Now it must be apparent to the meanest understanding, that equality in point of wealth never could be reduced to practice; for were the wealth of England to day divided amongst the inhabitants in equal portions, ere this day week the system of equality would be overturned; for the industrious would accumulate that which the idle and the prodigal squandered; so that to keep up the plan there should be endless divisions of property, which would be affording encouragement to the idle, and place an impenetrable bar before the exertions of the industrious. We will, however, endeavour to the utmost of our abilities to explain satisfactorily the real meaning of the word “ equality;" and for this purpose we will recur to our first principle, that "the sovereignty is in the People." No man, therefore, is subject to another, though all are subject to the same laws; no man ranks above another, except he is chosen as the executor of the laws, and then in his executive capacity he derives a pro tempore consequence, which, however, he forfeits with his situation; and all this may be without infringing upon the system of equality. When, however, the People lose the power of taking away that authority, there is an immediate end to the fabric. We cannot pretend to any equality in England, unless indeed it be equality of suffering, from the voracious appetites of plunder so conspicuous in the persons of Lords Castlereagh, Sidmouth, Liverpool, and Mr. Canning, and their numerous train of Parliamentary friends, who vote, like Mr. Thornton, without knowing for what, in hopes of soon being allowed to participate in the profits of their treachery and worse than highway robbery. The law which says that every man should be tried by his peers, would be unnecessary if the foregoing doctrine was established, for all would then be Peers to each other; nor would the honor of one class of persons of privileged pretensions to superior veracity be taken in a case of life or death, or in any case where the oath of another was adjudged to be requisite. Thus we perceive that the real meaning of the word " equality" is, that all should in the eye of the law be equal, and that no rank should be conferred upon any person which could raise him above the level of his countrymen.

From the foregoing treatise upon equality, our readers may suppose that our principles are republican, and truly they are right; for we think it the species of Government which approaches to the principles of Nature, and consequently to those of liberty and justice. We do not, however, see any serious objection to titles, when bestowed upon merit, totally unconnected with any sort of privileges,

and dying with the possessor. We are apt to imagine that they would act as a stimulus to the exertions of the good and the patriotic, and could not be encroaching upon the rights of posterity, as the son could not inherit the title of the father. There is one law in England, and also in many other Countries where the Governments are approaching to despotism, the abolition of which, though it would not produce an equality of wealth, yet it would reduce the immense disproportion which now does, and for ages has, existed, and gradually destroyed our almost every privilege. This law is primogeniture, by which the eldest son inherits the estates of the father, in exclusion to his brothers, even though one of them may have entered the world but a minute later than his more fortunate relative. There is something so unjust, so grossly absurd in this law, that we would be at a loss how to account for its adoption, were it not that we see a nation, nay, a whole quarter of the globe, silly enough to believe the infamous lies which are palmed upon them by a still more infamous set of hypocritical Christian and Mahometan divines, or rather demons. There is no general rule without an exception; and we feel a pride in copying the following advertisement from The Morning Chronicle of Saturday last, which proves that at least one Clergyman of the Church of England is willing to resign the emoluments accruing to him, as an inculcator of Christianity, rather than continue his services in a profession not consonant to his ideas of truth and justice,

He

"DOUCEUR.-A Clergyman, after a most laborious and reiterated investigation of all the evidence of the Christian Faith, is induced to desire an engagement, more compatible with Peace of Conscience, with sincerity and truth, than a further continuance in the Ministrations of the Church. will make a valuable consideration to any person, who shall procure for him a situation of Honourable Usefulness, which may be held witbout a sacrifice of Religious Liberty.Address, post paid, the Reverend Robert Taylor, Edmonton." "Witness, ROBERT TAYLOR."

What will" The Society for the Suppression of Vice" say to the advertisement from a man who has made Christianity his study, and although deriving emoluments from it, (which emoluments must be large, if we are to judge by the general port-coloured cheeks and fat paunches of the Clergy, who are in the habit of preaching up temperance aud sobriety,) still is he willing to resign them, rather than continue as Minister to a faith which he cannot reconcile to his conscience, or in other wards, which is founded in error, and supported by a set of hypocrites, who again are sup

ported and largely rewarded by a set of despots, out of the pockets of a duped and suffering community. The day, however, is at hand, when tyranny, political and theological, will sink into its native insignificance beneath the soaring flights of reason, unshackled and uncontrouled by pious. and hypocritical chicanery, or the more barefaced efforts of fraudulent and usurping despotism. The age of reason and freedom is about to commence, and from the unprejudiced verdict of a British Jury will we date its origin.

OBSERVATIONS UPON THE INQUEST AT OLDHAM, OVER THE BODY OF JOHN LEES.

