§ Order for Committee read.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair."
§ MR. SCLATER-BOOTHsaid, before the Speaker left the Chair he should like to call the attention of the House to the constantly recurring practice of taking Estimates, not only at the close of a Session, but at the commencement of a fresh one in respect of the financial year about to expire. A few years ago they had from the right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government a statement of his opinion on the matter, which he should like to recall to the recollection of the House. In 1867, upon the Supplementary Estimates being proposed, the right hon. Gentleman said it was always a matter of regret to him when Supplementary Estimates had to be brought forward. The usage of Parliament was, he added, to bring forward once for all the entire Estimates of the finances of the country, and it was most undesirable that that practice should be departed from. That was the view of the right hon. Gentleman in 1867, and he (Mr. Sclater-Booth) was sure that it was his opinion now, and also the opinion of the House. Of late years, however, the practice of the Government had been constantly to transgress that rule. The Budget of the Chancellor of the Exchequer having been brought in in April, 1870, there was a Supplementary Estimate in the following July for £47,600 on account of the Civil Service, and in March, 1871, there was a further Supplementary Estimate of £211,000, the whole being upwards of £250,000 in excess of the sum mentioned by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his Financial Statement. In the year about to expire a similar state of things had 2004 obtained. The Chancellor of the Exchequer made his Financial Statement in April. In July there was a Supplementary Estimate of £218,000, and in March of the current year they had a further Supplementary Estimate of £180,000 for the Civil Service, and of £20,000 for the Customs establishment, making an excess over the original Estimate of £418,000. This was a large sum to demand upon a Supplementary Estimate. The sums asked for were, moreover, charges for services which might very well have been included in the Estimates brought forward at the commencement of the financial year.
§ SIR JAMES ELPHINSTONEsaid, he had observed that the practice of bringing forward Supplementary Estimates had been growing from year to year. He protested against granting any money to the Government until the Estimates were fully and fairly before the House. He begged to move the adjournment of the debate.
§ Motion negatived.
§ SUPPLY—considered in Committee.
§ (In the Committee.)
§ (1.) That a Sum, not exceeding £64,047 15s. 11d., be granted to Her Majesty, to make good Excesses of Expenditure beyond the Grants for the following Civil Services for the year ended on the 31st day of March 1871, viz.:—
| Class I. | £ | s. | d. |
| Westminster Palace; Acquisition of Land | 1,023 | 19 | 0 |
| Surveys of the United Kingdom | 2,121 | 6 | 0 |
| Portland Harbour | 398 | 10 | 7 |
| Lighthouses Abroad | 10,465 | 8 | 4 |
| Class II. | |||
| Civil Service Commission | 278 | 6 | 4 |
| Paymaster General's Office | 49 | 13 | 2 |
| Stationery Office and Printing | 13,589 | 10 | 2 |
| Exchequer and other Offices, Scotland | 577 | 6 | 2 |
| Lord Lieutenant's Household, Ireland | 1 | 18 | 8 |
| Charitable Donations and Bequests Office, Ireland | 4 | 4 | 0 |
| Class III. | |||
| Court of Chancery, England | 4,304 | 1 | 3 |
| County Courts | 8,239 | 8 | 0 |
| Convict Establishments in England and the Colonies | 7,517 | 14 | 11 |
| Common Law Courts, Ireland | 2,051 | 3 | 7 |
| Class IV. | |||
| National Portrait Gallery | 194 | 17 | 2 |
| Public Education, Ireland | 12,395 | 16 | 6 |
| Queen's University, Ireland | 198 | 16 | 11 |
| Class VII.> | £ | s. | d. |
| Local Dues on Shipping under Treaties of Reciprocity | 4 | 3 | 6 |
| Malta and Alexandria Telegraph, and Subsidies to Telegraph Companies | 631 | 11 | 8 |
| £64,047 | 15 | 11 |
§ MR. HUNTsaid, he hoped that some Member of the Government would take notice of the observation that had fallen from his hon. Friend (Mr. Sclater-Booth). He thought those observations were worthy of the attention of the House, and he presumed from the silence of the Government that they had no excuse to offer for the practice challenged.
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, the remarks of the hon. Gentleman suggested their own answer. The Supplementary Estimates were for charges incurred during the course of the year subsequent to the date of the Financial Statement, and he was much afraid that, unless a Government came into power possessing the faculty of foreseeing what might happen in the course of a coming year, Supplementary Estimates would continue to be a necessity.
§ MR. HUNTsaid, that he should challenge the items in detail. He could not forget the repeated and severe observations made by the right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government when the Government to which he (Mr. Hunt) had had the honour to belong had proposed Supplementary Estimates.
§ MR. BOWRINGasked for an explanation of the Excess Vote for stationery, amounting to £13,590, in addition to which a Supplementary Vote for £33,000 was also about to be asked for. Last year the Estimate amounted to £370,531, being £5,125 less than in the previous year, and he then complimented Her Majesty's Government and the head of the Stationery Office on this saving. But the present large additions to that Estimate converted the saving into a large increase, and he was afraid that he must therefore withdraw his compliment.
