COMMITTEE. [Progress, 20th July.]

HC Deb 21 July 1871 vol 208 cc89-102

Bill considered in Committee.

(In the Committee.)

Mode of taking the Poll

Clause 3 (Regulations as to polling).

MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCK

proposed, in page 4, line 43, to omit the words, "or other mark," sanctioning an alternative mode of marking the ballot paper.

MR. W. E. FORSTER

said, that he would consider the matter on the Report.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCK

moved an Amendment in page 5, line 6, to leave out the words, "so as to show the stamp or mark on its back." He said that the sub-section would, by requiring the voter, after marking on the ballot paper the candidate for whom he voted, to fold the paper up so as to show the stamp or mark on the back, place an additional difficulty in the way of an illiterate voter exercising the franchise, and he failed to see why that additional trouble should be given.

Amendment proposed, in page 5, line 6, to leave out the words "so as to show the stamp or mark on its back."—(Mr. Cavendish Bentinck.)

MR. W. E. FORSTER

said, that a similar Amendment was considered last night, on the proposition of the hon. and learned Member for Leeds (Mr. Wheelhouse), on which occasion, he (Mr. W. E. Forster) explained the reason why the stamp was placed on the ballot paper.

MR. WHEELHOUSE

said, it would be desirable to know whether, in case the presiding officer, at the desire of the voter, pointed out the place where the voter should place his mark or cross, such assistance would be considered improper on the part of the presiding officer.

MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCK

said, he had tried to make the best out of a bad thing, and as hon. Members opposite had imposed silence on themselves, he thought they ought to be very much obliged to him. The words he objected to ought to be struck out, or a penalty should be imposed for non-compliance with the direction of the sub-section. At present no such penalty was imposed by the Bill. He wished to know whether, if the ballot paper was not folded so as to show the stamp or mark on its back, the vote would in consequence be rendered invalid.

MR. W. E. FORSTER

said, he would refer the hon. and learned Member for Whitehaven to sub-section 19 as to the last point; and with respect to the imposition of a penalty, he would on Clause 30, if the hon. and learned Member at that part of the Bill again raised the question, state the reasons why he thought no penalty should be imposed in the case mentioned.

MR. BOURKE

said, that a vast number of illiterate voters would have to ask the presiding officer how they were to fold the ballot paper, and their votes would consequently be known by him.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."

The Committee divided:—Ayes 101; Noes 32: Majority 69.

SIR MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH

moved the omission, in page 5, line 8, of the words, "in the presence of the presiding officer, put the ballot paper," and the insertion, instead thereof, of the words "shall hand the ballot paper to the presiding officer, to be by him put;" the object of the Amendment being that the presiding officer, and not the voter, should put the voting paper into the ballot-box. He moved the Amendment not simply because it was an improvement on the Bill, but because those who had given great consideration to the question of the Ballot believed that it was of vital importance for the prevention of fraud. Much evidence was given in 1869 before the Election Committee on that point, and several hon. Gentlemen agreed that it was really of vital importance that the presiding officer should put the ballot paper into the box; and among them was the hon. Baronet the Member for Chelsea, who stated that it was, in his opinion, essential for the prevention of fraud that the presiding officer should do this rather than the voter himself. The voter might put in two papers. On the other hand, he did not think it interfered with secret voting, because the presiding officer would not have time to discover what was written inside the paper, and he would merely receive it in presence of the voter, and put it in the ballot-box.

Amendment proposed, In page 6, line 8, to leave out the words "in the presence of the presiding officer, put the ballot paper," in order to insert the words "shall hand the ballot paper to the presiding officer, to be by him put."—(Sir Michael Hicks-Beach.)

MR. W. E. FORSTER

said, the point in the hon. Baronet's Amendment was one which had been considered in connection with the Bill of last year; but he had come to the conclusion that there was some danger of the returning officer seeing the vote, and there was much greater probability that there would be want of faith in the election if the voters were obliged to give the voting paper to the presiding officer. The danger of two papers being deposited by one voter was guarded against by the stamp.

MR. J. LOWTHER

said, he should support the Amendment, on the ground that if the voters were permitted to put the voting papers into the ballot-box, they would have an opportunity of putting in other papers containing, it might be, combustible materials or such a material as vitriol, which had been often introduced into pillar letter-boxes. By that means the voting papers might be destroyed. He hoped nobody would be allowed to approach the ballot-box except the presiding officer. That would remove a very great deal of danger, and would do more to inspire confidence in the electors than permitting voters to approach the box.

