Speaker 1: Chapter eighteen B of Considerations on Representative Government. This LibriVox
Speaker 1: recording is in the public domain. Considerations on Representative Government
Speaker 1: by John Stuart Mill, Chapter eighteen B. The government of
Speaker 1: a people by itself has a meaning and reality, But
Speaker 1: such a thing as government of one people by another
Speaker 1: does not and cannot exist. One people may keep another
Speaker 1: as a warren, or preserve for its own use a
Speaker 1: place to make money in a human cattle farm, to
Speaker 1: be worked for the profit of its own inhabitants. But
Speaker 1: if the good of the governed is the proper business
Speaker 1: of a government, it is utterly impossible that a people
Speaker 1: should directly attend to it. The utmost they can do
Speaker 1: is to give some of their best men a commission
Speaker 1: to look after it, to whom the opinion of their
Speaker 1: own country can neither be much of a guide in
Speaker 1: the performance of their duty, nor a competent judge of
Speaker 1: the mode in which it has been performed. N One
Speaker 1: consider how the English themselves would be governed if they
Speaker 1: knew and cared no more about their own affairs than
Speaker 1: they know and care about the affairs of the Hindus.
Speaker 1: Even this comparison gives no adequate idea of the state
Speaker 1: of the case. For people thus indifferent to politics altogether
Speaker 1: would probably be simply acquiescent and let the government alone,
Speaker 1: whereas in the case of India, a politically active people
Speaker 1: like the English, amid habitual acquiescence, are every now and
Speaker 1: then interfering, and almost always in the wrong place. The
Speaker 1: real causes which determine the prosperity or wretchedness, the improvement
Speaker 1: or deterioration of the Hindus are too far off to
Speaker 1: be within their ken. They have not the knowledge necessary
Speaker 1: for suspecting the existence of those causes, much less for
Speaker 1: judging their operation. The most essential interests of the country
Speaker 1: may be well administered without obtaining any of their approbation,
Speaker 1: or mismanaged to almost any excess without attracting their notice.
Speaker 1: The purposes for which they are principally tempted to interfere
Speaker 1: and control the proceedings of their delegates are of two kinds.
Speaker 1: One is to force English ideas down the throats of
Speaker 1: the natives, for instance, by measures of proselytism or acts
Speaker 1: intentionally or unintentionally offensive to the religious feelings of the people.
Speaker 1: This misdirection of opinion in the ruling country is instructively exemplified.
Speaker 1: The more so because nothing is meant but justice and fairness,
Speaker 1: and as much impartiality as can be expected from persons
Speaker 1: really convinced by the demand now so general in England
Speaker 1: for having the Bible taught at the option of pupils
Speaker 1: or of their parents in the government schools. From the
Speaker 1: European point of view, nothing can wear a fairer aspect
Speaker 1: or seem less open to objection on the score of
Speaker 1: religious freedom. To Asiatic eyes, it is quite another thing.
Speaker 1: No Asiatic people ever believes that a government puts its
Speaker 1: paid officers and official mischie maenery into motion unless it
Speaker 1: is bent upon an object, And when bent on an object,
Speaker 1: no Asiatic believes that any government, except a feeble and
Speaker 1: contemptible one, pursues it by halves. If government schools and
Speaker 1: schoolmasters taught Christianity, whatever pledges might be given of teaching
Speaker 1: it only to those who spontaneously sought it, no amount
Speaker 1: of evidence would ever persuade the parents that improper means
Speaker 1: were not used to make their children Christians or at
Speaker 1: all events outcasts from Hinduism. If they could, in the
Speaker 1: end be convinced of the contrary, it would only be
Speaker 1: by the entire failure of the schools so conducted to
Speaker 1: make any converts. If the teaching had the smallest effect
Speaker 1: in promoting its object, it would compromise not only the
Speaker 1: utility and even existence of the government education, but perhaps
Speaker 1: the safety of the government itself. An English Protestant would
Speaker 1: not be easily induced by disclaimers of proselytism to place
Speaker 1: his children in a Roman Catholic seminary. Irish Catholics will
Speaker 1: not send their children to schools in which they can
Speaker 1: be made Protestants. And we expect that Hindus, who believe
Speaker 1: that the privileges of Hinduism can be forfeited by a
Speaker 1: merely physical act, will expose theirs to the danger of
Speaker 1: being made Christians. Such is one of the modes in
Speaker 1: which the opinion of the dominant country tends to act
Speaker 1: more injuriously than beneficially on the conduct of its deputed governors.
