The Sun.
London, England, 1859-11-22 00:00:00

AB BALLO.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE
Sir,—ln the Times of to-day you
to invite my attention to your opinions ontke gilt-
tion of the ballot;and to attribute to me sentiments
so much at variance with those I really entertain
that I scarcely think thatsyou can in fair dealing
refuse me a reply. Permit me, then, to tell you that
your whole article is fallacious, and that, as your
foundation is unsound, down must go your fabric
with the slightest push. Allow me, in the most
delicate way possible, to administer that push.
Admitted, the ballot is not in itself a principle,
but the powerful means to a constitutional end. Ad-
mitted, the ballot is isolated from all other points of
electoral reform, while it is a leading step to any
and every condition of electoral reform. So far
from given the question of the ballot up, relaxing
my efforts to carry it out, I am encouraged
in the belief that the people have found a war-
rant for the truth of many of my statements made
in the House of Commons for the last 12 years
in the disclosures which have lately taken place
touching the rottenness of boroughs, and will very
shortly demand of their rulers why they persist in
their refusal to give the ballot a fair trial ; and I
cannot but believe that the imbecility of the argu-
ments of the all-powerful Times has impressed upon
the people the impossibility of an attempt to reason
against protected voting with any chance of suc-
cess. You have perverted the meaning of a very
plain and unmistakeable expression of my inten-
tions made at Bristol to my constituents at a late
public dinner. I there stated my intention to take
any useful measure of real reform which her Ma-
jesty's Government may offer, and not to bring the
ballot in collision with the same ; but my opinion
of the necessity of the ballot is unaltered—if possi-
ble, is strengthened—and so I am not likely to
" shelve" the notice of motion for the ballot stand-
ing in the Order-book of the House of Commons for
next session. Are you really serious, Sir, when you
tell the world that, as a matter of course, tenants
should vote with their landlords ? Will you favour
us with your interpretation of the meaning of the
words " to vote i'rcely and indifferently," which is
the command delivered by the law to every elector
at every election ? iow, a short time since, must
tenant farmers favourable to protection have voted
if their landlords were bent on free-trade, or rice
versa? At the late contest for Ayr did not Lord
Glasgow justify his interfering with his tenants for
the Whig candidate, because every Conservative
peer similarly interfered for the Tory candidate ?
You surely cannot pretend that Tenants are under
an obligation to vote for their landlords ? I chal-
lenge you to make that assertion. " No," you will
reply, " there is a social bond which causes them to
do so." Then I answer, the ballot will hinder no
man from voting according to his feelings, while it
will set many a man at liberty to vote according to
his conscience. Is Rip van Winkle with a pen in his
hand in Printinghouse-square ? Or is the editor of
the times pleased to be ilictions and jocular, when
he assures us that " Ladies and gentlemen of the
fashionable or the genies! quarters may be ardent
politicians, Tories, High Church, and all the rest of
it • they may argue and sentimentalise one with an-
other but while they are doing so nearly every
tradesman they employ is of the contrary set of
Thison sat
ruotuhso riatnad-
ttiiivden iaonfids ,
dmitodt
asvotes
laccordinglyassertion
s? " a
m
disproved fallacy. A more complete serfdom does
not exist than that in which the nobility and gentry
keep their tradespeoide in this metropolis. In the
city of Westminster, in which I now write, the
leading tradesmen arc not to be found on the regis-
ter of electors, or, should they be so, are mysteri-
ously absent on the day of polling, while both here
and throughout the country thousands are com-
pelled to falsify their consciences rather than lose
their bread. As to the independence of the farmer,
that is best illustrated by the malt elections in -
Ayr and Merionuth. I can only feel obliged to the
editor of the Times for this very bad joke. The
editor of the Times is pleased to assume that I pro-
fess horror and astonishment at the recent disclo-
sures. Disgust I confess to feel and to express at
those men of both dominant factions who persist in
upholding the present system, but astonishment
has long since ceased.
I cannot be astonished at the price of political
beasts in the Gloucester market in the year 1859,
when 30 years previously Mr. Grote demonstrated
that the price of a single Gloucester freeman was
£7, or £l4 the couple.
The editor of the Times asserts that the ballot is
not required in Bristol. He may satisfy himself
by accompanying me to the hustings in that ancient
city as to the value of that assertion. In the mean-
time I venture to assure him and his readers that a
sense ofAuty to my own constituency first in 1837
impelled me to become a champion of the measure;
and the petitions I have since presented, the fer-
-veva,. of the--appealsrand_ the numbers of signa-
tures, fully attest what arc the opinions of my con-
stituents on the subject.
I am, Sir, yours obediently,
F. HENRY F. BERKELEY.
Victoria-square, Nov. 19.

