we spent was expended in consequence of the neglect of our predecessors in Office, in not keeping up the public service in a proper state of efficiency. I can quite understand that the ignorant audience whom the right hon. Gentleman was addressing-["Oh. oh!”]—I mean ignorant on this point- were not so well-informed with respect to it as the Members of the late House of Commons who took part in its discussions; and I am not, therefore, surprised that the statements of the right hon. Gentleman were received with a considerable amount of applause. For some of those statements, made in the excitement of an election contest, I should be inclined to make some excuse; but there were others, which may, perhaps, be brought before the House at some future day, for which there is little excuse to be found, because they were made, I think, without due inquiry into the facts of the case. The right hon. Gentleman alluded,

Ministerial side of the House, declined to accede to my proposal, and the House divided, with the result I have just mentioned. We voted for the insertion of the word "entirely" because we did not see our way to providing the expenses of those Commissions without having recourse to some extent to the aid of public funds. We thought that the public were interested in some of the proceedings of those Commissions, and that to that extent there ought to be some charge on the public funds, while we entirely concurred in the principle of the Resolution that the general expense ought not to be defrayed from that source. My hon. Friend, however, who perhaps now may perceive that he was ill-advised in the matter, refused to accept the slight qualification of his Motion which I suggested, went to a division, and triumphed by a majority of 1. I was rather curious to see who supported him on that occasion, and I found that no less than fourteen Members of the pre-among other things, to the debate on the sent Government, and four Members of present Cabinet, went into the Lobby in favour of his Motion. He was supported, not only by the vote, but by the speech of the present First Lord of the Treasury, while he was assisted in telling the result of the division by the present First Lord of the Admiralty. Now one would have thought that that circumstance would have decided the course of action of the present Government in the matter. But the question does not rest here, because the Prime Minister made a very notable progress during the Recess. He then made a great number of speeches, which occupied a great number of columns in the different newspapers. So profuse were his utterances, indeed, that I almost despaired of getting through so vast a mass of words. I must, however, confess that I paid the right hon. Gentleman the compliment of reading the greater portion of those speeches, and felt much encouraged by those prolix effusions with which he relieved his mind. One of the chief topics on which he dwelt was the extraordinary extravagance of the late Government, and their great desire to squander the public money. I had some consolation in reading what the right hon. Gentleman said on this subject, because my conscience was very easy on the matter, for I felt that a great deal of the public money which

Motion of my hon. Friend the Member
for Chippenham; and one of the chief
counts in his indictment against the late
Government was that they had opposed
that Motion. So important were the ut-
terances of the right hon. Gentleman,
that they exist not only in the shape
of a newspaper report, but have been
bound up together and published in a
pamphlet. ["Hear, hear!"] I am not
astonished to find that hon. Gentlemen
opposite cheer; but the immortality of
these speeches may very well be re-
garded from two points of view, because
if they perpetuate sentiments worthy of
being perpetuated in the memories of
the fellow-countrymen of the right hon.
Gentleman, they also preserve many
rash and reckless assertions. I only deal
with that portion of the speech which
refers to the Vote before us.
If I re-
ferred to the general statements con-
tained in the speech, hon. Gentle-
men opposite might be somewhat aston-
ished at the assertions which were then
made. The right hon. Gentleman al-
luded to the course which was adopted
by the then Government, and said-

"We saw on the Notice Paper this year a Notice which would have saved the country a certain sum of money. I think some £20,000 a year, perhaps more. It was to the effect that the exholds, Inclosures, and Tithes which had been penses of certain Commissions relating to Copycharged on the Consolidated Fund should be borne not by the State but by the persons who

"Thus we had an opportunity, because Mr. Goldney, being the Mover of the Motion, and not acting in concert with us, it was not possible to cast upon it the discredit of being a party Motion. Well, what did we do? We supported Mr. Goldney, and what happened? We carried our Motion by 1. So keen were the Government to resist this reduction of expenditure, that after being thus beaten in a division some rumour went abroad that one or two Members had come into the House that they might, if they divided again, obtain a different issue. They divided again, and again they were beaten by 1."

election, declared his opinion that the expense of the Charity Commission should also be saved to the country. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, however, in ney), stated, the other night, that the an answer to my hon. Friend (Mr. Gold

