PresenJed by 
 <lie WorsliijDfiil Com{)&ny 
 of Goldsmiths. 
 
 1903 . 
 
A VOICE EROM THE IILLIOHS ! 
 
 REASONS EOR APPEALING 
 
 MIDDLE CLASSES 
 
 ON BEHALF OF THEIR 
 
 UNENERANCHISED BRETHREN. 
 
 BY A NORWICH OPERATIVE. 
 
 “It is a mockery to call a mau free^ wliom you deprive of a voice in making 
 tlic laws he is caUed upon to ohey.”—S ir W. Jones. 
 
 ‘'‘n''ithliold not good from tliem to whom it is due^ when it is in the power 
 of thine hand to do it.”—P kot. iii. 37. 
 
 Sl^^oudanil. 
 
 LONDON: HODLSTON AND SIONEMAN, PATERNOSTER ROW. 
 NORWICH: JAKROLD AND SONS; AND JOSIAH ELETCHER, 
 
 Price 2d. each; Is. Qd. per dozen; lls. per hundred. 
 
TO THE MIDDLE CUSSES OE GEEAT BEITAIE. 
 
 “Goteenment,” said an eminent writer, “owes its birth 
 to the necessity of preventing and repulsing the injuries 
 which the associated individuals had to fear from one another.” 
 A fact which few will feel inclined to question, whilst 
 many will admit that the offspring of the necessity adverted 
 to, has been, in many instances, the parent and the per- 
 petuator of innumerable injuries, scarcely less detrimental to 
 individual and social happiness, than those, the fear of which 
 led to its origin. 
 
 But such injuries are neither inherent to the existence, 
 nor a necessary consequence of this developed effect of social 
 requirement. Although the institution of civil government, 
 in itself, offers a strong temptation to the perpetration of 
 the very vices, in its collective capacity, which its office is to 
 detect, punish, and prevent; yet, in most instances where 
 those vices have been apparent, they have been the result of 
 a monopoly of governmental power, either by actual usur¬ 
 pation, or the exercise, on the part of a few only, of the 
 right of choosing the individuals upon whom this immense 
 responsibility is conferred. 
 
 The history of our own country would abundantly furnish 
 us with the means of establishing this assertion; but we 
 need only point to the injustice now perpetrated upon more 
 than, five-sixths of its adult population, and, to the consequent 
 effects, as sufficient proofs that class-formed governments 
 have not legitimately exercised the power with which they 
 have been entrusted, but have rather made those whom they 
 have placed without the pale of political privilege, the victims 
 of additional oppression and injustiee; debarring them from 
 the exercise of a self-evident right, and yet fixing upon them 
 the maximum proportion of the expense—in some cases 
 totally unnecessary—of discharging those functions they Ijave 
 claimed to exercise. 
 
From this degrading position, we—the working-classes of 
 this country—now seek to he emancipated; and lo that effect, 
 appeal for aid to you, our middle-class brethren. We do not 
 conceive any apology to be due from us for taking this step. 
 The endurance of wrong is a sufficient justification for seeking 
 the means of its removal ; and, believing that we are enduring 
 a wrong which you have the power to remove, we feel that 
 our appeal is neither premature nor unnecessary. 
 
 Under this conviction, we proceed to render our reasons 
 for soliciting your co-operation in the great work of securing 
 
 A FULL, FAIR, ASD FREE REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPIE. 
 
 1. Our appeal would be utterly useless, if we were inca¬ 
 pable of My substantiating our first reason.—Sccntwe 
 you CAN help us. 
 
 There are abundant proofs that your power is felt and 
 dreaded by the supporters of aristocratical usurpation. The 
 great victory of commercial reform is mainly attributable to 
 your influence, and if you were determined to convert the 
 asiom “ Representation should be co-equal with taxation” 
 from a truth coldly assented to, without an acquaintance with 
 its practical results, to a truth appreciated through the medium 
 of those results, the days of oppression’s reign would be 
 numbered; but that unhappy adherence to one or other of 
 the particular parties in the state (which, unfortunately, we 
 have too often imitated) has caused you to lose sight of the 
 identity of this principle with your own interests, and to 
 become the stepping-stones to wealth and power, of the 
 men who have disregarded those interests, as soon as their 
 ambitious designs have been accomplished. 
 
 We cannot belter prove your possession of the power to 
 emancipate us, than by calling your attention to the following 
 important article from a metropolitan newspaper. 
 
