TRANSFER OF AIDS. (Hansard, 12 February 1840)

§ Mr. Herries
would avail himself of that opportunity of making some observations suggested by the account of ways and means remaining of 1839, to be transferred by this bill to the service of 1840, in connexion with an assertion made some nights ago by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that the unfunded debt was reduced to 20,000,000l. It appeared by the account that 1,000,000l. of Exchequer-bills remained to be issued: the right hon. Gentleman had stated that 20,000,000l. were actually outstanding: when the issue was completed, the whole amount would, there- 166 fore, be 21,000,000l. And he thought this must really be the true amount of the unfunded debt, because he found on looking back to the "accounts, that the reductions which had been effected from the amount of 29,000,000l. at which it stood two years ago, were 4,000,000l. by transfer to savings banks, and 4,000,000l. by funding: in all 8,000,000l., leaving therefore 21,000,000l, as the now unprovided-for unfunded-debt, and not as the Chancellor of the Exchequer had stated 20,000,000l.

§ The Chancellor of the Exchequer
stated, that the first question of the right hon. Gentleman was, whether it was proposed to issue the one million of Exchequer bills which was granted last year? His answer to this question was in the affirmative. Again, with respect to the second question, which referred to the four millions in addition which had been spoken of by the right hon. Gentleman, he could only reply that it never was in the contemplation of the Government to issue, under the act of last year, any amount of Exchequer bills beyond the one million to which he had just alluded, and which they were authorised by Parliament to issue. The right hon. Gentleman had, therefore, conjectured right when he assumed that the Government did not intend to do so. With respect to the statement of the amount of Exchequer bills, he had given it accurately on the former occasion—namely, that on the 5th of January, 1839, it was 29,957,000l., and on the 8th of June, this year, the amount was 20,180.000l.; but he did not include in this statement the one million to be issued. This added will increase the statement of the unfunded debt from 20,000,000l. to 21,000,000l.

§ Mr. Herries
desired it to be clearly-understood, that the whole amount of 25,000,000l. of Exchequer bills voted last year in ways and means ought not now to be issued. The sum of 4,000,000l. of the former bills which they were granted to discharge having been funded, the actual issue must be confined to 21,000,000l.

§ The Chancellor of the Exchequer
stated the grounds on a former night, on which the House was called upon to make the vote which it did; and it might have the appearance of overlapping to a certain extent. He was not aware of any serious inconvenience that might occur from it. He would only add that, under the circumstances, it was impossible to take any other course.

§ Mr. Herries
observed, that if the right 167 hon. Gentleman looked back to the accounts of the unfunded debt on former occasions, he would find that care was taken in this respect when Exchequer bills had been funded to make a corresponding deduction from the vote of new bills in the committee of ways and means. If the right hon. Gentleman looked to former transactions, he would readily understand what he adverted to. This, however, was not a mere objection of form, although it now might be easily rectified, but still it was desirable that there should not be a recurrence of it. If they allowed the statement to continue to appear as it did, the account of the last year would not be correctly balanced, and would hardly be intelligible. It was the usual practice to make the vote in ways and means and in supply to correspond within a comparatively small sum—such as 100,000l. by which the former exceeded the latter: but in the present case, the apparent difference of 4,000,000l. owing to the irregular mode of conducting the finance business of the last year, was inexcusable.

§ The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that the appearance on the face of the amount might be such as the right hon. Gentleman bad described, but it would be set perfectly right in the general accounts, and no inconvenience could result from it. There were some overdue Exchequer bills not paid, and there were some sums required under the appropriation act. For his own part, he did not see any very serious objection to this alleged discrepancy.

§ Mr. Goulburn
contended that it was not merely an objection in form, but in substance. Here the House gave authority to the Treasury to issue 25,000,000l. of Exchequer bills, and it turned out that only 21,000,000l. were required.

§ The Chancellor of the Exchequer
It was believed that more would have been required.

§ Mr. Goulburn
They were wanted, then, to make up any deficiency in the revenue that might have occurred. On this ground, then, were they to issue 4,000,000l. of Exchequer bills? Owing to circumstances such as these, they might go on increasing the amount of Exchequer bills, which they would be obliged to meet subsequently by a loan. If the revenue had proved much shorter than it did, they must then have issued the whole amount of Exchequer bills that they asked for. He thought that it was extremely 168 objectionable that, in the appropriation act they should get an amount of 25,000,000l of Exchequer bills voted, when a much less amount would have answered the purpose. This, he repeated, he thought was an objection in substance, and not merely in form.

§ The Chancellor of the Exchequer
observed, that no doubt the amount of Exchequer bills voted in committee of ways and means was greater than was ever supposed was required, but the reduction might not have been such as had really occurred.

§ Mr. Goulburn
entertained great objections to the proceeding, and must repeat his dissent from the Chancellor of the Exchequer.