The Sun.
London, England, 1861-04-30 00:00:00

house discussing the important measures they have brought
before us. (Hear, hear.) It is easy for the Chancellor of
the Exchequer to describe our discussions as aimless and
uninteresting; but what I want to ask the house and the
Government is this—What )ther mode was there for this
house to express its opinion on the general scope and ten-
dency of the policy of the Ministry, and to ask that infor-
mation and those explanations which were necessary for us
before we could go with any profit into committee to con•
eider the propriety of passing the particular resolutions then
to be submitted to us ? (Hear.) When we reflect what an
elaborate,lengthened and complicated performance a financial
statement, especially inlhese days, necessarily is, it is impos-
sible that the Governmentcan suppose that on the first night
of such a statement being made the house can arrive at a
result upon the multifarious projects which solicit its con-
sideration. The Government must feel that for us to enter
in that manner, without thought or examination, into Com-
mittee of Ways and Means, and devote our attention to the
particular resolutions must lead to the most desultory and
immature discussion, and perhaps to rash and precipitate
conclusions which both the house and Government may after-
wards have cause to regret. (Hear.) As a general principle,
therefore, I say it is expedient that when a budget has been
introduced to our notice, before we go into a committee of
Ways and Means, there should be a discussion on its general
tendency. But, Sir, I think there are particular reasons
with reff rence to this question, and With reference also to the
present Government, which render such a course in the highest
degree necessary ; because I say that upon this subject last
session the House of Commons was kept in the dark. (Hear,
hear.) The House of Commons last year was summoned at
an earlier date than its usual period for assembling. Very
extensive financial propositions were then brought before
it. Those propositions were pressed upon our attention by
I cogent circumstances connected with treaties with foreign
Powers. And when the house expressed on' more than one
important subject the necessity of more information than
the Government were prepared to give, on both occasions
the house was not, in my opinion, treated with the candour
which it should at all times receive at the hands of a Mi-
nister. (Hear.) I don't want to make a grave charge, but
rather to illustrate the position I wish to put before the
house. I would refer to that China vote, the subject of so
I much discussion in this debate. When last year the right
lion. gentleman brought forward his proposals in such ex-
traordinary circumstances of pressure the attention of the
house was naturally called to the vote he then proposed,
amounting, I believe, to £500,000 for carrying on the war
with China. A great many gentlemen on both sides of
the house expressed their apprehension that that was
not an adequate provision for such a purpose. There
was considerable incredulity felt upon both sides, but what
was the reply of the right hon. gentleman ? He scoffed at
that incredulity and those apprehensions, and he said that
the expense of the Chinese war was not be measured by
that single vote, but by the proportionate increase that
would be found in the naval and military estimates of the
country, and on that representation the proposals of the
right hon. gentleman were passed. Well, what happened ?
A few months afterwards the same Minister came down to
this house and proposed a vote of almost as many millions
as at the beginning of the year he had proposed hundreds
of thousands to carry on that war. At this moment no one
can suppose that the right hon. gentleman in February was
not as fully aware of the necessity for that vote as in May.
(Hear, hear.) Therefore, it shows that the house should
not be hurried into coming to a decision upon financial
subjects. Take another instance. When the house met
last year, and the financial propositions were put before us,
there was a great expect: ion in the country that a proposal
would be made by the Government to provide considerable
fortifications for the defence of these realms; and there
were inquiries made from both sides of the house as to
whether any such proposal was contemplated by the Go-
vernment. The right hon. gentleman scoffed at all inqui-
ries. He rose and said that no proposal of the kind had
been before the Cabinet, and he would not listen to such a
suggestion. [The Chancellor of the Exchequer metre an
observation.] I beg the right hon. gentleman's pardon, I
heard him, I fully believe, make that observation. (Hear,
hear.) The consequence was that the whole of the finan-
cial propositions were passed, but a few months afterwards
the Ministry brought forward a most extensive scheme for ;
erecting these fortifications to the amount of some millions,
and then it turned out that these fortifications had been
resolved upon by the Government in consequence of
a report made by the Royal Commissioners which
was dated, I believe, before the meeting of Parliament, and
certainly was in the possession of Government when the
budget was brought forward. (Hear, hear.) Therefore, I
say under these circumstances it becomes the House
very cautiously to preceed when they are dealing with finan-
cial measures in the present day, and especially when those
financial measures are brought forward by the right hon.
gentleman. (Hear.) What has been the consequence of the
haste and precipitation of the house in passing the budget
of the right hon. gentleman last year ? The consequence
has been that there is a great deficiency. (Hear.) I ask the
house to consider how that deficiency has been supplied.
It has been :supplied by increasing the liabilities and di-
minishing the resources of the country—by reducing the
balances in the Exchequer and by increasing the debt.
(Hear.) At this moment, although I have listened with the
utmost attention to the statement of th 3 right hon. gentle •
man, I must say that I can make out no answer to the
statement of my hon, friend the member for Stamford as to
the mode by which the deficiency of last year has been sup-
plied. (Hear.) Is there a gentleman in the house who has a
clear conception of it? (Hear.) There was a sum of
£1,440,000 taken from the balances in the Exchequer and
an increase of the debt by the issue of Exchequer-bonds,
which ultimately arrived at the amount of-£440,000; but
there is an item of £620,000 more of a very peculiar and
suspicious character, which in the figures in the official
papers recently laid upon the table appears as repayments of
advances, and my hon. friend the member for Stamford
naturally wished for some explanation. He could not un-
derstand exactly how repayments of advances paid into
the Exchequer to be re-issued could become revenue raised
within the year for the service of the year. (Hear.) But
what has been the answer of the right hon. gentleman ?
He:says the repayments for advances being due to the Con-
solidated Fund, he did not take them for the service of
the year, but, being due to the Consolidated Fund, they
became part of the balances of the Exchequer. (Hear,
hear.) If they were due to the Consolidated Fund, and
paid into the Exchequer, they must be re-issued in answer
to fresh demands, and it is quite clear that the right hon.
gentleman has availed himself of the repayment of moneys
not raised in the year for the service of the year in order to
contribute to his deficiency, and therefore, according to his
own statement, ho has been taking out from the balances
not £1,440,000, but £2,000,000, and part of this sum was
repayments which ought again to be lent for the public
service. (Hear.) Ido net wish now to dwell much upon
this topic, as I have to call attention to more important
points, but it is a curious thing, remembering 1852, when
one of the predecessors of the right hon. gentleman proposal
as part of a scheme of great administrative reform, to take
repayments of £lOO,OOO as balances in the Exchequer, the
rig; ht hon. gentleman then rose and made that the chief
ground for his celebrated attack—(hear)—and in the name
of outraged finance called upon Parliament to terminate the
existence of a Government who could be guilty of such acts

