The Sun. — London, England, 1837-11-23 00:00:00

~. strik e e out of thei r h an i s t h e wea p ons w ith w hi c h th e y in SOl ong and so success f u lly fought against honesty nu dependence. N't Te said a few days ago that pro erth as property, ought to have no influence at elec 3, but this is not saying that a man who has pro t_ElY, and wh o emp l oys t h at property f or t h e b ene fi t of is poorer ne i g hb ours , an d to t h e increase o f t h e happi of the communit ,y, ought to have no influence. He ; l e i Probably better informed than many who are under and he has an ix iterest (to repeat our own words) an not attempting , c to impose upon them a person is unworthy to I ,e their representative :" this is l us t we called " th e i n fl uence o f personal character , s e Pported b y wea l t h an d stat i on, " an d we are g l a d t o l ° able to maintain. ourselves in this position by the letter to the Earl of Durham On the Ballot. b i g` The legitimate i t +fluence of property at elections (says Lordship) is a v ery different thing. And if he who poss esses property rec ommend himself to his neighbours by fitt re putation f or public-mindedness and knowledge be ati n g his station,. be may depend upon it his advice will t o ea enough be :isked, his judgment abundant;y deferred 'nad, if th e B a ll o t were i n ac ti o n, and to whatever party in the St ate: suc h a man m i g ht belong, his opinions Would powerfully ;influence the votes of his neighbours. I recomm en d t h e secre t mo d e of voting, not as weak n, I ng, but as stre ngthening, and considerably strengthen g' this legiti ma i xt tinfluence—l say, considerably strength ning it. " An adve n t urer comes d own to a borough containing a hundred v o t ers. With this borough he is entirely u" ne° finected. B u t h a v i n g, by some successful speculation, or perhaps by the assistance of some political association, Possessed himself of a sum sufficient to undertake an enter tr,iB° of this sor t, h e app li es it t o o perating on the corrupti- C RY of thi s sma ll const i tuency, or t h e major ity o f it. W e o re seen, by manifold'. experience, that the application th head money, and a judicious generosity during election time, have riot, to say the least of it, been less eff ectual in recent i nstances th an b e f ore th e p ass i n g of the R eform Bill, in inducing: the constituencies of either small or. large places to sell t'neir votes, in the coarsest manner, oe t ,ding strangers in opposition to claims of ancient con . nt i° ll , of legiti ma te i n fl uence of property, as well as per oriel and political ties long established. I say that the prior and natural inclination of such a 'constituency (at all events of that poorer portion of them, a large one, who can not be supposed to be governed by any strong political bias) W ould be to vote in accordance with the sentiments of the resident gentry who have been the longest and best known "‘uero ; were it not for the operation of a temporory bar !,nlo, the very terms of which depend upon its being seen whe rer the votes are given to the party which has bought them. saY, no adventurer wou ld b e ras h enough to speculate on ti_ t l'e strength o f hi s mere purse ag ainst the natural and legi n."tte influence of ncighb miring property', when he can no l onger be assured of the vote being duly exchanged for the l i n °4 °Y. I say, w here aid the pre-existing attachments , oni habit, if f rom no b e tt er f ee li ng , ar e in favour of neigh bouring property, the chan ce-corner with the purse would not risk it under a system of secret voting, having no se curity for a due return ; or if he were to try the specula ion, h e , would try it without, success. " I r ecommend secret viAing, no less as a protection for th e legitimate influence of property than for lawful inde pendence of the elective cranchise." What we contend against is what the enemies of he Ballot h ave b een accu stomed to consider the legi timate influen ce of property, namely, the power of the l andlord of 501. tenants-at-will, or of 101. household ers, to drive them to the poll and to compel them to give their suffrages, not according to their own con- Sciences,l but according to his command. Th i s is w c fiat Lord N ugen t ca lls the " illegitimate influence" of Property, and what, we venture to think, amounts , 'e nothin g less than a bribe. If it be worth, we will `ay, 101. to a tenant not to be turned out of possession °' a small farm or a house, and his landlord do not tu rn him out on condition that he votes for a parti cular candidate, whom he would otherwise vote against, what is it but a corrupt consideration tO the voter to violate his conscience ? There l e one point upon which we do not recollect t hat Lord Nugent touches, but it is one which Ought not to be entirely passed over, when con sidering the advantages or disadvantages of the Ballot We allude to the apprehensions of the Tories that it will increase the popular power. Even if such were to be the effect, and we do not dispute that it might be so to some extent in the outset of the e xperiment, the evil (granting it to be one, for the The of argument) would soon work its own cure. ,i t e opponents of the Ballot contend, and it forms ben„ t hem a strong ground of objection, that it would 00 - r in weiling, and would leave matters between the p o er constituents and the large owners of property oe u 'e " k as they are at present. If so, the popular power , cordi ng to their own showing, would r emain nu a:tinged. If, on the contrary, it were augmented, their emancipation, voted against the wishes of their _landlords, and those landlords found that they had lost portion of th e i r i n fl uen ce, they would not fail to take Speedy measures to restore it; and those imeasures would be of a benevolent and conci tiatory nature, and not o f t h at compu l sory an d Y r annical c h arac t er w hi c h now notoriously be longs to them. The difference would lie in the spe e:es of i n fl uence an d i n t h e cause i n w hich it origi nated, Lord Nugent very justly observes that propos - Junal repr esen t a ti on of p r ope r ty is not and never was e do ctrine o f t h e E ng li s h C onst i tut i on ; y e t, accor th the to the present system, a man of large estate may ha ve as many votes for . a county as he can create 50/. t e nancies. The reason why it is not and has not ee n the doctrine of our Constitution is obvious — viz. , that the law of Henry VI. considered freeholders own ing lands worth forty shilling and ;upwards per an tn upon an equality as to their interest in the main tenance and welfare of the State. "The value of mo ney has si nce muc h c h ange d, b u t a t present the small *state of a man who maintains his family out of it is Just as important to him as the domain of an individual u ° has thousands a year to waste. The peasant's coat of serge in the old story was more valuable to him than the noble's cloak of silk.