792 RICHARD S.HOROWITZ memorial drafted by Duanfang on the issue of administrative reform is particularly interesting for both its blunt criticism of the func- tioning of the bureaucratic monarchy,and its clear articulation of the benefits of foreign models of ministerial government.Duanfang focused his critique on four issues:the need for a responsible cabinet, the relationship between central and local authorities,the need for a single responsible head for each major government office,and finally the need to reorganize and rename ministries to better fit their actual needs and responsibilities.s Duanfang advocated a cabinet system,although not(in this case) on the parliamentary model.32 His cabinet would be made up of a Chief Minister and the ministers in charge of each major central government department.A cabinet,as he described it,meets as a group and makes major decisions,and then puts policy decisions into action.Whether these decisions are right or wrong,the cabinet together bears responsibility for them.'5 A significant advantage of this system,he argued,was that if government policy went awry,a new Chief Minister and cabinet could be selected,and 'No one under heaven dares find fault with the sovereign.'Duanfang argued the Qing system had no comparable body.The Grand Secretariat (neige-the same term used for cabinet)while once the 'pivot'of Chinese government,no longer handled key issues.The Grand Council,while bearing some similarity to a cabinet was not really the same:'it is barely prepared to advise those above it [i.e.the Throne],and it is unable to take responsibility for those beneath it.'55 The problem with the Qing system,from Duanfang's perspect- ive,was that decisions were made without sufficient information and discussion,and once made,it was hard to get officials to implement them. Two of the other major points also related to the central govern- ment bureaucracy.First,Duanfang noted the problem of leadership. s The text of this memorial is Xinhai geming,Zhongguo shixue hui comp. (Shanghai:Shanghai renmin chubanshe,1956),v.4,33-8.Reproduced from Duan- fang's collected works.This is a draft of a memorial submitted by Dai Hongci and Duanfang on August 25,1906 in QCLDS,vol.1,376-82. 52 Presumably he saw this as an interim development.In Ou Mei Zhengzhi yaoyi, 44-62 Duanfang presumes the existence of a parliament,although the relationship of cabinet members to the parliament is unclear-presumably a reflection of the differences among the British,American,German and Japanese cabinet systems. s3 Xinhai geming,4:34. s4 Ibid. s5 Ibid.792 RICHARD S. HOROWITZ memorial drafted by Duanfang on the issue of administrative reform is particularly interesting for both its blunt criticism of the func￾tioning of the bureaucratic monarchy, and its clear articulation of the benefits of foreign models of ministerial government. Duanfang focused his critique on four issues: the need for a responsible cabinet, the relationship between central and local authorities, the need for a single responsible head for each major government office, and finally the need to reorganize and rename ministries to better fit their actual needs and responsibilities.51 Duanfang advocated a cabinet system, although not (in this case) on the parliamentary model.52 His cabinet would be made up of a Chief Minister and the ministers in charge of each major central government department. A cabinet, as he described it, meets as a group and makes major decisions, and then puts policy decisions into action. Whether these decisions 'are right or wrong, the cabinet together bears responsibility for them.'": A significant advantage of this system, he argued, was that if government policy went awry, a new Chief Minister and cabinet could be selected, and 'No one under heaven dares find fault with the sovereign.'54 Duanfang argued the Qing system had no comparable body. The Grand Secretariat (neige-the same term used for cabinet) while once the 'pivot' of Chinese government, no longer handled key issues. The Grand Council, while bearing some similarity to a cabinet was not really the same: 'it is barely prepared to advise those above it [i.e. the Throne], and it is unable to take responsibility for those beneath it.'55 The problem with the Qing system, from Duanfang's perspect￾ive, was that decisions were made without sufficient information and discussion, and once made, it was hard to get officials to implement them. Two of the other major points also related to the central govern￾ment bureaucracy. First, Duanfang noted the problem of leadership. 51 The text of this memorial is Xinhai geming, Zhongguo shixue hui comp. (Shanghai: Shanghai renmin chubanshe, 1956), v. 4, 33-8. Reproduced from Duan￾fang's collected works. This is a draft of a memorial submitted by Dai Hongci and Duanfang on August 25, 1906 in QCLDS, vol. 1, 376-82. 52 Presumably he saw this as an interim development. In Ou Mei Zhengzhi*yaoyi, 44-62 Duanfang presumes the existence of a parliament, although the relationship of cabinet members to the parliament is unclear-presumably a reflection of the differences among the British, American, German and Japanese cabinet systems. 5 Xinhai geming, 4:34. 54 Ibid. 5 Ibid