have been periodically submitted to Parliament; and to this extent brought under the control of Parliament. A fund arising from fines imposed on soldiers for drunkenness is distributed in conformity with the recommendations of a select committee of the House of Commons in 1870. On May 14, 1867, a select committee was appointed by the House to enquire into the origin of Military Reserve Funds, the sources from which they are derived, and the objects to which they are applied. On July 22, this committee reported the evidence already taken, with a recommendation that they might be reappointed next session, to complete the enquiry." It was accordingly reappointed in 1868, and on May 22 reported an opinion, that on constitutional grounds the Military Reserve Fund should be wound up." The government promised to consider the matter. to the crown. ment The constitutional principle of parliamentary control Loans. is also applicable to advances or loans of public money, to foreign powers, corporations, or private persons; to Debts due the remission of debts due to the crown by any such persons or powers; and even to the sale of property Governby one department of the state, and its purchase by sales. another department for public uses." It equally applies to the gift of public money, or public stores, in the name or on behalf of the crown." Public departments are not now at liberty to give away stores without the direct sanction of Parliament. The rule, that no public property should be disposed of in kind, has been one of the most difficult achievements of financial reform during the last half century.' Before the establishment of this rule the public never knew when anything was given away, or what was the value of the gift." But by a Treasury minute, issued on May 13, 1871, pursuant to the First Report of the Committee of Public Accounts in that year, every public department is now Precedents. Paper duty. Hop duty. pealed. The government opposed the motion, but it was agreed to on division. Nevertheless, the chancellor of the exchequer refused to give way. Some days afterwards the House went into committee of ways and means, when the chancellor of the exchequer proposed to fix the rate of this duty at sixpence. The opponents of the duty again succeeded: the proposed rate was struck out, and no other amount inserted in the resolution. After this, the government acquiesced in the abolition of the duty.t On the same occasion (April 14, 1853), and as a part of his scheme for the abolition of taxes on knowledge, Mr. Milner Gibson moved a resolution condemning the continuance of the paper duty as a permanent source of revenue, as being impolitic and inconsistent with the efforts of Parliament for the encouragement of education. The previous question was proposed on this resolution, and negatived. On June 21, 1858, Mr. Gibson again brought forward the question, upon a motion That this House is of opinion that the maintenance of the excise on paper, as a permanent source of revenue, would be impolitic; and that such financial arrangements ought to be made as will enable Parliament to dispense with that tax.' The chancellor of the exchequer (Mr. Disraeli) stated his readiness to agree to the repeal of this tax when a favourable opportunity should arise, but he strongly objected to the latter part of the motion, as being a highly impolitic and inexpedient' endeavour to hamper the government by an abstract resolution concerning a tax, at a time when it would be impossible to act upon it. He suggested the withdrawal of the latter part of the motion, from the word 'impolitic,' which was also advised by Lord John Russell and other leading members, on the same ground. This being consented to by Mr. Gibson, the former part of the motion, condemning the permanent continuance of the paper duties, was agreed to without a division." In 1860, Mr. Gladstone (the then chancellor of the exchequer) included the abolition of the paper duty in his financial measures for the year, and a Bill for that purpose passed the House of Commons, but was rejected by the Lords. Next session a similar proposition was inserted in a Bill respecting customs and inland revenue, which passed both Houses, and became law. On March 5, 1861, Mr. Dodson moved to resolve 'that the maintenance of any duties upon hops is impolitic; and that in any remission of taxation or adjustment of financial burdens, provision should be made for the removal of such duties.' The chancellor of Hans. D. v. 125, p. 1187. * Ib. v. 128, p. 1128. ▾ Lords' Debates, May 21, 1860 A narrative of this celebrated case will be given in vol. ii. dents. the exchequer (Mr. Gladstone) asked no one to give an opinion on Precethe merits of this duty, but objected to the motion on the ground that it was an abstract resolution relating to the matter of finance. Without denying the right of the House, under any circumstances, to pass such a resolution, he characterised the same as being a rash innovation on the practice of the House in former times. He held up the paper duty resolution as an example which ought to be a warning to the House not to commit itself to a similar proceeding, but to await the proper time when the financial condition of the country could be considered as a whole in connection with the fiscal propositions to be submitted to it by the government. Acquiescing in these views, the House negatived the motion by a large majority.w The budget laid before the House by the chancellor of the exchequer in the following session contained a proposal for the repeal of the hop duties, so that the sentiments entertained by the House on this question ultimately prevailed. surance. duty. On May 4, 1860, and again on March 8, 1861, Mr. H. B. Sheridan Fire insurance moved for leave to bring in a Bill to reduce the duty on fire inOn both occasions the motion was opposed by the ministry, and negatived by the House. In 1860, the motion was made after the budget had been opened by the chancellor of the exchequer, and he objected to it because it was ill-timed, as it would effect a considerable loss of revenue that could not be spared, and because, even if its operation should be postponed, no tax ought to be condemned until the House is prepared to reduce or abolish it. In 1861, the chancellor of the exchequer objected to the motion on the ground that no proposal should be made to reduce a tax until after the budget had been brought forward, when, if it should appear that there was a surplus revenue sufficient to justify an abatement of taxation, the proposed claim for relief could be put into competition with similar demands, and be fairly considered by the House. On April 1, 1862, Mr. Sheridan again proposed his Bill. This time, as on the previous occasion, the budget had not been submitted to the House. The chancellor of the exchequer, in opposing the motion, said that it was 'the duty of every government-a duty always acted upon-to object to any individual and isolated proposals for the repeal of taxes before the House had within its view the general state of the revenue and charges of the country.' 