the feelings of the friends of the 
 candidate, by an open expression of dislike or dis- 
 approbation, it would soon be found necessary to 
 relax something of this overstrained delicacy, in 
 order to check those who might be inclined to avail 
 themselves of it unfairly. Thus though individuals 
 continued to act exactly as they did before, the 
 general tone of society would be materially altered. 
 It would have less ease, less flow, and less harmony. 
 Since then balloting at Clubs is not for the pro- 
 tection of individuals, but for the comfort of society 
 at large, as an argument for Parliamentary Bal- 
 loting it is utterly worthless. 
 
 But say Lord Nugent"^ and Mr. Leader^^^ — the 
 franchise is not a trust ! ' the only responsibility 
 which attaches to the electors, is the responsibility 
 to their own conscience for an upright discharge of 
 their several duties !' Therefore we must infer that 
 the former of the above arguments is a bad one. 
 But then we shall fall out with the Reviewer. For 
 he says, ' the electors are trustees for the commu- 
 nity to which they belong ; and in a trust, import- 
 ing tlie greatest good or evil to the vast majority 
 
 *33 See his Lordship's pamphlet, p. 25. Lord Nugent seems to 
 have jumbled together metaphysics nnd law, till mere common sense 
 has fled away in alarm. The notion of the responsibility of the en- 
 franchised to the un-enfranchised part of the community, which his 
 Lordship so much ridicules, is quite correct, but only involves at the 
 most a third portion of the real amount of the voter's responsibility. 
 
 '•»« Debate of June 23, 1836.
 
 91 
 
 of their countrymen. Can there be a more sacred 
 obligation 1 Is there anything in any conceivable 
 act of treachery to render it odious, which is not 
 to be found in the unfaithful discharge of this 
 trust ?''^^ Perhaps it will be wise to leave this 
 matter as it stands, and let our opponents thus 
 tumble over one another in the dark mazes of their 
 own metaphysics.*^^ 
 
 II. — We now come to consider the negative argu- 
 ments for the Ballot, — These have been in part 
 answered in the foregoing pages : the answer will 
 be made complete by a brief statement of the poli- 
 tical effects that the Ballot seems likely to produce. *^^ 
 These may be viewed — -firsts with reference to indi- 
 viduals : secojidly, with reference to the community. 
 
 First, — as to Individuals. It has been before 
 shown that the Ballot, if it is to ensure secrecy, 
 must promote falsehood on the part of the voters, 
 whom it is to protect. Thus then it tends strongly 
 to make the lower orders dishonest. Again, if they 
 
 135 West. Rev. p. 9. 
 
 136 The impartial reader will find this question settled in Burke's 
 Reflections, p. 177, 8, 9. Compare the Appeal from the New to 
 the Old Whigs, vi. 201, 2. If it is not a trust but a right, why 
 may it not be the subject of bargain and sale ? and if so, how can 
 buying votes be Bribery? — See Mr. S. Herbert's Speech, Feb. 15, 
 1838. . ' 
 
 137 As to the modest proposal of the Advocates of the Ballot, that 
 it should be tried, in defiance of all objections, by way of experiment, 
 merely to gratify their metaphysical whimsies, it is too ridiculous to 
 be further noticed.
 
 92 
 
 keep tile secret close from all those most dear to 
 them, the Ballot will cut off one whole set of the 
 most valuable moral relations :'^® by rendering men 
 not only independent of, but actually suspicious of 
 each other, it will break up society into units, 
 and sow schism and terror through the whole 
 length and breadth of the land. Individual voters 
 are likely to become dishonest, suspicious, and 
 discontented. 
 
 What effect is it likely to produce on Candidates? 
 Candidates, generally speaking, fall under the two 
 classes of rich and poor, each of whom use different 
 means of gaining the ends they have in view. The 
 former trust to the inert influence of wealth and 
 family connexions, and that passive strength that 
 accompanies the possession of property : the latter 
 rely on their own energy and enthusiasm, on stirring 
 eloquence, on the fearless avowal of extreme princi- 
 ples, and on that fascinating power which daring 
 and determined spirits can always exert over minds 
 of a less hardy character. Now the Ballot, sup- 
 posing it to ensure secrecy, will naturally tend to 
 exaggerate bribery on the part of the wealthy, by 
 rendering it necessary to bribe wholesale.'^® It will, 
 
 138 See Burke's Works, 3, p. 197. " The only method which 
 has ever been found effectual to preserve any man against the cor- 
 ruption of nature and example, is an habit of life and communication 
 of counsels with the most virtuous and public-spirited men of the 
 age you live in. Such a society cannot be kept without advantage 
 or deserted without shame.'' 
 
 Ji'^Q As was the case at Rome ; and the same example shews how
 
 93 
 
 at the same time, force the poorer candidates to 
 redouble their efforts, in order to meet the increased 
 force of their rivals. The man, who is now con- 
 tent with moderate Radicalism, will then dye his 
 opinions a few shades deeper. If he deludes the 
 people on only one subject now, he will delude 
 them on several then. The man, who borders on 
 extreme Radicalism now, will at once pass the Ru- 
 bicon. He who is now supposed to be a thorough 
 Radical, will then find out some new horizon of 
 political liberty on which to rest his gaze. In 
 short, new popular delusions will be discovered, 
 new tricks practised, and more political mounte- 
 banks will come on the stage to show them off. 
 All these latter arts of electioneering are, strictly 
 speaking, acts of bribery, as much as the former, 
 though of a somewhat different kind. The former 
 is pecuniary bribery, and is addressed to the lower 
 part of man's nature ; the latter is intellectual 
 bribery, and is addressed to the higher. Pecuniary 
 
 impossible it is to meet such bribery by law. See above, note 88. 
 Moreover, if at present a candidate is willing to spend (say) £2000. 
 for a chance — under the Ballot, supposing an arrangement made 
 that he is not to pay unless he is elected, he will of course have to 
 give, and be willing too to give more : because he will then pay for 
 a certainty. *' It sometimes happens that there are essential cir- 
 cumstances in the actual state of a government, about which the 
 constitutional laws are not only silent, but which are directly contrary 
 to all the written laws, and to the spirit of the constitution, as deli- 
 vered by theoretical writers.'' — D. Stewart's Philosophy of the Human 
 Mind, vol. i. 24?.
 
 94 
 
 bribery derives its power from corrupting the 
 morals: — intellectual bribery from perverting the 
 understanding. If the tendency of the Ballot, (sup- 
 posing it to ensure secrecy) is democratical, (and 
 it will shortly be seen that it assuredly is so,) it will 
 give increased means of influence to the poorer class 
 of candidates, and will render their weapons more 
 effective and more dangerous. Now of the two 
 kinds of bribery, the latter, as well in its nature, as 
 in its effects, is infinitely the worst. It is worst — 
 first, in its nature : because intellectual bribes must 
 always fall in with the current of general or local 
 opinion for the time being ; and therefore are in 
 reality nothing more than a skilful flattering of the 
 prejudices and passions of the electors, without 
 regard to the true interests either of the persons 
 themselves, or of the nation at large ; whereas pe- 
 cuniary bribes must always be opposed both to pri- 
 vate feeling and public opinion. 
 
 Moreover, there is this enormous evil attending 
 intellectual bribes, which doos not attach to pecu- 
 niary. Men are thereby bribed through their 
 virtues. The noblest and most generous natures 
 are corrupted as easily (if not more so) as those of 
 a less ingenuous character. Honest and liberal 
 minds suspect no meanness or artifice in others, 
 from being incapable of such practices themselves. 
 When the virtues are thus enlisted on the side of 
 dishonesty. Reason has no weapons left to use ; and 
 the most fearful curse that ever was pronounced —
 
 95 
 
 " I will curse your blessings," is literally ful- 
 filled. Hence it is that we often see men of the 
 highest and purest characters speaking and acting 
 in public on apparently the same principles with 
 characters directly the reverse. Intellectual bribes 
 corrupt the highest as well as the lowest classes : 
 they influence alike the rich and the poor ; and 
 they differ from pecuniary bribes in this very ma- 
 terial point, that they may be approved by the con- 
 science, while the latter are sure to be condemned 
 by it. 
 
 Secondly — as to the effects of this Intellectual 
 Corruption. Money Bribes injure the morals, and 
 debase the whole character of those who are con- 
 cerned with them. But these are comparatively 
 few. Intellectual Bribes have an all-pervading, 
 social influence, and a far wider range of operation. 
 Their effects may be gathered from their nature. 
 They have of course a direct tendency to diminish 
 the amount of that deliberate reason that is so need- 
 ful to the welfare of a state. Government becomes 
 more a matter of will, and less a consideration of 
 prudence. 
 
 Such (it seems) if secrecy be ensured, will be the 
 political effects of the Ballot on individuals. Next, 
 how will it affect the relations of the Community 1 
 
 Now, if it is to make the lower classes less de- 
 pendent on the upper, it will increase the popu- 
 lar power. If it makes them more dependent, it 
 will increase the aristocratical power. Probably,
 
 96 
 
 though this sounds paradoxical, probably it will 
 have both these effects. For it will make the lower 
 classes more independent of the opinions and senti- 
 ments, and moral influence of the upper classes; it 
 will at the same time make them more dependent 
 on the rich, through the increased amount, and 
 wider range of Bribery. In proportion as it in- 
 creases their independence, it will increase their 
 desire of rule, and their contempt of authority. 
 And as they will continue to receive bribes as long 
 as there are rich men to give them, they will gra- 
 dually become more and more venal and profligate, 
 till matters at length come to a crisis, and by the 
 general laws that seem to regulate the movements 
 of political bodies, the Holders of Property will be 
 forced to give place to the Rulers of the Mob. Such 
 were the effects of the Ballot at Rome.*^® It in- 
 creased Bribery in spite of repeated laws against 
 it, and with it the influence of the rich. Yet it 
 ended by giving the mob just enough licence to 
 enable them to yield up the state into the hands of 
 a Military Despot. 
 
 The account of the matter seems to be shortly 
 this. The richer class of the community trusting 
 to their riches, come in time to think gold all suffi- 
 cient ; and utterly forget that some industry, and 
 some watchfulness are needed to preserve that gold 
 in which they think their strength lies. They be- 
 
 »'»» Cic. de Leg. 111. c. 15. See above p. 68, and Burke's Works, 
 X. 83. Compare Humu's Essays, 3. p. 14.
 
