himself;" or, at his discretion, by the First Lord of the Treasury, notwithstanding that the Chancellor of the Exchequer may be present."

moved by

an ex

minister.

On March 4, 1867, General Peel, Secretary of State for War, Votes having differed with his colleagues upon the Reform question, retired from the ministry, and was replaced by Sir John Pakington, on whose behalf a new writ was issued on March 8. On March 7, however, General Peel being still the nominal Secretary for War, with the consent of the ministry moved the Army Estimates, in committee of supply, having expressed his willingness and desire to have an opportunity of explaining to the House' those estimates and that policy which he had recommended to his colleagues, and which they had adopted.' No objection was made to this proceeding, and, after the general had finished his statement, the vote for the number of men was taken.P

On March 14, 1867, a question of procedure arose upon the Navy Estimates. The newly appointed First Lord of the Admiralty had gone for re-election, and the ex-First Lord, who had been appointed Minister for War, had not yet resumed his place in the House, accordingly the Secretary of the Admiralty, Lord H. Lennox, was charged with the moving of these Estimates. It has been already stated that, upon the opening of the Army or Navy Estimates, and on moving the first vote thereon, it is usual for a discussion to take place upon the whole policy of the estimates; and that after the first vote has been agreed to, it is not competent for any member to discuss questions of general policy. Under these circumstances, it was objected (by Mr. Gladstone and others) that while the Secretary of the Admiralty was perfectly competent to move the estimates, and make the general statement thereon in Committee of Supply, the committee ought not to be asked to agree to the first vote until the responsible minister was present. If the First Lord had been a peer, then the secretary would be the recognised organ of the department in the Commons. But when the First Lord sits in the House of Commons, it would be highly inexpedient to discuss the naval policy of the government in his absence. Whatever argu

ments might be urged against that policy would be thrown away upon the secretary, who is the mere mouthpiece of his chief, it not being his business to announce a policy, or to give an opinion' of

his own.

A simple vote 'on account,' or a vote on a question of

• Hans. Deb. vol. clxxii. p. 75; vol. in Committee of Supply under someclxxxi. p. 1055.

Ibid. vol. clxxi. PP. 903-924.
Ibid. vol. clxxxv. pp. 1310, 1448.

In 1801, Mr. Pitt opened the Budget

what analogous circumstances; see
ante, vol. i. p. 81.

See ante, vol. i. p. 482.

By a Secretary in the

absence of

his chief.

The
Budget.

Secretaries of the Treasury.

detail, could be agreed to, upon motion of the secretary, in the absence of the First Lord, without any irregularity; but no discussion, or vote, upon 'the principle of the estimates' should proceed under such circumstances. It was finally agreed that the Secretary of the Admiralty should be allowed, 'for the sake of the public convenience,' to make his general statement in Committee of Supply, after which, at the suggestion of Mr. Gladstone, and with the consent of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the committee reported progress before agreeing to the first vote. After the First Lord had resumed his seat the debate was renewed, and the estimates were agreed to."

It is the obvious duty of the Chancellor of the Exchequer himself to submit the annual financial statement, usually termed the Budget,' to the House of Commons.

But on November 28, 1867, the Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr. Disraeli) being absent from illness, the Secretary of the Treasury undertook to submit, in Committee of Ways and Means, a financial statement and resolution in respect to the raising of funds to defray the cost of the Abyssinian expedition, for which the House had voted a supply of 2,000,000. No objection was taken to this proceeding, and Mr. Gladstone complimented the secretary upon the manner in which he had discharged the duty. Moreover, on account of the temporary nature of the proposed financial arrangement, and its being liable to alteration when the annual budget should be introduced, it was unanimously agreed to permit it to be debated at once, and passed the same day, instead of adhering to the usual practice of adjourning to a future day before expressing opinions or deciding upon the merits of a financial statement."

(d.) Subordinate Members of the Ministry.

The most prominent and useful of the subordinate members of the Administration are probably the two joint Secretaries of the Treasury. But it is unneces sary to dwell upon the position and responsibility of these functionaries, as we have already directed attention to their services, as the confidential assistants of the Leader of the Government in the control of the House of Commons, as well as to the official duties of the Financial Secretary in matters of supply." Their depart" Hans. Deb. vol. exc. pp. 345, 357, 358.

