1 10 6 https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/737b389fcaaa368dae059353225f13ed.pdf?Expires=1781740800&Signature=LU-3aEEhFqbvfySu7Kznk-pToZgPbiPQKgNzQJKQTjoeamtob6U0MIyI4Io95UuIgYZIEyu7%7E53NPEILFj7xS0UaU5qPnm44nAyiotLkaRmUsQSgcvQuRq9IG6zodU%7EH3HGWUJBbZCe7MXz80yaHV9WaDytZKQDgq1jSSxjsDxcq82QxNyC1EQB94F062lZ-UU6mR2epUMG1t-O1buhIcvYt7QwFUHgJgYaQ1m9WYjN%7Epf1U%7EsFz942mo4pC8RVPrWGrxIEyy87aWBR67fkJnArscuK8wg3sOt22zM-14r-MiMKvSHmH%7EJZzyQM0zNEU8gW3BqnUm1rS4sl6YDM%7E2w__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 7b507b9896ba175845e7568554056c5b PDF Text Text THE Liberal Situation: NECESSITY FOR A Qualified Franchise A LETTER TO JOSEPH COWEN, Jun. By G. J. Holyoake. No MEASURE [OF REFORM] CAN BE CONSIDERED WORTHY OF ACCEPTANCE, UNLESS IT AFFORDS A REASONABLE PROSPECT OF AFFECTING A SETTLEMENT OF THE •QUESTION. Parliamentary Government, by Earl Grey. [REPRINTED FROM THE “NEWCASTLE WEEKLY CHRONICLE.”] �■ V Hf* ■ I' > i �"The Liberal Situation. -------- 0-------TO JOSEPH COWEN, Jun., STELLA HOUSE, BLAYDON-ON-TYNE. My Dear Sir,—I address this letter to you, because since the days of Thomas Attwood (if you will permit me to say so) no English gentleman (great as have been the services of many) has taken the same personal, practical, and persevering interest in the Political elevation of the people at home and abroad, as yourself. Representatives of the Northern Reform Union, under your Presidency, visited the towns, villages, and hamlets in the two counties of Northumberland and Durham, and explained to the people the duty devolving upon them, of claiming, and never ceasing to claim, “universal” suffrage; and incul­ cating the sound doctrine of Major Cartwright—“that to be free is to be governed by laws to which we have our­ selves assented, either in person or by representatives for whose election we have actually voted; that all not having a right of suffrage are slaves, and that a vast majority of the people of Great Britain are slaves.” This is the true doc­ trine of the franchise question, and there will be no further reform until the working classes feel this and act upon it. If the working class are slaves through ignorance, let it be corrected—if slaves through coercion, let it be resented —if slaves through apathy, let it be terminated by those who know better, and who should inspire the people with self-respect. Indifference to political rights is indifference to public duty, and is an infamy equally in those who betray this indifference and in those who connive at it. The reform question is again being re­ opened. Manchester is trying to do something and Brad­ ford more. But the agitation has neither the compass nor as yet the courage in it necessary for great success. No Parliamentary party brings up the people to the front. Re­ formers act as though they were scared, and the claims of a twelfth part of the unenfranchised are all that any leader �4 The Liberal Situation. has ventured to press upon the notice of Parliament Thia ^ * shows a dangerous timidity. An honorary member of the Northern Reform Union, I have also had the satisfaction to represent it at several Conferences, may I therefore call attention to the desirability and possibility of realising our old Cartwright doctrine which gave to this Union all its value ? Recently, in the columns of the Times, Mr. Buxton, M.P., stated the “Liberal Dilemma.” There is a “dilemma,” and the way out of it is to look the Liberal situation plainly in the face. Soon after the Reform Bill of 1832 was passed, there appear­ ed on the walls of Birmingham a placard, put out by Cobbett, the purport of which was that the Reform Bill merely gave power to those who could help themselves, and still ex­ cluded the mass who could not. He told us that the word REFORM meant no more to the people than any other six letters. The Bill would give them some new masters, but any actual power had still to be won. I remember well the consternation and disgust with which the working class members of the Birmingham Political Union, of which I was one, read Cobbett’s placard. We hated him as the poor Brahmins did the European philosopher when he handed them a microscope, with which to see the insects in their food; but every year since the working class have seen, with the clearness of dismay, the truth of what Cob­ bett said. Earl Russell and Mr. Bright are the best regarded authors of Reform Bills. Neither has proposed other than to tread in the political footsteps of Thomas Attwood. I say nothing against Mr. Bright’s Bill—I rather serve it by describing it as giving us 200,000 new masters—a democratic advantage, yet affording protection only to those who have some means, and leaving politically defence­ less those who have none. The speakers at the late Brad­ ford meeting —Mr. Stansfeld, Sir F. Crossley, Mr. Baines, and Mr. Forster—pleaded for no more (Mr. Stansfeld alone gave advice which would secure more) than the partial en­ franchisement plan—a policy which palters with the popular hope—which fears to look the right in the face— which offers the least measure that can be called an im­ provement—settles nothing, and perpetuates the old dis­ appointment. Reformers on principle, who hold that the whole people are entitled to a share of control over what­ ever affects the national interest or English renown, would acquiesce even in a partial measure, though it should add but a single voter in a century. But about these partial �The Liberal Situation. 5 plans, which contemplate to admit the few and exclude the many, there need be no alarm on the part of Tories or Whigs, and there will never be any enthusiasm on the part of the people. The character of the working class has changed since this Reform question was agitated in 1830. The demand for the suffrage now is not alone a question of grievance, it is also one of degradation. The character of English statesmanship, the magnitude of our commerce, the wealth of our manufactures, the renown of our arms, are matters 'understood now by the common people, The Press carries information into every hut and workshop in the land; and the labourer and the artisan find themselves well used instruments without political recognition—they are no longer to be imposed upon by specious representations; they find themselves virtually a slave class with a longer chain than is commonly permitted, but the end made fast and kept secure nevertheless. They are patted with praise by noble lords and condescending gentlemen at Mechanics’ Institution soirees, and elsewhere, but they are never— trusted. When driven abroad to seek for bread, the English working man finds himself lowered in the eyes of the two nations—France and America—before whom he inherits the wish to stand with pride. It is nothing to tell him that in both these nations the franchise is abused®-were that true. He is a slave who has no privilege to abuse. The man who like the French elector has had freedom and voted it away, has a higher place than he who never even had that chance. The English workman is contumeliously kept in political inferiority as being something less in the eyes of Parliament than a Frenchman or an American. No English pride is taught to him, no sentiment of nationality is appealed to, no instinct of his race is trusted. He stands degraded abroad who is allowed no responsibility at home. There may be no howling at this exclusion, no riots, no sedition, but there ought to be an incurable resentment diffuse itself, like that which appeared for the first time when Lord Palmerston lately visited Bradford. As the Indian proverb says—even in that submissive land of the sun—“the dart of contempt will pierce even through the shell of the tortoise. ” I adhere to Major Cartwright’s dictum, a non-elector is a slave, and I hate to see a slave beside me. If he is a slave by political exclusion and does not resent it— if he is a slave by consent and does not feel degraded I equally de­ spise him. And, as intelligence spreads, this feeling will spread, and the non-elector will be an object of pity or �6 The Liberal Situation. contempt—of pity if he does not know his duty—of con­ tempt if he does know it, and does not wish to discharge it. The author of a warning pamphlet entitled “Look be­ fore you Leap,” and who is a master in the art of stating Conservative principles, reminds the working classes ‘ ‘ that their very numbers secure them respect and attention from the conscience as well as the benevolence of the classes above them.” This is the new fraternal doctrine which the Tories have taught, the Whigs have caught, and the Radicals are learning. It treats the non-electors like chil­ dren, who, so long as they stand on their good behaviour, may expect to have something done for them. The middle class would be despised if they were to submit to political inferiority and trust to the “conscience and benevolence” of the aristocracy fortheir welfare, and the non-electors will de­ serve to be despised if they continue to submit to it. These new Political Paternalists say to the people—“ You are wellfed, you have comfortable homes, you have plenty of work, you have sufficient wages, you could not do better for yourselves.” Why, if this were all true, it is no more than the farmer might say to his pig, or the gentleman to his horse, or the planter to his slave. Our new Paternalists, whose self-complacency is limitless, assure the non-electors that they are very well represented by the present very nice, liberal, considerate, good-natured, studious, patient, condescending gentlemen, lawyers, bankers, colonels, country ’squires, and noble lords who bestow upon the country the inestimable benefit of sitting in Parliament. There is one short, not to say contemptuous answer to all this. Every one knows that the middle class who cla­ moured for the Reform Bill in 1832 until they got it, were just as well represented by the Boroughmongers of that day as the working classes are by the Parliament of this day. Why were not the middle classes satisfied then ? They had quite as good “ indirect.' representation as middle class members afford the unenfranchised people now, besides that valuable hold which they had upon the “ conscience and benevolence of the classes above them.” What were the middle class of 1832 better than the work­ ing class of 1865 ? Instead of being better, they were inferior. They were more ignorant, more vulgar, more noisy, and ten times more seditious. But they had one virtue, now growing scarce in England—for which they are to be honoured; and that was, they were too manly and too proud to be represented on sufferance. They had too much sense to be imposed upon, and too much spirit to submit to the irritating and humiliating device of indirect �The Liberal Situation. 7 representation. Their cry was “we are as much men as any other class and. we claim and intend to be treated as Equals. "We are not going to be protected as an act of political condescension. We can, and will do that busi­ ness for ourselves. We want no patronage. We, as well as others, pay for the State, we do our share of fighting for the State, and we will have our share in controlling it.” This was the right thing to say, and the right tone to take —and it told. These middle class men got what they wanted, they have had their turn served, and they have served themselves well. They have got power, wealth, and university education for their sons, who are turning out promising students of literary and Parliamentary con. temptuousness. They turn now upon the people, and treat the unenfranchised with the same impertinent patronage which their fathers, a generation ago, so scornfully and so honourably rejected when they were subjected to it. There needs now no seditious sug­ gestion, no revolutionary action ; it only needs that the people be taught to imitate their new “ superiors.” Let the working class show as much pluck, as much sense, and as much resolution as the middle have done, and they may become as influential and as much respected by those who rule, as the middle class now are. It is strange to have to own that the chief politician who has seriously proposed to obviate the difficulty and dis­ credit of partial representation, is an Earh Earl Grey’s plan, so far as relates to the establishment of Guilds, enabling the working classes to elect a certain number of their own representatives, would undoubtedly meet a defined want. The people seek no absolute transfer of power to them­ selves ; they merely ask for such share as shall enable them to send to the House of Commons some representa­ tives of their own feelings, interests, and ideas. There are now many gentlemen in Parliament who really sympathise with the people, and are perhaps wiser, abler representa­ tives of the working classes than they would be able to elect for themselves. But this does not meet the case. These members are not the servants of the people. There is not a single member in the House who owes his seat to work­ ing class electors, and his vote and influence are—whatever he may wish—at the command of those who sent him there. A gentleman who, instead of engaging servants, should con­ descend, or be under the necessity of accepting volunteers, could give them no orders, exact no obedience, and must put up with their absence when he most needed them. Such is the nature of that “indirect” representation which �8 The Liberal Situation. the working class seek to supersede now, as the middle class superseded it in 1832. Let any one watch what takes place when the sitting member grants a political interview. When an M.P. receives a deputation of electors they meet as equals. The electors comport themselves as men having a right to an audience. When non-electors go up they are received as an act of condescension, or if received with frank respect, they retire with demonstrations of gratitude which mark the measure of their political in­ feriority. Should Earl Grey’s plan prevail, there would be an end of this humiliation, and his plan of election would disturb no balance of interests in any borough nor would its results monopolise any power nor swamp the educated classes of the nation. Mr. Buxton, M.P., brings forward a plan in accordance with Mr. Mill’s suggestion of enfranchising the working class, and guarding against their preponderance by giving a plurality of votes to other classes. * There is no valid ob­ jection to this plan. It already works well in every com­ bination in which property is at stake. It is perhaps less easy of adoption than Lord Grey’s plan, but has the equal merit of covering the entire ground of political disability. Its sole difficulty lies in the adjustment of votes. At pre­ sent the polling result in any borough is pretty nearly a known quantity. Every elector is ticketed and docketed ; his quality and price are known to the local parliamentary agents. Mr. Buxton’s plan might disturb these hopeful calculations. These electoral astrologers who make up our Parliamentary almanac will make frantic resistance to having their stars displaced, and their political nativities complicated. Self respect can never be a national characteristic with­ out national enfranchisement. Viewed in this light the plans of Lord Grey and Mr. Buxton are not without merit compared with the “ partial enfranchisement” advocated at the Bradford meeting. No partial enfranchisement can produce direct political improvement unless large enough to effect a substantial transfer of power, and this the ex­ perience of the last thirty years shows cannot be effected without menacing a revolution. There is no political com­ bination among the people able to do this, and politicians know this very well, yet treat with derision both Lord Grey’s and Mr. Buxton’s plans. Lord Grey’s does not suit * Vide Thoughts on Parliamentary Reform. Mill. By John Stuart �1 he Liberal Situation. g them ; it would create a class distinction, although we have notoriously nothing but class distinctions in the country. We have more castes in England than in India, and more sharply and inexorably defined. The politicians who raise the new cry against class distinction are they who acquiesce in enfranchising only a limited portion of the people, thus perpetuating, indefinitely, the bitterest, hatefulest, and most degrading of all class distinctions—that of a small class with votes and a vast class without. It is only your practical politician who shudders at a nominal distinction and keeps up a real one. Nor does Mr. Buxton’s plan suit them. Against this they revive a very old objection, viz.^ that it is better to have no vote than a proportional one— which all the thinking Chartists have long had the good sense to abandon. Every sensible mechanic knows that it is better to have one-third or one-fifth of the voting power of your neighbour than to have none at alL Let us hope that the Reform Company (Limited) who advocate partial enfranchisement and object to a proportional vote, will find that the working classes are no longer in love with the in­ sane dignity of utter impotence, or do not know the nature of that affected unity which awards the greater part of them entire and contemptuous seclusion. It is not an insult to offer a man a portion of power when the offer of it comes from members of a class who with#' hold all. But if the offer of a part be an insult, it is amuch greater insult to offer none: and those who advise the working man to reject as an insult the offer of a part, should tell him, and encourage him, support him, and de­ fend him, in treating as an insult his entire exclusion. If they will do this, I could admire both their policy and their consistency. But the advisers who say reject a part of a vote actually go to Parliament to ask only for a par­ tial admission of the people to power, and profess them­ selves willing to accept a mere instalment of the entire claim, which will postpone again for 30 years longer (for that is the English duration of a political makeshift) the consideration of a settlement. Is not the obj ection to graduatedvotes made in ignorance of the principles of Democracy? “The power which the suffrage gives,” as Mr. Mill observes, “is W over the elector himself alone ; it is power over others also. Now it can in no sort be admitted that all persons have an equal claim to power over others. There is no such thing in morals as a right to power over others, and the electoral suffrage is that power.” This power, therefore, when given to all must be graduated. He is not a democrat, but �IO The Liberal Situation. an anarchist, who insists that the vote of the most ignorant shall count for as much as that of the most highly educa­ ted class in the community. Mr. Mill’s plan of graduated votes would be regulated by a principle of plain reason and political fairness, and those who object to the plan evidently forget that we have al­ ways had it in operation in a state of pernicious inequality. An elector of Thetford has thirty-two times the power of voting of an elector in Newcastle-upon-Tyne, and is equal to 64 electors in Birmingham. An elector of Portarlington has 289 votes more than an elector of the Tower Hamlets. * Earl Russell, therefore, who regards a plurality of votes as an insult, must own that we have the “ insult” already in its offensive form, and have always had it as a u constitutional” thing. It is surely not an act of legislatorial wisdom to condemn as an alien proposal a plan for rationalising an ancient arrangement. Taken as a rider to a Reform Bill, which amended the distribution of seats (a point never to be lost sight of) and increased the number of electors, one of Earl Grey’s pro­ posals furnishes another solution of the Reform question. It is feasible to create an Electoral Guild, and register all the unenfranchised having a fixed residence and permit them to elect a limited number of members. The Spectator, in 1861, said that “forty members such as the working class would elect, would be a great deal less obnoxious than forty members nominated by Archbishop Cullen.”* ) Why could not a Guild of Supplementary Electors be an addition to the next Reform Bill ? Suppose the suffrage to be fixed at £6; it might be provided that whenever a guild elector shall become an occupier of a £6 house, that he be forthwith withdrawn and included in the National Constituency, and so on with each until in course of years the Supplementary constituency be extinguished. Suoh a plan would avoid the discredit of leaving five mil­ lions of the working classes entirely unrepresented; it * Vide the Imperial Poll Book 1832-1864, by Jas. Acland. t Indeed the “Spectator” of Nov. 23, 1861, remarked in the same article that “ It has been said that it is impossible to secure a suffrage which would give the numerical majority their fair share of power while leaving theirs to the cultivated minority, but if the working men accepted the compromise, it might be secured to-morrow.” I know not on what authority the “ Spec­ tator” made the statement I had, however, already, at the re­ quest of an eminent practical politician, personally ascertained of the principal political leaders of working men of England and Scotland that their acquiescence could be counted upon, the only doubt expressed being whether Parliament could be relied upon for anything. I communioated this result to the “Spectator” in 1861, subsequent to its statement appearing. �The Liberal Situation, II would in the meantime provide for the direct representation of Industry; it would enable Labour to be heard in its own name in the House of Commons, and avoid what the governing classes fear and nobody desires—a transfer of power from the intelligent minority to the numerical many. Democracy is, we know, in the eyes of the governing class, a Frankenstein kind of product. They think it a possible monster, wilful, irresistible, with a ravaging in­ tellect, and devoid of all sense of moral or political respon­ sibility, and they fear to breathe into it the breath of life. It is no answer to them to say they are wrong, that their fears are futile, that they ignore the established habits, good sense, and almost perilous docility of the English people. These fears are strong upon the governing classes. Like cattle who smell blood on the threshhold of the slaughter-house, those who have the upper hand have morbid noses, and smell “ Sheffield outrages” and ^Ameri­ can Democracy” in every Reform Bill, and you cannot force them under the axe of the Franchise. This is how they regard it, and it is folly to ignore the fact and not to act on its reality. It is of n6 use to tell them that “ on one side of the Alps Democracy consecrates Despotism, on the other it inaugurates Liberty,” and that in England it would, with the working class as it has done with the middle class—consolidate order. They do not believe it, and the expense of an agitation which shall make them believe it, is so costly and uncertain that every practical politician has an interest in giving heed to plans that might meet the difficulty, without disappointing the people, and enable Time, ever a better converter than force, to change their opinion. In justice to the governing class, who to their honour manifest a far fairer disposition now than in former years, it must be owned that “ nearly the whole educated class is united in uncompromising hostility to a purely democratic suffrage—not so much because it would make the most numerous class, the strongest power; that many of the educated classes would think only just. It is because it would make them the sole power : because in every consti­ tuency the votes of that class would swamp, and politically annihilate all other members of the community taken * together. ” The real “Dilemma,” indeed, is that all Radical orators reason in favour of universal suffrage, with­ out arming themselves with any plan which meets this forMr. Mills’Review of Mr. Hare’s plan. “Fraser’s Magazine.’ �12 The Liberal Situation. midable objection. After Mr. Gladstone’s late intrepid and conscientious speech, one would think that he might find one. Were it agreeable to the will, it is quite possible to the wisdom of Parliament to devise and annex to any Bill of Reform a plan which will enfranchise all honest men with­ out thus swamping the votes or influence of gentlemen ; which no Englishman wishes to neutralise or diminish. Whoever of political influence may advocate a plan of this description may count upon the enthusiasm of the nation ; Bince no workman could, without baseness, rejoice in a par­ tial enfranchisement which included himself, while it left his less fortunate brethren to renew the old struggle, brand­ ed by the old exclusion. This would be to manifest that spirit of politics without conscience which the Orleanisis of France displayed when they had placed Louis Phillippe on the throne, and the middle classes of England since they won the Reform Bill There may be no reason to refuse even a partial enfranchisement, but it would be as indecent in the working classes to exult in it as it would be in ten men who were taken from a wreck by choice of the captain, and who should throw up their caps in the face of all those left to their fate. If it can appear that the greatest mass of reformers can he united in favour of the partial plan, and no other, it will be the duty of all to support that with such energy as can be commanded. The political experience of the last thirty years has shown that reformers should persist in saying what they want—maintain what is right—and unite for what they can get. For myself, I do not write as an obstructionist: while I plead for what I believe to be pos­ sible and know to be necessary, I would work for whatever may diminish the discredit of our present representation. I belong to that class of Reformers who hold it to be dis­ creditable to exist without rights, and infamous to rest under their refusal. It can never be too often repeated that nob to seek enfranchisement is not to deserve it. I never look without contempt on any who submit to political exclusion; I never see without resent­ ment those who advise or excuse, or connive or countenance it. The franchise is more than a right—it is the means of discharging a public duty. And those who stand in the way of discharging that duty degrade me, and I resent the act, however veiled or explained—justified it never can be. Many generous politicians represented at the Bradford platform, desire the enfranchisement of the whole people. I know that the limited measure they deem practicably is forced upon them by the enemies of Reform. Let, how­ �The Liberal Situation. 13 ever, the people who shall accept such measure, do so with their eyes open—and let it be seen that their eyes are open. Let those who accept it, do so as a pledge to use their power on behalf of their countrymen excluded ; and then their acquiescence in the measure will have consistency, if not honour, in it. The opponents of Reform exult in the apathy of the people. The exultation is as indecent as the existence of the apathy is a reproach. There are six millions of adult men swarming our streets and workshops, lanes and alleys, towns and villages, peopling our mines and lining our shores—hard­ working, patient, and honest, whose toil goes to swell our wealth, and who are content to have no voice in expending the taxes they raise, or in controlling those wars in which their blood is spilt; who are satisfied to be counted as the “swinish multitude,” whose interest no member of Parlia­ ment is elected to consult, whose opinions no statesman regards, whose voices at a public meeting no one counts, whose expression of opinion is sneered at as so much im­ potent, popular, ignorant clamour; a people whom, the governing class “Holds when its pride has spent its haughty force As something better than- its dog, a little dearer than its horse.” It is a national humiliation when there exists thus a vast out-lying population without active unrest under this state of things. The unenfranchised classes owe to Mr. Bright an infinite debt of gratitude, whose single voice, when all others were silent, has been heard in the ignominious years that have passed, urging their rights and recalling them to self-respect. If Mr. Bright counsels that on the whole the best thing now is to unite in favour of the partial enfran­ chisement programme, his decision ought to be accepted as final, for he alone has earned the right to determine the policy of the Reform party. It shows in a very striking manner the ascendancy of aristocratic and conservative influence in England, that the governing classes have contrived not only to beat back, but to break down the reform spirit—that after the lapse of 30 years, Reformers come up asking for a meaner and shabbier bill than they were able to carry 30 years ago, for none of the Bills of late years introduced will produce anything like the change which the old Reform Bill effected, ineffi­ cient as it was. Indeed the value of the proposed reform bill of Mr. Baines is so small that no one can feel more than a theoretical enthusiasm about it. Every measure of �14 The Liberal Situation. reform introduced or contemplated takes the poor-rate as a basis for the franchise. Lord John’s bill did this—Mr. Baines’ does it. The Newcastle Chronicle has shown that the number of houses compounded for by landlords of the annual value of £6, £7, £8, £9, and £10 respectively, amount altogether to 8,000 houses in the four boroughs of Gateshead, South Shields, Sunderland, and Newcastle-upon-Tyne. Mr. Baines’ Franchise Bill would not give a vote to any one of them. The compound­ ing system has probably disfranchised more people than any Reform Bill, at present talked of, proposes to add to the electoral constituency. From a note to the returns published by Government it appears that in Birmingham alone there are upwards of 7,000 male occupiers of £10 houses who compound with their landlords for their rates, and who prefer losing their votes to becoming personally liable to such rates. One is compelled to admit, with the Economist, that the question of Reform is treated generally in a commonplace spirit, which excites surprise and bodes no good. Every scheme, it appears, is to be derided except those that run in old ruts. This was the old Chartist error, and cost us dearly. Reformers, if this policy continues, will be the prey of infinite delays and disappointments. It is quite time that political questions in England were adjusted by political reason, rather than by the exigence of neces­ sity and party strife. If no such supplementary plan of Reform as that of Earl Grey’s guilds, or Mr. Buxton’s proportional Voting, should be adopted, why could there not be added to Mr. Baines’ Bill an Intelligence Franchise, as an addition to the utmost extension of the suffrage he can obtain ? Then one satisfactory termination of the question would be made. Politicians of all parties admit that the franchise may be trusted to the intelligent. Let them decide what knowledge a man ought to have to enable him to vote, and if he does not acquire it his exclusion will be his discredit and not the State’s. Practical mastery of some sound popular book on Political Economy and one on Constitutional History would secure the requisite intelli­ gence. Government school examiners might attend at me­ chanics’ institutions (which would'then have some vitality, interest, and use in them), and give certificates of electoral fitness, the holders of which should be entitled io be placed on the list of electors. * * A sketch of the machinery existing, and probable results of a plan of this description, appeared in letters addressed to �The Liberal Situation. 