360 Parliamentary Reform. \_ APRIL, 



period stated by Sir Robert, was ten years after this, when the French 

 revolution was shaking the allegiance of the subject in every part of 

 Europe, when its singular success buoyed up the hopes of party, and 

 when the nation was really in an anxious state, and on the verge of war. 

 In November 1792. At that period the celebrated and unfortunate 

 Condorcet predicted the downfal of England as inevitable unless total 

 reform were instantly to take place. " Since the explosion of Liberty in 

 France/' said this writer, <e a hollow fermentation has shewn itself in 

 England ; and has more than once disconcerted the ministerial oper- 

 ations. Popular societies have been established in the three kingdoms, 

 and a parliamentary reform has been talked of, just in the same manner 

 as we talked of the states-general at the end of the year 1788, in France. 

 It is well known what a number of persons there are who think rightly, 

 and daily enlighten the people of England, and whose opinions furnish 

 subjects for useful disquisitions. This people, who at once fear and desire 

 such a revolution as ours, will necessarily be drawn along by those 

 courageous and enlightened persons, who always determine the first 

 steps ; the opening of the session of parliament which approaches, will 

 infallibly become the occasion of the reforms which are the most urgent, 

 such as those which regard the national representation. From thence 

 to the entire establishment of a republic, the transition will be the less 

 tedious, because the foundations of liberty have long existed in England." 

 Yet this crisis, such as it was announced, passed away, the popular out- 

 cry was loud, but it was wisely resisted, and the country still stood. 

 But the uproar for the change of the Constitution had been raised at sub- 

 sequent periods, and with as many ominous declarations of public ruin. 

 It was raised in 1819, and seconded by almost open insurrection in the 

 manufacturing districts, and it was put down. Again in 1823, when the 

 public pressures were severe, it was raised; and again it was put down; 

 it was put down without concession, and there is nothing in the present 

 state of affairs, nor in the nature of the clamour, that should make the 

 sacrifice of the Constitution necessary now more than then. 



The country is now filled with an outcry for reform. But there is 

 nothing in the present state of public affairs half so threatening as at any 

 one of the periods in which the outcry had been raised and safely put 

 down. There is no unpropitious harvest, no. sudden failure of trade, 

 nor of the national resources of any kind ; there is no war. The manu- 

 facturers are in full work, and agriculture is rapidly reviving. What 

 then has at this moment given such an excitement to the advocates for 

 change ? The three days of Paris ! The evidence that the populace 

 could overpower the force of the government when it pleased, the proof 

 of the popular power. This had stirred up the hopes of every partizan 

 of change in England, a result which had always been in some degree 

 felt in this country in all cases of foreign revolution. But let the outcry 

 be what it may, the duty of a House of Commons is to deliberate for 

 the public good, not to be influenced blindly by the popular will. They 

 are representatives, not delegates, councillors consulting for the whole, 

 not pleaders for the interests of particular places. The words of the 

 King's writ are " That the returning officer should cause election to be 

 made," not of persons to treat about the affairs of London or Liverpool, 

 but " about certain arduous and urgent affairs concerning us, the state, 

 and defence of our kingdom and the church." 



The proposed change in the system of elections takes it for granted 



