Peer. "I must say, that it is a little hard upon us, that we are to vote contrary to our opinion for the sake of becoming popular, and violate conscience to preserve our peerages, perhaps, and the privilege of our House! Commoner. But are you quite sure that you would vote contrary to your opinion in voting now for Reform? Your opinion we will allow to be, that the Bill is dangerous. Is there no danger without passing the Bill? -no danger in popular excitement-in popular resentment-in these equivocal Associations-in the arming the people?-no danger in the distress occasioned by a stagnant trade?-no danger in the discipline at Birmingham—in the angry masses of Ireland? Great God! will you tell us the whole people-whom you expose to these perils, that you won't be frightened, not by threats to your coronets and ermine there the sentiment, if wrong, may be chivalric-but by the evils that menace your whole country? This, indeed, would be a selfish and miserable pride, of which I cannot believe you guilty. But to return. Your opinion is, that to pass the Bill is dangerous. But it is also your opinion, that to reject it is dangerous. Compare the two degrees of danger: the first is remote and contingent; the other is at hand, and certain. This is the way-now that the time is past for speculative inquiry and calm discussion-this is the way that wise, and, let me add, patriotic men will view the question. Whosoever suffers himself to be convinced by the distress, the danger, the convulsions, that he sees around him, depend on it, England, in her hour of need, and her day of trial, will reckon Him, not among those who fear for their safety, but those who feel for their country. Peer. I am glad, after all, that you talk rather of converts than creations. I trust (with dignity) that a Revolutionary Minister will not give the last blow to our legislative Chamber by a creation which will make a nullity of its decisions. Commoner. I shall, I own, be well pleased if sufficient converts can be made to pass the Bill unmutilated through the Upper House; the more especially, as I really do not know from what ranks of life a very numerous creation can be taken. But a creation, more or less numerous, is clearly indispensable. It would be wise in the Ministers to make, at any rate, some part of that creation forthwith. The country calls for it; the country thinks it necessary; the country refuses to confide in the power of the Ministry, till it sees in such creation a proof of that power; and if only half a dozen Peers were made now, it would have a wonderful effect in tranquillising the public mind. These are moments, when, to obtain that tranquillity is a matter so deeply, so ardently to be desired, that no petty objections should be allowed to counterbalance the advantage. As some creation will be necessary, why not commence now? It would be even more dignified and decorous to make, if necessary, two smaller batches than one numerous one. Peer. You are, at least, a shade or two more gentle than your party's oracle, "The Times," which is vastly savage upon Ministers for not having sent a hundred of the tag-rag-and-bobtail among us long since, and by one dash of the pen. Commoner. The delay and reluctance Ministers have shown in that augmentation of your body, is, allow me to observe, a proof that they have not been guided solely by that desire for office, and that selfish ambition, you impute to them. As how, pray? Peer. Commoner. Why, it is quite clear, that whatever converts may be made on the Reform Bill, they will be converts to the Bill, not to the Ministers. If the Peers pass the one great measure, they will find a thousand opportunities of attacking Ministers hereafter, upon ground where the latter will be less backed by the people; and while so large a majority against the Government exist in the Upper House, the tenure of Ministers must necessarily be weak, equivocal, and insecure. Now there never hereafter will be so plausible an occasion, so popular a moment, for transferring the majority from the Opposition to the Ministers, from the Tories to the Whigs, as the present occasion and the present moment afford. Men, therefore, wholly bent upon power, as you suppose the Cabinet; men selfishly and recklessly (what shall I say?) wicked and revolutionary, would seize at once the opportunity and the excuse with which our Ministers dally, reluctant and delaying. We blame their want of vigour. That want is a proof, at least, of their moderation, and that they are guided by motives stronger than the preservation of power, which, either as relates to popularity in the country, or support from the Lords, could be strengthened in no way so effectually as by that creation they have yet so signally procrastinated. Peer. Why, to be sure, my Lord Grey can scarcely be expected to hasten so marked a blow on the dignity and power of his order, as this creation of which we speak. Commoner. Let us consider this point, my Lord! Every one, it is true, says, that a numerous creation would be a marvellous shock to your House. This is one reason why the more violent clamour for it, and the more moderate would delay. But I question whether, when we come to reflect, we shall not find that both parties are a little mistaken in their opinion. Peer. What! the Peers by a large majority reject a measure: in order to carry this measure, some unheard-of number of new Peers is sent among us, and we are thus swamped into submission. Can there be a doubt as to the effect of this creation upon the constitution of our Chamber? What is it but to say, that the decision of the Peers may be set aside whenever a majority in the Commons concur with a wish of the King. It forms a precedent which almost deprives us hereafter of any efficient voice in the national councils. Commoner. It is quite true, my Lord, that it establishes a precedent, which, if the temper of the times continue to ripen towards democracy, and your Lordships were to continue to resist that temper, would be followed up by examples finally destructive to the present privileges of your body. You are honest, Sir. Peer. Commoner. But mark; I say, "if the temper of the times continue to be democratic, and you continue to oppose it." Very well. Now I fear that you would, in the case of these hypotheses, be equally badly off, whether the "creation" furnished a precedent or not. If neither of these suppositions be made fact, you will be secure, in spite of all precedent; if they are made fact, the excuse of a precedent will not be wanting, even to the length of sweeping you away altogether! We stand in perilous times, my Lord, when desperate diseases require bold remedies; and we must not palter and prate about possible precedents for one order of the state, when we know not whether our next step may not be over the ruin of all. This is to emulate the quack, who stood in the market-place when the earth was shaking and palaces rocked to and fro, crying, "Famous pills, these-famous pills against an earthquake." But to return to our new "creation." If you are now in danger-it is from what?