T f- i 
 
 liEPORT OF AN ADDRESS 
 
 DELIVERED BY 
 
 MR. JOHN BELL, 
 
 EDITOR OF THE “LONDON MERCURY,” 
 
 IN THE 
 
 MUSIC HALL, BLACKETT STREET, 
 
 NEWCASTLE UPON TYNE, 
 
 On Tuesday Evening, September filh, 1836. 
 
 ALSO 
 
 THE SPEECH OF 
 
 JOHN FIFE, ESQ., 
 
 AND 
 
 MR. BELL’S REPLY. 
 
 I9rSWCa.3TZ.X: VFOIS' TITZ^TE; 
 
 PRINTED FOR AND PUBLISHED BY JOSEPH HARRIS, 
 No. 2, Butcher Bank, / 
 
 And Sold by R. T. Edgar, Newgate Street; T. Horn, Mosley 
 Street; and W. Fordyce, Dean Street, Newcastle; Lackland, 
 "South Shields; Harrison, North Shields; Chalk, Sunderland; 
 Wilson, Hexham; Oliver, Darlington; Hetheriiigton, Strand; 
 and Cousins, London ; Me. Kerracher, Edinburgh ; Robinson, 
 Glasgow; BaiTaclough, Sheffield ; Heywood, Manchester ; Hob- 
 son, Leeds; and T, Morrisoii, Senr., 13, Maygate, Dunfermline. 
 
 1386 . 
 
■ 331 . r 
 
 PUBLISHER’S ADDRESS. 
 
 WHEN the state of the newspaper press of Newcastle is taken into 
 consideration — where not one of tlie four journals of the Whigs and 
 Tolies give publicity to the public proceedings of Iladicals, except 
 on particular occasions, when it suits their pecuniciry interests, or the 
 designs of their partj — I trust there is no apoiogy necessary for 
 publishing tlie address of Mr Bell to the Radicals of Newcastle, for 
 I deem it a meeting of the greatest importance, inasmuch as its 
 numbers, and the rapturous display of approbation at the stern un- 
 compromising radicalism of Mr Bell, proves the falsehood of those 
 who assert that Radicals in this town have become apathetic specta- 
 Jtors of, or converts to, the selfish yet imbecile legislation of the 
 ^ Wliigs. It was an assemblage such as Radicalism was wont to 
 .^^make in its high and palmy days — w'hen it rested the success of its 
 ' J cause on the eloquence of its tiuiths, and not on the advice of shuf- 
 fling Whigs, when the pent up spirit and the long-brooding indig- 
 nation of the labouring men of Newcastle, which had long been 
 ^ suppressed by the conduct of “ trimming waverers and vacillating 
 ^ shabbies,” burst forth with a force, and in a tone that gave an 
 ^ electrical shock to those who had attempted to dupe them. 
 
 ^ Another of my reasons for publishing is, that tlie Whigs, with 
 their usual base cowai'dice, are traducing the character of a man 
 whom they had neither the courage nor the honesty to oppose. 
 They are reporting him to he— what ? — a Tory in Disguise — 
 ^ the asserter oj universal sufft^ac/e, the denouncer of the poor law 
 <3^ amendment act — the advocate of the rights of industry — the establisher 
 g - of Radical associations, who suffered eighteen months imprisonment 
 ^ and lost several tliousands of pounds in his connection with the True 
 Sun, in opposing Whig and Toiy domination. A Tory in disguise ! — 
 preposterous — surely, because we have allow^ed them lately to per- 
 
4 
 
 suade iis to support wliigisiu instead of radicalism, presuming on our 
 folly, they' are trying to persuade us that radicalism is toryism : but 
 Mr Bell’s o'sm words are the best answer to the calumny. 
 
 Another strong reason for the publication of this address is, that 
 the districts of Newcastle have been disappointed at not having had 
 the pleasure of a visit from Mr Bell, as they expected — but the 
 pressure of his own business being so strong, from it having been 
 decided that the London Mei'cury should appear on Saturday, the 
 17th instant, instead of a later period as was originally intended, 
 it was with difficulty he was enabled to come "from London and 
 give his promised visit to the Radicals of Newcastle, having to be 
 back immediately ; therefore, they will be in part compensated by 
 reading the disguised Tory’s'' address, who wishes them to unite in 
 Radical Associations and fight their own battles ; and, I trust, that 
 the advice of Mr Bell on this subject will not be thrown away, but 
 that the efforts of those who are arranging the mode of their forma 
 tion will be aided so that they shortly may have them established 
 both at Newcastle and the suiTounding district. Radical Elec- 
 tors AND Non -ELECTORS, heed not those who advise you — that 
 they are ineficient, and advise an unnatural coalition with impuri- 
 ty — ask them wffiat ever you got by concession ; you have given 
 all and got nothing; they mean that you should concede to them, 
 but never think of conceding ought to you, and so they will go 
 on until they get their purpose accomplished, and then they will 
 laugh at you ; they will tell you that you are weak — 3 "ou are 
 stronger than they — you are the thousands and they the units ; 
 and even Lord Durham owned that it w^as the Radicals, as- 
 sembled in the Spital, that wrested the Refoim Bill from the 
 fears of the Lords, so that they bear testimony to your strength. Fall 
 b ;ck on your principles, and disseminate them by discussion — and 
 that cause, which in the days of Cartwright was sneered at by Whig 
 and Tory, and which has prospered in their despite, w ill eventually 
 overthrow them and establish your freedom. 
 
REPORT, &c 
 
 Mr. JOHN BELL, onginally and for three years Editor and Joint 
 Propnchn' of the True Sun newspaper, and now Sole Proprietor and 
 Editor of the London Mercury, addressed the Radicals of Newca,stie 
 in the Music Hall, according to previous announcement, on Tuesday 
 Evening, September Gth, 1806. At a very early hour this spacious 
 building, c-apable of lioiding at the least two thousand perscns, w<is 
 completely hiled, and at the commencement and during the whole 
 time of the proceedinrs was crowded almost to suiibcation. rreciscly 
 8 o’clock Mr. Bell and his friends entered the orchestiu, and were 
 received witli the most ti*emendous cheering. 
 
 On the motion of Mr. Hairis, seconded by Mr. Laing, Richard 
 Ayi*e was called to the chair. 
 
 Mr. RICJIARD AYUE then rose and said — Gentlemen, T need 
 only utter the name of the individual whom I liave the honour of 
 introducing to you to night, in order to ensure for him a kind and 
 warm rea^eption. The name of Mr. Beil has been long known to the 
 laboiiring classes throughout the country ; and great is the debt of 
 gratitude u .?y owe him for his services and sacrifices in their behalf. 
 You will not tlierefore re(xuiie, I am sure, any iiitei’position from me, 
 dr.iing the time he is addressing you. 
 
 Mr. Bell then advanced to the front of the orchesh'a amidst the 
 deafning plaudits of the assembled hundreds, evidently gratified hy 
 the generous and enthusiastic manner in which he had been received. 
 AYhen the cheering, which continued for some time, had subsided, 
 
