An admirable speech made in Thursday's debate was that of
Lord Curzon. Nothing could have been better than the way in which he dealt with the misapprehensions about the Referendum. He exposed the absurdity of suggesting that a Referendum would be a very costly affair, and tore to pieces the fallacy that it would destroy representative govern- ment because it would put a cheek upon its oligarchic tendencies. We should like to point out, however, what appears to us a very serious error in Lord Curzon's speech. He seems to contemplate the Referendum being applied through the Post Office and by means of voting-papers, after the manner in which certain amateur popular polls have been taken. We are convinced that if Lord Curzon will look into the matter a little closer, he will see, as we have said else- where, that the safe and proper way of taking a Referendum is by means of personal voting by ballot, as in Parliamentary elections. Voting by the post, in the case of a vast electorate, would be impossibly cumbersome, if proper precautions were taken that only the persons entitled to vote filled up the papers. The only way effectually to prevent "stuffing the ballot-boxes" would be a poll of the people under the Ballot and Corrupt Practices Acts. A well-tested machinery exists for preventing fraudulent uses of electoral power, and this ought to be employed.
Previous page
