The Sun.
London, England, 1841-04-06 00:00:00

PUBLIC MEETINGS.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE. SUN.

" We must stand by our right to hold public meetings."

SIR —I most cordially concur with you in the
remarks you made upon the subject of public
meetings a few days ago. We are advised by
some fainthearted Whig journals to discontinue
public meetings until certain men, calling them-
selves Chartists, shall have learnt to respect the
rights of their fell)w-countrymen! Now, Sir, I
always prefer standing by my own rights to leav-
ing them in the keeping of Chartists, Whigs, or
any other party. The question is, whether pub-
lic meetings, upon important subjects, .can be
held legally, peaceably, and with effect? I say
yes. The machinery exists in every municipal
borough, calculated, and expressly designed for,
the decorous holding of public meetings; and I
say, moreover, that it is the fault of the Mayor,
who is also in all cases a County Magistrate, if
such meetings are. no: protected in the exercise
of their English rights of petitioning and making
known their grievances.
A meeting, called at the request of a. body of
requisitionists, by the Mayor or other constituted
authority of a borough or town, is presided over
as a matter of usage and right by the person, in
his official capacity,who calls the meeting. But
the inhabitants may, if they please, call a town's
meeting without the intervention of the chief
officer, and in such case they may elect their own
Chairman. In the late cases at Manchester and
Leeds, however, the Mayors were behind the
hour appointed by themselves for the meetings,
and some people took advantage of their absence
to nominate other chairmen, and they had,
under such circumstances, a right to do so. The
Mayor or other authority who has called a town's
meeting should take his seat as Chairman before
the clock strikes the hour for which he called it.
He is then responsible for the peaceable and or-
derly conduct of the meeting. The entire police
force is in his hands, and the military power
also, and what are these for, except to protect
us in the .peaceable enjoyment of our rights?
The object for which the meeting was called
having been explained, no other question can be
entertained. Let us suppose that the meeting
were called " to consider the propriety of peti-
tioning Parliament for the total and immediate
repeal of the Corn and Provision-laws," and that
a person moved a resolution in favour of the
Charter,—it is put of order to put such a motion,
and as the Mayor is bound to preserve order,
be cannot put it. He should inform the indivi,
dual mildly, but firmly, that the motion is irre-
12vant. If he refuse to yield to the Chairman
he must be removed by the civil power, along,
with all who back, him. There is no tyranny in
this ; it is merely a defensive act, to secure to
the meeting an opportunity of expressing an
opinion upon the question which brought them
together. They may decide upon that question
in any way they please. The Chairman must put
both the affirmative and negative, and the
majority, whether yeas or nays, decides the fate
of the meeting. Can any thing be fairer than
this ? The day after, or the same day if they
like, the Chartists may also hold their meeting,
to consider the propriety of petitioning Parlia-
ment for the Charter, and they have a right to
the same protection against the disorderly inter-
ference of Anti-Corn-law men, that the latter
have against theirs. In my opinion the Mayor
ought to convene public meetings whenever
called upon to do so by a numerous body of re-
quisitionists of reputable character, no matter of
what class, provided only that the object in view
be legal. But this rests with him.
With our municipal organization—those good-
old Saxon institutions of local self-government—
to shield us from the ukase of a certain "Irish gen-•
tleman," now in York Gaol, against holding any
more public meetings, why should we follow the
advice of Whig Journalists, and abandon that
right of assembling to petition and complain
which forms one of our distinguishing charac-
teristics as compared with the countries of the
Continent ? It would doubtless give great de-
light to the Duke of Buckingham and his party,
if those who advocate the repeal of the bread tax
would give up their right to hold public meet-
ings. And by the way, Sir, let me ask, in
conclusion, whether we are quite sure that
the attempt to put down Anti-Corn-law meet-
ings has not originated with the bread-taxers
themselves ? The late disclosures before the
Walsall Election Committee have proved that
the Chartist leaders are hired by the Tories to
kick up rows at the Anti-Corn-law meetings.
One of them, the hero of the Northern Star, and
for- years the terror of peaceable meetings in
Manchester, is proved by the evidence of one of
the witnesses, to have hired himself out to the
Gladstone party at Walsall. •
There are other leaders of the Chartists whose
means of honest livelihood are not very appa-
rent. The people must be warned and guarded
against such leaders, and there 'is no better
way of doing so than at public meetings; there-
fore, I repeat, we must stand by our right to
meet and petition.
I am,. Sir, your's faithfully,
AN ANGLO-SAXON.

April 5, 1841.
P.S. We want one man of spirit amonst our
250 and odd Mayors to take the bull by the
horns, and set an example to the rest. There
seems to be a very undue notion as to the right
of a minority in a meeting to put down by brute
clamour the majority, and prevent their being
heard. Sir Joshua Walmsley, the popular Mayor
of Liverpool, did good service by his firmness in
defending our public rights on one occasion, and
he has been more popular ever since. In no
town are meetings more orderly now than in
Liverpool.