Since the sanguinary suppression of the insurrection of 1857, the hatred cherished by Englishmen in India against the natives has naturally deepened, and threatens to lead to fresh entanglements. The English government has hitherto shown sufficient wisdom to withstand the efforts that have been made to emancipate the Europeans and Americans in India, entirely from the jurisdiction of the native*-a measure in itself calculated to exempt Europeans from punishment, by reason of the restricted number of European judges. The most enthusiastic adherent of the present form of government in England must admit that the absolute rule of a party cabinet, subject to frequent change, is unfitted to deal with Indian affairs, and with the interests of a population comprising 180,000,000, and that parliament is, of course, unable to control such rule. "Indian affairs are, according to my ideas of greatness, the most important of all our concerns.' This saying of Chatham's is still more true at the present day. On the maintenance of the Indian empire materially depends England's status in the world.

The functions and responsibility of the cabinet having been discussed, we now proceed to examine the manner of its formation. When a ministry is defeated, the queen, on the advice of the retiring minister, ordinarily summons the leader of the opposition, who thereupon takes steps to form a new cabinet, and generally assumes the office of first lord of the treasury; through the latter the ministry enters into communication with the sovereign. Since the accession of William IV. the following have been at the head of the treasury:

1830, Earl Grey.

1834, Viscount Melbourne.
1834, Duke of Wellington.
1834, Sir Robert Peel.

against the false religions. Lord Teignmouth, Lord Munro, Colonel Malcolm, and people of that class, rightly opposed themselves to the unconditional admission of Europeans, and especially of missionaries, into India. (Wilson, Hist. of Ind. i. 513.) The number of persons baptized, according to the " Proceedings of the Church Missionary Society," is very insignificant. In the Punjaub, according to the missionary reports, there were converted in 1856-7

1. In Umritsir, fifty-four persons, and twenty-five adults.

2. In Kangra, twenty-one in all.
3. In Mooltan, none.

4. In Peshawur, "a few."

On the 12th of June, 1857, Lord Ellenborough said, in the house of lords--"If the English were driven out, scarcely a dozen sincere converts would remain behind."

*"Times," Nov. 24, 1859.

1835, Viscount Melbourne.
1841, Sir Robert Peel.
1846, Lord John Russell.
1852, Earl of Derby.
1852, Earl of Aberdeen.

1855, Viscount Palmerston.
1858, Earl of Derby.

1859, Viscount Palmerston.

The following have usually a seat in the cabinet :-The lord chancellor, the chancellor of the exchequer, the five secretaries of state (home, foreign, colonies, war, and India), the first lord of the admiralty, president of the board of trade, and the lord privy seal, for the time being (June, 1861) the paymaster-general, postmaster-general, chief secretary for Ireland, the chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, and the president of the poor-law board. Until 1846 the commander-in-chief, likewise, belonged to the cabinet. On every change of ministry sixty functionaries, including the members of the cabinet, relinquish their posts, according to their respective departments; viz., three junior lords and two secretaries of the treasury, the junior lords of the admiralty, the president and secretary of the poor-law board, the attorneygeneral, solicitor-general, judge-advocate, the lord-lieutenant of Ireland, lord-advocate and solicitor-general for Scotland, as well as all the higher court functionaries.

The cabinet constitutes, however, according to the good pleasure of the party chief who forms it, a wider or narrower circle. In 1834 the Duke of Wellington was first lord of the treasury, and combined, likewise, in his own person, the several branches of the secretaryship of state; the lord chancellor, Lyndhurst, was his only colleague.*

In the Aberdeen administration Lansdowne held office without a seat in the cabinet. The postmaster-general, president of the board of trade, and the chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, had not a seat in the last cabinet; whereas in the present ministry, the representatives of these departments have a seat. All the members of the cabinet are privy councillors, and, as such, take the prescribed oath. Every ministry comprises statesmen who, with regard to certain questions of the day, are

* May, Const. Hist., i. 123.

fully agreed, and who, in relation to their professed opinions, have the expectation of receiving sufficient support from the house of commons. Each minister attends, independently, to the business of his own department.* On account of the disorganization of the party system "open questions," in other words, questions in relation to which every member of the ministry is at liberty to hold his own individual opinion, have come into favour. Lord Brougham blames this in the roundest terms,† as thereby people renounce fulfilling their duties to the government while retaining the advantages and profits of power. It is exactly in regard to the most important questions that the ministers, of all Englishmen, have no opinion, and this arises simply from the fact that ministers prefer retaining office to doing their duty.