 "We have lefore ns a list of 150 cities and boroughs, selected from Uie 
 whole number, as being in some measure open to popular inlluence. 
 Their representatives exceed 250. We find, upon consultiug file 
 returns presented to the House of Comraons, that these ISO boroughs 
 contain a total constituency of 300,000 elr-‘—■■ '’"'""’■■"o" l-t 
 
 places sending 28 members ai 
 
 ctors. Our J 
 
 cw ___.^.„2ntBtives of UO.OOO electors; 
 
 md 137 places, sending 222 members as the representatives of m 
 than 100,000 electors. The former co"""' "*■ *'■“ ^ 
 
 St of the city of Loudou and the 
 
5 
 
 metropolitan boronglig, anil the towns of Liverpool, Manchester, Bristol, 
 Birmingham and Leeds. We think that the decision of these constituencies 
 upon any great question which is to he carried solely hy the pressure of 
 a popular movement, can hai'dly he douhted. Under on effective system 
 of organizotiou most of those seats may he secured for the people; and 
 the only practical question remaining to he considered is, wliether it is 
 possible to arouse the other 137 places, with only 100,000 electors 
 divided amongst them all, to an assertion of their own freedom, and that 
 of their fellow-countrymen. A trifle ahove 80,000 votes would give us a 
 majority; the question would then he left to he decided hy the votes of 
 Ireland and Scotland, and in their hands it might he safely left, without 
 the smallest fear of the result. Upon the will of no larger a number 
 than 80,000 electors is suspended the fntm’e destiny of Britain." 
 
 It has often been asserted that the Eeform Bill is a failure; 
 regarded as a measure based upon the principles of universal 
 justice, it will not bear the sifting, but the above quotation 
 shows that it may be made the means of securing the entire 
 liberties of the people. The power it conferred upon you 
 has not yet been fairly exercised. We implore you to exert 
 that power on behalf of the powerless, and prove the truth 
 of our assertion—that you can secure your wronged brethren 
 their political rights. 
 
 We readily admit that the adoption of a course so contrary 
 to the general tenor of political tactics would place you in 
 opposition to many for whose exertions in partial reformation 
 you entertain the highest regard, but the really honest among 
 them would not be long in respecting your motives, and in 
 co-operating with you. We also admit that an unconstitu¬ 
 tional power is influencing the House of Commons, against 
 which the utmost perseverance and the most determined 
 vigilance need be exercised; but we have shown that it is 
 not more than your united efforts may overcome. 
 
 II. Because in demanding the franchise you ado]}ted the 
 SAME ABGUMENTS IOC ilow employ. 
 
 In the memorable struggle to procure the passing of the 
 Reform Bill, one great argument of its supporters was the 
 inequality of the representation. Glaring instances were pointed 
 out to establish that argument; and although Gatton or 
 Old Sarum no longer e.xercises an influence in the legislature 
 equal to the city of York, yet, it is easy to prove that equality 
 of representation is far from having been attained. We find 
 
6 
 
 that the city of Westminster, with a constituency amounting 
 to nearly 15,000, is equalled in the representation by Thetford 
 with a constituency below 200. Several instances of this hind 
 might be pointed out; hut let the following startling fact 
 suffice.—The united constituencies of Finsbury and Liverpool, 
 amounting to upwards of 29,000, return 4 members to par¬ 
 liament; whilst 66 boroughs, the united constituencies of 
 which do not exceed 27,000, return 105 members! Surely, 
 the demand for equal representation, which tvas so powerfully 
 urged by the reformers of 1832, may be reiterated by the 
 reformers of 1847. 
 
 The insqualUy and severe pressure of iaxalion was an 
 argument often enforced, when, as the means of securing 
 its reduction and equalization, you claimed the franchise. 
 The unjust system of indirect taxation renders the argument 
 far more available to us than it ever could be to yourselves; 
 as the only means of abolishing that system we seek to remove 
 the political disability of those who are the principal victims 
 of its injustice. Our complaint is embodied in the axiom— 
 
 Taxation without representation is tyranny.” 
 
 The pension list was pointed out as affording a powerful 
 reason for reforming the parliament. That reason still 
 exists. .Starving artizans and half-ruined tradesmen continue 
 to fm-nish the me.ans of supporting a host of idle drones, whose 
 aristocratical connections will ensure the perpetuation of the 
 abuse, until the monopoly of legislation be abolished. 
 
 Ute existence and continual increase of an enormous standing 
 army was complained of at the time of the Reform Bill 
 agitation: and confidently was it hoped that the passing of 
 that bul would ensure its immediate reduction. We echo 
 that complaint mth greater reason than you had for urging it; 
 the standing army has been increased by upwards of 30,000 
 men, since the year prerious to your political enfranchisement. 
 
 The existence of bribery and corruption was also adduced 
 as an argument in favour of the Reform Bill. That measure, 
 far from having suppressed these disgusting practices, has 
 furnished innumerable proofs that a partial recognition of 
 popular representation is inadequate to produce a pure con- 
 
7 
 
 stituency. Voting by ballot and the extension of the franchise 
 to every male adult, only can secure that desideratum. 
 
