POLITICAL MONOPOLY 
 
 i HOSTILE 
 
 SPIRIT AND PROGRESS 
 
 CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 BY A NORWICH OPERATIVE. 
 
 Author of one of the Prise Essays on the Temporal Advantages of the 
 Sabbath to the Working Glasses-. 
 
 “Though Christianity does not assume any immediate direction 
 in the affairs of government, it inculcates those duties, and recommends 
 that spirit, which will ever prompt us to cherish the principles of 
 freedom.”— Pobert Sail. 
 
 Scconti ffl&ottsantr. 
 
 LONDON: JAHROLD AND SONS, 47, SI. PAUL’S CHURCHYARD 
 HOULSTON AND STONRMAN, PATERNOSTER ROW. 
 
 Price Id. each : 9 d. per dozen: 5s. 6 d. per hundred. 
 
POLITICAL MONOPOLY 
 
 HOSTILE TO THE 
 
 SPIRIT AND PROGRESS OP CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 The time has passed in which it would have been 
 necessary, at the commencement of the following remarks, to 
 attack, as a prevalent conviction, the notion that the sphere 
 of politics is utterly beyond the range of Christian influence. 
 Such a position is generally deemed untenable, however 
 much opinion may vary, as to the degree of attention which 
 political subjects demand from those who profess to regard 
 the things of time as subordinate to those of eternity. 
 
 It may reasonably be contended that such attention 
 ought to be proportionate to the national importance of the 
 specified object, and to the evidence of its agreement with 
 the general tenor of Christian truth. No plea of mere 
 personal interest—no desire for the advancement of party 5 
 ought to furnish the motive for interference, on the part 
 of a Christian man, with political transactions. His 
 religion calls upon him to strive for an universal recog¬ 
 nition of its principles, and inasmuch as that recognition 
 can never be attained till all human laws are based upon 
 its authority, it is evidently his duty to make those prin¬ 
 ciples his standard of testing such laws, and his guide iu 
 rendering them obedience, or in striving for their abolition. 
 
 The subject of political monopoly, or the confinement 
 of the right of voting to a part only of the adult mael 
 
4 
 
 population, has recently excited considerable attention. A 
 conviction of the injustice of the system has led many to desire 
 its abolition, while others, professing to dread the effects of 
 that abolition, either oppose the enfranchisement of the 
 people, or treat the matter with cold indifference. If the 
 subject he viewed as a mere question of expediency, the mind 
 may be perplexed, and remain undecided; we need not, 
 however, grope amidst the mazes of imaginary policy, but 
 may take counsel from a guide, alike infallible and safe. 
 
 The fact that a very large portion of the professors of 
 Christianity conceive that they can lend their aid to the 
 maintenance of political inequality without compromising 
 their consistency, renders it incumbent upon those who hold 
 the contrary opinion to offer a candid and explicit statement 
 of their reasons for adopting it. Such reasons we willingly 
 proffer, earnestly desirous that they may be subjected to 
 severe but impartial scrutiny. If they can be proveduusound, 
 let our error be freely exposed: if they cannot, let the 
 acknowledgment of then- correctness be as unreserved as the 
 subject will be treated. 
 
 We are the more anxious to enter upon the vindication 
 of our position, from the conviction that success on our part, 
 will secure on behalf of the injured class, the active sympathy 
 of that portion of the community, whose inroads upon the 
 domains of moral and mental degradation, betoken their pos¬ 
 session of a power to give no ordinary impetus to the coming 
 struggle for political justice. 
 
 We believe, then, political monopoly to be hostile to the 
 spirit of Christianity— 
 
 I. Because it is directly opposed to those precepts which 
 enjoin the duty of justice to our neighbour. 
 
 The extreme plainness of the language in which such 
 precepts are given, leaves us without doubt as to the extent 
 
5 
 
 • to which they should influence our actions. We are com¬ 
 manded to love our neighbour as ourselves , and to do unto 
 others as we would they should do unto us. . Apply these 
 commands to the question at issue, and let us see how far our 
 representative system accords with their spirit. 
 