 97 
 
 come careless and easy ; given to selHsh indulgence 
 and languid indifference : they think nothing can 
 go wrong so long as their rents are paid, and the 
 funds keep pretty steady: and slumber and slumber 
 on, while their adversaries — needy, reckless, enter- 
 prising, energetic — are working, by day and by 
 night, in season and out of season, by force and by 
 fraud, by stirring eloquence and strong delusion, to 
 carry out their schemes of political agitation, and 
 build up their own power on the ruins of the Con- 
 stitution. 
 
 This craven and slothful spirit shews itself alike 
 in nations and in individuals ; and works the same 
 effects in both. The Romans tried to bribe away 
 the barbarians of the North, and were ruined by the 
 very means w^hich they trusted to for help. The 
 Saxons tried to buy off their Danish invaders, but 
 instead thereof, they bought a few trembling- 
 wretched years of doubtful and troubled peace, and 
 with them the certainty of coming slavery. And 
 just in the same way, will the upper classes of this 
 country, should the Ballot be adopted and secrecy 
 be ensured, gain a brief ascendancy through the 
 power of money ; but the tide must soon turn ; and 
 then will be seen the utter helplessness of wealth 
 and rank, and birth and graceful manners, and 
 easy refinement, when engaged in conflict with a 
 stern, unbending, determined democracy. 
 
 On the whole then it seems probable, that, if the 
 Ballot were to ensure secrecy, the moderate party 
 
 H
 
 98 
 
 might gain an increase of strength for a few years, 
 if tliey chose to try the powers of gold to the ut- 
 most ; but that their opponents would carry every 
 thing before them, sooner or later, by the mere 
 force of constant energetic action. 
 
 If then the Ballot is thus to affect individuals and 
 the community, how can it be said that it will pro- 
 duce no evils proportionate to those it will remove? 
 
 Butt nere is another very serious evil that seems 
 to be a necessary result of the Ballot, supposing it 
 to be so managed as to ensure secrecy: an evil 
 which is too important to be passed over ; though 
 as it is perhaps rather a matter of detail than of 
 principle, it does not strictly come within the scope 
 of the author's plan. 
 
 This is, the difficulty, not to say impossibility^ of 
 settling disputed Elections. For suppose a case. A 
 Candidate is defeated. He suspects that he has 
 been defeated by a majority of fictitious votes, ac- 
 cordingly a petition demanding a scrutiny is pre- 
 sented : and here be it remembered, that about 16 
 petitions out of 25 are preferred on this ground 
 alone. Now how is this scrutiny to be carried on ? 
 It may be that the Committee appointed for the 
 purpose, will first examine the Poll-books, and see 
 that the lists there entered correspond with the 
 Register. They may next inquire whether the 
 Register itself is correct. Now suppose that the 
 Committee, from one or both of these sources, find 
 that there really is a number of fictitious votes,
 
 99 
 
 equal to or greater than the majority for the sitting 
 member. What is to be done'' They must (it 
 seems) do one of two things : — either they must 
 send for each and all of the true voters (as then as- 
 certained), and ask them on their oath how they 
 voted, — and then where is the secrecy? — or they 
 must order a new Election by Ballot, without the 
 certainty that the sitting member has been unduly 
 elected — and then where is the justice? Surely 
 this is a great evil. 
 
 III. We may here take leave of the negative 
 arguments for the Ballot. Need any reply be made 
 to those for its immediate adoption? It may, how- 
 ever, be as well to add a few words about the in- 
 creased demand that is made for it.*'*^ If it»be true 
 that the demand has increased, the simple fact is 
 an illustration and a proof of what has been just 
 stated about the different modes in which the Con- 
 stitutionalists and their opponents work out their 
 political schemes. If the demand has increased — 
 is it not just what might have been expected from 
 the headlong enthusiasm of its supporters, and the 
 incredible timidity of some of its opponents. Mr. 
 Fox used to compare Mr. Pitt's oratory to the cheer 
 of an officer leading his men up to a breach ; and 
 who that has ever read any of Mr. Pitt's speeches, 
 badly reported as they are, does not feel the force 
 of the comparison. But can we find a like vigour 
 and steady determination in the speeches of Lord 
 
 ^*^ See Appendix D. 
 
 h2
 
 100 
 
 John Russell, Lord Howick/''^aiid Mr. Spring Rice? 
 They denounce the Ballot as an unmixed evil, but 
 declare their willingness to adopt it, if other means 
 fail ! Is not this rather the language of the be- 
 sieged, protesting that they would sooner die than 
 surrender, but humbly adding that they thought 
 they could not hold out much longer, because their 
 provisions would be all gone by the day after to- 
 morrow ? 
 
 Further : if the demand for the Ballot has in- 
 
 *'*^ The following argument of Lord Howick's deserves great at- 
 tention. " I object to the Ballot because I contend that it does not 
 secure to the electors what I contend they have a right to. Who is 
 there that has seen a popular election, and who knows the manner in 
 which the contests in this country are carried on, and yet is unaware 
 4hat the vote of an independent elector is looked up to in his neigh- 
 bourhood ; and that the countenance of a respectable farmer is fre- 
 quently of more value to a popular candidate than the mere amount of 
 his vote. Why then, I ask, should we exclude the tenantry of this 
 country from the privilege of using all their political rights ? 1 claim 
 for them the privilege of openly professing their vote, and of using all 
 the means in their power of furthering their own political views.'* — 
 Debate of 1835. If then secrecy be compulsory (which is imprac- 
 ticable) the Ballot will be grossly unjust : if it be not compulsory, 
 the Ballot will be utterly nugatory as a remedy, and produce tenfold 
 greater evils than it even professes to remove. Compare Middle- 
 ton's Cic. I. 476. — " Of one and fifty judges, who sat upon Milo, 
 thirteen only acquitted, and thirty-eight condemned him: the votes 
 were usually given by ballot : but CafOy who absolved him, chose 
 to give his vote openly ; ' and, if he had done it earlier,' says Vel- 
 leius, * would have drawn others after him ; since all were con- 
 vinced, that he who was killed, was of all who had ever lived, the 
 most pernicious enemy to his country.* "
 
 101 
 
 creased — it is because the evil for which it is sug- 
 gested as a cure, has not perhaps increased like- 
 wise : but certainly has not diminished : Because 
 the rich have continued to abuse their riches ; and 
 the great their influence ; and the mob their power ; 
 and a crowd of restless, meddling, mischievous 
 busy bodies of all professions and all parties have 
 too often, and too successfully combined to corrupt 
 and oppress and exasperate the poor. Is it then to 
 be wondered at, that honest men, sickened to death 
 by such sights, and incapable even of thinking of 
 them coolly and calmly, should be willing to try 
 any quack remedy in hard times ? Reckless men 
 are bad judges between conflicting evils : any 
 change seems a relief: and though a little calm 
 thought would shew the change to be an evil ten 
 thousand times as insufferable as that for which it is 
 substituted, yet in that change will an irritated and 
 oppressed spirit seek for rest — for '* oppression 
 makes wise men mad :" and — 
 
 '* It is the Time's plague when mad men lead the blind." 
 
 How this evil contest between wealth and poverty 
 — power and dependence — a spirit of contentment 
 with things as they are, and a hungry longing 
 for things that are not — is likely to end, the author 
 leaves it to wiser men than himself to foretell. — But 
 that the Ballot will not stay the disorder — and 
 further, that it will bring in a host of ills, far worse, 
 and far less curable, than those which it professes 
 to remedy — seems from the united testimony of
 
 102 
 
 Philosophers, Statesmen, and Historians "^ to be 
 quite beyond a doubt. May we not then hope 
 with the philosophic historian of England, that 
 ** such will be the force of time and evidence, that 
 they will at length prevail even over faction/'*"" 
 
 The author does not expect that the foregoing 
 arguments will have the smallest effect upon any 
 one of those persons, who already advocate the 
 Ballot. For who can hope to work by reason upon 
 minds that have been made up in defiance of rea- 
 son ? Those of our opponents, who are not dupes 
 themselves, are willing to dupe others : and any 
 hope of converting either class must of course be 
 quite visionary. But the prevailing epidemic may 
 perhaps be checked, when men of sound common 
 sense see the chief arguments on both sides of the 
 question fairly arrayed against each other ; and it 
 may then be more difficult to ensnare them by 
 logical fallacies, or delude them by fictitious ex- 
 amples from history : and possibly not even the 
 Honourable Member for London himself, formid- 
 able as he is from his high character and great abi- 
 lities, more formidable still from his tone and tem- 
 per as an Advocate, will be able any longer to per- 
 suade people that this unmanageable paradox, 
 which is his hobby at present, can ever be tamed 
 down into a safe serviceable truth. But if he should 
 succeed — if the clear light of common sense 
 should at length be abandoned for the faint glim- 
 
 143 
 
 See Appendix E. "4 Hume, Hist. I. 502.
 
 103 
 
 merings of spurious metaphysics, then may we ex- 
 claim with Shakspeare 
 
 ** Miserable England! 
 
 I prophecy the fearful'st time to thee, 
 That ever wretched age hath looked upon.** 
 
 Since the first edition of this pamphlet was pub- 
 lished, the question of the Ballot has been for a 
 fifth time discussed in the House of Commons. The 
 numbers in its favour have again increased, though 
 the reasonings in its favour have again diminished ! 
 For no new arguments were brought forward, and 
 those which had been drawn from every day practice 
 were completely abandoned. 
 
