§ LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILLasked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether it is intended to take a Supplementary Vote of Supply for the Salary and Allowances of Major Baring; whether the relative position of Major Baring as Agent and Consul General will be the same as that of Lord Dufferin with respect to the Officers in Command of Her Majesty's Naval and Military Forces in Egypt; and, whether Major Baring will be independent of, or subordinate to, Her Majesty's Ambassador at Constantinople?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICESir, it is not intended to take a Supplementary Vote in Supply for Major Baring's salary and allowances. I am not sure that I rightly understand the bearing of the second portion of the noble Lord's Question; but I may explain that the position of Lord Dufferin was altogether an exceptional one, and cannot be compared with that to be held by Major Baring, who succeeds Sir Edward Malet and not Lord Dufferin. Major Baring's rank and position will therefore be the same as those of Sir Edward Malet, and he will continue to receive his instructions from the Secretary of State, to whom his Correspondence will be directly addressed, Copies, when necessary, being sent to Her Ma- 216 jesty's Ambassador at Constantinople, according to the rule hitherto adopted by Her Majesty's Agents in Egypt.
MR. GORSTIs the House to understand that no part of the pay and allowances of Major Baring will become payable during the present financial year?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICENo; I do not say that. I said that there would be no Supplementary Estimate.
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEIt will be included in. the Votes before the House. As the House is aware, the Diplomatic Vote has not yet been taken, and according to the usual practice the money saved by the economy of the Government with respect to other charges could be applied in payment of such an extra charge as the present.
§ SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTEDoes the noble Lord mean to contend that it is usual in the beginning of a Session, in making financial arrangements, not to take a Vote of Credit for one portion of any Service because there is some hope of effecting a saving in another? That seems to me a now doctrine.
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEI was not making any general statement of financial doctrine, but answered a Question which was asked.
§ MR. W. H. SMITHThe matter stands in this way. It is proposed to increase the salary of a certain officer, and for that increase a sum of £2,000 will be required. Do the Government intend to make that increase without giving Parliament an opportunity of expressing an opinion on it?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEI do not think it would be fair to give an answer to a Question of this character without Notice.
§ SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFFDue Notice has been given. The Question put by my noble Friend is, "Whether it is intended to take a Vote in Supply for the Salary and Allowances of Major Baring?"
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEI have answered that portion of the Question. It is not intended to take a Supplementary Vote.
§ SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFFIf it is not, then where will the extra £2,000 be obtained?
§ LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILLI give Notice that, as the noble Lord has stated that the extra salary and allowances of Major Baring will be included in the Diplomatic Vote, I shall, upon that Vote, move, as an Amendment to it, that the Vote be reduced by a sum of £2,000.
§ MR. ONSLOWMay I ask the noble Lord whether the recompense which Major Baring will receive will be charged on the Imperial or the Indian Exchequer?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEPerhaps the hon. Gentleman will give Notice of that Question?
§ MR. CARBUTTsaid, he had given Notice that he would oppose this Vote.
§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORinquired whether, except for this extra payment to Major Baring, there would not be a surplus of £2,000?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEThere would be no difficulty whatever, if economies are effected in a Vote, in applying the surplus resulting from such economies towards payments in respect of the other details of the same Vote. The details of each Vote are not voted separately, but are given for the information of the House only.
§ MR. W. H. SMITHThe point to which I desire the noble Lord to direct his attention is this. Parliament has had Notice that the salary of a certain office is £2,000, and the Government are now proposing to increase that salary. I think that is an unusual course. I think it is an unusual course to increase a salary in that way without asking the authority of Parliament. Do the Government intend to increase that salary without the authority of Parliament?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICENobody could possibly object to the right hon. Gentleman bringing forward that question upon the Diplomatic Vote. I think the right hon. Gentleman will see that I have fairly answered the Question upon the Paper, and that any further discussion should properly be taken then.
§ SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTEI wish to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, or the Secretary to the Treasury, whether any arrangement respecting Major Baring's salary has been brought before the Treasury, and whe- 218 ther the Treasury have given it their sanction?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. CHILDERS)No arrangement of that character has been officially brought forward, though we are aware that it will be proposed in due course. My opinion is that the change should be explained to Parliament before it is made; and, so far as I am concerned, I will take care that this is done.