HC Deb 30 March 1883 vol 277 cc1110-2
LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether clerks in the Inland Revenue Office who might seek to approach Members of Parliament, either collectively or individually, with reference to the Motion on the Notice Paper of the House, calling in question the Circular of the Inland Revenue Board, would be liable to censure or dismissal by the Board; and, whether a movement among the clerks of the Department to petition Parliament in favour of the Motion would be either censured or prohibited by the Board?

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. CHILDERS)

Sir, the noble Lord in the first portion of his Question repeats, if not in words, in identical sense, a Question put to me before the Recess by the hon. and learned Member for Chatham (Mr. Gorst). I must, with great respect, decline to give any answer other than that I gave to the hon. and learned Member. However, I may add that the noble Lord's Question, although nominally relating to certain officers of Inland Revenue, really covers the whole of the servants of the Crown—soldiers, sailors, policemen, clerks in public offices, and others, numbering several hundred thousand individuals—and opens questions which could only be dealt with most carefully in debate, as I informed the hon. and learned Member for Chatham.

LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL

I wish to put a Question to you, Sir, as a matter of Privilege. As I am unable to get an answer from the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and as the parties alluded to in my Question are extremely anxious to give to Members of Parliament the information which is necessary to enable them to discuss this matter properly, I wish, Sir, to ask you whether any interference by heads of Departments prohibiting clerks in the Department from petitioning Parliament on the subject of their grievances would not be a gross breach of the Privileges of this House?

MR. SPEAKER

I am not prepared to say that the case contemplated by the noble Lord has arisen. Whenever a case may arise, it will then be my duty to give an opinion upon it.

SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFF

I beg to inform you, Sir, that I have been requested to present a Petition to this House by a servant of the Inland Revenue, and I do not present that Petition for fear that the person signing it should be punished by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I, therefore, ask you, Sir, whether or not I am entitled to present that Petition; and, whether the person signing it will be exempt from any punishment on account of the connection of the Petition with the House—in point of fact, whether he will be protected by the House from punishment by the Department?

MR. SPEAKER

It is for the hon. Member to exercise his own discretion in regard to the presentation of the Petition.

SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFF

I wish most respectfully to ask you, Sir, whether the petitioner will or will not be under the protection of the House?

MR. SPEAKER

I am really totally unable to answer the Question. I have not seen the Petition, and I can give no opinion upon it at all.

SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFF

I am quite ready to show it to you, Sir.

LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL

asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether there is any Treasury Minute authorizing or sanctioning the recent Circular of the Inland Revenue Board prohibiting clerks in that Department from approaching Members of Parliament; if so, why such Minute has not been published with the other Papers laid before Parliament; and, if he will without delay cause such Minute to be laid upon the Table?

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. CHILDERS)

Sir, in reply to this Question, I have to say that the Inland Revenue Board were entirely within their competence in issuing the General Order to which the noble Lord refers. The Chairman, however, consulted my lion. Friend the Secretary to the Treasury, who informed him that he approved of that Order. No Treasury Minute was necessary, either constitutionally or in accordance with custom.

LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL

Has the matter been before the Lords of the Treasury at all?

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. CHILDERS)

That is a Question which I decline to answer.