No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 November 2014
In his latest volume, W. I. Jennings makes the comment that his researches into the working of parliament were much simpler than those he made into the operation of the cabinet. The reason for this he explains is that all the proceedings of parliament are a matter of record, whereas the cabinet proceeds in secrecy and works by stealth. On the face of it, this seems a very sound and perhaps a very obvious judgment. But I have to confess that I have found just the reverse to be the case in making a hasty review of war government. We have an immense amount of material about the working and procedure of parliamentary institutions in peace-time and comparatively little about the machinery of the cabinet; but in war-time, or at least in the last war, we have diminishing information about parliamentary activities and an ever increasing quantity of material about the cabinet operations. Take, for example, the nature and functioning of the British War Cabinet. In addition to the official reports, the proceedings of the Cabinet have been scrutinized and investigated by several noted authors. The subject of a war cabinet is a pet topic for administrative disquisition. Every text-book finds it proper to enlarge upon the experience of the last war and its consequences in administrative efficiency. But turn to the parliamentary side and you will find that the standard volumes are careful to omit all reference to war-time devices except in an incidental and apologetic manner. It seems to be axiomatic with the authorities that war-time parliamentary practices are so exceptional that they are not to be cited as precedents and are so irregular that they may be noted only as warnings of what is not good parliamentarianism. Of the innumerable volumes of memoirs, biographies, and autobiographies the centre of attention is directed almost exclusively to the working of the cabinet system, and little or no attention is devoted to the legislature's part in the matter. There are but half a dozen articles on war parliaments, and only one book is devoted to a somewhat specialized side of parliament and war. There are the volumes of Parliamentary debates, the Parliamentary Papers, and other documents, but these are much fewer than in peace, and it may be noted that when something of vital importance is to be discussed parliament resorts to its own brand of secrecy in the secret session. On the other hand, the cabinet, though its meetings are still somewhat secretive, proceeds in war to more careful recording of its doings; in fact, records seem to be of the essence of a war cabinet, and every member of the administration seems to desire to have himself on the record—posthumously at least—to a greater degree than the mere parliamentarian.
This paper was to have followed a paper by Professor R. MacG. Dawson on “Cabinet Government in War-time.” That paper will be published shortly in a volume of lectures, Canada Between Two Wars, edited by Professor Chester Martin. At the request of several members of the Association, Professor Dawson substituted the paper on Winston Churchill which is printed above. Professor Clokie's paper might have been somewhat different if he had known that the paper on the Cabinet would not accompany his paper. It is also appropriate to point out that this paper was read a few days after the change of ministry in Great Britain, but was written before that change and has not been revised. (Editorial note.)
1 This paper was to have followed a paper by Professor R. MacG. Dawson on “Cabinet Government in War-time.” That paper will be published shortly in a volume of lectures, Canada Between Two Wars, edited by Professor Chester Martin. At the request of several members of the Association, Professor Dawson substituted the paper on Winston Churchill which is printed above. Professor Clokie's paper might have been somewhat different if he had known that the paper on the Cabinet would not accompany his paper. It is also appropriate to point out that this paper was read a few days after the change of ministry in Great Britain, but was written before that change and has not been revised. (Editorial note.)