As early as 1833, while MP for Cork, O'Connor had delivered an address to the
National Union of the Working Classes, a political society of London working men, expressing radical sentiments. However O'Connor truly came into his own not when addressing audiences of London artisans or in the House of Commons, but when he went north as a public speaker. He began to spend a large part of his time travelling through the north of England, addressing huge meetings, in which he denounced the
1834 Poor Law Amendment Act and advocated manhood suffrage. Only by securing the vote, O'Connor argued, could working people be rid of the hated
New Poor Law. O'Connor was a superb public speaker. He expressed defiance, determination and hope, and flavoured these speeches with comic similes and anecdotes. He looked the part of a popular leader, too. His physique was to his advantage: over six feet, muscular and massive, the "model of a Phoenician Hercules". There is no doubt that the working people who heard O'Connor at these great meetings in the north of England in the late 1830s adored him. The voice of the organization was O'Connor's newspaper, the
Northern Star, which first appeared on 18 November 1837 in
Leeds. It met with immediate success and was soon the most widely bought provincial newspaper in Britain. Its editor was William Hill, a former Swedenborgian minister;
Joshua Hobson was its publisher; and
Bronterre O'Brien, former editor of the ''
Poor Man's Guardian'', became the principal leader-writer. Perhaps the most popular part of the paper was Feargus' weekly front page letter, often read aloud at meetings; but the inclusion of reports of Chartist meetings from around the country and of readers' poetry were also vital sections of a paper made it a very important instrument in unifying and promoting the Chartist cause. When the London Working Men's Association published the People's Charter in 1838, O'Connor and the Star endorsed it but not the London leadership. O'Connor was not ready to accept the political leadership of the London Working Men's Association. He knew that the workers wanted something more immediate than political education. He became the "constant travelling, dominant leader of the movement" He, not
William Lovett, became the voice of Chartism.
Physical Force vs. Moral Force From the beginning O'Connor was attacked by Lovett and other leaders of the London Working Men's Association. They did not like his assertive leadership or the confrontational style of politics he represented. O'Connor, who had seen at first hand the embittered relations between workers and capitalists in the north of England, did not like the strategy of reasonable argument advocated by men like Lovett. He considered the situation was too urgent for that. O'Connor was not an insurrectionist but, like O’Connell in Ireland, he was not adverse to intimidating the authorities by a show of numbers. This was his thinking behind the organisation of monster meetings and mass petitions. On the question of moral force vs physical force, he chose his words carefully: I have always been a man of peace. I have always denounced the man who strove to tamper with an oppressed people by any appeal to physical force. I have always said that moral force was the degree of deliberation in each man's mind which told him when submission was a duty or resistance not a crime; and that a true application of moral force would effect every change, but in case it should fail, physical force would come to its aid like an electric shock — and no man could prevent it; but that he who advised or attempted to marshal it would be the first to desert it at the moment of danger. God forbid that I should wish to see my country plunged into horrors of physical revolution. I wish her to win her liberties by peaceful means. When the Chartist petition with 1,283,000 signatures was rejected by Parliament in summer 1839, tension grew, culminating in the
Newport Rising. O'Connor was not involved in the planning of this event, though he must have known that there was a mood for rebellion among Chartists. He was a dangerous man to the authorities, and a sentence of 18 months in
York Castle was passed on him in May 1840. In his farewell message, he made clear what he had done for the movement: Before we part, let us commune fairly together. See how I met you, what I found you, how I part from you, and what I leave you. I found you a weak and unconnected party, having to grace the triumphs of the Whigs. I found you weak as the mountain heather bending before the gentle breeze. I am leaving you strong as the oak that stands the raging storms. I found you knowing your country but on the map. I leave you with its position engraven upon your hearts. I found you split up into local sections. I have levelled all those pigmy fences and thrown you into an imperial union… O'Connor was jailed; while in prison he continued to write for the
Northern Star. He was now the unquestioned leader of Chartism. It was at this time that the song
Lion of Freedom was published in his honour. It was widely sung at Chartist meetings. Lovett, meanwhile, left the movement, full of anger at O'Connor but O'Connor's energy and commitment was to keep Chartism alive for the rest of the 1840s. In 1842 a convention of the newly formed
National Charter Association was held in order to draw up a new petition that was finally signed by 3,315,752 persons. The petition was denied a hearing, which added to the frustrations felt by working people at a time of great economic hardship. Across Britain in summer 1842 a wave of strikes broke out, calling both for an end to wage cuts and the implementation of the People's Charter.