'The popular principle of government, and the control of it by the House of Commons, depend on nothing so much as this,—that it should narrow into a single measure the financial operations of the year.' If brought forward after the introduction of the budget, the same objections to this motion would not apply. On this point it was Hans. D. v. 161, pp. 1448-1457. * Ib. v. 158, p. 728. y Ib. v. 161, p. 1667; and see v. 172, p. 813. Prece. dents of money advances. Loan Commissioners were at liberty to draw, without any annual The amounts which the commissioners can draw under these Acts are very large, and have hitherto been indefinite. But it has become necessary that the chancellor of the exchequer should know beforehand the probable extent of such demands upon him for pecuniary advances within the year. And he accordingly announced his intention of adding to his ordinary yearly budget an annual statement, or 'local budget,' for the purpose of enabling Parliament to be informed each year of the progress of loan transactions, and of determining what amount of money should be voted to supply loans to be effected through the commission, and of providing for the same by a separate Bill. Old running loans which have hitherto escaped the attention of Parliament are now to be abolished; and no loan is to be remitted or compounded without the authority of Parliament. The evidence appended to the afore-mentioned report embodies much information upon the operations of the Public Works Loan Commissioners.c By the Act 38 & 39 Vict. c. 58, the Treasury is empowered to issue to the Public Works Loan Commissioners, out of the Consolidated Fund, sums of money not exceeding in the whole three million pounds sterling, for the purpose of any loans by the commissioners which cannot be issued under Acts in force at the passing of this Act.d Previous to the Act of 1875, the Treasury had power by warrant to reduce the terms on which loans might be made by the commissioners. But by that Act Parliament divested the Treasury of this power, so that full responsibility might rest on the commissioners, subject only to the control and revision of Parlia ment.e On July 4, 1876, on going into committee upon a Bill to place four million pounds at the disposal of the commissioners for loans to be granted by them to local authorities during the current financial year, the president of the Local Government Board made the Vide Report, Com. Pap. 1875, v. Public Works Loan Bill, Ib. v. 229, 14, pp. 38, 60, 62, 66; Hans. D. v. p. 669. 233, p. 1687. b Ch. of Exch. in Budget Speech, 1876, on loan transactions for Pub. Works. Hans. D. v. 228, p. 1111. A detailed statement, or Local Budget,' promised on bringing in a Com. Pap. 1875, v. 14, p. 9, &c. ; Ed. Rev. v. 153, p. 548, &c. d 38 & 39 Vict. cc. 83 & 95. Hans. D. v. 230, pp. 872, 975, 981; v. 234, pp. 1169, 1291. March 21, 1865, Mr. Sheridan again submitted to the House a Precemotion to declare the expediency of reducing this duty to a uniform dents. standard of one shilling and sixpence on all descriptions of insurable property. It was strenuously opposed by the chancellor of the exchequer, who moved the previous question; but on division the previous question was carried, and the main question agreed to. On proposing the budget on April 27 following, the chancellor of the exchequer announced that, in deference to the unmistakable expression of opinion by the House on this subject, the government had decided to recommend a reduction of this duty to a uniform rate of one shilling and sixpence, from June 25. This concession, however, failed to satisfy Mr. Sheridan and his friends. Accordingly, in the session of 1866, both Mr. Sheridan and Mr. Hubbard gave notice of separate motions regarding this tax. Mr. Hubbard's motion, which was first proposed as an amendment to the motion for the second reading of the Customs and Inland Revenue Bill, was to declare the inexpediency of retaining, as part of the Inland Revenue for the service of the year, the present duties on fire and marine insurances, for certain reasons alleged. After a short debate the amendment was negatived without a division.f On March 7, 1876, Mr. Spinks moved to resolve, that the rail- Railway way passenger duty ought to be reduced at an early date, with a view passenger to its ultimate repeal. In amendment, Mr. Rodwell moved, that a duty. select committee be appointed to enquire into the operation of this duty, and especially as to its effect upon the working of cheap trains. The government accepted this amendment, and it was agreed to accordingly. The committee reported, on June 23, that it was undesirable to maintain this tax any longer than is necessary for fiscal purposes. On April 17, 1877, Mr. Knatchbull-Hugessen, who was a member of this committee, moved, seconded by Mr. Spinks, that, pending the question of the abolition of this duty, the other recommnendations of the committee should receive the early attention of government. To this an amendment was moved, to deprecate the abolition of the tax. After a long debate the chancellor of the exchequer stated that he objected to both motions, and to the House agreeing to a resolution, which points to the abolition of a tax, where there are avowedly not the means for giving effect to that resolution at once. Finally the motion and amendment were both with drawn. Hans. D. v. 178, pp. 1120-1124. 'f Ib. v. 183, pp. 1199-1202, 1407. And see Ib. March 19 and May 16, 1867, when the other unsuccessful attempts were made to obtain a further reduction of this duty. On April 6, 1869, Mr. Sheridan again proposed a resolution in favour of a reduction |