The Sun.
London, England, 1850-04-13 00:00:00

Tur SUN, LONDON'. SATURDAY EVENING-, APRIL 18, 1860.9

amended Bill was the re3ult of conference and corre-
spondynce with a great number cf hankers, merchants,
and others, most competent to understand its be-tring
and effects. He was not, therefore, eisposed to vary the
arrangement for proceeding with the Bill on Monday.
Mr. MULLINGS complained that there were several
omissions in the Bill and objections to the clauses, which
would seriously 'affect many persons.
MISCELLANEOUS ES TI MATES.
_

In reply to a question from Mr. HUME,
The CHANCE LLOR•of the EXCHEQUER said the
misce'laneous estimates would bo laid on the table of the
House in a few days.
MR. ANSTEY AND MR. SMITH O'BRIEN.
Mr. A NSTE Y complained of certain letters written to
him by Mr. Smith O'Brien on private business, since his
expatriation, having been opened by Sir Wm. Denison,
and gave notice that he should, on Tuesday next, move
a resolution on the subject, the purport of which would
be, that the matter wai one calling for the severest
Scrutiny on the part of the Rouse.
ARC no EXPEDITION.

Mr. lIUME moved for an account of the charge for the
purchase, repair, and outfit of the vessels now fitting for
the Arctic expedition; and also a statement of all sums
due or claimed by private builders for the building and
alterations of tee Niegmrv, Greenock, and Simoom, and
any other sums claimed for iron steam-ships for her Ma-
jesty's navy, specifying the names of the vessels and of
the buildere, the price originally agreed upon, the price
charged by the said builders, the sums paid on account
by the Admiralty, and the balance now claimed.—
Age eed to.
COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SALARIES.
Lord JOIIN RUSSELL rose and said he was now
about to propose the appointment of a Select Committee
to inquire into the salaries of offices held by Members of
Parliament, and to consider the propriety of reducing
them. There were various precedents for the appointment
of Committees fur the purpose of inquiring into offices
held during the pleasure of the Crown by Members of
Parliament. In 1798 a Committee was appointed to in-
quire into many branches of the public service, and also,
in 1828, a Committee which took into .its
notice the propriety of reducing the military
expenditure. In November cf 1830 Lord Al-
thorp proposed the appointment of a Committee
to inquire into offices held during pleasure of the Crown,
and in doing so he declared that though the Government
were prepared to undertake any reduction which might
be deemed expedient, yet he thought it better that there
should be a Committee, composed of independent Mem-
bers, to inquires into the subject. The Committee
of 1848, which had been appointed to inquire into
the military expenditure, had also performed its
duties in a manner highly creditable to itself and
useful to the Government. He (Lord J. Russell) had
postponed the Committee which he was at present about
to move for, from a wish that various gentlemen of great
experience and ability, who were engaged on the Com-
mittee of 1848, should be at liberty to take part in tsis
Committee. With respect to the first object of this Com-
mittee, viz., to inquire into the salaries of persons holding
office during pleasure under the Crown, several pro-
posals had already been made in a Committee which had
had the miscellaneous estimates under its notice. At
the same timd it would be recollected that frequent pro-
posals had also been made for the reduction of this
branch of the public expendituie, either by reducing the
salaries 10 per cent., or by diminishing the number of
persons employed in each department. Yet it seemed better
that any reduction of this kind should be decided upon
by a Committee composed of independent Members of
the House, than by the persons whose salaries it was
proposed to inquire into. Lord Althorp, in moving
his Committee, had stated that he did not think it desir-
able that the salaries of the high offices under
the Crown should be reduced so low as to confine them
altogether to persons of large private fortunes. With
regard to the second part of the motion ho said, that
when Lord Denman was appointed Chief Justice of the
Queen's Bouch in 1831, he proposed to take a salary of
8,000/, but no regular decision had been come to by
Parliament on the subject. It would be advisable,
if the salaries of the Chief Justices of the Queen's
Bench and of the Common Pleas were to be con-
sidered, that the salaries and retiring allowances
of the other judges should likewise undergo investiga-
tion. There were besides other questions of great im-
portance connected with the judges of the courts of
equity. Their salaries were considered by the Com-
mute° of 1798, and it was tit that they should
again be considered by a Committee, as since
that time many changes had taken place. The last part
of the motion referred to the diplomatic establishments
of the country;swhick were formerly defrayed out of the
civil list; but since the alterations which separated them
from being part of the expenses of the Sovereign's house-
hold, they had been placed on the Consolidated Fund.
As nineteen years had elapsed since that separation
took place it was desirable also that these establishments
should be reconsidered by Parliament. In proposing,
therefore, that there should be a Committee on these
subjects, he intended that evidence should be
taken before it with the view of asceitsining
in what shape reductions could best be made.
and he thought that at least one Member of
the Government should have a seat on that Committee.
The appointment of such a Committee was conformable
to precedent, and it appeared to him in accordance with
the general feeling of the House. He observed that
Mr. Disraeli and Mr. Henley had motions similar in
character, and presumed, therefore, that the question was
