ر

to poverty, the last of which is the most income, or the fruit of your labour, as powerful of the two. It is, therefore," your masters choose to take." This is, not with contempt, bat with compas- in fact, the language of the rulers to sion that we should look on those whose every man who is refused to have a state is one of the decrees of nature, share in the making of the laws to from whose sad example we profit, and which he is forced to submit. to whom, in return, we ought to make compensation by every indulgent and kind act in our power, and particularly by a defence of their rights. To those who labour, we, who labour not with our hands, owe all that we eat, drink, and wear all that shades us by day and that shelters us by night; all the means of enjoying health and pleasure; and therefore, if we possess talent for the task, we are ungrateful or cowardly, or both, if we omit any effort within our power to prevent them from being slaves; and, disguise the matter how we may, a slave, a real slave, every man is, who has no share in making the laws which he is compelled to obey.

'But some one may say, slaves are private property, and may be bought and sold, out and out, like cattle. And what is it to the slave, whether he be the property of one or of many; or, what matters it to him, whether he pass from master to master by a sale for an indefinite term, or be let to hire by the year, month, or week? It is, in no case, the flesh and blood and bones that are sold, but the labour; and if you actually sell the labour of man, is not that man a slave, though you sell it for only a short time at once? And, as to the principle, so ostentatiously displayed in the case of the black slave-trade, that

man ought not to have a property in man," it is even an advantage to the slave to be private property, because the owner has then a clear and powerful interest in the preservation of his life, health, and strength, and will, therefore, furnish him amply with the food and

that

What is a slave? For, let us not be amused by a name; but look well into the matter. A slave is, in the first place, a man who has no property; and property means something that he has, and that nobody can take from him without his leave, or consent. What-raiment necessary for this end. Every ever man, no matter what he may call one knows that public property is never himself or any-body else may call him, so well taken care of as private property; can have his money or his goods taken and this, too, on the maxim, that from him by force, by virtue of an which is every-body's business is noorder, or ordinance, or law, which he body's business." Every one knows has had no hand in making, and to that a rented farm is not well kept which he has not given his assent, has in heart as a farm in the hands of the no property, and is merely a depositary owner. And, as to punishment and reof the goods of his master. A slave straints, what difference is there, whehas no property in his labour; and any ther these be inflicted and imposed by a man who is compelled to give up the private owner, or his overseer, or by the fruit of his labour to another, at the agents and overseers of a body of proarbitrary will of that other, has no prietors? In short, if you can cause property in his labour, and is, therefore, a man to be imprisoned or whipped if a slave, whether the fruit of his labour be taken from him directly or indirectly. If it be said that he gives up this fruit of his labour by his own will, and that it is not forced from him; I answer, To be sure he may avoid eating and drink ing and may go naked; but then he must die; and on this condition, and this condition only, can he refuse to give up the fruit of his labour."Die, “wretch, or surrender as much of your

he do not work enough to please you; if you can sell him by auction for a time limited; if you can forcibly separate him from his wife to prevent their having children; if you can shut him up in his dwelling-place when you please, and for as long a time as you please; if you can force him to draw a cart or wagon like a beast of draught; if you can, when the humour seizes you, and at the suggestions of your mere fears, or

whim, cause him to be shut up in a were a fanciful thing; if it were only a dungeon during your pleasure; if you speculative theory; if it were but an can, at your pleasure, do these things abstract principle; on any of these supto him, is it not to be insolently positions, it might be considered as of hypocritical to affect to call him a free little importance. But it is none of man? But, after all, these may all these; it is a practical matter; the want be wanting, and yet the man be a of it not only is, but must of necessity slave, if he be allowed to have no pro- be, felt by every man who lives under perty; and, as I have shown, no pro- that want. If it were proposed to the perty he can have, not even in that shopkeepers in a town, that a rich man labour which is not only property, but the basis of all other property, unless he have a share in making the laws to which he is compelled to submit.

must it not always be true, that if your property be at the absolute disposal of others, your ruin is certain? And if this be, of necessity, the case amongst individuals and parts of the community, it must be the case with regard to the whole community.

