begged to call the attention of his noble Friend the noble Duke, to what appeared to him to be an anomaly in this bill. The Controller of the Exchequer was appointed by the Crown, and could not be removed by the Treasury. That, he admitted, was as it should be. It was not right that an officer who had the control of the public expenditure to a great extent, should be under the authority of that board whose expenditure amongst others, he was to control; but this bill recognised an Assistant-Controller of the Exchequer, who was to do the duty, and was, in fact, the controller in the absence of his principal Yet this officer was to be appointed, and to be removable at the will of the Treasury board—that was, of the body whose expenditure he was appointed to control. He was sure that such power would not be exercised by the Treasury, except for some act of misconduct; but still he thought it an anomaly that the Treasury should have the power of appointing and removing the officer who was to control its expenditure.
§ Bill read a third time and passed.