—Morning Chronicle. . Sir Robert P ee l i s a powerful extinguisher of Ra (1 p l eat hu m b ugs. The Right Hon. Baronet's sagacious h ° Phecy about the time of the Reform Bill passing, at the hottest advocates of the measure would by an or d 'hY become l ou d e r and more virulent in their abuse it tha n t h ose C onserva ti ves w h o h a d from the first 0 ' PPosed it, has since been verified in the most signal ; anti cs by the Radical proceedings of each passing e ek, both i n an d out o f P ar li a ment. And this pre dictiont of the Conservative leader proved not mer el y iie acuteness of his judgment with regard to the par ticular su bject of the observation, but hi s thorou g h sel ° ,.. wled ge of the parties who have assumed to them ciane: the name and character of " Liberal" politi • and of that sort of temper whence usually -ri ses th noth nn , e appetite for extensive change. There is th os 1,6 more manifest than that nine-tenths e wh, ou r i n Li even honestly cry out for "reform" of. stitutions, have never once fixed down their t h at a es t . " 1 any degree of staid or patient diligence to . which is indispensable towards the successful t qu ' e t:u t it of a wise and statesmanlike policy—viz., the Core :" of what practical mischief they wish to p ro an d by what specific and definite measure they 1 2 °s e to meet it. " R e form," as some of its ad ,eeochtiLgcs abs ur dl y term it, seems to mean with these t asti e men neith er more nor l ess than c h ang e i n ever nx succession. It is not with them an affair of 4intellect, or resulting from any process of moral di,ea' or of enlightened meditation, but simply like the d ef !e called a " wolf in the stomach"—it is an in atTable craving for somewhat more than has been alre b of w h a t swallowed. Had any reasonable calculation s een u at was right, or just, or consistent with a limited ao lo are hY, governed the desires of the " Liberal" party chat g s t US) they would have stated from the outset h It was that they proposed. But they were, un a Ppii p ur Yi regulated by no such considerations. Their Pose th e p with regard to the Crown—the Peerage— frorrititrl%Pmer,tY—the Church of England, was to wring of not what they ought to obtain for the sake "t i the Rios t general interest of the realm, but the ut the that they could by any means extort for re t i in es Pecial use of one exclusive portion of the ed ucate __ lL t Wer e " the dem ocrac y, composed of mere un u numb ers . O'C onne ll, w hen explaining a 41 ne his views of necessary change, let out the li e profligate and rapacious project :—" I will," said ri„lg et all I can for Ireland ;" not what it would "vhi e l; i, or LTlital)le, or hi ridi:!ial to the whclo Empire, but lie profess e d at th a t ti me no w ish to dismember, trie ot ~,ne would extort from England,and to the detri- L r-ngland, the largest amount of political plun der that he could lay his hands on. Why, then, what sort of statesmen are these ? What sort of lawgivers ? How ought they to rank as patriots, when they look but to one single class of the Queen's subjects as those for whom alone, at any stage in the progress of legislative reform—no matter what may have already been accom plished on behalf of " popular" rights—they feel themselves bound to make the slightest exertion ? When such men tell us, that in defiance of the Re form Bill, or indeed through the instrumentality of that very Reform Bill, which before it had passed into a law they extolled as the final annihilation of Toryism, and the sheet-anchor of " good govern " ment" to the end of time, greater coercion and more flagrant corruption are practised throughout England than under the old borough system, do they consider the import of their own words, and against whom they bear? The Whigs and Radicals taken together are still confessedly, and have been since the passing of the Reform Bill, more numerous in Parliament than at any former period. If, then, they have become so much stronger, and intimidation and corruption at the same time so much more prevalent, in whose favour is it, upon their own showing, that intimidation and corruption—ay, and " enormous lying," have been most extensively resorted to ? But what party is it, again, that has at command the preponde rancy of intimidation and corruption ? Is it not the Government of the day ? Is it not prc-erni newly the Government of the present day, the most notoriously wasteful, unscrupulous, and immoral, that ever existed in this country ? Yet, in the teeth of such a Government, and in contempt of it, what is the con dition of the House of Commons at this moment ? Conservative power, barely inferior to that of the united Radicals and Whigs : as compared with the Whigs alone, constituting a majority of more than an hundred. And these Radicals have the assurance to boast that the Conservatives are returned mainly by in timidation and corruption !—that an increase of Con servative members from 120 in 1833, to 320 in 1837, has been effected by intimidation and corruption I Why, if the Conservative landlords and customers can intimidate now, could they not equally practise the same expedient three or four years ago, and with the like results ? We must seek, then, for some better solution of the mystery. We must get up some more rational cause of the immense growth of Conservative principle, simultaneously with the flagitious increase of all the elements of official and material power on the side of the Radical ridden Ministers. Truly and triumphantly did Sir R. Peel retort upon the declaimers against Tory intimi dation, that the re-action had sprung from no such fountain—that they who had intimidated with a ven geance were not Tories, but members of that eternal movement faction which had really " frighted the isle" back to her propriety by their incessant threats of democratic revolution. The people of England, in the words of Lord John Russell himself, " could not afford a revolution once a-year." It is the perpetual alarm kept up by the turbulent and wild revolutionists—your suffrage-mongers, ballot-mongers, &c., that the Constitution of our ancestors must be destroyed, the Protestant Established Church thrown down, the glorious limited monarchy of England swept away, and a coarse, fierce, untaught, inflamma ble, tyrannical democracy, lifted up upon their ruins— it is that terror, forced into the imaginations of men who have been honest, though unthinking, Reformers, until they saw what was about to be perpetrated in the name of " Reform"—that it is, together with a respectful confidence in the wisdom as well as cou rage of the Conservative leaders, entertained by the bulk of the British nation, which has raised so irre sistible a reaction in this country, and which has of itself prepared the defeat and downfall of the Whig movement alliance, now in the agonies of a common dissolution. Of course, when men who have been accustomed to think of Reform as something tangible and definite, as in itself a specific movement of the body politic, for the attainment of certain understood and acknowledged ends, all within the sphere of the Constitution, to be followed by a state of repose and of stability—when, we say, such men find by expe rience that there is to be nothing definite, nothing ex plicit, nothing complete, nothing satisfactory, no resting place, and no repose but the repose of death to all our in stitutions, they will feel that it is time to renounce that compost of quackery and falsehood stupidly nicknamed " Reform." On Tuesday night, again, there was more of Radical absurdity exposed in the public market. Messrs. Leader and C. Buller were the salesmen, but the commodity would not take. Mr. Leader dealt pro fusely in—we, " the people." We, " the people of England," forsooth I It was the Tooley-street tailors over again. Lord John Russell, however, would not bid a farthing for the whole lot of patriotism. His Lordship seemed a more dogged Conservative even than on the previous Monday ; and we are glad that, as he evidently spoke for the Cabinet, and in conse quence of decisions adopted by the Cabinet, he brought the vapouring Radicals to that test, which most probably they have not virtue to abide by. These men talk—Messrs. Buller, Leader, Hume, Wakley, Grote, &c.,—they talk, we repeat, like men ready to act upon their boastings. But they will not substantially, or to any solid purpose, venture to oppose this Ministry, feeble and tottering though it be. They have beerikicked, it is true, by Lord John Russell, but, bitter as may be their complaints, they will be not the less apt for all that to kiss the foot that tramples them. We expect to see them as abject and confiding as before. In truth, to gain a separate victory over the Whigs would be a small achievement for the country. We want to see the Radicals cut off their own escape, rejoin the ship, share the fate of the in fected and death-stricken crew, and one and all perish irretrievably t ogether.