The Press.
London, England, 1857-01-31 00:00:00

PUBLIC MONIES.

WE stated that it remains for us to notice the
remedies propotted to be applied to the exist-
ing defects in the management of our public
monies. We have shown from the evidence--
the evidence equally of Lord MONTEAGLE and
Mr. ANDERSON-of the Exchequer and of the
Treasury, that the Exchequer check is in-
adequate—that it is ineffectual as regards the
rotual appropriation even of the monies which
pass through the Exchequer—that monies
issued from the Exchequer under her
Majesty's sign-manual for one purpose, may
be and are applied by her Majesty's Paymaster-
General, under the authority of the Lords
Commissioners of her Majesty's Treasury, to
another purpose—and that, irrespective alto-
gether of the various charges on the collection
of the revenue (such as drawbacks, and the
expenses of collecting the Customs and Excise,
&c. &a.), a very large proportion of her Ma-
jesty's revenue never finds its way into her
Majesty's Exchequer at all. We have quoted
a very significant question put by Sir JAMES
GRAHAM, from which, and the answer to it,
it would appear that it is within the range of
possibility that the public monies of the
country might even be made available for
electioneering purposes. It cannot be sup-
posed that such a state of things will be
allowed to continue.

In justice, however, to our public function-
aries, we are bound to add that, while it is
fair to argue even upon a possibility in such
matters, we do not in the slightest degree, or for
a, single moment, impute to any of our public
finctionaries malversation as regards the use
of the public money. No MITI understands
to Mr. HATTER—" that other
Treasury," indicated by

THE PEESS.

Sir JAMES GRAHAM—and no man discharges it
more efficiently. We have no doubt that he
applies the Government patronage—for it is
his business—most judiciously in purchasing
support for Government ; but we do not
believe he would dip his fingers into the
national till even to retain Lord PALMERSTON
in office. It is true—(the subject is a painful
one to revert to)—we have had men amongst
the Lords Commissioners of her Majesty's
Treasury of whom we should not venture to
say so much; but her Majesty's Treasury was
then prostituted to the purposes of an Irish
cabal. The Treasury was the reward of ser-
vices rendered in overthrowing the Govern-
ment of Lord DERBY; and consequent upon
that overthrow there are Royal orders in
existence in which the signature of her
Majesty is contaminated by the counter-
signature of JOHN SADLEIR. But our public
officers are men of integrity. We believe
there is no country in the world in which
there prevails anything like the amount of
honour and integrity, as well as efficiency, that
prevails in this country among our per-
manent public functionaries. It is they, in
truth, who carry on the business of the Govern-
ment—it is they who keep the great machine
in working order—it is they who regulate
its motion, and guard it against accidents,
when directed by inexperienced or reckless
statesmen. Sufficient consideration, we think,
is not given to the value of our permanent
public officers in the departments of the State.
They are seldom before the public—they are
little known out of their departments—their
useful path is without display, tulit alter honoree
—and the public are not aware of the debt
which they owe them. Therefore, in adverting
to the possibility of abuse, again we say we
convey no imputation upon our public
officers.

We stated, in one of our early articles on
this important subject, that the question as to
the mode of improving the control over the
management of our public monies resolved
itself into a contest between the Exchequer
and the Treasury. And the question really is
whether the Exchequer control shall be ren•
fiered complete and effectual; or whether the
Treasury is to be made responsible for the
application of all public monies according to
the votes and intentions of Parliament. Each
of these views is strongly and ably advocated
in the evidence.

It cannot be denied that the Commissioners
of 1831 intended to constitute in the Exche-
quer a complete control : nothing can be more
explicit than their language. The Exchequer,
they state, is the great conservator of the reve,
nuts of the nation ; the constitutional functions
of its officers, who hold their situations for life,
are to provide for the safe keeping and proper
appropriation of the public money. They
quote Mr. ELLIS, the Clerk of the Yells, who in
his letter to the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
of March 2, 1828, states that the Exchequer is
at least coeval with the Norman Conquest,
and that it has been from its earliest institu-
tion looked to as a check upon the Lord High
Treasurer, and a protection for the King, as
well as for the subject, in the custody, pay-
ment, and issue of the public money.
The whole Report of the Commissioners is
founded upon the principle thus laid down.
They recommend—

That the gross receipts of public money—whether
arising from taxes in any part of the United Kingdom,
from the income or sale of Crown property under the ad-
ministration of the Woods and Forests, from the sale of
old naval, military, ordnance, or other stores, from un-
claimed dividends, unredeemed prize money, deductions
from pensions, loans in Exctequer Bills, or from any other
sources—should be placed, without deduction, in the
custody of the Exchequer, and be accounted for to Parlia-
ment, whose authority should be necessary to the appro-
priation of the whole.

And in their very next paragraph they
add :

We feel this principle to be of paramount importance
for the security of the public money in the two great
branches of receipt and expenditure. We think that no
portion of the public treasure should be arrested, on any
plea or pretence whatever, on its way to the Exchequer;
and that no nortion of it should be issued frcm the Exche-
quer without previous Parliamentary sanction.

It is to be remembered that this Report bears
the signatures of Sir HENRY PARNELL, Lord
JouN RUSSELL, Sir JAMES GRAHAM, Mr. POULETT
THOMPSON, Sir FRANCIS BARING, and Mr.

SATURDAY,

ELLICE ; and we have quoted it because we
consider that it contains the strongest opinion
that can be given, and on the highest authority,
in support of that view of the subject.
On the other hand, Mr. ANDERSON and Mr.
MOFFAY—both, we must say, high practical
authorities, and men of great intelligence,
experience, and judgment, deny that the
Exchequer can exercise any effectual control.
In answer to a question put by Mr. HENLEY,
Mr. ANDERSON says:—

The public monies must be issued on trust. The great
departments receive it on trust, and they distribute it on
trust to the various unpaid accounts, and it is not until it
is finally paid away upon vouchers that yuu can really come
to the true and final appropriation of the public money.

his duty better that
Secretary of the
. -