The Sun.
London, England, 1860-01-27 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, JANUARY 27, 1860.

agreeable to members of the Government than to increase
the number of nights devoted to Government business. On
those nights the principal labour of official members was
discharged ; and those hon. members were quite in error
who supposed that there could be any wish on the part of 1
Government to increase the time necessarily devoted to the
Government business. If even they wished that increase,
it could only belrom a sense of public duty, and not for
their own personal gratification. He would call attention
to the way in which their present riles with regard to Go-
vernment business operated in tfie interval between the
commencement of the session and Easter. Two nights were
devoted to • Government business—Mondays and Fridays.
The other three nights were entirely devoted to questions
brought forward by independent members—Tuesdays and
Thursdays to notices, and Wednesdays to orders of the day.
On those days no Government notice or order was allowed
to have precedence ; they must be put at the bottom of the
paper, if they were brought forward. On every night of
the week questions were put by independent members •,
and every one who had been long in the house knew that
the number and importance of the questions put at half-
past four had very much increased ; and the time devoted
to those subjects had increased accordingly. Every inde-
pendent member had that power, and they had the whole of
Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday. On Mondays and
Fridays it generally happened that there were committees
of supply. On the motion for going into those committees,
independent members had the liberty of making two three, or
four motions, if no division was taken ; so that members who
came down to take part in the discussions on supply, found
that the house did not go into committee until seven, eight,
or nine o'clock. (Hear, hear, from Mr. W. Williams.) In
addition to that diminution of the time occupied by Govern.
ment business, there were the discussions raised on Friday
night on the question of adjournment. Taking away Tues-
days and Thursdays, the portion of each night occupied by
questions, that occupied by motions on going into committee
of supply, and the portion of Friday devoted to discussions
on the motion for adjournment, there was a considerable
subtraction from the number of hours allotted to the public
business in the beginning of the session. It was customary
for the Government to bring in bills for the consideration
of the house at the beginning of the session; they might
lie on the table ; but it was almost impossible for any Go-
vernment bill, if opposed,, to receive any consideration be-
fore Easter. The only nights devoted to the Government
business were occupied by committees of supply; and on the
other three nights they had no opportunity of being heard:
The consequence was that a large number of Government
bills were postponed to a late period of the session. Every-
body knew, when the morning sittings commenced in June,
how great was the pressure on the time and exertions of
members, as a great portion of the latter part of the session
was occupied with pressing business ; and, after all, many
bills had to be postponed, and much altercation arose as to
their postponement, and the order in which they should be
brought on ; and, altogether, considerable confusion arose
' in the latter part of the session. That was very much owing
to the regulations for the conduct of their business in the
part of the session before Easter. He was far from de-
siring to curtail the time that might be fairly allotted to
discussions raised by independent members. That time was
most valuable. It was necessary to the proper working of
the House of Commons that there should be a free expres-
sion of the voice of the people on subjects on which per-
haps no direct motion could be made. The subjects brought
forward on the motion for adjournment were chiefly ques-
tions addressed to Government by members who wished to
accompany those questions with some remarks. (Hear,
hear.) They were not generally in the nature of mo-
tions or proposals ; and when the noble lord (C. Hamilton)
said that thosediscussions facilitated the measures proposed
by independent members, he misrepresented the nature of
those discussions. No measure proposed by an independent
member could ever then be brought forward ; therefore it
was impossible that those motions could facilitate such bills.
(Hear, hear.) If he were to make a suggestion, he would
rather ask the house to consider whether it might not be
possible that on a portion at least of the Thursdays before
Easter, precedence might be given to orders over notices;
or at any rate to allow some portion of those days to be oc-
casionally devoted to the discussion of bills. It was-also
worth consideration whether some limit might net be fixed
with regard to the hour of the night at which motions might
be made on going into committee of supply ; for it was an
admitted inconvenience for members to come down, seeing
" supply" in the paper, and expecting discussions on the
estimates, and to find the house occupied in discussing co-
lonial or Indian questions, or some other matters wholly
foreign to the question of supply. He did not think that any
good would result from pressing this motion; but some im-
provenownt might be made in the distribution of their time
before Easter, so as to give more time to the consideration
of Government measures. He would also suggest that when
a motion had been brought forward by a member ofthe Go-
vernment the house had as much possession of this motion,
as full power of discussing it, as any motion made by an in-
dividual member. The Government had no control over the
subject of discussion when once it was submitted to the con-
sideration of the house. The only question was whether it
was desirable that a greater portion of time should be al-
loted to the subjects proposed by independent members or
to those proposed by Government.
Viscount PALMERSTON wished to add his voice to
those who recommended the withdrawal of the motion. It
was impossible for him to support the motion, or the argu-
ments adduced by the right hon. gentleman in its favour.