Ar the commencement of this Inquest we were induced to imagine that Mr. Ferrand, the Coroner, would discharge the duty of his office unbiassed by prejudice or by party. We have, however, been disappointed; his latter treatment of the reporters for the Times and Chronicle Papers, and also of Mr. Harmer, has been, to say the least of it, very rude and uncivil; this change we attribute entirely to the presence of Mr. Ashworth on the part of the Magistrates, Yeomanry, and Constables of Manchester, against whom it is now more than probable that verdict of Wilful Murder will be returned. This Mr. Ashworth is a Barrister, who has just sufficient brains to enable him to mislead a country Jury, if not opposed, as in this instance, to superior legal knowledge and natural capacity, in the persons of Messrs. Harmer and Denison. He laid down some principles which emanated from his own pericranium, to suit his immediate purpose, as if it were the law of England, but when asked to sign his name to his opinions, he refused, thus proving that his intention was to mislead the Court at an Inquest, when they were endeavouring to discover how an Englishman came by his death. Mr. Ashworth may be a lawyer, but he certainly is not an honest or a conscientious one, or he would scorn to pervert the law for the purpose of screening such fellows as Messrs. Ethelstone, Meagher, Nadin, and company from the vengeance of outraged justice. That a verdict of Wilful Murder will be registered against some wretch there can be but little doubt, and less regret, for the assassin who could coolly whet his knife for the purpose of sheathing it in the heart of a fellow-creature, cannot be a loss to any portion of society. That the Yeomanry Cavalry acted thus is now evident, for it has been sworn to by the journeyman of the cutler to whom the swords were given for the purpose of being sharpened. His evidence before the Inquest is clear and conclusive of the fact, and runs as follows

Daniel Kennedy, a journeyman cutler, sworn. -He deposed to having been employed by Mr. Richardson, of Deansgate, Manchester, to sharpen the swords of the Yeomanry Cavalry. It was in July. During the week ending the 17th of July, he had sharpened sixty. They were ordered to be made very sharp, and he made them so. There were but a few sharpened after that period. The Yeomanry brought their swords and took them away when done. Swords had been brought to the shop on other occasions to be cleaned, but he got no particular directions about sharpening them." Mr. Harmer having repeated one of witnesses answers somewhat differently from the way in which it had been uttered, the Coroner said, " Mr. Harmer, you shew too much zeal; a zeal which will be fatal to theobject you, wish to attain. I have already cautioned you on this head. I know very well what your motives are in doing this, but they will be defeated." Mr. Harmer replied, "God forbid, Sir, that I should be defeated in my object; for I seek only for justice, and that I hope is the feeling by which weare all actuated." The witness was cross-examined by Mr. Barrow, (a pettifogging attorney who attended in the absence of Mr. Ashworth) but nothing further was elicited.

The Inquest has been adjourned from Oldham to the Star Inn, Manchester, to answer some sinister motive which has not yet transpired, though we rather suspect it is for the purpose of more easily procuring a set of constables who will swear according to the price they are paid. A certain surgeon (Mr. Simmons), swore that he thought his skill, even without the advantage of actual knowledge, was better than the judgment and experience of Mr. Cox, who had ocular demonstration to assist his decision. We have no doubt but that Mr. Simmons will be allowed his expenses. Indeed we cannot imagine what could induce him to come forward, unless it was the temptation of one guinea per diem, which is allowed to medical gentlemen on these occasions, for, by his own confession, he never saw the body of the deceased. That he is puffed up with vanity and self-sufficiency is evident, and these are such invariable characteristics of a little mind and of a narrow understanding, that we confess ourselves loth to worship at the shrine either of his abilities or his self-opinion.

Another witness was called by Mr. Ashworth, whose name was Robert Hall, and who denied, on being sworn, having acted as a special constable on the 16th of August. On his cross-examination, however, he admitted that he had acted as a special constable, thus perjuring himself by contradicting his first statement. So much for Mr. Ashworth's

witnesses. Upon the entire evidence which is as yet before the Public, nothing can be more conclusive than that murder was committed. It matters very little whether the person who struck Lees can or cannot be identified, for, if the verdict be "Wilful Murder," Major Trafford, Mr. Burley, and every one who exerted themselves in the work of slaughter on that melancholy day, must be arraigned at the bar of their insulted country for a crime of aggravated atrocity, in whatever view it may be taken. Nay, the whole posse of Magistrates must be included in the indictment for murder, if it can be proved that the Yeomanry acted under their direction. That they did so, is tolerably clear from one witnesses evidence, which declared that they drew up before the house where the Magistrates were sitting, and after some cheering, a gentleman advanced from within to one of the front windows and gave the word "Forward,” when they immediately clapped spurs to their horses and gallopped into the midst of the defenceless crowd, &c. &c. Much has been said about letting ex parte evidence go before the Public, from which (it is maintained) erroneous judgments may be formed. Now this is an opinion we totally dissent from, for the following reasons. When proceedings in a Court of Justice, or in any Court, are given from day to day, the Public in general suspend their judgment until the evidence for the defence is produced, unless, as at Oldham, where the bulk of evidence is sufficiently strong and satisfactory to sweep before it the perjuries of more hired witnesses than there are magistrates and constables in Manchester. In the next place, when the proceedings are lengthy, as in the case of the King against Watson, Thistlewood, Preston, and Hooper, they become too cumbrous for the columns of a newspaper, and are published generally in a volume, which is too expensive for large circulation, and thus the Public are deprived of a great proportion of the knowledge of most important concerns to every individual in the community. This we conceive to be a strong argument in favour of publication from day to day, which is the only method by which the poorer classes can gain information as to the conduct of their Rulers. Perhaps this, also, is the reason why such publication is prohibited.

MEETINGS OF THE REFORMERS.

Our readers may remember that we have strenuously pointed out the necessity of Meetings being held throughout the Kingdom on one and the same day, and without_arrogating to ourselves, the credit of having been the first to suggest the measure, we exultingly communicate to the public, that it has been adopted, and that the first of the