131a-039.xml

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.

131a-038.xml

Title: [[131a-038] 1819 May 20 Defence]

Description: [131a-038]

1819 May 20

Defence of the Ballot

Edinb

Ballot

Objection I

In ballot no secrecy

3

3

Follows an abstract of the subordinate position advanced by the learned Reviewer /Gentleman/ in support of the objection here in question: each is accompanied with a short answer. That To give the most efficient check which in the nature of the case can be opposed to misrepresentation on my part, undesigned or /and/ if it be more agreable to gentlemen to say /add/ designed, I shall not be angry – the text of the Review will be found at the bottom of these pages.

1. Proof 1. Case 1. Case of Clubs, where Members are chosen or rejected by ballot. By this means quarrels are indeed excluded: but secresy there is none. Answer. To this case as to every other applies the general observation: if the mode of voting is what it professes to be and might be, certainty as to the truth of any thing that is said about the direction taken by /effect given to/ the vote is impossible. But in small clubs, the smaller the club, the easier are each mans affections known in the loose sense of the word knowledge: the greater is the degree of probability of which a guess in relation to them is susceptible. In respect of numbers how opposite this case is to that in question, any /every/ body who does not shut his eyes will /may/ see.

2. Proof 2. Case 2. Case of House of Commons. Ballot produces not secresy; nor independent choice. This is admitted by J.B Answer. Oh yes that it is. Observation /Answer/ I. the universally applying answer as above: no use in repeating it any more. Answer 2. Neither is this case in point. In the principal case in question the individuals proposed for choice are proposed separately: in that case here referred to, in lists. This being a complicated case, an appropriate modification of the plan in question would be necessary. Answer 3. In this case to the purpose of practice the cause why secresy is not preserved is – that the intention is it shall not be preserved.

3. Proof 3. Case 3. Case of India House Ballots. Per Reviewer, secresy is not here preserved. Reason paid: because not desired to be preserved. Assumption for Reviewer. On this occasion every thing that any body says is true. Per J.B. On this occasion suppose a man who never says any thing about the matter, tell us which way it is he has voted, and how it you know it?

131a-045.xml

Title: [[131a-045] 1819 May 20 Defence]

Description: [131a-045]

1819 May 20

Defence of the Ballot

Objection III – hostile to liberty

Love of Liberty extinguished

10

10

Objection III. Secrecy would extinguish the love of liberty.

Observations.

Oh sad! its end. But the reason is that the fervour /quantity/ with which alone the love of liberty can be kept up would be rendered inapt for the purpose it rendered too little or if that would not do, too great and too little at the same time.

Were radical reform to take place Every man would be indifferent as to every thing on which the comfort of his life depended, whether he were or were not called upon to pay in taxes what he was unable to pay, whether he was or was not insulted[?] for his poverty by one who wallowed in wealth while he had none: whether what was called justice was or was not administered upon terms such that it was in his power to put in for a chance of it whether the state of the laws were or were not such that it was possible for him to know what they were possible to escape being ruined, […?] or put to death although these were the laws to warrant it or for want of being able to know what it was, whether there be any one whom because they or their forefathers bought for money or servility a mass of factitious and spurious reputation /dignity/ found means to enjoy at his expence a quantity of respect to which they had no other title. Thus thinks the learned gentleman; thus at least his ingenuity employs itself in the endeavour to make us think: my lot it is to think otherwise.