ll and
obnoxious boroughs. This plan, though supported by Fox, was negatived
by a great majority. In 1785, he made a third attempt to secure a
reform of parliament, and again failed; and with this last attempt
ended all his efforts for this object. So persuaded was he of the
impracticability of the measure, that he even uniformly opposed the
object when attempted by others. Moreover, he changed his opinions
when he perceived the full connection and bearing of the subject with
other agitating questions. He was desirous of a reform, if it could be
obtained without mischief; but when it became a democratic measure, he
opposed it with all his might. Indeed, he avowed that he preferred to
have parliament remain as it was, forever, rather than risk any
prospects of reform when the country was so deeply agitated by
revolutionary discussions. Mr. Pitt perfectly understood that those
persons who were most eager for parliamentary reform, desired the
overthrow of the existing institutions of the land, or, at least, such
as were inconsistent with the hereditary succession to the throne,
hereditary titles, and the whole system of entailed estates. Mr. Pitt,
as he grew older, more powerful, and more experienced, became more
aristocratic and conservative; feared to touch any of the old supports
of the constitution for fear of producing a revolution--an evil which,
of all evils, he most abhorred. Mr. Burke, though opposed to the
minister, here defended him, and made an eloquent speech against
revolutionary measures. Nor can we wonder at the change of opinion,
which Mr. Pitt and others admitted, when it is considered that the
advocates of parliamentary reform also were associated with men of
infidel and dangerous principles. Thomas Paine was one of the apostles
of liberty in that age, and his writings had a very great and very
pernicious influence on the people at large. It is very singular, but
nevertheless true, that some of the most useful reforms have been
projected by men of infidel principles, and infidelity and
revolutionary excess have generally been closely connected.

But the reform question did not deeply agitate the people of England
until a much later period. One of the most exciting events, in the
domestic history of England during the administration of Pitt, was the
trial of Hastings and the difficulties which grew out of the
aggrandizement of the East India Company.

[Sidenote: Warren Hastings.]

In the chapter on co