enquiries was a recommendation that the enclosure of Epping Forest should be partially resumed; while, at the same time, an adequate portion thereof should be set apart for the public use and benefit.w Nevertheless, Mr. Howard persisted in carrying out the terms of the address, and not considering himself at liberty to sell, he determined to refrain from all proceedings to prevent further encroachments, or to maintain the forestal rights of the crown. Accordingly, in 1865, another select committee was appointed by the House of Commons, on Open spaces in and around the metropolis. This committee agreed with the House in the opinion that the Office of Woods and Forests ought not to have aimed so exclusively at making money out of these forestal rights, which had been originally obtained by the crown not for mere revenue purposes, but for the recreation of the chase, and that it ought rather to have endeavoured to make those rights contribute to the recreation of the people according to modern customs,. by preserving the forestal character of at least a portion of the open spaces at Epping and Waltham. They therefore recommended that no further enclosures of royal forests, commons, &c., should take place within the metropolitan area. Mr. J. K. Howard, the assistant-commissioner, appeared before this committee, and attempted a justification of his conduct in stopping all sales, and abstaining from all legal proceedings to abate enclosures and encroachments on the rights of the crown. In their report, the committee refrained from animadverting upon Mr. Howard's proceedings; although, in a draft report which was proposed, but not agreed to, there was a paragraph regretting 'the narrow and technical view taken of their duty by the officers of Her Majesty's Woods and Forests.' But they expressed their disapproval of the action of the Government in this matter, and advised that immediate steps should be taken to vindicate the crown's forestal rights over the lands in question, and to abate enclosures therein. They also recommended that a new board should be appointed to act as trustees for the preservation, on behalf of the public, of the forests, &c., around the metropolis. Pursuant to this report, the Government introduced a Bill, in the following session, to transfer the supervision of the forestal rights of the crown in Epping Forest to the Office of Works. This not being a revenue department, but one charged with the care of property held in trust for public uses, the Government would feel at liberty to W Report, Com. on Royal Forests, Commons Papers, 1863, vol. vi. pp. 552, 565-569, 582. Second Report, Com. on Open Spaces, Commons Papers, 1865, vol. viii. pp. 364, 385, 492-502. See also Commons Papers, 1866, vol. lx. p. 477. The bill was passed as a Ceneral Act, 29 & 30 Vict. c. 62, 'to amend the Law relating to the Woods, Forests, and Land Revenues of the Crown.' The sixth clause contains the provision in regard to Epping Forest. 1 Commis sions. ask for any necessary appropriation to carry out the wishes of Parliament in regard to the forest. The Office of Works, moreover, would no longer tolerate any encroachments upon the rights of the public upon the plea that it would cost money to enforce redress.a The history of this case, both as regards the hasty and inconsistent interference of the House of Commons to remedy the effects of a narrow-minded policy on the part of the Board of Woods and Forests, and the equally ill-advised proceedings of the board itself upon the occasion, shows the importance of bringing every public department into direct communication with Parliament, in order that it may be administered in harmony with the most enlightened opinions, and for the benefit of the whole community.b In addition to the great administrative boards which form part of the executive government of the empire, Parliament has sanctioned the appointment, from time to time, of various minor boards, or commissions, to whom particular branches of administration have been assigned which require special knowledge in the persons entrusted with their guardianship. These commissions are usually appointed by the crown during pleasure. But after their utility has been tested by experience, they are generally clothed by Parliament with additional powers, and made permanent. As a general rule, all statutory commissioners who are paid for their services are expressly declared to be ineligible to sit in the House of Commons, although a direct enactment to this effect is unnecessary, because all 'new offices' of profit disqualify the incumbents thereof under the statute of Anne. This disqualification would not, of course, apply to an unpaid commissioner. Temporary commissions, moreover, appointed by the crown to investigate a particular matter, do not disqualify, and z Chanc. of Excheq. in Hans. Deb. regard to the Office of Woods and vol. clxxxii. p. 958. Forests, Hans. Deb. vol. cxcii. p. 1816. a See an article on this case in Fraser's Magazine for May 1866, which was afterwards republished by the author, H. W. Cole, Q.C. Longmans, June 1866. b See also the Duke of Argyll's complaint in the House of Lords in it has not been uncommon to appoint members of the House of Commons to serve thereon. represen ment. Since the revival of the Reform question in 1852, the Their true principles of parliamentary representation have be- tation in come better understood, and great and increasing value Parlia is now attached to the representation, in both Houses of Parliament, of prominent and important commissions appointed by the crown, or by statute, whether for instituting enquiries into special subjects, with a view to future legislation thereon, or for the direct fulfilment of certain public trusts. Whenever a commission includes one or more members of either House, satisfactory information can be afforded in reply to questions as to the conduct and progress of a particular investigation,' and, in the case of a statutory commission, the legislature are enabled to satisfy themselves that the commissioners are