date

[131a-028] [copyist’s hand]
[131a-028]

[copyist’s hand]

1818 Dec r 20

Ballot

2

The electing by Ballot has long prevailed in New York, and still continues.

By the constitution of Pennsylvania, it is declared, (2d. Sect. 3d. Act) “That all elections shall be by ballot, except those by persons in their Representative capacities, who shall vote viva voce”. This is the very reverse of Maryland, where the Electors are appointed viva voce and afterwards in their Representative Capacities vote by ballot. The most prevailing mode of electing, viz, by ballot, is believed to be the safest; the fear of giving offence to powerful individuals, to relations, friends, and even to distant acquaintances, frequently induces the giving a vote, viva voce, which, by ballot, would be given for a more worthy object. Voting by ballot removes all restraint, and leaves the voter perfectly at liberty to follow the dictates of his own conscience and judgment. The argument in favour of the other mode is, that it creates a greater responsibility, and lays the voter under the necessity of voting for men of approved worth and merit; he would be ashamed, it is said, of publicly bestowing his vote, for personal friendship or any improper influence, on a worthless object: but this reason has been found by fatal experience to be more plausible and solid: Mankind, when determined to do wrong, too readily find arguments to justify themselves in their own eyes. Besides, it frequently happens, previous to an election, that clamors are unjustly excited, and rumors wickedly circulated against one of the Candidates, who, though not the most popular character at the time, is the most honest and able man. The friends of his adversary will propagate, with unbounded zeal, every thing they can to his disadvantage: this, for a while, will create a certain prejudice, which time, reflection, and better information would remove. Under these circumstances, may well-meaning voters, if they voted viva voce, would be restrained by timidity from voting for this seemingly unpopular-candidate, though at the same time they might be satisfied, in their own minds, that he was the most deserving of their suffrages: they would either stay at home, or vote for the favourite of the moment, whom they despised. In all popular governments, some idle men of the worst characters, and with the worst views, calling themselves “the people”, will, at particular junctures, set up a loud clamour. Peaceable men, who remain mush at home, attending to their business, are alarmed, ignorant either of the source or extent of this clamour, and often suppose both to be more important, and of much greater magnitude, than they are afterwards discovered to be:– Were they to vote openly, under these circumstances, few would have nerves enough to resist the popular current: for their personal safety, they would be compelled to sacrifice those opinions, by which, in a ballot election, they would honestly abide.
Similar Items
  • 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: [[131a-006] 1818 March 22 +]
    Description: [131a-006]

    1818 March 22 +

    Parl Reform Answer to Antiballot Observations

    2 o

    5

    5

    2. By the evils, which, in contradistinction to the above political evil, I would in conformity with the Antiballotists distinguish by the appellation of moral evils, I understand the morally evil effects of those causes, by which, under the open mode, the political evil abovementioned would as it seems to me be produced.

    That which, for the purpose in question, I assume, and as above, can not but assume, is – that under the open mode the suffrages given would to an incalculable extent, be productive of an effect opposite to the wishes and thence to the interest of the voters. If not free the votes are not genuine[?], and if not secret, they can not in general be free.

    1. But in so far, as it would be productive of an effect opposite to the wishes and interests of the voters themselves, it would thence be an injury done to the voters themselves: if on this occasion the word right is to be employed it would be productive of a violation of their rights.

    2 Moreover, under the most extensive system capable of being included under the denomination of universal suffrage, each voter will, in respect of his vote, be acting in two distinguishable capacities: viz. that of a principal, possessor of a personal right of his own, directed and properly directed in its exercise to the advancement of his own personal interest; and that of the possessor of a trust-right; to which, as to every trust right, is attached a duty: a duty to be performed for the advancement of the interest of those for whom the trustee is in trust.
  • Title: [[131a-039] 1819 May 20 Defence]
    Description: [131a-039]

    1819 May 20

    Defence of the Ballot

    Edinb

    Ballot

    Objection I

    In ballot no secrecy

    4

    4

    4. Per Reviewer. Universal suffrage men would not keep their own secret. Per J.B. General answer – it would not be in their power to break it. The talk which the Reviewer has in view what is the time of it? Is it before the act of voting? there is no act to tell of: nothing but the sort of intention a man chooses to profess. Is it after the voting? To this case alone is the general answer applicable or needful.

    5. Per Reviewer, they could not if they would. Per J.B. Oh yes they could: any or all could: and at the worst at no other expence than that of a self-preserving untruth, such as a man would tell to another who should want to know where a barrel of gunpowder is kept that he might set fire to it. But even such untruths are better prevented than uttered For /As to/ the proposed means of prevention, see above and below.

    6. Per Reviewer. The secret would be betrayed by the mode of voting. Yes; if contrived for the purpose of making known what it professed to conceal: as in Honourable House, as above: and this whichever side had the choice of it..

    7. Per Reviewer. By secrecy at the Poll tumult in previous meetings would not be prevented. Per J.B. Be it what it may in itself, this objection is here out of its place: the objection to be proved is – not that the secrecy would if attained be productive of inconvenience, but that it is unattainable. The practice will be answered in its place.

    8. Per Reviewer. In the canvas, affections would be betrayed. Per J.B. Neither is this position in its place, except in so far as the general answer applies to it. Canvassing and voting are not the same operation. Voting may exist without canvassing, in several of the United States it does so. Canvassing will be considered in its place.

    9. By ambition, the leaders, though or because they were but petty tradesmen would betray themselves. Per J.B. General answer, as above. Such of them as choose to betray themselves do so: the Reviewers conclusion is they would all do so, whether they chose it or no.