 An attempt was made by Mr. C. Duller in de- 
 fault of Dr. Bowring, to revive some of the histo- 
 rical arguments that had once been pressed into the 
 service. However, we were no longer referred to 
 Athens, or Rome, or modern Italy, or Spain, or 
 Portugal, or Belgium : — all these posts were aban- 
 doned too ! But we were told to look to ' moral 
 and enlightened Switzerland' — to ' moral and en- 
 lightened America' — and the Honourable Gentle- 
 man had half uttered * moral and enlightened 
 France,' (!) when a burst of laughter from all sides 
 of the House forced him to omit all mention of 
 French morality, and to content himself with hold- 
 ing up for English imitation the public manners
 
 104 
 
 and public conduct of a nation whose private cha- 
 racter he himself joined in condemning ! ^'^'^ 
 
 Now, As to America. Mr. C. Duller did not 
 attempt to show that in that country the Ballot 
 ensured secr-ecy. He merely said that it was esteemed : 
 which it has already been shown"^ has nothing to do 
 with the question. As to France, it need only be 
 said that though Mr. C. BuUer is satisfied with the 
 working of the Ballot in that country, the French 
 are not.^*^ If then Mr. C. Buller difiers in opi- 
 nion with the Americans and the French about 
 matters of fact, which must be better known to 
 them than they can be to him, may it not chance 
 to fall out that the Swiss also, if they were asked, 
 would disagree with him about the practical 
 
 *'*5 Compare Lord Brougham's speech, — (Times Newspaper, Feb. 
 24, ;1838.) — '* He entirely agreed with his Noble Friend (Lord 
 Melbourne) that it ivould be most unsafe to adopt the principle, 
 because it had been tried in other countries^ without most anxi- 
 ously considering and ynarking the peculiar circumstances con- 
 nected ivith those countries. To talk of transplanting such a system 
 from one country to another without that previous investigation and 
 scrutiny was futile. Nothing could be more unsafe than to transfer 
 the institutions of one country to another loithout carefully in- 
 vestigating every part of the question. It did not follow because 
 the Ballot succeeded well in another country that it should be tried 
 here. It must stand upon other grounds. He believed that 
 those who were friendly to it did not rest their argument upon 
 that point. ^' 
 
 ^'*^ See p. 21. Appendix A, will enable the reader to estimate 
 the morality of America, as well as the success of the Ballot in 
 elections. 
 
 *'*'^ See Appendix B.
 
 105 
 
 result of their own institutions ? For if the Ballot 
 ensures secrecy in Switzerland, it is the only 
 country in the world in which it does so. Is this 
 likely V'^ 
 
 Sir Robert Peel said, that in France the Govern- 
 ment was constantly suspected of tampering with 
 the Ballot boxes. Mr. C. BuUer defied him to prove 
 this. But if historical analogy is worth anything 
 (and the Advocates of the Ballot, and Mr.C.Buller 
 especially, by the pains they take to force some his- 
 toricala nalogies over to their side, plainly think it 
 is so) why then — Sir Robert Peel is probably right, 
 and Mr. C. Buller is probably wrong. For what 
 was the case in the Ionian Islands under the go- 
 vernment of Capo d'Istrias ? The Government was 
 
 I''® To what extent the Ballot prevails in Switzerland the Author 
 does not profess to know. But as some of the States are democra- 
 tical (Zurich, Basle, SchafFhouse, Uri, Schwytz, Glaris, Valais), 
 some aristocratical (Berne, Fribourg, Soleure), some monarchical 
 (Neuchatel), some a mixture of the three (St. Gall, Argovie, Thur- 
 govie, Geneve), and some republican (Vaud), — the fact of the Ballot 
 prevailing in them all (if such be the case) may prove that they all 
 see some advantage in it, but this advantage, whatever it may be, 
 must in such case be shared by all alike. Therefore it cannot be 
 the prevention of influence : for then the aristocratical and monar- 
 chical Cantons would not have adopted it. If, on the other hand, 
 it only prevails in the democratical Cantons, this would prove it to 
 be a democratical measure, and therefore unsuited to this country. 
 So in whichever way it be taken, it places the Honourable Member 
 for Liskeard in this dilemma : — The Ballot is either a step further in 
 
 democracy: or, it is of no importance at all! — (See Schocli 
 
 Tableau Statique de la Suisse.)
 
 106 
 
 not only suspected of tampering with the Ballot 
 boxes, but it is a known fact, that they actually did 
 so.^*^ And though after the abolition of the Ballot, 
 the evils that accidentally attacli to open voting 
 took the place of those that necessarily attach to the 
 Ballot, what does this prove — that the Ballot has 
 no evils ? No. It only shows that each system 
 has its evils, and so leaves the matter exactly where 
 it found it. 
 
 Mr. L. Bulwer said, that one of the first acts 
 of the thirty tyrants at Athens, was to substitute 
 open voting for the Ballot : seeming to imply 
 that they had entirely altered the political consti- 
 tution. But all we know is this : that in two cases 
 of state trials the prisoners were subjected to a 
 mock trial before courts composed of the Tyrants' 
 retainers ; and in each of the two cases the votes 
 were laid on tables in the presence of the Thirty, 
 instead of being put into urns.^^** The truths to 
 be learned thence, are these. That Tyrants pre- 
 
 149 « Under Capo d'Istrias when the provisional government ex- 
 isted and the court made a show of free elections, it is well known 
 that the UpvTavoi (or chiefs of each local government) were ordered 
 to unseal secretly, at night, the urns into which the votes had been 
 put during the day, and remove the white beans into the urn bearing 
 the names of the Government Candidates, re-sealing the urn I The 
 fact is well known : those who did it avow it openly. I mention it 
 to show how cautiously the Ballot should be regulated." — Napier's 
 Colonies, p, 3.58. 
 
 '^* The first case alluded to will be found in Lysias contr. Agorat. 
 p. 133, 5 foil., the second in Xenophon Hellen. 2. 4, 9.
 
 107 
 
 fer direct persecution to indirect: i. e. that it is 
 less troublesome and more satisfactory to an op- 
 pressor to be able on clear evidence to punish his 
 victim at onoe, than to have to detect him by the 
 slower and less certain process of the Spy system. 
 And this is obvious. But it proves nothing in 
 favour of the Political Ballot in this Country. The 
 object of the Thirty was to get the unanimous 
 assent of their followers to a specific act of horrible 
 cruelty, and thus to involve them all in the same 
 guilt as themselves. To gain this end they made 
 them vote openly, and had an armed force ready 
 at hand to compel their obedience. The great ob- 
 ject in view was a unanimous vote given at a par- 
 ticular conjuncture. But does this prove Lord 
 Brougham to be wrong in thinking that the Ballot 
 in England will produce the Spy system, and that 
 under the Spy system the voter will be detected : 
 — or, that a man will not be punished for being 
 known to hold opinions opposed to those of his 
 Landlord before an Election, when he is found to 
 hold the same opinions after the Election ? 
 
 But the same Author that furnished Mr. Bulwer 
 with one of the instances on which his statement is 
 founded supplies another which is perhaps more 
 to the purpose. ^^* At the famous trial of the eight 
 Generals after the battle of Arginusse, the majority 
 of the Assembly, voting according to constitutional 
 
 ^-^i Xen. Hellen. 1. 7, 7,
 
 J Oft 
 
 forms by sliow of hands,'" were on the eve of ac- 
 quitting them. But the day was far spent, and on 
 a pretence that it was too dark to count the num- 
 ber of hands, the proceedings were adjourned to a 
 future day. The faction opposed to the Generals, 
 employed the intervening time in devising the best 
 mode of procuring their condemnation ; and they 
 contrived (against the principles and practice of the 
 constitution)'" that judgment should be given upon 
 all the Generals by a single vote, which vote was no 
 longer to be hy show of hands, but by secret Ballot, 
 Then as these demagogues had spared no pains to 
 stir up popular fury against the accused, when the 
 trial again came on, and the votes were taken by 
 Ballot, the eight Generals were all sentenced to death, 
 and six of them (the other two having been con- 
 demned while absent), were executed!^^"^ Can there 
 be a more complete verification of Sir Robert PeeFs 
 very philosophical remark, that " under the Ballot^ 
 the multitude in times of excitement might be easier 
 misled by the arts of designing men than under the 
 present system of open voting ?" For we are told by 
 the Historian that " the Athenians shortly after re- 
 pented of the deed : and passed a decree that those 
 
 J52 See Herm. Pol. Ant. of Greece, § 130. 
 
 >53 They were nearly thwarted by the opposition of the Pry- 
 tanes, who refused to put " an illegal question" to the vote. 
 However, all these officers were at length overawed — " except So- 
 crates the son of Sophroniscus ; bnt this man said that he would do 
 nothing except according to the laws." — Xen. Hell. 1. 7, 15. 
 
 J5« Xen. Hellen. 1. cit. ^ 24.
 
 109 
 
 Demao-offues who had thus ensnared them into 
 guilt should be tried for high treason. During 
 a tumult some escaped. And when the chief of 
 them returned to the city after the prosecution 
 had been dropped, he was held in such universal 
 abhorrence, that unable to get food from any one, 
 he actually died of starvation !" The Advocates of 
 the Ballot may perhaps learn from this narrative 
 the political value of public shame, ^^^ 
 
 Mr, L. Bulwer also said that Aristotle has de- 
 clared it to be impossible to secure independent 
 voting without the Ballot. Now though the Author 
 will not presume to assert that Mr. Bulwer is posi- 
 tively incorrect, yet he will venture to say that 
 such an opinion is not to be found in the Ethics or 
 the Rhetoric, or the Politics of Aristotle. And on 
 the authority of several persons of greater learning 
 than himself he is very much inclined to doubt 
 whether such an opinion is to be found in any other 
 treatise of that Philosopher. But as of course Mr. 
 Bulwer has not intentionally made an unfounded 
 statement, there remains the possible alternative 
 that he has made a mistake. It is usual in the 
 House of Commons to talk of balloting for Election 
 Committees, where it would be more proper to say 
 drawing lots for them ; a method as distinct from 
 Balloting as chance is from choice. So it is just 
 possible that Mr. Bulwer, filled with the spirit of 
 the place, may have also confounded Lot with Bal- 
 
 *^^ Compare note 138.
 
 no 
 
 lot in the writings of Aristotle. And (if this be his 
 mistake !) then certainly a passage in the Politics 
 may be found to serve his turn :^^® — only he must 
 have translated or rather transmuted — '^ Election by 
 Lot is necessary for Democracy,'* (a fact quite imma- 
 terial to Mr. Bulwer's case) into '' Election by Bal- 
 lot is necessary for Independence,'* (a statement, 
 which, if true, is of very great importance).^" 
 
 Meanwhile though we must leave the dictum 
 of Aristotle in some measure uncertain, it is satisfac- 
 tory to refer to the undoubted opinion of another, 
 and perhaps a greater Philosopher, the Master of 
 Aristotle himself. " In a city," says Plato,^^ 
 '* w^here worthless and voiceless courts of justice, 
 thievishly concealing their own opinions decide the 
 causes clandestinely, there a heavy calamity falls 
 upon the whole state." 
 
