House of Commons, and to possessing unhallowed property in boroughs; and these were deemed sufficiently influential to raise the scale against the minister, if the unbiassed Peers, pro and con in sentiment, as was supposed to be the case, divided with a small majority on the ministerial side. Throwing into the side of Opposition the holders of close boroughs, it was feared that a majority, but of no great amount, would crush the measure. The tendency of feeling among many of the Peers is the extreme of aristocratic, and not a few make pretensions of an undefined superiority over their fellow-subjects, unconnected with that natural influence which wealth, if they be wealthy, confers upon them in common with property in general, unconnected with their situation in the House of Peers as legislators,—a sort of ridiculous consequence which generates a feeling of fancied superiority. This feeling has created for every question relating to popular liberty, in times past, the reverse of a kindly reception in the House of Peers among that portion of its members who have more of prejudice, and lack of sound judgment, than becomes legislators. It is not, it cannot, it must not be forgotten by the people of England, that so great were the aristocratic prejudices of the House of Peers in 1689, that when James II. was expelled by the House of Commons and by the people from a nation whose liberties he had outraged, he ranked half the House of Lords, save two, among his friends,-enemies to the freedom of the British people! Three voices more, and the people of England, the House of Commons, and half the House of Peers, must have submitted to bend the neck to despotism!-and the Electors of Hanover have still been petty German princes! We might cite other instances of this sympathy with arbitrary feeling in the House of Peers, but one is enough. In the present instance, however, the Bishops, save two, ranged themselves against the feeling of the country, and aided to throw out the Bill. Now their having seats in the House of Peers at all, where temporal and spiritual affairs mingle, is an anomaly; and it was to a proper jealousy of so heterogeneous a proceeding that our forefathers were very near keeping them out altogether. How much then does it become them to refrain from interfering in great popular questions on either side, how much less to put themselves conspicuously forward, and beard the feelings of 20,000,000 of people; two-thirds of whom, though free political subjects, do not acknowledge the creed which confers temporal power upon them. The situation of the Bishops respecting the Reform Bill, was one of peculiar delicacy, and the ground they would have gained by refraining altogether from interference is lost, and more than its advantages flung into the scale against them. They took their part, however, and they must bear the result. They have weakened their hold where it was desirable it should be strengthened. The majority of those who voted, did it, we shall no doubt be told, from a conviction of their doing right. Even a Philpotts might for once have felt, that political heterodoxy which may involve half a dozen opposite credences at the same moment, is perfectly compatible with orthodoxy in religion. The ecclesiastical conscience, of all consciences, is the easiest of adaptation to the

owner's immediate exigencies. We have heard, too, whispers of treachery and deception by some who bear the sacred garb. Are we to credit them?

The mode in which the Bill was treated in the House of Lords, must impress the public with no agreeable feeling of their Lordships' courtesy or good manners. Their Lordships exercised an undoubted right in throwing out the Bill, if they chose. The free exercise of their discretion belongs to them by the Constitution; but whether in the present instance they acted either with good policy as respects themselves or the country, is another question. Á proportion of them clearly acted on the side of self-interest; and we have yet to learn, notwithstanding a good deal of cant upon the subject among themselves, that a Lord is less governed by selfish motives than other men,- -we believe he is to the full as much under their government. The Bill was scarcely received with decency by the Opposition. The admitted demand for Parliamentary Reform by the country at large, the petitions which crowded in, the voice of a majority of the House of Commons amounting to 109, after long and anxious deliberation and debate, could not repress impatient indications of the spirit with which it was regarded by its irreconcilable enemies. Some semblance of temper might, for good manners' sake, have been preserved. A measure supported by so large a proportion of their Lordships, by the Commons, and people of England, and by the authority of the King himself, was entitled to be dealt with respectfully, especially as the Opposition was safe, knowing its strength: but what was the fact? Though a proportion of the non-content Lords would allow some Reform to be needful, (such a minimum no doubt as they alone might think fit to grant,) they, so far from suffering the Bill to go into a Committee, where they might have clipped it down until it was as useless as they could desire for any good purpose, abruptly moved that "the Bill be rejected!" Lord Wharncliffe seemed scarcely aware of the impression such a motion so worded must produce-that it would naturally fill every reflecting mind with just indignation, even in the remotest corners of the land. He subsequently asked leave of the House to amend his motion, which was very properly opposed by Earl Grey, Lord Holland, and others, on the ground that the motion and words were not inadvertent. A portion of the Opposition, among them the Dukes of Wellington and Buckingham, strongly urged the propriety and necessity of changing them; and those who had opposed the change, very mistakenly in our opinion, gave way.

