BROUGHAM AM) VAUX Friendly Advice, Most Respect- fully Submitted to the Lords on the Reform Bill JN 215 1831 B7 FRIENDLY ADVICE, MOST RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED TO THE LORDS, ON THE REFORM BILL. LONDON : JAMES RIDGWAY, 169, PICCADILLY. MDCCCXXXI. LONDON: PRINTED BY T. BRETTELL, RUPERT STREET, HAYMARKEl. LIBRARY jtJMVERSITY OF CALITORNM SANTA BAT*. SAL A FRIENDLY ADVICE, &C. &C. THE elections which have just taken place, and the enthusiasm which exists in the country upon the subject, make it quite evident that the battle of Reform is won in the House of Commons. A moderate degree of foresight would have shown the Tories that such must have been the event of a general election with the King, the Government, and the People, all united in favour of this one great measure. But it is evident that it is not to the under- standings of this party, that " coming events cast " their shadows before." They would not believe in the bare possibility of a dissolution of Parliament, though it was their own conduct that had rendered it necessary. On the morning it took place, though no longer a secret to any who would open their ears to hear the news, they were still incredulous, and still continued so, till the first gun which announced His Majesty's approach to West- minster, rung in their ears, the knell to their hearts. Well, the Parliament was dissolved and f> for the rest of that day they were in low spirits ; but the next, they were as sanguine again as ever. " The reaction in public feeling had begun ; it was " true the reformers would gain a few votes in the " county elections, but then they would be turned " out of all the boroughs not a corporation, a " freeman, or a pot-walloper would vote for them " they would be hooted at and driven from the con- " test." Now all this has happened, undoubtedly ; but not to the reformers. Wherever reformers have gone, they have been greeted, not only with the applauses of the people, but with the support of corporators, freemen, burgesses, pot-wallopers all the motley franchises, which at present return members to Parliament have combined to elect them ; and the treatment which the Tories anticipated for them, has been bestowed in full measure upon themselves. Nor is the experience of the past less a sealed book to the Tories than the prescience of the future. They have seen, both in our own history and in that of other nations (ay, and recently too), the ruin that has followed upon the determination to stand by old abuses, and the refusal of timely concession to the reasonable wishes of the people. And what use have they made of these examples ? Why, they refused, only last year, to transfer the right of sending members from the corrupt borough of Retford to the flourishing and independent town of Birmingham ! Thus verifying, politically, the language of Scripture, that, " seeing, they do not " see ; and hearing, they do not understand." To persons upon whose minds the evidence of facts makes no impression, it is difficult to apply the less forcible persuasive of reasoning ; and yet we would still hope that a sense of the injuries their blind and blinding obstinacy may inflict upon their country and themselves, and some glimmerings of reason, which must break in upon the most be- nighted understandings, will induce them not to peril the state, of which they are members. It is to the members of the Upper House of Parliament that we would principally address the following observations ; and for this reason, that, as we have before stated, the King, his faithful Commons, and the People, being all united for the success of the Reform Bill, the Peers are at present the only branch of the legislature, as well as the only body in the state, whose opinions are not declared upon this all-important subject. We trust they will not attempt to disturb the unanimity of their countrymen by an unseasonable or intemperate opposition to their wishes. We address the House of Lords upon this occa- sion with unfeigned respect ; we acknowledge that they possess among them great talents and much in- dependence ; we hope it will be found that these qua-- lities are coupled with wisdom. To those noble-* minded persons among them, who, possessing bo- 8 rough influence, are willing to sacrifice it for the good of their country and the satisfaction of the people, we have only to offer our heartfelt meed of praise and thanks, and pass on to that portion of the House who are the enemies of innovation and improvement. To such persons we would say, what do you expect to obtain by a continuance of your ungracious opposition to the wishes of the people ? It is impossible that you can hope, with King, Ministers, and Commons against you, to prevent the measure of Reform from taking effect. When Sir Joseph Jekyll died, he left his fortune to pay the national debt. " Sir," said Lord Mansfield to