The Apostle Paul wished to be dissolved; but, I doubt, if his friends had set him a day, he would not have taken it kindly of them." The bill was rejected by a hundred and ninety-seven votes to a hundred and twenty-seven.

[501] The Place Bill, differing very little from the Place Bill which had been brought in twelve months before, passed easily through the Commons.
Most of the Tories supported it warmly; and the Whigs did not venture to oppose it.

It went up to the Lords, and soon came back completely changed.

As it had been originally drawn, it provided that no member of the House of Commons, elected after the first of January, 1694, should accept any place of profit under the Crown, on pain of forfeiting his seat, and of being incapable of sitting again in the same Parliament.
The Lords had added the words, "unless he be afterwards again chosen to serve in the same Parliament." These words, few as they were, sufficed to deprive the bill of nine tenths of its efficacy, both for good and for evil.

It was most desirable that the crowd of subordinate public functionaries should be kept out of the House of Commons.