Signor Amari for stating that no building of importance at present survives in Sicily which can be with certainty attributed to the period of Musulman rule. The claims of the Cuba and the Zisa at Palermo have been conclusively disposed of. Nevertheless the great buildings of the period are in their essence, that is to say in the principle of construction, which is almost invariably that of the pointed arch, Saracenic. A typical example is to be found in the well-known Ponte d'Ammiraglio near Palermo. The Normans ordered the buildings, but it was the Saracens who were the actual builders. On the other hand Greek influence shows itself in the mosaic ornamentation, Latin in the form the basilican-given to the ecclesiastical edifices. The wooden roofs at Cefalù and Monreale as contrasted with the Saracenic ceiling of the Capella Regia and the gradual but very slight admixture of figure sculpture in the west door of Monreale show that in some departments there was a struggle in progress. Into such details, and into the interesting subject of the South-Italian architecture of the period, illustrated by the magnificent work of Schulz, it is impossible to enter. 6 We have endeavoured to call attention to that part of the subject which is of most interest to the general reader-the condition of the subject nationalities. But there are many other respects in which the Norman kingdom in Sicily is well worthy of study. The jurist and political philosopher will find a mine of study in the constitutions of Roger, William and Frederic, whilst the practical reformer may derive some useful hints therefrom on such subjects as medical education and sanitary regulation. The high-sounding title claimed by Roger of King of Sicily, Italy and Africa,' suggests the manifold foreign relations in which a central Mediterranean state would be involved, a state holding in its dominion both shores of the inland sea. Many of the enigmas of the life and reign of Frederic II. can only be solved by a knowledge of the history of what was his true fatherland. It was the union of the crowns of the empire and 'the kingdom' upon a single head that brought the struggle of the Empire and the Papacy to a crisis. The possession of the kingdom was worth the struggle; the loss of it was the loss of Italy. To the history of municipal institutions, to the history of commerce and of social life in Italy, the annals of the Norman kingdom make considerable contributions. And it was in Norman Sicily that the first words of Italian poetry were uttered, that Italian literature began. These subjects and others are all touched upon more or less by Signor Amari, whose work we cannot, in conclusion, on account of both its historical and literary value, too strongly recommend to our readers. ART. ART. VIII.-1. Reports from the Committee of Public Accounts, 1861-1875. Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed. 2. Parliamentary Government in England, its Origin, Development and Practical Operation. By Alpheus Todd, Librarian of the Legislative Assembly of Canada. In 2 vols. 1867, WHE HEN a duty is effectually performed, and yet causes to those who discharge that duty, not satisfaction but dissatisfaction, some misunderstanding must exist respecting its scope and object. This collision between fact and feeling attends, in some measure, that central feature of our polity, the control exerted by the House of Commons over the public purse. Never in the history of Parliament was that control more stringent, than it is at present; and yet of late years it has been spoken of by Members as if it were a failure; even the House itself, when engaged upon its financial duties, seems to betray, at times, a tinge of discouragement. By way of example, it may be mentioned, that some thirty or forty years ago, the nights devoted to the discussion of the estimates were among the chief fighting occasions of the Session; hours were spent in contesting the amounts demanded by the Government. These contests certainly do not now occur. Again, contrasting the Parliament of his youth with the Parliament of to-day, a veteran and sagacious Member expressed to us his surprise that the observation, 'Oh, the business of the evening, is only the Committee of Supply,' could be possible, even habitual to his associates. This casual remark was, however, carried much farther by a younger and more ardent Member of the House, who avowed, in the course of a debate, that he looked with despair and hopelessness at the process by which our estimates are said to be discussed in Committee. Night after night the House is supposed to apply itself seriously to a consideration and revision of those estimates; yet he knew of no case in which, by this process, the estimates had been seriously reduced or modified.'* More recently one, whose voice commands just respect, charged his hearers with flinching from the subject of retrenchment. The same cast of thought, also, found vent in a humorous complaint, that their pursuit after economy was like rat-hunting, as soon as one hole was covered over, the rats made their way through another.' ‡ * Mr. Stansfeld, 3rd June, 1862. 'Hans. Deb.,' 3rd series, 167, 307. Although Although we do not admit the absolute applicability of these censures, still they were not met by any decided contradiction from the House, the rat-hunting simile was certainly received with marked appreciation. Nor can it be affirmed that our legislators invariably do themselves full justice when occupied in the grant of public money. Towards the close of a long debate, weariness rising in the ascendant, votes involving large liability, too often, are swiftly, if not hastily, despatched, and the procedure of the Committee of Supply assumes, it may be feared, rather an air of unreality. Nor can much more be said for the style in which the House confirms and ratifies the transactions of the Committee. As briefly as decorum permits, the supply votes are read aloud at the Table, the Speaker responds with the formula which stamps validity upon each resolution, and so be it,' is expressed by silence around the Chair. If this, indeed, were all which the Commons effect as custodians of the public moneys, discretion should warn us to 'stand upon our marners,' and to say no more about the subject. Our constitutional polity, however, does not need such negative respect; it may, on the contrary, claim from us a confident reiteration of the assertion, that Parliament discharges its financial duties most efficiently, and that this efficiency has been greater, during the last fourteen years, than ever achieved since England's representatives quitted the Abbey Chapter House for St. Stephen's Chapel. 