Hebates in General Assembly.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume 1, Issue 45, 31 July 1858, Page 3

Hebates in General Assembly.

THE BALLOT. In ttie House of Representatives, on Thursday, July 8, on the order of the day for the second reading of the "Eegulation of Elections Bill," the question of the ballot came under discussion.

Tue Coloxia.li TEEiSTJREH opened the debate, grounding his main argument in favour of the measure on the necessity of eliciting and protecting the genuine expression of individual opinion. He treated the question as a practical question, denying that any abstract principle of right requires that voting should be open, and citing Guizot in support of iais position. On the fundamental principle, that the franchise is a trust and not a property, he declared his cordial agreement with the opponents of the measure, and pointed out that prominence was given to this j view in tho Governor's speech. The freedom of individual opinion, menaced by tho democratic doctrines of America, and by the tendencies of all societies on the American model, he declared to be essential to the right development of Eepivsentative Government, which, according to its true idea, was not government according to tho will of the many, or of the few, but Government according to the Divine and Electoral rule of Right, so far a3 that rule was discovered to the consciences and apprehended by the understauding of thoso to whom the suffrage is entrusted. The great danger in a colonial community was, that individual opinion would be overborne by the will of a real or apparent majority. He con: tended that the Ba^ot would support ths weak minded against the intimidation of turbulent, professional politicians, and would dimmish the influences of faction and class prejudice, and of that false pride .which induces a pertinacious atiherance to party opinions, in spite of conviction ; that it would do away with treating (though he admitted it might not prove effectual agrinst bribery) ; that it would give no opportunity to the Trimmers, who under a system of open voting, rush in to swell the majority of a victorious party ; and that the suffrage would be exercised with less reference than at present to private motives. On the whole thei'e was fair ground for the belief that the balance of advantage, in this country, was in favour of secret voting. Dr. Monbo contended that secret voting would lead to political secrecy generally, that it would interfere with the free and open discussion of public questions, and would consequently be fatal to political intelligence and political progress. He maintained that if men were afraid of the consequences of voting, it was better that they should not vote at all, than vote ■ secretly. While they abstained from voting, they might nevertheless ! take an active part in the discussion of public questions, and contribute to the formation of a healthy public opinion : but if they were to vote in scc/et, and if secrecy was to be of any use to I them, their whole life mustbe an act of political concealment, perhaps of hypocrisy. He argued i ttat the franchise was a public trust, not an individual right, that it was to be discharged openly, and that there' was no obligation; on the state to protect the holder of it from the consequences | of his vote; That it was not desirable (even if possible), to make -things too easy ; ■ /that >a . certain;; ■amount of difficulty aiid opposition and danger • Ibrought out the i higher quaUtiesofhumaa natttre,t \and e th)it this law was truereqTially.'ia^the physical;; ,and;the ..iri^rai ; world;; ajad applying, this lawYtb/ lie thought that a knowledge of possible?

injury from the conscientions exercise of his privilege would encourage and develope on the part of the voters generally, a feeling of responsibility and independence. He admitted that the ballot would probably be conservative in the first instance at all events. By conservatism in this country, he meant a state of society which offered no field for the exercise of the clap trap of the demagogue. But he considered it a false and self destructive conservatism. The basis of deinagogism was ignorance. They should seek to remove that by school instruction, and by those processes of education wliieh were found in the acquisition and engagement of property, and above all in the amplest exercise of local self government. These were the foundations on which to rear a healthy and lasting conservatism ; as to any conservatism, as to any secret practices among people of British origin, he utterly distrusted them. He thought them opposed to the genius of British Institutions, and not only empirical, but most mischievous.

Mb. Beowtj stated that, generally, his political intimates had been in favour of the ballot ; still he did not consider that any necissity had been shown for its introduction ; while so far as his own Province was concerned, he had no reason to believe that the electors had any desire to do secretly what they would not do openly. The hbn. member pointed out the fallacy of an argument used by the Colonial Treasurer, who had attempted to institute a parallel between the use of the ballot in clubs and in constituencies ; the one having reference to private companionship, the other to public duties. If a parallel were to be drawn at all, it would rather be between the use of the ballot in the esei*cise of a public trust by constituencies, and in the exercise of another public trust by the members of that House. If the principle were good, the Bepi'e3entatives ought also to vote by ballot, instead of openly dividing. But no one would seriously propose such a change as that.

