On this page
-
Text (4)
-
Untitled Article
-
Untitled Article
-
Untitled Article
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
that the tranquillity which he tried to persuade himself was acquiescence , and which his enemies feared was a sign of utter and hopeless demoralization , vras nothing , in fact , but discouragement . In language more than usually unguarded , his organs have of late over and over again admitted that throughout France there exists a party , the strength of which they try in vain to misrepresent , which continues enthusiastically opposed to the Empire , which is constantly intriguing and conspiring , and which is only waiting for a fair chance of success to break out into revolution . The report of a rising in Paris would lead to a rising in almost every town in France . Yainly it is pretended that the members of secret societies , the insurgents of Chalons , the individuals who are every day condemned for seditious language , are known to the police , are registered by them , are the remainder of the ' army of disorder' which fought in 1848 . Ten years have now passed , since that eventful period , and most of the prisoners made are quite young men . Then it is granted that ' les honnetesgens' or , as we should say , respectable people , are not all united in favour of the Empire ; and M . de Mokny beseeches that this division may cease . A few years ago we were told that all respectable people applauded the Coup d'Etat , and that only the canaille objected . If we took this statement literally , we should be obliged to infer that adversaries of the Empire are now for the first time to be found in the upper classes . But it is well known that formerly as now it was impossible to go into what is called society and find a single Bpnapartist who was not an official . If any of our countrymen go to Paris this year , let them make the experiment . When a man speaks in favour of the Empire , let them ask if in some way or other he does not receive public money . "We pledge ourselves that the answer will be uniform . But not all officials are content . Many , it is certain , are expectant . That Bonapartists exist somewhere , in Paris even , seems indubitable . All the votes thrown into the urns at elections cannot be forgeries , though many are . The truth probabl y is , that the partisans of the Empire and the partisans of revolution are about equally divided ; but between these two extremes there is a vast mass of indifferentism , which , is sure in the end to become hostile to any regime which puts society in peril by needless violence and exasperating espionage .
Untitled Article
THE JEW BILL DIFFICULTY . The Oaths Bill stands for the decision of the Commons on Monday next . In the previous debating , it has had to run the gauntlet between opponents representing two extremes—those who are for retaining the present oaths and excluding Jews , and those who are for a more summary course . Mr . Newdesate and gentlemen of that stamp continue their obstruction ; Mr . Thomas Duncombe calls Lord John Russeix to account for not proceeding by resolution ; and Mr . Roebuck has taken exception to particular passages in the bill . The principles upon which Lord John Russexl has proceeded have been , to effect the main object—the admission of the Jews ; in doing so , to make an improvement of the oath—upon which the great majority of the House of Commons is agreed ; but at the same time to avoid raising any complicated questions , or creating objections that would not otherwise be advanced . Thus Lord John simplifies the oath ; but he retains the general form of words , " And I make this declaration upon the true faith of a Christian , " a great majority of members desiring to keep , that form of attestation . A separate clause exempts the Jew from the necessity of using the expression . Mr . Roebuck ' s obieotion is , that the passage declaring ' that no foreign prince , person , prelate , state , or potentate hath , or ought to have , any jurisdiction , superiority , pre-eminence , or authority , ecclesiastical or spiritual , directly or indirectly , within this realm , " might be construed to mean a declaration that no auoh foreign dignitary has influence or authority over-the- « i # »< forolUpersona _ in ^ thia . cojiuii , Jir y ^ wfeobjg long to the Roman Catholic faith ; and Lord John proposes a slight alteration to do away with that objection . The effort to go direct to tho purposo of the bill , without raising issues that do not belong to it , has exposed Lord John to sneers for vacillation and compromise . Ifc appears to us , however , that the bjll is calculated to effect the one object , and at the Bame time to obtain the suffrage of tho groat majority in tho House of Commons . Mr . Duncombe assumed an almost hostile tone while asking Lord John whothor ho expected a
