The Sun.
London, England, 1864-12-10 00:00:00

rHE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, DECEMBER 10, 1864.

Reform. Movement in the West Riding,

On Thursday evening a demonstration took place
in St. George's-hall, Bradford, in favour of Parlia-

mentary Reform. Five members of Parliament, all

connected with the Wcst Riding of Yorkshire,
were announced to take part in the proceedings—
and out of the number, Mr W. E. Forster, Sir F.
Crossley, Mr Stansfield, and Mr Baines put in an

appearance. Mr E. A. Leatham was absent on ac-
count of a family bereavement. The body of the
hall and gallery were crowded—and in the stalls,
for admission to which a small charge was made,
there was also a good attendance. There were com-
puted to be about 3,000 persons present. The chair
was taken by Mr. W. E. Forster, M.P. ; and there
were also present in addition to the members of
Parliament already named, Aldermen Mitchell and
Law ; Messrs. S. C. Kell, A. Illingworth,W.Byles,
Whitehead, and other gentlemen of the neighbour-
hood. _ _ _

Mr FORSTER said—Before I make the few re-
marks with which I must open the business of the
meeting, I feel it due to you and myself, consider-
ing the other gentlemen present upon the platform,
to state why lam in the chair. We have present

this evening members of Parliament much better

fitted, from their standing in the House, and also

from the part they have taken in this great cines.

tion, to occupy the chair, especially my friend Mr.

Baines, who for two or three Sessions has with such

energy, with such ability (cheers), and such con.

-- - -
rage, held up the standard of reform, and therefore

I wish it clearly understood that the sole reason

why I am in thishonourable position is because this
meeting happens to be held in Bradford, and it was

thought that the member for Bradford, of all others,
should preside. (Cheers) This is a Bradford meeting,
and yet in some respects it may be called a West
Riding meeting. It is a meeting of the people of
Bradford, but it is such a meeting as might have
been held in any of the towns of the West Riding,
considering what the feeling upon this question now
is. (Hear, hear.) I have no doubt, if it had been
determined that the first meeting upon this question
should be held either in Leeds, Huddersfield, or
Halifax, you would have had a similar meeting, and

I suppose it is to the feeling that this meeting is
one representing the 'West Riding that we have so

large a number of the representatives of the West
Riding constituencies present tonight. (Hear,

hear.) Why do we Reformers hold this meeting,
to be followed up by other meetings elsewhere ?
We have had Reform meetings over and over again
in this hall, until we are nearly tired, without do•

ing any good. Why, then, have we this meeting ?
Because the promoters of the meeting, being active
reformers at Manchester and elsewhere, have come

to the conclusion that now especially it is desirable
that the reformers in our large towns, and in large
districts such as the West Riding, which has al-

ways held a strong interest on Reform, should meet

together in large numbers, and should call to their
counsel their representatives to consider the present
position of the Reform question, and that especially
at this time should they do so, chiefly for this rea-
son—that this Parliament, which waa originally a
Reform Parliament, which was called together as
a Reform Parliament, which has long ceased to be
a Reform Parliament—(hear, hear)—is now app.
proaching to its close. I don't say we are to have a
dissolution next session. We are very loth to die—
(laughter)—but we cannot live beyond next year,
and I suspect, even if wo don't resolve upon dying
next year, that during the next session we shall be
only dead-alive—(laughter)—and that the approach
of our deuth will weigh upon ns as a l'eavy cloud.
(Hear, hear.) I fancy we shall be thinking of our

dissolution, and therefore it is well that our consti-
tuents, and the country also, should be thinking
of the subj,2ct, and considering what, when Par•

liament is dissolved, shall bo done with the Reform
question. (Hear, hear.) It may be said, " Must
we wait until then ?'' I fear we must. I only
wish there was a chance to the contrary ; that at

the last moment Ministers should recollect upon
what conditions this Parliament was chosen, to
what extent it was pledged to Reform, and that

