§ MAJOR ROSS (Maidstone)asked the Postmaster General, Whether James Murdoch was, at the time of death last autumn, a depositor in the Post Office Savings Bank at Hastings; whether he had two accounts open in his own name, and whether any blame attaches to the postmaster at Hastings for allowing such an infringement of regulations; whether, last March, the Post Office authorities, on receiving explanations from the executor of the deceased, agreed to pay both accounts on the production of the probate of the will, and the performance of certain other requirements; whether the probate of the will has been sent to the office, and the other demands complied with; and, whether, on August 28th, the money remained unpaid to the executor; and, 1469 if so, what is the explanation for the long delay of six months dating from March, when the Post Office authorities had agreed to pay?
§ THE POSTMASTER GENERAL (Mr. RAIKES) (Cambridge University)The facts are mainly as stated by the hon. Member. It has already been explained to him that the case was one of an extremely complicated nature, and that there was great difficulty in arriving at a satisfactory conclusion that the depositor in both accounts was one and the same person, and even now it is not considered prudent to pay the money except under a bond of indemnity. As soon as this has been executed the money will be paid. No blame attaches to the Postmaster of Hastings in the matter of the two accounts, inasmuch as no records of Savings Bank business is retained by Provincial postmasters. There has been, no doubt, considerable delay in dealing with the question; but as in strictness the whole of the money was liable to forfeiture, doubtless the representatives of the deceased would rather undergo the inconvenience of delay than lose the whole amount. The bond has now been engrossed, and has been sent for execution, and the money will be paid as soon as possible.
§ MAJOR ROSSalso asked the Postmaster General, Whether the Postmaster at Hastings had among his records the two declarations signed by James Murdoch, according to Regulation 2 of the Post Office Savings Bank; whether the Controller, on March 9, wrote:—"It may be added that the required declarations will be prepared in this office;" and again, on June 21, "that the declaration should be prepared by you," i.e., the solicitors; whether the one indemnity first required had been since increased to three; whether the probate of the will, after inspection by the Post Office authorities, was not returned to the solicitors on June 21; and whether, on August 28, the Controller wrote requesting the date of the will?
§ MR. RAIKESThe answer to the first part of the Question is that the Postmaster General has the two declarations referred to. The Controller, on March 9, did write in the sense indicated, thinking the case might be dealt within the ordinary way. The Solicitor, however, advised that he was in error. The answer to the third part of the Question 1470 is No. Only one bond of indemnity is wanted, but it has to he executed by three persons. The probate of the will was returned to Messrs. Meadows and Elliott on June 21, and the Controller wrote for the date of it on August 28, not having noted it.