-

II.

1713.

Fourth, we find them, at this latter period, amount CHAP. to 390, including four Spiritual and twenty-eight Temporal Representative Peers from Ireland an increase, certainly, not at all more than commensurate with the improvement of properties and the increase of population. In fact, the proportion between the Peers and the population will be found nearly the same at both periods. Were such limits to be outstepped in any very great degree, the result could not fail to be felt injuriously by the landed interest, as withdrawing considerable proprietors from the representation of the counties, and throwing that representation into inferior hands.

Of the 207 Peerages which existed at the accession of George the First, not more than fifty-two remained unaltered at the death of George the Fourth. But the rest were by no means all extinctions. Many appear changed only from promotions in rank as, for example, the Earls of Exeter and Salisbury; and, on the other hand, several are continued in collateral branches, and under lower but more ancient titles, as was the case, for instance, with the Dukedom and Earldom of Shrewsbury. It may not be undeserving of notice as a singularity, that though, in 1714, the body of Peers was so much smaller than in 1830, a greater number of them held the rank of Dukes.

The House of Commons then, and throughout that century, consisted of 558 Members; 513 being sent from England, and 45 from Scotland. It is well

CHAP. worthy of observation, how large a number of II. the family interests and local ties which still 1718. exist, or, at least, which existed before Lord

Grey's administration, were in force at this early period. We find, in this Parliament, a Drake returned for Amersham, a Grimston for St. Albans, a Whitmore for Bridgnorth, a Musgrave for Carlisle, a Cholmondeley for Cheshire, a Bathurst for Cirencester, a Bankes for Corffe Castle, a Lowther for Cumberland, a Wynn for Denbigh, a Mundy for Derby, a Foley for Droitwich, and another Foley for Hereford, a Hervey for Bury St. Edmund's, a Mostyn for Flint, an Eliot for St. Germains, a Berkeley for Gloucestershire, a Brownlow for Grantham, an A'Court for Heytesbury, Lord Hinchinbrook for Huntingdon, Sir Edward Knatchbull for Kent, a Sibthorp for Lincoln, a Walpole for Lynn, a Wentworth for Malton, a Bruce for Marlborough, a Vaughan for Merioneth, Thomas Cartwright for Northamptonshire, a Fitzwilliam for Peterborough, an Edgcombe for Plympton, a Fleetwood for Preston, a Cocks for Reigate, a Vernon for Stafford, a Cecil for Stamford, a Dowdeswell for Tewkesbury, a Greville for Warwick, and a Forester for Wenlock.* These hereditary seats in Parliament, combining in some degree the permanence of Peerages with the popularity of Elections- these feelings of mutual kindness, which

See a list of this House of Commons in the Parliamentary History, vol. vi. p. 1246. The list is, however, incorrect in some particulars; and thus, for instance, does not contain the name of Steele. He was member for Stockbridge. (Hist. of Europe for 1713 and 1714, p. 265.)

bound together our wealthy gentry and their poorer neighbours, and brought them into frequent and friendly intercourse - these bulwarks against any sudden and overwhelming tide of popular delusion appear to me to have been one of the main causes of the good working of our ancient constitution, and, still more, of its long duration. Thanks, in great measure, to them, the constitution of England might long be compared to its country, -smooth yet not uniform, diversified yet not rugged, equally removed from the impracticable heights of democracy or the dead level of despotism! *

In support of this opinion I may be permitted to observe, that, in the times of Queen Anne as in ours, all the eminent statesmen of the age, with scarcely one exception, owed to the smaller boroughs, now disfranchised, either their introduction into public life, or their refuge during some part of it. Lord Chancellor Cowper sat for Beralston, Lord Chancellor King for the same place, Harley for Tregony, Craggs afterwards for the same, Walpole for Castle Rising, Steele for Stockbridge, Addison for Malmesbury, Prior for East Grinstead, Stanhope for Wendover, Lord Chesterfield for St. Germains, Pulteney for Heydon, Shippen for Bramber, and Bolingbroke for Wotton

* Dante says of Cesena, though in a different sense from that of a balanced constitution

"Cosi com 'ella siè tra 'l piano e 'l monte

"Tra tirannia si vive e stato franco."

F

Inf. c. 27. v. 53.

CHAP.

II.

1713.

CHA P. Basset! Such were the brilliant results of our late

II.

1713.

representative system. We have now irrevocably cut off the fountain head. But we wisely expect that the stream will not cease to flow!

I am not, however, a blind and indiscriminate admirer of our former Parliamentary constitution. Its most indefensible part, I mean the sale and purchase of seats, may be traced at a much earlier period than is commonly supposed. When Mr. Hallam states that this practice is never mentioned in any book that he remembers to have seen, of an earlier date than 1760*, he, for once, departs from his usual accuracy. Thus, for instance, we find Lady Mary Montagu write to her husband in 1714, when he wished to come into Parliament, 66 Perhaps it will be the best way to deposit a certain sum in some friend's hands, and buy some little Cornish borough." Thus also, "it is notorious," said the Earl of Dorset, in Parliament, when arguing against the system of triennial elections, "that that great number of persons have "no other livelihood than by being employed in "bribing corporations."+

66

Reports of the speeches in either House, which now exercise so powerful an influence upon the public mind, were at this period almost unknown. We find, indeed, some account of striking sentences, or the principal arguments of a few Parlia

• Constitut. Hist. vol. iii. p. 402.

+ Letters, vol. ii. p. 146. ed. 1820. When shall we have a complete and correct edition of that charming correspondence? Parliamentary History, vol. vii. p. 297.

II.

1713.

mentary leaders. But, in the first place, these do CHAP. not seem to have been brought before the public by a daily press; and, secondly, it is scarcely an exaggeration to say, that the record of a single protracted debate at the present time is longer than the record of a whole session in the reign of Queen Anne. Strangers, also, were much more frequently excluded than at present; and questions of foreign policy especially, were often (as now in North America) debated with closed doors. In the Parliamentary History for March, 1714, we find that the Commons having the day before made an order for clearing the House of all strangers, not excepting the Peers, it was moved in the Lords to make the like order, without excepting the Commons. But this motion was successfully opposed by the Duke of Argyle, who said, very much in the style of a courtier, "It is for the honour of this august assem"bly to show that they are better bred and have "more complaisance than the Commons!" A strange argument for legislators!

Still less was there at this period any publication of the lists of the divisions. In 1696, the printing and circulating the names of a minority in the House of Commons had been unanimously voted a breach of privilege, and "destructive of the freedom " and liberties of Parliament."* It may, however, be doubted whether the just responsibility of members to their constituents was thereby at all impaired ;

* Commons' Journal, vol. xi. p. 572.