The Sun.
London, England, 1833-04-26 00:00:00

Oon, but it is unpardonable on this. The consti.
ments of the absentees must look to it.

The arguments adduced against the ballot may
be summed up in a word, namely, that it will oc-
casion universal demoral,zation. This is the dull,
monotonous cuckoo cry of all who oppose it, whether

by essays in the Edinburgh Review, or speeches in
the Hnu,e of Commons. Yet what demoralization

can be so great with the as that which exists
without it ? In the one case the danger is constant,

pleasing, deadly—in the other it is purely theoreti-
cd. And are we to iefwe to rid ourselves of an
actual, existing evil, bec rise by so doing we may
run a remote—and mark ! only a remote—chance
of being inoculated with another ? Are we to ne-
glect the duties of the day in our anxiety to look
after those of the morrow ? The ballot is part and
parcel of reform. It is its natural sequel—its life
—its essence, without which it is all but a dry,
shrunken mummy. From the very first mooting of
the question, the people have always regarded it in
this light, and will scarcely be converted by the
sophistry of Sir R. PEEL-Still less by the vacillat-
ing sentiments of Lord ALTHORP, over whom the
Treasury Bench has worked its usual convenient
influence.

Mr. GROTE argued the question with consum-
mate ability. He took a clear—temperate—com-
prehensive view of it, and showed how, by the pre-
sent system of dependent voting, the Legislature was
poisoned at its fountain-head. His distinction be-
tween the legitimate and factitious influence of pro-
perty was ably defined, and brought to bear on the
question with itres stible weight.
Sir W. INGILBY, who seconded the Hon. Mem.
ber's motion, expressed himself in a terse, laconic
style, better worth attending to than a thousand
vague declamations. He would vote for the ballot,
because " the squires and the parsons were leagued
together to prevent the electors from giving an
honest vote."

Mr. F. T. BARING, for lack of better argument, was
compelled to go back to the first French revolution.
R.; attempted to " fright the House from its pro-
priety" by such bug-bears as MARAT, DANTON, and
ROBESPIERRE. But this is a stale trick, like the cry
of the " Church in Danger," and will not terrify us
now, whatever it may have done in the" good old
times" of PITT. We can bear now to hear of the
Convention without fear of paralysis or apoplexy.
Dr. LUSIIINGToti made a convincing speech in fa-
vour of the ballot—the more convincing that it was
founded on facts which came within the range of his
own personal experience. Mr. O'CoNNELL, too,
though he spoke briefly, spoke argumentatively, arid
to the point. He condensed the substance of a
pamphlet within the compass of a few short,
emphatic sentences.
Sir R. PEEL was of course strongly opposed to
the ballot. This is strictly in accordance with
what philosopher SQUARE would call " the fitness
of things," for men who have themselves but just
sprung from the democracy have always the greatest
horror of its influence. During the discussion of the
Reform Bill in the Lords, it was remarked that the
newest Peers were those most inveterate against
it. Sir R. PEEL'S aristocratic notions do not
sit well upon him in public estimation. The spin-
ning-jenny i 3 not yet forgotten ; nor can he yet
afford with propriety to shrug his shoulders, and
effect an elegant fastidiousness at the mention of the
word " democracy." It will triumph, despite his
opposition.
We may observe, in conclusion, that the dis-
cussion of last night, coupled with the budget,
and a few previous supplemental absurdities
on the part of Ministers, will go far to con-
vince the people that as yet they have got
but the shadow, not the substance of Reform. That
their two years' Herculean energies have been ex-
pended, not in bettering t heir own condition, but in
helping the Whigs to a snug birth on the Trea ury
Bench. Hence we anticipate a speedy—an over-
whelming reaction, which, should it displace the
Whigs, will most assuredly displace them for ever.
Two great parties have already been tried ; a third,
(the " movement" party,) is yet to have its trial.

The accounts from Oporto at the Admiralty are
quite as favourable to the Constitutional cause as
,he private accounts which have reached us.

New York papers to the 2(1 inst. have been re-
ceived, but their contents are not of sufficient
interest for extract. _

The French Papers of Wednesday contain no
news of importance. At the close of the sitting of
the Deputies on Tuesday, +he President announced
hat a Royal sitting would almost immediately take
dlace. The Session closes to-day, on which occa-
-ioo tile KING will go in person to the Chamber.
The National says that the Tribune is again to
he made the subject of Government prosecution.
FRENCIT RINDS, PARTS, APRIL 24.-Five per Cents., 101 f. 35c.
50c. 55c. 60c. 65c. 70c. 60c 65c. 60c. 1011, 63c. 80c. 50c. 55c. ; Four
Der Cents., 99.1. 75c. ; Three per Cents., 77f SOc. Sic 95c. 7Sf.
751. sc. ; National Loan, 1011. 65c.; Bank Actions, 1,740 f.; Rente
de Naples, 91f. 45c. 90c. 92c. 91c. 95c. 9•2 f. ; Roman Five per
Cents 90% %4 ; Bente d'Espagne, Five per Cents., 16 ;
Rente'd'Espagne, Three per Cents., 44(4 V 4 'A'a 44'!1;
; Royal Spanish Loan, 90L4 1k ; Rente Perpetuelle d'Espagne,
Five per Cents., 764 76 704 % ; Belgic Loan, 57 ;
Elaytian Loan, 2701. 2671. 56c. 2tof. Exchange on London, one
month, money, 25f. 75c. ; three months, money, 9.51. 65c.-Couis
4u/hen/iglu.
VIENNA, APRIL 15.-Five per Cent. Metalliques 91 13-16;
Four per Cents. St 4-5; Bank Shares 1196 4-5.

We have read with astonishment the report o,
one of the speeches delivered yesterday at the
Crown and Anchor, in which it was stated, that
Lord ALTHORP had said the country did not cry out
or the abolition of the House and Window Taxes,
remembering, as we do, that it is not two months
ago that his Lordship observed, that he was afraid
the House of Commons would insist upon a very
large reduction of those taxes, in consequence of the
very general feeling that prevailed against them
His Lordship made this observation, in reply to an•
application for the reduction of the Taxes on Know-
ledge, and evidently with the view of accounting for
the refusal to reduce them, by saying that the feeling
of the country was much more strongly expressed
against the House and Window Taxes than against
any other branch of taxation. Can Loid AurtiouP
labour under the delusion, that, because meetings
have not been held already over all parts of the
kingdom, to remonstrate against the continuance of
those oppressive taxes, the public are indifferent to
them ? He ought to remember, that, in many places
which are represented in the House of Commons by
independent men, the confidence repcsed by the
electors in their representatives renders any public
manifestation of feeling unnecessary, those represen-
tatives having pledged themselves to resist every
at'empt of the Ministers to retain the House and
Window Taxes. But, if Lord Aurtioße should
want further demonstrations of popular dissatis-
faction than that of Westminster, let him wait a
few days, and he will receive them from every part
of ihe country.
It was correctly observed at the meeting,
yesterday, that the inhabitants of the metro-
polis feel these taxes more severely than
50me parts of the country, but it must not be
inferred that the feeling against these taxes is not
zeneral among the middling and trailing classes
throughout the United Kingdom. In London, in-
deed, the burden is acutely felt, for trade is in a
state of stagnation ; and most of the houses of
tradesmen having been taken on lease some years
ago, when house property was much more valuable
'ban it is now, the inability to pay high rents, and
taxes proportioned to these rents, is very general.
In the neighbourhood of Russell-square, many of
the houses which were let on lease six years ago,
by the trustees of a public charity, at 1001. each
per annum, are now offered by the lessees at 701.
per annum, and even at this reduction they are