—(hear)—the only difference between the Government of
1852 and that of 1861 being that we ventured to propose to
du it with the consent of Parliament, and the right hon.
gentleman has done it without the consent of Parliament.

(Hear.) I will only touch for one moment upon the next
question—that of the Chinese indemnity. I take it for
granted that in F!orue way or other the right hon. gentleman
will obtain that sum of money from China, probably at the
expense of our merchants, for that seems to be not only
acknowledged but to be vindicated. (Hear.) All I would
say in passing upon this topic, which is no doubt suscepti-
ble of much controversy, for which at this moment we have
not time is this—l do not clearly understand upon what
principle c f finance this financial purist proposes to take this
year and a half of the indemnity, which, in my mind, must
have been pledged to the Consolidated Fund, to occupy the
place of the balances which had already been abstracted--
upon what principle of finance he applies this year and a half
of the indemnity to the service of the year. It is not money
raised within the year for the service of the year, which
the right hon. gentleman has told us is the only legitimate
source of revenue. However, that is not a point upon which
it is necessary for me to dwell at present. I come to the
question of surplus, and upon that head I must say I am
perfectly astonished by the argument of the right hon. gen-
tleman. He is surprised that anybody should doubt that he
is in possession of a surplus. (Hear, hear.) I must say I
think the indignation of the right hon. gentleman has some
foundation. I cannot believe that any person occupying the
position which he does could, under any possible circum-
stances, any conceivable circumstances, offer to the house
estimates of the great branches of revenue which were not
perfectly sound, well matured, and founded upon the deep-
est investigation and deliberation. I entirely agree in the
opinion of the right hon. gentleman of the high character
of those individuals to whom the right hon. gentleman and
all who have at any time occupied the post he now fills must
feel indebted fur invaluable services—l mean the heads of
the revenue branches and the heads of departments of the
Treasury connected with finance, which have been at all
times represented by men of adequate ability, and which are
represented at the present day in a manner never before ex-
celled, or perhaps equalled, in knowledge of duties and faith-
ful and sagacious discharge of those duties. But I may be
an wed to say I cannot but regret that the right hon. gen-
tleman to-night, and the President of the Board of Trade on
fOrmer evening, thought fit to draw the names and autho •
rity of those distinguished men into our discussions in the
House of Commons. Whatever may be their abilities, what •

•
ever their character, however great may be the debt which
the country owes to them, it is the right hon. gentleman and

her Majesty's Ministers who are responsible for all these
estimates; and although I freely and entirely acquit the
right hon. gentleman of having any intention of diminish-

ing that responsibility, as I am sure he is the last man to seek
to do so, yet every one must feel that the inevitable ten-

dency of bringing the names and authority of those gen-
tlemen into this house is to diminish that responsibility
(hear, hear)—to make Parliaments look to the heads of de-
partments and also has the tendency of diminishing the
freedom maa independence with which those distinguished.
men now perform those important duties. (Hear, hear.)
"But," says the right hon. gentleman, " I am met in a most
tinuottal and improper manner 1.357 the Opposition. Last