 Mr. BEIiL spoke as follows : — I feel very great xDleasure at the 
 manner in which I am thus recoiled by the labouring men of New - 
 castle ; and certainly if the vdeasuro be great, it is enhanced by the 
 consciousness tliat there must have existed a kind feeling towards 
 me, which has arisen solely from the relation of what I have done and 
 what I have suffered for the labouring classes throughout the country. 
 In addressing you on political subjects of imj^ortance, I am aware that 
 I shall ex^rress opinions which may not be altogether approved of hy 
 some of you — by the Mhig pail of my audience — but Ifam not to he 
 intimidated by any man or set of men — I am not to be influenced l-y 
 the opinions of the Whigs, or by any means induced or ccmpelled to 
 suppress those views which I have been always most ready to de^V, lu , 
 and -in the support of 'which I would be conUrnt fcariossly to dh-« 
 The vile and vacilating conduct of the I have ahwev s inosi 
 
 strenuously exposed and cud I bust if chore b^ 
 
6 
 
 you any person who would be numbered as their supporter and friend, 
 he will to night appear in their behalf, and controvert what I may 
 advance. I tmst among those who differ from my political opinions, 
 there will not be w^anting some one to defend their measures ; and if 
 there be, I am sure I will gladly give him a fair and candid hearing, 
 and beg of^ him only the liberty of making a repl}^ — (cheers). In 
 dealing with a Whig antagonist, I am by no means scrupulous — I give 
 no quarter and I expect none — (cheers). This is the mode of warfare 
 I have adopted in all my encounters with them during the last five 
 years, and I come here, as elsewhere I have repeatedly done, to defy 
 the Whigs, and to expose their baseness — (cheers). I have defied 
 them in my sphere as a political w^riter — I have defied them when at 
 liberty — I have defied them in a dungeon — and I defy them now — 
 (tremendous cheering). I come here to speak to you of your political 
 rights. You, the labouring men of Newcastle, have been long assist- 
 ing the middle classes in achieving their political freedom — you have 
 fought the battles of the Whigs wliilst resisting the domination of the 
 Tories — you have stood like a wall of adamant around them when 
 their privileges have been invaded, and you have fearlessly mshed to 
 ihe breach to support them in their conflict with the enemy ; but what 
 has been your rew'ard ? — What political privilege have you obtained 
 for yourselves? — What extension of your political power? — What 
 relief from the burdens which have oppressed you ? Having, by your 
 energies, placed the Whigs in the position they now' occupy in the 
 country — ha'sing stood by them w'hen they were unable to defend 
 themselves — having assisted them to maintain their rights, and to secure 
 to themselves an extension of political power, it is proper you should 
 demand of them w'hy, having achieved political power for themselves, 
 they should refuse to extend it to the labouring classes throughout 
 the country? — (Cheers.) Why is it that the laboming classes are 
 deprived of the elective franchise, which has been extended in con- 
 sequence of their exertions to the middle classes of society ? The 
 Whigs tell us it is because they have no property. Property they 
 certainly neither can nor will have under the operation of Whig mea- 
 sures, all of which seem adapted to rob the poor of their earnings, 
 and add to the accumulations of the rich — (cheers). But supposing 
 
 tliey have no property — is that a reason why they should be deprived 
 of the franchise ? Of all reasons that appears to me, by far the 
 strongest in favour of the universal extension of the franchise. If a 
 man be rich he can protect liimself and secure himself against aggi’es- 
 sion, but if he be poor he is comparatively helpless. It is poverty, 
 therefore, and not wealth that requii-es the protection of the elective 
 f -anchise — (cheers). If, then, you disfranchise the labouring classes 
 
 of the country, you at once deprive them of that protection which their 
 poverty requires — (cheers). I.et us look at the folly of this pretence, 
 for it is nothing more, with which the Whigs endeavour to delude the 
 people. They exclude the labouring classes altogether from any par- 
 ticipation in political power, and defend theii* exclusion on the ground 
 
7 
 
 that they are poor. And if the creators of England’s wealth be poor, 
 notwithstanding the fertility of her soil, and the spirit of her com- 
 mercial enteq^rize, what, I ask, is the cause ? Does not the more 
 disgrace attach to the great capitalists of the country ? — (Tremendous 
 cheering.) But poor they cannot be if eveiy one had the portion of 
 wealth he has created by his own industry, and to which he is there- 
 fore most justly entitled. The labour of the poor man, which is his . 
 wealth, requires even more protection than the accumulated labour of 
 the capitalist; and, moreover, the poverty of the one is occasioned by 
 unjust and oppressive laws — the wealth of the other arises out of in- 
 justice and oppression. The land of England belongs to the people 
 of England — to the labourers of England. The fertility of tlie soil 
 ought to enrich them, but they are impoverished ; the extent of her 
 commerce strengthen them, but they are weakened ; to live they ought 
 contented and happy, but, by Whig and Tory mismle, they are de- 
 graded by exclusion from political privileges as members of the civil 
 community, and rendered miserable by the exactions of legislative 
 imbecility — (tremendous cheering). In depriving you of the elective 
 
 franchise, tliey deprive you entirely of political power ; and to deprive 
 you of your political power, is to commit an act of legislative robbery 
 — (continued cheering). Again, it is said, the security of property 
 requires a limitation of the suffrage, by the adoption of a property 
 qualification” — as if x^roperty could be rendered insecure by giving 
 every individual a direct interest in protecting it. Every inroad on 
 private property is at present punished by the immediate incarceration 
 of the offender, and what can more effectually secure the observance 
 of respect for the individual acquisitions of industry ? But if the acqui- 
 sition of property is to be the only test of qualification for political 
 power, and if political power be its best safeguard, every measure 
 w'hich prevents the accumulation of property necessarily tends to 
 render it insecure. By what agency is property now rendered inse- 
 cure ? By the agency of the tax-gatherer. The tax-gatherer collects 
 a x)ortion of your property under the plea of more effectually securing 
 the remainder ; but then. Gentlemen, if you have no property to pro- 
 tect, where is the utility of paying to keep up an establishment to 
 protect it ? If you have property, you ought even on their own shew- 
 ing, have some measure of political power ; if you have a home, why 
 does the tax-gatherer tap so often at your door ? My advice to the 
 labouring men of England is, when they see any of these tax-gatherers 
 coming with their bag and book, to turn away from them at once, and 
 button their x^ockets — (cheers and laughter). They have no right to 
 demand of you the x^ayment of a tax, whilst you are excluded from 
 any pai’ticipation in political power — (cheers). But then, there is the 
 shop-keepers’ tax, and this amounts to six or eight times as much as 
 the tax paid directly to the government In eveiy shop-keeper you 
 see a tax-gatherer in disguise, by whose agency your property is con- 
 fiscated ; and you have no legal remedy, because the practice is esta- 
 blished and sanctioned by the legislative enactment of Whigs and 
 
8 
 
 Torios — (tremendous cheering). If the Whigs malie laws for them- 
 s ;lves and for their own party, it is not reasonable that you should be 
 compelled to support tlie macliinery by which they are carried into 
 e:s:eciition. If you are to pay the hixes, you ought to have a voice in 
 making the laws, as that is the only way in Vvddch you can have a 
 proper controul over your own earnings. In order that your property 
 may l>e secure, you have a right to demand political eman- ipation — 
 (cheers). You, tlie men of Newcastle, stand high in the list of Re- 
 formers. The Whigs owe their power to your firmness and detennine - 
 ti>n — you assisted them in carrring tlirough tliase great measures on 
 w'uch e'r existence as a ministry depended. But I am afraid they 
 are not satisfied even with their own handiworlc. Are they satisfied 
 with the i*efonn hill ? (a voice from the body of the hall — N o.) Neither 
 am I. Their dissatisfaction, however, arises from one cause and mine 
 arises from another. If they discovered defects under the old system, 
 why did they not endeavour to remove them under the new ? If pt»litical 
 power was then injudiciously and unjustly confined to a few. why do 
 they still withhold it from the great mass of the people — the labouring 
 classes throughout the country — (cheers) I You, the labouring classes, 
 have no right to be satisfied witli tlie refarm hiU, as few of you occupy 
 a house w'orth ten pounds a year, which seems to he the inhiimum 
 Wliig qualification for the possession of political power. Tliis, how- 
 ever, is not the principle upon which political power ought to be dis- 
 I>ensed. It is not because a man is a wealthy member of the commu- 
 nity tliat he should be allowed the privilege of voting in the election 
 of a parliamentaiy representative, hut because lie i.s a member of the 
 community. It is of no consequence whether he occupy a house of 
 ten pounds a year rent or a hundred pounds a year rent. If he be a 
 member of civil society, and contribute towards the support of the civil 
 government, he ought for this and for no other reason to have the full 
 enjoyment of all the privileges appertaining to such a condition. The 
 principle of the reform hill is most absurd, and its application accord- 
 ing to the provisions of that measure most foolish and inconsistent. 
 If a man is to have one vote because he occupies a house of tlie annual 
 value of ten pounds, according to all the rules of logic, the man that 
 occupies a house of the annual value of twenty poun-ls ought to have 
 two votes, of fifty pounds five votes, and of one hundred pounds ten 
 votes, that is, a vote for eveiy ten pounds of annual value at which his 
 house may be rated. The plan is most admirably adapted to tlirow 
 power into the hands of the money-mongers of the coimtry, and would 
 appear to have been devised for no other purj^ose. It is possible, 
 under the pi’esent system, to lay |out money very advantageously in 
 the creation of votes. A large capitalist may purchase five hundred 
 houses of the annual value of twelve pounds — he may then introduce 
 five hundrefi timauts wdio should pay him ten pounds a year rental, 
 the remaining two pounds being gi\'en to them by w^ay of bonus, in 
 order the more effectually to secure their votes in his favour, or that 
 they might be more immediately under Ms dhection. Tlius five 
 