one of his relations, " Sir Joseph was " a good man and a good lawyer, but his bequest " is a very foolish one Tie might as well have at- " tempted to stop the middle arch of Blackfriars " Bridge with his full-bottomed wig /" So say we to these opponents of Reform and we particularly beg the attention of Lord Mansfield's descendant to the apophthegm of his ancestor. The House of Lords can no more stop the success of Reform, than Sir Joseph Jekyll's bequest could pay the national debt, or his wig impede the current of the river Thames. Many of the persons we are now addressing are, doubtless, like Sir Joseph, good men ; and some of them, like him, may be good lawyers but their conduct, like his bequest, is exceedingly foolish. Nay it is worse than foolish, it is dangerous in the extreme. It is, doubtless, impossible for the House of Lords to stem the tide of Reform but in attempting to do it, the rash act may endanger their own safety, and with theirs that of all of us, who are, to a 'certain degree, in the same boat with them. The opposi- tion of the Lords must be powerless for any good purpose, but it may be yet pregnant with evil. Their continued resistance to the measure, so ardently desired by the people, may cause convul- sion in this now happy land nay, even civil war. And if this unhappily should be the case, it will be but poor consolation to those who are fellow- sufferers in the anarchy and confusion that would be thus produced, that the immediate authors of it would be, as is certain to be the case, its first victims. If the Tory Lords had any chance of being able, by their opposition to it, to prevent the progress of Reform, we should not be surprised, with the view they take of that question, at their exerting them- selves strenuously against it. But is this the case ? We will put it to the understanding of any one of them, whether there is even a possibility of their resisting successfully the current of public opinion, which now sets so strongly one way. Is there any instance in history of their ever having been able to do so, under similar circumstances ? It is true, they rejected the Catholic question, till Ireland was all but in open rebellion but then the King 10 and the great body of the people of England were with them ; now all are united on the other side : and great is their danger who resist the united will of a great nation. IP, therefore, it is clear, that the Lords cannot prevent the success of Reform, will they, for the imaginary pleasure of preserving their political con- sistency, endanger the peace of the country, the security of the throne, and the stability of their own order? These are the fearful consummations which their anti-reforming zeal, upon the present occasion, may bring upon themselves and upon all and that without the slightest hope, on the other hand, of their obtaining the object they have in view. When the burst of popular indignation in France swept away, during the revolution, the nobility of that country, one of the principal causes which led to this catastrophe was the feudal intrench men t of separate privileges and separate interests, which divided the higher orders from the great body of the nation. Hence these two parts of the body politic had nothing in common each viewed the other with suspicion and dislike ; and thus, when the current of events gave the power into the hands of the people, they wreaked their vengeance upon those whom they considered as their enemies. We ought to be thankful that such a state of things does not exist in England. Here the nobility have, for the most part, as plebeian an origin as the people ; and, though they are placed at their 11 head, they enjoy no exclusive privileges which are onerous to the rest of the community.' Hence the feeling between them and their fellow-countrymen is of a friendly kind, and one that is caused and fostered by the communication of mutual benefits. There is but one thing which could sever this union ; and that would be, if the House of Lords were obstinately to oppose, upon any one great question, the deliberate wishes of the rest of the nation. This would be sure to engender suspicion against them to make the people think that their interests and those of the nobility must be dif- ferent ; and, if such an opinion once gained ground, we fear the tenure of the Lords, as a branch of the Legislature, would be but an insecure one. We say we fear, because we are well convinced that the best interests of this country are involved in their retaining that power and that station in the government of the state which at present belongs to them. But why, it may be asked, do we suppose that any set of men can act thus madly simply because of their previous conduct ? Because they have never conceded any thing to the wishes of the people, till all the grace of concession was gone because they have never seen the signs