date

1819 Oct. 5 Parl. Reform Bill
1819 Oct. 5

Parl. Reform Bill

Reasons

§.5 Election Apparatus

§.8 Election how

Art. Secresy

5

5

5

In the open mode, the will of the Elector is exposed to the influence of will in both kinds at the hands of all persons in whose power it may be to cause him to receive evil in any shape, or to cause him to receive good in any shape, and to the number of persons so circumstanced, there is no certain limit: nor yet to the quantity of evil and of good which amongst them it may be in their power, as also in their inclination to cause him to receive: nor therefore to the force with which this sinister influence – for such surely it may be called – is capable of being made to operate.

In the secret mode he may be, {and is of course} {compleatly and effectually} preserved from all influence of the intimidative kind. For not having any possibility of knowing in whose favour a Voter has given his vote, neither Candidate nor Candidate’s friend nor any other man can have motive or inclination to cause him to receive evil in any shape on that account /for that cause/: the evil he can not but see[?] may be just as likely to fall on a friend as on an enemy. From other sources a man /candidate/ may have reason in abundance for concluding the voter to be an adversary: but none at all from his vote.

In the secret mode Voters may /will/ in great measure be preserved from influence of the corruptive kind For to the exercise of influence in this kind expence is for the most part necessary: and as in other cases so in this expence will generally speaking not be incurred without a reasonable certainty of an equivalent. By secresy of suffrage alone against the effect of influence in this kind freedom of suffrage would therefore in great measure be prevented /preserved/: namely in the same way that /by the operation of the same causes by which/ influence of the intimidative kind would so effectually be {prevent} preserved.
Similar Items
  • Title: [1819 Oct. 8. Parl. Reform Bill.]
    Description: 1819 Oct. 8.

    Parl. Reform Bill.

    Reasons

    §.5

    §.8

    Art Secresy of suffrage

    II Oppression or Conclusion

    3

    Never does a man lose an election /the loss of an Election take place/, but the seductive influence of the adversary is the cause: the seductive influence, partly in the corruptive, partly in the intimidative shape: but more particularly the intimidative that being the more tragical[?] shape, by which the image of men’s antipathies and through antipathies sympathies are most stirred.

    Well them will you have both excluded at once? will you have the secret substituted to the open mode? Oh no – not so: for then would the influence of property would be removed /excluded/ altogether: the influence of property the legitimate influence: for all influence howsoever irresistibly intimidative: all intimidative influence which is the influence of property is legitimate. Issuing from this source is Intimidative influence absolutely bad? Oh no: it is bad or good according as it is applied. Applied in favour /support/ of the Tories /a Tory/ – oh yes says a Whig it is bad indeed: applied in favour /support/ of a Whig is it then bad? Oh no, nothing can be better: it is employed /operates/ in favour of men of probity, and the only men who are so. Whatever is most bad if acted against us and ours, is most good if acted in support of us and ours. /is most good./ We are the salt of the earth. Not measures but mine are to be regarded. We are the only men: the only men who deserve the name. This is one grand maxim: this is one creed.

    See Fox’s History. : and Earl Greys speech in his motion on the State of Nation June 1810.

    Suffrage open or secret: say which you will have? This question – this is the spear of Ithuriel. At the touch of it, with not less agony than the most outrageous Tory, the Parliamentary Whig writhes.
  • Title: [1819 Sept. 18 Parl Reform Bill]
    Description: 1819 Sept. 18

    Parl Reform Bill

    Reasons

    §.9. Election Process

    Suffrage secret why

    Analysis

    10

    If he does not yield to it /to the intimidative force/, either the evil apprehended by him is actually made to befall him or it is not. If it is, here then whatever the amount and shape of it here is so much evil that in consequence of the preference given to the open over the secret mode actually takes place: say evil of sufferance, still there may remain and commonly will remain an evil, and that a very serious one, the fear, the apprehension of being made to sustain this same evil of actual sufferance. A tradesman suppose has a hundred customers, whose wishes, as he knows, all concurr in favour of a certain Candidate: the voter gives his vote against that candidate. These same customers may or may not any or all of them give him subsequently to this his vote less of their custom than they did before. But be this as it may, what they would do is al all times more than he can know: here then is a continual stream of anxiety flowing into his breast from all these hundred sources.

    Another thing. So far /If/ as the direction in which the influence operates is not only conformable to the direction which the wish of the voter would take were there no such influence but universally known to be so, the influence as above observed is of no effect, and in this open mode every thing is upon the same footing as if it were in the secret mode. True: but this is what can not in any instance be certainly known to any body. What is the consequence? that, in many instances, the sinister influence to the operation /action/ of which the voter stands by his situation exposed being visible to all eyes, the consequence is that while acting freely /with perfect/, a man is generally supposed /regarded/ supposed /regarded/ by an indefinite number of persons, as acting in conformity to such external influence as having been either bribed or intimidated or both at once.
  • Title: [1819 Sept. 18 Parl. Reform Bill]
    Description: 1819 Sept. 18

    Parl. Reform Bill

    Reasons

    §.9. Election Process

    Suffrage secret why

    Analysis

    9

    The voter Being thus exposed to sinister influence to the influence of will on will from without, {this influence is} either of the alluring kind, or of the intimidative and thence in case of prevalence coercive: and in each /either/ case he either yields to it or does not. /in some cases no such influence is applied /applies itself/ to him or is supposed by them to apply itself to him In so far as this is the case all is well: every thing is in this open mode upon the same footing as if it were in the secret mode If any such influence does apply itself to him, the direction in which it applies is either conformable to that taken by his internal wish, or unconformable: if conformable and known to be so, it is again without effect and in this open mode every thing is upon the same footing as if it were in the secret mode./

    If it is of the alluring kind and he yields to it, the result is the public evil the evil to the universal interest as above mentioned. But in this case to the individual there is no evil: on the contrary there is a good: and in so far as this good has place, by the whole amount of it a compensation is made to in his instance (this individual being as large a part of the public as any other is) for the public evil.

    If he does not yield to it, then all is right: upon the open mode every thing is upon the same footing as upon the secret mode: and nothing better can be said of it.

    If it is of the intimidative kind, here again either he yields to it or he does nor yield to it.

    If he yields to it, here then is a sense of injury a sense of oppression. Here then is a somebody by the fear of whom, that is of evil from whom – he is induced to sacrifice to the wish of that somebody his own wish: his own wish, and with it not only what in his own opinion is his own interest but what in that same opinion is the public interest: and thus to do what is morally wrong, even in his own eyes.

    Moreover his own uninfluenced wish is the wish to which by the act in question – by the act of thus giving his vote, he declares himself to have given expression. But by the supposition the declaration thus made is untrue. The law of sincerity is thus violated by him: and of its being so he can not but be conscious. Such is the degradation to which by fear of the individual in question – by fear of this terrorist, he has subjected himself.