The tone of the debates,as was said by competent witnesses,was perceptibly raised by his speeches.The accepted leaders,such as Bright and Gladstone,welcomed him cordially,and were doubtless pleased to find that they had been talking so much philosophy without knowing it.The young mell who were then entering public life looked up to him with reverence;and,for a time,even the squires,the embodiments of Tory prejudice,were favourably impressed.That could not be for long.One of the hits to which Mill refers with some glee in the Autobiography(80)gave the nickname of the 'stupid party'to the Conservatives.It expressed his real view a little too clearly.Between him and the typical 'John Bull'a great gulf was fixed.He could never contrive,though he honestly tried,to see anything in the class which most fully represents that ideal,except the embodiment of selfish stupidity generated by class prejudice,And the country-gentlemen naturally looked upon him as their ancestors would have looked upon Sieyes,could the Frenchman have been substituted for Charles Fox.They could dimly understand Whiggism,embodied in a genial,hearty member of their own class;but the flavour of the French philosophy,or its English correlative,was thin,acid,and calculated to set their teeth on edge.They showed the feeling after a time,and Mill retorted by some irritability as well as scorn,He did-not,I fancy,obtain that kind of personal weight which is sometimes acquired by a man who,though he preaches equally offensive doctrines,is more obviously made of the same flesh and blood as his adversaries.(81)Mill took a part in various parliamentary proceedings.He helped to pass the Reform Bill of 1867;he acted as a mediator between the ministers and the Radicals who were responsible for the famous meeting in Hyde Park;and he made a weighty protest on behalf of a generous and thoroughgoing Irish policy.He thought that a separation would be mischievous to both parties;but he advocated a scheme for giving a permanent tenure to existing tenants,with a due regard to vested interests.(82)He obtained little support for a policy which,at least,went to the root of the great difficulty;but the wisdom of his view,whatever its shortcomings,is more likely to be recognised now.The main peculiarity of Mill's position,however,is all that I am able to notice.In spite of his philosophy,he appeared to be a thorough party man.He fully adopted,that is to say,the platform of the Radical wing,and voted systematically with them on all points.
His philosophy led him,as he says,(83)to advocate some measures not popular with the bulk of the Liberal party.Of these the most important were the extension of the suffrage to women and the provision of representation for minorities.Many people,he observes,took these to be 'whims of his own.'Mill,in fact,was contributing to the advance of democracy.In his eyes,these measures were of vital importance as safeguards against democratic tyranny.The democrat was,of course,content to accept his alliance,and to allow him to amuse himself with fanciful schemes,which for the time could make no difference.
Mill,on the other hand,thought that by helping the democrat's immediate purposes,he was also gaining ground for the popularisation of these subsidiary though essential changes.The relation is significant;for,whatever may be the value of Mill's proposals,there can be no doubt that in many ways the democratic changes which he advocated have led to results which he would have thoroughly disapproved.The alliance,that is,for the time,covered very deep differences,and Mill was virtually helping Demos to get into power,in the expectation that,when in power,Demos would consent to submit to restrictions,not yet,if they ever will be,realised.There is the further question,not here debatable,whether,if realised,they would act as Mill supposed.
Anyhow,for the present,the philosopher was really the follower of the partisan.Mill made himself unpopular with a class wider than that which constituted the 'stupid party.'He took a very active part in the agitation provoked by Governor Eyre's action in the Jamaica insurrection.That he was right in demanding a thorough investigation seems to be undeniable.It seems also that a more judicial frame of mind would have restrained him from apparently assuming that such an investigation could have but one result.People of a high moral tone are too apt to show their virtue by assuming that a concrete case comes under a ****** moral law when in fact most such cases are exceedingly complex.
Mill,at any rate,and his committee impressed many people besides their strongest opponents as allowing their indignation to swamp their sense of fair play.Governor Eyre appeared to be a victim of persecution instead of a criminal,and there was,though Mill could not see it,a generous element in the feeling that allowance should be made for a man placed in a terribly critical position.
After the dissolution of parliament,Mill incurred further odium by subscribing to the election expenses of Bradlaugh.