of the times because they have never been warned by the past, or alive to the future. But they are now playing a deeper and more hazardous stake than they ever did before. They 12 now find themselves, not opposed to a party, but face to face with a united people. In such a posi- tion, we most respectfully warn them of the con- sequences of an unwise resistance. Those conse- quences are such as we tremble even to think of. But we will hope for better things of the hereditary legislators of England we will hope, that, " wise in their generation," they will see, at length, the necessity of uniting with the peo- ple, instead of opposing them of placing them- selves at their head, where they ought always to be, in the march of improvement and of directing, rather than thwarting their endeavours to amend and strengthen the constitution. It would seem, by the language we sometimes hear as proceeding from the Lords, that a very inadequate estimate is formed, at least by many of their lordships, of the extent and vehemence with which the desire of Reform pervades and possesses the people of this country. The General Election, just over, one should think, might convince any reflecting mind how universal this feeling is. The mere numerical returns are sufficient for the argument. But the kind of places which have chosen men pledged to the Bill, and the kind of men who have so been chosen, cast a light equally strong upon the same matter. For all England there are eighty-two county members. These, if any, are supposed to be chosen by the landed interest the Aristocracy. 13 In the county elections, if any where, is the in- fluence of the House of Lords felt. At any rate, those Lords whom we address as enemies to Reform, cannot deny this ; for their argument is, that the influence which they enjoy under the present sys- tem, will be taken away by the change, and surely they can never mean to rest their power in the House of Commons upon the rotten boroughs, and admit that they have nothing to do in county elections. Well how many country gentlemen, enemies of the Bill, have been returned to resist it, by the landed interest, under the law of elections as it now stands, and as those Lords are supposed to wish it may always continue? Exactly*^ or about an eleventh of the whole county representation ! What counties return these six ? Not Yorkshire not Lancashire not Lincolnshire not Chester nor Devon nor Somerset nor Kent nor Es- sex nor Norfolk nor Leicestershire nor Ox- fordshire nor Cumberland no but the close- borough counties of Westmoreland Monmouth Bucks (where supposed friends to Reform proved more friends to their family interest) Hunting- donshire, where one reformer greatly headed the poll, and a second might, with all ease, have accompanied him and Salop, where a gentleman was returned friendly to all other liberal measures, and therefore kindly retained, notwithstanding his unaccountable aberration upon the most important 14 of all. In every one city or borough which has any thing like a popular election, both candidates, and in London all four, were returned in favour of the Bill. The Anti-reformers, following their principal leader, Sir R. Peel's example, attempted to gain the freemen, and especially the non-residents, whom the Bill certainly disfranchises. These poor but honest and spirited men indignantly turned away from the appeal to their interested feelings, and joined in declaring for the whole Bill, and for those who would carry it through. See, again, the havoc which the prevailing sentiment has made among the strongest and most anciently established family interests all have been swept away before the universal tide of Reform. The Duke of Newcastle goes to " his own," but " his own knows him not ;" and two Reformers are returned for Newark, where one could not gain admittance a few months be- fore with all his zeal and all his talents ; and in both Bassetlaw and the county of Notts at large, his Grace, who returned two members last autumn, now returns no more. His parliamentary interest is reduced to four rotten-borough seats, where no man, save himself, interferes. The Duke of Beau- fort's own brother, and his eldest son, justly popular noblemen, and highly distinguished in the career of arms, are both flung out, because they stand against Reform. Their kinsman of Rutland loses both his 15 county seats, and his relative loses both his also at Grantham. The Percy of Northumberland is signally over- thrown by the Prime Minister's son, who, last autumn, had not ventured into the field : and above all, the Lowther influence, against which Mr. Brougham had thrice stood, and thrice stood in vain, when all he desired was to wrest one seat from the " great boroughmonger," is now com- pletely destroyed in all its strong holds. The Low- ther member for Carlisle is defeated Lord Lowther himself yet more signally beaten