Second. The system of registration, and the revision of the voters' lists. Third. The practices obtaining during the canvass and election. Fourth. The mode of voting. 1. The constituencies of our municipalities at present consist of every male person of full age, who on the last day of August, in any year, shall have occupied premises within the borough continuously for the three previous years, and shall for that time have been an inhabitant householder, within seven miles of the borough, provided that he shall have been rated to the poor rates, and shall have paid them and all borough rates during the time of his occupation. Against this qualification three different kinds of objections have been urged:-that it was too extensive; an objection made by the Tories: that it, needlessly, has been narrowed to those resident three years; a complaint made by friends of popular election and extended suffrage: and that by requiring proof of the payment of poor rates, not for the six months preceding August, but for the whole of the three years, an extraordinary facility is given to those interested in disfranchising electors; a fact which every one who has had opportunities of practical experience must readily admit. The first of these objections we think was fairly met by Lord John Russell in the speech with which he introduced the Municipal Bill to parliament. The noble lord, in stating the reason for adopting the qualification in question,—that is the existing qualification, observed:- I think we should consider those whom I may call permanent ratepayers, the inhabitants of the town, as perfectly fit and qualified to choose persons to represent them in its common council and government. It may often happen, and I think it does often happen, that the lower class of rate-payers, however well known and long established in the town, do not take such a warm interest in the election of members of parliament as not to be open to the various modes of seduction, and to those corrupt arts which have been ordinarily resorted to, to procure votes. I do not think that the same thing can be said when you place before them the propriety of choosing their own townsmen, perhaps their next-door neighbors, as persons fit to have a voice in the government of their own town. But there is another reason, as it seems to me, more conclusive than all, which is, that these rate-payers contribute directly to the expenses of the town. By this bill they will be obliged to pay the borough rate which may be required; and it is absolutely essential that they should not be exempt from it. Then according to the established principles, to the known and recognised principles of the constitution, it is right and proper that those who contribute their money should have a voice in the elections of persons by whom their money is expended.' But the principles appealed to by Lord John are denied by the Tories. However they may disguise their feelings, they dislike the democratic character and tendencies of this qualification; and, when they have it in their power, will make the evils of the municipal system, to which we now draw attention, an excuse for defacing its essential features; unless those evils are remedied, in due time, by a friendly hand. They boast at present, for the sake of turning public opinion in their favor, of the tri'umphs' which they are achieving in the boroughs; but in private conversation, and occasionally in their newspapers, the fact that they meditate the invasion of existing civic rights, oozes out. An illustration of this remark is supplied by a recent article in the Times. Boasting of the achievements which the money, liquor, and full-stretched influence of the Tory party has accomplished, that journal* observes:— These municipal elections, be it remembered, are beyond all ques tion the most popular appeals that are ever made to any English constituency. They are not confined to the £10 householders, like the parliamentary elections, nor yet to the freemen of the boroughs-still less to £50 tenants or freeholders, as in the counties. They rest upon household suffrage-the very point which some of our ultra-reformers are now proposing as an improvement on the franchises conferred by the Reform Bill. 'Consider for a moment the two parties in any great town. The Conservatives, where are they to be found? Do they not embrace the far larger proportion of the higher ranks of the middle classes, including nearly all the active virtue and felt benevolence of the community? Of the most self-denying and resolute of all classes-the sincerely religious-must we not seek more than nine-tenths among the Conservative party? And can it be, that these things should fail to exert an influence, growing, as we now see it, year by year, over the judgment and choice of the respective constituencies ?' Yet notwithstanding this state of things, which one would have thought was sufficiently satisfactory, the Times, in the very same article, darkly hints that the new corporations are doomed to destruction. As to the graver question,' it observes, of whether 'the new corporations, in themselves, are likely to prove beneficial to the inhabitants of these towns, or otherwise-that is a matter "the decision of which must necessarily be postponed until honest and respectable men shall have had a sufficient trial of the working of 'the whole system.' It is true that the present franchise is likely * Vide Times, November 5. to answer the purposes of the Tories; but it obliges them to court the suffrages of the people, and drains their coffers! any man It is argued by those who object to the restriction to three years residence, that a much shorter period is required as the qualification of the parliamentary constituency, who exercise a much more important trust. But it is doubtful whether can acquire a sufficient knowledge of local circumstances to qualify him to take a part in municipal matters, in a shorter period than three years. The interests in the custody of parliament can be appreciated equally well by a man whether he resides at Exeter, Birmingham, or York:-cælum non animum mutat. But peculiar local interests are not so readily understood. Beside, the body of ten-pound householders are necessarily a more permanent body, less liable to fluctuation, than a poorer and more widely extended class; and it may well be replied, that the restriction to three years continuous residence is necessary to prevent the improper manufacture of votes to carry some particular point. To serve the cause at the election in 1826, no less than 1870 freemen were made in Maldon; and it is well to provide against so scandalous an abuse in the reformed municipal corporations. We