§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR (Donegal, E.)asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether the appointment of Returning Officer in any division of a county can be made contingent upon payment of a fee to the Sheriff or Under Sheriff; and, whether a Sheriff or Under Sheriff is entitled to demand a fee of two guineas in respect of the appointment either from an applicant for the post or from the person actually appointed?
§ THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE (Mr. STUART-WORTLEY) (Sheffield, Hallam)(who replied) said: This is a question of law as to which it is not for me to give any opinion. The Secretary of State is advised, 1722 however, that under the Statute it lies within the discretion of the Sheriff to appoint a deputy or not, and that he is at liberty to demand from the Parliamentary candidates such payment as does not exceed that authorized for professional or other assistance by 38 & 39 Vict., c. 84. He does not seem to have any authority to demand payment from the applicant for the post or from the person actually appointed.
§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR, asked, what authority had control over matters of this kind, and to whom he should put the Question?
§ MR. STUART-WORTLEYsaid, it was for the Law Courts to ascertain the rights and liabilities of public officers.
§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORsaid, this was a serious matter. Sheriffs and Under Sheriffs were levying blackmail on candidates for certain offices. He begged to ask the First Lord of the Treasury which Department had charge of this matter?
§ THE FIRST LORD (Mr. W. H. SMITH) (Strand, Westminster)said, he was not in a position to give an answer then; but he would inquire.
§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORasked, whether, in the event of his laying before the right hon. Gentleman the correspondence which had recently passed between a Sub-Sheriff and a candidate on this subject, he would be prepared to give an explicit answer?
§ MR. W. H. SMITHsaid, he could not promise to give an explicit answer; but he would promise to give the best answer he could.