1819 June 11

Defence against Edinb g Review

Who

1

If M r Brougham is to be believed /According to M r Brougham/ [1] the system of secret suffrage is either impracticable or pernicious or both, because for the reception of the voter Major Cartwrights scheme employs boxes and certain other implements With the same force had he been Counsel against open suffrage he would /might/ have argued that it is bad /a bad arrangement/, because the votes are taken down in books called Roll-books. It rests with them to shew what there is more absurd /greater absurdity there is/ in the use of boxes for this purpose, than in the use of books. As well might he have said Jury trial is an absurd thing: for the place that Juries sit in is a box called the Jury Box. My plan must at least be equally absurd: for I must have one ridiculous box in /out of/ which the candidate names must be taken, another ridiculous box into which they must be put, and a slip of card cut into two ridiculous pieces joined together again by two ridiculous pieces of thread: at which when he sees the description of them, he will find them so effectually adapted to the purpose, that if it happens to him to be of the same mind, though he will /may/ not be much disposed to laugh at them himself: yet in hopes of carrying the scheme of which they form part to be regarded as either impracticable or pernicious, it will be his endeavour to make other Honourable Gentlemen &c laugh.

Well now from all this pleasantry what is the serious inference? I will declare plainly and simply what my inference is and let the reader judge of it. My inference is that all the while M r Brougham was thus arguing against the ballot, endeavouring to make the hearers regard it as impracticable or pernicious or both, he was in his own mind convinced to the contrary: convinced that it was practically /is in its nature[?]/ useful and unobjectionable. For had it been in his power to have produced against any arguments bearing upon the subject – in a word any arguments better than these whether the interest of the public or the interest of his own reputation were considered, would he have hazarded such as these. To every purpose but that of affording a pretence to those who were seeking for a pretence, would not silence have been a very advantageous substitute to such arguments?

Another reason I will give for my persuasion /in support of my inference/. That reason is – that if, M r Brougham is to be believed and in this I do really believe him, it would be or at least would have been for his interest that in the Election in which he was Candidate the mode of voting should be secret.

[1] Brougham’s Speech 2 June 1818