as to the most convenient mode of instituting the inquiry.
Mr. Disraeli, had, however, an amendment on the paper,
to the effect that Government should at once introduce a
measure for the reduction of salaries; but the Govern-
ment could not think it advisable to do so until the sub
ject had been inquired into by a Committee. The Go-
vernment hag nut been unmindful of the propriety of
carrying out reductions whenever they could, and within
the last few years no less a sum than 2,284,0001. had
been taken of the army, navy, and ordnance estimates.
With regard to the civil departments, it certainly ap-
peared to him that the Government had far better means
of making reductions, in point of detail, than any Com-
mittee of that House; and he thought that was proved
by what had taken place witk regard to the inquiries
instituted of late years both into the d-partments
of the Treasury and the Home Office. So
far as it appeared upon the general surface,
it could not be said that there were any extravagant ap
pointments in these offices, or that the salaries paid were
exorbitant; but yet by a minute examination made by
official persons it had been found possible to make con•
siderable reductions in the departments he had
mentioned. He could mention a few instances
where reductions had been made. In the
Treasury, two chief clerks, one senior, and four
junior clerks had been abolished at a net saving of
5,3451. per annum. In the office of the Paymaster of
the Forces, in the Ordnance, and in the Home-office
savings had been effected of upwards of 23,0001., and at
the same time, by removing some clerks from less use-
ful situations to posts in the offices where the
duties were heavy, there, has been complete efficiency
kept up in each office, and no want ,of attention to the
general business of the country, so far as these offices
were concerned, bad resulted from such reduction. With
Y, the reductions which had been
in
of the last thirty years were very
considerable cindrreseeea
indeed, since he found that in 1821 there
were 38 persons ,holding offices in that department,
receiving 42,9601. per annum. In 1830 the same
duty was ,performed Iby 29 persons, with a
salary of 24,080/., and at the present time it appeared
that the duties of the Treasury were performed for
25,000/. per annum, and considering the multafarious
nature of these duties, and the important matters which
the Treasury had to decide, he did not believe that
there could be shown anywhere, either in
Europe or in America, an example of duties
being so well performed for so small a re-
muneration. It had been said the Treasury was no-
thing better than an Augean stable, which required
cleansing; but in his opinion never were there public
duties performed so zealously, and efficiently, and econo-
mically as those performed by the permanent officers
engaged in the Treasury.—(Cheers.) At the
same time, Government had considered it ne-
cessary to make a comparison between the salaries
in establishments like the Bank of England, and
paid to these officers, and those received by clerks en-
gaged in
was bound to say that the result of comparison was
very much in favour of the 'clerks employed in
the Bank of England and such like establishments.
He had mentioned what had been done with
regard to the Treasury and the Home-office,
but it shouli be remembered that still further
reductions would be made from time to time, while, with
regard to the Colonial•office, a similar inquiry to that
he had mentioned as being made by official
persons was going on which would also lead to reductions.
Other reductions of late years had been made in the
Customs, and that was financially called the Excise
department. In those various departments there had
been a reduction of 5,1001. a year. There were various
other reductions which had been made in consequence of
the inquiry which had been carried on officially at the
Custom-house, and which amounted to no less a sum
than 64,7911 a
year. It was intended there should be a
reduction of twenty-eight clerks in the office, which
would be a further saving of 6,900/. odd. With
regard to the Excise and Stamps establishment, that
was formerly connected with the Board of Inland Re-
venue, and a large establishment of commissioners. The
Inland Revenue boards consisted of 38 commissioners.
The present board consisted of a chairman, a deputy-
chairman, and 6 junior commissioners; and there was a
saving of salaries alone of upwards of 30,000/. a
year. The reduction which bad been made within the last
two or three years had likewise been very considerable,
because when the Excise, Stamps, and Taxes, existed
as two• separate boards, there were twelve commis-
sioners, two chairmen, two deputy chairmen, and eight
junior commissioners, the united salaries of whom were
17,000/. a year. Compared with the former establish-
ment there was a saving of 5,6001. per annum. The
secretary's salary had like% ise been reduced
1,500/., the solicitor's 2,000/., the reeeiver-ge-
neral's 1,200/., and the comptroller general's 1,000/.
The distributors' poundage in Englaed and Ireland had
also been reduced 37,1001. But beyond this he must
state that in 1833 the number of persons employed was
9,033; the number emplo3e 1 last year was 7,009, being
a reduction of 2,024. The amount of salaries in
1832 was 962,174/. ; it was now 715,0001.,
being a reduction of 247,174/. The last ac-
count that had been made showed a decrease,
as compared with 1833, of 2,170 persons, and
in the salaries of 259,670/., being more than a quarter of
a million of money in that department. There had been
from time to time various other reductions; but it had
been thought desirable to effect those reductions with as
little as possible of hardship to individuals. Now, he
thought he should state, that in proposing this
Committee he proposed it, as it might have been
proposed in 1798, or in 1807, or in 1830, with reference

