House of Commons and the Army

House of Commons and the Army

The work critiques the relationship between the military and political institutions, particularly focusing on the transfer of military patronage from the monarchy to the House of Commons. The author reflects on a past perspective where the separation of powers was deemed essential, arguing that the monarchy's diminished authority has altered the constitutional landscape. The text suggests that the House of Commons, representing the people's will, may be better suited to oversee military appointments than a cabinet of ministers beholden to public opinion and political pressures. The author emphasizes the implications of a weakened monarchy, portraying it as a puppet lacking independent authority. This shift raises questions about accountability and governance, suggesting that a democratic body might provide a more legitimate oversight of military affairs. The argument is rooted in a historical context, contrasting past constitutional norms with contemporary political realities. The work delves into themes of power dynamics, the role of public opinion in governance, and the necessity of adapting constitutional practices to reflect changing political landscapes. It challenges the reader to consider the balance between democratic representation and the traditional authority of the monarchy, ultimately advocating for a reevaluation of how military power is structured and controlled in a modern state.

By Samuel Taylor Coleridge · First published 1830 · Genre: Political Commentary, Essay, Historical Analysis · 224 words

First lines

I was just now reading Sir John Cam Hobhouse's answer to Mr. Hume, I believe, upon the point of transferring the patronage of the army and navy from the Crown to the House of Commons. I think, if I had been in the House of Commons, I would have said, "that, ten or fifteen years ago, I should have considered Sir J. C. H. 's speech quite unanswerable, -- it being clear constitutional law that the House of Commons has not, nor ought to have, any share, directly or indirectly, in the appointment of the officers of the army or navy. But now that the King had been reduced, by the means and procurement of the Honourable Baronet and his friends, to a puppet, which, so far from having any independent will of its own, could not resist a measure which it hated and condemned, it became a matter of grave consideration whether it was not necessary to vest the appointment of such officers in a body like the House of Commons, rather than in a junta of ministers, who were obliged to make common cause with the mob and democratic press for the sake of keeping their places. "

What this Textopian page supports

House of Commons and the Army is listed on Textopian as an essay by Samuel Taylor Coleridge, dated 1830 CE.

This source record anchors work identity, reading entry points, and catalog context for checking claims about the work.

Good citation fit

Discussion starters

Similar titles

Genres

Tags

politics · military · government · House of Commons · army · navy · constitutional law · patronage · democracy · monarchy · public policy · political theory

More by Samuel Taylor Coleridge