government by the arts of flattery, manipulation, and intrigue; nor, indeed, by the improvement of democratic machinery, though this is extremely desirable, and calls for immediate attention.  For, above all, towers the question of character.”  It is quite evident that Professor Brown shares the delusion of the other advocates of the Hare system, that the manner of expressing public opinion has nothing to do with the character of public opinion.  The two difficulties laid down are essentially one.  The cardinal fact underlying representation is that it is a real social force, capable of reacting upon and moulding character, and therefore of improving the value of public opinion.  The independence, love of freedom, respect for minorities, and capacity for self-government, which are the most distinctive traits in the English character, are not innate, but are largely the products of the British Constitution.  If the only chance of improving the value of public opinion lay in the hope of inducing the individual electors to study the lessons of history, the prospect would be indeed gloomy.

Professor Brown regards party government as a necessary evil, resulting from the mechanical difficulty of securing unity of action from a plurality of wills.  This is practically equivalent to saying that legislation itself is a necessary evil.  But he writes:—­“Whatever may be the evils of party government, there can be no doubt of the utility as well as of the necessity of the institution itself.  The alternative to party government is the system of government by small groups.  In Australia the evils of this alternative have been occasionally displayed in practical politics; but it is to France that we must look for their supreme illustration.”  Turning to the chapter on the Hare system, we find that Professor Brown believes that the electors would still divide themselves into two parties, even if given the opportunity to form small groups.  “I cannot believe,” he writes, “that the reputation of our race for sound common-sense is so far misplaced that a provision for the faithful representation of the people would end in an immoderate Legislature!  For, although the Hare system is not perfect, it does undoubtedly afford an opportunity for an absolutely fair representation.  Of course the opportunity would be abused by some; but to argue that the abuse would be general, or if at all general, would long continue, is to argue that the people would prove themselves unworthy of the opportunity offered.”  While he was at the University of Tasmania the first election under the Hare system was held, and Professor Brown’s opinions are based on the result.  A second election has, however, just been held, which shows the futility of his hopes.