Page:History of the Radical Party in Parliament.djvu/283

 1 837.] First Reformed Parliament to Death of William IV. 269 Both Houses had adjourned to the I2th of May, and when the Commons met, Russell, who had become leader of the House, said that if he had learned anything by the experience of the last three years, during which he had been a member of the Government, it was that they frequently fell into difficulties by undertaking too great a multiplicity of measures an error which, if the Whigs had ever committed, they never from that time went anywhere near repeating. For the present session he announced, that whilst ministers would consider any question that had been brought before the House by the late Ministry, they would confine their own initiative to two questions municipal reform and the regulation of Irish tithes. This last subject was forced upon them because they had forced it upon the House as the instrument for destroying the late Govern- ment ; but it proved far more injurious to them than it had done to their rivals. Peel lost office, but the Whigs lost honour, by their method of dealing with the subject. Municipal reform was first dealt with, and the Act which the Government passed forms one of the strongest claims which they possess to the respect and gratitude of the country. It was introduced by Russell on the 5th of June, was read a second time on the I5th, and went into committee on the 22nd of the same month. There were numerous divisions over clauses in committee, but no alterations were made, the Liberal union being too strong and too fresh from its victory over the late Ministry to give way on any point. On the 2Oth of July the bill was read a third time and passed. In the House of Lords its fate was very different. The great merit of the bill was that it did for local government, so far as regarded the large towns, what the Reform Bill did for national government : it destroyed the system of corrupt, close, and self-electing corporations, and substituted for it the great principle of popular representation. The principle was limited and restricted, but it was there, and its presence roused the opposition of the Peers. A good deal was said about vested rights and ancient institutions, but the real ground of offence was pretty plainly put by Lyndhurst, when,