Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Editor's introduction
- Principal events in Bagehot's life
- Note on the text and annotation
- The English Constitution
- I The Cabinet
- II The Prerequisites of Cabinet Government, and the Peculiar Form Which They Have Assumed in England
- III The Monarchy
- IV The Monarchy (continued)
- V The House of Lords
- VI The House of Commons
- VII On Changes of Ministry
- VIII Its Supposed Checks and Balances
- IX Its History, and the Effects of That History – Conclusion
- Introduction to the Second Edition (1872)
- Biographical notes on persons mentioned in the text
- Bibliographical note
- Index
- Title in the series
VII - On Changes of Ministry
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2012
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Editor's introduction
- Principal events in Bagehot's life
- Note on the text and annotation
- The English Constitution
- I The Cabinet
- II The Prerequisites of Cabinet Government, and the Peculiar Form Which They Have Assumed in England
- III The Monarchy
- IV The Monarchy (continued)
- V The House of Lords
- VI The House of Commons
- VII On Changes of Ministry
- VIII Its Supposed Checks and Balances
- IX Its History, and the Effects of That History – Conclusion
- Introduction to the Second Edition (1872)
- Biographical notes on persons mentioned in the text
- Bibliographical note
- Index
- Title in the series
Summary
There is one error as to the English Constitution which crops up periodically. Circumstances which often, though irregularly, occur naturally suggest that error, and as surely as they happen it revives. The relation of Parliament, and especially of the House of Commons, to the executive government is the specific peculiarity of our constitution, and an event which frequently happens much puzzles some people as to it.
That event is a change of ministry. All our administrators go out together. The whole executive government changes – at least, all the heads of it change in a body, and at every such change some speculators are sure to exclaim that such a habit is foolish. They say, ‘No doubt Mr Gladstone and Lord Russell may have been wrong about Reform; no doubt Mr Gladstone may have been cross in the House of Commons; but why should either or both of these events change all the heads of all our practical departments? What could be more absurd than what happened in 1858? Lord Palmerston was for once in his life over-buoyant; he gave rude answers to stupid inquiries; he brought into the cabinet a nobleman concerned in an ugly trial about a woman; he, or his Foreign Secretary, did not answer a French despatch by a despatch, but told our ambassador to reply orally. And because of these trifles, or at any rate, these isolated un-administrative mistakes, all our administration had fresh heads.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Bagehot: The English Constitution , pp. 122 - 148Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2001