OBSERVATIONS. (Hansard, 8 June 1866)

§ SIR WILLIAM STIRLING-MAXWELL

said, he wished to call attention to the recent Returns relating to the office of Lord Lyon King-at-Arms in Scotland; and to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether, before advising Her 40 Majesty to fill up that vacant office, he will consider the recommendations made by the Commissioners for inquiring into the Courts in Scotland in their Tenth Report, ordered to be printed on the 10th of June, 1822, and take such other steps as may be necessary for the purpose of placing the Lyon Court under improved regulations? In calling the attention of the House to returns from the office of the Lord Lyon in Scotland, I may take the liberty of informing the House that the Lord Lyon, in spite of being dignified with a more sounding appellation than his brother heralds in England, is nothing more nor less than the principal herald of Her Majesty in Scotland. By the return which I hold in my hand, the House will see that the duty of this office is to deal judicially and ministerially with all questions of coat armour in Scotland. The staff attached to the office has consisted during the last ten years of the following officers:—The Lord Lyon himself, the Lyon Depute, the Lyon Clerk, his Depute, six Heralds, six Pursuivants (who, I understand, are heralds in an imperfect stage of development), and a Herald Painter. Their emoluments amount to something less than £2,000 a year, which is distributed among them as follows:—The Lord Lyon, £1,076; the Lyon Depute, £88; the Lyon Clerk, £214; the Lyon Clerk Depute, £142; the Heralds, £250 among six; the Pursuivants, £164 among the six; and the Herald Painter, £54. The duties of the principal officers—the Lord Lyon and the Lyon Clerk—have been for a great many years always performed by their deputies. The duties of the heralds, I believe, are restricted to appearing on certain rare occasions and making royal proclamations; and the duties of the herald painter are to emblazon the arms granted by the office. Of the annual revenue, about £900 a year comes out of the Consolidated Fund, and about £1,100 a year arises from fees. These fees are of two kinds, those received in respect of titles of honour granted by the Crown, and those derived from the issue of armorial bearings. The patronage of the office is entirely, I believe, in the hands of the Lord Lyon. There seems to be reason to believe that the practice of selling the higher posts in the office prevailed some years ago but was discontinued by the late Lord Lyon. The only offices no w sold are the six heraldships and the six pursuivantships. The return explains that 41 the sum paid for these offices may be assumed to be merely an equitable mode of transferring from officers who perform no duties a part of their salaries to those who carry on the business of the Lyon Court. The sum paid appears to be £315 for the office of herald, while £210 is paid for the office of pursuivant. The practice is consecrated by usage; the sum paid is fixed by custom; and it is impossible to impute any blame to the existing staff in respect of it. The messengers-at-arms also pay a certain sum for their places, but the sum paid is too small to be considered on anything more than an admission fee. The office of Lord Lyon was the subject of a very elaborate Report by a Commission appointed to inquire into the state of the courts of Scotland in the reign of George III., and I beg to call the attention of the Government to that Report as a document of much historical interest and value. It appears that at that time many abuses prevailed in the office. A large portion of the Report is occupied in explaining the nature of those abuses, especially in connection with the office of Lyon Messenger-at-Arms. The Commissioners recommend certain reforms in that department, and they also state that the fees demanded from persons applying for arms had been raised to an excessive amount, and seemed to have been imposed in an arbitrary manner. They further suggest that all fees received by the officers be paid into the Exchequer, that the officers be placed on fixed salaries, and that the sale of heraldships should be discontinued. It is possible that many of the abuses noticed by the Commissioners have been corrected; indeed, from what I know of the character of the honourable and intelligent persons who have long been the acting officials of the department, it is most likely that the greater part of the defects complained of have been remedied. I am bound to say that I have heard no complaint as to the manner in which the duties have been discharged graver than this—that on the occasion of Her Majesty's last proclamation, when the late Parliament was dissolved, the heralds appeared at the Cross in Edinburgh with the white horse of Hanover emblazoned on their tabards. As Her Majesty asserts no claim to the crown nor arms of Hanover, it would appear that her Scotch heralds, whose duty is supposed to be the administration and interpretation of the laws of heraldry, 42 were by the use of the Hanoverian arms committing a breach of their own laws. And now I have a word or two to say with regard to the appointment to the office which is now vacant. The last occasion on which this appointment was made was in 1796, when the Earl of Kinnoul was appointed Lord Lyon King-at-Arms, and the succession to it was granted to his eldest son, then a child. The consequence was that these two noble Lords held the office for the long period of seventy years. Up to the date of 1796 the salary of the Lord Lyon was £300 a year, but it was increased to £600 at the date on which the appointment was conferred on Lord Kinnoul. The reason assigned in a Report presented to Parliament in 1798 for that increase was that the office having hitherto been held by a commoner was then for the first time conferred upon a nobleman of high rank, In an account of the Order of the Thistle, by Sir Harris Nicholas, written in 1832 from the best sources of information, I find it stated that the same reason, which appeared to the Government of the day a sufficient reason for doubling the salary, was also a sufficient reason for almost extinguishing the duties. The Lord Lyon was excused from attendance at all ceremonials in connection with the Order of the Thistle, the chief public duty of the office, in consideration of his high rank. Of this transaction it may be sufficient to say that the habits of thought and ways of 1866 are not exactly those of 1796. There seem to be sound reasons why a Peer should not perform the duties of a Herald. The Knights of