— Times. That the Whigs have immortalised themselves in the memory of their country, by the greatest and most beneficial reforms which were ever effected by reason and argument, instead of violence and force, no one whose recollection extends to the year in which they were borne into office on the shoulders of the people, can by possibility deny. The Reform Bill—itself so glorious!y framed, and so unanimously carried—was in itself a monument of fame of which any Ministry—in fact, of which any people—might be justly proud. The abolition of slavery was another not less memorable in the annals of humanity, and which, in a few years, will confer blessings upon thousands, as well as prosperity upon our colonial possessions, which could never have been obtained from the Tories at any price. The open ing of the East India trade was another—most bene ficial in its results, and which is daily operating to the benefit of the people, both in a larger amount of ex ports as well as of imports. The Municipal Bill was another measure which strengthened the hands of the Government, while at the same time it conferred upon the people their just and legal right of controul over the management of their own affairs. Nor ought the cause of the Dissenters of the United Kingdom to be passed over without notice. They had their full share of attention from the Whig Government, as some persons are pleased to term the Administra tions of Lords Grey and Melbourne ; and it is an unquestionable fact, that in relieving them from the grievances of which they had so many just reasons to complain, they overcame difficulties which were previously conceived to be insurmountable. We might extend the catalogue to many more mea sures of great value and great importance ; but the above are sufficient to indicate the spirit which, up to the commencement of the present Session, has characterized the proceedings of the two Liberal Administrations of Lords Grey and Melbourne. It is still farther to the credit of the present Go vernment that it adheres with unflinching firmness to every measure which it has hitherto, in a practical shape, brought under the consideration of the Legis lature. The reform of the Irish Church—the settle ment of the Irish Tithe question, and of Church-rates in England, as well as the amendment of the Reform Act, both in the registration and the rate - pay in g clauses, are honourably adhered to ; and with all these claims upon the gratitude of the country—with all these titles to distinction and confidence, it is a matter of pain to us, which we have no language to express, to be under the necessity of condemning, in the most marked manner, the line of policy which Lord John Rissell has not only indicated, but repeated-- we with sorrow—will in future characterise the Melbourne Cabinet. When that Government was overthrown, we " nailed our flag to the mast of Reform," and both pub- TIIE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 1837. licly and privately we put in force every personal, physi cal, and public power at our command, to overthrow the spurious abortion of a timid Sovereign, and reinstate it in a position to do good to the people. We were suc cessful. The Peel Government was shattered to atoms, and finally destroyed—Lord Melbourne was again, most insultingly to the Sovereign, but most becomingly on the part of the people, forced into office ; and, it is but an act of justice to his Lordship to declare, that he has hitherto worn his honours with becoming dig nity and integrity, and that on every occasion on which it has fallen to his lot to defend the cause of the people, he has not, in the slightest degree, fallen short of the expectations formed of him. But what can we say of the Cabinet now, if Lord John Russell is to be considered as its mouthpiece ? What !—in the course of discussing the Reform Bill, state that the Ballot and Triennial Parliaments, and other measures were mat ters not fit o be grafted on the Reform Bill,but very fit to be adjuncts to it, and matters for further considera tion—and afterwards at Stroud threaten the Tory corruptionists with the application of the Ballot, unless they behaved themselves better —and now turn round upon the best friends of the Government—upon whose hearts and affections, as well as their daily and nightly toils, have been de voted to them—and with one fell swoop declare that they are no longer the supporters of their favourite measures ? We would write in moderation ; but no language can express our disappointment at the speech of the Home Secretary. It is mischievous to the Mi nistry—it is mischievous to the cause—it places every supporter of the Government in a false and uncomfor table position—it was needlessly uttered—it was un called-for—in a word, it was at once foolish and gra tuitously mischievous. We state these matters broadly. The public will judge whether we do or do not err. We admire the manliness of Lord John Russell's frank avowal of his principles, and give as ample credit for it, as we utterly condemn the course pursued by Mr. Wakley, which led to the declaration ; but the cheers of the Tories are condemnation enough of the former. Oh, these cheers !—when we hear them, they always betoken to us treason to the people.—Morning Advertiser of yesterday. We commented yesterday, at some length, upon the conduct of Lord John Russell in entering, most un necessarily and unwisely in our opinion, his determi nation not to form any portion of an Administration which would give its sanction to vote by Ballot, to the shortening of Parliaments, or to an extension of the Suffrage; and we now again repeat our condemnation of his conduct as calculated, on the one hand, to da mage the cause of Reform, and, on the other, to dis appoint and disgust all those who, however short the Cabinet may have come of their desires, have lent to it the most hearty and unflinching support. We are not however, inclined to enter now at any great length into the matter, inasmuch as the error, however grave, seems to be, we hope, in a fair way of being corrected. An Evening Paper, upon whose information we suppose we may rely, states as follows :—"We are rejoiced to hear that the leading Members of the Liberal party are at length assuming a position corresponding with their political pretensions, and the confidence reposed in them by large and intelligent masses of the people. A letter of friendly remonstrance is, we understand, in course of signature, intimating to her Majesty's Minis ters, that unless they are prepared to identify them selves more directly and immediately with substantial measures of Parliamentary Reform, they must no longer rely upon the support of the Liberal party.' There is nothing more to be regretted at the present moment, than that any difference of opinion, of prac tice, and of co-operation, should exist between the members of the present Government and those who have supported them, although in principle and prac tice they went beyond them. The Government, as a Go verninent, is in principle in a minority—the