Decision of the Crown upon advice of 'humbly requested the king's permission to give their answer generally and collectively.' They declared that they had no wish to conceal from the king that there existed amongst them some difference of opinion as to the advice to be tendered to his majesty on this subject. But they had unanimously agreed in the opinion that the measures in progress respecting Spanish America were in no way inconsistent with his majesty's treaty obligations towards his allies, and that they ought to be carried out. Mr. Canning, however (with the consent of Lord Liverpool), addressed a special letter to the king, justifying his conduct as Foreign Secretary in the negotiations upon this affair. Baffled in the endeavour to make a breach in the ministerial ranks upon this question, the king's only option was to dismiss all his ministers or none. He chose the latter alternative; returned a conciliatory answer to Mr. Canning's letter, and accepted the advice of his Cabinet. Sustained by the Premier, and by his other colleagues, Mr. Canning was enabled to persevere in his South American policy, and ultimately to conciliate the goodwill of the king.k m In all his communications with the sovereign, the Prime Minister is bound to afford the most frank and explicit information in regard to measures agreed upon by the ministers. Cabinet, and submitted for the royal sanction.' And it is not merely the right, but the duty of the sovereign, to exercise his judgment in the advice they may tender to him.' If the sovereign should not approve of the advice of his ministers upon any particular measure, they have then to choose whether they will abandon that measure, or tender their resignation." Under such circumstances, a minister is bound either to obey the [direction] of the crown, or to leave to the crown that full liberty which the crown must possess, of no longer continuing that minister in office." Stapleton, Canning and his The present Earl Grey, in the n be sent sovereign. In order to supply the crown with adequate means Official for exercising an independent judgment upon all affairs paper to of state, provision has been made, by constitutional to the practice, for the regular transmission to the sovereignordinarily through the Prime Minister, or else through other official channels-of every despatch, report, or other paper, which it is material should be perused by the sovereign, or which may be of use to enable the sovereign to decide upon the merits of any measure submitted to him by ministers." structions given to Foreign In the year 1850, it was deemed advisable that more Royal indetailed instructions should be conveyed to Lord Palmerston, who then held the seals of the Secretary of State for the Foreign Affairs, in regard to the manner in which he Secretary. should communicate with the crown upon matters appertaining to his own department. These instructions were framed when Lord John Russell was Prime Minister, and were by him communicated to Lord Palmerston. The memorandum was as follows: The queen requires, first, that Lord Palmerston will distinctly state what he proposes in a given case, in order that the queen may know as distinctly to what she is giving her royal sanction. Secondly, having once given her sanction to a measure, that it be not arbitrarily altered or modified by the minister. Such an act she must consider as failing in sincerity towards the crown, and justly to be visited by the exercise of her constitutional right of dismissing that minister. She expects to be kept informed of what passes between him and the foreign ministers before important decisions are taken, based upon that intercourse; to receive the foreign despatches in good time; and to have the drafts for her approval sent to her in sufficient time to make herself acquainted with their contents before they must be sent off. The queen thinks it best that Lord John Russell should See ante, vol. i. p. 231. Corresp. Will. IV. with Earl Grey, vol. i. pp. 43, 114. Prime with con crown, controls all State affairs. show this letter to Lord Palmerston.' Upon the receipt of this memorandum, Lord Palmerston wrote to the Premier, stating that he had taken a copy of it, and would not fail to attend to the directions it contained." The Prime Minister, being the recognised medium of Minister, communication between the sovereign and the heads of sent of the the various administrative departments, and the minister directly accountable to the crown for the government of the empire, must necessarily be cognisant himself of all important correspondence, which is received at or emanates from any of these departments. It is therefore required that all such papers should be regularly forwarded in the first place to the Prime Minister, then to the queen, and afterwards circulated amongst the other members of the Cabinet. By this regulation, the Premier is enabled to exercise the controlling influence which properly belongs to his office, over the proceedings of every department of state. If any question should arise in the mind of the sovereign, in respect to any matter contained in the official papers forwarded for her examination and approval, she would communicate with the Prime Minister thereupon. In this manner the whole administration is brought into due subordination to the supreme head. Should it be necessary for the sovereign to interpose, in order to control the conduct of any particular member of the ministry, she would always act upon the constitutional advice and responsibility of the First Minister of the crown. The usage on this subject will be further elucidated by the narration of a circumstance which occurred in the year 1851, and which led to the dismissal from office of Lord Palmerston, the then Foreign Secretary, for an alleged infringement of the royal instructions above mentioned. Hans. Deb. vol. cxix. p. 90. Lord John Russell, in Hans. Palmer neglect of royal in structions. Upon the occasion of