The Sun.
London, England, 1836-10-22 00:00:00

OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

The Edinburgh Review for October, just pub:-
Esher], ave.ils itself of an article on Lord Mahon s
Bistory to, discuss the question—which must every
day more and more occupy the public attention—of a
reform of the House of Lords. That the Upper
House can remain as it is no rational being can be-
lieve, whatever differs rice of opinion may exist as to
the proper remedy. The writer in the Edinburgh Re-
view repudiates the idea of the independence of the
Lords. In noticing the opinion expressed in a pamphlet
published in 1831, and attributed to a Noble Lord
who ions; filled a conspicuous place in the councils of
the State, that the Lords were entitled to " as full and
unrestricted a voice as. either of the other branches,"
the Reviewer observes—
To this sounding brass and tinkling cymbal,' we
reply, that our 'practical Constitution knows no such then,
retical independence ; that the Crown is controlled by
want of supplies, and the Commons by the fear of d2issolu-
lien ; and we ask the objector if he thinks it reasonable that
the Lords alone should be placed beyond ecntroul ? The
subordinate part they have acted during tb a last century has
kept their anomalous position out of sight. While they
indulged in gentle repose, with the occasional excitation of
a short debath—while they were content to remain, as
one of the wittiest of their number described them, ' a
hospital of incurables,' they escaped observation. But,
if they will emerge into 'notice, and take a more
bustling part in the daily Ousiness of the Government ; if,
like Faust, under the guidance of 111ephistophilcs, they are
seduced from their former seclusion and retiremer.l; into
restless and pernicious activity, they must expect to have
their pretensions canvassed and scrutinised with the same
strictness and severity as those of the other Members of the
Legislature. They are neither a self-constituted body, as
some of their flatterers have pretended—nor are they in-
vested with the power they possess for their own private
use and gratification. They form part of the State, which
was instituted for the common good of all. It is a mistake
to imagine that, unlike the other branches of the Lesgisla-
:ture, the House of Lords has remained always the same in
its character and spirit ; or that it has exercised at all
times the same power and influence ovr the Executive
Government. In the course of ages it has undergone as
many metamorphoses as some of the insect tribes in the
progress of a single year. Under the Plantagenets, though
a powerful antagonist to the rarone, it was to the people a
devouring caterpillar. During the iron domination of the
Tudors it sunk into torpidity, and became a chrysalis. It
leas been since a gaudy insect, with some propensity to sting.
It is to be hoped that it will not sting too deep, lest, like
others of the insect tribe, vitani in vulnere ponat."
The writer then examines the various projects which
have been submitted for " correcting the defects of the
Upper House, without impairing its efficiency as a va-
luable and useful part of the Government." The plan
of reducing the numbers by having Representative
Teers, in the same manner as for Ireland and Scotland:
is very properly repudiated. The limitation to Peers
possessed of lauded property, to a certain extent is also
objected to, on account of the difficulty of ascertaining
the amoint of debts and incumbrances on it. The
Reviewer objects to the election of the Upper House
from a list of candidates presented by the Crown that
" such elections, if popular, would give us a rival
House of commons, and, if committed to the more
opulent members of the community, that they would
end in a worse edition of the House of Lords. He
suggests 2 among other plans for gradually reducing the
number: and improving the character of the House of
Lords, that, leaving to the Crown its present pre-
rogative of creating Peers, no Peer claiming
by hereditary descent should sit and vote in
that assembly who had not been twice elected
unto the House of Commons, and sat in that
House for a certain number of sessions. " None
would find admission through the House of Com-
mons into tkre Upper House, but inert of inde-
pendent fe,rtune or of distinguished abilities. Those
who were; disqualified b 5 nature from discharging the
duty of legislators would be utterly excluded ; and
the House would be redeemed from the scandal of see-
ing proxies given for Peers who are hardly fit to
usunage their private affairs, and far less capable of
judging what is expedient or necessary for the public."
