When Report. be sooner revoked and discharged by the crown." in relation But a motion in the House of Commons, on May 17, 1836, for an Comaddress to the crown to direct a certain commission to report forth- missions with upon a particular portion of the enquiry entrusted to it, was to Parliadeclared by ministers to be a very unusual course, and an attempt ment. to take out of the hands of the crown the direction of a commission appointed by it.' After a short debate, the motion was withdrawn. For royal commissioners are not directly amenable to Parliament, but only to the crown." And Parliament ought not to interfere with their proceedings, unless it could be shown that they were acting unfairly, or were incompetent, or were otherwise unworthy of the confidence of the government, or of Parliament, when either House might address the crown for their removal from office. On March 24, 1868, Mr. Disraeli declined to lay before the House Reports of the Assistant Boundary Commissioners, on the ground that they were 'essentially confidential documents, supplied for the information of the Boundary Commissioners, who form their opinion upon them, and who are responsible for the opinion they give to this House.' Accordingly, a reference to these Reports by one who had perused them was declared to be out of order. But afterwards ministers consented to produce them. The Criminal Law Commission, appointed in 1833, was revoked on February 22, 1845 (Commons' Papers, 1854-5, vol. xliii. p. 405). The West Indian Encumbered Estates Commission was appointed under the authority of the Act 17 & 18 Vict. c. 117, which limited its duration to six years. By subsequent statutes, it has been prolonged to August 1869. (Civil Service Estimates, 1868-9, Class VII. No. 1.) The Oaths Commission, appointed on May 17, 1866, was revoked, and a new one issued on July 16, 1866. The Commission on Popular Educa- z Mirror of Parl, 1836, p. 1521. Departmental Com mittees. There is another species of commission, of a less prominent and important character, but which is nevertheless of great utility in furthering the work of administration, viz.: what is usually termed a departmental committee, appointed by a Treasury Minute,' or by the authority of a secretary of state, for the purpose of instituting enquiries into matters of official concern, and suggesting improvements or remedies for obvious defects or deficiencies in existing administrative arrangements. Such committees are generally composed of two or more permanent and experienced officers, belonging to the particular departments concerned in the proposed investigation, with whom is frequently associated a Lord of the Treasury, or some other subordinate member of the administration. On May 8, 1868, a motion was made in the House of Commons, to resolve, that 'two members of this House, and another civil engineer, should be added to the committee appointed [by the Secretary of State for War] to consider the question of the fortifications for the defence of the United Kingdom and of the colonies, and that arrangements shall be made to stop, as far as possible, all further outlay until that committee shall have reported to this House.' After a long debate, during which it was objected that the appointment of members of the House of Commons on a departmental committee, would have the effect of taking away, in a great measure, the responsibility in the matter which ought to rest solely on the executive government,' the motion was withdrawn. Another motion to suspend the said works until the report of this departmental committee shall have been communicated to the House, was then put and negatived.h If a political officer be included in a departmental committee, and a change of ministry should occur before its labours are completed, the committee would necessarily become defunct. Although, if the committee were prepared with a report, they might be permitted to pre For copy of the Treasury Minute, of April 12, 1853, appointing a Committee of Enquiry into the organisation of the permanent Civil Service, see Commons' Papers, 1854-5, vol. xxx. p. 375. See Mr. Gladstone's observations on the utility of an official committee of practical men, as a means of breaking ground upon a question of administrative reform. Hans. Deb. vol. cxciii. p. 320. Hans. Deb. vol. cxci. pp. 20212054. sent an informal and unofficial statement, or draft report, to the new administration, setting forth what they had intended to embody in their report, which would receive the careful consideration of the government.1 The remuneration of persons not already in official Expenses. employ, who are appointed to serve on a departmental committee, should be authorised and prescribed in the Treasury Minute, and charged to the account of civil contingencies. It would thus come under the review of the House of Commons, when a vote is submitted in supply to make good advances out of this fund.