THE ACCOUNTS OF THE WAR DEPARTMENT.—OBSERVATIONS. (Hansard, 30 July 1858)

§ MR. MACARTNEY

said, he rose to call the attention of the House to the paper No. 346 (Army Account 1856–7), in which appears the Report of the Commissioners of Audit, condemning the system of keeping and furnishing the accounts of army receipts and expenditure in the War Department, with the correspondence between the said Commissioners, the Treasury, and War Department. Also, to the paper, No. 424 (Establishment of the Consolidated War Department), with the view of pressing the appointment of professional actuaries to examine and arrange the army accounts for 1856, 1857, and 1858–9; so as to enable the House to ascertain the correct army expenditure previous to the next Session of Parliament, when forming estimates for the year 1859–60; and, further, to place the civil establishment under the Minister at War upon a better and more efficient system than exists at present. In the present mode of keeping the accounts in the War Department there was no means of arriving at a clear debtor and creditor account, and there was great danger, unless the Treasury and the War Minister took the matter up and remedied the false system which was pursued, that serious and heavy losses must occur. In 2358 one department of the War Office large defalcations and great mismanagement had already been made public. In 1855–56 the Commissioners of Audit recommended a similar system to be adopted in the War Department to that which prevailed in the navy. The system pursued at the War Office, if adopted by any man in trade would prevent his being able at the end of the year to balance his books. In 1856–57, owing to the difficulty of dealing with the accounts, the Commissioners of Audit repeated their objection to the system pursued. The object he (Mr. Macartney) had in bringing this matter forward was, that before any further change was made, the Treasury and War Minister should look into this matter and see what could be done. It appeared that it had been resolved that the accounts of the Royal Artillery and Engineers were to be removed from the hands of Messrs. Cox and Co.; and a gentleman who had risen from the ranks, as gunner, no doubt a person of character and ability, had been made paymaster of those corps. He had been employed in the topographical department of the War Office, at a salary of £200 a year, and he was now to have £600 a year, and had given security for £8,000, whilst no less a sum than £50,000 would pass through his hands monthly. Such a serious change as this should be well considered, and he hoped that the Government before next Session would take steps to put the accounts of the War Office on the system recommended by the Commissioners of Audit. The great defect was, that there was no competent Accountant General attached to the department. When the consolidation of the Ordnance with the War Department took place, no such officer had been appointed; Mr. Henry Smith, who was chief clerk and accountant in the Ordnance Department, having retired, Mr. Kirby, who had been fifty-one years in the service, and had retired on his full pension in 1854, was induced to return to active life, and to accept the office of Accountant General of the amalgamated offices on a salary of £1,500 a year. There was not, he believed, a more upright or honourable man in the office than Mr. Kirby, but it was cruel to him to bring him back to the service in that way. Moreover it was notorious that his system of accounts was that which was objected to by the Commissioners of Audit. He mentioned this to show the necessity of adopting the recommendation of the Audit Office. There was another great source of complaint in the 2359 system introduced into the Ordnance Office, arising out of the mode of promoting the clerks. He had brought that question before Parliament in 1854, but the House seemed impressed with the competitive principle, and it decided that the heads of departments had a right to select the best men for promotion instead of adhering to the system of seniority. Nevertheless, he wished now to call attention to the injustice towards the permanent clerks by the introduction of temporary clerks, many of whom obtained advantages over the permanent staff. Formerly there used to be very few clerks appointed in that way; but the late Minister for War had increased them to the number of 160. These men were not under the usual restrictions as to age. One temporary clerk was 54 when he entered only four years ago and some of them enjoyed much larger salaries than were given to regular clerks of much longer standing. He hoped the minute would be produced next Session which granted to Colonel Mundy (who was appointed Under Secretary for War, under the Duke of Newcastle, and remained in office only two years and ten months) a pension of two-thirds of his salary. In 1855–56 the expenditure of the War Department exceeded the estimates by considerably more than £2,000,000, and in 1856–57 by no less than £1,194,927. All these matters he brought forward to show how imperfectly the accounts of the War Department were kept, and how impossible it was to ascertain and to check its expenditure. He hoped the subject would occupy the serious attention of the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Minister for War during the recess.