date

1819 Nov. 15 Benthams Radical Proposed
1819 Nov. 15

Benthams Radical Proposed Addenda for 2 d Edition

75[?]

2

If case of an admission to make such entry, no act done by any person in consequence of such appointment shall be void, but the omission of culpable is a punishable misdemeanour; and to every person suffering harm in consequence, the delinquent is moreover responsible in {the name of} damage.

3. Wherever any act is required or permitted to be done /performed/ at a certain Office, an obligation is thereby imposed on the Office-bearer, and on all persons acting under him, to do what depends upon them respectively towards the performance of it: and on failure to suffer as above.

III. An Election Agent appointed either by a majority of the Cocertifiers whose names are signed to the Recommendatory Certificate, given in favour of a proposed Member, or by the proposed Member himself: in which case he becomes a Candidate. When a Candidate he may revoke any appointment made of an Agent by his Co-certifiers. Of every such appointment and revocation a memorandum shall forthwith be entered on the books of each Polling District.

No proposed Member shall appear /be present/ at any Polling Office during / the/ Polling time / day/ or on the day last preceding. No proposed Member shall in person solicit any Vote. ( )

(a) Reason. Appropriate aptitude is not in any point promoted, encreased or proved by any such personal solicitation
Similar Items
  • Title: [[clxvii. 89] 1821 March 23]
    Description: [clxvii. 89]

    1821 March 23

    Rid Yourselves

    Anti Constitut

    Corruptive influence

    .. "nor solicit for another. What? A Member of the Cortes would he have no means of giving the King or any person in his dependence to understand that the appointment of such or such a person a son of his suppose to such or such an employment would be agreable to him? no means other than solicitation performed by himself and in express words? A female to whom service in that shape in which sexual desire is ministered to is a source of subsistence, does she never employ any means of making /it/ known her readiness to render that service, other than by making the tender of it in express terms?

    This a bar to corrupt obsequiousness? Is it not rather a mask? But if a mask, what a transparent one! Is there a child in leading-strings /school boy/ that ought not to be ashamed, if found to have been deceived by it /covered with shame if detected in having been deceived by it/?

    What then is it that by this article is forbidden? yielding to corruptive influence /prostitution/ in this shape? Not it indeed: all that is forbidden is the express offer of his services to the corruptor's use.

    Can not solicit - a Deputy can not solicit. And, suppose he does make any /some/ such /a/ solicitation of this kind /has solicited/, what is he /in what can he be/ the worse for it? Is the appointment void? This is not said. Nor could it have been without injustice and absurdity: for were such the consequence, supposing a man about to be appointed to any such situation, it would be the power of any adversary he had in the Cortes, by so easy an act as that of soliciting for him, to prevent his having it.

    The solicitor is he, for such his solicitation, in any way punishable? /The act - the act of solicitation - is any punishment appointed for it? None whatever of no punishment on this occasion is any intimation to be found./
  • Title: [1818 April 24 Parl. Reform Bill]
    Description: 1818 April 24

    Parl. Reform Bill

    Text 1 o

    V. Penal Securities

    Election falshood

    2

    2

    1. Persons by whom, or in whose favour, Election falshood in respect of a

    Vote-conferring certificate is capable of being committed are

    1. The proposed Voter or say Certificate-man in whose favour the Certificate is given:

    2. Any Certifier or, forasmuch as there are several of

    them, say Co-certifier, who, by means of his signature, has

    concurred in the giving of the Certificate.

    2. Persons, by whom, on the occasion of the Recommendatory Certificate, required to

    be given in favour of a proposed Member, falshood is capable of being committed, are

    – the persons, or any of them, by whom such certificate is signed.

    Persons by whom forgery by fabrication, forgery by subornation, and /or/ forgery by

    utterance are capable of being committed are

    1. A proposed Voter – or an accomplice of his, forging the handwriting of a

    Certificated man, or that of an alledged Certifier

    2. A proposed Member or his Agent authorized or not authorized in the character of

    suborner /respect of a subornation/ of the forgery, or utterer of the forged document

    /utterance/.

    3. A proposed {viz} Voter or proposed Member, or any Agent or adherent of them

    respectively, un respect of the forgery of the pretended signature of the proposed

    Voter, or a proposed Co-Certifier of his title to vote.

    4. Any person forging the signature of an Election Clerk or any assistant or deputy

    /substitute/ of his

    Persons by whom without forgery fraud may be committed

    5. An Election Clerk, or any Assistant or Deputy /Substitute/ of his, by delivering

    or causing to be delivered to any person a Voting Card with the signature of any such

    Clerk, Assistant or Substitute for the purpose of its being dropt into a Voting

    check[?] by a person by whom no Vote /govern[?]/-confirming certificate duly signed

    has been delivered in to /at/ the office of the Election Clerk.
  • Title: [[copyist’s hand] 1819 Oct. 3. 1819]
    Description: [copyist’s hand]

    1819 Oct. 3. 1819 Nov 4 Not now

    §.3. Eligible who

    Art 3. No fewer than 6.

    ( ) (Six Certifiers – twelve) Art 3.

    Question 2. Why limit the signatures to so small a number as twelve.

    Reasons.

    1. Avoidance of Miselection

    The greater the number, of those among whom, in case of a recommendation given in favour of a proposed Member more or less conspicuously deficient in respect of any of the elements of appropriate aptitude, the reproach is shared, the less sensibly it is felt by any one: suppose them to mount for example, to hundreds – and amongst them in a large proportion men of distinction, man will be apt to feel little solicitude on this point, and may concur in giving a recommendation in favour of a proposed Member who in his (the Recommenders) own opinion possesses no place. By secrecy of suffrage, as per §.8. Voters themselves are it is true preserved from all sinister influence: but be the case of Recommenders | | that security can not be extended.

    If, in favour of the person in question, Recommenders in so small a number as six can not be procured[?], in the first place, scarcely can there be much probability of appropriate aptitude on his part; in the next place what is still more decisive – still less can there be any probability of his obtaining a majority of the Votes.

    So, if neither from his own Stock, nor that of all his unheeded supporters put together, he can obtain, in lieu of all Election expenses on the part of Individuals, so small a sum – say as £120.