HC Deb 20 May 1867 vol 187 cc853-60

SUPPLY—considered in Committee.

(In the Committee.)

(1.) Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £55,491, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1868, for the Salaries and Expenses in the Offices of the two Houses of Parliament, and for Allowances to Retired Officers.

MR. CHILDERS

requested information as to the state of the Fee Fund of the House of Lords, and on the assumption that there was a large balance on it suggested that the sum of £2,800 for the salaries of door-keepers payable by the Usher of the Black Rod, should in future be omitted from the Vote.

MR. HUNT

said, he believed the Fee Fund of the House of Lords ample to bear this expenditure, but he was not now in a position to give particulars. He believed there was a surplus of £80,000.

MR. THOMSON HANKEY

believed that the Fee Fund had never been audited by the Commissioners of Audit. He hoped the Secretary to the Treasury would direct that it should be audited.

MR. CANDLISH

wished to know how long the Fund had been accumulating?

MR. HUNT

said, it had been accumulating for many years.

MR. CHILDERS

wished to obtain a promise from the Secretary to the Treasury that the Fund should be audited in future, and that if it was found to be in excess the provision asked for now should not be asked for next year. There was a mystery about the Fund which successive Secretaries to the Treasury had failed to get at; but by a Bill passed last year the Treasury were empowered to insist upon the auditing of the Fund.

MR. HUNT

could not give any particulars about the Fee Fund, but believed that it was able to bear this charge.

MR. AYRTON

thought that the Tote was an extraordinary one, since it appeared that the Fee Fund showed a surplus. The Treasury ought to be assured before proposing a Vote like this that there was a deficiency in the Fund which necessitated an application being made to Parliament.

MR. HUNT

said, that the Fee Fund was a matter in which the House of Lords was rather jealous to interfere. If the hon. Gentleman the Member for the Tower Hamlets entertained any doubt about the management of that Fund, it was open to him to move for an inquiry. Several successive Secretaries of the Treasury had endeavoured, but without success, to solve the mystery of the House of Lords' Fee Fund, and he should be very glad if his predecessor (Mr. Childers) could give him any information on the subject.

MR. CHILDERS

said, that under a recent Act of Parliament the Treasury was empowered to insist that this Fund should be audited, and he wished to know whether it was intended that in future that power should be exercised?

MR. HUNT

said, he would endeavour to exercise all the powers conferred by the Act.

MR. ALDERMAN LUSK

moved that the Vote be reduced by the sum of £2,800.

Motion made, and Question proposed, That the Item of £8,300, being the amount required in aid of the Fee Fund of the House of Lords, according to the Estimate received from the Officers of the House of Lords, be omitted from the proposed Vote."—(Mr. Lusk.)

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

said, the Motion of the worthy Alderman would appear to be something like a slur on the officers of the House of Lords. This practice was a very ancient one, and ever since he had sat in that House the Fee Fund had been a mystery. Until the present time, however, the Treasury had not been provided with a weapon with which to attack such a state of things, but now they would take au opportunity to use the instrument provided by a recent Act of the Legislature. He hoped therefore that the worthy Alderman would withdraw his Motion, which might look like a slur on the officers of the House of Lords.

MR. THOMSON HANKEY

asked the Secretary of the Treasury if he would undertake to have the accounts audited next year?

MR. HUNT

stated that he did not know what were the precise provisions of the Act of Parliament; but that if it gave the necessary powers an audit of the Fee Fund would for the future be required.

MR. CHILDERS

considered that was satisfactory, because the Treasury had undoubtedly the power under the Act of last Session.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

Original Question again proposed.

MR. DARBY GRIFFITH

moved, as an Amendment, that the salary of the Librarian be reduced from £1,000 to £800, according to the recommendation of the Committee of 1848.

Motion made, and Question proposed, That the Item of £1,000, for the Librarian of the House of Commons, be reduced by the sum of £200."—(Mr. Darby Griffith.)

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

explained that the authority exercised in reference to this matter by the Speaker was delegated to him by the House, and he exercised it by the authority and wish of the House in unison with the Chancellor of the Exchequer and Secretary of State. He was sure that on reflection the hon. Member would feel that this was a matter eminently suited to the discretion of the Speaker.

MR. DARBY GRIFFITH

objected, on constitutional grounds, to the House delegating its authority.

