her heart was in the right place:  a statesman interfering with her on the ground that he did not want the boy cured would have deserved impeachment for gross tyranny.  But a statesman tolerating amateur surgical practice with inky penknives in school would be a very bad Minister of Education.  It is on the question of method that your expert comes in; and though I am democrat enough to insist that he must first convince a representative body of amateurs that his way is the right way and Mrs Squeers’s way the wrong way, yet I very strongly object to any tendency to flatter Mrs Squeers into the belief that her way is in the least likely to be the right way, or that any other test is to be applied to it except the test of its effect on human welfare.

THE SCIENCE AND ART OF POLITICS

Political Science means nothing else than the devizing of the best ways of fulfilling the will of the world; and, I repeat, it is skilled work.  Once the way is discovered, the methods laid down, and the machinery provided, the work of the statesman is done, and that of the official begins.  To illustrate, there is no need for the police officer who governs the street traffic to be or to know any better than the people who obey the wave of his hand.  All concerted action involves subordination and the appointment of directors at whose signal the others will act.  There is no more need for them to be superior to the rest than for the keystone of an arch to be of harder stone than the coping.  But when it comes to devizing the directions which are to be obeyed:  that is, to making new institutions and scraping old ones, then you need aristocracy in the sense of government by the best.  A military state organized so as to carry out exactly the impulses of the average soldier would not last a year.  The result of trying to make the Church of England reflect the notions of the average churchgoer has reduced it to a cipher except for the purposes of a petulantly irreligious social and political club.  Democracy as to the thing to be done may be inevitable (hence the vital need for a democracy of supermen); but democracy as to the way to do it is like letting the passengers drive the train:  it can only end in collision and wreck.  As a matter of act, we obtain reforms (such as they are), not by allowing the electorate to draft statutes, but by persuading it that a certain minister and his cabinet are gifted with sufficient political sagacity to find out how to produce the desired result.  And the usual penalty of taking advantage of this power to reform our institutions is defeat by a vehement “swing of the pendulum” at the next election.  Therein lies the peril and the glory of democratic statesmanship.  A statesman who confines himself to popular legislation—­or, for the matter of that, a playwright who confines himself to popular plays—­is like a blind man’s dog who goes wherever the blind man pulls him, on the ground that both of them want to go to the same place.