as now, but in fact, the Queen’s servants.  Remnants, important remnants, of this great prerogative still remain.  The discriminating favour of William IV. made Lord Melbourne head of the Whig party when he was only one of several rivals.  At the death of Lord Palmerston it is very likely that the Queen may have the opportunity of fairly choosing between two, if not three statesmen.  But, as a rule, the nominal Prime Minister is chosen by the legislature, and the real Prime Minister for most purposes—­the leader of the House of Commons—­almost without exception is so.  There is nearly always some one man plainly selected by the voice of the predominant party in the predominant house of the legislature to head that party, and consequently to rule the nation.  We have in England an elective first magistrate as truly as the Americans have an elective first magistrate.  The Queen is only at the head of the dignified part of the Constitution.  The Prime Minister is at the head of the efficient part.  The Crown is, according to the saying, the “fountain of honour”; but the Treasury is the spring of business.  Nevertheless, our first magistrate differs from the American.  He is not elected directly by the people; he is elected by the representatives of the people.  He is an example of “double election”.  The legislature chosen, in name, to make laws, in fact finds its principal business in making and in keeping an executive.

The leading Minister so selected has to choose his associates, but he only chooses among a charmed circle.  The position of most men in Parliament forbids their being invited to the Cabinet; the position of a few men ensures their being invited.  Between the compulsory list whom he must take, and the impossible list whom he cannot take, a Prime Minister’s independent choice in the formation of a Cabinet is not very large; it extends rather to the division of the Cabinet offices than to the choice of Cabinet Ministers.  Parliament and the nation have pretty well settled who shall have the first places; but they have not discriminated with the same accuracy which man shall have which place.  The highest patronage of a Prime Minister is, of course, a considerable power, though it is exercised under close and imperative restrictions—­though it is far less than it seems to be when stated in theory, or looked at from a distance.

The Cabinet, in a word, is a board of control chosen by the legislature, out of persons whom it trusts and knows, to rule the nation.  The particular mode in which the English Ministers are selected; the fiction that they are, in any political sense, the Queen’s servants; the rule which limits the choice of the Cabinet to the members of the legislature—­are accidents unessential to its definition—­historical incidents separable from its nature.  Its characteristic is that it should be chosen by the legislature out of persons agreeable to and trusted by the legislature.  Naturally these are principally its own members—­but