310 THE EXECUTIVE GOVERNMENT [Part IT
§ 3. Tue CoMPOSITION OF THE DOMINION CABINETS
The size of Cabinets differs considerably from Dominion
to Dominion, and in the Dominions there prevails a some-
what curious practice of having honorary ministers, who
are full members of the Cabinet in the usual sense of the
word, but who do not hold any office with emoluments
attached thereto. They are available not merely to conduct
governmental business in either House in which they may
sit, but they can also be used to do work in the absence or
illness of a minister, or to act as whips. The institution is
clearly a convenient one, and its use is increasing, not
decreasing ; it must be remembered that the great distances
in the Dominions are partly the cause; a minister who
visits an outlying part of the Dominion or state may have
long distances to go and be away for some days as a matter
of course in the middle of the session, and an ordinary
minister, probably extremely busy himself, has no time to
attend to the duties of another office. It must also be re-
membered that a minister in the Dominions has no assistance
in Parliament corresponding to the Secretaries and Under-
Secretaries of the governmental offices in England. The
plan was tried in Canada in 1887, when Parliament provided
for a department of trade and commerce presided over by
a minister of trade having control and supervision of the
departments of customs and inland revenue. The object of
this was to appoint a controller of customs and one of inland
revenue, who should be ministers but not members of the
Cabinet, and who should work under the supervision of
the Minister of Trade. The purpose was admitted by Sir
John Macdonald 2 in his speech on the Act for the creation
of the new arrangement to adopt the English practice as
regards Under-Secretaries. In 1892 the new arrangement took
! So usually in New South Wales; cf. Act No. 32 of 1902, ss. 36-8;
Parliamentary Debates, 1910, Sess. 2, p. 409. Interchange of duties in
South Australia is rendered possible by Act No. 1000, 1910.
* Canada House of Commons Debates, 1887, ii. 862, 863. It is recom-
mended for re-adoption by Sir R. Cartwright ; see Senate Debates. 1911,
p. 252.
