II

ELECTION

VENICE, March 11, 1852.

§ 9. Election. I pass to the second of the subjects named in my former letter, namely, “Election.” If by a “member of Parliament” we at present, in England, understand the mouthpiece of a constituency; a person, that is to say, sent into the House of Commons to express by vote* what he believes to be the opinion of the majority of his constituents on any given question, subject to the penalty of the loss of seat if he venture to express any other opinion, I have nothing to say respecting our principles of election; but in that case it is a pity we take the pains and undergo the agitation of elections at all. It would be wiser and cheaper to make wooden members of Parliament and work them by electric telegraph from the constituent towns and counties.

But if a member of Parliament is in any sort supposed to be a man chosen because he is wiser than other people, in order that, with other such chosen men, he may deliberate on questions too hard for the body of the people to decide (they not having, for the most part, time or opportunity to examine all their bearings), and that, having arrived at conclusions on such questions, the chosen body may declare and put them in practice, irrespective of the opinions of those who elected them-as far, I say, as this is the idea of a member of Parliament, so far our modes of election are simply insane (and if this be not the idea of a member of Parliament, any election whatever is useless).

* I do not say by advocacy. For if each member’s vote is predetermined by his constituents-all advocacy is useless.

600

[Version 0.04: March 2008]