to ale duties to be performed by those various officers,

and not with the view, which certainly scene Gentlemen
seemed to have ?a,l.:en very Ivarrel:-, the.; tltere was at
present such a decrease in the cxpeoses which belonged
to the office that it was poSsible, by some scale, to make
:a sudden reduction of the salaries of all of us.
The Comrni!t?.e would have to cousider not merely the
price of corn, but also what was the reduction in all
those expences which persons in public offices have to
bear. He did not think that were many of those items
which would Lear reduction. He held in his hand an ac-
count in detail the expense of a clerk -of 1501., and he
did not think that there were many items in that
which would bear reduction. There were various
other subjects which a Committee would have to con-
sider if it were proposed to make a reduction upon the
principle of prices. At the same time, he did not mean
to say that as the general price of living was very much
decreased, that might be taken into consideration; but
he did think it desirable that that decrease should be
taken on the standard of reduction. He was
now about to conclude what be had to say
with regard to the general proposition which
he had to lay before the House; but before doing so,
he would just allude to a proposition which had been
made, that the public service would be better carried on
if the persons holding office were altogether removed
from Parliament. It was evident that such a proposal
was qeite inconsistent with the mode of government in
this country. Unless they had persons in Parliament to
defend measures there which might be 'brought forward,
it was quite evident that there would be no sort of har-
mony between the Members of the the two Houses
of Parliament. They had an instance of this
in the attempt which had keen made to carry on the
business of the Poor-law Board without a Secretary of
State for that department in the House to defend its
measures. That had been altered, and under his late
lamented friend, Mr. Charles Buller, and the present
President, every complaint had been brought
into Parliament, and satisfactorily answered, so
that a much easier working of this branch had been
perceptible since the introduction of the President of the
Poor-law Board into Parliament. He merely mentioned
this as an instance, for he never expected that any Com-
mittee would for a moment entertain the idea of re-
moving members of the Government from their seats in
Parliament. He now left the question in the hands of
the House, feeling certain that any general Committee
would deal with it in a manner satisfactory to the interests
of the country. The present members of the Government
were merely tenants-at-will; but the Committee would
have to consider the permanent interests of the country.
The Noble Lord then concluded by moving the appoint-
ment of a Select Committee, to inquire into the salaries
and emoluments of 'offices held during the plea-
sure of the Crown by Members of either House of
Parliament, voted in the annual estimates; and also the
salaries and emoluments of judicial offices in the supe-
rior courts of law and equity in the United Kingdom;
and into the retiring pensions allotted to the judges; and
also into the expense of diplomatic establishments
charged on the Consolidated Fund.
Mr. DISRAELI rose to move as an amendment to
Lord John Russell's motion, " That this House is in
possession of all the information requisite to revise and
regulate public salaries; that Parliamentary Committees
of inquiry under such circumstances would only lead
to delay ; and that it is the duty of the Govern-
ment, on their own responsibility, forthwith to introduce
the measures that may be necessary for effecting
every reduction in the national establishments con-
sistent with the efficient discharge of the public service."
He said that if he had not thought that this amendment
which he was about to propose was one which, if
adopted, would be for the honour of that House, and for
the advantage of the public service, he should not have
presumed to have addressed the House on the present
occasion. He had listened with great attention to the
speech of the Noble Lord, and he must say he
was surprised at the general tenor of it.
The only impression on his mind was this—why did the
Noble Lord not persevere in that course which he had
prosecuted so successfully? Why should he have asked
a Committee of the House of Commons to discharge
duties which, according to his own account, be had pro-
secuted so successfully?—(Hear, hear.) The state-
ment which the Noble Lord had made was rather a
vindication of the principle which he (Mr. Disraeli) had
laid before the consideration of the House than one
which could at all authorise the present motion.—
(Hear.) It was extremely difficult to extract anything
like principle from the Noble Lord's statement, but he
dealt very amply in the precedents which he thought
justified the motion. He referred to the practice of sub•
(flitting to a Committee of the House estimates for the
public service, and reminded them that it bad been
adopted by successive Governments with great public
benefit. There was, bee ever an essential difference
between the precedents to which the Noble Lord

referred and the coarse which he proposed now
to adopt. It was ♦ery true that this, as well as
other Governments, referred the estimates for the
public service to a Committee of the House ; but
what were the estimates ? They were the embodied
opinion of the Government on an important part of the
public ervice; but the Government, under these ci:•

cumstances, did not shrink from previously stating their
opinions, yet he could not find that in the motion of the
Noble Lord he had preferred any opinion whatever.—
(Cheers.) He (Ir. Disraeli) was at a loss to
know whether it was the opinion of the
government that these particular branches of the public
service were susceptible of any reduction or not. If it
were the opinion of the Government that they were not,
they were now playing with the House of Commons,
and if, atter due investigation, proper inquiry,
and mature reflection, they arrived at a result
that they were susceptible of reduction, he
asked the Government to give the House the result
of their inquiry; let the House deal with it as it, in its
wisdom, inigut deem best. But the precedents
of the Noble Llrd appeared extremely infelicitous,
Now, he would take the instance of 1831, namely, Lord
Althorp's Cummitte.; of 1831—that Committee was ape
pointed to inquire into the salaries and offices held by
Nlewbers of both Houses c.f Parliament, but was
that a precedent for the motion• of the Noble