6 So direct a contradiction to an opinion, which we have shown to be prevalent among Members of Parliament, may seem strange. Still more will it be felt that our assertion 'suffers under probation,' when coupled with an avowal that their expressions of disappointment were founded upon fact. Popular fancy, also, points in the same direction, and still endows the Commons not only with the will, but with the power of making ample excision from the estimates. There it is,' according to a clown upon the comic stage, that they cuts people down,' in his contrast between the Houses of Parliament and the Hospital across the Thames, the place 'where they cuts people up.' But the clown was in error. Amputation even of a single limb from the gross body of the estimates, is a most rare operation in the House of Commons. Mr. Stansfeld had the advantage of the jester; in all probability, since he took his seta there, not a single important reduction from a vote of supply has been carried against the Government. The experience of the last ten years amply confirms his statement. In 1869, to commence with the first example that period affords, 521. a-year was withheld from a Vol. 141.-No. 281. gate-keeper gate-keeper in Richmond Park; and next year, 5000l., a proposed outlay on the Knightsbridge Barracks, was taken off the estimates. A protest against the works at Alderney marked the Session of 1871, and 21,4831. was consequently saved; and during the two succeeding years small items of expense, amounting to 8001., were negatived. This is the whole tale of reduction effected by the House of Commons between the years 1865 and 1875; it is needless to emphasise the lesson these brief statistics convey, by contrasting what was granted during those years, with that which was denied. Stress should rather be laid upon the fact that these reductions being advocated upon general arguments of policy, rather than upon economic reasons, received prompt assent from the Government; had even the Alderney vote been pressed, in all likelihood, it had been carried. And turning to a wider range of judgment, based not on the evidence of a few years, but upon life-long study and experience, Sir T. Erskine May, in his well-known history, points out that 'whatever sums ministers have stated to be necessary, for all the essential services of the State, the Commons have freely granted... so far from opposing the demands of the Crown, they have rather laid themselves open to the charge of too facile an acquiescence, in a constantly-increasing expenditure.'* A statement completely confirmed by Mr. Todd in his work on 'Parliamentary Government in England.'† But it may be urged that this opinion applies only to our own 'most brisk and giddy-pated times;' that Joseph Hume, at least, conformed to the clown's ideal of a Member of Parliament; that he must have been a cutter down of the estimates, and that the celebrity which still adheres to his name, must spring from his effective onslaughts in the Committee of Supply. This impression can be subjected to a conclusive test. Towards the close of his career Mr. Hume referred, with exultation, to what evidently he considered his most brilliant financial achievement, his campaign of 1822. He fought over again in remembrance, his motions and amendments advocating economy, and the '70 or 80' divisions by which he enforced his arguments. With even more satisfaction, he enlarged on the result of his endeavours; that result being the diminution of the estimates for the Session of 1823 by 3,000,0007., and the withdrawal of 10,000 soldiers from the army. Mr. Hume's reminiscences only prove how treacherous is memory, especially when memory *Constitutional History of England, 1760-1860' (Ed. 1871), ii. 100. + Parliamentary Government in England,' i. 490. Mr. Hume, February 25th, 1848. Hans. Deb.,' 3rd series, 96, 1838. deals deals with self, and with one's own exertions. The 1823 was larger than the army of 1822; the estimate of expense, army of naturally enough, was larger also. The reduction which he regarded as his work appears upon the accounts for 1822; 12,000 men were, that year, discharged from the ranks, and a saving of 1,000,000l. was effected. But announced as this reduction was to Parliament on the first day of the Session of 1822, that economy cannot be ascribed to Mr. Hume's efforts; the real cause was much distress throughout our agricultural districts, coupled with apprehension of a famine in Ireland. And in other ways, Lord Liverpool's Government showed a hearty desire to husband the resources of the country.* prey: If Joseph Hume, then, with all his vast resource of industry and obstinacy, failed to cut down the estimates, who can boast of success? Parliamentary experience has even condensed itself into a proverbial expression - almost into a byword-that if a Member desires to secure a defeat, he has but to propose a reduction of expenditure. At first sight, it seems unaccountable that this should be the case. of the national income is the desire of both the leading parties A prudent application in the State. No Chancellor of the Exchequer could now be denounced, even by the most rabid opponent, as a 'bird of the present Chancellor, during the last Session, declared with obvious sincerity, that he welcomed support to resist expenditure:'t and we may hear from a Secretary to the Treasury that he very reluctantly opposed' the reduction of a vote, because a statute left him no choice in the matter. Nor can it be said of our legislators, as was said formerly, that, creatures of a profligate expenditure, they are begotten by loans and douceurs.' The usages of Parliament devised to secure a grasp upon the public purse have been, from time immemorial, as effective as such precautions can be: so ably devised is the practice which governs the grant of money by the House of Commons, that an exclamation how wise were men three hundred years ago!'may be excused. And these forms and usages have been of late, not relaxed, but increased in stringency. Yet strengthened as they are, both by technical aids, and by *Lord Liverpool's ministry, in this respect, anticipated the course pursued by the next Conservative Government, of whom Mr. Gladstone recorded the fact, with pleasure that when the history of retrenching administrations, and of the commencement of true retrenchment in this country is written, the just historian must, in his opinion, give the Government of the Duke of Wellington, from 1828 to 1830, the honour of having first taken the matter in hand, with earnestness of purpose.'-23rd July, 1866. Sir S. Northcote, May 7th, 1875. 'Hans. Deb.,' 3rd series, 184, 1296. Mr. W. H. Smith, July 6th, 1875. Ibid., 1022. 'Hans. Deb.,' 224, 315. Q 2 the |