* Reports from departmental committees are usually re- Reports. garded as confidential documents, and are very seldom communicated to Parliament.' Thus, on June 8, 1868, the Home Secretary declined to lay before the House of Commons the report and evidence taken by a committee appointed by him to enquire into the management of the Metropolitan Police, ' for the reason that the witnesses were informed that their evidence would not be made public.' Immediately afterwards, the Secretary for War declined to lay upon the table the report of the committee on Obstructions for the Defence of Harbours, &c., as it contained matter which it would be inexpedient to make public.' m 2. THE PARLIAMENTARY DUTIES OF PARTICULAR MINISTERS. We next proceed to consider the duties which are appropriately assigned to particular members of the Administration in connection with Parliament. Our observations on this head will chiefly apply to the House of Commons, that being the chamber wherein the most arduous labours and responsibilities are exacted from ministers of the crown. But first let us briefly notice the places assigned by Hans. Deb. vol. clxxxviii. p. 1909. Commons' Papers, 1867, vol. xxxix. P. 425. J Commons' Papers, 1854-5, vol. xxx. p. 376. * See ante, vol. i. p. 551. Civil Service Estimates, 1867-8, Class VII. 1 Hans. Deb. vol. clxx. p. 198; m Hans. Deb. vol. cxcii. p. 1222. Places of parliamentary leaders. Treasury Bench. usage in the Houses of Parliament to the leaders of the respective parties of the Government and of the Opposition. In the House of Lords the members of the administration sit on the front bench, on the right of the woolsack; and the peers who usually vote with them occupy the other benches on that side of the House. The peers in opposition are ranged on the left side of the chamber; while those who desire to maintain a political neutrality usually sit upon the cross benches, which are placed between the table and the bar." In the House of Commons, the front bench, on the right hand of the chair, is reserved for members holding office under the crown; and the front bench opposite is ordinarily occupied by Privy Councillors and other members who have held office under the crown." The accommodation provided for members who desire to occupy a neutral position between contending parties is very inadequate." On the opening of a new parliament, the four members for the City of London claim, by ancient usage, and generally exercise, the right of sitting on the Privy Councillor's bench; at other times that bench is left for the ministers of the crown, who are supposed by their avocations to be prevented from coming down to take places for themselves. But though the reservation of the Treasury bench to the use of Privy Councillors is traceable at least as far back as the reign of Charles I., it is only as a matter of courtesy and not of right. Mr. Holles, an eminent member of Parliament in 1628, and William Cobbett, at the opening of the first Reform Parliament in 1833, are memorable examples of private members asserting the right, on particular occasions, of sitting on the front bench above the Privy Councillors." In Walpole's time May, Parl. Prac. ed. 1859, p. 204. P Hans. Deb. vol. clxxxii. p. 913. 1859, p. 205. Hatsell, Prec. vol. ii. p. 94. Knight, Popular Hist. of Eng. vol. viii. p. 317. (1741) it was customary for the leaders of adverse parties being Privy Councillors to sit upon that bench together ;* but since the accession of George III. it has been usual to concede to ministers of the crown of every grade, including even the officers of the royal household, the undisturbed possession of the Treasury bench. 88 (a.) The Leader of the Government in the House of Lords. In the House of Lords, as well as in the Commons, there is always a minister specially entrusted with the lead and management of public business on behalf of the executive government. When the Prime Minister is a peer, he will generally undertake this duty himself. Otherwise, it is confided to the minister who, in virtue of his position and qualifications, is considered by the Prime Minister as being the most capable of filling it with advantage. By whomsoever undertaken, the leadership of the House of Lords is a charge which confers great importance' upon its possessor, as well as 'great influence in the general administration and patronage of the government." It naturally calls for the exercise of the highest qualities of a statesman, inasmuch as the fixed character of our Constitution renders it the interest, not to say the paramount duty, of every minister so to shape his course as, if possible, to keep the two Houses of Parliament in harmony, and not to throw himself absolutely and entirely into the hands of one branch of the legislature, regardless of the wishes and feelings of the other."" Leader of the House of Lords. |