The Sun.
London, England, 1866-12-05 00:00:00

TRADES' REFORM MEETING.

Last night a meeting called by the leaders of the
London Trades and Friendly Societies was held in
St. James's-hall, Piccadilly, in favour of Parliamen-
tary Reform, as a sort of sequel to the open air de-
monstration of the previous day. The galleries were
hung with festoons of artificial flowers, and some of
the bannerets and mottoes used in the procession cf
the day before were displayed at the back of the
platform and in other parts of the building. Among
the most conspicuous of the latter were " Edmond
Beales and the right of meeting in the Parks ;"
" Honour Bright, our Guiding * ;" Residential and
registered manhood suffrage ;" " Vote by Ballot ;"
"The working men of London return their thanks
to Lord Ranelagh ;" " The People the legitimate
source of power," &c. At half-past 7 Mr. Bright,
M.P., arrived, accompanied by Mr. George Potter,
Mr. Mason Jones, and other leaders of the move-
ment, and was received with cheering. Mr. T. B.
Potter, M.P., Mr. Ayrton, M.P., and Sir J. Gray,
M.P., also appeared upon the platform. Most of
the trade delegates wore the scarfs and stars apper-
taining to their respective offices. The chair was
taken by
Mr. G. POTTER, who, in opening the proceed-
ings, said it was not his intention to detain them by
many remarks. He trusted they would give their
attention to the delegates and working men who
were to address them, though he had no doubt they
had come there that night to listen to one whom
they all so much delighted to hear. (Cheers.) They
were all aware that the demonstration of the pre-
vious day was meant for a certain object, and he
believed they were justified in stating that that de-
monstration was most significant, most important,
and most successful. (Cheers.) It was admitted by
all the papers that it was so, and the only cause of
complaint about it on the part of their opponents ap-
peared to be that they did not know how many per-
sons were present at it, and that there had not been
a row. (Laughter.) Those gentlemen seemed
to feel much disappointed that the proceedings
ended as they did. (No.) He would not quarrel
about numbers; he was not particular to a few
thousands, more or less, one way or the other. They,
were satisfied that tens of thousands did walk along
the streets of London last Monday, and that half a
million of persons or upwards witnessed it, those
spectators being, he was convinced, quite as desir-
ous of seeing the object attained as the members of
the procession themselves. (Cheers.) Of course,
they had not expected to please the Tory party.
They certainly had tried to please them ; but it ap-
peared that no possible reform demonstration would
satisfy them. First their 'gatherings were of too
rough and riotous a character ; then the proceedings
were too orderly ; and again the assemblages were
too small. Well, if their critics had not yet seen
enough of the working men of London and through-
out the country, they would show them some more.
(Loud cheers.) They might depend upon it that
that which the working men had begun they would
finish and complete ; and it was for their own cre-
dit's sake, and the sake of all whom they held dear,
incumbent on them to settle that question now, or
the responsibility must rest upon them, and the con-
sequences must be taken by them. (Cheers.) On
Monday they demonstrated by an orderly proces-
sion, and in that procession were the men who had
been stigmatised as venal, corrupt, and ignorant.
On Monday they were orderly, peaceable, and
worthy of the franchise ; and yet a few months ago
those very men were grossly slandered and libelled
in the House of Commons. However, on Monday
they had, as he had said, demonstrated. That night
they would have fact, argument, and logic. They
had met to welcome the great champion of reform
—(cheers)—and he was certain they would be inter-
ested and instructed by him as they ever had been
before, and that the great cause which they had at
heart would be advanced that night another step.
(Cheers.) The working men of London and the
country were getting up these demonstrations to
strengthens the hands of Mr. Bright, who would go
into the House of Commons next session more power-
ful, more influential, because backed by the people,

suggestion which involved me in a good deal of un-
friendly criticism—namely, that I thought the time
had come, or would soon come, when it would be
the duty of the working classes to make use of that
great organisation of theirs which extends over the
whole country, the organisation of trade and friendly
societies, for the purpose of bringing to bear upon
the Government the united power of a just demand.
(Cheers.) I said, further, that I believed one year
only of the united action of the working classes,
through their existing organisation, would h w o y
change the aspect of the Reform question. Now it
appears that the counsel which I gave eight years
ago has become the couusel of those who are in
favour of the enfranchisement of working Inca.
That counsel has been adopted recently to a large
extent, and every man in the kingdom feels that the
aspect of the question has been wholly charged.
But, as has been already said to-night, it .is very
difficult to please those by whom we arc opposed.
And, as was said eight years ago, so it i., said now,
that it is very undesirable that associatio,ns like these,
which were not formed for political purposes, should,
be worked for political ends. Well, that is a matter
of which the members of these societies must be held
to be the best judges. (Hear, hear.) We have known
other societies that did not profess to be political
which have entered largely into politics. I know
sseveral s yoefa
trhs
eagou
nt
thrayt
wneeraer
cl yo
navl le r tt
ehcle
intofag r ipc uo
itradi
societies for the purpose of sustf.ining au act of
Parliament which denied an honest and fair supply
of food to the people of this country. (Cheers.) And
even now, when agricultural societies and farmers'
clubs meet, we hear that sort of curious and confused
political discussion which takes place when the coun-
try gentlemen and county members make speecly,a
to their tenantry and county supporters. (Lai:,gh_
ter.) But these critics of ours say that tins mea-
sure—the combination of the trade unions, for poli-
tical purposes—is one which excites their fears, and
is of a very formidable nature. It was precisely
because it would be of a formidable nature that I
first recommended it. (Cheers.) The fact is that the
millions can scarcely stir but the few, who arc timid
and in some degree ungenerous in these matters,
feel this alarm. But you cannot help being numer-
ous. (Laughter.) If you had had a better Govern-.
ment during the last hundred years—if the land had
been more in the hands of the people, and less in the
hands of a small class—if you had had fewer pars,
lighter taxes, better instruction, and a freer trade,'
one-half of those in this country who are no ;v
called
"the working classes" would have been i:n comfort
and in a position equal to those whom we call the
middle classes. (Loud cheers.) But this is your great
difficulty, and it is the great difficecy of our oppo-
nents. You are too numerous to be let in with
safety, and they are finding out that you are too
numerous to be kept out with safety. (Cheers.)
Now, if these associations and the combination of
those societies be formidable, who made them forte_
dable ? These societies took no step until they were
challenged to it by the speeches, the resolutions, the
divisions, and the acts of a great party in the Par-
liament of the United Kingdom. Did they fail to
have fact and argument in favour of the change that
was proposed last session? No, but fact and argu-
ment had no effect upon whatever there is of rea-
soning power in the ranks of the Tory party. Did
that party think that the working men in England,
those who built this greaty city, those who covered
this land with great cities, those who have cultivated
every acre of its area, those who have made this
country a name of power through all time and
throughout the whole world—did they for one mo-
ment imagine that you would lie down and submit
without voice to the scandalous and unjust imputa-
tions heaped upon you ? (Cheers.) Did they think
that you would be silent for ever, and patient for
ever, under a perpetual exclusion from the benefits
of the constitution of your country ? If they are
dissatisfied with this movement, what would they
have? Would they wish that, as many did fifty
or sixty years ago, instead of making an open de-
monstration of your opinions, you should con-
spire with a view to change the political consti-
tution of your country ? Would they like that you
should meet in secret societies, that you should
administer to each other illegal oaths, that you should
undertake the task of midnight drilling, that you
should purchase throughout London and the pro-
vinces a supply of arms, that you should in this
frightful and terrible manner endeavour to menace
the Government, and to wring front them the con-

