14 SEPTEMBER 1850, Page 19

eitatting5 from t i t Vitt lunko.


TR& inquiries of the Official Salaries Committee were limited to places held by Members of Parliament, to the Diplomatic service, and to Ju- dicial offices in the superior courts of law. Besides pecuniary disclosures, the investigation led to much curious incidental matter, expository, on the highft.t authorities, of the constitution and practice of the Government, and the recognized ethics of plae,emen. It will be best at the outset of our examination of the Evidence, now published,* to submit the matter * Minutes of Evidence taken before the Select Committee on Official Salaries ; with Appendix and Index,-417 pages folio. The Report and Proceedings of the Committee, formerly published separately. and presented in substance in the 4vectator of August 10, are now included in the same volume. fOr 2460 Aiara of the queatjaa_a eakil thePaakker the reader per our- ge,lve,s may be overloaded, we shall this week entertain only the List- mentioned solidivision of Parliamentary Offices. , l'hes4 formed the transcendental, if not the most interesting branch of research. Parliamentary offioials, who hold offices during the pleasure of the Crown, and whose salaries are annually voted in the Estimates, con- stitute the paid representatives of the Government in both Houses, who walk in and walk out with every change of the Premiership. They are the bona fide and responsible State authorities for the time of all the great departments of administration; and constitute what is symbolically termed the Treasury bench, or Ministerial phetiqov,-a term not inaptly applied from the concrete body of Macedonian warriors, whose serried ranks pre- sented on all sides an impassable front. The number of this banded co- hort appears to average from forty to forty-four or forty-five. Of course it does not constitute the entire Ministerial strength : outside the official nucleus is a more numerous unpaid but less disciplined corps,-expect. ants waiting for mutinies or casualties ; volunteers from principle, party ties, traditional or personal sympathies ; and a not inconsiderable section who, like the late Mr. Wilberforce, from loyalty or duty feel bound to support every Government de facto, lest Chaos should come again, or Communism or Demagoguism be uppermost.

Here is the present muster-roll of her Majesty's defenders ; and as the return was made with a view to possible retremffiments, it is comparative, exhibiting the rate of emolument at antecedent periods. In addition, official residences, in whole or in part, are provided for the First Lord of the Treasury, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and the Lords and Secretary of the Admiralty.

President,of the Council Board of Trade- Seven Lords of Trade, at 10001. each 7,000 - - President - - 2,000

Tice-President 2.000 1 mPasaitedr-at iseil:eraLy-


Lord Privy Seal 4,036 2,054 2,000 Secretary at War 2,480 2,480 2,480 Paymaster-General 3,061 2,000 2.000

" The Judge-Advocate I Paid by Fees, ke.; 1 „,000


1. amount unknown. f " Admiralty-

First Lord 3,000 5,000 4,500 Junior Lords, 10001. each 6,000 (4) 4,000 ...

Comptroller of the Navy 800 2,000 1 BEd.

Secretary 3,000 2,000 t and Fees. 1

11,900 -- 10,600 14,000


The Master-General 2,150 3,650 3,000 Lieutenant-General 1,167 1,200 Abolished. . Surveyor-General 837 1.200 1,200 Clerk of the Ordnance 928 1,200 1,200 Principal Storekeeper 1,148 1,200 1,200

Clerk of the Deliveries 538 1,643 Abolished.

Treasurer 540 1,565 Abolished.

Secretary to the Master-General ... 534 1,200 1,000 7,842 12,258 7,600


The Master 3,010 2,000 5,653 5,500 Salary.

Chief Commissioner of Railway Board - 1.500

Chief Commissioner of Poor-law Board - 2,000 First Secretary 1,500 Second Secretary 1,500

The.Com limit mittee did not their investigations to direct emoluments, but digressed into official appurtenances,-patronage, fees, or gra- tuities; official residences, whether furnished or not, if fixtures were found or taken by the incoming Minister at a fair valuation ; and some more radical descended to "coals and candles." It is manifest that direct pay tells little as to the intrinsic value of appointments. Instances are numerous in private life of honorary secretaries who serve without salary yet profit largely, and by gratuities, patronage, or posthumous bene- factions, leave families well provided for. In the public departments a stout war has been waged against fees and perquisites ; they are still exuberant among the Law-officers of the Crown and the courts of law generally; but they have disappeared from the dockyards, where chips and shavings were most rife, and indeed from the entire of the great civil

offices of the Government.

