General Assembly.

Lyttelton Times, Volume X, Issue 598, 28 July 1858, Page 4

General Assembly.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Thursday, July Bth, 1858. vot-e- by ..ballot. Mr. Richmond moved the second readme of the "Regulation of-Elections Bill;" He would -not detain the House by any lengthened speech •as tne subject was one which had been so thorough, y canvassed, that nbthijjg more could be said about it; and feeling as he did that on such a-quesuqn hon. members would not feel disposed to give a silent vote, he was not disposed to keep ■4hem bpttled up any longer t!,an necessary Pie desired that the views of the Government should not-be misiiiiuerstood on .this subject, ana th?t tiie present measure should not be coupled with principles which they had no desire to entertain Hs believed that generally speaking the House was agreed on the great subject of electoral reform (hear, hear), aad he wished to say a few ■words on the different position of the colony and -■Uie mother country, with reference to such m-a-

sures as the present; that difference they were too apt to forget. The physical character of the colony was very dissimilar—for instance, the seasons are reversed, the sun rose on the right

side of the heavens in the same reverse way; and there were other obvious differences of ihe same nature, and the same distinction was exhibited in a great measure, in political matters. He believed that the colony should take England for its model, but discriminate between their relative position and circumstances. Open voting was a practical question, and as such the Government intended to deal with it—although by so doing they might incur the charge of inconsistency. They had already been accused of blowing' hot and cold; well they should continue to do so—they should still persist in blowing their cold fingers with their hot breath, to warm them, and blowing their hot broth with their cold breath to cool it (laughter); for he would remind the House that things were relative—and therefore consistency depended upon the point of view from which questions were regarded. Their object, was to apply principles, inVact this was the meaning of responsible government—it was founded upon the law of right, and was an expression of the matured opinion of the country, not of a single individual. It was an embodiment of the law of truth, right, and justice; he might call it a divine law so far as it was possible to discover such a law in reference to a question of this kind and, there fore the Government desired the expression of genuine individual opinion in that House in order to discover the general opinion of the country. He would not detain the House by enumerating: the judgments in favor of the ballot, as no doubt they were familiar to most honorable members, but he would content himself with simply . pointing out a few of the practical benefits of , secret voting1. In the first place, it would be a protection for individual opinion—which needed protection ag-ainst the undue pressure of many, andagainst those American tendencies to which all the British colonies are naturally exposed, and which have exerted considerable influence upon the political opinions of young legislatures. They felt it- necessary to protect individuals from the influence of turbulent politicians; for they might imagine men entering into the political arena, men ready of speech, unscrupulous in. principle, determined in character, invading the rights and sanctities of private life —and by threatening position and extensive influence, intimidating and preventing individuals from exercising the privilege of the franchise, according to their conscientious convictions; and by such means, that which was at first the minority 1 might become the victorious and domineering j majority. The ballot would also tend'to check ! the influence of faction; party feeling being in a great measure kept up by the cry of consistency —for when a man has attached himself to any particular party, he will adhere to it at any risk or sacrifice, to preserve what he calls his consistency; which has been correctly designated as the principle of little minds. Secret voting would certainly tend to discourage this party faction, and although he did not anticipate that the ballot would put down bribery and corruption, yet it would oppose a formidable obstacle to the practice of treating, and ihsy would not see, as under the present system, the disgraceful spectacle of a voter reeling about, hocussed by copious instalments of brandy and water, and holding in his hand a voting paper which had been filled up for him, aud giving it in to the polling clerk, utterly regardless of his right or the value of the privilege he was called upon to exercise, unless indeed some person in the interest of the rival candidate should take the paper from him and substitute another in its place. He should not go into the merits of pros and cons which might be urged on either side but merely state his conviction that the balance of arguments was in favor of the ballot. By means of it they would be enabled to throw an agis over those who needed protection. He might remark; that the Government did not consider this measure one of vital importance, or to involve any radical principle, had they done so they would have felt it their duty to make it a ministerial measure. They siraslv " considered, that it would be found, under present " circumstances,-a useful and salutary measure , for New Zealand. -

