_ THE CURIOUS REPUBLIC OF GONDOUR
As soon as I had learned to speak the language a little, I became greatly
interested in the people and the system of government.
I found that the nation had at first tried universal suffrage pure and
simple, but had thrown that form aside because the result was not
satisfactory. It had seemed to deliver all power into the hands of the
ignorant and non-tax-paying classes; and of a necessity the responsible
offices were filled from these classes also.
A remedy was sought. The people believed they had found it; not in the
destruction of universal suffrage, but in the enlargement of it. It was
an odd idea, and ingenious. You must understand, the constitution gave
every man a vote; therefore that vote was a vested right, and could not
be taken away. But the constitution did not say that certain individuals
might not be given two votes, or ten! So an amendatory clause was
inserted in a quiet way; a clause which authorised the enlargement of the
suffrage in certain cases to be specified by statute. To offer to
"limit" the suffrage might have made instant trouble; the offer to
"enlarge" it had a pleasant aspect. But of course the newspapers soon
began to suspect; and then out they came! It was found, however, that
for once--and for the first time in the history of the republic--
property, character, and intellect were able to wield a political
influence; for once, money, virtue, and intelligence took a vital and a
united interest in a political question; for once these powers went to
the "primaries" in strong force; for once the best men in the nation were
put forward as candidates for that parliament whose business it should be
to enlarge the suffrage. The weightiest half of the press quickly joined
forces with the new movement, and left the other half to rail about the
proposed "destruction of the liberties" of the bottom layer of society,
the hitherto governing class of the community.
The victory was complete. The new law was framed and passed. Under it
every citizen, howsoever poor or ignorant, possessed one vote,
so universal suffrage still reigned; but if a man possessed a good
common-school education and no money, he had two votes; a high-school
education gave him four; if he had property like wise, to the value of
three thousand 'sacos,' he wielded one more vote; for every fifty
thousand 'sacos' a man added to his property, he was entitled to another
vote; a university education entitled a man to nine votes, even though he
owned no property. Therefore, learning being more prevalent and more
easily acquired than riches, educated men became a wholesome check upon
wealthy men, since they could outvote them. Learning goes usually with
uprightness, broad views, and humanity; so the learned voters, possessing
the balance of power, became the vigilant and efficient protectors of the
great lower rank of society.
And now a curious thing developed itself--a sort of emulation, whose
object was voting power! Whereas formerly a man was honored only
according to the amount of money he possessed, his grandeur was measured
now by the number of votes he wielded. A man with only one vote was
conspicuously respectful to his neighbor who possessed three. And if he
was a man above the common-place, he was as conspicuously energetic in
his determination to acquire three for himself. This spirit of emulation
invaded all ranks. Votes based upon capital were commonly called
"mortal" votes, because they could be lost; those based upon learning
were called "immortal," because they were permanent, and because of their
customarily imperishable character they were naturally more valued than
the other sort. I say "customarily" for the reason that these votes were
not absolutely imperishable, since insanity could suspend them.
Under this system, gambling and speculation almost ceased in the
republic. A man honoured as the possessor of great voting power could
not afford to risk the loss of it upon a doubtful chance.
It was curious to observe the manners and customs which the enlargement
plan produced. Walking the street with a friend one day he delivered a
careless bow to a passer-by, and then remarked that that person possessed
only one vote and would probably never earn another; he was more
respectful to the next acquaintance he met; he explained that this salute
was a four-vote bow. I tried to "average" the importance of the people
he accosted after that, by the-nature of his bows, but my success was
only partial, because of the somewhat greater homage paid to the
immortals than to the mortals. My friend explained. He said there was
no law to regulate this thing, except that most powerful of all laws,
custom. Custom had created these varying bows, and in time they had
become easy and natural. At this moment he delivered himself of a very
profound salute, and then said, "Now there's a man who began life as a
shoemaker's apprentice, and without education; now he swings twenty-two
mortal votes and two immortal ones; he expects to pass a high-school
examination this year and climb a couple of votes higher among the
immortals; mighty valuable citizen."
