The Sun.
London, England, 1854-11-28 00:00:00

TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES.

Sir,—Not only is Odessa the greater feeder of Sebas-
topol and the depot whence the Crimea derives an im-
mense supply of provisions, ammunition, and men, but
it is, in fact and without exaggeration, one of the main-
spring of the Russian revenue, and, consequently, no
mean pillar of the enemy's power. The rival of St.
Petersburgh in wealth and importance, it is the empo-
rium where the produce of nearly the half of Russia is
collected in order to be exported in exchange for the
sinews of war. Its various guilds number nearly 1,000
merchants, many of whom are Greeks, whose wealth has,
in the shape of loans and donations, contributed largely
to the resources of our foe. Why, then, spare Odessa ?
It is a courtesy of that superfine sort which the nation
can but ill afford; while to our brave countrymen in
the Crimea it is an act of the most execrable inhu-
manity. For my part, Sir, I feel my blood rise
whenever I remember the foolery of that bombardment
of Odessa. 8,000,0001. or 10.000,000/. worth of Russian
" ways and means" lay at our mercy, and we contented
ourselves with pelting with red hot shot the military
mud banks of the city, or with chipping bits of stone
from the fronts of its forts. John Bull must be sinking
into the dotage of old age, and certainly deserves to be
beaten, if he finds any gratification in such perform-
ances. A. generosity so ungenerous to our brave de-
fenders merited no better result than the jubilantan-
nouncement of the Russian Government that the Allied
fleets had done their worst and retired in defeat and dis-
tress. I am, Sir,
A TRIM BRITON.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES.
Sir,— I am glad to perceive that the columns of your
journal have been thrown open to the question, " Why
spare Odessa?" and it is much to be desired that by
following it up the public may take the opportunity of
expressing what I believe to be their almost unanimous
opinion, in order that the Government may be awakened
from their merciful (so called) way of making war.
War is a dreadful scourge and an enormous evil ;
but, when it becomes the duty of a nation to take up
arms in the cause of right and ofjustice, that is the most
merciful proceeding which will render so immense an
evil of the least possible duration.
We are engaged in a momentous struggle with one of
the greatest Powers in the world—a struggle which it
will tax all our energies to bring to a satisfactory conclu-
sion and to humble a grasping and ambitious des-
pot. We must, _therefore, take every opportunity of
injuring and crippling so powerful an antagonist ; and
the people of this country have no sympathy with such
a half-peace half-war policy as caused the town of
Odessa to be spared, and which has undoubtedly occa-
sioned the loss of many of our gallant countrymen and
allies, by that place being the rendezvous of the Rus-
sian legions, which have poured into the Crimea to
annihilate our army, and forming, as it does, the great
source whence the enemy is obtaining his supplies.
I hope, then, soon to hear, with your advocacy, that
we shall make use of the power we possess, and that
at least a portion of the allied fleet, which can be easily
augmented, will proceed either " to capture," or " burn
and destroy," not only Odessa, but also every place be-
longing to the enemy it is possible to approach.—l am,
sir, your most obedient servant,
Nov. 27. AN ENGLISHMAN.

REVOLVERS IN THE CAVALRY.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES.

Sir,—l believe it is universally admitted that a re-
volver is a terrible arm in the hand of a cool and deter-
milted man, and for close quarters far surpasses anything
ever invented. This being a fact, I ask, Why does not
Government arm our cavalry with revolvers ? It is a
very awkward and long jois to load firearms OR horse-
back, and quite out of the question in an action, so that
when a man has fired his carbine or pistols, all be has
to trust to is his sword. I have seen several excellent
revolvers, most of which can be cocked as well as fired
with the trigger, so that a man may fire off his six shots
one after another, only using one hand. Now, in the
late charge of heavy and light cavalry, suppose every
man had been provided with two revolvers ; if they had
reserved their shot for close quarters they might have
made the most dreadful havoc with the enemy. Nobody
who has had any experience of this sort of thing will
deny this.
Now, the only reason I can see why these weapons
should not be universally introduced into the army is the
expense. But I have read in your paper that it costs
100?. to get a foot soldier out to the seat of war. I
should think the outside price of a good revolver for
the army might be 4/. NY hat proportion, then, does
Si. bear to the general expense of a soldier or the value
of a litei--+}eirret these -whom it may concern to see if
there is reason in what I say. —I am, sir, your humble
servau t, K.
Nov. 25.

TWENTY-FIRST DAY A FTER THE BATTLE OF
INKERMAN.