in Cumberland and he who would not before listen to one liberal member for Westmorland, is fain to accept one seat for his own son, in order to avoid the certain loss of both. These are the doings of the Bill, and they are wonderful in our eyes. But look at the kind of men who professed for they were compelled to profess principles of Re- form. How happens it that one Mr. Peel at Cam- bridge, professes a wish for a liberal allowance of Reform, though not for the whole Bill ? How comes it to pass that another Mr. Peel, at Newcastle, even pledges himself to the Bill ? What made Master Dowdeswell, by inheritance as well as personally against all Reform, give the same pledge at Tewkes- bury? What induced Lord Lowther, in Cum- berland, to avow himself a reformer, adding, " bet- " ter late than never ;" while his proposer, a Mr. Stanley, said " his noble friend was for a large 16 " and satisfactory kind of Reform such as the " people were resolved to have." The Parliament, chosen by the people in this way, is about to meet, and the Bill is to be intro- duced forthwith, such as it was last session. It will assuredly be carried up to your Lordships by very considerable, probably by very large majorities. Any majority above one hundred is plainly to be reckoned a large one, because it is formed, after deducting all the influence of all the close boroughs. These boroughs may be good, or bad, or indifferent ; they may be fit to keep if you will; they may even have the good qualities which make it necessary to retain them ; but one quality they certainly have not they do not represent any portion of the people their representatives speak the sense of a few peers alone. Therefore, in estimating the popularity of any bill, and in deciding how far its general accept- ance in the country ought to weigh with the House of Lords, you must of course deduct the votes of the rotten-borough members, for those show only the opinions of some few among the Lords them- selves. The members for all the populous places, and almost all the counties, will support the Bill. There will be a large majority, even including the votes of peers' nominees. Excluding these, the measure will pass almost without any dis- sentient voice. And such is the Bill which the Peers, are urged to reject ! No true friend to 17 the constitution to the security of property to the internal peace of the country to the landed interest to the manufacturing interest to the funded interest, can regard such advice without as- tonishment and alarm. But surely, if there be any class of the community more peculiarly interested in rejecting such counsels, than all the others, it is the Lords House of Parliament. And no man who calmly reflects on their position can, without the most serious alarm, contemplate the probable (is it not the inevitable ?) result of such rash recommendation being obeyed. This would indeed, be paying " too dear for the whistle" not for the whistle of the Lords at large but of three or four of their number. These surely are not times for the privileged " order" to set themselves against the whole cur- rent of public opinion. Were the love of Reform a plant of yesterday's growth, it might be safe to prune it carelessly, and even to pluck it up. But that which was a few years ago but as a grain of mustard-seed, and the least of plants, is now grown to a tree in which " the fowls of the air " build their nests." The truth is, that this great question has been continually making progress. Every time that misgovernment was felt, the suf- fering has redounded to the benefit of Reform. All other political subjects have been variable and fluctuating, and some have well nigh gone out of mind this only has steadily and perpe- B 18 tually, though often silently, moved forward. The follies the anything but innocent follies of its enemies, who refused even the least concession, and blindly and fondly slumbered in the irra- tional hope that it might always be contemned have, no question about the matter, greatly ex- pedited the diffusion of the prevailing desire for a change. Among these short-sighted men, the first place is, on every account, due to Sir R. Peel a man who had once, in his youth, gotten entangled in a question of the like kind, which he afterwards so bitterly repented having ever touched, and had no right, in his riper years, to commit a second blunder of the self-same description. Yet did even he show himself short-sighted enough to announce himself the irreconcileable foe of Reform, at a moment when all were becoming more or less its friends and he stoutly resisted giving to Bir- mingham the abused franchise of convicted Retford. This year he has only followed up the same error but how deeply does he now repent him of it ! How fervently does he wish the last year of his life could be blotted out ! In this wish we must say he has ourselves for partners. His