even at tha last moment Ministers would do their
duty and fulfil their pledges, staking their exis-
tence upon it, and calling upon Parliament to fulfil
its pledges, or stAing the existence of Parliament
upon it. I only wish that was probable, but I fear
we must consider that it is almost without the
range of probability. I think that at Reformers
the practical question we row have to consider is
what line eve shall take and in what position we
shall place this reform qu?stion after the next dis-
solution of Parliament. (Applause.) Just for a
moment let us consider that question. Is there any
reason why, although five or six years ego we
mlde the Reform question a paramount question
on the hustings, we should not do so at the next
dissolution ? (Hear, hear.) Are the circumstances
now different to what they then were ? Is the need
for Reform less ? Is there any more truth,
any less falsehood, in the alleged dangers of Re.
form now than there was then P (Cheers.) First,
as to the need. I think that in two or three sen-
tences I may pass over that. We all feel that the
need is as strong as it was before. Take our own
constituencies. We have upon this platform four
members of Parliament representing four consti-
tuencies. What are those constituencies ? Those
constituencies represent one million and a quarter
of people ; they comprise one-twentieth of the
population of Great Britain and Ireland. (Ap.
plause.) What is the share of the representa-
tion that these constituencies have ? We four who
aro hero, and our four colleagues who aro not
here, with one-twentieth of the population, have
one.eightieth of the representation of the kingdom.
Again, take the three towns that are represented
here—Leeds, Bradford, and Halifax. These three
towns have a population of 320,000, I mfght give
more striking cases, more striking illustrations, but
I will take three towns in our own immediate neigh.
bourhood—Pontefract, Knaresborough, and Ripon.
What is the population of these three towns ?
23,000. Each man who lives at Ripon, Pontefract,
or Knaresborough has 15 times as much voting
Power as the man who lives at Leeds, Bradford, or
Halifax. And what is the especial virtue that be.'
longs to the Pontefract, or Knaresborough, or
Ripon man that gives him 15 times as much voting
power as belongs to you here, or to the men of
Leeds? (" Hear, hear," and applause.) This is
the inconsistent, anomalous mode in which the re-
presentation is apportioned. But then going from
that, and coming to those who have votes, even
where there is representation, what are the voters
in these three constituencies of the West Riding—
Leeds, Bradford, and Halifax? They form less
than 1-25th of those free constituencies, while the
adult tax-paying men form considerably more than
one-fifth. Therefore the result is that only one man
out of five adult taxpayers has any share in self.
government—has any vote. (Hear, hear.) Weil,
then, who are those four-fifths that are excluded ?
What class do they form ? They are almost all of
one class—labourers, artisans, working men. I
have had some practical experience of that. When
I was contesting Leeds with my friend Mr Baines,
I could have counted the working men who were
able to vote for Mr Baines or myself upon my
fingers, and I could almost do the same in my pre-
sent constituency. Yet, as I ventured to 'say in the
House of Commons, if we go through these towns,
and if we look at what has been done, and
at what is doing, to what class have we
to look for the success of those towns
more than to the hard working artisans and
labourers who are thus excluded from all share in
the representation? (Applause.) Now, I will not
dwell any longer upon the need. We feel it to be
as strong as ever it Was; we feel it is an insult and
a disgrace.
(Applause.) We now come to the dan-
gers, Are there any dangers in this Reform, in this
act of justice, greater than they were before ? I
hear men constantly talking as 0101101 they feared
Reform muchmr;re Oftu they used to do, hut I at,
ways doubt whether Eliey fe.s.r 11t form E':0141 than
they did; they think there in less danger now in
F ";iiieFraing that fear or the appearance of it. Rut
why should they ? I won't anticipate my friend
Mr Bibles, who, if he says one.fourth or one-tenth
part of what ha has said in the House of Commons
would prove to demonstration to any opponent or
objector that if there was any danger—and I don't
bsjave there was-5 or 10 years ago, there must be

less danger now, such has been the progress to in.
dustry, morals, and prosperity of the working men
themselves. But fresh grounds of danger are es-

pressed. I hear men talking in an ominous way
about strikes for wages, and that, VI( refore, the
working men must not have the franetie. I am not
going into the question of strikes. We all lament

