Page 42 - History 2020

became editor of The Economist in 1861 (father-in-law owned it). The English

Constitution is his best-known work. Bagehot was what the Victorians called “a man
of business”, and had liberal, Whiggish views. Although not himself a politician, he
brings a practical and administrative turn of mind to understanding how the
constitution works.

But he also had wide intellectual interests – he wrote a book about Darwinism and
politics and his guiding principle is scientific: that how the British (and maybe any)
constitution operates is far from self-evident, even though it may appear to be so:

“The key to the difficulties of most discussed and unsettled questions is commonly in
their undiscussed parts; they are like the background of a picture which looks obvious,
easy, just what any one might have painted, but which in fact sets the figures in their
right position, chastens them, and makes them what they are. Nobody will
understand parliamentary government who fancies it an easy thing, a natural thing, a
thing not needing explanation.”

Bagehot came up with some original insights which are now often repeated as
though we’ve known they all along He has a knack for noticing the unnoticed. His
style is lively and readable. All this makes him a good guide to mid-Victorian thinking
and assumptions.

Bagehot liked the British Constitution. For all its faults, he thought it was better than
any of the available alternatives; Napoleon III’s “new liberal empire”, Prussia’s
bureaucratic monarchy, and America’s presidential democracy. He believed the

secret of our Constitution was not, as was often said, the separation of powers
(legislative, executive and judicial), or the balance between aristocratic, democratic
and royal elements (House of Lords, House of Commons, monarchy), but rather an
“accidental” discovery made during our history: a close union between the legislative
and executive functions, with the Cabinet as the “hyphen” or “buckle” fastening them
together. In a nutshell, power (the executive) was not separated from the law-

making assembly as it was in America. Power was vested in a Prime Minister and his
Cabinet within Parliament. The American President has to go up Capitol Hill to meet
his elected lawmakers. The British Prime Minister works among them; he is one of
them.

This, says Bagehot, makes our Constitution far superior. People pay real attention to
parliamentary debates because, on a single vote, the Prime Minister and his Cabinet
can be turned out. The American president can’t. He’s elected for a four-year term.
Few care what is said in Congress. This also gives parliament an educational function.

However, this isn’t its essential function: which is to elect the Prime Minister. The