I think it does not require any very elaborate argument to show that when men feel and know that the ability they show in parliament may be sooner or later rewarded by a seat on the treasury benches, and that they will then have a determining voice in the government of the country, be it dominion or province, they must be stimulated by a keener interest in public life, a closer watchfulness over legislation and administration, a greater readiness for discussing all public questions, and a more studied appreciation of public opinion outside the legislative halls.  Every man in parliament is a premier in posse.  While asking my readers to recall what I have already said as to the effect of responsible government on the public men and people of Canada, I shall also here refer them to some authorities worthy of all respect.

Mr. Bagehot says with his usual clearness:—­[32]

“To belong to a debating society adhering to an executive (and this is no inapt description of a congress under a presidential constitution) is not an object to stir a noble ambition, and is a position to encourage idleness.  The members of a parliament excluded from office can never be comparable, much less equal, to those of a parliament not excluded from office.  The presidential government by its nature divides political life into two halves, an executive half and a legislative half, and by so dividing it, makes neither half worth a man’s having—­worth his making it a continuous career—­worthy to absorb, as cabinet government absorbs, his whole soul.  The statesmen from whom a nation chooses under a presidential system are much inferior to those from whom it chooses under a cabinet system, while the selecting apparatus is also far less discerning.”

An American writer, Prof.  Denslow,[33] does not hesitate to express the opinion very emphatically that “as it is, in no country do the people feel such an overwhelming sense of the littleness of the men in charge of public affairs” as in the United States.  And in another place he dwells on the fact that “responsible government educates office-holders into a high and honourable sense of their accountability to the people,” and makes “statesmanship a permanent pursuit followed by a skilled class of men.”

Prof.  Woodrow Wilson says that,[34] so far from men being trained to legislation by congressional government, “independence and ability are repressed under the tyranny of the rules, and practically the favour of the popular branch of congress is concentrated in the speaker and a few—­very few—­expert parliamentarians.”  Elsewhere he shows that “responsibility is spread thin, and no vote or debate can gather it.”  As a matter of fact and experience, he comes to the conclusion “the more power is divided the more irresponsible it becomes and the petty character of the leadership of each committee contributes towards making its despotism sure by making its duties interesting.”