self-election of the magistrates;
and Sheridan required that this practice should be abolished. He
remarked, it was urged that abuses of a similar nature existed in
England; but he did not consider that this was an argument to justify
abuses in either country. Was justice, he asked, to be defeated by a
community of oppression? As there was a dread of innovation at this
period, Sheridan endeavoured to disarm this principle. Some persons, he
observed, think that the French revolution should deter us from thinking
of reform. Whatever might be the conduct of the parties engaged in it,
with regard to the event itself, there could but be one feeling upon
the subject; exultation and joy at the downfall of despotism in France,
which had been the greatest enemy England ever had. Its ambitious,
restless, and turbulent spirit, he said, had cost England thousands of
subjects and millions of money; but now that which had long disturbed
the happiness of the human race was completely destroyed. Could Sheridan
have seen into futurity, he would not thus exult-ingly have triumphed
over the downfall of the despotic government of France; for the
revolution was to cost England much more blood and treasures than the
monarchs of France had cost her at any period of history. Sheridan's
speech had the very reverse effect of that which he intended; it rather
exasperated than allayed the general fear. His motion was opposed by
the Lord-advocate for Scotland, who defended the corporations and
magistrates of the royal burghs from the charges brought against them;
and asserted that the power of self-election had worked well, and
was held in sufficient restraint by public opinion. Sheridan was
ably supported by Fox; but his motion was lost by sixty-nine against
twenty-seven.

DEBATES ON PARLIAMENTARY REFORM, ETC.

The subject of parliamentary reform had many times been debated in the
house of commons, though uniformly to very little purpose. The debates
in parliament, however, on this subject, if void of any immediate
result, had their effects. From them, and from the knowledge conveyed
through the medium of the press, the nature of our representative system
became well understood by the mass of the people, and about this period
a society was instituted for the alleged purpose of effecting a
reform in parliament, on the principles formerly advocated by the
prime-minister. This society assumed the name of the "Friends of the
People," and abou