In the opinion of the Committee, the salaries of the First Lord of the Treasury, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the three Secretaries of State, and the First Lord of the Admiralty, are not too high ; and from this con- clusion there may be only qualified dissent. Adequately to fill these offices the highest talents with the greatest experience in public affairs are unquestionably requisite, and service of every degree ought to be paid for proportionately to its worth, risk, or rarity: still it is possible that the State magnates may be overpaid. Greater incomes doubtless accrue to private individuals from trade, but they are the profits of capital ; from 1780. 1830. 1 8 50.

Emoluments. Emoluments. Emoltunents, -• First Lord, and Chancellor of the Exchequer .... 1 Junior Lord Ditto Ditto Ditto • Joint Secretary Ditto Home Secretary- Secretary of State Under ditto Foreign Secretary- Secretary of State Under ditto Colonial Secretary- Secretary of State Under ditto Treasury-- 7,430 1,220 1,220 1,220 1,220 5,114 5,114 f 5,000 1 5,398 1,220 1,220 1,220 1,220 3,500 3,500 5,000 5,000 1,200 1,200 1,200 2,500 2,500 22,538 22,278 18,600 5.312 6,000 5,000 1,013 2,002 1,500 -- 6,325 8,002 6.500 5,312 6,000 5,000 Not known. 4,000 1,500 5,912 8,000 6,500 NiL 6,000 5,000 NiL 2,000 1,500 Nil. 8,000 6,500 Not known 2,840 2,000 1 Average. ) 2,307 I

Chief Secretary for Ireland .... and Fees, amount

not known.

professions, but they are the proceeds of previous investments in educa- tion or labour; often too from mere personal aceomplishments—such as music or satation—but these are for the extra fashion -or rarity of the gift, not intrinsic or equivalent valises in exchange. Shittily for eervice, open to anybody's moffidatureship, like an unskilled employment, with- out premium or apprenticeship, no class in any walk of life are better remunerated than the stars of the Treasury bench. Perhaps it is right to be so ; though only service, it is doubtless high service, the Queen's or the public's, and it may be fit it should be richly paid for.

It is fair, however, to show what the recipients, past and present, urge on this vita consideration. Sir Robert Pea, Sir Charles Wood, and Lord John Russell, were all closely interrogated ; and such marvellous Agree- ment was there in their facts and doctrine, that it almost seemed the re- sult of confederate council or prior arrangement Sir Charles Wood backed his argument for unabated pay by putting in a mug quotation from Mr. Macaulay: but the historian's representation cuts two ways, and one directly in the teeth of the-Chancellor's deduction. Some offieird emolue merits may have been greater in proportion to private incomes from landed estates formerly than now, but what pf that for present guidance, if the period selected is one to shun, not to imitate? And precisely of this sort are the times of Charles the Second—notoriously bad times, in every line of corruption and profligacy—not, it is hoped, to be revived ; and most extraordinary it is that a staid astute person like Sir Charles Wood should without blushing refer to them for existing example or illustration. Turn- ing from this inadvertence, both as irrelevant and inadmissible, we subo join a more sober tenour of enforcement of the needful dignity, the mo- tives, and pay of a Prime Minister.

The interrogator and respondent are Mr. Cobden and Sir Robert Peel.

Question 316. (Kr, Cobden.)—"There is an immense power hi the hands of the individual holding the office of Prime Minister ? " Answer— "Immense power." 317. "And that surely is one of the objects for which hi gh.ofriee is de- sired in fact, is not the exercise of great power as much an object of ane• bition to a man as the actual emolument he receives ?"—" Certainly." .

