The Dominion. MONDAY JANUARY 13, 1919. THE NEW BRITISH CABINET

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 92, 13 January 1919, Page 4

The Dominion. MONDAY JANUARY 13, 1919. THE NEW BRITISH CABINET

At time of writing the list of appointments to the new Government in Great Britaiu is incomplete and jriay .be subject in some details to alteration, For the time being it can only be accepted provisionally as indicating the composition of the reconstructed Cabinet. As it stands, however, it bears interesting witness to the spirit of the times, and suggests that Mr. Lloyd George and_ his colleagues are honestly anxious to avoid _ dropping 1 ba-ck into the time-worn grooves out of •which they were forced by the war. £teports_ available at the moment liame eighteen Ministers, of whom seven, including Mr. Lloyd George himself, are Liberals. Of the remaining seats in the Cabinet, however, one is allotted tp a Labour representative, Mr. Barnes, and another to an Indian, Sib' S. P. Sinha, while there are other Ministers, notably Sir Eiuc Geddes and his brother, Sir Auckland, who are anything but _pqlitica) partisans even 'when, as in the case of the late First Lord of the Admiralty, they bear, a party label. . There, is already a fairly' plain suggestion that the Ministry has been selected with' little regard to, party strength in the House of Commons, and, in particular, that the Unionists have jn some degree subordinated the claims, they might in othen -circumstances have based upon their occupation of nearly four hundred Parliamentary seats. Very possibly this feature may be accentuated when the finally corrected list of the Cabinet is available, For instance, the portfolios not yet accounted for include two of some importance, Pensions and Labour, which were held prior to the election by Labour members.. Mr._ John Hodge, who was Pensions Minister, and Me. G. H. Roberts, _ who held the Labour portfolio, resigned prior to the election out of deference to the decision of their constituent organisations to secede from the Coalition. There has been some talk lately about the Labour Party assuming .the functions of a regular Opposition, but after the experience of the election it may brought to see the wisdom of accepting representation to the Government additional to that it,' or at all events the working population of . the country, enjoy in the retention of office by Me. (J. NBarnes. In that case the composition of the Cabinet iraild less than ever reflect party strength in the House of Commons. The appointment of Sir S. P. Sinha is one in regard to which fuller information will be awaited with'much interest, What his office is- is not clearly indicated at time of writing. The cablegram simply mentions India, and does not say whether the office i i§ that of Under-Secretary or Secretary of State. The' latter' is somewhat unlikely, particularly as there is no news of Sij? S. P. Sinha having contested or captured a- British seat, but the Lloyd George Government is not .averse to making bold experiments. The inclusion of a native-born Indian in the British Cabinet is in any case a strikingly new departure, and one that bears witness to the desire of the Government to forward liberal reforms' in India._ Sie S. P. Sinha' is a man of distinguished tion. He has been amongst other thin.gs a member, of the' Viceroy pf India's Executive Council, and has twice represented.lndia at the Imperial Conference. Ono of the most important omissions froja the Cabinet list as it stands is the absence of reference to the portfolio pf Education. Prior to the election the late Minister, Mr. Fisher, was vigorously forwarding comprehensive and far-reaching reforms in education, and he enjoys such a reputation that in the ordinary course of events his' reappointment may be'expected. : Assuming that it is correctly indicated, the composition of the new Cabinet deserves attention less on account of detail features than as representing a bold, attempt to give permanence to progressive improvements in'tho machinery: of government that were prompted and made possible by the war. If the par-' ticulars now transmitted are ii) general correct, the idea of setting up a f? all compact Cabinet has not been found practicable, but possibly it is proposed to continue the existing _ arrangement under' which & small inner Cabinet deal? authoritatively with big questions of policy. As they stand the appointments suggest that a not unsuccess-1 ful attempt -has been made to select Ministers with an eye solely, or mainly, to ability and qualifica-1 tions. Nothing Is of better promise in the composition of the Cabinet than the retention of Ministers like oiR Eric Geddes and his brother, who were called into tho Cabinet during the war period solely on account of their exceptional gifts as organisers and administrators, and would probably never have been heard of in their present capacity had the ordinary conditions of party politics been perpetuated. It goes without saying that as useful possibilities attaph i in times of reconstruction and peace as in the stress of war to an arrangement which makes the services of such men available to tho State, and also brings together the best brains of the normally competing political .parties. . The only question is wnether, with the sobering influence of the war removed, the arrangement will bear'the test of working practice. Apart from the widely representative character of the Cabinet, the facts thus far supplied indicate that a determined effort_ js contemplated ' to attain flexibility of organisation and to maintain conditions in which the GOTcrnment will be in cloge t.ouch with the people and with public opinion. _ As in his war-time administration, Mr. .Lloyd Georois is delegating the leadership of the House of Commons to Mr.-Bonae Law, and two other Ministers, Sir Eric GEDDEs and Mr. Barnes, are named as being appointed without portfolio. _ In the case of Sir Eric Geddes'this no cloubt means that his valuable services will be utilised from time to time where they are most needed, but as a whole ,the measure of freedom secured to important members of the Cabinet is probably intended tp guard against

its becoming solely a group of administrators absorbed in Departmental duties and out of touch with public sentiment and the changing problems of the day. The problems now to be faced are iri some respects piore gubtje and elusive than those which arose during the war period, and it is altogether desirable that the hea& of the Government and some of bis colleagues should bs free to consider and cope with these problems unhampered by ordinary administrative duties. If a Cabinet organised on the lines indicated to-day proves a success' in Great Britain a lead will be given to the whole Empire in tTic amendment of governmental methods.