Me. Daldy pointed out the difficulties that would arise in the application of so complicated a system to our numerous voting places, and argued that at out-stations corruption would be infinitely facilitated. He also observed that in place of having to bribe many voters, a candidate would now have only to bribe one poll clerk. The hon. member, however, laid the greatest stress upon the fact of the ballot not having been demanded by the people of the country. There had been no manifestation of feeling in favour of it.

Mb. Hall contended that, a3 the franchise was a trust to be exercised for the benefit of the whole community, it should be discharged in the face of the entire community. Experience showed that publicity, such as this, was the most efficient check upon the abuse of trusts, and the best modern legislation was based upon this idea. He thought it wiser to train the people to a clear appreciation of the value and importance of this ti'Hsfc,- than endeavour to remove every possible inconvenience from its public discharge. Intimidation, in this country, wa3 not to be apprehended. Bribery, it was admitted, would not be di minished by secret voting, which would introduce evils of another kind. To be useful to a voter, it must entail upon him an abstinence from political discussion, or constant hypocrisy. The experience of Trance was against it, that of America still more so. The hon. gentleman quoted from Tremenhere to show that secret voting did exist in some of the States, and had there led to repudiation. Australia could not be quoted, as the ballot had only just been introduced there. Mr. Hall then described the machinery proposed by the Government, which he declared to be so complicated as to be unworkable in many districts.

Mr. Cah:letox, after showing that the Colo-

nial Treasurer was not thoroughly acquainted with the American system, argued that the Ballot would only alford increased facilities for corruption ; that protection -was not needed for the -working classes, for Jack was not only as good as his master li2rc, bus; better. It would not protect the master, nor would it protect the man who desired to give an open vote, lest he should be accused of breaking promise ; it would only protect the man who desired to play false. But he would not permit himself to dwell upon mere practical considerations, where there was a principle at stake. He protested, as an English gentleman, against a measure whose object was to enable men to dissemble with impunity. His own time had been spent, for years, in lersecuting untruth, whether in the person of a Governor, or in the persons of those who professed, or to speak more strictly, pretended to profess a higher calling. He was called Quixotic, but should still persevere, and never rest until he had shamed something like truth into the .colony. And in accordance with the course he had hitherto pursued, he should give his vote against a measure which essentially implied deceit.

Me. Waud joined in the objections to the ballot. It had been rejected by the Imperial Parliament though strongly urged from without, and after the fullest ventilation, had been condemned as an un-, wise innovation, unsuited to the circumstances of the country. The evils at which it aimed, intimidation and undue influence in elections, were less to be feared in this colony than in the mothercountry. The lion, member argued that the introduction of the ballot was contrary to the spirit of English constitutional changes ; that such an essential alteration should be shown to be not only desirable, but necessary, and urgently demanded. But in fact the proposition was received with indignation by that portion of the public with which he (Mr. W.) was acquainted, and had not even been suggested by. the elections of the province to which it was deemed most" applicable. In every sense this measure was "un-English." He added that under any other circumstances than those in .■which the present government stood with respect to the House, a measure of such importance could not have been introduced to the Legislature without involving in its rejection, the resignation of ministers.. : . , .. = '"■"

I Me. "Win*, instead of entering into all the arI guinents that might be adduced for arid 'against the measure, contented himself with stating what. ?luid-; I b'eOT j '(ie'deoic^g l^poirit/ :^iu"' : liis~OTi^.-..niind;',' He believed the' House would agree with him, that EngUsh .principles shouldbe.our guide landnnodel. 1 -JButtheppUti^;^ ftoba^t sh^Vis^^

an element of secrecy into a system the very essence of which was publicity — to do away with the responsibility of the voter to public opinion. He for one had no faith in patent schemes and pet projects for patching up the old constitutional edifice by elements foreign to its nature, taking out a stone from its foundation and putting in a brick* Neighbour ing colonies might do so, if they thought fit, but he preferred looking to England. He. knew his lion, friend the Colonial Secretary, with, whom he so generally agreed, was prepared to laugh at the somewhat hackneyed word "unEnglish," but he was sure that his hon. friend was, the last man who would propose anything he might think at variance with English Oonstitu-. tional principles ; he would adopt the word because its frequent use showed that it represented. a principle in the mind* of nun, and should vote against the bill, because it was at variance with, tiiat principle of openness vrfiich was so essential to free instihitions, because in fine it was "unEnglish."

Me. Wiixiamsox supported the ballot, on tl egrotind of protection being required for voters, giving a number of instances which canu within his own knowledge, where undue pressure had been exerted.