Lord? 'Admit, which he was not ready to
do, that it was politic for a Committee of the House of
Commons to inquire into this subject without having the
opinion of the Mioisters upon it, how did the pre-
cedent of 1831 apply to this motion ? The duty
of the Committee of 1831 was to in-
vire into salaries embraced in the estimates, but
this Committee would have to inquire into salaries, emo-
luments, and pensions, which were received by Act
of Parliament ; and, therefore, if the Committee
come to a vote upon the subject of judicial
and diplomatic salaries, emoluments, and pen-
sions, it must be entirely non-effective.
To make such a vote effective, the Minister must intro-
duce a Bill, and if this Committee was to deal with the
salaries, emoluments, and pensions of judicial
and
introduce a Bill now? In that case they would have the
opinion diplomatic appointments, why did not the Ministers
of the Ministers upon the subject, while if
there were any details to be investigated, which
means admitted, then the Noble Lord might
he by no me
move that it be referred to a Committee. In his amend-
ment, which the Noble Lord seemed to have mis-
understood, he expressed an opinion that the House
was in possession of all the int? irmation necessary
to decide and regulate public salaries; and to prove
this he need only refer to the reports and papers
which had already been laid on the table, and
which the Noble Lord had made such use of.
say,hioh in regardlobse observe
to o the
from reportwliat of
fell The Hon. Gentleman, in continuation, said—Here I
must the
f hl
eroemotnthme Noble
ittee
of
1834, w
Lord to-nigh, and from some expressions of his the other
night, showed the tone of his mind, that that report, in
fact, forms the basis of the policy which I am now pur-
suing. I will call the attention of the House to the
reason given by Lord Althorp for that inquiry into these
Parliamentary salaries; and I will ask the House whe-
ther they consider that that is a satisfactory reason for
the course proposed ? Now, it appears to me, that Lord
Althorp, in the commencement of his speech when mov-
ing for this Committee, had laid it down—not as a matter
of principle, bat as a matter of what I may call senti.
ment—that there was an indelicacy in a Minister at-
tempting to settle the amount of his own salary; and the
Noble Lord opposite has referred to that sentiment as
ono that influenced him in the course he is now pursuing.
I ask the House are they prepared to sanction that sen-
timental course of conduct. In my opinion there is no-
thing more dangerous in the conduct of public business
than delicacy..—(lronical cheers from the Ministerial
benches.) Ido not know what Hon. Gentlemen from
their own experience may know on that subject, but
in my limited experience I know that wherever de-
licacy was admitted into transactions of business

I have always considerably suffered.—(Laughter)
Sir, I do not think aiMinist,er ought to shrink from the
performhnce of a public duty by telling us he considered
it indelicate.—(Hear, hear.) For example, I think that
there is nothing indelicate in an individual occupying
the position of a Minister of the Crown looking not
merely to his own interest but to that of his successors,
acting boldly upon his own responsibility and upon his
own knowledge, and proposing that which he thinks a
fair remuneration for a. public servant.—(Bear, hear.)
Considering well the interests of the public, and feeling
the necessity of having the highest talent engaged in
the public service, a Minister ought to feel no such deli-
cacy in settling the question himself. But Lord Al-
thorp, although I am willing to do jitstice to the great
qualities of that eminent person, we must remember, was
brought up in that exclusive Parliamentary system
which flourished here from the period of the accession
of the House of Hanover down to the year 1630, when
we know that the Ministers of State, and those particular
friends that sat near them, bore a particular relationship
to each other. Lord Althorp, as Minister, may have ex-
perienced a peculiar delicacy in dealing with these sala-
ries, which we should not be told existed in a reformed

House of Commons. lam of opinion that we have suf-
ficient information, in the first place, to revise and
regulate all public salaries. We have that information, in
my opinion, in the documents to which the Noble Lord
opposite referred; in the series of roports which he has
brought under our consideration; and in every report,
and especially the more recent ones, submitted to us.
These, in my mind, furnish a strong argument against
the motion of the Noble Lord, and in favour of the
amendment which I have the honour to bring under the
notice of the House. But we have other information.

We have every year the names of the persons and the
salaries of all those public offices brought annually under
our consideration. There is not an individual who filla
any of those public offices whose name we do not
know, and with whose salary we are not fully acquainted.
Not only as Members of Parliament, but as men of the
world, we cannot help being able to fotm an opinion
founded upon that information which exists in our own
archive,. We cannot help forming an opinion also on the
nature of the duties those individuals fulfil. I want to
know, then, if we agree to appoint a Committre, how
we are to obtain more information? Will you ex-
amine the judges? The Noble Lord says, "of course,
the Committee will have the privilege of summoning them
before them." Will you examine" the judges in refer-

