The Sun.
London, England, 1859-08-19 00:00:00

France through that small minority of voters, and
so one evening, when we were sitting in the House
of Commons, the telgraph flashed the news from
Paris that the Government of Louis Philippe had
been overthrown, and a republic proelaimed in its
stead. While the buzz of conversation ran round
the house as this piece of intelligence passed from
member to member, I remember well seeing my
friend the late Mr. Hume, who sat beside me, go
across to Sir Robert Peel to tell him what had
occurred. Sir R. Peel was then on the front seat
of the Opposition side, having been repudiated by
the large party he had lost by previously repealing
the corn laws. When Mr. Hume went beside him and
whispered to him the news, I remember his immediate
answer was this, " This comes of trying to govern a
country through a narrow representation in Parlia-
ment, without regard to the wishes of those outside ;
and it is what this party behind me wanted me to
do in the matter of the corn laws, but I would not
do it." (Cheers.) We stand here on a different
basis. Instead of 250,000 we have about 1,000,000
voters. But recollect this—that while France had
been a constitutional country then only about 25
years, we have been governed upon constitutional
maxims for centuries. Recollect that it is our boast
that the people here do rule, and have ruled for
many ages ; and, taking into account our great
pretensions in regard to the freedom of the subject,
and comparing our present state, having but
1,000,000 voters, with the state of France 12 years
ago with her 250,000, I declare that our case is less
defensible than that of Louis Philippe at the period
I have named. Our representation is, no doubt,
when contrasted with our pretensions, an enormous
" sham." (Cheers.) And remember there is no
security in " shams," because they are very liable
to be upset by any sudden reality, such as that
which was witnessed in the streets of Paris at the
epoch I have described. (Cheers.) I can imagine
such a thing as our hearing some day within the
next five years of the hurricane of revolution again
passing over the Continent of Europe. We know
what the effect of that was in this country in 1830.
Well, if, owing probably to some circumstances hap-
pening in India or elsewhere (for we are not with-
out our outlying dangers), there were such a crisis,
very great excitement prevalent in this country, and
great sufferings, discontent, and consequent disaf-
fection, I can imagine such a great change coming
like a thunder-clap from the Continent and throw-
ing up elements in England which might produce
innovations far greater than anything which any of
us now contemplate, and which would make the men
who will have to settle this question look back with
regret to the present tranquil times, and lament that
they had not, as prudent statesmen, dealt with it in
days of political prosperity. I am therefore choosing
the most homely and common sense counsels in
advising the present possessors of political power
to grapple with this subject when the people are
in a good temper and contented. We have seen
another change on the continent. We have seen
the great mass of the people there sometimes throw
themselves into the scale in favour of some one
great man or great party, and though it is not a
thing very likely to happen in this country, yet I
can well suppose that in any nation, if you exclude
five•sixths of the male adult population from elec-
toral rights, and proscribe them for generation after
generation, they might be disposed to avenge them-
selves on the privileged classes by turning the scale
in favour of some other part of the community who,
as they might think, had stood against their op-
pressors. These are not mere whimsical fancies,
but considerations which ought to weigh with
thoughtful men. But we are met by the bugbear
that our working classes are not fit to be entrusted
with the franchise. (A laugh.) The saying is,
"We believe they would injure themselves." (Re-
newed laughter.) Now, it has often occurred to
me in my travels to ask " if the people are not fit
to take care of themselves who are to be trusted to
take care of them ?" (A laugh.) I have put that
question to myself in many countries, whether the
people are governed as they are in Russia or in Aus-
tria, and whether they are ruled as they now are
in France. " Where," I have said to myself, "am
Ito find a resting place ?" How will you ever
establish a system by which the people will be well
governed unless you come to this conclusion,—that
they must be left to govern themselves. Ido not
profess to go to any of these countries for a rule for
our guidance ; there is another remedy for this dif-
ficulty as to the people's ignorance. (A Voice—" Go
to America.") Well, I have been there, but we must
deal with this as an English question—(cheers)--in
a practical spirit, and not as an American question.
I have not, however, any objection to illustrate
what I was about to say by a reference to America.
