1 JANUARY 1870, Page 14

A SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND.

mo understand the present agitation for administrative _I_ reforms in Scotland two things must be kept in view. The agitation is not popular, but Parliamentary ; did not begin with and is not carried on by the people, nor by their repre.

correfponding Boards in England and Ireland. All such Boards may be too costly, it is true, and some of them may besides be objected to on principle. These general issues are not raised, however, except it may be as regards the Bible Board and the Fishery Board, which are objected to on prin- ciple, and, as we think, rightly. The abolition of the one would only save about £900 yearly ; of the other, less than £3,000, if we deduct from the whole charges those relating to piers and harbours and the cutter and boat service, and set off against the balance the fees for branding, which exceed £4,000. The abolition of these two Boards is the utmost that can or should be looked for ; and we do not see that the cost of the others, any more than the cost of the depart- ments, can be reduced much. Take it that .£4,500 a year might be obtained by abolitions and reductions conjoined, would that suffice ? It would not suffice, we imagine, to pay salaries to the Secretaries and their private secretaries, so that the cost of the two new offices in London and Edinburgh would be a fresh burden on the country. As they are moving by him, or by him through his subordinates. Daring his , in the name of retrenchment as well as of more efficient sentatives in their interest. It is strictly a Members' move- ment, directed against what is called "the monopoly of the Administration" by the Scotch Bar. Again, the object of the attack on the Boards and Government departments in Edin- burgh is neither better nor more economical administration. The raid made on the Civil Service is an effort to discover duties and a salary for the Secretary for Scotch affairs, that is, to supersede the Lord Advocate. Not long since Mr. Duncan M‘Laren, M.P., who leads the attack, resented interference with the Edinburgh establishments as a violation of the rights of Scotland and the Act of Union. He now demands their wholesale reduction or abolition. In his case, it will be believed, the Scottish patriot has not been merged in the Imperial legislator. Mr. M-Laren is merely pressing his point in favour of the Secretary project, regardless of consistency and what some may conceive to be his duty to his country.

Of course, the motive to an act has little to do with its merits practically considered. There may be a good case for reform, although the reformers may be prompted to exertion more by personal than public considerations. Thus, though it is important to bear in mind the nature and objects of the agitation, we are not helped much by a knowledge of these in the decision of the question whether it is the public interest that the agitation should be successful. Before a decision on this point can be reached, there are two preliminary questions to be answered. Have the Scotch Members a grievance that it would benefit the public to remove ? and if so, do they propose the best and cheapest remedy for the evil ?

The grievance is, that the Lord Advocateship is the sole great office of State connected with Scotland, and that it can be held only by a leading lawyer. The public interest is said to be involved in this way,—that the Lord Advocate is an over- worked official, who cannot perform his duties satisfactorily. The remedy suggested is the appointment of a Secretary for Scotch affairs, who shall be in Parliament, and shall relieve the Lord Advocate of his administrative duties, except in connection with criminal prosecutions and of his legislative duties, except such as naturally fall under the charge of an Attorney-General.

The grievance tarns on a very partial view of the State arrangements. The Lord Advocate is not the sole great official, since the Home Secretary is Secretary for Scotland as as well as England and Ireland ; and it is open to Scotch lay members to aspire to the seals of the Home Office. There are, moreover, two Under-Secretaryships for Home Affairs open to Scotch Members if they can win them in the competi- tion of Parliamentary life, besides usually a Scotch Lordship of the Treasury. Since there are thus three or four offices they may have, any of which would give the holder great influence in Scotch affairs, the grievance seems to be mainly sentimental. It involves, moreover, a miscalculation.

It by no means follows that the office of Secretary would be monopolized by the Scotch Members. Their failure, as a rule, to obtain the offices at present open makes against the supposition that it would, and we cannot imagine that they desire the affairs of their country to be specially entrusted to Irish or English hands, rather than leave them as they are. The affairs of Ireland, under an arrangement similar to that they are advocating, have frequently fallen to the hands of Englishmen and Scotchmen. As to the connection of the grievance with the public interest, it is not quite clear that the Lord Advocate fails satisfactorily to perform his functions. That the complaint has so often been made might be held to prove it well founded, were it not that it has been made only and always by the promoters of the Secretary project. Even

the most captious of these ceased to complain during the Advocacy of Mr. Gordon ; and we have yet to learn that Mr. Young will not give at least equal satisfaction. The truth is, as most people know, the complaints were almost personal

to one who held the office, so long as he might well think it existed for himself rather than for the country. Assuming, however, that there has been room for dissatisfaction with the manner in which the duties of the office have been performed, and that in the interest of the public this should be provided against in future, we arrive at the second of the preliminary questions, whether the proposals of the reformers are the cheapest and most effective means to the end in view that can be devised.

