[xxxvi. 144]

1822 July 16

Constitut. Code Rationale

Supreme Operative

I Monarch absolute

II Monarch Limited

III Aristocracy

IV Monarcho-Aristocracy

1. Borough-mongers subject.

2 Why spoken of as paramount.

?. In a limited say rather a mixt Monarchy, the Aristocracy are not in practice co-equal with but dependent on and instruments of the Monarchy.

In England the Borough-mongers are under the King not the King under the Borough-mongers.

The King (it has been said) is in a state of subjection to the Borough-mongers. The party by whom this notion is adopted is the party of the people: it is on every occasion assumed, and argued upon as a principle. In relation to it, two questions will here present themselves. 1. Is it correct?: 2. Correct or /If/ incorrect to what cause is the use made of it to be attributed /what is the cause of its currency?/

Question 1. Is it correct /true/? Answer. It is not. /untrue./ That they /the two powers/ act not in constant union, thus far is true. But, on each occasion whatsoever be the course taken by the union, it is by the will of the King not by the will of any power that that course is determined: not by the will of any other power whatsoever be the situation of it, or by what name so ever denominated.

By Borough-mongers are meant the aggregate of the several individuals by whom the seats in the Commons House are filled. The cause why this denomination is employed will be mentioned in its place.

What is here assumed is - that the Lords House in its corporate capacity is in fact /practice/ in a state of subjection to the Commons House. Thus much is true, manifest and undisputed. ( Quere whether to state the proofs)

What is also assumed is that in a very large proportion the occupiers of the seats in the Commons House are located by individuals who have seats in the Lords House. This also is manifest and undisputed.