The right hon. gentleman had cited him (Lord Palmerston)
as an instance of those who had taken advantage of this prac-
tice of the house for the purpose of introducinga rather exten-
sive subject. (A laugh.) He therefore could not, sitting on
that side of the house, endeavour to curtail the liberty which
he had taken on the other side. (Hear, hear.) There were
occasions on which it might be a great public advantage for
members to have the opportunity, on the adjournment of
the house on Friday, to ask a question accompanied by a
detailed statement, which the regulations of the house for-
bade on another day, and also for the members of the Go-
ment who were interrogated to have the opportunity of
stating at greater length the circumstances of the cases re-
ferred to. He therefore hoped that what had been stated
in the course of the debate would induce hon. members to
use their discretion in introducing subjects on a Friday, if
the practice were to continue, and that some good would re-
sult from this discussion. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. BOUVERIE said he was not of so hopeful a tem-
perament as the noble lord. If he thought that the result
of this discussion would be to deter members from abusing
this privilege, he should be content. But the truth was it
was but a very small portion of the members—if they were
to be counted, a very small fraction, who resorted to this
practice, for the majority condemned it. (N., cyf..
- • .4. 4.- —•
city he referred to. He wished TO reinrilielre temptation
afforded to those members. When the noble lord the leader
of the house could not resist the temptation, when offered,
of making a long speech, no wonder that others fell into the
same course. (Cries of " Divide," and " Withdraw.")
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE was sorry to hear that the motion
was to be pressed to a division. Ile should prefer leaving
the:question on the footing on which Mr. Disraeli had placed
it. The motion might have been introduced in a more cau-
tious manner. The right hon. gentleman had referred to the
notices on the paper for to-morrow night, and had resorted
to the unusual course of singling out gentlemen by name.
The evil complained of might be remedied in twe ways—
either the discussions should be confined to business ac-
tually before the house, or the motions and discussions
might take place after the orders of the day had been dis-
posed of. He decidedly objected to the suggestion of the
Home Secretary, that members should give up their privi-
lege of bringing forward motions on going into committee
of supply. That was an ancient constitutional practice ; it
was the right of the people to have their grievances brought
under the notice of the house before their money was voted
away. (Hear, hear.) If a division were pressed he should
vote against the motion. He was quite satisfied that they
might trust to the good sense of the house to correct the evils
complained of.
The house then divided—
For the motion
Against '
Majority —llB
NEW WRITS.

On the motion of Mr. Commis it was agreed that in all
cases where the seat of any member has been declared void by
an election committee on the ground of bribery, no motion
for the issuing of a new writ shall be made without two days'
previous notice being given in the votes.
ABOLITION OF QUALFICATION FOR OFFICES.
The house having gone into committee, leave was given,
on the motion of Mr. HADFIELD, to bring in a bill to render
it unnecessary to make and subscribe certain declarations as
a qualification for offices and employments.
THE GLOUCESTER AND WAKEFIELD WRITS.
Sir G. LEWIS, in moving that no motion for the issuing
of any new writ for the city of Gloucester, or the borough
of Wakefield, be made without seven days' previous notice
thereof being given in the votes, said the house would re-
collect that the committee appointed to' inquire into the
election returns of Gloucester and Wakefield had reported
that extensive bribery and corruption had taken place in
both those boroughs, and that commissions had been ap-
pointed to inquire into the subject. The Gloucester com-
missioners had made their report, which was on the table,
and would be in the hands of members in a few days. The
result of that report was that extensive corruption pre-
vailed at the last two elections for the city of Glou-
cester. The report of the Wakefield commissioners had
ss
ie Conr ee rt as
thereforei r
rtkihvnaeotdwi
atwouldbe uresult
e the
hib
let readywh ic
not yet been presented, but he understood from their
ak
yehfis eul ds He
creoedmpi
reported
nottiesd_
committee n t
a e
h few
fW theda
that corrupt practices existed there. Under these circum-
stances it was no unusual or objectionable course to request
the house to agree to a resolution that no writ shoull ' issue
for the election of a new member for either of those places
without a previous notice of seven days.
Mr. HADFIELD wished to ask the right hon.
gentle-
man what principle was to be
adopted with regard to the
delinquents m these cases ; whether the bribers and the
bribed—(laughter)—were amenable to the law; or whether
they were indemnified against all consequences by the
cer-
tificate of the commissioners ? If so, the -of
issuing
a com-
mission was worse than useless.
Sir G. LEWIS said that the report of the Wakefield
commission was not yet made ; but with regard to Glouces-
ter, the Government had entered into no promise whatever
with respect to the witnesses who had given evidence.
