Lord Russell’s motion was, of course, bitterly opposed by the Tories.  The first man who arose to speak against it was Sir H. Inglis, member of the university of Oxford,—­a fine classical scholar, an accomplished gentleman, and an honest man.  He maintained that the proposed alteration in the representation of the country was nothing less than revolution.  He eulogized the system of rotten boroughs, since it favored the return to Parliament of young men of great abilities, who without the patronage of nobles would fail in popular elections; and he cited the cases of Pitt, Fox, Burke, Canning, Perceval, and others who represented Appleby, Old Sarum, Wendover, and other places almost without inhabitants.  Sir Charles Wetherell, Mr. Croker, and Sir Robert Peel, substantially took the same view; Lord Althorp, Mr. Hume, O’Connell, and others supported the government.  Amid intense excitement, for everybody saw the momentous issues at stake, leave was at length granted to Lord John Russell to bring in his bill.  No less than seventy-one persons in the course of seven nights spoke for or against the measure.  The Press, headed by the “Times,” rendered great assistance to the reform cause, while public meetings were everywhere held and petitions sent to Parliament in favor of the measure.  The voice of the nation spoke in earnest and decided tones.

On the 21st of March, 1831, Lord John Russell moved the second reading of the bill; but the majority for it was so small that ministers were compelled to make modifications.  After a stormy debate there was a majority of seventy-eight against the government.  The ministers, undaunted, at once induced the king to dissolve Parliament, and an appeal was made to the nation.  A general election followed, which sent up an overwhelming majority of Liberal members, while many of the leading members of the last Parliament lost their places.  On the 21st of June the new Parliament was opened by the king in person.  He was received with the wildest enthusiasm by the populace, as he proceeded in state to the House of Lords in his gilded carriage, drawn by eight cream-colored horses.  On the 24th of June Lord John Russell again introduced his bill, this time in a bold, manly, and decisive manner, in striking contrast with the almost suppliant tone which he assumed before.  On the 4th of July the question of the second reading was brought forward.  The discussion was carried on for three nights, and on division the great majority of one hundred and thirty-six was with the government.  The only hope of the opposition was now in delay; and factious divisions were made on every point possible as the bill went through the committee.  The opposition was most vexatious.  Praed made twenty-two speeches against the bill, Sugden eighteen, Pelham twenty-eight, Peel forty-eight, Croker fifty-seven, and Wetherell fifty-eight.  Of course the greater part of these speeches were inexpressibly wearisome, and ministers were condemned to sit and listen to the stale arguments,