principle of _Universal Suffrage_ was nothing new. I claim no merit in
having proposed any thing novel--this right is as old as the constitution
of England; it had been advocated by Sir Robert, afterwards Lord Raymond,
by Sir William Jones, and afterwards, with great perseverance and ability,
by the Duke of Richmond, who brought a bill into the House of Lords, in
which he claimed this right for the people, and proposed to carry it into
execution. At that time, however, no part of the people had petitioned for
it, and the bill was thrown out. At that period, the attention of the
populace of the metropolis was directed to other matters--they were
engaged in Lord George Gordon's disgraceful riots. The Duke of Richmond,
disgusted at the apathy of the reformers, to which he attributed the
failure of his favourite measure, soon afterwards accepted a place as
master general of the ordnance, and became a complete tool of the
ministers. The cause of reform languished till the year 1816, although
Major Cartwright, Sir F. Burdett, Mr. Cobbett, myself, and many others,
had made frequent efforts to call the people's attention to the only
measure calculated to check the progress--the fatal progress of
corruption, and its consequent effects, unjust and unnecessary war,
profligate expenditure, the funding or _swindling_ system, and the rapid
annual increase of a ruinous and irredeemable debt. It will be said that
these subjects will naturally be included in, and make part of, my
history. They certainly will, but there is one circumstance connected with
the events of 1816 and 1817, which is very imperfectly known to any of the
reformers, and which I feel it a duty to detail to them all before I
proceed any further.

In the latter end of the year 1815 and the beginning of the year 1816, the
evil effects of the war began to be severely felt amongst all classes
throughout the country; and, in the North of England, it was particularly
felt by those employed in the manufactories. Great disturbances prevailed,