proficiency distinguished by a diploma.[1] Others turn from the task in despair, and conclude that the vast range of the study places it, as a whole, beyond the intellectual grasp of any single mind, and that it is, therefore, vain to seek for greater qualities than we find in our daily path.[2] All, however, will probably agree that the country should collect the best materials which it possesses in the construction of its great representative assembly. Instead of this being attempted, the House of Commons, though nominally open to every subject, is yet surrounded by terriers, practical and legal, which tend, in their general character, to exclude the greatest number of those whose aid it would, upon that principle, be desirable to invite, and to facilitate the admission of those whom it would be desirable to exclude.
The obstacles are of a character which may be described as both practical and legal; practical, inasmuch as the cost and manner of elections impose difficulties which many, probably for the largest number, of those who possess the highest qualifications, are unable to overcome, and conditions to which they are naturally unwilling to submit; legal, inasmuch as large numbers of persons are disqualified by the arbitrary restrictions of positive law.
It is proposed in this chapter, after pointing out the circumstances in which our present methods of selection differ from those of former times, and remarking on the necessity of introducing a governing principle of a better nature, to treat of the increased facihties which may be provided, for obtaining in the House of Commons the services of the most highly qualified persons, and thereby giving effect to such better principle; and in the next chapter, to suggest the abolition of the practical and legal obstacles in the way of all such persons, of whatever class.
The difference, or rather, as it may not incorrectly be
