Thomas Babington Macaulay
ON THE REFORM BILL
March 1，1831
My honorable friend，the member for the University of Oxford［Sir Robert Inglis］tells us that if we pass this law［extension of suffrage］England will soon be a republic.The reformed House of Commons will，according to him，before it has sat ten years，depose the king and expel the lords from their House.Sir，if my honorable friend could prove this，he would have succeeded in bringing an argument for democracy infinitely stronger than any that is to be found in the works of Paine.My honorable friend's proposition is in fact this：that our monarchical and aristocratically institutions have no hold on the public mind of England；that these institutions are regarded with aversion by a decided majority of the middle class.This，sir，I say，is plainly deducible from his proposition；for he tells us that the representatives of the middle class will inevitably abolish royalty and nobility within ten years；and there is surely no reason to think that the representatives of the middle class will be more inclined to a democratic revolution than their constituents.Now，sir，if I were convinced that the great body of the middle class in England look with aversion on monarchy and aristocracy，I should be forced，much against my will，to come to this conclusion that monarchical and aristocratically institutions are unsuited to my country.Monarchy and aristocracy，valuable and useful as I think them，are still valuable and useful as means and not as ends.The end of government is the happiness of the people，and I do not conceive that，in a country like this，the happiness of the people can be promoted by a form of government in which the middle classes place no confidence，and which exists only because the middle classes have no organ by which to make their sentiments known.But，sir，I am fully convinced that the middle classes sincerely wish to uphold the royal prerogatives and the constitutional rights of the peers.
The question of parliamentary reform is still behind.But signs，of which it is impossible to misconceive the import，do most clearly Indicate that，unless that question also be speedily settled，property，and order，and all the institutions of this great monarchy，will be exposed to fearful peril.Is it possible that gentlemen long versed in high political affairs can not read these signs？Is it possible that they can really believe that the representative system of England，such as it now is，will last till the year 1860？If not，for what would they have us wait？Would they have us wait merely that we may show to all the world how little we have profited by our own recent experience？
Would they have us wait，that we may once a－gain hit the exact point where we can neither refuse with authority nor concede with grace？Would they have us wait，that the numbers of the discontented party may become larger，its demands higher，its feelings more acrimonious，its organization more complete？Would they have us wait till the whole tragicomedy of 1827 has been acted over again；till they have been brought into office by acry of“No Reform，”to be reformers，as they were once before brought into office by a cry of“No Popery，”to be emancipators？Have they obliterated from their minds—gladly，perhaps，would some among them obliterate from their minds—the transactions of that year？And have they forgotten all the transactions of the succeeding year？Have they forgotten how the spirit of liberty in Ireland，debarred from its natural outlet，found a vent by forbidden passages？Have they forgotten how we were forced to indulge the Catholics in all the license of rebels，merely because we chose to with- hold from them the liberties of subjects？Do they wait for associations more formidable than that of the Corn Exchange，for contributions larger than the Rent，for agitators more violent than those who，three years ago，divided with the king and the Parliament the sovereignty of Ireland？Do they wait for that last and most dreadful paroxysm of popular rage，for that last and most cruel test of military fidelity？
Let them wait，if their past experience shall induce them to think that any high honor or any exquisite pleasure is to be obtained by a policy like this.Let them wait，if this strange and fearful infatuation be indeed upon them，that they should not see with their eyes，or hear with their ears，or understand with their heart.But let us know our interest and our duty better.Turn where we may，within，around，the voice of great events is pro-claiming to us：Reform，that you may preserve.Now，therefore，while everything at home and abroad forebodes ruin to those who persist in a hopeless struggle against the spirit of the age；now，while the crash of the proudest throne of the continent is still resounding in our ears；now，while the roof of a British palace affords an ignominious shelter to the exiled heir of forty kings；now，while we see on every side ancient institutions subverted，and great societies dissolved；now，while the heart of England is still sound；now，while old feelings and old associations retina power and a charm which may too soon pass away；now，in this your accepted time，now，in this your day of salvation，take counsel，not of prejudice，not of party spirit，not of the ignominious pride of a fatal consistency，but of history，of reason，of the ages which are past，of the signs of this most portentous time.