discharging their duty in accordance with the trust which the legislature has confided to them. Moreover, after the presentation of their report, if the conclusions of the commissioners are impugned, the actual presence of one of their number in Parliament would be most serviceable, in explaining or justifying their conduct, instead of leaving their defence to be undertaken, at second hand, by a minister of the crown.h With regard to permanent commissions, which are charged with administrative functions, peculiar necessity exists for their distinct and efficient representation in Parliament. Being held in direct subordination to some political head, and limited to certain prescribed duties, it has not been usual to consider such commissioners as See Hans. Deb. vol. cxc. p. 1457, 1796; ibid. vol. cxcii. pp. 1838, 1850; and see post, p. 342. Mr. Walpole's Evid. before Sel. Com. on the Ecclesiastical Commission, Commons Papers, 1863, vol. vi. p. 192; Hans. Deb. vol. clxxxv. p. 190; ibid. vol. clxxxvii. 93. p. b Mr. Disraeli, Hans. Deb. vol. clxxxvii. p. 1941. And see ibid. Church holding political appointments. Persons are placed on permanent as well as on temporary commissions without reference to their political opinions, and if in Parliament are not removed upon a change of ministry. But so far as members of the House of Commons are concerned, it is evident that by constitutional analogy this exemption from liability to removal from office, must be restricted to unpaid commissioners; and that a salaried member of a permanent commission, being in the service of the crown, should only retain his office, in connection with a seat in the House of Commons, so long as he is a supporter of the existing administration. As yet, the first Church Estates Commissioner, who is appointed under a statute passed in 1850, affords the only example of a statutory paid commissioner (not being a minister of the crown) to whom has been granted the privilege of a seat in the House of Commons. No advantage, however, has been taken of this permission, but this Commission was represented in the House of Commons, from 1856 to 1858, by the third commissioner, who, though a salaried officer, is not appointed by the crown, and since 1859, by the second commissioner, who receives no salary. From August 1859 to November 1865 this office was filled by Mr. Bouverie, an unofficial supporter of the Government; it has since been held in conjunction with some ministerial office.' See post, p. 350. This point, however, has only been decided inferentially and not directly. For the proofs that may be urged on behalf of the position taken in the text, see post, p. 258; and note the practice in the case of the Second Church Estates Commissioner, who, though not paid and therefore not removable, is invariably replaced, as a parliamentary representative of the commission, on a change of ministry. * See further concerning this office, post, p. 263. The office of First Church Estates Commissioner' is not considered to be, in itself, a political, but a permanent office. (See Hans. Deb. vol. clxxxviii. p. 1475.) It is only in view of the holder thereof sitting in the House of Commons and representing the commission therein, that it can be placed in the category of political offices. ✰ Namely, from November 1865 to August 1866, by Mr. H. A. Bruce, vice-president of the Education Committee, and upon the accession of the Derby ministry by Mr. J. R. Mowbray, judge-advocate-general. mission. Commis sion. In 1863, a committee of the House of Commons appointed to en- Ecclesiasquire into the present state of the Ecclesiastical Commission and into tical Comthe expediency of reforming its administration of the ecclesiastical property and revenues, recommended that the management of Church property and the distribution of surplus Church revenues should be assigned to separate corporations; and that the former should be vested in a board to consist of two paid commissioners, who should be ineligible for Parliament. But that there should also be one unpaid commissioner on the board with a seat in the House of Commons for the purpose of representing the commission in that chamber.m Nothing has yet been done to give effect to this recommendation. The Charity Commission is another permanent board, regulated Charity by Act of Parliament, and entrusted with administrative and quasijudicial functions, of very considerable importance." This board is at present represented in the House of Commons by the Vice-President of the Education Committee, who is an unpaid commissioner. In view of a further extension of the powers of the Charity Commission, it was recommended by the Schools Inquiry Commission, in 1868, that in addition to its ministerial representative there should be added to it 'a member of Parliament, who would be able to explain in his place the reasons for every scheme that was proposed, to show its relations to other schemes, and, in the absence of a minister, to answer any questions that might be asked' in regard to the operations of the board. The debate in the House of Commons on March 25, 1868, upon Tancred's Charity Bill, a measure originally recommended by the commission, but which had been materially altered by a select committee, and was finally rejected by the House, 'showed the necessity that existed for some efficient representative of the Charity Commissioners in that House.' P mentary every trust. It is probable that, ere long, both the Ecclesiastical Parliaand the Charity Commissioners will have their ac- represenknowledged representatives in the House of Commons; tation of and should there be, hereafter, any other trusts of suffi- important cient public importance to require a mouthpiece in Par- public liament, the precedent established in the case of the Church Estates Commission will doubtless be followed, and liberty given to some officer connected therewith to sit in the House of Commons. For it is most desirable that that chamber should open its doors to receive accredited and competent representatives from every |