Irish and Radical Members form its majority, and how is it to carry on the affairs of the country without their support ? It is alleged by an Evening Paper that the Radical Members provoked Lord John Russell to an angry reply. We grant it. Mr. Wakley played a foolish part in the drama ; but that is no justification of Lord John Russell, either in being equally angry, or in placing his veto upon propositions calculated to advance the independent representation of the people. Lord John Russell has egregiously erred. He says that when the Reform Bill was introduced it was con sidered to be a final measure, while at the same time he allows that a final measure is a mass of nonsense, and that no one but an idiot could dream of stopping the progress of public opinion. His Lordship is not an idiot, but, on the contrary, an able, and clever, and well informed man—and yet, in the next breath, he says that he is perfectly willing to amend the Act in its details— that is, in the registration and rate-paying clauses but most unwilling to alter it in its principles—that is, in the substitution of the Ballot, of shorter Parlia ments, and an extension of the Suffrage. His Lord• .ship, let him give us proper credit for it, is a good logician. He knows what the why and wherefore in the House mean better, we believe, than any other Member ; and he will, therefore, take it in good part when we tell him that his argument is a sophism, and that he mistakes the mode of action for the prin ciple. The principle is the representation of the people—the mode is the question of short or long Par liaments, of a more extended Suffrage, and of Secret Voting. The anode may be wrong, but the principle of the Reform Bill is not infringed upon by it. The distinction is not a nice one. We would enlarge farther on this subject did any necessity exist for it ; but we trust in the course of to-morrow to be able to inform cur readers that the breach has been healed, and that, as during the last two Sessions, every Li beral will be found in his place in the House with sub stantial and satisfactory reasons to justify his adherence to the Melbourne Cabinet.—Morning Advertiser. UNIVERSAL SUFFRAGE. A very numerous meeting of the Working Men's Asso ciation met together yesterday evening at the White Con duit House, for the purpose of showing their respect and gratitude to Messrs. Roebuck, Thompson, Bowring, S. Crawford, and Ewart, the rejected candidates at the late general election ; and also towards those Members of Par liament who are friendly to the principle of Universal Suff rage. About 400 persons sat down to a plentiful and sub stantial dinner. Amongst the guests on the platform we noticed Mr. O'Connell, Mr. Wakley, Mr. Roebuck, Mr. Leader, Mr. J. Ficlden, Mr.Hindley,and Col. Thompson. The Chair was taken by JAMES WATSON, Esq. After he cloth had been removed, _ _ The CHAIRMAN begged the attention of the meeting whilst he explained the object for which they were as sembled. The object was to take steps for the purpose of making the Association known to the country at large, and to inform them that they were associated together for the purpose of obtaining for every individual arrived at maturity, and untainted by crime, the privilege of exercising the elective franchise.—(Loud cheers.) They were congregated for the purpose of obtaining Universal Suffrage.—(Cheers.) The object of the meeting and of the Association was to put every man in the possession of his political rights, and to make every man a free denizen of the country in which he lived.—(Cheers.) He hoped that by union and the spread of intelligence they would succeed in attaining that object, and that by their united and continued efforts they would obtain an early and final triumph.—(Cheers.) He wished that whatever dif ferences of opinion might exist on other topics they w ould all co r di a lly un it e in the attainment of the great right of Univer sa l S u ff rage .—(Cheers.) He would conclude by calling u p on a ll presen t t o give a fair and patient hearing to all th ose gent l emen w h o s h ou ld address them. Mr. R OEBUCK came f orwar d, an d was rec e i v ed with im mense cheering. He had been requested by the Association to propose the first toast. It was one which he was exceed ingly desirous of proposing, because it enabled him to ex plain what otherwise might not be understood, respecting certain points of his political creed, particularly respecting Universal Suffrage. The toast was " The people—may they see that political equality is justice, and union the only power to enforce it."—(Loud cheers.) His definition of Universal Suffrage was, that every inhabitant arrived at years of discretion, and untainted with crime, should pos sess a voice in the election of representatives to govern them. This was a rule which he had adopted as his political creed, not because he believed the peop l e were immaculate—not because he was inclined ever to sacri crifice his own opinions to the opinions of a majority—but because he believed there were no other means of forming a government that could bring out the welfare of the people in the same degree.'Did they believe a government emanating entirely from the people would commit no mistake ? Did they believe that, though each individual was failible, neler theleless, that when congregated into masses, they were in fallible? Not at all. He for his part, had no belief in the infallibility of any portion of the human race, Did he then wish to give the people power because he be lieved they would never do wrong ? Far from it. The his tory of all times told them that a majority was generally in the wrong. But was that a reason why they should throw political power in the hands of a minority, who had a direct interest in doing wrong? The great difference be tween a popular and an aristocratical government was this, that the one had a direct interest in going wrong, and the other in going right. He believed if they bad a popular go vernment to-morrow, they would very probably go wrong ; but they would go wrong becaUse they did not know the right path, and not because they did not desire to follow it. Having thus established what lie believed to be the grand: fundamental difference between these two forms of government, he would ask them how they were to work out the attainment of their object—how they were to per suade the great body of the people that it was for their in terest to combine, and endeavour to obtain one common end ? He would answer, that it was by so instructing the people, that they should know what was good for them.— (Cheers.) The people of England, when they desired an object, knew well how to obtain it. It might then be asked, why had they not universal suffrage? Why had they not a popular Government ? It was because they had not attained to the knowledge that they were requisite to their happi ness. They might blame the aristocracy—they might talk about the factions of Whigs and Tories—but the fault lay with the people themselves: Let no man blind and delude himself with the notion that the aristocracy kept them down. No such thing. They were down because they would crawl. It was a matter of doubt whether essentially the great body of the English population was really a tolerant body. The Chairman that evening had told them not to show any intolerance towards those who should differ from them, so that minor differences might not interfere with the attain ment of the one great end. He knew some subjects upon which the people of England were far from tolerant. He knew that in this sanctimonious land, if he chose to mention, on certain occasions, and in certain assemblies, the words No Popery, he would find men who talked about civil rights who would say they would not make common cause with Papists. He might extend it farther. He feared that there was not in the popular mind that toleration for opinion which was embraced in the toast he had to propose, namely, that they should be so tolerant of opinion as to believe that every opinion which a man held upon examination, nn matter how much opposed to their views, whether in government, re ligion, or the connection of society, and which opinion had been attained after due investigation, ought to be re- spected.