 One-sixth of the community assume the power of enacting 
 laws for the obedience of all, and enter into a state of irre¬ 
 sistible combination to enforce that obedience, whilst at the 
 same time they absolutely ^compel the five-sixths whom they 
 exclude from participating in a matter in which all are 
 equally concerned, to furnish the larger proportion of the 
 means of defraying such expenses, as they—the lawmakers— 
 may deem requisite to carry their arrangements into effect. 
 These aggravations are heightened by the fact, that the class 
 thus injured are the least able to pay their individual pro¬ 
 portion of such expenses even were they fairly levied, being 
 composed of those upon whose health depends theirattainment 
 
 • of the means of subsistence, and who are liable to innumerable 
 contingencies, unknown to others, but sufficient to reduce 
 them to penury and starvation. 
 
 That the command “ thou shalt not steal” is necessarily 
 embodied in the precepts adverted to, will assuredly not be 
 disputed. It must not be forgotten that the heavy burden 
 of taxation borne by the working classes is inflicted without 
 their consent, and in opposition to their earnest protestations 
 of its injustice. Spite of such protestations, the governing 
 class take what they please from the pockets of the governed, 
 Whilst our American brethren are justly censured for 
 tolerating a system which permits one man to hold another 
 as his property, and to compel him to labour at his will and 
 for his profit exclusively, merely allowing his victim the bare 
 means of sustenance, the slaves of this country—for as Sir- 
 W. Jones has justly observed, “It is folly to call a man free 
 
whom you deprive of a voice in making the laws he is called 
 upon to obey,”—although permitted to labour when they 
 please, and for whom they please, must submit to have taken 
 from the proceeds of their labour whatever the possessors 
 of the monopoly of legislation may determine, although the 
 residue may be inadequate to secure the means of lengthening 
 out an unenviable existence. Surely both systems are 
 practical violations of the first principles of justice, and the 
 defenders of either cannot consistently deprecate the existence 
 of the other. How opposed are both to the spirit of the 
 admonition, “ Provide things honest in the sight of all men!’’ 
 
 It must be remembered that those who are now in the 
 enjoyment of political freedom have afforded a striking proof 
 of the value they attach to its possession, in their earnest 
 and praiseworthy struggle for its attainment. That high 
 estimation—that earnest struggle—places a Christian elector- 
 in a position, in relation to his unenfranchised brethren, affect¬ 
 ing to no ordinary extent his own consistency. The desire for 
 political liberty now reigns as strongly in the breast of his 
 injured brother as it once did in his own. He must, from 
 personal experience, have some conception of the keen sense 
 of injustice felt by the political outlaw, and be well aware 
 too, that such injustice is not felt the less by those individuals 
 who profess to regard the divine precept under consideration. 
 A believer in the New Testament who feels that his Christian 
 brother is joining others in doing him this wrong, has more 
 need to exercise the duty of forbearance tlian is generally 
 admitted : especially when he recals to memory the fact, 
 that those in possession of the right he claims, acquired that 
 right through the exertion of the very class, who now seek a 
 return of that cordial sympathy and unwearied zeal, which 
 secured the enfranchisement of their more wealthy 
 countrymen. 
 
Such are our reasons for believing that political monopoly 
 is contrary to the precepts which enjoin the duty of justice 
 to our neighbour. We would respectfully urge all who profess 
 obedience to those precepts, to he influenced by them in 
 relation to the political claims of their brethren, or to 
 furnish their arguments for believing that, in this 
 particular case, their own will is to supplant their authority. 
 
 II. Because it is contrary to the jirecejit, “ Honour all 
 
 It will surely he conceded that the whole tenor of Chris¬ 
 tianity directly militates against the too prevalent practice 
 of honouring an individual some degrees below the externals 
 with which accident—comparatively speaking—has endowed 
 him. There is not much need of proof upon this point; 
 there is, however, an evident necessity to urge the professors 
 of Christianity to a practical avowal of its consequences. 
 
 That our social and political conventionalisms have not 
 escaped the taint, let the existence of legislative monopoly 
 testify. It cannot he said to he “ no respecter of persons ” 
 inasmuch as overlooking five-sixths of the community it puts 
 honour upon the remainder, not on the ground of their pos¬ 
 session of superior ability, nor of a greater deference on their 
 part to the requirements of morality. In the absence of all 
 reasonable cause for such distinction, we are hound to infer 
 that the practice is irreconcilable with the precept we are 
 considering. 
 
 None will deny that the institution of civil government 
 is intended to subserve the true interests of mankind. All, 
 being interested in the accomplishment of that end, have 
 an equal right to participate in the selection of the individuals 
 upon whom the powers of government shall be conferred. 
 An honour by no means to he lightly esteemed, and involving 
 responsibilities which cannot be too highly appreciated. 
 