these differences between labour and capital, but
they are no argument against the extension of the
franchise. Strikes, however deplorable, are not so
common and destructive as they were in former
times,and when they do occur are accompanied with
far less violence and outrage than used to be the case.
I begin to hope that we now see symptoms of a
greater agreement between labour and capital than
we ever saw before. (Hear.) I believe cooperation
is going to strike out strikes from existence.
Whether that will be the case or not, I say, as an
employer of iabour, that anything more fatal to our
class interests—if you choose to divide us into classes
—than this argument of the wages question against
an extension of the franchise I cannot conceive.
Then we come to what is said by those who are cone
stantly looking at the civil war in America.
" America is a democracy—America is a self-
governing republic, and there yon have a civil war,
and will you venture to insist on Reform when you
see what has occurred on the other side of the At.
lantic ?" What does this mean but that we are to
cling to our aristocratic Government, that we are
to fence it round and preserve it from the breath
of Reform ? Why ? Because the democracy of
America are engaged in a life and death struggle to
free their country from the grasp of a slave holding
oligarchy. Let us suppose for a moment that they
had done in America just what they have not done.
Let us suppose that the Republicans of America,
of the North, had continued to allow themselves to
be governed by the man.owners of the South.
What should we have said of them ? What did
we say of them? That they were so engaged in
mammon hunting that they forgot principle, that
they were careless of their own liberty, that they
were glad to connive at the tyranny of the South
over the negro ? (A Voice—" That is not a slave
question.") I beg your pardon ; it is a question
with which we are constantly taunted. (Loud
cheers, and another Voice—" That is not the ques•
tion.") I will bring you to the question very soon.
(Laughter and cheers.) Because they declared they
would no longer submit to be thns ruled, they at
the same time said they would not submit to have
their country broken up. If they had done the
contrary, what should we have said of them? We
should have said that they were cowardly—(loud
applause)—that those working men of America had
no patriotism ; that they preferred money and an
easy life to principle and to their country. (Hear,
hear, and applause.) And we should have said to
them, " Take care how y on let the aristocracy of
England lose its power and be replaced by a
democracy, which will thus allow itself to
be subservient to special interest.' (Applause.)
Because they have not done so, because the working
men, the artisans and yeomen of America have
poured out their lives for the last two or three years
on behalf of their country ; because at this last mo-
ment they have shown by their conduct at the late
vote that they even hated slavery more than they
loved union. (A Voice—That is not the question.)
I will come to the question. (Cheers and laughter.)
Because these working men on the other side of the
Channel have shown that they hated slavery, and
loved their country, therefore we are constantly told,
and I suppose my friend there would join in so tell.
ing us, the working men, the artisans and labourers
of England, are to be excluded from their share in
Government, and to be pariahs in their constitution.
(Loud applause.) Weil, but I think the opponents
of Reform ought to be ashamed of mentioning Ame-
rica, and for this reason. Who is it that has pre-
served this country from intermeddling in American
affairs ? Whether it was right or wrong, it would
have been considered by the Americans, as it would
have been considered by us, such an intermeddling
as might possibly, might probably have led us to war
with our kinsman cn behalf of slavery. I say who
has prevented this being done ? Not the aristocracy
of England ; not even the middle classes of England,
but the working men of England. (Applause.) I
am not complimenting you. I believe you would
have done it if you had been tried ; you were not
tried. But there were working men who were tried—
the working men of Lancashire, who were tried in
every way—(loud cheers)—who under the strongest
possible inducement, that of deep and unmerited
poverty, refused to palter with principle. They were
wrong, perhsps, my friend there would say ; but he
will not deny this, that whether wrong or right,
they have shown that the working men of that
great district—and I do not compliment them so far
as to suppose that they did what other working
men would not have done—fulfilled what is the
greatest and most necessary condition of granting
power to any order of men whatever. (Cheers.)
That is, they have preferred principle to interest,
they have preferred the good of their country and
the principles which they professed to a mere
pecuniary advantage. (Cheers.) I dare say a
great many of you, of the working men present,
have read Mr. Mill's book upon representative go-
vernment. Yon will have seen that he, although
a friend of the people,• and -a strong friend of
Reform, looks with some fear upon a great eaten.
sion of the franchise, because, he says, it would
throw a great deal of power into the hands of the
working classes, and that they might use that
power to the disadvantage of their country, and
might prefer their apparent interest, the in-,
terest of the moment, to the interest of the
country. I feel that this fear of his must
have been removed by what has taken place lately,
by the test which has been applied to them
within the last five years, and which they have most suc-
cessfully stood. I think I have shown the need is as great
as it was, and that tho dangers are even less than they were.
Then, are we or are we not to have the reform question a
pre-eminent one at the next dissolution? Here I am met
with another objection. I are told perhaps that "There is
no new fact. no new circumstance. We do not imagine that
the theoretical arguments on behalf of Reform are less strong
than they were. Wo do not suppose there is much in this
change. But we have discovered there was a hollowness in
what you thought to be a fact before. We have discovered
that all this talk about Reform was hollow and insincere.
We find out now by the apathy with which the Reform
question is viewed, and by the manner in which those who
professed Reform views at one time do not profess them
now—we gather from all that, that those working men
whom you talk so much about do not care to have votes,
I then surely we may leave them alone, and not give them
that which they do not care for." After all that is the
strongest argument we have to meet—the alleged apathy of
the people, and especially the alleged apathy of that class
in favour of whom the extension of the franchise is to be
made. Upon that point I might say this meeting alone is a
clear proof of apathy; but I will not be contented with that,
I will go into the question, if you will allow me, a minute or
two longer. (Cheers.) I don't mean to say there is so great
1 a call or so much need for Reform now as there was when
the great Reform Bill was passed ; I don't pretend to say
that there aro the agitation and feeling in the country there
were then. There is not even the same feeling among work-
ing men as at the time of the Chartist agitation, and why ?
not because they are not convinced, as they were then, that
they ought to have a share in the Government, but because
they found out that they then exaggerated the material
advantage they suppsed would be obtained by any change
of Government. (Hear, hear.) But this much I will
say, there is so much feeling about Reform
among the prominent and leading men of the Liberal party
throughout all our boroughs, and even in our counties, that
I will venture upon a prophecy, and it is this, that when the
dissolution comes we shall find that the Liberal members
will be just as much pledged to Reform as they were at the
last dissolution. (Hear, hear.) The question therefore
changes itself into this—are these pledges to be taken seri-
ously? Are they expected to be falsified or aro they not?
That is the question which we have to consider, and not
merely we ourselves. I want our opponents and lukewarm
friends throughout the country just to answer this question
in their own minds. Is it desirable—is it not dangerous--
that at the next dissolution members should be pledged to
Reform as they were before, and that those pledges should
be trifled with by the :lest Parliament as they have been
by this? (Hear, hear.) If that be the case, there will be far
more danger itv.,nlved in the breaking of these pledges than
in all that is imagined by the opponents of Reterm, ([Lear,
hear.) It will he destructive o all political morality, it will
be fraught with danger to the Parliament itself, and what
is by far the least of the evils, it will be utterly destructive,
and that for many years to come, of the Liberal party.
(Hear, hear.) I believe (ha question will present itself in
that active way to the Liberal party throughout the country
—will
atean presentetb pre
present
affirmativetesnetlfmo nwimt hesute h force that they will be obliged
tofi tgiv
answer;l evbaunlidleittle as we may think
o
that the force with
which that question will present itself to their minds will
be
. so great—however
much they may dislike enter-
taw ng it—that it will be carried tosome again
eeettiement.