Without referring to the report he should be unwilling to
give an answer to the question of his hon. friend. The
question was, what might have been done by the commis-
sioners themselves under the powers of the Act of Parlia-
ment. If his hon. friend repeated his question to-
morrow, he would be able to give a more precise answer as
to the steps which would be taken.
Mr. E. JAMES said that though no pledge had been
given, it was understood by members that some steps should
be taken by the Government when the Commissioners made
their report. There were numerous commissions appointed
with regard to Galway, Hllu ,
and Cambridge, and the reports
of those commissions were slumbering on the shelves of
the
house—a record of the impotence of Parliament to deal with
the evil. It was due to the house and the country that the
Government should adopt some course of action with respect
to these cases. He believed that every bribed voter received
a certificate from the Commissioners protecting him from
disfranchisement on giving his evidence.
Sir F. KELLY sold he feared, notwithstanding the dis-
position of the law officers of the Crown to prosecute and to
brine." about the punishment of those who acted against the
law, that in consequence of the immunity offered and pro.
mired by the Commissioners it would be found extremely
difficult to adopt any further proceedings against them. He
trusted, however, when the subject cam. before the house,
that some means would be found ofprosecutingand bringing
to punishment those who had been guilty of bribery, with-
out violating the pledge of the Commissioners. •
Mr. BRIGHT did not think this was a case for the law
officers of the Crown, or ono in which Parliament could
punish those who had been bribed as individuals. That wee
settled some
disfranchise the
ago, when a measure was brought in to
se the electors of Hull, or some other borough. He
was of opinion that it would not be strictly just to inflict the
punishment of dise f
certificate had beranehiserneut on those parties to whom a
ensue on their givingn given thatnopanal consequences would
and the housetheir evidence. Therefore the Govern-
mentcommitted in wouldWakeftell be unable to deal with the offences
on. the voters • still
indl Gloucester by inflicting punish-
mentfranchise permanently two ess Would they be able to dis-
pulations inatleiwe boroughs hawing such large
asQloieeetor apcj Walceacid

the Government might adopt another coarse which would
be consistent both with justice to individuals and the repre-
sentative rights, of two such large towns, and that was, to
suspend those rights for a limited time, so as to mark them
by the condemnation of the house and of the country.
(Hear, hear.) From his connexion with one of the candidates
for Wakefield, and also from residing not far from it, he was
more intimately acquainted with the results of the bribery
which had taken place in Wakefield. The result was that
out of 800 voters 100 had been corrupted and accepted bribes.
It was to him astonishing that only 100 had accepted bribes,
seeing that no man could walk any street in Wakefield by
day or by night without having a bribe offered to him. It
was, therefore, rather surprising than otherwise that only
100 accepted bribes, and thatthe other 700 rejected the money
which lay in their path. He might then be asked, why pro-
pose a suspension of their constitutional rights if 704 had
been innocent and only 100 guilty ? His answer was that
the 700 were not innocent. (Hear, hear.) No such corrup-
tion could have taken place if the leading men on both sides
had not been cognisant of and connected with that bribery.
(Hear, hear.) They were, though perhaps not directly
guilty, at least morally inculpated in these transactions.
(Hear, hear.) In 1835 or 1837 they had an election in the
borough in which he resided, and he was sorry to say that
that election had been conducted with a great profusion and
expense, especially on the side of hon. gentlemen opposite.
After the election was over a meeting of the Liberal party
took place, and a resolution was comet° thatunder no circum-
stances would they have any connexion with any person who
came into that town for the purpose of carrying an election
by any other than legal and moral means. The result was
to put an end to bribery in the town, and he believed that if
a dozen or half a dozen of the leading men in Gloucester or
Wakefield came to a similar resolution these corrupt prac-
tices might be done away with. He did not say that the
number of black men of Wakefield and Gloucester was
greater than that of other boroughs, but they were found
out, and he should be glad if they were made to feel that
the house and the country regarded their conduct with
horror, for nothing was more disgraceful to them as a
nation than conduct like this. He believed that the only
effectual remedy against bribery was the ballot—(cheers)
—but till that measure was adopted, he thought
Parliament would do wisely to suspend the constitutional
rights for such a period—not to exceed 10 years—as would
mark their condemnation of the practices that prevailed.
Mr. CLAY said no bill had been brought in to disfran-
chise any of the electors of Hull. A bill of that kind had
been introduced with regard to Galway. He would give
no opinion as to the legal effect of the certificate of commis-
sioners, but the object of the indemnity was to protect those
who gave evidence from personal consequences. It was
never intended to interfere with the right of Parliament to
disfranchise the borough, or any part of it. He agreed with
the hon. gentleman that suspension was a proper mode of
dealing with these corrupt boroughs.
