1819 May 14

To {Erskine} Disfranchising

Lett 5

Lett 6

Disfranchising extension

On the part of true reformers Transparent hypocrisy would it be to say the Election franchise is a trust – the men who deal thus by it are betrayers of this trust – a trust to which some such epithet as sacred would not fail to be added by Your Lordships eloquence. Of such logic and such eloquence /as/ the object and /so/ the effect is to persevere in the betraying of the trust of vastly superior importance, in the execution of which the trust in question depends for the whole of its importance The situation of Member of Honourable House though on occasion if towards and for the purpose of deception it is spoken of as a trust is scarce ever really considered so by any one to trust is power coupled with obligation That no obligation is considered as attached to the situation of Member of Parliament I have shewn elsewhere. + that the charge /imputation/ /words/ of absurdity and utopianism, theory and so forth could be thrown at the head of any man who should propose a measure grounded on this supposition: any measure having for its object the rendering attendance /presence/ at the only scene /field/ of duty any thing short of completely optional: the proposal would be called disgusting, and the proposer coughed down: disgusting, the highest point on the modern scale of reprobation

+ Supra or infra: Plan Cat.