Each country has its “cabinet council,” but the one is essentially different from the other in its character and functions.  This term, the historical student will remember, was first used in the days of the Stuarts as one of derision and obloquy.  It was frequently called “junto” or “cabal,” and during the days of conflict between the commons and the king it was regarded with great disfavour by the parliament of England.  Its unpopularity arose from the fact that it did not consist of men in whom parliament had confidence, and its proceedings were conducted with so much secrecy that it was impossible to decide upon whom to fix responsibility for any obnoxious measure.  When the constitution of England was brought back to its original principles, and harmony was restored between the Crown and the parliament, the cabinet became no longer a term of reproach, but a position therein was regarded as the highest honour in the country, and was associated with the efficient administration of public affairs, since it meant a body of men responsible to parliament for every act of government.[29] The old executive councils of Canada were obnoxious to the people for the same reason that the councils of the Stuarts, and even of George III, with the exception of the regime of the two Pitts, became unpopular.  Not only do we in Canada, in accordance with our desire to perpetuate the names of English institutions use the name “cabinet” which was applied to an institution that gradually grew out of the old privy council of England, but we have even incorporated in our fundamental law the older name of “privy council,” which itself sprang from the original “permanent” or “continual” council of the Norman kings.  Following English precedent, the Canadian cabinet or ministry is formed out of the privy councillors, chosen under the law by the governor-general, and when they retire from office they still retain the purely honorary distinction.  In the United States the use of the term “cabinet” has none of the significance it has with us, and if it can be compared at all to any English institutions it might be to the old cabinets who acknowledged responsibility to the king, and were only so many heads of departments in the king’s government.  As a matter of fact the comparison would be closer if we said that the administration resembles the cabinets of the old French kings, or to quote Professor Bryce, “the group of ministers who surround the Czar or the Sultan, or who executed the bidding of a Roman emperor like Constantine or Justinian.”  Such ministers like the old executive councils of Canada, “are severally responsible to their master, and are severally called in to counsel him, but they have not necessarily any relations with one another, nor any duty or collective action.”  Not only is the administration conducted on the principle of responsibility to the president alone, in this respect the English king in old irresponsible days, but the legislative department