ommercial
privileges. This committee was not the least beneficial result of a
session which has left no great mark on the statute-book.

[Pageheading: _MOVEMENT FOR REFORM._]

The weakness of Wellington's position had long since become apparent to
all. By his conduct in regard to catholic emancipation he had estranged
a powerful section of his tory followers. By his jealousy and haughty
attitude towards his whig allies, he had forfeited their good-will,
never very heartily given. By his treatment of Huskisson, a small but
able body of politicians was thrown into the ranks of a discordant
opposition. No one else could have induced the king to give way on
catholic emancipation, but the king had not forgiven him, and submitted
to him out of fear rather than out of confidence. Though singularly
deficient in rhetorical power, he still maintained his ascendency in the
house of lords by the aid of more eloquent colleagues, but Peel was his
only efficient lieutenant in the house of commons. The vacancy in the
office of lord privy seal, occasioned by the transference of
Ellenborough to the board of control, had at last been filled in June,
1829, by the appointment of Lord Rosslyn, nephew of the first earl, who,
however, added nothing to the strength of the ministry. In the meantime,
reform had succeeded catholic emancipation as the one burning question
of politics, but with this all-important difference that it roused
enthusiasm in the popular mind. Political unions, like the branches of
the catholic association, were springing up all over the country, and a
series of motions was made in the house of commons which feebly
reflected the feverish agitation in all the active centres of
population. One of these, brought forward by the Marquis of Blandford,
who had made a similar motion in the previous year, was really prompted
by enmity against the author of catholic emancipation. Another,
introduced by Lord Howick, son of Earl Grey, called for some general and
comprehensive measure to remedy the admitted abuses of the electoral
system. A third, and far more practical, attempt was made by Lord John
Russell to obtain the enfranchisement of Manchester, Leeds, and
Birmingham. A fourth, and perfectly futile proposal, was made by
O'Connell, in the shape of a bill for triennial parliaments, universal
suffrage, and vote by ballot, to which Russell moved a statesmanlike
amendment, in favour of transferring members from petty boroughs to
co