PATIENCE AND PERRY.
As far as national objects arc concerned, it has now become a mat- ter of perfect indifference how long Parliament sits, or how soon it
rises : if it sit till the day of judgment, we are where we were. Our salvation must date from the period, not only when it has ceased to sit, but when it has ceased to be competent (as now
constituted) ever to sit again. There are at least two timings neces- sary to effectual legislation, and we possess neither of them—a capable Government, and a working Parliamentary majority. If Government were capable, it would dissolve the Parliament ; if Parliament were honest, it would dissolve the Government. No capable Government would endure such a Parliament ; no honest Parliament would endure such a Government. But, in fact, with all their differences, they are only too well matched, and it is a mistake to suppose them morally at variance. If two fellows are fighting, it does not follow that they are not both rogues. Against the People, Parliament and Government are still united. Let us not, however, be misunderstood : we do not mean to say that Go- vernment has not lost the respect of Parliament—we only mean to say that the respect of Parliament is not worth having ; that one and the other'having lost the respect and confidence of the country, Loth must be changed, by an equal necessity, before a beginning can be made to that dearly.cherished object of Lord howls 's ambi- tion—" practical legislation."
• Whatever the crimes of Parliament may be, it is unquestionably to the course "pursued by Government of late years," that we are mainly indebted for a state of political affairs in which the func- tions of the Legislature are virtually suspended, at a time when all the social symptoms that ever made their prompt and efficient ex- ercise a matter of paramount necessity are in unusual and alarm- ing development. The Reform Bill has been seven years part and parcel of the Constitution—time Bill which was to bring down the pride and power of the Nobles, (insomuch that some at that time talked of resigning their lands and titles at once, rather than see them dwindle away,) while it was to give increased strength to the Lower House of Parliament and to confirm it in all its privileges. How stands the account tier 1839?—'To say nothing of taking a thrashing front the Judges of' the Queen's Bench, the Commons cannot pass a money-bill without the interference of the Lords! How operative the course " pursued of late years!"
By the Reform Bill the Commons were to become the empow- ered agents of popular government, and a formidable counter-irri- tant to the despotic temper of the Lords : many thought that Lords, through (20111111011S, were to come to reason—that the in- fectious virtue of the Reformed Assembly was presently to pierce the thin partition of the Houses, and make all one in the new faith. This was to happen " some milk-white day," as Tilburina has it ; in the advent whereof there are not wanting who yet be- lieve. Who would refuse to toast the Whigs in a pint of perry— !t they paid the score ? Not we : but when we find that "the pear" is still not ripe that is to make the liquor, we may be very grateful for the intention, but will certainly at the sante time be particu- larly hanged if' we can wait so long to slake our thirst ! We must go to another shop ; " and," as Nym says, "that's the rendez-vows of it." Eternity is a convenient batik to draw upon, and it seems to be as usefld to politicians as to natural philosophers. Astrono- mers, it is thought, to eke out a system, will draw a check for any amount of years they want : so some political schemers, who in every thing else are " final," are only infinite in the article of time and patience ; and if for example, at the end of seven years experi- ment, you have to say of their schemes that they are become already so much lumber, will make you no other reply than that " your remote posterity will think differently." Take, for a speci- men, the following argument for waiting a hundred years to enjoy the Reform Bill.
" 1 am convinced you will not, in a moment of disappointment, deface the work which you have made," says Lord JOIIN RUSSELL to his constituents. " Great changes in law and government often make themselves more felt, as the distance of time at which they were established becomes more remote." [II hat a wretched style, and how typical of the matter its confusion "Change" being "established," and "distance of time" becoming " remote ! " It is the " time," he means, that becomes " remote," not the " distance ; " the words might change places.] " Who can doubt that the subjects of George the Third [1760 to 1821/ eqjoyed more fully the benefits of the Habeas Corpus Act than oar ancestors did seven years after its enactment [1679.] " According to this calculation, Lord JOHN Russm.Liiiill be a most popular legislator about the year 1950, or from that to 2000 and the Reform Act will come happily into contemporaneous opera- tion with the Millennium.
In the mean time, the event is so for from having realized the expectations of those who imagined—not only that the Commons themselves were redeemed, but that there was redemption for the Lords through the Commons—that the fact stands simply thus, the Lords sin with impunity on the strength of the unamended lives of the Commons. They behold Peerage Reform indefinitely post- poned ; for they know it is idle to talk of setting their house to rights while " another place" is unretbrmed. They feel, to the full, the absurdity, under these circumstances, of attempting to throw upon them the charge of political obstruction, when they know they do but help that work—commenced in the " other place ;" and of impotently threatening them with a rod which they are well aware (as are their threateners) is due first to the shoulders of the People's own Representatives, and to the Government—their worthy epitome. It is difficult to imagine that the noble leader of the Commons was not perfectly sensible of these things when he wrote as follows, only a few months ago.
" With these dispositions, the superiority of the Lords in all matters of go- vcrnnicnt one day he asserted, or England may no longer lit.ar the double sway of yorrrmacnu in one Muse, [May we ask the noble lord, which mouse?] and opposition in the other. are in that ease to give the vici ory ? Evi- dently the People of the Pnited liingdom. The House of Commons must carry their measures by popular support, or le dissolved and give way to an ass ably more congenial to the Lords.'' Yes, the House of Commons MUd carry their (the People's) tncasures, and by popular support ; and because the body now composing that blouse won't carry them, and because the Govern- ment ?cwt./ carry them, and because in every case " popular sup- port" is out of the question, therefore both bodies must be changed with all speed, executive and legislative ; they must " be dis- solved," as Lord Jonx says, and must " give way to an assembly more congenial"—not " to the Lords," however, (to them they are sufficiently congenial,) but to time People, to whom they are respon- sible. On what " milk-white day" this shall happen, the present deponent saith not.; but certainly not till then will the struggle be betwixt the People and the Peers—not till then the pint of perry in which we are to drink the health of the Whigs.
Previous page
