something must be done. I shall offer my thoughts, such as they are, to the consideration of the House; and I wish that every noble Lord who hears me would be as ready as I am to contribute his opinion on this important service. I will not call my own sentiments crude and undigested; it would be unfit for me to offer anything to your Lordships which I had not well considered; and this subject, I own, has long occupied my thoughts. I will now give them to your Lordships without reserve.

"Whoever understands the theory of the English constitution, and will compare it with the fact, must see at once how widely they differ. We must reconcile them to each other, if we wish to save the liberties of this country; we must reduce our political practice as nearly as possible to our principles. The constitution intended that there should be a permanent relation between the constituent and representative body of the people. Will any man affirm, that, as the House of Commons is now formed, that relation is, in any degree, preserved? My Lords, it is not preserved; it is destroyed. Let us be cautious, however, how we have recourse to violent expedients.

"The boroughs of this country have, properly enough, been called the rotten parts of the constitution. I have lived in Cornwall, and, without entering into an invidious particularity, have seen enough to justify the appellation. But, in my judgment, my Lords, these boroughs, corrupt as they are, must be considered as the natural infirmity of the constitution. Like the infirmities of the body, we must bear them with patience, and submit to carry them about with us. The limb is mortified; but the amputation might be death!*

"Let us try, my Lords, whether some gentler remedies may not be discovered. Since we cannot cure the disorder, let us endeavour to infuse such a portion of new health into the constitution, as may enable it to support its most inveterate diseases.

"The representation of the counties is, I think, still preserved pure and uncorrupted. That of the greatest cities is upon a footing equally respectaable; and there are many of the larger trading towns which still preserve their independence. The infusion of health which I now allude to, would be to permit every county to elect one member more, in addition to their present representation. The knights of the shires approach nearest to the constitutional representation of the country, because they represent the soil. It is not in the little dependent boroughs, it is in the great cities and counties that the strength and vigour of the constitution resides, and by them alone, if an unhappy question should ever rise, will the constitution be honestly and firmly defended. I would increase that strength, because I think it is the only security we have against the profligacy of the times, the corruption of the people, and the ambition of the Crown.

"I think I have weighed every possible objection that can be raised against

Vide ante, p. 72.

a plan of this nature; and I confess I see but one, which, to me, carries any appearance of solidity. It may be said, perhaps, that when the act passed for uniting the two kingdoms, the number of persons who were to represent the whole nation in Parliament was proportioned, and fixed on for ever; that this limitation is a fundamental article, and cannot be altered without hazarding a dissolution of the union.

"My Lords, no man who hears me can have a greater reverence for that wise and important act than I have. I revere the memory of that great Prince who first formed the plan, and of those illustrious patriots who carried it into execution. As a contract, every article of it should be inviolable; as the common basis of the strength and happiness of the two nations, every article of it should be sacred. I hope I cannot be suspected of conceiving a thought so detestable, as to propose an advantage to one of the contracting parties at the expense of the other. No, my Lords, I mean that the benefit should be universal, and the consent to receive it unanimous. Nothing less than a most urgent and important occasion should persuade me to deviate even from the letter of the act; but there is no occasion, however urgent, however important, that should ever induce me to depart from the spirit of it. Let that spirit be religiously preserved. Let us follow the principle upon which the representation of the two countries was proportioned at the Union; and when we increase the number of representatives for the English counties, let the shires of Scotland be allowed an equal privilege. On these terms, and while the proportion, limited by the Union, is preserved between the two nations, I apprehend that no man, who is a friend to either, will object to an alteration so necessary for the security of both. I do not speak of the authority of the legislature to carry such a measure into effect, because I imagine no man will dispute it. But I would not wish the legislature to interpose by an exertion of its power alone, without the cheerful concurrence of all parties. My object is the happiness and security of the two nations, and I would not wish to obtain it without their mutual consent.*

"My Lords, besides my warm approbation of the motion made by the noble Lord, I have a natural and personal pleasure in rising up to second it.

The whole number of the cities and boroughs in England and Wales which, prcviously to the passing of the Reform Act, sent representatives to Parliament, amounted to 208, returning collectively 415 members. By that Act, those towns were selected for extinction as Parliamentary boroughs the population of which, according to the returns of 1881, was less than 2,000; and 56 English boroughs returning collectively 111 members, were accordingly entirely disfranchised. Boroughs, the population of which, according to the same returns, was under 4,000, and which, before the passing of the above Act, sent two members to Parliament, now send only one member. 30 English representatives were deducted from this class. The borough of Weymouth and Melcombe Regis, in Dorsetshire, which formerly sent four members to Parliament, now sends only two. Of the 143 members thus taken away from the old borough representation, 65 were given to English and Welsh counties; 64 to 42 new English boroughs, of which 22 return two members, and 20, one member each; one to

I consider my seconding his Lordship's motion, and I would wish it to be considered by others, as a public demonstration of that cordial union, which, I am happy to affirm, subsists between us-of my attachment to those principles which he has so well defended, and of my respect for his person. There has been a time, my Lords, when those who wished well to neither of us, who wished to see us separated for ever, found a sufficient gratification for their malignity against us both. But that time is happily at an end. The friends of this country will, I doubt not, hear with pleasure that the noble Lord and his friends are now united with me and mine, upon a principle which I trust will make our union indissoluble. It is not to possess, or divide, the emoluments of Government; but if possible to save the State. Upon this ground we meet-upon this ground we stand, firm and inseparable. No ministerial artifices, no private offers, no secret seduction, can divide United as we are, we can set the profoundest policy of the present Ministry, their grand, their only arcanum of Government, their divide et impera, at defiance.

us.