Speaker 1: In other respects, its interference is likely to be oftenest
Speaker 1: exercise where it would be most pertinaciously demanded, and that
Speaker 1: is on behalf of some interest of the English settlers.
Speaker 1: English settlers have friends at home, have organs, have access
Speaker 1: to the public, They have a common language and common
Speaker 1: ideas with their countrymen. Any complaint by an Englishman is
Speaker 1: more sympathetically heard, even if no unjust preference is intentionally
Speaker 1: accorded to it. Now, if there be a fact to
Speaker 1: which all experience testifies, it is that when a country
Speaker 1: holds another in subjection, the individuals of the ruling people
Speaker 1: who resort to the foreign country to make their fortunes are,
Speaker 1: of all others, those who most need to be held
Speaker 1: under powerful restraint. They are always one of the chief
Speaker 1: difficulties of the government. Armed with the prestige and filled
Speaker 1: with the scornful overbearingness of the conquering nation, they have
Speaker 1: the feelings inspired by absolute power without its sense of responsibility.
Speaker 1: Among a people like that of India, the utmost efforts
Speaker 1: of the public authorities are not enough for the effectual
Speaker 1: protection of the weak against the strong, And of all
Speaker 1: the strong, the European settlers are the strongest. Wherever the
Speaker 1: demoralizing effect of the situation is not in a most
Speaker 1: remarkable degree corrected by the personal character of the individual,
Speaker 1: they think the people of the country mere dirt under
Speaker 1: their feet. It seems to them monstrous that any rights
Speaker 1: of the natives should stand in the way of their
Speaker 1: smallest pretensions. The simplest act of protection to the inhabitants
Speaker 1: against any act of power on their part which they
Speaker 1: may consider useful to their commercial objects, they denounce and
Speaker 1: sincerely regard as an injury. So natural is this state
Speaker 1: of feeling in a situation like theirs, that, even under
Speaker 1: the discouragement which it has hitherto met with from the
Speaker 1: ruling authorities, it is impossible that more or less of
Speaker 1: the spirit should not perpetually break out. The government itself,
Speaker 1: free from this spirit, is never able sufficiently to keep
Speaker 1: it down in the young and raw, even of its
Speaker 1: own civil and military officers, over whom it has so
Speaker 1: much more control than over the independent residence. As it
Speaker 1: is with the English in India, So according to trustworthy testimony,
Speaker 1: it is with the French in Algiers, so with the
Speaker 1: Americans and the countries conquered from Mexico. So it seems
Speaker 1: to be with the Europeans in China, and already even
Speaker 1: in Japan. There is no necessity to recall how it
Speaker 1: was with the Spaniards in South America. In all these cases,
Speaker 1: the government to which these private adventurers are subject is
Speaker 1: better than they and does the most it can to
Speaker 1: protect the natives against them. Even the Spanish government did
Speaker 1: this sincerely and earnestly, though ineffectually, as is known to
Speaker 1: every reader of mister Help's instructive history. Had the Spanish
Speaker 1: government been directly accountable to Spanish opinion, we may question
Speaker 1: if it would have made the attempt, For the Spaniards,
Speaker 1: doubtless would have taken part with their Christian friends and
Speaker 1: relations rather than with Pagans. The settlers, not the natives,
Speaker 1: have the ear of the public at home. It is
Speaker 1: they whose representations are likely to pass for truth, because
Speaker 1: they alone have both the means and the motive to
Speaker 1: press them perseveringly upon the inattentive and uninterested public mind.
