en this question arises it can only be set at rest by
making parliament truly representative of the nation. Accordingly
popular discontent in 1769 was not merely directed against ministers and
measures, it demanded radical changes in the constitutional machinery,
and its demands were expressed by means which, though not
unconstitutional, were not recognised by the constitution, such as
public meetings and associations. Meetings to express discontent and
urge reforms were constantly held, and an association for promoting the
popular demands, called the Bill of Rights Society, was formed by a
clerical demagogue named Horne (afterwards Horne Tooke), Wilkes, Glynn,
and others. Among the changes which they demanded as remedies for the
unsatisfactory state of the representation were annual parliaments, the
exaction of an oath against bribery, and the exclusion from parliament
of holders of places and pensions. At this time, too, constituencies
began to assert a right to control their representatives by sending them
instructions as to their conduct in parliament.

[Sidenote: _CHATHAM AND BURKE AS REFORMERS._]

The movement found support in parliament. A few of the minority were
among its leaders; and others, though not disposed to go so far,
maintained the necessity for constitutional reforms. Whig tactics were
changed since the beginning of the reign. Beaten by the king and his
friends at the game of corruption, the whigs had become the advocates of
purity of election. The fact need not reflect on personal characters.
Some of the whigs of 1769 were consistent in their opposition to
corruption. As regards others, it must be remembered that abuses seldom
shock a man who gains by them; they become intolerable if they are
turned against him. Chatham himself once sat for Old Sarum, was elected
for Seaford apparently through bribery, and as minister was content that
Newcastle should gain him support by corruption. Chief among the abuses
which prevented the house of commons from representing the people were
the defects in its constitution. While the elections in counties and
some large boroughs were comparatively pure, the representation of the
smaller boroughs was a matter of nomination or corruption. Out of the
513 members for England and Wales, 254 sat for constituencies which,
taken together, numbered only 11,500 voters, and fifty-six boroughs had
each less than forty voters. Forty-four members sat for Cornish seats;
Middlesex,