experiment, that in 1777 secresy [sic] was in this case appointed in thefirst
instance: by the experience of forty-two years it stands confirmed’(Bentham
1819, p. 4). Chapman shared Bentham’s judgement of the effective‘secresy’of
the American ballot, and could invoke some relatively direct experience for his
judgement. From 1823 to 1833, he lived in Quebec, championed responsible
government in Canada, visited New York and Philadelphia, and rejoiced in
Andrew Jackson’s‘immense triumph of the people’in 1828 over their
enemies, who‘fell before the mighty influence of theballot-box’(Chapman
1835a, p. 12). Chapman here isnotdeploying the term‘ballot-box’merely as a
symbol of democracy; he is specifically referring to the concrete feature of US
voting—the ballot—that he believed made for democracy. To Chapman, the
question of the merit of the American ballot, and its replication in Great
Britain, was the question of all others, which distinguished the ultra-Liberal
from the Whig. His own answer was absolute, and inFallacies of the House of
Commons on the Ballot in Americahe defended the American ballot from its
English detractors:
Lord Stanley...merely tells us that in his opinion the Ballot in America is no
protection against bribery, and does not promote secrecy. I have seen, perhaps,
ten times as much of America and Americans as Lord Stanley, I have mixed with
the people, and I assert Lord Stanley’s opinion is erroneous, and his statements
incorrect. (Chapman 1835b, p. 15)Stanley could conjecture, said Chapman, how, under ballot arrangements
then prevailing in the USA, a‘landlord’might be able to observe how someone
voted. But:
Pray my Lord Stanley, can you not perceive that a law might be so framed so as to
prevent the said landlord, from being within hearing or seeing distance?
(Chapman 1835b, p. 15)Here we see the crux of Chapman’s position on the ballot. The American
‘secresy’ballot had done its mighty work across the Atlantic. It required only
a Benthamite penchant for technical detail to perfect it in Britain and her
dominions.
8.2 Proportional Representation
Any claim for Australia to have pioneered PR would be more precarious than
that regarding the secret ballot. History customarily awards the Swiss canton
of Ticino with thefirst use of PR, in 1890. But Adelaide Municipal Council
can place a serious claim for the deliberate, if minute and passing, exercise of
PR in 1840. And the state of Tasmania introduced, in 1896, a sophisticated
Australia’s Electoral Idiosyncrasies