 In supporting the Reform Bill it was also argued that 
 mlimklation existed to an extent toJiich required the enlargement 
 of the constituency to prevent it. Experience has taught us 
 that the enlargement effected by the Reform Bill is an 
 insufficient remedy. Our means of suppressing bribery and 
 corruption will prevent its possibility. The practice of open 
 voting will ever facilitate the commission of tlie crime, alike 
 on those whose poverty peculiarly exposes them to such 
 oppression, and those in more opulent circumstances, who in 
 innumerable ways are subject to its tyrannical influence. 
 
 The power of the aristocracy in the House of Commons was 
 urged as a reason for passing the Reform Bill. None can 
 consistently deny us the full force of this argument. 
 The very limited constituency in many small boroughs, 
 renders them the property of ck'tain aristocratical families, 
 whose nominees are as secure in their possession of seats 
 in the House of Commons, as any boroughmonger in the 
 palmy daj'S of Pitt and Castlereagh. Every measure presented 
 to that house is tested by its probable influences on aristo¬ 
 cratic privileges. 
 
 But the Reform Bill was further demanded as a Right. 
 
 “ The king; his rights, and no more“ The people; their 
 rights, and no less!” were mottos horribly annoying to the 
 aristocracy at that time; we scarcely need say, the latter is 
 as yet unrealized. “ Representation should be co-equal with 
 taxation” was then emblazoned on thousands of banners; 
 the existence of a property qualification for voting renders 
 this argument available to us. The opinions of Blachstone 
 and others were in constant citation. What meant the 
 reiteration of important incontrovertible truths at that time ? 
 We cannot conceive that they were urged unbelieved 
 i mere pretexts to frighten your opponents; but are persuaded 
 I that they were adduced to show the extent of the opinions 
 of those who were then seeking to embody, in a tangible 
 shape, a partial recognition of them. We fearlessly assert, 
 
8 
 
 that your advocacy of the Reform Bill on the correct grounds 
 to which we have adverted, has placed you in a position 
 which renders your co-operation with us a matter of consistency. 
 
 III. Because having exjjerienced our degradation, and having hud 
 your claim to the franchise ridiculed, you can sympathize with us. 
 
 Your position in 1832, is ours in 1847. You then felt that 
 political outlawry was no trivial matter. Encumbered with 
 an. overwhelming amount of taxation you sought to mitigate 
 it. Year after year had you made known your wants to your 
 professed representatives, and as often had they treated you with 
 contempt. Tired of fruitless attempts to procure an alleviation 
 of your burdens, and confident that you could never procure 
 justice through the medium of a system which was a caricature 
 on common sense, you nobly resolved that that system should 
 give place to one in which your power should he recognized. 
 
 The same treatment, even at the hand of a reformed House 
 of Commons, has been experienced by us; and, as a natural 
 consequence, the same determination has been the result. The 
 taunts and jeers with which our arguments have been 
 met, ate the echo of those heaped upon you, when you 
 demanded your political enfranchisement. If we are termed 
 the “turbulent lower orders,” your favourite measure was 
 opposed, as “ approaching to the despotism of a mob.”* If 
 we are denounced as the “ worthless rabble,” it was insinuated 
 that “ you were not that class of persons to whom attention 
 ought to be given; that your intellectual acquirements and j 
 moral character did not entitle your opinions to considera¬ 
 tion.”! Paltry jests are passed respecting the persons whom 
 Kc might elect; and it was impudently asked in the House of 
 Lords, if individuals elected by voters paying 3s. lOd. per 
 week, would be fit representatives.! We have been 
 denounced as desirous of the destruction of property; and 
 it was declared, that the Reform BiU “ took the franchise out | 
 of the hands of those' that were able to protect property, and I 
 gave it to the breakers of frames and machinery.”|| Denying 
 us the franchise, on the plea that it ■will invest those with 
 
 ^Mr.Banies. f MargjiisofBnte. j Earl of Hanowby. || EatlCamarvon. 
 