318. "And it ought to be taken into consideration as a portion of his re- ward e "—" It ought to be considered as one of the inducements to men to devote themselves to the public service' most certainly; but I doubtwhether advantages of that kind ought to be taken into account for the purpose of reducing the salary which a public officer ought to receive. A salary suffi- cient to enable the holder of it to maintain his office with a certain degree of dignity ought to be attached to it. I do not deny the extent of the power, or the value of the patronage ; but I do not think they ought to be considered as equivalents for salary." 319. "When you speak of the dignity of the Prime Minister., do not you think that that dignity is very much affected and very mueli increased by the immense power which he possesses as an individual ? ' —" Certainly."

320. "Would it make any difference in the dignity of that office, whether the Prime Minister spent in his own private establishment 10001. a year more or less ? "—" The greater the power a Minister has, the greater the liability to abuse. I think it would be unwise to attach to the office of Prime Minister, because he has great patronage and the facility for abusing it, a less amount of emolument than that which is required for the proper au port of the office. It is rather an additional reason why you should give a Minister no temptation to abuse his power on account of the inadequacy of his emoluments. The argument tells the other way, in my opinion."

321. "Is not that an argument that would not apply- to other members of the Cabinet, who receive the same salaries as the Prime Minister, but have not the same patronage ?"—" I think those who wish to see the arena of public service open to al, without distinction of rank or fortune, ought not to contend for an undue limitation of official emoluments. Thorp emolu- ments ought to be sufficient to induce a man of great abilities and of very moderate means to enter into the public service; and it would be unjuet to such a man to place him in immediate contact with men of Feat wealth, and leave him with insufficient means to maintain the proper dignify of the office which he held. I feel that very strongly. If you Were to adopt that principle, you would confine the tenure of great offices to the aristocracy and to men of fortune. That would he a great public misfortune." 322, "The offices of the highest amount of salary are generally taken now by rich men, or by men of aristocratic el:gums-ions; but if the emolu- ments were lower, might not that have the effect of opening those offices to men of another clue? "--" If you review the great offices of State'fbr the last fifty years—the office of Prime Minister, the Secretaries of State, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer—you will not find that aristocratic con- nexions have much influenced those appointments. In the ease -Of Mr. Pitt, of Mr. Addingfree ofMr. peessysi, of Mr. conning, it would surely be im- possible to contend that aristocratic influence had determined their appoint- ment. In other eases, wherein persons of high family- connexion have held the chief offices, it has been because they have been the fittest persons for them. Lord Grey and Lord John Russell did notowe their appointment as Prime Minister to their aristocratic connexion, but to their superior personal qualifications, and to the confidence of their party. I do not think they owed it in the slightest degree to the accident of birth. And so also with respect to the office of Secretary for Foreign Affairs: Lord Grenville and Lord Londonderry owed their appointments not to aristocratic connexion, but to their jest influence in the House of Commons, acquired by surlier

ability." . ..

Middle-class Premierships, it must be owned, have commenced ; they began with Mr. Pitt, and, unless the Duke of Portland and Earl Grey be held exceptions, have been uninterrupted!. sr continued. The first Lord Chat- ham, though virtually twice Prime Minister, was never so nominal/5r, 'fen

he never rose higher than Foreign Secretor; or Lord Privy Seal. Ante- cedently, the head of the Government, from the Revolution, was ostensibly and invariably a Devonshire, Bedford, Newcastle, Grafto, Poekingham, or other territorial grandee. Let us, however, keep to the salary exposition, Mr. Burke is exorcised, and a clever extract from that versatile states- man's speech on economical reform is given, which comprises the stamina of the defensive. "What," says Burke, "is just payment for one kind of labour, and full encouragement for one kind, of talents, is fraud and dis- couraiement to others. Many of the great officers have much duty to do, and much expense of representation to maintain' a Secretary of• $tate, for instance, must not appear sordid in the eyes of the Ministers of 'other nations ; neither ought our Ministers abread to appear contemptible in the courts where they reside. In all offices ofduty, there is, almost ne- cessarily, a great neglect of all domestic affairs ; a person in high office elm rarely take a view of his family house. If he sees that the State takes no detriment, the State must see that his affairs should take as little. I will even go so far as to affirm, that if men were Willing to serve in such situations without salary, they ought not to be permitted to do it. Ordi- nary service must be secured by the motives to ordinary integrity. I do not hesitate to say, that that state which lays its foundation in rare and heroic virtues will be sure to have its superstructure in the basest pro.. ffigacy and corruption. An honourable and fair profit is the best security against avarice and rapacity; as in all things els.va lawfid and regulated en-