When a ministry, upon certain important questions, fails to secure a majority, it either retires from office or applies to the crown for a dissolution. Occasionally, however, even important questions are not treated as cabinet questions; thus, in 1719, the ministry did not retire, although the Peerage Bill, which it had introduced, was rejected by a majority of 269 against 177. Walpole attempted, though unsuccessfully, to retain office in 1742, with a majority of one. Pitt who, in 1784, had the king and country with him, withstood five resolutions of the commons, which were passed at first by a majority of 160. The commons declared the continuance of his ministry unconstitutional, as he had not the confidence of the house, and frequently applied to the crown, by way of address, to dismiss the minister, but without success. From the 12th of January to the 1st of March, the opposition dwindled from 160 down to one-of course, by means of the wellknown expedient. By the dissolution of parliament in 1841 a powerful majority was returned against the Melbourne cabinet ; an amendment to the address by the opposition, having been adopted in the lords by a majority of seventy-two, and in the commons by a majority of ninety-one. Although the members of that ministry were personally acceptable to the queen, she thus expressed herself: "Ever inclined to esteem the advice of my parliament, I shall at once give attention to the formation of a new government."

By reason of the actual break-up of parties it frequently

occurs that ministries, notwithstanding repeated discomfitures, continue in office until a direct vote of want of confidence turns them out. Thus, in the year 1851, the Russell cabinet was continually in a minority; in consequence of Locke King's motion on electoral reform, it resigned, but as a new ministry could not be formed, the previous administration was, in a short time, reinstalled, and remained in power until Lord Palmerston, with the aid of the tories, succeeded in overthrowing it in 1852. The Derby administration (1858-9) only governed by the sufferance of the majority. On a dissolution and new election, it was displaced, not on account of any unacceptable procedure, for the cabinet had thoroughly accommodated itself with the majority, but simply because the ministry did not belong to the party of the majority.

CHAPTER XII.

PARTIES AND PUBLIC OPINION.

Party System.-Its Value or otherwise.-The whole Nation swayed by Party System.— Trial of Queen Caroline.—Walpole's Impeachment.—Cavaliers and Roundheads. -"Addressers" and "Abhorrers."-" Whigs and Tories."-Difference of Principles.-Democracy of the Jacobites.—" Hanoverian" Tories.—Republican Whigs. -Opposition against Walpole.—Parties from 1762 to 1789.—Preponderance of the Tories since 1789.-The Whigs and the Reform Bill.-The Tories supporters of the Policy of the Puritans.-Sir Robert Peel.-Protectionists.-Peelites."Palmerstonian Whigs."-Radical Aristocrats.-Benthamites.-Hume's Little Charter.-Manchester Party.-The Irish Brigade.-Chartism.-Public Opinion. -Want of reliable Information.-Alternating Influence of the Press and "Public Opinion."-The "Times;" Its Behaviour in the Matter of the New Poor Law; Its Supremacy.-Parliamentarism Jeopardied by "Public Opinion.”

As a consequence of parliamentary government there exist exclusive groups or sets, which are always striving for the possession of the treasury bench. Before the harmony of parliamentarism was disturbed by the Reform Bill, two great parties only were taken account of, the " whigs" and the "tories." The value or otherwise of such party system has been abundantly controverted. Parliamentary government would seem to stand in need of fixed parties; at all events, from this stand-point, Burke,* Russell, and Brougham are right, when treating of the party system, and yet the defects of parliamentary rule cannot be gainsaid. "For no one will contend that it is the best conceivable system which involves the resignation of competent and incompetent executive officers together, an able chancellor of the exchequer with an incompetent postmaster-general, a learned and upright lord chancellor with an unsuccessful home or colonial secretary."+ Even Brougham, who, with a certain air of resignation, deems parliamentary rule a matter of necessity, depicts its consequences in the most striking colours; the game which falls a sacrifice to party are the noblest principles, the nation is deluded, and its aristo

"The best patriots in the greatest commonwealths have always commended and promoted such connections. "Idem sentire de republicâ" was with them a principal ground of friendship and attach

ment; nor do I know any other capable of forming firmer, dearer, more pleasing, more honourable, and more virtuous habitudes."-Burke.

+ Cox, 122, 123.