—(Cheers.) This was true toleration, and :he trusted that they would have the advantage of practising it on the present occasion. What did they desire? Did the Government, as at present instituted, bring out the popular will in the manner in which we would have it? Ho did not want to have a majority triumphing over a minority : he want e d a G overnmen t w hi c h s hould bring out the po pular will for the interest of all classes, that there should be no reckless want of consideration for any portion of the community, but that as far as possible they should endea vour to bestow happiness upon every member of the com munity. He wanted to know if he was, because he held these opinions, to bow himself down, and to say that lie held no one opinion except that which the people—that was the majority—held. He asked whether it was fair or just to call in question a man's honesty because ho dif fered from ourselves on some important topics? If he looked back at the history of his own times, he found the ma jority generally in the wrong ; and, indeed, whenever he foundeoun like trhy which self voting in a majority he suspected he was wrong,—(A laugh.) Notwithstanding this, he was pre pared to go as f ar as an y o th er man t o t a ke steps to pre pare the public mi n d f or th e recep ti on o f gre at offices, and as belie ve d th a t un til th ey h a d un i versa l su ff rage , or some thingit ,t there would l ewould k after never a b n ey thing ingo; but ern partial,men t in tfahnis tious, and particular objects. At the present time there was a combination on the part of two factions to plunder and keep in ignorance the great body of the people, and they had been exceedingly successful in their endeavours, both in plundering the people and keeping them in igno rance. But the time was coming when the people would obtain their rights. The meeting in that room might be considered as the commencement of a brighter epoch, when the power of the people would not only remodel the government, but the whole social fabric of the country.— (Loud cheers.) This great power was rising from below, and not descending from the heights. He found that wherever darkness was maintained, ignorance fostered, bigotry kept alive, there he found the aristocracy at work ; but where he saw just and generous principles advocated, truth and justice to man made part of r ligion, there he felt certain that the people were at work.---(Loud cheers.) By the people be meant the masses, and not the mere 101. householders, for he was no friend to the shop ocracy.—(Loud cheers.) He found the great mass of the population stirring wherever any generous emotion was created or any broad principles of justice acted upon. Why then not give the people political power ? To obtain such power the people must show that they deserved it. How could they show that ? By showing that they were steadily pursuing the great object in view, as if it were of almost as much importance as their daily subsistence. The people were told that politics were not the business of the poor man. Why, the poorest classes were those who had the most immediate interest in good government. For then it was of the utmost importance that there should be security for life and property, and, above all, for labour, which was the basis of all property, for labour uncontrolled by masters or men, reckless alike of associations to keep down or to raise wages. Of this he had always been proud, that in the most aristocratical assembly but one in the world, he had the courage, and, he would have the vanity to say, the great gratification, of raising freely in the face of the aristocracy, the banner of democracy.—(Loud cheers.) I still believe, and will believe till I see it fairly stricken down, that this banner will still float, and be carried onwards in triumph till it is established, firmly stir rounded by the people of Great Britain and Ireland ; till each man possesses those political privileges which he deserves, and ought to have ; till Government being thus with the people shall seek to attain the happiness of the, greatest number, and until they see not simply a wise Go vernment, but an improving morality amongst the people ; and till they should not be disgusted, as they now daily and hourly were, with corruption in public men, ignorance and brutality amongst the people ; but till, on the contrary, they should see united intelligence and probity governing and watching over all.—(Loud cheers.) Colonel TIIOMPSON then came forward and was loudly cheered. He said that late events had proved that the people had none to trust to but themselves.—(Cheers.) It behoved them, therefore, more peculiarly to combine to gether to obtain their own rights, and if they were not feared or respected now, he pledged himself that they would be re spected hereafter. lie never heard anything so absurd as the arguments that men used for refusing the people their just rights. It was said, " Oh, if you get A you will ask for B." To be sure they would. The people must never be contented with what they could get at one time. They must not expect at one blow to arrive at the whole mea sure of their desires. They must, in the natural course of things, go on improving, and all improvement was progres sive. The Government laid all the blames on the people. They said that the result of the elections and other things proved that the - people did not desire to try these experi ments. It was like one person saying to another, " Lay hold 'of the short end of the stick, and let us try how strong you are." The people should have fair play before their apparent opinions were thus appealed to.—(Cheers.) All they wanted was an opportunity of testing the commu nity freely and fairly. They saw now the two parties of the aristocracy united in refusing them the means of testing the honest opinions of the people ; they saw both parties united in refusing to the people their just rights ; it, was for the people to show whether they or the aristocracy should succeed in the contest.---(Cheers.) Mr. FIELDEN, M.P., then came forward and said, that from his earliest political life he had been a supporter of universal suffrage, vote by ballot, and triennial Parliaments. —(Loud cheers.) He was particularly anxious to see the suffrage amended, as in his opinion it was the foundation of all good society.—(Cheers.) When the Reform Bill passed the first thing he said was, " Give the Bill a fair trial." Nothing at that time gave him greater pleasure than that the Administration succeeded in passing that Bill. But the result had disappointed him. If the Reform Bill had met the just wishes and wants of the people, they would have never heard a cry for an extension of the suffrage ; but the people now found taxation as heavy and the expenditure as extravagant as before the Reform Bill passed. It was the difficulties of the times which induced the people to make such strenuous exertions far the passing of the Reform Bill. They hoped that it would in some mea sure relieve them from the pressure of taxation. They waited the result of that experiment, but in vain ; they were disapp o i n t e d ; an d was i t unreaso nable, seeing that the object they had in view was not accomplished by the Re form Bill, that they should now endeavour to accomplish that object by further measures of Reform—(Cheers) ? They wanted an extended franchise to enable them to re lieve the poor man from the weight of taxation which op pressed him. HoW, then, were they to attain this object in a Constitutional manner ? By loading the table of the House of Commons with petitions, and showing to them what were the wishes of the great body of the people. He was happy that their Representative had already brought forward' this subject in the House.