Skip to main content

Full text of "Political Science Of The State"

See other formats

the dangerous prerogative of creating a new batch of peers.
Such compromises often repeated would ruin any house
which could obstruct legislation without defeating it; the
house would fall into contempt. But, in a democratic coun-
try like ours, if the two houses were of opposite politics,
neither would yield except so far as to make compromises
in small particulars. And, indeed, Mr. Mill remarks that
"in a really democratic state of society, the house of lords
would be of no value as a moderator of democracy ;" that
(the really moderative power) " in a really democratic con-
stitution, must act in and through the democratic house."
Mr, Mill regards the full representation of minorities in a
single house as a more effective centre of resistance to dan-
gerous legislation than any which a second chamber could
afford, which would be open to the imputation of class in-
terests adverse to the majority. If, however, a wisely con-
servative body were felt to be necessary, the office of which
would be to moderate democratic ascendancy, the best form
in which it could appear would be, he thinks, one following
somewhat the pattern of the Roman senate. It should be a
chamber of statesmen, as contrasted to the people's chamber
<{ a council composed of all living public men who have
passed through any important political office or employment.'1
Such a body would not only moderate, but also impel. It
should be confined to men who have been in a legal, political,
military or naval employment. But scientific and literary'
eminence are too indefinite and disputable " for supplying
such a senate with members. ... If the writings by which
reputation has been gained are unconnected with politics,
they are no evidence of the special qualities required, \yhile,
if political, they would allow successive ministries to deluge
the house with party tools." To yhich might be added that
literary men are seldom successful in politics. They are
either impractical or conceited, or too fine for the coarse
blows of public assemblies, and often unable to stand up for
their views in debate.
It is perhaps superfluous to criticise a project  which is