The Sun.
London, England, 1860-02-03 00:00:00

c rm.

circumstances _the hon. gentleman, I am sure, would not
form excessive anticipations as to any strong and decisive
impression being produced by any particular Govern-

ment on a course of feeling which has become established,
habitual—l might almost say inveterate—for some years
past. We have been tending in all respects towards a great
and rapid increase of expense, and it is in the nature of
things that the remedies to be applied to such a state of

affairs should be feeble in their origin, and that their first
results, at any rate, should be moderate in extent. It is

vain to hope, unless you have the concurrence of a powerful
feeling out of doors, that any particular Administration, at
auy particular moment, will effect any great reduction in
your civil and miscellaneous expenditure. The hon. gentle-
man may say —if your power is small, you may,
at all events, show that your intentions are good.
Well, when we lay our miscellaneous estimate on the table
and enter on their discussion, I think we shall be able to
satisfy the house—l am sure we shall be able to satisfy the
hon. gentleman—than whom no hon. member is more
anxiously bent on economy—that we have given to this
question our best attention. But he would find, from the
statement of my hon. friend the Secretary to the Treasury,
that the grqat bulk of the increase in those estimates is due

to a very small number of subjects, and that out of that
small number there are one or two which it is extremely
difficiilt to control. I promise my hon. friend, however,
that when we produce our proposals in regard to them it

will be soon that, if little can be done at any given momen
by any given Administration, we have yet sincerely en
deavoured to examine into the means both of checking the
present rapid increase and, where possible, of introducing
a diminution in this important branch of our expenditure.
I am sorry to say that one of the great offenders in this
matter is, as has been already mentioned, the educational
vote. We have giventhe most careful consideration during
the recess to this part of the estimates. But we found our-
selves confronted with this important fact—that a very
assiduous and intelligent commission was appointed two ox
three years ago to inquire into the whole subject, and that
it was hardly possible for the Executive Government to
propose, until that commission had reported, any changes
in tie educational vote materially affecting the principles
on which it is founded. We have endeavoured. however,
at this early date, both to check the rapid extension of this
branch of expenditure, and also—where we could do it
without unduly trenching on the province of the commis-
sioners—to give Parliament an indication of the direction
in which further improvement may be made. lam bound
likewise to add, that I am satisfied the commissioners take
a very serious view of the evils involved in the rapid in-
crease of this vote, and that it will be a main object of their
labours to control, if not altogether to arrest, that increase.
I regret to say my hon. friend the Secretary to the
Treasury has rather understated than overstated this evil
in describing the gigantic strides with which, from the
smallest beginning, the educational estimate has advanced
to £2,000,000 per annum. Those practically acquainted
with this subject will tell you plainly that, if you continue
to act upon the rules now in force, no very long course
of years will have elapsed before this £2,000,000 reaches
£3,000,000, or indeed a much greater amount. The growth
of this expenditure not only tends to augment the national
burdens, but has a most enervating effect upon the public
mind; and therefore on moral considerations, as well as
financial, it demands our most earnest attention. With re-
spect to two or three other important sources of increase
which have already been pointed. out, I venture to say that
it will be found that the Government have turned their best
attention to them during the recess. With regard to the mo-
tion now before us, I distinguish between it and the course
which the hon. member for Stafford invites us to take. I
cordially welcome the hon. gentleman as an ally in the cause
to which ho has devoted his energies, and in which he has
shown not only so much zeal, but so much ability. I could
not recommend the house to adopt the suggestion of the hon.
gentleman who spoke last, viz., that it should refuse to go
beyond the limit of £6,500,000 in voting these estimates. It
would break ray heart to think that no other remedy was
open to us. I do not think, even on the ground of prudence,
it would be a fit mode of dealing with an important ques-
tion. I thank my hon. friend for drawing our attention to
this subject; I am sure good will come out of this discus-
sion. It is not that the mind of the people of England is
obstinately fixed in these matters. It derives its tone in a
great degree from the temper of this house. And when it
is seen that we are in earnest on the subject of economy the
public out of doors will no doubt soon be found in harmony
with us. Although we are certainly acted upon by the po-
pular sentiment, we can also in return act powerfully on
that sentiment. The house and the country, in truth, act
and react on each ether. But with respect to this motion, I
frankly own I do not think it is ix a state in which it can
be advantageously adopted. The hon. mover included
in his ,view at least three subjects; lin fact, there are
nearer 30 than 3, each of which must obviously go
before any committee that has to enter on this vast field.
Any Select Committee which had charge of the department
of 'Woods and Forests and the Land Revenues alone would
have sufficient work ex its hands. Any committee ap-
pointed to examine into the expediency of making further
transfers from the consolidated fund to the votes would find
ample labour out out for it. The hon. gentleman has alluded
to a particular item. It is an affair of £2,lloo—the salary,
I think, of the Commissioner to the General Assembly. It
would take a committee more days than I should certainly
like to sit to determine whether a multiplicity of items of
that description ought to be transferred to the votes or not.
I am sorry it was not practicable to carry further the trans•
fers already effected. It was witblirreat reluctance that we
stopped short where we did. But the inquiry was a very
onerous one, and it alone would re luire the undivided exer-
tions of a select committee to conduct it satisfactorily. As
to the Civil Service Estimates, I venture to say no single
committee could embrace the business of reviewing that
expenditure. It is so vast and so varied, and some of the
questions involved in it are so difficult, that it would task
the time and attention of several distinct committees. In
truth, the hon. member has sketched out in his motion
views and objects that call for a much larger machinery
than this house could supply and keep in operation from
year to year. And here 1 come to a point on which lam
at issue with the framer of the resolution. A select com-
mittee of this kind appointed every year would not only not
be a good measure, but would be a decidedly bad one. It
would begin with taking away from the Executive its proper
responsibility, and would end by resolving all responsibility
into pure vapour; and it is impossible that a select com-
mittee could really be charged with the duties or the re-.
sponsibilities of a public department from year to year.
What the House of Commons can do in this matter must
be done periodically. By periodically passing from one
subject to another the house may be able, through its com-
mittees, to do a great work in reviewing the Miscellaneous
Estimates ; and periodically, I grant, every one of the hon.
member's subjects is a legitimate subject for such an in-
quiry. But let us not deceive ourselves abaut the power
and effect of these committees. A committee of this
nature sat 11 years ago. What was the issue of its labours ?
Why, a recommendation to abolish the office of a Lord of
the Treasury, whose salary was included in the Miscella-
neous Estimates, (Murmurs.). I believe I am correct in
stating that that was the principal and substantial measure
which proceeded from them. Therefore I am not very
sanguine as to the operation of such a committee, unless it
be appointed with a very special aim and devotes all its best
energies to the discharge of its duties. I hope that, for
these reasons, the hon. gentleman will not expect me to
accede to his motion. I give no opinion on the question
whether the time has yet arrived at which it would be de •
sirable to appoint another committee on the Miscellaneous
Estimates. Do not understand me to place any negative
on that subject. I would rather reserve my opinion upon
it. But I think, if I may say so, that having a new Admi-
nistration in office, it might be as well if the house allowed
us to lay our Miscellaneous Estimates on the table, and if
the hon. gentleman, or any other hon. member reserved it
to himself to consider whether it would bo for the public in-.
terest that a committee of this kind should be appointed.
Such a committee as is now proposed I hope the hon. gen-
tleman does not mean to press, for I certainly do not think
it consistent with the duty of the Government to assent
to it.