15 This species of franchise would have dignity in it, it would make education a political necessity, and in another genera­ tion would enfranchise a large proportion of the people, and ultimately transmute the English working class into the noblest electoral constituency in the world. Such a plan, not as a substitute for any contemplated present extension of the suffrage, but as an addition to it—providing for a continual increase of the electoral body in proportion to the ascertained intelligence of the unenfranchised—would satisfy the best friends of the people. * In pleading for an Intelligence Franchise, I do it for the sake of the progress it ensures. I am well aware, and so are those who exclaim against the want of Intelligence in the people, that Ignorance never has been in this country a political disqualification. England has always been largely governed by privilege and ignorance. If an Intelligence Franchise were to be universally enforced in England, we should disfranchise more than half our pre­ sent electors, and many magistrates: and perhaps some members of Parliament would fall under the rule. No one can deny the suffrage on the ground that an elector might make a fool of himself. > The right of making a fool of himself is a sacred thing in this country—and a privilege of which many avail themselves. Indeed, if such a right was disputed, it would be defended by a greater number of persons interested than any other right that could be threatened. Lord John Russell and the “Daily News,” reprinted under the title of the “ Workman and the Suffrage,” 1858. The Council of the Northern Reform Union afterwards adopted a memorial to Lord Stanley, as one of those statesmen reputed to treat politics as the science of public justice, praying his attention to this subject. * Nothing could be more remarkable or conclusive than the fol­ lowing remarks from a pamphlet which, though not published until 1859, was written, in greater part, at an earlier date;—“ No Conservative needs object to making the franchise accessible to those [the working] classes at the price of a moderate degree of useful and honourable exertion. To make a participation in poli­ tical rights the reward of mental improvement, would have many inestimable effects besides the obvious one. It would do more than merely admit the best and exclude the worst of the working­ classes ; it would do more than make an honourable distinction in favour of the educated, and create an additional motive for seeking education It would cause the electoral suffrage to be in time regarded in a totally different light. It would make it to be thought of, not as now, in the light of a possession to be used by the voter for his own interest or pleasure, but as a trust for the public good. It would stamp the exercise of the suffrage as a matter of judgment, not of inclination; as a public function, the right to which is conferred by fitness for the intelligent per­ formance of it.”-J. S. Mill. “Thoughts on Parliamentary Re­ form.”—pp 30-31. �i6 The Liberal Situation. For reasons which had better be confessed, the people are not in a condition to carry Reform themselves. Their political education has been so much and so long neglected, that they are now generally uninclined or incapable of self­ organisation —without which they are powerless. In the ire-action which will surely come they may amend this de­ ficiency. Besides the working class of England prefer to be led by gentlemen, and there are not as yet a sufficient number of gentlemen who care for Reform sufficiently, to incur the time, labour, cost, and obloquy of leading them. The sympathy of our Liberals is not, as a class, with the people, so much as with the aristocracy. I know many who would give £30,000 for an estate not worth £10,000, if by its possession they could live near a duke—while they would not give five shillings to enfranchise their countrymen. The Radicals have let a whole generation slip out of their hands. They began with the treacherous dogma that “ Truth is great and will prevail”—not knowing that it is the very worst thing to fight with, and is always beaten unless stoutly and expensively supported. Thus for twenty years there has been scarcely a single political union in the country, with funds to secure it three months’ existence. The result is that the children of the Radicals of the last generation are not Reformers now. In the best towns in the kingdom you can find but scant successors to the men who once made popular politics wholesome. Reason in the multitude is a very small quantity, and needs persistent cultivation to keep it influential. All the machinery for doing this has been suffered to die out. For years after the last Reform Bill there were hundreds of electors in every constituency whose votes could be relied upon. No one needed to canvas them; they were not to be diverted, bribed, or intimidated. This class of electors has nearly disappeared. The other week I looked through the poll books of the best instructed constituency in the kingdom. There was a nominal majority of 500 Liberals, but no Par­ liamentary agent could predict how they would vote. The landmarks of principle are no longer discernible. It is said that “when a Tory government succeeds to this we shall see what the opposition will do ?” There will be opposition to act unless the deterioration of politicians is stopped. Both parties have behaved so much alike of late years that the people do not know which is which, and have been so demoralized by the exhibition, that as far as the franchise is concerned, it does not matter to them which party rules. The fact is we have a middle-class Parliament and not a �7"he Liberal Situation. V Parliament of the people at all. The tone, the talk, and the interests consulted in the House of Commons, are es­ sentially middle class, tempered by a deferential regard for the views and comforts of the “ upper ten thousand.” The voice of the people, the busy struggling life of the nation, is practically ignored in that “Rich Man’s Club.” Now and then some piece of legislation is executed for the bene­ fit of the people, but it is the act of patrons and not of dele­ gates. The people have the humiliation of knowing that they have no power to exact it, and in consideration of having some attention paid them, they are expected not to make themselves troublesome, or to endeavour to meddle with governing, which they are told is no business of theirs. A member of Parliament is a gentleman who enjoys the joint dignity and luxury of spending 70 millions a year, and the diminishing handful of licensed persons called electors, have the exclusive privilege of authorising these members to assess and collect from the great body of the nation, who have no voice in the matter, this enormous sum. This is the scale in which gentlemen spend money who find themselves in a condition to command it. A Par­ liament of the people would have an interest in altering this. * It is nothing to the purpose to say that the money is judiciously expended. Those who furnish the money should have the right of an opinion upon its expenditure ; and a power of checking it, without which the opinion is of very little value. If a servant should seize his master’s cheque book, and proceed to administer his master’s affairs, it is just possible that he might prove a better administrator, and more economical manager, than the original owner of the funds, but no consideration of this kind would induce the master class to submit to this arrangement. This is precisely what the governing classes say to the people. “ We govern you very well, we allow you a good deal of liberty, quite as much as is good for you, and we put your means to good account. You are very ill advised not to leave well alone.” The working class one day will wonder at the effrontery which addressed this language to them, and be ashamed for that want of self respect which has led them so long to submit to it. Sometimes it is alleged that the working classes are dis­ qualified for electoral power because they are capable of * The Financial Reform Association has shown, as did James White, M.P., lately in a conclusive speech in Parliament, that the Incidence of Taxation requires further adjustment in favour of the people. Vide also Letters on Taxation by S. C. Kell, Esq., of Bradford. �i8 The Liberal Situation. corruption. The Northern Reform. Union made the cost­ liest experiment ever made in this country to put down bribery at elections. They found that all that was wanted to suppress it in Parliamentary or Municipal elections, was that bribery should be made a misdemeanour punishable by summary conviction before a magistrate, and that the briber should be given in charge like a pickpocket. Bribery would soon disappear under this treatment, but we had all soon reason to see that there was no intention or wish to interfere with it either by judges or Parliament. Men of * great fortunes are increasing in England. Parliamentary honours are important to them. Engaged solely in the ac­ cumulation of wealth, they have rendered no public service entitling them to that distinction, but they can buy their way to it. They can afford the cost, and bribery is their sole means of attaining distinction. It is an instrument which enables the rich to over-ride any claim of personal merit on the part of less wealthy candidates. Bribery is a rich man’s convenience, and is valued in England every year more and more, and will never be put down by a rich man’s Parliament. Sometimes this paternal management of the governing classes is sought to be justified by telling the people that . they are not taxed disproportionately. If they were not taxed at all the humiliation put upon them would be as great. It is every man’s duty to contribute his quota to the support of the state, and those who affect to relieve him of the honourable burden mean him ill. They degrade him. He is intended to pay dearly for the exemption, the price to be exacted is that of his independence. Mr. Stansfeld, M.P.. in the well-calculated speech he delivered at Bradford a few weeks ago, warned the outside public “ that Reform was only to be dealt with now by the force of a persistent and overwhelming national will.” But to create this the re-education of the people has to be entered on afresh, which will take time. The machinery of agitation has to be replaced, which will require means. The dying Parliament will do nothing for Reform. The next Parliament will do nothing until its days are nearly numbered, so that we shall have no Reform for years. The Pall Mall Gazette, with apparently fair in­ tentions, gives new currency to the latest political error that “ Reform must come in time.” Those who believe this * These results were stated, on the part of the Union, at the Con­ ference at York, (convened by the Social Science Association) at which Lord Brougham presided, when Sir Fitzroy Kelly made his statement, September, 1864. �The Liberal Situation. 19 will never see it. The only people worth listening to now are those who mean to make Reform come. Wearied and in' censed with Radicals playing the game of Whigs, and Whigs that of Tories, an immoral indifference towards the return of the Tories to power has taken possession of every­ body. The probability that Tories may be better, and the belief that they cannot be worse, will give us at the next election a strong Tory Government. The people will find out the difference then. The right thing is to vote for Reformers only who can be relied upon, and take measures to secure the choice of those likely to keep their word. The difference between a Whig and a Tory is very clear :— The Tory will rob you of a pound and give you a shilling, back, in a patronising way—the Whig will rob you equally and won’t give you even a shilling back, but he will give you the means of earning two for yourself. The Whig, stingy as he is, is greatly to be preferred. He promotes self-help and self-respect. The Tory represents the com­ fortable principle of authority and the graciousness of pa­ tronage—the Whig troublesomeness of reason and the harshness of self-exertion—the Tory sufferance and sub­ mission—the Whig independence and progress. The deplorable impotence of the people was never so con­ spicuous as now. Mr. Gladstone has made a speech in favour of Reform which ought to entitle him to the active gratitude of every non-elector in the kingdom. Before this time every town and village in the empire ought to have sent him an address. How powerless, how spiritless, how wanting in political penetration, how incapable of taking advantage of this merciful political circumstance, are the people now. Mr. Gladstone is the first minister in England who might, to use Mr. Thornton Hunt’s remaafk, “ become the Premier of the working classes”—who are yet unable to see or use the rare and priceless opportunity. On the other hand, how humiliating is the attitude of Parliament! There are at least 300 gentlemen in the House of Commons who profess to represent the people of England, and they turn towards Mr. Gladstone with an infantine gaze. It is a proud and honourable thing for him. In them it is something contemptible. Mr. Bright is by genius and service the natural leader of the people’s party in Parliament, and he, and about a dozen other mem­ bers, are all who seem capable of national imitation or of standing alone, or show proof of possessing an active con­ science in their work. Mr. Stansfeld, in the speech pre­ viously referred to, most usefully said “ that constituen­ cies should invite no pledge nor accept any from a membe �20 The Liberal Situation. unless they were prepared to support him in fulfilling it, and warned by the past he trusted that no candidate would enter into a pledge of Reform unless he is determined that as far as in him lies his party shall redeem it.” There would be no apathy among the people if members did their duty in this spirit. As to apathy there exists no more of it than is natural under the circumstances which have been allowed to operate upon the people. Mr. Mill, in those brief but compendious sentences quoted by Mr. Taylor, M.P., at Leicester, says :—“ Wherever the sphere of action of hu­ man beings is artificially circumscribed, their sentiments are narrowed and dwarfed in the same proportion. . . . Let a person have nothing to do for his country and he will not care for its It is a great discouragement to an indivi­ dual, and a still greater one to a class, to be left out of the Constitution—to be reduced to plead from outside the. door to the arbiters of their destiny, not taken into con­ sultation within.” Of causes which have contributed to produce political apathy in the minds of the people I should name :— L—When they found themselves left out of the Re­ form Bill of 1832, having merely obtained a new set of masters, and that they were not masters of themselves notwithstanding that their new rulers were more consi­ derate than the old ones—disappointments and discourage­ ment set in. 2. —Those who were not worn out by the old struggle, became indignant and disgusted. Indignation, some years later, led to the disastrous policy of breaking up the meet­ ings of the middle class engaged in the Anti-Corn Law struggle, which robbed the Reform cause of funds and friends, among those best able to make it efficient by pecu­ niary support. 3. —The disgusted portion also set their faces against all petitions to Parliament, in which they had lost confidence. This policy diminished political action, kept Parliament ignorant of popular feeling, and diffused a fatal conviction that it was of no use doing anything. 4. —-Judicious enemies of the people, denounced as “de­ magogues” or “hired orators” every advocate who made it his business to endeavour to instruct and plead the cause ■of the people. This treacherous daintiness, though it pro­ ceeded from topgues and pens venally retained to support things <as they wene, was actually listened to, until the ipeople were entirely disarmed of all who, in their rough ••and inecessaiy wayjCoajJdkeepup public spirit among those, �‘The Liberal Situation, 21 in whom it must die, unless sustained by wholesome agi­ tation. 5. —Then came the influence of the well-meaning but mis-calculating Communists and Co-operators recruited! from the ranks of the disappointed and disgusted politi­ cians. These preached material comfort as a substitute^ for political rights ; forgetful that a fat material prosperity, purchased at the expense of political duty is more despic­ able and morally disastrous than the leanest discontent, united with self-respect and public spirit. 6. —Afterwards set in the reign of dangerous philosophers who, like Thomas Carlyle^ diverted the intellect of the young men of the nation from political pursuits, by cover­ ing Parliament with pungent ridicule and mocking at the ambition of possessing the six millionth degree of partici­ pation in the “national palaver.” Other philosophers more serious, as Professor Newman, sincere friends of the people, but representing the unfortunate indifference of gentlemen and scholars to a political privilege, such as the franchise, which their high position and great personal influence enable them to do without, but which is the sole protection of the multitude against absolute oppression or abjectacquiescence in patronage. These influential publicists­ have taught that the personal, commercial and other liber­ ties are more precious than the mere right of voting, nob feeling that every liberty is in peril or is held on suf­ ferance by those who have no control ever public affairs. 7. —The American war has had a disastrous influence on the enfranchisement question. Sir John Ramsden’s inde­ cent exultation in the House of Commons, when he an­ nounced that “the Republican bubble had burst,” pro­ claimed how fatal to the liberty of the people everywhere is the expected triumph of tyrants anywhere. If the South could set up a slave empire, the working class in England would be told to be thankful that they are allowed theliberty they have instead of seeking, for more. It was the -success of the French Revolution in 1831 that precipitated: the Reform Bill in England, and the eowp-d’etat of LouisNapoleon in 1851 has thrown back every question of pro­ gress in England since. It was this conviction alone that helped to justify in many eyes the famous attempt of Orsini. Liberty is never safe in this country with a des­ potism flourishing in sight of our shores, appealing to-the sympathies of our aristocratic classes, always unfriendly topopular liberty. Agricola well understood this principle, for Gibbon relates that his reason for determining the con­ quest of Ireland was “that the ancient Britons would, wean- �22 The Liberal Situation. their chains with less reluctance if the prospect and exam­ ple of freedom were on every side removed from before their eyes.” Deep is the interest of the working classes of England that tyranny should be overthrown in every state near them, and in every country with which England has near political relations. 8.—The apathy, and what is worse, the impotence of the people has been much brought about of late years by the false promises of Cabinets and Parliaments. Reformers have been told that they had the word of gentlemen (and that gentlemen never lie) that Reform would take place. The people believed this. When gentlemen in high politi­ cal position make a public promise nobody doubts its ful­ filment. It is naturally supposed that they mean what they say, and that they will take trouble to redeem their word, within a fair and reasonable period. These promises put an end to agitation. It became unnecessary if these gen­ tlemen were to be trusted—an impertinence if their word was to be believed. Reformers were told the time was come when legislators would do an act of justice because it was reasonable, and the vulgar methods of out-of-door coercion might be safely and honourably laid aside. This fatal counsel prevailed. Nobody foresaw that year after year no earnest effort would be made to fulfil the promises given, and that ministers of the crown would plead that though they promised the fact of Reform, they did not promise the time, and that Mr. Milner Gibson would have on their part, reluctantly to confess, by way of excusing them, “ that no Government having once laid a bill upon the table of the House would have dared to recede from their position if the great body of the electors of England had shown that they were determined to keep them to their promises”— which was in effect saying that the Cabinet coming forward to fulfil their promise and finding they were not watched, took advantage of the circumstance and “skedaddled.” Mr. Milner Gibson forgot to confess that the promise was made to non-electors, who were powerless “ to keep the Govern­ ment to their promise,” with whom it was therefore doubly disgraceful to break their word. Mr. Mill has observed “ there are but few points in which the English as a people are entitled to the moral pre-eminence with which they are accustomed to compliment themselves at the expense ef other nations ; but of these points, perhaps, the one of the great­ est importance is that the higher classes do not lie, and the lower, though mostly habitually liars, are ashamed of lying ” It is difficult to think that some future political historian will not have to admit that on the question of �The Liberal Situation. 23 Reform the “higher classes” have lied and are not * r ashamed” of it. From these combined causes the political education of the people during the past twenty years has been disas­ trously neglected and affected, and they have gone back in political knowledge and in public spirit. Notwithstanding this unquestionable deterioration the people are not wanting in appreciation when a public man, whom they can trust, goes among them. When Mr. Gladstone (whose merciful interven­ tion has since given the people the Annuities Bill) visited the North, you well remember how when word passed from the newspaper to the workmen that it circulated through mines and mills, factories and workshops, and they came out to greet the only English minister who ever gave the people a right because it was just they should have it; and gave it them when there was no power to force it from him. Without him a Free Press in England was impossible. The organisation seeking it was the smallest that ever won a great measure; its funds were limited, its clients were poor, its friends in Parliament were a hopeless minority. Had it not been for Mr. Gladstone there would have been no cheap newspapers in England for years to come. He made him­ self the advocate of the unfriended ; he put into the hands of the poor man the means of political knowledge. Sir George Cornewall Lewis, the only minister from whom we had a right to expect it, would have given a hundred con­ clusive Whig reasons why it could not be done. If not the only Chancellor of the Exchequer who ever had a con­ science, Mr. Gladstone was the first who was ever known to have one, and when he went down the Tyne, all the country heard how twenty miles of banks were lined with people who came to greet him. Men stood in the blaze of chim­ neys ; the roofs of factories were crowded ; colliers came up from the mines ; women held up their children on the banks that it might be said in after life that they had seen the Chancellor of the People go by. The river was covered like the land. Every man who could ply an oar pulled up to give Mr. Gladstone a cheer. When Lord Palmerston went to Bradford the streets were still, and the working men imposed silence upon themselves. When Mr. Glad­ stone appeared on the Tyne, he heard cheers which no other English minister ever heard. He had done great things for commerce, and the commercial people were proud to tell him so ; but the people were grateful to him, and rough pitmen who never approached a public man before, pressed round his carriage by thousands. All the distinc­ tions of rank were obliterated in their gratitude, and a �2+ 7he Liberal Situation. thousand arms were stretched out at once, to shake hands with Mr. Gladstone as one of themselves. If there is a political apathy in England the gentlemen who hold the destinies of the country in their hands are themselves the cause of it, and have themselves to thank for it. The English people are not constitutionally prone to “ rest and be thankful”—they never did it yet ; and Lord John Bussell, who said it, never meant it. He never rested himself, it is not in his nature, and his son, Lord Amber­ ley, bids fair to yet farther illustrate the serviceable unrest of his race. True he has eaten his words on the platform at Leeds, but had he been a member of Parliament he would have preferred eating his pledge in the House. If proper trouble is taken to revive, or rather re-create the interests of the people in political rights, it may be ■done with less trouble than formerly and more effectually than ever. Formerly the people were politicians from im­ pulse, next they will become so from conviction, and such men never go back. The working class have no longer the prejudices which formerly rendered them impracticable. They may manifest the possession of special views—they may desire a complete and generous measure—they may maintain their preferences for what they con­ sider honest and just; but they will offer no opposition to, and are generally disposed to help all who go in the direction of the enfranchisement they seek ; and if to the Political Unions of Bradford, Manchester, and the Northern Beform Union of Newcastle, are added Unions in Birming­ ham and other great towns, and a sufficient Metropolitan Union in London, the B.form Members might be called upon to hold meetings among their own constituents, and take their places as the natural leaders of the people ; but agitation must be revived professedly and avowedly, and kept up as an independent department of popular govern­ ment. The expectations that a Reform Parliament will carry the work of political progress forward and lead opinion, is a delusion. They show no disposition of organisation among themselves—no more capacity for forming a people’s party than workmen themselves would show—nor so much. Bepresentatives manifestly require to be looked after like any other servants. It’is very discreditable, but it is true. It shows how little thought has been bestowed on the actual nature of the Liberal situation, that one may con­ stantly hear Members of Parliament lament, as something unexpected and unfortunate, the indifference of the people as to Beform. What else is possible, what else is to be expected ? Is it likely that six millions of persons can �The Liberal Situation. 25 maintain a perennial attitude of indignation for 30 years ? Every two or three years they are called out, as it serves the purpose of one party or other in the state, are promised Reform, and when interest or hope is re-awakened and the purpose is served of those who evoked it, they are dis­ missed with—nothing. Why, the shepherds in JEsop grew tired at last of rushing forward at the cry of wolf. No men will continue to pursue an object unless they can fight for it, or agitate for it, or buy it, or reason their way to it. The people have been counselled to lay aside all ideas of physical force, the only ideas which ever permanently in­ terest the great body of Englishmen—agitation has been discountenanced, and even the right of meeting in the open air has been interfered with, restricted, and made so ex­ pensive as to be impossible to working men. Agitation has become so costly that only rich men can employ it—and since workmen have not wealth to buy attention, and rea­ son has long failed to win it—what is to be looked for but that men will turn away in apathy and quiet hate, which answers no summons and which only accident and oppor­ tunity may stimulate into resentful action ? Even Members of Parliament excuse themselves for doing so little, saying the the people do not care for Reform. No people ever do care for liberty unless stimulated to do so. Liberty is like knowledge—the ignorant do not care for it, while those who have it will never part with it. Russian serfs, negroes, and French peasants do not care for liberty. The desire of liberty is the result of educa­ tion in using it; and those who wish to see the many manifest this noble desire, must put them in a condition to exercise freedom. It is not from the neglected and un­ taught many—not from the ignorant, the selfish, or supine, from whom the apostolate of enfranchisement should be expected, but from the educated few—from the informed politician, from the gentleman and member of Parhament. Mr. John Stuart Mill, the one great exception among Eng­ lish philosophers, who has ever lent the weight of his name to the cause of the people, has given reasons to thinkers, and the governing classes, which, were conscience allied to politics, would infuse enthusiasm into the advocacy of those who now ignobly wait on others. “ It is important,” says this writer, “that every one of the governed should have a voice in the government, be­ cause it can hardly be expected that those who have no voice will not be unjustly postponed to those who have. It is still more important as one of the means of national education. A person who is excluded from all participa­ �26 The Liberal Situation. tion in political business is not a citizen. He has not the feelings of a citizen. To take an active interest in politics is, in modern times, the first thing which elevates the mind to large interests and contemplations ; the first step out of the narrow bounds of individual and family selfishness, the first opening in the contracted round of daily occupation. The person who in any free country takes no interest in politics, unless from having been taught not to do so, must be too ill-informed, too stupid or too selfish, to be interested in them; and we may rely on it that he cares as little for anything else, which does not directly concern himself or his personal connexions. Whoever is capable of feeling any common interest with his kind, or with his country, or with his city, is interested in politics; and to be interested in them, and not to wish for a voice in them is an impossi­ bility. The possession and the exercise of political, and among others of electoral rights, is one of the chief instru­ ments both of moraland of intellectual training for the popular mind ; and all governments must be regarded as extremely imperfect, until every one who is required to obey the laws, has a voice, or the prospect of a voice, in their enactment and administration.” One who is as keen to see as feeling to describe, * asks of the British labourer, whose days are worn out in mine or factory— What end doth he fulfil ? He seems without a will, Stupid, unhelpful, helpless, age-worn man. And this forsooth is all! A plant or animal Hath a more positive work to do than he: Along his daily beat Delighting in the heat He crawls in sunshine which he dees not see. What doth God get from him ? His very mind is. dim, Too weak to love, and too obtuse to fear Is there glory in his strife ? Is there meaning in his life ? Can God hold such a thing-like person dear ? : " He hath so long been old His heart is close and 'Sold ; He has no love to take no love to give: Men almost wish him dead ’Twfflp best for him they said 'Twere such a weary sight to see him live. The Rev. Dr. Faber. ■ �Situation. 