Pronounce in a manner worthy of the expectation with which this great debate has been anticipated，and of the long remembrance Which it will leave behind.Renew the youth of the State.Save property，divided against itself.Save the multitude，endangered by its own ungovernable passions.Save the aristocracy，endangered by its own unpopular power.Save the greatest，and fairest，and most highly civilized community that ever existed，from calamities which may in a few days sweep away all the rich heritage of so many ages of wisdom and glory.The danger is terrible.The time is short.If this bill should be rejected，I pray to God that none of those who concur in rejecting it may ever remember their votes with unavailing remorse，amid the wreck of laws，the confusion of ranks，the spoliation of property，and the dissolution of social order.
托馬斯·巴賓頓·麥考萊
論改革法案
1831年3月1日
代表牛津大學(xué)的議員、我的尊敬的朋友（羅伯特·英格利斯先生）告訴我們，如果我們通過(guò)這項(xiàng)法律（擴(kuò)大選舉權(quán)），英國(guó)將很快成為共和國(guó)。按英格利斯的說(shuō)法，下院經(jīng)過(guò)改革后將在10年內(nèi)廢黜國(guó)王并從議會(huì)中罷免議員。閣下，如果我的尊敬的朋友能證明這一點(diǎn)，他將成功地為民主提供遠(yuǎn)比潘恩著作中的任何一篇論述有力得多的論據(jù)。我的尊敬的朋友的論據(jù)事實(shí)上是：我國(guó)的君主貴族制度對(duì)英國(guó)公眾的思想沒(méi)有約束力；絕大部分中產(chǎn)階級(jí)對(duì)這種制度感到厭惡。閣下，我說(shuō)，這從英格利斯的主張可以清楚地推論出來(lái)；因?yàn)樗嬖V我們中產(chǎn)階級(jí)的代表在10年內(nèi)將不可避免地要廢除王位和貴族；肯定沒(méi)有理由認(rèn)為中產(chǎn)階級(jí)的代表比選民更傾向于民主革命?，F(xiàn)在，假如我相信英國(guó)大部分中產(chǎn)階級(jí)對(duì)君主和貴族抱有反感，我將十分違心地得出君主貴族制度不適合于我國(guó)的結(jié)論。君主貴族制度，正如我所認(rèn)為的那樣，是有價(jià)值的和有用的，它們至今仍然是有價(jià)值的有用的手段，而并非目的。政府的目的是人民的幸福，我并不認(rèn)為在像我國(guó)這樣的國(guó)家，人民的幸?？梢酝ㄟ^(guò)一個(gè)中產(chǎn)階級(jí)所不信任的政府得到增進(jìn)，而政府之所以能存在，只是因?yàn)橹挟a(chǎn)階級(jí)缺乏表達(dá)其思想感情的機(jī)構(gòu)。然而，閣下，我完全相信中產(chǎn)階級(jí)衷心贊成維持君權(quán)和憲法賦予貴族的各種權(quán)利。
國(guó)會(huì)改革問(wèn)題仍然滯后。有些征兆的重要性是不可能誤解的，它們非常清楚地表明，除非這個(gè)改革問(wèn)題很快得到解決，否則國(guó)家財(cái)產(chǎn)和秩序，這個(gè)偉大的君主國(guó)的各種制度都將遭遇可怕的危險(xiǎn)。長(zhǎng)期以來(lái)熟練地掌握重要政治事務(wù)的人士竟看不出這些征兆，這是可能的嗎？難道他們真的相信英國(guó)現(xiàn)行的代議制只能延續(xù)到1860年嗎？如果不是那樣，那么他們要我們等待什么呢？難道他們讓我們等待只是為了向全世界表明我們從自己最近的經(jīng)驗(yàn)中得益甚微嗎？
難道他們要我們等待是讓我們?cè)俅蜗萑爰炔荒苡欣碛傻鼐芙^，又無(wú)法體面地讓步的困境嗎？難道他們要我們等待是為了讓心懷不滿(mǎn)的人數(shù)量增大，讓他們的要求越來(lái)越高，情緒越來(lái)越激昂，其組織羽翼越來(lái)越豐滿(mǎn)？難道他們要我們等到1827年的整個(gè)悲喜劇重演嗎？難道要我們等到他們像過(guò)去大聲疾呼“不要天主教”而取得官職成為“解放者”一樣，高呼“不要改革”而取得官職成為改革者？難道他們已經(jīng)忘卻（也許其中有些人將要忘卻）當(dāng)年的事務(wù)？他們已經(jīng)忘卻翌年的全部事務(wù)了嗎？難道他們已經(jīng)忘卻，在愛(ài)爾蘭那被堵塞了發(fā)泄途徑的自由精神，竟從被禁的通道中找到了出路？他們是否已經(jīng)忘卻我們被迫放縱天主教徒，聽(tīng)任他們隨意反抗，僅僅是由于我們拒絕給予他們憲法所規(guī)定的國(guó)民自由？難道他們?cè)诘却裙任锝灰资袌?chǎng)更難對(duì)待的社團(tuán)，等待著比地租更大的稅款；等待著比3年前與國(guó)王和議會(huì)分享愛(ài)爾蘭主權(quán)的人更狂暴的煽動(dòng)者？難道他們?cè)诘却顕?yán)重、最可怕的公眾憤怒的爆發(fā)，等待著最嚴(yán)重、最嚴(yán)峻的對(duì)軍隊(duì)忠誠(chéng)的考驗(yàn)？
假如他們以往的經(jīng)驗(yàn)使他們認(rèn)為推行這種政策可獲高級(jí)榮譽(yù)或者特別快慰，那就讓他們等吧！如果他們確實(shí)擺脫不了這種奇特的、駭人的迷戀，以致目不能視，耳不能聽(tīng)，心不能理解事物，那就讓他們等吧！但是，讓我們更好地了解我們的利益和職責(zé)。我們應(yīng)該根據(jù)重大事件向我們啟示的方向行動(dòng)：改革，就可以維持下去。因此，國(guó)內(nèi)外的一切都預(yù)示著那些堅(jiān)持反對(duì)時(shí)代精神而進(jìn)行絕望斗爭(zhēng)的人必將毀滅自己；當(dāng)歐洲大陸最引以自豪的王位的崩潰仍在耳際回響之時(shí)；當(dāng)英國(guó)王宮的屋檐為40個(gè)國(guó)王的流亡后裔提供可鄙的庇護(hù)所時(shí)；當(dāng)我們?cè)诿恳粋€(gè)方面看到古老的制度被*和偉大的社會(huì)瓦解時(shí)；當(dāng)英國(guó)仍然心智健全時(shí)；當(dāng)古老的感情和古老的社團(tuán)保持著可能很快消失的影響和魅力時(shí)；此時(shí)此刻，在這個(gè)你們所接受的時(shí)刻，在這個(gè)你們獲救的日子，你們應(yīng)該從歷史、理性、過(guò)去的時(shí)代和這個(gè)影響最為重大的時(shí)刻的啟示中采納忠告，屏棄偏見(jiàn)、黨派精神和有害的一致性所導(dǎo)致的可恥的自豪。
