A SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND.
OUR contemporary the Scotsman is usually as careful as it is invariably spirited ; but the excitement and distraction into which it has been thrown by a superfluous eagerness to keep Mr. Edward Jenkins from becoming the Parliamentary representative of Edinburgh, seems to have proved a little too much for it. Thus only can we account for the relaxation of vigilance betokened in the admission of an article which appeared last Wednesday, containing a furious and unwar- ranted assault upon the Spectator, delivered in connection with those proposals for reorganising the Scottish Executive, that are now engaging regard. We are accused of "crass ignor- ance," of encumbering the discussion by a contribution to it composed of "rubbish," of laying ourselves open to circum- stantial correction, in respect of every statement made in our innocent note of last week upon the subject. In any case, there was small occasion for such a discharge of big and hot words ; while the outburst becomes distinctly ludicrous, in the light of the patent blunders which our censor perpetrates,—blunders for an exposure of which one has only to turn to his issue of the previous day, and read therein a speech by the person who is directly and principally concerned, the Lord-Advocate. Where that fails to substan- tiate our averments (and it contradicts none of them), the lack may be readily supplied. It is only needful to cite the admis- sions made by our assailant, or appeal to historic facts which are incontrovertible.
The Scotsman starts with a blunder. It assumes that a change, which will restrict the Lord-Advocate to his legal duties, giving him much the standing of the Attorney-General, plus those important functions which he exercises in super- vising the Scottish system of public prosecution, is imminent ; and goes on to say, that " the desirableness of appointing
a Minister for Scotland is occupying the attention of the Government." In saying this it goes too far. The Lord- Advocate declared on Monday evening that "the Government had not oven approached the consideration of the question ;" and they certainly were too busy otherwise to bestow much heed upon it in the interval. Had it been said that a number of Scottish Members are pressing for such a change, as has been done repeatedly, and that the Home Secretary, like many of his predecessors, is not indisposed to welcome it, the allegation might have stood. • We are next found fault with for declaring that, by long prescription, the Lord-Advocate is virtually the Home Secretary for Scotland. Perhaps the statement should have been qualified by saying that it is so, except where the office falls into the hands of a weakling ; but we cannot make out the sense of the offered contradiction. " He is nothing of the sort," we are told ; "he is the adviser of the Home Secretary." Does the technical distinction
carry any important or appreciable difference V We scarcely think so ; and we are confirmed in our impression, when we find our impugner following up a fiat denial by such a wind-up to a long historical excursus as this :—" As there was no office to which the functions of a Scottish Score- tary of State could be attached, except the office of Lord- Advocate, they were gradually associated with that post 1" We said the Lord-Advocate has charge of all Scottish Bills, of course not meaning that private Members were prohibited from trying their legislative skill, but that he was the framer and pilot of Government measures. The statement is con- troverted with blunt emphasis. What says the Lord-Advocate V His language runs,—" One of the most important functions of the office is the preparation and promotion of Bills affecting the interests of Scotland ;" he explained that he would always be glad to receive the counsel and help of his colleagues in the representation, but he added, " I am bound to say, that as the greater number of Scottish measures are more or less con- nected with the peculiarities of our legal system, if every Scottish Member held a commission from the Crown, it would still bo necessary that they should consult and obtain the assistance of the Lord-Advocate." The exact import of this sweeping sentence we do not pretend to determine ; the words are probably much too wide for the speaker's intention, but construe them us you may, they fully bear out our statement both as to the " charge of Scottish Bills" and as to the "ini- tiation of Scottish reforms." And so as to the remaining subject of patronage. It is true that the right of appointment to legal offices is all that can be exercised directly by the Lord-Advocate,—his powers in that regard being, however, the same as those of the English Lord Chancellor ; but what of his influence as responsible adviser of the Home Secretary ? The dual office embraces well-nigh the whole field ; and, as matter of fact, all representations, even from the most influential persons, were wont to be re- ferred to him, and their effect depended on his sanction.
It is passing strange our critic should be unaware of this ; but our marvel that it should be otherwise is abated, when we find him speaking of a time " when Lord- Advocates [sic] were of a certainty in the House of Commons:' and asserting that " when a Government goes out, the Lord- Advocate generally goes to the Bench." Where has the writer lived his days, or what history has he read ? Has he never heard of previous Lords-Advocate who travelled far and deviously, making many futile essays, before they found a seat? Or can ho point to any instance during the century, except the last two, when accidental openings favoured the performance when the thing he describes as usual has taken place Upon the merits of the case we retain our opinion. The appointment of a Scottish Secretary would be a convenience to Scottish Members, for even when the Lord-Advocate abandons his private practice he is often called away from Westminster during the Session by his public duties. This is inconvenient ; and the awkwardness has often been complained of. We know from Cockburn's "Life of Jeffrey" that he felt oppressed by the weight and multifariousness of his duties, insomuch that he importuned Lord Grey for relief, and got a promise that he should be eased by some such arrangement as is now in contemplation. His successors, for the most part, have been more inclined to resist encroachment than to court a diminu- tion of labour or responsibility ; but every now and again the Scottish Representatives have agitated the question. Twice, at least, it has been made the subject of a formal Parlia- mentary debate,—on the first occasion, at the instance of the Liberal Mr. Baxter, who was answered by the Tory Mr.
Inglis, now Lord President ; and again at the instance of the Tory Sir James Fergusson, who was answered by the Liberal Lord Moncrieff, now Lord Justice Clerk. The Scottish Members who are now on the move ought to read these
replies. They are very cogent, if not absolutely con- clusive ; and they may well suggest the prudence of calling a halt, were it only on the principle that the ills we have may, in the quest for good, be exchanged for other and worse.
Previous page