Mk. OiiiiTiEit, after mucli reflection,. had resolved, to oppose the introduction of the ballot : his ob--jeetion to it was based solely upon the belief tliat it was premature. The ballot was alleged to be called for in England to protect the masses against the tyranny of wealth and an overpowering aristocratic influence. But New Zealand had no such influence at work ; all she had at present to complain of was impurity in her elections, — the result of treating, bribery, personation, and the like. If these evils were corrected — and that he contended, the other bills in the series -would correct — then there would be no necessity for resorting to so objectionable a practice as the secret vote. Ho. agreed in the opinion which Sir J. Macintosh had. put forth, on the improbability of accomplishingsecrecy in voting, lie objected to the mode in. which the Government proposed to give effect to the ballot ; he thought it would fail by reason of it 3 intricacy. At the sumo time he confessed ho had no sympathy with tb.3 arguments which had been used against 'the ballot; it might be "unEnglish," bub so also were the practices which, demanded its introduction.

Mk. Fohsaith said, that the objections raisedby lion, members who opposed the Bill appeared to be either sentimental or theoretical. Ke waa disposed to view it as a practical question. He could not agree with hon. members who asserted that rote by ballot wa?, in principle, essentially "un-English." It certainly was not the practice at present in England, but there were growing indications of feeling leading to the supposition that it might ere long be brought into practice. There certainly was nothing in the principle itself repugnant to British institutions. Changes in political affairs, quite as great as would be the introduction of rote by ballot, had been introduced during the last half century in England ; and it might with equal propriety hare been urged by those at the lime who objected to these changes, that they were "un-English." Fifty years ago, it would have bsen "un-English," in this sense, to advocate the repeal of the Corn Laws, or thrt a couple so disposed ought to be permitted to got married in a Methodist chapel. He had no sympathy with sentimental objections. The present system was admitted to be fraught with many evils. He was net prepared to say that the bullet would cure them, but he believed that the change would not make matters worse, on the contrary, it would in all probability cure some of the evils at present coin plained of; and, if the measure were found not to work, it would be easy to return (o the old system. He should therefore sup--, port the motion. Mr. Statfoed mainly confined himself to reply.. He had not expected to hear any novol arguments adduc-erl, and certainly had heard none on either--side. The question had been maturely considered by the Government before the Biil was drawn ;- and he believed that the ballot in certain cr.ses presented considerable advantages over the present system, although it was never pretended that it would ensure complete perfection. Th 3 hou. member argued against the old woi*n-out assertion, — that the bailct would necessarily engender deceit or suppivs-j political discussions. The leaders of public 'opinion would always openly declare their opinions, and the mass of (.lie electors would adopt or reject opinions without reference to themode of voting ; but when they did vote, they should be relieved from improper influences. 2\o. deceit or hypocrisy need bs practised by any elector, bccaus3 it was not known Low ha voted. He might simply be silent on tho matter, and need not be guilty of falsehood. Nor was the unmanly objection more tenable ; on the contrary, an elector would feel he was doing a mere unmanly thing when compelled, from fear of the consequences if he did otherwise, to vote against his conscientious convictions. The hon. member, after commenting upon the references that had been made to Lord Jeffrey and Sir James Macintosh, stated that the legislatures of two provinces, Nelson and Wellington — the latter unanimously — had memorialised for it, notwithstanding theassertion of hon. gentlemen that in this countryit was not wanted. He admitted that nothing conclusive could be proved from the example of - America or Australia ; as" in the former country the ballot was not in practice, secret voting;, in. the latter country its introduction was of too recent origin. He believed the result of such a mode of voting had been jrreatly exaggerated, either way — that by one party it was regarded with., undeserved dread, as a horrible monster, while by the other party too much wa3 expected of it. "ißEei.; himself, on the one hand saw no ground for? dread; but on the other hand he did not belieya that communities could be made virtuous byActs_ of Parliament. Still he thought the experiment!, worthy of a triaL ';.'•-.- ■

J The question -was then put and upon a division:^ being, calledtfor, the following ; vraa the result :~ Ayes 11 :— Messrs. Bectham,: Brodie, ."..E^st^;^ ;Haultaini: Henderson, Lee, Merrimani.Mchiiibiid^^ ; Stafford, Wlliamson, Foßpitb,;-rtelle^.3 «"J!l's^ \i i Noes 14 JSrbyrai ; ; Cailetbny;|> : Gai^]li;'z fCurtis/ Daldy,:;<3h^ bt iballbl; a6i»rdmgly^^atitfei^; S:^ ; ; &■£&