the celebrated coup d'état in France, of Dismissal December 2, 1851, when Louis Napoleon, President of the French of Lord Republic, dissolved the legislative assembly, assumed dictatorial ston for powers, and appealed to the people for a confirmation of his acts, the English Cabinet came to a general understanding that in this critical state of affairs in a neighbouring country it was the duty of England to observe a strict neutrality. A despatch to this effect, approved by the queen, was addressed to Lord Normanby, the British ambassador at Paris, by Lord Palmerston, as Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. But before this official communication was written, it seems that M. Walewski, the French ambassador at the Court of St. James's, had informed his government of a private conversation he had had with Lord Palmerston, in which his lordship had expressed to him his entire approbation of the act of the president,' and his 'conviction that he could not have acted otherwise than he had done.' This statement was communicated to Lord Normanby by the French Minister for Foreign Affairs, whereupon Lord Normanby, conceiving that it was quite inconsistent with the tenor of his own instructions, reported the matter to Lord Palmerston, and requested further advice for his own guidance. This despatch, in due course, came into the hands of the Prime Minister, who wrote to his colleague for an explanation of it. Before receiving a reply from Lord Palmerston, a communication from the queen herself arrived, making enquiry of Lord John Russell, respecting the same despatch, expressing incredulity at such an intimation of opinion on the part of her Foreign Secretary, and asking for explanations. Accordingly, next morning (December 14), Lord John Russell sent a messenger to Lord Palmerston, urging for an answer to his former letter, but it was not until the 17th that this request was complied with. On that day he received copies of two despatches; one from Lord Normanby, which had just arrived, commenting on the awkward position in which he was placed, owing to his having learnt that language had been used by his official superior that was inconsistent with his own instructions. The other despatch was from Lord Palmerston, in reply to the foregoing, and entering into explanations with regard to his lordship's own views concerning the state of affairs in France, justifying the sentiments expressed in conversation with M. Walewski, and contending that they were quite compatible with the formal instructions given to Lord Normanby. This despatch was dated December 16, and had been forwarded to Paris without having been submitted for the sanction of her majesty or the concurrence of the Prime Minister and the other members of the Cabinet. This proceeding was regarded by Lord John Russell as being highly irregular and unconstitutional. While in matters of small importance a Secretary of State was free to act according to his own judgment, without reference to higher authority, yet in an affair of such moment as that of giving the moral influence and support of England to the act of Louis Napoleon, it was evident that the approbation of the Prime Minister and of the whole Cabinet should have been first obtained, together with the express concurrence of the crown. Viewing the matter in this light, Lord John Russell felt that it was his duty to call upon the queen to interpose for the vindication of her own authority; but while still deliberating on the course he should pursue, he received a long letter from Lord Palmerston, also dated December 16, and explaining the reasons which had induced him to approve of the act of the President of the French Republic. But these reasons were considered by Lord John Russell to be immaterial, and beside the question whether a Secretary of State was entitled, of his own authority, to write a despatch, in his official position as the organ of the queen's Government, in which his colleagues had not concurred, and to which the royal sanction had not been given. He therefore decided that he must advise the queen to remove Lord Palmerston from office. Before resorting to such an extreme measure, he wrote (on December 17) to inform her majesty that he was in correspondence with the Foreign Secretary on the subject of the wishes of the crown regarding despatches and diplomatic notes. At the same time he informed Lord Palmerston that he should take no further steps in the matter for a few days, trusting that he would make some proposition that would render it unnecessary to proceed further in the matter. In this he was disappointed. Lord Palmerston merely wrote in justification of his own conduct, especially in regard to the holding of non-official conversations' with Foreign Ministers, which he observed could not in the slightest degree fetter the action of his Government, and on the other hand tended to produce good understanding and to facilitate public business. Lord John Russell, in reply to this letter, stated that it left him no alternative but to request her majesty to appoint another Foreign Secretary. Accordingly, on December 20, he wrote to the queen, enclosing copies of the correspondence between himself and Lord Palmerston, and advising that his lordship should be required to give up the seals of the Foreign Office. In coming to this decision, Lord John Russell abstained from consulting any of his colleagues, being satisfied that it was a proceeding for which, in order to avoid anything which might hereafter be tortured into the appearance of a cabal, he ought to assume the sole and entire responsibility.' However, two days afterwards, he met the Cabinet, read to them the entire correspondence, and appealed to their judgment to approve or disapprove of his conduct; stating that in the event of their disapprobation, he should retire from office. The Cabinet were unanimous in approving of the course taken by the Premier, he therefore proceeded at once to Windsor, |