§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR (Donegal, E.)asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether it is the fact that, although the Customs Estimates include an item for the Salaries of sixty-nine Surveyors for the Port of London, the number actually employed since the 1st day of January has not exceeded sixty-two; and, whether it is the intention of the Board of Customs to fill up the existing vacancies?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OFTHE EXCHEQUER (Lord RANDOLPH CHURCHILL) (Paddington, S.)The number of Customs Surveyors for the Port of London was 69, and salaries for that number were included in the Estimates. But early in this year the Customs Commissioners instituted an inquiry for the purpose of ascertaining whether a lesser number of Surveyors would not suffice for the duties to be performed. The Report of that inquiry was received in March last, and the result of it would be that the number of Surveyors would be reduced to 60, at which number they now actually stood. While the inquiry was taking place it was not thought prudent or possible to reduce the number of Surveyors. Of course, the saving to the Exchequer would be the difference between 69 and 60 Surveyors, and an account would be rendered to the Exchequer in due course.
§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORasked, whether the Customs Vote would be reduced in consequence?
§ LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILLI own that at first I was inclined to ask the hon. Member to move the reduction of the Vote, to which I should have assented; but I think, on the whole, the explanation of the Commissioners is a satisfactory one, and as there will be no loss to the Exchequer I will ask the hon. Member to be satisfied with the explanation I have given.