Anti-Corn Law League From its inception the
Anti-Corn Law League vied with the Chartists for the support of working people. Bread was dear, and the League claimed that repealing the taxes on import of grain would allow the price to drop. Chartists argued that without the Charter, a repeal of the Corn Law would be of little use. Other factors in their favour were the distrust by working people of anything supported by the employers, and the fear that free trade would cause wages to drop still lower. This last point was stressed by O'Connor. He made biting attacks on the Anti-Corn Law League. In some towns – for example, Birmingham – O'Connorite Chartists broke up League meetings. O'Connor himself was certainly not afraid of taking on the leaders of the League head-on in debate – in 1844 he took on
Richard Cobden in
Northampton.
National Land Company and the Petition of 1848 Faced with the declining strength of Chartism after the defeats of 1842, O'Connor turned to the idea of settling working people on the land. While in prison, he had advocated just such a scheme in the
Northern Star under the heading "Letters to the Irish Landlords". In 1835, he had given notice of his intention to introduce a bill to modify the rights of Irish tenants moved in Parliament. O'Connor considered that the "law of primogeniture is the eldest son of class legislation upon corruption by idleness". At the same time, he was opposed to the state ownership of land: I have ever been, and I think I ever shall be opposed to the principles of communism, as advocated by several theorists. I am, nevertheless, a strong advocate of cooperation, which means legitimate exchange, and which circumstances would compel individuals to adopt, to the extent that communism would be beneficial. As well as re-invigorating the Chartist Movement, O'Connor's plans were a powerful answer to emigration schemes for working people. He declared that Great Britain could support its own population if its lands were properly cultivated. In his book
A Practical Work on the Management of Small Farms he set forth his plan of resettling surplus factory workers on smallholdings of two, three and four acres. He had no doubts of the yields obtainable under such spade-husbandry. He proposed a stock company in which working men could buy land on the open market. The land was to be reconditioned, broken up into small plots, equipped with appropriate farm buildings and a cottage, and the new proprietor was to be given a small sum of money with which to buy stock. Consideration was not given to the difficulties for town people, many who had never lived in the country, of becoming farmers. O'Connor's plan was built on the assumption that land could be bought in unlimited quantities and at reasonable rates, and that all subscribers would be successful farmers who would repay promptly. O'Connor's Land Plan had its opponents in the movement, among them Thomas Cooper. On 24 October 1846 the Chartist Cooperative Land Company, later known as the National Land Company, came into being. A total of £112,100 was received in subscriptions, and with this six small estates were purchased and divided into smaller parcels. In May 1847 the first of the estates was opened at
Heronsgate, renamed O'Connorsville. O'Connor's colleague
Ernest Charles Jones wrote of this development: See there the cottage, labour's own abode, The pleasant doorway on the cheerful road, The airy floor, the roof from storms secure, The merry fireside and the shelter sure, And, dearest charm of all, the grateful soil, That bears its produce for the hands that toil. The subscribers who got the land were chosen by ballot; they were to pay back with interest and ultimately all subscribers would be settled. O'Connor and Jones started
The Labourer magazine to promote the project. Soon hundreds of working people were settled, and an outcry of opposition went up from the enemies of Chartism in the newspapers and in Parliament. Among the working people the Land Plan was very popular, O'Connor's assertion that the land was theirs meaning a great deal to them. In 1847 O'Connor ran for parliament and, remarkably, defeated
Thomas Benjamin Hobhouse in
Nottingham but the Land Plan ran into trouble. When he had taken his seat he proposed in
The Labourer that the government take over the National Land Company to resettle working people on a large scale. Those Chartist leaders with whom he had quarrelled accused him of being "no longer a 'five-point' Chartist but a 'five acre' Chartist." O'Connor replied to his critics at a meeting in Manchester but the political elite was moving to crush O'Connor's Land Plan, declaring it illegal. In April 1848, a new Chartist petition was presented to Parliament with six million signatures. O'Connor accepted a declaration by the police that the Chartists could not march en masse with their petition from a mass meeting on
Kennington Common. He made this decision to avoid bloodshed – he feared soldiers shooting down Chartists, as they had at Newport. An investigating committee in Parliament concluded that the petition contained not quite 2 million genuine signatures – it is unlikely, however, that the clerks could have counted this many signatures in the 17 hours they spent examining the petition. On 6 June 1848, the House of Commons investigation found that the National Land Company was an illegal scheme that would not fulfil the expectations held out to the shareholders and that the books had been imperfectly kept. A man under huge pressure, O'Connor began to drink heavily. In July 1849, the House of Commons finally voted on the People's Charter, and rejected it by 222 votes to 17. In 1850 O'Connor once more made a motion in favour of the Charter, but would not be heard. ==Last years==