Current:

Leader (1850-1860), 18th June 1853, Edition 1 of 1, Page 580, Untitled Article

Page 580
Page 4
4 of 24

On this page

  • Text (2)

      Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    • Untitled Article

      Untitled Article

    • Untitled Article

      Untitled Article

  • Transcript

    • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

      Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

      Untitled Article

      men hare stood forward and shown themselves ready to make sacrifices on behalf of their opinions , and ot t oe Government which they wished to establish . Xrom tne day when Sir John Elliot allowed himself to be imprisoned —an imprisonment which resulted in his death—to tne day when Sydney was willing to be condemned , and , wirn unquickened pulse , braved the verdict of an adverse and a packed iury , men were ready to sacrifice their lives , and were willing at any cost , to establish the principles of liberty which they espoused . " _ _ of voting

      But , it was answered , the present publicity leads to the t hraldom of the voter ' s conscience : and the ballot is the only remedy for intimidation . Take the case of the honest voter , the man who is pressed between ruin on the one side , and the discharge of a sacred duty on the other , would not the ballot be an advantage to him ? It would not ( it was urged in reply ); for to maintain secrecy a man should not alone vote in secret , hut , as Sidney Smith had said , he should " hurrah at the wrong speech , eat the wrong dinner , break the wrong heads . " For the ballot alone would not be effective in concealment ; a system of esp ionage would be introduced ; a man ' s vote would be suspected ; especially in Ireland , where , you know a man ' s religion you know his politics , or where a man ' s associates

      indicate his views . Besides , neither the people of England nor Ireland are so taciturn as to be able to keep a secret . ( The preservation of the Masonic secret was instanced as a proof to the contrary . ) It was also objected that you should make secret voting compulsory in all places . "Why not ? " answered Mr . Berkeley . " Then" ( asked Mr . Herbert ) , " how are you to prevent a man who acts in the face of day , proud of his undeviating consistency , braving the frowns of wealth , and resisting the blandishments of power , going up to the ballot-box and declaring how he votes ? It is not in the nature of the English character to skulk behind a mask , in doing that of which , far from being ashamed , he is justly proud , because it is his duty . " Mr . Cobden asked , " why not allow separate constituencies to try it , as an experiment , if they like ?"

      Another part of the argument against the Ballot was , that the franchise was one of the duties of the democracy , a trust exercised for the benefit of the public , and under the responsibility of public opinion . If it be not a trust , if it be not exercised for the benefit of the public , why not lot the voter take it and dispose of it in the dearest market ? But in fact it is a public trust , and public opinion in the present day sways many pure and honest voters . The lioii-electora have a risrht to know how the voter exercises his

      franchise , and any other practice would be contrary to the principle that prevails in all our institutions ? , and contrary also to the general principles of our constitution . In re }) ly , it was admitted that the constituency had a right to know how their representatives voted , but it was quite a different question when a voter cinne to vote for a candidate . In . such a case no earthly power had a right to come and ask the voter why he voted for one candidate rather than the other . The question of how a man was to give his vote was one between his conscience and himself , and ho would discharge it the better the more perfectly lie fulfilled his own conscientious convictions . And Mr . Coudijn sneered at the idea that it was " the duty of somebody to know how somebody else voted . "

      The opponents of the Ballot now took now ground . After arguing ( J ) , that the Ballot ivns not , secret voting ; ( 2 ) , that being secret voting , it destroyed the " public trust" principle of the franchise , they argued ( 3 ) , that , being Becret voting , it is immoral . . It goes to fins root of our whole system , ( ho tendency nnd the intention of * which in to develop individual opinion , to tf ive live fiction to every mind , to g ive frco expression to every thought . T . I Jtiut icraser I individu is not tho J ' jiigliHii ruin ; and if you introduce this system , you introduce a retrograde ! system—you arc introducing u system contrary to tho real expression of free institutions , and contrary to nil that , we have inherited froi ^ i thoso Saxon finiert which seem to have , had a greater idea of liberty

      than even our own . " L say , too , that if ever you succeed in adapting the Kii ^ lish character to this measure , ho that the I'lngYwU people really avail tlieniNclve . s < J" it , and conneiit to exercise their rights or ( heir duties under tho veil of secresy , you will have demoralized the Mulish character , rmd done a great deal to sap tho foundations on which our country stands . Tlio Knglish character hitherto has been manly , noble , and straightforward—a character well suited to tho dignity of liberty . That character would bo deteriorated by the operation of a measure tho very essence

      of which wns meanness and servility . If you say that men are to exercise Neeretly ' uny of tho public trusts of this country , and that they shall bo safe mid huriulcHS whatever may bo their conduct , yon do that winch endangers liberty , and you introduce a s p irit directly oppositea spirit <> l sluilking and irresponsibility . Lot its jiuuhc — lot us feel that we Imvo Home sure foundation , and that this is an cllieienl remedy—and , i ; i tho meantime , lot us retain a mode of voting which baa boen consistent and compiiLihlc . with all that is noble , all that is manly , und nil thut . is free in our institutJohn . "