Mr. MELLOR protested against its being supposed that
the commissioners had any authority beyond that of pro-
tecting those who gave evidence from the pains and penal-
ties of their corrupt conduct. It was a mistake to suppose
that it interfered with the right and power of Parliament to
deal with the electors as a whole, or in clasooa. The object
of a commission would be a farce if it was issued for this
purpose.
Mr. MALINS observed that they had blue-books in
great numbers put upon the table, which very few people
would read, and after all that expense they could have no
practical result unless they took some measure to put down
bribery. He looked upon it as a ridiculous thing to send
three commissioners to Gloucester and three to 'Wakefield.
If the right hon. gentleman had proposed to suspend the
writs for those boroughs that would be something intelli-
gible, but this resolution that the writs should not issue
without seven days' notice he did not understand. The
hon. member for Birmingham said that at Wakefield a man
could not pass through the streets night or day without
being tempted by bribery ; and yet where was the justice of
punishing 700 men when there were only 100 voters who took
bribes in that constituency, and who may hove been induced
to do so through poverty or necessity. He repeated, it was
a most ridiculous proceeding to issue these cemnaissions un-
less the house took some measures to ascertain who were the
bribers, and then some good might be done. The hon. mem-
ber RI. Birmingham told them the candidates for Hull did
not now bribe so directly as they used to do, but did not tell
them how much they bribed indirectly. He (Mr. Malins)
hoped that this abominable system of bribery would be put
down, and with that view he hoped the house would make
up their minds to adopt some measure which would have a
practical result.
Mr. BRIGHT, adverting to the statement of the hon.
member for Hull, referred to the pages of " Hansard" for
the purpose of showing that, in 1854, the Attorney-General
of that day proposed to introduce a bill intended to dis-
franchise the boroughs of Hull, Canterbury, Cambridge,
and other places, but the house did not feel disposed to
adopt that measure.
Lord R. CECIL considered that if the house were to
proceed to inflict punishment upon persons taking bribes
they would have to proceed in the ordinary courts of law,
and he believed it would be impossible to get any jury to
convict upon such evidence as would be produced. His hon.
and learned friend (Mr. Malins) talked about getting to the
root of the matter—but it appeared to him that the root
of the inaftr was the fact that they confided the franchise
to persons so poor that they could not withstand temptation,
and had no sense of the value of the franchise, but made it
a saleable article, and got the best price for it which they
could. People seemed to imagine that if you once prevented
a bribe passing from a briber to a bribee, you did every-
thing to secure an honest election. But did they, in that
case, suppose that a £lO householder would become more
patriotic or intelligent ? He happened to have been
one of the members of the committee which sat on
bribery at Gloucester, and it was there proved that
in every case the bribe was put down before the man
voted, and in two or three cases it happened that the men
voted against the party who bribed them ; and so he
believed would go on, nor did he believe the ballot would
be efficacious to prevent bribery.
Mr. W. WILLIAMS trusted that the sentiments just ex-
pressed by the noble lord would not have any weight in that
house when a reform bill might be introduced.
Mr. COLLINS observed that he knew Wakefield very
well, and he had no doubt the electors—especially the poorer
classes of them—were longing for a new election—ca laugh)
—but he felt perfectly certain if there was an election there
to -morrow' the longest purse would carry the day. With
reference to the suppression of bribery, it struck him that
the cost ot a corrupt election ought to fall on the particular
borough, as he considered it a public offence, and for that
ilt"V7Pea
mingham would be adopted, and that the writs for Glou-
cester and Wakefield would be suspended for the rest of the
session.
Sir G. C. LEWIS said be held in his hand the printed
report of the Gloucester commissioners, and that of the
Wakefield commissioners would be ret dy *.n a few days. He
intentionally abstained from making uny allusion to the
contents of the former report and confined himself within the
limits of the motion he had made. As to the general ques-
tion of the suppression of bribery, he should say that the re-
port of the Gloucester commissioners condemned in the very
strongest terms the provisions of the Corrupt Practices Pre-
vention Act, many of which they found to be perfectly nu-
gatory. (Hear, hear.) He did not wish to provoke any
discussion upon that question now, but he would state that
the Government had under consideration a measure upon the
subject. (Hear, hear.) They were preparing a bill which
he hoped would amend the provisions of that act, and, if
possible, the procedure respecting election petitions.
The motion was then agreed to.
THE CONSOLIDATED FUND.

