advantageous for trade,
which was not under our control, or within our reach. All these great
and numerous advantages we possess, he added, under the existing system;
but it will be impossible to retain them if we once establish a wild
democracy, a complete democratic assembly under the name of a house of
commons. On the two following evenings the principal speakers for the
bill were Lords Lansdowne, Goderich, and Plunkett; and against it, Lords
Dudley and Ward, Haddington, and Carnarvon. The fifth and last night of
the debate was begun by Lord Wynford, who was followed by Lord Eldon,
who condemned the measure as subversive of the right of property as
well as of the monarchy, and of every principle acknowledged by the
constitution. Lord Eldon concluded his speech by warning their lordships
of the danger of conceding the terms required; and by declaring that
if the measure passed, there would be an end to the monarchy. The
lord-chancellor, after taking a review of the courses taken by the
opponents of the bill, denied that the bill was founded upon population,
and not property. Lord Lyndhurst resisted the bill because it appeared
to him inconsistent with the prerogative of the crown, and with the
authority of their lordships; but, above all, because it was detrimental
to the rights and liberties of the people. The bill was opposed by Lord
Tenterden and the Archbishop of Canterbury, both of whom expressed their
belief that it would have a mischievous tendency. The Duke of Sussex
supported it; but the Duke of Gloucester, although desirous of temperate
reform, opposed it, as he conceived it to be a scheme for a new
constitution. Lord Grey, in reply, complained that the opposition to the
measure seemed to be carried on, less with a view to defeat the bill,
than to drive its advocates from office. He repeated that he was pledged
to this measure, or to one of equal extent; and said, that if a more
moderate scheme would satisfy the people, he would not be the person
to introduce such a measure. As to what course he should follow if
defeated, he could not say; but he should be culpable if he were to
resign his office and abandon his king, so long as he could be of use to
him; for he was bound to him by gratitude as great as ever subject
owed a sovereign. The house at length divided; and the bill, which had
occupied so much of the attention of parliament during this session,
and for which the people had long been earnestly striving
|