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

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

TIMES.—The demonstration of Monday was ap-
propriately followed by a meeting at St. James's
Hall last evening, with speeches from Mr. Bright
and several of the minor leaders of the agitation.
After showing their strength and organisation in the
streets, the Reformers have been naturally desirous
of rivalling the great provincial cities by the dignity
and influence of a public meeting held in a more
convenient place, and attended by a more select
class. Mr. Bright was accordingly engaged, and
made his first appearance this season before a Lon-
don audience. But there must be something politi-
cally deadening in metropolitan life. If the pro-
vinces have been really as enthusiastic as has been
reported, they must be strangely different from us
apathetic Londoners, who are mere " Needy Knife-
Grinders" in political indifference. Neither demon-
strations out of doors, nor democratic eloquence
within, seem to draw as theyshould. After a" whip"
of a couple of months from 23,000 to 23,000 men
marched in procession on Monday, while last even-
ing Mr. Bright made what was expected to be the
chief Reform speech of the campaign before an
audience which far from filled St. James's llall. Mr.
Potter was in the chair, and there were the usual
League celebrities who figured at the meetings in the
summer. But though, even at this period of the
year, when public amusements do not abound, few
would be likely to pay for hearing these gentlemen's
eloquence, we certainly did expect that Mr. Bright's
name would have crowded the hall. But it was not
so. For an hour the people came in gradually, but
at last, when the chair was taken, about a fourth of
the front and highest priced seats, which extended
over a large part of the hall, were untenanted, and
the people from behind took possession of them.
The galleries were fairly filled near the platform,
but at the end they were two-thirds empty. At no
time was there the slightest crowding in any part ;
indeed, the hall would have held with ease some
two or three hundred more than it contained last
night. Mr. Bright seems, unlike any one else we
have met with, to consider the success of Monday's
demonstration so complete as to justify him in
claiming credit for the idea which the leaders of
some of the Trades' Unions endeavoured to carry
out. He began by telling his audience how eight
years ago he suggested that the trade and friendly
societies should use their organisation for political
purposes. For a long time this advice was neglected,
but under the stimulus of the present agitation the
leaders of the working classes have, he tells us, taken
his counsel. The burden of his speech last night
was that this organisation should be strengthened
and made universal, so that all the power which the
artisans are able to use in industrial matters, in
questions of labour or wages, should be available
for political action. We cannot imagine what Mr.
Bright has found in his experience of the present
movement, so far as regards the London people at
least, which should encourage him in giving this
advice. He met the argument of those who said
that it was better the Trade and Friendly Societies
should not become political organisations by declar-
ing that this was a question for the members them-
selves. Exactly so ; it is a question for the mem-
bers; any association, as we all know, may be made
political, if the members who agreed in the original
object of the association also agree in political views,
or if the political agreement be a condition precedent
to admission. But this is not the case with the Asso-
ciations of the working men, and it is to a disregard
of this fact that the failure of the Reform leaders to
carry the working population in their train on
Monday is to be attributed. The great body of
the working classes no doubt sympathise with
the Reform movement, the views of those who
walked in the procession were shared by thousands
who took no part in it. But it is now plain that
a great number of Associations stood aloof, on the
ground that they were forbidden by the terms of
their incorporation from becoming political bodies,
and that those Associations which did join in the
Demonstration were unsupported by a large number
of their members for a similar reason. We must
confess that we hold the opinion Mr. Bright
stigmatises, and believe it is not desirable that
the Trade or Friendly or Co-Operative Societies
should be used as political machinery, either to ob-
tain a Reform Bill or any other political purpose.
In the first plce, such a perversion of object, such
a mixture of character, would be an economical
error in the case of Friendly Societies, and militate
against their financial success as much as if the
middle classes were to establish political banks, po-
litical trading companies, or political insurance
offices. In the next place, it would excite still more
the jealousy of the middle classes, already seusitive
enough, by the prospect of a vast organisation_ for
political control against which they th_
in
ems el themselves
would have no power unless they resorted turn to
combinations unknown in our constitutional his-
tory. The chief cause of the postponement
Re-
form from year to year has been the tacit
of
cit fear felt
by the middle class of this very organisation of the
(artisans. Their numbers, their docility, we might
say their submission to their leaders, the ease with
which they can be wielded, and the strength they
possess to coerce both their employers and the re-
cusant members of their own body, are the causes of
the passive hostility with which their claims have
been met, and which they may rest assured is
stronger among the higher trading class which em-
ploys artisan labour than among other country
gentlemen or the members of professions who are

popularly supposed to furnish the Tories of the
country. We do not think, then, that Mr. Bright
is a wise counsellor when he bids the working classes
resort to means which would excite such jealousies
and animosities. He chose to sneer at the opinion
we expressed yesterday that after the meetings of
the summer and the procession of Monday the Lon-
don working men might be content to keep quiet
till the meeting of Parliament. But we still venture
to believe that it is better advice, and more likely to
lead to a liberal and satisfactory settlement of the
Reform question, than any new enterprise for con-
solidating and extending to political matters the
tyranny of the Trades' Unions. As little can we
agree with Mr. Bright in his eulogy of the scheme
of a Franchise Bill without one for the Redistri-
bution of Seats. lie takes credit to himself for
having furnished the late Government with this idea ;
but there is, indeed, little reason for satisfaction,
for it was primarily to this unfortunate error, and
to the manner in which the Government persevered
in it until it had alienited the more moderate of its
supporters, that the disasters of the late session were
due. It is difficult to imagine Mr. Bright's purpose
in disinterring a plan which was so generally con-
demned, and telling us that it ought to form part of
the Liberal programme. Whatever passes, we will
venture to say that a franchise bill without a redis-
tribution of seats will not pass. Whatever views
may prevail in the House of Commons, the idea of a
Reform Bill spread over a series of years will never
be seriously entertained. No future statesman will
endanger office and reputation by a scheme the only
;result of which must be -to—keep undecided one of
those questions which, as Mr. Bright says, have no
respect for the repose of nations. We hope for an
easier and speedier settlement. This year has been
one of trouble and confusion owing chiefly to the
unskilful conduct of affairs in Parliament by the late
Ministry. Whoever may be in power, it is not likely
that such errors will be repeated. We have no doubt
that a bill can be proposed which will content mode-
rate men of all classes, and that the two houses will
be willing to pass it.