The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1899-06-01
EXECUTIVE RESPONSIBILITY.


Mr.. Hannis Taylor late Minister to
Spain, in his valuable treatise on The
Origin and Growth of the English Con
stitution, traces step by step the
gradual shifting of power from the
Sovereign to the Parliament, and the
growth, by unwritten law, Of the re-
sponsibility Of Ministers to the House
of Commons instead of the Throne.
This phase of English politica! his
tory is especially interesting to those,
in these Islands, who once undertook
to make the Kings of Hawaii respon-
sib1e 10 the Legislature and the peo-
pie This could not be accomplished
by changing the written law, because
the mass Of the people were indiffer-
ent to the source of responsibility.
These who undertook to make the
Hawaiian King responsible to the peo-
pie had not before them the history
of gradual growth of the principle of
Ministerial responsibility in England
TO the Legislature and not to the
King. A written law providing for
such responsibility would have had no
force in England, because the people
had to be educated to understand it's
necessity. The provision in the Ha-
waiian Constitution of 81 was based
on a theory, but was without a popu-
lar foundation that demanded it.
Mr. Taylor in his valuable work ex
plains how George III had assumed
the power of governing, Using his Min
listers as agents without responsibility,
and Parliament, divided by rival lead
ers, had permitted it. But the strong
English head was thinking over this
absolutism and suspected it. Finally,
in his troubles, the King went to Pitt
for aid, and made him First Minister,
and in the course of time Pitt took
from the King the responsibility of
governing and responsibility to Par
lament was established.
This admirable account OF the
growth of Parliamentary power is es-
pecially interesting, because it shows
how impracticable the attempts were
TO establish parliamentary government
here, twelve years ago. Whoever shall
write the history of our little mon
archy will, if he studies the growth of
this popular government in England,
be able to explain its failure in Hawaii.
To the American student this his /
tory of Parliamentary government is
especially attractive, because it shOwss
that the Revolutionary War was not
due to any hatred by the British Of
the American colonies, or any desire
to conquer them, but was due to the
arbitrary power of the King, which, at
that time, could not be controlled by
Parliament.
1t has been the practice for over a
hundred years for, American teachers
and historians to put the blame OF
carrying on the Revolutionary War
upon the British nation, and three
generations have lived and died in
America, in ignorance of the truth.
1t is now left to American historians,
educated to better research, and with
impartial judgments, to show the
American people that they have been
misled, and have filled the national
reservoirs of feeling with causeless
bitterness and hatred.
One of the most interesting state
ments made by Mr.. Taylor is that the
makers of our own great Constitution,
framing it at the time when the King
and not the Ministers ruled in Eng
land, gave. the President large powers,
and made the Cabinet merely his SER
wants. 1t was not until after the Con-
stitution had been adopted that the
principle of Parliamentary government
was established in England, and the
King was made only the nominal head
of the government. Had this princi-
pie been established before the adop
ton of the Constitution, it is probable
that our present system Of Executive
responsibility would have followed the
English precedent, and the President
would not have had the veto power,
and the Cabinet would have been a.
the disposition of Congress.