THE NON-RESIDENTIAL COUNTY FRANCHISE.
(TO THE EDITOR Or THE " SPECTATOR.'l SIR,—The non-residential county franchise has a value which the Spectator is not likely to depreciate as merely sentimental. It provides a kind of political anchorage in the old home; and in this aspect it is directly recognised by the existing law. The freehold qualification devolving by inheritance or bequest admits of earlier registration than that acquired by purchase.
Cases may occur in which the franchise derived from bequest may bear some resemblance to faggot-voting ; but these are exceptional and temporary, as when a testator bequeaths his freehold to his children share and share alike, with power to his executors to hold or sell at their discretion. The ordinary non-residential franchise is, however, generally that of the inheritors of real property whose callings or circumstances oblige them to live elsewhere. In less. frequent, but not un- usual, instances, fathers provide their sons with a county qualification at home, for the maintenance of which nothing more is required than attention to the Register.
Rightly or wrongly, most men would hold such a franchise in higher value than a householder's vote, say, for the old, un- divided Tower Hamlets when I was on the Register, at the elections of 1857 and later years. The bond of home, or county, association was then, as I know, and is still, as I believe, strong in London life ; and Liberals may cling to the franchise on personal, as well as on historical grounds.
It is probable that any proposal for the abolition of the non- residential franchise would allow some limit of residence beyond the county boundaries, and that thus my own vote for West Worcestershire would be safe, even though I live (to quote your Waterford correspondent) in the "unintelligible county" of Hereford. (We had imagined the tenant-farmers' return of Mr. Duckham in 1880 to be very distinctly intelligible.) But I also hold the franchise for North Warwickshire, by an inheritance a hundred years old, and I do not see that sound Liberal princi- ples require me to sacrifice this.
The distinction between bona fide freeholds and faggot-vote manufactories is evident, and is admitted in the Spectator article of this week. With the abolition of payment for travel- ling expenses, a sufficient security will have been obtained against the mere party manipulation of non-resident county votes ; and even Mr. Fawcett, I trust, may allow us to retain our historical rights in peace.—I am, Sir, &c., F. &WON. LEA. Tedstone Delarnere Rectory, Worcestc r, November 12th.
[The abolition of payment for travelling expenses does not in the least interfere with the manufacture of faggot votes. The rich, who chiefly enjoy these votes, would cheerfully travel far .at their own expense to record them.—En. Spectator.]
Previous page