We Te may here be excused for explaining why we use the words very mistakenly." Lord Wharncliffe we believe to be a sincere

man.

His Lordship too concedes the necessity of some Reform, as well as a few other of the opposing Lords, though they will not condescend to explain the limit to which they are willing the measure should extend. Many of the moderate Tories profess the same doctrine. It happens unfortunately for themselves that their party is nothing by itself. The moderate Tories are not strong enough to face the Whigs, and to battle the question of power alone. When the Duke of Wellington carried the measure of Catholic Emancipation, it was

by the aid of the Whigs; and that step led to the Duke's downfall as a minister. The bigoted, prejudiced, ignorant, purblind Ultra-Tories, withdrew their support from his Grace, because he would not condescend to be their tool in every thing, as former ministers had been ; and when his Grace was forced to resign, these stupid bigots, when too late, returned him back their support. There is no doubt but the hostility of Sir Robert Peel and the late ministers to disfranchising East Retford, was owing to the necessity of conciliating this party, though at the expence of their better judgment. We must imagine Sir Robert to be a very different man from what we believe him to be, if he had so little knowledge of public feeling as not to have perceived the expediency of transferring, from corrupt boroughs to large places, the elective franchise. The Ultra-Tories, however, will be the dictating party. Their influence is paramount, for most of them hold close boroughs, or are connected with borough interests; and they therefore dictate to the whole Tory body much more than they would be suffered to do on any other score, save that of influence arising from their usurpation of popular rights. Their measures are always the result of mutual deliberation; and they are not men who stickle much in niceties, as regards the effect any step may have on the public mind, if their own corrupt objects are in jeopardy. This party will have no Reform at all: they would rather exercise their power in strengthening their position in the domains of the people. They would resist by brute force, if they dared, any innovation that had a chance of affecting themselves; and they exhibit, amid all this absence of respect for public feeling, so much absurdity, stupidity, and lack of the commonest political foresight, that the moderate part of the Opposition are at times scarcely able to disguise their contempt of the capacity of those for whom they are constrained to exhibit a deference to insure their weight as a party. We look upon the first wording of Lord Wharncliffe's motion to be the expression prompted by this party's feeling, and thoughtlessly adopted by his Lordship. They have no feeling for the House of Commons, for the nation, for the Sovereign-self is their pole-star.

In Lord Wharncliffe's speech nothing new was promulgated. He did not answer one point in Lord Grey's masterly exposition of the end and objects of the Bill. Lord Wharncliffe did not disguise that he believed the House of Commons stood in need of a check lest it should become too powerful, or, in other words, lest the popular interest (the whole end and design of its existence) should be extended through its means. By a natural inference his Lordship would have the influence of Peers exerted in returning members to counteract the end for which the Commons exist. We can make nothing else of his arguments. The Scotch system his Lordship admitted to want revision. He denied that petitions were to be taken as any evidence of a desire for Reform by a most felicitous mode of reasoning, and concluded by calling on the Church to oppose the measure. The Earl of Mansfield opposed the measure in toto, but there was no speech of any remarkable power on the side of the Opposition, save the Earl of Harrowby's. It was curious enough too,

that his Lordship's strongest argument for the excellence of the present system was most pregnant with reasons for a change. His Lordship said he was charged with being the patron of a nomination borough-Tiverton, with twenty-five corporation electors. Now his grandfather, an attorney-general, had been introduced to the borough by the Government for the time being, under the patronage of a merchant, who owned great part of the borough (it should be, we suppose, part of the twenty-five electors!); and the intimacy continued with his family until he Lord Harrowby came of age, when the twenty-five electors returned his Lordship to Parliament; and the connexion continued to his, Lord Harrowby's, children, though he had no land there. Such was the marvellous power of his Lordship's personal influence, that if a couple of nabobs had gone down there he should not have feared them. His Lordship forgot to say what favours thirteen or fourteen of these corporators had received from him-what situations for themselves or relatives-what young men had been pushed forward in the public service-one of the many modes in which such obligations are repaid. Now Tiverton has, we believe, 5000 or 6000 inhabitants, who share in none of these good things. Could there be a more cogent argument in favour of Reform, than such a connexion as that described by Lord Harrowby continuing to exist in a free country!