27 He walks with painful stoop As if life made him droap And care had fastened fetters round his feet; He sees no bright blue sky, Except what meets his eye Reflected in the rain pools in the street. To whom is he of good ? He sleeps and takes his food. He uses the earth and air and kindles fire: He bears to take relief Less as a right than grief; To what might such a soul as his aspire ? Because the working class try to save, the harassing un­ certainty of their efforts is overlooked and under estimated. In a letter—if I may be permitted to quote it—which was addressed to Mr. Gladstone, when his Annuities Bill was be­ foreParliament, it was testified “thatthe English mechanics are, as a rule, prudent where they have hopes. They will save at any cost. I go into the houses of thousands where the wan cheek of the wife, and the early asthma of the husband, tell that it is an immoral thing to save,—they ought to eat every halfpenny they can earn.” It is impos­ sible to get public spirit out of this condition of things. A yet worse condition remains. During a quarter of a century that I have been accus­ tomed to address public meetings, and to witness them ad­ dressed by others, I declare that I never once heard an audience of working men, applaud or personally respond to any appeal to the glory of their country, or manifest any feeling of pride in it or about it,—while there is not a back­ woodsman, a pedlar, or a workman of the lowest degree, who comes to Europe from America, who is not a proud man when he speaks of his country. He has a personal in­ terest in it. Its power and renown are part of his life. The Englishman driven from his country, to better his condition, has never felt a proud man on his own shores. Pride in his country as being a part of its renown, as being an agent in it, actually influencing its home go * vernment and foreign policy—is a dead sentiment in an English working man. He may toil, he may fight, he may shed his blood in his country’s battles in every part of the world—he may defend its power with his life, but he knows that his father at home will not be allowed a politi­ cal vote. In Guildhall, London, I have witnessed a middle class orator turn to the statues there, and heard him invoke re­ gard for that national renown which these warriors and statesmen built up. Naturally the merchants and electors responded to the appeal—they were a conscious part of �28 The Liberal Situation. that renown. In a meeting in which working men and others (of the middle class) are present, slmiliar appeals may be, or appear to be responded to by contagion of cheer­ ing—but among working men, or by them, these appeals are never introduced. Nobody thinks of them. No one feels pride in that of which he has had no part, and from the glory of which he has been designedly and contumeliously excluded. An American is a part of his Republic. He owns some of its soil. He is one of its recognised citi­ zens. He has something to say as to who shall be Gover­ nor of his state or its Senator, and even President of his nation ! The American boasts of his country with a per­ sonal pride—he brags of it—but his very “ brag” has some­ thing wholesome in it. In England a workman is nobody. The utmost political privilege accorded to him is that of hooting at a hustings while some one is elected who shall tax his earnings in spite of him, and dispose of them with­ out his consent. He is not within the pale of the constitu­ tion. Six millions are thrust outside of it and kept out­ side of it. If workmen assume as much manliness as to clamour about it, the governing class say, “Oh, let them clamour—they are only non-electors— they can’t do any­ thing,” and with a political contempt, that is neither dis­ guised nor concealed, they turn away from them. The country, its government, its wealth, its power, its noble constitution, its historic renown, its aristocracy, its middle class, are thingsapart from the people—who exist by a sore of sufferance —who are free by permission only—having no recognition and no power. They receive at the utmost the praise of useful cattle—their industry sometimes wins them such commendation as might be bestowed on clever monkeys, or they obtain the paternal approval given to po­ litical children. If any one thinks this an overdrawn pic­ ture let him remember that all praise of the people has this sting in it—it is given to those who are never trusted and never meant to be trusted. We are accustomed in this country to allude to the con­ dition of the slave, who, when he sets foot on English soil, becomes free. 'In the same way and yet more honourably, the Americans, the Canadians, and our Australian brethren boast that the English labourer so soon as he becomes a re­ sident in those lands, becomes enfranchised— “ If his lungs breathe their air, that moment he is free, He touches their country, and his shackles fall.” He is admissable for the first time to the duties and dignity of citizenship. As to the effect of the Franchise in England, if extended �’The Liberal Situation. 29 universally without conditions, there is not the slightest ground for fear except on the part of those who seek to extend it. The Englishman is Conservative down to the Costermonger. The very populace are Tory in heart. The first effect of universal suffrage in England would he that we should have more gentlemen and Lords returned to the House of Commons than ever. Colonels and per­ sons of wealth and title would at once go up in the Elec­ toral scale. For a time constitutional prejudice and bi­ gotry would prevail. The clergyman and the squire would reign, and liberty would very likely go back in England— but it would be for the last time. National education would become a political necessity, experience in freedom would be acquired, and liberty would one day rest on broader and surer foundations than in any country in the world. There would arise an aristocracy of merit whom all would honour, and wealth instead of looking like a frau­ dulent exception would be regarded as a sign of the common triumph of competence. The moment an Englishman is endowed with power he becomes a new creature. Pipe­ clay a country boor and pronounce over him the magic shibboleth of “duty”—catch a wild mechanic or a turbu­ lent prize-fighter, and buckle a policeman’s strap round him, and henceforth he personates devotion to the death and becomes possessed of a ludicrous and inconvenient passion for propriety and order. The English nature which yields only thistles on the exposed common of exclusion, is no sooner admitted to cultivation, in some authorised enclosure, than it is fruitful in flowers of' established tints. The riotous Radicals enfranchised in 18B2, have for years set up a more dismal and protracted shriek against Reform, than ever the Boroughmongers set up against them. He who scratches a Radical in power will find a Whig under his skin. Half of them are screaming out against a transfer of power. The thing is perfectly impossible in England. Universal suffrage would neither disturb nor desire to disturb the influence of family, wealth and learning. And when it attains to intelligent action (if it should ever be permitted to exist) the multitudinous collision of its interests and opinions will effectually prevent the people acting as a class. But it is idle for the people * thus to argue their right to enfranchisement. You may find in the invaluable writings of Toulmin Smith historical arguments irrefutable, to prove that we ask merely for the * See a letter on this point by Mr. S. C. Kell, of Bradford.— “ Daily News,” Feb., 1865. �3° T'he Liberal Situation. restoration of ancient rights. Those who now garrison the constitution care nothing for what was. They don’t like Democracy and don’t intend to pass any measure in favour of it—and there’s an end of it. After 30 years of failure in reasoning with successive Parliaments he must be logic-mad who thinks to win Reform by it. A woman’s reason “I will have it, because I will" is, if accompanied by a woman’s resolution, worth all other arguments now, And if intelligence proceeds among women, they are likely to insist with more zeal than men, upon being included in the franchise to which they have undoubtely an equal right. An aristocracy of sex is quite as offensive and more injurious than an aristocracy of rank. Professor Newman, whose sympathies and position na­ turally connect him with the higher and cultured classes, has witnessed of late years such complicity of sympathy on the part of the aristocracy and governing class of Eng­ land with the despots of Europe, and those who seek to ally Republicanism permanently with slavery in America, that he has borne the important testimony that the best interests of liberty, morality, and progress, are most likely to be promoted by the Democracy, and may be advantage­ ously and safely entrusted to them. * It will be well when constituencies set their faces against mere rich men or men of title as such, but who have never done anything. The only ground on which any one ought to be permitted to enter Parliament is that he shall have done some service or acquired some distinction showing interest in and capacity for national affairs. Now a man who has a title or great wealth, but who never did anything for the people, who does not know how to do it and does not wish to know, is preferred by constituences to those who by thought, or toil, or sacrifice, have regarded the public welfare as higher than their own. Until the people set their faces against these showy, worthless, and base candidates, and personally and publicly despise every elector who votes for them, there will be no Reform in this country. So long as the tread of a foreign master presses the soil of Italy, no Italian, thinks himself free. The Unity of his country is his first thought. His trade interests as a workman are subordinate to his efforts after national inde­ pendence. So in England the first thought of all work­ men should be enfrachisement. Until a man is one of the nation—has a voice in its affairs—is one of those whose - * Vide—The Permissive Bill more urgent than Parliamentary Enfranchisement, by F. W. Newman. �The Liberal Situation. 31 views must be counted—who is taken into the national con­ sultation—he is enslaved. Earl Bussell has just told us in his Essay on the English Constitution, that he differs from those who hold that “ the right of voting is a personal privilege possessed by every man of sound mind and years of discretion as an inherent inalienable right.” He holds that “the purpose to be at­ tained is good government, the freedom within the State and their security from without,” and he would stop the suffrage at the point which promised this. This is the pure paternal theory, very benevolent, and very offensive. There requires no enlargement of the suffrage to accom­ plish this —for good government here may mean merely that sort of government which those who govern deem good: anyhow, should those who are governed differ in opinion as to what is good for them, they will have no power to help themselves under the operation of this theory. There is no popular party now who'rest its claims on Whig words of “personal privilege,” or talk'of “in­ alienable rights.” The people having given up banding the terms of political metaphysics. They look at the mat­ ter of enfranchisement in a far more practical way. They do not ask for the vote as a “ personal privilege'” they seek it as a means of discharging a public duty. Every person in a state is responsible for what goes on in the state, whether good or evil is done it comes home to him and to his children, and it is his interest and duty to see that what is done is what it should be. There is bilt one right, that of doing one’s duty. Whether the right of voting is “ in­ alienable” or not is of no consequence? The right of go­ verning is not “ inalienable” in any Whig, nor in the mid­ dle class who have all acquired it. Let the people acquire the same thing and no one will raise the “inalienable” question. No politicians, with few exceptions, now cafe for anybody but th emselves. Their whole skill consists in giving reasons why they should hold the privileges dr places they have, and why no one else could be safely entrusted with them. That member of government is deemed most valuable who finds out the most plausible reason for doing nothing, or who can best delay the fulfilment, or best defend the breach of a promise, and this is the whole art of English states­ manship which we are called upon to reverence as good government. It is quite true we have a great edifice of liberty in this country—we have a certain amount of good govern­ ment, and I can sympathise with and respect those who �32 The Liberal Situation. are reluctant to risk it. The whole force of these reasoners would, be given on the side of enfranchisement were it ac-. companied by protective conditions. “ Good government” would not and need not be risked. The National Reform Union of Manchester does propose an extension of the suffrage “to every householder or lodger rated or liable to be rated for the relief of the poor.” A bill which included all this, would do, and would end the agitation. But there is no such bill drawn. There is no member who would introduce it. Nor is there any pro­ bability of carrying it. The union gives no sign of prepa­ ration or persistency for carrying it. It would require a revolution to carry it. The union does not mean this. It does not even confront, nor even discuss the grounds of opposition to such a bill. Its programme runs in the old, tiresome, tame, wearying, struggling, discouraging, Radical rut. It proposes a suffrage without guarantees for its qualified action. It gives to the working class the numerical majority. I am not one who believe that the working class would ever vote down the men of property and education. But they might do so. No absolute guarantee can be given that they never would do so, and the men of property and intelligence would have, if this bill passed, to trust to this event not occur­ ring. They would hold their liberty and interests on suf­ ferance. They would be in the same position in which the unenfranchised now are. Objecting myself to hold my liberty on sufferance, I should be most reluctant to put this risk on the educated and wealthy class. No class ought to be putin this position. No class ought to submit to it. Now this is the real dilemma which exists. This dilemma the National Reform Union neither recognizes nor provides for. This formidable difficulty no Radical orator meets. This is why the Reform question stagnates and remains where it is. Everybody at times feels this difficulty, yet no one on the side of Radical Reform dares look it in the face, ox has the courage to state it, or attempt to meet it. How can it be met except by adopting Mr. Mill’s proposal of giving the wealthy and educated classes the protection of cumulative votes ? or by acting on Earl Grey’s suggestion of giving to the unenfranchised classes a special number of members who should share in the re­ presentation without swamping it ? Liberal M. P. ’s and the Liberal press appear to have set their faces against such indispensable plans, caricaturing them as “ fancy franchises” as though a vast and Protective Suffrage, which obviated an overwhelming difficulty, could be so described? It has �The Liberal Situation. 33 been assumed that the opinion of the people is against any such plan, whereas the opinion of the people has never yet been taken upon it. No meeting of the people, no Reform Union has ever yet discussed anything of the kind, except­ ing some dozen meetings which the present writer has ad­ dressed, when very favourable attention has been uniformly given to the subject. I know towns where ardent Re­ formers are themselves afraid of an Unqualified Suffrage. Good Radicals, the most thorough of their class, have said to me, “ There is a mob in our town [there is in every town], ignorant, selfish, venal, and reckless of principle : had they all votes, our present Liberal members would be unseated at the next election. They would vote against those who seek to raise them.” This is a general feeling in Liberal boroughs. Now there is no plan of £6 suffrage which selects the worthy and excludes the base. ■ All £6 suffrage is blind ; and hence we have Radicals arguing feebly and fearing much the results of the very measure they plead for. Surely this is political imbecility. This is the real dilemma which ought to be put an< end to by adopting a plan of protective suffrage, of which the only opponents are Radicals whose policy has long undergone petrifaction. Our Liberal members, to use the wholesome/ language of the Daily News, “have done their best to emasculate politics and make it the hollow unprincipled thing it now is; a miserable game from which men are feeling, that they must retire out of sheer disgust.” At the request of a Liberal M.P. I went recently to the best-informed and most reliable working-class leaders of the old school to ascertain whether they would move Reform-wards. Their decisive answer was, “ Let those who think something ought to be done do it. We have no more belief in Members, of Par­ liament. If our vote could unseat a Liberal at the next election it would constitute our only interest in giving it.” Mr. Bright, Mr. P. A. Taylor, and other leaders who can be trusted, have consistently acquiesced in a demand for “ manhood” suffrage. It is quite necessary that the people form their own opinions as to the kind of Reform Bill to be demanded, and ask for no blind or wild measure, but for a universal and Qualified Suffrage, and then the vexa­ tion, not to say outrage, of “ partial” enfranchisement will sink into the category of “fancy” futilities. Taking care that they are practical, and sure that they are reasonable, the people may take courage and be resolute. Mr. Baines, M.P., has injudiciously cut up the Reform Bill into pieces, with a view to introduce the “ thin end of the wedge” into the House. There is no assembly in the �34 The Liberal Situation. world with a sharper eye for thin ends of wedges than the House of Commons. You can’t “ dodge” Parliament, and it makes the people look foolish when they are represented as trying it. Bad as the House is, there is more to hope from its treatment of a bold and open demand, than from its acquiescence in small dexterity. Mr. Todd, of Gateshead, has shown in the Newcastle Chronicle, from a practical knowledge of the working of the suffrage, that Mr. Baines’ Bill based on rate-paying would be as fraudulent as Lord Russell’s was. As Mr. R. B. Reed expresses it, an £8 suffrage without a rate-paying clause would be of more value than a £6 suffrage with it. Mr Cobden has serviceably approved Mr. Todd’s proposal of basing the suffrage on moderate house-tax, which would put an end to all evasion and deception, and also to those modern nuisances—Revising Barristers’ Courts. Earl Grey is good enough to say in his volume, already referred to, that “Reform cannot be much longer delayed.” It is quite a gratuitous remark. Reform can be delayed. It can be refused with more safety now than at any time since 1832. The people are disarmed, demoralised, and impotent. Gentlemen do not care for Reform. Members of Parliament have coute to an understanding to frustrate it. The Cabinet intend to evade it. It can be safely disre­ garded, and the governing classes know it. After the tone in which Earl Grey’s work has been spoken of by the liberal press, I was surprised to find it well written, very instructive, and fair in spirit. Whoever breaks the fatal and demoralising silence on the Reform question is to be regarded. We have no apostolate of poli­ tical freedom in England now. There is more honest and honourable thought for the black slave in America than for the white workman in England. The negroes will be­ come part of the “ territorial democracy” before a sixth part of our countrymen will be deemed eligible for a £6 franchise. Both Earl Grey and Earl Russell hold to one principle, that the franchise is to be treated merely as a means of “good government”—a principle which renders any fran­ chise needless, provided the governing class condescend to behave well. The Emperor of the French governs without any franchise now—for that he substitutes ma­ terial comfort. The French people are treated in theory as political swine. Their styes are repaired—they are given clean straw, their troughs are filled with paternal wash, and they are provided with a History of Julius Caesar to read: what more can they want—what more could the franchise �The Liberal Situation. 35 do for them ? This is the actual consideration urged by the Times and the opponents of the franchise upon the people of England; and despicable as it is, it is the argu­ ment of the greatest force, of the most constant recurrence and popularity among us. There was dignity in sedition, conspiracy itself was a proof of manliness compared with this base temper and in­ action inculcated upon the people of England. The voices of O‘Connor and Ernest Jones were far nobler and wholesomer than this. Had we had of late years men who knew how to die for freedom as they have had in Italy, we should now be in a different position. It is better to be feared than despised. Nothing remains now but for the people to take their own affairs into their own hands, with singleness of purpose and fixed resolution to carry their own ends themselves. All hope in Parliament has long been over. Trust in members or the promises of Cabinets is a delusion and a snare. There must be advocacy and organisation. If it could be shown that violence can carry their objects it would be perfectly right to employ it. Those who are refused political recognition in a state, owe no allegiance to it. It may be imprudent, it may be disastrous to think of vio­ lence, but that is a mere question of policy. The necessity of resorting to some form of force, moral or physical, is unquestionable. There is an end of political responsibility where the right of political existence is denied. The tone of Parliament towards the unenfranchised, admits of no mistake as to its resolute defiance. If the people are found to be ignorant they are said to be unfit—if intelligent they are declared to be dangerous—if they clamour they are to be resisted—if silent to be disregarded—if feeble and with­ out organisation to be despised— if strong they are to be put down by force. What can it matter what they do while they are thus treated. To make themselves judi­ ciously disagreeable is their only chance of redress. After fifty years of boasted progress, the maxim of Bentham still remains true, that “ there is no Reform possible in Eng­ land until you make the ruling powers uneasy.” Without enfranchisement not of a few merely, but of the whole who are honest and industrious, there is no political life; with­ out the franchise there is no political existence ; belief in it should be the one faith, and the pursuit of it the one objeot of the working class. No trade interest should be regarded but as secondary; any form of social liberty should be held as subordinate; mere material comfort should be despised in comparison with this. No one should �36 The Liberal Situation. be listened to who stands in the ^ay of enfranchisement, no workman should cease to recent as an act of personal outrage every attempt to delay the attainment of it. It should never be forgotten that no one is regarded in poli­ tics except those who possess themselves of the means, and show the intention of enforcing their own claims. I subscribe myself a Member of the Northern Reform Union, which has never departed from the sound doctrine that it is the people of England who require enfranchise­ ment, and that the people axe not a class. G. J. HOLYOAKE. 282, Strand, London, W.C., Maroh 24,1865. w-< ■. <0 PAMPHLETS BY THE SAME AUTHOR. The Workman and the Suffrage—Letters on An Intelligence Franchise (1858) . • The Public Lesson of The Hangman . . 4th id. NEWCASTLE OH-TTSS I PRINTED AT THE " DAILY CHRONICLE" OTFICE. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Victorian Blogging Description An account of the resource A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library &amp; Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Conway Hall Library & Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Conway Hall Ethical Society Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data Pamphlet Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The liberal situation necessity for a qualified franchise, a letter to Joseph Cowen, Jun. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Holyoake, G. J. Description An account of the resource Place of publication: London Collation: 36 p. ; 19 cm. Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Includes bibliographical references. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available London Bookstore Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource [1865] Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context G5218 Subject The topic of the resource Liberalism Suffrage Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (The liberal situation necessity for a qualified franchise, a letter to Joseph Cowen, Jun.), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span> Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource English Conway Tracts Joseph Cowen Liberal Party (Great Britain) Liberalism Suffrage https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/a8d356ee3d53ed2f234466fe1d8db24b.pdf?Expires=1781740800&Signature=gtZEQ4OvmNs2m2bzmVU%7EZZNSK%7EwuK5BChAvL4zVG7KUdgOZkgcnOyttfurzK0N0QFeHTqM9P53bzGA%7EeejgxeLj6qSpDlx09c2ldrxrM6iyQZwUJfE5nCfLl-mtUv2a-nwzYl5Kf3-UzB3auCNFn5uPTorvHmEdZ2YEL0CzQtW74GA4DoBXYSVsGbM7ddSCp2CU5u4Eud-yrLDUtUJzXfq8TStCbG3TABSROjrV4o19GK4XVbS%7E3QUBtTQiwvzEcvziZnmrYCQNOGlXJTVfOCAQMCGgW1gJqo2KLv43kwvRuJQesppqgevqmYF7aXTLXJAGhETnGk%7EWKt%7EmkqOwICg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 20f9ff5ee1deeef80cd7e6d7ea791bc9 PDF Text Text THE WORKMAN AND THE SUFFRAGE. LETTERS TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE LORD JOHN RUSSELL, M.P., AND THE “DAILY NEWS.” BY GEORGE JACOB HOLYOAKE. AUTH0B OF “ SELF-HELP BY THE PEOPLE.” “ Certainly a good working measure that stopped many mouths, and sent the whole topic right to the end of the century, would be worth a little trouble.”—Times, Nov., 1858. ‘‘The real problem, of which no real solution has perhaps yet been published, is—By what enactment can skilled artizans be admitted to vote without swamping them and us by an unintelligent jnass whether of peasants or of town population?”—Westminster jReview, Jan. 1, 1859. Art. 1, “ Reform in Parliament.” ,.,f PEOPLE’S EDITION.“PRICE TWOPENCE. �Titter i —<jjr Mute. Titter ii.—<jji Norton nub tjjr Mrngr. Titter iit—<ljr Btilitg nf n ®uniripl Srnnrjjm. Titter in —^rnterfa tn forking (to Mrote. �f >' ■ : ■ VSSHKL Workman ant) iljt Suffrage. THE CHEAP VOTE. TO THE RIGHT HON. LORD JOHN RUSSELL, M.P. LETTER I. 147, Fleet Street, E.C., Dec. 1, 1858. 1 Mr Lord, When a constituent has any political wishes, the constitutional course seems to be that he should communicate them to his representative in Parliament, who, if he shall deem them relevant to the public situation, may find some opportunity of giving them effect. On this ground I, as a constituent of your Lordship, now respectfully solicit your attention. The first vote recorded in the Parish of St. Bride at the last election for the City of London, was given by me, and given to your Lordship. It was also the first vote I ever was able to give to a Member of Parliament. It is with politicians so astute as Count Montalembert, a recognised feature of English political contests, that with us a party is defeated but never beaten. We reserve to conviction other chances of asserting itself. Before Montalembert told this to Europe, your Lordship had said that the ‘ consciences of minorities ought to be respected.’ I know of no other Statesman who ever said this before your Lordship. For this sentiment I gave you my vote, and co-operated with those who stood by you in the late organised attempt to eject you from the representation of the City of London. Permit me to inscribe to your Lordship’s name the letter I here subjoin from the Daily News. The worst thing that can be said against the species of franchise I describe is, that it constitutes a cheap vote. It can be attained by thought without money ; and the (idea of a cheap vote is received now with the same kind of dis­ trust as the cheap Newspaper was a few years ago. Mr. Milner - Gibson had to meet precisely the same kind of objection when seeking the repeal of the Newspaper Stamp. In a public letter I addressed to him in the Leader, in 1853, there occurred the words I shall place by the side of words written by Lord Stanley in the Press of 1855, two years later:— ■ �4 G. J. HOLY OAKE TO THE HON. T. M. GIBSON, M.P., 1853. LORD STANLEY TO THE “PRESS,” 1855. “ To the vague and angry declamation of those who cry, ‘ You want to pull down English journalism and substitute an American press in its place,’ I scarcely hold it worth while to reply. The plain answer is—like people like press. The Ameri­ can press (which by the way does not by any means universally deserve the bad character given to it in this country) reflects, faithfully enough, the prevailing sentiment of American citizens. It is democratic—so are they. It is often vulgar, violent, abusive, addicted to braggadocio, and cre­ dulous of marvels—these are exactly the faults, a little exag­ gerated in copying, of a young and growing nation, in which material prosperity has advanced faster than the arts and refine­ ments of life. If in the English mind there be a corresponding state of feeling, by all means let it be exposed rather than con­ cealed. An evil fully brought to light is half remedied. But, in truth, the English character differs widely from the American; and a popular press, though ulti­ mately, it may help in forming, must follow, and be suited to, the bias of the popular mind.”