§ SIR W. HARCOURT (Derby)asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he bad any cognizance of the letter of Dr. Barr before its publication in the Times newspaper?
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURYes, Sir; I had cognizance of the letter, which, indeed, was sent to me on its way to the Press. I did not do more than make myself generally acquainted with its contents until after it appeared in print; but if I had read it in detail, I should equally have refrained from interfering with its publication, as I was under the impression that there was no impropriety in any gentleman refuting, in such manner as he might think right, errors or calumnies respecting which he has been called upon to deal, not in connection with his ordinary duties as a servant of the Government. It appears that in so doing Dr. Barr has not acted in strict accordance with the rules governing his department. In so far as there is blame attaching to him for this, it is evident that his reference to me may well have contributed to his incurring that blame.
§ SIR W. HARCOURTAfter that answer of the Chief Secretary for Ireland, I will ask the Home Secretary whether he has reproved Dr. Barr for his conduct in publishing this letter, which appears to have been corrected by the Chief Secretary for Ireland?
§ MR. MATTHEWSDr. Barr was, no doubt, guilty of a breach of official etiquette in publishing this letter referring to matters in his department without the sanction of the head of the department. There is no connection whatever between this and the communications that passed between Dr. Barr and my right hon. Friend. The Chief Secretary had neither the power nor the inclination to absolve Dr. Barr from 37 compliance with the official rule that governs this matter.
§ SIR W. HARCOURTI beg to ask whether the right hon. Gentleman will lay on the the Table the correspondence now in the Home Office on the subject of this letter; and will the right hon. Gentleman state what communication has been made to Dr. Barr, and what communication he has received on the subject from Dr. Barr? I may state that I addressed a letter on this subject to the Home Secretary some days ago, and that I have received no acknowledgment or reply.
§ MR. MATTHEWSMy apologies are due to the right hon. Gentleman. I thought my answer in the House would be accepted as an answer to the application. I have already informed the House of the nature of my communication to Dr. Barr—namely, that I have called his attention to the official rule, and requested him to observe it in future. No one knows better than the right hon. Gentleman how contrary it would be to all practice to lay upon the Table of the House communications between a Department and its officers.
§ SIR W. HARCOURTI will move for that correspondence, and call attention to the conduct in this matter of the Home Office with reference to the discipline of the Home Office, on the Vote for the salaries of the medical officers of the Home Department.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURPerhaps I may be allowed to correct a very singular lapse on the part of the right hon. Gentleman. I stated as clearly as I could articulate that I had not even made myself accurately acquainted with the contents of the letter, and yet the right hon. Gentletman, with that reply ringing in his ears, described the letter as one which I had corrected.
§ MR. T. M. HEALYMay I ask the right hon. Gentleman, when he received Dr. Barr's letter, what did he do with it?
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURI sent it on.
§ MR. T. M. HEALYTo the Times?
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURYes.