On this page

• Text (1)

  Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

  • 

    Untitled Article

• Transcript

  • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

    Untitled Article

    there would be a landed Aristocracy ; the new landlords would have a real not a pretended stake in the country ; we should be governed by the rich * since that is so great an advantage ; and at least the land , in which we are al * so deeply interested , would be in the hands of men , who , instead of ruining i *

    for posterity in order to have this year a few more pounds to spend , could afford to lay out money without any immediate return for the increase of its productiveness at a distant period . Though there are many reasons for desiring this change , we are not anxious to see it ; let the existing race of landlords save themselves if they can ; but it must be honestly . We will not help them to pay their debts with a slice off the loaf on every man ' s table .

    We have but one observation to add . Such questions as these are tests of the sufficiency of the Reform Bill ; they gauge , if we may be permitted the metaphor , the strength of the popular influences in the House of Commons . When we say , that all the people ' s representatives should be elected by the people , we are told that the influence of the people , is the influence of the numerical majority ; that minorities have rights , and t . iat unless particular classes are allowed to have representatives as well as the people , the majority will not be satisfied with justice , but will demand injustice ; will not content

    themselves with security against being plundered by minorities , but will insist upon plundering the minorities in their turn . Be it so . Produce to us then a Parliament which holds the balance even ; which obliges each party to be content with justice , and allows neither to plunder the other ; and we will acknowledge that the Parliament is reformed enough . At present it is proposed to free the immense majority from the most insupportable of their burthens , the most flagrant of their injuries ; this is refused , avowedly

    for the pecuniary benefit of the present landowners , and the refusal is backed by a majority of 312 to 155 . The interest , or supposed interest of the landowners , therefore , is an overmatch for obvious justice and the interest of all the rest of the community together , by more than two to one . Here is a case for a further Parliamentary Reform , which the stupidest can understand . We demand , then , further Reform . We demand it on the ground , not of any preconceived theory , but of the recorded failure of the present experiment . The Reform Bill has been tried , and proved wholly insufficient .

    To Mr . Poulett Thomson , Mr . Littleton , Mr . Ellice , Lord Howick , and the other Members of the House connected with the Ministry , who spoke or voted in favour of Mr . Hume ' s motion , belongs the praise of the seraph Abdiel , —that of submitting to temporary defeat in a cause certain of ultimate triumph . Lord Althorp did not give his vote to the cause , but he gave it his good word , saying , with much naivete , that he voted against it , but could not speak against his own conviction . Perhaps a time will come , when he will think it as impossible to vote against his conviction , as to speak against it .

    \ 2 th March . Political Oaths . —Mr . CT Conn ell has had the merit of being trie first to speak out , we mean in Parliament , what every rational person thinks , that oaths of office , a ^ d oaths taken by Members of Parliament , are worthless formalities , which do bo good whatever , and much harm . His declaration drew forth adhesions from several Members , in particular an animated one from Dr . Lushington , who brought upon himself a sarcastic reply from Mr . Stanley , by the strength of his commendations of bold policy . The lesson to Ministers was good , though the occasion scarcely required it ; where would be the boldness of abolishing these frivolous ceremonies ? It is not courage that is wanted , but common sense .

    When you require a man , before he is admitted into Parliament , or accepts an office , to swear that he will not attempt to change the existing form ° f government , or to destroy the Church , or some particular institution in the State ; is it supposed that you ever in reality prevent the nation from Polishing their Constitution or their Church , if they cease to think them essential to the public well-being ? It would be monstrous , if one generation could thus tie up the hands of all succeeding ages , and impose its institutions

    Untitled Article

    P olitical Oaths . 245

• Citation
  • Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), April 2, 1834, page 245, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2632/page/13/