The Sun.
London, England, 1852-01-20 00:00:00

are in fact assailable, ho writes, "and at least
liable to insult, and to have contributions levied upon
US, on all parts of our cents, that ie, the coasts of these
islands, including the Channel Isles, which till this time,
frees the period of the Norman conquest, have ever
been successfully invaded." Is is difficult to believen that
this statement could grow into the awful disclosures
contained in Sir Francis Head's work, and that the need
foraeming a few coact batteries could be straightway
turned into a necessity for fortifying a city like London
—as if our citizens hau nothing to do but play at sol. I
diers, like national guards. Tao question to be decided
—if additional deluge) should ever be required to meet
additional dangers—is how these defences should be se-
cured with the greatest advantage, without their be-
coming a burden to the nation. When, in 1798,
Secretary Dundas moved for leave to bring forward the
Government bill on the national defences, he quaintly
stated, amongst other matters, that it had become ne-
cessary in particular districts to erect covers for bat-
teries, and to raise works in critical situations, but
where these positions were he found it impossible to
point out. Happily we aro very differently situated.
There is not a point on our costs the exact defensive
0(1 urdainiatinecseosfurwvheei,c.h The
not
Governmentperfectly
is laid
aware
down in the
of
every
locality
which requires strengthening, and our present
engineer officers are not surpassed
forprofessional
knowledge by any corps in the world. We were told
the other day that the dockyards of Portsmouth and
Plymouth were to be put in a proper state of defence.
Why were they not always in a proper state of defence?
—because the money which is annually voted for ord-
nance works and which the public believe to be thus
spent is squandered in foolish " brick and mortar jobs."
Real defences are not expensive matters, so far as ma-
sonry is concerned; for the uselessness of long lines of
walls and ditches round the seaports were discovered
many years back. Sieges have become too- expensive,
and all that is required are good strong batteries, placed
at the as3ailable points of importance—open batteries
whence the gunners can take a steady airs at advancing
steamers, not expensive casements where thry get
blinded and suffocated with smoke. For in future
wars, ships will not amuse themselves in exchanging
long-range shots with the land batteries, but bearing
down on them will come to close quarters and endeavour
to overpower them with the weight of their broadsides.
Of this the Americans are fully aware, for many of
their coast batteries are in double and triple tiers like a
line-of-battle ship. The defences of Great Britain must
be restricted to the fortifications in our dockyards, the
entrances of the river leading to our commercial sea-
ports, and to having our large force afloat properly dis-
posed. We must insist upon having some of our ships
home. England, now again, as ever before, must rely
for her chief safety on the courage and dexterity of her
seamen and the presence of her Wooden Walls. Since
the attention of the Ministry is being given to this sub-
ject, we warn them to oise well what they have, before
asking for more—to offer the country army end navy
reform, before they ask for army or navy extension.
HERALD.—When a writer, in the Morning Chronicle,
a few days since, ventured a hope that Lord John Rus-
sell would not raise such a flame, before leaving office, as
should render the Government of the country by any
other persons impossible, it was inevitable that our
minds should be driven to the ballot as the real danger
at which these earnest deprecations pointed. To our
minds this is the only danger which exists in the discus-
sion or proposal of new reforms. As to the schemes for
disfranchising some of the smaller broughs, and giving
the seats to the counties, we can see no necessary peril
in them. They may be wise or unwise; but, at all
events, they seem to involve no very serious danger. It
would be quite otherwise with the adoption of the ballot.
In that we see much real peril, while we see also a pro-
posal to legislate expressly to relieve men from the obli-
gation of keeping a promise. With these views, thee,
when wo hear men talk of some danger connected with
the new Reform Bill, we naturally conclude that it is
the ballot to which they refer. There ie also a singular
circumstance, as connected with this question, perceptible
in the reform article in the Edinburgh Review. We
mean, that almost every other proposition that has
been named, or can be imagined, is discussed in that
article ; but that the ballot is studiously passed
over. We say studiously—for it is not possible that
the writer should have overlooked or forgotten it.
The entire silence observed on this subject is distinctly
expressive of one thing;—that the writer knew not
which side it might be necessary to take, on a question
which could only be answered by a plain Yes, or an
equally distinct No. And from this silence we draw a
further omen, that the Ministerial mind is not fully de-
cided to reject the proposal. Yet there is one very re-
cent and loud-speaking event which has an important
bearing on this question, and on which we must say a
few words. The Examiner, always a Whig-Radical
organ, and of course favourable to Mr. Grote's panacea,
had an article last week on what is called " The impos-
sible 7,439,216." The most surprising point in that
clever and ingenious article was, that its writer did not
see that the fact upon which it dwelt told about a thou-
sand times wow strongly against its own favourite, the
ballot, than it could do against the French President!
It is true that the one weak point in this election was,
that it was effected by secret veting. This was not the
President's first intention or command. He was per-
suaded by others to depart from his original purpose.
