Plurality of offices. It was a saying of Mr. Pitt, that when the premier was a peer, it was the duty of the lord privy seal to sit near him in the House of Lords and keep off the moths.' But such is the value now set upon this office, and upon that of chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, that in 1869, for the first time, they were included by Parliament amongst the offices the holding of which, for a certain period, would warrant the grant of a pension. In 1871 Lord Dufferin, the then chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, and paymaster-general, gave a humorous account of the multifarious duties imposed upon him by government. It is evident, therefore, that in the progress of administrative reform efforts have been made to lessen the number of offices that partake of the nature of sinecures, even to the verge of interfering with the efficient discharge of the onerous duties devolving upon the responsible servants of the crown. With reference to the combination of two offices in the hands of one person, it should be observed, that this is altogether a matter of ministerial arrangement, and is not unfrequently resorted to, at the discretion of the government. It can be authorised at any time by an order or declaration of the Queen in council, as it is a prerogative of the crown to create, regulate, or abolish offices. It has been customary for the vicepresidency of the board of trade to be held in conjunction with the post of paymaster-general; for the office of lord privy seal to be occasionally associated with that of postmaster-general; for the judge advocate general to serve as one of the Church Estates commissioners, and for the different secretaries of state to relieve one another in their several departments upon any pressing necessity. In 1855, when, during the absence of the colonial secretary (Lord J. Russell) on a special mission to Vienna, the duties of his office devolved upon the home secretary, the premier (Lord Palmerston), to relieve Sir G. Grey of the double burden, which began to press • Hans. D. v. 203, p. 886. P Ib. v. 196, pp. 861, 864; v. 197, p. 537; post, p. 231. • Ib. v. 204, p. 931. See ante, vol. 1, p. 622. unduly upon him, undertook himself the charge of current colonial Plurality business. The offices of first lord of the treasury and chancellor of of offices. the exchequer used frequently to be held by the same person; but it is doubtful whether they will be so held again. The Treasury Board and Board of Admiralty could not be administered by a secretary of state, as no act on behalf of a board constituted by warrant can be performed by any but those named in the warrant.t But such arrangements are merely provisional, and are set aside whenever their temporary purpose has been fulfilled, or the exigencies of the public service require it. When two offices are formally bestowed upon one person, it is usual to provide that the salary of the principal office only shall be paid; thus effecting a saving to the public so long as the plurality continues. The most notable example of a plurality of ministerial offices in the hands of one individual occurred in 1834, at the time of the dissolution of the Melbourne cabinet, when the Duke of Wellington was sent for, and advised the king to entrust the task of forming an administration to Sir Robert Peel. Sir Robert Peel was then travelling on the Continent, so that to prevent delay the duke, with characteristic promptitude, himself accepted the office of first lord of the treasury, together with the seals of one of his Majesty's principal secretaries of state, which gave him authority to act as secretary for all the departments, home, foreign, and colonial. His sole colleague was Lord Lyndhurst, who accepted the office of lord chancellor. This proceeding, though confessedly merely provisional, and only intended to secure to Sir Robert Peel, upon his arrival, a freedom of choice in the filling up of his ministry, was severely criticised at the time. Regarded as a temporary expedient, it could not be pronounced unconstitutional, though if resorted to under other circumstances, it might lead to serious abuses. A precedent in defence of the proceeding was adduced in the case of the Duke of Shrewsbury, who, at the close of Queen Anne's reign, accepted the office of lord high treasurer, in addition to the offices of lord chamberlain and lord lieutenant of Ireland, already in his possession. But this also took place under extraordinary circumstances, and did not continue for many days. Neither case would admit of justification except as a temporary and provisional arrangement." Political tenure of office governing body. We have already adverted to the principle whereby all the prominent executive offices are held upon the limited to tenure of parliamentary confidence, in the advisers of the crown, and a fair proportion of the political element is maintained in the governing body of every political department." But the progress of enlightened opinion of late years favours the limitation of political offices to the smallest possible number, consistent with the preservation and efficiency of a responsible government, and encourages