Dr.llosEO would say a few words in reply to the^ Colonial Treasurer. He entirely disagreed witn that hon. memberin supposing the present measure did not involve any radical principle; for he considered that it was a question of great importance, involving a great principle which lies at the very root of the British Constitution It was not a mere question of how a man was to vote. The hon. member had pointed out the distinction which exists between England and the colony he had referred to several physical differences, and had warned them that they should not blindly follow the home country bnt he would remind him that however much countries might differ in physical aspect, vet human nature was always the same. He quite agreed that they should follow the example of the home country; for there was no country in the world whose example- was more illustrious, or whose institutions could be copied more safely: and it was for that very reason he entertained so strongan assertion as -he did to secret voting. It had Jeen said that with the ballot persons would fEk «°»™* influenced by mere friendly feelings. Certainly men should go to the noil divested of such feelings, but it any influence were exercised, sure that of friendship was ?he least objectionable. But there was anotne? STt? matterr men sometimes vo?ed under the -influence of dislike and private pique andtnis feeling might be freely gratified under tne ballot system, and such men^m ghtrejoice in the opportunity thus afforded them wheh was a evil than that of frienSy iXence. He was prepared to urge a few arguments io^he^f^^".?- Thi ™ a queitioTas to tne expediency of putting down the svs^em of canvassing f or votes . £ *? e J^n election as stupid an affair as tVy S S n«' but after having accomplished hayS \Z .Sol> f ,lnsti*«tions would they cfse tVoi? c,?". te"ded. * ! at men could not exerust their political privileges and have the sys

■: tern of secret voting at the same time—the operation of such a system was entirely incompatible with the exercise of political freedom and independence. It had been said that it would protect men from the influence of those in authority, or having control over them; but [ he would" ask were there no other means of disi covering men's political principles than by kaov.iug how- they voted? If the system were to be carried out, and men wished to take advantage of secret voting, their whole life would need to be a secret; and how in that case could there be any free discussion or political life and energy? But there was another objection,— the system would lead to and encourage falsehood." He could conceive of a man who might wish to conceal his opinion, protesting and speaking white until he went to deposit his voting-paper, and then voting black; it would thus fead to hypocrisy and dissimulation, Perhaps it might be said that some men were so dependent that unless they voted secretly, they would not be able to exercise the privilege at all. In that case he contended it would be better for them not to vote at all, rather than secrecy; for it was far better that there should be general freedom of opinion, and some exercise of undue influence, than that they should sink into a state of political stagnation. Messrs. Brown, Daldt, and Capt. Cargill, opposed the bill.

