At  the  time  of  the  discussion  of  the  Parliament
Act,  a  correspondent  of  one  of  the  papers  asked  this
question  :  "  When  the  House  of  Lords  has  been
abolished  and  the  House  of  Commons  is  supreme,
what  is  to  prevent  the  Radical  majority  from  sus-
pending the  Septennial  Act,  voting  themselves
members  for  life  with  a  thousand  a  year  apiece,  and
making  themselves  dictators  of  Great  Britain  ?"

Well,  what  is  there,  since  they  (Parliament)  con-
trol the  army  and  the  navy,  and  thus  can  overbear  all
the  nation?  If  you  say  that  the  army  and  navy  are
mainly  Conservative,  and  would  not  obey  a  Liberal
Government,  then  what  is  to  prevent  a  Conservative
Government  from  doing  it  ?  What,  in  other  words,
is  to  prevent  each  side  using  force  when  it  finds  itself
in  possession,  to  install  itself  definitely  in  power
until  dispossessed  by  rival  force,  just  as  is  done  in
Nicaragua  or  Mexico?  Nothing  in  this  world  save
the  mutual  agreement  of  the  two  parties  concerned
that  the  differences  between  them  shall  not  be
settled  in  that  way — an  agreement  based  on  mutual
recognition  that  that  is  a  miserably  poor  way  to
settle  it;  that  force,  indeed,  cannot  "settle  it"  at


68    FOUNDATIONS  OF  INTERNATIONAL  POLITY

all — cannot  decide  what  is  in  the  best  interests  of
the  parties  concerned,  only  which  of  them  is
stronger.
