date

1819 May 23 Defence of Ballot
1819 May 23

Defence of Ballot

Under Ballot no secresy

Argument

1

What /That which/ his object makes it necessary for /to/ him /requires him/ to prove is 1 that men in general do not care /not/ a straw about their interest – do not care /not/ a straw what hurt they do to it – do /care/ not care a straw whether they are ruined or no and that for the credit of being thought to have ruined themselves they are generally speaking ready to do so. 2. that what every man must upon a moments reflection see that it is utterly impossible he should know or so much as give a rational guess at, every man generally speaking will believe. This /such[?]/ is what, finding /seeing/ that nothing is to be done without it, he scruples not to charge himself with To keep man from seeing the absolute untenantibility[?] of these notions on any ground of reason his expedient is –and it is the only one which the nature of his case left to him – his recourse /expedient/ is by which he is asserting over and over again the very thing in dispute, to raise and keep up a cloud of dust, composed of words upon words, that so peradventure the discernment /eyes/ /attention/ of his readers should be drawn off and prevented from attaching /fixing/ itself to /upon/ the true points.

In the execution of this plan so successful has he been this supposing this eloquence to have been spoken spoken for example in the House of Commons or at a London Tavern or Crown and Anchor great room, it may be difficult to say by whom by what proportion of the hearers the torrent of it might have been effectually resisted Unfortunately for its /his/ purpose the only theatre in which an opportunity could be found at pleasure for displaying it was a theatre /an imaginary one/ in which nothing is heard but every thing read and read at leisure: and thus it is that it remains exposed /subject/ to exposure and will remain so at all times /to the end/ so continue. Of the difference in this respect between what is to be heard only and what may be read, of the incomparable advantage given to deception and every deceiver by the fugitive mode of communication in comparison of the everlasting one, no man can be more truly sensible: hence the pains[?] we shall see him taking to render the act of reading an object of great[?] aversion and disgust, and the deep game he is content to play for the chance of rendering it so
Similar Items
  • Title: [3 March 1817 Plan Cat 2 o Note]
    Description: 3 March 1817

    Plan Cat

    2 o Note?

    Introd

    §.7. Virtual Universality

    V […?]

    2

    Look for p.1 of this.

    The mob led by Wat Tyler and Jack Straw chose Wat Tyler and Jack Straw. The mob of

    Naples led by the fisherman Massamillo chose Massamillo: continue the string of examples

    as long as you please. Good /True/. Tyler, Straw and Massamillo were thus chosen: chosen

    but for what? for sitting in an assembly of 700 men against[?] a majority of whom

    neither good nor mischief could be done? No; but for procuring temporary relief and

    revenge at the expence of a Monarch by whose tyranny they had been plunged into the

    depth of misery: and because no higher man would undertake to lead them. Even then by

    John Ball – the Reverend John Ball with whom their leaders consulted they would have

    been led in preference. Would they not M r[?] […?] […?]? but, he being Reverend, neither by John Ball neither for plunder nor

    battle, the only occupations of the moment, by John Ball would they be led.

    At Naples where on another occasion insurrecting against Spanish Tyranny | | a man of

    the population followed as /taken for/ a leader, for the reason was he chosen there

    because there was no other man of higher degree able and willing to take his place. In

    stept the Duke of Gleese[?] /a Duke/ without army or attendance, and the plebeian was

    deserted.

    Among the followers of Tyler and Straw how many were there that could read? Not one:

    how many were there who for instruction had access to any body that could read? unless

    to the Reverend Ball, not one. And the Reverend by /from/ him what could have been read

    by which for the conduct of public affairs any instruction could have been drawn? Not

    any thing. For as to the Bible – a school not a guide not quite so appropriate for

    modern politics as for religion – questionable enough may it be whether he had ever seen

    one.
  • Title: [[131a-045] 1819 May 20 Defence]
    Description: [131a-045]

    1819 May 20

    Defence of the Ballot

    Objection III – hostile to liberty

    Love of Liberty extinguished

    10

    10

    Objection III. Secrecy would extinguish the love of liberty.

    Observations.

    Oh sad! its end. But the reason is that the fervour /quantity/ with which alone the love of liberty can be kept up would be rendered inapt for the purpose it rendered too little or if that would not do, too great and too little at the same time.

    Were radical reform to take place Every man would be indifferent as to every thing on which the comfort of his life depended, whether he were or were not called upon to pay in taxes what he was unable to pay, whether he was or was not insulted[?] for his poverty by one who wallowed in wealth while he had none: whether what was called justice was or was not administered upon terms such that it was in his power to put in for a chance of it whether the state of the laws were or were not such that it was possible for him to know what they were possible to escape being ruined, […?] or put to death although these were the laws to warrant it or for want of being able to know what it was, whether there be any one whom because they or their forefathers bought for money or servility a mass of factitious and spurious reputation /dignity/ found means to enjoy at his expence a quantity of respect to which they had no other title. Thus thinks the learned gentleman; thus at least his ingenuity employs itself in the endeavour to make us think: my lot it is to think otherwise.
  • Title: [1819 June 5 Defence of | | Ballot]
    Description: 1819 June 5

    Defence of | | Ballot against B.

    1

    All the advantages that belong all that can be supposed to belong – to universality, equality and annuality of suffrage are grounded on the supposition, howsoever tacit, of the genuineness, as, when the whole of the population comes to be considered that of the genuineness is on that of the secresy of the voters. If genuineness, if secresy – are really not capable of being secured then Reform – Reform on the Representation – is not capable of being effected, and ought to be given up as hopeless.

    {I can suppose a man insincere if it be he regards secresy as unpreservable before the impossibility which in certain circumstances there is of its not being preserved has been explained to him and read by him, not afterwards.} Suppose a man to say I do not think in my view of the matter secresy of suffrage can be preserved if at /to before/ the time when he says this, the impossibility which under the circumstances in question there is of not being preserved has not been explained to him and read by him, in this case it is in my power to believe him to be sincere: it is not in my power in the opposite case.

    For, once more, my saying to a man It was for A.C. I gave my vote, is not letting him know how I gave my vote: it is only letting him know what I said /say/ as to my giving my vote: and, though the truth be that it is for A.C. that I gave my vote, yet if so it is that the man I am speaking to did not at the time see or otherwise perceive to whom it was /that it was to A.C/ that I gave my vote, no perception does my assertion give him of the fact: it is but my assertion; nothing more.

    To