date

[131a-020] 1818 March 22 +
[131a-020]

1818 March 22 +

Parl Reform Answer to Anti-ballotist

2 o

19

19

But canvassing is mentioned:– and how (it may be asked), how, upon your plan, under all these prohibitions is canvassing to be carried on? I answer – to every useful purpose, just with as much facility as at present. Every person, who either proposes or wishes to support a Candidate, will be just as much at liberty as at present to declare his opinion of that same Candidate:– to commend as many candidates as he pleases – to discommend as many candidates as he pleases. But, that which is not by any means necessary, is – that to this purpose he should declare to whom he means to give, or to whom he means to refuse, his vote. Why? because betwixt the time of the commendation or discommendation altered[?], an event that has nothing at all improbable in it is – that of his seeing reason, and very sufficient reason, for altering the prior intention respecting his vote.

Still, as a farther security against Election tyranny, a declaration to any such effect may likewise be included under the prohibition: the use of it is – to prevent would-be Election tyrants, from forcing their dependents, by declarations of this kind to give additional and undue weight to the opinions declared by them, and at the same time in a sort of indirect way to put to others the question how do you mean to give your vote? – tell me this, or it may be the worse for you.
Similar Items
  • Title: [[129b-396v] 22 Octob. 1810]
    Description: [129b-396v]

    22 Octob. 1810

    Parl. Ref. Plan

    Ch. 2. Catechism

    § 14 Election inconveniences

    28

    1

    { ☞ N.B. This order is here[?] changed

    Question or 1. What are the means that promise to be most conducive to the prevention of the inconveniences attendant on Elections.

    Answer. They are these following, viz.

    1. Causing the title /right/ of each Elector to stand on so clear a footing, that, unless a forgery be suspected, it can not be open to dispute.

    2. Delivering his vote /Causing his vote to be delivered/ in such a manner, as, not requiring him to stir from his own home, shall /strikes[?]/ of all expence on the score of conveyance.

    3. Prohibiting Candidates from visiting Electors at their own homes or elsewhere for the purpose of canvassing, i.e. asking for their votes

    Question | | or 2. By what means can the title /right/ of each Elector be put on any such clear footing?

    Answer. By ordaining that the cause of title shall be /consist of/ payment made for the last half year of a sum of money not less than so much, to a certain tax or set of taxes – suppose the assessed taxes: and that the evidence of such title shall consist in a duplicate receipt signed by the Collector; on which duplicate shall be written according to a form already printed upon the paper, called a Voting paper, the name of the Candidate for /in favour of/ whom the Elector intends thereby to give his vote: whereupon the Voting paper, being filled up according to a set of directions, printed thereon in forme[?] of a border or margin and being directed to the Returning Officer for the Electoral District, shall be transmitted to him by the post.}
  • Title: [[131a-013] 1818 March 22 +]
    Description: [131a-013]

    1818 March 22 +

    Parl Reform. Answer to Antiballotists

    2 o

    12

    12

    In regard to this distinction of honour – in regard to the punishment that would be inflicted by it – what (it must be confessed) requires here to be considered, is – that the only persons to whom it applies are the Candidates themselves: the Candidates, by whom, or to or for whose benefit it would be exercised. – {the candidates themselves to wit such of them and no other as at the time in question will feel /concur/ themselves unpopular to such a degree its[?] thought of by the people /electors/ to such an extent – as to stand in need of the said tyranny then exercised.} But the Candidates themselves (it will be observed) {all Candidates popular and unpopular together} are but a minute portion of the whole number of persons, by whom, but for such preventive as the open mode does not present, and the secret mode does present, this tyranny would – for the benefit of Candidates or even without a view to such benefit – be exercised: exercised, perhaps without its being known to the Candidate, at any rate without its being known that he knows it. By how unlimited a multitude of persons – agents, private friends, or neither agents nor friends, but merely man of the same party, or in the same interest – in support of one and the same candidates – may not the tyranny be – for continually, and to a prodigious extent is it not – actually exercised?
  • Title: [[131a-018] 1818 March 23 +]
    Description: [131a-018]

    1818 March 23 +

    Parl Reform Answer to Antiballotists

    2 o

    17

    17

    Of an intimation of this sort the effect would frequently be – the acting in subserviency, to, and giving effect to, Election tyranny. To no good purpose could any such intimation be necessary. For giving expression to whatever opinion it may happen to a man to entertain, or to wish to express, strange indeed it will be, if the whole quantity of times anterior to that of his giving his vote will not be quite sufficient.

    To compleat the emancipation of the voter from Election tyranny, a prohibitive clause, inhibiting this practice will be altogether necessary. To the person on whom the prohibition is imposed it can not be a hardship: on the contrary, in so far as he stands exposed to influence by yielding to which he would go counter to his own wishes, it can not fail of operating as a relief. Accordingly, any intimation given to any such effect, the law should declare to be an act of complicity with Election tyranny, the person who is guilty of it, an accessory – an accessory after the fact – to Election tyranny: an accessory after the fact, but not so as to require for conviction proof of the principal offence. For punishment his name might be entered in the Black book: entered in that reproachful book, but without being gazetted.

    Evidently enough, in this as in every other case, where it is really a man’s wish to avoid doing a thing, at the same time that it is the wish of some person under whom he is in any respect in dependence, that he should do it, a prohibition inhibiting him from doing it is – not a burthen but a relief. Nothing can more effectually free him from the irksome influence: after this, a question – how did you give your vote – would be an insult – it would be a command to committ an offence, and that a dishonourable one: it would be to say to him – you are that sort of person who to ingratiate yourself with me, or save yourself from any resentment, unjust as it would be are ready to committ a dishonourable offence.