Year: 1869




the serious attention of Parliament to measure
of constitutional reform which has for upward
of twenty years been subject of sOlicitude on
his part, but which has hitherto been opposed
with such bitterness by the dominant party in
the House of Lords as to give no opportunity
for candid discussion Of its merits On the 9Th
inst, his bill authorizing the creation of Life
" Peerages" was read for the first time OF
the manner of its reception we have no intel
ligence. That it will be violently resisted is
almost certain, and, unless the obstinate temper
of the Tory peers has greatly changed within
the last fifteen years, its final passage is ex-
tremely doubtful. There is, however, some
reason to hope that the self-cOnfdence of that
conservative body has been sufficiently shaken
by recent events to insure a fair hearing of
proposition based upon obvious legal necessity
and supported by intelligent public opinion
throughout the country.


The need of a system of peerages for lie
arises from the fact that while the Lords as
sumo all the functions of court OF final ap-
peal, they have for years been found incom-
petent to exercise them. 1t is needless to say
that by the great body of the House, no at
tention is given to legal questions the law not
being study to which British noblemen are
extravagantly addicted; and the lawyers VINO
have become peers by accession to office have
not only been few in number, but have IN
most cases been incapactated by age from the
proper discharge of their duties The principle
of final arbitration by the peers, at any time a
manifest absurdity, became the grossest mock
ery when it was found that important causes


h. dplISlOlS
of numerous courts composed of judges holding
the highest legal rank set aside, by perhaps
couple of elderly barons whose titles rested,
after ALL quite as much upon political as upon
legal foundations. Attention was first called TO
the imperfection of this mode of administering
Justice by Sir Harris Nicholas, in trenchant
letter to the Duke of Wellington, some forty
wears ago, but no practical attempt to improve
it was made until 1851, when Lord John Rus
sell, then Prime Minister, suggested the expe-
dient of q life barOny TO an eminent
Judge, who, however, declined to be the
subject of the experiment, not in the ap-
prehenson of any legal obstacle but be-
cause he foresaw the resistance of the
House of Lords, and was unwilling to be the
first TO confront it, Early in 1856, Lord
Palmerston's Government of which Lord John
Russell had recently been a member. and by
whose influence this second effort was de-
termined upon, induced Sir James Parke to ac-
cept the title of Wensleydale, Baron of the
United Kingdom, for life, and letters patent
were issued nominating him to the peerage.
This step was no sooner taken than the House
of Lords rose with almost unparalleled unan-
Unity, and with an energy unknown for many
years before, and never since displayed, to re-
pel what was denounced as an invasion or
their privileges. 1t was proclaimed unconsti-
tutional, and an abuse of the royal prerogative;
and every argument that historical research
could bring TO bear or ingenuity could devise
was arrayed against it. Lord Derby, III one OF
his most elaborate addresses, went to the
length Of declaring that if such precedent
were once established, the doom of the British
aristocracy was sealed.


In reply to technical objections, il was shown
by the Government that titles for life had been
conferred by numerous Sovereigns, from the
time of Richard H. to that of George H.; In
some instances upon fayorites and kindred in
others upon mistresses, and in others, again.
upon royal bastards and it was reasonably
enough urged that if the right of the Crown
remain unquestioned in vicious and unwhoe-
some cases like these, no remonstrance should
in decency be raised against its exercise in the
interest of public welfare. To prove the
perfect legality of the action. the evidence of
Coke, Blackstone, and other distinguished
authorities was invoked. Feeling their weakness
on this point, the Tory peers next submitted
that the recognition of such system would be
an acknowledgment of power by which future
Ministers might at any time force majority
upon the Upper House, and destroy its inde-
pendent character but this was parried by
recalling the enormous addition to the peerage
hastily made by Mr.. Pitt, at the time of the
Irish Union, and thus demonstrating that on
unscrupulous Government could as easily swamp
the Lords by means of new creations in
the regular way as under the proposed
new system. Finding the moral strength
of the argument entirely against them, the OPP
position finally demanded to know why,
in Lord Wensleydale's case, the particular
issue need be agitated at all, inasmuch rs that
gentleman had no male heir, and was certain
at his advanced age to have none, and could,
therefore, be ennobled according to the usage,
without danger of the title outlving him. To
this it was replied that the especial object was
TO create q precedent, for the reason that
although exigency required occasional additions
to the legal strength of the House of Lords, the
fortunes of such gentlemen as might be quail
fed for the elevation would seldom be sulli-
cient to enable them to found q hereditary
peerage, vast wealth being considered through
out the land, and above all 10y the
Tory peers themselves, essential to the sup
port of so high dignity. 1t does not appear,
however, that any nobleman felt called upon
TO repudiate the base and barbarous PROPOSE
tion that men Of brilliant ability and profound