men to look for promotion in the branch of the service to which they belong merely as the reward of their professional zeal and efficiency, thereby avoiding the evils of the American system, the ill effects of which have been elsewhere pointed out." It is to the manifest advantage of the State, and of the whole commonwealth, that differences in political opinion with the government of the day should not disqualify for the service of the crown. An active opposition to the government, on the part of those who are employed in the public service in direct subordination to some political functionary, is undoubtedly a just and adequate cause for dismissal; but the holders of more dignified or independent offices, such as military or naval officers, lords lieutenant of counties, sheriffs, and other distinguished public functionaries, who are not immediately engaged in political affairs, and who occupy an influential position in their respective localities, should be free to act as their judgment may dictate upon all questions of public policy; provided they do not compromise the government in their official capacity." Within the present century it has become the estab See ante, vol. 1, p. 612. y See ante, vol. 1, p. 613; post, p. Hans. D. v. 199, p. 1628. But see proceedings which led to resignation of Earl of Granard, in 1872, of the lord-lieutenancy of Leitrim. Ib. v. 212, pp. 859, 1368, 1498, 1518. lished usage to account all offices of this description as being tenable by men who are politically opposed to the existing administration. And the dismissal of persons from such offices on account of their opposition to the government, which was no unusual occurrence in the early part of the reign of George III., would now be regarded as tyrannical and unjust." Furthermore, in the case of military or naval officers, no impediment is placed in the way of their becoming candidates for a seat in the House of Commons; and if elected, no intemperate, or even factious language made use of by them, in their place in Parliamentunless taken up by the House itself, and made the subject of an address to the crown--would be accounted a sufficient reason for dismissal from the service. And similar freedom of speech is also allowed at ordinary political meetings, provided that nothing be said that is treasonable, or a direct infringement of the Mutiny Act, or the Articles of War." subordi nate to heads. As regards those who are directly subordinate to Officers any member of the administration a different principle applies. They are bound in duty to serve with the ut- political most fidelity and impartiality their superiors in office, whatsoever may be the political opinions they may respectively hold. These subordinate functionaries constitute the permanent element of the public service; and it is owing to the happy combination of the political and the permanent elements in the administrative system of Great Britain, and to their mutual dependence upon each other, that its successful operation is attributable. For in every department of state there is a permanent Political and per manent elements element, and also what may be termed a progressive and political one. The permanent public servants preserve all the traditions of the office, and carry on the ordinary business. They are the advisers of and, to a certain extent, a check upon, the new political chiefs who come in without experience; while, on the other hand, the tendency of all permanent officers is to get into a certain routine, and a change of the heads, from time to time, checked by the permanence of those who are always in office, tends very much to produce an improved system of administration of any department.” But it is undeniable that a needless preponderance of the political element must entail great evils upon the combined public service. Certain changes of policy are unavoidably incident to every change of ministry. As a necessary result of parliamentary government, all the departments of state are subjected to parliamentary control, and more or less exposed to the fluctuating influence of party politics, The predominant party will be in power, and will select its own instruments of government; and of course frequent changes of administration must lead to unsteady steering at the helm, to repeated changes of system, and infirmity of purpose, and to much wasteful expenditure. On the other hand, corresponding evils, of perhaps greater magnitude, would result from an undue preponderance in the permanent element. Parliamentary government is doubtless a complex and difficult system to work out. It is invaluable in the respect it shows for the liberties of the subject, but it is peculiarly exposed to abuses in matters of administration. So long as it continues in operation the government of the country must be carried on in harmony Evid. of Sir Charles Wood p. 336. Sir George Lewis used to (afterwards Lord Halifax)—a states- say that his duty was not to work man who presided over more public his department, but to see that his departments than any of his contem- department was worked.' Hans. D. poraries-in Report Com. on Board v. 217, p. 1371. of Admiralty, Com. Pap. 1861, v. 5, |