(Cheers.) I have great hope in the present position of the
leaders of our party. Don't suppose lam so sanguine as to
think our present Premier is likely to be very active in ob-
taining a Reform Bill. (Hear, hear, and a laugh.) We all
know that Lord Palmerston has a wonderful past to look
back upon—a past in some respects a glorious one and
greater than that of any other man now living ; but Lord
Palmerston is of that age, he has come to that time of life
when even he cannot look forward to a future. We have
other men in the Government who do look forward to
a future. You saw how Mr Gladstone—(loud cheers)—last
session looked forward to a future. Mr Gladstone knows
he has responsibilities and hopes in the future before him.
(Cheers.) But he cannot do all. Reformers throughout
the country, do your duty, and you shall not be forsaken by
Mr Gladstone. (Loud cheers.) I will only detain you a
few minutes longer by two or three remarks on another
branch of the subject, (Cheers.) I believe that we shall
have a Reform Bill ; and I agree with Mr Leatham that
the danger is not so much that we shall have no bill, as
that we may have a bad bill, (Hear, hear.) We must keep
our eyes open and our hands ready to prevent what he calls
a pernicious compromise. (Hear, hear, and cheers.) I urged
on working men to direct their attention to all discussions
upon Reform that are taking place, You must not suppose
that because certain suggestions appear to be a mere specu-
lation that they will not be listened to. Those who have
the power in their hands are very prone to try experiments,
and they will be only prevented trying them by finding
rom the earnestness of those concerned that they will not
be experimented upon. When we had the debate last ses-
sion, so excellently introduced by Mr Baines, I ventured to
say, in reply to an hon. gentleman who said that working
men wore hardly fit to discuss political subjects, that I
should like to bring him to my borough and introduce him
to working men who would discuss political questions with
him. (Laughter.) It might have improved him, and might
have improved you also. I know you discuss several of those
ideas that are started in regard to reform, and I want you
to read a book on the subject written by Earl Gray, son of
the Earl Grey who introduced the great Reform Bill. One
of his propositions is that the House of Commons should in
a measure elect itself, should cease to be a representative
body, and should become self chosen. I don't suppose for a
moment that such a proposition would gain much attention
(Hear, and applause.) Another proposition of his, and one
which I conceive to be the most injurious that could be
brought forward, is that though working men should have a
share in the representation, they should have it as a class, I
hope that when the working men do obtain a vote they will
vote as Englishmen, and not as a class divided from their
fellow countrymen. (Hear, hear, and cheers.) There is an-
other proposition of Earl Grey's which does deserve some
consideration. It is what he calls the representation of mi-
norities. I wish working men would direct their attention
to this subject, and make their opinion regarding it known
to the country, and especially to the House of Commons,
where it is certain before long to be discussed. Do not sup-
pose I commit myself to this plan. I see in it many dangers
It may make a minority in some cases a majority; it may
give men with special objects, such as the Mains Law advo-
cates, more than their due influence; might make elec.
tioneering as complicated and difficult as bookmaking at a
race ; but it is worth patient consideration by Reformers,
and especially by working men, because it is an honest
attempt to meet a danger honestly feared, and because,
at any rate, it is not unfair in principle. There is another
plan which is proposed, which is a most unfair one. It is
called a plurality of voting —giving one man more votes
than another because he has more money—just putting five
or six poor men together and saying they are only as good
as one rich man. I have cor fidence in the people of Eng.
land that they will never adopt such a proposition. (aear,
and cheers.) I have only to say, in conclusion, that I hope
the effect of this meeting will not end to-night, but that it
will lead to an active and efficient org4nisation on the ques-
tion of Reform. (Lend cheers.)
Sir F. CROSSLEY said that Mr Forster had dwelt a good
deal upon the want of good faith on the part of members of
the House of Commons. Ihe same thing had been touched
upon by other speakers and writers on Reform, but in Eng-
land they did not adopt the Eastern mode—as Herod did,
for example, when he ordered all children under two years
of age to bo destroyed, not only in Bethlehem, but all the
coasts thereof, in order to make sure of putting down the
Governor who was to be the ruler of the people of Israel.
They found a railway traveller who, in order secretly to rob
his fellow passenger, murdered him and threw him out of
the window. They did not seize every traveller in order to
make sure of the murderer. They tracked him, if neces-
sary, across the ocean. They gave him a fair trial—if
guilty, ht; had to suffer for what ho had done. The day of
judgment for the House of Commons was at hand. (Laugh-
ter.) The constituencies would soon have the whole matter
in their own hands, and it would be for them to look to the
pledges given in 1859, and to see how they had been carried
out. He could only answer 1.1. himself. He should be very
sorry to have to answer for the Liberal side of the House
of Commons—(laughter)---but for himself he could answer
that not only since the general election of 1859, but since
that of 1852, to the best of his recollection, he had been pre-
sent in every division on the Reform question, and also on
the ballot. (Cheers.) Ho had voted in every case in favour
of the measures which had been proposed, with ono excep-
tion, and that was Lord Derby's so-called Reform Bill of
1859. He went purposely from Yorkshire to hear Mr Dis•
raeli introduce that measure, and he stood up in his
place in the house, and told the right hon. gentleman that
in Yorkshire they would call it a great deal of cloth and
very little dinner. (Laughter.) It extended the franchise
to the classes that now possessed it, and left the working
classes just where it found them. But as they were without
reform, it was far better than having a bill palmed off upon
them to settle a question which it never could settle, (Ap-
plause.) It might seem an easy thing to be a member of
the House of Commons for 18 years, and to be in every
division on the Reform question and the Ballot, and so it
would if they divided first and discussed afterwards.
(Laughter.) But they had to hear the late arguments and
to wait till the small hours of the morning, and to find de-
bates continually adjourned. He had a very strong con-
viction in favour of Reform when ho entered the House of
Commons in 1862, and since that time that conviction had
been strengthened. Since then he had seen the working
classes in prosperity, and they used that prosperity by or•
ganising industrial associations, establishing savings banks
and building societies ; and many of them had merged
into the middle classes of society. They had seen the
working classes in adversity, which they bore so nobly that
the stanchest Conservative might not now be afraid to ex-
tend the suffrage to the moat intelligent of the working
classes. (Cheers.) He often thought it very singular that
men situated as he and the chairman were, with their capi-
tal invested for the most part in mills and machinery, and
employing large numbers of workpeoplo, should not be
afraid to extend the suffrage, while those whose property
was almost entirely in land should be their strongest oppo-
nents, Surely, if there was any disturbance in the coun-
try, their machinery and mills were of much more brittle
description, and were much more likely to suffer than the
land. (Cheers.) The solid acres were not likely to take
t) themselves wings and fiy away. He could only ac-
count for it on the ground that he and his hon. friend
came more in contact with the masses, and knew better
their wishes and feelings. When he entered Parliament
he went with a very strong feeling against the landed
gentry, for he had found their opposition to Parliamentary
reform so strong that he thought they wished to keep the
working men down; but in conversing with many of them
he was bound in all honesty to admit he was much mistaken
--and here again it was because he had come in contact with
them, just as he had said they wanted to do with working
men, that he had got to understand them. They believed
that to extend the franchise to working men would not give
us as good laws as we now have, and that they were better
friends to working men than he was because, the laws being
bad, it was worse for the working men than for them.
Nothing was gained for a cause by denying to their oppo-
nents all credit to the ground which they took up. Since
the Refot m Bill of 1832 the advance of the country had been
most marked in the intelligence of the people ; so that now

