Talk:Lord Privy Seal

Anecdote

Anecdote: during World War II, Winston Churchill was on the toilet when someone told him (presumably by shouting through the door) that the Lord Privy Seal wished to see him. Churchill's response: "Tell the Lord Privy Seal that I am sealed to my privy, and can only deal with one shit at a time." — Franey 13:17, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Very droll. I am just about to delete this nugget from the article, as it is not sourced. -- Hoary 02:35, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I wonder Hoary if the 2004 article https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/columnists/brian-viner/country-life-privy-to-information-531787.html, referring to a book published in 2000, would justify including the anecdote. Mcljlm (talk) 00:00, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Hardly, Mcljlm. It's not an article, it's a diary-style column (one that I think reads less like a newspaper article than like filler in Punch); and the book it cites sounds like the kind of thing that would uncritically recycle hearsay -- though I haven't seen it and may be doing it an injustice. -- Hoary (talk) 00:16, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Article not clear

This article speaks a good deal about what the role of Lord Privy Seal is not, but doesn't really clarify what the role IS. Why is a person given the title, Lord Privy Seal.. And what rights or powers does the title confer upon the person? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.146.131.78 (talk) 12:21, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Indian Civil Service

It mentions the Indian Civil Service in the article, playing on Voltaires comments on the Holy Roman Empire. However, it is not anywhere in the article on the Indian Civil Service. Perhaps that should be changed? Kaiser matias 07:34, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Voltaire's quotation is from 1756. <https://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Page%3AVoltaire_-_%C5%92uvres_compl%C3%A8tes_Garnier_tome11.djvu/562>

in 1880, Voltaire's quotation was used to mock british lord/minister sinecures and bureaucrats. <https://books.google.com/books?id=lKc6AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA248&lpg=PA248&dq=lord+privy+seal+holy+roman&source=bl&ots=rsGRa2Ovyn&sig=-oEK0J2Fj_wH6muL8KATVdKQN8k&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiqs_PfhIDPAhWDpx4KHbn0A7AQ6AEIPjAH#v=onepage&q=lord%20privy%20seal%20holy%20roman&f=false>

The line about the Indian Civil Service dates at least as early as 1922. <https://books.google.com/books?id=nOk_AQAAMAAJ&lpg=PA16&ots=5Dj2c9vFVU&dq=neither%20Indian%2C%20nor%20civil%2C%20nor%20a%20service&pg=PA16#v=onepage&q=neither%20Indian%2C%20nor%20civil%2C%20nor%20a%20service&f=true>. However, sometime between 1930 and 1934, Nehru tied it to Voltaire's quotation. <https://books.google.com/books?id=fu8qAAAAIAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=indian+civil+service>

One of the Lords Privy Seal, either Heath or Bevin (according to Heath) originated the Lord Privy Seal quip. LPS George Jellicoe paraphrased it in 1972. <https://books.google.com/books?id=ptawBAAAQBAJ&lpg=PA168&ots=Y2X8qOxJHX&dq=lord%20privy%20seal%20holy%20roman&pg=PA169#v=onepage&q=holy%20roman%20empire&f=false> — Preceding unsigned comment added by Namangwari (talk • contribs) 15:09, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Bad link?

"Peter Lacy" link in historical list seems to be incorrect — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.104.91.240 (talk) 06:08, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Moving the following from article

I do not think this belongs --Blue Tie (talk) 04:05, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Television industry term

The term "Lord Privy Seal" (as in "not bad, but it's a bit Lord Privy Seal") is used in the British television industry as shorthand for associating pictures too closely and literally with every element of the accompanying spoken script. The origin is a TV comedy sketch in The Frost Report taking the practice to an extreme, which backed a "news report" mention of the Lord Privy Seal with images, in quick succession, of a lord, an outdoor toilet, and a seal balancing a ball on its nose.

• 
  Lord
• 
  Privy
• 
  Seal

NB, the phrase was used by Richard Dawkins in describing Expelled (film) on his website. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 11:03, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Since The Frost Report, and the sketch were in black and white wouldn't it be preferable to replace the colour photos with the YouTube clip https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVlfvdH7qwY. Mcljlm (talk) 14:25, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Nicholas Bacon?

The list has a gap between William Paget, 1st Baron Paget (1555–1558) and William Cecil, 1st Baron Burghley (1571–1572). During this time Nicholas Bacon was first Lord Keeper of the Great Seal and then, after the act of Queen Elizabeth I., also Lord Chancellor, starting from 1558 to his death. Consequently he is named in the List of Lord Chancellors and Lord Keepers. But was he also Lord Privy Seal? In the corresponding german WP entry (Lordsiegelbewahrer) he is listed during this period. Why not in the english WP? And why did he lose the function in 1570, even though he still was Lord Chancellor (and Lord Keeper of the Great Seal)?

