Page:Thomas Hare - The Election of Representatives, parliamentary and municipal.djvu/257

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
THE DESIGNATION OF MEMBERS AND CONSTITUENCIES.
205

tion from physiology, they may be likened to the nervous centres whence the human frame is supposed to receive its impulse and power of harmonious action. It is the people, and not the surface of the earth, or the constructions which man has heaped upon it, which must be represented. The principle of personal representation is the great political doctrine of modem times.[1]

Every project for the distribution of seats, and indeed every actual distribution has professed to have regard to the number of voters in the constituency. All schemes, except that of the Duke of Richmond, have proposed a distribution more or less grossly disproportionate, or if not, of divisions more or less arbitrary. It is obvious that a just and natural distribution throughout the kingdom of the sources of political power requires, as its basis, that the same rights of suffrage should exist in every part of the kingdom. A consideration of the great question of the suffrage is reserved for a subsequent chapter. It is sufficient here to remark, that a right of suffrage, extensive and impartial, is, as Mr. Calhoun says, "the indispensable and primary principle,"[2] and that in conferring it, in the language of M. Guizot:—"Le gouvernement représentatif considère quel est l'act auquel vont être appelés les individus ; il examine quelle est la capacité nécessaire pour cet acte ; il appelle ensuite les individus qui sont présumés posséder cette capacité, tous ceux-là, et ceux-là seuls. Il cherche ensuite la majorité parmi les capables. C'est ainsi, en fait, qu'on a presque toujours procédé partout, même quand on a cru agir en vertu de la souveraineté du peuple. Jamais on ne lui a été vraiment fidèle ; on a toujours exigé, pour les actes politiques, certains conditions, c'est-à-dire, les signes d'une certaine capacité. On s'est trompé en plus ou en moins, et l'erreur est grave, soit à exclure des capables, soit à appeler des incapables. Mais on a obéi au principe du droit mesuré selon la capacité, même quand on professait le principe du

  1. Buckle's History of Civilization
  2. Disquisition, &c., p. 13