nised by the con Lansdowne), observed that nothing could be more Unrecog mischievous or unconstitutional than to recognise in an Act of Parliament the existence of such an office.'t stitution. Legally and constitutionally no one privy councillor has, as such, any superiority over another. All are equally responsible for the advice they may tender to their sovereign; and on the rare occasions when a cabinet determined its course by the votes of its members, the premier's vote counts for no more than that of any of his colleagues. Eight members of the cabinet, including five secretaries of state, and several other members of the government, take official precedence of him."/The prime minister is simply the member of the cabinet who possesses pre-eminently the confidence of the crown, and to whom the sovereign has thought fit to entrust the chief direction of the government But the choice of a premier, however necessary or notorious, must still be regarded as a matter of private understanding, there being no express appointment of any member of the administration to be the prime minister. member House. The premier may be either a peer or a commoner, Premier indifferently. It was Mr. Canning's opinion that the may be a prime minister should be in the House of Commons. of either Sir R. Peel, during the greater part of his career, held a similar conviction, but his experience in office, from 1841 to 1845, led him to a different conclusion, and induced him to believe that if the premier were in the House of Lords he would escape the enormous burden of toil and worry which renders the office, in the Commons, almost beyond human endurance." During the hundred years which have elapsed since the accession of George III. the office has been held for nearly half marks in Mir. of Parl. 1829, p. 802; and South Australia Leg. Coun. Jls. 1872, p. 9. Mir. of Parl. 1829, p. 1167. And see Ld. Holland's speech. Ib. p. 1164. " Mr. Gladstone, North Am. Rev. v. 127, p. 206. ▾ See Corresp. Will. IV. with Earl Grey, v. 1, pp. 9, 117. W 266. Martin, Pr. Consort, v. 1, p. With what office usually associated. the time by a peer. The distinction, moreover, is personal, not official. It might indeed be conferred on one who held no departmental office whatever.* Although both official and parliamentary experience are invaluable qualifications for this office, it is noteworthy that Lord Rockingham in 1765, the Duke of Portland in 1782, and Mr. Addington in 1812, had held no office when they were first made prime ministers, and that Lord Bute, the favourite of George III., became prime minister before he had ever spoken in Parliament. William Pitt was made chancellor of the exchequer at the age of twenty-three, and prime minister at twenty-four." In like manner, Fox was appointed a junior lord of the admiralty in Lord North's administration, in 1770, when he was only in his twenty-first year. Lord H. Petty was appointed chancellor of the exchequer in 1806, at the age of twenty-six. Lord Castlereagh commenced his public career as chief secretary for Ireland at the age of twenty-seven. Mr. Addington was placed in the chair of the House of Commons when but little over thirty years old and Lord Grenville, before reaching that age, had been Speaker of the House of Commons and secretary of state. Lord Palmerston became a lord of the admiralty when he was but twenty-three years of age. George Canning was appointed an under-secretary for state at the age of twenty-six. The present Earl Granville was made under secretary of foreign affairs at the age of twenty-two.e : Usually, however, the prime minister has held the office of first lord of the treasury, either alone or in connection with that of chancellor of the exchequer. Lord Chatham, it is true, never held either of these places, but while he was Mr. Pitt, and at the time of his acknowledged supremacy in the cabinet-in 1757 to 1761-was a secretary of state. Afterwards, when he formed a new administration, in 1766, he himself (having then become Lord Chatham) filled the office of lord privy seal. Again, from September 1761 to May 1762, the Earl of Bute was premier, while holding the office of secretary of state. In 1806, Mr. Fox held the premiership, in connection with the office of foreign secretary, Lord Grenville being the first lord of the treasury. And Mr. Canning, had he lived to complete the arrangements connected with the administration which he formed in 1827, shortly before his death, had determined to hold the office of premier in conjunction with that of secretary of state for foreign affairs, being 'satisfied that there could be no objection to his holding the two offices together, and having the disposal of the church patronage of the country in his hands'; for, according to the law of England, such patronage 'attaches to the office of secretary of state.' But these were exceptional cases, and ever since 1806 the position of first minister of the crown has been invariably connected with the office of first lord of the treasury. g Thus, in 1828, when the Duke of Wellington undertook