MR. BERESFORD HOPE

, in illustration of what his hon. Friend (Mr. J. Lowther) had just stated, referred to the case of Irish elections, where if it was known that the votes ran close, combustible materials might be put into the ballot-box, and in a short time the whole would be in a blaze. It was not at all a fictitious or visionary danger; they often saw such materials put into a pillar letter-box merely as a stupid jest; and when it was not a stupid jest, but when an important political issue depended upon it, the danger was greater still.

SIR MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH

said, he could not seriously think there was much danger; but he really believed the Amendment would be a precaution against fraud. If he had believed that the stamp would have been a sufficient precaution, he would not have brought the Amendment before the Committee.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."

The Committee divided:—Ayes 128; Noes 45: Majority 83.

MR. G. BENTINCK

proposed in page 5, line 12, after "station," to insert— (15a.) At the close of the poll the presiding officer shall open the ballot box, and shall set aside every ballot paper which is marked on the back with the number on the register in respect of which any elector may have claimed under the provisions of the fourth clause hereinafter contained, and shall make a list of such votes and claims and the numbers and the names and residences of such electors on the register, and shall seal up such ballot papers and the ballot papers of claimants together in a sealed packet, for the further inquiry hereafter mentioned. (15b.) The presiding officer shall, as soon as possible after the close of the poll, suspend the said list outside the polling place, together with a notice to the electors who have given such votes, and the claimants under the fourth clause hereinafter mentioned to appear before him at ten o'clock in the morning of the day following the election, or at some hour as near as possible to ten o'clock, in the presence of a magistrate to prove their identity with the elector so numbered upon the register, and upon the appearance at such hour of such voter or such claimant or claimants shall decide which of the said ballot papers is to be accepted and counted in the poll, and shall forward the accepted ballot papers in a sealed packet, to be called 'the accepted packet,' to the returning officer, and shall take down such particulars of residence and personal description of each such voter and claimant or claimants, and take such other steps for the furtherance of a prosecution or prosecutions under the twenty-ninth section of this Act of the voter as he may deem advisable for the furtherance of justice.

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

MR. W. E. FORSTER

said, he scarcely knew any object which the hon. Gentleman the Member for West Norfolk (Mr. G. Bentinck) could have in moving this Amendment. It might have been worth the consideration of the Committee had it been determined to have a scrutiny; but where there was to be no scrutiny it could serve no purpose.

MR. BERESFORD HOPE

said, that although there was to be no scrutiny, it did not follow there should be no machinery by which, in an infinitesimal degree, personation might be discovered and punished. He considered that the right hon. Gentleman the Vice President of the Council ought to accept that Amendment.

MR. G. BENTINCK

said, as he had heard no opinion hostile to his Amendment from hon. Members on the other side below the gangway, he expected their support.

SIR JAMES ELPHINSTONE

said, that judging from what had passed last night, the character of the Bill was changed, and it had now become a Bill for putting the House of Lords into a hole. What they were doing, therefore, realized a description once given of staghunting—running as hard as they could to catch what they had before. He feared the arrangement proposed in the Bill would lead to a great many bad votes being given, and for that reason should support the Amendment.

MR. BERESFORD HOPE

said, the difficulty would be met by substituting in the Amendment the word "returning" for "presiding." He could not trust presiding officers who were employed by the returning officer, but he could trust the returning officer, who was the servant of the State. He moved that "returning" be substituted for "presiding."

Amendment proposed to the said proposed Amendment, to leave out, in line 1, the word "presiding," in order to insert the word "returning."—(Mr. Beresford Hope.)

MR. G. BENTINCK

said, he could not accede to the arrangement, because whilst he had some sort of faith in the presiding officers, he had none in the State officials.

Question put, "That the word 'presiding' stand part of the said proposed Amendment."

The Committee divided:—Ayes 142; Noes 41: Majority 101.

COLONEL STUART KNOX

said, he hoped that the hon. Member for West Norfolk (Mr. G. Bentinck) would press the Amendment, and not be overawed by the indignant countenance of the right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government. It might be that the right hon. Gentleman had his pocketful of Royal Prerogatives; but as yet the House of Commons enjoyed its liberty, and should exercise it.

MR. G. BENTINCK

, after the appeal which had been made to him, and the encouragement he had received in the last division, would not have the slightest hesitation in proceeding to a division.

MR. BERESFORD HOPE

said, he was sorry to hear that determination, because he should not be able to vote with his hon. Friend (Mr. G. Bentinck). He feared that the clause, if agreed to in its present shape, might add an additional horror even to the Ballot itself, and make it more dangerous and revolutionary than it need be.

