New national era. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1870-1874, 1871-11-23
The New Social Movement i'm
England.
A Defense OF the Movement BY Another
Member OF the Workisgmen's Council.

A Defense OF the Movement BY Anothes
Member OF the workingmen's Council.
Mr.. George Howell, member of the British
Workingmen's Council, which is represented
as having conspired with the Conservative
leaders to outfank Mr.. Gladstone. has written
letter, dated November 2, to the London 1eie
graph, from which the following are extracts !:
lt is no matter Of surprise that the ministerial
journal of Fleet street should denounce the
whole affair, in a series of sensational " lead
ers," as Tory trick. No doubt the
writer of those articles is much better ac-
quainted with the character OF the whole Con
sentative party than we are, and, therefore,
knows how far any reliance can be placed upon
the explanation Of these noblemeu aud gentle
men, whose account Of the negotiations, so far
as they are concerned, has appeared. 1t is no
new thing that We should be doubted, however
explicit our denials may be-. but we can well
trust to the verdict of the public for our ylndl
cation. No political trick was ever intended,
and if it had been, the noblemen and gentlemen
whose names have been Published are the las t
to whom We should have applied. Who can
believe that the Marquis of Salisbury would
condescend to any such paltry means? Or
that Mr.. Claiborne Hardy would ally himself to
the Proletariat for any such purpose There
Is not name on the entire list that any man,
who respected himself, would dare accuse of so
palterlng with great social and political ques-
lions. Such notion never entered my head
when the matter was mentioned to me, and,
least OF all, when the names of the peers and
conmoners were communicated. AS to its
having any party political meaning, it was
never dreamed of by those whose names are
appended to our statement of the facts.
We have been severely censured by portion
OF the Liberal press for consenting to take part
in any movement in connection with such dis
tinguished members of the Conservative party.
TO me 1t appears that the surprise should be
rather on the other sidc-that these nobemen
and others should so far forget their prejudices
as to consent to consider, with us, some of our
social grievances. We, in our innocence,
looked upon the event as an omen that some of
the preJudices OF caste and privilege were giving
way before the urgent demands for better con.
dltions OF home life for working people. 1t
has been asserted, over and over again, that il
only common platform could be found where
men Of all classes, creeds, and parties could
discuss the questions, and suggest remedies, for
some Of the evils of our social life, it would
be signal for new conditions and for healthier
and nobler action. But the dread seems to be
that we should seek the platform for ourselves
Are middle-cass men afraid lest such contact
might soften the asperities of political strife,
and render more easy the victory of labor? /
hold the doctrine to be most disastrous that
we should confer with one party only, and not
accept all the aid We can get, without refer
ence to creed or politics, for the purpose of
improving the condition of our industrial poor.
Not long since laid before Mr.. Thomas Bras
sey plan for Improving the dwellings of our
very poor in the courts and alleys of London.
He really Endorsed it, and Mr.. w. Ii. Smith
quite as readily consented to cooperate, with
out the slightest reference to politics. Strange
as it might seem, / found myself compelled,
by conviction and sentiment, to cooperate with
the w Westminster Conservative Association for
the preservation Of the reclaimed spaces on
the Thames Embankment, although only q
year or two ago some of its members felt it to |
be their duty to thrash me in st. James is Hall.
After all, what do these objections mean? I'll
the Marquis of Salisbury said some severe |
things against the admission of the working |
classes to political power, so did Mr.. Robert |
Lowe, who now occupies position In the |
Cabinet second only to Mr.. Gladstone. If Mr.. |
Claiborne Hardy tried his utmost to put down |
meetings in the parks, so did that eminently |
representative of Whggery in the |
Liberal party, Sir George Grey. But the
of these historical antipathies is |
of no use for wOrkingmen. | have never held |
the notion that it is the divine right of any |
Mr.. Gladstone or Mr.. Disraeli, |
or any set or party of men--to deal exclusively |
with every political and social question affect |
ing 30,OO0,000 of our people. Nay, we have |
often said that if opportunities of intercourse |
only presented themselves many of those party |
which now materially OBJ |
struct good measures, would be given up in |
the interest of the common good. And we
should have failed in our duty if we had refused
cooperation, when we were invited, on grounds |
which, though non-political, have ever formed
part of our platform.