SUPPLY.—OBSERVATIONS. (Hansard, 30 January 1860)

SIR HENRY WILLOUHGBY
said, he did not rise to oppose the reception of the Report, but he wished to take that opportunity of calling the attention of the House to a practice which he believed was calculated to impair, if not altogether to render nugatory, the right of that House to vote Supplies. The House was aware that they never knew what was exactly the expenditure of any one year till some twenty months after it had been incurred. At the end of last Session, in the month of August last, the Secretary of the Treasury laid on the table of the House a document which showed the entire expenditure on the army and navy for the year 1857–1858. This was the last expenditure of which they knew anything—at present they knew nothing of the expenditure for the year 1858–59. The document was printed and issued to hon. Members only during the recess, when it was impossible for hon. Members to make any use of it. But he found that in that year more than £1,500,000 had been spent on the army and navy in excess of the Supplies which had been voted by that House. If these things were allowed to be done what became of the right of the House to vote Supplies? It appeared that £800,000 was spent on the navy in excess of the Supplies, embraced under twelve different heads, on almost every conceivable subject—law charges, acquisitions of land, coastguard, transport service, and so on. In the army he found that the excess for the same year amounted to £1,029,000, and that had been spent under six different heads. It was true that the House was afterwards called on to vote money for this expenditure in excess, but by that time their power of control was gone, as the money had been long spent. He wished now to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether there had been any excess of 271 expenditure over supply for the financial years 1858–59; and if so he would ask the House whether they did not think it necessary to apply some remedy to this abuse, and insist that no excess should be allowed except in cases of the gravest emergency. He would not have pressed this matter on the attention of the House if he did not feel that it struck at the root of all the financial power of the House, and if he did not believe that the practice was annually increasing to a large extent.

§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER
—The hon. Baronet has called my attention and the attention of the House to a subject of great importance and great complexity, but which, I think, cannot be discussed with advantage, except upon notice indicating the direction which the discussion is likely to take. The hon. Baronet has put to me a question whether during the financial year ending the 5th April, 1859, there has been any excess of expenditure over the Supplies voted by the House of Commons in any department. Of course I need not say that the hon. Baronet might have better put the question he has put to me to the Gentlemen who were responsible for the finances of the country at that period, of whom I was not one—but it does happen that the accounts of the War Department have been obtained within the last few days—a little earlier than usual—from which it appears that there is an excess of expenditure for the year 1858–59 over Supply somewhat exceeding £300,000. The hon. Baronet may wish to make his remarks or comments on this statement, and he will have an early opportunity of doing so, as it is the intention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary for War to ask for a vote of Supply to cover this excess of expenditure, on one of the days of the week. With regard to the larger aspect and bearings of this question, I shall not enter upon them casually and loosely, as I must do were I to do so now, but I can assure the hon. Baronet that Her Majesty's Government are very sensible of the importance of avoiding any expenditure in excess of the Supplies voted by the House, except in cases of urgent necessity; and when compelled to do so, of rendering an account to Parliament at the earliest possible moment.

§ COLONEL SYKES
said, that he wished some Member of the House would move at once a vote of censure upon the head of any Department who should have ex- 272 pended money in excess of his Votes. That was the only remedy he could think of for the evil, and he would cordially support his hon. Friend opposite in any such attempt.

§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER
—Sir, I am sorry to say that I have rather understated the excess of the army expenditure in 1858–59. That excess amounts to £470,000.