我們應(yīng)該以與人們對(duì)這場(chǎng)偉大辯論所寄予的期望相稱(chēng)并將留下長(zhǎng)期回憶的方式表明態(tài)度；恢復(fù)國(guó)家的活力；救救那被瓜分的財(cái)產(chǎn)；救救那受到自己的無(wú)法控制的感情危害的廣大群眾；救救那受到自己的不得人心的權(quán)力危害的貴族。我們應(yīng)該把有史以來(lái)最偉大、最光明磊落而又度文明的社會(huì)從那可能使多少世紀(jì)以來(lái)積累下的智慧和光輝的豐富遺產(chǎn)毀于一旦的災(zāi)難中拯救出來(lái)。真是岌岌可危，時(shí)不我待。如果這一法案遭到否決，我祈求上帝：那些贊成否決的人中沒(méi)有一個(gè)在法律被踐踏，等級(jí)被打亂，財(cái)產(chǎn)被掠奪和社會(huì)制度瓦解時(shí)會(huì)以后悔莫及的心情想起自己所投的票。
ON THE REFORM BILL
March 1，1831
My honorable friend，the member for the University of Oxford［Sir Robert Inglis］tells us that if we pass this law［extension of suffrage］England will soon be a republic.The reformed House of Commons will，according to him，before it has sat ten years，depose the king and expel the lords from their House.Sir，if my honorable friend could prove this，he would have succeeded in bringing an argument for democracy infinitely stronger than any that is to be found in the works of Paine.My honorable friend's proposition is in fact this：that our monarchical and aristocratically institutions have no hold on the public mind of England；that these institutions are regarded with aversion by a decided majority of the middle class.This，sir，I say，is plainly deducible from his proposition；for he tells us that the representatives of the middle class will inevitably abolish royalty and nobility within ten years；and there is surely no reason to think that the representatives of the middle class will be more inclined to a democratic revolution than their constituents.Now，sir，if I were convinced that the great body of the middle class in England look with aversion on monarchy and aristocracy，I should be forced，much against my will，to come to this conclusion that monarchical and aristocratically institutions are unsuited to my country.Monarchy and aristocracy，valuable and useful as I think them，are still valuable and useful as means and not as ends.The end of government is the happiness of the people，and I do not conceive that，in a country like this，the happiness of the people can be promoted by a form of government in which the middle classes place no confidence，and which exists only because the middle classes have no organ by which to make their sentiments known.But，sir，I am fully convinced that the middle classes sincerely wish to uphold the royal prerogatives and the constitutional rights of the peers.
The question of parliamentary reform is still behind.But signs，of which it is impossible to misconceive the import，do most clearly Indicate that，unless that question also be speedily settled，property，and order，and all the institutions of this great monarchy，will be exposed to fearful peril.Is it possible that gentlemen long versed in high political affairs can not read these signs？Is it possible that they can really believe that the representative system of England，such as it now is，will last till the year 1860？If not，for what would they have us wait？Would they have us wait merely that we may show to all the world how little we have profited by our own recent experience？