Hans. Deb. vol. clxxxv. pp. 1814-1857.

mental functions will be more appropriately described in another chapter.*

y

of subor

When the responsible minister of a department of Position state is present, it is not usual for the secretary or under- dinate secretary to answer questions upon departmental affairs. ministers. An under-secretary or other subordinate minister must be regarded as being merely the mouthpiece of his superior officer, and as only responsible for giving effect to the instructions of his chief, and for his personal good conduct. The political head of the department is alone responsible to parliament. All subordinate officers are really bonâ fide subordinates, and have no authority to speak for themselves in any single thing.' This applies even to an under-secretary who represents his department in one House whilst his chief sits in the other, though an under-secretary or vice-president who is in this position, and is required to take a prominent part in the conduct of public affairs, is naturally supposed to have a share in the government of the department, and cannot absolve himself from a certain modified responsibility in regard to the same, notwithstanding that a much greater degree of responsibility attaches to the departmental chief, whose directions the subordinate officer is obliged to carry out, and whose authority is supreme.*

On March 21, 1867, on motion by a private member of the House of Commons for leave to introduce a bill to repeal the Ecclesiastical Titles Act, there being no Cabinet ministers present, but merely the Solicitor-General for Ireland representing the Government, the leaders of Opposition intimated that 'they understood his position better than to expect him to express any opinion upon a question like this.' And for his own part, all that he could say was, that he had no special communication with the Government on the subject.' b

Law business in

House of Lords.

In the
Commons.

Crown law

officers.

(e.) The Law Officers of the Crown.

The legal business of the crown in the House of Lords is conducted by the Lord Chancellor, who is exofficio Speaker of the House and a prominent and influential member of the Cabinet in every administration. He is chiefly responsible for the administration of justice throughout the kingdom, in connection with the Home Secretary. And he usually takes an active part in furthering the measures of Government in the House of Lords.

The common law judges, also, it may be observed (not being of the peerage), may be specially summoned to attend as assistants in the House of Lords, and their opinion may be asked by the House, not only in relation to points of law and equity when their lordships are sitting as a court of judicature, but also upon public bills pending in Parliament, and as to the strict legal construction of existing statutes. But they will decline to answer any question which they consider should not have been propounded to them—or which involves points likely to come before them in the courts below.d

The Home Secretary is generally a member of the House of Commons, and is answerable therein for all matters relating to the administration of justice, and especially for the exercise of the prerogative of mercy, which is administered through him.o

The law officers of the crown who are now considered eligible to sit in the House of Commons, are the AttorneyGeneral, the Solicitor-General, and the Judge AdvocateGeneral; together with the Lord Advocate, and the Solicitor-General for Scotland, and the Attorney and Solicitor-Generals for Ireland. None of these func

See post, p. 689.

See cases cited, Macqueen, House of Lords, pp. 46-61. Mirror of Parl. 1831-2, p. 442. See also ibid. 1840, p. 2370; Hans. Deb. vol. lxv. p.

1122; ibid. vol. cxliv. pp. 2033, 2050. See ante, vol. i. p. 344.

See Return on Offices of Profit, Commons' Papers, 1867, vol. lvi. p. 19.

tionaries are ever included in the Cabinet. Their continuous presence in the House of Commons, though very desirable and most serviceable, is not therefore essential or obligatory."

It is an acknowledged principle that the House of Commons ought not to proceed to make any alterations in the administration of law and equity, except with the sanction and authority of the law officers of the crown.h This sanction cannot be effectually given unless by the presence of those functionaries in Parliament, when questions of legal reform are under consideration, in order that they may advise as to the proper method of accomplishing the same. Wherefore, it has been the uniform practice, from a period anterior to the Revolution of 1688, to require the presence of the Attorney and SolicitorGenerals of England in the House of Commons, to assist in framing laws, and in carrying on the government of the crown in Parliament.

In 1826, when Mr. Canning was leading the House of Commons in the ministry of Lord Liverpool, he wrote to the Premier representing that there were three legal offices, usually parliamentary, which have been, for the first time, suffered to go out of parliament by the present government, and which, if not restored in the next House of Commons, will be considered as lost by desuetude,' viz. the Master of the Rolls, the Judge Advocate, and the King's Advocate; all important in the highest degree to the well carrying on of the king's business in the House of Commons, and all within my memory, and till of very late years useful and efficient supporters of the administration.' After pointing out the important services that could be rendered by these officers, he concluded by a protest to his chief against all these defalcations from the constitutional and accustomed support of the government

See ante, p. 236. Mr. Roebuck and Mr. Walpole, in Hans. Deb. vol. clxii. pp. 1338,

1340.

See ante, p. 80, post, p. 699.