-a collision with Public Opinion! What would, then, remove the danger?-a reconciliation with Public Opinion! How would you bring this about?-by a new infusion of such men as advocate popular principles! Thus, if a numerous creation of Reformers were made, your House would suddenly be converted from an obnoxious to a popular assembly. Instead of resisting reforms, it would propose them; and you would, almost as by magic, cease to be in peril from the people, because you would cease to resist their desires. Peer. In other words, we should be an assembly of Radicals. Commoner. Not so. Men of large property, inheriting the prejudices of birth, and possessed of that practical intercourse with the real world which sobers, and it may be, degrades, political theories, will be always slower to devise than the philosophical, and more wary to act than the vehement, Reformer. Every legislative assembly is a little behind the spirit of the day. The House of Commons is now far more democratical than it ever has been; but you may see, by comparing its tone with the tone of the press, that it is not nearly so democratic as the humour of the times. If this be the case with a representative body, it must be far more the case with a body not brought into electioneering contact with the people and you need never, therefore, fear that a House of Lords can be too radical, or not sufficiently a procrastinator of popular principles. I will suppose, then, this creation made; I will suppose the Reform Bill passed; I will suppose the : Lords rendered liberal by the new infusion-seconding, not rejecting the popular measures of the Commons; I will suppose them acceding to a wise and early Reform of the Church, (that must come next!) I will suppose them passing the repeal of the Six Acts; I will suppose them supporting my Lord Brougham in his amendment of the Poor Laws; I will suppose them freeing Ireland from her ecclesiastical abuses;—and I will ask you-I will ask any man-if the Lords would not then be safe-if the Lords would not then be powerful-if the calumnies of" Black Books" would then be purchased and believed— if the people would then debate in private, nay, demand in public, the uses of your Chamber, and the justice of your control? It is only when deeply exasperated against their rulers, that the people speculate on their rights. When William the Fourth ascended the throne, there was no friendly feeling to monarchy in this country. If at the time Charles the Tenth brought crowns into contempt, William the Fourth had advanced the standard of Anti-reform, can we say-can you, my Lord, as an Anti-reformer, lay your hand on your heart, and say, that that standard would not have waved over a fallen throne? We know, at least, that William the Fourth would not have been the beloved, and safe, and mighty King that he is now-that he could not, as now, have felt secure-that come what may, in riot or in civil war, not a hair of his head would be assailed--he would not have felt his subjects his friends, and that his citadel, in convulsion, would be the hearts of a devoted nation? Why is William the Fourth powerful?-because he is beloved! Why is his throne firmer than that of any monarch in Europe?-because it is based in opinion! My Lord, your august body can yet attain the same security by the same means. Identify yourselves with the interests of the people, and we shall hear no more said against the aristocracy than we now hear said against the monarchy. Whatever procures that identification is your best chance of permanent authority. It will benefit your order more than a thousand precedents will injure: and that prerogative which the creation of new Peers will seem to weaken, the infusion of new principles will (if human policy can effect any thing to that end) in reality preserve! TO THE THIRTY-SECOND VOLUME. Cannibalism in New Zealand, 200. Ackermann's Forget-me-Not, noticed, 456. Canning, room in which he died, 402. ABSENTEE, the little one, 332. Actress Countesses, 489. Althorp, Lord, 321. America, opinions and facts on, 297. Amethyst, The, noticed, 458. Amulet, The, noticed, 457. Ancient Mariner, The, 330. Catalogues of French MSS. 584. Chandos, Marquis of, his amendment, 268. Cholera Morbus, observations on, 13. Disarmed, 468. in the Gazette, 490. Chateaubriand and Louis-Philippe, 529. Annesley, Mr. his work on Indian dis- Clinton, Mr. F. speech of, 120. eases, 18. Annuals for 1832, noticed, 455. Anti-Innovator, 379. April, lines to, 75. Arbuthnot, Mrs. pension of, 90. Aristocracy in France, 174 education of, 192. in Religion, 437. Artist, a mad one, 57. August, lines to, 447. Aunt's Bequest, 178. Bar, English, sketches of, No. V.-Sir Scottish, sketches of, No. III.—Mr. Baring, Mr. Bingham, action brought Bayly, T. H. poetry by, 153, 551. the new, 224. Beggar, story of one, 56. Cockneyism Chronicled, 293. Comic Offering, The, noticed, 458. 445. Country, state of, 395. Belgium and Holland, hostilities between, Davy, Sir H. life of by Dr. Paris, 88. British Palace at Pera, 313-destroyed, 316. Dublin, election at, 1. Brougham, Lord, sketch of, 507. discussion, 270. Duel, Canadian, 493. circumstances that led to one, 54. Byron and Napoleon, or They Met in Edinburgh Review, criticism of, 450. Heaven, 552. VOL. XXXII. Education of the aristocracy, 192. |