The Sun.
London, England, 1859-03-21 00:00:00

TO THE RIGHT HON. LORD JOHN RUSSELL.
MY LORD,—When in Parliament, previous and
subsequent to the passing of the Reform Bill, I
was opposed to the Ballot on the principle that
Englishmen ought not to be afraid to state their
opinions openly ; but the experience of several con-
tested elections convinces me that, however desir-
able such conduct might be, it was not just, and
hardly decent, for the Legislature to expect that a
poor man should subject himself and family to"ruin
by the honest performance of a public duty. I
therefore repeatedly voted with Mr. Grote for the
introduction of the Ballot, not as an unmixed good,
but to avoid the wicked hyliocrisy—for such it ap-
peared to me—of giving a vote to a citizen to be
exercised ostensibly according to his own opinion,
but really according to the opinion of another, and
this under the penalty of ruin.
Subsequent consideration has not only confirmed
but strengthened this view ; and I have often felt
how carefully those who oppose the Ballot conceal
their real objection, which is nothing more nor less
than the fear that, if it was adopted, property
would no longer exercise that legitimate influence
to which it is undoubtedly entitled, as one of the
rewards of successful industry either of its present
_ _

possessor or of those from whom he derived i
This real objection never having been prominently
advanced in debate, of course there has been no
reply to it ; and yet such reply appears to me so
crushing, both in a social as well as a political
point of view, that I cannot forbear bringing it
, directly under your lordship's attention.
The possessors of property, exercising an influ,
ence—it may be perfectly honest and legitimate
as well as the contrary—are landlords, manufac•
turers, employers of skilled labour, and purchasers
of the luxuries, comforts, and necessaries of life,
from an Overstone to a navvy. At present this
influence cannot be used without the'suspicion that,
if not successful, the voter will suffer. A score of
navvies calling upon a ten-pounder in a backstreet,
to ask him to support A or B, may not really mean
that if he will not comply with their request they
will withdraw their custom, but it has an ugly
look. An Overstone sending for a wealthy trades-
man in Cheapside, who is often under obligation to
his banker, and begging him to support your lord-
ship at the next election, has an equally ugly
appearance.
The steward of a landed proprietor, and the
overseer of a wealthy manufacturer, soliciting the
support of a candidate, is in the same dilemma. The
request may mean, if you do not vote as we desire
it will be worse for you ; it may mean nothing of
the kind, but is it possible for the voter to know
this ? Just in proportion as it is intended to use
coercion so.the request will be mild and conciliating
—" the voice is the voice of Jacob," but the tench
may be as rough as Esau's. _
Pass the Ballot, and what a social change. The
voter is equally solicited, for it is fatuitous to be-
lieve that the possessors of property will ever
refrain from seeking to obtain political influence,
but such influence will be owing not entirely to
their property, but to their kindliness and for-
bearance ; and just in proportion as a landlord or
manufacturer, an Overstone or a navvy, was kind
and forbearing to those with whom he came in
contact, so would his influence at elections be ac-
cording to the extent of his property, and simply
for this reason, that he would be brought in con-
tact with a greater number of voters to appreciate
his kindliness and forbearance.
But your lordship may say there can be little
doubt that, socially speaking, the Ballot would be
an improvement ; but I am a statesman, and must
look not merely to the social but to the political
effect of the measure—the Ballot might induce the
wealthy and the powerful to treat those with whom
they come into contact with greater courtesy and
kindness; but what safeguard is there that such
conduct will enable those who practise it to have
the same influence, which it is admitted their pro-
perty gives them, under the system of open elec-
tions ?

Surely the reply is, the principles of human
nature are a sufficient guarantee. Your lordship
cannot have forgotten the trial of power between
the raging North Wind and the kindly Sun over
the poor traveller—so has it always been, so it will
continue to be to the end of time. But if the point
were doubtful—if kindly and considerate conduct
did not in every case enable the possessors of pro•
perty to exercise a legitimate influence at elections
—is there no fear that the pent-up feeling of voters,
who believe they are coerced, will burst out in an
unpleasant manner, and then the possessors of pro.
perty will find that the violence of a mob is not to
be compared in its. destructive powers to'the up-
rising of the middle class of society. Those it was
whose wrongs occasioned the French Revolution.—
I have the honour to remain, your lordship's most
obedient and faithful servant,

March 17, 1859.

AN ]X-M.P

PROFITS OF SHIPPING.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.
SIR, I have waited for some days to see if

contradiction would be given to your assertion in a
leading article, that "it was well known that,
during the war, shipowners paid their ships in a
single year." As none appeared, I now take the
liberty of doing so. In proof, take a ship of 1,000
tons register chartered by Government at 20s. per
ton per month—the usual rate paid—which you
will find amounts to £12,000 per annum ; while
the expenses of that ship, for sails, ropes, stores,
provisions, insurance, seamen's wages, and general
charges, would amount to more than £7,000 per
annum—leaving £5,000 to pay depreciation, tear
and wear, and profit. This ship, British-built,
would cost £2O per register ton ; it would there-
fore take four years alone to pay the ship, instead
of one, as you assert. Nor were the ships engaged
in the carrying trade, at the same time, paying so
well ; and I should know something about it when
I had a ship so engaged of about 1,200 tons, classed
12 years Al. My experience will be borne out by
any shipowner.
British shipping now is not paying, and losing
at nearly as great a rate as they made profit before.
It is therefore of consequence 'that. no erroneous
impression should be given forth from your influ-
ential columns without some one taking up a pen
to show the true position, present and past, of a
BRITISH SHIPOWNER.
Glasgow, March, 18, 1859.

COUNCIL OF INDIA.

" CANNING."

THE GOVERNOR-GENERAL AND THE

The following. ". copy of a despatch from Lord-
Canning, Governor-General of India, dated from'
Allahabad, vindicating his Council in India in re-
spect to certain unfavourable comments made on
their conduct in this country," was published on
Saturday :
" Home Department, Allahabad, July 6, 1858.
"To the Honourable the Court of Directois of the East
India Company.
" Hon. Sirs,—lt has caused me much regret and pain to
observe that upon more than one occasion during therecont
discussions in Parliament upon Indian affairs it has been
alleged that the Governor-General has not received from.
the members of the Council of India that decided and effec-
tive support which, in the difficulties by which the Govern-
ment of the country has been surrounded, he might have
expected to receive.
" 2.' This has been expressed in different terms ; but,
however expressed, it is so contrary to fact, and so unjust;
to those with whom, as colleagues, I have had the pleasure
and advantage to act, that I trust I may be allowed to place
on record my distinct denial of the allegation.
" 3. A general charge can bo met only by a general
denial ; and were the charge directed 'against myself r
should not have troubled your hon. Court with any notice of
it. But it is directed against others whom I best can vin-
dicate ; and therefore I desire to say that the support which
I received from my hon. colleagues, all and each, from the
first beginning -of the mutinies up to the time when I left;
Calcutta and became separated from the Council,
.was con-
stant and zealous and that it was uniformly given with
that frankness and ind ependence of judgment without which
ea-operation in Council is worthless.
" 4. I am the more anxious to say this, because since I
left Calcutta two most valuable servants of your hon: Court,,
my respected friends Major-General Low and Mr. Dorin—
have retired from. the Council of India and returned to
England.
" 5. Their final separation from the Government of India.
makes it especially incumbent upon the head of that Go-
vernment to be careful that no injustice which it is in his:
poWer to avert shall be done to their past honourable ser-
vices.—l have, &c.,

A letter from Belgrade states that the Prince
Milosch had fallen ill, and that his son, Prince Michael,( had
undertakers the despatch of business.