In that country they have generally a system of
universal suffrage ; but it does not prevail every-
where, and until lately the franchise was not so
widely extended as it is now. I saw it recently
stated in a New York newspaper that 30 years ago
the suffrage in the State of New York was not
more popular than it is now in England. In various
of the American States you have a great variety of
franchise—in some parts universal suffrage; in
others a tax-paying suffrage ; in others, again,
household suffrage ; and in others still, a property
qualification; but the tendency everywhere and
always is to widen the basis of the franchise, and
increase the number of voters. The principle is
now everywhere admitted that they must come to
manhood suffrage for the whole white population.
But the point I wish to arrive at in regard to this
alleged ignorance of the people is this—that I have
found in America that everywhere the question of
education lies at the foundation of every political
question. Everywhere in America the influential
and wealthier classes advocate education for the
people as the means of enabling them to govern
themselves. (Cheers.) Their reasoning is this—
the people govern for themselves ; they govern us
as well as themselves, and unless we educate the
people our free institutions can't possibly exist.
Their maxim, in fact, everywhere is, "Educate, or
we perish." The consequence is that the influen-
tial classes in America devote themselves to the
instruction of the whole community in a manner
and to an extent of which no country in Europe
can have any idea. I lately visited, during my
travels, places where, when I was in America 24
years ago, the Red Indians were still encamped.
Now there are to be frequently found in those spots
flourishing towns, and I discovered among all those
new communities that school-houses were the
largest and most conspicuous buildings ; that even
while the streets were unpaved, and most of the citi-
zens were dwelling in wooden tenements, there
were large brick or stone structures run up, each
containing eight, ten, or twelve large rooms, and
every room from the floor to the roof was filled
with children, all receiving, without a farthing of
charge to their parents, as good an education as
could be given iu the time to the sons of the mid-
dle classes in England. (Cheers.) I have no hesi-
tation in saying that this system of education in
America has gone hand in hand with.the extension
of the elective franchise, and that the strong and
pervading motive with the citizens of that country
in instructing their youthful population is to enable
them to exercise the political power they possess
for their own benefit, and that of the entire com-
munity. (Cheers.) Now, one advantage I expect to
see accrue from a wide diffusion of the franchise in
this country is, that there will be an increased at-
tention paid by those who fill influential places to
the promotion of national education ; and if this
should have the effect of drawing different classes
together and inciting them to a common effort to
raise the moral and intellectual condition of the
great mass of the people, I know of no better result
that could be produced by any measure than that
which will emanate from an extension of the suf-
frage. (Cheers.) There are questions, however,
connected with our taxation which some people
think could hardly be safely left to be decided by
a largely augmented constituency. Now, lam of
opinion that in that respect too the country would
gain from such a measure. I believe the tendency
of legislation in our fiscal affairs, as the result of a
more widely extended franchise, would be very
much to promote the prosperity of our commercial
system. What is it that some people are afraid
of ? They say if you give the -vote to the people
they will tax property, and they will relieve
themselves of taxation. I cannot follow the
subject into all its details, but I am not at all
alarmed at this threat, even if all that is predicted
in that direction should be fulfilled, and if the votes 11
of the people removed to a large extent the taxes
that now press upon articles of consumption, such
as tea, sugar, paper, and other articles, taxed at
our customs and excise offices, still I do not believe
that would prove injurious to the country, If the
working people who are added to our electoral list
should instinctively replace a large portion of our
indirect taxes on property or income, it would have
a beneficial effect on the commerce of this country,
and the working classes urged, you may say, by
their natural instincts of selfishness, would in fact
be carrying out the most enlightened principles of
political economy. (Hear.) I do not know any
result of the extension of the franchise that would
be more likely to benefit the upper class as well
ltahregeeloyllsarn
as the lower, if I may use the term, than a
change in our fiscal system, which would very
fer that thosepaidptiontofhienwipoorsitisintlgiactlasarsees7awnd
remove •
ti.a
revenuenisn-
thefeao income and property. I there-
educrat
fore see in
education
inorance a greater change
prospective transfer
r.i;, for the people, and in the
of improved
coulration. I cannot see that
the working class
would be injurious to the other
do that which
power,
lei: classesl, ry itioko of tyhteo c
deal
munity. I am sometimvoeisi old that the class, if
if they had the
lam not afraid of that par-
ticular with it something like. trades unions,
mea-
sures through Parliament that shoud benreefiet
ticular classes. Well,

have had classes in possession of the power of le-
gislating before now who have used it for their
own advantage. We had the Corn Laws passed
by the landowners, the Navigation Laws passed for
the benefit of the shipowners, the timber duties
passed for the benefit of the timber merchants, and
sugar monopolies for the benefit of the West Indians.