It is quite certain that something must be done with
the Peers. It is idle to call on the people to pro-
nounce their opinion on every measure in such an un-
equivocal manner as must place the Peers under the
necessity of passing it. It is well observed by Hume,
that all Governments exist by opinion. Public opi-
nion in Russia expresses itself by knocking the Czar
on the head ; and at Constantinople the Sultan,
when in collision with the opinion of his subjects,
is disposed of pretty much after the same manner.
'Unquestionably no Government can resist the voice
of an united people. But men form Constitutions,
in order to be freed from the necessity of general
risings ; arid the Constitution which leaves men
no other alternative, when they wish to carry
any measure, but to act en masse, may be
safely pronounced exceedingly defective. We must
have a Constitution in which the branches of
the Legislature shall move, without being driven
by the apprehension of popular section. The people
must provide for their da::4ly wants, and they
ought not be distracted from their concerns to
compel one branch of the Legislature to do its duty. If
there be such a vice in, the composition of that branch
that it will always act against the people, except when
compelled to act against its inclination by apprehension of
danger, this is -pronouncing sentence of condemnation
against it. The writer in the Review justly, we
think, supposes the Lords to have.provoked a colli-
sion unr.ler the impression of regaining their influence
in the House of Commons by changes in the elec-
toral body. In case of a dissolution the fate of the
country will be placed in the hands of the electo-
ral body. " Let it never be absent," says the writer,
ss from their thoughts that a majority of one in the
House of Commons -may undo in a single week all
that for years they bave been labouring to accomplish.
Let them recollect that as the Reform Bill was passed
by the King and by a majority of the two Houses,
so it may be repealed by the same authority." How-
ever, without reference to this contingency, it is quite
certain that, as the Reviewer justly observes, " the
two Houses cannot remain in their present position
for another session ; that the power of legislation can-
not be much longer suspended ; that the country can-
not con.t.inue under two hostile assemblies counter-
acting each other ; that one of them must give way—
spontaneously, if wise—under the influence of some
over-ruling necessity, if obstinate."—Morning Chron.
Our readars will have observed, that at the dinner
given in Ireland to one of his Majesty's Cabinet, and
in Scotland to his Attorney-General, the health of
O'Connell was ostentatiously given—at the first by the
Chairman—at the second by a high military officer,
who supports the Government. Does not this prove,
that it is at least useful, if not agreeable, to the Mi-
nisters to pay him all possible court, and to support
his credit with the people ? They absolutely con-
descend to flatter him as slaves do the tyrant whom
they fear; yet, if they could secure their power with-
out. his aid, there is not one of them that would not be
" brutal and bloody enough" to see him hanged with
pleasure The necessity of having the powers of the
Government, and the emoluments of office, in their
own hands, is the only maxim to which they adhere
with undeviating fidelity. For this they would either
pull down the church and the monarchy, or strenuously
support them—praise or punish O'Connell—indulge
or insult the`King—make or break a foreign alliance.
Every body knows, that if the ultra-Tories would but
have consented to some colourable reform in Parliament
that might have enabled Lord Grey to redeem, or, to
insist that he had redeemed, one of his pledges, he and
the Whigs would have eagerly jumped. into an alliance
'with them. The object of maintaining their own
power was the true Whig principle that measured the.
extent of their reform, and governed all its
The destruction of the Conservative party, that is, of
the rank, the wealth, and the intelligence of the coun-
try, is now their secondary object, as the energy and
consolidation of that party form the most efficient ob-
stacle to their determination of continuing in office.
Hence all their fury and falsehood, when at their dis-
loyal threepenny feasts they fall foul upon the Conser-
vative party, or any of their leaders. Hence the un-
blushing and unbridled audacity with which they de-
nounce Sir. Robert Peel, the Duke of Wellington,
'Lord Lyndhurst, as enemies of all rational reform—
knowing as they do full well, that the rational and
constitutional reforms meditated and proposed by these
illustrious statesmen have been frustrated hitherto by
nothing else but the
determination,,, of the Whig party