Mr. Hall could not give a silent rote on a subject of much importance, and he should bring forward a few of the stock arguments which had been spoken of, and he did not see that the hon. Colonial Treasurer had brought forward anything else. The subject had been under discussion many years, and nothing new could be cited on either side. He maintained that the franchise was a public trust and not an individual right and the exclusive property of the voter, and he thought it would be admitted that if non-electors had not a positive right to know how men gave their votes yet it was expedient to make it public. The trust committed to public servants in Courts of Justice and other Government establishments was exercised openly, and why should we not do the same. There was considerable difference between the principle of balloting in clnbs and the present one; the former was an individual right, while the latter was a public trust. The hon. Colonial Treasurer had quoted from M. Guizot but he had not followed out his argument, for that distinguised author says, if from circumstances open voting be made too difficult. His first argument was that it would check intimidation. He (Mi\ H) agreed with the hon. member for the VVaimei in thinking that duties might be made too easy and pleasant. Those who exercised the privilege of the franchise should be taught to regard it as a trust""tOtr~SaC7rc-<3 — fco-r-hc—sacriiiccck—cor-a- . little intimidation' as generally speaking. But he denied that there was any necessity for such a precaution in this country. The idea of intimidation was generally speaking a mere idle dream, or if such cases did occur they were generally greatly exaggerated—in fact it was a mere bugbear. The hon. Colonial Treasurer had admitted that the ballot would not stop the practice of corruption. Andif not likely to do that, he would ask the Government to reconsider the fact that, although a candidate could notunderthe ballot be'quite sure that an elector would give him his vote under the influence of bribery, yet there would be every, probability of his doing so tosuchahigh degree of probability as to warrant the candidate in exercising his corrupt influence. I Again there would be another kind of bribery introduced by secret voting—it would be exercised on the result of the election; a certain j number of persons might unite to procure the ! return of a particular candidate, and might thus introduce far more extensive corruption than at present exists. And then, the ballot-boxes would be in the possession of certain parties for a considerable time, and there was no guarrantee for their integrity or protection against corrupt influence. Another objection would be, the encouragement of-hypocrisy so far as the ballot took effect. A man might be in so dependent a position-that he dared not express his real opinions but professed directly opposite views to those he held until the last moment, and then in voting falsified all he had previously asserted; and thus, by the ballot, a man was to ba protected in a system of life-long hypocrisy. Certainly it might also protect those who were sincere and conscientious—but in any case it would undoubtedly protect the hypocrite, and that class he did not wish to see protected. But the ballot would also throw distrust and suspicion on all those who voted at an election (hear, hear), and those feelings would be introduced, and cause great evils in society. The experience of America was certainly opposed to secret voting, and Mr. Tremenheere, whom the hon. Colonial Treasurer had quoted, declared that the repudiation of the State debt in that country, which was so great a blot upon its reputation, would never have been carried but for the system of secret voting; and that gentleman totally conj demned the ballot.

Mr. Richmond merely cited that author to show what was secret or what was open voting; and the practical abandonment of the former. Mr. Hall objected to the particular machinery by which it was sought to carry out the system —it was most complicated, and in country districts he believed it would be found to lead to inextricable confusion. The writing out of the names on the voting papers would entail a very heavy and almost impracticable duty upon the clerk. Australia might be cited as an example of the working of the Ballot, but there was no experience there; the shortness of the time it had been in operation did not warrant them in drawing any conclusion on the subject. For the reasons he had stated he should vote against the bill. ■ ■ . •

_Mr. Cahletok would not weary the House with a repetition of arguments on the subject. He felt a kind of personal antipathy towards it, and should vote against the measure. Mr. Moor house opposed the measure. He belie%-e(l that most honorable members had long ago made up their minds on this question. He had done so about twelve years ago, when he attended the meetings of a certain spouting society, when this subject amongst others was pretty f'uliy discussed. His reasons were, that if a man was invested with.a public trust open voting- would be some barrier againat the extreme

danger there was of abusing it. He ■would even go further than public voting, and would compel every man to record his vote, and would attach o heavy penalty to the neglect of'this duty. He would have a public officer appointed, who should register the name of every man entitled to vote, and who should he authorised to compel the recording of votes. 'Secret voting would have a tendency to demoralise the public mind; and he considered that every man should be encouraged to vote openly and publicly, which tend to produce that manliness and independence of opinion which was necessary under tree institutions, and to tea.eh their political obligations to the community at large. He trusted the measure would not be carried.