The Lord Advocate is the public prosecutor in Scotland, and his special function is to preserve the peace of the country. The more serious indictments issue in his name, and the mode of trial of all criminal eases, except police cases, is prescribed absence in Parliament he is relieved of these duties by the Solicitor-General. In Parliament he has the charge of such legislation, initiated by the Government, as affects Scotland; the greater part of it has for long been of the description of " law " legislation, and nearly all of it such as an able lawyer must have

been consulted in preparing. He is ex (lido a member of one

or two of the Edinburgh Boards, but they generally get on with- out him. He attends them only when specially called in. With the departments, excepting the Crown Office, he has almost no connection save in his character as a counsel ; some of them correspond directly with the Home Office, and others with the Treasury. It is here we find the explanation of a confes- sion the reformers are making, namely, that as matters are arranged, the duties performed by the Advocate which could be taken from him and given to a Secre- tary of Scotch affairs are quite insufficient to justify the appointment of so high an official. The Secre- tary would have a few Bills to conduct through the Commons annually and to receive a few deputations respecting them ; beyond that he would be functionless. And hence also the inquiry that is being made into the public depart- ments in Scotland. Duties for a Secretary are sought in the boards and departments because they cannot be taken in sufficient numbers from the Advocate. He has not got them.

More than one of the departments is at this moment without a head, the offices having fallen vacant and being left in suspense pending the inquiry. The suggestion is that a Secretary may be made to supersede the heads of departments. But nothing can be plainer than that this is an unworkable idea. The departments, even supposing them centralized in a secretarial office, must have heads of some sort, by whatever name they shall be called ; and it is very clear that when the heads have been made as humble as it is possible for them to be, only a resident Secretary can properly control them, and that the bumbler they are made the greater need there will be for control by a superior officer. It also seems clear

from the complexity of the various duties that officer would have to perform that he must be a permanent official.

The Secretary that the reformers desire to see appointed is to be in Parliament, non-resident, that is, from February to September ; a political officer changing with the Government. It follows that a feature of the projects of the reformers must be the appointment of a permanent Under-Secretary resident in Edinburgh, in addition to the Secretary in Parlia- ment. Brought thus to a practical test, the scheme is seen to involve a considerable increase of expenditure on the administration in Scotland—the payment of two Secretaries

and of private Secretaries to both of them, and the esta- blishment of secretarial offices both in London and Edin- burgh—the Lord Advocate and Solicitor-General remaining as before. Indeed, only an extreme immodesty could suggest a reduction of the salaries of either of them.

The reformers are not stupid men, whatever else they may be. It must have been a perception of the expensiveness of their project that led them, while searching the departments for functions for the new officials, to propose the pillage of the Edinburgh Boards to furnish them with salaries. Could they take more funds from the Boards than they require for their scheme, the scheme, as a whole, might seem economical. This, however, we suspect, cannot be done. There is nothing exceptional about the Boards but the smallness of their cost. The finance accounts show that they cost much less proportionally than the administration, they must make their case very plain at this point ; that more shall not fall to be paid instead of less, for what after all is a very doubtful improvement in the Admi- nistration.

Whether Scotland has been suffering under a succes- sion of over-worked Lord Advocates or not no one doubts, but it has been a well-governed country. It is peace- ful and content ; the present complaints, as we said, come not from the people, but the Members. Nowhere else is crime so firmly checked. Lastly, the country is prosperous. There should be a clear and strong reason for violently dis- turbing arrangements under which such results have been reached. If, as has been alleged, the Lord Advocate is over- worked, would not the reasonable course be simply to give him such assistance in the performance of his duties as will enable him more easily to overtake them ? Such assistance, it has been suggested, might well be given in the shape of a well-paid Secretary to the Lord Advocate, such as is attached to the Lord-Lieutenant in Ireland—usually known as Under- Secretary—and who, residing in Dublin, is of immense ser- vice in the Administration. The suggestion seems to merit careful consideration. Take an example of the services such an officer might render. A good Secretary who could aid the Lord Advocate in preparing Bills, and in making the necessary clauses to give the Scotch the benefit of English legislation, instead of the too common clause—" this Act shall not apply to Scotland "—would be invaluable, and by rendering un- necessary the multiplication of Government Bills, would save money to the country, as well as lighten the duties of his chief. Since the evil complained of, if it exists at all, is capable of being thus simply and cheerfully remedied, without a radical change in a system that has hitherto worked well. and since, so far as appears, the counter-proposals are of doubtful expediency considered apart from the expense, and in an economic view lead not in the direction of retrench- ment, but the reverse, the decision we reach is that it is not desirable that the present agitation should be successful. The remedies proposed are not the best devisable, and are too violent and costly for the occasion.