X.

CHAP. "trusting those whom it has invested with any part "of the supreme power, since such distrust would "render the exercise of that power precarious and

1719.

impracticable." * I may add, that while the advantages of the King's prerogative to create Peers are constant and increasing, the danger of its abuse is extremely rare. During the peaceful reigns of the four Georges such an idea was never at any moment entertained by any statesman. It was reserved for the tumultuous times which preceded and which followed them. And on the whole, I would no more forego the benefits of the Royal prerogative from the possibility of its misuse, than I would prohibit navigation to prevent the danger of shipwrecks!

For these reasons I believe that the Peerage Bill of 1719 was a narrow-minded, violent, and baneful measure, founded on mistaken principles, and tending to dangerous results. If it be asked on whom the blame of having planned it should mainly rest, it will be found stated by most of the later writers, such as Coxe t, that the measure was projected by Lord Sunderland. That statesman certainly pressed the bill with great warmth, and had a stronger interest in it, since the animosity of the Prince of Wales was especially and personally levelled at himself amongst the Ministers. But on the other hand, I am bound not to omit that, in the debates of the House of Commons at the time, Lord Stanhope was

* Blackstone's Comment., book i. ch. vii. See also book iv. ch. ii. sect. 7.

+ Memoirs of Walpole, vol. i. p. 116.

X.

attacked as the projector of the measure; and that CHAP. amidst the unpopularity of the Bill, the charge was never denied by himself or by his friends.

If we next inquire to whom the praise of defeating this measure is most due, there can I think be no doubt that it belongs almost solely and exclusively to Walpole. We learn from Speaker Onslow, that when the Whigs in opposition held a meeting at Devonshire House during the recess to consider the course they should pursue upon this subject, the whole body appeared either favourable to the bill or despairing of any successful opposition to it. Very many considered it as a sound Whig measure to restrain a prerogative against which they themselves had repeatedly inveighed, and protested that they could not with any show of decency oppose it. Lord Townshend himself had already in the House of Lords approved its principle, and several other Peers were not averse to the increased importance which it would confer upon themselves. On the whole, it was the general opinion of the meeting that the bill should be permitted to pass without opposition. Walpole alone stood firm. He declared that this was the only point on which they could harass the Government with effect, and that he saw a spirit rising against it amongst the usual supporters of the administration, and especially the independent country gentlemen. One of these, he said, a member of the House of Commons, he had overheard declaring to another with many oaths that though his estate was no more than 8007. a year, and though he had no pretension to the

1719.

X.

1719.

CHAP. Peerage for himself, yet he would never consent to the injustice of a perpetual exclusion to his family. "Such a sentiment," added Walpole with his usual sagacity and foresight, "cannot fail to make its way. "It will have a strong effect upon the whole body "of country gentlemen; and for my part, I am de"termined that if deserted by my party on this " question, I will singly stand forth and oppose it.” Walpole's declaration produced much altercation and resentment, and many attempts were made to shake his purpose; but finding him firm, his friends gradually came round to his opinion, and at length agreed to act with him as a body, — to take no division on the ministerial project in the Lords, but to resist it in the Commons.

At the opening of the Session on the 23d of November, the Peerage Bill was announced by the following expressions of the King's Speech: "As "I can truly affirm that no prince was ever more "zealous to increase his own authority than I am "to perpetuate the liberty of my people, I hope

66

you will think of all proper methods to establish "and transmit to your posterity the freedom of "our happy Constitution, and particularly to secure "that part which is most liable to abuse. I value myself upon being the first who hath given you "an opportunity of doing it; and I must recom"mend it to you to complete those measures which "remained imperfect the last Session." Two days afterwards the bill was brought forward in the Lords by the Duke of Buckingham, to whom it had been entrusted by the Government, probably be

X.

1719.

cause the Duke being a vehement Tory, his support CHAP. might be expected to gain some votes from that party in the House of Commons. The measure was the same as that proposed last Session; but in order to conciliate the Commons, the Ministers engaged to their friends that in case of the bill passing the Lords would consent to part with their privilege of SCANDALUM MAGNATUM, and permit the Commons to administer an oath, and that the King would give up the prerogative of pardoning after an impeachment." mere trifles," observes Mr. Hallam, "in comparison with the innovation projected."*

According to previous arrangement, the Peerage Bill appears to have encountered no opposition in the Lords (except a speech from Earl Cowper), and it passed through all its stages in a very few days. But far different was its reception in the Commons. On the 8th of December, it having been read a second time, the debate was taken on the question, "That this bill be committed." The fate of the British Constitution seemed to hang suspended in the balance. On the ministerial side, the chief speeches were those of Craggs, Lechmere, and Aislabie; and though scarcely any par ticulars are preserved of them, we find them called by high authority "very able performances."+

Constit. Hist. vol. iii. p. 322. For the inducement held out by Ministers, see Lord Middleton's Minutes, Coxe's Walpole, vol. ii. p. 172.

+ Speaker Onslow's Remarks.

N N

X.

1719.

CHAP. Amongst the adversaries of the bill, the ingenuity and talent of Steele were as powerfully shown, and more fully reported. But by far the most splendid speech on that occasion was that of Walpole; and it may, in fact, be doubted if any harangue of so much eloquence and effect had ever yet been delivered in the House of Commons; whether we judge of it by the impression which we are told it produced, or by that which the records of it make upon ourselves. He began with great spirit: “That the usual path to the temple of honour had "been through the temple of virtue; but, by this "bill, it was now to be only through the sepulchre "of a dead ancestor." He inveighed against Stanhope, who," he said, "having got into the "House of Peers, is now desirous to shut the door "after him;" he touched with infinite caution and address on the unhappy breach in the royal family; he drew a striking picture of the evils and injustice of the Scotch clauses of the bill. In his skilful hands an argument was derived even from his own party tactics, that no division should be taken in the other House; "for surely," he urged, "the great unanimity with which this bill has passed "the Lords ought to inspire some jealousy in the "Commons." On the dangers to the constitution and to freedom he enlarged with all the eloquence of truth: "That this bill will secure the liberty of "Parliament I totally deny; it will only secure a

Walpole's reported speech was in great measure compiled from his own memoranda (Coxe's Walpole, vol. i. p. 125.) The same, I suspect, was also the case with Steele's.