The bulk of its matter， however， is best described by (84) the phrase organized gossip. The sort of intercourse that people formerly carried on at cross-road stores or I over the back fence， has now attained the dignity of print and an imposing system. That we absorb a flood of this does not necessarily mean that our minds are degenerate' but merely that we are gratifying an old appetite in a new way. Henry James speaks with a severity natural to literary sensibility of " the ubiquitous newspaper face， with its mere monstrosity and deformity of feature， and the vast open mouth， adjusted as to the chatter of Bedlam， that flings the flood-gates of vulgarity farther back [in America] than anywhere else on earth." [2] But after all is it any more vulgar than the older kind of gossip ？ No doubt it seems worse for venturing to share with literature the use of the printed word.
That the bulk of the contents of the newspaper is of the nature of gossip may be seen by noting three traits which together seem to make a fair definition of that word. It is copious， designed to occupy， without exerting， the mind. It consists mostly of personalities and appeals to superficial emotion. It is untrustworthy梕xcept upon a few matters of moment which the public are likely to follow up and verify. These traits any one who is curious may substantiate by a study of his own morning journal.
There is a better and a worse side to this enlargement of gossip. On the former we may reckon the fact that it promotes a widespread sociability and sense of community； we know that people all over the country are laughing at the same jokes or thrilling with the same mild excitement over the foot-ball game， and we absorb a conviction (85) that they are good fellows much like ourselves. It also tends powerfully， through the fear of publicity， to enforce a popular， somewhat vulgar， but sound and human standard of morality. On the other hand it fosters superficiality and commonplace in every sphere of thought and feeling， and is， of course， the antithesis of literature and of all high or fine spiritual achievement. It stands for diffusion as opposed to distinction.
In politics communication makes possible public opinion， which， when organized， is democracy. The whole growth of this， and of the popular education and enlightenment that go with it， is immediately dependent upon the telegraph， the newspaper and the fast mail， for there can be no popular mind upon questions of the day， over wide areas， except as the people are promptly informed of such questions and are enabled to exchange views regarding them.
Our government， under the Constitution， was not originally a democracy， and was not intended to be so by the men that framed it. It was expected to be a representative republic， the people choosing men of character and wisdom， who would proceed to the capital， inform themselves there upon current questions， and deliberate and decide regarding them.
That the people might think and act more directly was not foreseen. The Constitution is not democratic in spirit， and， as Mr. Bryce has noted， [3] might under different conditions have become the basis of an aristocratic system.
That any system could have held even the original (86) thirteen states in firm union without the advent of modern communication is very doubtful. Political philosophy， from Plato to Montesquieu， had taught that free states must be small， and Frederick the Great is said to have ridiculed the idea of one extending from Maine to Georgia. " A large empire，" says Montesquieu， " supposes a despotic authority in the person who governs. It is necessary that the quickness of the prince's resolutions should supply the distance of the places they are sent to." [4]
Democracy has arisen here， as it seems to be arising everywhere in the civilized world， not， chiefly， because of changes in the formal constitution， but as the outcome of conditions which make it natural for the people to hare and to express a consciousness regarding questions of the day. It is said by those who know China that while that country was at war with Japan the majority of the Chinese were unaware that a war was in progress. Such ignorance makes the sway of public opinion impossible；and conversely， it seems likely that no state， having a vigorous people， can long escape that sway except by repressing the interchange of thought.
When the people have information and discussion they will have a will， and this must sooner or later get hold of the institutions of society.
One is often impressed with the thought that there ought to be some wider name for the modern movement than democracy， some name which should more distinctly suggest the enlargement and quickening of the general mind， of which the formal rule of the people is only one among many manifestations. The current of new life that is sweeping with augmenting force through the older (87) structures of society， now carrying them away， now leaving them outwardly undisturbed， has no adequate name.
Popular education is an inseparable part of all this：
