§ SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBYsaid, he wished to repeat a Question which he put the other night. For the last two years he had thought their financial policy so unsatisfactory that he never felt himself in a position to support the repeal of the paper duty, or any other duty. He had always anticipated the serious deficiency of the last two years; and he thought there 771 would be a deficit at the end of 1862–3. The deficit of 1860–1 was £2,550,000, and that of 1861–2 was £1,164,000, making together in round numbers £3,700,000. The question he wished the House to consider was how the deficits should be discharged? It was said that they were to be paid out of the balances; but what was the meaning of that? He believed that there was a serious question at the bottom, and that, in fact, in a covert way, they were running into debt. The balances consisted mainly of monies appropriated for purposes that were likely to be in operation within a short period. For instance, this year, £350,000 was included in the balances, being destined for fortifications, for which purpose it might be drawn out; and there was also a series of items arising from the balance of advances and repayments of loans. For many purposes, under Acts of Parliament, loans were advanced for public purposes. Those loans, which were capital lent, ought surely not to be mixed up with the ordinary finances, but should be kept clear and distinct, otherwise they only deceived themselves as to their true position. Had not the balances, however, been mixed up with monies repaid from various sources under these Acts? And, if so, was it not true that, for two years, the Government had been silently and almost surreptitiously adding to the public debt of the country? That was a point on which a clear answer should be given, because it touched the marrow of our system of finance.