NOTES 133 



The figures, or at least their results, seem therefore to con- 

 tain an irrational element. But the explanation is rational 

 enough, and on the whole it supports those who believe that 

 " the will of the people " exists and that it is neither capricious 

 nor vacillating. 



(i) The very large discrepancy between the number of votes 

 pollable and polled is partly explained by the fact that in some 

 constituencies there was no contest, and therefore no votes 

 were cast on either side. But where a party or a candidate does 

 not think it worth while to contest a seat, the presumptive 

 evidence is strong that the other party is in a very large majority. 

 The will of the people is so strong that there is no object in 

 challenging it. 



(ii) But uncontested seats do not account for anything like 

 the whole discrepancy between votes pollable and polled. 

 Many voters abstain, either through indifference or because they 

 object to a particular candidate or are out of sympathy with 

 their party at the moment ; they will not vote against their 

 party, but they will not vote for it. This was notoriously the 

 case with many Liberals in 1895 and 1900, and with many Con- 

 servatives in 1906. 



Those who refuse to contribute to the expression of the 

 general will from pique or laziness or resentment may easily 

 lose an election for their party, and they are thus a negative 

 factor of great and sometimes decisive importance to the 

 candidate and his organisation. It is the existence of this 

 lukewarm element which inspires the elaborate propaganda 

 and canvassing, and all those attempts to raise the enthusiasm 

 of the crowd which are of profound interest to the psychologist 

 as well as to the politician. 



The figures show clearly enough that this type of occasional 

 voter is more numerous on the Liberal than the Conservative 

 side of politics. If the Liberals had polled as many votes in 

 1895 and 1900 as in 1885 they would have won those elections, 

 since the Conservatives registered fewer votes in 1895 and 1900 

 (when they won) than in 1885 (when they lost). It was only 

 because the Liberals were able to bring practically every man 

 to the poll in 1906 that they beat the record Conservative vote 

 of that year. 



The explanation of this apparently curious discrepancy 

 between the dispositions of parties is probably that the Liberal 

 looks on his politics as a crusade, and is therefore more likely 

 to vote to the last man when he is enthusiastic, and to sulk in 

 his tent when he is not particularly stirred. The Conservative 

 from his very nature takes the middle course : he is never so 

 enthusiastic, and never so utterly discouraged, with the result 

 that he is a more dependable voter, both in good times and bad. 



