페이지 이미지
PDF
ePub

CONTENT S.

PAGB

CHAPTER 1.
TO WHAT EXTENT FORMS OF GOVERNMENT ARE A MATTER OF
CHOICE...........

CHOICE......................................................................

.......

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

. CHAPTER II.
THE CRITERION OF A GOOD FORM OF GOVERNMENT............... 26

CHAPTER III.
THAT THE IDEALLY BEST FORM OF GOVERNMENT IS REPRE-
SENTATIVE GOVERNMENT ......

............................ 55

CHAPTER IV.
UNDER WHAT SOCIAL CONDITIONS REPRESENTATIVE GOVERN-
MENT IS INAPPLICABLE...........

............ 81

.

CHAPTER V.
OF THE PROPER FUNCTIONS OF REPRESENTATIVE BODIES......... 97

CHAPTER VI.
OF THE INFIRMITIES AND DANGERS TO WHICH REPRESENTA-
TIVE GOVERNMENT IS LIABLE ..........

.............. 120

CHAPTER VII.
OF TRUE AND FALSE DEMOCRACY; REPRESENTATION OF ALL,

AND REPRESENTATION OF THE MAJORITY ONLY .......

CHAPTER VIII.

OF THE EXTENSION OF THE SUFFRAGE

I

...............

CHAPTER IX.
SHOULD THERE BE TWO STAGES OF ELECTION ? .................... 196

CONSIDERATIONS

ON

REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT.

CHAPTER I. TO WHAT EXTENT FORMS OF GOVERNMENT ARE A

MATTER OF CHOICE. ALL speculations concerning forms of government bear the impress, more or less exclusive, of two conflicting theories respecting political institutions; or, to speak more properly, conflicting conceptions of what political institutions are.

By some minds, government is conceived as strictly a practical art, giving rise to no questions but those of means and an end. Forms of government are assimilated to any other expedients for the attainment of human objects. They are regarded as wholly an affair of invention and contrivance. Being made by man, it is assumed that man has the choice either to make them or not, and how or on what pattern they shall be made. Government, according to this conception, is a problem, to be worked like any other question of business. The first step is to define the purposes which governments are required to promote. The next is to inquire what form of government is best fitted to fulfill those purposes. Having satisfied ourselves on these two points, and ascertained the form of government which combines the greatest amount of good with the least of evil, what further remains is to obtain the concurrence of our countrymen, or those for whom the institutions are intended, in the opinion which we have privately arrived at. To find the best form of government; to persuade others that it is the best; and, having done so, to stir them up to insist on having it, is the order of ideas in the minds of those who adopt this view of political philosophy. They look upon a constitution in the same light (difference of scale being allowed for) as they would upon a steam plow or a threshing machine.

To these stand opposed another kind of political reasoners, who are so far from assimilating a form of government to a machine that they regard it as a sort of spontaneous product, and the science of government as a branch (so to speak) of natural history. According to them, forms of government are not a matter of choice. We must take them, in the main, as we find them. Governments can not be constructed by premeditated design. They "are not made, but grow.” Our business with them, as with the other facts of the universe, is to acquaint ourselves with their natural properties, and adapt ourselves to them. The fundamental political institutions of a people are considered by this school as a sort of organic growth

from the nature and life of that people; a product of their habits, instincts, and unconscious wants and desires, scarcely at all of their deliberate purposes. Their will has had no part in the matter but that of meeting the necessities of the moment by the contrivances of the moment, which contrivances, if in sufficient conformity to the national feelings and character, commonly last, and, by successive aggregation, constitute a polity suited to the people who possess it, but which it would be vain to attempt to superinduce upon any people whose nature and circumstances had not spontaneously evolved it.

It is difficult to decide which of these doctrines would be the most absurd, if we could suppose either of them held as an exclusive theory. But the principles which men profess on any controverted subject are usually a very imperfect exponent of the opinions they really hold. No one believes that every people is capable of working every sort of institution. Carry the analogy of mechanical contrivances as far as we will, a man does not choose even an instrument of timber and iron on the sole ground that it is in itself the best. He considers whether he possesses the other requisites which must be combined with it to render its employment advantageous, and, in particular, whether those by whom it will have to be worked possess the knowledge and skill necessary for its management. On the other hand, neither are those who speak of institutions as if they were a kind of living organisms really the political fatalists they give themselves out to be. They do not pretend that

« 이전계속 »