or two, living in the neighbourhood, should have power to send whenever they pleased, and take away as much as they pleased of the money of the shopIt is said, that he may have this share keepers, and apply it to what uses they virtually though not in form and name; pleased; what an outcry the shopfor that his employers may have such keepers would make! And yet, what share, and they will, as a matter of course, would this be more than taxes imposed act for him. This doctrine, pushed home, on those who have no voice in choosing would make the chief of the nation the the persons who impose them? Who sole maker of the laws; for if the rich lets another man put his hand into his can thus act for the poor, why should purse when he pleases? Who that has not the King act for the rich? This the power to help himself, surrenders matter is very completely explained by his goods or his money to the will of the practice in the UNITED STATES OF another? Has it not always been, and AMERICA. There the general rule is, that every free man, with the exception of men stained with crime and men insane, has a right to have a voice in choosing those who make the laws. The number of representatives sent to the Congress is, in each state, proportioned to the number of free people. But as Ay, and experience shows us that it there are slaves in some of the states, always has been the case. The natural these states have a certain portion of and inevitable consequences of a want additional numbers on account of those of this right in the people have, in all slaves! Thus the slaves are represented countries, been taxes pressing the inby their owners; and this is real, prac-dustrious and laborious to the earth; tical, open, and undisguised virtual re-severe laws and standing armies to compresentation! No doubt that white pel the people to submit to those taxes; men may be represented in the same wealth, luxury, and splendour, amongst way; for the colour of the skin is no- those who make the laws and receive thing; but let them be called slaves, the taxes; poverty, misery, immorality, then; let it not be pretended that they amongst those who bear the burdens; are free men; let not the word liberty and, at last, commotion, revolt, revenge, be polluted by being applied to their and rivers of blood. Such have always state; let it be openly and honestly been, and such must always be, the avowed, as in America, that they are consequences of a want of this right of slaves; and then will come the question all men to share in the making of the whether men ought to exist in such a laws, a right, as I have before shown, state, or whether they ought to do every-derived immediately from the law of thing in their power to rescue themselves nature, springing up out of the same from it. source with civil society, and cherished If the right to have a share in making in the heart of man by reason and by the laws were merely a feather; if it experience.

ever

Such is the foundation of this right, seen Pitt's and Sidmouth's and Casand such are the general consequences tlereagh's dungeoning and gagging of a want of the enjoyment of it; of all Bills? And would our miserable fel which consequences, the last only ex- low-subjects in Ireland ever have seen cepted, we have already amply tasted laws to shut them up in their houses in this country. If this right had been from sunset to sunrise on pain of transenjoyed in England, should we have portation? Would they ever have seen seen the families of the aristocracy fed any of the scores of horrid scenes of from the pension and sinecure lists; that which that of NEWTONBARRY is only is to say, on the fruit of the people's one? And, should we ever have been labour? Should we have seen men covered with the eternal disgrace of transported for seven years for what is leaving them without poor-laws, while called poaching; that is to say, for thousands upon thousands of them have taking, or attempting to take, wild died from starvation, after having eked animals, and thereby disturb the sports out their existence by feeding on seaof the rich? Should we have seen laws weed and other such things, while the inflicting ruin, and, contingently, de- ports of their fine country were crowded struction of body, on the people, for with ships and steam-boats, carrying turning barley into malt, or gathering away its beef, pork, flour, butter, sheep, hops from their hedges? Should we hogs, and poultry? Should we have seen old men, and even women, have heard of a surplus-population and harnessed and made to draw carts and a surplus-produce at the same time? wagons like beasts of burden? Should Should we ever have heard of taxes, we have seen a law to hang a man for raised for the purpose of getting the striking another without doing him any working people out of the country, bodily harm? Should we have seen while the lands are half cultivated; and Lords GUILDFORD and WALSINGHAM (for I must stop somewhere) should we (both of whom voted against the Reform ever have seen, at the same time, enor Bill) with four church-livings each, mous taxes raised in order to give prewhile those who do the duties of the miums to the idlers to increase their parishes are little better off than labour- numbers? No: none of these things should ing men? Should we have seen the we ever have seen; nor any of these Dean and Chapter of ELY taking away corn-laws, combination-laws, or laws the great tithes of the parish of LEKEN- about truck, or about STURGES BOURNE; HEATH, a VICAR (who has another living) for neither of these things would have taking away the small tithes, while a found a place in the mind of man. curate, with ten children, has seventy- Well, then, if such be the foundation five pounds a year allowed him, and no and nature of this right; if the consehouse to live in, and who digs, like a quences of a want of its enjoyment be common labourer, to raise potatoes as such; and if, with the exceptions abovehis almost only food? Should we have stated, it is clearly a right belonging to seen military and naval academies, for every man, what injustice to attempt to the purpose of educating the children of withhold it even from the small portion the rich, by means of taxes raised on the of working men to whom this REJECTED poor? Should we have seen the magis- BILL would have yielded it! And what trates allow, for the maintenance of the impudence, what insolence, to accord hard-working man, not half so much as this right to a tax or tithe-eater, who the subsistence of the lowest common is, only by taxes or tithes, enabled to soldier? Should we have seen that liee in a house of twenty pounds a-year, soldier receive and send his letters while you withhold it from the man postage-free, while the working man is from whose labour come those taxes compelled to pay an enormous tax and those tithes! The bare thought of (besides the cost of carriage) on his let-such insolence awakens indignation that ters? Should we have seen any of sets utterance at defiance! Go, DENMAN ; these things? Should we ever have go to NOTTINGHAM again, and tell them

