PROGRESS OF THE PEERAGE REFORM QUESTION.
4' SHALL we overturn the Peers ? " is a question seriously dis- cussed in Blackwood's Magazine for the ensuing month. Of course the writer is horrified at the idea of such an issue ; but still he thinks it necessary to set forth an elaborate defence of the Peers, and an exposition of the disasters which would befall us if they were laid on the shelf. This of itself ought to be suf- ficiently alarming to their Lordships. If the advocates for Peer- age Reform were merely noisy persons without influence, they would receive nothing but fierce and contemptuous reviling from the Tory writers. But it is deemed advisable to take a dif- ferent tone ; and HUME'S history is quoted for the fact, that some of the most signal attacks on CHARLES the First's prerogative were carried by a very slender majority—the famous " Remon- strance" by eleven votes only; whereas Lord MELBOURNE is sup- ported by a majority of between thirty and forty. This manner of treating the subject proves this, if nothing else, that in the opinion of the Tories themselves, it will require an arduous struggle to support the House of Peers in its present powers of mischief. It is a stale trick of political partisans to misrepresent the views of their antagonists. Thus, Blackwood argues as if' the question at issue were the demolition of the Upper Chamber and the esta- hl shment of a Republic; whereas, all that is sought for is such an alteration in the constitution of the House of Lords as shall insure its permanence as well as its usefulness and respectability in the eyes of the Nation. But even the smallest measure of Reform in this direction is opposed; and we are gravely assured, that if the present Conservative majority is overwhelmed by a creation of Liberal Peers' " it is utterly impracticable that freedom can exist a year." Just in the same spirit and with the same wise forecast, it was laid down as an incontrovertible truth, that
• " the sun of England would set for ever" on the passing of the Catholic Relief Bill, and that the Constitution would be at death's door if the execrable Reform Bill were carried. Yet here we am, Tories and all, alive and vigorous—the Lords more rampant than ever, and the sun of England as bright as usual at the end of October. With this experience of the Tory prophets, the People are not likely to be frightened by their predictions. When any change, disagreeable to any party, is reasonable in itself, it is usual to mystify the subject by assuming that its con- comitants will be injurious. Thus it is asserted that a Reform of
• the Peers will end in deposing the King and uprooting the Aris- tocracy. By the way, until the Orange plot is cleared up, we think that little should be said by the CUMBERLAND faction about deposing the King. But let that pass. We are anxious to know what cause there is to anticipate the threatened disasters ; for we laugh at the idea of reenacting the horrors of the French Revo- lution of the last century, in England ; and until it shall appear that WILLIAM the Fourth is as arbitrary, faithless, and besotted in his notions of kingly power, as CHARLES the First, we shall continue to think alarms at the prospect of another Long Parlia- ment and Royal execution equally ridiculous. The fact is un- d ubted, that the People of England are not only firm in their allegiance to WILLIAM the Fourth, but that they are determined to secure the rightful succession of VICTORIA the First, against all the traitors who may lurk under Orange or any other colours. In order to establish a probability that the violent proceedings .a the CROMWELL party in England, or the Revolutionists of 1794 in France, are likely to be repeated by the English Re- formers of 183a, some similarity in the circumstances of the times must be shown. Now, although we are no apologists for Tory government, yet we cannot pretend that the mass of the people of this country have been goaded into desperation by the tyranny of their rulers, as the French were for a long period by the oppres- sions of the old Bourbons : there is consequently no motive for such signal vengeance as the French took. Again, there is no attempt at illegal taxation—no seizure of Members of Parliament —no LAUD or STRA.FFORD-DO: broken oaths of a treacherous King—to make good a parallel between 1835 and 1640. And when it is also remembered that the People have in the Reform Act an instrument of peaceful and lawful change, the tempta- tion to violence appears wholly wanting. Therefore, we repeat, it is idle to attempt to scare off the Reformers from a practical good, by dire forebodings of evil, which are only present to the diseased imaginations of alarmists, or are simulated by the hy- pocritical defenders of abuses in the State. The writer in Blackwood labours to persuade his readers, that a purely Democratic Government is more likely to degenerate into a Despotism than a Monarchy or an Oligarchy. But that is not the question at issue ; which is simply, whether the House of' Peers shall become responsible to the Nation for the exercise of its legislative authority, or whether there is to be a constant state of collision between the Upper and Lower Chambers. Supposing, however, that we had to choose between a Democracy, an Oli- garchy, and an Absolute King, as lovers of freedom, we should without hesitation clurose the first ; for nothing seems to us more absurd and inconsistent with experience, than the assertion of Blackwood, that "it is hereditary descent which tempers the rigour and checks the selfishness of absolute power," while "rotation in office" has a contrary tendency. We should say that frequent election, by the People, was the most sure method of rendering the governing power subservient to the national advantage—at any rate to the advantage of' the majority. Strict responsibility we take to be the best security for good conduct on the part of the rulers of a country, to whatever class they may belong : the Tories must effect a miraculous change in our nature before they can destroy the irresistible tendency of mankind to abuse power above control.
Fully sensible of the dangers of the position which the Peers now occupy, and of the necessity of regaining some of the popular favour they have lost, the author of the paper in Blackwood re- commends their Lordships to "prepare, and pass through the Upper Thaise, a number of bills having a practically beneficial, but no democratic tendency," and to throw upon the Commons " the odium of rejecting such measures because they have not a revolutionary character,'? This is, no doubt, very cunning; but it will puzzle the Lords, with all their dexterity, to pass beneficial measures for a nation of twenty-five millions of people, and only about five hundred nobles, that have not a democratic—which is only another word for popular—tendency. And it might so happen, that the Commons would make improvements on their Lordships' bills, which it would be alike unpleasant for the Lords to pass and hazardous to reject. In that case, where would be the advantage of this notable plan for gaining popularity ? No—the Lords cannot stave off Reform by any Parliamentary juggle.
Previous page
