§ MR. WINTERBOTHAM (Gloucester, Cirencester)asked Mr. Chancellor of 1242 the Exchequer, Whether Mr. Bernard Mallet, who was appointed to a situation in the Treasury in 1885, is the same gentleman who entered the Foreign Office by a limited competitive examination, after nomination, in 1882; and whether he was transferred to the Treasury without further competitive examination; whether Mr. E. G. King-Harman, who was appointed to a situation in the Home Office in 1886, is the same Mr. King-Harman who entered the Admiralty Office in 1886, after competitive examination; and whether his transfer to the Home Office took place without any further competitive examination; whether it is a fact that Mr. King-Harman was third on the list in the competitive examination; and whether the gentleman who was second on the list in the same competitive examination was left in the Office of the Board of Trade; and whether the situations in the Office of the Board of Trade are inferior to those in the Home Office in immediate salary and in future prospects; whether Mr. F. S. Parry entered the Office of the Board of Trade in 1885, being second on the list in the competitive examination, and was appointed in 1886 to a situation in the Treasury without further competitive examination; and whether the gentleman who was first on the list in the same competitive examination was left in the Office of the Board of Trade; and whether the situations in the Office of the Board of Trade are inferior to those in the Treasury in immediate salary and in future prospects; whether Mr. J. M. Dodds entered the Post Office in 1885, being seventh on the list in the competitive examination, and was appointed in 1886 to a situation in the Office of the Board of Trade without further competitive examination; and whether the gentlemen who were fourth and fifth respectively at the same competitive examination were left in the Post Office; and whether the situations in the Post Office are inferior to those in the Office of the Board of Trade in immediate salary and in future prospects; whether it is the case that every vacancy in the Treasury and all but one in the Home Office, for the last two years have been filled by the transfer of gentlemen from other Offices without further competitive examination; and whether, if such transfers had not taken place, there would have 1243 been vacant for competitive examination in December, 1886, a situation in the Treasury, with salary beginning at £250 a-year, and also a situation in the Home Office, with salary beginning at £200 a-year; and whether the best appointment actually vacant at that time was one with salary beginning at £100 a-year; and, whether he can inform the House what were the definite reasons for which the Chiefs of Department and the Lords of the Treasury considered it to be for the public interest that competitive examination should be dispensed with in filling any or all of such, vacancies by the transference of gentlemen from other Offices; and, whether he will assure the House that his influence will be exerted to prevent such transfers being made, except upon clear and sufficient grounds, and solely with a view for the promotion of the public interest?
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER [Mr. GOSCHEN) (St. George's, Hanover Square)I understand that the circumstances of the transfers from one Office to another of the gentlemen named are substantially correct. The last two vacancies in the Treasury were filled by the transfer from other Departments of the gentlemen named in the hon. Gentleman's Question. The Order in Council of 1870 dealing with competition reserves to Departments power to transfer to vacancies as well as to fill them by open competition. Since the passing of that Order, there have been 10 appointments to second-class clerkships in the Treasury. Seven of them have been filled by open competition, and three by transfer. I am informed that former Heads of the Treasury thought it advisable to exercise occasionally the power of transfer, so as to obtain the services of men after a certain degree of trial as officials. I believe that such transfers wore made with a sole view to the public interest; and, as far as I am concerned, I readily give my assurance to the hon. Member that I shall not favour transfer except upon clear and sufficient grounds, and solely with a view to the promotion of the public interest. But I may add, for the information of the hon. Member and the House, what has been written to me by the Secretary of the Civil Service Commission, who says—
As to the grounds on which the several transfers were made we have no information, 1244 our functions in such cases being limited to ascertaining and certifying that the transferee possesses the qualifications required for situations of the class to which he is to he appointed. On the question of the policy of such transfers, it would hardly be within our province to express any opinion; hut we may be allowed to point out that they were strongly recommended by the Play fair Commission—see page 18 of their first Report, paragraph on, 'Recruiting of Superior Departments.' It is clear, even from that paragraph alone, that the Head of the superior Department was intended to select, on his own responsibility, the person whom he thought fittest to be transferred, without regard to the place he might have taken in the entrance examination; hut if there were any doubt it would he removed by what is said on page 12, as to the method in which original appointments should be made—more particularly in the last two paragraphs on that page.The hon. Member will, therefore, see that these transfers, as carried out, formed part of the system of competition adopted. I gather from one paragraph in the Question, asking whether a certain number of Offices would not have been open to competition if these transfers had not been made, that one of the points in the Question, and the suggestion that has led to it, is that there is a certain vested right on the part of those who are going to enter the Public Service that no clerkships should be filled up except by open competition. On the part of the Public Service, I must entirely repudiate any such idea; the interest of the Public Service alone has to be considered. I must add that I consider it inadmissible to maintain that after persons have once entered the Public Service the transfers are to be guided by their original marks, and not by the aptitude which has been shown in the appointments they have held.