The Sun.
London, England, 1841-01-14 00:00:00

and made the bulk of the people eagerly canvass '
theories of government.
It is at the same time true, and the fact is
worthy of attention, that many of the middle
classes, satisfied with their recently-acquired share
of the representation, fearing that they will lose
in importance by the suffrage being more exten-
sively diffused, and not a little alarmed by the
progress, and still more by the demands, of the
bulk of the people, have become Tories. Even
many of those who still support the Whigs out of
gratitude, are in their hearts so much Tories, that
they would at once forsake the Whigs were they to
propose further concessions to the democracy. Of
that we daily see proofs. If that be what the
Times means by the increase of Conservatism, we
admit it ; but we cannot believe that it is a circarn-
stance favourable to the stability of the Con-

stitution.
The Liberal Members of the middle classes
were the links which connected the aristocracy
with the working classes. As long as the latter
could hope for the assistance of the middle classes,
they looked to them for aid. As the middle classes
deserted their Liberal principles and turned Tories,
the people separated from them, and the rupture
between the upper and lower classes became com-
plete. Such a statement may be gratifying to the
Tories, but it threatens mischief to the community.
The Whigs are unable, even if they be willing,
to take any measures to satisfy the bulk of the
people ; the Tories would only put an extinguisher
on all hope, and could only take measures to exas-
perate and control the working classes. From neither
class of statesmen, while the electoral body continues
of its present opinion, can the community expect
measures calculated to heal our present divisions.
This forebodes no pleasant futurity, and is more a
matter of sorrow than exultation.
We have before asked, and we should like to
have the question answered, if the people are not to
be contented, how are they to be governed ? The
utmost amount of constraint and coercion which
can be conveniently is already employed. More
troops and more police would only more impoverish
and aggravate the evils: Ireland is speaking with a
voice of her own. If the Irish be not convinced that
the Imperial Legislature is disposed to do them justice
—if it go on countenancing Lord STANLEY'S
political bigotry—they will become almost unanimous
in demanding repeal, and some circumstance will
give them so much power that they must either be
put down by the sword or repeal must be granted.
The Chartists are increasing in order and organiza-
tion. We know nothing of their numbers, but we
believe that they are far from contemptible. To
keep the millions out of the pale of the Constitution
will be as impossible for any length of time as it was
perpetually to exclude the Catholics. The latter were
excluded on account of their religion ; the former
are now excluded on account of their poverty—a less
valid reason, for Christianity praises poverty and
denounces wealth. The millions, then, have greater
claims than had the Catholics, and nothing is re-
quired but organization and leaders to make them
irresistible. The middle classes, to the satisfaction
of the Tories, have deserted them, but leaders of
their own class they will easily find, and, thus cut
off from all sympathy with the upper classes, the
quarrel will only be the more embittered if not the
more deadly.

The Times exults at the people being opposed
to perpetual change. If the fact were so, its
exultation would be misplaced. Compare Eng-
land with Italy in the reign of CHARLES
the FIRST, and compare the two now, and it is
apparent that the English Constitution has under-
gone as great a change in spirit, if not in form, as
the community has made progress in arts and
knowledge. The monarch now holds only a nomi-
nal power—then he was almost despotic ; the no-
bility have equally sunk in the scale ; they are out-
shone in wealth by the middle classes, with whom
they have been obliged to share their power.
Dissent is almost as powerful as the prelacy,
which, in the days of the first CHARLES, was al-
most equal to the Sovereign. It is good that the
Constitution has so changed. If it had been sta-
tionary, as the Times represents it, while the society
had made such prodigious progress, it would have
become wholly unfit for our purposes, and some re-
volution would before now have shattered it to
atoms. Since the commencement of this cen-

tury, society has made a more rapid progress
than ever before. It moves, like population, with an
accelerating ratio. Our numerous colonies and our
trade places it beyond the control of Government.
If our institutions, therefore, be not changed to cor-
respond with social progress, they will every day
become more and more onerous, more and more
hampering, till they be burst by a convulsion.
This is what the Tories, by measures of coercion,
seem anxious to bring about. They seem to court
a revolution, as a homage to their wisdom, because
they have predicted it. They may have the power
to realize their prophecy, but it will be ruin to
themselves.

Having pointed out the source of the conflict of
opinion now prevalent between the upper and
lower classes, in respect to their claims to make
laws for one another, we shall now, and occasionally
hereafter, notice some of the consequences and in-
ferences to which that difference of opinion leads.
The lower classes, for example, in claiming a full
share of representation, seem to have one great
advantage over property. They have not been tried
and found wanting. Property has been entrusted
with the power of legislation, and whatever it may
have done for itself, it is the universal opinion of
labour that property has cheated and degraded it.
There is no chance, therefore, of ever again inducing
labour to submit to the exclusive claims of property,
while labour, never having been tried, can call
fancy to its aid, and make promises of bliss which
no experience can test. It has indeed broken loose
at times from the restraints imposed by property,
and has then worked terrible destruction, but it has
never been quietly and orderly installed into the
office of a law maker, and has, therefore, never
been tried. Perhaps the United States may be
considered an exception to the remark ; and if it be,
experience can have nothing to say against entrust-
ing industry with the power of making laws.
On one point it has, we think, a decided supe-
riority over property. Property never yet has had
any respect for industry. In fact it may be said of
property generally throughout Europe, that it ex.
ists by a violation of the rights of industry, and has
therefore a continual tendency to preserve and
maintain itself at the expense of industry. On the
contrary, industry has a great, a marked, and an
inherent respect for property. It aspires to pos-
sess property.
There is in this circumstance a
strong reason to believe, were
ithe power industry,o e rof making
equally
with property, entrusted with
laws, industry would inflict no injury on property,
but would protect and preserve its rights.
Industry and poverty have no special influence
over
Property. Wants and privations may some-
times rouse its sympathies, but, in general, pro-
perty looks on industry and -poverty as encroachers, or
even as criminals, and makes laws for them accord-
ingly. Property, however, has a great influence
over industry and poverty, and that influence would
not be destroyed, vie doubt even if it would be
by -separating from it the exclusive
much lessened,
power to make laws. To speak in perfectly plain
terms, if universal ,suffrage were established to-mor-
row, and no property qualification were required