object, however, to, and strongly protest against, the provision which requires proof of the payment of rates for the whole of the three years. It is the source of frauds without number. The parish books having, during that interval, passed through the hands of six different overseers, and perhaps as many assistants, the most extraordinary facilities are afforded for the erasure of names and items, and the foisting in of charges of arrears. And yet the provision is as useless as it is mischievous. It has been framed for the purpose of securing the payment of rates. But it is perfectly superfluous. The Poor Law Amendment act does not require its aid. An overseer is compelled to make his payments quarterly. If he fails to do so punctually, by the act* to amend the laws relating to the assessment and collection of 'rates for the relief of the poor,' he is liable to have his goods sold. He is obliged, therefore, to collect the rates immediately, and to allow no arrears. Finally his accounts are audited, confirmed, and allowed by the auditor before he leaves office. To suppose, there fore, that arrears remain due, except in the case of publicly known defaulters, is a gross absurdity. The mischievous operation of this provision will be better seen when we come to the second division of our subject. II. The system of registration and the revision of voters' lists. * August, 1839. VOL. VIII. 3 c the highest political importance: and it cannot be too often impressed upon the public mind, that if the liberal cause is abandoned in the revision-court, it is abandoned irretrievably. Beside the hostility of objectors, most people will be surprised to learn that the municipal franchise is subject to six perils from over seers. 1. By the omission of a householder's name from the rate-book. 2. By putting his name in pencil in the book. 3. By omitting to give credit for paid rates. 4. By omitting his name from the citizens' list delivered by the overseer to the town clerk. 5. By informality in the title or superscription of such list. 6. By erasures in the rate-book and the insertion of spurious arrears. It matters not that a man has established his claim in 1840; the ignorance or misconduct of an overseer, in either of these cases, may deprive him of his vote in 1841! Is not this monstrous? Does it not appear vexatious and tyrannical in the extreme, that householders should annually be subjected to the inconvenience of proving qualifications which they have already proved, and meeting objections which have already been met and answered? In a recent paper* on the subject of parliamentary registration, we made an observation which is equally applicable to the present case; When a man has once proved, to the satis'faction of the court, that he occupies a house of value sufficient 'to entitle him to the franchise, on what plea can he annually be 'required to prove the validity of his title, so long as he con'tinues to occupy the same premises?' The liability to objection every year is one of the most vicious parts of the whole system. It produces exasperation and annoyance. It disfranchises multitudes who are persecuted by hired Tory objectors. An effort is now generally made to pack the parishes with Tory overseers, in order that the rate books may be tampered with; or that Tory objectors and agents may have free access to the parochial records. In many cases Tory objectors and electioneering under-strappers are appointed as deputy overseers. The provincial newspapers abound with the most shameful cases that arise in this manner. In many instances men who have died or have removed (who can therefore be personated), are retained on the citizens' lists. In others, liberals are omitted by tens from the rate books and lists!! and it is now an established plan, in cases where a landlord pays the rates of a number of houses, to give a receipt for A. B. and others:' thus destroying the proof of rating in the case of the others!' These facts must be forced upon the * Eclectic Review, August, 1840. attention of the legislature; for unless the evils we complain of be remedied, it is obvious that the unprotected burgesses will be borne down by Tory combinations. We select two cases, which will illustrate, in a striking manner, the remarks which we have here made; one, where the omission of a householder's name from the rate book caused his disfranchisement; the other, where the insertion of spurious arrears of rates by a Tory agent was detected. We quote them from a liberal journal published in York.* 'John Johnson, the occupier of a house in Bilton Street, in the parish of St. Cuthbert, claimed to be inserted on the burgess list. He was objected to on the ground that he had not been duly rated. Johnson was conscious that he had regularly and punctually paid his rates. The rate book was produced, and it was discovered that in the rate of the 7th of January, 1839, his name was omitted from the rate book. A blank was left where his name should have been; but the house which he occupied was rated as usual, and the rate due from it was entered down as paid!!! On reference it was found that Mr. Johnson's name was on the rate immediately before that in January, 1839, and in the rate next after the same January. It was proved by a witness in court that Johnson had occupied the house for upwards of three years, and had not removed from it, or for a moment ceased to reside in it. Yet the court deprived this man of his vote!!!' Now this case arose out of the fact that proof of the payment of rates, during the whole three years, is most unnecessarily required. The omission of the name may have arisen from accident or design; but in the next we have a case of positive malice and fraud: "ROBERT SCOTT, of Redeness-street, was objected to by the Tories. The ground of objection was demanded. It was replied that he had not paid all his rates. The overseer's books were produced, and it was discovered that in the rate of the 4th of July, 1838, the sum of three half pence!! was charged to him as arrears, while it appeared that he had paid the sum of 2s. 74d. It was urged that these arrears had never been demanded, yet the court refused to allow the vote. On looking closely at the book it was discovered that there had been an erasure where the 74d. had been written, yet the court refused to allow the claim! Fortunately the overseer's receipts were produced; and it was found that the receipt had been given by Mr. RALPH HORNER (overseer) for 2s. 9d.!!! The vote was allowed at length, and Mr. GARWOOD observed that it was a most barefaced and disgraceful attempt to disfranchise an elector." These cases prove how much depends upon OVERSEERS; and *The Yorkshireman. |