The Sun.
London, England, 1833-01-22 00:00:00

he were -anxious only for independent voting.
He first endeavours to show that the bal'ot
would not be so efficacious in giving protection
as its advocates suppose it would be—that
against landlords and agitators it would not be a
safeguard.—" At present," says the Reviewer,
the victim of these oppressors is at least safe,
if he obeys their commands. Under the ballot,
the probability is, that many who now vote
openly would not dare to encounter the suspi-
cion to. which they might expose themselves; for
that in Ireland it should become the practice for
the rulers of the multitude to leave voters to
themselves, merely because the franchise was
exercised in secret, is what no one, however slight
may have been his acquaintance with that unhappy
country, would expect." Then it is said it would
favour bribery. The writer, however, seems to
have his misgivings as to the int fficacy of the
ballot, and proceeds to show, that the slender
protection afforded by it would be purchased at
too great a price. Here we have all the argu-
ments as to its tendency to produce hypocrisy
spread out before us- in their most imposing
form. "It works corruption and debasement,"
`says the writer, " mainly by making falsehood
familiar. If then the ballot familiarizes false-
hood, it is as bad as oppression ; but it is clear
that the oppression we are treating of does not
degrade like other tyranny ; it teaches no false-
hood. A voter is compelled not to vote ac-
cording to his conscience, or even to vote con-
trary to his conscience. His lot is most hard ;
the conduct of his oppressor is execrable ; no
epithet is. so bad that he has not amply earned
it ; but still his dependent deceives no one in the
vote he gives; he votes avowedly under com-
pulsion. The public is injured, no doubt ;
and by the ballot this injury is avoided,
for the real, though carefully concealed opi-
nion of the voter is fairly represented.
But this appears to be a good purchased too
dear, when it can only be obtained by the habi-
tual practice of deception on the voter's part."
There is a strange moral obliquity in all this.
A man may send to Parliament one whom he
conceives utterly unfit to discharge the duties of
an able and upright representative—he may by his
vote contribute all that in him lies to the ruin of
the nation, because it is known that he violates his
conscience under compulsion, and he deceives
no one. He may commit a most heinous act
—he may besides brand himself as a liar, be-
cause, his opinions being known, the lie can
deceive no one ; but he must not follow the dic-
tates of his conscience in contributing, as far
is in him lies, to the returning to Parliament a
man whom he believes an able and fit represen-
tative, because the meant by which he is en-
abled to vote conscientiously might enable him
to deceive the wretch who would compel him
to violate his conscience. This is, indeed,
straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel. It
has been again and again shown, that, if the
Ballot be effective to conceal the vote, the per-'
sons anxious to exercise undue influence would
have small temptation to demand that, of the
truth of which they could have no assurance.
But waving this consideration, are we to put the
possible deception practised towards a tyrant,
who would compel a fellow-creature to commit
a flagrant wrong, for one moment in competi-
tion with the degrading spectacle of human
beings publicly branding themselves, as guilty
of doing that which, in their conscience, they
►bhor—of declaring, by their vote, a falsehood,
because they act under the compulsion of fear of
want ? From a nation constantly familiar
with such degrading spectacles, all virtue and
elevation of character would in time be utterly ba-
tished. IVlen would in time come to make a jest
of the most sacred duties. Then the Reviewer
commits the fallacy of considering the electors
rustees for others. " Those individuals (he
:ays) assuredly are bound to regard themselves,
if any men are, as acting for others, as well as
for their own interest ; and those others, who
have no votes, are entitled to know how a trust
io nearly affecting them is exercised." The
constituency is either sufficiently extensive, or it
is not. If it is sufficiently extensive—that is, if
t embraces all those who ought to have a vote
by making them responsible to those who ought
o have no vote, is saying that those who are
•xcluded from voting because they ought to have
to vote, should yet control those who are
selected for voting, because they are the only
'ersons deemed properly qualified. If, on the
ether band, the constituency is not sufficiently
.xtensive, it ought to be made so ; for nothing
.ould be more absurd than to exclude from vot-
og those who are as well qualified as those who
vote. But the whole argument is worth no-
,hing. The principle of Reform is, that the
ranchise is co-extensive with the interests of the
iation ; and the security for the due exercise of
he franchise is, that the interests of the nation
will not commit a felo de se. However, the
city of London has set a very different example
o the country from the course which would
receive the sanction of the writer in the
dinburgh Review. The example will, we
'Jaye no doubt, be everywhere followed. The
hree Members for the city present—Mr.
Grote, Mr. Alderman Wood, and Sir John
Key—promised to support the petition. Mr.
Alderman Wood, indeed, distinguished very
properly between the house and window tax
and the taxes on carriages, &c. Mr. Grote
allowed that the representative system had been
materially improved by the Reform Bill, yet, at
he same time, he could not but confess that it
was far from doing all that was required. It had
!eft several evils unremedied, and additional se-
curities to be provided for. Among the im-
provements to be suggested to a Reformed Par-
liament, there was no one greater—no one,
indeed, so important—as the measure of the
ballot. And be publicly promised that he should
consider it his solemn and indispensable duty,
on the very first opportunity, to originate a mo- .
tion in the House of Commons to bring in a
Bill for enabling electors to vote by ballot.—
(Immense cheering.)" Mr. Grote concurred
with Alderman Woad in thinking that some
discretion should be used in calling for the re-
peal of more than the house and window tax.
The interval between this and the meeting of
Parliament will be devoted to similar meetings.
This day the inhabitants of nine parishes of
Westminster will meet. -We apprehend on all
the subjects agitated at the meeting yesterday
there will everywhere be found but one opinion ;
and, if that opinion be strongly expressed, Mi-
nisters must attend to it.—Morning Chronicle.

The Church, as is acknowledged by all who
understand the state of Ireland, although from
circumstances it may now appear the most pro-
minent cause of immediate difficulty to the ad-
ministration of the general government, has no
claim to an equal rank of evil with the dreadful
condition of the labouring poor, produced by
the habitual and heartless disregard of ',their
landlords. This we have described as the
master-grievance of the nation,—as being at the