The following “Notes on England” (1872) were written by
Hippolyte Taine, who was one of the leading intellectual
figures in France in the early decades of the Third Republic, established after
Emperor Napoleon III capitulated to the Germans at Sedan in 1871. Here is an excerpt describing Taine’s visit
to England’s House of Commons, and note his admiration for an institution where
there is “freedom from constraint” – in some ways not unlike the land
itself. Perhaps Justin Trudeau’s unprecedented lack of parliamentary decorum (aggravated by an imperious Supreme Court
deadline on Assisted Dying) would benefit from a look back – to “a certain dignity” apparently
found in another country, in a different culture, in the mother of all
Parliaments.
In the House of Commons
from ten o’clock till midnight. There is
still greater freedom from constraint; the House is full, and all have their
hats on their heads; some wear them far back and pressed down. Several wear white hats, fancy trousers and
coat, are leaning back, half-lying on their seats, one of them is entirely
lolling on his, and two or three are rather free and easy. They enter, go out, talk with a wearied and
unceremonious air; certainly a club in which one were to behave in this style
would be moderately respectable.
The ministers were
pointed out to me – Lord Palmerston, Mr. Milner Gibson, Lord John Russell, Sir
Charles Wood, Mr. Gladstone. Alongside
of us, in the gallery, several members of the Upper House came and seated themselves,
one young immensely rich duke, all had bad cravats, and he had a shabby
coat. Below us there is silence. The members, tightly packed on their benches,
have not even a desk on which to write.
They take notes upon their knees, drink a glass of water which they
afterwards put on their seat. Each one
speaks in his place, in a natural tone and with few gestures. Certainly a chamber arranged in this way, and
so narrow, is incommodious, and even unhealthy, too warm in the summer for the
night sittings; a man must be quickly worn out there. But this simplicity denotes a business-like
people, who suppress ceremonial in order to get through their task. One the contrary, a raised tribune, isolated
like that of our Legislative Assembly, leads to theatrical eloquence.
The
business of the day related to the encroachment of the Lords, who had voted a
money bill without the assent of the Commons; the debate, it is said, is one of
the most important of the year; the House is full and attentive. After Mr. Seymour, Mr. Horsman rises. Very distinct pronunciation, a perfectly just
and convinced tone, energy without emphasis.
His thesis is that the Lords are not a body of simple, privileged
personages; though not elected, they represent the people. They are country gentlemen, like the others,
having the same interests, the same education, the same ideas, being as well
situated to decide about the common interests. Election is but one means only
for naming the representatives of the nation; there were others, for example
the possession of a certain dignity, which is the case of the Bishops,
inheritance, which is said of the Queen and of the lay Lords. Besides, since 1832, the Commons have had a
marked preponderance; the control of a second body is required, without which
they would fall into pure democracy, &c. Rather long, he repeated himself; however he
made an impression; cries of “hear, hear” arose at nearly every sentence. After him, in the opposite sense, spoke Mr.
Bright, an accomplished orator. But I
had seen too many things these days; my nerves are not as strong as those of a
member of Parliament, and I left the House.