On the moticT.ithatheliouse;ll;:icig; into committee to
consider the proposition of the Chancellor of the Exchequer
respecting the Consolidation Fund,
Mr. HANKEY expressed a hope that the right hon.
gentleman would not discuss his resolution, which affected
very important interests, that evening, inasmuch as hon.
members had only that morning an opportunity of seeing
the resolution. (Hear.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER hoped the
house would in this instance follow the universal practice in
such cases by allowing the Speaker to leave the chair, and
then the measure could be much more conveniently dis-
cussed in committee.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY said it appeared to him that the
house was always in a difficult position in matters of finance
being contained in resolutions. No member had had an
opportunity of seeing the resolution until that day, and of
asking a question as to its bearine-s on most important inte-
rests. It was perfectly true that if the right hon. gentleman
passed this resolution he must bring in a bill on the subject;
but what was the meaning of the resolution at all ? It was
that they should have some security in making great financial
changes, in which they would have to deal with 36 millions
of money, and give power to create stock and to cancel stock
as the Commissioners of the Treasury might think proper.
Four hundred and fifty petitions had been presented, in-
cluding among the petitioners every bank of importance in
the United Kingdom, praying for an inquiry preliminary to
legislation. Well, they bad had inquiry, and committees
had come to resolutions nothing like that of the hon. gentle-
man. There ought to be at least a week's notice of such a re-
solution as the present, dealing, as it proposed to do, with
£28,000,000 of stock and £8,000,000 of Exchequer-bills. The
house was now called upon to enter into the very nature and
character of savings banks, and he ventured to say that the
house was not in a condition safely to affirm such a resolution
as that submitted to them to-night. There ought to be at
least a week's delay, and he might add that members were to
a certain extent taken by surprise in bringing forward this
subject on a Thursday evening. (Hear, bear.)
Mr. RICARDO declared he did not understand the reso-
lution as it stood on the paper, although he had given much
attention to the subject with which it proposed to deal. He
thought the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Ex- •
chequer ought to be allowed to make his statement in com-
mittee; but that the matter ought then to stand over for
some time, in order to give members an opportunity of un-
derstanding and considering the statement and resolution
os the right hon. gentlemen.

Mr. WILLIAM'S wished the Chancellor of the Exchequer
would add to this resolution—That it would be expedient to
repeal the act of Parliament which gave the Commissioners
for the Reduction of the National Debt the power of chop-
ping and changing this vast amount of money into Exche-
quer Bills or Consols as they thought fit, with a view of
sustaining the money market.
Mr. SPOONER was of opinion that it would be desirable
to permit the Chancellor of the Exchequer to make his state •
mont, and then that there should be an adjournment of the
matter, with the view of allowing the house to consider well
the resolution and the statement of the right hon. gentleman
before it came to any vote.
Colonel SYKES expressed himself of a somewhat similar
opinion, and did not think that where £36,000,000 of money
was at stake, the house ought to be called upon off-hand to
lend itself to a resolution like the present.
The house went into committee.
dots
oocTimhnhe aoorvfgeCetGHhu
repAeofaNnotuCtßohEwrei
iLtncaLgionnOr
Consolidated
and Ireland
itt
resolution,
tFEhu
Fund
nCdt i
tHori
sfeEsetpQxhepet JeetudEoi
United
int
tte
dthht
eoeKnesruiernaongsti
sums
due to savings banks and friendly societies, and to provide
for' the payment of the interest thereon to the Commis-
sioners for the Reduction of the National Debt, and also to
make provision out of the Consolidated Fund, or by Exche-
quer Bills, or by Excheauerßonds, for any difference which
may now or hereafter exist between the assets in the hands
of the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National
Debt in respect of savings banks and friendly societies, and
the liability thereon, and for the interest on such Exche-
quer Bills or Exchequer Bonds ; and also to authorise the
cancelling of such amounts of the several capital stocks of
annuities held by the said comniiisioners for savings banks
and friendly societies respectively, as may appear to the
Commiatouers of her Majesty's Treasury to be expedient,
ethreaattehde. h
a ,andl
lower
forw er
rthootecorfea
intitoenroostfltilkieanaThoounoatspiotaflcsatpoiotakls stock bearing
be ar
cancelled,ing
hoped
right hon. gentleman proceeded
d d • • until
Would not come to any eci c opinion
hon, gentlemen wo on thteosors observe v soe
and for paying the interest
house. The resolution he submitted was strictlywitiad
confor-
mity with precedent, with convenience, I,n
he had laid the statement be was about to make before.the
would be adopted on
had been said, he hoped the resolution
tb
that night. It had been trnlynbserYo ti•Ar 1 would PvPrY
ad-
vance of public business ; so that, notwithstanding what
difficult to gather the effect of a measure from a resolution.
could not however comprehend the objection of the hon.

gentleman the member for Evesham, who said he could not
understand the resolution, and in a moment after said itwas
the same resolution which he had brought forward five
years

Sir H. WILLOUGHBY—No, no.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—Thehon.
baronet certainly said the resolution was to the same effect.