MR. HUNT

said, he knew as a Member of the House, but not in his official capacity as Secretary to the Treasury, that there was to be a reduction in the salary of the Librarian.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

Original Question put, and agreed to.

(2.) £38,836, to complete the sum for the Treasury.

(3.) £20,308, to complete the sum for the Home Office.

(4.) £51,410, to complete the sum for the Foreign Office.

(5.) £24,250, to complete the sum for the Colonial Office.

(6.) £23,423, to complete the sum for the Privy Council Office.

SIR J. CLARKE JERVOISE

called attention to an item of £15,000 for National Vaccination and purposes connected with it.

MR. HUNT

said, that there was some addition to the Estimate of this year, but that it arose out of the recommendation of the Select Committee which sat last year, under the Presidency of the late Vice President of the Council. That Committeee recommended that certain sums should be placed at the disposal of the Privy Council to give gratuities to persons found upon inspection to have performed the work of vaccination successfully.

Vote agreed to.

(7.) £59,386, to complete the sum for the Board of Trade, &c.

MR. CHILDERS

hoped that the present Government would find some office for that most efficient public servant, Mr. Chisholm, who was now discharging the duties of the Warden of Standards, an office that was about to be transferred to the Assistant Secretary of the Commercial Department.

MR. HUNT

said, that the present Government quite appreciated the value of Mr. Chisholm's services, which would not be lost to the public when the proposed transfer of the duties of the office of Warden of Standards to the Assistant Secretary was completed.

Vote agreed to.

(8.) £1,938, to complete the sum for the Privy Seal Office.

(9.) £6,091, to complete the sum for the Civil Service Commission.

(10.) £14,200, to complete the sum for the Paymaster General's Office.

(11.) £28,000, to complete the sum for the Exchequer and Audit Department.

SIR GEORGE BOWYER

wished to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with reference to a letter of Mr. Romilly, addressed to the right hon. Gentleman at the beginning of the present year, whether the Government were prepared to extend the operation of the Audit Department so as to bring within its cognizance the accounts of all the other public Departments. The Act of last year had proved a complete failure.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

said, that the Controller General, and also his Deputy, were in a position of complete independence of the Treasury. Their offices were patent offices, and held during good conduct. The Treasury had no control over them.

MR. CHILDERS

observed, that what had been stated by the Chancellor of the Exchequer was strictly correct. Mr. Romilly's letter was written some time before the Act of last year came into operation. That Act was passed in accordance with the representations of Committee after Committee; and the authority of the Treasury over the Audit Office was greatly diminished by it.

Vote agreed to.

(12.) £23,463, to complete the sum for the Office of Works and Public Buildings.

MR. BENTINCK

wished to know, whether the practice of this Office was that an architect in adition to his salary should receive a commission on any works he might execute?

MR. HUNT

would make inquiry, and let his hon. Friend know what the practice of the office was.

MR. CHILDERS

said, the salary covered the ordinary professional duty of the architect in connection with existing buildings; but if he should be employed on any new and large public building, he would be entitled to the usual commission.

Vote agreed to.

(13.) £18,744, to complete the sum for the Office of Woods, Forests, and Land Revenues.

MR. BONHAM-CARTER

asked, whether as wood was no longer used in the dockyards to the same extent as formerly, the cost of planting timber would still be incurred in the New Forest and elsewhere?

MR. HUNT

said, that the demand for timber for use in the navy had not yet ceased, and at the present time purchases were made in different parts of the country. The question whether we should go on spending money for plantations in the New Forest and other of the Royal domains would no doubt be considered.

Vote agreed to.

(14.) £15,383, to complete the sum for the Public Record Office.

MR. POWELL

said, that while in the previous year £3,000 had been spent in publishing the valuable series of historical documents under the enlightened superintendence of the Master of the Rolls, in this year only £2,000 had been so allotted. He hoped that this reduction did not indicate any diminished energy in the prosecution of a work which was in every way so satisfactory.

MR. WHALLEY

asked, whether the report was true that the person appointed to sort those documents for the purposes of history was a Roman Catholic? ["Oh, oh!"] Mr. Turnbull, the late officer, was a Roman Catholic, and he hoped that his successor was not open to the same objection?

MR. HUNT

said, that the amount devoted to this purpose varied according to the nature of the work undertaken, but there was no intention to curtail the work. As to the question of the hon. Member (Mr. Whalley), he was sure the Committee would be of opinion that the best man should be engaged for such a work, without reference to his religious persuasion.

