Page:Life of William Shelburne (vol 1).djvu/449

Rh House of Commons in their opposition to those who, in the words of Chatham, "had called up a conflict of high and sacred jurisdiction between Parliament and the City of London." It became clear that there was hardly any measure, however unwise, which the King and his advisers were not ready to attempt and a subservient majority anxious to accept. Shelburne hoped as a pis aller to rally the various sections of the Whig party in an effort to obtain a dissolution. Temple was willing to leave his retirement for the purpose of making the motion, but Camden considered the attempt impolitic, and Rockingham hesitated. "Unreasonable refinements in some, and tergiversations in others," destroyed every hope of success. But even an immediate dissolution of Parliament would at best have been a doubtful remedy. The Court would probably have secured as large a majority in the next as it possessed in the present Parliament, nor could any real and permanent alteration have been produced except by recourse to the Reform of the House of Commons. "I never heard a reflecting man doubt," writes Shelburne to Chatham, " on the county representation being the greatest restorative possible of the constitution." "I have mentioned the shortening of the durations of Parliaments to your Lordship more than once, but I have scrupled telling you how very much I have been pressed upon it, until I saw it coincided with your Lordship's general views for the public." But these ideas only terrified Burke, and when Sawbridge proposed a motion for triennial Parliaments, it was rejected by 105 to 54; "the Rockingham party," says Walpole, "not liking the measure. The idea at best was not quite disapproved, but the execution not much desired by any."