All have one vote, but certain classes of persons, qualified by property ownership, tax-payments, education, office-holding or professional dignity, are given one or two supplementary votes. Opposition to this political inequality had been growing from the first, until it united the Socialist and Liberal parties in a demand for the revision of the Constitution, not only to abolish the plural suffrage, but to introduce proportional representation and compulsory education. The agitation attending this demand brought about, in April, a general strike throughout the country of workmen in all departments of industry, to the extent of 350,000. The Government resisted the demand, maintaining that the system of plural voting had not been sufficiently tried, and the bill for constitutional revision was defeated in the Chamber of Representatives, after a bitter debate, by 84 votes to 64. The situation was described as follows by Mr. Townsend, the American Minister to Belgium, in a despatch of April 19: "The struggle between labor and capital in Belgium has become extremely acute in the past few years. A large industrial population, confined to a small superficial area, with long hours of labor and small wages, have combined to produce a feeling of discontent among the working classes, who, perhaps unjustly, blame the existing Government for a condition of affairs which may be due to economic conditions rather than political. This is a factor which may be largely responsible for the rapid growth of Socialism in Belgium during the past few years. Liberals and Socialists have combined to fight for universal suffrage, and have raised the cry ‘one man one vote’ as a panacea for the existing ills. "The Clericals maintain that the existing system of plural voting meets the present requirements of the country; that it places a premium on education, and acts as a check to the power of the ignorant, who are prone to resort to violence and disorder. The more moderate Liberals in the House of Representatives expressed a willingness to accept a compromise in the shape of a total abolition of the triple vote, granting one vote at 25 years and a second vote to married men of 35 or 40 years, with legitimate issue. The Clericals, however, would not consider a compromise and opposed revision in any form.