Inclosure Commissioners would raise what the late Secretary of the Treasury £17,000 by fees-though he did not add

had done to secure this result-but confessed that the Government did not see their way to relieve the public from the charge of the Charity Commission. He declared that he himself should like to impose an income tax on charities. Now, I say that after what occurred the Government were bound to attempt to carry out the Resolution of my hon. Friend. We were taunted, when in Office, with not having the power to give effect to some of our wishes; but what is the use of having a strong Government in Office, carrying great measures by a majority of 118, if, having decided opinions on such a subject as this, and having pledged themselves as deeply as they can by Resolutions in this House and by speeches out-of-doors, the Government

I gather, then, that in the opinion of the present Government this £20,000 a year ought to have been saved to the country and thrown upon the persons interested; and the Members of the then Government were held up as so keen against the reduction that they took a second division. I do not think that this ac- do not see their way" to carry out that count of what occurred in the House which they severely censured us for not quite accords with the facts; because, so carrying out? When this sort of thing far from resisting the spirit of the pro- happens it ought to make Gentlemen posal, I stated that I entirely concurred careful of what they say in their elecin it, but that we thought its terms so tion speeches. I think they ought not strict as to require qualification. How-to attribute to their political opponents ever, the Colleagues of the right hon. a desire to squander public money, and Gentleman were so determined upon to throw upon the public charges which effecting this economy that they refused to admit of any qualification. Well, I cannot conceive after the right hon. Gentleman had supported the Motion, and after the grave charge brought by him against the late Government-that, coming into power with such a majority, he might not have found means to carry out the views he expressed in Opposition. My hon. Friend the late Secretary to the Treasury (Mr. Sclater-Booth) brought in a Bill to enable the Inclosure Commission to levy fees, and the Commissioners will thus be able, according to their estimate, to raise a sum of £17,000 to meet the expenses of £20,000. The late Government were entirely of opinion that the expense should not be borne by the public, and they took measures accordingly. But now a word or two on the subject of the Charity Commission. The right hon. Gentleman, by his vote here and by his taunting speech at the

ought to be borne by private persons, whereas when they come into Office they themselves do nothing. At the time when the right hon. Gentleman supported the Motion of my hon. Friend he had had some experience as to the difficulties of imposing charges upon charities, and had made a proposal which he was unable to carry; yet, knowing the difficulties of the case, he refuses to qualify the terms of the Motion, and then goes down to his would-be constituents and charges the then Government with resisting the reduction of expenditure in this instance. What has happened? The right hon. Gentleman and his Colleagues propose these two Votes, not having, as regards the Charity Commission, taken one single step to relieve the public.

MR. GLADSTONE: Sir, I congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on having commenced his speech with a criticism

upon our proceedings, as to which he | Now, Sir, the question is one that, after possibly had something to say. We all, it may not be useless to discuss. asked for a Vote for four months on The right hon. Gentleman speaks of me account of the Miscellaneous Services. as if I had raised the subject of the vote That was admitted to be unnecessary, of the hon. Member for Chippenham though it was for the public convenience, (Mr. Goldney) gratuitously before my and the Vote on Account was reduced to "would-be constituents." What haptwo months. The right hon. Gentleman pened was this-I did state to my concompares with this proposal the jealousy stituents-as they then were, and as I of the Opposition of last year, who would hoped they would be again, and it is only consent to a Vote for six weeks. to me matter of grief that they are But he entirely omits from his com- not - I did state to my constituents parison that upon which the whole that, in my opinion, a due control merits of the case turns-namely, that had not been exercised over the exlast year the Government had been con- penditure of the country during the two demned on a vital point of policy, and years the then Government had been in had been placed in a minority of more Office; and I am happy to say that it than 60 by a vote of which the head has in some manner or other happened of the then Government declared that it that, when that declaration was made in would produce consequences more for- the face of the country in one of those midable than foreign conquest. Sir, I prolix speeches to which the right hon. unfeignedly regret that the right hon. Gentleman refers-that £3,000,000 had Gentleman has raised this question. been added to the public expenditure in We have other matters to transact than two years-the "ignorant audiences" in to rake up these old controversies- Lancashire, whom he has thus again the frivolous as I shall show them to be good taste to describe, were considerably but I am compelled to follow the right impressed with the fact, and the opposing hon. Gentleman on the ground over candidates immediately challenged the which he drags me. That was the posi- right hon. Gentleman on the subject tion of things last year, and the Opposi--and much notice was taken throughtion with singular mildness proposed, after the vote I have mentioned, that Supply should be taken for a limited period. Yet the right hon. Gentleman, while instructing others in their publie duties, thinks it right to institute this comparison, omitting from it the point on which the whole case rests. How-head, but I am compelled to appeal to ever, with this portion of his speech he was comparatively successful; but he goes on to instruct me upon the mode in which election speeches should be framed, and, rising in the latter part of his speech to a height of calm philosophy, says that great inconvenience is likely to arise when Gentlemen before their constituents or, as he, with, excellent taste, remarks, their would-be constituentsbecome reckless in the language they use. Undoubtedly those who are unfortunate enough to number the tale of years which have passed since I became a Member of this House must feel peculiar happiness when they receive lessons of this description from Gentlemen who have entered public life some quarter of a century afterwards, and who, growing rapidly in wisdom and experience, have acquired so remarkable a capacity for lecturing their seniors.