§ MR. BAXTERsaid it would appear that the hon. Member's compliment last year was premature. The cost of stationery and printing had greatly exceeded the expectations of the Department, and until the House came to some decision with reference to the Returns ordered to be printed there was very little chance of the Vote being reduced.
§ MR. SCLATER-BOOTHsaid, the Government as well as the House was responsible for the increase in the Vote. It appeared that the Government had the largest share of the Vote.
§ MR. DENTsaid, the increase of the Vote was attributed to the extraordinary facilities given for Returns. Every Member who wished to get certain information for his constituents moved for Returns, which were interesting to them only, and they were granted. Greater firmness was required on the part of the Government to resist them.
§ MR. ALDERMAN LUSKsaid, he did not think it was fair to ascribe the increase solely to the cost of printing Parliamentary Returns. Two years ago it was affirmed by a Government Return that the expenditure under this head for the year only was £4,000 to £5,000. He was opposed to the practice of presenting Supplementary Estimates. When brought forward they should be fully explained, and reasons given for their necessity.
§ MR. LIDDELLsaid, the stationery and printing Votes were difficult to estimate. No one could form an estimate of the expense, for instance, of the printing and stationery that would be required in connection with the Alabama Claims. It would be necessary for the Government to exercise greater vigilance, and check the Returns moved for. He did not think it would be fair to challenge the opinion of the House upon a Supplementary Estimate for increased expenditure, which had been incurred and must be paid. If a Vote of the Committee was to be taken, it should be on the complete Estimate for the year.
§ MR. MUNTZsaid, a very considerable sum was wasted in the Blue Books that were delivered to Members. He had received Blue Books in the last year that would occupy any man's reading for 10 years. He was perfectly certain that not one Member in ten read them. He knew many hon. Members who never read them, but sold them for waste paper. He thought a saving might be effected if hon. Members had to apply for them, instead of their being delivered to them at their residences.
MR. GOLDSMIDsaid, the increase of the Vote was to be attributed to the increased amount of business transacted by Parliament. More letters were written in the Lobby than formerly. 2007 The prospect was that the Vote would increase rather than decrease.
§ MR. PIMsaid, he was glad the attention of the House had been called to the Vote. Two years ago he made a similar suggestion as to the delivery of Blue Books to that made by the hon. Member for Birmingham (Mr. Muntz).
§ Vote agreed to.
§ (2.) That a sum, not exceeding £44,427 7s. 4d., be granted to Her Majesty, to make good Excesses of Expenditure beyond the Grants for the following Revenue Departments for the year ending on the 31st day of March 1871, viz.:—
| £ | s. | d. | |
| Post Office | 9,950 | 4 | 1 |
| Telegraph Services | 34,477 | 3 | 3 |
| £44,427 | 7 | 4 |
§ (3.) £8,000, Supplementary sum, National Gallery.
§ MR. AYRTONsaid, the time of the payment did not depend upon the action of the Government, but of the persons who had property to sell, which property the Government found it necessary to acquire. Some cases required long investigation, and others had to go to arbitration. In some instances the question of title had arisen. Under these circumstances, it was impossible for the Government to be able to form anything like an accurate estimate of the money that would be required.
§ MR. HUNTsaid, that in the original Estimate for the enlargement of the National Gallery in 1870–71 two sums were mentioned—one of £24,000 for the enlargement of works, and £20,000 for the purchase of sites. The Government ought to have known some money would have been required this year for the purchase of sites, and they ought not to have taken credit for £20,000 not expended last year, and then have come this year for Supplemental Estimates. If there was an intention of acquiring land for the National Gallery, why was not the money taken in the original Estimate? It might be very pleasant for the Chancellor of the Exchequer to come down to the House on Budget night and take credit for reducing expenditure; but if that was to be done by striking out an item for a site which was known to be required, such a pro- 2008 cess of conducting the business of the country was illusory.
§ MR. AYRTONsaid, the original estimated expenditure for this service was £142,000, and included the amount which now had to be voted. The claimants having completed their claim were entitled to be paid; but the voting of this money would not affect the Estimate of the cost of the whole service.
§ MR. HUNTsaid, he wished to point out that, although there was more land to be acquired, no sum for its acquisition was inserted in the original Estimates. No doubt the reason of this was a desire on the part of the right hon. Gentleman to present a pleasing balance-sheet.
§ MR. AYRTONobserved that so far from there being any disposition not to take Votes, £237,000 had been voted and re-voted. This sum might have been taken before had it not been for a desire to be precise.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ (4.) £10,000, National Thanksgiving in St. Paul's Cathedral.
§ MR. BOWRINGinquired whether this was the final Estimate, or whether further sums would be asked for next year?
§ MR. AYRTONreplied that until the accounts were settled with the persons employed on the work it was impossible to say within a few pounds what was the exact sum which would be required; but, so far as he knew at present, he believed this sum would cover the amount.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ (5.) £2,000, Supplementary sum, British Embassy Houses, Constantinople, &c.
§ MR. MONKinquired whether the Government was keeping faith with the House in asking for this Vote before the plans for the new buildings had been laid before the House?
§ MR. AYRTONwas of opinion that no good would result from the House examining the plans. It was simply proposed to restore the Embassy House to the state in which it was previous to the fire.