enco to the expenses of their circuits? Will you make
theta prolece their tevtirn bills and their vouchers?
Will you call eminent counsel before you and examine
them as to their professional incomes? Will you summon
their clerks to produce their fee-books? It is impas-
sible to contemplate anything so indecorous and it -
discreet.—(Laughter.) But the Government has all
this information, even from the beat sources—they hold
confidential communication with the judges, and they
could not offend the dignity of the highest magistrate in
acting upon that information which they have so cau-
tiously obtained. The Government could acquire a
knowledge as to the salaries and emoluments connected
with all these offices from the most eminent members of
the bar, by whom they are surrounded; and, mind you,
the Government are a portion of the House, and that
information of the Government is the information of the
House. I will now refer to our diplomatic establish-
ment. How will you investigate into that subject?
Will you summon the ambassadors from Constantinople,
Vienna, and Paris? Will you have them brought over
from the German courts to be examined, or will you ob-
tain that information in a mush more convenient and
satisfactory manner ? Will you summon before you the
Noble Lord the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs ?
Ile will give you the most accurate and most complete in-
formation. You will thus have the advantage of
ceiling with a Minister who is perfectly acquainted
with all those details.—(Hear.) But suppose that
instead of this evidence the Noble Lord would prepare a
Bill on the subject, and introduce it into the House. We
should have, in this case, more speedily and satisfactorily
before us the advantkee of his knowledge and experi-
ence, and would be enabled to attain these results more
quickly, which, as advocates of economy, and the effi-
ciency of the public service, we so much desire.—(Hear,
hear.) The Noble Lord, in adverting to my resolution,
has, I am sure from misapprehension, entirely miscon-
ceived the latter portion of it. He seems to think that
in laying down an abstract declaration I have stated it
is the duty of Ministers to introduce m-asures that may
be necessary for effecting every reduction that is com-
patible with the efficient discharge of the public service,
and I have ettempted to impress on the House that
Ministers are guiltless of any attempt at reduction.
Now the amendment I sin about to move is specifically
irrespective of what Ministers have done in past times.
I say, whatever reductions in these establishments it may
be necessary now to accomplish, that it is their duty to
come forward, and on their own responsibility to advise
them. lam perfectly well aware that, in attempting to
offer any opposition to a measure of this kind—which,
though it comes forward in a plausible shape, I am in-
duced to believe that the House will consider it to have
a very insidious teadency—l shall have great difficulty in
arguing against a proposition which, on the surface, is
flattering to the feelings of the Huse of Commons,
which seems to delegate authority to the House of Com-
MODS, and which seems to increase the power and
authority of this assembly. All I seek to do is to ask
the House well and wisely to consider whether the effect
of the motion of the Noble Lord be really of that charac-
ter to which I have referred; whether it may not rather
have the tendency to diminish our authority instead of
increasing it. Now let us tea in what situation the House
will be placed if we accede to this motion of the Go-
vernment. In the first place we have to deal with this
Committee. I have not the smallest doubt that the
Gentlemen who will compose that Committee will be
worthy of that responsibility which will be entrusted to
them. I will not say for a moment that it will be a
packed Committee, because that would be coarse.—
(Laughter.) All I will say of it is this—l think that it
aill;oea well-arranged Committee.--(Renewed laughter.)
It will, no doubt, be a Committee the majority of which
would consist of Gentlemen who, from political feeling
and private consideration, would have a lively sympathy
with the policy of the Government...-(Hear, hr ar.) In
that case it is very possible that those who are advocates
for revision and retrenchment in the public establish-
lishments will not find that the Committee will come to a
resolution very favourable to their views. But lot us
advance to another part of the subject, and suppose
that the Cotnuiittee will not only be a fair Committee
—because all Committees we - must consider fsir—
but absolutely a fair Committee. Suppose they come to
a resolutio❑ which we have so much at heart, will it be
a Committee which will be enabled to effect that which
has reference to a very important and more serious
portion of the motion ? Why, as I said More, this
Committee ca❑ only come to resolutions, which will
amount, in fact, to an opinion given by that Committee
upon a statement of facts that are already before Par-
liament. There is another consideration which I think
the House ought to weigh well before they accede to the
motion of the Noble Lord. What I want to impress on
the House is this—not to permit themselves to be led
away by the- precedents of estimates which have been
referred to Comittees. Ido not mean to take a pedantic
view of the character and duties of the House of Com-
mons. I do not want to :put a sever con-
struction on the part of the constitution which
defines the duties of the House of Commons,
nor to refer to those duties as they were consi-
dered in the days of the Tudors and the Stuarts. On
the contrary, I think it is a beneficial necessity that a
great deal of the power of the State should be concen-
tred in this assembly. Ido not grudge the House ef
Commons that power which we have over the public
purse. On the contrary, I deplore of late years, parti-
cularly since the passing of the Reform Bill,
that the powers of the House of Commons over the

