unsafe and inefficient instrument for the direction of It is doubtful whether all these committees were Charles II. actually organised at this time. But the so called committee for foreign affairs,'-which consisted of the lord chancellor and five others, mostly his intimate friends and adherents,-took the lead and became in reality a Cabinet Council, to whom alone the king entrusted the secrets of his policy, and wherein was discussed, invariably in the presence of the king, all the most important affairs of state, both foreign and domestic, before to 1859, see Haydn, Book of Dignities, p. 6; Cox, Eng. Govt. p. 648, pp. 119-146. See ante, vol. 1, p. 92. Lister, Life of Clarendon, v. 2, Cox, Eng. Govt. p. 648. Cabal. they were submitted to a general meeting of the Privy Council. This confidential committee virtually superseded the rest of the council, who were only consulted on formal occasions. In connection with the formation of this cabinet, or Cabal, as it was then termed, the king greatly increased the number of the whole council; and thus obtained a valid reason for employing only a select body of his advisers. This designation has been erroneously supposed to have been derived from the initial letters of the members composing the Cabal, in the year 1670. But this, in point of fact, was a mere coincidence; as the same term was applied to a former ministry, in 1665. It is a derivation from the Hebrew, originally signifying something secret or mysterious, but gradually extended to include the idea of conspiracy and intrigue." For Charles II. had an extreme dislike to the formality of long discussions in full council, adverting to which, in 1679, his Majesty thanked the whole body of his councillors for all the good advice they had given him, 'which,' he added, ' might have been more frequent if the great number of this council had not made it unfit for the secresy and despatch that are necessary in many great affairs. This forced him to use a smaller number of you in a foreign committee (the Cabal), and sometimes the advices of some few among them upon such occasions, for many years past.' 6 Of the first ministry of Charles II. we are informed by Clarendon, that the treasurer (Southampton), the Marquis of Ormond, General Monk, with the two secretaries of state, were of that secret committee, with the chancellor (Clarendon himself), which, under the notion of foreign affair re appointed by the king to consult all his affairs before they came to a public debate.'' And Roger North, referring to this period, says that 'the Cabinet Council consisted of those few great officers and courtiers whom the king relied upon for the interior dispatch of his affairs'; and that while at first it was but in the nature of a private conversation, it came to be a formal council, and had the direction of most transactions of the government, foreign and domestic.' These cabinet meetings were holden, for a Cabinet time, about twice in the week; but after a while, for under the greater convenience of the king and his ministers, it Charles II. became customary to hold them upon Sunday evenings. Every Lord's Day, the great officers of state would attend the king to morning service in the royal chapel, and be at hand to wait upon him in the evening, for consultation on public affairs." This curious custom of state attendance at church on Sunday mornings, and of the holding of Cabinet Councils every Sunday evening, continued to be observed in the reign of Queen Anne,b Charles II. was a monarch who coveted the possession of arbitrary power. He therefore naturally preferred to avail himself of the services of a few trusty councillors, whom he could choose from amongst their less pliant colleagues. Hallam tells us that the delays and decencies of a regular council, the continual hesitation of lawyers, were not suited to his temper, his talents, or his designs.' And it must be confessed, that the Privy Council, as it was then constituted, was too numerous for the practical administration of government. Thus by degrees it became usual for the ministry or cabinet to obtain the king's final approbation of their measures before they were laid, for a mere formal ratification, before the Privy Council.' Nevertheless, we are assured by Clarendon, who, as lord chancellor, took an active part in all these proceedings, meetings rity of go that the cabinet 'never transacted anything of moment (his Majesty being always present) without presenting the same first to the council-board.' He adds, that while at first they were all of one mind, in matters of importance,' yet that after about two years, the king added others to this cabinet of different judgment and principles, both in Church and State,' to himself, whereby his own influence with the king was considerably impaired.a Unpopula- The Cabal' ministry lasted about three years, and vernment. Was very unpopular. Nor need we wonder at this, for whatever might be the advantages of cabinet government, the check upon the will of the sovereign which was, to some extent, afforded by a body so numerous and influential as the Privy Council, was lost sight of, if not altogether removed, when the administration was placed in the hands of a secret oligarchy. And should the enormous power entrusted to the cabinet be abused, it would be difficult, if not impossible, to call them to account. The Cabal' ministry was broken up in 1674. Sir Thomas Osborne, soon after created Earl of Danby, then became chief minister, and retained office until 1678. The history of England at this period is that of a continual struggle between the crown and the Commons, during which time the executive was never more profligate and anti-national, or representative government more factious and corrupt. The Earl of Danby, being impeached by the Commons for treasonable practices, was sent to the Tower. For a short interval public affairs were in a miserable plight. The Parliament became daily more and more violent; while the king's authority was so low, that it seemed as difficult to dissolve Parliament, as to carry on the government without a dissolution. Sir W. Temple's scheme. At this juncture his Majesty applied to Sir William Temple, one of the foremost statesmen of the age, and e Lord Clarendon's Address to Dicey, p. 66; Knight, Hist. of Eng. v. 4, ch. 20. by his advice was induced to accept a new scheme of administration. This was nothing less than an ingenious attempt to combine the advantages of the old system of government by a council with those of the modern device of government by means of a cabinet, selected from amongst the principal parliamentary leaders. As a necessary preliminary, the existing Privy Council was dissolved, and a new one appointed, which consisted of only thirty persons. Of these, one-half were selected from the chief officers of the crown and household, including also the archbishop of Canterbury and the bishop of London. The remaining moiety were chosen from among the leading members of both sides of the two Houses of Parliament, without office, but being required, as an indispensable qualification, to be possessors of large estates. This council was presided over by a lord president, who however had neither the authority nor the influence of a prime minister. Otherwise, this new-fangled Privy Council bore some resemblance to a modern cabinet; but with the all-important difference, that there was no agreement that all the councillors. should concur in carrying into effect, and supporting in Parliament, the decision of the majority upon questions of public policy; or even that they should abstain from parliamentary opposition to each other. And although the goodwill of Parliament was sought to be conciliated at the first formation of the new council, its continued existence was not made to depend upon its retaining that goodwill. In the selection of persons to compose this council, Temple's idea was that the leading interests of the whole community should be represented therein. Thus, the archbishop of Canterbury and the bishop of London were to take care of the Church'; the lord chancellor and the chief justice to inform the king well of what 1 Temple's Memoirs, by T. P. Courtenay, v. 2, pp. 34-74. |