vernment for every copy of a British paper printed! The people assembled in large masses to discuss the question, and poured their petitions into Parliament for abolishing the tax altogether. A committee, representing a large and highly respectable meeting in London, waited upon the Prime Minister to plead the cause of intelligence. Popular feeling became too strong to allow the ministry to pass by the question in silence or contempt, and the statute was revised; but the tax was only reduced, and not repealed. A stamp of from 1d. to 1d. was laid upon all newspapers, (which made every copy cost from 2 to 3 cents more), and to guard against violations of the law, several very severe enactments were passed, which, as a London Review well says, "might have served as a good model to the French ministers for the Fieschi code." The old law was continually evaded, and it was estimated that more unstamped publications appeared in London than paid duty. The new law devised a summary cure for this thirst for intelligence. It authorized the seizure of all unstamped papers and the presses by which they were printed, without the form of trial; the simple affidavit of a common informer could ruin any man engaged in instructing the people through the medium of an unstamped press. This measure was forced through Parliament by the help of the Tories, who may always be relied on in such cases. But a fraction of the Whig party manfully lifted their

voice against it, declaring that a government which would commence its career by practically announcing that the people were unworthy of a free press, was not deserving public confidence and support. This was the first act of the Melbourne ministry, equally oppressive to England, as the Coercion Bill had been to Ireland under ' Earl Grey.

This tax upon knowledge had no tendency to allay the feelings of a people who could not forget that while Parliament had saddled upon the country a debt of four thousand millions of dollars in extending the foreign power of the empire, gratifying the ambition of political leaders, and in clothing the privileged classes in ermine and gold, it had never expended a guinea upon the education of the poor. The Westminster Review tells us, " Among the most influential supporters of the Melbourne cabinet, some of the most violent enemies of education were found." Even members of that cabinet have been heard to say in public companies, that "there was too much education in the country; and defended their opinions by repeating the old worn out fallacy that books unfitted the laborer for the duties of life."

What hope can the British people borrow from a government whose reformers talk in this way? Too much education for millions of the Saxon race! Too much education for civilized men anywhere! Too much education for a being

made in God's image!! Even the Whig ministry refused to do anything to promote National Education, (if we except a small pittance they granted to Ireland,) until the very last year they were in power. "They refused, by postponement, the opportunity of making an excellent beginning in establishing District Schools of Industry in connexion with the New Unions, in place of the schools now held in the Workhouses, under the most contaminating influences. A carefully digested plan for thus commencing the work of education, with at least 100,000 children of the lowest classes, and to which there would have been no serious opposition, was laid aside. Finally a Board of Education was appointed for England, but not a Board independent of party, like that created for Ireland, ten years before, by Lord Stanley, but a political Educational Board, changing with every change in the cabinet."

With what consistency can a government which has for centuries thus neglected the education of its people, talk about their not being intelligent enough to be qualified for the elective franchise! How happens it they are not? And how long will the present discipline of the government require to fit them for the duties of freemen? From the day the Whig government came into power till the day they gave up their places, the lower classes have been praying for relief from the burdens that oppress them-and they have prayed in vain. They have gradually been giving up

all hope of substantial help from either of the great parties, until the conclusion has been forced upon them, that justice never will be awarded to the mass so long as they are not represented in Parliament. They have now turned away from kings, queens, parliaments and reform bills, from which they experienced so little relief; and fallen back with a confident and desperate resolution upon themselves, adopting the CHARTER for their rallying cry. We shall say nothing of Chartism in this place it deserves a place by itself, which it shall have in another part of the work. The Chartists have long ago been put down in the newspapers, but no where else. Says Carlyle, "the living essence of Chartism has not been put down.” It is easy to believe this true when it has swelled its numbers, in three years, from five hundred thousand to three millions.

WE SHALL NOW NOTICE MORE SPECIFICALLY SOME OF THE BURDENS THAT PRESS UPON THE BRITISH PEOPLE.

rate.

These burdens I have no desire to exaggeWould to God I could believe they have ever been exaggerated! for it would then be other than with a feeling of sadness I have taken up my pen to write out the woes of some millions of the poor of our father-land.

Before we could be prepared for a contemplation

of the distress of the lower classes, we must inquire into the laws which govern them, to ascertain what agency these laws have in producing suffering. If the British Government have not by unjust legislation incurred the guilt of distressing the disfranchised poor, let the world know it, that the blame may no longer be charged upon an innocent party; and if on examination it shall appear the government have enacted cruel and wicked laws, that have enriched the few and impoverished the many, let the world know it.

A thousand years have passed away, and during this long period the people have been the victims of unjust government. One race of kings after another has come and gone; one generation of privileged classes after another has appeared on the stage, and moulded the constitution and laws of the empire to suit themselves. It would be strange indeed, if in the selfishness and pride of power they should not have forgotten the interests of the poor.

In such an estimate as this, we must not pass by the NATIONAL DEBT. In the gratification of national pride and ambition-in the prodigal expen'ditures of successive administrations for the extension of conquest, building palaces for monarchs and their favorites-in the bestowment of estates and pensions on the privileged orders of society— and in the maintenance of an immense military and naval force to extend the empire abroad and suppress popular rights at home, England has