taxation of the country has considerably diminished.—
(Hear, hear.) The House of Commons has now to
deal with a comparatively small portion of the public
expenditure. And for my own part, I regret to see that
the sugar duties has ceased to be regulated by an annual
vote.—(clear, hear.) Therefore it is not the authority
of the House of Commons I am contending against, when
I tell you that you will mike a grand mi,talte if you
permit the Ministry to advise you to carry out this
motion. What will be the situation of the Committee
if they are even disposed to carry out the most sanguine
hopes of reform? What will be the situation of the
House of Commons under these circumstances? Hitherto
it has been a principle of the constitution that we E hould
not have the privilege of originating a tax. No private
Member of this House has the privilege of proposing a
vote of the public money. You bare teen the guar-
dians of the public purse and the critics of the public ex-
penditure, and in this respect you necessarily ocmpy a
popular position. A Minister places these estimates he-
tore you in a manner so extraordinary that, if often in-
dulged in, would transfer the executive from Downing-
street to St. Stephen's; and he asks the House of Com-
mons to fulfil those popular functions, the exercise of
which has made the House of Commons live so
long in the affections of the community—be asks you
to be the guardians of the public purse and the
critics of the public expenditure. But what does
he do now, when he places a blank leaf in
your hands, and asks you to fill it up by the insertion of
the amount which yeti think is necessary for the expen-
diture of the country, ift reference to peculiar establish-
ments? Why, he asks the tionse of Commons to tax
the people—he invests you with the most invidious
power--and hereafter, if these establishments should be
called oppressive, the people cannot say it is the admi-
nistration, or Downing-street, or the Government of the
country, that had cast these burdens upon them, but the
House of Commons would be placed in the obnoxious po-
sition—the House of Commons, which the people have
hitherto looked upon as the guardians of their treasury,
who had saved them at all times from the fiscal extor-
tions of the executive.—(Hear, hear.) In fact, nothing
can be more unconstitutional than the Government es-
caping from the responsibility which was incident to it-
. self by such a course.—(Hear, hear.) At the same
time they cannot take a course which, if persisted in, is
more calculated to diminish its authority and to lower
the character of the House of Commons than that course
which calls on the House of Commons to settle the
amount of taxation. Now, I ask the House to
consider what must be the conduct and what the
inevitable consequences of this Committee, if you
agree to the motion of the Noble Lord ? What-
ever may be the information we possess, and amply
possess on all those subjects—whatever information the
Government may possess irrespective of their position as
Members of this House, if the Committee is appointed,
one thing is quite clear—they must investigate de novo
into all these details as if they had no previous know-
ledge of the subject, because nothing can be considered
authentic or satisfactory to the country without a full
and
..complete examination into all these questions.
What will the Committee have to examine? It will have

to examine into three subjects, which, if minutely
ex-
amined into, would require three Committees instead of
one. They will have to examine three subjects which
would require a combination of knowledge in these Mem.
bers, which, even in the House of Commons, this small
number of persons could not supply. The man who
would be best qualified to decide on the amount of sala-
ries to be received by Members of Parliament holding
office under the Crown would be totally unfit to decide
upon the question of judicial salaries; whereas a mart
most competent to decide upon the latter would be ut-
terly lost if he entered into the complicated arrange-
ments connected with our diplomatic establisments.
Well, then, what would be the necessary conse-
quence as regards the Committee? It would be a
Nattering estimate to suppose that at the end of the ses-
sion they had concluded their ',hours. No one could
suppose that this was possible. We would have on the
tattle of the House the evidence given before the Com-
mittee at the commencement of the session of 1851; and
then the Committee would ask leave to sit again. We
have certainly heard a great deal about the works of art
that are to be exhibited in 1851, and great doubts enter-
tained as to whether our countrymen would be able to
compete with foreigners ; but I think we could then ex-
hibit one production which no foreigner could match,
and that would be the blue book that would emanate
from this Committee.—(Laughter.) I swill, therefore,
ask whether you, the Members of this House, who are
anxious for revision and reduction, can consistently sup-
port a motion Oat must lead to this inevitable result ?
—(Hear, hear.) It it do not, I will show you it will
lead to worse. If the Government upon their own
responsibility, furnished with all that informs.-
tient upon the subject which by their position they
possess, which is not in any degree possessed by the
Members of the House generally—if they would come
forward frankly und in a straightforward manner
to express their opinions upon this question; if they
would give us tie ad vantagl of their knowledge and ex-
perience, and at once introduce a Bill on these three sub-
jects, who can doubt but that the Noble Lord himself',
who is a Member of this House for a period of 30 or
40 years, the turn of whose mind has been to make
himself thoroughly acquainted with constitutional sub-
jects connected with tee House of Commons—who can

doubt but that in one morning, if he chose, he could
settle the whole question as to the propriety of revising
the existing sell., of Parliamentary sAlaries—a question
which would take a Committee months, and perhaps
sessions, t.) firm any opinion upon.—(Hear, hear.) I
have rOerred to the Noble Lord the First Minister of

the Crown, and to the Noble L',rd the Steretery of
State. If the Noble and Learned Lord who presides in
the other House would but propose a measure on this
important question, with what promptitude the Go-

