e to the House of Lords, informing them
that "he has so much at heart the settling the Peerage of the whole
kingdom upon such a foundation as may secure the freedom and
constitution of Parliament in all future ages, that he is willing that
his prerogative stand not in the way of so great and necessary a work."
The ostensible motive for the proposed legislation was to get rid of
difficulties caused by the over-increase of the numbers of the peerage
since the union of England and Scotland; the real object was to guard
against such a _coup-d'etat_ as that accomplished in Anne's later days
by the creation of the twelve Peers, of whom Mrs. Masham's husband was
one. Nothing could be more generous and liberal, it might have been
thought, than the expressed willingness of the {175} King to surrender
a part of his prerogative. This very readiness, however, expressed as
it was by anticipation, and before the measure had yet made any
progress, set a great many persons in and out of Parliament thinking.
A vehement dispute soon sprang up, in which the pamphleteer, as usual,
bore an important part. Addison, in one of his latest political and
literary efforts, defended the proposed change. He described his
pamphlet as the work of an "Old Whig." It was written as a reply to a
pamphlet by Steele condemning the Bill, and signed "A Plebeian."
Reply, retort, and rejoinder followed in more and more heated and
personal style. The excitement created caused the measure to be
dropped for the session, but it was brought in again in the session
following, and it passed through all its stages in the Lords without
trouble and with much rapidity.

When it came down to the House of Commons, however, a very different
fate awaited it. Walpole assailed it with powerful eloquence and with
unanswerable argument. The true nature of the scheme now came out. It
would have simply rendered the representative chamber powerless against
a majority of the chamber which did not represent. This will be
readily apparent to any one who considers the subject for a moment by
the light of our more modern experience. A majority of the House of
Commons, representing, it may be, a vast majority of the people, agree
to a certain measure. It goes up to the House of Lords, and is
rejected there. What means in the end have the Commons, who represent
the nation, of giving effect to the wishes of the nation? They have
none but the privilege of the Crown to create, u