§ The EARL of ST. GERMANSwished to put some questions to the noble Marquess the Postmaster General, respecting the salaries paid to the clerks in the Money Order Office in the Post Office. It appeared that the clerks in that office were divided into several classes, according to the length of their service, whether seven, ten, or fifteen years, and that the highest of these classes received salaries of from 250l. to 300l. a year, the second class of from 200l. to 240l., the third from 80l. to 130l. There was a fourth called the probationary class, which received 70l. or under, a year. The salaries paid to persons holding offices of similar trust in mercantile establishments or public companies were generally much higher. It was too much to expect that a person should be satisfied who was to receive only the highest of these salaries after being forty years in the public service. How could they expect young men to keep up a respectable appearance and maintain themselves on salaries of 70l. a year? It was notorious that a great number of these clerks were driven by necessity to resort to the Insolvent Debtors Court for relief, and the Commissioners had often expressed their surprise at the smallness of the salaries paid. It was understood that a sum of 16,000,000l. a year passed through the Money Order Department of the Post Office, which had now in effect become a banking establishment of great importance, and it required men of great application and intelligence duly to perform the duties entrusted to them. He would not say anything as to the risk incurred by paying such inade- 605 quate salaries, but he would observe that he was satisfied no course was so impolitic as under-paying public servants. He hoped the noble Marquess would not say it was impossible to increase the salaries in this department of the Post Office, because the Office was not in itself remunerative; but if he did, he (Earl St. Germans) did not think that it would be considered as a valid objection against his suggestion. The first question he had to ask was, whether the noble Marquess was prepared to propose to the Treasury a revised scale of salaries for the officers of the Money Order Office specially, or for the Post Office generally? The other question was respecting a recent appointment of a person to be head of the department to which he had alluded. This had been made a subject of discussion elsewhere, where the noble Marquess had no opportunity of explaining the reasons which induced him to appoint the present chief clerk to the Money Order Office. It had been said in another place that the junior clerks in the Post Office were accustomed to rise to the head of each department by seniority. It was complained that, in this case, all the clerks in the Money Order Office in London bad been passed over, and a person from Edinburgh had been appointed to that situation. It was stated that several of them were the seniors of the person in question, and were very competent persons to fill the office. He thought that such a step ought not to have been taken. The only reason for it was said to be, that on a recent occasion the junior clerks had presented a memorial to the Post Office authorities representing certain grievances of which they complained. When a recent vacancy occurred, his noble Friend at the head of the Post Office was said to have called upon these clerks to retract the statements made in their memorial, and on their refusal to do so, had appointed to the vacancy a gentleman not connected with that department, though he was connected with the Post Office generally. If this were a misrepresentation, he had now given his noble Friend an opportunity of correcting it. He had also been informed that Lord Lonsdale had filled up four vacancies at the heads of various departments in the Post Office, by appointing the senior clerk in each to succeed. He would not say whether the principle of promotion by seniority was the best to act upon; hut still the practice prevailed, and he hoped 606 some explanation would be given, as this appointment appeared to have given great offence to persons who had long been in the public service.