We should go into a useless length, and burthen our readers with repetitions, were we to notice the speeches separately. Before this Number of the Metropolitan appears, they will have had as much of them as they see worthy, by heart from the newspapers. It suffices to say, that able speeches were made on both sides, but that the Lord Chancellor's surpassed all; that with the exception of himself and Lord Plunkett, the law Lords cut the worst figure in the House. Lord Eldon talked in his usual strain, but said nothing to the purpose respecting the Bill; a good deal of himself, his birth, parentage, and education; his age, his legal opinions, his approaching end, and so forth, but did not cry. Lord Lyndhurst played his natural game, and on the present question his colour was Ultra-Tory. The House divided. Present-Content 128, Proxies 30-158. Noncontents 150, Proxies 49.-Majority against the second reading of the Bill, 41.

The House of Commons met on the 11th ult., when, in consequence of the rejection of the Reform Bill in the Lords, resolutions were passed declaratory of the regret of the House at the fate of the Bill, and expressive of the unabated confidence of the Commons"in the integrity, perseverance, and ability" of his Majesty's ministers" in introducing and conducting it." The House divided, 329 for the motion, aud 198 against it. Majority for ministers, 131.

The utter rejection of the Bill by the House of Lords, naturally produced a great sensation of disappointment throughout the country. Excesses much to be regretted have in some places been the result, but they originated with the lower classes. The feeling of the middle classes, and of those whose opinions are of the most importance, is exhibited in a very different manner. All are eager to discover what steps will be taken by Ministers in the present fearful

emergency. The House of Lords, whatever may have been the motives of the majority, have lost the public confidence. Questions will now be mooted, which, had a different course of conduct been pursued, would have slept for some time longer. The perverse determination to resist public opinion, legally and constitutionally expressed, will inevitably produce consequences which were not foreseen by those who rejected the Bill. The ground thus lost never can be regained. It is in vain for a few individuals self-endowed with political wisdom to resist the general voice. It is in vain for the members of the House of Lords, enemies of all Reform, who have been the means of flinging out the Bill, to flatter themselves that the recent disinclination to meet the wishes of the nation will be forgotten by it. Far better were it, that resisting those arbitrary principles which have become second nature to them, as belonging to past and not to present time, the non-content Lords had given something like a reflection on the consequences for their own sakes. We do not say for the sake of the nation,-that will take care of itself, but for the sake of preserving the respect of the people towards them. That House cannot defeat the march of events; it cannot stay the progress of mind, nor prevent whatever abuses have been admitted within the temple of aristocratic sanctity, from being dragged forth to the light. An ingenious writer, Mr. Inglis, has attributed the backwardness of many of the members of our aristocracy in information, and their invincible prejudices, to the system of education in our universities. That very little is learned in those places, compared to what might be taught, we are ready to admit. An individual who has made fair use of his time beyond their walls, has acquired more general and useful knowledge at twenty-two, than an Eton and University-man has at thirty. But except in the restricted system of education, and the enormous waste of human life in devoting so much of its term to one or two acquirements of no use to nine-tenths of the persons so educated, (except those intended for the Law and Church,) we do not see that the Universities are to blame. They are excellent places for study to those who choose to be studious; and most branches of learning are accessible there, though not regularly taught. The truth is, there has grown up with the English aristocracy, be the cause what it may, an overweening hauteur of conduct and manner exhibited by no other body in the civilized world, while it must not be denied that the people in past time have shown a constant deference towards it. This overweening conduct has gradually separated it not only from sympathy with the people, and a feeling for their interests, but has cramped and limited the acquirements of no inconsiderable portion of the whole, so that it is for ever in arrear of the spirit and intellect and information of the age in which it lives and moves. Fresh infusions into it from men who have distinguished themselves by their public services, younger sons of the gentry who have had to struggle alone in the road to fame and honour, have solely kept up a respect for its character beyond that which may be

In a pamphlet entitled "The present Political Crisis and its Causes;" well worthy perusal.