— Press, February, 1855. “And here lies close to our hands a clear answer to all who fear that an untaxed press would, in this country, descend to the level of the ‘ rowdy’ portion of the American press. Never! unless English nature and En­ glish culture should also be changed by the same Act of Par­ liament which unstamps the press. Can the skilful mechanic endure bad machinery ? Will the cultivated architect endure an incongruous building ? or a painter endure a daub ? or an orator spouting ? or a practical politician loud-mouthed rant ? or the scholar illiterateness ? or the artist bad taste ? And as of art and manners, so of news­ papers. The cultivated, thought­ ful operative will not tolerate a paper inflated, antagonistic, and superficial. ‘ Rowdy’ journals will never sell in Great Britain until we possess a ‘ rowdy’ popu­ lation and Yankee backwoods. In the United States the same law holds good. The first-class journals of that country are sup­ ported by the cream of the inha­ bitants, and the rising tone of the American press generally indi­ cates what it will be on the social consolidation of the great Trans­ atlantic Republic.” — Leader, April, 1853. . L°r4 Stanley is the only Statesman whom I have noticed as coin­ ciding in any idea before made public, by one not a member of his own party, nor a compeer in Parliament. There is hppe, therefore, in this country that any suggestion that may have the fortune to prove relevant and practical will receive as much attention as it shall deserve; and I know no Statesman from whose independent character this hope may be better entertained than from your Lordship. I have the honour to be your Lordship’s faithful Constituent, G. J. Holyoake. �THE WORKMAN AND THE SUFFRAGE. FROM THE “DAILY NEWS ” OF NOV. 23, 1858. LETTER II. 147, Fleet Street, E.C., November 20,1858. Sir,—It is, I readily own, one of the privileges conferred in these days by the great press of this country upon the working class, that their claims are heard in the columns, where those who influence public affairs are likely to read the statements preferred. It is, Sir, under this impression that I, a member of the old Birmingham Poli­ tical Union of 1831-2, and now an honorary member of the Northern Reform Union, solicit the favour of saying a few words upon the qualification of the franchise in the pending Reform Bill. If members of the working class do not speak out now, the time will soon pass when their voices can be regarded. No programme of the contingent bill yet described is likely to satisfy those whom I presume statesmen of all parties desire to satisfy—the people. In each species of suffrage proposed by any party likely to carry anything, a large portion of the working class who will feel the disappointment the most, and resent it with bitterness, will be excluded. Universal suffrage is a thing of the future. No statesman will pro­ pose it now, and no Cabinet could carry it in England. Not that any government need fear it; so many of the people are uninformed, pre­ judiced, and indifferent upon politics, that ignorance, animus, and bigotry may be relied upon to vote for “ things as they are.” And were votes given to all, means would exist, and means would be used, for limiting any “ dangerous ” operation against established in­ fluences. For myself, I doubt the wisdom of carrying universal suff­ rage by popular forces—if it could be so carried—so long as the in­ fluential classes deem it “ dangerous,” because it would generate on their part, or through them, new elements of corruption and intrigue in the state in their endeavours to circumscribe the operation of the dreaded franchise ; for men outraged or alarmed naturally seek to pro­ tect themselves by any means. In our country, at this time when no class seriously intends the injury of another, I would no more lend myself to set up a tyranny of the working classes over gentlemen and scholars, than I would sit quietly under a tyranny of the rich over the poor, which under present arrangements certainly occurs. Univer­ sal suffrage, if adopted frankly by the “ governing classes,” would work well in this country, where reverence for law, for rank, and wealth, is the religion of the streets and lanes ; but I agree with Mr. Bright, that while a politician may reason from his own convictions �6 and plead for their prevalence, a statesmen can only govern well with the highest consent of all classes. I for one should be sorry to see the day in England when a member of parliament shall be the mere mouthpiece of a section, or the fanatic of a political school, instead of being the expositor of the true interests of the whole people. But universal suffrage is not the question yet. Reformers them­ selves are not in earnest about enfranchising everybody. Walk on any promenade—stand in any thoroughfare, and say who need give his days and nights to an agitation for endowing with the suffrage all he will see there ? Who cares to give votes to “ fast men,” who think more of the cut of their collar than the welfare of their country, and who have a deeper respect for their tailor than for any statesman—to selfish men, who care only for themselves—to ignorant men, incapable of judging anybody—to indifferent men, who care for nobody— to sensualists, sots, and all the descending grades of “rabble,” who are, unfortunately, included in the general public, and whose political right to the suffrage every advocate of universal enfranchisement must hamper himself with maintaining ? Not more than one man in a hundred in this country, gives time, money, serious thought, or takes an earnest part in public affairs. Why should any one die of exhaustion in endeavouring to enfranchise so many as com­ prise a mere apathetic mob, who put no value on a vote ? At the same time, many would work hard and work long that even a limited number of men, intelligent and earnest, who desire to take part in securing the well-being of their country, should be enabled to do so. Now, any mere mechanical suffrage founded on rating, or rent, or oc­ cupation, will, as the existing suffrage does, include many utterly worthless persons, and exclude numerous deserving, intelligent, but poor men, who might by a simple expedient be included. What is wanted is an expansive suffrage which shall be open to the worthy and shut out the unfit. The Spectator (a sound political thermo­ meter of what it is safe to attempt) has recently said—and I think you have expressed some analogous opinion—that “ there is no reason why a large and substantial extension of the franchise should not be ac­ companied by the construction of other forms of the franchise, intro­ ducing into parliament the representation of other influences.” To this question I address myself. In the contemplated Reform Bill what is wanted is some security that every elector shall have knowledge enough not to behave stupidly in matters of industry and commerce, nor vote blindly or reck­ lessly for parliamentary candidates likely to disgrace the state or dis­ organise society. Then let our contingent Reform Bill be based on a rating suffrage, or moderate rental, but provide for the admission of all to the franchise, not otherwise to be included, who may possess or acquire a certain intelligence qualification. This might consist of readings in political economy and English constitutional history. John �1 Stuart Mill’s “ Principles of Political Economy,” or some popular digest of it, such as the Dean of Hereford has written or might write, * might be one book decided upon to be read by the candidate for the franchise. Hallam’s “ Constitutional History of England,” and Warren’sf “ Blackstone,” or popular abstracts thereof (as authorised by “ appointment ”), are possible works which might be chosen. Let the selected books be read at home, in classes, at Mechanics’ Institutions, in private or public schools, and let all readers pass a public examina­ tion to be held twice a year, or oftener, in each town or village, by certain Franchise Examiners, appointed by local authorities, and the certificate that such readers had passed such examination—which should not be pedantic, difficult, or capricious, nor turn upon any agreement of opinion with the examiners nor the authors, but merely upon intelligent comprehension of the purport of the appointed books —should be a certificate of the franchise, and its production at the polling-booth entitle the holder, he being of the electoral age, and neither criminal nor pauper, to vote in the election of members of parliament. John Stuart Mill, the Bev. Dean Trench, Professor Key, Archbishop Whately, Professor Newman, the Rev. Charles Kingsley, Lord Stanley, M.P., General Thompson, M.P., and Pro­ fessor Maurice, or any similar quality of scholars whom learning does not override, and who retain, with a knowledge of what is sound, a healthy instinct for what is possible and practical to our mechanics, could select two or three suitable books, and draw up a short series of questions, which would be unanimously accepted as suitable, sensible, and unobjectionable, as permanent test questions. My reason for thinking some such arrangement as this would be acceptable to the people generally, is, that it would be satisfactory even to extreme sections on whose behalf I write, who go farther than any other party in politics. To them the “ six points of the charter ” seem tame and restricted. They hold principles of democracy which imply that womanhood, as well as manhood, is included inhumanity. They would not stop at the establishment of the aristocracy of men (which is all that the charter proposes) as the final effort of political justice. They admit the reasonableness of women being ultimately admitted to some direct voice in the affairs of the state, to the extent to which it exacts from them taxes and imposes upon them responsi­ bility. They do not see why parliament should not include colonial representatives. New political blood from the confines of the empire might be found to invigorate the centre. But they are not so mad * Vide “ Lessons on the Phenomena of Industrial Life.” Dawes, Dean of Hereford. By the Rev. Richard + Mr. F. R. Jones, solicitor, County Court, Huddersfield, protests against Mr. Warren’s edition, as poor, trifling, irrelevant, and characterised by a poverty of expression dis­ honourable to Blackstone.—Letter to the Writer. �8 as they seem : while they would advocate the principle they deem in­ trinsically right, they would go with the strongest party likely to carry the most practical measure in that direction—holding that conviction is not honesty, hut obstinacy, when it becomes an obstruction, and that it is fanaticism when it refuses instalments of its own truth. The advantages of the kind of self-acquired suffrage I suggest would be, among others, these: 1. All demagogues (using the term in Mr Grote’s sense), advocates, and agitators, would accept it, because they are all in favour of popular knowledge. 2. All persons and partisans likely to give the government trouble, if excluded, would be satisfied with the opportunity of an intelligence franchise, cease agitating in a discontented spirit, and commence to study and qualify themselves. 3. All teachers, instructors, lecturers, and clergy of all denomina­ tions, favourable to popular knowledge, would probably be in favour of this species of suffrage, and give it the moral force of their recom­ mendation—it being a tribute in aid of and in appreciation of their secular endeavours. 4. It would give political importance without imparting a politi­ cal character to mechanics’ institutions, working men’s colleges, and im­ provement classes. It would add a popular interest to these institu­ tions which they have always wanted and never yet possessed. 5. It would give parents a political motive for having their child­ ren educated. It would infuse some purpose into the present injuri­ ous desultoriness of reading, by connecting it with citizenship. . 6. It would set thousands of young men reading whose minds are now unoccupied, and attract others from low associations and familiar­ ise them with public duties. 7. This self-acquired suffrage would become a matter of pride, and many otherwise enfranchised would qualify themselves in this way as a matter of credit. 8. For the first time in England this franchise would, to use a popular phrase, set “ brains above bricks.” Political virtue would no longer be confined to the purse, but depend upon the under­ standing. 9. It would diminish that worship of materialism and property which is attaining a deplorable prevalence in England, so destructive of the finer qualities of man. How can the preacher censure or reproach the gross materialism of the times, so long as Christian statesmen continue to sum up all political virtue in paying a substan­ tial rental to your landlord, and in having a balance at your banker’s ? 10. No intelligent, earnest, honest men would any longer feel themselves outcasts from the State because they were poor and unfor­ tunate. The door would be open through which modest capacity and moderate intellectual industry could enter into citizenship. In this competitive scramble, dignified with the name of “ our commer­ �9 cial system,” the prize is not always to the honest or hardworking. Property is not always possible to the artisan, but intelligence is. Then, the just thing is to recognise understanding and moral worth, and no longer to add to the penalties of inevitable misfortune that of political disqualification. 11. This suffrage would create a new body of voters, whom the State could trust to substantially understand its interests, who would possess what it cannot now be said that all electors possess—viz., “ intelligence, love of order, the instinct of public management.” * 12. It would benefit every man who attained this description of franchise. The intelligence he would thus acquire would be a per­ sonal advantage to him, even if the exercise of the vote were not. 13. A Reform Bill settled with this proviso would be final, and not lead, as it otherwise must, to an interregnum of discontent and a renewed agitation a few years hence. The voters would augment as natural intelligence extended—they would be admitted as fast as they were qualified. Such a bill would regulate itself, and keep pace with all possible progress. 14. It would exclude the incapable, the idle, the apathetic—also the ignorant, whom statesmen most affect to dread, and most of the vicious, whom statesmen ought most to dread. 15. It would shut out the “mob” without offence. It would be a select franchise without insulting exclusiveness. It would not brand poverty—it would brand ignorance only, and open the door for its instruction. The apathetic would not have the energy to complain of exclusion, and the idle would not be listened to if they did. Prejudice would hardly object to this franchise. Pro­ perty could not'be endangered by it, and hereditary timidity need not be afraid of it. 16. If any future agitation arise touching the franchise, it will chiefly relate to facilities for instructing the people. . Thus, Sir, popular intelligence would be linked inseparably with popular freedom—a connection worthy of leaders of the people, worthy of England, and one that has never yet been consummatedin any country. If this franchise be devised liberally, without pedantry and in a practical spirit, might it not be tenable ? It is not likely to be ridi­ culed in these days when noble Lords attend Liverpool Conferences for the promotion of popular knowledge, and when Whig and Tory peers lecture weekly to Mechanics’ Institutions. Compare with this the probable suggestions that have been made. I will enumerate three. (a) A character franchise, which a gentlemanf of great soundness * Vide “Spectator,” No. 1,538, Dec. 19,1857. t Mr. Francis, of the “Athenaeum.” �10 °f judgment has mentioned, would be objected to by the people, as making the working classes dependent for it upon their employers and “ betters,” from whom it is intended they should obtain the cer­ tificate which should enable them to vote. (&.) A savings’ bank franchise would often include the selfish, and exclude the son who expended all he could spare in supporting an aged father or mother, or helpless brother or sister—who would be ten times more worthy of the franchise than hundreds who would get it. (c.) A benefit society and club franchise is no guarantee of intelli­ gence or of interest in public affairs. Private prudence is not always, nor generally, identical with political knowledge and public virtue. These proposals, however, are not devoid of merit: whether the one I make is on the whole preferable must be left to judgments more impartial than my own. Agreeing as to the moral right of the claim for the Suffrage advanced by the Northern Reform Union and the Political Reform League of London, permit me, in conclusion, to notice the apparently unanticipated operation of the extent of franchise they demand. .The Manchester Guardian (No. 3,812) expresses an objection to a wide suffrage which will be renewed in higher quarters. “ Our Borough Members,” it urges, “ would be made, by the immense extension of the franchise, the mere creatures of the lowest class of the electors, by whom all other classes would be swamped. They would cease to represent intelligence, education, and all that really constitutes public opinion, when they were not the nominees of the rabble, where they were not the choice of a self-elected caucus.” This might happen sometimes, and when it did it would be as unjust and undesirable, but not more so, than when, under existing arrange­ ments, a Member of Parliament merely represents certain select interests, and not the people. In England, assuredly, though the very “ rabble” had votes, learning and wealth would know how to take care of themselves. Florian, the fabulist, tells us that when the iron pot swam down the river, all porcelain vessels launched on the same element had to look out. Riches and intellect are the iron pots sent by the governing classes down the river of politics, and the fragile clay jars floated there by the people will do well if they escape unsmashed; certainly they stand a poor chance of success in any competition with rivals of such density and superior momentum. Do not think that members of the working class will very soon find their way into the House of Commons. And if they did, are they more to be feared than the Irish Members were at the period of Catholic emancipation, and may they not hope to acquit them­ selves as well ? And if a few working men do get there, will they even endanger the State or lower the character of the House ? I think not. What they can do, and all they can do, is perfectly well known �11 now. Until there is payment provided for Members of Parliament, Brown and Smith would soou find their way into the Gazette, or be starved to death through want ofmeans to support their position. Besides, they would soon be discharged from their situations in the factory through their losing time in attending “ the House.” Or if they had indulgent employers and were able to keep their “ places,” we should see them running down from the forge or the foundry with faces like Ethiopian serenaders, to be present at a “ division.” The electric wires that now summon the Marquis of Claret from the Carlton, or Sir Henry Madeira from the Reform Club, must tele­ graph to Buggins in a coal mine, and communicate with Sykes at a ginger beer factory. How often would Stiggins in a fustian jacket catch the eye of the Speaker ? Would Bob Martin be presentable at court in a paper cap? Would Snooks, M.P., be eligible to waltz at St. James’s in his shirt sleeves ? And how would the working class M.P. transact the business of his borough ? Would he give the town­ clerk an audience at a coffee-house after seven o’clock, when his work was over ? His annual speech to his constituents must be delivered on a Saturday afternoon. When the bankers or the corporation of the town wanted the services of their member, to watch some bill be­ fore the House, would they endeavour “ to catch him at a dinner time ?” If a proposed railway were about to chop up the ancient landed estates of the neighbourhood, would the Earl of Whitechokerlea and Lord Fitzsatin, constituting, with others, a deputation, wait upon the sitting member, in the hope of seeing him as he left the factory gates at “ bell ringing ?” The whole thing is so supremely absurd that nobody but a Tory could imagine it, and nobody but a Whig of antique faith could believe it. And when payment of representatives is conceded, which will be somewhere about the year 1898, only here and there a workman, and he of known integrity of character, would be elected. The presump­ tion against all others would be that they were merely seeking wages otherwise unattainable, which supposition would exclude them from the votes even of their own order. Granting that now and then a working class member may be elected (after 1898), could their fatuity, garrulity, and dropsical oratory exceed what we now witness on the part of certain highly respectable and right honourable boobies, who never lifted a hammer or earned a shilling by manly toil ? The workman is not particularly likely to lower the character of the house. Would he exercise any “ dangerous influence ” by his presence there ? What weight would he have ex­ cept upon a few questions which he might happen to understand ? If he had the vanity, the folly, or stupidity to speak on any other, he would sink at once to the level of those distinguished bores whom nobody reports except for derision, and whom nobody regards. De­ prived by birth, position, and indigence, of sound various political education, he must be generally silent, or be the echo of opinions known �12 not to be his own. A man may conceal his ignorance among his equals , but among those who know more than himself, disguise of his incapacity is impossible. A representative of the working classes would find that the actual business of government must always be in the hands of men of intellect. Upon many local, municipal, and industrial questions, and upon many general questions, where common sense and incorruptible honesty are required, he would be a desirable addition to the deliberative composition of the House, and having the good sense to restrict himself to such topics he might hope to have weight with the House according to his capacity. But as for making any other impression by illicit or blatant means upon an assembly of 650 English gentlemen, conservative by position and by birth, proud by nature, jealous by education, and independent by wealth, he would soon find, as everybody knows, the thing to be utterly impossible. There is hardly any probability, with the widest extension of the franchise, that any workman will be elected this generation. Henry Hunt, with wealth, connections, and popular prestige, obtained a seat only at the close of his life. Cobbett, with acquired fortune, rare political capacity, and a reputation which no English writer had possessed since the days of Swift, grew old before he became a mem­ ber of parliament. W. J. Fox, distinguished in many ways, and the greatest orator of the Anti-Corn-Law League, was grey with years before he was accorded a seat—and there is not a second constituency in the empire that would do as Oldham has done. Where then is the prospect of seats for men of lesser means, lesser power, lesser mark, and still more unacceptable opinions ? To widen the electoral basis may give satisfaction where there is now discontent, but it will in no way alter the instincts of Englishmen. We are not Frenchmen, and we are not Americans. Liberty with us is progress, not a capricious extreme; and parliament has no more to fear in the way of degeneracy from the presence of a few workmen, than the army has to fear de­ moralisation from the incorporation of a band of acrobats. These suggestions, which, submitted by a friend, received some con­ sideration from some members of the late government, are now de­ ferentially submitted to you. In my opinion, the franchise I describe, if acted upon, might enable the country to realise that condition sketched by the statesman whom the Duke of Argyle quoted at Dun­ dee the other day: “ Happy is that people between whose past and whose present no gulf of forgetfulness has been fixed; whose pro­ gress has been steady progress, under the guidance and protection of their ancient laws; no national element of life rejected, no national memory forgotten.” I am, Sir, your obedient Servant, G. J. Holyoake. �13 THE UTILITY OF A MUNICIPAL FRANCHISE TO THE RIGHT HON. LORD JOHN RUSSELL, M.P. LETTER III. 147, Fleet Street, E.C., Dec. 4, 1858. My Lord,—I am no Reform Bill maker. This new pastime of connoisseurs in politics I do not meddle with. The actual work will be done by professional or accredited hands But upon the destiny of any possible Bill no voice in Parliament is likely to be more influential than your Lordship’s. Though dogmatism will be deservedly neglected, the impressions of those outside may be recognized in a country where public opinion is assumed to be the inspiration of law ; and, therefore, one may ask, since the idea of a rating suffrage has been started, why cannot we have the thorough thing done ? Any minister having a Reform Bill to negociate might save himself a world of trouble by relegating its legal difficulties to the municipal sphere. Why not (after deciding what places or congeries of places shall send members to parliament) settle such vexed questions as the nature of the franchise and the ballot, on the permissive principle ? Give powers to the municipalities to determine the future nature of the franchise for themselves. Who outside a town know so well who is fit to vote as the people within it ? Were the franchise left as it is, and boroughs permitted to extend it when and as the Town Council—• the best judges in the matter-—-may determine, it would render that national self-government which Count Montalembert has so praised in the English people, something like a reality, and would infuse new life and dignity into local action—it would relieve Parliament from the perplexity of a settlement which will probably satisfy no­ body—it would dissipate the idea of a restricted suffrage being a Parliamentary tyranny, and turn men’s attention home, and put the “ affairs of the people ” where the late Sir Robert Peel said they ought to be found, “ in the hands of the people.” How this plan might be adapted also to counties, the resources of your Lordship’s sagacity would quickly determine. As one who travels much in the provinces, I know that few books would be more valuable than a volume upon the Borough Politics of England. Here and there knotty political questions are settled by local common sense, over which the collective wisdom of the nation bungles for a generation. A debate in a corporation is, I grant, often as vapid as some debates in the Commons, but invested with national functions, a competition in excellence will spring up in Town Councils, which will become, as they ought to be, the normal schools of our Members of Parliament. I have the honour to be, Your Lordship’s faithful Constituent, G. J. Holyoake. 