—(lmmense cheering.) The division on the Ballot showed that the two factions were now amal gamated, and that the present Administration was nothing more than the Whig body moved by Tory strings and wires. —(Cheers.) He hoped that the people would in the end overcome both factions, and obtain for themselves their just Cheers.) The toast was then unanimously drunk. Mr. LEADER came forward to propose the next toast, and was most loudly cheered. He said, before he said anything on his own behalf he had a duty to perform to wards an absent friend, Sir William Molcsworth, who had requested him (Mr. Leader) to offer an excuse for not being present. Sir William Molesworth begged him to assure the meeti ng th a t he agreed with them entirely in opinion, and that he would assist them in carrying out their object, but that he was prevented from being present by a very severe cold.—( Hear, hear.) A great deal had been said atout two :aristocratic parties, the Whigs and the Tories. Some gentleman had been pleased to say that he hated both equally. Now, for his part, though he detested both, he did not feel an equal detestation for both. He really thought that the Whigs were not quite so bad as the Tories.—(Cries of " Oh, oh," and loud cheers.) Those who expressed their disapprobation appeared to imagine that he wished to defend the Whigs. Heaven forbid that he should undertake the task !—(A laugh.) But still he did say that the Whigs were not quite so bad as the Tories. The Whigs had occasionally done some liberal things.— (Cheers.) The Whigs had always professed liberal opi nions ; and certainly during their last possession of office they had done something for the good of the people of Iretand.—(Loud cheers.) But what had the Tories ever done ? The Tories not only never did anything good, b u t they always profesied opinions hostile to the well being and the liberties of the people.—(Loud cheers.) It was true that the Whigs had lost by the late elections but he was not prepared to say that that proved a re-action in favour of Toryism. It was absurd to say so. Let not the To ries imagine that in saying how much they detest the Whigs they detest the Tories less ; on the contrary, the Tories were detested, if possible, more than the Whigs. He was delighted to find that they were unanimous in de testing both.—(Loud cheers.) It seemed to him that the only difference was as to the degree of detestation. After all, what was the use of talking about Whigs and Tories ? The real fact was, that the Whig party committed suicide the other night.—( Loud cheers.) As a party the WThigs were now extinct.—(Cheers.) If they had not openly coalesced with the Tories, he would venture to say that very few weeks or even days would elapse before they would see a coalition.—(Loud cheers.) Let him then hear nothing more about Whigs and Tories; the only parties now were the aristocracy and the democracy.— (Cheering.) He confessed he for one was not sorry that the distinction had been drawn. He had no fear of what ;he Tories could do against the people. He grieved to say hat they might do mischief in Ireland, but he trusted that the people of this country would not support them in in• flicti - ng injustice upon Ireland.—(Loud cheers.) As to the evils they might do in England he had little fear, as he thought that the very advent of Toryism to power would raise such a spirit of opposition throughout the country, that the people would have a chance of obtaining good . . measures.—(Cheers.) When the Whigs were in power, people fancied they were going to do something for them, and therefore they trusted them and gave thern support ; but when they saw a Tory Government grinding them down as they had formerly done, when by force and fraud they were oppressing and plundering the people, then would the people exert their power to put down the tyrants. The toast he had to propose was the following :—May the principle of universal suffrage, and all the essentials to the free exercise of our political rights, be paramount to all party measures among the honest few in the House of Commons." —(Cheers.) In that sentiment he most sincerely concurred —and he must confess lie never yet heard a good argu ment against giving the Suffrage to every man who was called upon to pay the taxes and to obey the laws.—(Loud cheers.) If he understood any thing, that meant every man in the community arrived at years of discretion, and untainted by crime. It would ill become him to make any professions. The people had unfortunately too much ex perience of those who were loudest in their professions, and Ise wished to see no more defections from the cause of the people.—(Loud cheers.) He would, therefore, make no professions. He did not ask them to trust his words—he called upon them to look to what he had hitherto done, and in future to judge him, not by his words, but by his actions. He would no longer trespass on their patience, as there were other Gentlemen in the room who had stronger claims upon their attention, and he was sure they would excuse him when he mentioned the name of Daniel O'Connell.—(lmmense cheering.) Mr. HINDLEY, M.P., came forward to support the toast. He said that they had heard much of the Tories, the Whigs, and the Radicals. He would tell them who they were. He considered Toryism as darkness—utter dark ness ; he considered Whiggism as the first dawning of the day, but Radicalism he considered as the lightness of the noonday sun.—(Cheers.) Was he to be told that there was no difference between light and darkness ? A man might, indeed, knock his head against a post in the twi light, because the,light:was not quite sufficient to enable him to perceive the danger ; but if they bed patience they would soon see this light gradually expanding, and even tually pouring forth a full blaze of truth and fairness.— (Cheers.) Again, he considered Toryism as a type of the departure from Egypt—Whiggism a type of the passage of the Red Sea—and Radicalism as the land of Canaan, to which they were fast approaching.—(Loud cheers.) They had heard the toast given, and he would ask them what was the principle of universal suffrage ? It was, that every man of mature years, of sound mind, and untainted by crime, should have a voice in the representation of the country.—(Cheers.) Could any man deny this? What was the reason assigned by Blackstone why all men should not have a voice in the representation ? He said that some per sons were so circumstanced that they could not exercise a free will in giving their votes. Since Blackstone wrote they had found out a remedy : but it was extraordinary that those who maintained the principle refused to adopt the remedy. He must confess that he was not so anxious for the Ballot, as for the extension of the suffrage.—(Cheers.) He must, however, candidly tell them that he had no hope of obtaining universal suffrage from tho present House of Commons. There were in that House an honest few who sincerely;supported that principle ; but its success must rest upon the determination of the millions.