The principal question arises most naturally from a main doctrine of these essays. I have said that Cabinet government is possible in England because England was a deferential country. I meant that the nominal constituency was not the real constituency; that the mass of the "ten-pound" house-holders did not really form their own opinions, and did not exact of their representatives an obedience to those opinions; that they were in fact guided in their judgment by the better educated classes; that they preferred ...
Read More
The principal question arises most naturally from a main doctrine of these essays. I have said that Cabinet government is possible in England because England was a deferential country. I meant that the nominal constituency was not the real constituency; that the mass of the "ten-pound" house-holders did not really form their own opinions, and did not exact of their representatives an obedience to those opinions; that they were in fact guided in their judgment by the better educated classes; that they preferred representatives from those classes, and gave those representatives much licence. If a hundred small shopkeepers had by miracle been added to any of the '32 Parliaments, they would have felt outcasts there. Nothing could be more unlike those Parliaments than the average mass of the constituency from which they were chosen. I do not of course mean that the ten-pound householders were great admirers of intellect or good judges of refinement. We all know that, for the most part, they were not so at all; very few Englishmen are. They were not influenced by ideas, but by facts; not by things impalpable, but by things palpable.
Read Less
Given the lowness of politics today, to read the higher reaches of this great provider is a privilege. Just take pages 280 - 281. Incomparable. Timeless. Thank you Walter Bagehot.
normin
Dec 15, 2011
The book arrived in good condition. However, even allowing for the fact that the writer wrote in the 19th century, I found it tedious and wordy. I was looking for a fuller explanation of the (unwritten) English constitution, but I found too many instances where the writer was tempted into side-issue comparisons, mostly unfavourable, with the American Constitution. I found it too tedious to finish.