Would they have us wait，that we may once a－gain hit the exact point where we can neither refuse with authority nor concede with grace？Would they have us wait，that the numbers of the discontented party may become larger，its demands higher，its feelings more acrimonious，its organization more complete？Would they have us wait till the whole tragicomedy of 1827 has been acted over again；till they have been brought into office by acry of“No Reform，”to be reformers，as they were once before brought into office by a cry of“No Popery，”to be emancipators？Have they obliterated from their minds—gladly，perhaps，would some among them obliterate from their minds—the transactions of that year？And have they forgotten all the transactions of the succeeding year？Have they forgotten how the spirit of liberty in Ireland，debarred from its natural outlet，found a vent by forbidden passages？Have they forgotten how we were forced to indulge the Catholics in all the license of rebels，merely because we chose to with- hold from them the liberties of subjects？Do they wait for associations more formidable than that of the Corn Exchange，for contributions larger than the Rent，for agitators more violent than those who，three years ago，divided with the king and the Parliament the sovereignty of Ireland？Do they wait for that last and most dreadful paroxysm of popular rage，for that last and most cruel test of military fidelity？
Let them wait，if their past experience shall induce them to think that any high honor or any exquisite pleasure is to be obtained by a policy like this.Let them wait，if this strange and fearful infatuation be indeed upon them，that they should not see with their eyes，or hear with their ears，or understand with their heart.But let us know our interest and our duty better.Turn where we may，within，around，the voice of great events is pro-claiming to us：Reform，that you may preserve.Now，therefore，while everything at home and abroad forebodes ruin to those who persist in a hopeless struggle against the spirit of the age；now，while the crash of the proudest throne of the continent is still resounding in our ears；now，while the roof of a British palace affords an ignominious shelter to the exiled heir of forty kings；now，while we see on every side ancient institutions subverted，and great societies dissolved；now，while the heart of England is still sound；now，while old feelings and old associations retina power and a charm which may too soon pass away；now，in this your accepted time，now，in this your day of salvation，take counsel，not of prejudice，not of party spirit，not of the ignominious pride of a fatal consistency，but of history，of reason，of the ages which are past，of the signs of this most portentous time.
