HC Deb 13 May 1853 vol 127 cc323-4
MR. COWAN

said, he begged to ask the Chief Commissioner of Works whether an arbitration has been offered to Dr. Reid, on the part of the Government, in reference to the course pursued towards him at the Houses of Parliament; and, if so, who were the arbiters and their umpire? If it he true that any decision has been given in Dr. Reid's favour; and, if so, what the decision has been? Whether, in the event of any such decision having been given, it was founded on legal considerations, or solely on the merits of the case? Whether the Chief Commissioner will agree to the production of all papers and documents connected with the appointment of any I such arbitration, including the notes of any shorthand writer who may have at tended its proceedings?

SIR WILLIAM MOLESWORTH

said, in reply to the first question, he had to state that Dr. Reid was removed from his office, in charge of the ventilation of the Houses of Parliament, by the late Government; that, in consequence of his removal, Dr. Reid claimed compensation; that the Government agreed with him that the claim should be submitted to arbitration; that a claim was prepared, and signed by the Government and Dr. Reid, the Government appointing Mr. Forsyth as their arbiter, and the two arbiters appointing the Hon. George Denman as the umpire. With regard to the second question, he had to state that Dr. Reid claimed 10,280l. and the arbiters gave him 3,230l. The third question could only be answered by the arbiters, who probably would not answer it, and he was certainly of opinion that they ought not to do so. He presumed that the arbiters gave their award in conformity with the terms of the submission. In reply to the fourth question, he begged to say that he had no objection to the production of the submission and the award; but he objected to the production of the shorthand writer's notes, because they amounted to some six thousand folios, and the expense would be considerable.