Speaker 1: The distrustful criticism with which Englishmen, more than any other
Speaker 1: people are in the habit of scanning the conduct of
Speaker 1: their country towards foreigners, they usually reserved for the proceedings
Speaker 1: of the public authorities. In all questions between a government
Speaker 1: and an individual, the presumption in every Englishman's mind is
Speaker 1: that the government is in the wrong, and when the
Speaker 1: resident English bring the batteries of English political action to
Speaker 1: bear upon any of the bulwarks erected to protect the
Speaker 1: natives against their encroachments. The executive, with their real but
Speaker 1: faint viliities of something better, generally find it safer to
Speaker 1: their parliamentary interest, and at any rate less troublesome to
Speaker 1: give up the disputed position than to defend it. What
Speaker 1: makes matters worse is that when the public mind is
Speaker 1: invoked as to its credit, the English mind is extremely
Speaker 1: open to be in the name of justice and philanthropy,
Speaker 1: in behalf of the subject community or race, there is
Speaker 1: the same probability of its missing the mark. For in
Speaker 1: the subject community also there are oppressors and oppressed powerful
Speaker 1: individuals or classes and slaves prostrate before them. It is
Speaker 1: the former, not the latter, who have the means of
Speaker 1: access to the English public. A tyrant or sensualist who
Speaker 1: has been deprived of the power he had abused, and
Speaker 1: instead of punishment, is supported in as great wealth and
Speaker 1: splendor as he ever enjoyed. A knot of privileged landholders
Speaker 1: who demand that the state should relinquish to them its
Speaker 1: reserved right to a rent from their lands, or who
Speaker 1: resent as a wrong any attempt to protect the masses
Speaker 1: from their extortion. These have no difficulty in procuring interested
Speaker 1: or sentimental advocacy in the British Parliament and press, the
Speaker 1: silent myriads obtain none. The preceding observations exemplify the operation
Speaker 1: of a principle which might be called an obvious one,
Speaker 1: were it not that scarcely anybody seems to be aware
Speaker 1: of it. That while responsibility to the governed is the
Speaker 1: greatest of all securities for good government, responsibility to somebody
Speaker 1: else not only has no such tendency, but is as
Speaker 1: likely to produce evil as good. The responsibility of the
Speaker 1: British rulers of India to the British nation is chiefly
Speaker 1: useful because when any acts of the government are called
Speaker 1: in question, it insures publicity and discussion, the utility of
Speaker 1: which does not require that the public at large should
Speaker 1: comprehend the point at issue. Provided there are any individuals
Speaker 1: among them who do for a merely moral responsibility, not
Speaker 1: being responsibility to the collective people, but to every separate
Speaker 1: person among them who forms a judgment, opinions may be
Speaker 1: weighed as well as counted, and the approbation or disapprobation
Speaker 1: of one person well versed in the subject may outweigh
Speaker 1: that of thousands who know nothing about it at all.
Speaker 1: It is doubtless a useful restraint upon the immediate rulers,
Speaker 1: that they can be put upon their defense, and that
Speaker 1: one or two of the jury will form an opinion
Speaker 1: worth having about their conduct, though that of the remainder
Speaker 1: will probably be several reads worse than none. Such as
Speaker 1: it is, this is the amount of benefit to India
Speaker 1: from the control exercised over the Indian government by the
Speaker 1: British Parliament and people. It is not by attempting to
Speaker 1: rule directly a country like India, but by giving it
Speaker 1: good rulers, that the English people can do their duty
Speaker 1: to that country, and they can scarcely give it a
Speaker 1: worse one than an English cabinet minister who is thinking
Speaker 1: of English not Indian politics, who does not remain long
Speaker 1: enough in office to acquire an intelligent interest in so
Speaker 1: complicated a subject upon whom the factitious public opinion got
Speaker 1: up in Parliament, consisting of two or three fluent speakers,
Speaker 1: acts with as much force as if it were genuine,
Speaker 1: while he is under none of the influences of training
Speaker 1: and position which would lead or qualify him to form
Speaker 1: an honest opinion of his own. A free country which