those intelligent portions of working men were far better
qualified to use the franchise than was the class above them
at that date. But it was said, if' we were going on so weil,
where was the necessity for any change ? This reminded
him very much of the boy who was ridiculed by his fellows
because he had grown too large for his clothes, and when he
asked his father for a new suit fit for his larger size, was
replied to by the parent—" Thou cub, thou, what dost thou
come crying for a new suit of clothes for, when thou has
thriven so well in what you have.' (Laughter);lt was safe
to extend the franchise--and because it was safe, it was wise
and necessary. (Cheers.) Sir Francis, after urging the
necessity of including in any measure of Reform vote by
ballot, concluded by proposing—
" That the present state of Parliamentary representation,
excluding as it does a large mojority of the people from any
share in self-g ,vernment, is most unsatisfactory and
unjust,"

Mr STANSFELD, who was received with applause, said—
The resolution, to speak to which I have been invited
to come here to-night, may be said to be the expression
of a political truism. for it is a proposition to which sue
cessive Parliaments, successive Ministries, and both of the
great parties of the State have given their assent. The
two last Ministers— first a Conservative, and lastly a Liberal
administration—have brought forward practical measures of
Reform. The Conservative Ministry came into power by
what one might call an accident in political warfare. With
them a measure of Reform was rather, I think, a Cabinet
measure than one expressive of the wishes and the views of
their supporters, Their Reform Bill was accepted by their
followers as a party necessity. It was rejected by the House
of Commons. On what ground was that measure rejected?
It was explicitly upon the ground that the Liberal party
had already pronounced a more advanced scheme, and were
prepared to hying that advanced scheme forward again.
Well, we know that that Reform Bill s as defeated by an
adverse vote, and that the Conservative Ministry dissolved
that House of Common; and appealed to the country. You
had this Parliament returned, and as soon as this Parlia-
ment met you had a vote of want of confidence moved, and
that vote of want of confidence was carried against the Con-
servative Administration. And thereupon the present
Ministry came into power, chosen by the Parliament which
had been elected upon that question of Reform. In due
time they also brought forward the:r measures of nolut
and I would say of it that it was at least a genuine, though