I hope an early day will be agreed upon for considering the state of the nation. My infirmities must indeed, fall heavily upon me, if I do not attend to my duty on that day. When I consider my age, and unhappy state of health, I feel how little I am personally interested in the event of any political question. But I look forward to others, and am determined, as far as my poor ability extends, to convey to those who come after me, the blessings which I cannot hope long to enjoy myself."

The 24th of January was fixed upon by the House as the day for taking into consideration the state of the nation; but as no Lord Chancellor had

the new Welsh borough of Swansea; 8 to the Scotch burghs, thereby increasing the number sent by them to the British Parliament from 15 to 23; 4 to the Irish boroughs; and one to the University of Dublin. The following is a statement of the entire representation of the three Kingdoms now composing the House of Commons:

been appointed in the place of Lord Camden, who had been dismissed from office on the 17th of that month, the motion was adjourned until the 2nd of February. In the mean time, the Duke of Grafton, very much to the astonishment of the nation, resigned his office of first Lord of the Treasury. His Grace was succeeded by Lord North, who was already Chancellor of the Exchequer. Mr. Charles James Fox now entered upon office for the first time, having received the appointment of a junior Lord of the Admiralty.

THE MARQUIS OF ROCKINGHAM'S MOTION RESPECTING THE JUDICATURE OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS IN MATTERS OF ELECTION.

The proceedings of the House of Commons, relative to the Middlesex election, being loudly complained of on the part of the public, they became the subject of discussion in Parliament.

On the 2nd of February, the House of Lords being in a committee upon the state of the nation, the Marquis of Rockingham moved, "That the House of Commons, in the exercise of its judicature in matters of election, is bound to judge according to the law of the land, and to the known and established law and custom of Parliament, which is part thereof."

The motion was opposed by the Earl of Sandwich. When the noble Earl had concluded,

66

Lord Chatham began with observing, that the noble Lord had been very adroit in referring to the journals, and in collecting every circumstance that might assist his argument. Though my long and almost continued infirmities," said he, "have denied me the hour of ease to obtain these benefits, yet without the assistance of the journals, or other collaterals, I can reply to both the precedents which his Lordship has produced.

"I will readily allow the facts to be as the noble Earl has stated them, viz. That Lionel, Earl of Middlesex,* as well as Lord Bacon,† were both, for certain crimes and misdemeanors, expelled this House, and incapacitated

* The Earl of Middlesex, who had been raised to the office of Lord Treasurer of England, in the reign of James the First, through the influence of the Duke of Buckingham, was likewise through his influence impeached by the Commons for bribery, oppression, and neglect of duty. Having been found guilty of four of the charges brought against him, he was sentenced (May 13, 1624) to pay a fine of £50,000, to be imprisoned in the Tower during the King's pleasure, to be for ever incapable of holding any office, and never again to sit in Parliament, or come within the verge of the Court.

Bacon was impeached by the House of Commons for having taken bribes from the suitors in Chancery when he was at the head of that Court. He acknowledged his guilt, and was sentenced (May 3, 1621) to pay a fine of £40,000, and to suffer all the other penalties imposed on the Earl of Middlesex.

from ever sitting here, without occasioning any interference on the part of the other branches of the legislature.

"Neither of these cases bears any analogy to the present case. They affected only themselves. The rights of no constituent body were affected by them. It is not the person of Mr. Wilkes that is complained of; as an individual, he is personally out of the dispute. The cause of complaint, the great cause is, that the inherent rights and franchises of the people are, in this case, invaded, trampled upon, and annihilated. Lord Bacon and Lord Middlesex represented no county or city. The rights of no freeholder, the franchises of no elector, were destroyed by their expulsion. The cases are as widely different as north from south. But I will allow the noble Earl a succedaneum to his argument, which probably he has not as yet thought of. I will suppose he urges, that whatever authority gives a seat to a Peer, is, at least, equally respectable with that which gives one to a Commoner, and that both in expulsion and incapacitation, the injury is directly the same:granted; and I will further allow, that if Mr. Wilkes had not been re-elected by the people, the first expulsion, I believe, would have been efficient. Therefore, my Lords, this comparison ceases; for except these noble Lords mentioned, had received a fresh title, either by birth or patent, they could not possibly have any claim after the first expulsion. The noble Lord asks, How came this doctrine to be broached? And adds, Who should be more tenacious of their liberties and privileges than the members themselves? In respect to the latter part of this question, I agree none should be so proper as themselves to protect their own rights and privileges, and I sincerely lament that they have, by their recent conduct, so far forgotten what those privileges are, that they have added to the long list of venality from Esau to the present day. In regard to the first part, how came this doctrine to be broached? I must tell the noble Lord it is as old as the constitution itself; the liberties of the people, in the original distribution of Government, being the first thing provided for; and in the case of Mr. Wilkes, though we have not instances as numerous as in other cases, yet it is by no means the less constitutional. Like a comet in the firmament, which, however it may dazzle and surprise the vulgar and untutored, by the infrequency of its appearance, affects the philosopher, versed in astronomic science, no more than any other common process of nature, being perfectly simple, and to him perfectly intelligible. Need I remind you, my Lords, at this period, of that common schoolboy position, that the constitution of this country depends upon King, Lords, and Commons; that each by its power is a balance to the others? If this is not the case, why were the three estates constituted? Why should it be necessary before an act of Parliament can be passed, that their mutual concurrence should be had? My Lords, I am ashamed to trudge in this common track of argument; and have no apology to make, but that I have been drawn into it by the noble Lord's asserting, that we had no right to interfere with the privileges of the other House.

"The noble Earl has been very exact in his calculation of the proportion