CHAP.
IX.

Locke.

§ 2. Li

berty of

and the

Press.

preceded it. They held that the relations of ruler and
ruled were governed by some undefined social compact
entered into before the memory of man, which bound
the ruler to some undefined and elastic terms of con-
formity with the needs of the ruled.
Facts were,
however, greater than theories, and the main fact was
that the king, if he meant to preserve authority, must
appeal to some other argument than the claim to here-
ditary right.

Another consequence of the Revolution was hardly the Pulpit of less importance. Government after government had wrecked itself by attempting to grasp the control of the domain of religion and intelligence. The old claim of Anselm and the medieval churchmen had been set at naught. For a century and a half religion and politics had been strangely mixed. The holders of power had been in the position of a garrison defending all that they counted dear from the most violent attack. In such a position they had used the vantage ground of authority to prevent the spread of principles which were certain to be turned against them in actual combat. Gradually since the first days of the Restoration, all this had changed. The garrison had gathered strength, had marched out into the open country, and had been able to keep the field. The Church of England knew itself to be strong in the reverence of the great majority of the nation. Circumstances, never likely to occur again, had made it possible for a combination between Catholics and Dissenters to be formed under the shadow of James's Declaration of Indulgence. Yet so strong had the Church been, that not only had that combination failed to effect anything against her, but even the greater part of the Dissenters themselves had preferred to trust to her leaders for toleration, rather than risk all by assailing her. Therefore, the concession made to the

Dissenters by the Toleration Act was made without difficulty. It was easy to permit the assembly of separate congregations for purposes of worship outside the pale of the National Church as soon as it was ascertained that all those congregations, if they chose to combine together, would be too weak to affect the position of that Church which they had resolved to abandon. A few years later, the Toleration Act was supplemented by the withdrawal of the existing censorship over printed A free press and a free pulpit took their places in the new system established by the Revolution.

matter.

Like all great changes, the concession of liberty of speech and of writing was accompanied by results of which its authors had no foreknowledge. In the first place, it made government easier by withdrawing a whole sphere of human action from its influence. As long as those who were in authority were able to put to silence those whose opinions were adverse to their own, or at least to visit them with grievous penalties, the power which they possessed was so enormous, as to be liable to the grossest abuse, whilst it was certain to rouse the most determined opposition. Struggles for power under such conditions, resembled the struggles between hostile armies which allow no quarter to one another. Each successive government was anxious to secure not merely the present possession of influence, but the power of stereotyping ideas upon future generations by the suppression of the teaching of principles which it disliked. All this was abandoned by the statesmen of the Revolution. Whig and Tory might differ in their views; but the future was to be left to take care of itself. If the future would be moulded to some extent by Parliamentary action, it would be moulded to a far greater extent by words uttered or printed which were now placed beyond the control of any

СНАР.

IX.

$3. The Sphere of Govern

ment re

stricted.

СНАР.
IX.

$ 4. Immediate

the Pre

domin

House of

government whatever. In a new shape, the liberty which had been claimed by the heads of the organised medieval church was given over by a triumphant State to the individual conscience.

The two cardinal principles of the Revolution, thereResults of fore, were, that the government should be conducted in accordance with the will of the House of Commons, and ance of the that the House of Commons, predominant as it became Commons. in the government, should have no authority over the free expression of political and religious opinion outside its walls. For a long time before, both these principles would have been regarded as likely to lead straight to anarchy. As a matter of fact, they combined to lay the foundations of an order more stable than had yet been seen in England. After all, there was something permanently true in the reasoning of the advocates of monarchical authority. Neither five millions of men nor five hundred men can govern a country. To manage public affairs, even in a single department, requires a familiarity with the course of business and special mental aptitude, combined with a sense of responsibility for success or failure which is only possible for a single individual, whilst the task of keeping the heads of different departments in harmony is also only possible for a single individual. Till this was understood, the growth of parliamentary power brought with it the growth of parliamentary faction. The last years of William were embittered by the meddlesome intervention of the House of Commons in matters which it was unable to understand, and which it discussed with the strong passion of ignorance goaded by personal spite.

$ 5.

Cabinet

Govern

ment.

Gradually, a better system evolved itself out of the necessity of the circumstances. The Commons, separated as they were into two great parties, divided in opinion on the questions of the day, fell naturally

under the control of the ablest members of the party
in the majority, who alone were able to obtain the
necessary concurrence of the House in the measures
proposed by the government.
As therefore no govern-

ment could do without the support of the House of
Commons, the sovereign was obliged to choose his
ministers from the ranks of the majority. The Com-
mons obtained the power of securing that the general
direction of the course of government should be in ac-
cordance with the wishes of its majority, whilst from
that very assurance it ceased to be tempted to interfere
with those details of business which it could safely leave
in hands in which it had confidence. The further task
of keeping the administrators in harmony was at first
entrusted to the king. It was William who judged
when any particular minister was to be appointed or
dismissed, or when the whole ministry had better be
changed. After the accession of George I., who was too
indolent and too foreign to English habits to be com-
petent to fulfil this task, it devolved upon one of the
ministry, who acquired the name of Prime Minister, and
who became responsible for the general work of those
who became his subordinates. In this way Cabinet
Government gradually came into being. It is in reality
a committee formed of members of both Houses of
Parliament, and liable to have its existence terminated
by the victory of the Opposition in the House of Com-
mons. It has vindicated the work of actual government
from a House which, if it attempted to take it upon
itself, would be certain to degenerate into a disorderly
mob, whilst each successive Cabinet adapts itself to the
general feeling which prevails in parliament at any given
time. The new organisation had thus all the advantages
without the disadvantages of the old. It confided the
work of government, as before, to a directing mind, whilst

CHAP.

IX.

CHAP.

IX.

§ 6. The House of of Commons and the Nation.

it took care that that work should be exercised under responsibility to those who represented the average tone of the community.

Such at least was the ideal form of the new constitution, an ideal which, after the lapse of nearly two centuries, it is still tending to realise. Probably the time will never arrive when every member of a large community will vote from entire reliance on political conviction uninfluenced by personal considerations. It certainly had not arrived at the end of the seventeenth century. Even now, when we speak of public opinion, we refer to the opinion of a larger or smaller circle in proportion to the larger or smaller interest excited by the subject under discussion. There are questions brought before Parliament of so intricate and technical a nature, that only two or three hundred persons in the nation are capable of forming an opinion on the subject, or have any wish to do so. There are, on the other hand, subjects of so engrossing interest, that several millions of people, whether they are capable of understanding the matter or not, are at least ready to express an opinion. The greater the political intelligence of a people is, the larger are the number of subjects which appeal to the wider circle, and the fewer the number of subjects which appeal to the narrower circle. On the other hand, every achievement of the object of popular demand is followed by a time of apparent lethargy. The large circle has been satisfied in its demands, and it takes some time before the pressure of new wants is felt, and before the smaller circle of more intelligent men has discussed the remedies, and has convinced the masses that those remedies are worthy to be adopted. Such seasons of alternate activity and lethargy are of as constant recurrence in the political hody, as the alternations of action and sleep in the physi