power who have no property in the state, is as absurd as was 
 the opposition offered to the Reform Bill, by one of the 
 aristocracy,* because “ it conferred the right of voting upon 
 householders in St. Giles, who, though inhabiting houses of 
 £40 a year, were receiving parish relief.” Universal suffrage 
 meets an abundant share of opprobrium; and it was stated 
 that “renters of 3s. lOtZ.per week, W'as the vert/ worst species 
 of representation that could be devised.”! Out “ immorality” 
 has had its share of comment; and the bench of bishops, as 
 the “ guardians of good order and religion," were entreated to 
 prevent the passing of the Reform Bill.| Our “ dishonesty” 
 has been tauntingly vaunted; and it was said in the House of 
 Commons, that “£10 householders were not the proper 
 persons to return members to Parliament; great numbers of 
 whom paid their rent weekly, because their landlords tvould 
 onhj trust them from loeeJc to ioeek”\\ Predictions of the most 
 disastrous character, respecting the consequences of our' 
 attaining our demands, are plentiful; and it was asserted 
 that if you secured your object, “ no administration would be 
 able to carry on the Government for six months.Ӥ We are 
 termed, “ reckless innovators;” and it was said of your bill, 
 that it would bring into Parliament “ the talents of dema¬ 
 gogues, the talent of mischief, and that talent which would 
 pull down, and crumble to dust, all the institutions of the 
 country.’’^ We are indignant at the insinuation, that an 
 assembly, composed of the representatives of the whole 
 people, would be inferior in eharacter to those elected by a 
 portion of them; and you were indignant, rvhen, in 
 opposing your claims, it was unblushingly avowed of the 
 Parliament prior to the passing of the Reform Bill, that it 
 was “ the noblest assembly of freemen in the world;” that 
 there was “ no hope of seeing an assembly equal to it, for 
 talent, integrity, and patriotism.”** Our demands are 
 termed “revolutionary;” yours were opposed, because 
 granting them would be followed by “ confusion—civil war; 
 and some powerful chief, when men’s minds w'ere satiated 
 * Lord Wyaford. f Lordliyndliurst, J lordWynford. H SirC.Wctlierell, 
 
 § Sir J. Shelly. *[[ Lord Wynford. ** Lord WliarnclilFe. 
 
10 
 
 with trouble, would interfere, and establish a military 
 despotism.’'-'- hare been accused of holding strange ideas 
 respec-t-Ing the “ national debtand at the time of the reform 
 agitation, it was said, that “ neither freeholders nor fundholders 
 must flatter themselves that their property would be safe. 
 Xo new government had much regard for the debts of an bid 
 one.”f 'Vl'e have been termed “anti-monarchists;” and it 
 was said, that “ a reformed Parliament would take the crown 
 off the king's head.”t The late premier^ declared, that “ a 
 reformed Parliament would give the government of the 
 country into the hands of demagogues; it would reduce this 
 happy land to a state of despotism and destruction;” and 
 although the monarchy would not be nominally abolished, 
 sffll it would be virtually, by the democrats who would reign 
 in the House of Commons.” We would observe, that 
 whatever the perplexities of the Kt. Hon. Baronet may have 
 been, he has never been tormented by a majority of democrats. 
 With such quotations we might fill a volume. Do 
 not imagine that we urge them on your notice by way of 
 taunt or ridicule. Xo! we do so, that it may be seen that 
 the same fears were entertained respecting your attaining the 
 franchise, as are now deemed sufficient reasons for withholding 
 it from us; that the scorn—the degrading epithets—the 
 villainous falsehoods—which have been heaped upon us, are 
 the same in substance, which aristocratic impudence then so 
 liberally dealt out in opposition to you. We know they 
 silenced you not; but excited within you a stronger 
 determination to acquire the power which might enable you 
 successfully to contend against your malevolent slanderers. 
 They have produced the same effect upon ourselves; and we 
 are confident that a review of your past feelings will lead you 
 to the conclusion that you are bound to aid us. We will 
 never cringe to our oppressors, whilst we can appeal for 
 help to those, who once experienced our degradation, and 
 who gloriously achieved a victory, we are determined to 
 obtain. 
 
 * ^r. Tiice. f Sir E. Tman. % Sir E. Vmau. 
 
 § Sir E. reel. 
 
11 
 
 IV. Because you arc imklted to otje exeetioxs for your 
 possession of the eleetke franchise. 
 
 You will not deny tliat your attainment of the rights of 
 citizenship was not solely the result of your own efforts— 
 that the “ pressure from without” which forced the Reform 
 Bill through the House of Lords, did not accumulate its 
 Strength from yourselves alone. You were assisted by us, 
 who, so far as the possession of political liberty was 
 concerned, had neither part nor lot in the matter. You 
 assured us that your attaining the franchise would prove 
 beneficial to us; we believed you, and rested not till your 
 object was effected. We now appeal to you, as holding a 
 right, obtained through our instrumentality; the value of 
 that right you appreciate, and the certainty that you prize it, 
 adds cogency to our arguments. If an effort w’cre made to 
 deprive you of that right—in plain terms, if the repeal of the 
 Reform Bill were attempted, to whom would you look for 
 aid ? Surely, to the very men, who now seek the attainment 
 of the rights they assisted you to secure; to those, who are 
 now striving to render impossible the backward march to 
 despotism. Rest assured, that our success in battling for 
 your liberty has rendered more ardent the thirst for our own. 
 
