The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1875-11-10
Is Presbyterian Government Representa-
tive System.

government of the Christian Church as
pure democracy, or as a representative re
public? THE former, ia the Congregational
lists reply; the latter, the Presbyterian's.-
But what is a representative republic Ii
it the substitution of the rule of the fesO fol-
that of the many for conscience sake alone
The people cannot all come together for de
liberation and action, and therefore few
men are chosen to act in the room of thC
people. Is that the sole or the main grounC
on which representative government is based
One ground that is, no doubt; for how coulC
whole community-even in single city
manage to hear any mans voice if they al
came together? But this is not the chieJ
ground of the substitution uuder considerat
tion. But here it is: there cannot be any
wise or right action without deliberation
and greas crowd can never deliberate
One man may teach crowd, if they will SIT
quietly and listen and crowd may attend
upon debate, by two or more speakers
and be profted. But no such thing as free
yet calm debate is possible to very large
concourse of people, if every man that
chooses is to have his say. And this is the
reason why people can never wisely govern
themselves directly. If they all come TO-
gether, there is likely to be tumult instead
of a delberative assembly. We may add as
another chief reason why the direct govern
ment of the people must be substituted by
their self-government through chosen rulers,
that by no means all of the people are COM
petent to give wise counsel. In the repre-
sentative republic, therefore, wise men and
good men are chosen by the people to act in
their room, and it is for them to see that the
republic shall suffer no damage.
Accordingly, it is by no means correct that
in a true representative republic, the men
commissioned to act for the people are to do
what may be the general desire of their con-
stituents. Ia the first place, how can they
tell what is the general desire? The peo-
pie have never had the opportunity to ex-
press their desires, and the blatant few who
make the most noise do not always speak
what the people generally think. Butt the
second place, the people cannot know what
they should desire, without free and full con-
ference had and as this cannot be had by
all the people, they must commission their
wisest and most trusted men to hold the con-
ference for them. And these men meyer
ought to be cramped with instructions by the
people; nor should they ever 60 into the
conference respecting the public good with
their hands warped by judgments formed be-
fore the conference is had; nor should they
ever enter it determined to consult the wish
es or the interests of their immediate con-
stituents only, but the interest, and especial
ly the duty, of the whole body. The thing
to be decided by the conference is, not what
the people wish to do or have done, but what
it is the true interest and duty of the people
to do or to have done. The State, it has
been well said, is designed to realise the idea
of justice. States must do right. Repre-
sentative assemblies are designed to take
counsel together, and after every man who
has anything to say has contributed to the
general stock of sound knowledge, then the
decision is to be made in such manner as the
we'll doing and well-being of the State may
require.
1t would seem that New England is look
ing with some special interest these days
into the workings of PreSbyterianisn. The
Boston Congreqationalist is continually at
it. The ideas entertained of the representa-
tive system by our Independent friends are
not at all such as are expressed above. Ac-
cording to their statements, representative
''misrepresents his constituency by voting
as they would not do in his place" and
"the representative is to be so entirely in
sympathy with the general desires and feel
ings, that the result Of the legislation is to
be the same from the smaller number as it
would have been from the larger; and 10
point of fact, SO far as that proved to be the
result, land only so far,) was the government
that ensued purely representative in its char
acter." In other words, what the people
wiU, however misguided by passion or ig,
norance or self interest, and not what the
people owe to themselves, to others, and to
God, is the end which true representatives
of the people must seek to bring to pass.
Now, the difficulty with this theory Of
representative government is that it really
makes it differ in nothing from pure dem
ocraoy. The people are to have their will
and way, whether good for them or bad
whether right in them or wrong. Or per-
haps the people can do no wrong. Voa
pOpuS, vOr Del. The people are to be del
fed. Thus does democracy often run mad
What we call the government of repre-
sentatives, the COngregatiOnalist nicknamel
" an Oligarchy." Well, with the lovers o
pure democracy run mad, who would leve
all down SO as to have none higher than th'
lowest who would insist on equal rights fol
all to equal things who would recognize nj
superiority of wisdom over folly, or knoWl
edge over ignorance, or of virtue over vice
with such, an {" "oligarChy" is of course th'
worst thing possible, because it acknowledge
that the few are better in some respects thai
the many. But as between US and the Con