Pronounce in a manner worthy of the expectation with which this great debate has been anticipated，and of the long remembrance Which it will leave behind.Renew the youth of the State.Save property，divided against itself.Save the multitude，endangered by its own ungovernable passions.Save the aristocracy，endangered by its own unpopular power.Save the greatest，and fairest，and most highly civilized community that ever existed，from calamities which may in a few days sweep away all the rich heritage of so many ages of wisdom and glory.The danger is terrible.The time is short.If this bill should be rejected，I pray to God that none of those who concur in rejecting it may ever remember their votes with unavailing remorse，amid the wreck of laws，the confusion of ranks，the spoliation of property，and the dissolution of social order.
托馬斯·巴賓頓·麥考萊
論改革法案
1831年3月1日
代表牛津大學(xué)的議員、我的尊敬的朋友（羅伯特·英格利斯先生）告訴我們，如果我們通過(guò)這項(xiàng)法律（擴(kuò)大選舉權(quán)），英國(guó)將很快成為共和國(guó)。按英格利斯的說(shuō)法，下院經(jīng)過(guò)改革后將在10年內(nèi)廢黜國(guó)王并從議會(huì)中罷免議員。閣下，如果我的尊敬的朋友能證明這一點(diǎn)，他將成功地為民主提供遠(yuǎn)比潘恩著作中的任何一篇論述有力得多的論據(jù)。我的尊敬的朋友的論據(jù)事實(shí)上是：我國(guó)的君主貴族制度對(duì)英國(guó)公眾的思想沒(méi)有約束力；絕大部分中產(chǎn)階級(jí)對(duì)這種制度感到厭惡。閣下，我說(shuō)，這從英格利斯的主張可以清楚地推論出來(lái)；因?yàn)樗嬖V我們中產(chǎn)階級(jí)的代表在10年內(nèi)將不可避免地要廢除王位和貴族；肯定沒(méi)有理由認(rèn)為中產(chǎn)階級(jí)的代表比選民更傾向于民主革命?，F(xiàn)在，假如我相信英國(guó)大部分中產(chǎn)階級(jí)對(duì)君主和貴族抱有反感，我將十分違心地得出君主貴族制度不適合于我國(guó)的結(jié)論。君主貴族制度，正如我所認(rèn)為的那樣，是有價(jià)值的和有用的，它們至今仍然是有價(jià)值的有用的手段，而并非目的。政府的目的是人民的幸福，我并不認(rèn)為在像我國(guó)這樣的國(guó)家，人民的幸?？梢酝ㄟ^(guò)一個(gè)中產(chǎn)階級(jí)所不信任的政府得到增進(jìn)，而政府之所以能存在，只是因?yàn)橹挟a(chǎn)階級(jí)缺乏表達(dá)其思想感情的機(jī)構(gòu)。然而，閣下，我完全相信中產(chǎn)階級(jí)衷心贊成維持君權(quán)和憲法賦予貴族的各種權(quán)利。
