It is well plainly to recognise that if democracy is to be a blessing instead of a curse there are three conditions necessary to control and guide its action.  First, with the consciousness of power there must be a deep sense of responsibility.  Secondly, with freedom of action there must be a law-abiding spirit, a habit of obedience to those laws of action which control the arbitrary changeful will of the moment.  The prayer of the old Greek poet is one for all time: 

    May my lot be to keep a reverence pure in word and deed,
    Controlled by laws, lofty, heaven-born,
    Of which the father is God alone,
    Not by the mortal nature of man begotten
    Never in oblivion lulled to sleep! 
    God is mighty within them and grows not old.

Thirdly, there should be an ideal of what we aim at, of what we wish the nation to become and to do, carefully thought out, and consciously set before us—­its attainment the object of our efforts—­and with that must be combined patient attention and steady work in planning and in taking each practical step which will tend towards its realisation.  Mere captivating phrases are a will-of-the-wisp leading us to that “dangerous quag” of revolutionary change into which “even if a good man fall he will find no bottom for his feet to stand on.”  Reformation and revolution are “contraries” though not perhaps “contradictories.”  Either for the individual or the nation vague aspiration not followed by beneficent action is the kind of stimulant which destroys virility.  It renders even virtue sterile, and engenders no new birth.

The Reign of Law is the best protection of Liberty.  Arbitrariness—­the term seems the nearest we have to express the idea, but it is not quite happy, and the use of the more expressive German word “Willkuer” might be pardoned—­is as great a danger in a democracy as in an autocracy, and it is less capable of remedy.  The “divine right of the odd man” “to govern wrong” is too often assumed as an article of political faith.  A new generation may think that to quote from an early Victorian writer is to appeal to the “dark ages”; but is there not a warning for all time in Hallam’s words, “the absolute Government of the majority is in general the most tyrannical of any”?  It is possible to decapitate a king who sets himself above the law, or to deport or destroy a reactionary and tyrannous aristocracy, but against the crimes or follies of an unrestrained majority there is no appeal.  Chaos, “red ruin, and the breaking up of laws” follow in their steps.  A general and deep sense of responsibility as well as consciousness of power among “the masses” is a necessary condition for welfare in a country with democratic government.