Mr. Lkb should vote for the ballot, although it seemed probable that he would stand alone, and the measure be rejected—but,if so he considered it'would only be for a time, as the measure would be found indispensable, under the present circumstances of the colony. Mr. Ward thought that although this had been called a 'stock' subject, and no novel arguments could be adduced, still it was highly proper that on so important a matter every reason which could be urged on one side or the other, should be brought forward, that the subject might be thoroughly ventilated. (Hear). He was not up in the 'stock' arguments; in fact, the proposal of the ballot in this couutry was quite fresh to him. The first intimation of it had reached Canterbury only a" few days before he left that province, and he could assure the House that it had been received there with general feelings of indignation. (Hear, hear.) That expression of feeling must be regarded as most important, as coming from the electors themselves, to whom the pretended benefit of secret voting was addressed. The* great objection felt in the province alluded to was that it was 'Un-English.' (Hear, and laughter) He expected some hon. members would laugh at this word, several times repeated during the debate: it conveyed more sound argument and was capable of a clearer explanation than those who laughed at it seemed to suppose. In England the system of secret voting had been strongly urged by a certain party; it had received lengthened and full discussion, and debates in Parliament had thoroughly sifted and exhausted the subject. Still it had been rejected; he might say the consolidated sense of England had pronounced against it, and not less at present than in former years. (Hear, hear.) The evils which the ballot was meant to cure which were only intimidation and undue influence at election, were far more rampant in England than in this colony, where accordingly the introduction of that system of voting was far less desirable.(Cheers.) But in another sense the proposition -before. the_Hou.se was • Un-English.' It was contrary to me -spirit- of.English statesmanship, adverse to the practice which has always wisely guided the eminent law givers of the mothercountry in dealing with the constitution to introduce any change without a pressing necessity. For ordinary laws which Parliament might be called on to pass it was generally sufficient to show that their object was desirable, and that they were calculated to obtain that object,—but in changes affecting the constitution, the axiom ■was • Quieta non movere,' there, was a wise reluctance to take any step in alterations unless urgently and almost universally demanded from without. Now no such universal demand had been made for the ballot ; in fact it had been stated in the course of the debate by one of the members for the province of Auckland that in that province, for whose especial benefit this innovation had been contrived, no demand had even been given vent to by the . electors for its introduction. Under such circumstances he could not but say that the Government had acted improperly in bringing in the bill, and he would add that except in the special position in which the house consented to place- them, ministers could not have ventured to propose the measure without standing or falling by it. It was agreed as a general rule that a ministry .should.-not resign except on a vote equivalent to want of confidence, and he cordially approved of such a course. He did not therefore blame them for leaving this an open' question, and so leaving members free to vote against it—but in any other legislature, where: there were the materials of forming a second' Ministry, the Government would not venture upon a proposal so important as this without staking their existence upon it. (Hear, hear.) As to the practical application of the ballot, that of it 3 effects upon elections little need be said in addition to what had fallen from previous spea- > kers. The ground upon which its introduction was urged was the corruptness of election practices m certain places; but those practices which the ballot pretended to correct were simply intimidations and undue influence, while the real evils were those which, the purification of the rolls, the 'Corrupt Practice Act' would prevent ! Taking that case which the Colonial Treasurer had supposed for illustration of his argument the elector stupified with drink, and allowing his voting paper to be filled in by a friend of one candidate, which paper, if the drunken elector reached the booth without further interference would form a vote in the favor of that candidate without the knowledge of the elector, perhaps contrary to his wishes, if sober. This supposed case would be met in various ways without the ballot In the first place, bribery and treating Inn rf £* PTSha^ le ' aIJ publicans' influence would be T destroyed by the other acts of the ' series (Hear, hear.) Then.it might be made competent to a returning officer to refuse the vote of a drunken elector. (Hear.) But in addition he would suggest that the written paper ffi « f°i iabi? to misuse should be abolished, £ ♦•* . \ English vivd voce vote should be substituted, where no falsification of the elector s meaning could be attempted. (Hear, and Oncers.) In fane, the cause of most of the excite- ' ment and improper practices at elections was the : strong set of public opinion either in one direction or towards one of two or more parties. The large number of ignorant electors under our free institutions, and the activity of some unscrupulous men perhaps acting upon them, increased the evil attendant upon what we otherwise rejoiced in; but it was idle to think that the ballot would stop that, or check the current of popular feeling which always decides an election. The ballot had been proposed in England as a theoretical

