THE BALLOT.

Evening Star, Volume VIII, Issue 2118, 18 February 1870, Page 2

THE BALLOT.

To the Editor of the Evening Star. Sib,—l have read with much satisfaction your article in your last evening’s issue on the question of the Ballot. It is a question upon which I feel strongly, and therefore make no excuse for seeking space for a few remarks in support of the views you have advanced. To my mind, “vote by ballot” is sound in principle, and, from experience, I can assert that it is admirable in practice. I feel entitled to speak strongly, having, when it was first proposed to introduce it in Victoria, opposed it by voice and pen. However, after carefully watching its working in the neighboring colonies for the last dozen years, I am free to eonfess that I never made a greater mistake in my life. Int that time descanted upon the value of doing right from a souse of right, in defiance of friends, opinions, or financial considerations, and denounced the man as a coward who hesitated to boldly exercise hia rights of citizenship in defiance of all pressure which might be brought to bear against him. I still cherish the sentiment, but confess that in the present state of society, it has a most injurious political effect, The remarks of the hon. Dr Buchanan quoted by you I most thoroughly endorse, and I will even go further than he has gone, and state as a fact that not only such associations as he has mentioned, but the Chamber of Commerce, and even religions bodies, do exercise an influence detrimental to the free and unbiassed expression of public opinion, whenever an important election takes place. I maintain that the “ballot” is as much, if not more, necessary to secure the conscientious voting of what is termed the upper classes, as it is those of the working men. I will give one illustration in evidence of this. Before the ba lot was law in Victoria, in conversation with one of the most wealthy and intelligent men in Melbourne, 1 said to him, “ You are of course going to support Mr Stawell?” (now Sir William Stawell, Chief Justice of Victoria). He rcplfed “ No ; I will not vote at all. I know that Mr Johnston is an inferior man, and hope he will not be elected, but we have the ladies to think about. Mrs J. ami M 'S M. you know are intimate fri nds, aud if I should oppose Johnson, although he might have the good sense not to allow that to interfere with our friendship, his wife would not, and there would be a split in my Cabinet more troublesome to me than a Ministerial crisis. If we had vote by ballot, I would vote against Johnson unmistakably, and have told him so. ” In Dunedin similar occurrences have come under my observation. I have heard men give as an excuse for voting contrary to their conviction, that Mr So and So was an office-bearer of this or that lodge, of which he was a member; and many others of a similar character. But, Sir, this question has been so frequently ventilated that it is unnecessary to say more on the subject. Now, Sir, my object in writing, is to urge you to stir up the Otago Political Association to move in this matter. Mr Reynolds should not be allowed to go to the Assembly with bis Ballot Bill in his hand, without having also a monster Petition from Otago in favor of the measure. An organisation to this end should be initiated, and the Otage Political Association is the body from which it should emanate.—l am, &c., Miynu.. Dunedin, Feb. 18, 1870.