 The Authority of these great names has weight 
 with some reasoners, though not with all. To the 
 Honourable Member for London their support or 
 
 ^56 Lib. 6. 2, 820. where Aristotle ranks among the Political 
 elements essential to a democracy — to aipel^at Tag apyag naTvaq 
 Ik iravTiDVy to ap-^eiy TravTag fxev tKCc^ov eKa-^oy S' ev fJ.ipei irayTOjy, 
 TO KXrjpioTctg elyai Tcig dp')(ag y Traaag ?/ ouai fxi) kfiKiipiag ^iovTai 
 Kul Tt-yvrig k. t. X. and further on — kdv Zi Tig icaraXei^^^ c^ dp-^^alag 
 fjCTaftoXijg, tote ntpiaipeiff^ai Tt)y Zvva^iv avriig koI i^ alpETwp 
 KXrjpijJTOvg TTOiEiv ***** ovTb) yap ay virdp^eip vo/ii^ouy 
 TTjy t' IffVTTjTa TTJ TToXiTslg. Kal Tfjy eXev^epiay. 
 
 ^•'•^ This assertion is supported at length in Appendix F. 
 
 158 Legg. ix. p. 876. B. This passage first met the Author's eye 
 in the columns of the Times newspaper.
 
 Ill 
 
 opposition is quite indifferent. For while some of 
 his party make a show of resting their case on the 
 safe ground of history, he, well aware of the im- 
 possibility of so doing, soars with unruffled calm- 
 ness into the misty heights of metaphysics. Quot- 
 ing no history, relying on no precedents, scorning 
 all matters of fact, he boldly lays the foundation of 
 practical government on a philosophical basis that 
 all the best philosophers have pronounced unsound ! 
 Can it be wondered that from the combination of 
 two such elements as misquoted History and mis- 
 taken Philosophy a result should come out, such as 
 the Ballot ?
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 A. 
 
 The Author has said that Mr. Grote thinks but 
 meanly of matters of fact, as the foundation or aids 
 of legislation. His reasons for saying so are these. 
 It is now six years since Mr. Grote made his first 
 motion on the Ballot. Whether or no he then had 
 means of procuring certain information on the working 
 of the Ballot in America, the Author will not say. But 
 that previously to any of his subsequent motions, he 
 might have gained the most full, satisfactory, afid irre- 
 futable evidence that there the Ballot does not work 
 well, the Author boldly asserts, and now produces his 
 proofs. 
 
 In the New York Commercial Advertiser, taken in 
 regularly at the North American Coffee House, the 
 Author found the annexed account of an election that 
 took place at New York, in April, 1834. The result of 
 which is, that in the first city of the Western World, 
 under the Ballot, there was for the space of three days, 
 more brutality, and ferocious violence, than is ever wit- 
 nessed in the most brutal and most riotous election for 
 the most unquiet borough in Ireland, under the system 
 of open voting. Yet, in 1838, four years after this 
 
 I
 
 114 
 
 event took place, Mr. Grote quoted, in the House of 
 Commons, the opinion of Mr. Stuart, (a traveller) as 
 conclusive evidence that American elections, under the 
 Ballot, were orderly, peaceful, and well conducted ! 
 Therefore, the Author feels himself justified in saying 
 that, if Mr. Grote had been as anxious to get a tho- 
 rough, statesmanlike knowledge of facts, as he was to 
 build up a political structure on mere visionary meta- 
 physics, he would have taken pains to obtain that in- 
 formation which the iVuthor is now enabled to offer to 
 the public. 
 
 The same remarks will apply equally to Mr. C. Bul- 
 ler's eulogium on America, as ' a moral and enlightened 
 people.' To know how far a nation is moral and en- 
 lightened, we should watch them in times of trial. Sea- 
 sons of political excitement are times of trial ; and afford, 
 perhaps, the best possible tests. If then at those times 
 one nation exhibits less self-control, and more passion, 
 and commits acts of violence, more in number and 
 greater in degree, than other nations under similar cir- 
 cumstances, they prove themselves to be less moral, 
 and loss enlightened than their neighbours, and are, 
 therefore, unworthy to be looked to as examples. 
 
 Let the reader contrast the most violent outrages that 
 have ever been committed at the most keenly contested 
 election for Westminster or Liverpool, with the follow- 
 ing account of a contested election at New York!
 
 1 15 
 
 Account of the First Day of the Flection* 
 
 (Taken word for word from the New York Commercial Advertiser, 
 April 9, 1834.) 
 
 BLOODY AND DISGRACEFUL RIOTS. 
 
 In all those Wards where the intelligent friends of 
 THE Supremacy of the Laws were in the majority, 
 and where they had force to comniand order, the public 
 peace was preserved. In the first Ward the only vio- 
 lence committed was upon the person of a young gen- 
 tleman, as he would call himself— wAo attempted to 
 impose a misspelt ticket for Mr. Verplanck upon a reso- 
 lute elector. Having established the fact beyond dispute, 
 and ascertained that he had a supply of such spurious 
 ballots, he found himself in the middle of the street, 
 quicker than he could have got there by a more gentle 
 process. 
 
 In the fourth Ward there was some fighting, though The heal- 
 
 nothing of a very serious character. But in the sixth peaceful 
 
 Ward the true spirit of Jacksonism was delineated in j^Q^g^fjL i 
 
 characters of Blood ! Clarkson Crolius, Jun., a young 
 
 gentleman of great respectability and spirit, was assailed "^^^^1^1^^^ 
 
 with bludgeonSy and fell covered with wounds. He was f^»® Ballot 
 • 1 )y» 1 1 • T /• 1 IS to pro- 
 
 carried oft under the apprehension that he was liieless. tect honest 
 
 His wounds however were washed and dressed, and he jntfmida^'" 
 
 resumed his station in behalf of the Constitution before ?^°""~ 
 
 (Mr. 
 the Polls. Grote.) 
 
 The Jackson rioters, headed by an Ex-Alderman^ now Proofs that 
 had possession of the ground, and our friends sent for classes ia 
 reinforcements to preserve the peace. Comparative frrso^'^mo- 
 order prevailed for a time : but before night a gang of^^^ and en- 
 near ly an hundred infuriated wretches, of the Jackson as to be 
 party, armed with bludgeons, commenced their violence En^fjgh 
 anew. They tore down all the Independent Republican imitation ! 
 
 I e
 
 The noble 
 acts of a 
 
 116 
 
 flags, invaded the Committee Room, rohhed them of 
 their Ballots, and then commenced an assault upon the 
 Independent Republican citizens, who were vainly exert- 
 free, 'moral ing themselves to keep the peace. Some of the Jackson 
 
 andenlif^h- 7 • t 7 • 17 
 
 tened ' pai'ty Were armed with knives, and about twenty citizens 
 peop e . ^,^^ knocked down, bruised, and some of them shockingly 
 
 cut and mangled. Among the most severely injured was 
 An election a Mr. Pievson, who was knocked down, and when sup- 
 not un En- posed to he dead, was held up in triumph to the exulting 
 Sacterf '^^^ % ^^^^ ^«**^ ^f ^^^ ^^^^ ! Such is the brutality of 
 
 the party with which the Whigs have to contend in the 
 
 sixth Ward. 
 
 <13p We feel constrained by a sense of duty, to con- 
 Further demn, in the most unequivocal terms, the conduct at 
 
 proofs that ^ 
 
 the Upper the polls of Dennis M 'Carthy, Esq., the Alderman of 
 America the sixtli Ward. Though a magistrate, whose duty it 
 rai and'en- ^^^ *^ assist in the preservation of the peace, we have 
 lightened' the most positive and unquestionable information, that 
 
 as to be 
 
 models for he himself, with his own hands^ attempted to rescue a 
 Imftation! '^^oter from the hands of the constable having him in 
 charge. 
 
 Postscript. 
 
 Healing A gentleman, whose name we did not learn, had his 
 
 effects of I 7 xi • 
 
 the Ballot ! '^^'^ broken this moi'nmg. • 
 
 Second Postscript. 
 
 Half past one o'cZocA.— We have just heard that John 
 Tranquilli- Targee has been committed to Bridewell, and has since 
 ofThe ^ ^Gen bailed out. We also learn that Mr, Pierson is dead. 
 
 Account of the Second Day of the Election, 
 
 (New York Commercial Advertiser, April 10, 1834.) 
 
 Renewal of the Riots. 
 Oneoclock,P,M, — A gentleman informs us that he saw 
 
 BallotI
 
 117 
 
 a man felled to the pavement by a fragment of a hoard — Moral. 
 another rioter instantly dashed a barrel upon the fallen and healing 
 man — another sprang upon him with his feet : our info?'- the^BaHot! 
 mant was compelled to fly for his life, and he came 
 forthwith to our office with the news. He thinks that 
 the man was killed. 
 
 It was reported that a man was instantly killed by a Prophecy 
 blow from a shillelah. The mob are tearing up paving Westmin- 
 stones. The mayor has been badly injured. v^ewer^ful- 
 
 At the moment of the rush of the rioters from the fi'ied— 
 
 Deinocrati- 
 
 Polls, there was a cry among them of '* Clubs. In- cai Utopia! 
 stantly, as if by consent, large numbers of bludgeons 
 were handed out of contiguous groceries. 
 
 0^ But we must go to Press. There is now said to 
 
 be fighting at the Polls of the sixth Ward. 
 
 » 
 
 Account of the Third Day of the Election. 
 
 (New York Commercial Advertiser, April 11, 1834.) 
 
 The Closing Scenes. 
 
 Amidst such scenes of violence and consternation as Elections 
 have marked the election which closed last evening, it '° America 
 
 O' are peace- 
 
 has been impossible to state facts in all instances with fui, orderly, 
 
 that degree of accuracy and precision which we could conducted ! 
 
 desire. Our object has been to give a history of the ^^j^^^. ^^^' 
 
 memorable ** three days," with the most scrupulous Kent's 
 
 Com men- 
 regard to truth, without colour or exaggeration. Nor taries.) 
 
 have we indulged in the publication of rumours without 
 
 investigating them, as far as circumstances would allow. 
 
 And now that the scenes of riot and confusion have 
 
 passed by, on a calm review of what has occurred, we 
 
 are only surprised that our errors have not been more 
 
 numerous and important than they were. 
 
