148 THE EXECUTIVE GOVERNMENT [PART 1T 
appointment felt by some people in Canada at the failure of 
Lord Dufferin to dismiss the Ministry of Sir John Macdonald 
when it became discredited by the Pacific Railway scandals 
in 1873, and at the grant of a dissolution in 1891 to him purely 
for party advantage; but it is neither a wise nor a just 
utterance. No doubt there is a tendency in the great work 
of Todd? to see too much of the other side of the case, to 
present the Governor as a benevolent genius presiding over 
the destinies of the country and exercising the same sort of 
influence that, on his theory, was exercised by the Sovereign 
in the Mother Country. But not only was that theory of the 
action of the Sovereign hardly in accordance with the facts, 
but the Governor can never hope to attain that dignity of 
position which gives a Sovereign a claim to the respectful 
attention of even the ministers who lead the Imperial House 
of Commons and control the destinies of the Empire. None 
the less, there are many important functions yet in the hands 
of the Governor, and he may exercise an influence over the 
Colony of which he is Governor much greater than is 
suspected by outsiders who do not realize the working 
of the Government. Of course this is essentially a matter of 
individual character. If a Governor prefers to allow political 
matters to go on with his formal concuirence, he may do so; 
in many cases the difference will not be obvious, and the loss 
may not be great. On the other hand, it must be remembered 
that a Governor is entitled to take the same close interest in 
political events as the Sovereign in this country, that he is 
entitled to the fullest confidence of his ministers, that he 
is entitled to be informed at once of any important decisions 
taken by his Cabinet, and that he has the right to discuss 
with the utmost freedom any such proposals. He can point 
out objections, he can give advice, he can deprecate measures, 
he can secure important alterations, but always at the price 
i Parliamentary Government in the Colonies, ed. 1, 1880. He was con- 
scious of the probable criticism (pp. ix, x), but he overestimated similarly the 
position of the Crown in England, and he did not accept the distinction now 
go clear between the Crown in the United Kingdom, which must always act 
on advice except in a very narrow sphere, and the Governor; cf. Lowell, 
Government of England, i, 37=50; Anson, Law of the Constitution®, 11,1, 37 seq.