servatives into power again, Mr. Brotherton, who had represented Manchester in Parliament for ten years, said in addressing the working men of the town, "The landed interest have a monopoly which raises the price of food fifty per cent. higher in this country than in other countries, and this for the benefit of the Aristocracy.

If a poor man goes to a grocer's shop to buy articles that are taxed, the taxation is so unequal that out of every shilling the poor man lays out, 5d. is tax; but out of every shilling the rich man lays out, only 2d. is tax. The Corn Laws rob every poor man of every third loaf, and their families are deprived of that bread in order that it may be given to support an insolent and rapacious aristocracy." I think even Libertas will hesitate before sweeping the authority of Brotherton to the ground.

In assailing the political equality of American citizens, he says, "The political privileges of the United States have been readily and unwisely bestowed on these foreigners." If many of them cherished the despotic principles of the one whose insolent falsehoods extort the present reply, I might agree with him, for we cannot be too jealous of the invasion of tyranny. But most foreigners who come to our shores have been too effectually cured of all partiality for despotism by the tyranny which exiled them from the land of their birth, ever to wish to see it established among us.

But a writer who can defend the alliance of Church and State, and deny that oppression exists in Great Britain, may well make war against political equality. I doubt not it offends his sight to behold the shackles fall from the shiploads of his hitherto-oppressed countrymen when they reach our shores, to see them have a voice in the administration of the government which controuls their interests. To me I confess it is a

pleasing spectacle.

"They touch our country and their shackles fall."

They who have always been bowed down under despotism, find when they stand upon the soil of the New World they are men.

He also says, "These privileges are alike injurious to the holders themselves, and to the Union at large," and expatiates upon " the despotism of the majority," thinking it worse than the consolidated tyranny of the English Aristocracy. Now I am much of the opinion of the Irishman, who in signing an Anti-Corn Law petition, reminded the landlords that when it seemed to him desirable he should die of starvation, he wished the privilege of starving himself, and when their assistance became necessary he would “just give them a call."

This bugbear of the "despotism of the majority," which has been so universally harped upon by the enemies of Republicanism in Europe, is

thus disposed of by the Edinburgh Review, (Oct. 1840) "Yet neither ought we to forget that this lawless violence is not so great, because not so lasting an evil as tyranny, through the medium of law. The despotism, therefore, of the majority within the limits of civil life, though a real evil, does not appear to us a formidable one." The writer might have added, that our experience as a nation thus far, proves most conclusively that no form of government is so exempt from violent agitations and tumultuous riots as our own. Every English newspaper we take up contains some account of riots and bloodshed. It is well known that during the last election in England, the island was the scene of numberless outrages, and that they were attended with savage ferocity. A standing army and a numerous and vigilant police distributed over the whole country, are unable to prevent these outbreaks-they are constantly occurring, and they will continue, so long as the people feel that they are trampled in the dust. How was it during the Presidential election in this country in 1840? We have the assertion of the London Morning Advertiser, that although the excitement which attended that great struggle was unprecedented, yet not a life was lost amidst the agitations of seventeen millions of people, nor even a serious disturbance witnessed.

Aristocrats have always rung changes on the old adage of tyranny, that "the mass are not qualified to govern themselves." In reply to this, Sidney

Smith has a word worth your attention. happy Ireland! what protecting angels have the aristocracy been to you! Look at your bold peasantry; not above a fourth part of them destitute of all food, and nearly a half that have a potatoe per day, and a few with 'point' into the bargain. Behold that noble contempt for luxuries, with which they export millions of quarters of corn, and pounds of butter, cheese, and ham, while they philosophically starve at home, under their own cabin and corn-bill, with none to make them afraid; nay, with many to be afraid of them. See how plump and fat the Corn Law has made them. My friends it is a bitter mirth which rules us in thus treating this subject."

One thing has been demonstrated by the experiments of past ages; that if the people are not qualified to govern themselves, aristocrats and kings are not. How have the masses always been abused, stripped of their rights, oppressed, devoured? What is history? Blood, toil, agony, and tears! What have earth's millions gained by the sweat and labour of six thousand years? And yet this has not been the doing of the people. Hitherto in the old world, they have had "nothing to do with the laws, but to obey them." Let their miseries then be laid at the door of the tyrants who have enslaved them. "The people not qualified to govern themselves?" How is this known? They have never had a chance to make the experiment!

But Libertas" ventures some statements that have excited my astonishment still more than anything I have yet quoted.

"When wages are nearly equal, the working man's money will go farther, and provide him more comfort in England than in America;" and he asserts that our "government and laws have imposed heavier burdens on the working man here, than in the old country." (102 p.)

The author must have either known these assertions to be false when he made them, or his ignorance utterly disqualified him to discuss the subject for such extravagant statements an intelligent man cannot believe. I shall say but a word in reply to them in this place: but in other chapters of the present work, he will find facts. which no man in his senses will think of disputing; demonstrating that there is no country in the world where the working classes have such heavy burdens to bear as in Great Britain. For the present, let me quote a few words from British authorities, for the illumination of this British writer. Says the Edinburgh Review, (Oct. 1840:) “America is all middle class: the whole people being in a condition, both as to education and pecuniary means, corresponding to the middle classes here." Every man knows that this would not be the case, unless the same equality of rights and privileges existed, that we see in their condition.

The Hon. Charles Augustus Murray, grandson of Lord Dunmore, who was governor of Virginia