 Our statements have, indeed, fallen far short of the '! ^o^^j" 
 
 truth, rather than gone beyond it. Among the incidents no man can 
 
 be intimi-
 
 118 
 dated, be- not noted by us, was one in Cross Street, where a few 
 
 CiiimA it' 
 
 cannot be ^oz^n of the Mobocracv attacked some of the Whig 
 iie°vltes°^ party as they were going home from the Polls : the 
 He will latter, however, showed no disposition to be maltreated 
 
 never tell • i • • i 
 
 how be is With impunity, and the affair ended without any consi- 
 voie^o'r\a8 ^^^^^^^ i"j"ry to either party. The other occurred in 
 voted, 6e- the fourteenth Ward, where a man was asked to what 
 
 cause It will 
 
 be against party he belonged, and answering for Verplanck, he was 
 to do so !" instantly set upon by half a dozen ruffians^ and dragged 
 of ihe° B* ^ ^^^^ ^ spirit store, where they gave him a most tremendous 
 lot, passim.) beating, and wounded him in the face, 
 - It was a moment of fearful anxiety and universal con- 
 
 sternation when our paper went to press yesterday. The 
 transactions occurring subsequently we gather from the 
 morning papers — chiefly from the Journal of Com- 
 merce. The riot commencing at twelve o'clock was 
 thus occasioned.— The Sailors belonging to the Whig 
 party went up Broadway with their ship the Constitu- 
 tion, and whilst passing Masonic Hall, gave three 
 cheers. Stones were immediately thrown at the frigate 
 by a number of Jackson men, who threatened to destroy 
 it. This outrage led to some harsh expressions on both 
 sides, and the news being communicated to the Com- 
 mittee at Masonic Hall, they rujjhed out, aided by some 
 citizens, and drove the disturbers of the peace from the 
 ground. 
 
 They had scarcely done so, when several hundred 
 fellows from the fourteenth Ward rushed up Duane- 
 street, and attacked them most furiously. The Com- 
 mittee at the Masonic Hall came to the assistance of 
 their friends, but the disparity of numbers was so great 
 that they were obliged to retreat into the Hall, pursued 
 by a large number of the mob. Information being 
 communicated to the Mayor and Police, the former
 
 119 
 
 high functionary, accompanied by the Police officers, instance of 
 constables, and about 40 watchmen, proceeded to the ^-^^^^ 
 scene of action. There they discovered an exhibition ^'^'i'"^**^^. 
 of violence, which they had not been prepared to expect, ing to the 
 
 ^ ' cr r x^ -t BallotjWis- 
 
 In endeavouring to suppress it, numerous persons, nearly dom and 
 50, were knocked down and beaten, some qf them receiv- universally 
 ing severe and dangerous wounds, diffuse , 
 
 Captain Stewart, of the first watch district, was whicii the 
 
 1 'flP* •• 
 
 badly cut on the left side of the head. Captain Munson, classes are 
 of the same district, shockingly injured — all his ribs j^^^. ^j" fj^e 
 broken, and his left arm fractured in two places — his ^^^s of mu- 
 
 , . tual bene- 
 
 scull horribly fractured and his face much cut. Captain faction'! 
 
 fipp West 
 
 Seaman, of the second watch district, cut in the head ; ^ev. i3, 
 a watchman named Styles, mortally wounded : Colonel ^^• 
 Fleet, assistant to Captain Munson, severely hurt: Explana- 
 Captain Staerff, of the third watch district, much tionofwhat 
 
 ^ °*' IS meant by 
 
 hurt, Messrs. Otterwell, Sinclair, Blunt, and ten or the efficacy 
 fifteen watchmen wounded ; besides Messrs. Joseph L. lotia Ame- 
 Hays, Hartington, Dunshee, Police Officers, and '''^*- 
 Messrs. Walsh and Sowendyke, constables. The Offi- 
 cers succeeded however in arresting ten or twelve of 
 th^ rioters, who were sent to Bridewell. 
 
 The scene was a very painful one. Dozens lay bleed- 
 ing on the ground at a time, and report soon spread that 
 several had been killed, and that houses had been destroyed. 
 In consequence of this intelligence being conveyed to 
 the lower Wards, the inhabitants of that part of the 
 city proceeded to the scene of action and its neighbour- 
 hood ; and Duane, Elm, Pearl, Cross, Augustus, and 
 Chetham streets, in the sixth Ward, as also Broadway, 
 
 .A clear 
 
 were filled with from 15 to 20,000 citizens, determmed, proof that 
 if necessary, to prevent further aggression. It was also ^^^ "g"" 
 obvious that a military force was indispensably necessary. ^'""* ' '"':^ 
 Indeed the civil authorities should have jyrocured military expected.
 
 120 
 
 assi tanceat an earlier day. But the Mayor disliked to 
 
 call in the aid of the troops while it seemed possible to 
 
 avoid the necessity. Able counsel were now consulted, 
 
 The Ballot ^^^^ ^-^ ^^^ decided that the city was clearly in a state of 
 
 perfectly - j j j 
 
 successful ! insurrection. The course to be pursued was no longer 
 doubtful ; a messenger was sent to the Navy Yard to 
 solicit the presence of a body of the United States 
 Marines for the preservation of the peace. On appli- 
 cation to Colonel Gamble, the Commander, he said he 
 would very readily furnish a detachment and head them 
 himself, were it not that he had just sent them on board 
 the ships Brandywine and Vincennes, in consequence 
 of which they were no longer under his orders. Ap- 
 plication was then made to Commodore Ridgely, com- 
 mander of the station, who declined interfering, stating 
 that whatever his personal feelings might be, he did 
 not deem himself authorised to do so. A request was 
 also sent to Governor's Island to the same effect. Mean- 
 while several hundred patriotic citizens, being appre- 
 hensive that the rioters would obtain possession of the 
 Arsenal, and employ the arms against the peace of the 
 city, and the safety of its inhabitants assumed the re- 
 sponsibility of taking possession of the Arsenal, to prevent 
 the arms being taken by the mob, and to protect them from 
 destruction. The rioters immediately surrounded the Ar. 
 senal in large numbers ; but the Whigs kept possession 
 until relieved by the Mayor and his posse. 
 The peace- Having ordered out a strong detachment of our city 
 SlctiorT/ infantry, under the orders of General Sandford, with 
 by Ballot ! ^^^ squadrons of cavalry, a counter request was dis- 
 patched to Governor's Island, so that no United States 
 troops were eventually called in. The military assem- 
 bled 7vith considerable alacrity ; there was ** mounting in 
 hot haste" — and much of the activity and bustle incident
 
 121 
 
 to the unexpected approach of a foe in times of war. 
 The orders were immediately from General Morton, 
 who detached 1200 men for the service; and by three 'Under the 
 o'clock they were on duty at the Arsenal. But after order and 
 these demonstrations the courage of the mob evidently goc[^°vim 
 began to ooze out, and order soon resumed her sway, be perfect!' 
 There were to be sure many threats against the United 13,36. 
 States Bank, and several of the Anti-Jacobin Printing, 
 offices : and some of our contemporaries took the pre- 
 caution to arm with great efficiency. 
 
 The night passed away without interruption of the 
 public peace. At the closing of the poll, the Ballot 
 Boxes of the sixth Ward were removed to the City 
 Hall, followed by 4 or 5000 people, where they were 
 kept through the night. No attempt was made to 
 seize them. The Infantry were chiefly quartered at the 
 Arsenal — reposing upon their arms ; and the Cavalry at 
 the City Hall, A small detachment was stationed in the 
 Merchant' s Exchange to he ready to act if the Bank or 
 printing offices should he assailed. But happily there 
 have been no farther disturbances. The rioters amounted 
 to some hundreds, most of them armed with cluhsy and 
 other weapons, which it would seem had been prepared 
 for the purpose heforehand. Whilst preparing this ac- 
 count, we know not what the result of the Election is ; 
 but apprehend that Laurence has been elected by a small 
 majority. Indeed it would be an astonishing event if 
 he is not. When we consider that the Whig party has 
 been compelled to contend against an army of custom- 
 house officers, say 500, and their dependants and con- < The Ual- 
 nexions : an army of more than 1000 corporation de- ^.^'^"^',',1. J^^" 
 pendants : and a lare;e host of state officers — all or- dependence 
 
 ^ , . ^ of the \ o- 
 
 ganized for action the lohole year round: when, more- tei'! 
 over, we reflect upon the fact which is clearly and
 
 122 
 ' V,".'!^^ indisputably established, that the leaders of the Jack' 
 
 the Ballot . . . . 
 
 all canvass- son party, aided hy a Jeroclons and Jacobinical press, 
 
 tioneering ^^^^ been for weeks organizing, the only matter of 
 
 ^^ ^*'* astonishment is, that we should have accomplished so 
 
 cease 
 
 ' I 
 
 *The Bal- Hiuch. In this point of view it may be said, that 
 makeU though the Election itself was lost, yet we have 
 the iuterest achieved a mi2:htv victory — that we have ensured at 
 
 of the rich » J .7 
 
 to raise the the next contest the triumph of the free ! 
 
 and morals ^^ ^^^ large majorities for Mr. Verplanck in the first 
 
 ofthepeo- fQ^r Wards may be read the sense of the merchants in 
 
 pie to the •' ^ ^ 
 
 highest reo;ard to the United States' Bank. That the choice ho^ 
 
 pitch'! . . 
 
 w. Rev. been determined by illegal votes there is no doubt. Dur- 
 13, 39. ^^g ^j^^ whole contest it was both melancholy and amusing 
 tical conse- to See the immense number of foreigners, loho were driving 
 the'saHot ^P ^'^^ry moment to the Marine Court to get out certifi- 
 will be that cates of Naturalization. Almost every five minutes an 
 men will omnibus came up filled with them. Nine-tenths of them 
 can-do so ^*^^^ of the vcry lowest class, and many not long enough 
 free of ex- ^^ f^^g QQuntrv to wear out the clothes they brought on 
 
 pense,or "^ . . 
 
 are willing their backs. They went to the Court foreigners in 
 
 their own every sense of the word, altogether ignorant of the insti- 
 
 exp^ses'! (^^i^j^g qJ- ifiig country, and of almost every thing else; 
 
 13, 18. hut the moment they enter — hoc presto, they are instantly 
 
 altogether changed; and in five minutes they come 
 
 out intelligent American citizens, burning with love 
 
 of country and patriotism, and are sent off to the 
 
 Polls to support the Constitution, and break mens 
 
 heads. ^^® 
 
 ^*^ The Author has been informed by an eye-witness 
 that no words can give any notion of the violence and 
 tumult of this election. ' The effect of some hundred 
 Irishmen knocking their sticks in concert on the 
 pavement, before they made their onslaught, was the
 
 123 
 
 C=^ All those persons who were wounded in the riot J^^.*^'"/fi,Q 
 of yesterday, and taken to the hospital, have 50 /ar Ballot! 
 recovered as to be able to go to their own homes, with the 
 exception of Capt. Munson of the city watch, who ivas 
 sever ell/ wounded in the back of the head by the edge of 
 an axe. His situation is very critical, but the surgeon 
 has hopes that he will survive the injury. 
 
