HC Deb 27 February 1888 vol 322 c1475
MR. HOYLE (Lancashire, S.E., Heywood)

asked the Under Secretary of State for India, If "the terms which the Secretary of State considers misleading in the advertisements" by the Superintendent of Army Clothing, Madras, for tenders for the year 1889–90, are those of the paragraph numbered 3 in the specifications—namely, "Articles of European manufacture are not required;" if so, would those terms exclude goods made in Lancashire and Yorkshire, and would they freely admit goods made in the United States of America; what was the total cost of advertisements last year for the goods amounting to £17,000 in value, of which only £24 in value were contracted for; and, will the Secretary of State for India feel obliged, in the interests of the Public Service, to cancel any and all contracts entered into in contravention of the pledge given to this House on the 10th of March, 1887?


(1) Yes; but as regards goods from the United States the advertisement was not likely to have any practical consequences. (2) The cost of the advertisement is not known to the Secretary of State. (3) No; such a course would not, in the opinion of the Secretary of State, be for the interest of the Public Service, and the Secretary of State is very doubtful whether he even has the power.

MR. HOWELL (Bethnal Green, N. E.)

asked, whether it was intentional that goods manufactured in the United Kingdom should be excluded?


No, Sir; I think I have answered that Question several times before. It was not intentional.


Did not the hon. Gentleman say last year— The rule of the Service is fair competition between articles of Indian and European manufacture; and will the Secretary of State see that effectually carried out?


Yes, Sir; I think that is what I said last year.