sition.

And here it will be appropriate to notice a feature in The oppoour political system, which began to be developed contemporaneously with the establishment of parliamentary government, and which has materially contributed to the vigour and efficiency of the same- namely, the presence in both Houses of an organised opposition.

The political party of which the administration for the time being is the mouthpiece and representative is invariably confronted in Parliament by another party, who themselves expect to succeed to power, whenever they acquire sufficient strength to overthrow their antagonists, and to assume the responsibilities of office. Acting upon well-defined principles, and within the strict lines of the constitution, to which they profess an equal attachment to that exhibited by its official defenders, the adherents of this party have been aptly styled ‘Her Majesty's Opposition,' and although the propriety of this designation has been disputed, yet it may be understood as implying that loyalty to the sovereign, and that honourable and patriotic rivalry in political strife, which should equally animate all parties in the great council of the nation.*

W

functions.

The opposition exercise a wholesome influence upon Their parliamentary debate, and upon the conduct of the business of the crown in Parliament, for they are the constitutional critics of all public affairs; and whatever course the government may pursue, they naturally endeavour to find some ground for attack. It is the function of an opposition to state the case against the administration; to say everything which may plausibly be said against every measure, act, or word of every member of the ministry; in short, to constitute a standing censorship of

A phrase which originated with Mr. Hobhouse, Ed. Rev. v. 133, p. 301.

* Mr. Lowe's observations, Hans.

D. v. 221, p. 373.

y Mr. Disraeli, Han. D. v. 174, p. 1366; and see Ib. v. 230, p. 1523.

The Oppo- the government, subjecting all its acts and measures to a close and jealous scrutiny."

sition.

But on questions of foreign policy, while they would naturally criticise freely the action of government, especially in the preliminary stages of such questions, it has been customary of late years for the opposition to refrain from any party warfare, and to extend the utmost forbearance, and, so far as may be possible, a generous assistance, to ministers, in maintaining the honour of the crown and the just influence of the British government in foreign affairs."

While parliamentary opposition affords a valuable security against the misconduct of a government, it is, nevertheless, liable to abuse, and may easily be perverted to factious and unpatriotic issues. It may be made the vehicle for personal acrimony and false accusation. It may pander to the popular passions for selfish or sectional ends. It is mainly kept in check by two considerations. Firstly, that its own proceedings are reviewed and criticised by the constituent body, aided by the free comments of the public press. Secondly, that in the event of success attending the endeavours of its leaders to replace the existing government, they must, for the sake of consistency, give practical effect in office to the policy they advocated in opposition. The view of this contingency exercises a sobering effect upon the character of an opposition, and tends to keep it within the bounds of moderation. Thus, as the hope of acquiring office reduces the bitterness of opposition, so the fear of a compulsory acceptance limits its extravagance.'

b

545. Mr. Disraeli, Hans. D. v. 130, pp. 912, 1029, and speech at Glasgow, Nov. 22, 1873. Martin, Pr. Consort, v. 3, p. 435; v. 4, p. 394. Marquis of Hartington's observations in 1876, Hans. D. v. 231, pp. 223, 743; and see Ib. v. 234, p. 679; v. 236, p. 765. b Ed. Rev. v. 101, pp. 16, 17.

с

Hearn, Govt. of England, p. 540.

e

d

6

It is an old maxim, that the duty of an opposition is very simple, it is to oppose everything, and propose nothing.' And in the same spirit, Sir Robert Peel used to say that he declined to prescribe until he was called in.' The peculiar office of the opposition is doubtless to watch with keen eye the conduct of the government they oppose, to see if anything be wrong or blamable, or liable to criticism therein-to trip them up even before they fall-at all events if they stumble to mark their stumbling, and call upon them to set things right again." The originators of measures and inventors of a policy, the individuals who come forward with their schemes and suggestions for public approbation, are not the opposition, but the ministers of the crown; we (the opposition) stand here to criticise the suggestions and schemes which they bring forward, and which are founded on knowledge wherein we cannot share, and inspired, no doubt, by the feeling of responsibility under which they act.' But it is quite compatible with these functions for an opposition, under certain circumstances, to coincide with the policy of ministers, and to ground their attack upon the weakness of the administration in carrying out principles which the sense of the country has approved."

i

Leader of the oppo

As a legitimate opposition forms the true counterpoise of the constitution," so the leadership of the sition." government is suitably reflected in a leadership of the opposition, by means of which the forces of the opposing party are marshalled and controlled. Without efficient leaders no party organisation can be successful or complete.

