The Washington herald., 1907-07-14
M. P. CANNOT RESIGN

Riddle Of Buckinghamshire 20 Henley in
Oxfordshire. was many years ago partly
covered by a thick forest of beech trees.
in which bands of desperate rogues and
robbers found a secure hiding-place; it
was the dangerous duty Of the steward
to protect the surrounding country from
the marauding expeditions of those out
laws, as well as to collect the revenues Of
my lord the King The revenues are
gone The freebooters have long disap-
peared. But the Office of steward of the
Chiltern Hundreds survives, withou: du-
ties and without emoluments, to serve the
singular purpose of enabling members Of
Parliament to lay down the burden of
their legislative responsibilities without
waiting for a dissolution. The first mem
Der appointed to the office. solely TO en-
able him to resign his seat, was Mr.. john
Pitt, and the date OF the appointment
was January II, 1850 The liberatlng stew
ardShip has been in constant use for the
same purpose ever since, and has been
granted as a matter of course to any
member of the House of Commons who
I
House, without any regard to party or
political considerations. The stewardship
is retained only until a fresh application
for the office is made TO the chancellor
of the exchequer. Each new warrant ex-
pressly revOkes the grant to the previ-
Gus occupant Of the post. and the new
steward in turn continues in office TIL the
time for him 10 make way for another.
It was stated by Sir Robert Peel, as
chancellor of the exchequer. in the House
/ of Commons. on February .. 1916, that the
office cannot be conferred twice on the
same day. If there is a second application
| for the position on the same day. recourse
/ is had 10 two other stewardships of an
lidentically nominal character-those Of
the manors of East Hendred. in Berk-
shire, and Of Northstead and HcmDholme.
/ in Yorkshire. There was still another Of
fee used for the same purpose. the Es-
cheator Of Munster, a survival of the
Irish Parliament, and confined to Irish
representatives, but it was abolished in
! 1888
Twice on Same Day.
Since 1850. the statement of Sir Robert
Peel. in 1916, notwithstanding. there have
been four instances Of the stewardship
Of the Chiltern Hundreds having been
granted twice on the same day-the cases
are set forth in a list Of the stewards
since 1850, issued by Parliament in 1886
but. of course, two men did not hold the
position at the same time as the second
appointment, in each instance. set aside
the first Even so great an authority on
things Parliamentary as Sir Erskine May
has slipped in dealing with the steward
ship of the Chiltern Hundreds. in his
great work on Parliamentary PTOce-
dure" He says that the appointment is
resigned az soon as its purpose is effect
81 81 l1IM Nsu p sD uoos sc 81 lBql 'pS
sued for the seat vacated But this IS
not so. and the steward holds his office
of profit-which means that he goes on
doing nothing and receiving nothing-un-
I'll his successor is appointed.
In the warrant the chancellor Of the
exchequer declares that he reposes in the
stewards care and fidelity especial
trust and confidence Now, il has oc-
casionauy happened that member Of
Parliament has been compelled by the
fear Of outraged public opinion hastily TO
retire into private life because of some
act which. while II did not bring him
within the meshes of the law, was moral
" wrong or socially disgraCeful. To
meet the cases of these black sheep.
Gladstone, ir 1851 while chancellor Of
the eXchequer made an alteration in the
phraseOlOgy If the warrant in order TO
prevent any conception that the granting
OF the stewardship of the Chiltern Hun
dreds conferred either honor or credit. 1t
happened in that year that member OF
the House of Commons. and n conspicuous
{ Ia. I'D
for and was granted the Chiltern Hun
dreds, and a new writ for his constitu-
ency was Immediately issued. It suisse
qUently transpired that he had been de-
tected in professional swindling Of so
gross a character that his patent of ..
c. was revoked and he was disbarred. IT.
was this case that led Gladstone TO
omit from the warrant of appointment g.
the Chilterns and similar stewardships the
words expressing special trust and con-
idence in the care and fidelity" of the Of
ficehOider. in order to remove any scan
dial that might be caused by granting
them 10 persons unworthy Of the favor of
the crown who might desire 10 vaCate
their seats in Parliament. For some rea-
son, presumably because no official rec
ord was kept Of the change, the omitted
words were subsequently replaced. But in
1871 Sir Stafford Northcote. as chancellor
Of the exchequer. again omitted them, and
since then the warrant has been issued
without the halo of honor which the orig
inaI phraseolOgy impaired.
Issued as Matter of Course.
The warrant is issued, as I have said,
in all cases as matter of course, save
where the applicant Is liable to expulsion
from the house for a criminal offense. or
TO be deprived of his seat on an election
petition for bribery or corruption. In
these instances it is refused so that the
House might retain the control over the
offender with a view TO censuring him or
expelling him. Gladstone laid it down
that the duty of the chancellor Of the ex-
chequer on receiving an application for
the stewardship was TO consider wheth-
er the gentleman who asks for the Office
can. by any possibility, be escaping from
any duty he owes to Parliament. or any
law under which he has come by his cleo
ton TO Parliament; and unless there is
some ground or color Of positive objec-
ton of this nature, TO grant the office
without making further inquiry" The
Office was refused in 1872 The applicant
was Lord Chelsea, against whose election
for Reading a petition had been lodged
During the trial of the petition, Lord
Chelsea. as a compromise, entered into
an agreement-in order. it was said, to
avoid a bribery and corruption inquiry
TO vate his seat and to obtain it for the
petitioner (his opponent at the election)
or forfeit $1,000 But his application to-
Goulburn, the chancellor of the ex-
chequer. for the stewardship of the Chill
tern Hundreds was rejected Il consider"
wrote Goulburn, that by lending my as
sistance to the fulfllment of Qny engage
ments which may have been catered into