out the country of the matter-and, sin-
gular to say, we have been recently in-
formed by the right hon. Gentleman that
about and from that very date it became
a great object of the right hon. Gentle-
man to reduce the current expenditure.
The right hon. Gentleman shakes his

his speech last night, in which he said
that about the month of September-
[Mr. HUNT: I said long before, in the
autumn]-the operations of the right
hon. Gentleman were specially pointed
to the subject-it was in the autumn, he
says, he became finally convinced that
the revenue would fall short of his esti-
mates, and it was in the autumn he
made, not vigorous, but renewed and
extended-for I have no doubt he thinks
he always made vigorous-efforts for re-
ducing the expenditure of the country.
That was the time when the dissolution
was in prospect, and when, by means of
these prolix speeches and otherwise, the
country had become aware of the manner
in which its financial affairs were regu-
lated. I was then told that it was my duty,
being in command of the majority in the
last Parliament, to cut down and keep
down the expenditure. I think those ac-

533

I

quainted with the last Parliament will be | Gentleman, instead of accepting that aware that any power possessed by myself vote, because there was some rumour or others on this Bench was of a very about the House that two or three Memlimited character, and I deny the pro- bers had come into the Lobby which position that we could be held respon- might change the division, declined to sible for that great expenditure, if we accept the vote and challenged it again took the opportunity from time to time and was beaten. If the right hon. Gento make known our disapproval of, and tleman thinks it a right mode of prowhen occasion offered endeavoured to ceeding towards the representatives of reduce, the public charge. I then made the people that when those who are the the observation which the right hon. chosen guardians of the public purse Gentleman has read, and which appears have declared their disposition to aboa most just observation-that though it lish a public charge, they should be met was very difficult for us, engaged in by that kind of opposition on the part political controversies of the highest mo- of the Executive Government, I have ment, to be continually worrying the the misfortune to differ from him. Government on this and that question hold that such a mode of proceeding is of expenditure, which would have de- not decorous, and scarcely constitutional. graded the struggle in which we were Had it been an attempt to force expenengaged on the subject of the Irish diture on the Government the right hon. Church into what would have appeared Gentleman might have been perfectly to be a mere contest for the immediate warranted in challenging the vote; but, grasp of Office; yet, when we had the where the House has, by a majority, deopportunity offered us on the Motion of clared in favour of the abolition of a a Gentleman of so much intelligence as particular charge, the intimation is enthe Member for Chippenham, from the titled at once to the respectful consideraother side of the House, we were glad tion of the Executive Government. So to support it. It was for that purpose far as regards the proceedings of last I introduced the passage which the right April; and, if I understand rightly, the hon, Gentleman has quoted as an in- right hon. Gentleman now makes it a stance of the rash and inconsiderate charge against the Government that they statements in my speeches; but every have not removed from the Estimates syllable of which I here deliberately the charge of the Charity Commission. adopt. I then pointed to the proceed- It seems that the right hon. Gentleman ings of the right hon. Gentleman. It is himself went to work and framed a plan quite true he said he thought a part of under which a scale of fees was conthe expense might be borne by the par- structed relating to the Copyhold and That scale was, I ties taking the benefit of these Commis- Inclosure Commission, and estimated to sions, and he wanted the House to affirm produce £17,000. the Motion that the expense of these Commissions should not be entirely defrayed by the public. But the hon. Member for Chippenham, certainly not on my inspiration, would not agree to that Amendment, and he was quite right, for if he had adopted it the House would have declared that a portion of the expenses of those who take the benefit of these Commissions should be borne by the public. I think he was right, and I would vote with him again if the same circumstances should arise. But what I did observe, and what was the point of my criticism, related to the form of proceeding adopted by the right hon. Gentleman-for it was this-The House of Commons gave its judgment-it is true, only by a majority of 1-in favour of the reduction of the public expenditure, and to my astonishment the right hon.