the formation of a ministry, he resigned his office of commander-in-chief, which was then usually held in connection with a seat in the cabinet, and accepted the office of first lord of the treasury. He was at first averse to this step, and only yielded to the remonstrances of Sir R. Peel. But he afterwards admitted that the financial control of the Treasury over all other departments of state rendered it most embarrassing, if not impossible, for the first minister to hold any other office.i Moreover, the weight of parliamentary authorities was decidedly averse to the union of military and civil supremacy in the same hands.j of the Thus oscillating to and fro in the progress of suc- Present cessive generations, from the great epoch of the revo- position lution until now, the powers of the Cabinet Council cabinet. have gradually attained to maturity, until the entire administration of the affairs of the kingdom, at home and abroad, has been assigned to the responsible ad f Rep. on Official Salaries, Com. Pap. 1850, v. 15. Evid. 286, 287. Parl. Hist. v. 16, p. 234. Mir. of Parl. 1829, p. 802. And see Bulwer's Life of Palmerston, v. 1, pp. 182, 191; Colchester's VOL. II. Diary, v. 3, p. 505. h See ante, vol. 1, p. 182. 63, 98. N The is un the law. visers of the crown for the time being; leaving to the sovereign little else than the right to offer suggestions, to exert a personal influence upon the public policy, and the conduct of public affairs, with the power-which, however, can be exercised only under certain limitations of giving or withholding his assent to the recommendations of his responsible ministers. The Cabinet Council (like the office of premier) is a body unknown to the law and hitherto unrecognised by known to any Act of Parliament-that is to say, it has no corporate character; its decisions as such have no authority; it is merely a meeting of ministers to discuss important business. Nevertheless, it is now universally recognised as an essential part of our national polity. The cabinet. A curious illustration of the fact stated in the text may be mentioned. In 1851 a committee of the House of Commons was appointed to consider of means to prevent the inconvenient crowding of members on their way to the bar of the House of Lords, to attend the opening and prorogation of Parliament. The committee reported a series of resolutions to regulate the attendance of members on these occasions. But, on considering the report, notice was taken of a certain priority proposed therein to be assigned to 'cabinet ministers,' which was disagreed to by the House, on the ground that these functionaries are unknown to the constitution, and have no legal status, as such, in the country.m It is, in the words of Lord Campbell, 'in the practical working of the constitution-a separate defined body in whom, under the sovereign, the executive government of the country is vested,' and without whom the monarchy could not now subsist.'" This definition must be understood as including, not the cabinet merely, but the entire administration, of which the cabinet is the ruling head. The ministry itself cabinet. comprises the whole assembly of political officers charged The with the direction of public affairs, whose tenure of office is dependent upon that of the existing cabinet. This body, which is styled the Cabinet, the Ministry, and (not unfrequently) the Government, is invested with two characters. In one of those characters they are ministers of the king as a branch of the Parliament, and of the king as the head of the executive government. In the other, they are virtually a standing committee of the two Houses of Parliament, being respectively members of the Upper and Lower Houses, and preparing and conducting much of their business. As combining the two characters, they may be deemed a small and select body to whom the sovereign Parliament (which consists of king, lords, and commons), delegates its principal functions.' The leading characteristics of the Cabinet Council are thus described by Lord Macaulay, whose personal experience as a politician and statesman gives peculiar emphasis to his words. The ministry is, in fact, a committee of leading members of the two Houses. But this definition is partial and misleading. To consider her Majesty's ministers as a mere committee of Parliament is to overlook the important fact that they also represent the executive power of the crown and of the nation." It is nominated by the crown, but it consists exclusively of statesmen whose opinions on the pressing questions of the time agree, in the main, with the opinions of the majority of the House of Commons. Among the members of this committee are distributed the great departments of the administration. Each minister conducts the ordinary business of his own office without reference to his colleagues. But the most important business of every office, and especially such business as is likely to be the subject of discussion in Parliament, is brought under ⚫ Austin's Plea for the Constitu- P See Hans. D. v. 215, p. 232. tion, p. 7. |