it was a moderate, measure of Reform. But that measure
was not suecessef ul, yet it was not defeated by any absolute
vote. Passive resistance was enough to kill it. It was with-
drawn. It foundered like some over-laden barque heavily
labouring in the trough of a leaden sea, without breeze
enough to fill its sails and to carry it home to port. (Cheers.)
Well, now, when that barque of Reform went down, how
was the fact received and accepted by the country? We
discovered that we, even the more advanced Liberals in the
country at large—no doubt in this respect led astray by the
bidding of rival parties upon the question of Reform—had
been hugging ourselves into a false security and into a
delusive hope that we had been discussing and deter-
mining what we would accept, or perhaps I should
speak more accurately if I were to say what we would re-
fuse, instead of determining to put our shoulders to the
wheel and to carry some satisfactory measure of reform;
when all history ought to have told us that no such mea-
sure can be relied upon to be carried, save by the determined
and persistent exertions of those who are to profit by its en-
actment, (Cheers.) We who have seats in the House of
Commons have had to think much, and doubtfully some
times, but carefully, on the great question of reform ; and I
think I may say, speaking for my colleagues upon the plat.
form, as well as for myself, that we feel our first duty to-
night to be to explain to you as we see it, with the utmost
possible clearness, what I will call the situation—what is
possible and what is necessary to be done. Now, we have
heard that reform is in abeyance. It is in abeyance, and yet
I agree with your chairman that it is a question which must
come up again ere long as a leading question for Parliamen-
tary decision. I know itis said that prophets, to be safe,
should above all things avoid the element of time, and I will
do so, (Laughter.) But I think at least your children was
not far wrong in saying that there were many reasons,which
should induce ono to imagine that the reform question can
hardly fail to be seriously raised at least in the Parliament
which is to succeed that which now exists. I assume with
him that pledges will be again invited upon the question.
Now, I trust—and I conjure you as representing here a
large constituency—l trust, in fairness to your representa-
tives, that no such pledge will be invited, and that no such
pledge will be accepted, unless you are prepare] to support
those from whom you invited that pledge. (Loud cheers.)
And I trust, too, that warned by the past, no candidate will
accept such a pledge unless he has determined, so far as in
him lies, that his party shall redeem it. I think there has been
a fault, to speak freely, in out-of-doors agitation upon reform
which it is necessary to avoid in the future. Men have been
got together intellectually interested in the question of re-
form. But they have dealt with it rather sentimentally, if you
will allow me the expression, than in practical earnest. Their
mental satisfaction appears to have consisted in discussions
of programmes—whether you should start with a principle
or whether you should accept a compromise, and if a com-
promise, what compromise— and then but too often our ex-
perience has shown us that the programme at length ac-
cepted has been, so far as all practical labour is concerned,
allowed to fall to the ground. Now, in my mind, such dis-
cussions continued too long are worse than a waste of time.
I say, let every man, and every association of men, declare
with the utmost freedom the utmost extent of their wishes
—but let them, at the same time that they speak openly
and think freely, also show that they possess judgment and
common sense. Let them recognise the fact that Reform
which is not revolutionary is necessarily progressive and
gradual, and that whatever their opinions may be, or my
opinions may be, the result inevitably is and, must be cora-
promise—(applause)—a poor and worthless compromise if
they refuse to assist in the work, but a substantial measure
of Reform, though still a compromise, it they will put their
shoulders to the wheel, I will go on to ask myself and you
what is the situation, what is the position of this question,
with reference to the state of mind of those classes and of
those men who will practically have to decide the question
in the Houses of Parliament. I find now none hardly left
of that old, stern, bigoted, determined opposition to Reform,
as if Reform and Revolution were identical terms, which
characterised certain classes in the time of the former Re-
form Bill, On the contrary, I have found a general accepts
anc of the notion that some extension of the franchise
must sooner or later, and at no distant time, take place, and
that its effect must be to admit the working classes of the
country to some share, at least, of the franchise. But I think
I have perceived an inclination, not unnatural, on the part
of those who possess a monopoly, to put off that evil day,
and I am sure that I have found in their minds a fear that
they seem to have conjured up of beim:swamped—swamped
under the dead level of some vast overpowering new class,
which is to leave them no political existence at all. If these
observations be correct, you will see that the difficulties we
have to overcome are, first, a disinclination—l do not say
a bigoted opposition—and second, a fear ; and what I de-
sire to say to this meeting is this, that I think we, who
are members of the House of Commons, may be surely left
to deal with the rear; but that with the disinclination it is
you, you the outside public, and you alone, that can deal,
and you must deal with it by the force of a persistent and
overwhelming national will. (Cheers.) No man, no rea-
sonable man, desires a reform of such a nature that its
consequence should be thie—that the whole policy, the le-
gislation, the administration of the country should take its
tone from what may be called working-class influence alone.
There is not the remotest chance of any measure being even
introduced into the house, in which such a danger ...you'd
lurk. I am quite sure my hon. friend the member for Leeds,
who will speak after me, will have no difficulty in proving
the innocence of his prorny of any such danger or design.

