"And you stayed there just six weeks out of four months, Sheffield,"
answered Reding.
Carlton had now joined them, and, after introductory greetings on both sides, he too threw himself upon the turf. Sheffield said: "Reding and I were disputing just now whether Nicias was a party man."
"Of course you first defined your terms," said Carlton.
"Well," said Sheffield, "I mean by a party man, one who not only belongs to a party, but who has the _animus_ of party. Nicias did not make a party, he found one made. He found himself at the head of it; he was no more a party man than a prince who was born the head of his state."
"I should agree with you," said Carlton; "but still I should like to know what a party is, and what a party man."
"A party," said Sheffield, "is merely an extra-const.i.tutional or extra-legal body."
"Party action," said Charles, "is the exertion of influence instead of law."
"But supposing, Reding, there is no law existing in the quarter where influence exerts itself?" asked Carlton.
Charles had to explain: "Certainly," he said, "the State did not legislate for all possible contingencies."
"For instance," continued Carlton, "a prime minister, I have understood, is not acknowledged in the Const.i.tution; he exerts influence beyond the law, but not, in consequence, against any existing law; and it would be absurd to talk of him as a party man."
"Parliamentary parties, too, are recognised among us," said Sheffield, "though extra-const.i.tutional. We call them parties; but who would call the Duke of Devonshire or Lord John Russell, in a bad sense, a party man?"
"It seems to me," said Carlton, "that the formation of a party is merely a recurrence to the original mode of forming into society. You recollect Deioces; he formed a party. He gained influence; he laid the foundation of social order."
"Law certainly begins in influence," said Reding, "for it presupposes a lawgiver; afterwards it supersedes influence; from that time the exertion of influence is a sign of party."
"Too broadly said, as you yourself just now allowed," said Carlton: "you should say that law _begins_ to supersede influence, and that _in proportion_ as it supersedes it, does the exertion of influence involve party action. For instance, has not the Crown an immense personal influence? we talk of the Court _party_; yet it does not interfere with law, it is intended to conciliate the people to the law."
"But it is recognized by law and const.i.tution," said Charles, "as was the Dictatorship."
"Well, then, take the influence of the clergy," answered Carlton; "we make much of that influence as a principle supplemental to the law, and as a support to the law, yet not created or defined by the law. The law does not recognize what some one calls truly a "resident gentleman" in every parish. Influence, then, instead of law is not necessarily the action of party."
"So again, national character is an influence distinct from the law,"
said Sheffield, "according to the line, "_Quid leges sine moribus_?""
"Law," said Carlton, "is but gradually formed and extended. Well, then, so far as there is no law, there is the reign of influence; there is party without of necessity _party_ action. This is the justification of Whigs and Tories at the present day; to supply, as Aristotle says on another subject, the defects of the law. Charles I. exerted a regal, Walpole a ministerial influence; but influence, not law, was the operating principle in both cases. The object or the means might be wrong, but the process could not be called party action."
"You would justify, then," said Charles, "the a.s.sociations or confraternities which existed, for instance, in Athens; not, that is, if they "took the law into their own hands," as the phrase goes, but if there was no law to take, or if there was no const.i.tuted authority to take it of right. It was a recurrence to the precedent of Deioces."
"Manzoni gives a striking instance of this in the beginning of his _Promessi Sposi_," said Sheffield, "when he describes that protection, which law ought to give to the weak, as being in the sixteenth century sought and found almost exclusively in factions or companies. I don"t recollect particulars, but he describes the clergy as busy in extending their immunities, the n.o.bility their privileges, the army their exemptions, the trades and artisans their guilds. Even the lawyers formed a union, and medical men a corporation."
"Thus const.i.tutions are gradually moulded and perfected," said Carlton, "by extra-const.i.tutional bodies, either coming under the protection of law, or else being superseded by the law"s providing for their objects.
In the middle ages the Church was a vast extra-const.i.tutional body. The German and Anglo-Norman sovereigns sought to bring its operation _under_ the law; modern parliaments have superseded its operation _by law_. Then the State wished to gain the right of invest.i.tures; now the State marries, registers, manages the poor, exercises ecclesiastical jurisdiction instead of the Church."
"This will make ostracism parallel to the Reformation or the Revolution," said Sheffield; "there is a battle of influence against influence, and one gets rid of the other; law or const.i.tution does not come into question, but the will of the people or of the court ejects, whether the too-gifted individual, or the monarch, or the religion. What was not under the law could not be dealt with, had no claim to be dealt with, by the law."
"A thought has sometimes struck me," said Reding, "which falls in with what you have been saying. In the last half-century there has been a gradual formation of the popular party in the State, which now tends to be acknowledged as const.i.tutional, or is already so acknowledged. My father never could endure newspapers--I mean the system of newspapers; he said it was a new power in the State. I am sure I am not defending what he was thinking of, the many bad proceedings, the wretched principles, the arrogance and tyranny of newspaper writers, but I am trying the subject by the test of your theory. The great body of the people are very imperfectly represented in parliament; the Commons are not their voice, but the voice of certain great interests. Consequently the press comes in--to do that which the const.i.tution does not do--to form the people into a vast mutual-protection a.s.sociation. And this is done by the same right that Deioces had to collect people about him; it does not interfere with the existing territory of the law, but builds where the const.i.tution has not made provision. It _tends_, then, ultimately to be recognised by the const.i.tution."
