The Daily bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Hawaii]) 1882-1895, 1891-02-20
ENGLISH PRECEDENT.

EDITOR BULLETIN
In the current discussion on 1.-The
Queen and the Cabinet | do not
lay much stress on foreign precedent.
Particularly not on United States
practice, where the President is the
responsible head of the Executive,
and chooses his ministers to suit his
policy. Not much, either, on Ger
man precedent, for that Empire is
behind our own in constitutional
limitations of the soyereign's will.
England is the most nearly analogous
to Hawaii, but England's practices
are not law TO this independent king
dom with written Constitution.
They are only useful as guides in a
new situation for which our Consti-
tuition does not adequately provide.
Below will be found extracts and
condensed statements from the British
Encyclopedia, the facts in which |
have generally verified by reference
to several English historians at hand.
These are not intended as C0ntradic-
tions of the assertions made by "E.
n. NJ" but to show that some of
these must be taken in a greatly mo-
dified sense. Under the heading,
Cabinet, the Encyclopedia has the
following passages:
Instances are not wanting III our
history in which the direct action of
the Sovereign has overthrow Cabi-
net, or prevented a Cabinet from
being formed. In 1872
Lord Moria was defeated in the at
tempt to form a Cabinet by the re-
fusal Of the Regent to consent to a
change in the household and in 1889
similar reason was alleged by Queen
Victoria TO prevent the accession to
office of Sir Robert Peel. But
though this step was defended and
sanctioned by minute of the Wing
Ca binet of the day, it is now gener-
ally regarded as unconstitutional,
and the objection was never re-
peated.'
1.-The representatives of the spend
ing departments should, if pos
sible, be members of the House which
votes the supplies. Mr.. Disraeli
followed this precedent. "
"a serious division in the Cab
met is, as is well known, an infali-
bic sign of its approaching dssolu-
ton. There are cases in which a
minister has been dismissed for de-
parture from the concerted action of
his colleagues. Thus, in 1851, Lord
PalmerstOn having expressed to the
French ambassador in London his
unqualified appreciation of the coup
d'etat of Louis Napoleon against the
Assembly when the Cabinet had re-
solved on observing strict neutral
ity on the subject, Lord Russell adj
vised Her Majesty to withdraw from
Lord Palmerston the seals of the
Foreign Department, and his lord
ship never again filed that office"
Sir Robert Peel said that, on re-
signing Office, he offered no opinion
as to the choice of a successor.
"That is almost The only act which
is the personal act of the sovereign"
were his words cit is for the SOW
ereign to determine in whom her con-
fidence shall be placed" Comment
ing on this the author Of the article,
"Ministry,' in the Encyclopedia,
says: "Yet this selection BY the
crown is practically limited. No
prime minister could carry on the
government of the country for any
length of time who did not possess
the confidence of the Houae If COM
mons"
William Tvs dismissal OF Lord
Grey's Ministry, and calling in of
81: Robert Peel to form a new Gov
eminent was the ''last time" that
"the sovereign actively interfcred in
the change of Ministry"
Under the head, "Ministry." The
Encyclopedia says:
I'm order that there may always
be an existing head of the state the
king is regarded as corporation.
He cannot die; there can be only
demise of the crown-that is, a
transfer of the royal authority to
different person.
The impression l should gain from
consideration of the actual working
of the English Constitution is that
the personal preference of the SOW
ereign does not count in the forma-
lion or mutations of ministries. She