s Bench.]

[Pageheading: THE REFORM BILL]

_Queen Victoria to Lord John Russell._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _21st January 1854._

The Queen has received Lord John Russell's letter of the 19th, and the
Bill as now agreed upon by the Cabinet, which she hopes may meet the
wishes of the Country and pass into law.[8] From what she understands
the chief argument used in opposition to the measure will be, that
corruption and bribery is the evil which the Country really complains
of, and not an unequal distribution of the representation, and that a
new distribution or even extension of the franchise will not touch
the evil, and may be said perhaps in some instances to tend towards
increasing it. The success of the measure will therefore, she
concludes, in some degree depend upon the Bribery Bills which will
accompany it. How far are these advanced? and what expectation has
Lord John Russell of succeeding in framing such a measure as would
remove that ground of objection to the Reform Bill?

[Footnote 8: Notwithstanding the impending war, the Government
considered itself bound in honour to bring in a Reform Bill.
Lord Palmerston and his special supporters were opposed to the
project, but the measure was brought forward on the 13th of
February. After a chequered career it was withdrawn. The
Bill for the prevention of corrupt practices at elections
was introduced on the 10th of February, and after many
vicissitudes and several Ministerial defeats in the Commons as
well as in the Lords, it was, in a modified form, carried.]

_Queen Victoria to Mr Gladstone._

WINDSOR CASTLE, _7th February 1854._

The Queen must apologise for having kept the enclosed papers so long,
and in now sending them back she does so without feeling sure in
her mind that she could with safety sanction Mr Gladstone's new and
important proposal.[9] The change it implies will be very great in
principle and irretrievable, and the Queen must say that Lord John
Russell's apprehensions as to the spirit it is likely to engender
amongst the future civil servants of the Crown have excited a
similar feeling in her mind. Where is moreover the application of the
principle of public competition to stop, if once established? and must
not those offices which are to be exempted from it necessarily degrade
the persons appointed to them in public estimation?

[Footnote 9: Mr Gladstone had written on the 26th of January