evident that they cannot all agree in wishing for the same thing at
the same time, while if they, or any considerable number of groups,
want different things at the same time, the result in so far is
anarchy. Government is paralysed, and with the well-known
excitability of humanity in groups men begin to confound the
importance of the thing wanted with the importance of getting what
they want. The clash of contending factions is apt to suggest the
clash of arms. The first necessity, therefore, is the formation of
large and coherent parties, not merely for the purpose of
accomplishing what is desired by the majority of the people, but
also for suppressing agitation and social disturbance on behalf of
what may be called merely objects of passion or private interest
with comparatively small groups, at least until those objects
enlist the support of a large minority. (Vol. i., pp. 492, 493.)

+Professor Nanson.+--In Victoria the Hare system is championed by Mr.
E.J. Nanson, Professor of Mathematics at Melbourne University. Professor
Nanson approaches the subject entirely from a mathematical standpoint,
and resolutely refuses to admit the factor of human nature into his
calculations. Following Mr. Hare, he is a declared opponent of party
government, and "would like to see it pushed further into the
background." Moreover, he regards every step in the process as an end in
itself. Thus the act of voting is one end, representation is another,
and the rule of the majority a third. Leaving aside for the present,
however, the elaborate mathematical devices which are proposed for
attaining these supposed ends, let us take only the principles on which
they are based. These are laid down as follows:--

(_a_) The rule of the majority.