The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1880-09-23


frrcu The Londcu Ss,ccsaios.i
II ia remarkable sign OF the pohtica'
times, and not one Of good omen, tnat now,
fos The third or fourth times ine ieaueIs o.
rartses IN the House OF Commons have taken
3. co,,ntinp me speeches OF individual mem.
hers. We are far indeed from blaming either
Lord Harrington or SIR stafford Nofthcote
for the computation they produced to- Tue
House OF Commons yesterday week. ~
was quite right that the speeches should
be counted. Lord Harrington could mol
have brought the real state Of the case
more powerfully before the House than by
1he sfrIkinc ud dbSurdum argument which
ne kubmittcd 10 II. IL all the members
were 10 sneak AZ the rate OF the selected
members. no said, then n you allowed ten
minutes for each speech. an ordinary six
months session would last over eight
wears; while n the speeches only occupied
eve minutes each, such session would oc-
cupy four years. "whicb," a. be justly
remarked, after Euclld's fashion, ais alb.
surd.v
II follows, then. either that some mode
must be invented OF keeping silent the In
creasipg number OF representatives who
wisS 10 talk. or else that parliamentary work
on anything like the scale needed will be-
come wholly impossible. The reason we
call the tendency TO count speeches and to
obtrude the statistics OF such computations
on the House ominous IL this Ii shows that
the House OF Commons 10 losing the very pc
cul;ar characteristic by which alone II was
ftfed to do what IL did--the compare
tive apathy, the relative taciturnIty, the
Interference for discussions conducted
through few selected combatants, the
obedience 10 q few fixed centres, which
once marked the great majority OF lis MEN,
bers. The iste Mr.. Bagebot, in celebrated
passage, drew attention TO the paradox OF
our form OF government some fifteen years
ago; aud ever since be wrote, that paradox
ia form has been growing nearer and nearer
TO what bids fair 10 be fatal paradox IN
fact--an intoIerabe combination OF prac-
teal inconsistencies that may wreck the
Constitution. "Of all odd forms OF
government be said, the oldest
really Is government by public meeting.
Here are 65S persons collected from all
parts, different IN nature, different in inter-
ests, different in look and language. IL we
think what an empire the English is, how
various are its compoDents, how incessant
its concerns, how immersed in history its
policy; IL we think what vast informa-
ton, what nice discretion, what a consist
ent will ought to mark the rulers OF that
.empire-we shall be surprised when we
see them. We see changing body OF
miscellaneous persons, sometimes few,
sometimes many, never the same for an
hour; sometimes excited, but mostly dull
and alf-weaiy-impatient OF eIoquence,
catching at any joke as an alienation.
These are the persons who rule the British
empire-who rule England, who rule Scot
land, who rule Ireland, who rule great
deal OF Asia, who rule great deal OF Poly
nesia, who rule great deal OF America,
and scattered fragments everywhere.
You have not perception OF the
final elements in this matter till you
know that government by a club is a
standing wonder" 1t is, no doubt,
a standing wonder still; but IL threatens TO |
become an exploded wonder, wonder OF
the past, before long. If things 90 on as
they now do. Directly we begin to count |
speeches, to show, as Lord Harrington |
showed most conclusiyely, that IL all MEN, |
sbers OF Parliament acted as an increasing
number OF members of Parliament are now |
acting, we shall require sessions OF between |
four and eight wears TO do what we have |
been accustomed to do in six months, we |
are becoming aware that Parliament is get |
ting unfit for its work, and that, too. |
partly by becoming, from one motive
or another. worthy, or unworthy, too much |
interested In IL.
The old notion In Parliament was that the
duty OF the many was 10 vote, and only OF
the few 10 speak. Farther, ii was assumed |
that even OF those who babitually spoke and |
exerted real Parliamentary Influence only |
certain proportion would speak on great |
occasions, the others reserving themselves |
for criticisms Of detail and matters of bust.
ness. All that is changing now. The ST. |
lent voters are diminishing, and the voluble |
speakers increasing. Nor Is that the |
worst. Even amongst the speakers the |
number OF those who speak on all posi- |
BILE occasions, on great occasions even more |
than on small. Is increasing rapidly; and |
worst OF all. perhaps, the speeches deliver |
cd on the more critical issues before the |
House are not even ibinned off by the pre-
yalence OF a general opinion that they |
ought to show substantial cause for their |
OVID existence; that they should at least |
aspire to be speeches OF force, and |
breadth, and impressveness. We have a |
notwithstanding number OF very poor
aud empty speeches, delivered on &C.
casioDs which ought TO be regarded
as critical occasions-ihe talk OF infe-
rior minds-tak whch.passes through the
ears Of the House without even so much
House. 1t Is not. so far as we can Judge,
that the House is inferior in its composition
10 what IL used TO be; but rather that its |
individual elements are more uneasy 10 |
their hold Of their position, more anxious to |
Justify ii to their constituents, and much |
less disposed than they used to be TO respect |
the collective opinion Of the body to which |
they belong. The inferior elements OF |
the House, except among the Irish MEM
bers, are, perhaps, rather more intelligent |
than the inferior elements OF any former |
House; but il is terrible set of against |
this that they are also much less conscious
Of their inferioriiy, and less modest about
il; while even The ADLER men appear to think
il easier to win attention by speaking often, |
and speaking without any serious effort, |
than by speaking seldom, but taking care |
that whenever they do speak they make |
themselves felt.
The number OF great speeches dwindles |
every Parliament, and the number OF cob |
seryations" multiplies. The clever men |
exhale 10 witty structures, without any |
body OF conviction. The stupid men are |
perhaps less stupid than they were, but I'M |
fortunately much more disposed to share |
with the House the misfortune OF whatever |
stupidity they can still boast. And thus |
the House Of Commons generally, though |
il may not have lost--though it may |
even have gained. In average in,elli- |
rence. has lost vastly In organization. |
There may be more nervous centres than |
there used 10 be, but then there Is far less |
government far less directing force I'm the /