The Press.
London, England, 1858-02-13 00:00:00

.•
policy. Thus it will be seen that's.) long as the House of
Commons was the popular element in the Constitution, it
was not the governing body ; and that when it became the
governing body it ceased to be the popular element. Under
either condition its constitution was well enough adapted
for the discharge of its duties. When, after the long
torpor of the eighteenth century, the people awoke from
sleep, and demanded that the popular element of the
Constitution should be revived, nobody seems to have con.
sidered what, by that time, the House of Commons had
actually become. In 1832, therefore, the popular chit-
ranter of the house was partially restored, while its non.
popular functions were still retained ; and the consequence
is, that it is now a standing contradiction to itself. It
cannot govern the country because it is too much of a
mob, and it cannot resist oligarchical influences because it
is too little of a democracy; at present neither system,
neither government by the many nor government by the
few, is allowed a fair chance.
Neither in the present essay, however, nor in
the article from which we have been quoting,
is any definite suggestion offered for the solu-
tion of the difficulty. Lord Grey certainly
recommends that the powers of Government
should be increased, but then he does not tell
us how. And the writer in the New Quarterly
promises a remedy, but has unhappily ne-
glected to explain it. The fact is that tho
future of the House of Commons is one of
those questions on which, whatever men may
think, they hesitate to speak boldly. We
would not seek to disguise our own apprehen-
sions on the subject. Time is gradually veri-
fying many of the predictions by which the
first Reform Bill was accompanied. Those
doctrines of political optimism by which the
populace is alternately pacified and flattered
are a bar to philosophic statesmanship. And
her Majesty's Ministers have lost those powers,
now more desirable than ever, which enabled
them to withstand the blind impulse of demo.
cracy or the selfish instincts of trade. Who•
ther the forces of the Constitution admit of
such readjustment as to revive those powers
without their concomitant corruptions is now
the problem before us. No man can be san-
guine of the result ; and writers may well be
pardoned who, after investigating the phe-
nomena, decline to enunciate a theory.

Another passage in which the present essay
coincides with the New Quarterly Review is
that which treats of the subsidence of great
political questions, and its effect on Parlia-
mentary Government. Lord Grey writes :

The fact of all the most important public questions on
which parties were formerly divided having been finally
settled, has contributed to increase the difficulty of main-
taining the authority cf the Government in the House of
Commons. While these questions were still at issue, they
served as a bond of union both to the party which sup-
ported , and to that which resisted, the measures in dispute,
and helped to keep up the party discipline upon which the
strength of a Ministry, as well as that of au Opposition,
greatly depends.
In the New Quarterly we find :

The predominance of social over political questions
proves that party is in abeyance. For party arose out of
the conflict of politics, and in proportion as the one ceases
to interest, the other will cease to flourish. For the pro-
motion of such reforms as at present occupy the attention
of men like Lord Stanley and Sir John Pakington, the
House of Commons is not adapted. That great assembly
has grown up through ages of high political excitement.
When dynasties and creeds were at stake —when a speech
from a great orator was an event of European importance,
and when, moreover, its own debates were the only regular
expression of public opinion. But in quiet times, when
no great interests are involved, when oratory is superseded
by journalism, and knowledge is more important than
genius, the House of Commons has come round to some-
thing like Mr. Laing's description of it, and is useful prin-
cipally for the purpose of voting the supplies.
- -

Here again, however, Lord Grey's method is
purely tentative. Though he makes Minis-
terial efficiency to depend upon party effi-
ciency, he does not inform us how his pro-
posal to strengthen Ministers would revive
party. But the fact is, it is a mistake to sup-
pose this country has arrived at the state in
which " all great questions are settled, and
" only minor points remain." Consequently,
the remarks of M. tie Tocqueville here
quoted do not apply to England, however truo
of America. Parties are hero held in abeyance
because they are in a state of transition.
The management of Liberalism is changing
hands, and as the extremes on either side be-
gin to fall off, the residuum will probably
amalgamate into a powerful Conservative
party, devoted to the safety of our essential
institutions. While the Church and the aris-
tocracy. and, covertly, the Crown, remain ob-
jects of hostility to an influential body, it can-
not be said that all great questions aro settled.