BALLOT—WHAT FOR ?

Daily Southern Cross, Volume XV, Issue 1132, 4 May 1858, Page 4

BALLOT— WHAT FOR ?

To the Editor of the Southern Cross. 8 Sir,— l hope that, although one of the humblest of p the «ettlers of the colony of New Zealand, I may be al- v lowed t^ express my great satisfaction that t l .e Supreme c Government of the colony hns taken in hand to aoieu<J t the present most inexpedient and debasing system ot \ electing members for House of Representatives, and n thus, in fact, for the Provincial Councils— not forget- J ting, I hope, hereafter some new plan for the »»P omp ; Jl ment ot Superintendents. But, however much credit v may bo due to the Colonial Ministry for their exertions j in Urn 'matter, I would respectfully request them to v pause and consider, before they mar all their good t works and intentions, by getting their Bill No 5 *or c the regulation and conduct of Elections confirmed as 1 a law of the land. This Bill proposes two most mo- t mentous alterations in the conduct of elections, which i if carried will probably, in the end, cause momentous 1 delation from and deterioration of our copy of the 1 Bmih Constitution. lam no admirer of the blac-K- i guardism of elections, as they are but too frequently c conducted, nor of the bribery, occasional coercion, ana r disgraceful drunkenness with which they are too otten , attended. But it is possible, to a great degree, to get i rid of those, as has been shown in the elections as t generally conducted in England, since the passing ot , the la.t Act for their regulation. The gross injustice , to be legalised by this Bill, if passed into a law, ot , •creening pc?rsons intrusted with momentous public t duties from the public observation of their actions, m discharging such duties, is so foreign, so opposite, to t every other portion of ihe British Const iiution, con- ] sidered judicially or legislntnnally that it cannot do | othorwise than operate prejudicially. We shall next a have a law to forbid open courts of justice. It is not < comfortable either to the inefficient judge, the bullying < pleader, or the guilty culprit tbat their acts should be , exposed ; theretor?, to save their feelings, such things { must hereafter be done privately. And why should j they not ?it will only be in annolgy with other things ; , for it appears that the candidate* who are to ask for the , suffrages ot the people, to be allowed to tax them, and ] to legalize the spending of their money, are becoming , so fragile, so mealy-mouthed, or so self-important that ] they can no longer, as independent men. meet the as- ( sembled people face to face and tell them what they , mean, but they must be very quietly, very gingerly invited by two nice behaved electors -in full dress and , well perfumed, I presume— to bestow their gentlest attention upon the business of the colony, upon the private recommendd iin ot skulking constituents who.hay ing been appointed trustees to act for the benefit, not of themselves, but for the general community, are presumed, by this intended Act to be ashamed or airaid publicly to put their trust in execution. It will, however, be but right to show in what way this said Bill 19 liable to more serious charges. It is intended to effect two objects. One to substitute a private nomination of candidates, in writing, by two electors, such candidates being excused from all appearance on the hustings, and thus ireed from all necessity of giving the public any account of their opinions or statement ot their intentions in legislating for the peraons and property of the people. At the dame time getting rid of all unpleasant questioning, as to the manner in which any former public trust r>ay have been by them discharged. This may be all very genteel, for what I know. It may be all very well for the shirking, scheming, time-serving candidate probably. But is it well that the public should know nothing of the opinions and intentions, on public matters, of the men whom they are to elect ? Would any one of the ministers take into his service, or employ any one, from a ahoe black to a barrister, without knowing something of his qualifications? without seeing him. questioning him, and ascertaining as far as possible how he was qualified for the business for which he might happen to want his services ? He would have no fish out of , water for himself, and if so, why ask the people to take a representative, without having a legitimate— a public means of ascertaining his fitness for the service upon ( which they want to employ him ? ' But I think I hear a sort of reply, that there are other means of getting at the opinions of candidates besides their open and manly appearance before their constituents and the public generally, upon the hustings. Yes, very truly. I see the means plentifully advertised in the Auckland papers of the present week : meetings of candidates and electors at pothouses and nobbier stalls. ; And this is the proposed New Zealand rational and moral substitute for a face to face men ting of candidates , and electors, upon the hustings, in Old England's t fashion. Drunkenness; profligacy, disgusting language, , and m udlin blackguardism, in exchange for a lew hard j word*, and, if rough yet straightforward, explanotions i and opinions. ' The candidates for the Pensioner Settlements alone are, I observe, to 1-ave four such consecutive love-meetings | (I suppose they are Jove- meetings, or the candidates would not go.) Do the Ministry consider hww, in fact they are insulting all the present members ot the House ot Representatives and of the several Provincial Councils, who propose again to serve as such, when j they assume that they are ashamed, or afraid, or otherwise unwilliag to meet their constituents, to give an a< count of their doings. Or have they considered how they depreciate the moral courage and self respect of all intending candidates, by thus assuming that they fear to meet the public and the electors in open day, and honestly to explain their doings ; and therefore prefer meeting them at public houses and grog shops, where mm and gin may have so muddled the intellect* of their picked audience that they have no power but for the drunken cheer given to the dispenser of the alcahol. If candidates really have any opinions on public affairs or any propositions for the furtherance of the public good, let them, in the good old English style, publish such opinions and propositions, in the public papers, and circulate them also if need be upon the broadsheet. Reference can be made to these hereafter, and are so far valuable. The most flattering lickspittle on earth could not say so much lor pothouse orations, delivered to drunken auditors. The other object proposed by this Bill is to introduce vote by Ballot into this colony— country that is to be. Before the Ministers could hive screwed up their courage to this point, they must have fully entertained the delusion that the electors — the voter*— were such by some inherent right, peculiar to them— a club having equal privileges, purchased by equal payments. But this is by no means the case. They are made, or are to be made or constituted by the Bill, to b° Act, Ne. 3, "Thequalification of Electors Act." All sane men in the colony, •who are subjects of her Majesty Queen Victoria, are equal in the sight of Law of England as of the Law of God. All then have inherently, property or no property, a right to vote for persons to represent them in the making of laws, as those laws will, in many cases, affect the persons of the people, because all cannot, as in old Teutonic times, attend in person. Now, this said Act No. 3 selects only certain portions of the sane men ot the colony for electors, who are to use the privilege thus hestowed upon them, not only to elect the men to represent themselves together with the other men in the colony, but also all th» women and children, who are certainly as deepiy interested as the men in the welfare of the colony But these men, who by the Act are to be electois. can be so only as trustees. There is nothing in the Bill that gives them any other right or power. Nor dare the Ministry eniinciate the doctrine (that the other sane men, who may happen to have the privilege of electors, are a degraded race, and unqualified to have any word or control in the matter whatever. Now, this necessary controul, this power of Linking after what very much concerns them, both the <li-fr<inchised men and women— and children, also if of ►ufficient knowledge to understand the matter— cannot be exercised without a knowledge of the manner in which their trustees exercise their trust— in other words, without knowing how and for whom the electois vote, This cannot be done where vote by Ballot is practiced. Therefore vote by Ballot is most unfair and dishonest, as regards the other parts of the community not electors, and, be it recollected, that these other parti of the community comprise at least three-fourths of the whole. The Ballot therefore is to preclude at least three-fourths of the population fpm exercising any control whatever, in matters most intimately concerning all in their persons and the greater portion of them in their properties. It is nonsense to say that this large disfranchised portion of the people would have no influence upon an election, where the votes were given openly and consequently known beforehand. Why, the skul i»g cowards, who have not the manliness to give an open vote, require a public to direct them in th«ir course and to Keep them steady, even to themselves. It is nonsense to «ay that a considerable portion of those who are to be curtailed in their inherent rights are not as able to judge as a considerable portion of those upon whom the right of voting is to be con - firmed. I mynelf am not to be an elector, but I can't bow to the assumption of the Ballot, that because, with many better men, I »m not & voter, therefore I cannoi be an adviser. But whac is the good of the Ballot system, as I have not heard it intimated that it was neceasnry to promote dodging and lying by legislative enactment ? It will not prevent canvassing. It will not prevent guzzling, nor ever has done. It will not prevent bribery, but rather encourage it, or at least gambling; for nothing is easier than to bribe by betting upon the event of the election. But perhaps it will prevent coercion. This is an electoral crimeof which 10 times morehas been made than ever it deserved. It is a fine fund of, and margin ior complaint, where people just vote as they find it to be their wish or interest, and then plead coercion to the other party, aa a set off. Conflicting interests canvasling—oh! coercion is * fine scapegoat, It i> pleaded