Question put, "That the words '15a. At the close of the poll the presiding officer shall open the ballot box, and shall set aside every ballot paper which is marked on the back with the number on the register in respect of which any elector may have claimed under the provisions of the fourth Clause hereinafter contained, and shall make a list of such votes and claims and the numbers and the names and residences of such electors on the register, and shall seal up such ballot papers and the ballot papers of claimants together in a sealed packet, for the further inquiry hereafter mentioned,' be there inserted."

The Committee divided: — Ayes 73; Noes 177: Majority 104.

MR. W. E. FORSTER

next moved the omission of all the words after "officer," in line 13, down to "and shall," in line 17, with a view of subsequently adding words to the effect that at the close of the polling the presiding officer, if he was not the returning officer, should, without opening the ballot-box, deliver or transmit it to the returning officer.

Amendment proposed, in page 5, to leave out from the word "shall," in line 13, to the word "shall," in line 17, both inclusive. — (Mr. William Edward Forster.)

SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSON

said, he thought that was the proper time for discussing the question as to whether the presiding officer ought to be prevented from opening the ballot-box. As a large amount of confidence must, under any circumstances, be reposed in the presiding officer, he could not believe there would be much danger in allowing him to count the votes given in his district. He would also suggest that much inconvenience would be avoided by a provision in the Bill that all the ballot-boxes should at the close of the polling be brought into one central place, there to be examined by the authorized person.

MR. BERESFORD HOPE

said, he must repeat his arguments against allowing the presiding officer to open the box and sum up the votes. In Ireland especially very funny things might happen. For instance, a bundle of voting papers might unfortunately be lost in a mountain district, and then nothing would remain but the memoranda of the presiding officer to show how the votes had been given. He trusted the Amendment would be withdrawn.

Question put, "That the words 'shall, in the presence of such of the agents of the candidates (if any),' stand part of the Clause."

The Committee divided:—Ayes 91; Noes 176: Majority 85.

Amendment proposed, in page 5, line 17, after the word "officer," to insert the words "shall without opening the ballot box."—(Mr. William Edward Forster.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

MR. GOLDNEY

said, he wished the Committee to approve the principle, that instead of the voting papers being sent in the ballot-box to the returning officer, the presiding officer in such polling-booth should be the party to cast up the votes in the presence of the candidates' agents. It would be a more simple and expeditious mode than that provided by the Bill. In large constituencies of 10,000 and 12,000 electors, if the sole duty of counting and examining the whole of the voting papers were cast upon the returning officer, as proposed by the 10th clause, great delay would be the consequence. He could not get through more than two a minute, and if he worked eight hours a-day, it would take nearly a fortnight before the whole could be examined and the poll declared. The mode he (Mr. Goldney) proposed was the one adopted in their colonies. He proposed to amend the proposed Amendment by omitting the words "without opening."

Amendment proposed to the said proposed Amendment, to leave out the words "without opening the ballot box."—(Mr. Goldney.)

LORD HENLEY

said, the proposed Amendment of the hon. and learned Member for Chippenham (Mr. Goldney) would be very advantageous in the case of counties and large towns, where the distance from the outlying polling-places to the central one was often very great. Great delay between the close of the poll and the declaration of the numbers would cause great dissatisfaction. It would be possible in some cases to forward the boxes during the day so that the enumeration and examination might go on with the polling. The difficulties to be encountered in carrying out the provisions of the Bill were, however, he believed, much exaggerated, for it would, in his opinion, be easy enough for the returning officer to enumerate in the manner proposed by the Government 2,000 papers, instead of 120 an hour.

MR. W. E. FORSTER

said, he could not accept the proposed Amendment, especially when the proposed increase of polling-places was taken into consideration. It was not suggested that the returning officer should be permitted no assistance; but as it would be his duty to determine the question of the validity of any particular voting paper, the work ought to be done under his personal supervision. As he understood Clause 10, the returning officer would have power to employ persons to assist him in counting the voting papers; and Clause 13 empowered the returning officer alone to sign the validity of the papers. But his chief objection to permitting the presiding officer to examine and check the voting papers was that agents would have an opportunity of forming an opinion as to how parties voted in small localities. The clause as it stood would answer every purpose, and only one agent of each candidate need be present to see that the returning officer behaved fairly.

