jumping into one hedge, jumped into another to scratch them in again.

Were more to be said in favour of Equitable Adjustment than has ever yet been uttered, or is conceivable, we should hold that the time has not yet arrived for the consideration of it-nay, that barely to consider of it now were a dishonesty; for the conduct of a nation in difficulties should be the conduct of an honest man in difficulties, and does such a one think of compounding with his creditors before he has retrenched his unnecessary expenses, and dispensed with all articles of show and luxury? Before we hear of "Equitable Adjustment" we must cease to hear of millions for the support of Royalty, a profligate Pension List, an useless Diplomatic Service, a numerous Standing Army waiting on the most pacific policy, and a wealthy Church plunging one-third of the kingdom into strife. Before any plan for breaking faith with the public creditor can be looked at, we must see the Church property placed to the public account, and the Clergy moderately paid according to their services, and only where there is a demand for them; pensioners dismissed, troops disbanded, military institutions broken up, the salaries of all the superior public functionaries reduced, the property of the Crown, the Duchies, &c. sold, and the state of the Monarchy accommodated to the distressed circumstances of the nation. As a plea for every extravagance, we have long been accustomed to

hear of the Dignity of the Crown, and the necessity of upholding it; but before we contemplate the spoliation of the fundholder in anticipation of bankruptcy, we must hear of the Honesty of the Crown, and the renouncement of its trappings for the modesties suited to the necessitous condition of the nation. The Honour of the Crown must show itself in the severest economy before one stiver is withheld of the covenanted dues of the public creditor, who has trusted his means of support to the State in reliance on the public faith The first Magistrate of England should dwell in the decencies of the American President before the fundholder is dispossessed of his property on the plea of necessity, or apprehended bankruptcy. Nor should this be all. Before we take what we have no right to take, an inquisition must be had to ascertain what we may with justice claim in the way of restitution, and the harpies who have fattened on the public plunder should be called to account and compelled to disgorge. If possession is to be disturbed-if any necessity sufficiently strong for the disturbance of possession, not disputable according to the existing law, presses upon us, the possessions which have accrued from public pillage are the first and fittest subjects for seizure, and we have all a pretty good guess where they lie, and where the scrutiny should commence. No time estops the claims of the King, and no time should estop the claims of the nation when on certain grounds

seeking restitution from roguery, rather than resort to confiscation against the confiding and the unoffending. A view of the public accounts would enable us to trace to favoured individuals sums to a vast amount, for which no service had been rendered or could be pretended. Much hardship would fall on innocent descendants, it may be said, from such a process of restitution, and it were better to content ourselves with securities against future malversation than to scrutinize and revoke the misbestowed rewards of the State for years past: this doubtless is true, but the evil of such a course of proceeding would be preferable to the greater mischief and dishonesty of plundering the fundholder-before which extremity is proposed, resort must be had to all other expedients for the public relief having in them any show or savour of justice. Try all things, we say, before a notorious and unquestionable wrong. And while waste, luxury, and a vicious bounty, are to be seen in the State, hold the man in suspicion who, by preaching the robbery of the fundholder for the relief of the public burthens, would divert the minds of the people from the proper objects of retrenchment to a measure of the most heinous dishonesty. While a shilling can be fairly retrenched, let us not think of knavishly denying a shilling where it is strictly due: when we have done all we can do for a rigid economy-such as should be practised, supposing

the bankruptcy to be staring us in the face, which is the only plea for Equitable Adjustment—then it will be time to obey necessity should it dictate composition; but firmly are we persuaded, that by the employment of all the means of saving and obtaining money, which should precede the extremity in question, it would be averted, and the national resources and energies made available to support the Honesty of the Nation.

A KEY TO THE BALLOT QUESTION.

WITHOUT any fear of wearying our readers, we return again and again to the Ballot, knowing the great interest of the subject, and the anxiety of the public to be guarded against the pretences or sophistries which are put forth to discredit the only resource against the foul influences. There is not, however, any adverse argument which our friends may not dispose of as easily as we can by employing the rule which has enabled us to unravel all the entanglements of this question. It is simply as follows:

Every objection to secret voting applies more strongly to open voting; or, every vice which can be supposed to exist in consequence of the Ballot,

exists far more extensively and injuriously in the

present system.

Every argument against secret voting will be broken up by the working of this rule. Whatever be the circumstances supposed by the opponent, let the reader consider what will be the effect of them at the open hustings. Dependency he will find the common term of every hypothesis; upon this the evil power in every conceivable case turns; and in the open voting it turns against the public object-in the secret for it. For example, Mr Spring Rice, at the Cambridge election, argued thus against the Ballot :

66

"Let me put a case-suppose a master who em66 ploys many workmen: he canvasses them, and "threatens dismissal if they do not promise to vote "for his favourite candidate. They may, it is "true, refuse such promise, but they may also, "under the present system, decline breaking their "word, or abandoning their principles. But if they yield, the promise is given; if they keep "their promise, the present evils remain unmitigated; they vote against their opinion. But it " is suggested that they may break their promises. "True; but is it to fraud, to lying, and to dis"honesty, that we can or ought to trust for a re"medy in this case? Are hypocrisy and baseness "thus to become the pledges and guarantees for "English freedom? I go a step further; not

66