plan of counteracting certain evils which op nrefi sed the poor elector, and, \ e rather thought been adopted by certain\colonial lenri«i,f chiefly as affording an oppo.tunl ty C££g£? cinq a novelty—something rtmark-ihi« ju~ be talked about-into tlillr Sadon "t,* 0 adoption of a system of secret vu,i ne . " „l ™ a stigma upon the electors of thev>inn • eyes of the world, and he sincerelvS V\i the vote of the house this evening wC that vent the stain from attaching itself to us'ri? re" hear.) ' v^-ear Mr. Weld said that the Government had si mitted the introduction of this measurp V 1 matter.of expediency. He believed tW - England the main principle had been that S\ public political discussion, and that to attend \ to import secret voting into such a svatem » P a complete fallacy. * tcm Was Mr. Haultain would support thr. m^o because he believed that cSpt wac£?"*' elections had caused the met EnSS anTdf moralizing influences to be exercised over n" large part of the community. It had bPPn •'? that these influences wereWd on tlTe^ ranee of the people ; -then so long as sudi ' ranee existed-and consequently the Jvils £" Sof m lt '~so iong woukl he -pptt aS; Mr. Williamson had thought much, on *i • subject while in England, and had at i?,? 8 cided in favor of the ballot with considerate luctance. He did not believe that the!Si,! * the majority in England was against the "ballot It had been said that the poorer clas^i!, were not so liable to influence as those at ho™ but it was not this class which was so ,2 aftected in the colony as that respectable claw of retail dealers and tradesmen who were deum dent in a large measure upon merchants and wholesale firms. Many instances might be cited of intimidation and improper influence bein" exercised over this class. H e knew j nstanc "* himself in which voting-papers had been for warded to parties, enclosed in the business en" velopes of a large firm, and when the unfortu" nate creditors saw them they were supposed to contain the account which they were not ore pared to meet, but on finding that they contained only voting-papers, these individuals were glad enough, to purchase so cheaply -i tern porary relief from the pressure of their liabilf ties at so cheap a rate,—although very likely entirely in opposition to their consciences - He believed that vote by ballot would effectually check such disgraceful occurrences Mr. Ollitier said it.was his intention to vote against the bill. He questioned the propriety of its adoption, although he would admit that there were circumstances in the recent experience of Auckland and Wellington which might perhaps justify its introduction. He would give Go vernment great credit for the consideration winch they had given to the entire subject of electoral reform, for the bill before them was OnX?. nS a SerieS} the great ob Ject being to establish a system which should obviate the necessity for years to come for a reform agitation. That object would be as well attained without this bill as with it—the bills for the prevention of corrupt practices and for the purification of the electoral roll were in themselves sufficient to meet all the wants of the colony It, had been said that freedom of individual opinion was characteristic of the mother country, but his experience of the past led him to a different conclusion. Theoretically it might be true; practically was the reverse; and in proof of this assertion he would ask them to bear in mind the fact that a small volume (Dodd's Parliamentary Companion) would disclose. Under the head of certain boroughs, it was said this borough was the property of Lord This or Mr That, while it was as well known that tenants* on the estate were forbidden to vote otherwise than as the steward required; it was so upon pain of ejectment. The ballot was called for in England to protect electors from such inflnences as those; it was called for to control an overpowering money influence. Sydney Smith says, the abominable tyranny of the ballot is, that it compels men to conceal their yotes who hate concealment; but concealment in England was only needed to protect the voter from the tyranny of wealth. A great deal had been said about the public trust which electors were called upon to discharge in recording their vote. He thought that the franchise was a man's individual voice in the government of his country as a tax-payer he had a right to say to whom he would delegate the power of imposing taxation by the distribution of public money, and for which he would be called upon individually to contribute. In this light it was a personal question; it carried with it a duty of selecting trustworthy men; but he saw no ground for the argument that he was necessarily bound to discharge this duty openly, if he preferred to do so privately In the exercise of this choice the elector had a right to demand protection, and so tar as he could understand the question, interference with that right proceeded from the overriding influence of wealth. Check the influence; check and punish the briber; and you destroy the occasion for concealment. It was argued that electors felt that they had a claim upon persons for whom they voted, and the ballot would destroy this imaginary claim; but among men who in this colony were for the first time ! enjoying electoral privileges, he had found a great number of instances of persons who deemed the power to vote a privilege and eagerly sought tor direction as to the mode in which they should best discharge the duty; they would willingly , be led by those in whose judgment they placed confidence, and felt grateful for the guidance. There were of course instances of persons standing, aloof, of, "trimmers" (men who waited to see which way the majority tended); they were hangers-on to the successful parties, and voted accordingly, but happily they were few in number. Was it necessary to introduce the ballot to remedy such an "abuse as that? Might it not be productive of greater evils than those they sought to remedy? He should be glad to see a clause introduced in the " Conduct of Elections Bill," forbidding the publication of the state of the poll until its final close. This would effectually balk the "trimmers." Quotations, hod been freely made from Tremenheere and others. He would hazard one from a writer whom every one would acknowledge as an authority upon whatever subject he wrote—Sir J. Macintosh:— •