there that you belong to a ministry who in any manner to lessen the number of think right to TAKE AWAY, directly, voters in the great towns; then I say, the suffrages of out-lying voters, and, in that the bill is an evil, clearly an evil, future, of all burgesses and freemen; instead of a good; for then it will be a and who have now found out, that a bill to disfranchise the few working men rent of ten pounds a year, in great towns, who now have votes, and not to enfranis two low to qualify a man to give a chise one single working man in the whole vote for a member to serve in Parlia- kingdom! It will immediately disfranment! Go, DENMAN ; go and tell them chise the out-lying burgesses and freethat! You need not, then, put forward men, and also disfranchise the scot-andyour claims on them for your trouble in lot voters; and it will, in a short time, the prosecution of me and for your disfranchise the resident burgesses and mighty and anxious labours in Hamp-freemen; while to not one single workshire and Wiltshire. You have only to ing man in any part of the kingdom will tell them THAT! Ah! but will you it give a vote; and, with regard to ponot be preserved from this for six years litical rights, all the working millions to come! I verily believe, that even of this kingdom will be virtually that will be attempted. represented; that is to say, by their masters, precisely as the blacks in Vir

66

And I am to express my "confidence," am I, in a Ministry who, I fear (and have given reasons for my fearing), entertain a design to do this act of insolent injustice! Of all men I shall be the most ready and the most happy to find, and to acknowledge, that my fears have been unfounded; and, in that case, I shall again be ready to give "the whole bill" a "fair trial;" and shall be the last man in England to cavil at the acts of Ministers, or to do any-thing to annoy them, or make their course difficult. But, as things now stand; with announced "alterations" in the bill; with the nature of those alterations kept a secret from us; and with the speech of the Lord Chancellor before our eyes, it would not only be folly, but downright baseness, in me, and treachery to you, the working people, were to refrain from expressing beforehand my opinions upon the subject.

Let it! I would much rather it should, than that this withholding of the ten-ginia are by theirs! pound suffrage should take place. What did I support the Reform Bill for Not because it gave all that I thought it ought to give. It was expressly stated by the advocates of the bill, that the ballot and the duration of Parliaments were to become subjects of distinct and subsequent discussion. The suffrage was the great matter; and though it fell far short of justice to the working people, I saw that, by making the standard so low as ten pounds rent in the great towns, the working people would, in a few years, return from fifty to a hundred members, who would be likely to maintain their rights. I saw the injustice of shutting out the agricultural labourers, as the bill completely did; but then I knew, that it was impossible for a member to be faithful to the interests of the weaver and to neglect those of the hedger and the ploughman. I saw but a few members, comparatively, to be returned by the working people; but then I knew that those few would be REAL MEN; and that BARING saw too, when he foreboded that the great towns would send "pushing men, who would "look into all the papers laid before the "House." I saw these things; and on this ground, and no other, I supported the Reform Bill.