1 ,i J | | ' �14 PROTECTION TO WORKING CLASS INTERESTS. TO THE RIGHT HON. LORD JOHN RUSSELL, M.P. LETTER IV. 147, Fleet Street, E.C., January 20, 1859 My Lord,—I write short letters because in the nature of things a statesman cannot be expected, amid his many duties, to read long ones. Were not the occasion imminent, and the time relevant, I had not troubled your Lordship at all. By birth and life I belong to the order of the people. Like Lord Grey I am disposed to stand by my order, and for the same reason that Lord Grey was disposed to stand by his. It is because to the order of industry no direct recognition is designed in the projected Reform Bill, that I write to your Lordship. Every order in Great Britain but this, has the benefit of Parliamentary protection. When will the turn of the people come ? That every tenth man of the working class should be in receipt of parochial relief, is a condition of degradation which every member of that class shares who silently suffers it. If the “ out-door relief of the aristocracy ” be disgraceful, the out-door relief of the democracy is no less so. The pauperism of the. working class is treated like petty larceny, and there is not a parish in the kingdom where the recipient of “ relief” is not made to feel this. We perform a sufficient part in the production of the enormous wealth of this country to be entitled to such a share of it as shall save all honest members of our order from this disgraceful con­ tingency. The dishonest you may denounce and we will disown them. Therefore, as one of the people, I claim the vote, not as a “ charity,” which I despise,,nor as a “ privilege ” (for it is more or less than that), nor as a “ right,” which Parliament deems revolutionary, but as a means of defence and protection against depredators whom the magistrate does not recognise nor society brand; but which are not the less real and serious. Give protection then to the interest of poverty—no interest.needs it half so much. Give Industry, which toils without proportional rewards, probably to die on pauper bread, power of self-defence. Are landlords, bankers, merchants, and shopkeepers eternally to be consulted, and never the workman ? Why are the people alone to be told to look to frugality as their means of competence? “Frugality” is the fair sounding term in which the counsel of privation is disguised to them. Why should not the opulent be advised to practise the wholesome virtue of frugality (good for all conditions) ? They might then live on much less than they now have need to appropriate from the aggregate earnings of labour. There then would remain an immense surplus, which might be added to the income of the workman, since the wealthy would not want it. My �15 Lord, why should advice be given to us which is never taken by those who offer it, and which is intended to reconcile us to an indefensible and unnecessary inequality ? We covet no man’s riches (not his lawful riches, because he has a right to them—not the unlawful ac­ cumulations, that would be criminal) ; we envy no man’s legitimate fortune, nor do we propose to attack it, but we demand that Parliament shall no longer secure to wealth and intellect a monopoly of political power wherewith to combat men their inferiors in knowledge, and who are almost without means. Poverty wishes to save itself from the necessity and discredit of mendicancy. It has always been patient, it is beginning to have pride. It objects to the protracted doom of direct labour, direct dependence, and indirect representation. From this injustice it is more in your Lordship’s power than that of any other statesman in the House of Commons to save the people. On the question of Reform no man’s word will be weightier. When the electoral margin is widened, as it is agreed by late and present governments it ought to be, the door ought to be left open whereby well-intending but poverty-stricken intelligence may obtain admission. He who by any just service secures this, will save future Parliaments renewed contests, the country renewed agitations, and the people from abiding and justly entertained discontent. A story was told the other day of a Dublin cabman who had carried a rather heavy gentleman a full mile, and who was offered the precise fare of sixpence. Before taking it, he covered his horse’s head with the horse cloth, giving as his reason for it that his horse was a “ dacent baste,” whom he should be sorry to see how great a weight he had carried for so small a reward. And certainly, unless John Bull gets a substantial and expansive extension of the suffrage, he ought, on the day a meagre and disappointing Bill passes, to have his head covered, lest the people should see how great a load of taxation they have endured, what rivers of blood they have spilled in defence of their “ betters,” and how great a load of the aristocracy they have carried for so poor and mean a remuneration. I have the honour to be, Your Lordship’s faithful Constituent, ♦ G. J. Holyoake. i �APPENDIX TO THE LETTER TO THE “ DAILY NEWS." TBOM MB. J. THANCIS. “ Athenseum ” Office, Wellington Street, Strand, Dec. 3rd, 1858. Dear Sir,—I have to thank you for the courteous manner in which you have in­ troduced my name into an important letter written by you, andinserted in the Daily News, on the “Workman and the Suffrage.” The suggested character franchise you judge would be objected to, as the certificate would be issued by employers and betters. I am aware how difficult it is to remove prejudice from the mind of a working-man. I should, however, hope that the option when presented him thus easily to obtain what is so much desired, on reflection—and working-men do re­ flect—the reluctance would be overcome, and thus many thousands who should be voters would possess the privilege. I like much your proposed educational ex­ amination. Many no doubt would avail themselves of it; but the time and application required to qualify I fear would prove too restrictive. Why should not both plans be adopted ? Fortunately, of late years, feeling has been an influence at work in the framing of laws; hence, in regard to marriage, those who object to its being solemnized at church, can avail themselves of the service of the dissenting minister, while such as . desire neither can with equal validity sign the marriage contract at the registration office. Let but a kindred influence operate in the proposed extension of the suffrage, and the intelligent working-man will find himself in the enjoyment of a privilege that shall bind him still more strongly to the institution which in principle I believe he loves. I am, dear Sir, yours truly, To Mr. G. J. Holyoake. Francis. The Western Times,of Dec. 25thult.,republishestheletterto the Daily News entire. Along letterdiscussingit, in the Statesman, Dec. 4, signed “A Macclesfield Weaver,” accepts it “as a pledge of moderation, not only for the writer, but for the thousands of intelligent men represented by him.” The Northern Whig, Nov. 25, in a long leader upon it, finds “some things which it is important to press on public attention at this period.” The Beacon and Christian Times, Nov. 24, considers “ among other advantages of the scheme, the plea that it would be a self-acting franchise, continually widening with the diffusion of intelligence. There is something in the suggestion. An educational franchise ought no longer to be insuperable in these days of competitive and middle-class, examinations. Many political associations have considered it. These quotations sufficiently illustrate the sense in which the suggestion has been regarded. But it deserves to be added that the National Review (for January, 1859) observes, Mr. Holy­ oake proposes that the franchise should be given to those who could pass a political examination; an examination that is in some standard text-book—-Mill s Prineipies of Political Economy,’ or some work of equal reputation. But it does not need to be explained that this would enfranchise extremly few people in a country. rit would be enough if it enfranchised all whose exclusion would be discreditable to the State.] Only a few persons give, or can give, a scientific attention to politics, and very many who cannot, are in every respect competent to give their votes as electors, and even to serve as representatives. [A.valuable admission.] It is probable that such an examination suffrage, in addition to the kinds oi suffrage which exist now, would not add one per cent, to the present constituen­ cies. [Its value does not turn upon the numbers it might, include, but upon, its enfranchising those who would give vitality to discontent if excluded.) And it it were made a necessary qualification for the possession of a vote, we should theieby disfranchise ninty-nine hundredths of the country.” [Nobody proposes anything so absurd as a retrospective qualification. The Editor of a Tyneside newspaper told me that an imperative Intelligence Suffrage would disfranchise halt the magistrates of his county.] John Watts. Printer, Fleet Street, London. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Victorian Blogging Description An account of the resource A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library &amp; Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Conway Hall Library & Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Conway Hall Ethical Society Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data Pamphlet Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The workman and the suffrage: letters to the Right Honourable Lord John Russell, M.P., and his 'Daily News' Description An account of the resource Edition: People's ed. Place of publication: London Collation: 15, [1] p. ; 18 cm. Notes: Includes bibliographical references. Appendix to the letter to the Daily News from John Francis and the Western Times. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Holyoake, George Jacob Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Holyoake & Co. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource [1859] Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context G4960 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource English Subject The topic of the resource Suffrage Suffrage Working Classes https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/62dd8b35636ac897246b0260df2d37fb.pdf?Expires=1781740800&Signature=CEUNAd6YnEeVk9gNSNDq2vCWnBT98pSajB7HFocmi0L%7ESIUWZGzTM5-5q22CUaRY5lFFk0YfAMbCh9s7nt6%7ETc9fJXXI7WJf-%7E32WhlDcfbL14gy1CdJK%7E1b5lOiNXecKazNnUmLjUSj1wMyvfpkour%7Ee8ny-3c275U40Mr4lWjLEkGjbDVy9RvcbT6S-2P3Z5fCHoqT3uhlX9YTnI%7EDSr2sULrLMRv5aW93hC27sz981aPtlgHyJ65rsWFxpDzQaBNK6R%7E4kMLDbC8CrN40p09PDbm1sF%7E9%7EJcVQPDjEED03iDjsvEJZdg7VCjyt8ePS9NGhNWyIVFP0ZXWyAhasA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM c1e45468ec3edaae0a3f179e2a0123fd PDF Text Text ,.o 1; I X1' [From Mr. IIolyoake.~} k iw IW'' A NEW IW * Defence of the Ballot In Consequence of Mr. Mill's Objections to it. BY * George Jacob Holyoake. * s® : political Error is like a Serpent alive at both ends—if severed it may still sting: A while it wriggles it lives: and those who mean to end it must—chop at it. V jL J||f . 4 [FOURTH EDITION."] LONDON: BOOK STORE, 282, STRAND, W.C. 1868. [threepence.] " �PREFACE. ' reads these few pages, will see the occasion of them. Since many politicians have treated the same subject, it will seem presumption or weariness for me to recur to it; but experience teaches that long standing error, and especially Political error is like a serpent alive at both ends__ if severed it may still sting : while it wriggles it lives: and those who meali to end it must—chop at it. This statement of the case of the Ballot was made at the Council of the London Reform League. Mr. Edmond Beales, the President, expressed in the name of the Council, approval of the argument and Mr. A cl and moved that it be printed, and with a view to its circulation, at this time, in the Branches of the Reform League and other Political Societies. While the Third Edition was in the press, Lord Hartington spoke upon the subject of these pages at Standish, and Mr. Hughes, M.P., at Frome. Their conjoint Speeches sum up the sentimental objections to the Ballot. Lord Hartington says “ all public duties ought to be performed openly, especially the great constitutional duty electors owe to their country.” . One would fall prostrate before the moral elevation assumed by this noble lord, did not one see that he is careless whether the great “ duty ” be performed or not: since he has at no time proposed that its discharge be made obligatory upon the elector. His lordship connives at the desertion of the “ duty they owe to their country ” by half the electoral community who do not vote, and are not obliged to vote at all; and so of Mr. Hughes, who alleges that “open voting is more manly than secret voting,” but takes no account of the compulsion of voting openly : Is that manly ? The de­ pendent voter can be taken by the nose as soon as he has given his vote, and he has to submit to it. And is this Mr. Hughes’ theory of Electoral manliness ? As an officer of volunteers, Mr. Hughes thinks it good judg­ ment to take them into the field in an attire which does not expose them by conspicuousness to the enemy, but he would take up his electors to the Poll ticketed like a target. Like the Spectator, Mr. Hughes appears to regard it unmanly in Liberals to use discretion in fighting. G. J. H. 20, Cockspur Street, 8. W. �A New Defence of the Ballot. It is incumbent upon those who took part in limiting the discussions of the Reform League to its own programme, to show that the subjects which the League is pledged to promote, are capable of occupying its members and interesting the public. It was for this reason that I asked last year for an opportunity of calling attention to the arguments by which the claim to the Ballot may be supported, and at our Meeting at St James’s Hall, on the 28th of January, I indicated, in a short speech, the reasons I now more fully state. For years past, the subject of the Ballot has been thought to be insipid—it has been felt to be growing obsolete—it has been much assailed by defamatory and con­ temptuous epithets. As a Beacon-light of the Liberal party, it has burned of late years, but fitfully. One who utters nothing lightly on questions of public moment—Mr. J. S. Mill, M.P. has declared that “ the Ballot ought to form no part of a measure for reforming the representation of the people.” Even now, ardent advocates of the Ballot—as Mr. Noble—speak of it apologetically, as something which they wish the people were strong enough to do without, and only defend it as a political necessity of the time—warranted by the presence of intimidations which excuse the weak for desiring the protection of the Ballot— but which the manly s/iould, and the patriotic otherwise wouZd, instinctively reject These opinions, and these concessions indicate the modern misconception of the uses and dignity of the Ballot. Instead of apologising for desiring the Ballot, we ought to apologise for being without it, it being a mark of manliness to demand it, and of independence to possess it. The Ballot is the weapon of the strong and of the strong only—a condition of individuality of action and a necessary complement of enfranchisement. Mr. Mill, who like Jeremy Bentham, is a master of what an American would call “ iron-clad phrases ”—says that the Ballot means “ secret suffrage.” It is this very quality which makes it invaluable. Secret suffrage is Free suffrage— secret suffrage means an impenetrable, an impassable, a defiant suffrage. Bribery cannot touch it—-intimidation cannot reach it—that delicate instrument in Electioneering Mechanics, known as the political screw—cannot operate upon it. There is a right and a wrong side in most things—yet in arguing upon the Ballot it is suggested that that which is secret must be wrong altogether. There are two descriptions of secrecy—an infamous secrecy and an honourable secrecy. The base kind of secrecy is that employed in mean, furtive, or criminal acts; as when a man lies, or conceals the truth in giving evidence, or clandestinely filches from another. But there is a second description of secrecy which is manly, as when I lock my doors against intrusive or impertinent people—or when I exclude others �4 from meddling with my affairs without my consent—or when I provide for the protection of my own interests in my business or my family. This is necessary and justifiable secrecy. In these cases I merely exercise the right of personal privacy * in what concerns me primarily, vitally, and concerns me alone. Privacy is my protection. For guarding my personal interests in the state the Ballot is all this to me. The Ballot is not “ secret voting ” in the bad sense of being the act of an un­ avowed agent—done in an unrecognized manner—and for a venal object. The Ballot is secret suffrage in the legitimate sense of privacy and security. The voter is a known person—he is selected by the state—his qualifications are approved—he is an appointed elector—he has recognized interests at stake—he is an instructed and informed agent. The Candidates who offer themselves to represent him have appealed to him—they have addresed him—they have set forth their claims before him—he has a duty assigned him to his country and his conscience. Now there is only one method by which he can discharge this duty. It is only by the use of a secret suffrage that he can come personally forward in a way in which corrup­ tion can have no hope of arresting him, and intimidation no chance of diverting or deterring him from indicating who shall be his responsible agent to represent his views—tax his resources, protect his interests—and attempt in his name to increase the freedom, honour and repute of his native land. All this independence of action, is my business as a voter, and if that indi­ viduality of action which Mr. Mill so usefully vindicates, is to be secured to me— voting must be left my business. It is no affair of my neighbour how I vote, or for whom I vote, or why I vote—since I exercise no power or freedom which he does not equally possess, and which I do not equally concede to him. I am said to be an “ independent ” elector, I am told it is my duty to be independent; then why should any one want to know how I vote ? I am not called upon to consult my neighbour as to what I shall do. If I am obliged to consult him he is my master, but he has no business with a knowledge of my affairs, and if he wants it he is impertinent—if he insists upon it he is offensive—and means me mischief if I decline to do his bidding. Open voting was invented by persons who had an interest in persuading the people they were free, when all the while they were under effectual control. Those who devised open voting knew what they were about. It did not matter much who had votes, so long as the aristocracy, the landlords, or labour-lords could always know who gave votes against them. Poes any one suppose that with the feelings which the governing classes entertained towards the people, that they would give the suffrage to any number of the people, to do with it what they pleased, and use it in a manner unknown, and therefore uncontrollable ?_ The governing classes in State and Church would have been idiots, with their distrust of the multidude, to have parted with vital power, that they could no longer check. It would have been in their eyes an act of wholesale abdication. They saw in the Ballot the removal of the dam which kept the deluge from their doors. The “manipulators of mankind” who devised open Voting, knew it must be submitted to, because they were able to enforce it, but they looked to its being decried and resented from the first moment its purport was seen: it never occurred to them that future patriots could be found to applaud it, and that philosophy, would discover political virtue in it. Tyranny may hope yet that some one will discover that oppression is a scheme for developing the manliness of slaves. * There is a good and bad publicity as well as a good and bad privacy. That is a good publicity when a man is accorded the Victoria Cross. That is a villainous publicity, when, for instance an Elector is convicted of selling his vote. �Reformers on the other hand clung to the Ballot with the instinct of self-pre­ servation. Then their national pride was assailed and they were told (Lord Palmer­ ston was great at this) that it is un-English to fight the hattie of freedom with precaution. According to this reasoning the use of armour plates is cowardly, and it is un-English for a gunner to fire from a casemate. I esteem the courage of individuality as highly as Mr. Mill, hut there is no reason why individuality should not take care of itself. It is madness, not manli­ ness in a man who opposes his single head to twenty swords. His fool-hardiness will merely deter others, and the reputation for courage he will acquire will not outlive the Coroner’s Inquest upon him. Individuality like other virtues is subject to the law of self-preservation. There might be more individuality of character than there is if every man was his own policeman. There might be more personal resolution than there is, if every man rejected the enervating equality of the law, which protects the weak against the strong. Then even the coward must fight and the weak must struggle or perish. But that is insanity of individuality which wantonly enters upon unequal conflicts; and open voting is of the same order of fatuity. Secret suffrage is the Needle-gun which places the proletariat and the proprietor upon an equality in the electoral combat. The theory of Representative Government calls upon me to delegate my power to another for a given time. Once in seven years I am master of the situation— afterwards I am at the mercy of the Member of Parliament I elect. He may tax me, he may compel the country into war, he may be a party to base treaties, he may limit my liberty, he may degrade me as an Englishman, but I am bound by his acts. From election to election—he is my master. I must obey the laws he helps to make, or he will suspend the Habeas Corpus Act and put a sword at my throat, or fire upon me with the latest improved Rifle he has made me pay for in the Estimates. I may howl but I cannot alter anything. My only security is that a time will come when I shall be master again. I shall taste of power for one supreme mo­ ment, when I shall stand by the Ballot Box. Then I can displace the member who has betrayed me, and choose another representative in his stead. But if the Candidate, or friends of the Candidate, subject me to espionage as I approach the Polling Booth, he can defy me and perpetuate his power to cheat me. If, because a man’s politics are not of the Government pattern, Sir Richard Mayne (who always treats the working class as a criminal class) is minded to place him under sur­ veillance, as a political suspect—that is intolerable, yet this is not more so than that the Parish Overseer should be placed in the Polling Booth to watch how he votes, and report it to whomsoever it may concern. This is to legalize the “ tyranny of the majority.” Disguise it as you may, the device of open voting is mere political insolence. I am told that the vote is “ a trust ” then let me be trusted with it! I am not trusted so long as my use of it is watched. If I choose to vote openly that is my bravery, my pride, my ostentation, or my hardihood—if I am forced to vote openly that is the badge of my inferiority—it is the sign that I am not to be trusted. The open voter who is compelled to be so, is under surveillance—he is kept under the eye of his masters—he carries only a political Ticket-of-Leave, and is duly reported to the political police—his landlord, his employer, his customer, or his priest. My power of secrecy is the sign of my independence, and I treat as my enemy all.who, under any pretext, would impose upon me the degradation of publicity. I repeat, in order to impress it, that under the representative system the state accords to me but one minute of independence in seven years, namely, the mo­ ment when I give my vote. My interests, my preferences, my honour, my con­ science, my country are then in my own keeping; and neither my neighbour, nor my employer, nor my landlord, nor the Government, shall, if I can help it, control �6 me then. If I am to share the responsibility of a citizen I will be free. But to be free I must have the power of defiance—and. there is no defiance save in secrecy. I am ever at the mercy of those who retain in their hands the power of knowing what I do at the Polling Booth. It is asked why should the member of Parliament be compelled to vote openly_ it the elector votes secretly ? I answer, because the member is the responsible agent—the elector is the master—the elector delegates to the member the power of life and death, of freedom or coercion over him ; and he has therefore the right to know how this power is exercised, and to recall it one day, if need be. It is the elector who gives dignity to the member, not the member who gives dignity to the elector. The elector never abdicates his manhood or mastership; and so long as the Constitution secures him this independence, he yields to the law, to which he con­ sents by his representative—a proud obedience, which otherwise no cunning could win and no,force exact. 1 do not say the Ballot gives wisdom, I only say that it gives freedom. A man may give a silly vote secretly as well as openly. It is true that with the Ballot a man is free to be a fool—but without it he is not free to be wise—politically. But you cannot disenfranchise men for being fools—if you were to do that you would make such abstractions from the present constituencies that in many towns and counties there would be no voters left to elect anybody. This argument invalidates no one of these ordinarily advanced in favour of the Ballot. It is still true that the Ballot would frustrate Bribery—baffle intimidation and economise the expense of elections ; but if it made them dearer I should reason as I do, for independence is worth all it costs. Since the days of Defoe there has been a clamour for the Ballot in England — because the Liberals were narrower in the throat and tenderer in the head than their opponents. The Tories excel in shouting and fighting. They are more certainly . the violent than they are the “ stupid ” party. At the last election in Rochdale the Reformers with the thickest heads had to be placed in the front. Only patriots with craniums of a well ascertained density were able to serve their country at the Poll; and as a general rule, where the Candidate’s purse invigorates the contest, the peculiarity of a free and independent elector is—a bandaged head. With a secret suffrage the voter, Mr. Mill says, is “ under no inducement to defer to the wishes of others.” True he is under no arbitrary inducement—but he remains under the natural inducements of sympathy, of conviction as to its utility or rightfulness, to consult the wishes of others. He ought to be under no other inducements. If the wishes cf others are to be made compulsory upon him, the honest course is to set him aside and let the “ others,” whose wishes are to prevail vote for him. I refuse to be bound by any consideration, or by any coercion of publicity, to vote as “ others ” wish. If I am taxed “ others ” will not pay my taxes—if I am oppressed or degraded “ others ” will not bear my dishonour. I therefore repudiate any coercive obligation to vote as “ others ” wish—whether in days of peace or strife, now, or at any time. A strong point against secret suffrage, is, as Mr. Mill puts it, that the mean or selfish can do the base thing and “ escape shame or responsibility.” But these knaves do this now under open voting—they always make things pleasant for themselves. You cannot reach them except by administering Lynch law at the Polling Booth, or pursuing them by a Vigilance Committee. | If the base or selfish are to be coerced by exposure and risk, it should be done to « ’ jurymen- base jurors may set the rascal free, or hang the innocent through prejudice, or inattention to evidence—but if to expose these you were to subject all jurymen to the danger of publicity, you would have fewer honest verdicts than you get now. You get justice done by giving security to those who award it—and this is the only way of getting honest votes at the Poll. �1 r Mr. Mill is a leader, who allures all who seek light, by the luminousness of « >. thought which he sheds over every subject he treats, and his conclusions are usually stated with such lucid force, that allegiance becomes a necessity of the understanding: and I should hesitate to dissent from him, did not long experience and passionate conviction, assure me that it ought to be done. Mr. Mill’s < eminence, sincerity and perspicacity, have lent to the case of the opponents of the Ballot a dignity and weight, with which they were unable them­ selves to invest it. But it is contrary to Mr. Mill’s principles or practice to desire Reformers to acquiesce in his arguments, unless convinced by them. All he asks is, that which he has a right to ask—that his views shall prevail unless good reasons can be given against them. We all desire, as much as Mr. Mill, or Mr. Hughes, or Mr. Gladstone, that manliness shall prevail among Englishmen. What I ask is that manliness shall have fair play. But that is a mere mania for manliness, which would prohibit the conditions of its action. It no doubt would be one form of manliness to send our merchantmen out into a sea, infested and kept infested with pirates. But it is far more manly in a nation to sweep the sea clear of pirates, and keep it clear. Open voting invests the sea of politics with pirates, and it is no » more decent in those who happen to be able to fight, to do so, than it is lawful for those who are able to protect themselves when assaulted, to take the law into their own hands, and exempt the judge from the duty of punishing the offenders. I maintain therefore, that the secret suffrage is English, because it is English to be free and defiant. Manliness does not consist in living under the obligation of fighting, but in the capacity of fighting when fighting is inevitable. The compul­ sion of open voting enables the Briber to follow the scoundrel who has sold his country, to see that he renders his vote to the Candidate who has had the baseness to buy it. Since voting is made open, and not also compulsory—it does nothing to ensure individuality of character. For it enables the coward to skulk his duty at the Poll, and subjects him who shows himself there to all the social penalties of publicity. On some it entails violence, on others loss of employment or connections, it may'be £5, it may be £500 a year, according a voter’s extent of business—and to expose him to these risks represses, not promotes, individuality. Individuality is a quality which requires encouragement to grow—but it must possess a ferocious vitality if it developes itself under the treatment, to which public voting subjects it. The Individuality of action, Mr. Mill aims at, is only to be obtained out of a quickened conscience and an intellect open to truth, left to exercise itself in a fair field, where facts can act. You can no more get men through the wicket gate of the Poll, where they may be marked for reprisals and penalties, than you can get cattle through the butcher’s door after they smell blood. Those whom you do get there at dangerous elections, are mostly they who are too poor, or too obscure to be hurt, or those who care not what follows—until it overtakes them; then as many of them that are harmed, ever after run screaming about the world against the cost­ liness of being a Reformer, creating reaction everywhere. When a Voter comes to grief in this way, and has to look to friends for aid; neither he nor his friends like the situation: and if he regards his- difficulty as one of the casualities of patriotism, thoughtfully provided by Liberal politicians, lest sacrifices should be deficient among their followers, the household' of the weak-headed Voter, quickened by consequences, take a very different view of the matter : and do more than any enemies can, to spread disaffection in ranks, where the policy of the generals is to keep up the manliness of their troops, by exposing their families to the fire of the foe. In military affairs the commander prides himself on affording all possible shelter to his forces. It is only in political warfare, that generals take credit for exposing their troops to fatal reprisals. It is because I am an advocate of “ Individuality ” that I am an advocate of the Ballot. The ruler, the master, the priest, always suspect that the human machine will go wrong, unless they wind it up and keep the key in their pocket. Every man , • » �likes to have his hand on his neighbour’s shoulder. I would take it off onee in every seven years. You see I advocate no terrible innovation. I would trust the grown-up taxpayer with the control of his own affairs, for one minute at every Gen­ eral Election. This is all that the Ballot means. In argument, no question is met unless it is met on the strongest ground the op­ ponent takes. To call the Ballot “ secret voting,” is the most damaging epithet an adversary applies to it, I, therefore, accept Mr. Mill’s phrase. The term which the friends of the Ballot would select, is that of Free voting. Personal voting is a fair term for it. A man votes, as he marries, not for his neighbour’s satisfaction, but for his own. Mr. Mill says, that if a voter may go wrong, “ but the feeling of responsi­ bility to others may keep him right, the friends of the Ballot admit that not secrecy, but publicity should be the rule.” I, a friend of the Ballot, refuse to admit this. Whether the voter goes right or wrong, I stand by his freedom. He is responsible to no publicity. He is responsible alone to his sense of right and the public good. A “ secret suffrage ” would not, as some fear, convert life into a strategem. Secrecy is like salt—an entire meal of salt would be highly unpalatable, but a little salt sprinkled over a meal, approves itself to the taste of all nations. And a little (wise- and conditional) secrecy sprinkled upon the Ballot box, makes a vote palatable to the conscience, and sweetens the politics of the Kingdom. We hear on all hands to day from Parlia’mentary Members, an admission which has humiliation in it. They are saying to their constituents that the intimidation, menaced by the Tories, is driving us to the Ballot. This is indeed an un-English confession. If the Ballot be a wrong thing, nothing should drive Reformers to it. The Ballot is spoken of as a sort of dastard’s refuge, which the heroic Reformers should despise. I for one decline the Ballot on these terms. If it be a mere craven security, or an ignoble defence, Reformers should have none of it. Some Candidates say if the people demand it, it must be conceded. But if it be a wrong thing in itself, I would neither concede it, nor acquiesce in conceding it—however the people might demand it. We will not send the Hon. Mr. Berkely annually to the Bar of Parliament to plead for a cowardly democracy. We will accept all the responsix bility of freedom. We adopt no disguise of the slave and obey no instinct of the fool. The bravado of open voting does not conceal from us that it is an acknow­ ledgment of the right of others to control us. We repudiate that, and therefore we resent as an outrage any attempt to subject’us to the manipulation of others. * The Ballot is the imperial attribute of the Sovereign Elector, whose province it'is to impose responsibility upon the Representative, the elector himself being responsi­ ble to the law alone, should he sell the birth-right of his freedom, his Vote—in which case it should be forfeited for evermore. At a General Election I would make no question supreme. Every Candidate should be accepted on his general merits, and the ground of his recognized capacity and public services. But I would ask of every new Candidate “Do you mean to vote for the Ballot—not merely acquiesce in it, if you must; not, merely vote for it, if others do—but do you mean it?