British Constitution

Author: (British) Walter Bagehot
Publisher:
Publication Date: 2005-08-01
Features: This book explains the relevant aspects of the British constitutional system, particularly the legislative and executive powers combined in the Cabinet, the ancient and esteemed status of the Queen, and symbolic governance, reflecting the inseparable nature of politics and constitution, as well as the significant correlation between the constitutional landscape of a certain period and the character of political parties and Cabinets. The academic value of this book lies in its detailed description and accompanying commentary on the British constitution, showcasing the basic features of British political and constitutional systems in the 17th and 18th centuries. Walter Bagehot's research on the foundations and mechanisms of the British government began to be published in 1865 when he was nearing the peak of his career. He was still under forty but was already making a name for himself as an editor at The Economist; he was recognized as an authority on financial matters; he was well-known among the Liberal leadership and was actively seeking an opportunity to enter Parliament. As one of the founders of the Fortnightly Review, it was natural for him to use his pen to help this new publication. His articles on the British constitution appeared in the inaugural issue of the Fortnightly Review in May 1865, followed by a series of eight articles that concluded in January 1867. The titles of his articles were highly topical. The 1860s was a period of intense constitutional debate. Standard works on the constitution, such as those by Brougham, Grey, and Russell, were being reissued, and new works like John Stuart Mill's Representative Government had also emerged. There was a desire to highlight the characteristics of the institutions that had brought political stability and economic prosperity to Britain; at the same time, there was concern about whether these institutions could face three imminent challenges: adapting to the demands of domestic social development, enabling the nation to compete with and surpass the rising powers abroad, and providing a viable model for other countries, especially British colonies. The purpose of The British Constitution was to elucidate the workings of the British government, consider the traits inherent in the British people that made it possible, and demonstrate its advantages over its main competitors, particularly the presidential system of the United States, which "if not careful, would surpass Britain in the process of world progress" (page 12). All these matters influenced the question of whether other nations could successfully adopt it, and the British colonies were particularly interested in this issue, as they were in the early stages of self-governance. (It is worth noting that the highly detailed description of the British parliamentary system that appeared in 1867 [the year Canada was federated] was not by Bagehot but by the following two individuals: Alphaeus Todd, the librarian of the Legislative Assembly of Canada, who utilized Bagehot's articles; and W. E. Hearn, a professor of history and political economy at the University of Melbourne.) Bagehot's thinking on the evolution of political institutions aligned with a national spirit that tended to idealize the formal structures of the time; he believed that people were content with the British system, and he was clearly content as well. However, he did not think the government machinery was without merit, and if his articles had begun during a period of apparent political calm, it would have been a good time to consider improvements, as he suggested in The Economist on March 25 and October 28, 1865. The British constitution was not "a mysterious entity but a rational invention, and its benefits lie solely in its ability to achieve good objectives." Therefore, the British constitution could be improved by "upholding these objectives and carefully shaping the British constitution toward them." There was no reason to believe that "our laws, political system, and government administration" should not be made to "function like a scientific machine, precise in detail and effective in overall results." His preference for well-functioning mechanisms and his admiration for science were characteristic of Bagehot.