 V. Because our political emancipation would jirove conducive 
 to TOUR ADVANTAGE. 
 
 Our interests are identical. In contending for political 
 liberty, we seek the means of reducing taxation, and of 
 destroying every harrier to the attainment of national 
 prosperity. It must be evident, that you would reap a two¬ 
 fold advantage in the reduction of taxation—a diminution of 
 your expenses, and the reception of a large proportion of that 
 part of our limited income, which now finds its way into the 
 revenue, to provide for those who are comparatively free 
 from taxation. As individuals particularly interested in the 
 prosperity of all classes in the state, you could not better 
 promote your interests, than by investing with their rights, 
 those, who, as the effect of their being withheld, are under¬ 
 going privations necessarily reflected on yourselves. An act 
 of justice brings its orvn rervard. The very fact of your 
 
assisting to radicate the claims of your injured fellow- 
 countrymen, would create a bond of union which tyranny or 
 treachery might vainly attempt to sever. The base gratifica¬ 
 tion which our common enemies have felt in witnessing our 
 dissensions, would cease, when they beheld those, whom they 
 have too long succeeded in dividing, imited in the determi¬ 
 nation to destroy the power which enslaves them. The 
 victory would speedily be gained, and the recollection of past 
 discord would not be permitted to harass an unity of 
 purpose, in securing a full and fair possession of those 
 blessings, which Providence has designed for all, but which 
 oppression has prostituted to the advantage of a few. 
 
 VI. Because many of you have rendered great assistance in 
 EDUCATISG TJS. 
 
 There was much sagacity evinced by those, who opposed the 
 education of what they termed the “lower order.®,” on the 
 ground that it would render them discontented. Their 
 exertions to prevent that dreaded catastrophe were futile; for 
 although there is yet great necessity for the advocates of 
 popular education to be zealous in their work, yet enough has 
 been done to realize the awful prophecy. By teaching us to 
 appreciate the great maxim—“ knowledge is power”—you have 
 led ns to become acquainted with our country’s history, and 
 with the lives of those who have exercised an influence on its 
 destinies; and, finding that many of the wars and strifes 
 abroad, and much of the misery and starvation at home, have 
 been occasioned by a vicious system of legislation, it is only 
 natural that we should seek to destroy the prolific source of 
 Such complicated wretchedness. If education has taught us 
 that our limited resources render necessary the exercise of the 
 strictest economy, it is not strange that we should demur to the 
 absorption of so large a portion of those resources for govern¬ 
 mental expenses. We have been made sufficiently conversant 
 with the connection between cause and eflbct, to perceive that 
 our interests cannot be secure, until we have a share in 
 enacting the laws we are compelled to obey. It should be 
 remembered, too, that true enlightenment of mind, independent 
 of other causes, produces a hatred of any system which 
 
18 
 
 requires a passive obedience to human dictates. By teaching 
 us that our intellectual faculties are not to be absorbed in 
 “ whistling at the plough,” or in “ making obeisance to our 
 betters,” you have propounded sentiments, which have led us 
 to acquire correct ideas of our worth and importance in 
 society; and we ought not—we will not be satisfied with a 
 condition bordering on serfdom. 
 
 If you imagine that these results of education are disastrous; 
 if you believe that discontent will produce a worse, rather than 
 a better state of things; if you think that we are in error, when 
 we seek our political emancipation,—then cease to educate the 
 masses; stop the school-master in his progress; proclaim the 
 hliss of ignorance; and, if you have not advanced too far 
 already, you may retard the recognition of the rights of man. 
 
 But we are far from believing that you would do this; 
 conscious of the individual sacrifices which many of you have 
 made to promote our well-being, through the medium of 
 education, we are emboldened to hope that you will aid us in 
 procuring that liberty, the desire of which, your own benevolence 
 has, to a great extent, helped to enkindle. 
 
 VII. Because many of you take a lively interest in propaga¬ 
 ting the great truths of the Christian religion. 
 
 The numerous voluntary institutions formed for the did'usion 
 of religion, have helped to strengthen the desire for political 
 justice; and it is gratifying to observe, that the means by which 
 that justice is now sought to be obtained, are strictly in 
 accordance with the principles and requirements of divine 
 revelation. Tremble not at the effect of your own zeal! You 
 must either cease from disseminating God’s word, or prepare 
 yourselves for a grand recognition of its hallowed dictates. 
 Christianity struck the bonds from the negro, aud the honour 
 awaits it of destroying the oppression under which your 
 fellow-countrymen are suffering. The time has passed, in 
 which designing men could make the Bible the te.xt-book of 
 tyranny; your Bible Societies—your Home Missionary and 
 Christian-Instruction Societies—and Sunday Schools—by 
 presenting Christianity, as it came from God, have struck a 
 blow at injustice, which priestism can never counteract. 
 