—do you care for it ?—will you be at trouble to secure it, and establish forthwith, for me as an Elector, my rightful and un­ assailable independence at the Poll ? ” •Let any one who doubts this, read Mr. Hepworth Dixon’s notable Address on EreeVoting, delivered at Guildford, April 23rd, 1868. He will there see how James I. and Charles I. dealt with the Ballot Box. For Distribution a Cheaper Edition is Published. Single Copies, Id.; Twelve, tod.; Twenty-five, Is. Post Free. Apply— Mr. Howell, Secretary, Reform Teague, 8, Adelphi Terrace, London, TF C. ' � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Victorian Blogging Description An account of the resource A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library &amp; Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Conway Hall Library & Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Conway Hall Ethical Society Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data Pamphlet Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource A new defence of the ballot in consequence of Mr. Mill's objections to it Description An account of the resource Edition: 4th Place of publication: London Collation: 8 p. ; 22 cm. Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Holyoake, George Jacob Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Book Store Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1868 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context G5220 Subject The topic of the resource Political science Suffrage Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (A new defence of the ballot in consequence of Mr. Mill's objections to it), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span> Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource English Conway Tracts Great Britain-Politics and Government-19th Century John Stuart Mill Political reform https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/a35fbe05e1d227e9bbd50ed4c02966c1.pdf?Expires=1781740800&Signature=V048JD6oKs4qcJ0wm6F2HKhIiLpIi6WOTfR7CwsX4z-EuV6pm9G6Xyp3rRiTVOu6e8liU16YINz0H4pWSTaRqG7XdvmHQHrz4hWGgVQwuDu6pqNXeRHGRuZqJ5MPiKHDDm5-4kyYGsRPZBtyprqsouzn65YA3waispUuixgE4OKEk-P%7E40YtG5caneJMuw3ZtHiPfucuf2GXMtiFz7L7Pl4b0bgijYoZhCXwxHOjJhLhbfrCNHVC73ufiue-CqTe8m82BcG60KvAITi1DoPewmfwr0JJcwuKOGaN-E2foKKv9K1hl6FCsvBcKoB2bHOxwZbRXOXVasp%7ESM3Iw7bt7w__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 73a7bbcac8f4ed308ef30826f903fb82 PDF Text Text PROPOSAL FOR ESTABLISHING A CHEAP, JUST, AND EFFICIENT MODE OF Elating itUnxbirs uf Wrfamtnf, AND FOR SECURING THE JUST AND EQUAL REPRESENTATION OF THE WHOLE PEOPLE. WILLIAM LOVETT. LONDON WATBELOW AND SONS, PEINTEES, CAEPENTEBs’ HALE, LONDON WALL. 1869. ��PROPOSAL, &c. 1. That for the purpose of obtaining an equal repre­ sentation of the whole people in the Commons House of Parliament, and for preventing as far as possible the undue influence of great and wealthy families, or of individuals who would seek to control the voter in his choice, the United Kingdom be divided into a sufficient number of Electoral Districts, each containing as nearly as may be an equal number of inhabitants, and each returning one representative to Parliament and no more. 2. That all persons of legal age, sound mind, and untainted by crime, who have occupied any house, lodgings or apartments in a house for three successive calendar months, be eligible to vote for the repre­ sentative to Parliament for the district they live in, and for no other. 3. That preparatory to every general election the returning officer of the district should cause a printed form to be sent round to every householder in the district, requesting him or her to fill up the same with the names of all persons, of the age of 21 or upwards, who have resided there for three months or more ; and from which forms, when returned, he shall cause a list of electors to be made out. That after proper publicity �4 be given to this list, he should hold open courts of adju­ dication in his district, for the purpose of hearing and deciding on all objections, and from the list thus revised he should cause a Voter’s Certificate to be sent round to every person qualified to vote. 4. That to secure members of Parliament possessing high intelligence and good moral character, all persons seeking this high honour of legislating for a nation (or for filling other important offices of State) should be required to pass an examination, showing that they possess the requisite knowledge and ability, and should hold a diploma to that effect before they should be entitled to offer themselves as candidates, or to take their seats in Parliament, or be appointed to any important office. 5. That the knowledge requisite for members of Parliament (or for the offices referred to) should be clearly set forth in a special Act of the Legislature, and the mode pointed out by which persons seeking such high honour or place of trust, should present themselves before Public Examiners, which (roverTi-merit should appoint to meet at stated times and places ; and persons who shall prove their ability and fitness before such examiners, according to the provisions of such Act, should obtain a diploma to that effect. 6. That every nomination for a member of Parliament should be made by a written requisition, delivered to the returning officer, and signed by at least one hundred electors belonging to the district, who, in recommending their candidate, should be required to certify to his �5 moral character, and also that he holds a diploma of having passed an examination to prove that he possesses the requisite knowledge and ability required by law. 7. That to prevent all undue influence, bribery and corruption in the election of members of Parliament, the votes of the electors should be taken by Ballot; the present expensive, unjust, and bribing mode of can­ vassing for members should be abolished by law, and persons punished for having recourse to it; and all Committee or other meetings for the election of mem­ bers held at Public Souses be done away with, as having heretofore been the cause of much undue influence, riot and disorder. 8. That to do away with the present disgraceful and costly mode of electing members of Parliament, which excludes the representatives of the working classes, and of all persons, however competent, who have not the means of purchasing their way to power ; it should be the duty of Parliament to enact, that a sufficient number of Pistrict Salls, or commodious buildings be erected in every voting district, to be used as permanent hustings, or voting places ; the same to contain a sufficient number of committee rooms, and a large hall for public meetings and voting place ; the rooms to be used for public meet­ ings, lectures, evening schools, or other district purposes, when not needed for the elections. That all candidates for seats in Parliament should have the free use of such halls during the election; such as the use of the large hall, or balcony in front, from which to address the electors in their turn, and the use of the committee rooms �6 and voting place, so that the only expense needed to he incurred by candidates would be that of printing their litis and circulars. The erection and repair of such halls should be paid for by the inhabitants of the district, and be managed by them. 9. That previous to the day of election, the large room in each of the said district halls should be fitted up with moveable fittings, in order to secure secrecy in voting, and justice and despatch in receiving and regis­ tering the votes given for each candidate. The plan of the fittings in such voting place is shown in the model to which this paper is attached. 10. That a sufficient number of lallot loxes be pro­ vided for each voting place—one for each of the candi­ dates nominated—and formed on a plan for securing secrecy in voting, and at the same time for registering the votes given, so that the deputy of the returning officer might be able accurately to announce the state of the poll at the end of the election, without the necessity of any counting of the votes. The model of such a regis­ tering ballot box is hereto attached. 11. That the returning officer of the district should be required to appoint a deputy to set in front, behind the ballot boxes, at each voting place on the day of election, to see that the voting is conducted orderly and fairly, and to cause all persons to be arrested that attempt to vote unfairly, or seek to promote disturbance. It should also be his duty to show the accredited friends of the candidates the register of the ballot boxes before and after �7 the voting, and to see that the correct numbers given for each candidate are posted up on the outside of the building, at the end of the election. In order that the friends of the candidates should have the opportunity of seeing that the voting is conducted fairly, they should be provided with seats immediately behind the deputy returning officer. 12. That every elector entering the voting place on the day of election, should be required to show his voter’s certificate to the registration clerk at the entrance A ; and if it be found correct, he shall be allowed to pass on and receive from the deputy returning officer’s assistant a balloting ball at the entrance B ; when he should enter the balloting place C, and with all despatch drop his ball into the box of his favourite candidate ; the name and colours of the candidate being placed on each box to guide him. After he has thus given his vote he should pass out of the balloting place by the door D. The table before the deputy returning officer should be inclined outwards, and the arrangements within so constructed, that the ball, in whatever box deposited, should roll down the middle of the table in front of the deputy to be ready for the next voter ; and thus, should any elector make use of any other balloting ball than the one given to him, it will roll out and lead to his detection before he leaves the room. The deputy might also be provided with different coloured balls in the drawers of his table, so that he might change the colour whenever he thought proper, and thus more effectually guard against unfair voting. �8 13. That any person convicted of registering Ini in self in more than one voting district; of forging or using any forged voter’s certificate, or of trying to vote in any other district than his own; or of going from house to house, or place to place to canvass for the votes of electors, or in any other way contravening the electoral Act, should, for the first offence be subject to one year’s imprisonment, and for the second the loss of his electral rights. Also that any candidate employing persons to canvass for him, or should seek to secure his election by bribery; or by intimidating or using any undue in­ fluence over an elector, or otherwise contravening the Act, shall be subject to one year’s imprisonment and the loss of his seat for the first offence, and for the second, the loss of his electoral rights, and to be for ever after disqualified from having a seat in Parliament. 14. That in order to obtain properly qualified persons as Legislators ; men disposed to devote their sole time and attention to their parliamentary duties; instead, as at present, often dividing their time between their private business and their parliamentary duties ; or in regarding the honour of their seats as passports to fashionable society ; members of Parliament should be paid for their services by a writ on the Treasury, the same as any other officers of State. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Victorian Blogging Description An account of the resource A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library &amp; Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Conway Hall Library & Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Conway Hall Ethical Society Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data Pamphlet Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Proposal for establishing a cheap, just and efficient mode of electing members of Parliament and for securing the just and equal representation of the whole people Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Lovett, William Description An account of the resource Place of publication: London Collation: 8 p. ; 19 cm. Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Waterlow and Sons, printers Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1869 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context G5621 Subject The topic of the resource Parliament Suffrage Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Proposal for establishing a cheap, just and efficient mode of electing members of Parliament and for securing the just and equal representation of the whole people), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span> Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource English Chartism Conway Tracts Representative Government and Representation William Lovett https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/0c79c0891c51a0ac8ef780936cf77952.pdf?Expires=1781740800&Signature=kHVBK60TFe%7EpKg0M4rrdpnpHSBUOFNXHD1rmb3%7EF%7EEdeWmXQKA%7En%7ESFUEKS-KLxsPqo%7EOm43nMoIHusgqBDXr5WCU54Vy6ARfCMrl8npAqJ2Ngf5yaboubSgGacg4qDEB8oaY3C3v45GmoLOUnHzPeUsUuh95Jbyav7eoW21IW%7E-TDq0pRhSOQHsX35mb63HHZbLlU1lRvbPjgU2EAXvlgPbtw-WIZdAHkfctZ6BFSYfwQpQlqBg9Yusmts0uc5h1ki3kUB%7ExflF%7EezDOB-25Vw6GHX8Dq-MrOOtUoKPIOAxAzBirSwljCtTcq5ncqhI1qoIhDqXrrBXaxPfKGczWg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 4d39785ceaf91ad9ff9450d11e4832f8 PDF Text Text THE POWERS OF WOMEN, AND IIOW TO USE THEM. HERE has been, perhaps, a greater change of opinion in England on a greater variety of subjects—social, political, and religious —during the last ten years than had taken place in the whole period which had elapsed since Europe was convulsed by the Reformation. Whether the change has been for the better or the worse will be, of course, estimated differently by different minds, but the fact itself will hardly be disputed. Ten years ago household suffrage was considered an impossible tenet belonging to the ultra-Radicals ; we have lived to sec it given by a Conservative Government. The abolition of the Irish State Church was the scheme of “ philosophical levellers;” it has become the popular cry on which a party rides into power. “ Essays and Reviews ” was petitioned against as fraught with horrible novelties of heresy; the book may be said to have died in bringing forth a bishop, but scarcely a weekly paper or a monthly magazine now appears which does not contain doctrines almost as “advanced.” The revolution has been more tranquil and peaceful than any former one. The Bishop of Peterborough did not offer to go to the stake in defence of the Irish Establishment; Lord Derby swallowed the bitter draught of the suffrage instead of laying down his head like Strafford on the scaffold. Liberal admissions take out the sting of the strongest defences of orthodoxy ; and the revision of the authorized version, headed by the Bishop of Winchester, looks a little like the �¿22 THE CONTEMPORARY REVIEW. theological equivalent of Mr. Disraeli taking the political bread out of the mouths of his adversaries by the “ ten minutes ” Bill. Lastly, the whole question of the use of women in the world, their “ rights ” and their 11 wrongs,” is being discussed in a manner which contrasts very remarkably with the tone of even a few years back; while the discussions in Parliament upon female suffrage, the municipal vote granted last year to single women possessing the necessary quali­ fication, the Married Women’s Property Bill, which has just passed the House of Commons, the education—artistic, medical, scientific, and literary—now offered to them by so many bodies, public and private, show the breach which has been made in the fortress of ancient opinion. The movement has now indeed attained a wider, deeper signifi­ cance than is even indicated by such changes in England. It is spreading over the whole world in the marvellously rapid way with which the interchange of ideas takes place at present among nations ; through that “ solidarity ” which is at last comprehending even the unchanging East. It is showing itself in Russia and Spain, in India and America, the old world and the new alike. Russian ladies are taking medical degrees at Zurich, and now at St. Petersburg; schools for Hindoo girls are established and well attended at Madras and Calcutta. Monseigneur Dupanloup protests against the lowering effect of the poor education given to girls in France, and the Roman Catholic bishop is as urgent in his demand for a higher ideal of woman’s life as our English radical philosopher. But though both extremes of opinion agree as to the evil of the present state of things, though the Saturday Review is as strenuous in its description of the vacuity of the lives and occupations of thousands of women as the most strong-minded of the lady writers, there is the greatest possible divergence as to the remedy and the means of applying it. Give them the same education as men, says one side ; but we are at this very moment revolutionising the instruc­ tion in our boys’ schools, and declaring the subjects to be often illtaught, and not always worth learning. Shut them up with governesses and in school-rooms more strictly, says the other ; but it is the girls who are the result of this very training of whom we are now complaining. Meantime two or three hard facts have come out in the discussions on the subject. The census of 1851 showed three millions and a half of women working for a subsistence, of these two millions and a half were unmarried. At the census of 1861 the number of self-supporting* * The wretched gulf below into which so many of these are driven by misery, the wholesale destruction of soul and body which takes place, cannot here be entered on, and indeed this class is not included in these numbers. �THE POWERS OF WOMEN. 523 women had increased by more than half a million, many with relations dependent upon them. The pretty, pleasant, poetic view of life by which man goes forth to labour for his wife, while her duty is to make his home comfortable, is clearly not possible for this large portion of womankind, since, although a certain number of them are single because they preferred celibacy to any choice offered to them, a very large proportion are so from necessity, and certainly find the burden of maintaining themselves a heavy one. That the “highest result” of life both for men and women is a really happy marriage there can be no doubt; where each is im­ proved by the other, and every good work is helped, not hindered, for both. It is an ideal which has existed, though it may not have been carried out, from very early times—and it is somewhat dis­ couraging that, as Mr. Lecky has shown, some of the most beautiful pictures of the relation, and indeed of womanhood at large, are to be found in Homer and the Greek tragedians; “the conjugal tenderness of Hector and Andromache, the unwearied fidelity of Penelope, whose storm-tossed husband looked forward to her as to the crown of all his labours, the heroic love of Alcestis volun­ tarily dying that her husband might live,” and many more such. Later in history, though Aristotle gives a touching account of a good wife, and Plutarch declares her to be “ no mere housekeeper, but the equal and companion of her husband,” we must go on to Rome for an equally high type of a wife. “ The Roman matron was from the earliest times a name of honour,” and a jurisconsult of the empire defined marriage as “ a lifelong fellowship of all divine and human rights.” Indeed, “ the position of wives during the empire was one of a freedom and dignity which they have never since altogether regained.” That modern society has not always shown an advance on these questions may be seen in Mr. Maine’s observation that the canon law, which nearly everywhere prevailed on the position of women, has on several points “deeply injured civilization.” Mr. Mill’s description of the relation seems drawn from his own experience:— “ What marriage maybe in the case of two persons of cultivated minds, identical in opinions and purposes, between whom there exists the best kind of equality” (not that of powers, but of different capacities), “with each their respective superiority, so that each can have alternately the plea­ sure of leading and being led in the path of development . . . where the two care for great objects in which they can help and encourage each other, so that the minor matters on which their tastes differ are not all-important, . . . here is a connection of friendship of the most enduring character, making it a greater pleasure to each to give pleasure to the other than to receive it. . . . This is 110 dream of an enthusiast, but a social rela- �524 THE CONTEMPORARY REVIEW. tion on whose general realization will depend the best development of our race.” To enable women to fulfil their share of this union it will be granted must require far more cultivation than they now generally attain. For the very large portion who cannot obtain this “highest result,” and who yet have the misfortune to require food and clothing, which they must earn for themselves or starve, it is surely not too much to ask that they be furnished ungrudgingly with all possible means of fitting themselves to perform well what­ ever work society will permit them to carry out. As to what is “ unnatural” work, opinion varies so much in different ages and countries, that we are hardly yet entitled to dogmatise. “ Nature,” Mr. Mill thinks, “ may be safely left to take care of itself, and that in any work for which women are really in­ competent they will drop out of the race ;” but he hardly seems to allow for the extraordinary plasticity with which women adapt them­ selves to the ideal required of them by public opinion. Among the North American Indians all the heavy labour—the carrying of burdens, &c.—falls to their share without any feeling of hardship, the duty of the “ braves ” being only to fight. In many parts of Germany the division is the same ; the peasant woman digs, ploughs, manages the cattle, carries the fuel and the hay from the mountains, while the men are either with the army, or sitting smoking and drinking in the little “ platz ” of the village. In Scotland the stalwart fishwives would be horrified at their husbands doing any­ thing but manage the sea share of the business; they have their boats and nets to look after, and have nothing whatever to do with matters on shore, where the woman reigns paramount. An extremely curious instance of what habit and opinion can make of women appeared not long ago in that very unromantic source of information, a British Blue-Book. In the account of a mission sent by England in 18G3 to induce the King of Dahomey to give up the slave trade, the envoy, Commodore Wilmot, remarks incidentally :— “ The Amazons are everything in this country. There are nearly 5,000 of them in the king’s army;” and he adds, “ there can be no doubt that they are the mainstay of the kingdom. They are a very fine body of women, remarkably well-limbed and strong, armed with muskets, swords gigantic razors for cutting off heads, bows and arrows, blunderbusses, &c. ; their large war-drum was conspicuous, hung round with skulls. “ They are first in honour and importance, all messages are carried by them to and from the king and his chiefs. They are only found about the lojal palaces, form the bodp-guard of the sovereign, and no one else is allowed to approach them. At the reception of the embassy the kinoordered them to go through a variety of movements and to salute me, which they did most creditably; they loaded and fired with remarkable rapidity, singing songs all the time. . . . They marched better than the men, and �THE POWERS OF WOMEN. 525 looked far more warlike in every way ; their activity is astonishing—they would run with some of our best performers in England. On one occasion the king appeared in a carriage drawn by his body-guard of women. As soldiers in an African kingdom and engaged solely in African warfare, they are very formidable enemies, and fully understand the use of their weapons.” Besides 5,000 of these under arms, there are numerous women to attend on them as servants, cooks, &c. Their numbers are kept up by young girls of thirteen or fourteen, attached to each company, who learn their duties, dance, sing, and live with them, but do not go to war till they are considered old enough to handle a musket. They are fully aware of the authority they possess—their manner is bold and free; but in spite of a certain swagger in their walk, he speaks particularly of “ their good manners and modest behaviour ; most of them are young, well-looking, and without any ferocity in their expression, though an occasional skull or jaw-bone may be seen dangling at their waist-belts. They are supposed to live a life of chastity, and there is no doubt that they do so, as it would be impossible for them to do wrong without being found out, and such discovery would lead to instant death.” “ The only menial service they perform is to fetch water (which is extremely scarce) for the use of the king and his household, and morning and evening long strings of them may bo seen with water jars on their heads silently and quietly wending their way to the wells in single file, the front one with a bell round her neck, which she strikes when any men are seen ; these immediately run off to leave the road clear, and must wait till the file has passed, for if an accident happened to the woman or her jar, any man near would be con­ sidered responsible, and cither imprisoned for life or his head cut off. Business is stopped, and everybody delayed to their great inconvenience, by this absurd law.” The Amazons enjoy their con­ sequence, and laughed heartily when they saw the commodore obliged to step aside in order to avoid them. It was mentioned by Bishop Crowther, in a lecture at Torquay, that in war, fewer prisoners by far are made among them than among the men soldiers ; they fight more fiercely, with more deter­ mination, and would rather die than yield. “ Indeed,” says Wilmot, 11 they are far superior to the men in everything—in appearance, in dress, in figure, in activity, in their performance as soldiers, and in bravery.” It is curious to see the old Greek legends, which we have so long disbelieved, thus fully borne out. The evidence is the more interesting as it appears merely as part of the report of the embassy,“ presented to both Houses of Parliament by command of her Majesty,” with no object of proving anything to anybody in the matter. �526 THE CONTEMPORARY REVIEW. Here is a whole body of women distinguished for the very qualities we should bo most inclined to refuse them, the produce of a “ welldirected ” education to the end required. It is difficult at present to make any sweeping assertions as to what women can or cannot do, as even if we decide categori­ cally for England, we shall find the standard of their ability vary by merely crossing the Channel in France ; and if such a dis­ cussion had been possible in India, and a Hindoo Mr. Mill had expressed hopeful views of their powers and of wliat might be expected from them under a different régime, the weekly papers of Benares would certainly have replied that the nature of women was tolerably well known since the beginning of the world ; that they had had time enough in all conscience to give proof that their powers were but little above those of animals ; that they could not be trusted out of the zenana to take care even of themselves ; that it was doubtful whether they had any souls at all, and, at all events, certain to the orthodox, that theii1 only chance of immor­ tality was by burning themselves on the funeral pile of their hus­ bands. Yet even with public feeling so strongly against them, “ the best native Indian governments are those directed by women,” says Mr. Mill, borne out by Sir Richard Temple and many other authorities. Seven-eighths of the world is Pagan, Mahometan, or Budd­ hist, where the lowest opinion concerning women still prevails ; and even in Christian countries the education given to them is so much for show, so little for use, so empty of real knowledge, that we have hardly yet the materials on which to found our judgment as to their powers, unless exceptionally. That these will turn out to be the same as those of men is, to say the very least, most improbable ; that God should have created two sets of beings, so different physically and outwardly, if he had intended one to be merely the repetition of the other, and unless they had been fitted to perform different functions in the world’s great work. Such a variety of gifts is required to accomplish what is wanted around us, that it will be strange if we cannot arrive at a certain joint co-operative action between men and women which shall be better than that of either alone. “ Two are bettei’ than one,” as Solomon says, and even than one and one. There is a male and female side to all great work which will not be thoroughly carried out unless both can labour at it heartily together. The silent share contributed by women in man’s work,—to take only a few of the instances found in late biographies, the assistance given by the sister of Mendelssohn in the composition of the “ Lieder ohne Worte,” by old Miss Herschel in her brother’s calculations, by Mrs. �THE POWERS OF WOMEN. 