APPROPRIATION OF THE ESTIMATES. (Hansard, 14 March 1856)

§ MR. H. BAILLIE
said, that when the House was in Committee on the Army Estimates, it was stated that when any Estimate exceeded the amount required for the public service the surplus remaining in the hands of the Government was, by the Appropriation Act, turned over to any purpose which the Government might 182 think proper to apply it to without the control of that House. Now he wished to call the attention of the House to the manner in which that power was worked by the Government. Take first of all the Estimates for the Army. Last year the Vote was for 212,000 men. He was informed that on the 1st of January there was a deficiency of 45,000 men, and that a deficiency equal to that, or nearly so, existed almost the whole year, so that the Government had received during the last year an amount of revenue equal to the maintenance of at least 40,000 men, which they had been at liberty to divert to any other purpose that they might think proper to apply it to. That was as regarded the Estimates of last year. This year Government proposed to them an additional number of 30,000 men, the Estimate being for 246,000 men, so that in order to complete that Estimate Government would have to raise no less than 70,000 men in the course of the current year. In addition to that, the loss of the army in time of war might be taken at about 30,000 a year, so that if that Estimate was to be fairly carried out they must raise within the year at least 100,000 men; and they all knew it to be impossible for them to raise even 50,000, which was more than had ever been raised within any one year. They would, therefore, have an enormous amount of surplus money on the Army Estimates in the present year. Then the Estimate for the Militia was for 120,000 men. Now it was well known that they had not got half that number of men, and if they got half as much, that was as much as they could expect to raise on the volunteer system. The Estimates for the Militia amounted to about £3,000,000, so that Government would have a surplus on that head of about £1,500,000. He trusted that Government would be able to offer some explanation as to what they did with that large surplus.

§ MR. WILSON
said that, as he understood the question, it was this:—If there were a sum of money taken for a certain number of men, and that number of men were not raised, what became of the surplus money? The rule with regard to this particular Estimate, and to all Estimates, was this: At the close of the year the accounts were made up, and they were audited by the Commissioners of Audit. If there was a surplus, it was returned into the Exchequer; and if there was a 183 deficiency, it was provided for by a Vote. The House would bear in mind that the Votes of the House in Committee of Supply bore no relation to the money in the Exchequer. The cash account was one thing, the estimated expenditure was another and a different thing. There might be a large excess of expenditure for which the moneys in the Exchequer were not sufficient. On the other hand there might be a great diminution in the expenditure, and there might be no surplus in the Exchequer. The House would perceive that whether the moneys in the Exchequer were sufficient to meet the whole expenditure did not depend altogether upon the Votes of Supply, it depended also upon the amount of revenue within the year; and although it was always estimated in the Budget that the revenue from all sources would be sufficient to meet all the Votes, yet if the revenue fell short, as it had done this year, the Estimates would, of course, be insufficient. Had the whole of the militia been embodied last year and the whole of the £3,000,000 that was voted for the militia been expended, the effect would have been that the increased expenditure over and above that which was likely to have taken place would have been £1,500,000 in addition.

§ MR. FREDERICK PEEL
said, that, if the hon. Member for Inverness-shire (Mr. Baillie) would look to the mode in which the increase of 30,000 men was distributed, he would find that the increase was in the Artillery, the Engineers, the Land Transport Corps, and the Foreign Corps. There was also an apparent increase, which was not really an increase, arising from the transfer of some regiments from the Indian establishment to our home establishment, the expenses of which, consequently, were no longer borne by the Indian, but by the Imperial Treasury.

§ MR. SPOONER
said, that, with reference to the observations made by his hon. colleague (Mr. Newdegate), he wished to explain that the accounts which he (Mr. Spooner) had asked for were totally distinct from those which his hon. Friend had asked for. The accounts which he himself had asked for were those recommended by the Committee of last year, and had reference to the special expense of the cost of the manufacture of small arms at Enfield.

§ MR. MONSELL
said, that, as the Enfield 184 factory was not yet at work, it was obviously impossible to furnish the returns required by the hon. Member of the number of small arms it had turned out.

§ SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBY
said, he wished to know under what authority money voted for one purpose had been applied to another? He was aware that, under the provisions of the Appropriation Act, the surplus of one Vote could be applied to the purposes of another by going through certain forms, but that power was never meant to be carried to such an extent as it had been in this case. Now that the Army, Ordnance, and Commissariat Estimates were all lumped together in one Estimate, it would be perfectly possible for the War Minister to spend the whole £35,000 voted without any control, just as he pleased, and the functions of the House of Commons, as guardian of the public purse, would be entirely nullified. It was a question for consideration whether some change ought not to be made in the Appropriation Act to meet the case.

SIR FRANCIS BARING
said, he thought this was a question of great importance, and he should be glad to hear some explanation from the Government as to what they intended to do with regard to it. Formerly the Army, Ordnance, and Commissariat Estimates were all voted separately, and though, with the consent of the Treasury, the surplus of one Vote in the Army Estimates might be applied to the purposes of another Vote in the Army Estimates, money could not be transferred from the Army Estimates to the Ordnance or Commissariat Estimates. Under the new arrangement, however, Army, Ordnance, and Commissariat Votes, all being taken in one Estimate, it would be perfectly possible to apply money voted for Army purposes to Ordnance or Commissariat purposes, or vice versâ. Under those circumstances the check possessed by the House of Commons over the expenditure of the public money was very much weakened. He would suggest that a Committee should be appointed to consider in what way Parliament, without interfering with the efficiency of the public service, might retain, what it ought really to have, some check over the issue of public money.

MR. WALPOLE
said, he thought that the proper time for providing against the risk of abuse in the transfer of money from one Vote to another would be when 185 the Appropriation Act was brought forward. From what had passed on a former evening he had gathered that the subject had engaged the attention of the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and he would suggest that the right hon. Gentleman should confer with the noble Lord at the head of the Government before the whole of the Estimates were voted, and endeavour to come to some decision as to what course it would be most advisable to adopt to meet the difficulty caused by the new mode of preparing the Estimates.