By and by my friend met a venerable personage, and not only made him a
most elaborate bow, but also took off his hat. I took off mine, too,
with a mysterious awe. I was beginning to be infected.
"What grandee is that?"
"That is our most illustrious astronomer. He hasn't any money, but is
fearfully learned. Nine immortals is his political weight! He would
swing a hundred and fifty votes if our system were perfect."
"Is there any altitude of mere moneyed grandeur that you take off your
hat to?"
"No. Nine immortal votes is the only power we uncover for that is, in
civil life. Very great officials receive that mark of homage, of
course."
It was common to hear people admiringly mention men who had begun life on
the lower levels and in time achieved great voting-power. It was also
common to hear youths planning a future of ever so many votes for
themselves. I heard shrewd mammas speak of certain young men as good
"catches" because they possessed such-and-such a number of votes. I knew
of more than one case where an heiress was married to a youngster who had
but one vote; the argument being that he was gifted with such excellent
parts that in time he would acquire a good voting strength, and perhaps
in the long run be able to outvote his wife, if he had luck.
Competitive examinations were the rule and in all official grades. I
remarked that the questions asked the candidates were wild, intricate,
and often required a sort of knowledge not needed in the office sought.
"Can a fool or an ignoramus answer them?" asked the person I was talking
with.
"Certainly not."
"Well, you will not find any fools or ignoramuses among our officials."
I felt rather cornered, but made shift to say:
"But these questions cover a good deal more ground than is necessary."
"No matter; if candidates can answer these it is tolerably fair evidence
that they can answer nearly any other question you choose to ask them."
There were some things in Gondour which one could not shut his eyes to.
One was, that ignorance and incompetence had no place in the government.
Brains and property managed the state. A candidate for office must have
marked ability, education, and high character, or he stood no sort of
chance of election. If a hod-carrier possessed these, he could succeed;
but the mere fact that he was a hod-carrier could not elect him, as in
previous times.
It was now a very great honour to be in the parliament or in office;
under the old system such distinction had only brought suspicion upon a
man and made him a helpless mark for newspaper contempt and scurrility.
Officials did not need to steal now, their salaries being vast in
comparison with the pittances paid in the days when parliaments were
created by hod-carriers, who viewed official salaries from a hod-carrying
point of view and compelled that view to be respected by their obsequious
servants. Justice was wisely and rigidly administered; for a judge,
after once reaching his place through the specified line of promotions,
was a permanency during good behaviour. He was not obliged to modify his
judgments according to the effect they might have upon the temper of a
reigning political party.
The country was mainly governed by a ministry which went out with the
administration that created it. This was also the case with the chiefs
of the great departments. Minor officials ascended to their several
positions through well-earned promotions, and not by a jump from gin-
mills or the needy families and friends of members of parliament. Good
behaviour measured their terms of office.
The head of the governments the Grand Caliph, was elected for a term of
twenty years. I questioned the wisdom of this. I was answered that he
could do no harm, since the ministry and the parliament governed the
land, and he was liable to impeachment for misconduct. This great office
had twice been ably filled by women, women as aptly fitted for it as some
of the sceptred queens of history. Members of the cabinet, under many
administrations, had been women.
I found that the pardoning power was lodged in a court of pardons,
consisting of several great judges. Under the old regime, this important
power was vested in a single official, and he usually took care to have a
general jail delivery in time for the next election.
I inquired about public schools. There were plenty of them, and of free
colleges too. I inquired about compulsory education. This was received
with a smile, and the remark:
"When a man's child is able to make himself powerful and honoured
according to the amount of education he acquires, don't you suppose that
that parent will apply the compulsion himself? Our free schools and free
colleges require no law to fill them."
There was a loving pride of country about this person's way of speaking
which annoyed me. I had long been unused to the sound of it in my own.
The Gondour national airs were forever dinning in my ears; therefore I
was glad to leave that country and come back to my dear native land,
where one never hears that sort of music. _