Mr. BRIGHT wished to-make an observation upon the
two speeches which hat just been delivered from the Trea-
sury bench. If those speeches were logical and to be taken
as authorative there was no remedy. for the present evils, of
which nobody appeared to complain so loudly as the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer. (A laugh.) Because, if no such
motion as his hon. friend had proposed were adopted, it was
quite clear that they Were shut up to
,the plan which was
now followed, and which, according to every speaker who
had yet addressed, the house, was leading us to a condition
of things most alarming and deplorable. He always found
the Chancellor of the Exchequer complaining on these
occasions that the house and the country were not suffi-
ciently economical, and yet every Chancellor of the Exche-
quer refused to accept anything that would give the
public departments the power to resist proposals of increased
expenditure. Years ago the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
when asked to sanction suchproposals, used to say, " What
do you think Mr. Hume will say ?" Mr. Hume was not
there now, and unfortunately his mantle did not appear to
have fallen upon any member of the house. (Much laughter,
and a general look in the direction of the seat occupied by
the hon. member for Lambeth.) He had heard Chancellors
of the Exchequer make this answer to those who besieged
the Treasury for additional expense. Why did they-thus
use Mr. Hume's name ?:. Because they felt the necessity of
some power beyond their own, even if it were only the pre-
tence of a power. (Hear, hear.) Suppose the Chancellor of
the Exchequer had such a committee as was now proposed
to refer to and to fall back upon—not a committee like the
Library Committee, that nobody knew anything about—
and he for one never heard of anything they ever did—(a
laugh)—but a committee honourably chosen every session,
not packed for special objects, as they generally were.
(hear, hear.) The Treasury might then say, when gentle-
men came to them from all parts of the country demanding
additional oxpenditare, "We cannot put such an increase
into the estimates. If we do, do you think the 15 gentlemen
appointed by the House Commons will agree to a proposal
of this nature ?" Thus between the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer and the committee a very efficient check would be
put upon many itemise of expenditure that were now voted
without question. A few years ago a committee sat to in-
quire into.the civil service estimates. Ono of the older mom-
here of the committee, not now in the house, told him there
was a young member of the house connected by spacial ties
with the Whig families, and it was his casting vote that de-
stroyed that otherwise immortal Lord of the Treasury. (A
laugh.) What was the fate of that young member after-
wards ? Why, they never put him on a committee from
that day to this, and never would unless ho repented. (A
laugh.) Another committee was afterwards appointed. The
noble lord (J. Russell), who was then Prime Minister,
agreed that a fair committee should be appointed to inquire
into the expenses incurred by official salaries. The hon.
member for Rochdale (Mr. Cobden) was a member of that
committee, he was another, the member for Coventry was
also upon it, and it was composed of the usual number of
members. The committee examined Sir It. Peel, the pre-
sent Prime Minister, the noble lord now the Secretary of
State for Foreign Affairs, and manv members then in the
house. What did they roman-tea ? There were many
recommendations that they agreed to unanimously, there
were many others upon which a large majority were agreed,
and the total of the reductions they recommended amounted
to £70,000 to £Bo,ooo'a-yoar. What was the result ? The
salary of the Judge-Advocate was reduced by £5OO, and
that of the Secretary (tithe Treasury by an equal sum. The
Government reduced the salary of a noble lord at the Peer.
law Bootrci A 400) whereupon he resigned, `l r,