But if the ten-pound suffrage be to be raised, or, if it be to be so altered, by transferring it from rent to rate, or

If this foul deed should be attempted in a new bill, I shall lose not a moment in petitioning against that bill myself; and I shall advise all others, and espe cially, the working people, to do the same. I would fain have ground for hoping that the necessity will not arise: but, if the new bill contain any-thing, no matter what, to lessen the number of voters in the great towus; then let the working people in those towns, and in the small towns and the counties also,

4

turn with scorn from the preachers up you my advice as to several steps that of patience! What was the ground on you ought to take. In the meanwhile, I remain, your faithful Friend,

which I gave my support to the bill? I saw that it would immediately disfranchise all non-resident voters, and, in a short time, all the working people who now have votes; but I saw, on the other hand, that, by giving a vote to

ten-pound renters in the great towns, it CHOPSTICKS OF HAMPSHIRE, would insure the return of from fifty On the County Meeting at Winchester,

to a hundred members, by the free

and uncorrupt voices of the working

people; and I knew that those mem

held on the 26th of October, 1831.

3

Bolt-court, Oct. 31, 1831.

bers would soon cause to be done those MY FRIENDS, things which ought to be done. But LORD GREY, our present Prime if this provision of the bill be taken out, Minister, said, some years ago, that he or damaged, am I still to approve of the would stand by his ORDER, meaning the bill! Am I to see disfranchised all the Order of Nobility. I never saw any working men who now vote, and to see harm in that declaration, though it gave no working men enfranchised in their great offence to many, who, most likely, stead: am I to see, by a false and base wanted to be nobles themselves. For pretence about "ununiformity," the qua-my part, I do not want any such thing; lification in great towns so raised as to nor do I wish to see the order of nolessen that number of working voters bility pulled down. But, as I belong which is, according to the bill, already to THE ORDER OF THE CHOPSTICKS, too small; am I to see, in addition which, by-the-by, is much more ancient to the working country-people, those than the Order of Nobility, LORD GREY of the great towns premeditatedly strip-will excuse me, if I express iny resoluped of their rights! am I to see the tion to stand by my Order; and that I few oligarchs of the boroughs exchang-will certainly do, as long as I have a ed for a swarm of oligarchs, one of mind to think and a hand to put my whom is to be found in every counting- thoughts upon paper. house, and in every great homestead; Along with this, I shall send down am I to call that "a reform" which into Hampshire, and all over the kingwill be manifestly intended to disfran- dom, my TWO-PENNY TRASH for Nochise the whole of the working people, vember. Read that with attention : it and to make them, for ages, the slaves will fully explain to you the reason for of a grinding, an omnipresent, never- my opposing, at the meeting, an Adsleeping, oligarchy of money, with little dress which expressed confidence in the finger heavier than the loins of the Ministers. Pray read it attentively; boroughmongers: suspecting this to be and then you will see how deeply you intended, am I to express my confi-are all interested in the matter. But, dence" in those by whom I think the the object of this present paper is to intention to be entertained! Paralysed give you an account of the proceedings be my hand when I write, blistered and at the late COUNTY-MEETING; for, not burnt up be my tongue when I pro-a fiftieth part of you could be present nounce, such "confidence;" and, eter- at the meeting; and even those who nal shame be the lot of all those who (suspecting as I do) are calling on the people to express or repose such "confi

dence!"

66

were present could know little or nothing of the wheel-within-wheel that were put in motion to deceive them, and to give a false appearance to what was My friends, be not deceived, be not really intended. The present time is of cajoled, be prepared! The moment I vast importance: on the measure, to be arrive at the certainty that the Minis-adopted within the next six months, ters intend to do this thing, I will give may depend, whether you shall again live