9 
 
 liimdred voters might he kept up at far less expence than an old tme 
 blue Tory esquire could keep up a pack of hounds. The cost of keeping 
 five hundred electors for a year would only be a thousand pounds, and 
 this is a considerably less sum than what is required for the support of 
 an effective canine establishment — (cheers and laughter). There is 
 another reason why the Whigs exclude you from any participation 
 ill political power. I use the word Whigs, because you have done 
 more in support of that body than of any other paity in the state, and 
 it is only fair that when they have power they should assist you. 
 They, however, appear to have made use of you only to secure power 
 effectually to themselves, and having done this, they now discard you 
 altogether. I therefore unhesitatingly accuse them of baseness and 
 treachery — T despise and detest their meanness, and I turn from the 
 contemplation of their inconsistency and worthlessness with ineffable 
 disgust. [Here a party of Whigs, who had fnr some time evidently 
 been suppressing their rage at the tenor of Mr. Bell’s obseiwations, 
 began hissing tremendously, but the hissing was instantly drownded 
 in the burst of acclamation and continued cheering which immediately 
 followed. The scene was tumultuous. When the tumult had in 
 some measure subsided, Mr. Bell said] : — 
 
 Permit me to request that no unseemingly inteiTuption may be given 
 to the gentlemen that would thus giatify tl\eir resentment. On the 
 subject of Whig inconsistency, I am always very plain, and 1 ever bid 
 defiance to them all as I defy them now. I haa e been struggling in de- 
 fiance of them all my life, and no single man, or any number of men, 
 shall make me quail in denouncing their baseness. I give them full 
 liberty to hiss and hout me till they are tired. Should there, however, 
 be a Whig present, who is disposed to use more convincing arguments, 
 if he will only stand forward in defence of his party I shall be most 
 happy to listen to his observations, and, as I said before, I will only 
 claim the pnvilege of replying to him. 
 
 The most tremendous cheering, mingled with hisses from the Whig 
 party, ffollowed the delivering of the above declarations. When the 
 cheering subsided Mr Bell resumed : — 
 
 I was saying, another pretext advanced by tlie Whigs, as a reason 
 for excluding the labouring classes from the possession of political 
 power, is that they are ignorant. But why are they ignorant ? And 
 if they are ignorant, why is their judgment so often appealed to by the 
 Whigs ? If they are ignorant, who is to blame ? They have had the 
 full benefit of Whig and Tory Avisdom for the last one hundred and 
 fifty years, and yet they are so ignorant as to be incapable of exercising 
 the elective franchise ! But how, I ask, does it happen that they are 
 so often appealed to by the Whigs when it suits their own purpose ? 
 During the last four years we have seen the Whig leaders at the head 
 of thousands of the labouring classes, assembled in the large towns 
 throughout the country, remonstrating with the legislature, and sending 
 petition after petition, all of them embracing questions of interest to 
 which the attention of the parliament was at tlie time directed ; and 
 
10 
 
 yet we are told by the same party that the laboining classes ai*e too 
 ignorant to be trusted 'vvith the franchise. They appealed to them in the 
 most direct way, and courted the exj)ression of tlieir sentiments when 
 questions of importance came before the legislature, and yet they refuse 
 to appeal to them now on questions of much less moment. If h be 
 proper to appeal to the people at all, and surely the experience of the 
 last few years show’s that it is not only proper but must soon become 
 imperative ; would it not be better to appeal to them as electors, in 
 which chai’acter their opinion might be constitutionally recognized, 
 and brought to bear effectively on the question before them by the 
 return of an individual to represent their opinions, than, as now, to 
 ap]^>eal to them as petitioners, when it is notorious that the petitioning 
 of the people is a mere mockery unless it be made to assume another 
 shape in order to suit the purpose of their Whig leaders. If tlie Whigs 
 were right in appeaHng to people on subjects in days'gope by, itw’ould 
 be wise in them to recognize such appeals now’, as on them may depend, 
 at no distant day, their individu^ and personal safety. (Cheers.) 
 Mr Chairman. The Whigs of the present day, in their addresses to the 
 labouring men throughout England, have, curiously enough, raised the 
 cry of Peerage Reform, and have endeavoured eveiy’ w’here to stir up a 
 crusade against the House of Lords. My advice to the labouring men 
 of England is, have notliing to do with the matter. Let the Whigs 
 a 'd Tories fight their battles by themselves, and do not 3’ou interfere 
 betw’een them. — Do not join in the silly endeavour to put down the 
 House of Lords. Do you ask how I make this out ? I answer, look 
 baok at the course of legislation in this country for some yeai’s. Con- 
 sider well the conduct of the men and the nature of the measures they 
 have inti’oduced, and be not deceived by the* specious promises and fair 
 representations of an interested political party. If you look at the 
 course of legislation, you see robbery perpehated under the form of a 
 measure called the Poor Law Amendment Bill, and under w’hat cir- 
 cumstances was this measure passed into a law’ ? W^hy, the Whigs 
 carried the measure in the teetli of a Radical minority in the House of 
 Commons, and the Lords were induced to pass it by representations 
 from the same party w’hich influenced their fears. After depending 
 for political existence on the peoj^le, who, by tlieir united energies, had 
 placed them in power, they forsook the people and deceived tliem. 
 (Cheers,) Do not he deceived by them again ; hut if ever you are 
 called upon to support them, m^ike universal suffrage the -price of your 
 labour in their service. (Cheers.) But w’hat is to be the natui*e of the 
 Peerage Reform wliich is so much talked about ? Are we to have a 
 ten-pound House of Lords as w’ell as a ten-pound House of Commons ? 
 Are the same parties that choose the representatives in the lower house 
 to elect the Peers who shall represent them in the upper ? W’'e already 
 owe a debt of gratitude to the W^higs, but that gi*atitude would be 
 greatly increased certainly, if, in addition to the advantages already 
 conferred through their agency, we should also he blessed with a ten- 
 pound House of Lords. They are now under a salutary check ; but if 
 
11 
 
 LIBRARY 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS 
 W L'RBANA-CHAMPAIGH 
 
 they could OTenvhelm the House of Lords they would insult us with 
 impunity. (Continued cheering.) And what are the Whig reasons 
 for doing away mth the House of Lords ? Simply, because they will 
 not pass the crude measures which they bring before them. They do 
 not wish to extend refonn on principle, but to carry it just so far as to 
 answer then own dishonest ends and no further. When these Whigs 
 ask the support of the labouring classes, in order to overthrow the 
 House of Peers, it is right to tell them at once that they seem entirely to 
 forget that they are talking to the swinish multitude — to people of no 
 intelligence, utterly incajDable of properly exercising the elective fran- 
 chise — totally unfit for the enjoyment of the least particle of political 
 power. (Cheers.) Do not interfere at all in the matter unless they 
 agree to give you at once universal suffrage. It is a mighty pretty 
 quaiTel in which they ai’e engaged, but take no notice of it — let them 
 fight away. — Pull Devil, pull Baker.” If past experience has had any 
 influence over you, let it deter you from mixing yourselves up in their 
 petty quaiTels, in which one of them may indeed be benefitted, but 
 in which you, the laboming men of England, can gain nothing. 
 (Cheers, mingled with hisses, and cries of that's not right.") It may 
 not be right, but I should be glad to know the gentleman’s reasons, 
 which would be much more satisfactory than hissing as he does. My 
 reas( n for giving this advice to the labouring men of England is this — 
 at present they have no participation in political power, and are in 
 consequence left enthely at the tender mercies of the Whigs. We 
 have already seen the course of Whig legislation, and you have witness- 
 ed some of the returns made to you by the Whigs for tlie sersdces you 
 have already rendered to them. You have, however, too long been 
 working in their cause without any remuneration — ii is time for 3-011 
 to get a fair price for 3^0111’ labour — let that price be nothing less than 
 universal suffrage. If any of you should render them assistance 
 without this very proper stipulation — if any of 3mu should lend 3’oui'- 
 selves to support the Whigs, after the floundering manner in which 
 they have proceeded since they came into power, and especially after 
 witnessing that beautiful specimen of Whig legislation, the Poor Law 
 Amendment Bill — if aftejr a course marked by imbecility and ignorance, 
 characterised b3" cunning, and pursued b3’ selfishness, any man shou d 
 think of supporting a Wliig ministry, all I can say of him is, he de- 
 seiwes to die in a Whig workhouse. I say that if after seeing that 
 false and cruel Grey robbery perpetrated on the labouring classes of 
 England, there should be found any one to oin their ranks without a 
 fair and honest stipulation, and that no less than a universal extension 
 of the suffrage, he can have learnt nothing by the lessons of experience 
 that have been read to him, and he does not deserve to profit from the 
 exertions of his more consistent brethi’en. (Cheers.) Mark the con- 
 duct of my Lord Brougham wdien advocating tliis measure in the 
 House of Lords. Such v\'as the course of events, said he in substance 
 to their lordships, tliat unless they passed this measure, it might be, 
 that in little more thun a year, they voald be imable to retain their 
 