.4LLEGED BRIBERY

AT NOR II 'MIL

,wNerCleYt.o2hla.ve
This afternoon further Npr°ocßeWediinC;
been taken in the matter of the four summonses
issued against leading members of the local Con-
servative party for bribery at the general election
for Norwich in April last, but it will be seen from
the subjoined report that a postponement has been
agreed to. The summonses were issued at the in-
stance of William Randall Lacy, and the first
charged Captain Ferdinand Ives with unlawfully
bribing a certain Toter or voters to vote for mem-
bers to serve in Parliament for the city of Norwich.
The second charged Mr. J. H. Bignold and Mr. J.
Bailey with unlawfully conspiring to procure the
return of Sir Samuel Bignold and Mr. Charles
Manners Lushington as members to serve in Par-
liament for the city of Norwich. The third charged
Sir S. Bignold, the Rev. F. S. Bignold, and Mr.
James Hardy, with unlawfully conspiring, by bri-
bery and other illegal means, to procure Ae return
of the said Sir Samuel Bignold and Mr. Charles
Manners Lushington as members to serve in Par-
liament for the city of Norwich. The fourth charged
Captain Ferdinand Ives and Mr. G. Priest with
bribing or conspiring to bribe a certain voter or
voters of the city of Norwich, at the general elec-
tion for members to serve in Parliament for the city.
These summonses were taken out by the Liberals
after the Conservatives obtained a summons against
Mr. William Wilde, Mr. William Wilde, jun., Mr.
William George Wilde, Sir William Foster, and
Mr. James Stowers, for a conspiracy to bribe at the
April election at Norwich.
At the sitting of the magistrates to-day,
.I‘l7. Wilde, sen., attended, and made some obser-
vations to the bench in a tone not generally audible.
Mr. Blake, one of the magistrates. said he dis-
claimed anything like any power to make any ar-
rangement about the cases.
Mr. Willett, another member of the bench, said
the magistrates might talk about them without
making arrangement.
Mr. Jay, solicitor, of Norwich, said, as regards
the summons against Sir Samuel Bignold, he had
been originally instructed to apply for au adjourn-
ment, but as he had since been appointed 'Under
Sheriff of the city, he thought it would be prudent
for him to withdraw from the case. His friend,
Mr. Preston, would, however, apply to the Court
on the subject.
Mr. Preston intimated that Sir Samuel Bignold
was much engaged on Mondays, when the board of
directors of the Norwich Unfon•office held their
meetings. The summons had also been
sweerelyvkedvery recently, and he therefore applied to
the Court to allow the case to stand over for a fair
and reasonable time to enable him to instruct coun-
sel in a matter involving so serious a charge.
The Mayor inquired whether anyone appeared on
he other side to offer any objection ?
Mr. Jay said notice had been given to Mr. Lacy
uit the application would be made.

Sir William Foster, one of the parties sum-
moned by the Conservatives, and a gentleman of
on the
JayLiberalcalled o
side,
Saturday influence
afternoon Mr.
him and stated that he was authorised on behalf of
certain parties to ask
for a postponement of all
the cases except the one which had been before
the magistrates last week (that of Mr. Col-
lins) ; the postponement to be made for a fort.
night. He (Sir W. Foster) assented to the pro-
position, and he should be very happy to agree to
the proposal now made on the understanding that
the hearing of the summons affecting himself and
the other Liberal defendants was postponed also,
that they might have the same opportunity of pre-
paring for their defence as Mr. Preston asked for on
behalf of his friends.
Mr. Jay said this was perfectly correct.
The Mayor inquired whether Air. Preston repre-
sented the prosecutors in the other case to which Sir
William Foster had referred ?
Mr. Preston replied in the negative.
Mr. Bullifant said he was quite content that the
proposed adjournment should take place.
After some further discussion, it was agreed to
postpone the hearinr, of all the summonses referring
' to Parliamentary electionsb till the second week in
' December ; the charge against Mr. Collins—of con-
i spiring, with Mr. H. Croxford and others, to coy-
• rupt Mr. Joel Fox, the town councillor, by the offer
of /500 to vote for eight Tory aldermen—to be
,• proceeded with as originally arranged.
" Matters have, therefore, been narrowed to the
municipal affair.