§ MR. RYLANDSI desire, Sir, before you leave the Chair, to enter a protest on the part of independent Members against the course taken by the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in making his Statement on the Motion that you do leave the Chair instead of in Committee of Supply. While, of course, I do not presume to say that the right hon. Gentleman was out of Order, yet the course he has taken is one which, in my recollection, is entirely unprecedented, and one which has exposed the House to a very considerable amount of inconvenience. The right hon. Gentleman has brought in what in effect is a third Budget for the present financial year. That, in itself, is most unexampled, and in consequence of the extraordinary step taken to-night it has been followed by a Motion on going into Committee, which has led to a discussion of matters entirely apart from the financial proposals of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. It is quite clear, if the right hon. Gentleman had adopted the usual course in moving that you, Sir, do leave the Chair, without making any observations, then the Motion on going into Committee would have come forward in due course, and the right hon. Gentleman would then have made his Statement with the Chairman of Committees in the Chair. The discussion in that event would have proceeded in a regular and orderly manner; but, as it is, I am doubtful whether even on the Vote, which will be put from the Chair when we have resolved ourselves into Committee, I should not be precluded from making general observations which appear to me to have been called forth. 1879 The Chancellor of the Exchequer has taken a course to-night which I feel myself—and I believe I am not alone in that opinion—Is calculated to confuse the mind of the House. If the House of Commons is to possess any efficient control over the Expenditure and over the taxation of this country, it is quite clear that they ought to have a full Statement, in regard to the Expenditure and taxation, placed before them in an explicit and ample manner by the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the occasion of his moving the Budget for the year. But he has not done so. The Chancellor of the Exchequer came down with a Budget at the usual time of the Session, and he gave the House to understand what would be the Expenditure of the financial year; and he laid before the House certain proposals as to the taxes he intended to levy during the year. We were supposed to base our judgment and opinion upon the Budget as stated. But what do we find? That the Estimates of the right hon. Gentleman prove in the course of a very few months to be utterly delusive. You find the right hon. Gentleman coining down to the House from time to time, no doubt with sincerity, but under the influence of a very large organ of hope, and in the most sanguine manner, anticipating that the Expenditure would be less, and the Revenue greater than it has subsequently proved. Thus, after the first Budget had been found to be delusive, and after the right hon. Gentleman had taken another unprecedented course, of laying upon the Table of the House a scheme embracing the ordinary and extraordinary Expenditure—a scheme alike confusing to the country and the House —he came down with a second Budget. The Government shirked new taxation, so the Chancellor of the Exchequer proposed to borrow, admitting that the Expenditure was getting beyond the sums that he had anticipated. Again, he had hopes for the future, which had not been realized. We have now a third Budget, and again we find that the Chancellor of the Exchequer comes down to the House and tells us that the Expenditure is greater than he had estimated, and that the taxes have not realized what he expected. The result of all is that he has landed us in a financial difficulty, which I do not hesitate to say is without example in recent years. The system 1880 of borrowing cannot go on for ever. The Chancellor of the Exchequer has put off the evil day as long as possible, and the time is fast approaching when he will have to impose additional taxes upon the country. What will be the inevitable effect of the Statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer in bringing his third Budget before the public? It will be this—that persons engaged in large mercantile operations—persons interested in tea, spirits, and tobacco—will go in for heavy operations in the anticipation of some additional taxation on one or other of these articles. Such operations will certainly cause men engaging in them very great inconvenience, and the passage of a large and unusual quantity of goods through the Customs will give to the Chancellor of the Exchequer a large amount of Revenue this year which does not belong to the year. Present appearances of Revenue will, of course, be improved; but next year will not present so favourable an aspect. Those connected, as I am, with the commerce of the country, have a right to complain of the Statement made to-night, and a right to assert that there should be no delay in laying before the House the Budget for the coming financial year. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Pontefract (Mr. Childers) has shown that it has always been the custom, when there was a large deficiency, for the Chancellor of the Exchequer to come down immediately and state the facts of the case in Committee of Ways and Means. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer does what he now proposes, he will not only do serious injury to the commerce of the country, but he will be setting up another precedent which it is undesirable to pursue. I do not desire to occupy the House longer than necessary, but I have one remark to make which I could not well make in Committee. The Chancellor of the Exchequer stated that he intended to apply a sum of £400,000 to the military operations in South Africa, which had been provided by savings in other Departments of the State. Now, I wish to point out to the right hon. Gentleman that this is a clear case of a transfer of sums voted by this House for particular purposes to other purposes not contemplated by the House at the time the money was voted. I think it a most objectionable course, although a 1881 legal one, to be adopted. Let me put this to the right hon. Gentleman. It might have happened that if he had come down to the House for a Supplementary Vote for the expenses of the South African War, the policy and conduct of the Government with regard to that war might have been fairly challenged. The Government, by taking the course they had pursued, had prevented any consideration by the House of the transactions of an important part of the Imperial policy. They had escaped any challenge of their policy in consequence of the Treasury giving authority to the Army Department to transfer sums of money which had been voted out of the funds granted in this House under entirely different conditions to entirely different objects. That £400,000, so granted by this House, had been taken with the sanction of the Treasury to pay for the South African War. I say that the control of Parliament in such matters does seem very much like a farce. I am not prepared to say that under no circumstances ought such a transfer to be allowed; for I know that if a rule was laid down too stringently, there might be a certain amount of public disadvantage; but if this system is to be so largely adopted I contend that, whatever may be the inconvenience to the Departments, the House of Commons ought to be determined to put a stop to it. I wish it to be understood that £400,000, voted for certain specified purposes, has been expended in war, and this has been done without Parliament being consulted in the matter. I must apologize for intervening between the House and its going into Committee of Supply. I should certainly not have done so had not the right hon. Gentleman thought it right to depart from a practice of this House without the consent of the House.
§ Main Question, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair," put, and agreed to.