Mr. Fox, "not to pull down, but to work upon our constitution;
to examine it with care and reverence; to repair it where decayed; to
amend it where defective; to prop it where it wanted support; and to
adapt it to the purposes of the present time, as our ancestors had
done from generation to generation, and always transmitted it not only
unimpaired, but improved, to posterity." The measure was supported by
Mr. Hobhouse, and opposed by Messrs. Dennison and Lamb; but the debate
did not present much novelty, and it terminated in the rejection of the
motion by a majority of two hundred and forty-seven to one hundred and
twenty-three.

ALTERATION OF THE CRIMINAL CODE.

At this period Mr. Peel applied the powers of his clear and
dispassionate mind to the simplification and improvement of our criminal
code. On the 9th of March he introduced a bill to consolidate the
various acts which related to offences against property. He explained
the nature of these acts at great length; but the bill was not carried
through the commons during this session, Mr. Peel stating, that from the
multiplicity of its details, it was necessary to proceed in it with the
most cautious deliberation. Another bill, which was introduced by
him, and which passed into a law, had for its object the removal of
inconveniences belonging to the administration of the criminal law
generally, and in particular the amendment of the existing regulations
relative to admitting bail in cases of felony. One clause, which Mr.
Lamb endeavoured to introduce into the bill, was contested with great
vigour on both sides of the house. This was a proposal, which had
already frequently been rejected, for allowing counsel to
prisoners. This clause was supported by Messrs. Williams, Twiss,
Scarlett, Brougham, and Denman; and opposed by the attorney
and solicitor-generals, and by Messrs. Peel and Canning. The
attorney-general allowed that in regard to its merits the opinion of
the bar was divided; but he expressed his conviction that it would be
injurious to the prisoner as well as to justice. As criminal proceedings
were now conducted, the prosecutor's case was opened by a simple
statement of facts; and the judge always took care that his counsel
should not go further, and the evidence was heard dispassionately. After
this the prisoner's case was gone through in the same way, except that
there was no previous statement of facts, because the general nature of
the case was al