Those, therefore, who assume a monopoly of legislative 
 functions ought to be well furnished with credentials of their 
 authority. Such credentials never having been produced, 
 it becomes our duty to “ honour all men ” by advocating the! 
 principle of political equality. i 
 
 III. Because it is based upon the assumption that the : 
 possession of wealth includes the possession of vihtue and 
 
 INTELLIGENCE. 
 
 It would be absurd to contend, at any length, that such 
 an assumption is unwarrantable. The fact that our present 
 political system includes a property qualification for voting 
 upon that assumption, ought, however, to excite the 
 suspicion of every one who denies its correctness. That 
 system and the declarations of the New Testament upon 
 this point, are evidently at issue ; no contrast can be more : 
 glaring. The one expressly cautions us against making , 
 wealth the subject of desire ; the other holds it out to us "■ 
 as the only means of acquiring the common rights of 
 citizenship. The whole tenor of Christianity, and the life 
 of its Founder, is one practical comment upon the absurdity 
 of paying an undue deference to wealth, aud yet we are, 
 at this very hour, tolerating a system which would have 
 enfranchised the scribes and pharisees, whilst it politically i 
 outlawed the very men whom God honoured with the most 
 important mission ever entrusted to humanity. 
 
 Those who believe that the control of the affairs of a 
 Christian church rests entirely with its members, and at j 
 the same time uphold the system we are deprecating, are | 
 especially inconsistent. ■ They readily concede to the poorest j 
 member of their body an equal share in the management ' 
 of such affairs; including not only the choice of the persons 
 to whom the temporal concerns of the church are 
 entrusted, but even of the individual upon whom • 
 
•devolves the great responsibility of affording instruction upon 
 Ipubjects of eternal import. Surely it is not possible to 
 ^conceive that such matters are of less importance than those 
 iwhich would occupy his attention as an enfranchised citizen, 
 ‘and yet, although he is invested with the higher responsibility 
 ton the authority of God, he is debarred his share in the 
 . (inferior upon the authority of man! 
 i IV. Because of its unhappy effects. 
 
 : “ By their fruits ” it is said, “ ye shall know them.” If 
 ’the fruits of our representative system are to furnish the 
 means of judging of its conformity with Christianity, addi¬ 
 tional proof of the correctness of our position is too easily 
 'attainable. That system has originated feelings of enmity 
 mnd mistrust which nought but its removal can destroy. It 
 •; has arrayed class against class, and in thus leading to an 
 • imagined hostility of interests, has fostered the most 
 injurious prejudices and the most unworthy suspicions. 
 ‘.Laws, so far from being recognized as the security of the 
 ! weak against the encroachments of the strong, are regarded 
 ’ by many as mere vehicles of oppression, which it is patriotic 
 ! to disregard. When men are debarred from the exercise of 
 j the right of self-government it is not strange if they attribute 
 many of the evils which they suffer to the ms-government 
 of others, and look with suspicion upon efforts to promote 
 their welfare which originate with those parties who oppose 
 their enfranchisement. The practical recognition of that 
 jj right would remove such suspicion, by affording an oppor- 
 | tunity of testing the correctness of the popular opinion 
 j respecting many of the evils under which society is suffering, 
 
 •j and which eveiy Christian patriot must desire to remedy, 
 j Such are the more prominent reasons for our conviction 
 that political monopoly is hostile to the spirit of Christianity. 
 | We think it strange that many of those who in their 
 
10 
 
 private capacity strive to adorn the doctrine of God their 
 Saviour in all things, should allow their judgment to he so 
 warped by conventialism as to sanction a public injustice. 
 This anomaly is rendered still more glaring from their laud¬ 
 able zeal to uproot the existence of kindred evils in other 
 countries. That zeal convicts them of a kind of eccentric 
 inconsistency. They are labouring hard for the destruction 
 of the system of caste in India, and are maintaining a close 
 approximation to it at their own doors; the working classes 
 of this country being to all intents and purposes a class of 
 political Soodras. They nobly strive to bring heathen 
 barbarians under the sceptre of the Prince of Peace, and 
 at the same time lend their aid to wring from their 
 poorer Christian brethren the means of maintaining an 
 enormous establishment of war. They rightly censure one 
 system of slavery unhappily rife in other countries, and 
 yetheednotthe existence of another in their own. In 
 short, they are striving through a variety of means to 
 secure a recognition of the principles of Christianity abroad, 
 whilst they are practically sanctioning their violation at 
 home. 
 
