§ MR. HOOPER (Cork, S.E.)asked the First Lord of the Admiralty, Whether 1524 timber property of the Government, admitted to have been appropriated to his own use by an official engaged on the works at Haulbowline, was used for the manufacture of furniture for that official; whether the furniture was made by men employed on the Haulbowline works; and, if so, was their work counted in the time charged to the Government service; whether, in that event, he will order restitution to be made to the Government by the person for whom the furniture was so made; whether the men so employed have been since discharged from the works; and, if so, has the discharge been made at the instance of the official mentioned; and, whether, under all the circumstances, he will order an independent inquiry to be held into these matters?
§ THE FIRST LORD (Lord GEORGE HAMILTON) (Middlesex, Ealing)I am informed by the Admiral commanding at Queenstown that nothing is known of the allegations contained in the Question; and that no discharges have been made except those necessitated by the completion of works.
§ MR. HOOPERasked, whether, on a previous occasion, the noble Lord had not also pleaded want of knowledge on the Question; and whether, on applying to the Chief Secretary, an answer was not given admitting all the allegations; and also whether, under these circumstances, the noble Lord would again address an inquiry on the subject to the Admiralty at Queenstown?
§ LORD GEORGE HAMILTONsaid, so far as he understood, the police had no information on the matter.
§ MR. HOOPERsaid, the facts were exactly as he had stated; and he appealed to the Parliamentary Under Secretary for Ireland to corroborate his statement.
§ THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDER SECRETARY (Colonel KING-HARMAN) (Kent, Isle of Thanet)said, so far as he recollected, the answer to the Question on a previous occasion was that this official was entitled to a certain quantity of fuel.
§ MR. HOOPERasked, if that were so, why notice should be given discontinuing in express terms the practice he had been guilty of?
§ COLONEL KING-HARMANsaid, I thought it was because there was some doubt as to whether the timber which was being taken was proper timber.
§ MR. HOOPERasked the First Lord of the Admiralty, whether he would hold an inquiry?
§ LORD GEORGE HAMILTONsaid, he thought the Question, on the face of it, carried its own refutation. It was very unlikely that timber of this class could be used for furniture, as suggested. It was likely that these allegations emanated from the men who were discharged.
§ MR. HOOPERsaid, that was not so, and asked whether, if affidavits were submitted, an inquiry would be granted?
§ LORD GEORGE HAMILTONremarked that if the hon. Gentleman was satisfied as to the veracity of these allegations, and would put proofs in his possession, he would certainly consider the circumstances, though he could not promise to hold an inquiry He would exercise his discretion in the matter.