=Source.=--_The Life of the Duke of Wellington_, by J. R. Gleig.
_Letter from the Duke of Wellington to J. R. Gleig, Esq._
"London, 11th April, 1831.
"I have received your letters of the 8th and 9th. It is curious
enough that I, who have been the greatest reformer on earth, should
be held up as an enemy to all reform. This assertion is neither
more or less than one of the lying cries of the day.
"If by reform is meant parliamentary reform, or a change in the
mode or system of representation, what I have said is, that I have
never heard of a plan that was safe and practicable that would
give satisfaction, and that while I was in office I should oppose
myself to reform in parliament. This was in answer to Lord Grey
on the first day of the session. I am still of the same opinion.
I think that parliament has done its duty: that constituted as
parliament is, having in it as a member every man noted in the
country for his fortune, his talents, his science, his industry, or
his influence; the first men of all professions, in all branches of
trade and manufacture, connected with our colonies and settlements
abroad, and representing, as it does, all the states of the United
Kingdom, the government of the country is still a task almost more
than human. To conduct the government would be impossible, if by
reform the House of Commons should be brought to a greater degree
under popular influence. Yet let those who wish for reform reflect
for a moment where we should all stand if we were to lose for a day
the protection of government.
"That is the ground upon which I stand with respect to the question
of reform in general. I have more experience in the government
of this country than any man now alive, as well as in foreign
countries. I have no borough influence to lose, and I hate the
whole concern too much to think of endeavouring to gain any. Ask
the gentlemen of the Cinque Ports whether I have ever troubled any
of them.
"On the other hand, I know that I should be the idol of the country
if I could pretend to alter my opinion and alter my course. And
I know that I exclude myself from political power by persevering
in the course which I have taken. But nothing shall induce me to
utter a word, either in public or in private, that I don't believe
to be true. If it is God's will that this great country should be
destroyed, and that mankind should be deprived of this last asylum
of peace and happiness, be it so; but, as long as I can raise my
voice, I will do so against the infatuated madness of the day.
"In respect to details, it has always appeared to me that the
first step upon this subject was the most important. We talk of
unrepresented great towns! These are towns which have all the
benefit of being governed by the system of the British Constitution
without the evil of elections. Look at Scotland. Does Scotland
suffer because it has not the benefit of riotous elections? I
think that reform in Scotland would be, and I am certain would be
thought, a grievance by many in that country. I can answer for
there being many respectable men in Manchester, and I believe
there are some in Birmingham and Leeds, who are adverse to change.
"But how is this change to be made? Either by adding to the number
of representatives in parliament from England, or by disfranchising
what are called the rotten boroughs! The first cannot be done
without a departure from the basis and a breach of the Acts of
Union. And, mind, a serious departure and breach of these acts,
inasmuch as the limits of the extension could not be less than
from fifteen to twenty towns. The last would be, in my opinion,
a violation of the first and most important principle of the
constitution, for no valid reason, and upon no ground whatever
excepting a popular cry, and an apprehension of the consequences
of resisting it. But this is not all. I confess that I see in
thirty members for rotten boroughs thirty men, I don't care of what
party, who would preserve the state of property as it is; who would
maintain by their votes the Church of England, its possessions,
its churches and universities, all our great institutions and
corporations, the union with Scotland and Ireland, the connection
of the country with its foreign colonies and possessions, the
national honour abroad and its good faith with the king's subjects
at home. I see men at the back of the government to enable it to
protect individuals and their property against the injustice of
the times, which would sacrifice all rights and all property to a
description of plunder called general convenience and utility. I
think it is the presence of this description of men in parliament
with the country gentlemen, and the great merchants, bankers, and
manufacturers, which constitute the great difference between the
House of Commons and those assemblies abroad called 'Chambers of
Deputies.' It is by means of the representatives of the close
corporations that the great proprietors of the country participate
in political power. I don't think that we could spare thirty or
forty of these representatives, or change them with advantage for
thirty or forty members elected for the great towns by any new
system. I am certain that the country would be injured by depriving
men of great property of political power, besides the injury done
to it by exposing the House of Commons to a greater degree of
popular influence.
"You will observe that I have now considered only the smallest of
all reforms--a reform which would satisfy nobody. Yet it cannot be
adopted without a serious departure from principle (principle in
the maintenance of which the smallest as well as the greatest of us
is interested), and by running all the risks of those misfortunes
which all wish to avoid.
"I tell you that we must not risk our great institutions and large
properties, personal as well as real. If we do, there is not a man
of this generation, so young, so old, so rich, so poor, so bold, so
timid, as that he will not feel the consequences of this rashness.
This opinion is founded not on reasoning only, but on experience,
and I shall never cease to declare it."