ministers, and "dinned
their lordships' ears" with denunciations of the measure, and
declarations that the bill, instead of saving, would tend to the
destruction of that house and of the monarchy. He thought differently.
There were clangers, not imaginary or hypothetical, but substantial and
imminent, both to that house and to the monarchy, to be apprehended
from proceedings which tended to a collision between the hereditary and
representative branches of the constitution. He concluded by declaring
that his continuance in office must depend on his conviction of his own
ability to carry into full effect the bill on their lordships' table,
unimpaired in principle and all essential details. The Earl of Carnarvon
said, that if he could venture to make any comment on the reasons
assigned for the proceedings of ministers, he would say that they had
hurried on in their violent course, because they feared that if their
opponents were permitted to introduce their measures, not all the power
and influence of ministers could have produced a collision between the
two houses. It was his duty, as the continued day for the committee had
been fixed on his motion, now to get rid of it. He therefore moved
that "the order for the committee on the reform bill be discharged." He
added:--"Thus I leave it to other noble lords to do their dirty work."
The order was accordingly discharged.

On Friday, the 18th of May, on the assembling of the peers, the Earl of
Harewood asked Earl Grey whether it was yet settled that ministers were
to continue in office? His lordship answered, that in consequence of
having received the king's request to that effect, and in consequence
of now finding himself in a situation which would enable him to carry
through the bill unimpaired in its efficiency, he and his colleagues did
remain in office. He moved that the committee on the bill, under
these circumstances, should be taken on Monday. The Earl of Harewood
continued, that he had understood the continuance of Earl Grey in office
depended on the power he should receive to carry the reform bill--a
power which might be conferred by the creation of peers, or by the act
and will of certain lords in seceding from their opposition to the bill.
In the choice of these two evils, it was his duty to select the lesser.
He had opposed the bill on the second reading, and he would likewise
have opposed many of its details in the committee, but the wiser course
would be now to