368 SCIENCE PROGRESS 



over of Bills from one session to another, and limiting the 

 duration of speeches, would go far to relieve that congestion of 

 business which is the excuse for so many legalised irregu- 

 larities ; while two Parliamentary Reforms, so simple as to be 

 readily understood and appreciated by the man in the street, 

 would suffice to relieve the elected representatives of the 

 people from Cabinet Autocracy, on the one hand, and from 

 Party tyranny on the other. Let us, in the first place, follow- 

 ing the example of other nations, and abandoning, to that 

 small extent, our insular conservatism, elect our popular 

 Chamber for a fixed term of four or five years. A Prime 

 Minister deprived, by this change, of the power of dissolution, 

 dare not attempt to force unpopular measures upon supporters 

 who, without endangering their seats, could at any time 

 replace him by a statesman enjoying the confidence of the 

 majority of the House. By this easy and well-tried method, 

 Ministers would become in fact, what they are now in theory 

 only, the leaders and not the masters of the House. 



The influence of Party cannot be eradicated in a Repre- 

 sentative Assembly, but experience has shown that it must 

 be limited and controlled. In order, not to destroy, for that 

 is impossible, but to curtail the power of the Whips let us, in 

 the second place, extend to members, who now vote openly 

 in the Division Lobbies, the protection which the Ballot Act 

 has for many years conferred upon electors voting at the 

 polling booths. The object of the Ballot Act is to ensure that 

 every elector shall be able to vote according to his convictions, 

 and without fear of consequences ; but the object of the Party 

 Whips in the House of Commons is to ensure that every 

 member shall vote with his Party, irrespective of his convic- 

 tions, and with a clear understanding of the consequences of 

 any failure to obey their injunctions. Every argument which 

 can be advanced against granting this protection to the repre- 

 sentatives of the people can, with equal force, be employed 

 against giving it to the people themselves, while the contention 

 that members of the House of Commons must be denied the 

 protection of the ballot in order that their constituents may 

 know how they vote in each division, is disingenuous and 

 designed to conceal the real object of open voting. The Closure, 

 now so often oppressive, and even brutal, in its application 

 would, under the ballot, lose much of its harshness while pre- 