12 
 
 estates. What was Lord Brougham s conduct on this occasion ? w>is 
 it that of a wise legislator advocating a judicious measure for the bene- 
 fit of his country? No. Every fear was appealed to and excited in 
 order to pass this bill ; and it is singular what contrivances were adopt- 
 ed in order to circulate the amount of crimes committed throughout 
 the kingdom. The most awful descriptions were given of the labour- 
 ing classes, and their lordships were told at once to go and be witnesses 
 of these scenes themselves. Proceeding, however, on the authority of 
 Lord Brougham, they consented to pass the bill solely that they 
 may not themselves be deprived of their own estates. Wliat were the 
 reasons generally urged for the adoption of this measure ? Why the 
 very same reasons that hath been set forth by Mr. Malthus some years 
 ago. That worthy parson imagined it necessary, in order to amelio- 
 rate the condition of the working classes, to cut them off gradually by 
 starvation, and limit their further increase by a number of restrictions 
 and regulations ; and my Lord Brougham had exactly adopted the 
 same dogmas. The poor had originally a legal claim upon the soil of 
 England — a claim which was acknowledged by the statute law — and 
 it was the aim of these Whig legislators to deprive the poor of this 
 claim, in order that the estates of the landlords might not be swallowed 
 up in the gradual augmentation of poor rates, which the state of the 
 labouring population daily rendered more imperative^ (Signs of dis- 
 approbation, hissing, and partial cheers,) It is all very well in the 
 Whigs to say this was not their intention — that they had no wish to 
 deprive the poor of their claim for support — but read the statute, and 
 read also the reports of the Whig commissioners. It is expressly 
 stated, the right of the poor to support out of the land is ultimately 
 abolished, but it not being expedient to push it this far at once” — and 
 thus it goes on to give some directions as to the present application of 
 this principle ; but you see at once that the right of the poor to main- 
 tainance is now legally abolished ; and, that though the system is repre- 
 sented as the chief object of Whig concern, the principle itself is in 
 reality the thing which they aim at destroying altogether. This, I think, 
 is most clear, from the conduct of liOrd Brougham on the occasion to 
 which I before alluded — when urged asto the poverty of the labouring 
 classes, he placed before their lordships but one — an only alternative. 
 He did not say reduce the civil list — abolish the pension list — do away 
 with a standing army — tax the funds — No ! he only said, “ Your lord- 
 ships must rob the poor or give up your estates.” And why ? Because 
 Lord Brougham is a Whig at heart, and a coward. He was afraid to 
 come in contact with their lordships on a question in which he him- 
 self was interested. The poor had no representatives there, and 
 therefore he made a direct push to get the property of the poor. 
 (Cheers, and partial disapprobation) What was done with respect 
 to the old corporations ? Why, tlie Whigs agreed to heai' counsel 
 at the bar of the House of Lords in support of them, and the 
 foulest felon in tlie most aristrocratic courts of justice can demand 
 thisi and I, more than once, liave been permitted to defend 
 
13 
 
 myself. The trial was indeed a mockery — a Whig Judge, a Whig 
 Attorney General, and a Whig Jury ; I had courage, however, to defy 
 them, one and all — I defied the Judge — I defied the Attorney General 
 — and I defied the Jury. This I have done and much more, which 
 I maj not with propriety at present enumerate, in forwarding the 
 cause of the labouring men of England. (CheerSyloud and continued.) 
 liut tliere was no one to plead the cause of the poor man at the bar of 
 the house — no one to guard his vested rights — (loud cheers) — no one to 
 shew either the illegality of the proceedings or the injustice of the mea- 
 sure they were about to adopt, (continued cheers.) Had there been 
 any one to represent the interests of the poor in the house during the 
 discussion on this bill he might have said, “ The old poor laws may 
 indeed be prejudicial to the interests of the labouring classes and in- 
 jurious to the society at large; and, therefore, it may be necessary to con- 
 sider whether they ought to be remodeled or entirely abolished ; but we 
 are only one party, the labouring men of England are the other — we 
 must consult them before we agree to adopt any specific measure on 
 the subject Let them send representatives to this house anj we will 
 consider the subject conjointly.” Had there been an honest represen-' 
 tative of the labouring classes, he would have stood alone on the fioor 
 of the House of Commons, and would have demanded an extension of 
 the suffrage as the very first step Awards the settleoient of this ques- 
 tion. {Loud cheers.) While on this subject, let us not forget the 
 special reasoning of the Whigs. They said, “The existence of the old 
 poor laws,” and in this they borrowed the sentiments of parson Malthus, . 
 “ tended to encourage improvidence, profligacy, and vice.” {A voice from 
 ih.€ body'of the hall, “ It did.’) The gentleman says it did. How the 
 existence of a principle, founded in the nature of human society, and 
 recognized ever since the establishment of those laws which protect 
 property, can be productive of idleness and profligacy, is, I think, very 
 difficult to perceive. Whatever evils attend the practice of a principle 
 good in itself, the principle is not to be repudiated or rejected. But 
 that was not the question. The evils attendant on an improper ad- 
 ministration of the poor laws might have been obviated without at all 
 interfering with the general principle which recognized the right of 
 the poor to support, had that been the object wliich the Whigs con- 
 templated. If, however, vice and profligacy existed under the old poor 
 laws, — if the labouiing men of England were immoral and impro- 
 vident, who were to blame ? And look at the honesty of the charge. li 
 the charge mean any thing it is a compliment to the labouring men cd 
 the country. Are not the aiistocracy idle ? If you be idle too, you. 
 resemble them. {Cheers and lamjhter.) If you be idle you are the 
 more like the aristocracy. Do they not monopolize all the knowledge ? 
 Laughter.) You, according to their account, monopolize all the ig- 
 norance, so that you are both monopolists. {Cheers and laughter.) 
 Tliey aie idle and you are idle — they are immoral and you are immo- 
 ral — they are monopolists and you are monopolists — you make a com- 
 mon lot in these respects, and therefore they ought not to complain. 
 
14 
 
 (Loud cheering) The people of England are accused of impro^ ideiicc. 
 I'Ue goveniraent sets them an example of improvidence. If they are 
 improvidkmt, they imitate the government ; and it is scarcely fair to 
 accuse them of vices daily practiced by their legislators. (Loud cheers.) 
 It is, however, a vice less horrible and destructive than war in which 
 governments are fain to plunge the people — ^it is not so bloody and 
 expensive. (Cheers.) But tlie Whigs have been guilty of all manner 
 of vices — they formerly encouraged lotteries — now they encourage gin 
 shops, lire cry of the Whig cabinet is not cheap government but 
 cheap gin. (A voice, ‘‘ They have given us cheap knowledge.") Yes, 
 when they could not help it. — Oh, yes ! they have given you a penny 
 stamp instead of a fourpenny one, an act by which the press will be 
 more deeply fettered than before. They still continued their crusade 
 against the liberty of the press. And w hy should they have done this ? 
 The press is interwoven with tlie extension of the popular franchise, llie 
 principle of the things are alike. You must pay a penny tax before 
 )ou can rea<i a newspaper, the design of which tax is ^to connect the 
 newspaper press with men of property — to circumscribe knowledge — 
 and to keep the poor man in ignorance of his condition. The penny 
 tax, 1 repeat, was designed for die express purpose of confining tlie 
 publishing of newspapers to men of property. I hope, however, they 
 have carried it too far. They will be deceived I have no doubt. It is 
 a Whig trick. (Cheers.) 
 
