unduly foment political excitement, and increase the expenses of elections, which are already a just ground of complaint. Of late years the popularity of this question has declined, not so much on account of any theoretical preference for septennial Parliaments, as from a conviction that the House of Commons has become accountable to the people, and prompt in responding to their reasonable desires. ballot. The "ballot" is another question repeatedly debated Vote by in Parliament, and a popular topic at the hustings, at public meetings, and in the newspaper press. No sooner had the reform act passed, than complaints were made that the elective franchise, so recently enlarged, could not be freely exercised. It was said that the landlords in counties, and wealthy customers in towns, coerced the free will of the electors, and forced them to vote against their opinions and consciences. As a protection against such practices, the necessity of secret voting was contended for. To give the franchise, without the means of exercising it, was declared to be a mockery. It was not for the first time that the influence now complained of, had been exerted over electors. It had formerly been recognised as one of the natural rights of property. It was known that a few landowners could nominate the county members. They conducted the freeholders to the poll, as naturally as a Highland chieftain led forth his clan to the foray. But now a new electoral policy had been commenced. The people at large had been enfranchised; and new classes of electors called into existence. The political ties which had bound the electors to the landlords were loosened; and the latter, being deprived of their absolute ascend ency, endeavoured to sustain it by other means. The leaseholders enfranchised by the reform act, being the most dependent, were the very class peculiarly needing protection. The ballot had been called by Cicero the silent assertor of freedom,- tabella, vindex tacita libertatis; and it was now proposed, in order to ensure freedom of election. The ballot has been sought mainly for the protection of voters from intimidation and undue influence; but it has also been recommended as a safeguard against bribery. It has been resisted by arguments too various to be briefly reviewed. The strongest, perhaps, is that every political function being publicly and responsibly exercised, and every debate and vote in Parliament published for the information of the people, electors can scarcely claim an exemption from that law of publicity, to which their rulers and representatives are subject. Why are they alone, to be irresponsible? Apart from theory, its practical efficacy has also been denied. It has been said that if intimidation were intended, means would be taken to discover the votes of electors, in spite of all the machinery of the ballot. Nor would bribery be prevented, as a candidate would secure fulfilment of corrupt promises, by making his payment for votes, contingent upon his success at the poll. The advocates of the ballot have, perhaps, exaggerated the advantages of their favoured scheme, while its opponents have magnified its evils and its dangers. It is a measure upon which sincere reformers have been, and continue to be, divided. At times, it has made progress in the number and influence of its supporters. Yet such have been its vicissitudes, that it is still difficult for a political observer to divine, whether it will be suddenly adopted,-in the crisis of some party --- struggle, or be laid aside as a theory for the disputation of pamphleteers, and debating societies. In 1833, Mr. Grote took possession of the question of the ballot; and from that time until 1839, he continued to advocate the cause, in a series of temperate and philosophical speeches, as creditable to his political wisdom, as to his learning and ability. He argued in the calm and earnest spirit of the theoretical statesman; not with the fierce temper of the democrat. His honest labours greatly advanced the popularity of the cause, and improved its parliamentary position. In 1833 he found but one hundred and six supporters1; in 1839 he had two hundred and sixteen." Mr. Grote having retired from Parliament, the question was not allowed to be forgotten. In 1842 Mr. Ward adopted it 3; and since 1848, Mr. Henry Berkeley has made it his own. With ample stores of fact and anecdote, and with varied resources of humour, he has continued to urge on the question, year after year; but without increased support. In 1848 his motion was carried by a majority of five." In 1849, it was defeated by a majority of fifty-one: in 1852, by a majority of one hundred and two; and in 1860, by a majority of one hundred and seven. Such reaction of opinion, upon a popular measure, is more significant of ultimate failure, than a steady position, without progress indeed, yet without reverses. Since the reform act, the qualification laws,-which Qualificain different forms had existed for one hundred and fifty years,-have passed away. It was ostensibly to cor 1 Hansard's Deb., 3rd Ser., xvii. 608-Ayes 106, Noes 211; Ibid. xxviii. 369; Ibid., xxxiv. 781; Ibid., xxxvii. 7; Ibid. (1838), xl. 113. 2 Ibid., xlviii. 442-Ayes 216, Noes 333. 3 Ibid., lxiv. 348. 5 Ayes 86, Noes 81, tion Acts. rect the evils of bribery at elections, that property in land was first proposed as a qualification for a member of Parliament. The corruption of boroughs being mainly due to the intrusion of rich commercial men, without local connexion, the natural jealousy of the landowners suggested this restraint upon their rivals. In 1696, the first measure to establish a qualification in land, was received with so much favour, that it passed both Houses; but the king, leaning rather to the commercial interests, withheld his assent. In the following year, a similar bill was passed by the Commons, but rejected by the Lords; who had now begun to think that a small landed qualification would increase the influence of the squires, but diminish the authority of the great nobles, who filled the smaller boroughs with members of their own family, and dependents. The policy of excluding all but the proprietors of land, from the right of sitting in the House of Commons, was at length adopted in the reign of Queen Anne', and was maintained until 1838. In that year this exclusive principle was surrendered; and a new qualification substituted, of the same amount, either in real or personal property, or in both combined.2 In 1858, the law of property qualification was abandoned altogether. In its original form, it had been invidious and unjust; and, from its beginning to its end, it had been systematically evaded. It would probably not have survived so long the jealousies from which it had sprung, had it not been invested with undue importance, by radical reformers. But when the repeal of this insignificant law was proclaimed as one of the five points of the "Charter," it is not surprising that 19 Anne, c. 5; 33 Geo. II. c. 15. 2 1 & 2 Vict. c. 48. 3 21 & 22 Vict. c. 26. more moderate politicians should have regarded it as one of the safeguards of the constitution. Since the passing of the reform act, various minor Proceedings at amendments have been made in the electoral laws. The elections registration of electors has been improved and simplified1, improved. the number of polling-places has been increased2, and the polling reduced, in counties as well as in boroughs, a single day. Even the Universities, which had retained their fifteen days of polling, were glad to accept five days, in 1853. Promptitude in election proceedings has further been ensured by the change of some ancient customs. The prescriptive period of forty days between the summons of a new Parliament and its meeting- enlarged by custom to fifty days since the Union with Scotland, --having become an anomaly in an age of railways and telegraphs, has been reduced to thirty-five. Another ancient custom has also given way to a more simple procedure. By a recent act the writs for an election are addressed direct to the several returning officers, instead of passing through the sheriff of the county.5 form. A more general revision of the representative system, Later meaas settled by the reform acts of 1832, has also been sures of rethe aim of several administrations, and Parliaments. For some years, there had been a natural reluctance to disturb the settlement which those important measures had recently effected. The old Whig party had regarded it as a constitutional charter, and contended for its finality." But their advanced Liberal supporters, after many discussions in Parliament, and much agitation and "pressure from without,"—at length prevailed over 66 1 6 & 7 Vict. c. 18. 2 6 & 7 Will. IV. c. 102. 3 5 & 6 Will. IV. c. 36; 16 & 17 Vict. c. 15. 4 By Lord Brougham's Act, 1852; 15 Vict. c. 23. 5 16 & 17 Vict. c. 78. |