COLONEL BARTTELOT

said, he thought the right hon. Gentleman the Vice President of the Council had considerably underrated the importance of the proposal now made. He was prepared to trust the presiding officer, and a procession of ballot-boxes in Ireland, going to the returning officer to be counted, would be very likely to excite the populace and lead to a riot. He would support the Amendment of his hon. and learned Friend (Mr. Goldney), because he believed it was likely to facilitate the casting up of the poll, and the declaration of the result to expectant electors.

MR. BEACH

said, he must point out to his hon. Friends that, under the Bill, there would be a large increase in the number of polling-places, and, if so, there would be great difficulty in obtaining presiding officers of the same standing as those now employed. He could not, therefore, think that they could be trusted with that responsible duty, or that the Amendment could be adopted with safety.

SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSON

said, it was easy now to add up from the polling-book the number of marks; but the returning officer would have to unfold each voting paper and see that each was properly marked. This would more than quadruple the labour of the returning officer.

MR. GOLDNEY

said, the returning officer must also hear the objections raised by the agents to the ballot papers in particular cases. Taking all these circumstances into consideration, he must again say that he did not think the returning officer would be able to look over more than 120 ballot papers an hour, and in the case of a large constituency the result of the poll would not be known for a fortnight.

MR. M'CARTHY DOWNING

said, that if the Amendment were carried it would destroy the principle of secrecy upon which the Bill rested, so far as concerned Ireland. If, for example, the number of polling-places in the county of Cork were increased as proposed, they must be 80 in number, with 80 deputy-sheriffs. All the electors voting at a particular polling-place might easily be tenants of one landlord, and the deputy-sheriff, on opening the ballot-box would see at once whether they had voted as the landlord expected. He ridiculed the idea of the ballot-boxes being stolen in the course of their removal from place to place.

MR. HERMON

said, that when there was an inducement to fraud the means of committing it would be found, and he feared that the ballot-boxes would be got at during the period of transit, if at no other time.

MR. BERESFORD HOPE

said, the discussion showed how difficult and hazardous an experiment was about to be tried. The right hon. Gentleman the Vice President of the Council, if not the grandfather, might be called the father of the Ballot. Even the right hon. Gentleman himself had not fathomed the depths of this question. Both the plans suggested were bad; but the least bad alternative was to put up with the delay in ascertaining the number of the votes and the difficulty in counting them, and to send the ballot-boxes unopened to the returning officer. There could be no adequate guarantee for accuracy in the counting at each polling-place by the rustic representatives of the returning officer. He thought, therefore, the balance of argument was slightly in favour of the Bill as it stood.

MR. W. E. FORSTER

said, he must remind those hon. Members who feared that the ballot-boxes would be forcibly taken possession of or destroyed, that the polling-books at present were just as likely to be so dealt with.

MR. GOLDNEY

said, he must remind the right hon. Gentleman the Vice President of the Council in his turn, that if the polling-books were destroyed a check would still remain in the hands of the election agents.

MR. W. E. FORSTER

said, he doubted whether confidence would be felt in the counting by the presiding officer, and thus it would be necessary to count twice over.

LORD CLAUD JOHN HAMILTON

said, he would, with regard to what had been said about Ireland, refer to the excesses at the Dungarvan election as a proof of the acts of which Irishmen were capable at election time. Their spiritual advisers taught them it was wrong to steal, and Ireland was therefore free from theft. But the same advisers might teach them that it was right and proper to attack the ballot-box, and they would then attack these boxes, perhaps under the leadership of the priests. The ballot-boxes must be escorted by the police on the way to the returning officer, and in some places the number of mounted police was insufficient to discharge any such duty.

MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCK

said, he could not but think that the system of voting by ballot must be a very clumsy one if it did not insure secrecy at the polling - places. The presiding officer there might suspect, but he could not be sure, how any vote was given. In the municipal elections in Cumberland the ballot-box was opened in the manner suggested, and he had never heard that any secrecy had been violated.

MR. BAGWELL

said, as an Irish Member, he must deny the justice of the attack made on the Roman Catholic priests of Ireland. In all his experience he had never known them, though they took a strong view of political matters, countenance violence such as attacking ballot-boxes or carrying away poll-books.

LORD CLAUD JOHN HAMILTON

said, he would refer the hon. Member for Clonmel to the reported proceedings at the last election for Drogheda.

MR. SCOURFIELD

said, at the Taunton election two years ago, the poll-book disappeared, and had never since been heard of.