Speaker 1: attempts to govern a distant dependency inhabited by a dysmo
Speaker 1: people by means of a branch of its own executive
Speaker 1: will almost inevitably fail. The only mode which has any
Speaker 1: chance of tolerable success is to govern through a delegated
Speaker 1: body of a comparatively permanent character, allowing only a right
Speaker 1: of inspection and a negative voice to the changeable administration
Speaker 1: of the state. Such a body did exist in the
Speaker 1: case of India, and I fear that both India and
Speaker 1: England will pay a severe penalty for the short sighted
Speaker 1: policy by which this intermediate instrument of government was done
Speaker 1: away with. It is of no avail to say that
Speaker 1: such a delegated body can not have all the requisites
Speaker 1: of good government. Above all, cannot have that complete and
Speaker 1: over operative identity of interest with the governed, which it
Speaker 1: is so difficult to obtain. Even where the people to
Speaker 1: be ruled are in some degree qualified to look after
Speaker 1: their own affairs. Real good government is not compatible with
Speaker 1: the conditions of the case. There is but a choice
Speaker 1: of imperfections. The problem is so to construct the governing
Speaker 1: body that, under the difficulties of the position, it shall
Speaker 1: have as much interest as possible in good government and
Speaker 1: as little in bad now. These conditions are best found
Speaker 1: in an intermediate body. A delegated administration has always this
Speaker 1: advantage over a direct one, that it has, at all
Speaker 1: events no duty to perform except to the governed. It
Speaker 1: has no interests to consider except theirs. Its own power
Speaker 1: of deriving profit from misgovernment may be reduced. In the
Speaker 1: latest Constitution of the East India Company, it was reduced
Speaker 1: to a singularly small amount, and it can be kept
Speaker 1: entirely clear of bias from the individual or class interests
Speaker 1: of anyone else when the Home Government and Parliament are
Speaker 1: swayed by such partial influences in the exercise of the
Speaker 1: power reserved to them. In the last resort, the intermediate
Speaker 1: body is the certain advocate and champion of the dependency
Speaker 1: before the imperial tribunal. The intermediate body, moreover, is, in
Speaker 1: the natural course of things, chiefly composed of persons who
Speaker 1: have acquired professional knowledge of this part of their country's concerns,
Speaker 1: who have been trained to it in the place itself,
Speaker 1: and have made its administration the main occupation of their lives.
Speaker 1: Furnished with these qualifications, and not being liable to lose
Speaker 1: their office from the accidents of home politics. They identify
Speaker 1: their character and consideration with their special trust, and have
Speaker 1: a much more permanent interest in the success of their
Speaker 1: administration and in the prosperity of the country which they administer,
Speaker 1: than a member of a cabinet under a representative constitution
Speaker 1: can possibly have in the good government of any country
Speaker 1: except the one which he serves. So far as the
Speaker 1: choice of those who carry on the management on the
Speaker 1: spot devolves upon this body, their appointment is kept out
Speaker 1: of the vortex of party and parliamentary jobbing, and freed
Speaker 1: from the influence of those motives to the abuse of
Speaker 1: patronage for the reward of adherents, or to buy off
Speaker 1: those who would otherwise be opponents, which are always stronger
Speaker 1: with statesmen of average honesty than a conscientious sense of
Speaker 1: the duty of appointing the fittest man. To put this
Speaker 1: one class of appointments, as far as possible, out of
Speaker 1: harm's way is of more consequence than the worst which
Speaker 1: can happen to all other offices in the state. For
Speaker 1: in every other department, if the officer is unqualified, the
Speaker 1: general opinion of the community directs him in a certain
Speaker 1: degree what to do but in the position of the
Speaker 1: administrators of a dependency where the people are not fit
Speaker 1: to have the control in their own hands. The character
Speaker 1: of the government entirely depends on the qualifications, moral and
Speaker 1: intellectual of the individual functionaries. It cannot be too often
Speaker 1: repeated that in a country like India, everything depends on
Speaker 1: the person, no qualities, and capacities of the agents of government.