rashness has our blame perhaps, rather our regrets more than any thing else. His abilities are valuable to his country his services have been very considerable and it is fit to hope that they may become again available. But for the pre- sent he has placed himself in a situation where he 19 really cannot be of use to the state, and cannot gain a good distinction for himself. Already he has faltered, and displayed the resolution to recede; and thus the very chief of Anti-reformers betrays, by his wavering, that the tide is too powerful to be stemmed and that he is himself prepared to be carried away before it. Other individuals there be in the like predicament, and these right many But " peace to all such !" A word must, however, be said of a corporate body, which has much disgraced itself in the contest Cambridge University and the clergy thereof. A great majority of the lay-voters were for Reform, and a much greater majority of the clerical were against it. There are few observers of the signs of the times, who are not intimately persuaded that those reverend persons already bit- terly repent their over-exertions, and curse their victory. We hope and trust the repentance comes not too late. Friends to the constitution and to the church establishment, we are truly anxious that the follies of those unwise clergymen, may not be visited upon their order at large. As we should deeply lament any ill-placed and unjust spirit of retaliation, w r e hope and trust the heads of the clerical body will, by their wisdom and moderation, save the church. If, indeed, the right reverend bench should unhappily pursue the course now repented of at the University if they should set themselves in hostile array against 20 the whole nation's wishes then indeed would our fears wax great, not for the fate of the Reform Bill, but for the fortunes of the English church. And we verily believe that establishment, with all its imperfections and even abuses, to be the best, because the most learned, tolerant, and bene- ficent, which has been settled any where in the world. Of the Irish sister we say nothing, ex- cept that her unbending resistance to all improve- ment, where so much is wanted, bids fair to produce, in Church Reform, the consequence which so many Anti-reformers now deplore as the result of their votes upon Retford and Penryn. The Lords at large, however, are as much inte- rested as the Bishops in the Bill having a quiet passage through their House. Can they in safety stand wholly apart from the whole people the only body which does not sympathize with the rest of the community? Can they safely for their own order proclaim themselves ' the only obstacle to the attainment of the desire of the whole nation's heart? We answer plainly and shortly No. In this word are included many reasons and many motives, which we, who have lived through the years 1820 and 1829, had rather not develope. But we will rather observe, that there is a hope lurking in many breasts, of being able to steer a middle course. They do not deny that the country has pronounced its irrevocable will for 21 a large Reform. Nor do they question the im- perious necessity of complying with this wish. But they would fain hope that something short of " The Bill " will satisfy the people, and their project is to throw it out, with a declaration in favour of a more scanty measure of Reform. Here we must speak out, for this is, of all delusions, by far the most dangerous. As states- men, we no more dread the absolute rejection of the great measure, for the sake of the Government, than, as churchmen, we are afraid of atheistical doctrines undermining the religion of the Gospel. But we dread the delusion we have referred to, as we do the subtle poison of plausible deism. Let those who lay to their souls the flattering unction be undeceived. It won't do. The time is gone when such things might pass now they cannot. There is another most important consideration, which it is fit to state, as a warning to the ho- nest and respectable members of the Lords House against the subtle arts of factious men. These may not venture to attack the Reform Bill openly in front; but they will try to take it in flank. They will not oppose it, or move any thing against it ; but they will certainly vote against the Govern- ment on every thing else, in order to throw out the Government and the Bill also. They will hardly move an amendment on the address to the King ; but they will get up little motions against 22 the Ministers they will try to throw out what- ever is proposed by the Government they will oppose the Chancellor's Law Reforms, and Lord Melbourne's Subletting Act, and whatever else they can hope to defeat. Let the Lords beware of all such tricks for tricks they are. All of their manoeuvres mean only one thing hostility to the Reform Bill. The meaning of everything the Opposition will say, is "Throw out the Bill: " the meaning of every question they will put, is " Throw out the Bill ! " The meaning of every vote they will give, is "Throw out the Bill!" 1 They may affirm, and vow, and swear, and smite their breast, shed abundant tears, and heave deep sighs, and call God to witness that they have no enmity to the King's Government; and are not prepared to give any opinion on the Bill, until it comes before them ! Heed them not turn away the ear from their cry all they do really mean is to get your votes against the Ministry, and then they reckon on the Bill, the hateful Bill, being lost for ever. All who wish well to the House of Lords and the Constitution must carefully be on their guard against such devices. The loss of the Bill, as it is, means nothing more nor less than the removal of the existing Ministry or rather, it means a great deal more but it at any rate means this. Every one of its members will be out of the King's service on the morrow. And now we come to the point at once Who dares advise his Sovereign to form a Ministry of Newcastles and Peels, Lowthers and Knatchbulls ? They may have a narrow majority of the Lords of the Commons the great majority is against them. We say nothing of the impossi- bility which any such Government must find of carrying on the Government in the House of Lords for want of debaters we say nothing of the storm of public indignation, which must break swiftly on the heads of such a Ministry. We assume that every thing out of doors will be profound peace that the people of all ranks will stand patiently by, and see the combat joined in Parliament without a murmur we speak only of that combat in that Parliament and we ask, how a Government can go on with all the members for cities, towns, and counties all over England, deeply pledged against it and a large majority against it, even taking in the nominees of Peers ? Would the Anti-Reform and Mock-Reform Ministry venture upon a dis- solution the third within twelve months ? This question is easily answered in the negative. The inevitable consequences of a contrary line of conduct in the Lords, from the one we have suggested and advised, are so evi- dent, and so frightful, that it is not neces- sary to enter more into detail respecting them. But we entreat the Anti-reforming Peers to weigh, calmly and dispassionately, in the ba- lance, the certain evils which must result from 24 their hopeless contest with the country, with the possible and contingent evils which they anti- cipate, if they yield at once, and with a good grace, to the wishes of the other orders in the state. These latter are, the too great preponderance of the democratic power in the state and the fear of further changes, if the old land-marks of the constitution are once removed. We do not, of course, address ourselves to those selfish and trading politicians who, being now out of office, are only anxious to get into it again. Their reason is clear for opposing a measure which ensures'to the country the continuance of a more liberal Ministry than has ruled, of late years at least, these Islands. But we wish to put the matter to the heads and consciences of those independent and well- meaning noblemen, who, we firmly believe, have the best interests of their country at heart, however unfortunate we may sometimes think their views upon political subjects. We wish to address our- selves to the Mansfields, Newcastles, Kenyons, Camdens, Northumberlands, Buccleuchs to the men incapable of sordid feelings, and in whose hands at this moment rests, as we verily believe, in a great measure, the decision, whether England shall be a peaceable and a happy, or a disturbed and a distracted country. ,v To- 'them we would say, will you bring imme- diate and certain anarchy upon your country, in 25 order to ward off the possibility of the increase of democratic influence in the constitution at some future time ? Can you even seriously believe that such men as the Dukes of Norfolk, Somerset, Devonshire, Grafton, Bedford Lord Grosvenor, Lord Cleveland, Lord Yarborough, Lord Stafford that Lords Winchelsea, and Manvers (with whom you so long acted), and so many others with great estates and high-sounding titles, are anxious to increase the democratic influence in the country beyond its due bounds ? The supposition, that any of these men we have mentioned, who are placed in situations which render them entirely independent of the favours of the crown, would support a measure, the tendency of which was to endanger their possessions and destroy their real power and influence, is to the last degree absurd. But then, say others of the opponents of the Reform Bill, if you once remove the ancient land- marks of the constitution, you will be unable to stop when you wish. This argument would be a very true one, if it were intended to retain any of the abuses of the system ; but as they are