date

Marg ls revised. 1819 Mar. 27 + §.6
Marg ls revised. 1819 Mar. 27 + §.6

To Erskine

ult o

Lett. 6. E. AntiReformist

6. 4. Spontaneity rely on

{5}

34

1

§ 6. Expedient 4. Prescribing reliance the free spontaneous act of Honourable House

{From eloquence such as Your Lordship’s on a subject such as the present, nothing ought to appear extraordinary.} In the midst of those confessions that have been noticed, in the very next sentence (p. 29) to the most explicit of things perpetually interwoven with the whole thread of them – {in the midst of all this it is that} /do/ we see two /three/ other intimations given: 1 one that, spite of all those imperfetions and corruptions {producing} /productive of/, and {produced} /as above confessed, produced/ by this same corrupt influence Parliament either is[?] actually entertains, or at least may reasonably be expected to entertain {at any time} a disposition to amend itself: 2 that in virtue of this same […?] disposition {it is a fit object of the most unqualified and universal affliction and respect: 3} /this same corruptly influenced body “changed or unchanged as to the general form of election should {says Your Lordship p. 32.} have the habitual confidence of all ranks and classes throughout the kingdom”/ and 3. all /that at the same time all persons/ who, not being in Parliament, seek to encrease, or if necessary to produce a disposition of that sort on the part of Parliament, are replete with such undescribable wickedness, that even Your Lordships eloquence sinks under the attempt to find description for it.

In pursuance of the persuasion professed to be entertained of the existence of this generous and self-denying disposition – of the actual or probable or at any rate the potential, existence of it – {for I am surely[?] afraid of not being warranted in attributing any such design as that of say something to a passage which has so much the appearance of having for its object the saying nothing} – in pursuance at any rate of this profession, one condition I must not omitt to confess my having observed annext to the ripening of this disposition into act, in such sort that to the good people of this country it shall not be altogether without fruit. This is that the act into which the disposition shall have ripened shall have been, (to use Your Lordships words p. 29.) “the free spontaneous act of the House of commons, or” (an act performed) “through respectful petitions of the people”: through, meaning I presume in consequence of: for to my eyes the […?]ness of this portion of Your Lordships rhetoric does not shew quite so clear as to secure me against all apprehensions of doing unintentional injustice to it.
Similar Items
  • Title: [1819 June 7 To Erskine ult]
    Description: 1819 June 7

    To Erskine

    ult o

    Lett. 6. E. AntiReformist

    § 6. 4. Spontaneity rely on

    2

    35

    2

    and in particular on the occasion of the phrase “ it shall be the free spontaneous act of the House of Commons, or through respectful petitions” as above, after hunting through more than a page for the antecedent substantive, on which the import of the pronoun relative it depends, I have been forced to give up the pursuit as hopeless.

    Be this as it may, in this condition I see a sort of alternative: the designation of two sets of operations or courses, by either of which the so highly desirable disposition may be brought into act. These are – 1. “the spontaneous act of the House of Commons; 2. “respectful petition of the people”, meaning, I presume, the acts respectively performed, in and by the presentation of such respectful petitions.

    This I find in p. 29: and in p. 28. at more than a page distance, in the course, but still far removed from the beginning, of this breath-exhausting pair of sentences, in which all things imaginable are strung together, I observe accordingly these other words – “if Parliament should be disposed, either spontaneously, or in compliance with respectful petitions of the people, to consider &c and should fearlessly enact,” and so forth.

    Here then are two causes /incidents/ presented to us, each of them as a cause likely to come into operation, each of them as an incident which we are called upon to regard as being to a certain degree probable: namely to such a degree, that the existence of one or other of them ought to be relied on by us as being sure to take effect; acted on; and that in such sort as to prevent our harbouring a thought of bringing about a state of things confessedly so desirable.

    In this place that one of the two which calls for consideration is the alledged /supposed/ “free spontaneous act” of Honourable House. Why? – because the sort of instruments in question, namely petitions from the people, though easily spoken of, are, as I shall have occasion to remind Your Lordship, not quite so easily brought into existence and presented; and because if on the part of Honourable House any such […?] beneficent despotism really has place, it would be a loss to both parties if it were prevented from {manifest}ing {itself}, and ripening into act, and thus displaying before the eyes of – an admiring and grateful people.
  • Title: [Marginals revised 1819 June 8 + ┴ § 7]
    Description: Marginals revised 1819 June 8 + ┴ § 7

    To Erskine

    Lett. 6 E. Anti Reformist

    § 7.5. Spontaneity rely on

    1

    §.7. Expedient 5. Prescribing reliance on spontaneous self-reform by the House of Commons.

    “Free spontaneous” self-reform on the part of /by/ Honourable House! There would be an Utopia indeed! A scene well worth the trouble /visiting/ though a man had to go as far as Armata for a peep at it should any such raree-shew be ever exhibited there for the entertainment of the Court But the time ....? Here again comes the question about the time – the time, shall it be when effects are produced without causes? No: that would be early: the earliest time that can be assigned is that which effects are produced by the whole imaginable force of obstacles: of obstacles of counter-acting causes – of counter-causes – which shall we say my Lord? for so new an idea does present a most imperious demand for a new name to speak of it by. No: when, after pausing for a moment to think of the new course into which he is entering, we see Father Thames wafting his waters as regularly from Richmond to Kingston, as now he does from Kingston to Richmond, then it is and not before that we shall begin to be upon the lookout for a reform of Honourable House, effected by “the free spontaneous act of Honourable House.

    And then, my Lord, when it does come, on which side of the House is it to take its commencement? On the Whig side? Oh no: on that side Honourable Gentlemen though like Your Lordship (on p. 14) as much devoted to it as ever, - though, like Your Lordship, (on p. 30) in heart and soul devoted to it, – Honourable Gentlemen will not be yet prepared for it.
  • Title: [Marg ls revised 1819 Apr. 10 + § 2 6]
    Description: Marg ls revised 1819 Apr. 10 + § 2 6

    To Erskine

    ult o

    Lett. 6. E. AntiReformist

    § 7. 5. Petitions Rely on

    3

    1

    36

    1

    In my eyes vice does not become virtue by being cloathed in power

    ☞ Employ the language used by E. in speaking of its corruptions &c

    Remains now the other branch of the condition: reliance on the only remaining one of the two modes of commencement which the change is to be allowed to have: viz. respectful petitions of the people”.

    Now to this mode of commencement, so it be but allowed /capable to have place/, I for my part have not any the smallest objection: no nor, on a little consideration I dare venture to say, any one else who on the subject of parliamentary reform thinks with me.

    Respect indeed? respect for a body of men so constituted? respect meaning the inward sentiment? Oh yes for some of them, on my part at least there would be no difficulty. But by the House on this as on every occasion must be meant the majority of the House. But the /Now /And/ this/ majority to what are they indebted for their seats? to the “free spontaneous” to use your Lordship’s words to the “free spontaneous” suffrages of the people, whose /those[?] on whose free/ choice depends the only title which in words they can respectively and individually pretend to? Alas! The contrary is not only is matter of notoriety but has been rendered so by those inquiries labours and disclosures by which the cause of the people has been so richly benefited and for which in happier times the people were /became/ indebted to those parliamentary Whigs who did not then disdain to call themselves the friends of the people or to act as if they had been, M r Erskine and M r Gray then of the number, as well as M r Fox and so many other Whig workers now no more.