ebr Otrtropolfst.

The Committee of the Working Men's Association are taking active steps to insures grand demonstration on the part of the working classes

on Monday next. In every district of the Metropolis, local commit- tees have been appointed, we understand, for arranging the mode and manner in which the workmen are to assemble previous to their depar-

ture for Palace Yard, and the time when they are to start for that spot, so celebrated in the annals of Radical Reform meetings, when " Eng- land's Pride and Westminster's Glory" was wont to lead the van. Every part of the town, from Blackwell to Paddington, where a printed bill can be posted, is covered with placards announcing the meeting, and stirring appeals to the people to be present at it. In the parish of Limehouse, printed notices are circulated stating that the liadical Reformers of that district will meet at eleven o'clock, and pro- ceed in regular order to the place of meeting. At the bottom of the notice are these words—" Those workmen who are afraid of their masters need not attend." What the result of these united exertions may be, it is not possible now to say. There is, however, little doubt but the congregation will be very great. It is said by the parties themselves who are to take part in the proceedings, that the speeches will not be characterized by any violence of sentiment or expression ; but that they will be temperate though decided. The resolutions, it is added, will also be characterized by the absence of every thing inflamma- tory. Several Members of Parliament are expected to be present, and to take part in the proceedings. Among [those, the names of Mr. Leader the Member for Westminster, Mr. Hume, and Mr. Attwood the Member of Birmingham, are mentioned. It is expected that the proceedings will occupy at, least five hours. The principal speakers will be from the working-classes themselves. The High Bailiff of Westminster is to preside on the occasion.--Morning Advertiser.

The Committee of the Working Men's Association have put forth an address "to the People of England, in reply to the objections of the Press." This document is temperate in tone and language ; and though not free from mistakes is creditable to the ability of its authors. It commences with a disavowal of any intention to " make any foolish attack on the press or its conductors," but proceeds with much truth to Comment on the slippery character of some newspapers- " We rather lament that such a powerful instrument towards man's political and social redemption should be constrained, by interest or party, to shut out truth from its pages, and make error a marketable speculation ; or that men, so competent to direct aright the public mind, should be employed to mystify and mislead it. lint we think that the many notorious changes and conversions re- cently witnessed, the skilful balancing of opinions, the fear-to offend and desire. to-please disposition, which have characterized so great a portion of those papers who call themselves ' liberal,' should open the eyes of all those who desire to see the press as cansistent in practice as It ought to be honest in principle. Such eccentric courses, and such conduct, in men professing liberality of sentiment and honesty of intention, can only be countenanced by the public's disregard of all principle, or the private encouragement of those who maintain their fraudu- lent position by unworthy means. We would be the last to restrict the freedom of thought or the most unbounded expressions that could be given in opposition to our own opinions,—as we consider truth can only be elicited through the severest test of mental conflict; but when, in the same paper, we perceive the most ultra political principles set forth in the strongest language to.day, perti- naciously defended by the most cogent arguments to-morrow, and the most sweeping condemnation and invective bestowed on them the day following, we confess we do not think it free discussion, but direct apostacy."

It is affirmed that legislation alone has " made the difference between democratic America, despotic Russia, and pauperized and oppressed England ; " and they ask, If this is true, why Englishmen should not have the same means of regeneration that America possesses? It is said that their ignorance and poverty should preclude Englishmen from the franchise; but they ask whether the intelligence and prosperity of America was not the consequence of obtaining political rights?— " Granting that a number of our countrymen are in poverty, can these gen- tlemen show, by any valid reasoning, the absolute necessity for their being so, especially in a country blessed by nature with such abundaut resources? Nay, can they trace the existence of that poverty to any other source than corrupt aid exclusive legislation ? Granting, too, that ignorance to a great extent pre-

vails, to what other cause can it be attributed than to those who have legislated to

keep knowledge from the people ? And therefore is it net as immoral as it is unjust to make the effects of corruption a pretence for upholding the cause of

it? We would call upon any reflecting individual to take up the history of his wuntrY, and to investigate the true cause of all the wars, the superstitions, the oppressions, and the persecutions, which leave so many stains upon our national

character. He will also find it to be an exclusive and corrupt government; and will find that in proportion as the spirit of democracy has forced its influence on the Legislature, so have the venomous influences of the public been abated. " Warned, therefore, by the expelience of tbe past, and cheered by the example of modern Democracy, whether in Switzerland, Norway, or America, we think every lover of his species ought to exert his influence to remove that prolific source of evil—corrupt legislation. It is not 60 much hy forms of go- vernment that evils are generated or removed, as by the principles of exclusive or responsible representation—the former acts for itself, the latter for the people. Therefore, according to our humble abilities, are we seeking to remedy the evils we complain of ; and we believe the most effective means will be those we have embodied in the People's Charter."