In order to ensure freedom of voting, h ordered the
vote to be secret. And here is the reward. He is now
told, " You have polled more votes than
could by possibility have existed." Let us
look at this allegation, first, as it affects
Louis Napoleon's election ; and, secondly, as it shows
the absurdity of the whole system of ballot-voting. 1.
As far as Louis Napoleon's election is concerned, the
objection is merely frivolous. Is there a living man who
doubts that the President received as many millions of
bona fide votes as there were of hundreds of thousands
against him? In a word, is there any one who doubts
that he had the vote of fully nine out of every ten? And
if this cannot be doubted, of what consequence is it to
him, or to his election, whether or no 300,000 or 400,000
votes in his favour were mistakenly or fradulently
thrown in ? The great proof of that election really
was what the return represented it to be, is found in
the fact, that there had been no denials of its sub-
stantial truth. Had any town or village known that
its inhabitants were indisposed towards Louis Napo-
leon, and would vote against him, and had they
afterwards seen an official return, showing that
1,200 voted in his favour, and only 86 against him,
would they not have disclaimed, publicly, the whole
transaction, and have denounced it as a cheat? Bat not
a whisper of the kind has been heard. The general
truth of the return is established by the universal assent
of the people. So far, then, as Louis Napoleon is con-
cerned, the charge is immaterial. We may ask the
Examiner, and other impugners, " What is your be-
lief? Do you suppose that as many as 1,000,000 of
votes were fabricated? Well, if that be all, the result
will be, that in your view, tbo President was only
elected by 6,439,216 votes, against 640,737—0 r only by
10 to 1, and not by more than 11 to 1, as the official re-
turn stated. And that is all you have to say. Well,
what matters it, whether you are right or the official
return? Either way the majority was prodigious." But
the case is different when we turn from the elected to the
method of election. It matters nothing to Louis Napo-
leon whether he were chosen by 7,439,216 votes, or by
n 6,439,216. But when we come to discuss the Ballot, and to
a
speak of its merits and demerits,
that it matters a greatdeal to
find its own advocates boldly asserting
fabricated.
under a
ballot election a million or so of votes can be
And we believe that many have some ground for their
assertion. Whether it arose from the overzest of some
officials, or from a crowd of partisans nothgoopveert?Taegu".-
lified, or from whatever other cause, we
ee
late fact
to be, that more votes were taken at t
taken. We believe
that, Presiden-
tialelection than ought to have been
that, making the proper allowance for abstaining par-
ties, so many as 7,439,216 voters could not have been
polled. And this conclusion is verified by a few minutes
examination of the various official returns. At Paris, in
the department of the Seine, with 1,364,933 inhabitants,
we find only 292,343 votes given, or little more than 01:10
for each five of the population. And we imagine that itt
the metropolis—in the very seat of political interest—
the abstainers would be quite as few as in most other
places. But what aro wo to say, then,
when we find
such returns as the following;_
Departments. Population. Votes.
Oise
...... 107,552
Aube 261,881 ...... 76,173
Indre and Loire o 312,400
Seine and Marne...... 51,361
340,212
Somme ............... 570 529
In our view these votes are
possible." Allowing for ,as the Examiner says, " im-
fearful, dO not believe the sick, the aged, and the
that out of such populations
such votes could be obtained. We must suppose, there-
fore, that those who held and managed the ballot-boxes
played false. discretion. Their zeal, in some cases, outran their
And so it ever is in ballot-elections. We
never yet knew one
in which great interests were at
stake, in which
fraud was not charged, on ono side or the
other. Take a case at our own doors' The vestry of
St. Pancras is chosen by ballot. And whenever there is
a contest, the first struggle between the two parties
always is,," Who shall aoint the scrutineers?" Which-
ever side can nominate thep parties who aro to hold the
ballot-boxes, reckons itself sure of the election. Such is
the working of the ballot, even in England. Why should
we expect it to work better in France?

[ADVERTISEMENT.] Holloway's Ointment and
Pills a certain and effectual Remedy for Diseases of the Skin,
Ringworm, Scurvy, Leprosy, Jaundice, Scrofula, King's Evil,
Sore Heads, and the most inveterate Skin Diseases to which
the human race is subject, cannot be treated with a more cer-
tain, safe, and speedy remedy for their cure than Holloway's
Ointment and. Pills, which act so peculiarly on the constitution,
and so effectually purify the blood, that those diseases are
quickly eradicated from the system, and a lasting cure obtained.
These sovereign remedies are equally efficacious in curing
Tumours, Burns, Scalds, Glandulated Swellings, Ulcerous
Wounds, Rheumatism, Contracted and Stiff Joints--Sold by
all Druggists, and at Professor Holloway's Establishment, 244,
Strand, London.
The number of trees of liberty already cut down
in Paris and the banlieue is about 1,200. The most remark-
able was one which was planted by Louis Blanc opposite
the clock in the garden of the Luxembourg. The number of
the inscriptions —" Liberti Evalite Fraternite," on public
buildings which have been removed,
is about 1,000.
Galignani.