severity. Even so late as 1747, Cave, the wellknown editor of the Gentleman's Magazine, was brought to the bar of the House, and compelled to apologize for a similar offence*. These few facts show the struggle that was made to retain an absurd privilege; and the present state of the case shows as clearly how ineffectual was the attempt to preserve it, amidst the growing opulence and intelligence of the people.

SECTION V.

On the Number of Members.

An important circumstance in the constitution of the representative body, is the number of its members; and it is not easy to see on what principle that number should be regulated. Two methods of deciding the point present themselves. We might commence any arrangements in relation to it, by determining the number of electoral districts into which a country should be divided, when the number of representatives, on the plan either of single or double representation,

*Hallam's Constitutional History, vol. iii, p. 399.

would follow as a direct result: or we might begin by determining the number of representatives of which the legislature should consist, whence the number of electoral districts would be necessarily obtained. Of these two methods, the latter seems the proper and eligible course; for surely the size of the assembly should be first considered, in relation to the functions which it has to perform; and the most convenient and efficient numerical magnitude having been ascertained, the electoral districts should be regulated in conformity with it. Still, however, the number of members proper to constitute a legislative assembly is far from being determinable with such absolute precision as to preclude any modification from taking into account the number and size of the districts, which must always form a consideration in actual arrangements. The matter is one which manifestly admits of considerable latitude. Even with regard to the determination of the number of members which in itself would be most eligible, it seems impossible to find any precise principle on which to proceed. Some approaches, nevertheless, to the solution of the problem, may be made.

The supreme legislative assembly is essentially, as already explained, a deliberative body; and it

is acknowledged that large assemblies are unfit for deliberation. This arises from several causes. Every one accustomed to public affairs, must have remarked the effect of the mere presence of large numbers on the mind. Emotions arising from what is done or said, are greatly enhanced by it; so that a fact or expression which would scarcely be felt if a man were surrounded by only half a dozen others, becomes the cause of warm excitement in a numerous assembly. Hence the members are led into partial and magnified views and exaggerated phraseology; and even men of sense are seduced by irresistible sympathy into weak and inconsistent language and conduct. Amongst other effects, the known prevalence of some particular opinion in the assembly, especially when maintained with zealous warmth, seems to be sufficient to deprive an individual of the power of contending against it, and even to shake, for the moment, his confidence in his own well-considered views. He is borne away by the torrent.

"In a numerous assembly," says an able writer, "individuals are more subjected than on other occasions to their senses and their imagination, and less capable of consulting and obeying the dictates of reason. Hence the origin of that religious frenzy, which formerly affected so

M

powerfully both the minds and the bodies of the enthusiasts of the Cevennes; and hence the acts of insanity into which public bodies are apt to be hurried in times of political revolution."— Everywhere," he adds, example acts upon

66

the moral part of our frame, mechanical imitation on the physical *."

The manner in which the feelings are wrought up to a high pitch in large bodies of men, by trifling causes, is strikingly shown in the sudden panics on the one hand, and in the spirit of enthusiastic valour on the other, which occasionally seize whole armies; in the violent outrages of mobs; and in the religious extravagances of what are called camp meetings. "From instances of popular tumults," says Hume, "seditions, factions, panics, and of all passions which are shared with a multitude, we may learn the influence of society in exciting and supporting any motion, while the most ungovernable disorders are raised, we find, by that means, from the slightest and most frivolous occasion †."

* Report on Animal Magnetism, quoted by Dugald Stewart. Elements, vol. iii, p. 200.

† Hume, Inquiry concerning the Principles of Morals, sect. 9.

The same heightening of emotion by the presence of numbers, on a smaller scale and in a modified form, manifests itself in less multitudinous and more enlightened assemblies than some of those just mentioned. Indeed, as Cardinal de Retz observes in an often-quoted passage, "all great assemblies are mere mobs, and swayed in their deliberations by the most trifling motives."

Where something is to be done, where action is what is wanted, where the spirit of enterprize is to be excited, this extraordinary exaltation of the emotions by sympathy and imitation, may be exceedingly useful; but where momentous questions are to be examined and discussed, where deliberation is the business to be performed, and an enlightened decision the object to be attained, this enhancement of feeling, by the presence of numbers, is an obstacle to judicious determinations, and is more likely to pervert than to benefit the proceedings of the deliberative body. This is a strong reason why the members of such a body should be limited to the smallest number consistent with the labour to be performed.

In large assemblies, too, mere physical powers usurp an undue influence in comparison with mental endowments. Energy of declamation, grace of gesture, compass and melody of voice,