So that we would have the election, and what the opponents of the proposal have in mind would not be carried out. It is a strange thing to me, if the attitude of certain Senators was determined by their animus or feelings against certain other Senators, they do not carry out their feelings to the extent of giving the attendance in this House which is expected of them. If I might refer to the proposer of the amendment, I may say that only yesterday he rather decried attempts by a statistician in the other House who based his calculations on figures which had due regard to the few. The Senator has now attempted to give effect to proposals which have their real intent and are really based on a consideration of the few. This proposal is turned not to the general body of members who attend the sittings of this House, but to those who are continually absent, and he does not want to facilitate them in any way.
Is there nothing to be said for postal voting? Yesterday Senator O'Farrell said that there had been no parallel case upon which we could go. There is no direct parallel, but cases could be cited which are somewhat collateral. If my mind serves me right. I remember, when a boy, seeing tenants going to the nearest town—in some cases a fair distance—and waiting around to pay their rent to the agents of the landlords. That system has been done away with, nobody has suffered, and the tenants are all the better off. Through receivable orders and through the medium of the post they are able at present to pay their annuities. There are no direct representatives of the Land Commission waiting in warm offices in the cities and towns to receive the rents of the unfortunate tenants. The postal system was introduced very effectively, certain economies were effected, and the time of the tenants saved. In County Kerry at the present time the rates are collected through the post. There is a very strong feeling that the rates should be collected in every county by post, and that certain economies could be effected in that respect, and if economies, consistent with efficiency, can be effected in that way, there is no reason why they should not be.
Let us examine the arguments in favour of postal voting which can be put forward. Senator O'Farrell made light of one argument which can be advanced—the argument of economy. He admitted that there would be a certain economy in the system of voting by post rather than by having Deputies and Senators to attend here and register their votes in the ordinary way. It may, of course, be stated that the economy would be very limited, but every economy that can be made, consistent with efficiency, should not be disregarded in this State. In the first place the convenience of voters will be suited. As the Minister himself has said, there seems to be no reason why, when this House or the other House is not sitting, there should be a special meeting of the Seanad or of the Dáil simply to bring Senators and Deputies together for the purpose of voting. There seems to be no particular point in doing that when the thing can be done, and done quickly and well, otherwise. In the third place, through that system of voting we are likely to get a hundred per cent. vote, and that is, after all, something that we ought to aim at. I know many public speakers and close thinkers in this country who are at present of the opinion that those who do not utilise the franchise should not continue to enjoy it.
There is certainly a very definite public opinion in that respect, and if we, through the medium of this postal vote, can secure getting approximately a hundred per cent. vote, is there any reason why we should not try to put it into effect? They tell us that a hardship may be inflicted on a Senator or Deputy who may be away. Through this system of the postal vote a Senator or a Deputy who is ill will be enabled to vote. That is an argument that cannot be disregarded. In the fifth place, the Bill provides that due regard shall be had to the maintenance of the secrecy of the voting. In my opinion, based upon certain experience in that respect, the system of postal voting lends itself to the maintenance of secrecy. In the 1925 election, when the panel of candidates was being prepared, it is known that certain representatives of the political parties who then sat in the House took it upon themselves to examine the papers of the voters, who were Deputies on that occasion. If that procedure is again followed it would be absolutely impossible to maintain secrecy. We are either out for the secrecy of the ballot or we are not. If we are out for the secrecy of the ballot we should support a scheme which makes for the maintenance of that secrecy, and there can be no question about it that postal voting makes for the secrecy of the ballot, so that we are either consistent in that or we are not. In the sixth place, we stand for the principle in regard to the Seanad enunciated in the Constitution. The Constitution says that due regard shall be had in the selection of candidates to the ground that they "have done honour to the nation by reason of useful public service or that, because of special qualifications or attainments, they represent important aspects of the nation's life." At the same time, we know what human nature and human tendencies are, and the likelihood with everyone of us voters is this, that we regard the cause to which we have given allegiance, or the movement with which we have been associated, as the one which is in a sense predominant, and our natural tendency is to give votes to persons who have been themselves prominently associated with us in that movement or cause. That is perfectly natural. If we were to vote in this House, or if Deputies were to vote in the Dáil, and if meetings are to be held and if consultations are to take place, following on what Senator Jameson said yesterday, the very natural tendency would be that we would congregate, not in any rough-and-ready way, but in our political groups, and as to-day what we have regard to is the bringing of kudos to our political parties, that would be the tendency instead of the opposite when we came together. I am prepared to accept it that when they vote in their homes many of the voters will give their numbers one and two to persons who have been associated with them in a movement; they will be likely to give their number 3, 4, 5 votes to candidates who will more materially conform to the requirements set out for them in the Constitution. That would be a slight attempt to depart from the party system, and that would be all to the good. The departure might only be a slight one, but it would be a step in the right direction, and again, that should not be disregarded.
A very strong case can reasonably be made for postal voting. No case has been made against it—or none that I have heard. The fact that you want to penalise a few Senators who do not attend regularly in this House is not any case against postal voting. If you want to penalise Senators who do not attend regularly there should be another way of doing that, and that should be attended to at another time. It should not be beyond the ingenuity of Senators and Deputies to devise a means of dealing with that question when it arises. That question should arise at another time; it should not be mixed up with any consideration of the question before us now, but should be examined on its intrinsic merits. I have yet to hear a case against postal voting.