MR. WHALLEY

referred to an action at law in which the late Mr. Turnbull had raised the whole question, alleging that he was not disqualified by reason of his religion, and the evidence given on the trial was that it was the religious duty of Roman Catholics to destroy or mutilate any documents reflecting upon their religion. ["Oh, oh!"]

SIR GEORGE BOWYER

rose to order, protesting against language which cast dishonour upon every Roman Catholic Member.

THE CHAIRMAN

understood that the hon. Gentleman was stating the result of a trial, and was not then giving his own impressions.

MR. WHALLEY

said, that the jury gave a verdict against Mr. Turnbull upon the evidence adduced before them that there was an absolute obligation upon Roman Catholics to destroy or mutilate any document adverse to their religion. Before exercising, therefore, such extreme liberality, the hon. Gentleman ought to investigate further.

Vote agreed to.

(15.) £287,798, to complete the sum for Poor Law Commissioners.

MR. DILLWYN

wished for an explanation of this Vote, which exceeded by more than £69,000 that of last year.

MR. GOLDNEY

said, the inspectors' salaries were £700 per annum, and their personal and travelling expenses were charged as much again, whereas the inspector of schools, who had more duties to perform, only charged £300 per annum for personal expenses.

MR. HUNT

said, that inquiries had been made, and a new arrangement for the future was resolved upon. The personal allowance formerly made was to be discontinued, and a salary of £900 given, which was to cover all charges. He hoped that this arrangement would be satisfactory to the public. With reference to the increased charge of £69,000, it was occasioned principally by the extension to Ireland of the system in force in England of grants towards the salaries of Poor Law Officers pursuant to the Resolution arrived at by the House. It was proposed that the Treasury should defray the salaries of schoolmasters and half the salaries of medical officers in Ireland and half the cost of medicines, which would require an addition of £65,000 to the Vote as proposed last year.

MR. CHILDERS

hoped that in the arrangement that had been come to with the Poor Law Inspectors there would be no misunderstanding as to the calculation of superannuation on the basis of their salaries. He presumed the Government would institute a rigid inquiry as to the basis upon which they would in future pay the half salaries, &c., of the medical officers for Ireland.

LORD NAAS

said, Government were quite ready that the strictest inquiry should be made into the manner in which medical relief was dispensed in Ireland. The effect of the new arrangement would be to place the subject of medical relief and officers' salaries in Ireland on the same footing as in England.

SIR JOHN TROLLOPE

thought that as the President of the English Poor Law Commission was now for the first time a Member of the other House, the whole of the business of the Office coming before the House of Commons must be transacted by the Secretary, and it might be proper, under these circumstances, that that Gentleman's condition should be considered.

MR. POWELL

called attention to the subject of pauper schools, which, he said, contained upwards of 34,000 children, who were under the care of the State even more than wards in Chancery. A grant for pupil-teachers which appeared in the Votes last year had now disappeared, and that without explanation.

MR. ALDERMAN LUSK

called attention to the inequality of the sums voted for education in the three kingdoms.

MR. GOLDNEY

expressed his approval of the new arrangements which had been made with respect to the Poor Law Inspectors.

MR. HUNT

gave explanations in detail to show that the present system was an improvement on that which it had superseded.

Vote agreed to.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again." — (Mr. Candlish.)

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

(16.) £32,158, to complete the sum for the Mint, including Coinage.

(17.) £29,622, to complete the sum for Inspectors of Factories, Fisheries, &c.

(18.) Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £3,989, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1868, for the Salaries of the Department of the Queen's and Lord Treasurer's Remembrancer in the Exchequer, Scotland, of certain Officers in Scotland, and other Expenses, formerly paid from the Hereditary Revenue.

Whereupon Motion made, and Question, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again,"—(Mr. Lusk,)—put, and negatived.

Original Question put, and agreed to.

(19.) Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £4,413, he granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1868, for the Salaries of the Officers and Attendants of the Household of the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland.

Whereupon Motion made, and Question, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again," — (Mr. Candlish,)—put, and negatived.

Original Question put, and agreed to.

(20.) £11,733, to complete the sum for the Chief Secretary, Ireland, Offices.

(21.) £17,620, to complete the sum for the Office of Public Works, Ireland.

Resolutions to be reported To-morrow.

Committee to sit again To-morrow.

House adjourned at a quarter before Two o'clock.