HC Deb 27 May 1850 vol 111 cc390-1

House in Committee of Supply.

Motion made, and Question proposed— That a sum, not exceeding 92,300l., be granted to Her Majesty, to pay the Salaries and I Expenses of the two Houses of Parliament, and Allowances to Retired Officers of the two Houses, to the 31st day of March, 1851.

MR. HUME

said, he found there was a considerable increase in the amount proposed to be voted as salaries and expenses of the House of Lords. Last year it was 21,900l; in the present estimate it was 32,400l. The amount required in aid of the fee fund was last year 14,000l.; in the present year 24,500l.

The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

said, that the expenditure of the House of Lords was in process of progressive reduction. The cause of the increase in the vote this year was, that during the last few years there had been a balance of money received from fees, which was partly unexpended last year, and which was available for reducing this demand upon the Treasury. This balance having been expended last year, a greater proportion of the salaries and expenses of the House of Lords had to be met by the vote now before the House.

MR. V. SMITH

said, that a very care-fid report bad been made by a Committee of the House of Lords upon the salaries of their officers. The Treasury ought to have put hon. Members in possession of this report, so that they might see how the money was voted.

MR. HUME

proposed to reduce the vote by 32,400l., the amount of the salaries, &c, of the officers of the House of Lords, in order that the Government might have the opportunity of laying the report of their Lordships' Committee before the House.

Afterwards Motion made, and Question put— That a sum, not exceeding 59,900l., he granted to Her Majesty, to pay the Salaries and Expenses of the two Houses of Parliament, and Allowances to retired Officers of the two Houses, to the 31st day of March, 1851.

The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

said, the Committee on Miscellaneous Estimates expressed a hope that the accounts and expenditure of the House of Lords would be submitted to a searching revision by a Committee of that House. This revision was going on, and he should therefore oppose the Motion.

MR. HUME

replied, that the House had at present no proof of this searching investigation.

The Committee divided:—Ayes 48; Noes 110: Majority 62.

Original Question put.

Vote agreed to