We have had classes in this country who have
usurped political power and applied it to their own
selfish purposes ; but the progress of enlightenment,
and the continued discussion of these question has
shown that this process of selfish legislation is, after
all, only suicidal to those who follow it, and that the
best interests of all are consulted by those mea-
sures which deal fairly with the interests of all.
If the matter came to be fairly discussed between
the enfranchised working men and those above
them in the social scale, I don't think they would
be likely to come to any conclusions on these ques-
tions that would be likely to prove inimical to the
rest of the community. I always fall back upon
this consideration—that when we have taken into
partnership a large section of the working class as
electors, we shall all be interested in seeing that
they get all the information we can possibly give
them on these subjects. (Hear.) The law of self-
preservation will be always at work, and we shall
through the newspapers, through our addresses
and our schools, be constantly trying to bring up
the intelligence of the working class, if that be ne-
cessary, so as to enable them to fulfil their duty as
electors without any of those dangers of which
some people (though lam not) are afraid. With
regard to the particular measure with which we
shall probably have to deal I am very sorry to say
that I don't think the country or the House of
Commons is in the mood for a very strong measure
of Parliamentary Reform. I know not whether to
blame the House of Commons or the country. I
rather think there is quite as much agitation about
political reform in the House of Commons as in the
country. It has got into the House, and they don't
know what to do with it. (Laughter.) It is bandied
about from side to side. All parties are professing
to be reformers. Everybody is for an extended
franchise, and upon my honour I think at heart
nobody likes it very much or cares much about it.
I think it best to speak frankly, whether or not it
excites cheers or be acceptable, and I am sure
that is the course which a Rochdale au-
dience will always approve. (Cheers.) When
I was travelling in America my friend Mr.
Bright, was making some of the most elo-
quent speeches that ever have been delivered by a
human being in this country—(great cheering)—in
favour of a large measure of Parliamentary Re-
form ; but I did not gather from the newspapers
that there was much spontaneous combustion in the
country to help him in his efforts. An American
friend of mine, a great admirer of Mr. Bright's elo-
quence, said to me, " Ah, you and Bright made a
great mistake; if you are going to be political re-
formers you ought to have gone for reform before
you repealed the Corn-laws, because now everybody
is well fad, and get plenty of work and wages, and
they are all turned Tories." (Laughter.). Ido not
go so far as that, but it must be said, in looking
back for the past forty years, that in almost all cases
of great political excitement, when reform was the
most popular with the masses, it was at a time of
great manufacturing distress, when provisions were
dear, labour scarce, and the people discontented with
everybody and everything about them. On the
contrary, there is no doubt that by the measures
which I hope without vanity I may say Mr.
Bright's name and my own, and the names of many
others here are associated, we have put an end to
those occasional periods of starvation. We are not
driven to subsist upon cabbage stalks and garbage,
and there is generally plenty to eat, but I should
be sorry to find that my American friend was so
far correct that the people of this country, because
they were well fed and generally in receipt of fair
wages, are therefore indifferent to their political
rights. It must be admitted that there has been
rather an unusual quiescence with regard to this
question of reform, and I may tell you candidly
that those who advocate it in Parliament find it
very difficult to get admission to the electoral
pale for those outside, unless they are knock-
ing pretty loudly for access. (Hear, hear.) Still
I say this is a time when statesmen ought to
deal with the question, and, if there be one
atom of sense, one grain of wisdom among those
privileged classes—they would really the end
come in and deal with those questions effectually,
they won't lose another session without agreeing
to such a large measure of Parliamentary reform as
shall carry us over at least the next 20 years. Lord
John Russell has given notice of his views, and
pledged himself, as I am informed, to a measure of
£6 rental in boroughs and £lO in counties. In a
borough like Rochdale I suppose £6 rental would
give a very large addition to your electoral list, be-
cause, owing to the higher rents in such a town,
the £6 householders would include a very large
proportion of the working class. But if you go to
the smaller places in the rural districts and to the
farming villages and small towns generally, the £6
rental would not add largely to the constituency,
and I believe in Scotland and Ireland it would have
a very slight effect. Altogether the £6 rental
would not, I believe, double the present constitu-
ency. I have not had an opportunity of investi-
gating it, and probably it would not be easy to do ;
but I am told that if the franchise were extended
to the £6 rental, it would not add a million to the
present million of voters. I have heard some people
say it would not add more than 500,000 or 600,000.