14 
 
 We couceire that religion should regulate and control 
 the affairs of nations, as well as of individuals and families; 
 and that in proportion as human laws approximate to 
 the standard of moral rectitude which the New Testament 
 exhibits, will national happiness result. A transgression of a 
 divine law, on the part of a collective body, is surely as 
 offensive to Him who made it, as its commission by a solitary 
 individual. The command—" Thou slialt not steal’’—is 
 practically infringed upon, in the principle of taxation without 
 representation. He, who was an example of mercy atid 
 forbearance, denonuced injustice in terms too plain to be 
 misunderstood; and His injunction, “Love thy neighbour as 
 thyself,’’ is not thoroughly regarded, so long as our claims are 
 unrecognized. What then becomes of the assertion, that poli¬ 
 tics are beyond the range of Christian duty ? Let the question 
 he seriously considered, and we fear not the decision to which 
 the worhings of conscience will prompt. 
 
 VIII. Because ice have abaxdoxed all hopes of help from 
 other sources. 
 
 The originators of the Reform Bill, frightened at their own 
 work, have refused to proceed further in the march of political 
 improvement; and, as a palliative to the wound inflicted upon 
 aristocratical dominion, have declared it to be a “ final measure.” 
 Some of them are now the strenuous opponents of the rights of the 
 people: while others, by their indifference, warn us to place no 
 confidence in them. In. both Houses of Parliament our 
 claims have been treated with insult and derision. 
 
 To you, therefore, we are compelled to look. It remains to 
 be seen, whether you will follow those examples, or whether a 
 sense of justice will not prompt a different decision. Let us 
 not have to add your determination to continue our debase¬ 
 ment. What ray of hope would then enlighten our path! 
 Despair would take the place of faith in honest argument for 
 principle, and who shall venture to predict the consequences! 
 
 IX. Because a favoubable oppoktusity of ukitinG 
 WITH us now presents itself. 
 
 We have proved your possession of the power to invest us with 
 
political freedom, and have adduced our reasons for soliciting 
 its exercise. We rejoice in being able to conclude them by 
 inviting you to join an organization, destined to become the 
 most powerful engine of political improvement ever originated. 
 Yonr co-o])eration will speedily make it a “ great fact.” Jlany 
 influential individuals have publicly recognized its priucijtles, 
 and are zealously promoting its objects. The “Natio.v.vl 
 .Wliaxce” has been formed, for the purpose of procuring, by 
 moral and constitutional means, a full, fair, and free 
 represeiilalioiL of the people. It is rapidly increasing in 
 tlie number of its members, and in influence; its success is a 
 matter of time, resting mainly with yourselres. We are aware 
 that yo\i hesitate, on account of the extensive nature of the 
 change we contemplate. We have been told that gradual 
 reform would in lime secure our object, and add greater 
 stability to the interests of the country. But we find no 
 gradual reformers uniting for an extension of the franchise, 
 and we have not sufficient patience to wait their emharkatiou on 
 the sea of organic change, nor any desire to engage in a 
 Struggle, the issue of which will not invest evei-ij man with his 
 political rights. Neither are we willing to admit the correct¬ 
 ness of the argument. There can he little safety in contimial 
 change. Besides, gradual reformors often become the advocates 
 of finality as soon as a specific object has been gained, and a 
 deadness of political feeling ensues, lasting till other individuals 
 resume the protracted work. 
 
 It is evident, that in order to effect any important change, all 
 classes of reformers must unite; it is therefore worth examining 
 our opinions, to ascertain the difference which may exist. 
 
 Many are advocates for what is termed “ household suffrage,’ 
 without being aware to what extent it really differs Ifom 
 “universal suffrage.” It has been estimated that the 
 former would enfranchise upwards of five inillioiis— 
 the latter under seven millions; surely this difference ought 
 not, by perpetuating divisions, to prevent the acquirement of 
 eitherj and as "household suffrage” would enfranchise that 
 class, which is allowed to be the least competent to exercise tlie 
 electoral right, (viz., agricultural labourers,) and yet retain 
 
16 
 
 several iu bondage, whose position and advantages better quality 
 them for the discharge of that right, it must be obvious, that 
 rendering the suffrage complete, is the only method of removing 
 discontent, and preventing absurd and unnecessary restrictions. 
 We therefore can witli greater confidence invite you to engage 
 in a struggle—essentially sublime, inasmuch as it aims at the 
 enfranchisement of jiak, iiTespective of the accidental circum¬ 
 stances by which he may be surrounded. 
 
 Such are our reasons for urging upon your attention one of 
 the most important questions ever introduced iu the annals of 
 political history. We trust we have given them honestly and 
 candidly, and in a manner not undeserving attention. 
 