'bpi:antis the best security against ddiauehery and wean." Further, Mr. Burke' inges—" If any individual were to decline his -appointments, it

might give an enetir advantav to estiliffitious ambition over unpretend- ing service ; it might breed invidious 'comparisons ; it Might tend to de- stroy whatever little unity and agreement may be found among Ministers ; • and, after all,_ whest an,ambitious man had run down his competitors by a frillackits show Of dilintereitedifess, mei flied 'himself in power by that means, what-security- is therethat he would nett change, his course, and claim as amindemnity ten times more than'llebils given up?"—Very foreilife this 's for Aamiredlienisaid services, like presents-to rich people, are nmehitek be seeeeefeel.

In reply to the Chairman Mr. J. Wilson Patten, Lord John Russel/ follows nprthe ergenient of his,predecessorthe has .an amusing but ques- ti enable illustitition- 1227, ‘511lithireg,ard to the Wanes AI the.efacee-of4lie, higher class, you think that if those salaries were reduced, taking, for instance, the three Secretaries of State; the same-- eflIciency7ivouldnet be-attained in the dis- charge of the duties of those -offieeelres" The Committee can judge.

of that,' as to the 'particular eerie, jiist as well as I-ctin : I thinkothieCommits tee are appointed rather to consider Or themselvea, 'hating ilainterest more than a general interest in the Metter; what is a sufficient saltirY,fdi offices of great labour and raspootihility, ,, The. general prineiplejsehe IreCt in view certainly is,' that you should :not/narrow-toe much. yeur Choice- of -public ser-

vants. If you say that you will not give a salary whiciuthall be sufficient without the possession of-never/ considerabisettriVate fortune; of course you limit the choice of the most Important public Servants to men who-have good

private --fortune." . .120.; " From your knowledge of-the way in which Gevernmenta are car- ried on on the Continent, should you say that, as compared with the expense of living in England, . the salaries of the officers 'of the Crovernment are

greater or less in England than they are in some of the tither principal states of Europe ? "—" I .do not blew much of the' k4arieteg the Ministers in

foreign wearies, anclIdO not know whether;t1MY hale pot in nianY fereign

countries various emoluments:and 4 patronage of have lag since been abolished in this country-. But there is one thing:with-regard to-the Croyeeninetif Of Femme 'inr,vihiektbsy differ very muchfroire this country,..— nemely, thet'a man 'goes, into a'liptel, as it's calkk- he'ffilds com- pletely furnished, and everything ready for hiritTleil'Werilded oiLantuda„ Mid

he can receive company there, and give dinners there without any expense at Miler -the hotssemidifiweiture. Now eeee with,regard to any of the officers here. It is an some degree the case with the First Lord of the Admiralty ;• he has a certain number of rooms of reception, which are furnished,. but Ibelieve the .sleeping-rooms are not 'furnished by the public. With regard to all the other offices, I think that no man could take any Of those high offices without incurring some expense, unless he his a very con- siderable private- fosturie. Lord Lapadownes, or Lord Stanley, or Sir Robert Peel, need not incur any great additional expense ; .butIknow, for my own

part, .1 never had a debt in:my life leti6 First.Lordef the Treasury. I have now paid it off; so that it was no great einiumbranee tome. But it is necessary to make some oiiffe-Y onffiliing one ofthesegreat-offices, unless you have a large_ _private feitithis).-/Y, 1 I fi 110. 11, 5 1229. (Mr. Bright.) "It is assumed to , be necessary, but is it really necessary, to incur those large expenses ? Is it necessary„ffir estainplc, that the First Lord of the Treasury or a Secretary ef State shoelflrlive on a par, ,

with reference to expense, with a man who has 20,0004 or 30,0001. a year, and who spends the largest portion of it? Would the office suffer if any gen- tlemais or nobleman holding it were to live in a more moderate style, on