Opposi tion in relation to the government.

A leader of opposition is usually chosen from personal considerations, and for the possession of qualities that point him out as the most fitting man to be appointed to the direction of the state or, at all events, to the leadership of the House in which he sits, in the event of the premier being a member of the other House, when his party succeed to power. Meanwhile, he must be able to command the support of his adherents by sagacity in council and promptitude in action. In the words of Lord Bolingbroke, 'people will follow like hounds the man who will show them game'; but a political leader must be prudent as well as energetic.

A leader of opposition should not lend himself to any attempts to thwart unnecessarily the progress of legislation in the hands of ministers; but should rather endeavour to secure as far as he could for both sides of the House a fair and free discussion; and when that discussion has been obtained, to facilitate the progress of public business, even if he disapproved of the measures of the government.'* In proof of the amenities which grace the proceedings of the British Parliament, notwithstanding the keenness and severity of party strife, it is regarded in both Houses as the appropriate duty of the leader of the opposition to second any motion. proposed by the leader of the government, for the adoption of addresses of sympathy or of congratulation to the sovereign, or for giving the thanks of the House to particular individuals for meritorious conduct:' Furthermore, it is customary for members of the opposition who formerly held office to co-operate with ministers in endeavouring to prevent the passing of any measures

J Lewis, Administrations, p. 305 n.; and see p. 398. Ed. Rev. v. 126, p. 565. Yonge, Life of Ld. Liverpool, v. 1, p. 210; v. 2, p. 164. Le Marchant, Life of Earl Spencer, pp. 243, 257. Torrens, Life of Melbourne, v. 1, p. 129.

Mr. Disraeli's rule in opposi

tion, Hans. D. v. 182, pp. 1860, 1973; Ib. v. 206, pp. 1189, 1588, Marquis of Hartington, 1b. v. 230, p. 935.

See Yonge, Life of Ld. Liverpool, v. 3, p. 455. Hans. D. v. 185, p. 814; Ib. v. 193, pp. 480, 520, 865, 914,

prejudicial to the crown or to the public service, by affording to the House the benefit of their advice and official experience on the subject."

Communications

them.

And here it may be appropriately noticed, as a peculiar characteristic of English political life, that, as between a rule, the keenest contests between rival statesmen in the political arena do not prevent them from meeting on friendly terms in private life and social intercourse. By mixing together at such times without restraint, both parties learn to respect each other, and to refrain from the fierce extremity of party warfare."

Moreover, it is usual, with a view to the furtherance of business in Parliament, for the leader of the House, or other prominent ministers, to communicate freely with the heads of the opposition, in order to arrive at an understanding in regard to the conduct of public business or of debate-which will tend to the convenience of members,-or to facilitate the settlement of delicate questions,-affecting the privileges of Parliament, the interests of the throne, the royal family, or otherwise, which are not necessarily of a party character."

Occasionally, such communications assume a more important aspect, and refer to different political questions, in the settlement of which the co-operation of both sides of the House is desirable.

m Earl Grey, Hans. D. v. 191, p. 686. Mr. Gladstone's speech on the Revenue Officers' Disabilities Removal Bill, Ib. v. 193, p. 394. Mr. Hunt, on inland postage question, Ib. v. 195, p. 252. Mr. Disraeli's defence of dpt. of Woods and Forests, Ib. v. 203, p. 689; and his advocacy of annuity to H.R.H. Prince Arthur, Ib. v. 208, p. 587.

" Mr. Disraeli at Glasgow city, Nov. 19, 1873; Duke of Argyll's observations, Hans. D. v. 232, p. 658. But this kindly spirit has not always existed between political rivals. Ewald's Life of Walpole, p. 408.

• See Colchester's Diary, v. 2, p. 269. Torrens, Life of Melbourne, v. 2, pp. 321, 334; Mir. of Parl. 1834, p. 2746. Hans. D. v. 159, pp. 234236. Ib. v. 195, p. 594; v. 207, p. 1130; v. 222, p. 67; v. 224, p. 1152. Stockmar's Memoirs, v. 1, pp 1xxi. 301; v. 2, pp. 27, 38. In 1876 the neglect of Mr. Disraeli to communicate with leaders of opposition in reference to Royal Titles Bill gave rise to much party discussion injurious to interests of the crown and jeopardising to the administration. Ib. v. 228, p. 855.