The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1896-11-29

For party government to be successful there
must be two parties opposed to one another and
alternating in power. as there have been usu-
ally In England since the days of William Ill,
and as there have been usually In tho United
States since Washington's second admiuistra-
ton. No such state of things has existed under
the third French Republic. and it was reserved
for Mr.. Lowell. fIrst OF Americans. to say why.
About tho fact there is no doubt whatever.
and we need not attempt to condense the pages
in which he recapitulates the numerous muta-
tions of Ministries since 1871. IL is the causes
that concern us. and we proceed at once to
these. Mr.. Lowell, in the first place, points
out ION page 102) that in tho United States
and England. while we may differ In re-
gard to tho ideal form of government, We
are all of ono mind on the question Of
what government Is entitled TO our actual al
legiance. and we are all determined to yield to
that government our obedience and support. In
short. o common understanding or consensus
in regard to the basis and form of the govern
ment is so universal in tho American republic
and in the United Kingdom that every citizen
or subject feels as II It were natural and inevi-
table. In all tho countries of Continental
Europe possessed of parliamentary institutions.
the case is otherwise. moro or less. 1t is never
theless obvious that such a consensus is the
lOunuhtAoA VI MA pOiibiSoi "a
all law and order; it Is easy to see,
first, that II it were seriously ques-
toned. the position of the government
would DO shaken, and. secondly, that. II It were
destroyed. the country would be plunged into a
state of anarchy. Now. in France. there are
many persons who do not accept the consensus
on which the political authority OF the day is
based: such persons are termed in France
rreconcilables Men OF this sort do not admit
the rightfulness OF the existing Government,
and. although they may submit to II for the mo-
ment. their object 10 to effect q revolution by
peaceful II not by violent means. Hence. their
position Is essentially different from that Of all
other parties, for these aim only at directing the
policy of tho Government within constitutional
imits, and can DO intrusted with power
without danger to tho fundamental institu-
tions OF the nation, whereas the irreconcilables.
on the contrary. would use their power to upset
those institutions. and. therefore. cannot be
suffered to get control OF the State. They form,
IN a word. an opposition that is incapable of
taking Office. Thus they present o disturbing
element which. In q parliamentary form of
government, throws the whole system out of
gear. In a foot note. however. Mr.. Lowell
recognizes tho fact that 1t is impossible to draw
a sharp line between what Is revolutionary and
what Is not, or to define exactly an irreconcil-
able. The matter depends, in point of fact,
upon the opinion of the community. Thus. DO
fore 1885 homo rule might fairly he said to
have been revolutionary. and the Irish homo
rulers to have been irroconcilable: but after
Mr.. Gladstone made homo rule a practical
question in English politics. II would have been
absurd to call Parnells followers rreconcilables
Another thing noticed by Mr.. Lowell about a
consensus 10 that 1t cannot be created Arti-
hcially, but must be the result of a slow growth
and long tradition. Its essence lies in tho fact
that 1t is unconscious. The people of the United
States. for example, could not, by agreement.
| give to a dictator the power which the Gear
Yields in Russia, for, except in the presence of
imminent danger. he would have no authority,
unless the people believed In his inherent right
to rule, and the people cannot make themselves
believe In any such right simply by agreeing
to dose. The foundation otgoyernmenti 10 faith,
not reason. and tho faith OF a people Is, as a
rule, not vital. unless they have been born with
1t. In n foot note. tho author points out a curl
Gus and almost a solitary exception to this prIn-
ciple. which is to be found in the history of tho
United States. The generation that framed the
Constitution looked upon that document as very
imperfect, but they chung to 1t tenaciously as
the only defence against national dismember-
ment. and. in order to make it popular, they
praised 1t beyond their own belief In its merits.
This effort to admire tho Constitution was mar
vellously successful, and. in the next genera
ton. resulted in a worship of the Constitution
OF which It's trainers never dreamed.
In France. on the contrary, the revolution of
1889 destroyed all faith in tho political
institutions of the past, and was unable
to substitute universal faith In anything
else. 1t did. indeed, give birth TO a code
Of law and TO an administrative system.
both OF which have taken a strong hold on the
nation, and have survived every change in the
government. These are the permanent ele-
ments in France. and tho only ones that have
acquired the blind force Of tradition. They