國(guó)會(huì)改革問(wèn)題仍然滯后。有些征兆的重要性是不可能誤解的，它們非常清楚地表明，除非這個(gè)改革問(wèn)題很快得到解決，否則國(guó)家財(cái)產(chǎn)和秩序，這個(gè)偉大的君主國(guó)的各種制度都將遭遇可怕的危險(xiǎn)。長(zhǎng)期以來(lái)熟練地掌握重要政治事務(wù)的人士竟看不出這些征兆，這是可能的嗎？難道他們真的相信英國(guó)現(xiàn)行的代議制只能延續(xù)到1860年嗎？如果不是那樣，那么他們要我們等待什么呢？難道他們讓我們等待只是為了向全世界表明我們從自己最近的經(jīng)驗(yàn)中得益甚微嗎？
難道他們要我們等待是讓我們?cè)俅蜗萑爰炔荒苡欣碛傻鼐芙^，又無(wú)法體面地讓步的困境嗎？難道他們要我們等待是為了讓心懷不滿(mǎn)的人數(shù)量增大，讓他們的要求越來(lái)越高，情緒越來(lái)越激昂，其組織羽翼越來(lái)越豐滿(mǎn)？難道他們要我們等到1827年的整個(gè)悲喜劇重演嗎？難道要我們等到他們像過(guò)去大聲疾呼“不要天主教”而取得官職成為“解放者”一樣，高呼“不要改革”而取得官職成為改革者？難道他們已經(jīng)忘卻（也許其中有些人將要忘卻）當(dāng)年的事務(wù)？他們已經(jīng)忘卻翌年的全部事務(wù)了嗎？難道他們已經(jīng)忘卻，在愛(ài)爾蘭那被堵塞了發(fā)泄途徑的自由精神，竟從被禁的通道中找到了出路？他們是否已經(jīng)忘卻我們被迫放縱天主教徒，聽(tīng)任他們隨意反抗，僅僅是由于我們拒絕給予他們憲法所規(guī)定的國(guó)民自由？難道他們?cè)诘却裙任锝灰资袌?chǎng)更難對(duì)待的社團(tuán)，等待著比地租更大的稅款；等待著比3年前與國(guó)王和議會(huì)分享愛(ài)爾蘭主權(quán)的人更狂暴的煽動(dòng)者？難道他們?cè)诘却顕?yán)重、最可怕的公眾憤怒的爆發(fā)，等待著最嚴(yán)重、最嚴(yán)峻的對(duì)軍隊(duì)忠誠(chéng)的考驗(yàn)？
假如他們以往的經(jīng)驗(yàn)使他們認(rèn)為推行這種政策可獲高級(jí)榮譽(yù)或者特別快慰，那就讓他們等吧！如果他們確實(shí)擺脫不了這種奇特的、駭人的迷戀，以致目不能視，耳不能聽(tīng)，心不能理解事物，那就讓他們等吧！但是，讓我們更好地了解我們的利益和職責(zé)。我們應(yīng)該根據(jù)重大事件向我們啟示的方向行動(dòng)：改革，就可以維持下去。因此，國(guó)內(nèi)外的一切都預(yù)示著那些堅(jiān)持反對(duì)時(shí)代精神而進(jìn)行絕望斗爭(zhēng)的人必將毀滅自己；當(dāng)歐洲大陸最引以自豪的王位的崩潰仍在耳際回響之時(shí)；當(dāng)英國(guó)王宮的屋檐為40個(gè)國(guó)王的流亡后裔提供可鄙的庇護(hù)所時(shí)；當(dāng)我們?cè)诿恳粋€(gè)方面看到古老的制度被*和偉大的社會(huì)瓦解時(shí)；當(dāng)英國(guó)仍然心智健全時(shí)；當(dāng)古老的感情和古老的社團(tuán)保持著可能很快消失的影響和魅力時(shí)；此時(shí)此刻，在這個(gè)你們所接受的時(shí)刻，在這個(gè)你們獲救的日子，你們應(yīng)該從歷史、理性、過(guò)去的時(shí)代和這個(gè)影響最為重大的時(shí)刻的啟示中采納忠告，屏棄偏見(jiàn)、黨派精神和有害的一致性所導(dǎo)致的可恥的自豪。
我們應(yīng)該以與人們對(duì)這場(chǎng)偉大辯論所寄予的期望相稱(chēng)并將留下長(zhǎng)期回憶的方式表明態(tài)度；恢復(fù)國(guó)家的活力；救救那被瓜分的財(cái)產(chǎn)；救救那受到自己的無(wú)法控制的感情危害的廣大群眾；救救那受到自己的不得人心的權(quán)力危害的貴族。我們應(yīng)該把有史以來(lái)最偉大、最光明磊落而又度文明的社會(huì)從那可能使多少世紀(jì)以來(lái)積累下的智慧和光輝的豐富遺產(chǎn)毀于一旦的災(zāi)難中拯救出來(lái)。真是岌岌可危，時(shí)不我待。如果這一法案遭到否決，我祈求上帝：那些贊成否決的人中沒(méi)有一個(gè)在法律被踐踏，等級(jí)被打亂，財(cái)產(chǎn)被掠奪和社會(huì)制度瓦解時(shí)會(huì)以后悔莫及的心情想起自己所投的票。