DEMOCRACY AND LIBERTY.

Clutha Leader, Volume XXIII, Issue 1141, 17 July 1896, Page 7

DEMOCRACY AND LIBERTY.

. (Cojtihued.) - , : ;; The';, gravest dd.ubt§..' arise in Mi Leclcy's mind as to whether a Parliament elected as Parliaments are now is fitted to 'deal with the difficult and dangerous questions ,/iffectiug trade, labor, and society which are rapidly coming to the front in all countries. He has watched closely great elections, and it astonishes him ■ to find how largely the chance of . a . candidate depends upon his skill in appealing to the supposed direct and immediate interets of large sections of his electors, in making use of claptrap and popular cries, in inflaming class animosities, and in pledging himself to conciliate groups of thorough-going faddists. Few public men, he avers, look beyond, the interests of their party and the chances of an election. He must be a sanguine man, moralises Mr Lecky, who can look across . such a scene with confidence as to the future. Mr Lecky's own view is that the electorate established in Great Britain in J832, which admitted all classes from the top to the bottom, but guve the balance of the power to .the lower middle class, was the best ever created for the good of the community. As regards manhood suffrage it must be confessed that both eulogy and invective are useless. The system is with us, and it needs to be intelligently worked with appropriate institutions. The practical danger is putting the new wine into old bottles — introducing democracy without the checks which wise democrats are the first to require in the interests of a cause which they wish to be associated with success, and not to be defeated by excesses and failures. Mr Ltcky look's with interest to the Belgian dual vote, every man having one vote, and the heads of families of a certain age having another. However, it is Mr Lecky's strong opinion that the one way to render a democratic Government safe and useful as well as strong is to secure an effective Upper House. A single and uncontrollable Chamber mus.r, he admits, end in disaster, and the necessity of a second Chamber to exercise a controlling, modifying, retarding, and steadying influence has, he urges acquired almost the position of an axiom. He writes ' It is also one of the greatest and most distinctive excellencies of British legislation that it is- in general framed, not on a decisive victory to one set of interest?, and obtaining perfect symmetry or logical coherence, but with a view of satisfying, as far as possible, many different and conflicting interests, classes and opinions. The permanence and efficacy of legislation, according to English notions, depends essentially on its success in obtaining the widest measure of assent or acquiescence, and provoking the smallest amount of friction and opposition. In carrying out this policy the. action of the House of Lords has been of capital importance. Very frequently it represent especially the minority which jU overpowered in the other House. The will of the majority in the stronger Chamber ultimately prevails, but scarcely a great contentious measure passes into the Statute-book without compromises, modifications, or amendments designed to disarm the Opposition, or to satisfy the wishes of the minorities, •or to soften the harsher features of inevitable transitions. The mere consciousness that thtre is another and a revising assembly wrose assent is indispensable to legislation has a moderating influence on majorities and Ministers which it is difficult to overvalue. The tyranny of majorities is, of 'all form. -3 of tyranny, that which, in the conditions of modern life, ?s most to be feared, and against which it should be the chief object of a wise statesman to provide.' Mr Lecky devotes many pages to schemes for rendering the House of Lords more effective than it is. He would create a small body of hereditary peers elected by the peers as a whole and strengthened by life peers, and he would give this body a suspensory veto — its veto to be set aside by a two-thirds majority in successive Houses of Commons. And also he favors the Swiss referendum, namely, that after the bill had passed both Houses it may be vetoed by the people. In this form "the referendum is no doubt, as Mr Lecky indicates, a conservative force, but it is to be feared that the writer has not noted how swiftly the referendum descends to the plebiscite, and the plebiscite, or *the vote on matters actually being fought out in the Legislature, is government by haste, by members, and by the impulse of the moment — by all the influeuces, in fact, which Mr Lecky most strongly condercs. A mob is a number of people who may be either respectable, educated, and well meaning or otherwise, but who are swayed by the moment's passion, and hence the plebiscite as distinguished from the referendum in mob government. We have dealt simply in this notice with Mr Lecky's views of democracy as it affects politics. The bulk of the work refers to democracy in its connection with religion, with taxation, with liquor laws, and with labor. Oi these chapters it may be said that they are of unequal merit, some apparently being * chips from the workshop ' oi raateial left over' from Mr Lecky's

prior volume. As an economist Mr Lecky, as is uatural, is more wavering and uncertain than Mr Leuky as a. • historian dealing with politic il subjects. . But all the chapters are of interest and ■ some are of great value, and they may | demand a second notice. — The Argus, Melbourne. 1 I