 About tliree }ears*ago, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr Spring 
 nice, said — The abolition of the Newspaper stamp dudes w as entirely 
 a financial question. What does Lord Melbourne now say ? Why, 
 that it is not a financial question at all, but a question of morality. — A 
 question of Morality! (Tremendous cheei'ing.) The Whig cabinet 
 have no right indeed to accuse the labouring men of vice and immo- 
 rality. I always put the question in this way. You complain tliat the 
 w ages of labour are paid by the parish, or at least a part of them, and 
 the remainder by the persoiis for whom that labour is expended. But 
 what is the cause of this? The labouring men are not to blame for it. 
 Their poverty subjected them to all the evils and inconveniences of 
 this mode of payment, but their poverty w as surely not the cause of 
 tliese evils. N o. The cause rested entirely with the Wing and Tory 
 administrators of the poor law, who were not responsible for the iii- 
 juiies tliey indicted, whilst, contrary to all foims of justice, 
 tiieir victims w^ere. But will the new system be less expensive than 
 the old one ? The amount of poor rates paid under tlie old system, 
 was stated in round numbers at £8,000,000, But a large portion of 
 this may be set down as the wages of labour honestly rendered. It 
 signified nothing to the labouring man w’hetlier he w as employed by tlie 
 state, or the parish employed him, so long as he performed 
 litmest labour and* looked only for its fair rcwvard. You must, therefore, 
 in estimating the ex[)ense of the old system, deduct fftm £8,000,000 
 a fair proportion as the reward of labour lionestly rendered by the 
 labouiing men throughout England. Deduct also a further amount 
 
15 
 
 equal to the present great demrnd for labour throughout England ; for, 
 observe, the general demand for labour is at the present moment far 
 above the average, arising from several causes which must before long 
 cease to operate, and allow that demand again to find its level. After 
 making these deductions, set on the opposite side the amount required 
 for their support now even on the scale of a Whig workhouse — a bastile 
 would be a more proper designation — add the expense of building and 
 repairing tliese Whig bastiles, and the amount of the W’uig Commis- 
 sioners’ salaries, and I pledge my life the new system is considerably 
 more expensive than the old. (A voice from the body of the halt, 
 “ JVait awhile,") You are right Wait awhile. As the scripture 
 saith, “ The end is not yet.” Mark the cause of public prosperity, and 
 the extraordinary demand for* labour at present existing. They arise 
 entirely from the public speculations that are afloat, and the excessive 
 issues of the Joint Stock Banks, and these extra issues depend 
 greatly on the Bank of England. You all know the Bank of England 
 is rather feverish just now. The directors are at a loss what to do. They 
 talk of increasing the rate of discounts, and they have actually refused 
 to discount some of the best commercial bills that ever got into circu- 
 lation. They talk of throwing exchequer bills on the markets, 'I’hese 
 will naturally fall in value, and Mr Spring liice will next find it con- 
 venient to raise the interest, and fund a portion in order to surmount 
 the difficulties. In any case there must be a cessation of the demand 
 for labour. Many of those national woiks whith are contempiattHl 
 will never be attempted to be carried into execution, and many of those 
 airefdy in operation will be stopped. Then vidll be the time when the 
 eflect of this Wiiig measure will be most severely felt. Many of those 
 who are now reaping the reward of their honest labour will be com- 
 pelled to take refuge in a Whig workhouse and subsist of Is. 3^d. 
 per week. (Applame.) It was not, however, their natural love of' 
 cruelty that induced the Whigs to adopt this measure. It was not 
 that they might witness a miserable and unhappy peasantry, but simply 
 that they might reduce the rate of wages in tliis country to that of 
 labourers in Ireland. (Cries of “ No, no.") I’ll give you my reasons, 
 for I dont like to make unfounded charges. (Applause.) There iwe 
 in Ireland 2,300,000 persons starving on sea-weed, or subsisting on 
 the charity of others almost as poor as themselves. (A voice, “ Fahe, 
 false.") If that gentleman be a Whig I at once refer him to the Whig 
 reports where the statement will be found — if he be a radical, he is a 
 bad radical — it would be w ell for him to make himself better acquainted 
 with the matter than he appears to be. {Cheers.) I am not making 
 these statements on my own authority. — If they be lies, they are Whig 
 lies, for they ha^e made the statement themselves. {Cheers.) Weil, 
 is it not probable that out of upwards of 2,000,000 persons bordering 
 on starvation, a very great number will not, as according to the Whig 
 Commissioners they do, come over to this country regularly and perio- 
 dically for three or six months in the year ? A stout able man in Ire- 
 land receives but 4d. or 5d. per day, and*a labouring man in this conn 
 
16 
 
 try will aTerage ]3s. or 14s. per week. Is rot tlie effect ther of this 
 influx of labourers, many of whom settle in the country, finding it so 
 much better than the home they have left, to reduce permanently the 
 rate of wages in this country ? Here, mark me, 1 do not deny the right 
 of the Irtsh labourer thus to benefit himself if he possibly can — he is 
 right in disposing of his labour in the best market j but itwould certainly 
 be much better if the wealth of Ireland could be made to contribute in 
 a greater measure than it now does towards alleviating the condition o. 
 the labouring classes, by giving them constant employment at a fair 
 remunerating wage. The effect, however, of this influx of labourers is 
 the same — the result must be the lowering of the wages of labour in 
 this country, which is what the Whig legislators aimed at. {Cheera.) 
 The wages »)f labour, before the passing of the Poor Law' Amendment 
 Act, might be about 7s., 8s., JOs., or 12s. per week, a great part of 
 wliich w’as paid by the parish. Is. Sjd. per week is the allowance in a 
 Whig workhouse, and this is to be given only on conditions to which no 
 independent mind can submit. The individual, before he can receive 
 even this sum, must consent to be separated from his wife and family 
 — robed in workhouse apparel — debarred from the converse of ac- 
 quaintances — and denied even the privilege of at fending the ordinances 
 of his religion. as he might be accustomed to do in his parish church. — 
 He is to be a Malthusian. (Applause.) Their desire is, that they 
 should not be comfortable in the workhouse, and therefore they have 
 arranged it so, that th*e condition of the poor in one of those establish- 
 ments, shall be less comfortable than the condition of the poorest of 
 the labouring men throughout the kingdom. W^hat must be the effect 
 of these an’angements ? W^hy, that an able-bodied man will put up 
 with any pittance, how'ever small, as the rew’ard of honest labour, so as 
 he may divide it with his wife and family. I say the labouring men of 
 England would submit to any degree of privation sooner than be im- 
 mured in one of these Whig bastiles. Thus will they succeed in 
 lowering the rate of wages, and increasing the profit of the money- 
 ihongers. — In order to maintain the offspring of titled profligacy they 
 are content to beat down the wages of the industrious labourer. {Cheers.) 
 Mr Robuck is somewhat favourable to thse Whig schemes, but I hope 
 lie will recover of bis infatuation. There is not a real radical member 
 of parliament a Malthusian. How can he be so if he be honest ? In 
 every Malthusian you see only an oppressor. {C beta's.) It is said the 
 greatest discovery of modem times was the discovery of the principle 
 of population by Mr Malthus. The principle appears to me greatly 
 to interfere with the liberty of the subject. It would appear that, ac- 
 crnding to this principle, a labourer has no right to exist at all. There 
 is so great an anomaly in calling a Malthusian a Radical, that I deem 
 the thing altogether impossible, but I may be wrong, {CJieers, and 
 disapprobation from the Wkigs^ Mr Chairman, the advice I have 
 given to the labouring men of England is such as I am convinced they 
 ought to act upon. The Whigs are gi-adually pressing down the wages 
 of the labourer, and throwing money into the hands of the rich capi- 
 