It must be obvious to anyone who took the most cursory
view of the matter, that there was the greatest difficulty in
framing such a resolution as the present, which proposed to
alter the state of the law as regarded the dealing with a par-
ticular fund, so that it should be neither so full as to anticipate
the bill which was to be founded upon it, nor so meagre as
not to give the committee an idea of its scope. He admitted
that the law gave a title to the finance minister of the
Government over the principal and interest of those funds,
and that of principal and interest there was a clear claim to
restitution. He further admitted that this was a state of things
which called for a remedy. That remedy he proposed to
effect by the bill he would submit, and to give a full title to
every savings bank and friendly society over the whole
sums placed in the hands of the Government, principal and
interest, according to the stipulated terms. (Hear, hear.)
He had not the slightest doubt that every hon. member
would agree with him that this fund should he held secure
and harmless. (Hear.) If that were so, the real debt of
the state to savings banks and friendly societies was not to
be measured by the amount of stock which the commis-
sioners held, but by the amount which had actually been
paid over. (Hear, hear.) In the official statements under
the present law of the national obligation's and the amount
ef public liability, the consideration just adverted to was
omitted, and consequently these statements wsre untrue,
for we owed to friendly societies and to savings banks a very
considerable sum, which, he repeated, was nowhere men-
tioned in those official statements. That sum was said to be
about £2,000,000. That was one object of the bill. A second
object of the bill was to have a correct statement of the public
Idebt'made from year to year—a statement duly verified,
and which would represent the exact amount we owed. A
third object of the bill was to economise the Management of
those monies,but the nature of the resolution did not admit
of his going into such particulars as would define how he
meant to carry this out. A fourth object of the bill was to
limit the power at present possessed by the Chancellor of the
Exchequer over those funds, consisting of about L 49,000,000.
Some one had spoken of it as if the Chancellor of the
Exchequer wished to obtain greater power over these funds.
Why that was quite needless, for the finance minister al-
ready possessed the most complete control over those funds
—more, in his opinion, thanthe public interest required. The
remarks of the hon. gentleman the member for Lambeth
(Mr. W. Williams) as to the present conversion of those
funds into foreign bills, &c , were 'pit() true, and also that
in fact a new permanent national debt was created without
1 the consent of Parliament. He alluded to what were termed
deficiency bills and consolidated fund bills ; from and by
such means deficiencies were, under the present law, sup-
plied by the balances in the Exchequer. It was well known
that by the conversion of such bills into stock, it was in the
power of the finance minister, when there were deficiencies
in the public revenue, to use those funds, making a perma-
nent debt without the constant of Parliament. That power
he, by the proposed bill, intended to abolish. (Hear, hear.)
Lastly, he proposed to bring the whole of the transactions
of the Chancellor of the Exchequer through the medium of
the National Debt Commissioners periodically under the
revision of Parliament. He must say he was very sceptical
as to what had been said about the general ill-use of those
funds, though he admitted there might have been instances,
but still he must again own that there was vested in' the
finance minister a very considerable discretion, and he was
of opinion that the public interests would be better served
by these matters being annually brought under parliamen •
tary review. He proposed in the bill to enact for the first time
that all such transactions should, at the commencement of
every session, be submitted to Parliament, nor would he be
content with the mere presentation ofreturns. The committee
of that house which sat some three years ago on public monies
among other recommendations made one very valuable and
judicious, to the effect that the public accounts m the various
departments should regularly, at the commencement of
every year, be submitted to a committee of the house,
whose members should be chosen by the Speaker.
This seemed to him (the Chancellor of the Exchequer)
a most valuable suggestion, and he did not consider that
the house, as the guardian of the public money, would
discharge its duty without seeing from time to time how
those monies were appropriated. He had now stated the
general provisions of the bill which he had asked leave
to introduce—reminding the committee of what had hap-
pened on a former occasion. In 1854, parliament was
summoned together to consider matters connected with
the Crimean war, and he upon that occasion asked the
house to sanction the introduction of a resolution similar
to the present, upon which to found a hill. This was ob-
jected to by some, but the right hon. gentleman the
member for Buckinghamshire supported him (the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer), and was of opinion that the
preliminary resolution ought to be first disposed of, in
order that a plan should be submitted, and this was done
with the unanimous consent of the house. (Hear, hear.)
However, if after what he stated hon. members still de-
sired a postponement, he would not further resist it.
His wish was that they should affirm the resolution
whereupon to found a bill, which he would have printed
in the course of three or four days, and then there could
be an adjoUrnment of days, or even weeks, to consider
its provisions—(hear, hear) and before he asked them to
assent to the second reading.
