Clarendon and the Privy Council, 1660-1667

1912 251 Clarendon and the Privy Council, 1660-1667 I. CLABENDON'S THEOHY OF ADMTNISTBATION Downloaded from T I iHE restoration of Stuart monarchy in England was accom- JL panied by the re-establishment of the administrative system of early Stuart times. The innovations of the Commonwealth and Protectorate were swept away, and, in appearance at least, the executive was restored to the form and practice of the time before http://ehr.oxfordjournals.org/ the civil war. The presiding genius of this reconstitution was Sir Edward Hyde, created in 1661 earl of Clarendon, by which title it will be convenient to designate him. Clarendon embodied the principles and beliefs of the older constitutional royalists. During the exile he had constantly striven against the arbitrary ideas of those more advanced royalists who inclined to despotism, as well as against the tendency of the queen mothers party to alienate national feeling by seeking aid at the hands of foreigners, at University of Connecticut on June 15, 2015 [n ecclesiastical matters he, like Charles I, was a staunch sup- porter of the church of England, while in civil government he had unbounded confidence in the efficacy of entrusting the administration to a sworn privy council, strong enough on the one hand to restrain the encroachments of parliament, while respecting its privileges, and on the other to check the undue influence of unofficial favourites, while adding weight and dignity to the royal authority. The members of that board [he saidj Imd been always those great officers of state, and other officers, who in respect of the places they held had a title to sit there, and of such few others who, having great titles and fortunes and interest in the kingdom, were an ornament to the table.1 He held the highest estimate of its rights and duties. For by the constitution of the kingdom, and the very laws and customs of the nation, as the priw-council and every member of it is of the king's sole choice and election of him to that trust, (for the greatest office in the state, though conferred likewise by the king himself, doth not qualify the officers to be of the privy -council, or to be present in it, before by a new assignation that honour is bestowed on him, and that he is sworn of the council;) so the body of it is the most sacred, and hath the greatest authority in the government next the person of the king himself, to whom 1 Continuation of the Life of Edicard, Karl of Clarendon, Oxford, 1857, j 733. 252 CLARENDON AND THE April all other powers are equally subject: and no king of England can so well secure his own just prerogative, or preserve it from violation, as by a strict defending and supporting the dignity of his privy-council.1 The privy council and the administration generally, according to Clarendon's conception of them, had no other head than the king. The modern notion of an English prime minister had not yet appeared, while the older French conception of an adviser, dependent on the king for his authority, while relieving him of the burden of administration, was opposed to Clarendon's views. He himself, during the short period when he enjoyed the Downloaded from monopoly of the royal favour, was solicited to assume such a position, but declined on the ground that it was foreign to the English constitution. Some time subsequent to March 1661 Ormonde proposed to him that, in order to sliield the king from the evil influences http://ehr.oxfordjournals.org/ to whioh he was exposed, he should give up his office of lord chancellor, and betake himself wholly to wait upon the person of the king. By this means he would find frequent opportunities to inform the long of the true state of affairs, and the danger he incurred, by not thoroughly understanding them. That the king from the long knowledge of his fidelity, and the esteem he had of his virtue, received any advertisements and animadver- sions, and even suffered reprehensions, from him, better than from any at University of Connecticut on June 15, 2015 other man; therefore he would be able to do much good, and to deserve more than ever he had done from the whole kingdom.8 In fact it was suggested that instead of filling a great office of state he should take a position which the example of the French ministers, Richelieu and Mazarin, to say nothing of the great favourite of the last reign, the duke of Buckingham, had rendered familiar to English politicians. Clarendon, however, was not to be tempted. In his reply he asserted ' that England would not bear a favourite, nor any one man, who should out of his ambition engross to himself the disposal of the public affairs '. Referring to the term ' first minister ', he characterized it as ' a title so newly translated out of French into English, that it was not enough understood to be liked, and every man would detest it for the burden it was attended with '. He added that the king himself, who was not by nature immoderately inclined to give, would be quickly weary of so chargeable an officer, and be very willing to be freed from the reproach of being governed by any ... at the price and charge of the man who had been raised by him to that inconvenient height above other men.* Clarendon's own conception of the functions of the privy council was singularly lucid. In his mind, as clearly as later in that ' Contifi. oj IAJe, f 612. • Ibid. § 86. • Ibid. K 86-90. 1912 PRIVY COUNCIL, 1660-7 253 of Locke, existed the conception of the separation of legislature and executive. The legislative functions were to be committed to the king in parliament, while the whole superintendence of the executive was to be entrusted to tho king in council. By the presence of the great officers of state, the chancellor, the treasurer', the general, the lord high admiral, the two secretaries of state, and the chancellor of the exchequer, as also of several lesser officials and several officers of the household, the council would be in touch with all the great deportments and would bind them into a single administrative system. Through the treasury it Downloaded from would control the assignment and expenditure of the entire revenue of the crown ;5 through the secretaries it would have cognizance of the foreign relations of the state. The genera) and the admiral were the heads of military and naval affairs, while the chancellor was at once tho representative of the judicial http://ehr.oxfordjournals.org/ body and the official president of the house of lords. Every important executive measure would be submitted to its judge- ment, and even in legislative matters the initiative of the crown was to be placed at its disposal. Clarendon believed that his conception of the privy council was in accordance with the traditional practice of the state. It was in fact ideal, and never had had an historical existence. His privy council differed largely from the privy council of at University of Connecticut on June 15, 2015 Henry VIII and Elizabeth, dependent on the personal will of the monarch and in great matter* rather a consultative than an executive body. It differed no less from the counoil of tlxe earlier Stuarts overshadowed by the influence of unofficial favourites, who, being naturally rivals of the great servante of the crown, continually strove to restrict the king's confidence to an inner ring of their own friends and dependants. Clarendon's conception of the ponition of the privy council was that which he and other constitutional royalists had endeavoured to establish during the period of their parliamentary opposition to the predominance of Buckingham and Strafford, and which they had endeavoured later to oppose to the encroachments of the Long Parliament on the independence of the executive. II. THE OBGANIZATION OF THE PBIVY COUNCIL The complexity of the administration was already so great at the Restoration that it was necessary to organize the council somewhat elaborately to meet it. The greater part of the work was transacted in committees, and of these three disfinct kinds may be distinguished. There were in the first place a considerable * This control was not exercised by the treasury itself &8 at the present day. For » clear statement of the position of the tn-aHurcr see T)r. W; A. Shaw's preface to th» Calendar of Treasury Book; 1600-7, pp. xxxv-xxxvii. 254 CLARENDON AND THE April number of temporary committees to put business into shape for the council. There were also in the second place two committees of a more permanent character to deal with naval affairs and with matters relating to the colonies. And there was, lastly, the foreign committee, which was in fact an inner council dealing with affairs of special moment. (a) The Temporary Committees Whenever a question involving detail came before the council it was usual to relegate its consideration to a small committee, Downloaded from whioh investigated it and reported to the council. About fifty such committees were appointed between 8 August 1660 and 2 January 1666-7.6 Many of them are concerned with points of foreign policy, others with domestic matters, and others again with trade. Their duration varied. Usually they were dissolved http://ehr.oxfordjournals.org/ or fell into abeyance as soon as council had accepted their reports. Sometimes, however, if the nature of their business required it, they continued in existence longer, and council, when it deemed it necessary, ordered them to meet.

Load more