right information, than when he would employ it for the perpetration of misrule. If in every conceivable instance wrong information is not to be considered a violation of the rule of veracity, not a breach of morality, but on the contrary a meritorious act, it is when it is necessary to defeat such a purpose as this.

name.

Among the gross inconsistencies which crowd the minds of Englishmen, one of the most remarkable is that which exists between the abhorrence of the ballot, on account of the supposed mendacity connected with it, and the habitual conduct of the men who express that abhorrence. The same mendacity, exactly, if they persist in calling it mendacity, which a voter may use to baffle his corrupter, they themselves practise every day from the slightest motives. Every time they write "obedient, humble servant," at the bottom of a letter, they tell a lie, if lie it must be called, of the very same description. Every time they direct a servant to say at their door to the people who want them, that they are not at home, when they are at home, they not only lie themselves, but in this instance have no scruple at all in making another person lie, notwithstanding the intolerable pollution they ascribe to it in the case of the ballot. It surely is not necessary for us to go on shewing how much of the whole business of life, in this purest of countries, is carried on by lying, if words and actions conveying false information deserve this opprobrious Let us look to more solemn occasions. The law hardly does any thing but by means of a lie; witness the writs which give commencement to a suit; and witness, to go no farther, pleadings of almost all descriptions. Not only breaches of veracity, but breaches of oath, are committed with the utmost indifference. How common is it, for jurors on their oaths, to declare an article worth but a few shillings, which they know to be worth, perhaps, ten times as many pounds, only that they may not subject a criminal to a greater punishment than he deserves; how necessarily does the law requiring unanimity in juries, compel a part of the jury in almost all doubtful cases to perjure themselves? We need but allude to the daily use of fiscal oaths, and theological oaths, to be reminded of the perfect callousness with which false swearing is practised and regarded. Nay, remarkable as it must be esteemed, we on no occasion lie more grossly, and habitually, than in our devotions; in our addresses to God himself, at the very time that we are professing with our lips that we believe him omniscient, and acquainted with our innermost thoughts. Do we not hear people daily telling God in their prayers that they renounce the pomps and vanities of the world, when we know their hearts are filled

with nothing else? Does not every man who repeats the prayer, called the Lord's, tell the Deity, that he wishes "not to be led into temptation?" And do we not know many such men devoting all their thoughts to the accumulating of riches, or the acquisition of worldly grandeur, which the scripture tells them are the greatest of temptations; since it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into the Kingdom of heaven ?-Need we go on ?-Surely not.

And yet have we men, who, after seeing to how great a degree the whole tissue of our lives is formed of lying, and after being themselves inured to it, profess so violent a hatred of the falsehood accidental to a vote rendered independent by secrecy,as to account the independence, and all the inestimable benefits which flow from it, less than an equivalent? We should have accounted this one of the most perfect of all possible specimens of Tartuffizing, if we did not know that there are valuable men, who have formed with the false information, which may occasionally be necessary to obtain the independence of which secrecy is the means such an association of ideas, as they do unhappily mistake for moral disapprobation.

But beside the proof we have given, that the wrong information incidental to the ballot belongs not to the class of cases in which the moral rule of veracity is concerned; beside the certainty of the rule, that the least of two evils is to be chosen; and the perfect proof by the practice of Englishmen, that in innumerable instances they regard the use of falsehood as little or no evil, while bad government is acknowledged to be the worst of all evils; beside all this, we have still to observe that the objection assumes what is not true. It assumes that every vote which would be suborned, if openly given, would be attended with mendacity if given secretly.

First observe, that if this were so, the cases, in respect of mendacity, would only be equal. Every suborned vote is by the supposition a mendacious vote. What ground then is there for any preference on the score of veracity; and what ground is there not for preference on the score of national good? This objection, drawn from the love of veracity, is thus clearly seen to be utterly worthless.

Such, however, is the admirable working of the ballot, that it would preclude the occasion for mendacity in many, in probably a great majority of instances, from the beginning; and in the end would utterly abolish it. If men never continue to do any thing in vain, men will not seek promises from others, in circumstances in which the promise is of no use to them.

Where there is no promising at all, there can be no false promising. The ballot, therefore, is really the means of delivering votes from mendacity. One of the arguments in favour of secret voting springs from the very source, from which this mistaken objection is drawn.

Suppose a man to go about, asking promises from electors who vote in secret. He obtains them, of course, from all the men, from whom he would have obtained a prostitute vote in the case of publicity. An act of mendacity is necessary in either case, whether the promise is kept or broken. But of two lies, equal to a man in other respects, he may pretty surely be expected to prefer that which favours his own inclinations. The promise, therefore, is to the man who exacts it no security for the attainment of his object. It is obviously the reverse, if the attempt to impose an odious chain be felt as an injury by the man who is sought to be degraded. Every man from whom a promise is exacted to vote in one way, has received a new motive to vote in the opposite way, by this badge of slavery nefariously fastened upon him. It is abundantly certain, that the exaction of promises,--in these circumstances more than useless, would soon be abandoned, and voting would be as pure of falsehood as it would be of dependence.