Tne resolution having been read from the chair,
Mr. H. HERBERT expressed his regret at omissions in
the statement of the right hon. gentleman. The mode of
management of the money lodged in the banks previous to
the period to which he had alluded, viz., before it reached
the hands of the Commissioners for the Reduction ef the
National Debt, was in a most unsatisfactory state, and it
ahould be in such a satisfactory state as that the depositors
should have back the amount lodged in the hands of the
state. The Chancellor of the Exchequer; came forward,
and told the house and the country that he wished to bring
in a measure for dealing with this matter. If it were be-
yond his power or ability to produce a good measure, he
should put the savings banks in a position free from the
control of Government, for failures had taken place, and the
depositors, who were generally of the lower orders, were
told that the Government was not responsible, and the ma-
chinery for the purpose was not sufficient. Now if it were
beyond the power of the right hon. gentleman to remedy
that state of things, the Government should get rid of all
communication with those banks. Some time ago Parlia-
ment quite relieved trustees and managers of all regional-
bil wrc was cost was too large to make them responsible for.
He could not let the opportunity pass without expressing a
hope that the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the
Exchequer would deal with both the questions to which
he had referred, and that it would prevent losses arising in
future to depositors in savings banks, (Hear, hear.)
Mr. AYRTON thought the resolution proposed by the
right hon. gentleman was rather ambiguous in its language,
and did not inform them what he intended, as Chancellor
RTHCOTE agreed that the ob-
jects f
Sirthe
sExrAe. hFelltioeßr ,
Dt o
Nd o.
o
Of the Chancellor of the Exchequer were good. The
object which he had in rising was to ask the Chancellor of
the Exchequer whether he understood him to say that, in
dealing with the public money, he proposed that a com-
mittee should be appointed which would have power, not
only to exercise its functions in relation to the interest on
money in savings banks, but other branches of the public
expenditure. He should be glad to know from the right
hon. gentleman whether any measure of the kind was
contemplated, and whether he proposed to deal with the
recommendation of the committee on public monies in
their report, which was, that in proportion to the expendi-
ture of the different public offices there should be some kind
of check on the part of the house over such expenditure ;
and he wished to ask him whether there was any measure
of the kind contemplated by the Government.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY said it was true that the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer had power to lay hold of the
monies in savings banks ; but he believed the right hon.
gentlemen would find that that which occurred in 1854
would occur again. The great majority of the house ob-
jected to the measure then proposed. Did the committee
think it right that those monies should be placed in the
hands of trustees and managers, to convert as might be
thought proper ? He trusted that the trustees and mana-
gers throughout the United Kingdom would call on the
hour eto resist any such change. That was the recommer.
dation of the committee to which he had alluded, and it
was because he thought the resolution proposed by the
right hon. gentleman would strike at that portion of the
question, that he should object to the passing of it. If,
however, it was the opinion of the committee that it was
desirable to see the bill, he should not divide them upon
the question of passing the resolution.

Sir F. BARING was very glad to hear that his hon.
friend opposite did not intend to persevere in his opposition
to the adoption of the resolution. As he (Sir F. Baring)
understood the question, the Chancellor of the Exchequer
was compelled by the:riilesof the house to press the reso-
lution. It was suite clear that the resolution was not as
intelligible as desirable ; but the committee were not com-
mitted by the resolution to adopt the proposed bill. The
object of the resolution was to give power to deal with
the savings banks' funds in relation to the Consolidated
Fund. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had stated
the objects which he had in view, and he (Sir. F. Bar-
ing) was bound to add that those views appeared to
him to be most desirable. (Hear.) He did not suppose that
there was any one in the house who would say that the de-
positors in savings banks had not the right to resist a very
small amount of interest for the money which they had
placed in savings banks, and the sooner that was settled the
better. There was also another point upon which he was
desirous to speak, because he was one of those who had
"sinned" like othei Chancellors of the Exchequer. The
Chancellor of the Exchequer had at present power over the
money in savings banks, whothez safely or not. It was his
(Sir F. Baring's) fate to employ that money as a financial
minister. He would not now fight over 1841, but he would
say it appeared to him to be a power which he thought the
Chancellor of the Exchequer ought to be deprived of.
(Hear, hear.)

Mr. BARROW said he wished not to be understood as
approving of all the details of the measure simply because
he did not move an amendment and divide upon it. As a
trustee of savings banks, he must say that, if the bill con-
tained a power such as the right hon. gentleman described,
he should strongly desire to see it removed.
Mr. J. L. RICARDO thought it impossible to object to
the intention which the right hon. gentleman had professed,
but he thought a committee should be appointed to consi-
der some of the details. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer
had the control he desired, the same course would be fol-
lowed as before. The right hon. gentleman would avail
himself of it to meet his financial requirements. Having
heard the explanation of the right hon. gentleman, he found
it necessary to await the bill itself.