in satisfaction to tho party who does not get the vote. It's a fine ground for complaint this coercion. It will cram customers for the shop in -very pity for the poor man who, having voted as his interests led him, couJd plead his injured conscience and harrassed feeling*. Hut what have the high Bpirited electors to do with coercion. Such poor, humble, dependent, wretches as trip tenant farmers, with their many thousands each ot invested capital in the country, and the manufacturers and ahopkeepers of the spiendid cities and towns o. England these are the men, of course, on whom coercion in to be practised. Not upon New Zealand colonists who, when they meet each, other are often too independent to yield the common marks of respect and recognition. Surely the Ministry'are not mad enough to suppose that protection from coercion is wanted here. Yet, in the 9th clause of this Bill No. *, " A Bill to amend the Law relating to the Registration of Voters," they have provided that any person may have his name omitted from the Roll, if desirous, and thus avoid the possibility of being coerced. At the same time, no one wants to put his uame upon the list unless he pleases. By the old electoral laws in England, the fact of a man being a freeholder made him an elector. Here it'« a man's own choice. Altogether, this pie* of the Ballot, as an escape from coercion, is all gammon, and no more. I would most respectfully ask of the initiated, if the whole pretence of Ballot, as a protection be anything else than sheer gammon throughout? And I would further ask the same initiated, if they ever knew vote by ballot to keep secret a man's vote from any one afterwards wishing to know it ? I never heard of such a But I may have somebody proudly announcing, oh ! there are large bodies of men whose votes are taken by Ballot. Yes there are, where all the voters are on an equal footing— where but one or two dissentients are sufficient to stultify the proceedings of the whole body— where private quarrels are likely to ensue from a different mode of proceedure. As, for instance, in the large clubs in London, where the members are all equal contributors to the funds, and where, although the number of members in a club generally exceeds that of any but the largest of our electoral districts, yet one or two black balls are a negative to the motion. Al oin many charitable institutions, where the election of an object or objects ior the charity is te question this is decided by ballot generally, to sa»e time. In these cases, the voters act entirely for themselves, and are in no degree the trustees for any body else (whenever such is the case the votes are open), but here the pnvleged voters are. while they vote as individuals, the trustees for others to * much greater extent. I remain yours, &c, L. S.

April 22, 1858. P.S.— lt is not to be forgotten thftt the public have, at least, as much right to be acquainted with the proceedings of their trustees, the qualified voters, as they have with the proceedings of the House of Representatives or of tho Provincil Council. Secrecy in giving the votes of the one may be followed by secrecy in the acting and voting of the others. This would follow in time, by parity of reasoning, and a capital precedent would be established by the Ballot. Do the people of New Zealand sigh for the establishment of a tyrannous oligarchy ? Ballot is the fiist step to obtain it. Venice talked of liberty and called itself * ftepubiic, with its irresponsible Council often.