 The fact must not be overlooked that this inexplicable 
 anomaly is one of the most powerful hindrances to the 
 spread of the gospel amongst our own population; especially 
 to the success of our Town Missions. It would assuredly be 
 wrong to swerve in any degree from the established rule 
 of such associations which prohibits their agents from 
 entering, during their visits, into conversation upon political 
 subjects; but were it known that those upon whose zeal 
 and liberality such societies depended were the staunch 
 advocates of political justice, the missionary would often-be 
 a welcome visitor, where he is now repulsed with anger, or 
 looked upon with ill-concealed suspicion. 
 
ir 
 
 The unenfranchised classes have a powerful claim upon 
 the sympathy of Christian professors from their commendable 
 zeal in promoting general education. The electoral right 
 was not always denied. Time was, when the masses were 
 unable to appreciate its worth, or were indifferent to the 
 fact that withholding that right involved their degradation. 
 It is, happily, not so now; the thirst for freedom is daily 
 increasing in intensity, and will increase till her cup has 
 been proffered. The cause of this is easily traceable. 
 Men, whom knowledge has enfranchised from the bondage 
 of ignorance, cannot snbmit to political slavery. The class 
 most removed from the possibility of attaining the ordinary 
 means of education have been reached by our Sunday Schools. 
 The kind of instruction there acquired is just of the character 
 to make them deprecate injustice, as well as to lead them 
 to test the conventionalisms of the age by the dictates of 
 eternal truth. The effect of a Christian education is not 
 dependant upon clime. The degraded children of Ham 
 drank deeply at the stream of religious knowledge, and 
 West Indian oppression was doomed. In like manner, and 
 from the like cause, must the political serfdom of England 
 expire. Christian brethren, you have aided to plant the 
 desire for freedom iu the hearts of the masses; it behoves 
 you to be foremost in the struggle to secure its realization. 
 
 No professor of the religion of the New Testament can 
 consistently adopt the commonly urged argument that the 
 unenfranchised are not prepared for the exercise of political 
 freedom, and therefore cannot be entrusted with electoral 
 power. If political exclusiveness be a wrong, that wrong 
 is indefensible on any plea. No argument can be adduced 
 from God’sword which will qualify us for the postponemen 
 of an act of justice. He, therefore, who hesitates through 
 ear, to strike from his brother the fetters of political 
 
12 
 
 slavery, virtually pleads the ignoble cause of selfishness, and 
 cannot justly censure those who, on the ground of necessity, 
 venture upon the defence of any other line of conduct which 
 that word condemns. 
 
 J Fellow Christians! We earnestly entreat you to enter 
 upon the serious consideration of tills important question. 
 That mission of mercy which it is our duty and privilege to 
 promulgate, has been too often prostituted to the service of 
 tyranny; let us determine that it shall not be made an 
 instrument to uphold the foul injustice which political 
 monopoly embodies; that it shall not, by being allied to 
 fraud, seem a curse rather than a blessing. The “true 
 faith” has been the rallying cry of thousands, who have 
 been leagued for the maintenance of error, and the accom. 
 plishment of crime; let the truth of our faith be seen, in 
 its anting us on the side of right rather than of might, 
 and prompting us to energy on behalf of the oppressed. 
 
 It is now in our power to afford an irresistible proof of the 
 competency of Christianity to produce “ good will amongst 
 men,” by. m akin g it the means of uprooting one of the most 
 prolific causes of enmity that ever cursed our country. Let 
 us seize the golden opportunity ere it passes. Six millions, 
 • victims of the most aggravated oppression, now demand 
 redress. Whilst the worldly-wise hesitate to repair their 
 wrongs, and the selfish with levitical indifference pass by, 
 heedless of their complaint; let us afford an unmistakeable 
 proof that the religion we profess cannot tolerate oppression, 
 cannot sanction wrong; but that, whilst it urges the 
 consecration o’f the heart to Goif, it admits the existence 
 and enjoins the advocacy of the bights of man ! 
 
 j/f ^ 
 
 Printed by Jarrold and Sons, London Street, Norwich. 
 
 /