 Horrible Barbarity. 
 
 {'Aqyt York Commercial Advertiser, April 9, 1837.) 
 
 We have just been informed that Mr. Lancaster <« Under the 
 Odell, one of the challengers of the Independent Re- dom^anT^' 
 publicans, has been stabbed by a Jackson assassin ! He yirtue will 
 
 * ^ y be univer- 
 
 was in the performance of his duty, and on the point of sally diffu- 
 challenging the vote of a Mr. Smith, whom he did not different 
 believe to be a legal voter; the latter threatened that if beTnTt tT-^' 
 he did challenge the vote he would be the death of him: gether by 
 
 ^ , . the ties of 
 
 Mr. Odell replied, that it was his duty to do so ; and mutual 
 the vote was accordingly challenged. After the Poll tion"T" 
 was closed, as Mr. Odell was retiring^ he was stabbed JY®^*:^®^* 
 by Mr. Smith, and his abdomen ripped open so that his 
 bowels gushed out ! ! To what are we coming ? 
 
 Twelve o'clock. — Mr. Odell is yet alive, but grievously 
 injured. 
 
 most terrific sound he ever heard.* He added — ' I 
 positively saw several men dragged up to vote in 
 knee breeches. Now you never see an American in 
 knee breeches.' (!) It turned out on inquiry that 
 these men in knee breeches had been taken out 
 of ships newly arrived from Europe, hurried off to 
 the scene of action without any attempt to disguise 
 their European outside, naturalized on their way 
 up the street, and changed iorthwith into indepen- 
 dent American Electors !
 
 13, 36. 
 
 124 
 
 Official Compassion. 
 
 (From the same.) 
 
 Mr. Eley, a merchant in Maiden-lane, was severely 
 
 wounded yesterday in the sixth ward. In making his escape 
 
 he was pursued by a gang of ruffians, and was compelled 
 
 to / u^h into a house to save his life. It proved to be the 
 
 ','^H,^^^' residence of Mr. , a Custom-house officer. He 
 
 lotwillgive 
 
 men of pro- complained that it was very rude for a stranger to come 
 
 pertysuffi- . » . i • j " '. ^' , 
 
 cient mo- ^>*t<? nis house without an invitation ! 
 lile the Long Islanders. 
 
 utmost (From the same.) 
 
 tS i^\d- Challengers look out ! Floods of Jackson men were 
 lectand yesterday imported from Long Island, who boasted of 
 (W. Rev. their voting on their return ! 
 
 False Tickets of Naturalization. 
 
 (From the same.) 
 
 ** Messrs. Editors, 
 
 As it is an undoubted fact that a certificate of 
 naturalization belonging to one person has been made to 
 pass from hand to hand for the purposes of voting on 
 the Jackson ticket, would it not be adviseable for the 
 Committees of Vigilance to publish a reward for the 
 conviction of such proceedings : and would it not also 
 be adviseable to offer a reward to any one who should 
 fully convict another of voting more than once at every 
 election ? The Jaw, I believe, specifies imprisonment 
 and a fine of £250. for voting unlawfully, therefore a 
 larger reward than that might be offered with safety. 
 
 As the Jackson cause is in a desperate state, there 
 
 is but little doubt they will resort to desperate and unfair 
 
 means.'' L. 
 
 Look Well to your Ballots. 
 
 (From the same.) 
 
 An immense number of spurious tickets are afloat in 
 all parts of the city. The name of Mr. Verplanck is
 
 125 
 
 spelt variously, — as Julian G. Verplanck, and Julian 
 C. Verplanck. Remember that it should be Julian 
 C. Verplanck. All others are spurious. 
 C^ JBeivare of counterfeits ! 
 
 Short Memories. 
 
 (From the Same.) 
 
 A terrible outcry is raised because in these hard 
 times, some persons have been dismissed from em- 
 ployment. Have not Mr, Martin Van Buren, and 
 the Regency f been dismissing labourers in the public ser- 
 vice constantly for more than fifteen years past ? Has \q^ ^jh ge. 
 
 not GeneralJackson done the same — and that too with a p^^®*^® 
 
 mdepen- 
 
 most unsparing hand-^andfor no other cause than opi- dence of 
 nions sake ? 
 
 But these proscriptions it is very convenient to forget. 
 
 Mr. Clay's Opinion of the Interference of Go- 
 vernment WITH the Electors in America. 
 
 (New York Commercial Advertiser, April 11, 1834 ; Extract of a Letter 
 from a Gentleman to that Paper.) 
 
 " Mr. Clay's opinion is, what the opinion of every man 
 of intelligence not blinded by party prejudice must be, 
 that it rests with the people whether they will have mO' 
 narchy or their own hitherto free institutions. The 
 people do not want monarchy, but still there is danger 
 that they may have it. Indeed, they have it now <. Absolute 
 IN ITS worst form ; because, with a show of a house J^«™ocracy 
 of Representatives, a majority of that house is the mere ranny." 
 creature of the Executive Will. And there is danger Poi. 5, lo. 
 that this state of things will continue, through the efforts 
 made, and to be made, to deceive the people into the 
 belief that General Jackson is their best friend ; that he 
 stands between them, and an aristocracy that seeks to 
 trample them in the dust."
 
 126 
 
 In the debate of 1835 Lord Stanley gave an ac- 
 count of American elections, exactly according with 
 the above. But many doubted, and some denied 
 its correctness ! Nor is this strangce. For — '* it is 
 always easier to deny than to inquire. To refuse 
 credit confers for a moment an appearance of supe- 
 riority, which every little mind is tempted to as- 
 sume when it may be gained so cheaply, as by 
 withdrawing attention from evidence^ and declin- 
 ing the fatigue of comparing probabilities."* 
 
 B. 
 
 Dr. Bowring tells us from his own knowledge that the 
 Ballot is efficient in French Parliamentary Elections, let 
 the reader test the accuracy of the doctor's knowledge by 
 the following extract from the Times, Jan. 12, 1838 : — 
 
 '* M. Sivry opened the debate by charging the Ministers 
 with illegal practices. 
 
 " M. Cheganay, Attorney-General for the Tribunal of 
 Rennes, denied that, as charged by M. Sivry, a man im- 
 prisoned under sentence for manslaughter had been pro- 
 mised his pardon if he would vote for M. Hello, the 
 Ministerial Candidate : but he did not deny that, as stated 
 by M. Sivry, the man in question had, on the day of the 
 election for Ploermel, actually been taken from his 
 prison to the municipality, where he voted for M. Hello* 
 
 '* M. Sivry resumed, and proceeded to contend, from 
 the language of the Prefect, which he stated in detail, 
 that the Government had directly interfered in the election of 
 Ploermel by threats., menaces, bribes, and promises ofplaceSy 
 and grants for public works, 
 
 * Rambler, No. 87.
 
 127 
 
 44 # # * M Mauguin charged the Prefects of the depart- 
 ments of La Correze and La Lozere rvith improperly inter- 
 fering in the elections. M. Larabit made similar charges 
 in respect of the authorities of the latter and other depart- 
 ments. 
 
 *' M. de St. Albin and M. Larabit severally charged 
 Ministers with illegal practices during the last elec- 
 tions. . . . M. Roger begged to be allowed to mention a 
 fact, proving that public functionaries had been dismissed on 
 account of their political opinions. A respectable physician, 
 personally known to him, had been superseded in the 
 direction of an hospital in the department of Loiret, 
 because he had voted against the Ministerial Candidate. 
 * * * M. O. Barrot approved of M. de St. Albin's amend- 
 ment, and read a paragraph of the electoral law to prove 
 that the Cabinet had no right to interfere, directly or 
 indirectly, with the elections. 
 
 "M. de Montalivet adduced in refutation oT the doc- 
 trine of M. O. Barrot the conduct followed by the Presi- 
 dent of the United States, who dismissed from office all 
 the functionaries who did not use their exertions to pro- 
 cure the return of Government Candidates. * * * The 
 Government he said, could not remain indifferent to the 
 contest when electoral committees were formed over the whole 
 territory, who circulated all sorts of calumny against the 
 Ministerial Candidates. His interference in the last 
 elections had, he again declared, been perfectly honour- 
 able and legitimate. 
 
 '' M. de Motalivet, after noticing some particulars in 
 M. Dupont's conduct, said he did not blame it; he merely 
 wished to prove he (M. Dupont) had been likewise of opi- 
 nion that Ministers had a right to influence elections." 
 
 So much for the efficiency of the Ballot in France ! 
 
 But even if secrecy were ensured in France, there
 
 128 
 
 are two circumstances which render it quite inapplicable 
 as an argument in favour of the Ballot in England. 
 1st. The Electors in France are a very much higher class 
 of persons than those in England. The Electoral quali- 
 fication there is the annual payment of 300 francs, a sum 
 equivalent at least to £12, in direct taxation ; while the 
 English voter is qualified by a mere promise to pay £10. 
 a year in rent. Hence it is, that as the class of voters 
 there is much superior, so their number is much smaller 
 than it is here. In France, the proportion of the Electors 
 to the population is 1 in 182, in England it is 1 in 24. 
 