vernment might come to a full and satisfactory settirt
went, and a dignified decision in respect to the judio'e
salaries. Who is these who does not know how cola
,0,
'
petent the Noble Viscount the Secretary of State w°ll
be to decide a question as to diplomatic services? Pi
might have all those Bills brought in at once; and /ft
is really the opinion of the Government that these re.
ductions should take place, they should have bee°
brought in long ago—(Hear, hear)—when the step
could have been taken in a manner creditable to theta'
selves and satisfactory to the House and the country
(Hear, hear.) I have shown the House if they ar
jointed this Committee what the consequences would!):
as respects the Committee themselves, and what w.
inevitable consequence would be in respect to the lora
tion of the Members of this House. The Noble Lor
has referred to a motion made by the Hon. Member for
Oxfordshire, and he has done me the honour of referricg
to a notice of motion which I have given. Now, I aeo
not, at this moment, acquainted with the details of WI
proposition of the Hon. Member for Oxfordshire, but
have the knowledge of his sincere and straightforWa,,,
character. lam convinced tbat he bas not taken up tit
question in an idle and tritling manner. I know Ii
has occupied his consideration for a considerable clod
and I have knowledge of his business-like habits se
indomitable perseverance.—(Hear, hear.) Whatever
may be the opinion of the House as to his proa°'
sition, I earsiLet doubt but that it will b°
a well considered and a dignified propoeitioe;
(Hear, hear.) I ask you frankly, with 1,1)//
chance of success will my lion. Friend the Member fat
Oxfordshire introduce fur your consideration a measure
which he intimated last year, and which, no doubt, ia e
interval, has been most seriously considered and o),e!v
Lured, if you afford the First Minister of the Crews Oa
pretext for saying, after he has sat down, that them ill:,
Commi tee appointed up stairs to inquire into the tit
ject, and ther, fore no proposition of the kind could 1,
listened to. Could you for a moment have fancied, k
was for the honour of the House of Commons or the ir
terests of our constituents to support tie motion of tbe
First Minister of the Crown when you reflect upon
consequence on the conduct of independent Merobettri
Can you for a moment make up your mind to suppe'e
a motion which, if it be not unconstitutional in its ortgl,,
as it will be in its rosette, must prove most hostile
ht;
Parliamentary independence. (Hear, hear.) ht;
Noble Lord has adverted to a notice of mine on the tay'l
of the House. Ile might taunt me with the fact abet
the notice was given a day after his own notice 110
given. I can assure you, Sir, that that was a caitiaili
arising from my sudden and constrained absence.!
(Cheers.) The Honourable Member for Montrose
aware that, many wat Its More, I mentioned to him tb
it was my intention to bring forward this motion.
now, Sir, I will say one word with respect to my made
in bringing forward the motion of which I gave notice
,;
I do not wish now to enter into any discussion as to
causes that have produced, in letter years, in this coil!'
try, that which may be called an impatience of taxatile
and that which certainly did not exist some time ago. 174
not want to bring any elements of controversy into
discussion to-night which do not properly belong to I;
but I think that Gentlemen on both sides of the Hoag
wilt readily admit that there is a desire on the part e{
,
their constituents that a great economy in the adinio'''
tration of our affairs should be forced upon the Gofer
went. This, it will be admitted, is a very general fee'
iog.—(Hear, hear.) Now, I felt it to be my duty to or
pose measures which, upon their surface, bore the sir
pearance of being extensive reductions in the public es,
penditure. I did oppose them—first, because I .per
ceived that they were founded upon the unphilosor,'
bm a
is that the expenditure of a great empire should Irg
regulated at any 'articular moment by what might bar!
been but the necessary and sufficient expenditure in 1)5,0
times. I opposed them, secondly, because they Yin
propositions of a vast character, and because Pole,
refrained from entering into any details.—(ge.
hear.) I conceived them to be unwise, or if altef
to be utterly impossible. I always have beeo
to,
opinion that if reductions in our e,tablishments are to 0
effected, they must be proposed by those who are maste
of the details in the particular branch of the service 0
which the reduction is sought, before they can be right',
brought for investigation by this House, and when LI
are so proposed, then those who submit them may e,
with confidence upon this House to support thelote,
(flew., hear.) Such was my feeling in placing that
tice on the paper which the Noble Lord has referredt7p
I was very willing to have seen the question take°
by the Government. I was even in hopes that it 10.°,41
be so; and when there were rumours that praatl-b;
measures of reform and retrenchment were to be brody
forward by the Government, I, feeling that the mats!
which 1 had attempted to grapple with was one of cee,
siderable difficulty, did hope that it would be taker:l
by the Government; but it was not.—(Bear, hear.) !+' 0„1
I then ventured to give that notice, not unconscious e,
the difficulties I had to contend with. I knew that Ito!
thing could be more irksome than to propose a reft./fO,
in any particular branch of the public service, Parttetto
larly when that proposition came from a Member io ea
Opposition, or from one who was not connected with
go
Government, or who was that which is called a ttl'a
Member of Parliament. Now, the diplomatic service
eg
one which is very generally referred ta, and respect/big
which there is a very general idea that considersto;
retrenchments might be made, and this too with a, 'e i
regard to the public service. But then, as to the ,00
tails, we are not so familiar with them as with t"
which are connected with our domestic service,
.0114
therefore many of them have, in point of fact, escaeri•
criticism. I was, then, well aware of the extreme nae,
culty of meddling with that branch of the public sell'fi-%
I do not desire to speak of myself. I am only eesettw",e
the ft min