the Thistle are always Peers, and the attendance of a noble Lord upon them in that capacity is hardly consistent with the idea of equality which the word peerage implies. If a Peer ought not to attend the Knights of the Thistle, still less ought a noble Lord, who may perhaps at other times represent Her Majesty or lord-lieutenant of a county, to go into the streets of Edinburgh to make public proclamations. But if he ought not to do these things, neither ought be to accept of this post. An office should never be offered to, or accepted by, any person who is not prepared to perform the duties attached to it, whatever they may be. No English Peer would accept a similar office in England. As a Scotch-man, I should be very sorry to see one of our aristocracy holding a place that would be considered beneath the dignity of a Peer 43 in England. Being unwilling, however, to rely on my own opinion on this point, I thought it right to consult a noble Duke whose opinion is justly entitled to great weight on any public question—the Duke of Buccleuch. That noble Duke at once said that he quite agreed with me that it is an office which ought not to be held by a Peer, and he expressed a hope that it would not again be conferred on a Peer. In making these remarks, I would not have it supposed for a moment that I cast any reflection upon the late Lord Kinnoul. He succeeded to the office by hereditary succession, and he enjoyed the office as part of his patrimony. As to the abuses which were brought under the notice of the public by the Report of the Commissioners in 1822, there is little doubt that that Report first informed the noble Lord of their existence. Even before that Report was issued, it appears that he had himself begun to check the traffic in the posts of the Lyon Court, I am further bound to say that the persons who now compose that court do the highest credit to the judgment of Lord Kinnoul. Mr. Burnett, the Lyon Depute, is probably known to this House as the author of several contributions to historical literature. I may mention that one of his works, which appeared a few years ago, called The Art of Pedigree Making, is one of the most entertaining books on antiquarian subjects which has appeared for a long time. Another of the officers is Professor Lorimer, whose name is well known to hon. Members in this House. If any man in Scotland or anywhere else need not feel ashamed of holding a sinecure, it is Professor Lorimer, who fills, in the most distinguished manner, one of the chairs in the University of Edinburgh. Public law, the subject of his teaching, does not afford large emolument, but the ability and value of his lectures are generally acknowledged; and he is the author of several able works on moral and political science. He was one of the earliest and most strenuous advocates of Scotch University Reform. The right hon. Gentleman the leader of this House will, in due time, propose that the Scotch Universities send a Member to Parliament, I have ventured to give notice of an Amendment to enable them to send two Members. If either he or I shall be able to justify our proposition, it will be upon arguments based upon a condition of things which has been mainly brought about by 44 the able, unwearied, and hitherto unrequited exertions of Professor Lorimer. With the other gentleman connected with the office I am not personally acquainted, but I understand that the direction of his studies qualifies him in a special manner to perform his duties. I trust, therefore, that Government, in disposing of the patronage placed in their hands by Lord Kinnoul's death, will use it as well as it was used by that noble Earl. But I hope no appointment will be made until due consideration has been given to the recommendations of the Report of 1822. I have heard, and I hope it is true, that the fixed salary is going to be withdrawn. I venture also to think that the salaries of the heralds, so far as they are derived from the Treasury, might also be saved. It is surely an absurd anachronism, in these days of various better means of publication, to pay several gentlemen £50 a year each for going into the streets to announce by word of mouth the proclamations of Her Majesty. Supposing these fixed salaries all to be withdrawn, there will still be a revenue accruing to the office of £1,100 a year. I am informed that certain arrangements in regard to Messengers-at-Arms are under consideration, which may somewhat affect this revenue, but I believe I shall not overestimate it if I call it in any case £1,000. There is a considerable amount of fees derived from patents of honour, which there is no reason to expect will be diminished. In that portion of the revenue of the Lyon Court, more especially affected by its own activity and aptitude, and which is derived from grants of arms, there has of late years been a very marked improvement. The fees from this source were, in the year ending 1st January, 1864, £962; and though in 1865 they fell to £712, yet in 1866 they rose again to £926. I hope the Government will pay some regard to these figures, and will see that the office is one well worth looking after. While I am aware that it may be considered not within my province to make suggestions as to the disposal of Government patronage, I cannot help venturing to express a hope that this post will be conferred upon some gentleman who has distinguished himself in the walks of historical literature. We have in Scotland a fair array of eminent historical writers. But since the middle of last century, when David Hume was glad to accept what he called "a genteel office of mall revenue"—the 45 keepership of the Advocate's Library with £40 a year—I am not aware that there has been any increase in the number of public posts which offer a man of letters a decent competence, with some leisure for the prosecution of his studies. The office of Lord Lyon appears to be a post of that kind. The Lyon is in some degree a keeper of public and historical records, and it is certain that his duties cannot be worthily or reasonably discharged unless he possesses ample historical knowledge. In addressing the present Government I am addressing several gentlemen who are themselves distinguished men of letters, and who may be supposed to take an interest in the well-being of the literary profession. I may therefore hope that in this appointment the claims of that profession will be considered, and that it will be conferred on some one who, possessing the necessary qualifications as a man of business, has also signalized himself by contributions to the historical literature of his country.