--(Cheers.) Let those amongst them who had no votes stand up.—(About a third of the company rose.) He would call upon all those who were standing to swear, like Hannibal, that they would not rest until they had obtained them.—(Loud cheers.) Ho was gratified exceedingly to see so many persons who had votes assisting their less fortunate brethren in procuring their rights.—(Cheers.) They must depend for success on their own efforts. They should seek to obtain petitions from every borough in the empire ; and where the majority of the people were favourable they should get them to write to their representatives, and call upon them to sup port their cause.—( Hear.) They should then have a re gular field day, and he doubted not but that the result would be the successful triumph of the cause.—(Cheers.) Mr. WAKLEY came forward to propose the next toast, and was very loudly cheered. He said that some of his constituents supposed that he had been truckling to a treacherous Ministry in the House of Commons. The toast he held in his hand conveyed the refutation of the im putation.—( Loud cheers.) If he had given any support to the Whig Ministry, it was because Ireland had asked it, and he could not refuse.—(lmmense cheering.) During centuries Ireland had appealed to English Governments. What was the answer to her appeals? Whatever it had been it was always written in blood. Ireland, the finest country on the face of the globe, was rendered distracted ; the people of that country had been persecuted and oppressed, and had for centuries suffered every evil which treachery and bigotry could inflict. What answer, then, was he to give when appealed to ? Ireland asked for justice from the people of England, and the people of England had shown a desire to do justice ; and it was now only necessary in pleading the cause of Ireland, to mention the name in order to animate every heart with the wish to do justice.—(Cheers.) In lending his aid, therefore, to the Ministry in office for the last three years he had his eye steadfastly bent upon Ire land. He was told by the friends of Ireland—and by Da niel O'Connell, the friend not only of Ireland but of the human race—(lmmense cheering)—he was told that it would serve the cause of that country if the present Minis ters, at least for a time, were continued in power, and if the Tories—the cruel and persecuting Tories—were excluded from office.—( Loud cheers.) His constituents in Finsbury had approved of the course he had pursued.—(Cheers.) But if any man believed that it was from any personal motive that he had lent his aid to the present Ministers, that man did him very great injustice.—(Cheers.) He believed he could not show his regard for the people of England better than by maintaining the cause of justice to the, people of Ireland.—(Cheers.) They had been told not to look either to Whigs or Tories, but to relinquish both names. Now, he thought this was not wise. It was always better to recollect one's enemies. He would always keep them in mind, in order that he might protect himself against their machinations. It was his occupation to seek for the possession of his rights, and it was the occupation of his enemies to withhold those rights. Let him for a moment observe the situation in which they then stood. It was true that he, also, as had been expressed by his eloquent friend Mr. Roebuck, had unfurled the banner of demo cracy in the Chapel of St. Stephen. He had held the standard with a firm hand ; and though he had been advised by many sincere friends of the people not to push the question to a division, he thought that it was his duty to do so—(Hear, hear, and loud cheers) — not but that he believed, and knew, that many men who voted against his motion were as sincere in their advocacy of the popular rights as he was, and most earnestly desired to see the suffrage extended to every class ; and amongst those, Daniel O'Connell stood forward.—(Some hisses, and loud cheers.) Mr. Roebuck had spoken of the spirit of in tolerance which so frequently showed itself in this country when a difference of opinion existed. He would ask those gentlemen who expressed their disapprobation of the votes of the majority on that night, whether it was not possible that many Hon. Gentlemen voted against his motion be cause they thought that he bad brought it forward at an /V against inopportune period ? He knew many who had voted him, who, upon almost all other oc*Oes, would be de lighted to vote with him.—(Cheers.) 1 - le'cOrsideried that he _was right in bringing forward that motion, and also in pressing it to a division.—(Loud cheers.) If it did nothing else, it was important, at any rate, to show to the people of England what men in the House of Commons, under the most adverse circumstances, would go into the lobby to support this cause, even though they were but twenty in number.—( Loud cheers.) He had heard many dispute the propriety of his bringing forward his motion, but he had heard no reasons stated.—(A gen: tleman said, " You were premature.") The only answer he could give was, that they were now in the year 1837, and the people of England were not in the possession of their rights.—(Loud cheers.) He would come to the object they had more nearly in view. It was no use for them to meet and talk unless they did something.—(Cheers.) He would recommend a plan for their adoption for procuring the great right of Universal Suffrage. Let the non-elec tors in every parish form an association, to be called " The Franchise or Suffrage Association ;" and, having done so, let them choose a Vice-President from amongst their own neighbours—let them subscribe pence, for pence would be amply sufficient, as it was not necessary for a farthing to go out of the parish. Let them elect a President. He would suggest that the President should be a Member of the House of Commons, and, if possible, that the Mem ber representing the place should be chosen. Such a so ciety would not come within the statute against correspond ing societies. A party thus formed in the House of Cont mons, acting together and representing the great mass of the people, would have a weight which no Government could resist in the attainment of just rights.—( Loud cheers.) Until they had some simple organization like this he could tell them that their efforts would avail little. It was absurd to say that the people were now represented. There were six contested elections at the last general election where there were not more than 100 voters polled, thirty-five con tests with not more than 200 voters, and eighty-nine con tests with not more than 300 voters. And this was what was called the representation of the people. There were thirty-three Members in the House of Commons, the ag gregate number of the voters by whom they were sent not amounting to the number polled in Finsbury alone ; and yet any one of the thirty-three might neutralise any vote of his (Mr. Wakleys'). Ho had been called a traitor to the cause of Reform because he had brought forward the question of the Ballot and the extension of the suffrage ; but he would venture to tell them that until they had an extension of the suffrage and the protection of the Ballot, the people of this country would never be in possession of their just rights. He would conclude by moving the toast he had risen to pro pose, it was as follows—" Our Irish brethren : may they soon enjoy an equality of political right , , a lirger share of their country's blessings, or their independence be esta blished on the wreck of faction !" Mr. O'CONNELL came forward and was most enthu siastically cheered. He said that his Honourable Friend Mr. Wakley had made an admirable speech on the state of England, and had ended by giving an admirable sentiment on behalf of Ireland. He had put the alternative dis tinctly, justice from the English Government, or the inde pendence of Ireland.