402 ITS LEGISLATIVE FAILURES. to play was a thankless and an ungracious one, which brought them no honour at the time, and could not secure them even the compensation of the grateful acknowledgement of posterity. Yet the thoughtful critic will admit that it was an eminently useful part. They interposed between the Radicals with their crude theories and the old Tories with their disastrous prejudices. They accomplished no heroic legislation, but they inscribed many admirable measures in the Statute-Book, contributing to the social welfare and religious freedom of the people. They refused to destroy, but they were careful to amend. This is just the work, however, which the public cannot appreciate. A great legislative reform, a reform on a colossal scale, they see and understand; but the minor improvements which facilitate the efficient action of the constitutional machinery, they cannot discern, and they do not value. So it naturally happened that the Radicals fell away from a Government which, in their eyes, did little or nothing; while the Conservatives grew more and more impatient of a Government which, in their eyes, was always doing something. And this unpopularity was increased by the administrative inefficiency which they undoubtedly exhibited, and their unfortunate inability to produce a good financier. When they fell in 1841, their fall was unaccompanied by a single expression of regret. No Ministry ever passed into the cold shade of Opposition amid such absolute indifference. To the observer it seemed most strange that they should have held their ground so long, when everybody was evidently so pleased at their retirement. Yet, after all, their failure was not so STRENGTH OF THE OPPOSITION. 403 much their own fault as the fault of the Peers, who set themselves from the first to neutralise their activity, and paralyse their legislative efforts. And in this unworthy task they easily succeeded, the Opposition being as overwhelmingly strong in eloquence and characters as in numbers. Ministers had against them, as Macaulay reminds us, Brougham, who from a dangerous friend had been converted into a mortal foe; the Duke, "with the highest character of any public man of the age"; Lyndhurst, Aberdeen, Ellenborough, and others, every one of whom was an overmatch for their best orator. And they had besides les gros bataillons in their front. observes, that an Upper Chamber which will accept from Ministers whom it detests no measure that has not behind it an irresistible mass of excited public opinion, has, sooner or later, the fate of those Ministers in its hands.* No doubt, the Liberals, under the leadership of a man of genius, who could have conceived and executed great measures, and have awakened by his eloquence the public sympathy in support of them, would have triumphed over every difficulty; but then, unfortunately, they could not at that time boast of such a leader. The Prime Minister was a man of considerable 66 For, on the one hand, the friction generated by the process of forcing a Bill through a reluctant House of Lords annoys and scandalises a nation which soon grows tired of having a revolution once a twelvemonth; and, on the other hand, the inability of a Cabinet to conduct through both Houses that continuous flow of legislation which the ever-changing necessities of a country like ours demand-alienates those among its more ardent supporters who take little account of its difficulties, and see only that it is unable to turn its Bills into Acts,"-G. O. TREVELYAN, Life and Letters of Lord Macaulay,' ii. 57. 404 THE CONSERVATIVE LEADERS. ability; and his lieutenants commanded respect by their talents, high character, and long services; but not one of them could excite the popular enthusiasm or stimulate the energies even of their own party. In the Lower House their inferiority was as conspicuous as in the Upper. What but defeat could be the result when they encountered Stanley and Graham, Gladstone and Sidney Herbert, and Peel, the greatest Parliamentary captain of his time? V. THE Whig Administration might justly claim credit for the measure which distinguished the session of 1835, the Municipal Corporation Act. It introduced into the local government of England a much needed reform, and settled it upon an uniform basis. A corporation had come to be regarded as "a close governing body, with peculiar privileges," existing not for the benefit of the governed, but for the advantage of the few individuals who had usurped authority. And while in small and insignificant boroughs this close form of municipal government prevailed, towns were growing in wealth and population, the inhabitants of which were wholly excluded from any share in the management of their own affairs. Two millions of people, says Sir Erskine May, were denied the constitutional privilege of selfgovernment. "Self-elected and irresponsible corporations," he adds;* "were suffered to enjoy a long dominion. Composed of local, and often hereditary, cliques and family connections, they were absolute masters over their own townsmen. Generally of one political party, they excluded men of different opinions, —whether in politics or religion, and used all the * Sir T. Erskine May, Constitutional History of England,' ii. 497-499. 406 MUNICIPAL REFORM SUPPORTED BY PEEL. influence of their office for maintaining the ascendancy of their own party. Elected for life, it was not difficult to consolidate their interest; and they acted without any sense of responsibility. Their proceedings were generally secret; nay, secrecy was sometimes enjoined by an oath." The interests of the community they scandalously neglected; to their own they were zealously devoted. The patronage that belonged to their position they bestowed on their friends and adherents; the corporate funds that were placed in their charge they expended upon feasts and revelry. Each corporation was a corrupt and selfish oligarchy, whose demoralising influence sapped the foundations of all public virtue. Sir Robert Peel was too wise and thoughtful a statesman to oppose the inauguration of a new and better order of things. He gave his hearty support to the Government measure, which, with some few amendments, was successfully carried through both Houses. As proposed by Lord John Russell, it vested the municipal franchise in those inhabitants who had paid poorrates within the borough for three years; and by them the governing body, consisting of a mayor and town council, was to be elected. The ancient order of aldermen was to be no longer maintained. The pecuniary rights of existing freemen were preserved, during their lives; but their municipal franchise was superseded; and as no new freemen were to be created, the class would be eventually abolished. The councils, having been reconstituted so as to secure public confidence, were charged with fuller powers, for the police and local government of the town, and the administration |