The gap appeared with version 16:20, 9 June 2004 (by User:Zoicon5), while in the older version 19:17, 25 April 2004 (by User:John Kenney) William Paget, 1st Baron Paget was listed as Lord Privy Seal from 1555 to 1571. But this surely is wrong since he retired in 1558 and died in 1563. -- Lars, 18:40, 01 June 2008 (CEST) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.193.39.164 (talk) 16:42, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Lord John Russell, Privy Seal?

On pages 235-6 of the Bobbs-Merrill edition of Melbourne, in the chapter "After Reform", the author refers to Lord John Russell as the Privy Seal. He is not listed in the article, and he is not listed in Wikipedia's "Lord John Russell" page. Since Melbourne is one of the finest and best well-researched biographies to have been written, and which made the Modern Library's best 100 nonfiction list, then I think that this may be an oversight on the part of Wikipedia editors.bruvensky (talk) 05:04, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

I think that this is not an oversight, but an error on Cecil's part (such errors will appear in virtually any historical work, no matter how good otherwise). If Cecil was talking about the period around the passage of the Reform Act, Russell held the position of Paymaster of the Forces, which he held during Grey's ministry and Melbourne's first ministry. In Melbourne's second ministry, Russell was Home Secretary and then Colonial Secretary. Russell was never Lord Privy Seal, and I doubt that if you looked at a biography of Russell, rather than a biography of someone else in which Russell appears tangentially, you'd find any reference to this claim. 70.42.157.5 (talk) 16:34, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

English/British

Is there any actual justification for treating Lords Privy Seal before 1707 as holding a different office from Lords Privy Seal afterwards? The Privy Seal is the monarch's personal seal, not a state seal. Wouldn't it make more sense to split it by monarch? 70.42.157.5 (talk) 16:25, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Early Lords Privy Seal list revisions

I have extensively reformatted the list of early office holders. Lords Privy are now split by monarch as was previously suggested, details such as other offices held and terms of office have been clearly separated. Other offices and titles not held during tenure have been remove. Where known, Birth–Death has been included. The existing list contained several instances where the office was said to be held In Commission, however I can't seem to find any sources to support this being the case. A quick Google search, a search on the London Gazette, and the compendium book I frequently use have turned up nothing. I have taken these out, but if sources support it then it should be reinstated. I would assume that for some of these there was a prolonged vacancy, or several people exercised the duties of Lord Privy Seal without formal appointment. ToastButterToast (talk) 14:23, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Prime Minister Edward Heath (cropped).jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. Community Tech bot (talk) 01:53, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Sir Anthony-Eden number 10 Official.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. Community Tech bot (talk) 11:43, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• J R Clynes.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:29, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Anthony Eden (retouched).jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:23, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Ernest Bevin anecdote hyperlinks

According to https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lord_Privy_Seal&diff=next&oldid=1096976673 User:Clyde293 you changed the anecdote's 2nd and 3rd hyperlinks from Outhouse to Privy Council of the United Kingdom and Pinniped to Privy seal. That removes its point. Mcljlm (talk) 10:41, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Mcljlm, I'm sorry, I don't quite understand what you mean. The preexisting hyperlinks linked to pages that didn't make contextual sense.

If by that removes its point you mean relieving it of its comedic value, I would ask you to (re)read wp:Humor. $Clyde2_{3}^{9}$ (👋 • 🗣 • ✍️) 14:20, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure User:Clyde293 what you mean by "The preexisting hyperlinks linked to pages that didn't make contextual sense.". They illustrated exactly what the anecdote was about. If you don't already know the Frost Report Lord Privy Seal sketch I suggest you read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Frost_Report#%22Lord_Privy_Seal%22 and watch the 1-minute clip https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVlfvdH7qwY which has the same idea. The sketch made such a deep impression on me {though I forgot it was in The Frost Report) that I often referred to it decades later. Mcljlm (talk) 16:45, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Mcljlm, the average reader of this article does not care about esoteric British terminology and will not understand a reference from such an obscure sketch. Instead, the average reader is more concerned with the meaning of the terms in context.

The original quote's meaning is not related to the reinterpreted meaning from the satirical sketch, and should not be portrayed as such. $Clyde2_{3}^{9}$ (👋 • 🗣 • ✍️) 12:56, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean by "the average reader of this article" User:Clyde293. Many WP articles, especially those concerned with government, law, the sciences, technology, economics, philosophy, etc., use what may appear to be esoteric terminology. This article explains the post's original function and what it has become. It's first 7 sentences have links to other WP articles enabling readers to learn more about specific terms.