17 
 
 talists. The proper way to improve the condition of the labouring 
 Classes would be to elevate them instead of depressing them — to aug- 
 ment the reward of labour instead of diminishing it to the lowest sum, 
 on wdiich it is barely possible to live. If things are allowed to go on 
 in this way the spirit of the labouring men will give way, and they will 
 sink lower and lower until they be poor and wretched beyond all possi- 
 bility of portraying. Now is the time for the labouring men of Eng- 
 land to make a stand — they should have done so long ago — they should 
 have done so in 1834, when the cause of the Dorchester labourers was 
 before the public. {Cheei's.) And let me say, for I -will never stoop 
 to tlie meanness of llatteiy’, or forbear to expose, even among the ia- 
 bom'ing classes themselves, what is wrong, the part the labouring men 
 of England acted on that occasion was disgraceful and dishonourable 
 beyond all power of expression. Why, they stood by with their arms 
 folded, and saw their fellow labourers taken away from their families 
 and transported beyond the seas for an imaginary offence. O, it will take 
 yeai-s of strenuous effort to wipe away that disgrace. I say the labour- 
 ing men of England should have risen simultaneously — they should 
 have gone with them in a body, and have left the Whigs to cultivate 
 the fields and reap the reward of their own labour. {Cheers.) There 
 •were about 30 or 40,000 men assembled near TiOiidon at the time ; and 
 if these men had done their duty, the Dorchester labourers would not 
 have been sent out of the country. I v/as in gaoh Their depaibire 
 Wcis delayed in order to ascertain the result of this gi'eat meeting The 
 Whigs were in terror, and had that assemblage waited six hours longer, 
 •till darkness covered the city, the Dorchester labourers would have 
 been still in England. (Cheers,) It may not be known to all of you,, 
 that, at that time, the ships were lying in the downs, waiting till they 
 received the telegraphic signal for their departure. Six houre longer 
 would have caused the order to be reversed, and have jirob ably restored 
 these men to their homes and families. (Cheers.) Tlie period of their 
 return will soon expire, and then let tlie labouring men. of England 
 wi}>e off the disgrace that attaches to them — let them bear these injured 
 individuals in triumph through the provinces, and moreover place them 
 by pecuniary subscriptions above the reach of Wliig and Tory influence 
 or fear. The labouring men of England must take the matter into 
 their own hands — let every one give something if it be only a farthing 
 — they owe it to these victims of Whig cruelty. Never allow the Whigs 
 to compensate them. If any compensation is due from the Whigs, it 
 is due to you, the labouring men of England, and not to them. The 
 comjxjnsation which you deserv^e, and which you ought to insist on, is 
 nothing less than universal suffrage. (Cheers^ To ameliorate 
 the condition of the Irish labourers, and place them above the 
 necessity of emigi-ation, I would at once introduce into that ccun- 
 ti y a system of poor laws. On this I differ from Mr O’Connel],, 
 and often, have I endeavoured to convince him of the absolute 
 necefesity of this step. He, however, does not appi*ore of its adoption. 
 He says if you introduce poor laws intg Ireland, you will at once strike 
 
18 
 
 a blow at that noble and generous feeling which at once awakens com- 
 misseration and prompts to relieve. In England you see persons in a 
 great measure indifferent to the sufferings of their neighbours j but in 
 Ireland one shares the misfortune of the other, and participates in all 
 his deprivation — he breaks with him his last morsel, and ^us allays 
 at once his own hunger and t'nat of his brother. Would you destroy 
 this prevalence of generous feeling, and introduce a greater dependance 
 on the parish ? I have never myself been in Ireland, but I always 
 understood there were many generous spirits in this part of the world. 
 Permit me to ask you ffte reason of this remarkable generosity of feel- 
 ing? Why will the generosity of the Irishman prompt him to share 
 his last potatoe wdth his fellow-labourer in distress ? Pardon me when 
 I say it is because if he did not pi'event the extinction of life in his 
 brother-labourer, the rich w^ould not do it. Their fiiendship and gene- 
 rosity springs in a great measure out of their condition, which has been 
 for years such only as to awaken those feelings of kindness and com- 
 misseration T^^hicll exist in the human heart, and are developed in a 
 community of suffering. The generosity of the Irish labourer is like 
 the generosity of the Indian in the w^oods. — It is the generosity of the 
 Arab in the wilderness. — It springs from the similarity of tlieir con- 
 dition, and is nurtured by their mutual dependencies and privations. 
 You have heard the eloquence of Mr O’Connell when portiaying the 
 sufferings and wrongs of Ireland — a land of fertile valleys,green hills, 
 natural rivers, and every thing calculated to render, it the abode of a 
 rich and happ}" nation ; and you have heard him bewail over the causes 
 of its degradation. I have always thought he acted rather inconsist- 
 ently in these matters, for if the poverty of Ireland be the .cause of 
 that generosity w^hich he so much admires, and which he would pre- 
 • seiwe even at the expence of permanent relief, then instead of lament- 
 ing over that poverty he ( night to rejoice — instead of decrying absen- 
 teeism he ought to encourage it, as by the poverty which it creates is 
 awakened a noble and generous spirit which ought to be carefully 
 . cultivated and sacredly protected. In order to raise the condition of 
 the Irish labourers and to secure them eflectively from the horrors of 
 starvation, a system of poor laws should be introduced, acknowledging 
 their claim on the property of the rich, and thus diffusing the same feel- 
 ings and the same interests throughout the whole nation. (Cheers.) 
 I have spoke to you on subjects both general and local ; general sn 
 , far as relates to the state of radicalism throughout the country, and 
 local so far as relates to the labouring men of Newcastle. My object 
 and wish is to establish a radical association in this town. (Cries of 
 Noy no!” followed hy Yes, yes!”) I think I hear ‘‘ No, no,” from 
 some quarter. I do not desire the gentleman saying “ no” to join it. 
 If the labouring men be determine to do so, I am sure they will not ask 
 tlie consent of the gentleman that uttered No. (Cheet's and laughter.) 
 My desire is to see the labouring men of Newcastle in the possession 
 of political powder. You a light to universal suffrage, and this 
 
 should be one of the tc:ms of your union. If you demand your rights 
 
19 
 
 now, and are unanimous in your demands, the Whigs will be unable > 
 longer to withhold them from you. (Cheers.) The formation of a radiral 
 association is most important at the present moment. You have ncrw 
 in your hands the political destinies of England — it is now absolutely 
 necessary for the labouring men of all the large towns to unite. 
 Their example will, I trust, be followed by every village and hamlet hi 
 the kingdom ; so that there will not be a labourer in England who is 
 not a member of a radical association. It is neccessaiy to carry the 
 principle even into private life. The word radical and labourer are sy- 
 noiiimous tenns. There is no labouring man tlmt is not a radical — he 
 cannot avoid being a radical ; let him therefore join himself at once to 
 a radical association and carry out the principles of radicalism. {Cheers.) 
 And here let me recommendyou to commence a system of exclusive deal- 
 ing. {A voice, ‘‘ Veiy bad.') If it be bad, why do the Whigs and To- 
 ries practice it ? is shocking ." — ‘‘ very had.') The more you are 
 
