TOPICS OF THE DAY.
MAKLNG THE BEST OF IT.
AN' elaborate paper in the January number of the Edinburgh Re- view, the accredited organ of the literary and aristocratic 'Whigs,
supplies the crowning evidence that Lord John Russell meditates
DO large extension of the suffrage, nor any sweeping revision of electoral districts. Though disclaiming, of course, official au-
thority, its earnestly apologetic tone towards Ministerial inactivity., past, present, and to come, is redolent of official inspiration. It is not easy to understand why the Prime Minister should have done himself so much wanton mischief as must result from a violation of his implied undertaking to supply the place of Mr. Locke King and his supporters, if they would cease to embarrass the Govern- ment by their volunteer legislation and guerilla attacks. Weak and ineffective as has been his recent political conduct, we should be loath to believe that, to escape from a momentary difficulty, he made a solemn pledge without that earnest consideration of the subject which would alone have justified him in making it, or qualify him for carrying his promise into cwt. There is only one principle on which he could vindicate himself; and that is, that he promised under the impression of a new Reform Bill being a really popular want, but that experience since has proved that impression to have been a mistake. To shape his conduct so avowedly by the low standard of loudness of demand, to offer such a premium to agitation, and to throw the practical government of the country so completely into the hands of demagogues and trading politicians, would be a lamentable precedent if it were adopted as a dogma of Ministerial morals. No highminded patriotic man would avow it as his principle of action, however ready on par- ticular occasions an overworked Minister might be to avail him- self of it as an excuse for not adding a voluntary labour to those forced upon him by the exigencies of the time. The truth must be that Lord John Russell made the mistake of supposing, that in site of appearances the Liberal party had such confidence in him as to render it only necessary for him to assume the re- sponsibility, and undertake the charge of providing a supplement to the Reform Bill, and that instantly a feeling of enthusiastic gra- titude would still all minor differences of opinion, check all crotchets of theory and all clamorous interests, and leave him to settle the question when where and how he thought best. He
time has by this found his mistae, and must heartily wish that
he had been either more or less explicit—had either made no promise at all, or had limited it beyond the possibility of misap- prehension or misconstruction. But, apart from the embarrassment into which Lord John's un- dignified surrender to a mutiny in his own camp has brought him, the question possesses difficulties enough of its own, enhanced at this moment by the doubtful and portentous aspect of foreign affairs. A time when, in the opinion of many, an European war is imminent, is not the most desirable time for agitating organic
changes in our constitution, nor for investing a large class with po- litical powers of which they will have to learn the limits and the
use by practical experience, and which it would require a miracle to insure their using wisely and moderately at first. Not even the greatest flatterers of the people we should suppose, would deny the folly of expecting from a newly-enfranchised population a firm and vigorous support for a Minister who should be compelled, in de- fence of the national position, largely to increase the taxes—when prices were raised, production diminished, and distress was pressing most heavily upon the class newly called into po- litical existence. We by no means refuse to acknowledge pa- triotism_and high spirit among that class, but voluntarily to rest
our sole dependence on it in a crisis, may be, of national existence, would be dangerously unwise. Nor indeed, without reference
to a contingent event, is the question of franchise-extension so simple and self-evident as some of our popular orators would repre- sent. It is, on the contrary, beset with serious difficulties of by no means merely theoretical validity. It is allowed on all hands, that whenever the question really comes before Parliament for set- tlement, a large extension will be inevitable. In other words, the democratic element in our constitution will be greatly strengthened.
To avoid mistake' we mean by the democratic element, that of which numbers merely form the strength. It is no abstraction, but the
simplest statement of a fact, that the three forces operative in our society are knowledge, property,. and numbers. Classes, properly syeaking, have broken up ; and individuals, or associations of in- viduals, according as they possess one or all of these forces rule among us. At once to give a preponderating or a potentially ex- clusive power over the representation to the numerical element, would certainly be unjust, and the attempt to do so would probably defeat itself in the working. Should the three elements ever become coincident, a simple universal suffrage would be the truest and there- fore the safest form of representation. Till then, property and know- ledge must have a distinct place assigned them in the constitution ; and to frame a scheme which shall adjust the coordination of know- ledge property, and numbers, is more difficult than to exhibit the glaring inconsistencies of our present system of representation, when viewed either as based on property or on numbers. The real charge against the present system is, not that it does present inconsistencies when so viewed, but that its inconsistencies are referrible to no principle—that, defended as it is on the ground of working well, or representing classes, it does neither the one nor the other, any more than it represents either property or numbers.
The wish to preserve it as it is, can only be strong with the class of gentlemen who at the creation of the world would have cried, as Paul Louis says "0 mon Dieu ! conservons le chaos." But whenever our statesmen seriously take in hand to solve this question, the loudest cries are and will be for a simple extension of the suffrage. The accompanying changes which are requited to make household or even universal suffrage not only safe but a source at once of stability and progress, are too audacious novelties too crotchety theories, or something by which so-called practical men express their contempt for those who look into the past and into the future as well as the present, for light to direct action. This, above n11 other reasons, is why we would rather see the question of Electoral Reform wait than be undertaken by a weak Government, with the temptation of using it as a party cry, and so adopting a hasty and inconsi- derate measure, to be passed amid hurry and passion and repented of at leisure, when minds are calm and experience begins to de- velop its consequences. Meanwhile, though we can expect from Lord John Russell no sweeping corollary to his Reform Bill, like the postscript to a lady's letter, we see no reason why defects admitted on all hands should not be done away with now, as well as at any future time. He would meet with no opposition difficult to overcome, if he proposed at once to disfranchise every constituency of less than a thousand electors; or, if the number of the House of Commons is mystic and sacred, lo combine with such constituencies new places to make one thousand the minimum. The abolition of sink-holes of cor- ruption is something very different from a new Reform Bill—much less showy, but probably more practical, certainly more practicable. We do not expect great measures from a weak Government; but small measures well conceived, thoroughly adequate for their pur- poses, and heartily advocated as things needed by the country, not cries useful to the party—these might go far to turn a weak Go- vernment into a strong one, at least in the absence of bolder states- men to win back some little of that public confidence, the want of which is the real cause of the weakness of the present Govern- ment, and of the consequent paralysis of our political action.
Previous page