The MARQUESS of CLANHICARDEsaid, he had no objection to reply to the questions of the noble Earl—indeed he felt obliged to him for having afforded him an opportunity of replying to most erroneous statements which had been made elsewhere as to this appointment. First, as to the Money Order Office, he feared his answer would not be entirely satisfactory to the noble Earl. He agreed with him that it had been the custom in the Post Office, and other public departments, to raise the clerks by seniority; but circumstances might justify a departure from this rule. He had been called upon to provide a superior officer in a most important department of the Post Office, and in doing so he found he was obliged to look to other considerations than seniority; but he was not prepared to enter into an explanation of all the circumstances which led to the appointment to the office in question. As to the allusion that had been made elsewhere respecting the resignation of clerks in consequence of the lowness of the salaries paid, he had no doubt if any of them should resign he should have 500 applications to fill their places. He was ready to admit the salaries were low; but if these offices were considered so bad, why were such numbers desirous of entering them? He must also say, in fairness, that he did not think that the Money Order Office was exactly the department where the pay was the least, looking to the nature and character of the services to be performed. He did not mean to say that they were sufficiently paid; but he could state that the situation of the clerks had been amended during the last three months. It was only two months since he had recommended that the probationary class of clerks should have an increase of salaries, on the advice and recommendation of Mr. Rowland Hill. The business of the Money Order Office had so increased that it had been found necessary to appoint not less than 114 new clerks, cither by himself or by his predecessors in office. Since 1846 the following change had been made: at that period there were 128 clerks receiving only 70l. a year, but at present there were only 51 in that class. So far he had, he thought, satisfactorily shown that the lower class of clerks had recently been 607 put in a better situation than before.; With respect to the other question, no doubt an application had been made to him to appoint the senior clerk head of the Money Order Department, and that he had seen reason to appoint another person to that office. He was now happy in being in a situation to make a short statement, because, in another place, in consequence of this appointment, a most unfounded attack had been made on a most able and upright public servant. He conceived this to have been one of the most disgraceful proceedings that had taken place, for there was not the slightest ground for such an attack. He was sure the noble Earl would admit that the public service could not be carried on with efficiency, if gross and unfounded attacks were constantly to be made on gentlemen engaged in the service of the Government. As he had said before, that although they might admit that they should look to seniority, yet in particular cases it was necessary that other circumstances should not be overlooked. As for the case of Mr. Farmer, whose promotion had been cavilled at so much, he was the head of the Money Order Office at Edinburgh; he was senior to nearly all the clerks in London, and it therefore was almost a case of seniority. He was not prepared to state the reason for passing over any particular person, but in this case an attempt had been made to check the fair consideration of the subject by pure fabrications; and in regard to the memorial alluded to, although it was not the direct cause of any individuals being passed over, no doubt it had a certain effect. As had been stated, not less than 16,000,000l. a year passed through the Money Order Office, all of which was in small sums. Such a department necessarily required a great number of clerks. He would here correct another gross misstatement which had been made in another place. It had been said that in 1844 Mr. Farmer had been considered disqualified to remain in this Office, or at least he was less qualified than others: there was not the least ground for such an assertion. At that time one of the chief officers in the Post Office recommended four clerks for promotion to certain places. The Earl of Lonsdale asked whether the senior clerks were not competent to these offices, and on his being told that they were, he appointed them. Immediately after this the Earl of Lonsdale appointed this gentleman to be the chief clerk at the Edin- 608 burgh office. Where Mr. Farmer came from, or who his relations were, he did not know. In many instances applications were made to him with reference to the promotion of individuals in the Post Office, but he could safely affirm that Mr. Farmer owed his appointment to no private influence whatever. It had been said elsewhere that Mr. Hill had made very harsh regulations with respect to absence on account of sickness, and the necessity of providing a substitute. Now it happened that a person in the Post Office, who had been absent from duty fourteen months on account of illness, applied to him (the Marquess of Clanricarde) at the end of that time for further leave of absence. To this he consented, but at the same time he said that leave of absence could not be indefinitely prolonged, and that if at the expiration of the period the party was unable to perform his duty, his place must be supplied by somebody else. Mr. Hill then mercifully interposed, and obtained permission for him to allot his salary to another person at the expiration of the period in question, so that upon his restoration to health he might come back to the Office without affecting his standing. In consequence of that occurrence a regulation was made, that where a person's leave of absence had expired, he might, if unable to attend by reason of ill health, pay for a substitute. The regulation, in fact, was made for the benefit of the clerks, and was by no means calculated to oppress them. But then it had been said that the clerks had only three days' leave of absence. The subject, however, was looked into some time ago, and it was found that for several years past the average leave of absence granted to each clerk was twenty days. It was then settled that in future every clerk in rotation should have one calendar month's leave of absence. With respect to the Money Order Office, it had been said in another place that the auditor of the Bank of England had been called in, and that he had said he had never seen accounts in such a state. That was undoubtedly true; but where was the justice of saying so without adding that the auditor was called in for the purpose of examining the accounts, and that they had since been placed on a much better footing? They had been told that thirty or forty additional clerks would be required for three or four years to clear off the arrears, and that it would involve an additional outlay of 10,000l. a year. No 609 additional clerks, however, had been employed, and a saving of 11,000l. a year had been effected. He was sorry that his noble Friend had alluded to the subject of a revision of salaries in the Post Office. That question had been a long time under consideration; but although he thought that the clerks in the Money Order Office might be better paid than they were, he was unable to hold out hopes of any immediate change being made.