 opposed by the Whigs and Tories, the more general let the system be- 
 come. The gentleman says it is a bad system. I do not defend it. 
 {A voice, “ IVe depend on them for a living.") The gentleman says the 
 Whigs and Tories keep you. There he is wrong. It is you that keep 
 them. I repeat I am not here to defend the system, but I recommend 
 you to follow the example of the Whigs and Tories. What is good as 
 an instrument in their hands for the support of profligacy and de- 
 bauchery, ought to be an instrument in your hands to achieve your 
 political freedom. If the bow be a little too much bent on one side, it 
 may be prudent to bend it a little on the other. I hope the labouring 
 men throughout England will at once seize the instrument and wield it 
 with a powerful and effective arm. The labouring men at Sheffield 
 pledged me to do so, and I doubt not I shall soon witness them in ac- 
 tive operation. {Cries of^^It is shocking — it is shocking.') I care not 
 what one individual, or all the individuals in the kingdom think of the 
 matter, I hold to my opinion, and I would sooner meet a body of la- 
 bouring men, should I be certain of being tom to pieces by them, than 
 give in when I consider myself in the right. And do you suppose 
 that I shall be compelled to yield to the opinions of a few p^try 
 Whigs? {Cheers.) My whole life has been shocking to the Whigs. 
 Every thing opposed to the narrow minds of the Whigs and Tories is 
 shocking — I hope the shock will be electrical bye and bye. {Tremen- 
 dous cheering.) {A gentleman in the orchestra, W e dont ask you to 
 
 give up your opinion.") I dont ask the gentleman whether he asks 
 me 01' not, to give up ray opinion, I tell you I will not. I do not 
 know the gentleman that has interrupted me, but if he or any otlier 
 gentleman thinks proper to reprobate the doctrine, he is at liberty to do 
 so. I shall be mcst happy to listen to any of his observations on tliis 
 most shocking doctrine. {Cheers.) I came here to learn, as well as to 
 teach, and I shall be happy to learn either from Whigs or Tories. 
 What I deem shocking they may happen to approve and practice, as I 
 appear to do in matters which they deem shocking. I shall therefore 
 resume, my seat and give any gentleman an opportunity of expre^siiig 
 his sentiments on the subjects I have brought before you. 
 
20 
 
 • Mr Bell then sat down amidst the most tremendous and continued 
 cheering. 
 
 The Chairman tlien said, if there he any gentleman present, op- 
 posed to the principles of Mr Bell, we shall he glad to ^ve him an im- 
 partial hearing. For myself, I could sit all night and hear Mr Bell, 
 {Cries of shocking,'^) but my duty as chairman of this meeting dic- 
 tates to me the propriety of now listening with equal attention to the 
 observations of any gentleman that may entertain an opposite opinion. 
 
 Mr Bell : — I am here to answer any gentleman, be he Whig, Rad- 
 ical or Tory — ^^since we are about the thing let us have a jolly cross-ex- 
 amination. {Cheers.) 
 
 The Chairman : — Is there any Radical present? 
 
 Mr Fife, who had occupied dining the evening aback seat in the up- 
 per part of the orchestra, was at this moment observed, and attention 
 being drawn to that quarter, loud calls were instantly made for that 
 gentleman to address the meeting. Mr Fife made his way to the front 
 of the orchestra amidst the most tremendous cheering ; and, after a 
 brief notice of the circumstances under which he rose to address the 
 meeting, and an allusion in his usual style to the reporter of the Tory 
 newspaper, who, by the way, was not present, Mr Fife proceeded nearly 
 as follows : — 
 
 MR. FIFE’S SPEECH. 
 
 I cannot altogether agree with the opinions expressed by Mr Bell 
 in the very eloquent speech he as this night delivered. On the subject 
 of universal suffrage I perfectly agree with him in principle, but differ 
 rather as to the immediate step to be taken in order to bring about 
 such a state of things. In my opinion, Mr Doubleday expressed a 
 sentiment similar to that of Mr Bell, on a recent occasion, in Ridley 
 Court school-room. He said, “he felt convinced tlie government 
 w'ould never be pure but under a system of universal suffrage.” I do 
 not, however, think that by aiming at universal suffrage we are most 
 likely to obtain it. When I want to get in a wedge I contrive to in- 
 troduce the thin end of it first. Now, if we wish to procure universal 
 suffrage is it not better to begin by extending tlie suffrage gradually, 
 t(» obtain that most desirable object? The aristocracy are in utter igno- 
 rance of you, and from their ignorance proceeds their alarm, and, from 
 excessive alarm, they refuse to extend to you the political pri'sReges 
 you may desire. In my opinion every means sliould be used for re- 
 moving this ignorance, and if you find them willing to concede a part 
 of what you desire, to accept, as by such partial extension of the suffiage 
 you will be brought into contact ivith them, and they will of course 
 perceive that tlieir fears have been unfounded. In my opinion, the 
 course of legislation has been giudually improving for some years ; 
 and though some measures have been passed which are not altogotlier 
 so perfect as we might desire, yet, upon the whole, the measures of 
 govennnent have been move suited to the wants and wishes of the 
 people than tlxey have been heretofore, {Cheers.) I have nothing to 
 
21 
 
 say m defence of Mr Malthas — I am not a Malthusian. But I think 
 Mr Bell, in alluding to Mr O’Connell, the able and eloquent champion 
 of liis country’s freedom, who, although not a Malthusian, is opposed 
 to poor law’s, did not deal fairly with Mr O’Connell’s argument He 
 said, the absence of poor laws excited their generosity towards each 
 otlier, and not that distiess w’as the cause of that generosity. Mr 
 O’Connell’s jiremise was not that distress created this generosity of 
 feeling but the absence of distress. In his opinion, the poor have a 
 right to a maintenance in the land in which they li%"e, and this right 
 is so secured and defended that no force or fraud can deprive them of 
 it. The Poor Law Amendment Bill does not destroy this right, though 
 it might have been as w’ell had it recognized it more clearly. We have 
 not had sufficient experience of the Poor Law Amendment Bill to jus- 
 tify us in condemning it altogether. The absence of a partial good is 
 not a sufficient cause for condemning it, and the labouring men least 
 of all ought to do so. {Partial clieering.) Some distinction ought, I 
 think, to be dra^vn between the Grey and Melbourne administration, 
 especially when w^e consider the Coercian Bill w’as the act of the for- 
 tner. The Irish Appropiiation Bill too, a measure of the present go- 
 vernment, ought to point out an essential distinction bet%veen the two. 
 Mr O’Connell supported the latter, but he was opposed to the former. 
 I, as a Radical, have a right to judge of the actions of both adminis- 
 trations ; and if I opposed the former I think it .my duty now to sup- 
 I>ort the latter. {Partial cheering.) With regard to the Dorchester 
 labourers, I think the sole intention of the legislature, in transporting 
 these individuals, w^as to uphold the supremacy of the law. Had a 
 siifficient number of Radicals been in the House of Commons W'hen 
 tlieir case w’as brought forwai-d they would not have suffered as they 
 have done. If the Whigs were in the circumstances which Mr Bell 
 has described, I can only say, Shame on the Whigs. It was a most 
 arbitrary stretch of power, and the men ought not to have been sent out 
 of the country, as the supremacy of the laws could have been maintained 
 w’ithout carrying the thing to such an extreme as they did. Mr Bell 
 has endeavoured to assign motives to the originators of the Poor Law 
 Amendment Bill, I do not stand here to defend that bill ; but I think 
 Mr Bell has caiTied his condemnation rather too far, when he con- 
 demns all the supporters of Whigs throughout the country. {Strang 
 signs of disapprobation.) I contend the reasoning of Mr Bell went to 
 shew that the Whigs supported and carried the Poor Law Amendment 
 Bill in oi-der to reduce the rate of wages, and then he recommends you to 
 adopt a system of exclusive dealing in order to raise the rate of wages. 
 (“ Wo, no from Mr Bell.) I should like to hear Mr Bell prove tliat 
 the evils which he deprecates, under the new system, were not in exis- 
 tence under the old system. {Partial cheering.) As to Lord Bieughaia 
 — I confe 5S I never understood Lord Brougham — even at the Queen’s 
 trial, and ever since that period, he has been completely beyond my 
 comprehension. 
 
