Misc Writings and Speeches, vol 4 | Page 7

from my soul, wish to see them, if
employment were always plentiful, wages always high, food always
cheap, if a large family were considered not as an encumbrance but as a
blessing, the principal objections to Universal Suffrage would, I think,
be removed. Universal Suffrage exists in the United States, without
producing any very frightful consequences; and I do not believe that the
people of those States, or of any part of the world, are in any good
quality naturally superior to our own countrymen. But, unhappily, the
labouring classes in England, and in all old countries, are occasionally
in a state of great distress. Some of the causes of this distress are, I fear,
beyond the control of the Government. We know what effect distress
produces, even on people more intelligent than the great body of the
labouring classes can possibly be. We know that it makes even wise
men irritable, unreasonable, credulous, eager for immediate relief,
heedless of remote consequences. There is no quackery in medicine,
religion, or politics, which may not impose even on a powerful mind,
when that mind has been disordered by pain or fear. It is therefore no

reflection on the poorer class of Englishmen, who are not, and who
cannot in the nature of things be, highly educated, to say that distress
produces on them its natural effects, those effects which it would
produce on the Americans, or on any other people, that it blinds their
judgment, that it inflames their passions, that it makes them prone to
believe those who flatter them, and to distrust those who would serve
them. For the sake, therefore, of the whole society, for the sake of the
labouring classes themselves, I hold it to be clearly expedient that, in a
country like this, the right of suffrage should depend on a pecuniary
qualification.
But, Sir, every argument which would induce me to oppose Universal
Suffrage, induces me to support the plan which is now before us. I am
opposed to Universal Suffrage, because I think that it would produce a
destructive revolution. I support this plan, because I am sure that it is
our best security against a revolution. The noble Paymaster of the
Forces hinted, delicately indeed and remotely, at this subject. He spoke
of the danger of disappointing the expectations of the nation; and for
this he was charged with threatening the House. Sir, in the year 1817,
the late Lord Londonderry proposed a suspension of the Habeas Corpus
Act. On that occasion he told the House that, unless the measures
which he recommended were adopted, the public peace could not be
preserved. Was he accused of threatening the House? Again, in the year
1819, he proposed the laws known by the name of the Six Acts. He
then told the House that, unless the executive power were reinforced,
all the institutions of the country would be overturned by popular
violence. Was he then accused of threatening the House? Will any
gentleman say that it is parliamentary and decorous to urge the danger
arising from popular discontent as an argument for severity; but that it
is unparliamentary and indecorous to urge that same danger as an
argument for conciliation? I, Sir, do entertain great apprehension for
the fate of my country. I do in my conscience believe that, unless the
plan proposed, or some similar plan, be speedily adopted, great and
terrible calamities will befall us. Entertaining this opinion, I think
myself bound to state it, not as a threat, but as a reason. I support this
bill because it will improve our institutions; but I support it also
because it tends to preserve them. That we may exclude those whom it
is necessary to exclude, we must admit those whom it may be safe to

admit. At present we oppose the schemes of revolutionists with only
one half, with only one quarter of our proper force. We say, and we say
justly, that it is not by mere numbers, but by property and intelligence,
that the nation ought to be governed. Yet, saying this, we exclude from
all share in the government great masses of property and intelligence,
great numbers of those who are most interested in preserving
tranquillity, and who know best how to preserve it. We do more. We
drive over to the side of revolution those whom we shut out from
power. Is this a time when the cause of law and order can spare one of
its natural allies?
My noble friend, the Paymaster of the Forces, happily described the
effect which some parts of our representative system would produce on
the mind of a foreigner, who had heard much of our freedom and
greatness. If, Sir, I wished to make such a foreigner clearly understand
what I consider as the