The Sun.
London, England, 1858-11-17 00:00:00

On the other hand, it seems useless to put votes
for national purposes into the hands of men who
take no interest in anything beyond the gossip
of the workshop, or the noisy talk of the beer shop
or gin palace. If petty and low matters alone
occupy their minds, why ask them to vote on affairs
which never occupy their thoughts or their conver-
sation, and on which they never read. Such a
class of voters would be either a mere nominal
addition to the constituencies, or, in their utter
indifference about measures and men, would be
open to the most paltry and corrupt inducements.
Without the Ballot they would be the very Helots
of every election, and even with it they possibly
might tempt rival candidates to the worst kind of
expenditure ; though no candidate could, one
would think, like to.hazara treating and bribing
men who might vote against him in spleen, because
they thought he did not " fork out enough."
lire must say that it is highly creditable to the
u•orkiny men, that whenever they ask for the
Suffrage they ask also for the Ballot. It shows
unmistakeably that they prize liberty of suffrage
above mere animal gratification, or the chance of a
sovereign or more from a candidate. They ask to
he deprived of the power to get a bribe in the
same breath in which they ask for a vote. We
repeat, that considerate men among the better-off
classes must honour the non-electors of the opera-
tive class for uniformly asking for a franchise
inaccessible to bribery. The old freemen in the
boroughs would not do this. They do not want
the Ballot, but beer or money. Tenants-at-will
also are too timid to ask for their own freedom. The
British workman, to his credit, asks for his political
freedom pure et simple.
Up to the present time it certainly looks as if
working men were preparing to renew their demands
for admission to the franchise with firmness and
moderation. Besides the meetings at Birmingham,
Marylebone, Glasgow, and Finsbury, there has
been, as our readers have seen, a very large and
important meeting at Manchester. It was con-
vened by working men in the Free-trade Hall,
which large place, able to contain four or five thousand
people, was quite filled, and the well-known leaders
of the advanced Liberals among the electors were
also invited and attended, Mr. BAZLEY, the new
candidate, among the number, and Alderman HEY-
WOOD was invited to take the chair. The people's
resolution for manhood suffrage, vote by ballot,
triennial Parliaments, and equal electoral districts,
was of course carried ; but it was fully and fairly
discussed, as compared especially with the proposal
of a rating suffrage, for which Mr. BAZLEY avowed
his preference, and Mr. EDWARD POTTER argued
at length. Both these gentlemen were not only
patiently heard, but cheered, and a vote to support
Mr. BAZLEY carried unanimously, notwithstanding
his :advocacy of a somewhat limited franchise. It
was significant, too, that the very same people
who hissed Mr. BRIGHT, the peace-at-any-price
man, a few years ago, now loudly cheered JOINT
BRIGHT, the Parliamentary Reformer, and his
colleagues MILNER GIBSON and COBDEN too. They
would not have the wrong man in the wrong place,
but they were hearty enough for the right man in
the right place.

What strikes us as the most important feature
of the meetings hitherto is the determination of
the operatives not to embarrass, but to support the
middle classes. They insist naturally and consis-
tently on their right to manhood suffrage, but they
are ready to do their best to secure a rating suf-
frage. Time was when the Charter was held to be
of more consequence than cheap bread, and when
meetings to promote repeal of the Corn Laws were

interrupted by noisy demagogues who surely were
in the pay of the Protectionists. All such—tactics
were explicitly repudiated at this meeting by the

very same class of men, and it unquestionably

shows a groat advance in practical good sense, and
good feeling too. Their expectations, too, seemed
to be very moderate of the direct benefit to be

gained by securing their political rights. Alto.

,;ether the tone of the vast meeting was that of
men to whom it would not be easy to refuse a vote

as incompetent to use it with discretion. Should

such be the course taken by the working men

generally, should such meetings be numerous and

widely extended, and the temper of them be the

same, we are assuredly not far from something
bordering very closely on universal suffrage. Mil-
lions acting calmly, intelligently, yet decidedly,
would be a consideration to which any Minister

must yield—perhaps would be willing to yield.
The safest time to popularise the suffrage must be
when men's tempers are reasonable, and their cir-

cumstances pretty good.

At a recent meeting of the Commissioners of
Supply of the Stewartry of Kirkcudbright, a very
important,sukect was ventilated, which is deserv-
ing of serious. consideration. It was suggested by
Mr. WITHAM, of Kirkcormack, who, had been
nominated one vf a Committee to confer with Lord
-KINNAIRD, respecting some aniendments in the
Lunacy Bill for Scotland. The hon. gentleman
declared that " he should consider it his duty to
suggest that the Lunacy Act for Scotland be assi-
milated, in one respect at least, to the Lunacy Act
for England. The act contains a clause, one similar
to which he should like to see inserted in the act for
Scotland,providingthat noperson shall be appointed a
commissioner in lunacy who not only has any interest
in anyprivate lunatic asylum throughout the country,
but who shall declare that he has had no such interest
for three years previously; and further, that no
application shall be competent by any person to
any sheriff or other authority for leave to keep
any lunatic in any, house belonging to any com-
missioner in Scotland. These clauses were not in
the Lunacy Act for Scotland; but he believed it was
intended that they should be, for he could not con-
ceive that it was the intention of the Legislature that
any Commissioner in Lunacy should place himself in
a position where his private interests might clash
with the discharge of his public duties." We have
had the question of lunacy so frequently brought
forward lately, and under such painful circ -
stances, that all parties will cordially concur in
the opinion that the utmost
possible protection
should be afforded to the unfortunate persons who
are or may be suffering under the most direful
calamity to which a human being can be subjected

many care to obtain the franchise ? Do they care
enough for it to present their claims in numbers,
and in a temper which must be met by argument
and persuasion, beca.use no opening is furnished to
the constable and the bayonet ? We confess that
we shall watch the movements- of the operatives
with no little curiosity. We should not ourselves
advocate the bestowment of the franchise beyond
the demand for it. Logic would doubtless give a
vote to every man who had to obey the laws or
pay the taxes of his country. The theory of re-
presentative government supposes that all are
equally represented; and it is confessedly ungra-
cious for the elector to say to the non-elector, I can
serve you better than you can serve yourself.
That is the argument of every despot. It is Lcuis
NAPOLEON'S answer to all the able men to whom
he interdicts liberty of political speech and action.
It may do for the parallels of Paris and Lyons,
but it will not do for those of London and Man-
chester.