22 
 
 A gentleman, in the body of the hall, having reqvcaied Mr Fife to 
 notice the principle of excluswe dealing recommended by Mr Bell, Mr 
 Fife proceeded to notice that subject as follows : — 
 
 I am glad the subject of exclusive dealing has been mentioned. 
 Some of you were accused of practicing it at the late election. It was, 
 however, a Tory lie. — The accusation was completely unfounded. If 
 a domestic had ashed me how he was to vote, I should not have been 
 the pei*son to have exercised the slightest degree of compulsory inflic- 
 tion — I would have left him to exercise hisown judgment in the case. The 
 same argument applies to exclusive dealing. I think Mr Bell '5\all 
 admit, that we ought to hesitate before we cany into operation a system 
 more calculated to enslave and injure than to liberate and benefit the 
 people. 1 think the thing shocking in principle, and I would not like 
 myself to see it earned into execution. The least we can do in the 
 present shite of political parties, is to concede a little of our owm views ; 
 and by making common cause with those men who are anxious to 
 ameliorate the institutions of the country, though they do not exactly 
 go to so great a length as we do, to endeavour gradually to bring oiur 
 own principles into operation by advancing toward.s that point even 
 though it be with tardy steps, {cheers.) I think, adopting a system of 
 exclusive dealing would not promote that object so properly as by taking 
 the method I have suggested! I'he Whigs are bad but the Tories are 
 worse. I, for my pai’t, would shake hands with the man who would 
 come nearest to my views, and I would support him, whether Whig or 
 Tory, if he agreed to give the most If the Whigs agree to give 
 you the Ballot, support them. If they agree to give you even House- 
 hold Suffrage, support them. Whoever they be that would give you 
 most political power, it is the duty of the people to support them. {Par- 
 tial^ qheering.) I differ entirely from Mr Bell, when he says, universal 
 suffrage or nothing. In my opinion, yeai-s and years may pass avray 
 before the suffrage will be universally extended — we must get house- 
 hold suffrage first If we can get household suffrage in three years 
 we may get universal suffrage in three more, but if we fix on universal 
 suffrage or nothing, thirty years may elapse and we shall not obtain it. 
 In conclusion, I would recommend you not hastily to adopt a line of 
 conduct entirely new to you. Time will produce its changes ; and if 
 you embrace every opportunity of legally and peacefully promoting 
 those views which you, as Radicals, entertain, the day cannot be far 
 distant that will dawn on your enjoyment of all the political powers 
 which, as members of civil society, you ought possess, {cheering.) 
 The remarks I have made have been in perfect good humour, and 
 without the slightest intention of leading to any angry discussion. — 
 {continued cheering.) 
 
23 
 
 MR. BELL’S REPLY. 
 
 My Bell rose to reply to the observations of Mr Fife, and spoke nearly 
 as follows : — 
 
 Mr Chairman and men of Newca,stle — The gentleman that last ad- 
 dressed you has said, he thinks the Whigs are anxious to carry into 
 operation just measures of reform, whereas I think quite the reverse. I 
 think they are opposed to every measure of Radical reform, and that 
 their gi-eat aim is to do as little in that way as possible, {cheers) 
 The gentleman has told you, it was liis plan when he wanted to intro- 
 duce a wedge to contrive to get the thin edge of it in first — «o- is it my 
 plan — but I say, the Whigs are properly the thin end of the wedge — 
 What have we been hammering at for the last six years but to drive 
 the w'edge up to the shoulder } We have laboured in vain if we have 
 not yet succeeded in introducing the end of it. {Mr Fife, I meant a 
 wed'fe of the same stuff) I am aware the Whigs are not of the same 
 stufi* as the Radicals — the one is but rough metal, the other is tem^ 
 pered steel ; but if a wedge of the same stufi* must be introduced, it is 
 time we had the Wliigs out, as they have already had much too long a 
 trial, {cheers) The gentleman says, it will never do to confound 
 the Grey and Melbourne administration. What do the membeis of 
 the Melbourne party tliemselves say ? Do they not claim credit firr 
 all the acts of the Grey administration? They claim credit for 
 the Reform Bill — The opening of the India Trade, and many other 
 acts. — Nay more, at a recent meeting in London, Mr Litton Bulwersaid 
 that, in reference to certain measures, they were actually bound by the 
 Grey administration, and acted on the plans they had -’prepared. If the 
 Melbourne claim the merit of tlie Grey administration, ought they not, 
 in common justice, to be charged also with the demerits ? But ai*e the 
 Whigs dififerent now from what they were in 1831 and 1832? I can 
 scarcely think they are — I am sure that they are not. {Loud cheeriny) 
 Then again, the gentleman says, they are afraid of the labouring classes 
 of tlie country, and this operates in deterring them from granting 
 you those political privileges which you are entitled to. They are 
 afraid of you ! Were they afraid of you at the period alluded to, when, 
 in every district throughout the kingdom, they called on you to rise in 
 bodies and carry them into ofiice ? — They were not afraid of you when 
 assembled in support of their mercenary purposes but they are terror- 
 stricken when you assemble to urge and support your own claims. — 
 They would keep you down now under tlie pretext of being afraid of 
 you. {cheers) Mr Fife does not altogether approve of my recommenda- 
 tions of a system of exclusive dealing. Now it is all very well to re- 
 probate^ a thing in itself evil, but is it not as well to reprobate it by 
 whatever party it may be used^? 'The Whigs are loud in reprobating this 
 shocking doctrine as tliey please to call it But the brother of Lord 
 Brougliam recommended the Welch electors to button their pockets 
 whenever tliey saw the tax-gatlierer, and refuse those supplies, without 
 which governments would soon perish. And did the Wliigs reprobate 
 
that ? Earl Fitz/William recommended the people, during the reform 
 agitation, to refuse to pay taxes altogether till the hill v.-as parsed.— 
 Did the Whigs reprobate that ? Oh, no ! 'J'hey only reprobate the 
 practice when it is turned against themselres. (cheers,) Tlie argu- 
 ment Mr life has put forth, toucliing the Dorchester labourers is most 
 singular. One would think ^^hat our laws were as unbending as were 
 the laws of the Medes and Persians— that they never could ibe revoked. 
 It was hut a paltry excuse to say, the majesty ot the law needed to be 
 maintained. The Whigs themselves, who sanctioned and permitted 
 this violation of all human justice, merely because it happened to be ac- 
 cording to law, deserve, every one of them to be extirpated, (ch-eers,) 
 The struggle we, however, had wdth the Whigs, in order to procure the 
 reauction of the stamp duty, at once sets them forth as the enemies of 
 all reform. In this struggle we acted only on the princit^les laid down 
 by the Whigs themselves. Mr Brougham, who promulgated the plan 
 on \vhich we acted, was made a master in chancery : I recommended 
 the people to persevere in refusing the payment of the stamp tax, and 
 . myselt refused it, and I was consigned to a dungeon. When, on mv 
 trial, I asked for my Lord Milton — for Mr Brougham — for Earl Fitz- 
 wdlliara — ^expecting, of com'se, that they would be my companions in 
 gaol— behold they were at large, Tliey were allowed to disseminate 
 their principles when it suited the Whig government, and I, for dis- 
 seminating them when it did not suit them, was incarcerated. This is 
 Whig, justice, (cheers.) I do not mean to advocate the principle of 
 exclusive dealing, because I do think it bad ; but then if the Whigs 
 use it against you it is only fair that you should use it against them — 
 if fhey employ it, in order to deprive you of political "power, it is only 
 fmivthat yx)u should employ it in order to obtain political power. I 
 to adopt the W^hig plan of warfare, ^nd to carry 
 it on yigourously. (Tremendous cheering^ 
 
 , Mr Bell then went on to’ shew that the effect of the Poor Law 
 Amendment Bill would be, as he stated, to reduce tlie average rate of 
 wages throughout the country, and veiy mucli to diniiuish the comforts 
 and happine^ of the labouring classes ; contending that a system of 
 l)oor laws for Ireland was a measure which ought at once to be adopted 
 iu that CQUutiy^, as tlie best means of disseminating peace and improv- 
 ing the coil ditipn of the Iiish population. 
 
 Mr Bell, in conclusion, said: — Now is the time for the labouring 
 classes to unite,, in order to achieve their freedom. The moment is 
 auspicious, Oimt this opportunity and years of darkness and sanguin- 
 ary warfai'e may succeed. Form Radical Associations — concentrate all 
 your forces, and endeavour silently and safely to bring into operation 
 those great principles of freedom which have been thrown aside by the 
 Whigs. Unite aud the victoiyis yours! 
 
 Tlie learned gentleman aud" his friends tlien retired amidst the most 
 tremendous cheering. 
 
 FINIS. 
 
 TJ'rn. Jteni^ Printer, 99, Side, Nerceastk.