§ MR. MONKsaid, the Government promised last year that no large Vote should be asked for re-building the Embassy House until the opinion of 2009 Parliament had been taken as to the desirability of re-building the Embassy at all. The observations of the right hon. Gentleman were not to the point, and he should oppose the Vote.
§ MR. ALDERMAN LUSKsaid, he thought the right hon. Gentleman's statement was by no means a satisfactory one. What were hon. Members there for but to examine into questions of this kind?
§ VISCOUNT ROYSTONsaid, he thought small matters of this character, within the administrative power of the Government, ought not to be interfered with. On items so small as to almost raise a smile, hon. Members on the Liberal side of the House made objections which led the House to interfere in the most ridiculous manner with necessary and important improvements, and to prevent Ambassadors from properly sustaining their position. It would be well if hon. Gentlemen would have regard to common sense, and enable the Government to carry out its arrangements.
§ MR. WHITWELLsaid, he hoped some explanation of the Vote would be given.
§ MR. AYRTONsaid, the plans had been carefully considered by an officer sent out from the Office of Works, who after full investigation came to the conclusion that it would be more economical to restore what remained of the building than to attempt to re-build it.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ (6.) £3,000, Supplementary sum, Mint.
§ (7.) £2,050, Supplementary sum, Paymaster General, London and Dublin.
§ (8.) £33,000, Supplementary sum, Stationery, &c.
§ MR. HUNTsaid, the original Estimate for the Stationery Department, as was the case with other Estimates, was cut down last year by the Government in order that the Chancellor of the Exchequer might make a good appearance on Budget night, and now the Government came forward to ask that the deficiency thus created might be made good. He protested against illusory Estimates being brought before the House.
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERrepudiated such an insinuation, especially after the head of the Department had confessed that the head and front of his offending was supposing that the sum had been over-estimated. It should be remembered that he himself 2010 had been called upon to provide for an unexpected increase in the Army Estimates, and the right hon. Gentleman opposite must know that in using the word "illusory" he was going very near what was not Parliamentary language, and which imputed motives having not the slightest foundation.
§ MR. HUNTsaid, he would withdraw any un-Parliamentary or uncourteous language he might have used. But what he meant by "illusory" Estimates were Estimates which did not rest on proper data. In that sense he hoped the word was not offensive. It was not right that after Estimates were voted at the beginning of the financial year the House should be asked to supplement them at the end of the year.
MR. GLADSTONEsaid, he did not think that where there were 200 Miscellaneous Estimates, and a deficiency was afterwards apparent in one or two, they should be stigmatized as "illusory." The fair test was the Estimates generally, and not individual items, where discrepancies might creep in quite innocently.
§ MR. HUNTdisputed the doctrine of general Estimates, because the House voted money for specific purposes.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ (9.) £14,000, Supplementary sum, Court of Chancery, England.
§ (10.) £10,000, Supplementary sum, Police.
§ (11.) £20,000, Supplementary sum, British Museum.
§ (12.) £18,000, Supplementary sum, Embassies and Missions Abroad.
§ (13.) £27,000, Supplementary sum, Superannuation and Retired Allowances.
§
(14.) Motion made, and Question proposed,
That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £4,810, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1872, for certain Miscellaneous Expenses.
§ MR. LEAasked for an explanation of some of the items having reference to the expenses incurred in the investment with decorations of several distinguished personages.
§ MR. BAXTERsaid, that he was not in a position to give the explanation at the moment, but that he would be able to do so on the Report.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."—(Mr. Lea.)
§ MR. VERNON HARCOURTsaid, that hon. Members were constantly told they must not discuss the Estimates as a whole but in detail, and now that that was done they were asked to agree to a Vote without any explanation of the items of which it consisted.
MR. GLADSTONEstated that the explanation would he given when the Report was brought up, and that if it were not deemed satisfactory objection to the Vote might then be taken.
§ MR. LIDDELLsaid, he thought the Committee would merely be acting on the principle which had been laid down by the Prime Minister himself as to the jealousy which the House ought to exercise with regard to these Supplementary Estimates if they insisted in reporting Progress under the circumstances.
MR. GLADSTONEsuggested that if the Votes were not taken that evening, there would be some difficulty in passing the necessary Ways and Means Bill before the close of the financial year.
§ MR. COLLINSsaid, he thought, after the understanding which had been come to last year, that no opposed business should be taken after half-past 12, the Committee ought not to be asked to proceed with the discussion of the Estimates at so late an hour.
§ MR. LEAsaid, he would withdraw his Motion to report Progress, on the understanding that the Report was brought up sufficiently early to allow of explanation and discussion.
§ Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Original Question put, and agreed to.
§ (15.) £23,304, Supplementary sum, Miscellaneous Advances to Civil Contingencies Fund.
§ (16.) £2,360, Mediterranean Extension Telegraph (Guarantee).
§ (17.) £3,100, Supplementary sum, Crown, &c. Abuna of Abyssinia, &c.
§ (18.) £20,000, Supplementary sum, Customs Department.
§ Resolutions to be reported To-morrow; Committee to sit again To-morrow.