SOME NEEDS OF A DELIBERATIVE ASSEMBLY.
IF, for the sake of argument, we may suppose a State which throughout its history had been governed by a despot, the people having had no voice whatever in making laws or imposing taxes,—if we may suppose such a State suddenly to be given the opportunity of making for itself a deliberative Assembly, how would it set about the task ? Or if, to go further, it were to determine to copy on its own scale the best example of deliberative Assembly it could find, which we will suppose to be the British House of Commons, what are the provisions and properties of that Assembly which would seem to it the most necessary, and the aspects which would seem the most striking ? The question may be best answered, perhaps, by trying to see what an average man coming from the State in question to London would find actually proceeding at Westminster during the course of a fairly prolonged debate,—let us say a debate on an Education Bill. There are certain points which would strike him at once. Whether he would not miss certain less obvious but equally important points, and so return home to bungle his copy of what he saw, is another question.
-Suppose, then, that he has the machinery of what he sees explained to him. He is told, first and foremost, that the men who take part in the debates of the Assembly are chosen by the people, that each man represents the opinion of the majority of the inhabitants of the district from which he comes, and also that ameng them all there are here and thorn men who represent out-of-the-way opinions, and preach queer gospels ; so that on the whole be sees *produced before hint the character and the thoughts of a mass meeting of the country's inhabitants. But of course there must be subjects on which varying opinions are held. 1162 finds, then, the Assembly divided into two main parties, thinking differently upon the questions of the day ; and in regard to the way in which those questions should be practically dealt with, he sees one party making pro- posals which the other party opposes, until the Assembly bus had enough of arguing the merits of the case, and finally, as an Assembly, decides what to do. But, again, bbere must be rules on which such argument is conducted. Those rules, then, be finds drawn up. Next, they must be adhered to, and to see that they are adhered to, and that debate is carried on in a proper manner, he finds one man given authority over the whole Assembly, to decide what the various, speakers may or may not say and do during debate, and to see that official record is taken of the deeisions of the Assembly on the questions discussed.
That is simply the rough idea of the machinery which he would get ; and if, having thoroughly mastered the intricacies of first and .second readings of Bills, Committees, temporary chairmanships, and the rest of it, he were to set up in. his own country a copy of the machinery, and get elected corresponding officials, what would happen ? The People elect their representatives, and the machinery is set in inOtion. Would it be likely to run smoothly ? It might --1-for a time. But if it were to stop it would need a man who had seen the machinery of an Assembly like the House of Commons begin to gird and grind to the verge of stopping, to put his finger on the difficulty, and to point out how and where the oil ought to be poured. For the truth is that for all well-conducted and businesslike national deliberative Assemblies—there are not very many in existence—there is needed something more than a number of parties to thrash out the merits of particular questions, and certain officials to see that they thrash them out decently and in order. Besides " officials" there are needed " unofficials,"—if we may coin a word. There are times when the machinery girds and grinds, and not all the authority or power of the official can set it running smoothly. It is then that men will often listen to the " unofficial," and he, if he realises his position, and once establishes himself in the minds of his fellow-Members as the man to whom to turn in certain difficulties, is capable of rendering to the Assembly to which he belongs, and so to the country, services which, though in no way officially recognised, are some of the most valuable that can be rendered by a single citizen.
Such men are, of course, rare. They are chiefly needed in 'a deliberative Assembly when each side knows that it is partly in the wrong, but when neither side will have the grace -to admit the fact.. Or they are needed, to take another case, when a Minister belonging to a party which is in a, majority in the House has adopted an attitude which he is disinclined to relinquish, or makes a proposal which he is unwilling to withdraw, but which is clearly against the " sense of the House,"—that instinctive know- ledge of what is right which belongs to nearly all large meetings of men. And they seem to ?all into three classes. First, and perhaps best, you have the man who may be depended upon to discern on any occasion the-' sense of the House,"—not an easy thing to do, but rather one requiring a wide knowledge of men and things, and tact and resource beyond what most men possess. He is, of course; deeply respected ; he speaks but seldom and shortly, yet he always has something to say ; and when parties and speakers are becoming quarrelsome, or apt to contend over details which a broad-minded man sees really matter very little one way or the other, be can often restore the whole House to a perfectly good humour, and get what the House as a whole wants done or tuadone, by a few words which arc listened to simply. because they come from him. He may be best summed up, perhaps, as a man who draws attention to your good points. He is, in that respect, opposite in character and in the effect he has upon the House to the second class of "unofficial." This is the man who invariably speaks his mind, no matter whether he hurts your feelings or not. He must, of course, be a man of extremely sound judgment. and thoroughly 'recognised to be s0 by the House, 60 that if he tells you that you are making a fool of yourself you readily accept that as the case. He is, in short, like the confidential family servant, privileged to speak his mind, who, when he sees, let us say, two brothers, or a father and son, at loggerheads, tells each of them where they are in the wrong, and why they are in the wrong, and so staves off what might be an awkward split in the family. If he has a sense of humour so much the better,—as, indeed, it is so much the better in the case of the other gentler "un- official." But a sense of humour is not absolutely neces- sary to the success of either. They do good, and render their peculiar services to the Assembly to which they belong simply by speaking their minds to men who will listen to them and take their advice, whether they chaw attention chiefly to what is good or to what is bad. Last of the three comes the "unofficial" who is a buffoon, and a very valuable property of a deliberative Assembly he is. "It takes a wise man to play the fool well," and nobody heeds the buffoon the less because he is a buffoon if he fools thoroughly well. He can jest at the Minister on the brink of making a mistake, as the Court jester used to jest at the King, without giving offence, yet still driving his point hard home. In some ways, of the three types of " unofficials " he is the most powerful. When he gets up to speak he has the instant attention of his audience, who have a pleasant feeling that somebody is going to be laughed at without being hurt, and that behind the laugh there will be a dose of sound common-sense. If the functions of the other two " unofficials " are to bring back the House to the main road, to look seriously at what is good and what is bad respectively, the function of the fool is to lead his audience down a side road to look at what is ridiculous, and to send them back to the main road in a good temper. And of the three, which is, we will not say the most valuable, but the rarest pessession, as he is nit. doubtedly a great "need," of a deliberative Assembly ? If we are to state an opinion, it will be that the fool is the rarest of the three,—for the reason that to-day the other two are to be found in our own House of Commons, but not he.
Previous page
