TOPICS OF THE DAY.
THE SPEAKERSHIP.
TO our mind, the Speaker ought to be a much more important figure in the Democratic House of Commons of the future than lie has ever been in the Middle-class House of Commons of the past. We do not mean that we wish to see a sudden and re- volutionary change made in the interpretation of the duties of that office. On the contrary, such a change would be most unadvisable and mischievous. But we do think that if the House of Commons elected by a democracy in the interests of a democracy, is to be as efficient for democratic purposes, as the House of Commons elected by the middle and higher class in the interests of the middle and higher class was for the purposes of the well-to-do classes, the Speaker of that House must gradually develop the office into one of greater signifi- cance and greater responsibility than it has hitherto in- volved. Sir Henry Brand has made an admirable Speaker, and on one occasion displayed an energy and originality in the discharge of his duties which properly won for him the gratitude of the whole Empire. But Sir Henry Brand was appointed Speaker before the effects of the recent democratic change had developed themselves, and quite rightly took his chief precedents from the examples of such Speakers as Mr. Denison and Mr. Shaw Lefevre ; nor could it have been fairly expected of him that he would strengthen the whole con- ception of the duties of the office, even though he did rightly strike one coup delat, when it became evident that a small party had determined so to conduct themselves as to make legislation of which they disapproved wholly impracticable. But, unless we are much mistaken, the Speaker of the Demo- cratic House of Commons of the future must regard himself more or less as the trustee of the whole House to prevent the reckless waste of time and energy ; and must display, there- fore, not only impartiality,—which all our Speakers have displayed,—but a steady resolve to keep speakers to the point they are discussing, and to resist any attempt to prolong talk for the sake of delaying action. He must exercise the full rights of the Speaker to put down individual encroachments on the patience of the House, and so prepare the House for such a use by him of the right of closure of debate as would express the general resolve of the nation that debate is to be practical, and not a machinery for retard- ing the execution of a legislative purpose. We believe that the Speaker would be supported in gradually applying the rule of closure so as to stop redundant debate, though it would be obviously necessary to use the greatest impartiality in the application of the rule, and to take every care that it should not be even liable to the imputation of being used as a party instrument. But with the enormous competitive pressure on the time of the House which democracy necessarily involves, it is certain that the Speaker ought to be more and more invested with the power to winnow away the chaff of mere verbosity, unless the House is to prove a very inferior instrument in the hands of the people to that which it has proved in the hands of the aristocracy and the middle- class.
'folding these views about the Speakership of the future, we cannot but think that the choice of a successor to Sir Henry Brand is one of the most important of the political duties which devolve on the present Administration and the House of Commons. We desire to see a man of something like special genius for the place chosen,—a man whose first quality, of course, would be impartiality, but whose secondary and equally conspicuous qualities would be decision, tact, and sympathy with the public spirit of the House. We have already mentioned Mr. Courtney as having shown indications of exactly such qualities as are needed on the few occasions on which he has replaced the Chairman of Committees in difficult and exhausting crises. He is comparatively young, and has that self-confidence, that promptitude, and that pleasure in showing his superiority to party considerations, which may make an able man either a snubbing Govern- ment official, or a great servant of the House. If a man of much greater experience than Mr. Courtney were wanted, it is only justice to a very shrewd and very resolute Member, of whom the public knows far less than it ought to know, to mention Mr. Dillwyn, with his long experience of the House, his iron frame, his keen eye, his complete indifference to praise or censure, his excellent judgment, and his indomitable strength of purpose, as one who would not be afraid to serve the House as the House now most needs serving, by interpreting with perfect impartiality, as regards its various sections, its• impatience of anything like waste of time. Such a nomination would excite some surprise in the country, but hardly any in the House itself.
It has been said, however, that the House and the Government look to the class of Cabinet or passed Cabinet Ministers fon the authority needful to give a new significance to the Speaker's functions. If so, there are several men to whom we might with some confidence look, though we should not count Sir Williams Harcourt as even a possible candidate. With all his great quali- ties, Sir William Harcourt is just the very type of man of whom it would be impossible to make a good Speaker. In the first place, the Irish party already regard him as their implacable enemy, and no condition could be more unfavourable for success than that. We should say that one of the great conditions of success in a new Speaker, would be a disposition on the part of the Irish Members to believe in his fairness, in- his disposition to deal with them as he would with any other.
section of the House. But what is more important than even.
the deep-seated prejudice of the Irish Members, is Sir William Harcourt's strong bias towards the wishes of the majority, an almost fatal tendency in a Speaker, who ought to feel even a more jealous sympathy with the minority, as a minority,— unless that minority were engaged in subverting the purposes of the whole body to which they belonged,—than with the majority itself. Sir William Harcourt is a great party leader, but he has never shown, and never could show, that almost jealous indifference to popular bias wherever justice was at stake, which is one of the first requisites of a great Speaker. There are men whose self-respect shows itself in defying a majority where equity requires that a majority should be defied ; and both Mr. Courtney and Mr. Dillwyn have, we believe, this kind of self-respect in abundance. But Sir William Harcourt has not. His tendency is to trample on a minute party which he happens to deem at once dangerous and• weak, and to scorn their resentment. No quality could be more fatal to the success of a great Speaker. Sir Henry James, whose name has been mentioned in this connection, would have far greater claims on the consideration of the House..
He is very able, and has plenty of tact, but whether he would- not take too historical a view of an office which needs " evolu- tion," is, we think, open to great doubt. Besides, we need him as a statesman, a capacity in which the public estimate of him grows daily.
Both Mr. Childers and Mr. Goschen have been spoken of as possible Speakers, and if either of them were inclined to give up yet higher prospects for the sake of taking an office which un- doubtedly needs something of " evolution " in the interests of democracy, either of them has great qualities for the post. Mr.
Childers has a great and just reputation for fairness of mind.
Neither the Irish Members nor any other Party in the House would anticipate anything but perfect fairness from him,—indeed, the Irish Members have every reason to regard him as a friend.
Moreover, he has had his experience of the working of demo- cratic institutions in Australia, and with his perfect equanimity, his " sweet reasonableness,"—as Mr. Arnold calls it,—and his strong sense of duty to the State at large, he might well hope to make a great office of the Speakership. Mr. Goschen is younger, and has established a reputation for entering into Conservative feeling which would give him a considerable claim on Conservative support. And with his great weight of character and reflective impartiality, he might give a quite new efficiency to the Speakership. His conduct of the mission to Constantinople showed that decisiveness which is one of the essentials of the Speakership of the future. The man who could deal effectually with a shifty Sultan, is just the man to deal effectually with a shifty Bashi-Bazouk of debate. But we cannot but doubt whether either Mr. Childers or Mr. Goschen would give up the more attractive career of a power- ful Minister for the comparatively inconspicuous one of a Speaker. Whoever the next Speaker may be, however, the one thing needful is that he should have the tact, the impartiality, the
promptitude, and the energy requisite to magnify his office,—
to make of the Speakership a more positively directing power than it has hitherto been, a power exerted in the interests of the State at large, and in the full confidence of popular support. The aim of the new Speaker and his successors should certainly be to economise the time, to increase the legislative efficiency, and to raise the dignity of the House of Commons, without derogating in the smallest degree from the absolute impartiality of the Chair.
Previous page
