office. 1880, of a report by Mr. D. B. Eaton, which affords a comprehen- Appointsive history of the whole subject of civil service reform in England. ments to The principle which regulates the choice of persons to fill political offices under the British crown will be explained in another part of this treatise. It is here material to notice that, although appointments to office under the crown are made in the name of the sovereign, it is contrary to the spirit of the constitution for any such appointments to be made except through a responsible minister, and after consultation and agreement with the prime minister." The complete and unreserved recognition of this principle is of recent date. George III. was fond of the exercise of private patronage and disregarded, sometimes, the restraint of constitutional rules.* His son and successor, George IV., was of a similar disposition in this respect. In 1829 he directed the military authorities to issue patents conferring two military appointments, without having previously taken the advice of the prime minister (Duke of Wellington) thereon. The home secretary (Mr. Peel) demurred to this transaction; and agreed with the premier that, had the appointments been to political or ecclesiastical offices a stronger remonstrance would have been advisable. But in consideration of the king's health, and the unobjectionable selection of persons made by his Majesty to fill these vacancies, they contented themselves with recording, in an official memorandum, their sanction to the appointments. But, in the event of the recurrence of a similar proceeding, it was agreed that the king should be informed that the secretary of state ought not to forward instruments conferring appointments to his Majesty for his signature, without previously communicating with the first lord of the Treasury, and ascertaining that he is acting with his sanction and consent." ▾ See v. 2. w See ante, p. 271. * lb. p. 281. Wellington, Desp. Civil Series, v. 6, pp. 162, 166, 181. Another case, Ib. p. 300. Appoint ments to permanent offices. Political patronage. But from and after the complete establishment of the principle of open competitive examinations for the selection of candidates to fill up vacancies in the civil service of the crown in the United Kingdom, which dates from the year 1870-political patronage has been entirely abandoned, and there has been a complete surrender of the power formerly exercised by members of Parliament over appointments to office." same. In selecting individuals to fill subordinate places of honour and emolument, a great responsibility devolves upon the existing administration. Public opinion will no longer tolerate the prostitution of offices for political services that so often disgraced our history in former times. It is now an admitted necessity, that every one appointed to an office of trust, however small, should be qualified for his post, otherwise the choice will bring discredit upon the government, and may lead to the withdrawal of public confidence and parliamentary support from those who are accountable for the But so long as this principle is not lost sight of, it is acknowledged to be the privilege of an administration to give the preference, in appointments to office, to their political friends and supporters; for among the powers that are required to enable a government to perform its functions with efficiency, there are few more essential than that of reward." The patronage of the crown,' says May, has ever been used to promote the interests and consolidate the strength of that party in which its distribution happened to be vested.' It is true that the offer of places, as a corrupt inducement to vote at elections, has long been recognised by the legislature as an insidious form of bribery. But while carefully avoiding the committal of any offence against the law, b Eaton, Civil Service, pp. 310, Grey, Parl. Govt. p. 311; Rowland's Eng. Const. p. 437. b May, Const. Hist. v. 2, p. 91. © 2 Geo. II. c. 24; 49 Geo. III. c. 118, &c.; Rogers on Elections, 316347. 6 age. the patronage of the crown within certain limits to be Patronpresently noticed-has been systematically, though not invariably, distributed by the ministry of the day, as a means of rewarding past political service, and of ensuring future support.' It is worthy of remark that the Earl of Shelburne (formerly prime minister), a stanch Whig, accepted the Marquisate of Lansdowne from the hands of Mr. Pitt; continuing in Opposition, notwithstanding; though he took but little part in politics after his retirement from office. And in November 1858, during the Derby administration, the Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone, M.P., was appointed lord high commissioner extraordinary to the Ionian Islands, from a sense of his peculiar fitness for the post, and notwithstanding his being a leading member of the Opposition.e The greater part of all local patronage has been dispensed [by the patronage secretary to the Treasury] through the hands of members of Parliament, supporting the ministers of the day. They have claimed and received it as their right; and have distributed it, avowedly, to strengthen their political connection.'' On May 24, 1860, the then lord-lieutenant of Ireland (Lord Carlisle) was called upon in the House of Lords to defend an appointment he had made to a lieutenancy in an Irish county. While vindicating the propriety of his choice, he admitted that if he had had recourse to persons differing in political sentiment from the government, he might have found one or two persons more eligible for the post; but, he added, 'I think it due to those who concur in political opinion with her Majesty's government, whenever I have to assign stations of honour and distinction, unless there is some strong reason to the contrary, to give the preference to those who entertain the opinions and support the principles to which I myself owe the position I hold, and the power I possess of dealing with such matters at all.' This,' he continued, 'has been the general practice in this country;' in proof of which assertion he 4 Lewis, Administrations, p. 55. eCom. Pap. 1859, sess. 2, v. 15, p. 576. And see Hans. D. v. 172, p. 954. Ib. v. 195, p. 482. Earl Grey, in his essay on Parl. Govt. new ed. p. 48, points out the tendency to encourage corruption, and especially that kind of corruption which consists in the the owners of certain toll bridges over the Rivière des Prairies, but in so doing a select committee of the legislative council on the Bill recommended that compensation should be given by the government to the said owners." Pursuant to this recommendation, the Board of Works awarded indemnity to the bridge proprietors.P • Canada Leg. Council Jour. 1852-3. ▸ Can. Ssse. Pap. 1862, No. 25. CHAPTER XV. ROYAL PREROGATIVE IN REGARD TO OFFICES AND regard to offices and public officers. THE Crown, besides being the fountain of dignity and Prerogahonours, is likewise entrusted by the constitution with tive in the sole power of creating such offices, for carrying on the public service, or maintaining the dignity of the state, as may be required. It has also, by virtue of the prerogative, a right to make choice of all persons to be appointed to fill places of trust and emolument under the crown; to determine the amount of remuneration to which they shall be respectively entitled; and to dismiss them from office, according to its discretion. & Every office and employment in the public service derives its authority either directly or indirectly from the crown; and in the eye of the law is accounted honourable, because implying a superiority of abilities; and being always presumed to be filled by the person best qualified for the same. Offices are in the gift of the crown, because the law supposes that no one can be so good a judge of the merits and qualifications of public officers as the sovereign by whom they are employed.b As the king may create new titles, so may he create new offices, but with this restriction, that he cannot create new offices with new fees annexed to them, nor annex new fees to old offices; for this would be a tax a Macaulay, Hist. of Eng. v. 4, b Bowyer, Const. Law, p. 147. p. 303. VOL. I. R R |