think, properly framed by the right hon.
Gentleman, and properly adopted by my
right hon. Friend near me (the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer). [Mr. HUNT
here made an observation.] I beg par-
don, the fees were authorized by Act of
Parliament. But although £17,000, the
estimated amount of these fees, was not
the precise equivalent of £20,000, there
was so far a compliance with the Vote of
the House of Commons. The right hon.
Gentleman, however, appears to think
that that vote was binding on the pre-
sent Government in some
which it was not binding on the late
Government. The vote of the House
of Commons, once passed, was not a
bit more binding on the Members of
the majority than on the minority. The
right hon. Gentleman has forgotten to
tell us why he did not apply himself

sense

in

to frame a scheme of fees for the Cha- | in the Parliament dissolved in 1865, a rity Commission. [Mr. HUNT: Because compact party blanded together almost we had no opportunity.] The right hon. as one man, when parties were nearly Gentleman framed a plan for the Copy- balanced, to oppose the proposal that we hold Commission, why did he not frame made, which would not only have rea plan for the Charity Commission? The lieved the public from this charge but a right hon. Gentleman remained in Office great deal more. And that is the plan nine months, under the vote of the House which, unless we are able to devise a of Commons, which he twice raised, and more direct method, we shall desire to which was twice carried against him; give effect to and carry out. But the but he took no step. [Mr. HUNT made right hon. Gentleman says-" Why not an observation.] If I am to under- give effect to it now?" Why do not stand that he did take any steps, I am we postpone the Irish Church to introonly sorry they did not become known to duce a charge upon charities? Does he my right hon. Friend near me, because not know, if we did introduce such a I am sure my right hon. Friend would tax what would be the effect? The time have been very glad to have availed may come when we may impose it, but himself of any suggestion that, by a di- does the right hon. Gentleman think we rect method of operation, would have are such children in our business as to relieved the public of the charge of the yield to such a suggestion? Why, we Charity Commission. But he has given should have immediately banded tous no account whatever of any proceed-gether not only hon. Gentlemen oppoing taken by him to fulfil the wishes of site, but I am sorry to say there would the House with regard to the Charity be local agencies exercising a grievous Commission. Well, but we come into power, and he says that his disobedience to the vote of the House with respect to the Charity Commission does not excuse us. That is perfectly true. What did we do? We looked at the matter and found two methods in which effect might conceivably be given to the vote. Looking at it with reference to the direct charge, we did not see our way to get rid of it. But if the right hon. Gentleman is more anxious than we are, and able to devise a method by which we might remove that charge from the Estimates, we shall be too happy to sit at his feet and obtain the smallest contribution towards the public welfare which he may be graciously pleased to bestow I must abide by, extend, and enlarge on us. We have got another mode of what I then stated. And I say, on my proceeding, and it is to apply to charities own part, and on the part of my right the just, rational, and obvious method of prescribing by law that property which is given by persons, when they die or otherwise, not to their own flesh and blood, but to certain objects they choose to prefer, shall pay, like other property, for the protection it receives from the State. And to my perfect astonishment the right hon. Gentleman is so imprudent as to recall the fact that we have already endeavoured to establish this just principle, and says we could not do it. No, Sir, we could not do it. And why? Because the Friends of the right hon. Gentleman would not let us. Because we saw opposed to us,

pressure upon divers worthy and en-
lightened men on this side of the House,
We should be compelled to consume day
after day in barren and fruitless discus-
sion of a question whether we should
levy a tax of £20,000 a year upon
charities, and we should be neglecting
the promotion of a measure on which
we think the harmony of the nation and
the prosperity of the country depend.
That is our answer to the right hon.
Gentleman. I am sorry to be led back
over the old ground, because our desire
is to go onwards, yet I do not shrink
from anything I said to my constituents
on the subject of the financial policy of
the late Government.
On the contrary,

hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Government, that we shall show we entertain the same opinions in regard to the Charity Commission whenever we have the opportunity. Nay, more, if the right hon. Gentleman will kindly rise in his place and give us the assurance, and without delay, that on his side, or upon the Bench on which he sits, if we propose to apply this principle of taxation to charitable among other funds, we shall receive their warm support, and that we shall not find them voting against us, or taking their flight in a mass from the House, as we have seen before to-night, but that we shall