whose leaders designed a policy of moral force, of education. In its first address, the association marked its future task in the following terms:

Who can foretell the great political and social advantages that must accrue from the wide extension of societies of this description acting up to their principles? Imagine the honest, sober and reflecting portion of every town and village in the kingdom linked together as a band of brothers, honestly resolved to investigate all subjects connected with their interests, and to prepare their minds to combat with the errors and enemies of society-setting an example of propriety to their neighbors, and enjoying even in poverty a happy home. And in proportion as home is made pleasant, by a cheerful and intelligent partner, by dutiful children, and by means of comfort, which their knowledge has enabled them to snatch from the ale-house, so are the bitters of life sweetened with happiness.

Think you a corrupt Government could perpetuate its exclusive and demoralizing influence amid a people thus united and instructed? Could a vicious aristocracy find its servile slaves to render homage to idleness and idolatry to the wealth too often fraudulently exacted from industry? Could the present gambling influence of money perpetuate the slavery of the millions, for the gains or dissipation of the few? Could corruption sit in the judgment seat-empty-headed importance in the senate-money-getting hypocrisy in the pulpitand debauchery, fanaticism, poverty, and crime stalk triumphantly through the land-if the millions were educated in a knowledge of their rights? No, no, friends; and hence the efforts of the exclusive few to keep the people ignorant and divided. Be ours the task, then, to unite and instruct them; for be assured the good that is to be must be begun by ourselves.

At the beginning the agitation was preeminently peaceful. The London Working Men's Association introduced a sys

tem of national and international addresses as a means for enlightening the people on all social and political events of importance. The addresses were well received by the better elements of the working class, but failed to exert so great an effect on the masses who felt impatient with the "moral, vacillating, scheming humbugs," and preferred "to take their affairs in their own hands." It was no surprise, therefore, that the advocates of physical force and insurrection, welcomed by the people from the very outset, soon gained the upper hand in the movement. Indeed, rampant dissatisfaction was displayed on more than one occasion, and some of the leaders went even so far as to withdraw their active support. The fatal blight of discord was, however, overcome during the first period. The masses were imbued with the hope that the People's Charter would bring about complete salvation. The Charter contained, indeed, only political reforms, but the people knew from the leaders that such reforms were the only instrument for the extermination of all evils. The Chartist speakers, as well as the Chartist writers, all agreed that the curse of the country lay in "class legislation":

It has corrupted the whole government-poisoned the press, demoralized society, prostituted the Church, dissipated the resources of the nation, created monopolies, paralyzed trade, ruined half its merchants, produced almost national bankruptcy, depressed the whole working classes, and pauperized most of them. Consequently, the sooner we get rid of such a monstrous system, it will be so much the better for all, except for those who either live, or expect to live, by plunder.1

The masses believed, they were eager to believe in everything which held out the promise of relief. They took up

1 The Chartist Circular, April 18, 1840.

the rallying cry, "The Charter, the whole Charter, and nothing but the Charter," with a zeal characteristic of the common people. This reacted on the leaders and forced their personal and theoretical differences to the background. The differences were by no means given up. The leaders merely buried their hatchets for a while, with the understanding that they would be picked up again at the opportune time after the Charter should have become an accomplished fact. Until then they were willing to let their economic and social creeds take care of themselves. This was made clear by Bronterre even as early as 1837. In discussing his pet theory of nationalization of land, he cut himself short:

Better, far better it were to sink such questions for the present. When all shall have votes, it will be in the power of each to make known his sentiments respecting the land, as well as respecting everything else, and should a majority think with him, his sentiments will become law without cavil or constraint. Till then, our theories, however just, are useless.1

The good intentions of the leaders were not realized. There were too many points of friction in their mental constitution as well as in their temperamental make-up. At the time of popular excitement, all were carried away by the torrent of general indignation, few stopping to soothe their personal feelings. It was only after the movement had met the strenuous opposition on the part of the government and had become paralyzed, that demoralization set in, disrupting the Chartist army into a number of hostile squads.

The small coterie of leaders, who during the first period stamped their personalities on the movement and directed the destinies of millions of people, included men of excep

tional character and mentality, who gave themselves like martyrs to the cause.

William Lovett, the author of the People's Charter and "the gentlest of agitators," was, according to the description of Francis Place, a tall, thin and rather melancholy man, "soured with the perplexities of the world," but "honest-hearted, possessed of great courage and persevering in his conduct." He was born on the 8th of May, 1800, in a little fishing town in the county of Cornwall. His father, a captain of a small trading vessel, was drowned before William was born. As a boy Lovett received some schooling in a rather suffocating religious atmosphere.

My poor mother, [he writes of his boyhood], like too many serious persons of the present day, thought that the great power that has formed the numerous gay, sportive, singing things of earth and air, must above all things be gratified with the solemn faces, prim clothes, and half sleepy demeanor of human beings; and that true religion consists in listening to the reiterated story of man's fall, of God's anger for his doing so, of man's sinful nature, of the redemption, and of other questionable matters, instead of the wonders and glories of the universe.1 In his early youth, he was apprenticed to a rope-maker for a term of seven years. His master, however, soon gave up his indentures, and Lovett turned to fishing and other trades. On the 23rd of June 1821, he went to London where, after some struggles and adventures, he became a cabinet-maker. In 1828, he joined the "First London Coöperative Trading Association" and soon afterwards accepted the position of store-keeper in this association. He was also a prominent member of the "British Association for Promoting Coöperative Knowledge."

1 William Lovett, Life and Struggles, pp. 7-8.

At that time he believed that the gradual accumulation of capital, by means of coöperative trading associations, might ultimately enable the working classes to get the industries and commerce of the country in their own hands. He also accepted Robert Owen's doctrine of community of property: The idea of all the powers of machinery, of all the arts and inventions of men, being applied for the benefit of all in common, to the lightening of their toil and the increase of their comforts, is one the most captivating to those who accept the idea without investigation. The prospect of having spacious halls, gardens, libraries, and museums, at their command; of having light alternate labor in field or factory; of seeing their children educated, provided and cared for at the public expense; of having no fear or care of poverty themselves; nor for wife, children, or friends they might leave behind them; is one the most cheering and consolatory to an enthusiastic mind. I was one who accepted this grand idea of machinery working for the benefit of all.1

In 1830, he was active in the formation of the "Metropolitan Political Union," whose object was "to obtain by every just, legal, constitutional and peaceful means an effectual and radical reform in the Commons' House of Parliament." He was also connected with the "unstamped" agitation which originated the cheap political newspapers and pamphlets. In 1831, he refused to serve in the militia, as he explained it, "on the ground of not being represented in Parliament and of not having any voice or vote in the election of those persons who made those laws that compelled me to take up arms to protect the rights and property of others, while my own rights and the only property I had, my labor, were not protected." 2 The same year, he joined "The National

1 Lovett, op. cit., pp. 43-44.

Ibid., p. 66.