date

[mainly in copyist’s hand] 1819 June
[mainly in copyist’s hand]

1819 June 11

Parl. Reform Bill Reasons

Electors Who

Universality

Idiots Brougham

2 June 1818

1

Extract from M r Brougham’s Speech in the Debate of 2 June 1818 on Sir Francis Burdett’s Motion for Parliamentary Reform Resolution Hansard p. 1164

1 But M r Bentham was a real advocate for Universal Suffrage. He was a far more sturdy, and infinitely more consistent reformer than the hon. baronet, as he gave votes not only to all men, but to all women also. He drew no line at all; he weighed not with practical nicety the claims of different classes; he recollected that his principle was universal; he tossed away the rule and the scale altogether, and without restriction, let in all – young or old, men or women, sane or insane, all must vote – all must have a voice in Electing their Representatives. He did not even sanction the exceptions which the hon. Baronet seemed inclined to admit with respect to persons of an unsound mind. The veteran reformer (Major Cartwright) had lately favoured the world with a plan of suffrage, illustrated by plates, where balloting boxes, ball trays, stands, &c &c. in most accurate array met the eager gaze of the much edified enquirer. Now M r Bentham was the patron[?] of the Ballot, and his doctrine was, that all who can Ballot, may enjoy the elective franchise. The moment a person of either sex was able to put a pellet into a Box, no matter whether he were insane, and had one of the keepers of a mad-house to guide him, still M r Bentham said, that though he did not support the utility of allowing idiots or mad persons to vote, for their own sakes, yet, rather than make a distinction, he would allow them, as they could not do any harm, and the unbending consistency

might
Similar Items
  • Title: [1819 June 11 Defence of | | Ballot]
    Description: 1819 June 11

    Defence of | | Ballot against Review

    2

    Broughams Speech

    2 June 1818

    {Now for something that M r Brougham will not deny that he understands something to the force of which M r Brougham will not be insensible.} Loud, and I dare say not more loud than just were his complaints of the undue influence exercised to his prejudice on the occasion of the Westmoreland Election: Electors who if free would have voted for him, forced by terrorism to vote in favour of his competitors the Lowthers. Call the number of those forced votes 1000. Now suppose all force removed and the voters idiot what would have been the consequences. The Lowther would have For Lowther 500: For Brougham 500: thus given to Brougham by idiot votes, 500. For no reason can be assigned why the Lowthers should have got more than half /a majority out of the 1000/ more than why Brougham should. If then the idea of an idiot’s voting in an election is ridiculous, the idea of his success in any contest for the representative of Westmoreland is ridiculous. Under the system of ballot He would carry the Westmoreland Election of the present forced Lowtherites a thousand idiots could be brought up to vote, and he can not carry the Election under the /the existing system – the/ system of terrorism and open suffrage.
  • Title: [[131a-027] [mainly in copyist’s hand]
    Description: [131a-027]

    [mainly in copyist’s hand]

    1818 Dec r 20

    Parl. Reform Bill

    Reasons

    Ballot

    1

    From “A Comparative View of the Constitution” of the United States by W. Smith of South Carolina LL.D. Philadelphia 1796, “printed by John Thompson, and sold by all the Booksellers in the United States

    pp. 18, 19, 20.

    It has often been a disputed point, whether there is greater safety in viva voce or ballot elections. In most of the States, the elections by the people are by ballot. Maryland and Virginia pursue the old english custom of polling; every voter there goes up to the hustings, or place of election, and declares aloud the candidate for whom he votes. It is remarkable, in the Constitution of Maryland, that all elections for the House of Delegates, and for the Electors of the Senators, are to be viva voce, but the Electors are to vote for the Senators by ballot. If the balloting was considered the mode the most free from influence or undue bias, then it ought to prevail in the Elections generally; and vice versa, if open votes were considered the safest, then the electors of the Senators should pursue that mode. The Governor and the Council are elected by the joint ballot of the two Houses, and the Senate supply vacancies in their own body by the same mode: the Senators of the United States are also chosen by ballot. By the Constitution of New York, elections are directed to be viva voce; but the framers of it, doubting the expediency of that mode, inserted the following clause in their Constitution: (See 6 th) “And when as an opinion hath long prevailed among divers of the good people of this State, that voting at elections by ballot, would tend more to preserve the liberty and equal freedom of the people, than voting viva voce: To the end, therefore, that a fair experiment be made, which of those two methods of voting is to be preferred:

    “Be it ordained, that as soon as may be after the termination of the present war between the United States of America and Great Britain, an act, or acts, be passed by the legislature of this State, for causing all elections, thereafter to be held in this state, for Senators and representatives in Assembly, to be by ballot, and directing the manner in which the same shall be conducted. And whereas it is possible, that after all the case of the legislature, in framing the said Act, or acts, certain inconveniences and mischiefs, unforeseen at this day, may be found to attend the said Mode of electing by ballot:

    “It is further ordained, that if, after a full and fair experiment shall be made of voting by ballot aforesaid, the same shall be found less condusive to the safety or interest of the State, than the method of vothing viva voce, it shall be lawful and constitutional for the legislature to abolish the same, provided two thirds of the Members present, in each House respectively, shall concur therein; And further, that during the continuance of the present war, and until the legislature of this State shall provide for the election of Senators and Representatives in Assembly, by ballot, the said Elections shall be made viva voce.”
  • Title: [[mainly in copyist’s hand] 1819 June]
    Description: [mainly in copyist’s hand]

    1819 June 11

    Parl Reform Bill Reasons

    Universality

    Idiots – Brougham

    2 June 1818

    Archb p of Canterbury

    10 June 1819

    2

    Archbishop of Canterbury. “Such would in his sincere and unbiased opinion, be a most perilous experiment, and he implored their Lordships to consider the consequences before they attempted to run the risk. He found only one experiment like it, and which took place in the reign of James the second, when it was attempted to have a Catholic King, but a protestant house of Lords and a protestant House of Commons. Fortunately, the deluded Monarch, under whose reign it was tried, did not succeed; but let their Lordships see what was the attempt now made. It was nothing else than to have a protestant king, with Catholic Houses of Lords and Commons.” (hear hear.)