Bevin, if he said "neither a Lord, nor a Privy, nor a Seal", was indicating he wasn't a member of the aristocracy, nor an outdoor toilet (he'd been a member of the Privy Council since 1940 so it doesn't mean that), nor a web-footed mammal (if it meant the King's personal seal the phrase would lose its point since ostensibly he would receive that seal with the job). Notice that the British ambassador to the US in December 1961 used a very slightly different version of the phrase: "But he [ Edward Heath ] is not a lord, he is not a privy, and he is not a seal." https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1842&dat=19611218&id=Pv0rAAAAIBAJ&sjid=ssYEAAAAIBAJ&pg=6166,5955715&hl=en. Richard Dawkins explained the meaning of the phrase in March 2008 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c39jYgsvUOY&t=27s (specifically from 03:26).

The sketch illustrates the meaning directly (in addition to the 27,000+ people who've found it on YouTube there are probably many others who remember it if not in what programme it was broadcast {for years I thought it had be in It's a Square World} so I wouldn't call it obscure) which is why I mentioned it to you.I wasn't suggesting mentioning the sketch in the article Mcljlm (talk) 21:47, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Do you now understand User:Clyde293, especially after Richard Dawkins' explanation, why your changes are inappropriate? Mcljlm (talk) 17:58, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

No, Mcljlm, I do not. Bevin’s remark was made nearly a full decade before the advent of The Frost Report, and should not be made to show correlation with a meaning from a sketch.

Bevin was most certainly not saying that he wasn’t a toilet or a pinniped. He meant those terms in context, namely that he wasn’t a Lord, or a seal. It has been established that the office does not grant membership to the privy council, so his remark there still makes sense.

Anyway, this is borderline WP:SYNTH, and Wikipedia frowns on reinterpretation of quotations by editors. $Clyde2_{3}^{9}$ (👋 • 🗣 • ✍️) 04:14, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

As I mentioned above User:Clyde293 Bevin had been a member of the Privy Council since 1940 (when he became Minister of Labour and National Service, a cabinet post). As https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/privy-council mentions "All members of the cabinet are sworn into the privy council." and "Membership lasts for life" (except in very rare cases mentioned in that article). https://www.parliament.uk/site-information/glossary/privy-council/ mentions "Privy Council members include Cabinet members past and present".

Why did you write "It has been established that the office does not grant membership to the privy council"? The post of Lord Privy Seal, as the WP article as well as https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/bbm%3A978-1-349-17431-7%2F1.pdf as well make clear, is a cabinet post. Mcljlm (talk) 03:56, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Mcljlm, At this point, we’re just going back and forth. You are refusing to acknowledge my point that the reinterpretation from the Frost Report cannot be used since the article directly cites Bevin, not the frost report.

Please read WP:DTS before you respond to me. $Clyde2_{3}^{9}$ (👋 • 🗣 • ✍️) 04:07, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

The joke is clearly a pun on privy (a shitter) and a seal (sea creature). DuncanHill (talk) 10:28, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you user:DuncanHill. Mcljlm (talk) 12:14, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello @DuncanHill. Could you please provide WP:RS that definitively shows Bevin referring to himself as a toilet and a pinniped? Thanks. $Clyde2_{3}^{9}$ (👋 • 🗣 • ✍️) 23:23, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

@Clyde293: I suspect you are not a native speaker of English. It is, to those of us who are, a very obvious pun. Also, one would not say "a privy" to mean "the Privy Council". The way you are linking makes it meaningless, and not a joke. DuncanHill (talk) 23:36, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

@DuncanHill Your presumption is incorrect. I am a native speaker of the English language, and have seen no WP:RS that indicates that it is a joke. I’m not sure the pun is obvious enough to not require citation. $Clyde2_{3}^{9}$ (👋 • 🗣 • ✍️) 23:43, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

@Clyde293: It doesn't make any sense at all otherwise. I do not see how you can twist "a privy" to mean "a privy councillor" or "the Privy Council" (and, as noted above, Bevin was already a PC, so he would hardly claim he weren't). An Englishman in the 40's saying "a privy" cannot mean anything other than a khazi. DuncanHill (talk) 23:51, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

@DuncanHill I stand corrected. Thank you and @Mcljlm for your patience. $Clyde2_{3}^{9}$ (👋 • 🗣 • ✍️) 23:53, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

I notice you've put the quotation back in, saying "Quotation can be included, consensus reached." in the summary, but with your hyperlinks instead of user:DuncanHill's. Mcljlm (talk) 01:02, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

@Mcljlm My apologies. It’s fixed now. $Clyde2_{3}^{9}$ (👋 • 🗣 • ✍️) 01:25, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

• Coat of Arms of England (1660-1689).svg
• Coat of Arms of England (1689-1694).svg
• Coat of Arms of England (1694-1702).svg
• Coat of Arms of England (1702-1707).svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:44, 30 January 2023 (UTC)