 2ndly. The Ballot was instituted in France with the sole 
 view of protecting the voter from the power of the Crown. 
 Unless then it can be shewn that the French Monarch 
 is endowed with the ubiquity and activity of the Land- 
 lords and Employers, and Customers in England, the 
 security of the Electors there would be no proof that 
 they would be secured here by the adoption of a like 
 system. Under these circumstances we may well wonder, 
 not that Mr. Grote should have withdrawn his argument, 
 but that he should ever have advanced it. — See Mr. 
 Barlow Hoy's Speech in the Debate of June 2, 1835, and 
 Goldsmith's Statistics of France, p. 16. 
 
 C. 
 
 Un-English. After the rough treatment this word has 
 received from Lord Nugent and other critics, of whom it 
 is enough to say, that they are no better or worse than 
 his Lordship, it may seem fool-hardiness in the author to 
 venture upon using it again. But he has done so, chiefly 
 from the consideration that his Lordship is even less 
 happy in his illustrations than he is in his analogies.
 
 129 
 
 His Lordship says, — ' If the Ballot is un-English, then 
 the Reformation must be un-English ; because it was 
 the setting of a German and Genevan graft of Religious 
 freedom upon the ancient stock of English Popery.' It is 
 strange that his Lordship should not have known that 
 the Reformation was entirely of English origin. Germany 
 and Geneva procured those seeds of freedom from Eng- 
 land, which were sown there again in after time, when 
 the soil was better fitted for their growth. ' The writings 
 of Wiclif, carried to Bohemia after the death of the Queen 
 of Richard II. (who was sister of Wenceslaus, king of 
 Bohemia, and died A. D. 1394,) by some of her attend- 
 ants, who then returned to their own country, marked 
 out the way for John Huss and Jerome of Prague, who 
 about fifteen years afterwards opposed the usurpations of 
 the Romish Church.' (See Miller's Phil, of Hist. ii. 301.) 
 Moreover, the English and German Reformations were 
 as unlike as it was possible for them to be. . Germany 
 might have again suggested to England the idea of Re- 
 formation in the abstract ; but it most assuredly did not 
 furnish the working plan of the thing itself. (Conf. War- 
 burton's Alliance, p. 51, 52, and Milton's Doctrine and 
 Discipline of Divorce, I. 339, * who but Alcuin and Wic- 
 lif, our countrymen, opened the eyes of Europe, the one in 
 arts, the other in religion ?') His Lordship next instances 
 the Revolution — because * it was a disturbing with Dutch 
 and German safeguards for civil freedom, the ancient 
 system and succession of English tyranny !' This perspi- 
 cuous illustration is even less fortunate than the last. It 
 would be as correct to call the masts of our vessels un- 
 English, because they happen to be made of Canadian 
 timber. His Lordship then says — things may be English 
 and yet bad ; and instances the Slave Trade, and the 
 Penal Code! Might he not as well have said— Bull- 
 
 K'
 
 130 
 
 baitino:, and Prize fi^i-litiu"; ? for the former, if it ciui be 
 termed tlie characteristic of any nation, belongs rather to 
 Spain than Enghind ; the hitter is peculiar to England, 
 but not characteristic. Such illustrations give no light, 
 but rather darkness visible. 
 
 D. 
 
 The increased demand for the Ballot, Amid this wail- 
 ing of oppressed electors, a correct ear may perhaps 
 detect notes that sound more like the forced sobs of hired 
 mourners than the unfeigned tones of real woe. Tiie 
 followiniT statement will illustrate this remark. In the 
 Times, Dec. 1837, it is reported that, " Mr. Grote pre- 
 sented a petition from the inhabitants of Freshingfield 
 and other villages in the eastern division of the County of 
 Suffolk, praying for the adoption of vote by Ballot, in 
 consequence of tlie bribery, corruption, and intimidation 
 practised upon the electors at the late general election. 
 The petition was signed by 506 names. There was a cir- 
 cumstance, however, connected with the signatures which 
 he deemed it fitting he should mention to the House, as 
 he did not know whether it might not operate as an 
 objection to the reception of the petition. The petitioners 
 were the i .habitants of several rural villages, and many 
 of them, though in a respectable station of life, were 
 unable to write their own names. Those persons who had 
 taken the petition round had signed the names of several 
 petitioners, but not until they had read the petition slowly 
 over to them, and had ascertained that they could not 
 write, but could only mahe their mark, which the peti- 
 tioners had afterwards made in their presence. He 
 wanted to know from the Speaker whether a petition thus 
 signed, and with this want of technical formality could 
 be received by the House.'* .
 
 131 
 
 Under what class of Advocates for the Ballot are we to 
 range these marJismen — Historians, Metaphysicians, or 
 Statesmen ? 
 
 E. 
 
 Authorities against the Ballot. The opinion of Plato 
 has been already seen, p. 110. Alcibiades, when ^sked 
 whether he would not trust his country, replied, " Yes, 
 for any thing else, but in a trial for life, not my mother ; 
 lest by mistake she put a black ball for a white one." 
 (Plutarch in Vita Ale.) See the opinion of Cicero above 
 given, note 3 Pliny, in a letter written soon after the 
 revival of the Ballot at Rome, having mentioned the evils 
 that had arisen from open voting, goes on to say — *' ad 
 tacita sufFragia, quasi ad remedium, decurrerunt. Quod 
 interim plane remedium fuit : erat enim novum et subi- 
 tum. Sed vereor ne procedente tempore ex ipso remedio 
 vitia nascantur. Est enim periculum ne tacitis sufFragiis 
 impudentia irrepat. Nam quoto cuique eadem honestatis 
 cura secreto, quae palam? Multi famam, conscientiam 
 pauci verentur." (Lib. 3. epist. 20.) The fears he has 
 here expressed, proved too true. In a subsequent letter we 
 find the powerful sketch (for which we are indebted to the 
 speech of Sir Robert Peel, February 15, 1838,) of a man 
 voting by the Ballot. " Poposcit tabellas, stylum accepit, 
 demisit caput, neminem veretur, se contemnit." (Lib. 4. 
 epist. 25.) -'The Ballot," says Mitford, '* without pre- 
 venting corruption, admits mistake, excludes responsibi- 
 lity and hides shame." (Hist, of Greece, iii. 459.) 
 (The Republican) Milton s account of a crowd of men 
 voting by Ballot is characteristic and interesting :— " And 
 this annual rotation of a Senate to consist of three hun- 
 dred as is lately propounded, I'cquires also another popular 
 
 K '2
 
 132 
 
 assembly upward of a thousand with an answerable rota- 
 tion. Which besides that it will be liable to all those 
 inconveniences found in the foresaid remedies, cannot but 
 be troublesome and chargeable, both in their motion and 
 their session, to the whole land ; unwieldy with their own 
 bulk, unable in so great a number to mature their consul- 
 tations as they ought, if any be allotted them, and that 
 they meet not from so many parts denote to sit a whole 
 year lieger in one place, only now and then to hold up a 
 forest of fingers, or to convey each man his hean or ballot 
 into the box, without reason shewn, or common delibera- 
 tion : incontinent of secrets if any be imparted to them^ 
 emulous and always jarring with the other senate." (The 
 ready and easy way to establish a free commonwealth. 
 Prose Works, iii. p. 4l6.) Montesquieu says — "The 
 people's suffrages ought doubtless to be public, and this 
 should be considered as a fundamental law of democracy. 
 The lower class ought to be directed by those of higher 
 rank, and restrained within bounds by the gravity of 
 eminent personages. Hence by rendeiing the suffrages 
 secret in the Roman Republic, all was lost, it was no 
 longer possible to direct a populace that sought its own 
 destruction." (Esprit des Lois, ii. cap. 2.) The following 
 is Gibbons view of the effects of the Ballot, " The Tri- 
 bunes soon established a more specious and popular 
 maxim, that every citizen has an equal right to enact the 
 laws which he is bound to obey. Instead of the centuries 
 they convened the tribes ; and the patricians after an 
 ineffectual struggle submitted to the decrees of an assem- 
 bly in which their votes were confounded with those of 
 the meanest plebeians. Yet as long as the tribes succes- 
 sively passed over narrow bridges and gave their voices 
 aloud, the conduct of each citizen was exposed to the eyes 
 and ears of his friends and countrymen. The insolvent 
 debtor consulted the wishes of his creditor, the client
 
 133 
 
 would have blushed to oppose the views of his patron, the 
 general was followed by his veterans, and the aspect of a 
 grave magistrate was a living lesson to the multitude. A 
 new method of secret Ballot abolished the influence of 
 fear and shame, of honour and interest, and the abuse of 
 freedom accelerated the progress of anarchy and despotism. 
 The Romans had aspired to be equal, they were levelled 
 by the equality of servitude, and the dictates of Augustus 
 were patiently ratified by the formal consent of the tribes 
 or centuries." (Decline and Fall, single vol. edit, p 718- 
 19.) Fergusons account of the matter is substantially 
 the same : — " With these establishments, calculated to 
 secure the functions of office, the use of the Ballot was 
 introduced first in elections, and afterwards in collecting 
 opinions of Judges in the Courts of Justice, a dangerous 
 form of proceeding in constitutions tending to popular 
 license, and where Justice is more likely to suffer from the 
 unawed passions of the lower people, than from any impro- 
 per influence of superior rank, and where the authority 
 of the wise and the sense of public shame were so much 
 required as principal supports of Government.*' (Hist, of 
 Rome, p. 81.) Mr. Burkes opinion is quoted in the title 
 page of this pamphlet. Mr, Broughams may be seen in 
 Appendix G. Lord Broughams in note 61. 
 
 It has been said in the text (p. 109) that Mr. Bulwer 
 might have quoted Aristotle in favour of the Ballot under 
 the mistaken impression that the KXfjpoQ or Lot so irequent 
 in Athenian Elections was the same thing with the 
 Ballot, or secret vote, ypv^poQ (\l/n<pll^iadai.) It remains to 
 give proofs of that assertion. 
 
 Now when Mr. Bulwer makes an historical statement
 
 134 
 
 in connexion with Greek authorities, we naturally expect 
 to find some clue to such statement in his work, entitled 
 " Athens — its Rise and Fall." And this clue may there be 
 found. In vol. 1. p. 407, iMr. Bulwer writes, "Probably 
 about the same period [the legislation of Clisthenes] the 
 mode of election to public offices generally was altered 
 from the jmhlic vote to seer it lot.'' Again, vol. 2. p. 330, 
 it is said that " as we have already seen, it was in all pro- 
 bability Clisthenes who weakened the more illicit and 
 oppressive influences of weal.h by establishing the ballot 
 or secret suffrage, instead of open voting,'' The second 
 of these places makes reference to the first; both are 
 evidently intended to contain a statement of the same fact; 
 the open voting of the latter is plainly equivalent to the 
 'public vote of the former, and in like manner the secret 
 suffrage of the second must be the same with the secret 
 lot of the first. That is, Mr. Bulwer has in his History 
 of Athens confounded Lot with Ballot, KXiipog with v^j/^o? ! 
 