I have heard, but I cannot believe it, that amongst
the colleagues of Lord John Russell there is some
idea of a resistance even to this moderate measure ;
but I would ask those noble lords and right hon.
gentlemen whether it is worth while disturbing the
franchise at all if they don't go thus far at least P
Next year it will be 30 years since the first Reform
Bill ; that bill added one million to the electoral
body ; we have waited for 30 years, and now it is
considered extreme to add another million. Out of
the 6,000,000 adult males in this country, 5,000,000
have no votes, and then if we aro to go on no faster
than these additions, it will take four times 30

years before all the adult males of the country are
entitled to vote. Nobody, I should think,
would consider that travelling at too fast a
rate. (Cheers.) I do not say that it is
necessary that we should get it all at once, but
gradually, and as we haven chance of getting it;
though if the present Government should falter in
the measu7e shadowed forth by Lord John Russell
it will be most suicidal and unwise. Assuming, at
all events, that this question of the franchise will
be dealt with, there is another question to which I
attach the utmost importance—the ballot. lam of
opinion that the ballot is sure to follow the exten-
sion of the suffrage. (Cheers.) There are about
230 men now in the House of Commons pledged to
the ballot, and the effect of the first election under

a Reform Bill would inevitably be to carry it.
(Cheers.) The extension of the suffrage, therefore,
natually would lead to the ballot. lam for keep-
ing the question separate from other questions, and
I have always advised the Ballot Society in London
to confine its attention to this matter alone. Since
I have been home I have been asked a dozen times
—what do people think of the Ballot in America ?
Why, nobody says anything at all about it there.
It is so perfectly understood by 99-100ths of the
community to be the very best way of taking votes
that people think no more of discussing its advan-
tages than of discussing whether they shall button
their waistcoats in front or behind, or whether
they shall mount a horse on the right side or
the left. There are not two sides to the question,
and nobody ever thinks of debating it. Everybody
admits that the ballot is the most convenient,
peaceful, and moral means of taking votes ever de-
vised. In ordinary cases voting goes on with as
much tranquillity as the course of proceedings on a
Sabbath-day here. People go to the polling-booth
as quietly as to their places of worship, they de-
posit their vote, nobody interferes with them ; no-
body cares to know how any man votes, nobody
questions his right to vote just as he likes—and,
when that is conceded, nobody has any interest
in opposing the ballot. (Cheers.) I quoted last
night a passage from a letter written to me by an
American gentleman, in which he says, " Having
been for 50 years in close intimacy with the
machinery of parties, and in active participation in
the conduct of elections, I never knew a vote
bought or sold, nor one which I had any reason to
believe to be bought or sold." Those are the words
of a gentleman who is at the head of the Democratic
party in America; and the reason is this, that the
constituencies are so large that it would be quite
futile to attempt to carry an election by bribery,
just as it would be impossible to carry one in that
way at Manchester or Leeds, or any other such
large town. Considering, then, that we are
28,000,000 of people, ought we not to have all our
constituencies much larger than they are ? (Cheers.)
I know not how we are to keep the House of Com-
mons within its present limits if you are to give
votes to all persons entitled to them, unless you
enlarge the constituencies. This brings me to the
redistribution of seats. In any new Reform Bill
you will have to give a considerable number of new
members to large places like Manchester, Liverpool
and Leeds, and, of course, Rochdale will come in.
(Hear, hear.) In my opinion it would be the most
convenient and the fairest plan if you divided your
large boroughs into wards, and gave to each ward
a member. Instead of lumping two or four mem-
bers all together, as the represeneatives of the whole
town, you should divide it into four wards, say,
and give a member to each ward ; and as in most
towns there are quarters which are inhabited chiefly
by the aristocracy and others chiefly inhabited by
the working classes, in this manner you would
secure the most complet-i representation of all the
various classes in a town. I have often observed