they condemned his enemies and acquitted his friends. After the Revolution, they were made
irremovable except by an Address from both Houses of Parliament. It was thought that this would
cause their decisions to be guided by the law; in fact, in cases involving party spirit, it has merely
substituted the judge's prejudice for the king's. However that may be, wherever the principle of
checks and balances prevailed the judiciary became a third independent branch of government
alongside of the legislative and executive. The most noteworthy example is the United States'
Supreme Court.
The history of the doctrine of checks and balances has been interesting.
In England, the country of its origin, it was intended to limit the power of the king, who, until the
Revolution, had complete control of the executive. Gradually, however, the executive became
dependent upon Parliament, since it was impossible for a ministry to carry on without a majority
in the House of Commons. The executive thus became, in effect, a committee chosen in fact,
though not in form, by Parliament, with the result that legislative and executive powers became
gradually less and less separate. During the last fifty years or so, a further development took place,
owing to the Prime Minister's power of dissolution and to the increasing strictness of party
discipline. The majority in Parliament now decides which party shall be in power, but, having
decided that, it cannot in practice decided anything else. Proposed legislation is hardly ever
enacted unless introduced by government. Thus the government is both legislative and executive,
and its power is only limited by the need of occasional general elections. This system is, of course,
totally contrary to Locke's principles.
In France, where the doctrine was preached with great force by Montesquieu, it was held by the
more moderate parties in the French Revolution, but was swept into temporary oblivion by the
victory of the Jacobins. Napoleon naturally had no use for it, but it was revived at the Restoration,
to disappear again with the rise of Napoleon III. It was again revived in 1871, and led to the
adoption of a constitution in which the President had very little power and the government could
not dissolve the Chambers. The result was to give great power to the Chamber of Deputies, both
as against the government and as against the electorate. There was more division of powers than
in