representative government-第43节
按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页,按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页,按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部!
————未阅读完?加入书签已便下次继续阅读!
cated superiority of education; were it only to give the tone to public feeling; irrespective of any direct political consequences。 When there does exist in the electoral body an adequate sense of the extraordinary difference in value between one person and another; they will not lack signs by which to distinguish the persons whose worth for their purposes is the greatest。 Actual public services will naturally be the foremost indication: to have filled posts of magnitude; and done important things in them; of which the wisdom has been justified by the results; to have been the author of measures which appear from their effects to have been wisely planned; to have made predictions which have been of verified by the event; seldom or never falsified by it; to have given advice; which when taken has been followed by good consequences; when neglected; by bad。 There is doubtless a large portion of uncertainty in these signs of wisdom; but we are seeking for such as can be applied by persons of ordinary discernment。 They will do well not to rely much on any one indication; unless corroborated by the rest; and; in their estimation of the success or merit of any practical effort; to lay great stress on the general opinion of disinterested persons conversant with the subject matter。 The tests which I have spoken of are only applicable to tried men; among whom must be reckoned those who; though untried practically; have been tried speculatively; who; in public speech or in print; have discussed public affairs in a manner which proves that they have given serious study to them。 Such persons may; in the mere character of political thinkers; have exhibited a considerable amount of the same titles to confidence as those who have been proved in the position of practical statesmen。 When it is necessary to choose persons wholly untried; the best criteria are; reputation for ability among those who personally know them; and the confidence placed and recommendations given by persons already looked up to。 By tests like these; constituencies who sufficiently value mental ability; and eagerly seek for it; will generally succeed in obtaining men beyond mediocrity; and often men whom they can trust to carry on public affairs according to their unfettered judgment; to whom it would be an affront to require that they should give up that judgment at the behest of their inferiors in knowledge。 If such persons; honestly sought; are not to be found; then indeed the electors are justified in taking other precautions; for they cannot be expected to postpone their particular opinions; unless in order that they may be served by a person of superior knowledge to their own。 They would do well; indeed; even then; to remember; that when once chosen; the representative; if he devotes himself to his duty; has greater opportunities of correcting an original false judgment than fall to the lot of most of his constituents; a consideration which generally ought to prevent them (unless compelled by necessity to choose some one whose impartiality they do not fully trust) from exacting a pledge not to change his opinion; or; if he does; to resign his seat。 But when an unknown person; not certified in unmistakable terms by some high authority; is elected for the first time; the elector cannot be expected not to make conformity to his own sentiments the primary requisite。 It is enough if he does not regard a subsequent change of those sentiments; honestly avowed; with its grounds undisguisedly stated; as a peremptory reason for withdrawing his confidence。 Even supposing the most tried ability and acknowledged eminence of character in the representative; the private opinions of the electors are not to be placed entirely in abeyance。 Deference to mental superiority is not to go the length of self…annihilation… abnegation of any personal opinion。 But when the difference does not relate to the fundamentals of politics; however decided the elector may be in his own sentiments; he ought to consider that when an able man differs from him there is at least a considerable chance of his being in the wrong; and that even if otherwise; it is worth while to give up his opinion in things not absolutely essential; for the sake of the inestimable advantage of having an able man to act for him in the many matters in which he himself is not qualified to form a judgment。 In such cases he often endeavours to reconcile both wishes; by inducing the able man to sacrifice his own opinion on the points of difference: but; for the able man to lend himself to this compromise; is treason against his especial office; abdication of the peculiar duties of mental superiority; of which it is one of the most sacred not to desert the cause which has the clamour against it; nor to deprive of his services those of his opinions which need them the most。 A man of conscience and known ability should insist on full freedom to act as he in his own judgment deems best; and should not consent to serve on any other terms。 But the electors are entitled to know how he means to act; what opinions; on all things which concern his public duty; he intends should guide his conduct。 If some of these are unacceptable to them; it is for him to satisfy them that he nevertheless deserves to be their representative; and if they are wise; they will overlook; in favour of his general value; many and great differences between his opinions and their own。 There are some differences; however; which they cannot be expected to overlook。 Whoever feels the amount of interest in the government of his country which befits a freeman; has some convictions on national affairs which are like his life…blood; which the strength of his belief in their truth; together with the importance he attaches to them; forbid him to make a subject of compromise; or postpone to the judgment of any person; however greatly his superior。 Such convictions; when they exist in a people; or in any appreciable portion of one; are entitled to influence in virtue of their mere existence; and not solely in that of the probability of their being grounded in truth。 A people cannot be well governed in opposition to their primary notions of right; even though these may be in some points erroneous。 A correct estimate of the relation which should subsist between governors and governed; does not require the electors to consent to be represented by one who intends to govern them in opposition to their fundamental convictions。 If they avail themselves of his capacities of useful service in other respects; at a time when the points on which he is vitally at issue with them are not likely to be mooted; they are justified in dismissing him at the first moment when a question arises involving these; and on which there is not so assured a majority for what they deem right as to make the dissenting voice of that particular individual unimportant。 Thus (I mention names to illustrate my meaning; not for any personal application) the opinions supposed to be entertained by Mr。 Cobden and Mr。 Bright on resistance to foreign aggression might be overlooked during the Crimean war; when there was an overwhelming national feeling on the contrary side; and might yet very properly lead to their rejection by the electors at the time of the Chinese quarrel (though in itself a more doubtful question); because it was then for some time a moot point whether their view of the case might not prevail。 As the general result of what precedes; we may affirm that actual pledges should not be required; unless; from unfavourable social circumstances or faulty institutions; the electors are so narrowed in their choice as to be compelled to fix it on a person presumptively under the influence of partialities hostile to their interest: That they are entitled to a full knowledge of the political opinions and sentiments of the candidate; and not only entitled; but often bound; to reject one who differs from themselves on the few articles which are the foundation of their political belief: That in proportion to the opinion they entertain of the mental superiority of a candidate; they ought to put up with his expressing and acting on opinions different from theirs on any number of things not included in their fundamental articles of belief: That they ought to be unremitting in their search for a representative of such calibre as to be entrusted with full power of obeying the dictates of his own judgment: That they should consider it a duty which they owe to their fellow…countrymen; to do their utmost towards placing men of this quality in the legislature: and that it is of much greater importance to themselves to be represented by such a man than by one who professes agreement in a greater number of their opinions: for the benefits of his ability are certain; while the hypothesis of his being wrong and their being right on the points of difference is a very doubtful one。 I have discussed this question on the assumption that the electoral system; in all that depends on positive institution; conforms to the principles laid down in the preceding chapters。 Even on this hypothesis; the delegation theory of representation seems to me false; and its practical operation hurtful; though the mischief would in that case be confined