gs of any gentlemen in my position. I itIIIO
that amonest the difficulties to be overcome, I ha" I
encounter first of all that of official informatiuo.o
knew that next I had to encounter a Minister unrival,
in his acquaintance with the details of his office' I
(Hear.) These, then, were fearful odds; and ,
ask, is there to sustain a man under such circuusste7,o
next to the honour of at airing public distinction? Lai
the belief in the generous sympathy of men oil , 7,-01t
sides of the House—it is the belief that they will 'way
with ence on any slight errors that may be toned
i II
by a Member under such circumstancer, and that t
will support him if he is right.—(Cheers.) I ask 13
what possible chance of success could I have on *Teo,
question if I have not only to encounter official intcll,ol
ation, not only an able and accomplished Minister, /0
have also to appeal, as I should then have to do, if, ital
motion of the Noble Lord be adopted, to an emasett°,,e
Assembly—(Cheers)—that has delegated all its ,'
Lions to another Chamber, sitting in another plac"01
(Hear, hear.) Why, there would be no chance
fe
though the great body of the Members may vote. ro
forma here, still as to that vote effecting a reduotiooo,
the public expenditure, rely upon it it would be in reo,
and it will be nothing more than a mockery and a t1.91)1
sion.—(Cheers.) I have heard with great regret th:y
has been said that this motion of mine is not a fit
Lion. I have heard with very great regret that Go" 01,
men have said, that though they approved of the 004
went they cannot support it, because it is " a Peed
movement." That is a very dangerous and a 1 tt
vague phrase, and Gentlemen should well consider of
before they allow their conduct to be influence 4 let
such a motive, and permit it to have a control feo
their behaviour.—(Hear, hear.) lam not one of tl'oot
who deprecate party connexions. As long as we Pee
a Parliamentary constitution, I think parties are 014
sary; for without parties, a representative assailoa
might degenerate into the most corrupt of governoietol
—(Hear.) .I wish to see revived two great parties, five
think they are for the advantage of this realm. if
however, is not the opinion of many Gentlemen to eeil
House. They have declared that they do not apPriir
of party connexion; they profess themselves as the Peil
titular representatives of popular interests. They "00
us on every occasion that party connexions are thectut#
of the great evils of this country. I shall now he; eft
prised if many of these Gentlemen vote agaioe'rlf
amendment of which they approve'because it is a Peal
movement.—(Cheers.) It ever there was an amenaid°3o et
that entirely arose from the business papers of the o°lol
this is the one, and I am at a loss to discover any 'of
could so purely arise from it. Had it not been for elt
motion of the Hon. Member for Oxford and others/de,
whatever side of the House they sit—motions well oti
serving the consideration of this House—this motion bi
the part of the Government would not have been brat,
forward. Had it not been fcr that motion the 11000
merit would never have been brought forward-^4;es
which has now been brought to defend the independed
of the House of Commons against a Minitted
mar ceuvre.—(Cheers.) What the fate of the amend
may be it is not for me to decide upon; but I can tols, 1
bringing it forward, that I have proposed it beettoetas
sincerely believe that, if adopted, it will sustain' •°0
honour of this-House—the credit of the administra' of
itself ; but, above all, it will conduce to the welfare
the public bervice.—(Cheers.)
Upon the question being put,
thel
Sir B. HALL, in supporting the motion, declared 10
he would have desired to see the inquiry extendnAae
all branches of the public service, and especially it
intermediate officers in the public departments; °tot
was they, and not the great officers of the State, ale
were overpaid. He would have an inquiry ititoool'
services and payment of every officer paid above
a year.
Mr. HUME supported the amendment. An 10etr
-. re'
by public committees resulted in no good. Their or
commendations were never carried into effect unless bet
proved of by the Government. He pointed to ceir
had occurred with committees in recommending thf3ioo'
station of reductions with the navy and army pronlot„o'
and yet, in defiance of these recommendations, the Yee,
motions were continued. They had now, in the 010 f
dices to the ordnance and navy estimates materialsbad
bringing down every unnecessary expenditure io . and
departments. So tar these reports were invaluable' bf
every hour they would tell for the public interest cad
pointing out how and where reductions might be c !oft°
—(•' Hear, hear" from Lerd J. Russell)—but no oat
to the Government.—(Cheers.) The only strong F tbe
which wes pressed by either of the reports was I° art,
report of the Committee on the navy estimates, /0
tnat te as a red t ction of the number of adottrals'is. 03
present they saw men who had retired from the
half-pay he did not know how many years; CO° "he
be had stated what was the amount of halfsPaJ'oo:
thought he should be warranted in saying that the,,aiee
vernment had tehaved extremely ill, and had not 07180
the interests of the community.—(Hear, hear.) I°,lepoi
who n the finance Committee sat up stairs, the bace'J t 0
was 876,000/. Up to 1840 it was gradually red°,,ooo"
762,000/.; and from that period to this it was 73160
To leave it to Ministers to effect reductions updo t JD
ports of committees, was, therefore, in his °pints:o94loW
use.—(Hear.) In 1834 ho (Mr. Hume) was tho..`.'ittee,
man of a Couttnittee on lighthouses; and that Co,lou'reaet
recommended in the strongest possible manner tewilica
of the shit ping interest from the heavy charges we be"
the lighthouses inflicted upon them. At that 0% tbif,
twcen 300,000/. and 400,0001. annually was levied /tip
shape of light dues, and applied in various waY,°:im, class
in spite of the report of the Committee, not a single 010
was done, except with reference to one reconl

flan,
fain th
were ti
ber for
care w.

DO use..
before
huPPo:
Could ,
to and
Geutlet
mittee
Sear; t

Were
he In

and rig
.
Sit to
c

fault, a
bear.)
the H,
. r

60
tared - to
e
to
d
n eitY
ly fd..11
ts;tb
ale, be
ince op
ore 1"