The morning call., 1890-12-28
OUR METHODS AND OTHERS.

Mr.. Jay Gould is better financier than
a politician. His views OH public affairs
have seldom commanded respect or even
much attention. lie looks at questions from
the standpoint of the capitalists interest,
and though in this respect he does not differ
much from other people, the habit strips his
opinions of the weight which they would
derive from his wealth and power if they
were broader. Still, whatever is said by q
man who is supposed to be worth hun
dred millions, more or less, and to give en-
ployment to many thousands of persons,
will oil WAYS find listeners and when lie SAYS
that he thinks the country would be better
off if we followed the English example, and
turned out the administration whenever the
elections went against 1t, a good many peo-
pie will wonder if he is right.
1t is not very easy to see how Mr.. Goulds
idea could be carried out. If an election had
taken place in England with results similar
to those of the November election in this
country, Lord Salisbury would have ten
dered his resignation to the Queen, and
would have advised her to send for Lord
Harrington or MIR. Gladstone tc replace
him. Usage would have compelled her to
follow the advice. and she would have en-
trusted the seals of office TO any member of
the opposition who believed that he would
command a majority in Parliament. We
have no prime minister in this country; the
head OF the administration Is the President;
there is no one 10 whom he could tender
his resignation. If lie did resign his office,
Mr. Morton would succeed him, and he fail
ing, Mr.. Reed would follow in order, and
after him Mr. Blaine. But the Inaugural
ton of Morton Reed or Blaine would not I'M
ply change of policy; the verdict as ex-
pressed at the election would only be ear
ried out by the inauguration Of Democrat,
aud for that transmutation we have no ma
chinery in our system.
Mr. Gould's idea, apparently, contem-
plates an amend ment to the Constitution
which provides for the resi- gnation of the
President, and Presidential election when
ever the administration party was beaten in
the off years. This might be done, but 1t
would be likely 10 reduce the Presidential
term from four to two years, and to
plunge the country into political confusion
twice as often as now. That would not be
relished by the people at large, who, if any
change were made. would be more apt to
extend the Presidential term to six years
than to reduce it. Americans are too sensi-
bic a people to enjoy the business dis
elections.
The difference between the English
methods and our own is one to detail.
When party loses public confidence in
Great Britain. it is overthrown Immediately,
and its antagonists take its place. When
the like occurrence takes place in this coun-
try, the overthrow is postponed for couple
OF years. The delay affords the party in
power an opportunity to consider the situa-
ton; it likewise gives the people time to
think twice on the subjrct, and to make
sure their off-year verdict reflected their de-
liberate sentiment Most minds VIII regard
our plan as the more philosophical and the
wiser of the two. 1t generally happens in
this country that the off-year elections re-
suit adversely TO the party in power; the
stay-at-home vote is large, and the enthu-
siasm reused by the contest for the Presi-
dency has cooled. Quite often, four years
reflection bring back the old love, and peo-
pie vote as they had voted for years pre-
viously, and reverse their off-year verdict
Ii, as Mr.. Gould suggests, power and Office
changed with every floating fancy of the
hour. our politics would be in chronic con-
fusion, and the Government would lack the
element of stability. The country would
probably get along, Notwithstanding but it
is hard to see What it would gain if we be-
gan to tread in the footsteps of the French
Republic, in which the average lease of
power of Prime Minister is about six
months.