XOTES OF THE MONTH. 465 



our noble and honourable law-givers, as a reflection upon the wisdom 

 of our ancestors and consequently opposed. When railways and 

 steam coaches shall be as common as they are now rare, people will 

 look back with astonishment to think that the opposition of feeble 

 minds should so long have delayed this utility from the public. If 

 we look back upon former parliaments we see the same spirit of 

 advance characterizing the people, and the same slavish subser- 

 vience to old forms marking the aristocracy. In looking over 

 " Gray's Debates/' we find this feeling admirably exemplified in a 

 debate on a bill for building a bridge at Putney, on April 4th, 1671. 

 A Sir W. Thompson remarks on the walls, gates, and boundaries of 

 the city of London, " the which no man can increase or extend ; 

 these limits were set by the wisdom of our ancestors and God forbid 

 they should be altered. But, Sir, though these land marks can 

 never be removed I say never for I have no hesitation in stating 

 that when the walls of London shall no longer be visible, and Ludgale 

 is diminished, England itself will be nothing! though Sir, these 

 landmarks be indestructible except with the constitution of the 

 country, yet it is in the power of speculating theorists to delude the 

 minds of the people with visionary projects of increasing the skirts 

 of the city, so that it may even join Westminster !" 



Who does not see in our own times a lineal descendant, of this 

 twaddling old coxcomb in the person of Lord Eldon or Sir Robert 

 Inglis, or of a score more, who seem to have been created solely as a 

 check to all human improvement a millstone round the neck of the 

 swimmer, a clog to the fleet of foot? The same objections against 

 building Putney Bridge have been raised against the upsetting of 

 Old Sarum ! In those days the house likewise had its wags gen- 

 tlemen who could set the house in a roar ; but we who know that 

 honourable house are aware that it does not require the talent of a 

 Yorick to accomplish so desirable an end. On that same debate 

 touching Putney Bridge we find a Mr. Boscawen, a gentleman who 

 will be immediately recognized as the original of the present illus- 

 trious knight of the defunct Boroughbridge, the facetious Sir 

 Charles. In a cutting tone of irony this ancient Tom Fool remarks 

 -" perhaps some gentleman would find out that a bridge at West- 

 minster would be a convenience. Then other honourable gents 

 might dream that a bridge from the end of Fleet Market into the 

 fields at the opposite side would be a fine speculation; or who 

 knows," (chuckles the wag) "but at last it might be proposed to 

 arch over the river altogether, by building a couple more bridges, 

 one from the Palace at Somerset House, and another from the front of 

 Guildhall into Southwark !" (Great laughter) " Perhaps some hon. 

 gent might propose that one or two of these bridges should be built 

 of iron !" (Shouts of laughter) " For his part if this bill passed he 

 would move for bills to build bridges at Chelsea, Hammersmith, 

 Brentford, and a dozen other places besides !" (continued laughter). 

 How would this old twaddler about the " wisdom of his ancestors" 

 stare, if he could now behold those bridges, the mention of which 

 created such " roars of laughter," on the very plans he proposed, 

 and one actually of iron ! What a lesson is this for the Sir Robert 

 M. M. No. 88. 3 F 