Speaker 1: This truth is the cardinal principle of Indian administration. The
Speaker 1: day when it comes to be thought that the appointment
Speaker 1: of persons to situations of trust from motives of convenience,
Speaker 1: already so criminal in England, can be practiced with impunity
Speaker 1: in India, will be the beginning of the decline and
Speaker 1: fall of our empire. There, Even with the sincere intention
Speaker 1: of preferring the best candidate, it will not do to
Speaker 1: rely on chance for supplying fit persons. The system must
Speaker 1: be calculated to form them. It has done this hitherto,
Speaker 1: and because it has done so, our rule in India
Speaker 1: has lasted and been one of constant, if not very rapid,
Speaker 1: improvement in prosperity and good administration. As much bitterness is
Speaker 1: now manifested against this system, and as much eagerness displayed
Speaker 1: to overthrow it, as if educating and training the officers
Speaker 1: of government for their work were a thing utterly unreasonable
Speaker 1: and indefensible, an unjustifiable interference with the rights of ignorance
Speaker 1: and inexperience. There is a tacit conspiracy between those who
Speaker 1: would like to job and first rate Indian offices for
Speaker 1: their connections here, and those who, being already in India,
Speaker 1: claim to be promoted from the Indigo factory or the
Speaker 1: attorney's office to administer justice or fix the payments due
Speaker 1: to government for millions of people. The monopoly of the
Speaker 1: civil service so much inveighed against, is like the monopoly
Speaker 1: of judicial offices by the bar, and its abolition would
Speaker 1: be like opening the bench in Westminster Hall to the
Speaker 1: first comer whose friends certified that he has now and
Speaker 1: then looked into Blackstone. Were the course ever adopted of
Speaker 1: sending men from this country or encouraging them in going
Speaker 1: out to get themselves put into high appointments without having
Speaker 1: learned their business by passing through the lower ones, the
Speaker 1: most important offices would be thrown to Scotch cousins and
Speaker 1: adventurers connected by no professional feeling with the country or
Speaker 1: the work held to no previous knowledge, and eager only
Speaker 1: to make money rapidly and return home. The safety of
Speaker 1: the country is that those by whom it is administered
Speaker 1: be sent out in youth as candidates, only to begin
Speaker 1: at the bottom of the latter and ascend higher or not,
Speaker 1: as after a proper interval they are proved qualified. The
Speaker 1: defect of the East India Company's system was that though
Speaker 1: the best men were carefully sought out for the most
Speaker 1: important posts, yet if an officer remained in the service, promotion,
Speaker 1: though it might be delayed, came at last in some
Speaker 1: shape or order to the least as well as to
Speaker 1: the most competent. Even the inferior in qualifications. Among such
Speaker 1: a corps of functionaries consisted. It must be remembered of
Speaker 1: men who had been brought up to their duties and
Speaker 1: had fulfilled them for many years at lowest without disgrace
Speaker 1: under the eye and authority of a superior. But though
Speaker 1: this diminished the evil, it was nevertheless considerable. A man
Speaker 1: who never becomes fit for more than an assistant's duty
Speaker 1: should remain an assistant all his life, and his juniors
Speaker 1: should be promoted over him. With this exception, I am
Speaker 1: not aware of any real defect in the old system
Speaker 1: of Indian appointments, it had already received the greatest other improvement.
Speaker 1: It was susceptible of the choice of the original candidates
Speaker 1: by competitive examination, which besides the advantage of recruiting from
Speaker 1: a higher grade of industry and capacity, as the recommendation
Speaker 1: that under it. Unless by accident, there are no personal
Speaker 1: ties between the candidates for offices and those who have
Speaker 1: a voice in conferring them. It is in no way
Speaker 1: unjust that public officers, thus selected and trained should be
Speaker 1: exclusively eligible to offices which require specially Indian knowledge and experience.
Speaker 1: If any door to the higher appointments, without passing through
Speaker 1: the lower be opened, even for occasional use, there will
Speaker 1: be such incessant knocking at it by persons of influence
Speaker 1: that it will be impossible ever to keep it closed.
Speaker 1: The only accepted appointment should be the highest one of all.
Speaker 1: The Viceroy of British India should be a person selected
Speaker 1: from all Englishmen for his great general capacity for government.
Speaker 1: If he have this, he will be able to distinguish
Speaker 1: in others and turn to his own use that special
Speaker 1: knowledge and judgment in local affairs which he has not
Speaker 1: himself had the opportunity of acquiring. There are good reasons
Speaker 1: why the Viceroy should not be a member of the
Speaker 1: regular service. All services have more or less their class
Speaker 1: prejudices from which the Supreme Ruler ought to be exempt.
Speaker 1: Neither are men, however, able and experienced, who have passed
Speaker 1: their lives in Asia, so likely to possess the most
Speaker 1: advanced European ideas in general statesmanship, which the chief ruler
Speaker 1: should carry out with him and blend with the results
Speaker 1: of Indian experience. Again, being of a different class, and
Speaker 1: especially if chosen by a different authority, he will seldom
Speaker 1: have any personal partialities to warp his appointments to office.
