10
UNIVERSITY COURIER.
forms drifts towards aristocracy; third, that a constitutional monarchy is more sensitive to the will of the people than republicanism.
A supremacy that is sound in theory will not always establish itself in practice. The manners and customs of the people must be taken into consideration. The general intelligence and moral inclination of the popular will determine the practicability of any form of government. Republicanism never had and never can have any lasting security where moral degeneracy in politics and social inequality exist.
Disorganization has been a chief cause of the destruction of all forms of government, and republics are not the least liable to its pernicious influence. This difficulty lies in the management of political affairs. The people act through representatives, whom our forefathers doubtless thought would always be chosen from a superior class of men, who would be loyal to their trust; but the evil has manifested itself, and grown to immense proportions. In all history, oppression and disunion can be traced, directly or indirectly, to the influence of capital. It, more than any other element, tends to destroy that unity which ought to exist in national affairs. Republican forms are not fortified against it. Favors are bought. Bribery and eloquence are employed to influence the suffrages of the poor and ignorant, and the people become tools in the hands of ambitious office-seekers for the acquirement of personal ends. Winning public favor becomes a business. The rights of the people are usurped, and that freedom, which republicanism promises so positively to maintain, is supplanted in a great measure by the control of wealth. All this is a sign of weakness and evil.
Republican Rome Illustrates vividly the exhausting influence and fickleness of this foe to such institutions. The revolution which caused her overthrow received its first development in the attempt to adjust the wrongs arising from the usurpation of the rich and oppressions of the poor. These vices had grown to such proportions that none but the wealthy could rise to political distinction, since no others could command the suffrages of the populace. Such drift of affairs have, invariably, ended in civil dissensions and the complete prostration of law and order. Here are the elements of revolution. Here is the bane of Republicanism, which has been resorted to for control since the birth of party government.
"The natural tendency of republican forms drifts towards aristocracy."
That supremany, which ever has in view the "rights of the people," cannot foster political rings and corporations which so effectually corrupt the elective franchise.
From what has been said, we may infer that the accumulation of wealth has a tendency to centralize power in the hands of the few, and the more thoroughly this is done, the nearer it approaches an aristocracy.
The manner in which political affairs are carried on in this country illustrate this fact very forcibly. Fraudulent means are resorted to by those in power in order to favor their personal friends. Appointments are made from partisan considerations, for some act of kindness received, not from worth.
There is a law of self-aggrandizment, united with the cunning of politicians, which imposes upon the people themselves, and this increases as the country grows in wealth.
A worthy politician says: "Republicanism leads to aristocracy and autocracy in politics worse than absolute monarchy." Hamilton recognized this fact as it existed in our constitution, and for that reason favored another form of government. Our officers, the chief executive not excepted, are not elevated beyond the reach of party constituents, and are prejudiced more or less by them. Serious danger may arise from this alone. Petty jealousy between rival factions, deeds of violence and a lack of confidence in the government will grow out of it, and create disrespect for law and break the unity of national affairs.
That form of government, whatever be its denomination, which is the most sensitive to the intelligent will of the people, and maintains an equilibrium among all orders will be the ultimate form.
The third point that I wish to establish is this: "That a constitutional monarchy is more sensitive to the will of the people than republicanism."
The last fifty years of English history is a model of reforms in behalf of the people. They enjoy religious freedom. A national system of education has been established. The remarkable and indefensible abuses of the representation are tolerated no more. Moderation has distinguished all the measures of the legislature.
Her history is one of a monarchy under which the people have acquired all the rights of a republic. Such is the liberal and progressive policy of her government. In some respects it is one of the rarest ideals of republicanism, while on the other hand, the state enjoys all the security of an ancient monarchy. But constitutional government, while it has in a great measure, withdrawn the monarch from that personal exercise of power, has relieved him from party conflicts and from responsibility for unpopular measures. He is associated with no party. He is under obligations to no combination for his tenure of office; thereby he can hold an even balance between rival statesmen.
As far as absolute power is concerned, he is more limited than the President of the United States; because the government of England is virtually in the hands of the ministers who are appointed by the crown from the party that has the majority in Parliament; while in this country the Cabinet has no power except through the President. The ministers are appointed almost entirely upon merit; and when any measure of that body is defeated, they are expected to resign, and with the advice of the leader of the opposing party, a new one is appointed to fill its place.
Thus we see that the English government is a structure of checks and balances, sensitive to the will of the people, yet associating loyalty with patriotism, and a respect for law and order, of which the crown is the symbol.
It is customary in this free country of ours to look with withering scorn upon anything that approaches royalty; to recognize it as a restraint upon liberty, and to denounce it as incompatible with the rights of humanity; but the old animosity will subside when a few more years shall have been added to our history, bringing with them the fruits of a supremacy pregnant with party strife and trampled rights. For I thoroughly believe that republicanism has reached its climax in this country and will weaken as the resources become more nearly exhausted. It was begun when the people existed in simplicity of manners and customs, and as they