527 Austen and Lady Hamilton* in the production of their husbands’ works on jurisprudence and metaphysics, and that which is told by M. Renan and Mr. Mill in their touching tributes, the first to his sister, the other to his wife,—is only known from magnanimous men, rich enough in ideas not to grudge such acknowledgments. “ On ne prête qu’aux riches,” says a French proverb. But how this joint work for the world can best be generally carried out remains still to be settled. To take, however, one instance : the administrative power with which Mr. Mill credits woman enables her to assist most efficiently conjointly with men in the management of philanthropic estab­ lishments— hospitals, reformatories, asylums, workhouses, &c.r where she is found to give more comfort more economically than men, to spend less with greater results. She has generally more intuitive insight into character, and is less liable to be taken in (pro­ vided her affections are not concerned). She is both more considerate and considering, more observant of small indications than a man, and draws her conclusions more carefully, and carries out her kind intentions with more thought. “ And Mary pondered all these things in her heart,” is a very true picture of her sex. She is a particularly efficient teacher of male pupils, says one good educational authority ; there is a certain rude chivalry among boys when they know that they cannot be compelled to do a thing by force, which will often make them yield. For example, a class of unruly lads in a ragged school, utterly unamenable to the discipline of a man, has been known to obey a young woman ; as a difficult-tempered horse is sometimes most easily guided by a female hand, when it is at the same time both skilful and light. There was one remarkable instance of such influence in the late American war. After the arrival of the lady nurses in the different field hospitals of the northern army, the degraded attendance which ordinarily follows a camp gradually melted away. The husbands, brothers, and relations of the women who had given up the pro­ tection of their homes for the sake of the wounded did not choose that their belongings should be exposed to such scenes, and the baser element almost entirely disappeared, at least from sight. One of the most curious “ changes of front ” in public opinion which has taken place, is concerning the care of the sick. Surgery and medicine seem to have been regarded as peculiarly feminine occupations in the Middle Ages. Even queens and princesses were regularly instructed in the “ healing arts.” To be a good leech was as important in a complete education then as to play on the piano nowadays, and was certainly not less useful. * The Edinburgh Review says “ We are, in truth, indebted to these two ladies that the most profound and abstruse discussions of law and metaphysics which have appeared in our time became accessible and intelligible to the public.” vol. xiv. n n �528 THE CONTEMPORARY REVIEW. That there are certain branches of the profession adapted for women most people will now admit—i.c., midwifery and the diseases of women and children; we may indeed come to regard this part of the craft as one into which men have intruded themselves instead of the contrary cry. But it is clear that women physicians neither can nor ought to be consulted or trusted who have not undergone the most thorough training and submitted to the most searching exami­ nation. The difficulties which must result from a course of joint study for men and women together are such in the present state of things as to render it most undesirable ; but in France, the question is solved by a separate training, which there for sixty-nine years has given as perfect an education to midwives, both practical and scien­ tific, as well can be. It includes a course of instruction in a hospital of two hundred beds, where none but women pupils are received. A first-class certificate is not given under two years, a second-class not under one, and without a certificate no one can practise in France. The lady professors of this institution are physician accoucheurs, not merely midwives, and hold a rank, both scientific and practical, quite equal to our first-class “ ladies’ doctors ” here. No classes or lectures such as are often proposed in England, could possibly afford the requisite training, unless accompanied by the practical work on the patients themselves such as is thus afforded in France. In the same way no certificates or examinations in nursing could be of any avail unless they are the result and the evidence of trained work in a hospital, to be judged of not by a board theoretically, but by the training surgeons and nurses. Many foreign universities, however, Zurich, Stockholm, &c., have •shown no jealousy of women doctors, but will now admit any woman who can pass their examination for a medical degree. With regard to other special training, the greater facilities given in the classes at the Royal Academy, the female schools of design at South Kensington and elsewhere, the Academy of Music, &c., will now enable women to obtain the thorough knowledge necessary for good work in art. It is to be hoped that some proof of effi­ ciency may soon be exacted for governesses and schoolmistresses: a diploma such as is required to be shown by them in Germany, France, and Switzerland, will be a natural result, indeed, of the examinations now offered by Cambridge, London, Dublin, Edin­ burgh, and, lastly, Oxford. The class of female teachers will thus be raised both in position and salary. In America, at this moment, they stand very high in the scale, and are even entrusted with a great .share of the conduct of large boys’ schools. But it is for those women who do not intend to be either doctors, or artists, or schoolmistresses, that our improved education is most wanted. As it is, in the very fields which are considered to belong �THE POWERS OF WOMEN. 529 to women by the most niggardly estimate of their powers, they are totally without training of any kind, and each individual is forced to make out the very A B C of useful knowledge for herself. For instance, in the conduct of their houses and the management of their children, which the staunchest Conservative would declare to be their peculiar province, what pains is taken to give them even the most elementary knowledge of the things likely to be most useful to them ? What woman has learnt how to prevent the frost from bursting the water-pipes, which flood half the houses in London unnecessarily every winter ? or what has caused the cracking of the boiler, and how it may be avoided? or the facts concerning food, that proportion which is best for each different stage of life, and how to make the best of it ? “ I’m sure it was the bread was very nice last time ; I can’t think why it isn’t so this while,” says even a clover cook. The rule of thumb is universal, and the mistress cannot correct it. Again, with regard to the health of the children and household, the frightful ignorance of mothers, both rich and poor, annually sacrifices the lives, and, what is really worse, the health, of thousands of human beings. It is a common saying that the first child is generally a victim to the experimental efforts of the poor mother, who, having never learnt what is good either for herself or her off­ spring, can only guide herself after having been taught by the bitter knowledge of experience. Women will be found “sending for the doctor ” for the slightest ailment, either of their own or of their children, which the commonest sense and the most easy acquaintance with hygiene ought to enable them to cope with ; yet “laudamy and calomy” are the “simples” they have not scrupled to use. Every girl ought to go through a course of training as to what is required in all ordinary cases of emergency— how to bind up a cut, to put out fire, to treat a burn, the bad effect of air on a wound, its necessity to the lungs, the measures necessary to guard against infection—“ common things,” as they are called, but uncommonly little known at the present day. Questions of fresh air are beginning to be a little better understood; yet still, passing along the crowded streets of London, and looking up at most of the nursery windows, rows of little pale faces may be seen peering through the closed casements, “ for fear they should catch cold,” which is often the only form of care conceived of, and is carried out by making them as liable to cold as possible. A great medical authority declares that the children of the lowest and artisan class in London are healthier than those of the class above them, because they are allowed to play in the gutter, which cannot be permitted to “ genteel ” children, and the fresh air compensates for inferior Eving and much want of care. How much of the disease NN2 �530 THE CONTEMPORARY REVIEW. and ill-temper of our children, and consequently of our own, is owing to ignorance in their keepers, which might be prevented by the better education of nursemaids (no very Utopian notion), it is grievous to think of. Again, with regard to education, there is a peculiar appetite in a healthy-minded child, evidently placed there by nature, for observing the facts around it, and seeking for their interpretation—“ why ? ” “ what?” “ where?” is the substance of the talk of intelligent children. Questions as to the reasons of everything, as to the birds, beasts, flowers, and stones they meet with. Instead, however, of satisfying this curiosity, we give them names, the hardest husks of knowledge, “ Mangnall’s Questions,” and “ Pinnock’s Catechisms,” the very deadest dry bones of information. As a general rule let what it can sec, and touch, and taste, and smell, and the explanation thereof, come before things which its limited experience does not enable it to realise, and therefore take interest in, and which are generally to it mere words, such as history, geography, grammar. The abstract comes later in life. There can be no doubt that such instruction comes within a woman’s province ; let her, at least, learn how best it may be accomplished. There are many questions still remaining to be solved as to how body and soul react on each other, which women are peculiarly fitted to assist in settling ;—for instance, although asceticism and epi­ cureanism are alike mistaken rules of life, how yet the good which exists undoubtedly in both is to be secured in education ; how to give the mind the fairest play ; to “ have the body under subjection,” in one sense—to make it the slave, and not the master, in the joint concern,—yet so to cultivate it as to render it the healthy organ, or interpreter to execute the intentions of the mind, and how neither mind nor body can do its best without a proper balance being attained. Education having gone too much in the cramming direction, the pendulum seems likely now to sway too far on the opposite side for men—athletics, for their own sake, (although the sitting still regimen is still required for women) ; while the wisest among the Greeks seem to have aimed at the perfection of outward form, chiefly as the instrument of the inward powers of man. Again, the field of philanthropy has never been contested to woman: let her be taught to fulfil it wisely. Men have such respect apparently for her power of intuition that they seem to think she can do as well without as with study. The excellent women who under­ take to assist the poor, probably at this moment are doing at least as much harm as good, demoralising them by teaching dependence, and diminishing their power of self-reliance ; they are utterly ignorant in general of political economy, in its best sense ; of the laws of �THE POWERS OF WOMEN. 53i supply and demand; of that which constitutes real help, i.c., that which rouses man to help himself; while their religious teaching too often resolvesitself into proselytism and dissemination of doctrinal tracts. These are studies without which charity degenerates into the pouring of water into baskets, whereas in France the administration of the Poor Law, the bureau de bienfaisance, is committed by Govern­ ment to the care of the Sisters of Charity, who are considered as the fittest instruments for the work. With regard to comparatively smaller matters, such as art, there can be no doubt that if woman’s knowledge of what really constitutes beauty were more cultivated, if her taste were higher, or, indeed, any­ thing but the merest accident of feeling, oui' hideous upholstery, our abominable millincry-portraits, the vulgar or vapid colouring of our drawing-rooms, would improve. “ Natural selection ” would get rid of the monstrosities in our shops by the simple process of the bad not finding purchasers, as much as by any schools of design. Again, with regard to dress, wider interests would probably indi­ rectly tend to cure the extravagance which constant change of fashion produces. For a woman to take care that her outward cloth­ ing makes her as pleasing as circumstances comport, is a real duty to her neighbours ; but this is not at all the aim of fashion. There is nothing which puzzles the male mind, and especially the artist mind, like its mystery—why every woman, short and tall, fat and thin, must wear exactly the same clothes ; why their heads must all bud out in an enormous chignon one year, and their bodies expand into an immense bell in the next, under pain of being unpleasantly remarkable, by the edict of some irresponsible Vehmgericlit which rules over us. The tyranny of opinion is such that no woman dreams of resisting beyond a certain point; she has been taught that to be singular is in her almost a crime, and she accordingly undresses her poor old shoulders, or swells out her short body, and is intoler­ ably ugly and unpleasant to look at to her male relations, but is satis­ fied with the internal conviction of right given by the feeling that at least she is in the fashion ! More knowledge of real art would show her that if certain lines are really becoming, their opposites cannot be so too; that there is a real science of the beautiful, to contravene which is as painful to the instructed eye as notes out of tune in music to the instructed ear. The power wielded by woman is at present so enormous, that if men at all realized its extent, they would for their own purposes insist on her being better qualified to use it. If any man will candidly confess to himself the amount of influence on his habits of thought and feeling throughout his life, first of his mother and sisters, of young ladyhood in general, and �532 THE CONTEMPORARY REVIEW. later of his wife, daughters, and female friends, the opinions modified, the incentives supplied by women, old and young, he will be almost appalled by the thought of the manner in which this potent being has been left to pick up what education she could from an ignorant governess or an indifferent school; while her ideas of right and wrong, her religion and morality, have generally been obtained by being care­ fully kept from hearing that there is another side to any question The important and the trivial are generally strangely mixed up in her mind: traditional rules—such as that though it is wicked to read history on Sundays, you may make riddles out of the Bible ; that you may cut paper for patchwork on the Sabbath, but if you sew it is a sin —being not seldom considered almost as binding as the Gospel itself. A custom becomes in such a woman’s eyes as sacred as morality; the inextricable confusion of the form with its meaning, which is so common, and which makes it so dangerous to touch or improve a symbol lest we damage the thing symbolized, may be greatly traced to the unreasoning traditional mode in which women, half the human race, regard everything. The sentimental part of their minds being stronger, their power of association more vivid than that of men, anything connected, however remotely, with their affec­ tions, is clung to more warmly, and makes it more difficult for them to part with the external shape which a thought has been in the habit of taking in their eyes. Accordingly, even in matters of politics, which have been sup­ posed to be out of their line, “ the party of the roses and night­ ingales,” as Mr. Grant Duff once euphuistically called it, has been a power in the State, a very sensible influence, which has often checked, and even prevented, useful reforms. To give her the “ responsibility of her opinions ” might be a cure for this, but the question of the suffrage cannot be looked upon as an important one. During the past session the municipal franchise was granted to unmarried women, with this comment from the con­ servative ex-Chancellor, in assisting to pass the Bill: “ Since an unmarried woman could dispose of her property, and deal with it in any way that she thought proper,” said Lord Cairns, “ he did not know why she should not have a voice in saying how it should be lighted and watched, and in controlling the municipal expenditure to which that property contributed.” In one of the southern counties, five large, well-managed estates, almost adjacent to each other, belong to women either unmarried or widows. Here a district, amounting in size almost to a small county, is virtually unrepre­ sented. If the representation of property is to be a reality, it seems as if these women ought to “ have a voice in choosing the repre­ sentatives who are to regulate ” the national “ expenditure ” to which �THE POWERS OF WOMEN. 533 they contribute so largely. A single woman is no infant to whom the law allots trustees ; she can conduct her own affairs and dispose of her estate as she sees good. The franchise is certainly an inferior­ privilege to such functions as these. It is perfectly true that these women would prefer being without the franchise, but the question is, what are the arrangements by which the duties of property may be best performed? They are called upon, as a matter of course, to use “ the legitimate influence of a landlord ” with their tenants : why should they be allowed to shirk the responsibility, to be spared the personal onus of decision in political opinions ? Are not these likely to be better weighed, more justly and well considered, if they know they can be called to account for the proper employment of their power ? It is no new theory, after all, that women should be treated as political entities. One barony, at least, was bestowed by Pitt on a single lady in right of her borough influence ; and the very fact of a woman being able to use the power of a great proprietor without the check of publicity and open responsibility, inclines her to make the question a personal one, and not a trust for the good of the “ republic.” With regard to a married woman, it seems to be very unwise to press her claim. Any property she possesses is, after all, represented by her husband ; if she votes contrary to him, it will merely neutralize his vote ; if she votes with him, it is an unnecessary reduplication ; there seems no good in putting such an abstract cause of contention among married people. In England, by manners, although not perhaps by law, the influ­ ence of woman has been more useful, calmer, less dreaded, and more open, than in any country since the days of Evo. When they have ruled it has been by acknowledged sway; the difference between Queen Elizabeth and Queen Philippa, and the Montespans and Pompadours of France. The Maitresse du Rot has been no re­ cognised part in our constitution; no fine ladies like Madame de Longueville, and the other lady leaders of the Fronde, have ruled the destinies of our country according to the influence of the lover of the moment. There have been names of power amongst us, but they have been good as well as great. In Roman Catholic countries, where the feeling for women has culminated in the adoration of the Virgin and the deification of many female saints, where the longing for feminine tenderness which could not find satisfaction in the stern ideal to which they had reduced their Christ, has erected an intercessor in “ the mother of God,” woman, intellectually, has been degraded curiously to the utmost, the notion of her spiritual eminence having, as it were, �534 THE CONTEMPORARY REVIEW. stifled any other. Christianity, great as its influence has been for woman, has not worked at all alike in this respect in different nationalities even close at home, and it would be curious to trace out the reason for her varying position at the present day in the different Christian countries—in America, where from the disparity of the sexes she takes a high hand as to her personal claims, but does not seem to have improved in wisdom beyond her old-world sisters ; in Germany and Italy, where she holds a strangely inferior place, from the most different causes, for the German woman is generally and in some respects highly educated, while the Italian (with some exceptions in the north) is almost utterly ignorant; in France, where the influence of woman has always been more really great, probably, than in any country in the world, America not ex­ cepted, with the single exception, which however symbolizes a good deal, that they must not wear the crown—i.e., be ostensibly sovereign. The Frenchman is said to be more good-tempered, the woman more imperious; in a household she is very really the better half. Partly, perhaps, in consequence of the drain upon the male part of the nation caused by its warlike propensities, the affairs of the shop, of the bureau, the management of the money of the family, in fact, has devolved in great part on her. Monsieur often is amusing himself at the café, while madame, nothing loth, is admi­ nistering the joint affairs of the commerce, in which she has probably an equal stake in money, while her property is to a great extent under her own control, and is looked after very keenly; indeed, her strict attendance at the bureau is mentioned in an interesting article of the Revue des Deux Mondes as one reason for the fearful mortality among infants in France. Again, the power of the mother over her grown-up sons, both by law and custom, is in our eyes most extraordinary. One of Madame Sand’s best-known novels runs on the refusal of the widowed mother of a marquis of forty, in full possession of his own estate, to let him marry a young lady, well­ born and well-bred, but poor. No surprise is expressed; it is an ordinary incident in his social world—it is impossible for the marriage to take place without her permission. The relation, however, between the sexes in France seems to be one of antagonism—an armed peace—constant resistance on one side, and terror of encroachment on the other. In the absence of any idea of justice, “a woman’s rights are what she can get foi’ herself;” and their amount is almost incredibly large to our notions, lor instance, on the occasion of a marriage in the higher classes, the bridegroom is required as a matter of course by the young girl and her mother to renounce his profession, which is often mentioned as one reason of the frivolous life led by young men of family in France. �THE POWERS OF WOMEN. 535 The sudden change in a French girl’s life, the tremendous leap from her convent education to the rush of dissipation in the world, makes her temptation to independence still greater. She has not even been allowed the choice of the man who is to rule her ; he is generally more or less in love, she has all the advantage that perfect coldness and self-possession can give. She rules by dint of her esprit, her strong will, her tact in pleasing the least worthy part of men ; and her desire for power is evidently far greater than in England, where, after the first blush of youthful coquetry is over, a girl generally subsides rapidly after marriage into the “family woman,” the wife and the mother ; whereas the Frenchwoman’s career onlv then begins. And what is considered at least to be its nature may be guessed from M. Fame’s problem (for even a caricature is evidence of a popular mode of thought), “Etant donnée la femme, c’est à dire un être illogique, subalterne, malfaisant, mais charmant comme un parfum délicieux et pernicieux,” how is she to be treated? In England, on the contrary, at the present moment, take it for all in all, the position of an educated woman of a certain class is probably unequalled both in legitimate influence and happiness. If she is at all qualified for it by character, she is trusted and consulted by her husband in everything ; she is respected by her sons for her experience in life ; she has a large field for her administrative capacitie,—the schools, the cottages, the sick, the poor, both in London and the country, employ all her philanthropic energies. She is cut off from no great questions of national interest, poli­ tical, literary, benevolent ; if her opinion is worth having, she is listened to by men with perfect respect and attention. She wants nothing more of privilege for herself of any kind. It is not for these that any change is necessary. But because these have their “ rights,” in cant phrase, and indeed something more, by custom, if not by law, it is no use for them to blink the fact of the intolerable sufferings endured often by women of the lowest class without a chance of redress, or that the lives of the greater portion of the middle class are miserably wanting in interests and cultivation of any kind ; while for the increasing number of women who must earn their own bread, there are hardly any fields open, and they have hitherto been even denied the facilities for fitting themselves to work which are provided so largely for men. That this has happened by accident more than design, appears in the Reports upon Endowed Schools, which are proved to have often been intended by their founders for girls as well as boys. The com­ mittee, headed by Lord Lyttelton, sitting now upon them, has been requested to ascertain what means can be adopted in each case to add a separate provision for the education of girls, or to enable them to �53^ THE CONTEMPORARY REVIEW. share in the classes for boys, as in the national schools. At present the lower class is bettor provided for in this matter than the middle and upper. It is to be hoped that Government will not neglect so fair an opportunity of securing what might become a national and lasting provision for this want. Mr. Rogers has already led the way by starting a middle-class school for girls pari passu with the great school for boys in the City of London. Meantime, as if to prove that girls would make use of any oppor­ tunities given them, several of the school inspectors in England and Scotland report that they found the capabilities of girls as good in general as those of boys ; that although part of the school-day was devoted rightfully to needlework, they did as well as the lads of the same amount of training when taught by the same masters. In the few schools for the upper class which have existed, the acquirements of the average of boys and girls are found to run very evenly, though here and there a boy appeared who beat all the girls. The brains of women, says Dr. Barlow, quoting many authorities, English and foreign, are larger than those of men in proportion to the size of their bodies, while their temperaments are more nervous and sen­ sitive ; they thus require good education for their guidance more even than men ; whereas cut off, as they too often have been, from the most interesting subjects in life, it is not surprising if they often throw their whole souls into petty questions with a vehemence which makes good men sigh and hard men laugh. “Les femmes excellent à gâter leur vie,” has been most truly said, and not seldom that of their belongings besides. Excellent women may be seen spoiling the comfort, as far as in them lies, of their “ mankind,” about some miserable little matter of anise and cummin to which their illdirected conscience affixes an inordinate interest, while the greatest national questions of right and wrong (for which they have proved they can care so deeply) are to them uninteresting often because unknown ; for how large a portion of them may still be said to be “ brought up in the religion of darkness and fear,” which Plato complained of even in his day ? They are often accused of putting their affections above any abstract interest, however high, yet how many of them have shown the power to suffer and to die for the noblest causes. Martyrs are of no sex or time. “ The mother of seven sons,” as told in Maccabees, “ saw them all slain in one day with horrible torments ” for their faith, by Antiochus. Filled with courageous spirits, stir­ ring up her womanish thoughts with a manly stomach, she stood by and exhorted them to remain firm for the right, “and last of all, after her sons, died also.” Women like Vivia Perpétua, whose martyrdom for her faith was preceded by the agony of appeals from her husband holding up her baby before her, and her father entreat­ �THE POWERS OF WOMEN. 