and that one thing is your labour and your will. The hon.
member concluded by seconding the resolution.
Mr BAINES, in the course of his remarks, said—The re-
solution which has been put into my hands to move says
"That further delay in remedying this injustice, after it
has been repeatedly admitted in speeches from the Throne,
and by the leaders of both parties, would bo derogatory to
the character of Parliament and destructive to political
morality." That might have been put even more strongly
than it is put as to the facts which are there referred to.
The Queen from the throne has five times recommended to
Parliament to take this question into its consideration. Four
Administrations, including every Prime Minister for the
last 12 years, have also declared their adhesion to the prin-
ciple of Reform. Both Houses of Parliament, and both
sides of those houses, have, on every occasion when the
Queen addressed them, pledged themselves to take the
question into their serious consideration. These are pledges
given to the nation, and the nation at the list general elec-
tion received and confirmed those pledges. I have got hero
the words used by Lord John Russell at a meeting of Lib° •
ral members, held at Willis's Rooms, before the last Parlia-
ment actually assembled, and before the Queen's speech was
delivered, at which Lord Palmerston, Lord J. Russell, and
other members of the Liberal party met to determine what
course they should adopt. Lord J. Russell spoke these
words—" The Reform Bill ought to bo as unlike as possible
to that which had been lately rejected (meaning the plan of
Lord Berl)) ). It ought to enlarge the franchises of the
people, and there should be no counterbalancing provisions
to take away wit h one hand what was given with the other."
Here the noble lord referred to the plan which ho himself
had sketched, of which the two main features were an ex-
tension of the county franchise to the occupiers or £lO and
of the borough franchise to occupiers of £6. And what did
Mr Bright say in the presence of these noble lords, and of
the whole Liberal party at that meeting ? "He hoped to
see a measure of Parliamentary Reform brought forward
not less liberal than that which they had recently seen
sketched by Lord J.Russell"(£lo and £6). (Cheers.) These
were the conditions upon which the present Government
received the adhesion of the Liberal party, and upon which

they afterwards came into office. I consider the measure
sketched by Lord John Russell is a debt of honour due from
the Governnient to the country. I for one have called upon
them in the House of Commons—and I call upon them here,
and will continue to call upon them —to redeem their pledges
and prove themselves men of honour. (Hear, hear.) On
this many said, " You must, at the next general election,
obtain from all your members a pledge in favour of the elec-
tive franchise." But I am disposed to go a little faster than
either. I think that the next session of Parliament, and be-
fore we come to the dissolution, is the time for Government

to redeem their pledges, and that the Parliament and the
people should insist upon that redemption. (Cheers.) In my
opinion, the first session of Parliament is in every respect
the worst time atwhich the question of reform can be brought
forward. The last session is the best time. And not only so,
but the last session is the only time in which Ministers and

the existing House of Commons can redeem the pledges
which they have given to the public. In the presence of
these pledges, remembering what they promised and what
they are again about to face, I think it would be better that
you would urge them to an immediate decision of this ques.
tion. Now, when the political atmosphere is celm, when
every other question is swept out of the way, now is the
time when this question should be urged upon the House
of Commons. Nor do 1 agree with those who think there
would not be a very fair prospect of success if a measure of
that kind were brought forward by Government. 1 obtained
for my motion last year, and I was below Mr Locke King,
no less than 216 votes with 24 pairs, making 240 in favour
of the measure ; but you cannot judge from the support a
private member receives of the support a Government mea"
sure would receive. If Lord Palmerston were to come for-
ward and say, "I have given my pledge, I am bound as a
man of honour to redeem it," and were to say to the house
moreover, "We must meet the country, whether we redeem
our pledges or not; is it better to meet the country without
having brought forward a measure and having exerted our
utmost strength to support it and carry out our pledger,
or to be subject to the reproach of having broken our
pledgee?'—there is very strong reason to believe that if
Government were thus to feel and thus to act they could
carry the measure in the House of Commons. There is one
man, if we could call him forward—the man wha has been
electrifying the house and the country session after session
by his magnificent speeches, and whose glorious sentiments
and large heart correspond with his mighty talents in finance
and with his wonderful eloquence—if we could but hear the
silver trumpet voice of Gladstone—Parliament and the
country I believe would respond in a manner which would
secure success to a measure so brought forward. (Applause.)
Lord Russell, who for many years with honour brought the
question before the HOMO of Commons, having been re-
moved to the Upper House, is, perhaps, a little disposed to
" rest and be thankful"—(laughter)—but Mr Gladstone is
in the prime of his strength ; he has felt the claims of the
working classes; he has acknowledged there both to theme
selves and to Parliament ; he has acknowledged that Go-
vernment and Parliament have not done their duty towards
the working classes. JSio is the man to take up this question
and if you call upon him I am not sure he won't answer you.
(Cheers.) Surely it would be a grand ambition for Mr.
Gladstone, the man who, by the commercial treaty with
France, put the top stone on the temple.of tree trade in this
country, and thus loosened the last shackles from the arms
and feet of industry, that ho should be the means also of
leading the industrious classes within the sacred pale of the
English constitution. (Cheer:.) That would be a grand ob-
ject of ambition—that he should be Enabled to say that ho
found industry fettered and left it unfettered, that he found
the people unrepresented, and that he was the means of
conierring upon them the franchise. (Applause) I know
some say they are indirectly represented, and that
that is the same thing—that if they are well governed
and indirectly represented they are protected equally.
It does to me appear absolutely puerile to introduce that
argument as an objection to conferring the franchise
upon the working classes. My belief, my conscientious
belief is, that the introduction of a considerable repre-
sentation of the industry of this country into the House
of Commons would have the effect of improving the char-
acter of that House, and not of deteriorating it—would add
to the elements of safety and of intelligence, and not with-
draw r nything that would be considered a safeguard of our
constitution.
Mr R. KELL seconded the motion.
Mr Alderman GoDWIN moved—"'That it is necessary
Reformers throughout the country should co-operate with
energy in order to induce the Government and Parliament
to settle satisfactorily the Reform question. This meeting,
therefore, rejoices in the establishment of the National
Reform Union for that object, and promises to that organi-
sation its hearty support."
Mr WHITEHEAD seconded and Mr A. ILLINGWORTH
supported the motion, which, with the previous ones, was
carried unanimously,
A vote of thanks to the chairman concluded the pro..
ceedings,

