SUPPLY—EXPENSES OF COMMISSIONS OF INQUIRY. (Hansard, 23 May 1850)

§ MR. J. STUART
said, that he had given a notice to call the attention of the House to the return (No. 669), of 1848, of the number of Commissions of Inquiry appointed since 1830, and the expense of each. No doubt the hon. and gallant Member who moved for the return, intended that it should afford authentic information, not only of the commissions, but of the expenses of those commissions. The order of the House required, not only that the expenses generally should be stated, but all incidental matters, such as the members, the officers, and clerks. It appeared by this return that no fewer than ninety-one Commissions of Inquiry had been issued by the successive Governments of this country between 1830 and 1848. It appeared, moreover, that, according to this return, the expense to the country of these Commissions of Inquiry had been above 638,000l. That would appear to be an enormous sum; but he was sorry to say that by reference to documents more authentic, from their nature, than this return, contemporaneous with this return, containing information extracted by examination from individuals before Committees of the House, the statement of 638,000l. as the expense of these commissions, was not one-fourth of the expense to which the country had been put. He was anxious to call the attention of the Government to this subject, because when the hon. and gallant Member, who moved for the return, had obtained an order for the continuation of the return, there should be some greater degree of care and attention bestowed upon the returns. In 1838 a commission was 286 issued on tidal harbours. That commission might have been of great utility, and he found it stated that the expense of the commission was 1,779l.; but when he turned to the report of the Committee on Miscellaneous Expenses, he found that for this commission alone the printing was for the three years 5,117l. He attributed no ill faith to this return; he attributed to it carelessness and gross inaccuracy. In 1845 a commission was issued with a very peculiar object in its inquiry; it was called, "The Metropolitan Railway Termini Commission." The modest sum of 502l. was stated as its expenses in this return. 502l. seemed not to be much; but he had looked at the report of the Committee on the Miscellaneous Expenditure, and he found that instead of 502l., for the two years' printing of this commission, 2,857l. was paid. So gross a degree of carelessness, such extraordinary inaccuracy, ought not to be passed over without the notice of the House. It would be found in the report of the Committee of Miscellaneous Expenses as to the various expenses attending these Commissions of Inquiry, that the result was that, instead of 638,000l., the country had been put to an expense of 2,000,000l. by these Commissions of Inquiry. One of the witnesses who had been examined stated that these Commissions of Inquiry were one great cause of the expense of printing for which the House voted from year to year, without attending to the way in which the large sum was applied. The witness stated that the great expenses of printing were wholly occasioned by new Commissions of Inquiry, and he added that he should not he surprised if the sanitary printing was to come to 60,000l. He called the attention of the Government to these matters, presuming that that was all that was necessary to remedy these enormities.

§ COLONEL SIBTHORP
was very glad his hon. and learned Friend had drawn the attention of the House to the subject. He (Colonel Sibthorp) had moved for the production of the return referred to; but he confessed that, now it was on the table, it was very difficult to know what really was the expense of these commissions. He did not suppose that this and other returns were made out wilfully incorrect, but it was evident that there was great carelessness in not showing the House and the public what expenses really were incurred. He bad no doubt as to other commissions being asked for, which would cause a great public expenditure, if his hon. Friends and himself 287 did not persist in exposing the system, and insist upon having a full explanation of the expenses.

SIR F. T. BARING
said, he ought perhaps to apologise for the absence of his right hon. Friends and Colleagues on that occasion, but they were certainly not aware that this question would have been brought forward. With reference to this return itself, he apprehended that the gravamen of the complaint made by the hon. and learned Member for Newark was, that the expense of the printing was not included in it. [Mr. STUART: And the stationery.] The printing and stationery. [Mr. STUART: And the clerks.] Well, if the expense of the clerks was omitted, it certainly would imply some incorrectness in the return. With respect to the stationery, there was not a separate account kept of it as regarded each department of the public service, but an estimate was made every year of the probable quantity that would be required by each. With reference to the printing, he could not but admit that it was a heavy expense; but he was informed that regulations had been issued by the Treasury, in conjunction with the Home Office, for putting these matters, as regarded the printing at all events, on a better and more economical footing. Perhaps, when the miscellaneous estimates should be brought forward, the hon. and learned Member would introduce this subject again, and then those of his Colleagues to whom the subject more particularly related would be there to give such explanations as might be required.