to be done away with by the Bill, all reasonable oppo- sition to our representative system is removed and the defenders of it are thus placed on a vantage ground, from whence they may easily defy the attacks of their enemies. Besides, look at the evi- dence of history. At the revolution of 1688, our 26 liberties were established, by the *' Declaration of " Rights," which was afterwards confirmed and perpetuated by the Act of the same name. Doubt- less the advocates of abuses at that time held the same arguments as those of the present day do now. They said, of course You cannot stop here your Bill of Rights, which contents the liberals of this year, will not content those of the next you will be impelled from concession to concession, till the power of the crown is at an end* ! But what has really happened ? The Bill of Rights has remained the same ; and has been the text-book of our liberties, without variation or change, ever since. There is another argument used by anti- reforming Peers, to justify resistance to concession, which is even a less valid one than those we have already disposed of. They say, if the House of Lords yields upon this occasion, it confesses its weakness ; and will neither have, nor deserve to have, power in future. Now this is of all reason- ings the most futile. Why is every one anxious respecting the opinions of the House of Lords ? Why are we even now making this appeal to them ? Simply, because they have great power and influence in the state because they have the * " A very powerful minority believed the constitution to " .be most violently shaken, if not destroyed." HALLAM'S Constitutional History The Convention Parliament , 1689. 27 right, we trust they will not have the will also, to negative this great measure of justice and libe- rality. Nor is it possible to conceive any con- tingency which could deprive them of their power, except their setting themselves in direct opposition to the other orders of the state. If they " pursue the triumph and partake the gale" with the people, their power is safe and immove- able. But who can say what may be the conse- quences of opposing their wishes? The House of Lords is a powerful body ; but it neither can, nor ever was intended to overbear the other estates of the realm, when those other estates are united in their wishes and their determi- nations*. If, therefore, the Lords wish to preserve their present eminent station if they wish to prevent those divisions between the two Houses of Par- liament, which, if the testimony of history is to be * There is no error more fatal than theirs who maintain the prevailing opinion on Reform to be one suddenly and lightly taken up by the people of England. To resist a sud- den popular impulse is the duty of all wise and good states- men, but in an especial manner of the Peers. The desire for Parliamentary Reform is more than half a century old, and every year has augmented its force. It was acknowledged even by Lord Chatham, no rash speculator, no friend of revolution. He felt its justice, and he truly foresaw its gathering strength, when he said, " If the Commons reform " not themselves, they will be reformed from without with a " vengeance." 28 relied upon, would, probably, end in their own dis- comfiture if they wish to avert the renewal of "troubles" in England they will ponder well, and long, and calmly, before they place themselves in collision with a reforming Sovereign a reform- ing House of Commons and a reforming People. Putting aside however, for the moment, the consi- deration of the consequences that may result from the successful opposition of the Lords to the Reform Bill, as regards the country, let us merely consider in what a position they would find themselves, with reference to the other House of Parliament, by pur- suing such a line of conduct. It is now quite certain, that the House of Commons, which has just been chosen, is a reforming one in the most decided sense of that word. The members of it have been selected by the people, wherever the voice of that people has any weight in the Elections, for the sole purpose of supporting the Reform Bill. Their duty, therefore, to their constituents is to use every means which may be legally within their power, to enable that Bill to pass into a law. Now, under these circumstances, if the Lords negative the Bill, it is quite obvious that the natural course which the Commons have to pursue, is to stop the public business, and refuse the supplies. Here, then, the Lords are at a dead lock what are they to do ? We will suppose, for argument's sake, that they succeed in turning out the present government or in disgusting them so, that they 29 throw up their offices. In come the feebles again and if, under these -perilous circumstances, the feebles dare to accept office, they have but one step to take, namely, to dissolve Parliament. We ask any