majority in the House of Lords . Of course Lord John ' expected' no such thing ; for nobody can calculate what the Lords may do . They have rejected the measure through several successive years ; they may now see the policy of getting out of their odious and unpopular position . Several reasons would justify their doing so . The bill will present itself to them in its most inoffensive form . Various political changes in the country would render it easy for the Lords to accommodate themselves to a more liberal spirit . If they do not accept the oath in its amended form , they may have to put up with the Jew Bill or its equivalent in a worse shape . It is not desirable to go before the House of Lords with a threat that if they reject the bill the Commons will go on without them . But however that may be , the question of proceeding with the bill , it appears to us , was settled last session , when it was determined not to adopt Mr . Dillwtn ' s proposition of proceeding b y resolution alone , but to give the Lords another chance , and to leave the conduct of the measure for that purpose in the hands of Lord John Russell . He has thus far contrived at once to repel the obstructions of the Tory opponents , while debarring them from any right to say that he has taken an advantage through the forms of the House . On the contrary , he has the acknowledgments of Mr . Newdegate , and the ' cordial thanks' of Mr . Walpole , for the fairness with which , while pressing the measure forward , he has given its opponents warning , and has enabled them to put in their resistance . Never , therefore , did a bill go up to the Lords with a stronger case , or fairer reasons for using this opportunity to close a vexatious question , which must remain open , and must continue to irritate the public , until it is closed in the one way .
Untitled Article
THE PUBLIC MONEY . A cubiotjs and suggestive discussion occurred in the House of Commons on Tuesday . Sir Cormewall Lewis objected to the vote of 500 , 000 / . for the militia until he had obtained explanation as to the surplus arising out of last year's vote for the army . As our readers are doubtless aware , the support of soldiers in India is no expense to the home Government . The maintenance in India , in 1857 , of some forty or fifty thousand additional English soldiers , completely relieves us of the expense of supporting fifty thousand men . Out of this transfer of expense arises , of course , an important saving . The late Chancellor op the Exchequer asked why the money thus saved could not be transferred from the support of the army to the support of the militia . Mr . Disraeli promptly replied , and took a fair advantage of his opponent . He considered it more constitutional , when money was wanted for the militia , to ask Parliament for a grant than to apply to one department money accidentally saved in another . That course , he said , might not be radically objectionable in the case of small savings , but half a million was too large a sum to transfer without the authority of Parliament . This appearance of Mr . Disraeii as the ' very good boy * of national finance elicited loud praise from Sir Henry Willoughby , Sir Francis Barry , and
Mr . Cardweix , and the maladroit Whig essayist who so promptly thrust himself forward as an advocate for misapplication of money was silenced , while Mr . Disraeli sat down with all tho complacent feeling of 'little Jack Horncr , ' enhanced by the self-denying recollection that he had not even put his thumb into the Exchequer pic . If in addition to the littlo ' green ledger' of the Royal British Bank there had been found a private journal recording a debate in the bank parlour , in whioh Mr . STAPLETON , tho all-but-acquitted director , advised Cameron to transfer a sum of money in their bands as security to tho account of deposits , and thus give a fictitious inoroase to their cash in hand , or to apply to the payment of bills money voted by the directors for buildingwo should consider Mr .