Col. SYKES having expressed his qualified approval of
the xleasure, subject to an unobjectionable control on the
part of the Government,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, in
reply, that ho hoped to be able to pass a good bill on
the subject in the present session. They were now
dealing with the question of the custody of public
monies, and he conceived that his proposition was
strictly confined within the proper limits. He could
relieve the mind of the honourable member for
Nottinghamshire, by stating that the Government would
take .ao power of ordering a lower rate of interest to be paid
to the contributors. With regard to-the functions of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, in reference to the tneasu-e,
he could only say that the Government must retain some
amount of discretion in the investments.
The resolution was then agreed to, and the house having
resumed, it was reported by the chairman.

SitPLY.
Tho SPEAKER read theP paragraph from the Queen's
Speech, and the usual resolutiDn was passed that supply
be granted to her Majesty. It was also resolved that the
Speech should be taken into consideration to-morrow.
The house then adjourned shortly before nine o'clock.

[ADVERTISIMENT.I—EPPB's (Homoeopathic Chemist)
COCOA.—This esteemed preparation is sold by the prin-
cipal grocua at is. ad. per lb., in 11b., Vb., and 4111
packets. Each
_packet is labelled " James Epps, Honice"
fathic chemist; Londo4,"

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS.

PRIVATE BILLS.

In the House of Commons yesterday Mr. Massey reported,
that, in accordance with Standing Order 67, he haa conferred
with the Chairman of Committees of the House of Lords,
for the purpose of determining in which House of Parlia-
ment the respective Private Bills should be first considered ;
and that they had determined that the bills contained in the
'ollowing list should originate in the House of Lords, viz. :
Athenry and Ennis Junction Railway.
Athenry and Tuarn Railway.
Auchterarder Common Muir.
Banbridge Junction Railway.
Belfast and Ballymena Railway.
Belfast and County Down Railway.
Belfast, Holywood, and Bangor Railway.
Brandon's Estate.
Brompton, Chatham, Gillingham, &c., Water.
Caledonian Rail way (Branches to Lanark, &c.)
Caledonian Railway (Lesmahage Branches, &c.)
Carrickfergus and Larne Railway.
Commercial Docks Acts Amendment.
Cork and Limerick Direct Railway.
Cowes and Newport Railway Extensions.
Croydon Gas.
Dover Gas.
Dublin (City) Steam Packet Company.
Dublin and Drogheda Railway.
Dublin and Kingstown and Dublin and Wicklow Rail.
vay Companies.
Dublin and Meath Railway.
Dublin and Wicklow Railway.
Dumfries, Lochmaben, and Lockerby Junction Railway
East India Coal Company.
East India Fibre Company.
Eau Brink Drainage.
Edinburgh Railway Station Access.
Edinburgh Royal College of Surgeons.
Ennis and Galway Junction Railway.
Everton, &c , Drainage.
Fergus River Navigation Improvement, &c.
Finn Valley Railway.
Forest of Dean Central Railway.
Galashiels, Innerleithen, and Peebles Railway.
Galway Pier Junction Railway.
Glasgow Town Clerks.
Governesses' Benevolent Institution.
Grand Canal, Midland Great "Western of Ireland and
Great Southern and Western Railway Companies.
Grand Surrey Docks and. Canal.
Great Northern and Western (of Ireland) Railway.
Great Ship Company.
Grunty Fen Drainage and Improvement.
Hamilton and Strathaven Railway.
Holyhead Water.
Inverness and Aberdeen Junction Railway.
Inverness and Ross-shire Railway.
Isle of Wight (Eastern Section) Railway.
Keith and Dufftown Railway.
Kells and Baillieborough Railway.
Kilkenny Junction Railway.
Kilrush and Kilkee Railway and Poulnasherry Embank.
ment.
Letterkenny Railway.
Limerick and Ennis Railway.
London Bridge Railways Terminus Hotel Company.
London Hydraulic Power Company.
London Sheriffs Court.
Londonderry and Lough Swilly Railway.
Maidstone, Rochester, Chatham, &c., Water.
Maidstone Water.
Matlock Water.
Medway Valley Water.
Midland Great Western Railway of Ireland.
Monkland Railways.
Montrose and Bervie Railway.
Morayshire Railway.
Newry, Warrenpoint, and Rostrevor Railway.
North British Insurance Company.
North Kent Water.
Portadown, Dungannon, and Omagh Junction Railway
Railway Clearing House (Ireland).
Royal Naval School.
Sheffield Cutlers' Company.
South Devon Railway.
Southall New Cattle Market.
Spalding Water.
Symington, Biggar, and Broughton Railway.
Torquay Gas.
Waterford and Kilkenny Railway.
aterford and Limerick Railway.
Waterford and Limerick and Great Southern and Western
Railways.
Wellington Suspension Bridge.
West of Fife Mineral Railway.