134 SCIENCE PROGRESS 



(iii) The figures in detail, when examined constituency by 

 constituency in a series of several elections, give very little 

 support to the prevalent idea that the popular will is vacillating, 

 and still less to the theory that the decisive vote is that of the 

 man who changes his opinion at almost every election — " the 

 political animal with a nose for the winning side." The number 

 of those who vote Liberal at one election and Conservative at 

 another is demonstrably small. It is, of course, quite impossible 

 to work out the figures, but the weathercock elector is probably 

 not one in fifty of the total poll. These bugbears of the election 

 agent are not, from the point of view of the candidate, numerous 

 enough to worry about. They may win or lose a seat here or 

 there where opinion is very equally divided ; ' but the actual 

 turnover of votes appears to be so small that it cannot affect 

 the result of a general election. 



The man who sometimes votes and sometimes abstains is 

 far more important, simply because he is far more numerous — 

 so numerous, indeed, that his vote or abstention has decided the 

 fate of many governments. It is clearly conceivable that a 

 minority of voters may sometimes win an election. Without 

 allowing for uncontested seats, the total Liberal vote in 1885 

 was not half the electorate, yet they won ; the total Con- 

 servative vote in 1895 and 1900 was even less, yet they won. 

 Allowing for uncontested seats, the Liberals in 1885 and the 

 Conservatives in 1895 and 1900 would probably have polled 

 between 50 and 60 per cent, of the total electorate. 



But this is not a valid argument against " the will of the 

 people." The man who lets judgment go against him by con- 

 sent in the law courts is not an argument against the adminis- 

 tration of justice ; and the man who is not sufficiently interested 

 in politics to go to the poll cannot complain if he is governed by 

 a minority. He has tacitly contracted out of the general will. 



This abstention is far more marked in matters of local govern- 

 ment than in parliamentary elections. In the latter case the 

 voting varies, in contested seats, from 60 to 90 per cent, of the 

 total electorate, which is practically the largest possible poll ; 

 the odd 10 per cent, of abstentions being accounted for by old 

 age, illness or death, or unavoidable absence. For local 

 government the voting varies from 30 to 50 per cent, in London 

 County Council elections ; in some other county or local 

 elections the percentage is considerably less. In local govern- 

 ment, therefore, a passive majority is ruled by an active minority 

 — in parliamentary elections on the whole the majority rules. 



The reason is simple. The issues at local elections are often 

 unimportant, and evoke little interest, and people will not take 

 the trouble to understand them. When the issues are important 

 and rival policies are in sharp conflict — as in the Progressive- 