2000/.- or 3000/. a year "—"I do not think he could very well live for 2000/. or 30001. a year. I do not think that at present the persons who hold,

those offices, and who "have only moeenite fortunes, at all compete or live in the same style with persons of 20,000/. or 30,000/. a:year.. If you inquire with respect to those members of the Government-who have not a large pri- ✓ ate ' fortune, whether in the preeent Goierninene el; any ether, I do not

think you Will find that they do that. 'Buei-dirtiin inEchuit of expense for more carriages And servants, I think is necessary in, tiia country, where men holding high offices have to associate with persowe 4/Sege:fortune • and though they may not compete with them, it is necessary-to come something near to their style, of living. Now in a republic it is suite different. If

recollect right, when Monsieur De Torcy went from Louis the Fourteenth to endeavour to make peace with the..Dutch Government, he was t-cry lunch struck on calling on the Grand Pensionary to find the door opened by a sere vant-maid, and he thought it showed very great Republican.eimpliesty: and no 'doubt it was very- becoming; but I think that if Lord 'Palmerston had only a' housemaid to open the door, and Foreign Ministers Called there, everybody would or that he was very mean and unfit fer his situation." The inference may be doubted : at all events theAltiatietion is bad, as- auming dignity to consist in wealth and that poverty degrades ; whereas it is meanness that degrades ; and this may and does coexist in equal degree perhaps, according to individual character, in all ranks, high and low, the affluent and the poverty-stricken. ButIhe'chief luxury ef the Premiership; the bewildering fascination, is not * salary annexed, but its boundless patronage,—the gift of coronets, mitres, deaneries, livings, and chief justiceships, the choice of Cabinet col-

leagues, with the disposal, iii short, of everything most precious in Church and State, the Colonies; the Diplomatic service, -(for the Prime Minister

is consulted in. every department, on every great ePPI?ill*LOA) and our

Oriental dependencies. In this respect Lord John admits. his peculiar geed fortune • having in his present short reign had the appointment of the two Archbishops, And the chieferiyin'the nomination Of Sir Cliarl6s 1■1416.4-to, the

Commandership of the Forces iii India, an office Of 18,0001. fiYea.f: With windfalls like these to disport, who would not incline to worship Lord

John—be of his admiring train—or 'anxiously watch his gracious hod or recognizing smile ? —and that though he is not rich, nor, any More than the Grand Pensionary of Holland, makes a great figure in -livened at- tendants, banquets, concerts, soirees, equipage, or household neighbour- hood And establishment. Despite all these anti-opulent drawbacks, he is the most powerful man in Europe, the Czar of Muscovy excepted : and it is his position, mind, not his pay or personal display, that creates his un-

approachable greatness: ' The Prime Minister has been said to he the veritable King of England, and the Queen only a "sleeping partner." All, however, is not gold that glitters, even in this empyrean. The burden of excess is felt. No court is so beset with suitors as all accessible; avenues to the Lord of Cheshani' Place. In consequence the mass of appointments is disposed of by subordinates, or according to settled routine. In the Revenue depart- ments, for instance, men rise as they rise inthe Army, by length of ser- • vice, according to established regulations ; and the construction of these

regulations is in the Revenue Boards. Except in the appointment of Com- missioners, the Treasury does notinterfere. The Pienrier distributes only the great prizes; ‘itud Lord Johii relates that Mr. Pitt once ,observed that it never but once °course& in, his powerful administratiamthat he was "able to place exactly thtkrain hi wishod_in the office he wished."