PUBLIC
RECORDS.

A.D. 1837.
Part II.
Selections.

enable him to correct misapprehensions of the short-hand writer or verbal inaccuracies; and the printed evidence so corrected submitted to the Chairman, who would see at a glance, without any trouble, the extent and propriety of the corrections. The integrity of a vivâ voce examination would thus be preserved; and in those cases where such a mode of examination is desirable, its integrity is of essential importance. All the inconveniences of delay in printing would likewise be prevented.

It is also submitted for consideration whether this viva voce mode of taking evidence might not for some inquiries be exchanged for a better. In matters of science and speculative opinions depending on long trains of reasoning and logical deductions, written questions and written answers would be more efficacious than the present mode; and if the facts on which the opinions proceeded appeared disputable, a vivâ voce examination might be superinduced. Under all circumstances, both modes should retain their distinctive features. At present the professed vivâ voce examination is a mongrel of both, besides being subject to the disadvantages before spoken of.

[Several pages of illustrations of the changes made in the Evidence on the Record Commission were published in the pamphlet, but the following examples are sufficient for the present purpose. They will be read with additional interest with the reminder that the pamphlet was brought before the notice of the House of Commons by SIR ROBERT PEEL himself, and its suggestions adopted.]

Illustrations to Remarks on certain Evils to which the printed Evidence taken by Committees of the House of
Commons is at present subject; selected from Mr. Cooper's Evidence, taken before Select Committee on Record
Commission. 22, 27, 29 April, and 2 May, 1836.

ANSWERS attempted to be substituted.

My clerk keeps no regular account.

I think it may turn out, including the
liabilities of the old board, which we have
still to discharge, we are as much in debt.

Mr. Cole has produced a title-page and a
preface to that work, and the work as if it
was a complete work, without my sanc-
tion or authority; the preface was intended
to be a preface to the appendix.

Being secretary to the board, I thought it desirable to give it either anonymously or in a fictitious name.

Yes; there is the record of the cheque-
ends and the aforesaid rough daily book.

I acknowledge no such thing. Including
even the liabilities of the old board, which
we have still to discharge, we are not as
much in debt as that board was in March,
1831; of course I now class its liabilities
with its debts.

(Question thus altered.) Then you do
not say that Mr. Cole sent this preface on
his own responsibility?-It seems to me
quite immaterial whether he did or not.
The putting this preface into type may rest
either on my responsibility or Mr. Cole's;
he may take the alternative best suited to
his own views.
I am afraid I had no motive so good.

Selections.
Part II.

A.D. 1837.

RECORDS.
PUBLIC

PUBLIC
RECORDS.

A.D. 1838.
Part II.
Selections.

Necessity of
Committees.

COMMITTEES OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.-
ADMINISTRATION BY LARGE

NUMBERS.

Extracts from an article written by me and printed in "London and
Westminster Review," vol. V. and XXVII., No. 1, Art. IX., p. 209.

THE impactumbrous a machine as the House of Commons,

HE impracticability of transacting business in detail by so

with its 658 members, creates the obvious necessity for subdivisions of its labour and delegations of its power. Hence the appointment of Committees.

If we confine our remarks on this occasion to the operation of Committees, it is not that we are unmindful of other defects in the legislative system. The House of Commons, when even a third of its members are assembled, is useless for all purposes of delibe ration, and serves only as a mere theatre for rhetorical display All the real business of the nation is transacted in thin houses the multitudinous assemblages answer no purpose but to enable parties to muster their strength. We see, that for much of what the House does, and for nearly all that it leaves undone, nobody is responsible; that all its work is the most inefficient kind of work, volunteer-work; that its proceedings are at once hasty and dilatory; that it hardly ever succeeds in expressing its own meaning, for want of mere workmanlike and mechanical execution in the construction and language of its Acts. The means of making the House itself a more efficient instrument for the transaction of business require separate consideration. For the present we shall only direct attention to the working of Public Committees, as emanating from the House under its present imperfect constitution; and shall point out how practical improvements might be introduced into the operation of these Committees, without the

adoption of any new principle, and how materially their value, PUBLIC competency, and efficiency would be enhanced.

