CHAP. 1832. 112. The King submits, authority to All was now accomplished. The King, at the eleventh hour, had made an effort to assert the independence of the Crown, and avert the degradation of the House of Peers, but without success. A large majority of the and gives House of Commons had supported the Whigs in their create peers, attempt to force the two other branches of the legislature, and nothing remained to the Sovereign but submission. The only resource competent to a constitutional monarch in such a crisis-that of appealing to the people—was sure to fail in this instance. In the excited state of the public mind, a still larger majority in favour of the bill would inevitably be returned. The King saw the necessity of his situation, and yielded, as by the spirit of the constitution he was bound to do. Earl Grey and his Cabinet were reinstated in office, on a permission given in writing that they might create as many peers as might be necessary to secure a majority in the House of Lords. The reluctance of the King was painfully manifest, but he had no alternative, and the decisive paper was given to the Lord-Chancellor, who, with Earl Grey* ii. 331, 337. and Sir Herbert Taylor, were alone present at this May 17. 1 Roebuck, memorable interview. All stood but the Sovereign the overthrow of a nation's confidence, there is none so active or so general as that of astonishment at the individual who it is now notorious has tripped up the heels of Lord Grey. What, the Duke of Wellington! The commander-inchief of all the ultra-anti-reformers in the kingdom now offers himself as Minister-nay, has for some months been making fierce love to the office, with a full and undisguised resolution to bring in with his own hands a 'strong and satisfactory' reform bill! There may be dexterity in such conduct-there may be generalship-there may be food for incontinent exultation and chuckling at Apsley House; but it affords evidence also of more ignoble faction, of a lust for office more sordid and execrable, of a meanness of inconsistency more humiliating and more shameful, than we had even suspected the Duke of Wellington of being capable of affixing to his own political character. As for success in such a course of imposture, it is, let us once for all warn his Grace, hopeless." It is curious to contrast this passage with the just and splendid eulogium on the Duke in the columns of the same journal twenty years afterwards, on occasion of his death. * It was in these terms: "The King grants permission to Earl Grey and to his Chancellor, Lord Brougham, to create such a number of peers as will be sufficient to insure the passing of the Reform Bill-first calling up peers' eldest sons. WILLIAM R. Windsor, May 17, 1832."-ROEBUCK, vol. ii. p. 331, note. whole time a thing unprecedented with that courteous CHAP. monarch.* XXIII. 1832. 113. circular to to leave the Peers. Still solicitous to avert, if possible, the dire alternative of a creation of peers, the King, as a last resource, The King's requested his private secretary to write a circular letter the Opposito the leading peers, requesting them to stay away from toon per the House of Peers and allow the bill to pass. This House of expedient had the desired effect. It could not throw a May 17. veil over the coercion of the Upper House, but it prevented the evil of that coercion being rendered permanent by the introduction of a permanent body of men, who might keep on the fetters in all future time. The practical good sense of the Duke of Wellington at once saw that matters had come to such a crisis that one or other of these evils must be incurred, and he wisely adopted the least of the two. Though feeling, as he himself said, that yielding to a threat to create peers was as much a viola- Parl. Deb. tion of the constitution as such a creation itself, he bowed 1015; Ann. Reg. 1832, to necessity, and rose and left the House, followed by 188; Roeabove a hundred peers, none of whom appeared there again 336. till after the bill was carried.1 Lord Grey and Lord Brougham are said to have afterwards declared that, if the Opposition peers had stood firm, the Reform Bill and their Administration would have both been defeated, as they would probably not * "The excitement, anger, and hurt pride of the King at this memorable interview were very evident, and marked by unusual circumstances. The one was, that he kept Lord Grey and the Chancellor both standing the whole time; the other, that Sir Herbert Taylor was kept in the room. The Chancellor's asking for a written promise Earl Grey deemed harsh and uncalled for: 'I wonder,' said he, as soon as they left the presence, 'how you could have the heart to press it, when you saw the state he was in.' The Chancellor replied,' You will see reason to think I was right.'"-ROEBUCK, vol. ii. p. 333. "ST JAMES'S PALACE, May 17, 1832. +"MY DEAR LORD,-I am honoured with his Majesty's commands to acquaint your lordship that all difficulties in the arrangements in progress will be obviated by a declaration to-night from a sufficient numbers of peers, that in consequence of the present state of affairs they have come to the resolution of dropping their farther opposition to the Reform Bill, so that it may pass with out delay, and as nearly as possible in its present state.-I have the honour to be, yours sincerely, HERBERT TAYLOR." xii. 1012, buck, ii. 1832. 