Any thoughtful and unbiased observer of our political tendencies in the nineteenth century could hardly have avoided the conclusion that the twentieth and succeeding centuries would see important changes in the practice at least, if not the theory or external form, of our Government. To stand still was impossible to the increasing pressure of the needs of our political life; and to what, therefore, were we driving? "The Crown" had already, in the nineteenth century, become "constitutional;" which meant that already it could have no will of its own, apart from that of the people, as indicated by the majorities of their representative system. Our Upper House had gone partly on the same road with the Crown, and might perhaps have as fully traversed the "constitutional" field, but for the saving practice of incorporating distinguished outside ability into its hereditary ranks. The Upper House, in this way, retained more or less of a real political life. Indeed, when, very early in our retrospect, as we shall presently see, the ecclesiastical element seceded from that House, and when, later on, the hereditary element was suffered to die out, there resulted quite a renovation of its political strength. But there were no available parachutes of these kinds to save "the Crown," which gradually, therefore, dropped out of practical account, paled from political view, and finally disappeared from the country's Government.
We are a people peculiarly addicted to political
