Nevertheless, this same Parliament upon the occasion of its grant to the king, petitioned that it be expended for the advantage of the kingdom, and that competent treasurers be appointed to keep the accounts.[245] The thirteen-year-old king readily fell in with the idea. To the Parliament of 1379 he sent letters in which he said, “That you may be fully informed of the real nature of the said necessary expenditures made and to be made, the treasurers for the said war shall be present and shall appear, at such hour as pleases you, to show you clearly in writing their receipts and expenditures made since the last Parliament.”[246] The House of Commons, later during the same Parliament petitioned for the discharge of the special treasurers, and prayed that the Treasurer of England with the Chamberlains of the Exchequer receive money as “was usual of old.”[247] Here is an early instance of the individual action of the House of Commons. But in 1380, the tide turned back. The commons who were assuming leadership in the situation, hearing from the chancellor of the very serious embarrassment in which the crown found itself, were stung to the belief that there was extravagance in the royal household, or else that the ministers were incapable. They therefore prayed the king to allow the election in Parliament of the chief officers of state. Richard responded favorably and the commission was appointed, with the old treasurers of subsidies, William Walworth and John Philipot, as members.[248] By 1382 the reversion to the system of special treasurers was complete,[249] and from that time, save at moments of great national confusion, these officers were regularly appointed and had as their duties the keeping of accounts, both of income and outlay, which were to be presented before Parliament at its session immediately following. [Taxation by Parliament] Over the levy of taxes Parliament, so it appears, had unquestioned control throughout the reign;[250] the king’s household was vastly extravagant and the royal prerogative of purveyance was exercised to excess, but even in the articles of deposition no word of complaint, save in the most general terms, is levelled at the king for laying taxes unlawfully, and this remonstrance is unsupported by specific instances. Indeed, the most violent outbreak on the score of taxation was against Parliament itself.