, Stapleton ' s oomplioity rather clearly established . ^ h ^ CojiNj | WALL . LEwii 9 j > Eonly _ advises a transfer of puDlio ~ moncy equally unauthorized ? "" " ~ " ~ The scene suggesta more than the curious assumption of characters for one night only . It stimulates inquiry as to tho system of nntional accounts which would permit tho misapplication advised by Sir Cornewall Lewis . Parliament made a grant of money to support the army , and tho Treasury has power to divert this money fiom tho support of tho army to the pay of tho militia , and this without the authority or even tho knowledge of Parliament . Or , the process may be reversed ; money grantod by
Parliament to the muitia may be transferred to the account of the army . There have been times in English history when the Commons would readily grant money for the militia , but , jealous of the Crown , would have refused it for the support of aa increased or increasing army , and , though there is no present probability , such times may occur again . Yet the control and audit of our national accounts is so imperfect that the servants of the Crown mi ght transfer to the support of an augmented standing army the moneys voted without stint for the constitutional militia . This will seem almost incredible to readers unversed in the mysteries of circumlocution , but the authorities on the subject arc
indisputable . There are two offices of the Slate especially charged with looking after the expenditure of . . the public money ; the Comptroller of the Exehequer presides over the issue of money to the Crown , and the Audit Office checks the expenditure in detail . But the Comptroller , after seeing th : it a certain sum . is given to the Crown ' on account of a special branch , and that that sum does not exceed the amount granted by Parliament for that branch , has no further knowledge of the way the money foes . Lord Monteagle is the Comptroller of the ixchequer , and for aught he knows Sir Cuahles Trevelyan and the clerks of the Treasury may sbend the monev intended for the militia in
whitebait dinners at Blackwall . This will seem a coiuic exaggeration , but it is simply the fact . Before the Commons' Committee on Public Moneys , Lord Monteagle , this Comptroller who does not control , said : — " The Treasury in many instances pays money without any legal authority to pay it , ; md applies it to purposes foreign to that for which it is appropriated . " ( Question 27 S 7 . ) Again he says : — "If you ask me whether the Paymaster applies money for purposes unauthorized b y law , diverting that money from the legal purpose for which it was issued , and to which he was bound by the Exchequer and the Appropriation Act to limit the expenditure—that , I say , takes place every day ; : iud such is the statement of Sir Charles Trevelyajt and the admission of Mr . Anderson . " ( Question
2789 . ) These are strange statements , coming from the officer appointed at a high salary to control the management of our public moneys . Let no impetuous reader run away with the idea that there is any actual embezzlement . Lord Monteagle is a member of Parliament and a reader of the newspapers , and lie mixes in good society ; by these means he knows quite well that there is no
embezzlement for private purposes of any portion of these public moneys , but as Comptroller of \ ha Exchequer he knows nothing about it . The security of John Bull ' s money depends on the personal honour of our officials , and on the inquisitive spirit of our ' rising ' senators and newspaper correspondents . There is no system of accounts constructed to ascertain the legal appropriation of the public money . Surely in a nation of shopkeepers this is a grievous fault .
The Audit Office is the other office charged with the supervision of the national accounts . But tho Audit Offico has not sufficient power . It is subordinate to the Treasury , and its inspection is governed by frequent communications from the superior office . Thus the Crown , represented by the Treasury , directs the auditors appointed to examine into the expenditure of the public money . The Audit Office does its work correctly and conscientiously , but tho Treasury has acquired by ' prescription the power to direct the Audit Office to * pass' an account objectionable according to law . This blunder of
subordinating to tho expanding agent the olhccr appointed to inspect him , is most astounding , a « d could only have grown up in a ' oonstilulioatu country . The fn-3 t man in this country who established an organized audit of public money was our greatest sovereign—his Highness tho Lord Protector—but his auditors were independent of the Treasury , and reported directly to Parliament—a reform now urgca by tho Commons' Committee on tho Government . Tims , tho tmggcstcd reforms ot to-day woro living faots in Cuomw ell ' s tune .
Untitled Article
LIBERAL INS AND OUTS . Mr . Bernal Osbornm is n . typo of those Liberals whose independence is from time to time colipsou by official responsibility . IJo has a louder and inoro flexible tongue than most of tho goijtlomcn who agree with him on tho Ballot and similar questions ; but his tongue seems not the only floxiblo pan , oi his nature . An Admiralty Soqrctaryship Bilonooa the member for Middlesex , who was then asluunou
Untitled Article
_ j T H E Ii E A D E B . [ No . 417 , March ? 20 , 1858 .
-
-
Citation
-
Leader (1850-1860), March 20, 1858, page 280, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse2.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2235/page/16/
-