"If the ballot should be thought a less offensive mode of voting against an individual than the voice, this slight advantage is altogether confined to -those classes-Jof society who have leisure for such fantastic refinements, But are , such influences likely, or rather sure, to act on the two million voters who would be given to us by universal suffrage? Let us examine them closely. -Will" the country labourer over avail •himself of the proffered means .of secrecy?- To believe this, we must suppose that he performs the most important act of his life—that which most flatters his pride and gratifies his inclination—without speaking of his intention before or boasting of his vote when he has given it. His life has no secret. The circle of his; village is too small for concealement. His wife, his children, his fellow labourers the companions of his recreations, know all that he does, and almost all that he thinks./ Can anyone believe that he can pass the evening before or the evening after the day of election, at his ale house, wrapt Tip in the secrecy of the Venetian senator, and concealing a suffrage as he would a murder? If his character disposed him to secrecy, would his situation allow it? "'■■".. .••:•/■'•

—That extract was convincing to his mind that secrecy was hardly likely to exist, even with the ballot. Apart from the principle itself, he thought the mode'proposed by the bill for recording the vote most '.complicated and objectionable; its very complications would ensure failure. If he was required to declare his opinion upon a system, lie ; should prefer, with his honorable Mend, the member for LytteltoiVthe viva voce vote. . STotliing could be more objectionable than the voting paper, as at present used, nine-tenths were filled.up for the voters —those who could neither read nor write were not unfrequently victimised by designing advocates of a party. He did not believe that either Returning Officer or Poll Clerks would be open to corrupt influences—but suppose it probable, the Corrupt Practices Bill fully provided for their punishment. He should vote against the bill, believing thatits introduction was uncalled for and premature.

Mr. IToesaitbc supported the bill.

Mr. Tatloe saw nothing in the bill to prevent a man from voting openly if he wished it. He really could. not understand how the old"ProgressvlParty "could vote against the measure, it Was a proof "that they were retrograding fast.