MR. TALBOT

said, he approved of the Amendment of the hon. and learned Member for Chippenham (Mr. Goldney), and thought that if the Government proposal were adopted, seven days would elapse in some cases before the result of an election was known.

MR. ASSHETON

said, he also felt himself constrained to vote with the hon. and learned Member for Chippenham (Mr. Goldney.)

SIR LAWRENCE PALK

said, it would be impossible to render the Ballot a secret mode of voting. The tenants would vote with their natural leaders, their landlords, and their doing so would become known.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the said proposed Amendment."

The Committee divided:—Ayes 216; Noes 104: Majority 112.

Amendment (Mr. W. E. Forster) agreed to.

MR. G. B. GREGORY

moved to insert words providing that the aperture through which the ballot papers were inserted in the box should be sealed up in the presence of the agents of the candidates.

MR. W. E. FORSTER

said, he would accept the Amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

LORD AUGUSTUS HERVEY

moved, in page 5, line 29, to leave out "which is not stamped or marked by the said instrument (as provided by this Act) or." An onslaught, he said, had been made on the magistracy of the country; but if they could not be trusted what confidence could be placed in those to whom authority was temporarily intrusted by this Bill, and who would be armed with the power of nullifying large numbers of genuine votes? It would be monstrous that a vote should be rendered invalid by the accidental omission of a stamp, and he hoped that the Government would not, by opposing that Amendment, pursue a policy of inscribing on their banner the word "disfranchisement" as well as "prerogative."

Amendment proposed, in page 5, line 29, to leave out the words "which is not stamped or marked by the said instrument (as provided by this Act) or."—(Lord Augustus Hervey.)

MR. W. E. FORSTER

, in opposing the Amendment, said, that if no effect were given to the provision it would be waste of time to stamp any paper.

LORD CLAUD HAMILTON

asked what redress a voter would have if his paper went unstamped through the neglect of the returning officer?

MR. W. E. FORSTER

replied that the elector, on finding the paper unstamped, could go to the returning officer and have the defect remedied, by seeing that gentleman stamp it himself.

Question put, "That the words 'which is not stamped or marked by' stand part of the Clause."

The Committee divided:—Ayes 195; Noes 73: Majority 122.

SIR MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH (for Lord JOHN MANNERS)

moved, in page 5, line 32, to leave out from "vote for" to "voted," in line 35. Those words provided that if any other mark than the one made by the voter to indicate the candidate he voted for appeared on the paper, the vote should be void. He objected to the manner in which the Bill interfered with the liberty of the elector, by compelling those who did not need the protection of the Ballot to vote secretly; and he pointed out that under the sub-section a presiding officer disposed to commit fraud might mark a number of voting papers with some chemical preparation of ink which should be invisible until the papers were counted, when, on the marks being detected, certain votes would be lost to one or other candidate. Then, again, if the voter made a mistake in placing his cross opposite a candidate's name in the event of his making an erasure in order to correct it, the voting paper could not be counted. It was necessary to deal cautiously with that matter, and for that reason he moved this Amendment.

MR. W. E. FORSTER

said, he did not deny the importance of the point, but would not detain the Committee by stating again at length that the Bill proposed a secret ballot, which would be neutralized by the adoption of the Amendment.

MR. BERESFORD HOPE

said, he thought that provision should be made for ignorant voters, who, if they failed to comply with the regulations in the Bill, would be disfranchised, perhaps for seven years.

MR. WHEELHOUSE

said, he saw no objection to allowing a man to register his vote openly, if he wished to do so.

SIR JOHN HAY

asked for a definition of the mark which would be sufficient to vitiate a voting paper, and suggested that in some instances, many such papers might become marked accidentally.

MR. W. E. FORSTER

said, the subsection stated that the mark which would vitiate the voting paper must be a mark other than the cross or mark intended to show for which candidate the vote was given.

MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCK

said, the right hon. Gentleman's answers were, as usual, very unsatisfactory, and he must express his satisfaction at seeing the hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Richmond (Sir Roundell Palmer) present on that occasion, and hoped they would have the benefit of his advice in dealing with the question. He had always imagined that the hon. and learned Gentleman was opposed to the Ballot; but he had hitherto not explained why he had changed his mind on the subject. He hoped he would look at the 19th sub-section and inform the Committee how he thought it would operate. Meantime, he should move that the Chairman report Progress.

Motion agreed to.

And it being ten minutes before Seven of the Clock, the Committee report Progress, to sit again upon Monday next; and at Seven of the Clock, the House suspended its Sitting.

The House resumed its Sitting at Nine of the Clock.