—(Loud cheers.) It was a proper and a manly sentiment, and he congratulated himself and Ire land ; and he begged to be permitted roost respectfully to congratulate that meeting on the fact that they were the first English assembly which had bad the manliness and the honesty to toast Ireland in terms implied by the toast just pronounced.—(Cheers.) He saw they were beginning to understand one another.—(Cheers.) He might have a little of the brogue on his tongue, but his heart throbbed in unison with their's in the cause of universal liberty.— (Loud cheers.) It was said that political gratitude was a lively sense of future favours, and in that view he in tended to express his gratitude to them for their services—a gratitude which he should feel as long as be had a tongue to tell it, a heart to throb, or an arm to lift in defence of the common cause of English liberty.—(Cheers.) His Hon. Friend had talked of his Irish brethren. That ex pression was not new. The first instance of brotherhood he recollected was that in Xsop's Fables between the giant and the dwarf. The giant and dwarf agreed to become brothers, and to travel together in search of adventures. They were employed in a battle together, when the giant, from his superior strength, got little damage, but the dwarf lost an eye ; the giant, however, took care to keep all the plunder. They journeyed on, and in the next adventure the dwarf lost an arm, and the giant again suffered little hurt, but took all the plunder. When they were pre pared to encounter another similar adventure, the giant cried out to the dwarf, " Come on, my brave boy ! this time we will make our fortunes." " But," said the dwarf, " no more battles for me ; I get al the blows, whilst you get all the plunder."—(A laugh.) Ireland, in the same way, got all the blows, but England got all the plunder ; and the worst of all was, that not only were the people of Ireland plun dered, but the people of England were equally plun dered. He was for a brotherhood of a different kind ; he would not plunder, but he would compel the plunderers to refund. The object for which they were met was to form an association for the attainment of universal knowledge. There was a noble field for exertion, a true and a just cause. He was an advocate for Universal Suffrage.—(Cheers.) He might not be aware exactly of the mode of attaining that object, but he had never lost sight of it. Now, what was the position in which England was placed on the subject of Universal Suffrage ? The Tories would never consent to extend the suffrage ; of that there could be no doubt. Then, again, the Whigs were equally opposed to Universal Suffrage. He used to boast, indeed he never hesitated to avow, that he was a Whig-Radical. Well, he was a Whig- Radical no longer.—(lmmense cheering.) He was now simply a Radical. And why lie threw off the adjunct he would toll them at once. Lord John Russell had told them the other night that it was intended by the Reform Bill to give more power to the counties of England than tothe towns. How had the county constituencies repaid him ? They had sent an immense majority of Members to oppose his policy ; indeed they had shown themselves the most ungrateful con stituencies that ever existed.—[A voice in the room cried out, " They do not oppose his policy !"j Did they not op pose his policy in Ireland ?—(Loud cheers.) It might be considered exceedingly selfish, but he could not overlook the interests of Ireland.—(Cheers.) They opposed his Irish policy, they opposed every liberal measure. He had heard it said that they ought. to hate the Tories and the Whigs equally.—( Hear, hear.) Now, hatred was always candid. There was no dissimulation in it, there was nothing so sincere as hatred. They would therefore readily believe that ho was candid in his hatred of the Tories, but he must confess that he could not reconcile the toast which had been so enthusiastically received with an equal hatred of the Whigs. He did not think that the quantity of hatred ought to be made equal to both parties. His Honourable friend Mr. Wakley, when he belonged to the medical pro fession, and found too patients, never dosed them alike if the disease was different.—(Cheers and laughter.) The last toast ought to be expunged out of the category, or the Tories and Whigs ought to be placed on a different footing. The Tories for seven centuries had exercised an unmitigated tyranny and oppression over Ireland. If they thus sympathised with their sufferings, let them not place the Whigs on the same footing with the Tories. Let them recollect the partisan judges, the partial jurors, and the partisan sheriffs of Tory times ; and what, he would ask them, could be more horrible than a partisan judge, jury, and sheriff? He sincerely believed that the present Mi nisters were anxious to do justice to Ireland. He would never vote for them when lie thought they were wrong — he would vote against them on the Canada (Loud cheers.) If he found them at any time acing inconsistently with the rights and interests of English 111C11, Irishmen, or Scotchmen, he would vote against them as firmly as he would vote with them when by so doing he violated no principle. As for Ireland, the Whigs were infinitely better than the Tories. If they had a Tory domination revived there, it would drive the country to a civil war or to a painful submission. Sooner than have a civil war he would submit even to partial magis trates, partisan sheriffs, partial jurors, partisan judges, and to see the power and wealth of the state turned to the oppression of the people. But anxious as he was, for the sake of Ireland, to retain the present ministry, ho was not the less ready to denounce the sentiments expressed on late occasions by . Lord John Russeli.—(Loud cheers.) With respect to the occasion on which these sentiments were expressed, he would not say that the course of his honourable friend (Mr. Wakley) was judicious in pres sing on the subject. He did not blame any man for differ ing with him in opinion, indeed he sometimes differed with himself, and on that very occasion he changed his mind two or three times before he ultimately decided whether he would go into the lobby or remain in the house. Why then should he blame others for a difference in opinion ? He knew that his honourable friend was as honest as the sun ifs making his motion ; hut he new equally well that his heart was as honest. His judgment might be fallible ; but his heart was honest. This was the very thing that s hould be tolerated, and he would say that they could never succeed in their object unless they tolerated these differences of opinion in honest men.—(Cheers). If they would take his advice he would tell them in three words what to do—ho would say "agitate, agitate, agi tate."—( Loud cheers.) The must agitate if they wished to keep down the party who had deluged every field of the old, and every gulf and stream of the ocean with blood ; and who had imposed a thoustind millions of taxes on them, and mortgaged their industry even to the latest posterity to pay them.—(Cheers.) Their first and chief object should be to give protection to the voter.—(Cheers.) It bad been said that intimidation had been resorted to in Ire• land at . the elections. Why, the strongest proof of the country was that he was himself most anxious for the Bal lot, which would be the means of putting down all int:mi.