cession of your rights ? But surely one of two
modes must be taken. (Cheers.) If there be a sen-
timent of the people, a deep and wide-spread senti-
ment of injustice no longer tolerable, then, judging
from all past history of all people, one of two modes
willbe taken—either that mode, so sad and so odious,
of secret conspiracy, or that mode so grand and so
noble which you have adopted. (Cheers.) You have
at this moment across the Channel, if the reports
which the Government sanctions are true, an exhi-
bition of the plan which I deplore and condemn.
You have there secret societies, and oaths and dril-
ling, and arms and menace, and a threat of violence
and insurrection. Is there any man in England who
would like to see the working men of Great Britain
driven to any such course in defence of or in the
maintenance of their rights ? (Cheers.) Well, I
hold, then, that men in this country, whateyer be
et
thex t ennos
biolne
eoxf h
itbhietisouoff, rtahgee
0,
their abstract opinion on this question of a wide
oi ogn
men
opinionn
o f
Englandw hi c h a
nh
da s been
rsdheortltyl da
nci reallyg
ra
nzd'e jeoxi chei
bai
Well, now, I said that if
Scotland ma ddenbr
during
gt hteh we ork
past-
three months. (Cheers.)
there be a grievance,
and a deep sentiment that
voicet h r e
to is a
ex
p r es
express grievance,
and
proclaim
there
lintu.
complainsitirlinaecteisssatlrelygrbieeva-
? It is this—that you
ance of which you
v the native inhabitants of a
citizens,
; and what is
m
t yourgovernment is not
a ptytroyo by
a
a monarchy, or an oligar-
chic government
arnmlaerngteoafad essentialan
portion of which is
oligarchy, but that it is a go-
vernment
conducted by the honestly elected representatives of

the people; and the grievance is this—that this Con-
. . .

Istitution, so noble in its outline and in its purpose, is
defaced and deformed, and that, when you look at
it, it seems in that respect absolutely worse than
any other representative Constitution existing in the
world--(cheers)—for I believe there is no repre-
sentative system whatsoever at this moment, in
America or in Europe, that is so entirely deformed
from its natural, just, and beautiful proportions as

is the representative system of this country. (Cheers.)
What can be more clear than this, that the aristo-

cracy of land and wealth usurp the power in both

Houses of Parliament ? (Cheers.) The Lords repre-
sent themselves and generally the great land-owners,
it may be, with great fidelity ; but at the same time
we must admit and deplore that at least one-half of
the House of Commons is in fast alliance with the
majority of the House of Lords. (Cheers.) Now, I
said before, and I repeat it again, that there is no

security whatsoever for liberty under a government
unless there be, as an essential power in it, a fair
representation of the nation. An illustrious man,
the founder of the great province and now the great
State of Pennsylvania, 'William Peun—(eheers)--
in the preface to his Constitution of that province,
a Constitution of the widest and the most generous
freedom, uses these words—he says, " Any govern-
ment is free to the people under it, whatever be the
form, where the laws rule and the people arc a party
to the laws ; and more than this is tyranny, oli-
garchy, or confusion." Now, let us ask ourselves, can
it be truly said, can it be said without the most direct
falsehood, that the people of this country, through
the House of Commons, are really a party to the
laws that are made? (No.) It is not contradicted,
it is not disputed at all, that only 16 out of every
100 men are found with their names upon the elec-

toral roll, and are able, all other circumstances
favouring, to give their vote at a general election.
And it is not disputed that half the House of
Commons, that an absolute majority of that llouse,
is elected by a number of electors not exceeding
altogether three out of every 100 men in the
United Kingdom. (Cheers.) Now, I have taken
from which a great
amount of valuable information may be had on this
the trouble to make a little calculation from the
facts contained in a very useful book published by
a very old friend of mine, Mr. Aclaud, called ",tea
land's Imperial roll-book,"