§ MR. HORSFALLsaid, there seemed to prevail a general complaint of the unsatisfactory answers given to questions put to Ministers in that House. Just before the recess he put a question to the hon. Gentleman the Secretary of the Treasury having reference to the Customs' establishment at Liverpool, the answer to which was unsatisfactory. It was a question not affecting Liverpool alone. All the manufacturing places in Lancashire and Yorkshire were interested in it. They had a large amount of property intrusted to the officers of that establishment, and they all knew what the consequences generally were when men were inadequately paid. The question which he had asked the Secretary of the Treasury was, whether any Commissioner had been sent, or was intended to be sent, to Liverpool, to inquire into the complaints which had been preferred as to the inadequacy of the pay of a large body of men at the Customs' establishment of that port. The answer of the hon. Secretary was, that no such Commissioner had been sent, or was intended to be sent; that he (Mr. Horsfall) was very unreasonable, and that more had been done for the port of Liverpool than for any other port in the kingdom; that the Long Room had been revised and the salaries of the clerks had been raised; and when he (Mr. Horsfall) ventured to give an expression of dissent from that statement, the hon. Gentleman the Secretary of the Treasury said, in a somewhat triumphant manner, "The hon. Gentleman must allow him to know best, he having the papers before him." As he 886 (Mr. Horsfall) was not in the habit of asking unreasonable questions, he would shortly state the grounds on which he put his question. After repeated complaints had been made of the inadequacy of the pay of the lower officers in the Liverpool Customs' establishment, it was suggested that a Commissioner should be sent down to inquire into the subject; and his hon. Colleague on the other side of the House and himself addressed a letter to the Lords of the Treasury, respectfully submitting this to their consideration. They pointed out that this was the course which had been pursued by Lord Canning in reference to the Post Office of Liverpool, and which resulted in a settlement which was not only satisfactory to the mercantile interest, but to the clerks of the establishment itself. Six weeks elapsed and, no acknowledgment having been received, he called at the Treasury, when the Secretary stated that an answer had been sent. At that time his (Mr. Horsfall's) colleague was on the continent—he did not know but that it might have been received by him; but, finding that no such answer had been received at the end of two months, they addressed another letter to the Treasury. Well, they at length got an answer, stating that the matter was under consideration. It was not till six months afterwards that he put the question in his place in that House to the Secretary of the Treasury, when he, who represented nearly 500,000 of the population of the country, was to be told that the question was unreasonable; and that more had been done for the port of Liverpool than for any other port in the kingdom. He thought the hon. Gentleman made a slight mistake in that respect. It was the port of Liverpool which had done more for the Treasury than any other port in the kingdom, and it had done more for the revenue than any other port, and was therefore entitled to some consideration, and ought to have its Customs' establishment placed on a proper basis. But the hon. Gentleman said the Long Room had been revised and the salaries of the clerks had been raised. What had that to do with the complaint which had been preferred? The complaint spoke of the lower grades of officers, and the hon. Gentleman tells the House that he (Mr. Horsfall) was very unreasonable in not being satisfied, because the higher grades of clerks in the Long Room had had their salaries raised. But what was the fact, even with regard 887 to those whom the hon. Gentleman had brought forward? Justice had not been done even to them. Compare their position with that of the clerks in the Long Room in London. In London they had sixty-six clerks, seven of whom have £500 per annum; whilst in Liverpool they had thirty-six clerks, who did at least three-fourths as much work as the sixty-six clerks in London, and yet Liverpool had only one clerk at £500 per annum. The hon. Gentleman had said that he (Mr. Horsfall) must allow him to know best; but with all respect for the hon. Gentleman and for his general attention to the commercial interests of the country, he ventured to say that he (Mr. Horsfall) knew more of the working and the requirements of the Liverpool Custom House establishment than the hon. Gentleman did; and if the necessary Returns for which he intended to move were granted to him he would undertake to show that great injustice had been done to officers of the Customs, especially of the lower grade, at, Liverpool, not only with regard to pay, but with regard to what are termed merit promotions.
§ MR. WILSONsaid, he must appeal to the House whether it was possible for the public service to be conducted if such a course as the hon. Gentleman had pursued were generally adopted. What had the Treasury to do with the Customs or any other department but to administer the laws of the country through men in whose high honour and judgment they could have confidence? And if hon. Gentlemen were to come, not only to the Treasury but to that House, with the cases of officers serving in those departments, he would ask them to consider how long the heads of those departments would have any weight or influence with those serving under them? In the course of last autumn, for the first time since he had had the honour of being at the Treasury, he received a communication from the hon. Gentleman (who was Member for the borough and one of the first merchants of Liverpool) and from his hon. colleague (Mr. J. C. Ewart), bringing before the Treasury the claims of some officers in the Customs for increased remuneration. The universal rule was, that subordinate officials should come to the Treasury only through their superiors, and the propriety of such a regulation must be obvious to the House. Least of all was it decent that they should approach the Treasury 888 through the influence not only of their Members, but of persons carrying on a large business in the towns where they were stationed. He stated that as a general principle, without applying it to the hon. Member who had brought the question forward. As to the hon. Member not having received any answer to his communication, he could not account for it. He told the hon. Member the answer had been sent, and from that day to this he had never heard that it had not been received.
§ MR. HORSFALLsaid, a second letter was sent, informing the hon. Gentleman that no answer had been received.
§ MR. WILSONsaid, he had never seen that letter. With regard to the complaint, a surveyor general of the Customs had just returned from Liverpool, and his report was extremely satisfactory, both as to the feeling of the lower grade of officers and as to the working of the system. He was unwilling to go into details. He was satisfied that that was not the place in which he ought to do so, and he thought he should be justified in declining to entertain questions of that kind on Motions for the adjournment of the House. If those persons applied to the Commissioners of Customs, and through them to the Treasury, in the ordinary way, every possible attention would be given to their claims.