calm and unprejudiced observer, what would be the result of such a proceeding ? It is obvious, it must be the returning of a House of Commons twice as reforming, and ten times as radical as the present. For if the country is, to a man, for Reform now, what will it be when irritated by further opposition by the turning out of those ministers who had promised them the boon they so anxiously desire, and by the coming back of the rule of the feebles, which they so much abhor. Thus, then, the last state of the House of Lords would be worse than the first they would find themselves equally without supplies, and without the means of carrying on the business of the country and in a state of exasperated hos- tility with the people and their representatives. The present House of Commons is not likely to wish to injure, or trench upon, the privileges of the other House of Parliament ; but this would probably not be the case with one summoned under the circumstances which we have imagined. In such a case, the war between the two Houses would be internecine ; and if this were once com- menced, it is not difficult to foresee which party would be victorious, especially where the one 30 would be backed by the whole power of the people, and the other would have become suspected by it. In the time of the civil war in England, we find it stated, that, in the year 1646, " The " majorities of the House of Lords and Commons " differed from each other upon almost every poli- " tical topic ; and it was only by the reluctant " and ungracious yielding of the former that " public business was at all enabled to proceed*." What was the consequence ? We turn to another page of the same history, and we find, that, " On " the 6th of February, 1649, it was voted, that the " House of Peers in Parliament is useless, dan- " gerous, and ought to be abolished*." The misery and disturbances which followed these dissensions in the different branches of the Legislature are well known to all. Then came the iron rule of Cromwell the merciless restoration the tyranny and folly of the Stuart brothers nor was England destined to enjoy tranquillity or happiness till the period of the revolution at length gave her a con- stitution which had the support of the people as well as of the court. These are the facts which we learn from the history of our own country, and those of other lands afford us the same lesson ; namely, that an unwise resistance to the just wishes of the com- * Hist, of the Commonwealth. 31 munity is sure to entail misery upon the country, and more especially upon that branch of its go- vernment which stands prominently forward in the ungracious office of refusal. May such times and such scenes be far from us we feel confident they will be so but if any thing could bring them upon us, it would be any rash determination of the Upper House of Par- liament against the opinions of the other estates of the realm. FINIS. Printed by T. Hrettell, Rupert Street, Haymarket, London. m GENERAL ELECTION OF 1831. In the Press, and in a fen days will be Published, The RESULT and CONSEQUENCE of the GENERAL ELECTION of 1831 j containing the Authentic State of the Polk, with Remarks on the Conduct and Character of the several Candidates. NOW READY, PLAIN READING for PLAIN PEOPLE ; or an Account of the English Constitution and the King's Reform Bill. 20*. per 100. The PATRIOT KING to his PEOPLE ; addressed to every Elector in the United Kingdom. 8*. per 100. An OFFICIAL EDITION of the REFORM BILL for ENG- LAND and WALES ; with the Amended Schedules, as intended to be proposed in the Committee. 1*. The SPEECH of the RIGHT HONOURABLE THE LORD DURHAM on the REFORM BILL. 1*. ; or 3*. per dozen, for distribution. CORRECTED REPORTS of the SPEECHES of LORD JOHN RUSSELL, the LORD ADVOCATE, Mr. MACAULAY, and Mr. HAWKINS, on the REFORM BILL. Is. each. Mr. DYSON'S SPEECH to the FREEHOLDERS on RE- FORM. Thirty-fifth Edition. 1*.; or 12*. per 100. " Most of the arguments against the Bill are answered." See Times, May 12. Foreign Affairs. THOUGHTS on the PRESENT ASPECT of FOREIGN AFFAIRS. By an ENGLISHMAN. 3s. " Suum cuique." The Emperor Napoleon. OBSERVATIONS upon the AUTHENTICITY of " BOUR- " RIENNE'S MEMOIRS of NAPOLEON." By BARRY E. O'MEARA, Esq., formerly Surgeon-in-Ordinary to the Emperor Napoleon, at St. Helena. 1*. 6tl. *,* This Pamphlet is produced conjointly with such of the contemporaries of Napoleon as are eminently qualified, by their personal or otherwise intimate knowledge of the details of his history, to disprove the misrepresentations of M. de Bourrienne, and to convince the public of his false pretensions to the reputation of an authentic historian. SPEEDY BINDER - ~ Syracuse. N. V. : = Stockton. Calif. THE LIBRARY UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Santa Barbara THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE STAMPED BELOW. Series 9482