      Iho reply of the Itallot udvocutcH had much force . They exposed tho present system of " boxing , beer , and bribery . "

      But intimidation is the grand evil . Its action is complex and its effects are manifold ; its weapon is punishment ; it works by that far-famed instrument , wholly ^ nd solely English in its invention , the election screw . The election screw , concisely and shortly , is a power which the elector cannot resist under ruin ; it is discovered by an inquisition into his private affairs worthy of a Fouche or a Vidocq , and carried on by election agents with a view to twist from your free , independent , and manly Englishman a dishonest vote . It assails the elector at his fireside it turns him out of his farm or house , it ruins the tradesman , and puts the debtor in prison . When a right good agent of the Derby or the St . Alban ' s breed undertakes to return a candidate for any g iven borough , he first

      tries the efficacy of the screw , of bribery , and corruption ; if these aids fail , he then , as a last resort , hires and disciplines a mob to thrash the electors going to and coming from the poll , to upset them in carriages , and to smash their windows . And there are certain men so far unmanly as to object to have voters beaten , and others so un-English as to object to have them upset in carriages ; while there are some who are both so unmanly and so un-English as to think that an effusion of brickbats over a tea-table in the middle of a family party is an unwelcome event . 4 " And this , " said Mr . Bebkeiey , " is your glorious electoral system , o which you are so proud , and which is so manly and so English . "

      Examples of the use of the Ballot formed the next field of controversy . Its prevalence in clubs and several sporting societies was pointed out . Mr . Sidney Herbert replied : — " The object of the ballot in clubs is to enable you to act upon predilections and aversions which you cannot justify and dare not avow , and it rests upon the ground that everybody has a right to choose with whom he will associate . Beyond that there is no principle involved . It is the right you claim of selecting your associates and friends without giving any public reason , or without being able to f ive any reason or justification of the aversions and prejuices which you may entertain . That is exactly why the ballot is useful in clubs , and why you should prevent its use in the exercise of public functions . You want every man to feel the weight of responsibility which falls upon the exercise of public functions . "

      Mr . Cobden , in answer , said that " Mr . Herbert did not very happily account for the motives which induced people to have recourse to it when he said that the motives were such as they dared not avow . But the fact was , that it would be inconvenient to vote openly , and therefore , to shield themselves from a slight inconvenience , they adopted a privilege which they would not allow others to enjoy . " The use of the Ballot in Prance , Belgium , and America , where it procured tranquillity , was pointed out ; hut it was shown that the ballot in many parts of the States , Massachusetts , for

      instance , was not secret voting , as every elector gave in the name he voted for on an open slip of paper ; and in those States , where the ballot had been really secret , corruption had advanced , and there were suspicions of the officials . As to the Continent , the ballot might be suited for despotic countries ( it had established despotism in Venice ) , but was utterly repugnant to the spirit of popular representation . The rejoinder to this argument were two instances—one , where , by the ballot election of secretaries in the Chambers , despotism had been defeated in Spain ; the other , a better story of an Italian club .

      In Florence , the other day , Prince Lichtenstein proposed a member of the Windisehgriitz family as a member of a club or r 6 union there . Now , as the Austrians arc all hated in Italy , this young man , probably very amiable in himself , was black-balled . The consequence was that Prince laehtenstcin , like all military sabreum , was furious ; he called out the military , occupied all the posts , threatened to interfere with the popular amusements , and called a meeting of the club , to which he said—" The ballot is alfrnonsense , the ballot is not freedom , let us have publicity . " Of course , with the sword hanging over their heads , the members of the club could not do otherwise than assent , and the result ¦ was that the candidate who was tho day before blackballed was then unanimously elected . The debate on tho whole wiw interesting . Mr . Henry Bkhkklk v was the mover of the " annual motion . " His

      speech wuh very Bpinted , almost " sportsmanlike" in its gaiety and illustrations ; and happy in putting the old arguments in new words . Sir John Villieks Siiiclt / k y seconded the mot ion in a rather dull speech . Mr . 10 . J ! au , spoke with bis UHiialwantofficu . se ; being the only Oppositionist who spoke . He opposed the motion . Mr . l " n ijym moui : was philosophical in itn support . Mr . Bu . vnv ( the only Irish s ] M » ikcr ) gave some Irish instances of intimidation . Mr . Sidnkv IIkiiiiicrt next rose ilh tho spokesman of the Ministry : his speech was clever and persuasive . Mr . OonnicN , in following him , hoped that Mr . Herbert would be compelled to change bis mind on this as on the Corn-law

      question , uud made an argumentative : HjHiech on tho question , threatening » Ballot League , and pronouncing a Reform Bill without the ballot , imperious . Sir RoiiKitT Pi : kl , in an eccentric but not . dull display , supported tho motion in a very Radical speech : and diverged to attack Lord John Russell for his late Anti-Catholic Hpeech . Mr . Buioiif spoke , not with his usual ability } und Lord John itirBHJCi / b concluded the debate , putting forward some facts , und ufiing some eloquen t declamation .