Speaker 1: This great security for honest bestowal of patronage existed in
Speaker 1: rare perfection under the mixed government of the Crown and
Speaker 1: the East India Company. The supreme dispensers of office, the
Speaker 1: Governor General and governors were appointed in fact, though not formally,
Speaker 1: by the Crown, that is, by the general government, not
Speaker 1: by the intermediate body, and a great officer of the
Speaker 1: Crown probably had not a single personal or political connection
Speaker 1: in the local service, while the delegated body, most of
Speaker 1: whom had themselves served in the country, had and were
Speaker 1: likely to have such connections. This guarantee for impartiality would
Speaker 1: be much impaired if the civil servants of government, even
Speaker 1: though sent out in boyhood as mere candidates for employment,
Speaker 1: should come to be furnished in any considerable proportion by
Speaker 1: the class of society which supplies viceroys and governors. Even
Speaker 1: the initiatory or competitive examination would then be an insufficient security.
Speaker 1: It would exclude mere ignorance and incapacity. It would compel
Speaker 1: youths of family to start in the race with the
Speaker 1: same amount of instruction and ability as other people. The
Speaker 1: stupidest son could not be put into the Indian service
Speaker 1: as he can be into the church, but there would
Speaker 1: be nothing to prevent undue preference afterwards, No longer all
Speaker 1: equally unknown and unheard of by the arbiter of their lot,
Speaker 1: a portion of the service would be personally, and a
Speaker 1: still greater number politically in close relation with him. Members
Speaker 1: of certain families and of the higher classes and influential
Speaker 1: connections generally would rise more rapidly than their competitors, and
Speaker 1: be often kept in situations for which they were unfit,
Speaker 1: or placed in those for which others were fitter, the
Speaker 1: same influences would be brought into play which affect promotions
Speaker 1: in the army and those alone. If such miracles of
Speaker 1: simplicity there be who believe that these are impartial, would
Speaker 1: expect impartiality in those of India. This evil is, I
Speaker 1: fear irremediable by any general measures which can be taken
Speaker 1: under the present system. No such will afford a degree
Speaker 1: of security comparable to that which once flowed spontaneously from
Speaker 1: the so called double government. What has accounted so great
Speaker 1: an advantage in the case of the English system of
Speaker 1: government at home has been its misfortune in India that
Speaker 1: it grew up of itself, not from preconceived design, but
Speaker 1: by successive expedients and by the adaptation of machinery originally
Speaker 1: created for a different purpose. As the country on which
Speaker 1: its maintenance depended was not the one out of whose
Speaker 1: necessities it grew, its practical benefits did not come home
Speaker 1: to the mind of that country, and it would have
Speaker 1: required theoretic recommendations to render it acceptable. Unfortunately, these were
Speaker 1: exactly what it seemed to be destitute of, and undoubtedly
Speaker 1: the common theories of government did not furnish it with
Speaker 1: such framed as those theories have been for states of circumstances,
Speaker 1: differing in all the most important features from the case concerned.
Speaker 1: But in government, as in other departments of human agency,
Speaker 1: almost all principles which have been durable were first suggested
Speaker 1: by observation of some particular case in which the general
Speaker 1: laws of nature acted in some new or previously unnoticed
Speaker 1: combination of circumstances. The institutions of Great Britain and those
Speaker 1: of the United States have the distinction of suggesting most
Speaker 1: of the theories of government, which, through good and evil fortune,
Speaker 1: are now in the course of generations reawakening political life
Speaker 1: in the nations of Europe. It has been the destiny
Speaker 1: of the government of the East India Company to suggest
Speaker 1: the true theory of the government of a semi barbarous
Speaker 1: dependency by a civilized country. And after having done this
Speaker 1: to pairs, it would be a singular fortune if, at
Speaker 1: the end of two or three more generations, this speculative
Speaker 1: result should be the only remaining fruit of our ascendancy
Speaker 1: in India. If posterity should say of us that, having
Speaker 1: stumbled accidentally upon better arrangements than our wisdom would ever
Speaker 1: have devised, the first use we made of our awakened
Speaker 1: reason was to destroy them, and allow the good which
Speaker 1: had been in course of being realized, to fall through
Speaker 1: and be lost from ignorance of the principles on which
Speaker 1: it depended. D. Meliora. But if a fate so disgraceful
Speaker 1: to England and to civilization can be averted, it must
Speaker 1: be through far wider political conceptions than merely English or
Speaker 1: European practice can supply, and through a much more profound
Speaker 1: study of Indian experience and of the conditions of Indian government,
Speaker 1: than either English politicians or those who supply the English
Speaker 1: public with opinions have hid hitherto shown any willingness to undertake.
Speaker 1: End of Chapter eighteen B and end of Considerations on
Speaker 1: Representative Government Recording by Bill Burst