The assertion that the "best test of intelligence is property," is scornfully denied-

" We know of hundreds of rich fools, and thousands of housekeepers whose knowledge does not extend beyond their counters, and who are no more qualified to judge of any man's political capabilities than the most ignorant ploughman, whose common sense would not, at least, be subject to such influence as the fear of losing a wealthy customer. If wealth alone formed a sufficient guarantee for just government,' the benevolent portion of mankind would not for so many years have been striving to rescue the enslaved negro from the mercenary grasp of the wealthy planter of India and the Southern slaveowner of America ; nay, further, if intelligence alone were sufficient, we should not have such a catalogue of had laws to complain of. " The great boast of England is ' trial by jury,' but vrhy do we prefer the less intelligent jury to the more intelligent judge, who fully knows the law, and is a more competent judge of evidence? Simply because honesty is not always united with intelligence. We have found out that wealthy and intel- ligent judges cannot even be trusted in a cuurt of law : and we are therefore pleased to submit to the occasional blunders of an unbiassed jury, rather than trust our lives to a designing judge. If men without responsibility were strictly virtuous, a few intelligent individuals would be found sufficient to make and execute the laws ; but as they are not so, we must endeavour to make them honest by making them accountable and responsible for their actions. "

The following passages contain much truth, and the claim to the franchise is cleverly urged- " But we are told that 'we are virtually represented '—that 'our interest,

are identified with those who represent us.' This is very false philosophy : man does not always pursue his own real interests—if he did, he would never commit so many crimes and blunders as he does ; on the contrary, he pursues an imaginary interest, as passion or circumstances determine ; and hence the necessity for laws to regulate his conduct. So with men collectively, so with classes—they uphold the interest of their class according to their power or incli- nations; and it is only by a mutual reliance on, and responsibility to each other, that oppression can be guarded against.

"Land, labour, and capital are the peat sources of wealth: without land and labour, capital would be unproductive; without capital and land, labour could not be employed; and without labour, both laud and capital would be useless. Here there is a mutual necessity for mutual interests; and, being so dependent each upon the other, justice demands that, in all the arrangements necessary for production and distribution, equality in legislation should prevail. But, no; we are told 'the capitalists (head the labourers, and, therefore, will oppose giving them their rights.' We would here stop to ask these very con- sistent gentlemen, who talk of 'virtual representation,' what just cause have English capitalists to dread or to oppose the English labourer, more than Ame- rican capitalists have to fear the power of universal suffrage in that country? The people there find it to be their interest to protect and encourage capital as the best seed for future production ; they find it equally beneficial to remove monopolies and develop their own resources, taking care that as the publie cause is promoted, individual interests shall not suffer ; they know that know- ledge is the surest promoter of peace and order, and therefore seek to extend it—. they find that poverty is the most frightful source of crime, and therefore seek to remove it. Do the opponents of universal suffrage imagine that Englishmen would be less wise in pursuing their own interests than Americans are?"

In reply to the assumption, that to admit the masses to suffrage is " inexpedient," it is asked whether the experiment having succeeded in another country, it is not expedient to try it in our own ? They re- mark, in conclusion, that they will not be misdirected from their great object of obtaining the suffrage by the advice given them to agitate against the Corn-laws; which advice, they think, " exhibits the hol- lowness and hypocrisy" of the persons offering it ; and they warn their opponents against provoking a trial of strength between the pro- prietary and the working classes, by interference with the proceedings of the latter.

The chief error pervading the reasoning of this address consists in the disregard of the economical circumstances of the different countries cited by its authors in illustration of their positions. It by no means follows, that because Universal Suffrage works well in America, where land is plentiful, want unknown, and where, in fact, a large proportion of the working population, the Negroes, have no votes, that it would be safe in England, where political convulsion would be followed by physical suffering inconceivable in America. In Switzerland too, as has been remarked by the Morning Chronicle, the bulk of the people encounter the severest privations, notwithstanding their democratic institutions, in consequence of being too thick upon the ground. They want, as we do in England, that great element of national pros- perity, abundance of land. Very much indeed depends upon good or bad government ; but the most perfect of political institutions that eau be conceived would not raise the remuneration of labour ; and the working imien do not seem to carry their views as far us colonization, or to rely upon increase of trade for the relief of distress.