RECORDS.
A.D. 1838.

Selections.

The multitudinous composition of Committees, and the evils in Part II. their mode of procedure naturally consequent thereupon, together with the absence of any obligation on their part to report the result of their labours, or on the part of the House to notice them, constitute the principal defects of these bodies.

The impotent conclusions of Committees have become proverbial, and the best mode of bolstering up a job or evading the redress of a grievance is supposed to be taken when a Committee is appointed under pretence of investigation.

Some beneficial changes were introduced at the commencement of the Session of 1836, in the constitution and proceedings of Committees, but a necessity for greater improvement must have impressed itself on all who have watched their operation.

The most material of these changes tended to increase in a trifling degree the small modicum of responsibility attaching to each member. The numbers, which before had averaged as many as 30 and 40 members, were, as a general rule, reduced to fifteen. A sort of vague record is preserved of each member's attendance, and of the actual share he takes in the proceedings.

It is argued by those who call themselves practical men, and sneer at theory, that the chances of obtaining assiduous attendance and efficient work are enhanced by the appointment of a numerous body. Fifteen members, it is speciously said, will give a better attendance, and work more effectively than three or five. But how the facts tally with the assertions, a table given conclusively demonstrates. In Committees of the House of Commons, as in all administrative bodies whatever, whether companies, societies, or boards, the management of the business falls into the hands of those who feel the strongest interest in its transaction. It rarely happens that more than one or two persons besides the member who originates the Committee feel any strong interest in the subject. Every one of the Committees of last Session is an example, showing that the real business of the inquiries is virtually conducted by one, two, three, or at most five members. The table shows that great part of the fifteen members are quite superfluous: we shall hereafter point out with what serious detriment to the inquiry the superfluous numbers operate.

Great num

bers an

impediment.

PUBLIC
RECORDS.

A.D. 1838.
Part II.
Selections.

It is customary to elect as chairman of the committee the member with whom the inquiry originates; he is the person who is most interested in its success, and on whom consequently its management devolves. Such was the case in fourteen of the abovementioned Committees. In each of these fourteen, the member, and almost the only one, who was punctual at every meeting of his Work of the Committee without exception, was the chairman. The exceptions to the practice of electing the mover chairman, occur in the Committees on the British Museum, Joint Stock Banks, Aborigines, and Port of London.

Chairman.

Mr. Hawes originated the British Museum inquiry, and Mr. Hawes was the only member who attended every sitting of it. Mr. Clay, the mover of the Joint Stock Bank Committee, was the only member punctual at all its meetings. Mr. Fowell Buxton, though chairman and mover of the Aborigines Committee, seems to have left the conduct of it principally to Mr. Lushington, who attended every sitting but one. In the case of the Port of London, the chairman was engaged, at the same time, with another more interesting Committee, on Railway Bills, of which he attended every meeting.

Throughout the whole 18 Committees there are but four instances where any members besides the chairmen or movers attended every meeting of the Committee. These occur in the Arts and Manufactures, where one member attended all the meetings of the Committee. In the Colonial Lands, two; in the Shipwrecks, one; and in the Public Bills, two members.

It is clear, therefore, beyond doubt, with whom the management of every Committee rested.'

Let us look at this matter not in individual cases, but in the aggregate of the whole eighteen. Here again we shall see how curiously the results corroborate the principle that management of business always falls into the hands of a very few persons. Multiplying the total number of sittings of each Committee by

'There is a singular illustration of the extent to which the character of the Chairman influences the proceedings and despatch of the Committee. Mr. Hume moved for an inquiry into the Coal Trade on the 1st of June, and he completed it forthwith. His Com

mittee met daily on several occasions -on the 14, 15, 16, 17, 20, 23, 24, 27 June, overcoming all the obstacles which prolong the same number of sittings of other members' committees during three and four months.