537 ing her to have compassion on his grey hairs. Through all the phases of persecution, Pagan, Catholic, and Protestant alike, women have never been found wanting, and not in religious questions alone—in the French Revolution the women suffered for their political faith like the men. It has been remarked that no woman ever then put forward her sex as a reason for being spared; they had “ the courage of their opinions,” and went to the scaffold unflinchingly, although some of them, like Madame Roland, did not believe in any future state. In the Indian mutiny there were no weak lamentations or com­ plaints under the almost intolerable sufferings and privations to which the women were exposed. They had most of them spent their lives in the gossip and idleness of Indian stations, yet when courage and endurance were called for, their heroism was as great as that of the men. The stuff is there, it only requires to be adequately made use of. In spite of what Mr. Mill says, there can be little doubt that women are by nature more pliable than men, more ready to take the colour which public opinion represents as right, and also to endure more for what they believe to be true, in small things* as well as great. But this only makes it more incumbent upon society, which in this case means men, to see that the ideal life held up to women is a wise one, and that their education is in a wise direction. The jealousy of women acquiring knowledge, in England at least, is quite modern. At the time of the Reformation, of the revival of learning through the classics, they were allowed to obtain whatsoever they pleased of the new fields of knowledge; and Latin and Greek, through which alone these could be obtained, were freely, taught to them. They suffered death again and again in political risings in England, that unpleasant proof of their importance. Lady Salisbury, Jane Grey, Arabella Stewart, were not spared because they were women ; and in the feudal times, Mr. Mill declares that both politics and war were considered part of their proper business in life. Sir Thomas More, in his ideal republic, even proposes that the “ priests should be few in number, of either sex.” And though we arc not very likely to follow out such a counsel as this, yet northern civiliza­ tion has always been based, more or less, upon respect for women, as shown alike in the honour paid to female prophets and priestesses in the earlier faiths of Teutonic and Scandinavian nations, and the ideal held up by chivalry in later Christian ages. “ We may, on the whole, well admire the instinct,” says Mr. F. Newman, “ which made the old Germans regard wTomen as penetrating nearer to the * Would anything induce men to submit to the tortures of tight-lacing, or of tho Chinese “lily feet”—utter absurdities of the most harmful kind—for the sake of being “ comme il faut ”—in the literal sense, “ as one ought to be ? ” �538 THE CONTEMPORARY REVIEW. mind of God than man docs.” That a large share of the higher moral and ideal work of the world may fairly be taken by her, is shown by the fact that though the male and female population is nearly equal in number, the crimes committed by men are usually five times as numerous. Her influence now is more than sufficiently great; it is not desirable that it should be in any degree increased. What is wanted is to give her the training and discipline by which that which she has may best be used. There are symptoms on all sides of a change of thought, a desire to make more use of her powers in various work. Dean Alford, in his. paper on “The Christianity of the Future,” has observed, that “woman’s action in the Church” has been neglected in our present civilization, that “ the Reformers levelled in the dust, instead of attempting to regenerate, the whole conventual system of Catholicism.” Mr. Tennyson hints in his Guinevere at the double power which the united action of men and women brings forth; and the reason he gives for his hero Arthur’s failure is the failure of his wife. “ If he could find,” says the “bard,” “ A woman in lior womanhood as great As he was in his manhood, then, he sung, The twain together well might change the world.” And again, in “ The Holy Grail,” he makes Arthur himself declare that if he can be joined to her whom he considers the pearl of women— “ Then might we live together as one life, And reigning with one will in everything, * Have power on this dark land to lighten it, And power on this dead world to make it live.” Mr. Tennyson has insisted on the “ diverse ” nature of men and women in lines which have become almost hackneyed by constant use, and therefore these hints at the joint action which shall make both more strong, the division of the work of the world between them, each supplying the deficiencies of the other, are the more important. To enable women, by the wisest teaching which the nation can give, to make themselves ready for such a future, must be our object. A move of such an extent as is now taking place in women’s minds cannot be repressed, their further advance is merely a question of time ; let us insure that it is made in the right direction. Not in solitary action, for which with her quick sympathies and tender affections she is eminently unfit; not by usurping the work of men either as M.P.s, Amazons, or female lawyers, nor again by dooming half the human race to the most petty trivialities by way of keeping �THE POWERS OF WOMEN. 539 them virtuous and contented, shall we obtain the best work for the world. It is Iago only who condemns women to “ suckle fools and chronicle small beer.” To find the use of everything is the grand discovery of modern science, to waste nothing of whatever kind, and certainly not power. The body politic can hardly be made stronger by bandaging one hand tightly (even if it be the left) to prevent it from getting into mischief. A beautiful Hungarian myth says, “ Woman was not taken from man’s heel, that he might know he was not to trample on her, nor from his head, for she was not to rule over him, but from the rib next his heart, that she might be nearest and most necessary in every action of his life.” And not until this joint action shall have been fully carried out in all work (different in kind for man and woman, and therefore for that very reason each fitting into each) shall man indeed “have power on this dead world to make it live,” as the Creator of both seems to have intended for the benefit of all. V. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Victorian Blogging Description An account of the resource A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library &amp; Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Conway Hall Library & Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Conway Hall Ethical Society Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data Pamphlet Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The powers of women and how to use them Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Verney, Frances Parthenope [1819-1890] Description An account of the resource Place of publication: [s.l.] Collation: [521]-539 p. ; 25 cm. Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Article signed as 'V'. Also known as Frances Parthenope Nightingale. From Contemporary Review 14, July 1870. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available [s.n.] Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource [1870] Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context G5402 Subject The topic of the resource Women Suffrage Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (The powers of women and how to use them), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span> Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource English Conway Tracts Women Women-Suffrage https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/a76dab14b694d497a4d05b9d3abb8385.pdf?Expires=1781740800&Signature=I3FbvqwI%7ELacbIruSS4AidE%7EOdkDP7ith4cnr1dc3RnAk0SylF4Qr-GhckGw3iuI-soDU2SCqM5Oz7St5IGdqhGU6EE9Ez5F8UlS2DUTYl3qMkd-3sREKvYTrYkIvfES6cFWITAqNQjAw45cf4gEIYXW3PyYd6-9N0bxhTCFnW6XhcBNW%7ENDplzp0PRYBUeAEuMAx97E7R3s7rHhNXgFEKsZvR8FiillsQIjplv36gYROJextVPHs9cQI%7E3ZHqpsFNrPIbx3Btak9GF7NVSmPOecgtuPN5kRLo7DzFsyhWj9YlhJCxNotVVuCjCDYagWgsD1Y5v30LZfJqhUGJcBpQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 56b9598028b87e8ba51c243b7aa10846 PDF Text Text \v y-C/ (3 94 Abraham Lincoln—Fifteenth Amendment. ABRAHAM LINCOLN—FIFTEENTH AMENDMENT. BY REV. JOHN WEISS. Whoever recalls some of the fa­ mous dates of history, will have a suspicion either that Providence in­ dulges a taste for coincidences, or that the historian has been mytholo­ gizing. It was understood between Xerxes and the Carthaginians that, when he passed over into Greece, they should invade Sicily. The bat­ tle of Salamis was fought on the 23d of September, 480 b.c., and the great victory at Himera, in Sicily, gained by Geton and Theron over Hamilcar, occurred on the same day. Such a nice adjustment of events at both ends of the line of invasion happen­ ed so long ago that it passes for an improbability. But one is ready to believe it since Gettysburg and Vicksburg were announced to Ame­ rica on the same 4th of July, as if God celebrated; and Lookout Mountain and Missionary Ridge crowned the first Thanksgiving at which all the States sat on the same day. Does a sublime irony also mingle with these grave touches of Providence ? For I remember that the head and cap of the Goddess of Liberty was lifted to its place on the dome of the Capitol at noon on De­ cember 2d, four years after another head with a cap upon it was lifted up to draw all people to it. Fused and moulded in their hearts, the bronze crowns the precise moment, as if to give the country God’s opin­ ion of an execution. But April is America’s month of resurrection. It is full of Easter- days. On the 19th, in 1689, the men of Boston put the tyrannical An­ dros into his own castle, built by him to command the town. On the 19th, in 1775, Lexington retorted sharp­ ly on Governor Hutchinson. And on the 19th, in 1861, Massachusetts went to Baltimore. This month, Fort Sumter challenged, and Richmond surrendered, and Booth finished the lingering treason. We stand in this week of patriotic memories, with the day set apart by Christians for cele­ brating a resurrection, to remember a genuine one in the passing away of Abraham Lincoln’s spirit into the proclamation of the Fifteenth Amend­ ment. Surely this month, when our fields begin to resume their green, marks a springtime of emotions and ideas that puts an accent on the page of history. It is a month when every thing has seemed so often lost just before every thing has been virtually gained. It is the divine vindication of appa­ rent failures; and I do not know that the theory of Providence was ever more precisely stated than by two negroes who had just heard of Mr. Lincoln’s death: Said one, “ Well,I tell you now, human events be one mass of ignorances.” Said the other, 11 Ah! yes ; but de Lord puts in his stick, and stirs them up, and makes a heap o’ wisdom.” So it seems to­ day. If Providence be the grave­ digger, the turf finds nutriment. We should grow tired in mentioning the evidence of this which has been ao' �Abraham Lincoln—Fifteenth Amendment. cumulating ever since the rebellion brought in a series of disasters. It was the last resort of a desperation that defeats itself in taking it. . Paymaster Smith, of the Kearsarge, used to relate that the Alabama’s flag was shot away four or five different times during the action, while our flag was hit but once. Captain Winslow had a battle-flag furled at the mizzen with the stops, ready to let go if victory was ours ; and the last shot that was fired by the Alabama carried away the halyards, and threw it open to the breeze. So treason at last tore away the country’s hesitation, and set liberty broad open over all the States. It seems a good thing for Ameri­ can pulpits to recall on Easter-Sun­ day the character of the man who first proclaimed the emancipation which the nation has just secured and ratified. His own private for­ tune represented what is possible to the poor and miserable, provided they are reared in a republic; if not a station as exalted as his own, or such an opportunity to become en­ deared to the hearts of millions, at least freedom like his own, which brought out his natural capacity. He was a conspicuous symbol of the American idea, born among the poor white trash of Kentucky. He was the country reduced to its simplest terms. When a German soldier, who had been promoted for good beha­ vior in the field, grew very grateful, and tried to show the President, with much garrulity, that it was a safe thing to make him an officer because he came of an excellent family in Europe, and was, in fact, the son of a nobleman: “Oh! never mind Ki^,” said the witty American no- 95 ble; “ you will not find that to be an obstacle to your advancement.” The President meant to say that all the fine qualities of common people eventually get to the front in this country, and all the low qualities of superfine people are eventually or­ dered to the rear, with the mules and the baggage. How grudgingly we conceded administration to the low qualities of his accidental suc­ cessor ! The President’s mind was plain, with a tendency toward metaphysi­ cal speculation so decided that he sometimes told his friends he had missed his vocation. One of his ear­ liest efforts was a rationalistic treatise, which an over-zealous partisan put into the stove, lest it should hurt his political prospects. This quality ap­ peared conspicuously in his early analysis of the sophistries of Senator Douglas, and was always like some cleaner or picker, that frees a staple of its refuse. His common sense kept it in the service of practical questions, and it never interfered with his natural ability to grow up to their level. He did not represent the prophetic thought of a few minds, but the great bulk of thinking, or rather of the popular instinct, which is coming up abreast of the finest in­ telligence. It was not his mission to proclaim the truths which were necessary to America, before there was an America to accept them. His healthy growth was due to the sagacity which waited for the im­ pulses of the country to gather head­ way, and which never mistook a good deal of local feeling for a deli­ berate American conviction. But he had a faith in the ultimate resolu­ tion of the people, that kept him �96 Abraham Lincoln—Fifteenth Amendment, steady all the while. The advanced posts of truth often sighed to hear the trumpet’s comfort and assurance from his lips, and lamented the silence. But his roots were in the prairie, where he absorbed both sun and air; and when he went to the grist, he went full of nature. His temper was not enthusiastic; he never fired the popular heart, any more than the corn and wheat do in growing. He never appeared to yearn after the point which at length he gained ; but, as if he had the instinct of all the country’s staples in him to make the fruit itself put forth its own blos­ som, his feeling could not be hurried to antedate his growth. When the time came, he said something that struck another hour of liberty’s life. For his roots tapped our hearts, and went working all around for every drop, slowly to draw in and change the people’s secret hopes into the people’s unconcealed America, whose eyes this morning beam with majesty and confidence. His fancy was homely, and seemed to point his thought on purpose with the commonest illustrations, as if to satirize the flowery politicians. Fifty years of oratory, self-laudation and arrogance, of corrupt expedients ably recommended, of crimes against the people adroitly argued, of latent treason covered by that flaunting rag called patriotism—this bad dream of a restless country was broken by a rude and honest voice ; as when he said, “ Gold is good in its place ; but living, brave, and pa­ triotic men are better than gold.” There is no chance for bribery in that. How welcome were his sen­ tences, bare as your hand, but clos­ ed firmly on their object, to hold it, and nothing more ; not to play fast and loose with our great ideas, but to win and keep them for the benefit of all. The large, hard-featured hand which tore all our old bunting to the ground, hung out the flag of the com­ mon people of America. Before me as I write there lies a cast of his hand, brought to me from the West, where it was taken. It is closed tight around a willow stick, which he had just been whittling. There is no flesh to spare ; the act of grasping brings out deep wrinkles at the base of the thumb, and the veins which run up to feed the long, prehensile fingers. Just as you say it is the most virile hand you ever saw, its symmetry strikes you. From the knotted wrist to the perfectly fashioned nails, it is the hand built by a man in whom balance of think­ ing, tenderness of feeling, perception for unaffected beauty, gives shape and artistic finish to a power that could throttle without drawing breath. And the homely willow stick makes this symbol of a great president complete. See this hand in his addresses and state papers. They are filled with something better than rhetori­ cal contrivances. They show a power of divesting the subject-mat­ ter of every thing that is merely ad­ ventitious, either in ornament or in suggestion. The President’s religion was, like his rhetoric, stripped of every incum­ brance ; he was content with God for his day’s march. He woke with that essential in the morning, and had reason to be grateful for the sustenance in his tired bivouac at night. Whenever he took the name of God upon his lips, it became the �Abraham Lincoln—Fifteenth Amendment. utterance of a heart that was filled with a sense of the divine presence in the history of America. The leaders of the rebellion made a co­ pious use of the name of God. Gene­ ral Lee was accustomed to speak of the blessing of the Lord of hosts which rested on his arms; and Jef­ ferson Davis hid the venom of his sting in the sheath of holy phrases. You will see elaborate liturgies in vogue wherever established oppres­ sion seeks to prolong its irreligious life. Bishops and ministers used to prove the divine sanction of slavery by being very evangelical about the Bible, thus literally holding up the crucifix to advertise the auction-block and whipping-post. During the middle ages, a famous instrument of death, called the Maiden, was in use. It was the figure of a beautiful virgin placed in the niche of a prison cell, to repre­ sent the adorable Madonna. The prisoner, exhausted by fasting and torture, and turned into this cell, falls in supplication before this image, which is contrived to open its arms, as if to invite his bewildered fancy to a protecting embrace. He rushes into the trap ; the arms close, and a thousand knife-blades kiss his life away. Such is the religion of every kind of oppression. It is fair with all the forms of Christianity, and its mouth is filled with the di­ vine invitation, “ Come unto me, all ye that labor.” It is a Jesus utterling those words with sinister intent to keep the wretched in its power; and a thousand secret miseries spring forth to drink their blood. The President never traded in the name of Jesus. From the testimony which has been lately brought forvol. i.—7 97 ward by Mr. Herndon, his law-part­ ner, who was the intimate of his opinions, we learn, as we might ex­ pect, that his religion was primitive and simple, as he was ; it consisted in a profound sense of the Infinite, in childlike trust, in absolute devotion to the orders of the day. It will sur­ prise some men that he did his work without a mediator. When John Alden wanted Miles Standish to do a bit of courting for him, the old soldier’s advice was, “ If you want any thing well done, go and do it yourself, John.” The President ad­ dressed himself directly to the source of all beauty and goodness. He never wasted time in speaking well of Jesus, still less in struggling to ima­ gine that his way to the present God lay through this departed person. His sincerity needed miracles as little as Theodore Parker’s did. They were both alike in freeing their man­ liness from the fetters of the super­ natural ; that ball and chain clanked at the ankles of neither. Of what accountto him, in the multifarious tasks of strength and tenderness which he accomplished, would have been a be­ lief in feeding the five thousand or in the raising of Lazarus ? He witness­ ed a truer resurrestion with his own eyes ; a country bandaged from head to foot starting from its noisome tomb at the voice of a great people. He cast out demons with little honest sentences, which they bit and raged at in vain. All the lameness in the country gained sound muscles in his frame, paralyzed liberty leaped up, threw away its crutches as he passed by, and grasped a million muskets. And when, at their approach, he saw the rebellion, reduced to its own shape, rush violently down a- steep �A braham L incoln—Fifteenth Amendment. 9S place and disappear, the mythologi­ cal swine must have seemed less im­ pressive. Let us commend to the churches the problem of this religious man, who got along so well on sim­ ple integrity, and never met a mo­ ment so critical as to claim the aid of a supernatural mediator. Strange to say, God himself sufficed from the first gun at Sumter to the proclama­ tion of the Fifteenth Amendment. Abraham Lincoln never played the diplomatist with God’s name ; he never used the airy phrases of reli­ gion to feather public documents, or conciliate the respectability of our theologies. For God was in the camp of his armies, and claimed a seat at his council-board, and thun­ dered in the great majority which bade him occupy till death. •7V *7V TV dfc 'TV Now the people must bring all these homely qualities of the great President to the work of the Fif­ teenth Amendment; the same pa­ tience and tenacity ; the same good sense; the same placability; ele­ ments that wait for results before they put on lustre. They are like the rough gems which catch the light in noble flashes when long grinding proves their temper. The amend­ mentwill drain our manliest qualities before it becomes a fact as well as a law. ***** We must see that the personal re­ ligion of Abraham Lincoln is fur­ nished to these men, instead of the forms of sectarianism. We must in­ sist that the missionary shall have his theology reduced to marching rations as he goes among those chil­ dren in religion to distribute to them the plain truths of morals, of health and order, of a practical knowledge of God, of hopes less fantastical than their crude feelings now claim. But first, some missionary must visit us. What Northern sect cafi invite them into its meeting-houses with the text, “ The rich and poor meet together; the Lord is the Maker of them all ” ? Only those can meet together who are able to offer pre­ miums for the best seats. It will be long before a black man with money in his pocket can compete at this new auction-block, where religion is knocked down to and by the highest bidder. May it be long, indeed ! What sect can venture to proclaim to the negro that Christianity means brotherhood, when it does not mean that in horse-cars, hotels, railroads, theatres, and concert-rooms, and on­ ly means it to the extent of about four of the worst pews in a meeting­ house. It does not mean that in the very places where our chances for contact are the best. It is a glitter­ ing generality that keeps its own coupe ; the seat for the other person is not yet put in. Will the China­ man, whose Buddhism received its first inspiration from the heart’s na­ tural recoil at caste, be much im­ pressed with the equality that has forgotten the first lesson in optics, that yellow is a constituent of white ? The day will come when white itself in this country will depend upon a harmonic gradation of all the cheeks that the sun kisses. The sun has no sallies of contempt, of which these are the hues. It loves to divide its unity. Whatever form this naturali­ zation may assume, the missionary must be its first preacher, and if he will insist upon it that one is our Lord and Master, let him at least sweeten �Abraham Lincoln—Fifteenth Amendment. the assumption by confessing that all of us are brethren. In this respect the Catholic starts with an advantage over the Protestant of a thousand years of ministry among all races and tolors. Rome has no squeamishness that turns on nationality. It knows hdlv to put a black bishop over a black diocese ; and in course of time the country will discover that the whole diocese will vote to please the bishop. The pope does not go into a cathedral and put up seats at high mass to be contended for by prospe­ rous dry-goods merchants ; he pre­ fers to collect his Peter’s pence by making the whole building the home and solace of the miserable. The more meagre and bloodless the fly is, the more sumptuous is the invita­ tion to walk into the pope’s parlor. You may claim that he is fallible, but you can not deny that such diplo­ macy will have infallible results. It will bring all the pariahs of America to their knees before Rome’s confes­ sionals. Of all the incidents in the New Testament, the baptizing of the Ethiopian has been most dear to the city that loves to propagate the dra­ matic faith of eighteen centuries. The South has already been selected for a special field. Politics and re­ ligion powerfully combine to guide the operations of the priest among this people of ardent feeling, picto­ rial fancy, flashing emotions. Music and symbols may attract them intp a fetichism, or idol-worship, no more emancipating than what their an­ cestors in Guinea practiced ; and per­ haps some day all these dusky millions at the elevation of the host will bow down to a policy that is. at war with republics, that watches to gg throw our Bible out and bring our money in, to found sectarian schools and a feudal system on the soil which free blood has so often ran­ somed. Crucifix in hand, the priest will point to the symbol of sorrow as he walks among the despised and re­ jected ; they will recollect their stripes and perceive our prejudice, and throng into the gate which the man who was acquainted with grief will seem to throw open to them; and the cross will again become a club to dash out the brains of revering hu­ manity. Protestantism has no chance short of instantaneous and absolute equality, North and South, practical fraternity that makes exclusion a crime, and opportunity a claim to the country’s gratitude in every man who offers it. Then your Fifteenth Amendment will be ratified, not by mere bluster of cannon, but by the sincere welcome of thirty million lips. After the battle of Gettysburg, the grateful heart of Abraham Lincoln compromised itself to all our hopes in these sentences : “ Thanks to all, peace does not appear so distant as it did. I hope it will come soon, and come to stay, and so come as to be worth the keeping in all future time. It will then have been proved that among freemen there can be no successful appeal from the ballot to the bullet, and that they who take such appeal are sure to lose their case and pay the cost. And then there will be some black men who* can remember that with silent, tongue, and clinched teeth, and. steady eye, and well-poised bayo­ net, they have helped mankind on to' this great consummation. Let us bequite sober. Let us diligently ap­ ply the means, never doubting that a. just God in his own good time will1 give us the rightful result.” It seems to be a message from him on an Easter morning, “ Let us be quite sober. Let us diligently apply the means.” �We f an dahL JUNE, 1870. THE NEW POWERS OF CON­ the force, intelligence, and capacity for organization to use that power GRESS. efficiently, he can command any The pretense of State sovereignty thing and every thing that rightfully vanished at Appomatox. It disap­ belongs to him. That, therefore, is peared when Lee sheathed his per­ our primary reliance. If the negro jured sword. The Tenth Section of neglects to avail himself of this Article First of the Constitution for­ means of self-defense, it is his own bade the States to exercise the usual fault. If he proves incapable of powers of sovereigns : those touch­ using it efficiently, that will be his ing treaties, the raising of armies, misfortune. But whether such a re­ the coinage of money, the laying of sult comes from his weakness or his taxes on imports, etc. The Thir­ neglect, it is the same peril to us; teenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth and we can not afford to let this Amendments still further cut down ready weapon of the nation’s de­ the powers of the States. Following fense drop from our hands. Whe­ in the line of that Tenth Section, ther weak or neglectful, we must, for and carrying out its policy still fur­ our own sakes, for the nation’s sake, ther, these amendments define who protect this ally to the fullest extent shall constitute the citizens of a that the circumstances allow. In State, and prohibit the State’s in­ the present transition state, for seve­ terference, in certain respects, with ral years to come, the new citizen the civil and political rights of its must have the special intervention citizens. Still further, these amend­ of Congress. The most explicit ments intrust Congress with the duty laws, such as can not be evaded of providing for the enforcement of or transgressed with impunity, are their provisions. As to the matters the debt the nation owes to the new specified in these amendments, voter. therefore, Congress is empowered It is not for us to suggest the de­ to exercise legislation in the am­ tails of such laws. One or two prin­ plest manner. ciples we may presume to point out We do not rely, in the last resort, —principles which should underlie on any legislation for the protection all legislation on these points. All of the black race. Every voting will admit that the difficulties in this class, in the long run, protects itself. class of laws are—first, to initiate The negro has the ballot. If he has proceedings; secondly, to secure � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Victorian Blogging Description An account of the resource A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library &amp; Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Conway Hall Library & Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Conway Hall Ethical Society Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data Pamphlet Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Abraham Lincoln - Fifteenth Amendment Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Weiss, John Description An account of the resource Place of publication: [Chicago] Collation: 94-99 p. ; 24 cm. Notes: From The Standard, Vol. 1, no. 2, June 1980. The Fifteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the federal and state governments from denying a citizen the right to vote based on that citizen's "race, color, or previous condition of servitude". It was ratified on February 3,1870, as the third and last of the Reconstruction Amendments. From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available [s.n.] Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource [1870] Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context G5446 Subject The topic of the resource Race Suffrage Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Abraham Lincoln - Fifteenth Amendment), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span> Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource English Abraham Lincoln American Reconstruction Conway Tracts Race Racism United States Constitution