PARLIAMENTARY DEVELOPMENT.*

THERE is much to be said, from many points of view, for our national habit of getting along somehow and employing our- selves too busily to pause to consider how we are going and to square our actions in accordance with principles and abstract ideals. Nevertheless, though collective self-con- sciousness is just as demoralising a weakness as individual, it is worth while occasionally to review the position and examine the facts and tendencies of to-day in the light of those of the past. A survey of this sort has been prepared in very scholarly fashion by Mr. Lowes Dickinson in his study of The Development of Parliament during the Nineteenth Century, in which he traces the process by which the political pre- dominance has been transferred from an aristocratic oligarchy to a democracy which is, as he believes, Socialistic in tendency and purpose.

A very interesting part of his sketch is devoted to develop- ing his contention that the great Reform Bill of 1832 vraa not regarded or designed as a step in the direction of demo- cracy by its supporters. "Whigs as well as Tories," he says, "were emphatic in their repudiation of the whole theory of democracy." Its opponents, of course, stigmatised it as "a first turn of the helm towards the whirlpool of democracy," but Mr. Dickinson contends strongly that Whig reformers were perfectly sincere when they retorted that the Bill in- volved nothing of the sort, but merely made a few superficial • The Development of Parliament during the Nin.teenth Century. By G. Lowe, Dickinson, M.A., Fellow of Buig's College, Coinilaidge. Loudon: Longman, Greer, and Ca.

alterations in the machinery of Government. Under the old regime, the power of the King and his Minister had often been sufficient to override the national will :—

" The evil as it was analysed by the Whig reformers centred about one point, the influence of the Crown and the Ministry. It was during the latter years of the American War that this abuse began to make itself felt. The war, in its latter development, was at once unpopular and calamitous ; it was continued, against the clear sense of the nation, by the personal influence of the King, exercised through the Minister and his bought majority ; and it ended in the loss of the American colonies. These were the facts that gave rise to the reform agitation in 1780. The executive had been clearly at variance with the nation, and equally clearly

it had been wrong In the circumstances of the great French war Fox imagined that he saw a repetition of those of the war with America; in both he maintained that a contest which was unpopular and unjust had been perpetrated against the de- clared sense of the nation by the corrupt influence of the Minister

in power After the peace, the same point of view recurs. The disturbed state of the country, from 1815 on, provoked the Government to drastic measures. The Habeas Corpus Act was suspended, and the right of free speech and of public meeting practically suppressed. Once more it was felt that the liberties of the subject were not safe, that the Government was approxi- mating to an irresponsible tyranny ; and Lord John Russell, writing in 1823, is so far from anticipating the advent of demo- cracy that he professes to fear the extinction of the Constitution in a despotism."

These extracts sufficiently indicate Mr. Dickinson's point of

view, though it must be admitted that they also reveal a certain amount of inconsistency in it. If the Whig reformers

were solely inspired by the desire to prevent the executive from acting in a manner contrary to "the clear sense of the nation," and yet did not perceive that they were making a step in the direction of democracy, they can have had but vague conceptions as to the meanings of words. For what is

democracy but government according to "the clear sense of the nation " P Of course every man attaches what meaning he pleases to the word "nation," and hence it is that argu-

ments on the principles of government are at once inter- minable and profitless. But a scheme of reform which would have merely transferred the power of flouting the national will from the King and his Minister to an oligarchy elected

on a system of closely restricted franchise, would have only picked us out of the frying-pan to throw us into the fire. No doubt many of the most enthusiastic reformers were only wishing to obtain political power for their own class, and keep it, but these men only afford another instance of the unpromising instruments with which the most satis-

factory achievements are sometimes accomplished, and their existence and their desire for finality cannot be accepted as any argument against subsequent measures of reform.

By democracy Mr. Dickinson apparently means govern- ment by the lowest class ; we should be sorry to misrepresent him, but we can only infer that some such notion inspires him when he says that by the Reform Bill the House of Commons was to be made" more representative, but not more democratic, than before." And he certainly seems to fear

that this is the goal which we are nearing, owing to the

successive steps towards democracy which he describes in a very lucid and interesting manner. But in a nation in which the higher classes have any of the qualities which justify their position, the extension of the franchise to the lowest classes does not mean that the chief political power falls into their hands. The forces of wealth, education, social position, and hereditary aptitude are so strong that there need be no fear of their, being overridden by sheer numerical superiority, as long as their possessors retain enough energy and publics spirit to make them take their proper share in the manage- ment of public affairs. This is a fact which Mr. Dickinson appears to overlook in his pessimistic analysis of the trend of political tendency; and it is much too often forgotten by many gifted but spiritless men, who avoid the duties of public life, because, forsooth, the House of Commons is no longer

a socially select body, and has ceased to be the best club in London. The House was never meant to be a club, but a representative assembly, and it becomes more fully repre- sentative by containing one or two Keir Hardies instead of

merely a monotonous collection of faultless frockcoats and patent-leather boots. After all, it is not Demos who is dangerous in a democracy, but Cleon ; and Cleon is less dan- gerous than ridiculous, as long as he comes from the leather. selling class. It is when we see well-educated men aom- peting for the votes of the lower chums by flattering their ignorance and promising them what they have no -,:ght to

covet, that there is some excuse for despairing of the Re- public. Neither of the great political parties is altogether above suspicion in this respect, but this is not the fault of the working man, but of those who ought to know better.

Mr. Dickinson, however, seems to believe that democracy, in the sense of government by the ignorant multitude, is already in full swing in England, and from this point he proceeds to argue that since the working classes are intent on Socialism, Socialism will be introduced in the near future ; and he contends that the House of Commons, as at present constituted, is not an Assembly to which such a question can be safely left. Its Members he considers to be no longer representatives of the nation, but delegates from various places. The want of independence of the modern Member, and the pressure that is brought on the rank-and-file by the party organisations, are of course factors which cannot be wholly upheld; but it would be obviously absurd that a representative, once elected, should be bound by no con- sideration for the opinions of his constituents and the aims of his party, and the present system is at least better than the one under which Members were independent enough to sell their votes to the executive. As to the desire of the British working man for Socialism, we do not believe in it. Mr.

Dickinson bases his assumption on certain resolutions passed by Trade-Union Congresses, which have since been shown to be no more truly representative of working-class opinion than the unreformed Parliament. Socialism is always popular with the destitute ; but the working classes are very far from destitute, and every year that adds to their enor- mous hoards deposited in the Post-Office Savings-Bank increases their distrust of schemes for the redistribution and abolition of private property. There is no doubt a tendency nowadays to encourage much more Government interference and supervision than our sturdier forefathers would have tolerated,—this, however, is a very mild form of Socialism, and is common to all classes; but we refuse to believe that the "nationalisation of the means of production" and all the other Fabian nostrums are accepted by any appreciable proportion of working-class politicians.

If, however, we cannot altogether agree with Mr. Dickin- son's conclusions, we are very glad to acknowledge that he has written a clever book on an interesting subject, which deserves the attention of all thoughtful citizens. A highly important chapter deals with the change in the position of the House of Lords, caused by the passing of the Reform Bill, its relations since that time with the other House, and its attitude towards popular legislation. A good deal of very instructive light is thrown on this vexed question. For instance :—

"The repeal of the Corn Laws is probably the most important measure of this century ; it was that which has most profoundly affected the position of the landed aristocracy; and it was passed by an Upper House, composed of landlords, on its first introduc- tion, by a large majority. Those who wish to realise the sig- nificance of this fact may try to imagine the probable action of a Second Chamber composed of cotton manufacturers on a proposi- tion to impose a duty on the import of cotton into India."