 Further^ it may well be asked what Mr Bulwer means 
 by *' secret lot^' in the first of the places quoted. How 
 can a lot be more or less secret? This strange and ano- 
 malous expression is plainly due to the parliamentary 
 confusion alluded to in the text, whereby Mr. Bulwer 
 took lot to be the same with ballot, and gave it an epithet 
 which fits very well with ballot, but can have no sense at 
 all when applied to lot. If the author had not been able 
 to prove his point by comparing the two places above 
 quoted, this single expression would have amply served 
 his purpose. 
 
 Therefore, it seems more than probable that when Mr. 
 Bulwer quoted Aristotle in favour of the Ballot, he mis- 
 understood his Author. The fact is (as has been stated in 
 p. 61 of the text), the Greeks were not acquainted with 
 the use of the Ballot as a jwlitical engine. And it would
 
 13o 
 
 indeed be strange if one so cautious as Aristotle had de- 
 liberately stated the Ballot to be necessary to liberty, when 
 in fact it never was used to secure or maintain political 
 liberty in any state of Greece that we know of. So then, 
 before we can take Mr. Bulwer's mere word, we must 
 have a reference to the place of Aristotle which he meant. 
 Those of his admirers who think it impossible that he 
 should have misrepresented Aristotle, will be startled to 
 find that he has palpably misrepresented Cicero. If they 
 doubt it, let them turn to note 3. And at all events, 
 whether Mr. Bulwer can escape from the charge of misre- 
 presenting Aristotle or no, there is another charge con- 
 nected therewith from which he caw?20^ escape. The second 
 passage above quoted clearly proves, that the Historian 
 OF Athens was ignorant (or disguised his knowledge) 
 that at Athens all magistrates were elected hy open vote or 
 by lot, and none at all by Ballot ! ^^^ 
 
 G. 
 
 In the Debate on Mr. O'Connell's motion for Parlia- 
 mentary Reform by Universal Suffrage, May 28, 1830.' 
 Mr. Brougham attacked the Ballot with arguments, 
 which Lord Brougham seems unable to answer. No one 
 
 i6o« 'pjjg Author ventures to recommend the follAving passage 
 from Aristotle to tlie attentive perusal of Mr. Grote and Mr. Bulwer 
 ^ti ^e fiT]6e tovto avTO dyvoely, ort xp^ irpoaiytLv r^ ttoXXw XP"^V 
 Kai toIq TToXXoic treffiv, ty o'(q ovk ay tXaBey el ravra KaXuig 
 cT^cv* Trdyra yap c^f^ov Evpqrai fxiy, aXXa rd fiey ov (Tvyi}KTai, 
 TOiQ ^ ov YpQvTaL yiyu)ffKoyT£g. /ictXtora C ay yiyoiro ^ayepuyj si 
 rig toIq tpyoig iSot T})y rrjy roiavnjy TroXireiay KaracTKevai^o/ieyrjy, 
 Polit. 2. 5, 5.
 
 136 
 
 will coniphuii of the following long extract from his 
 speech.* 
 
 " He felt persuaded that Election by Ballot would not 
 give the necessary security for the concealment of the 
 vote, unless by incurring much greater evils than those 
 which this measure professed to remedy. So long as a 
 seat in Parliament was an object of general ambition, 
 candidates and their partisans would be active in can- 
 vassing the country in all quarters and directions. Agents 
 would traverse the country from one end to the other, 
 would see the voters day after day, and eventually live 
 among theni. He spoke now on the supposition of there 
 being a contest, and of landlords and tenants being en- 
 listed in it. The Agents of the respective Candidates 
 would importune each individual voter, till at last some 
 one of them thou2:ht he had made sure of him. In all 
 probability his landlord, on applying to him, would obtain 
 a promise from him in these convincing terms : " I'll 
 vote for you, and for you alone ; you are my landlord, 
 my benefactor; I fairly and honestly tell you, that no 
 power on earth shall ever make me vote against you ;" 
 still meaning, according to those who defended the Ballot, 
 all the while to vote for his landlord's opponent. It would 
 seem, however, that this evil was to be remedied by the 
 Ballot. Well, the House would suppose this system 
 adopted, and all due precautions for secrecy being ob- 
 served, the voter walking to the poll, and presenting him- 
 self at a sort of sentry box made for the purpose. So far 
 as mechanical arrangement would go, there was little 
 difficulty in devising means to keep the matter secret ; 
 but various other points were to be taken into considera- 
 tion. It was to be presumed that the balloting instru- 
 
 * See Hansard's Parliamentarv Debates.
 
 137 
 
 mem would be a sort of small pellet, with a certain stamp 
 upon it, the forgery of which would be a grave offence. 
 The voter might very easily put this pellet into the box, 
 without the result of his vote being known at the time; 
 but afterwards came the bustle and the mob, and the 
 consequent scenes attendant upon them ; after havhig 
 voted for the opposite Candidate, he would, in all likeli- 
 hood go on to congratulate his landlord on having won 
 the day. Thus far for his ingenuousness. In all cases 
 where there was a contest there would of course be con- 
 versation respecting it — the individuals who had voted 
 would talk on the subject in their private walks, at 
 Church, after Church, and above all at the ale-house. 
 Who then could tell him that such a person as he now 
 described could be so much on his guard, as not to excite 
 the slightest suspicion as to the manner in which he had 
 given his vote ? To observe such profound secrecy he must 
 say nothing whatever to his wife ; nothing whatever to his 
 children ; nothing to his dearest friend ; nothing to his 
 pot companion ; no, he must be as dumb as the tankard 
 which they had just emptied between them. That was 
 the situation in which election by Ballot was to place this 
 working and independent freeholder for three long years, 
 till the next opportunity presented itself for him to exhibit 
 his rare qualities. After the election was over, the land- 
 lord of course would look to his books, in his eagerness to 
 ascertain how they stood : Seeing that he had perhaps 
 only 50 votes after the 500 solemn promises he had re- 
 ceived on consulting the book, and finding how the num- 
 bers stood, he might probably be told that the votes were 
 wrong. This however could not be, for they were all 
 given by means of an unforgeable pellet. Every agent, 
 on being applied to, would at once say, in order to vindi- 
 cate himself, " 1 am quite sure they can't be any of my
 
 ]38 
 
 five votes, for I went to so and so — to Mr. this, and Mr. 
 that — to Sir Robert this and Sir Robert that ; and all 
 the Misters and all the Sir Roberts gave me positive 
 ])roniises." This unexpected result would natuially set 
 all the people on the watch to discover how the individual 
 in question voted. Tf he should be bold enough to say to 
 his landlord, " I voted against you," thpn he lost his 
 farm; if he should be asked by him how he voted, and 
 should answer, " I won't tell you" — then also he must 
 lose his farm. If he should say, '* I voted for you," and 
 his landlord should reply, " How can that be, from the 
 state of the books?" all his asseverations as proof of the 
 fact would be useless, both parties would separate with 
 much suspicion on one side and no good feeling on the 
 other. Election by Ballot would give rise to a continual 
 system of vexatious watching, and annoyance — (hear, 
 hear, from Mr. O'Connell). His honourable and learned 
 friend seemed to doubt that it would have that effect, but 
 he (Mr. Brougham), must now suppose that there would 
 be bad landlords, crafty agents, and hard-hearted stewards; 
 or if such characters did not exist, why have recourse to 
 the Ballot at all ? Well, on the first discovery w^hich took 
 place, one landlord would make an example of one or 
 two of his tenants, and the consequence would be, that 
 the remainder would abstain altogether from the Ballot, 
 and not vote on either side. {Lord Milton : the landlord 
 may turn them out for not voting at all.) Mr. Brougham 
 proceeded — What his noble fiiend said was very true ; 
 but all that he wanted particularly to urge was, that the 
 secret was sure to be betrayed, and must at some time or 
 other come to the ears of the landlord. All these facts 
 showed very clearly, how groundless was the expectation 
 that election by ballot would accomplish the purpose in 
 view. But there he might be permitted to ask with much
 
 139 
 
 deference to his honourable and learned friend, and those 
 who agreed with him on the subject, whether, though it 
 must fail in this respect, it might not, at the same time, 
 fully accomplish one of the blacke-t and foulest purposes 
 of any that could debase and destroy the character of 
 man ? Whether it would not make a hypocrite of a man 
 throughout the whole period of his existence ? Whether it 
 would not as was forcibly described by an eminent writer, 
 make him exist as a person whose 
 
 " whole life was one continued lie'' ? 
 
 Such a person must be perpetually on the watch against 
 his warmest friends and closest connexions; always trem- 
 blingly afraid to keep a secret, the discovery of which 
 would be equally fatal to his interests and character. This 
 was nothing more or less than to lead a life of deception 
 and fraud to the last moment of human existence. The 
 character of an individual thus circumstanced was true 
 only in its hypocrisy. The man who could for months 
 conceal the manner in which he had voted — who could 
 hold his tongue on that subject which was the universal 
 topic of conversation — who could keep his secret from his 
 friend and his wife, who would never mention it even at 
 the ale-house, would be false to his country and his friend, 
 and could neither be true nor faithful in any of the re- 
 lations of life ; nor would men believe him true unless 
 human thought were subverted. The result would be, 
 either that the Ballot would be altogether inelFectual, or it 
 would be a little effectual — for it could never be very 
 effectual — and that little efficacy would be purchased by 
 the fearful sacrifices which he had endeavoured to depict. 
 
 THE END. 
 
 >ORMAN AND SKKlkN| rUlMEUS, MAIDEN I.ANE, COVENT GAItULN.
 
 , ... ^ 

 
 ^^^
 
 ''J^l 
 
 5^^t 
 
 f5?S^' 
 
 -v;. 
 
 
 
 ,'^/^' 
 
 ^^^^ 
 
 •^^^^^^^: 
 
 ^xtK^ 
 
 f-^:->>