 Well aware, however, that certain objections to the doctrine 
 of political equality are considered sufficiently sound to warrant 
 its rejection, we wish to conclude by briefly adverting to them, 
 and attempting their refutation. 
 
 1. It is asserted that, as a body, we are not snfftciently 
 intelligent to be entrusted with the franchise. 
 
 It must not be forgotten, that property—not intelli¬ 
 gence—has been the standard of political privilege, consequently 
 there is nothing antecedent to strengthen the ohjeclion. 
 
 We are not, however, prepared to admit that the question of 
 EIGHT to the franchise is at all effected by the ignorance or 
 intelligence of a community. The difficulty of defining an 
 intellectual qualification is a proof of the untangibleness of the 
 objection. We contend that helping to defray the expenses of 
 a state, involves the right to a share in the control of its pro¬ 
 ceedings ; and should a certain class, through the influence of 
 circumstances, be less enlightened than their more fortunate 
 brethren, it is the duty of the latter, not to deprive that class of 
 the right, hut, to aim at placing them in the possession of those 
 intellectual advantages which would qualify them for its correct 
 exercise. We have here another instance of that ever-apparent 
 providential arrangement which exhibits the mutual dependence 
 of men upon each other, in making it the interest of the intelli¬ 
 gent to aim at the mental improvement of the ignorant, and to 
 strive at eradicating the seeds of error from the minds of the 
 mis-informed. Freedom is the best pioneer of education; an 
 
enliglitened community would tread speedily upon the heels of 
 an enhanchised people. 
 
 We are not disposed to deny that a vast amount of ignorance 
 exists amongst us. The amount of labour requisite to procure 
 the necessaries of life, renders it impossible to devote otber than 
 a very limited portion of time to mental improvement. It 
 therefore follows that the blame of our ignorance does not rest 
 wholly upon ourselves. Nine millions per annum are received 
 by those who profess to be our instructors, and yet, so grossly 
 have they neglected their duties, that—if they are to settle the 
 question—we are yet unfit to control our collective affairs! 
 We submit, that it impudence, rather than ignorance, were 
 considered a ground of exclusion from the franchise, our 
 assumed instructors would be disqualified. 
 
 It is worth observing, that we have heard nothing of this 
 charge when our influence in relation to other snbjects has 
 been requested. We have been urged on to turn the scale in 
 favour of each political party ; and have been deemed suffici¬ 
 ently intelligent to understand the most weighty questions the 
 legislature has taken into consideration, or we should never 
 have been solicited to make our opinions known through the 
 medium of petitions. In fact, our opjionents cannot resist our 
 claims on this ground, without convicting themselves of 
 hypocrisy, or deserving the charge they urge against ms. 
 
 We are not inclined to deny that the effects of ignorance 
 have been apparent amongst us. It is true that we have been 
 too eager to do tbe bidding of a proud and selfish aristocracy ; 
 that some of us have accepted bribes to engage in the slaughter 
 of men who had never injured us, under the delusive impression 
 that we were fighting for our own homes and our country’s 
 glory; that we have been too anxious to “ doff the hat” to the 
 licentious and worthless; that many of us have revelled in the 
 pot-house, brawling “Britons never will be slaves,” whilst 
 bowing the neck to oppression: and thus have given our 
 opponents an advantage they have not failed to perceivebut 
 now, when we regard slavery as a degradation ; when starvation 
 itself is not often sufficient to tempt an arlizau to follow in the 
 wake of the man-slayer; when we deem it more honourable to 
 
IS 
 
 respect worth than empty show and childish title; when tem¬ 
 perance is beginning to “exalt the man;’’ when we have 
 ascertained the cause of our degradation, and found it to be the 
 tyranny of an aristocracy who now urge against us the charge of 
 ignorance, as a reason for retaining us in bondage, we repel the 
 accusation with scorn, and demand our rights. 
 
 2. We have heard it contended that the working classes, 
 having sought to obtain their demands by physical force, have 
 proved the danger of conceding them. 
 
 We think no individual is prepared to hazard the assertion, 
 that we contemplate the attainment of our enfranchisement by 
 force of arms. We can assure you, that the few who hold such 
 an idea, form a minority as contemptible as their means. But 
 without defending that conduct which, unfortunately, some of 
 our brethren have exemplified, we are desirous of tracing the 
 causes which led to transactions we deplore, both on account of 
 their incompatibility with the object sought, and the erroneous 
 impressions they have created on your minds. 
 