      Untitled Article

      THE SUCCESSION DUTY . The Opposition , led by Sir Jphn PakittgtoD , made * & smart resistance to this Bill at ft late stage . On the order of the day ( Monday ) fbr going into Ctrtflmittee , Sir JoHtt Pakington moved as an amendment , that they should go into committee this day six months ' , and then spoke against the Bill at some length Mid in a tone of unexpected warmth and indignatiotii Mr *

      Gladstone had said that the present law tot legacy duties was anomalous and unfair j if so , it would he better to repeal the legacy duties altogether than to pass the proposed Bill . If the tax is Unsound in principle , we should not extend it . It wotdd opprejM the landed interest , it would touch the yotingef children of the gentry of all classes' —it was , as the late Lord Grey had said , a tax upon misfortune , Those who would suffer most from the tax were the small

      proprietors . The present legacy duty wad called ail anomaly , hut was it not also an anomaly that rateable property was burdened with poor rates when personal property whs not subject to them . Mr . Gladstone had admitted the " peculiar and exceptional burdens" which pressed upon rateable property . Its direct burdens he admitted to be 14 , 000 , 000 / . or 15 , 000 , 000 / . ; they werS really 17 , 500 , 000 ^ per annum , or 22 per cent , on the whole , while the burdens upon personal property were from 3 , 000 , OOOZ . to 4 , 000 , 000 ? . Its excessive

      inequalitywas an argument against the tax i a man twenty-one years of age , in the bloom of early manhood , and another in consumption , Were taxed the ( tame . It WaS a cruel burden . A man aged thirty -nine , succeeding his brother in a property worth 1001 . per annum , would have to pay 45 / . by the end of five years . Mr . Glad ' stone presumed on the weakness and selfishBesa of human nature , for the present holder * of property would not hare to pay the tax- ^—it would devolve on their successors . Here Sir John made an attack on

      the bishops , evidently in revenge for the vote in favour of the tax which that " class of persons" had given " in another place . " " I see no reason why the property of corporations sola should be altogether exempt . ( Loud cries of ' Hear , hear , ' from the Opposition benches . ) "With regard to one portion of those corporations sole—I mean the bishops —( renewed cries of assent from , the ' Conservative ' Opposition ) — they have already expressed - their high approbation of the tax , and I do not see on what ground they should be released . " ( Loud cheering . ) The inquisitorial nature of the tax Was another ground of objection to it . The moment a death occurred , those succeeding to the property were to give the collectors the fullest information , under severe

      penalties . Those penalties were necessary j the tax was so odious , that it should be enforced by tyrannical enactments . But would the people submit to this P " If it should be enacted—though I would be the last man to counsel my countrymen to resist this law—still t will exercise every feeble influence 1 may possess to tell tho country to resist by every legitimate ana lawful means an impost so vexatious , by machinery so tyrannical and inquisitorial . " With regard to timber , the timber upon estates often stood from generation to generation , and yet it would be taxed ever y tim © a death took place . This was not taxation—it was plunder . The tax would be " especially oppressive on the poor man . Fox and Grey had opposed a succession tax , Adam Smith had

      condemned it , and Sir Kobert Peel had objected to it unless the present inequalities on rateable property were removed . Pitt ' s proposal was not like the " present : it was a war tax . One cause of the present proposal was the peculiar constitution of a Government which had no pnrty—which at one time had to apolo * gise for a Protestant speech * and at other times to par . der to the Radical prejudices of some of its supporters . As Mr . Disraeli had said , this War of classes should cease ; but this measure would revive a sense of injury and injustice . Tho Government should not

      reckon on a permanent revenue from this tax ; at nd distant time it should be repealed , in obedience to tho unanimous dcuiiuid of an indignant nation . ( Cheers . ) Mr . itjCADLAM supported the tax . Ho pointed out that land was nt present exempted from the probate duties , and gave instance * of the tax . A man leaving 20 , 000 / . consols to his son , ' that son would have to pay 2 / . per cent , upon the capital , but if n person left an estate worth 20 , 000 / . to his son , that son would have to pay no probate duty , but a legacy duty , which would be only on ono half tho value of the lond .

      It was urged by Mr . FjMcattFiittD in reply , that it HiKicoKsor to a farm had to make repairs , and seldom found it unencumbered . Mr . II . . T . Puii / limoub , sup-i porting the tax , objected to Lord Grey or Mr . Fox as authorities upon jmlitical economy . Mr . Muia , ixeB ( who claimed to speak as having ' made as many WllW as any man in tho country" ) objected In every way ttt the tax . It was a tax upon all property , settled And , unsettled j upon property pcttled l > y past , present , or future documents . Persona holding proporty under

      Untitled Article

      580 THE LEADER . [ 8 A * tmDA ¥ ,

  • Citation
    • Leader (1850-1860), June 18, 1853, page 580, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1991/page/4/