populous, but the local organization remained the political unit. The Representation of the People's Act of 1867 followed the same principle. The Redistribution Act of 1885, however, has given consistent form to the new idea.1 It cuts up the local governmental organizations, the counties, cities and boroughs, into election districts, each containing on the average about 54,000 inhabitants; and it ordains that each district shall send one representative. This is in principle representation upon the basis of numbers. This is the logical consequence of the doctrine of popular sovereignty. The act of 1885 still permits some modifications of the principle and a few exceptions to the principle. It allows towns containing more than 15,000 and less than 50,000 inhabitants to be reckoned as one election district and send one member, and those containing more than 50,000 and less than 165,000 are entitled to be formed into two districts and send two members, one from each district. It does not disfranchise the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge, Dublin, London, Glasgow and Aberdeen, and Edinburgh and St. Andrews, although the constituency in none of these exceeds 7000. We must remember, however, that a university constituency means voters, not, as in other cases, all persons. These are the modifications as to the population necessary to form the districts. The exceptions to the principle of district representation are the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge and Dublin, the city of London, and those towns which before the act of 1885 were entitled to two members and also contain a population of more than 50,000 and less than 165,000. In these cases the representation is still upon the basis of the local governmental organization; i.e. population does not determine the number of members, except in the last case, and these constituencies are not divided into districts. For example, Oxford University with a constituency of 6000 sends

1 Statutes of Parliament, 48 and 49 Victoria, c. 23.

two members and elects them upon a general ticket, Cambridge with a constituency of 7000 does the same, and Dublin with a constituency of but 4000 does the same. The num

ber of members of the House of Commons according to this act is now 670.1

Lastly, the general principle upon which this act proceeds is that each member represents the whole Empire, not a particular local organization nor exclusively a particular constituency. The member is under no obligation, therefore, to follow instructions from the voters or the inhabitants of the district from which he is chosen. They have no legal means of enforcing any instructions. They cannot demand his resignation. In fact, a member cannot resign. He may be appointed by the chancellor of the Exchequer to the stewardship of the Chiltern Hundreds, or of the manors of East Hendred, Northstead or Hempholme or to the escheatorship of Munster, and if he accepts the office he thereby vacates his He may then resign the office and free himself from. public duties. In case of the insanity of a member, the constituency that elected him may petition the House to consider the question of his disqualification; and the House may proceed thereupon, as well as upon its own motion, to declare the seat vacant on account of mental disqualification.2 This, however, cannot be considered a legal means of enforcing instructions from a constituency upon a member. The fear of defeat at the next election may, of course, influence the member to bow before the instructions of his constituents, but that creates no legal necessity to regard them. Legally, he is simply referred to his own judgment and his own conscience. This is uninstructed representation.

The only legal rules which exist for the distribution of the representation in the House of Lords are that the number of members from Scotland shall be 16; the number from Ire

1 Almanach de Gotha, 1890, p. 745.

2 Anson, Law and Custom of the Constitution, p. 71 ff.

land 28; the number of ecclesiastics, 26; and the number of the Lords of Appeal in Ordinary shall be 2, eventually 4 The whole number of members of the House of Lords is at present about 541.1 It would be strained to assume that these numbers represent the relative interests involved. Upon such an assumption we should be obliged to consider that the secular interests of England were greatly over-represented as contrasted with those of Scotland or Ireland, or with the ecclesiastical or judicial interests of the entire Empire. This certainly cannot be regarded as the principle of the distribution of the representation in this house. It would be nearer the truth to regard the members of this house as representing the interests of the country over against those of the towns. We must remember, however, that many of these Lords of Parliament own great blocks of city property, while a very large proportion of the persons belonging to the constituencies of the House of Commons are owners of country land. We cannot then say that what they represent is exclusively the interests of the country as against those of the towns. In fact, I think we must come to the conclusion that the Lords represent, in principle, the interests of the whole Empire, and of all classes, as truly as the Commons. They differ from the Commons only in the manner of their selection.

With the

They are also uninstructed representatives. exception of those chosen by the Peers of Scotland and of Ireland, it cannot be said that they have any particular constituencies. They cannot be required by any body to resign on account of opinion and votes, or for any other reason; in fact, there is no such thing as the resignation, surrender or alienation of membership in the House of Lords. A Scotch member may lose his seat as a representative of the Peers of Scotland by accepting a peerage of the United Kingdom,

1 Almanach de Gotha, 1890, p. 745.

i.e. a peerage conferred by royal appointment; a bishop may vacate his seat by resigning his episcopal office; a Lord of Appeal in Ordinary may lose his seat by ceasing to discharge the judicial duties associated with his appointment, and any peerage may be forfeited by attainder or extinguished by act of Parliament.1 None of these things can, however, be regarded as resignation in the ordinary sense, certainly not as resignation caused by the discontent of any constituency with the act or opinion of a representative in the House of Lords. There is not even the influence of a new election, except in the case of the sixteen Scotch members, to affect them. They are in a position to think and to act with great independence.

4. Qualifications of Membership.

The qualifications or positive requirements for holding a seat in the House of Commons are but three, viz; the male sex, the full age of twenty-one years and the quality of citizen or subject, either by birth or naturalization. The first of these requirements rests upon custom, which, therefore, either house might change through the exercise of its residuary power to judge of the qualifications of its members. The second and third, however, rest upon statutes of Parliament and cannot be modified by either house alone.2

The disqualifications or negative requirements are more numerous. Incurable insanity; the possession of a peerage, except an Irish peerage whose possessor is not a Lord of Parliament (such a person being able to sit in the Commons for any county or borough of Great Britain); possession of clerical office in the established churches of England or Scotland or in the Roman Catholic Church; possession of certain secular offices, such as those concerned with the return

1 Anson, Law and Custom of the Constitution, p. 201. Encyclopædia Britannica, vol. xviii, p. 467, Art. Peerage.

2 Statutes of Parliament, 7 and 8 William III, c. 25; Ibid. 5 Anne, c. 8; Ibid. 4 George IV, c. 55.

of the elections, with the collection of the revenues or the auditing of public accounts or with the administration of property for public objects; possession of judicial office, or of any office created since the 25th of October, 1705, when not specially excepted from the rule by act of Parliament; receipt of a pension, i.e. “a grant of royal bounty repeated more than once in three years," excepting "civil service and diplomatic pensions"; holding a government contract; conviction of felonious crime, or of corrupt practices at a parliamentary election; the state of bankruptcy: all these are made, by various statutes, disqualifications for occupying a seat in the House of Commons.1 Appointment to almost any other office than those mentioned above, removes the person appointed from his seat in the Commons, but if re-elected after his appointment, he may hold both his office and his mandate.

The qualifications and disqualifications for membership in the House of Lords are not so numerous; but so far as they go, they are similar to those which obtain in the House of Commons. A Lord of Parliament must be of the male sex.2 He must be of the full age of twenty-one years. He must be a British subject, and it is not quite clear that naturalization will make an alien a subject for this purpose. The disqualifications, in the case of the Lords, are conviction of felonious crime and the state of bankruptcy.5

Lastly, refusal or failure to take the oath of allegiance disqualifies from sitting and voting in either house, but does not vacate the seat.6

5. The Rights and Privileges of Members.

The members of the House of Commons are privileged from arrest, during the session and for forty days before the

1 Anson, Law and Custom of the Constitution, p. 71 ff.

2 Encyclopædia Brittannica, vol. xviii, p. 467, Art. Peerage.

8 Anson, Law and Custom of the Constitution, p. 191.

4 Ibid. p. 191.

5 Ibid. pp. 191, 192.

6 Ibid. pp. 57, 58, 193.