114. on this on the act. 1 Roebuck, CHAP. have exacted from the King his promise to create peers. XXIII. If they have really said so, it only proves how ignorant they both were of the force of the current which they Reflections themselves had put in motion. It was impossible to preevent, and vent the bill then being carried; the excitement of the nation was such, that victory to the Reform party, ii. 335, 336. or a bloody civil war, in the course of which, whatever side ultimately prevailed, the constitution would have perished, were the only alternatives left. The Whig annalist has, with more truth and justice, described the state of the country at this crisis in the following words, which all who recollect the period must feel to be just "The violence of the language employed by persons intimately connected with the Whig chiefs, the furious proposals of the newspapers known to speak the sentiments and wishes of the Cabinet, all conspired to make the country believe that, if an insurrection were to break out, it would be headed by the Whig leaders, and sanctioned by the general acquiescence of the immense majority of the Whig party. The consequence was, that a very large proportion of the more ardent Reformers throughout the country were prepared to resist, and civil war was, in fact, thus rendered far more probable than was ever really intended by those who were using the popular excitement as a means whereby they were to be reinstated in office. * Had the Opposition peers stood firm, and had Lord Grey retired without having exercised the power confided to him by the King, the Whig party would at once and for ever have been set aside; a bolder race of politicians would have taken the lead of the people, civil war would have been dared, and the House of Lords, possibly the throne itself, would have been swept away in the tempest that would thus "That the chief members of the Whig administration ever intended to proceed to illegal extremities no one can for a moment imagine; but that the conduct of their friends led the reforming world to think of, and prepare for armed resistance, is beyond a doubt."-ROEBUCK, vol. ii. p. 311, note. XXIII. 1832. have been raised. Fortunately for the fame of Lord CHAP. Grey and the Chancellor, fortunately for the happiness of England, the practical good sense of the Duke of Wellington extricated the nation from the terrible diffi- 1 Roebuck, culty into which the Administration and the House of 336. Lords had brought it."1 ii. 311, 335, passes both royal assent. The resistance of the House of Peers being thus over- 115. come, the bill proceeded at a rapid rate through its re- The bill maining stages in both Houses. Its passage through the Houses, and Peers was not in form mere dumb show, but in effect it receives the was so. A trifling minority, reduced now to twenty or June 7. thirty members, suggested a few inconsiderable amendments of no consequence, which were adopted by the Peers. The third reading in that House was carried by a majority of 84; the numbers being 106 to 22. Persevering to the last in his amiable illusion as to the real tendency of the measure, Earl Grey's last words on the subject were, "I trust that those who augured unfavourably of the bill will live to see all their ominous forebodings falsified, and that, after the angry feelings of the day have passed away, the measure will be found to be, in the best sense of the word, conservative of the constitution." Next day the Commons agreed to the amendments of the Lords, and the day after, June 7, the bill became law, and the British constitution was essentially and permanently changed. From being a mixed constitution, in which all classes were directly or indirectly represented, it became what may be called a Poligarchy, in which supreme power was lodged in a section of the community, numerous, indeed, but belonging only to one class in the state. The royal assent was given by commission; the commissioners being, the Lord-Chancellor, Lord Welles- 2 Parl. Deb. ley, Lord Lansdowne, Earl Grey, and Lords Holland xiii. 374; and Durham.2 The King was vehemently urged by his 1832, 194; Ministers to give his assent in person, the well-known ii. 337, 355; sign of the measure having met with the royal approba- ii. 67. tion; but he positively refused. "The question," said he, Ann. Reg. Roebuck, Martineau, CHAP. 1832. 116. and Irish "was one of feeling, not of duty; and as a sovereign and a gentleman he was bound to refuse." As the English Reform Bill was the trial of strength The Scotch between the two great parties into which the State was bills passed. divided, so its passing was the turning-point between the old and the new constitution. But it was immediately followed by two other measures which, in their ultimate result, was still more decisive of the future policy and social condition of Great Britain. These were the Scotch and Irish Reform Bills. They were quickly brought forward, and carried by large majorities in both Houses. The Scotch bill increased the members for that portion of the empire from forty-five to fifty-three, and gave two members to Edinburgh and Glasgow, and one to Paisley, Aberdeen, Perth, and Dundee. But the great change made was in the class of electors both in burghs and counties; and this was so great as to amount to a total revolution. The number of members for Ireland was increased to a hundred and five; but the constituency, both in boroughs and counties, was entirely altered, and placed in harmony with the English Reform Bill. Mr O'Connell made great efforts to get the 40s. freeholders, disfranchised by the Relief Bill, restored to their electoral privileges; alleging, with great plausibility, that the object of the Reform Bill being to give the same political rights to the two islands, there was no reason why the 40s. freeholders of Ireland should be denied a privilege which those of England enjoyed. But the proposal was resisted Ann. Reg. by Government; and the bill, making the county franchise a £10 interest in a freehold, or a £50 rent, passed both Houses by large majorities.1 1 Mirror of Parliament, 1832, iii. 2537; Roebuck, ii. 357, 365; 1832, 204, 206. 117. The change thus introduced into the Scotch and Irish Vast effects representation has proved more important in its ultimate form in effects than even that made in England. In the latter and Ireland. Country the alteration was great, but not entire; a large of the re Scotland number of the old boroughs remained, the existing freemen and freeholders were preserved, and though many |