Mr. IPj^ckek thought that both sides had been faifly heard; he himself would not be able to vote with the ministry—he wished he could (laughter). From his own observytion during the session, he had discovered what he conceived to be two currents in the House—the Auckland current and the Middle Island current. In the Middle Island there is. no occasion for this measure, they heard very little about bribery and corruption there, and such a bill therefore would be needless. He believed that ultimately the ballot would be adopted in England. He would suggest that it should not be forced upon the whole ,colony; but that if any particular province needed it or requested its benefits might be conferred upon them then let them enjoy it. He "believed from all that he had heard that Auckland needed it very much. Well, he would say they had a right to have it, and any other place where it was expected, to work beneficially. Mr. Staseobp had not expected to hear any new" arguments on the subject and he was not disappointed. He had listened with great pleasure to the speech of an honorable member who had just arrived amongst them, Mr. Ward, and be believed that gentleman would prove a great acquisition to the House, but he had certainly been, guilty of some imprudence in taunting the ministry with their moderation in not making the present bill a ministerial measure. It had been said that friendship would frequently" cause a man to vote for a candidate against his •convictions; but he would remind them that enmity -was a far more powerful feeling than friendship: the latter was comparatively passive, while the former would not scruple at any means to attain its ends; and it was from this principle that protection was needed. Your enemy would glory in open voting, to show, his enmity towards you, while your friend would be comparatively indifferent "about the matter. It was argued that there could be no political pro-; .gress without open voting; he entirely disagreed: with that opinion, for whatever system of election was adopted, men would always be found to express their political feelings freely and openly. : Another said that it would teach deceit, and liOrd Jeffrey had been quoted in support of the argument; "but it should be remembered that people might differ on that question, and that they had not to deal with a nation of Lord Jeffreys. The hon.. member for the Waimea had said that nature improved by contending with obstacles: well, physicaL nature > did, but the rule did not hold good in many cases; —he might point to Russia in the North-of Europe as an instance of the contrary, where the people nad to contend with great difficulties of soil and climate, and position, and yet were sunk in a state*of semi-barbarism; while from the sunny land of -Greece, when nature had supplied every >vant, there :had sprung some of the most enlightened and patriotic nations the "world had seen. .A.S a proof of the inconsistency of the arguments pursued—it had been said that.the people of England did not need the ballot: what did hon. members say then: to,the "People's Charter," -which required 14 carts to take it to the House of Commons, and had a million and a half of signatures attached to it—at all events, a vei-y large number, even after allowing for the fictitious -'Dukes of Wellington, and others. He believed that a-large proportion of the English people "wished to see the ballot established, and the present bill was intended for those who did want it. The hon. members for Canterbury seemed to "view the matter through a greenspectacle medium; the fact was, they had no experience on the subject. But let,them not suppose things would always go on so smoothly and swimmingly with them as at present^ besides, Canterbury was but a tenth part of the whole colony. As to what had been said of "a life-long hypocrisy," he believed there were few men who would not express their opinion and say for whom they voted, as for instance in the case of the contest which took place some time since between Colonel Wynyard and Mr. W. Brown for the Superintendency. He would conclude by saying that the probable effects of the, measure were generally

greatly exaggerated—hon. members seeming to suppose that some unknown evils would arise from the measure. He would give one reason in support of it; he believed it would have a very powerful effect in one way, it would remove many men from undue influence, who desired to vote freely but had not the power to do so according to their consciences.

Mr. Richmond had scarcely any argument to answer except that of the hon. member for Lyttelton. That hon. member and others had said they were at a loss to understand why the measure had been introduced. He (Mr. R.) would state under what circumstances they introduced the bill. The Governmeut had bound itself to remedy the corrupt state of the electoral law; in doing so they had to consider that part of Sir George Grey's Proclamation which related to the conduct of elections, and they were led to frame the present measure from a consideration that the present circumstances of the colony warranted such a system. The Government, in framing this bill, had looked forward to the future position of the colony; its present tendencies were decidedly democratic; possibly things might take a good turn, and the many-headed monster be restrained within his legitimate bounds; but he believed that the measure would yet be called for and would yet be carried by a majority in this House. (Hear.) The question was then put, and, upon a division being called for, the following was the result:— ■-'■,'■ Ayes—ll. ifoes—l4. Mr. Beckam Mr. Brown Brodie Carleton East - Cargill Haultain Curtis Henderson Daldy Lee Graham Merriman •■-■ Hall Richmond Moorhouse Stafford: Monro . Williamson Packer Forsaith (teller) Taylor Ward Weld Ollivier (teller). After some routine business, during which several bills were advanced a stage, the House adjourned. .