7

Nor would this be the only moral effect of secret voting; it would have others of the greatest extent, and importance. This, undoubtedly, is one of the most interesting points of view in which the subject can be considered. Take away from the men of property the power of obtaining the suffrages of the people by improper means, and you may deem it certain that they will immediately apply themselves to the obtaining them by proper means.

It is impossible not to be delighted with the idea of the consequences which would result from such a change. Whereas, at present, the traffic which takes place between the parties who give and the parties who obtain votes, corrupts them both; the intercourse between them, in the other case which we have supposed, would operate most powerfully to their mutual improve

ment.

The evidence of this we think is incontestible.

The moment

it was seen that the people gave their suffrages only to those whom they regarded as best endowed with the qualities which fit men for the duties of legislation, the men of property would exert themselves to attain and to display those qualities. They would then have a motive for their attainment, of which at present they are nearly destitute. Stores of knowledge, habits of mental application, of self-denial, of preferring the public in

terest to the private interest, whenever there is incompatibility between them, are not easily acquired; and never will be acquired (bating remarkable exceptions) by those who have not a strong motive to acquire them.

We think, that putting the elective suffrage on a proper footing would afford that motive to the men of property in England. Men of property love distinction; but the distinction of property, where it is not connected with political power, or strongly associated with the idea of it, is insignificant. The great desire of men of property, therefore, always will be for the distinction connected with public services. But, if they had an adequate motive for the acquisition, in a superior degree, of the high mental qualities, which fit men for the discharge of public duties, it cannot be doubted that they have great, and peculiar advantages, for the accomplishment of their purpose. Other men, even those who are not confined to mechanical drudgery, are under the necessity of employing the greater part of their lives, in earning the means either of subsistence or independence. The men who are born to a property which places them above such necessity, can employ the whole of their lives in acquiring the knowledge, the talents, and the virtues, which would entitle them to the confidence of their fellow citizens. With equal motive, and superior advantages, they would, of course, in general, have superior success. They would be the foremost men in the country, and so they would be esteemed.

Aa, says Plato, (Пoλır. г.) speaking after Phocyllides, örav τῳ ἤδη βιος ᾖ, ἀρετὴν ἀσκεῖν. "A man has peculiar advantages for attaining the highest excellence of his nature, when he is above the necessity of labouring for the means of subsistence."

The man who is placed in these circumstances, has not only the whole of his time to bestow, in early life, upon the acquisitions which fit him for the business of legislation and government; he alone, and not the man without fortune, who is still engaged in other pursuits, can bestow his time and attention, undivided, upon the public services with which he is intrusted. Our opinion, therefore, is, that the business of government is properly the business of the rich; and that they will always obtain it, either by bad means, or good. Upon this every thing depends. If they obtain it by bad means, the government is bad. If they obtain it by good means, the government is sure to be good. The only good means of obtaining it are, the free suffrage of the people.

Radical Reformers are commonly stigmatized in the lump; and, as names of peculiar opprobrium among the suborners of votes, they are called Democrats, and Republicans. We see

not why either of these names, unless misconstrued, should be dishonourable. For our parts, however, we are Aristocrats. We think it best, that government should be placed in the hands of the Aporo; not only in the sense of the Greeks, who understood by that term the BeλrioTo; but in that of the moderns, who understand by it only the Rich. We only desire that it be placed in the hands of the rich upon such terms as will make them the Αριστοι and Βελτιστοι. Whoever are the Αριστοι and Βελο TɩOTOι, we desire to be governed by them; and, with the suffrage upon a proper footing, we have no doubt that they would be the Rich.

If the effect of placing the suffrage upon a proper footing would be thus salutary, with regard to the intellectual and moral qualities of the rich; let us inquire next what it would be in regard to the rest of the community.

;

We have seen that, while votes are liable to be suborned, and while the rich obtain their purpose with the people by corrupting them, they do corrupt them. The consequence is inevitable and neither the insensibility to moral evil which habit produces, nor all the refinements of modern disguise, can hinder any fair observer from understanding the Tragi-comedy of which we are the spectators.

But, if the business of the rich is to corrupt the people, when they can obtain their purpose by corrupting them, it will no less certainly be their endeavour to improve them, if you render it impossible for them to obtain their purpose with the people by any other means than improving them.

Who will deny that this would be the consequence of placing the suffrage upon a proper foundation? When the people are under no inducement to choose representatives from any other consideration than that of their fitness, it becomes immediately the interest of the rich, that none but the fittest should be chosen. Whenever the benefits of misrule are taken out of the hands of the rich, the rich have then the strongest interest in good government. Good government, however, nothing but the good choice of the people can procure.

But the more wise and the more virtuous the people can be rendered, the goodness of their choice is rendered the more certain. It becomes, immediately, therefore, the interest of the rich, to employ their endeavours to raise the intellects and morals of the people to the highest pitch; that no artifice may be able to deceive, or interest to seduce them, either in regard to what is best to be done for their country, or the men who are fittest to promote it.

But, if the men of power and influence in the country, along