"There is another remarkable phenomenon of a similar kind now in process of development," said Carlton, "and that is, the influence of agitation.
I really am not politician enough to talk of it as good or bad; one"s natural instinct is against it; but it may be necessary. However, agitation is getting to be recognised as the legitimate instrument by which the ma.s.ses make their desires known, and secure the accomplishment of them. Just as a bill pa.s.ses in parliament, after certain readings, discussions, speeches, votings, and the like, so the process by which an act of the popular will becomes law is a long agitation, issuing in pet.i.tions, previous to and concurrent with the parliamentary process.
The first instance of this was about fifty or sixty years ago, when ...
Hallo!" he cried, "who is this cantering up to us?"
"I declare it is old Vincent," said Sheffield.
"He is to come to dine," said Charles, "just in time."
"How are you, Carlton?" cried Vincent. "How d"ye do, Mr. Sheffield? Mr.
Reding, how d"ye do? acting up to your name, I suppose, for you were ever a reading man. For myself," he continued, "I am just now an eating man, and am come to dine with you, if you will let me. Have you a place for my horse?"
There was a farmer near who could lend a stable; so the horse was led off by Charles; and the rider, without any delay--for the hour did not admit it--entered the cottage to make his brief preparation for dinner.
CHAPTER II.
In a few minutes all met together at table in the small parlour, which was room of all work in the cottage. They had not the whole house, limited as were its resources; for it was also the habitation of a gardener, who took his vegetables to the Oxford market, and whose wife (what is called) _did_ for his lodgers.
Dinner was suited to the apartment, apartment to the dinner. The book-table had been hastily cleared for a cloth, not over white, and, in consequence, the sole remaining table, which acted as sideboard, displayed a relay of plates and knives and forks, in the midst of octavos and duodecimos, bound and unbound, piled up and thrown about in great variety of shapes. The other ornaments of this side-table were an ink-gla.s.s, some quires of large paper, a straw hat, a gold watch, a clothes-brush, some bottles of ginger-beer, a pair of gloves, a case of cigars, a neck-handkerchief, a shoe-horn, a small slate, a large clasp-knife, a hammer, and a handsome inlaid writing-desk.
"I like these rides into the country," said Vincent, as they began eating, "the country loses its effect on me when I live in it, as you do; but it is exquisite as a zest. Visit it, do not live in it, if you would enjoy it. Country air is a stimulus; stimulants, Mr. Reding, should not be taken too often. You are of the country party. I am of no party. I go here and there--like the bee--I taste of everything, I depend on nothing."
Sheffield said that this was rather belonging to all parties than to none.
"That is impossible," answered Vincent; "I hold it to be altogether impossible. You can"t belong to two parties; there"s no fear of it; you might as well attempt to be in two places at once. To be connected with both is to be united with neither. Depend on it, my young friend, antagonist principles correct each other. It"s a piece of philosophy which one day you will thank me for, when you are older."
"I have heard of an American ill.u.s.tration of this," said Sheffield, "which certainly confirms what you say, sir. Professors in the United States are sometimes of two or three religions at once, according as we regard them historically, personally, or officially. In this way, perhaps, they hit the mean."
Vincent, though he so often excited a smile in others, had no humour himself, and never could make out the difference between irony and earnest. Accordingly he was brought to a stand.
Charles came to his relief. "Before dinner," he said, "we were sporting what you will consider a great paradox, I am afraid; that parties were good things, or rather necessary things."
"You don"t do me justice," answered Vincent, "if this is what you think I deny. I halve your words; parties are not good, but necessary; like snails, I neither envy them their small houses, nor try to lodge in them myself."
"You mean," said Carlton, "that parties do our dirty work; they are our beasts of burden; we could not get on without them, but we need not identify ourselves with them; we may keep aloof."
"That," said Sheffield, "is something like those religious professors who say that it is sinful to engage in worldly though necessary occupations; but that the reprobate undertake them, and work for the elect."
"There will always be persons enough in the world who like to be party men, without being told to be so," said Vincent; "it"s our business to turn them to account, to use them, but to keep aloof. I take it, all parties are partly right, only they go too far. I borrow from each, I co-operate with each, as far as each is right, and no further. Thus I get good from all, and I do good to all; for I countenance each, so far as it is true."
"Mr. Carlton meant more than that, sir," said Sheffield; "he meant that the existence of parties was not only necessary and useful, but even right."
"Mr. Carlton is not the man to make paradoxes," said Vincent; "I suspect he would not defend the extreme opinions, which, alas, exist among us at present, and are progressing every day."
"I was speaking of political parties," said Carlton, "but I am disposed to extend what I said to religious also."