Demonstration of the Confederate Congress

The Index publishes the following resolutions,
which were introduced in the Confederate Congress
on November 18, by Mr Henry, senator from Ten-
nessee :

Resolved, by the Congress of the Confederate States of
America :—That the people of the Confederate States are
endowed by their Creator with the inalienable rights of life,
liberty, and the pursuit of happiness ; that to secure these
high rights governments were instituted among men, de-
riving their just powers from the consent of the governed,
and, whenever any government becomes destructive of
these ends, it is the right of the people to alier or abolish it,
and to substitute a now government, laying its foundation
on such principles and organising its powers in such form
as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and
happiness ; that ou those principles, embodied in the
Declaration of American Independence, the United Colo-
nies, in 177 G, d.ssolved the connection that bound
them to the Government of Great Britain, and on them
the Confederate States have severed the bonds of that poli-
tical union which connected them with the people and the
Government of the United States of America, rather than
submit to the repeated injuries inflicted upon them by that
people, and to the usurpations of that Government, all of
which had the direct object to deprive them of their rights,
rob them of property secured to them by constitutional
guarantees, and to establish an absolute tyranny over these
States.

Resolved—That the Confederate States appealed to arms
in defence of these rights, and to establish these principles,
only after they had in vain conjured the people and the
Government of the United States, by all the ties of a com-
mon kindred, to discountenance and discontinue these in-
juries and usurpations, and after they had petitioned for
redress in the most appropriate terms, and received in
answer only a repetition of insults and injuries, which fore.
shadowed usurpations still more dangerous to liberty.
Resolved—That.after:nearly four years of cruel, desolat-
ing, and unnatural war, in which the people of the Con-
federate States have unquestionably established their
capacity for self-government, and their ability to resist the
attempts of the enemy to subjugate them, this Congress
does not hesitate to aver its sincere desire fur peace, and to
that end prwelaims to the world the readiness of the Go.
verntnent of the Confederate States to open negotiations to
establish a permanent and honourable peace between the
Confederate States and the United States, upon the basis
of the separate independence of the former.

Resolved—That the time has come when the Confederate
Congress, in the name of the people of the Confederate
States, deem it proper again to proclaim to the world their
unalterable detertuinat bin to be free, and that they do not
abate one jot of their high resolve to dio freemen rather
than live eaves ; and further, if the people of the United
States, by re-elreting Abraham Lincoln, mean to tender to
them four years more of war, or reunion with them on any
terms, deeply depr:3ating the diro necessity wantonly
thrust upon them, and relying upon the Justice of their
cause end the gallantry of their soldias, they acceept the
guago of battle and leave the result to the righteous arbi-
trament of Heaven.

Itcsolved—That in view of the determination of the
eneu►y to prosecute this horrid war still further, against
which tho ewifi;Llerato States have at all times protested,
and which the enemy had waged with extraordinary vigour,

and— which has been marked by acts of extraordinary
atrocity, in violation of the usages of civilised waddle, the
Congress of the Confederate States will from this hour
dedicate themselves anew to tho groat cause of sell. defence
against the combined tyranny of the enemy. That it shall
no longer be the momentary occupation of the Congress and
the people of the Confederate States, but the business of
their lives, to gather together the entire strength of the
country in men and material of war, and put it forth as
with the will of ono man, and with an unconquerable de-
termination to defend their altars and their firesides till the
last votary of freedom falls around them.