 There is a very prevalent conviction that a standing army 
 exercises an injurious influence upon a community. It must 
 not be forgotten, that in this country, its ranks are filled from 
 the working classes. ’The Duke of Wellington has complained 
 of the antipathy of middle-class parents to their sons adopting 
 the military profession, and of the necessity for the Government 
 to look to the lower orders for the protection which it 
 required. Hence, it is evident, we have laboured under a 
 considerable disadvantage. Would we had imitated you iii 
 being wiser than the Government in this matter; but the 
 glowing eulogiums which we have heard heaped upon “ gallant 
 charges’’—“splendid broadsides"—“decisive vollies”—and 
 “nobly cutting up the enemy,’ have allured some of us 
 to seek initiation in the science of man-killing. Many 
 of those who have professed to proclaim the message of 
 the “ Prince of Peace,” have prostituted their holy calling to an 
 opposite purpose. Their consecration of military standards, 
 coupled with the glory they have attached to the profession of 
 shedding blood, has led many to imagine—like the followers of 
 Mahomet—that he who dies on the field of battle, is certain 
 
19 
 
 of an inheritance in the region of bliss; and often have the 
 relatives of those who have fallen, been deceived with this 
 monstrous assurance; whilst their sighs have been unheard amid 
 the clamour attending “ brilliant illuminations,” the “ crackling 
 of bonfires,” and the echoes of" vollies," and “ feu de jois.” 
 
 It must he conceded, that the working classes could never 
 have learned the superiority of moral force from the example of 
 their governors; who have always, in their transactions with 
 other nations, given full prominence to the opposite principle. 
 In matters of dispute, an appeal to arms has been their favourite 
 resort, accompanied with boastful blusterings of “national 
 honour;” and one sad effect of their folly has been the 
 creation of an impression on the minds of a portion of their 
 subjects, that physical force is in harmony with reason, in 
 proportion to the probability of success. 
 
 We have found that a modification of the same principle has 
 been adopted by the leading parties of the state, in their 
 contests for political power. Men of the highest pretensions 
 to virtue, who have become candidates for parliamentary honours, 
 have effected their objects by the most arbitrary and disgusting 
 means. Electioneering tactics, as they are termed, have had 
 a most injurious effect upon the masses. Thousands of them 
 have been hired to interrupt public meetings, and to heap 
 abuse on political leaders. To stop processions, bludgeons 
 have been placed in their hands, with intimations that they 
 were qualified to understand their use; and to aid them in their 
 brutal employment intoxicating drinks have been plentifully 
 distributed. Can it be wondered, that those who have been 
 thus debased, should exhibit the fruits of their debasement in 
 attempts to accomplish their own purposes by similar means! 
 
 Such proceedings, however, we desire to hold up to universal 
 detestation. Our political rights we would scorn to obtain 
 by the infliction of social wrongs. With faith in the vitality 
 of truth, we confide only in those means which harmonize 
 with its hallowed dictates. 
 
 3. Many of our opponents contend that a feeling of revenge 
 exists in the minds of the working-classes, which renders it 
 desirable, on the score of safety, to disregard their claims. 
 
20 
 
 It is certain that the working-classes must have been but a 
 slight remove from angelic beings, had not the insult and the 
 oppression they have experienced, produced some of those 
 inferior feelings consonant to human nature; the former does 
 not produce lore, nor the latter respect; it is therefore not 
 “ passing strange” that those who have been the victims of both, 
 should look somewhat reproachfully upon the supporters of the 
 system which has originated their grievances. 
 
 But we do unequitocally deny the existence of revengeful 
 feelings towards those who have denounced our claims. Suffering 
 through the medium of a vicious and corrupt system of legis¬ 
 lation, our hostility is directed towards that system, under the 
 conviction that its destruction will be followed by the removal 
 of that opposition of interests, and those feelings of mistrust, 
 which have too long perpetuated discord and division. 
 
 We will not trespass upon your attention merely to refute 
 charges unworthy an allusion. We are now content to leave 
 the consideration of our claims with you; trusting that we shall 
 soon be united in the glorious struggle to secure them. 
 
 We would that the liberty we seek were universally enjoyed. 
 The victory of might over right we have now in view, would 
 give an impetus to the glorious career of freedom which tyranny 
 could never stay. In the work of political regeneration it may 
 be said “ the field is the world !” and every modification of 
 serfdom must be destroyed ere that work can cease. 
 
 The empty boast that England is the “ envy of surrounding 
 nations” has been vaunted long enough. Her sons’ enfran¬ 
 chisement would convert it to a reality, though but of a short 
 duration; for envy would speedily he followed by determination 
 to emulate her example. The effect of that determination 
 would he irresistible ! Revolutions sought through the medium 
 of the sword, tyranny can meet—can subdue; but with the 
 power of iioEii foece it can never cope. The strain of Liberty 
 shall yet be heard in the very recesses of despotism ! aud every 
 down-trodden serf he aroused to an assertion of his right to 
 participate in its blessings.