§
1. Motion made, and Question proposed,
That a sum, not exceeding £260,472, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1890, for Superannuation, Retired, and Compassionate Allowances and Gratuities under sundry Statutes, and for Compassionate Allowances and Gratuities awarded by the Commissioners of Her Majesty's Treasury.
§ SIR G. CAMPBELL (Kirkcaldy)I think we have great reason to complain that so very important a Vote, involving serious considerations, which received much discussion in previous Sessions, should be sprung upon us in this irregular way. I have no doubt that the First Lord of the Treasury is anxious to make progress with the Estimates, but he gave a distinct pledge some time ago, which I think must have escaped his memory, that, 1594 excepting the Irish Votes, the Estimates should be taken in their regular order. It is particularly unfortunate that this Estimate should have been selected for consideration to-day out of the ordinary course, seeing that the Treasury Minute in relation to the Civil Service, which I believe has been laid upon the Table, has not yet been distributed to Members.
§ * THE SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. JACKSON, Leeds, N.)That Minute has no reference to this Vote.
§ SIR G. CAMPBELLIt refers to the medical certificates or to the terms upon which superannuation is to be allowed.
§ * MR. JACKSONIt will be dealt with on the Superannuation Bill.
§ SIR G. CAMPBELLI think we ought to know what the Government intend to do before these Superannuation Allowances are voted. What I want to know is, whether this Estimate contains all the Superannuation Allowances we shall be asked to vote this year? Last year a Supplementary Estimate was presented, and, although we allowed it to pass, it certainly contained items which were open to criticism, and which ought to have been disallowed. In the present case I wish to know if there are Superannuation Allowances, of which we have no knowledge, which will have to be paid out of this Vote? Before we go into particulars, I hope the Secretary to the Treasury will be able to tell us whether it is a fact, or not, that a good many Annuities and Superannuation Allowances have been granted, the nominal list of which does not appear in the papers attached to this Vote.
§ * MR. JACKSONWhen this Vote was before the Committee last year I was asked whether the list attached to the Estimate contained a complete list of all the Superannuations granted and which were paid at that particular time. I explained that the list attached to the Estimate contained particulars of all the Superannuations added up to the November previous. I also explained that it had been the custom hitherto to publish once every three years a complete list of all the Superannuation Allowances, and I was asked whether in future I would not have a complete list published every year. I replied that next year is the year for publishing a complete list, and that if it was the wish of the Com- 1595 mittee that a complete list should be published every year I would see whether the wish could be gratified. The list attached to the present Estimate does not contain every Superannuation Allowance; for instance, the allowances granted since the 30th of November do not appear in the list. They will appear next year. As I have said, a complete list will be published next year. I think there is no reason beyond the labour and the cost of preparing it why the list should not be given every year in a complete form.
§ SIR G. CAMPBELLI think it is necessary we should have a complete list of Superannuation Allowances presented along with the Estimate. At present we only know what Superannuations are granted; we do not know whether they are rightly or wrongly granted. We are asked to vote some Superannuations now, and not to know anything about them until next year, when it will be too late. The whole object of the lists attached to the Estimates is defeated, because they are out of date. I certainly understood that the result of the discussion last year would be that we should have a complete list presented with the Estimate.
§ * MR. FLYNN (Cork, N.)I observe there is a Superannuation Allowance of £236 5s. to Mr. Clifford Lloyd. Mr. Clifford Lloyd's age is given as 41. He served only 11 years, and received a salary of close upon £1,000. But the Committee know that this gentleman has been employed in the Public Service since this Superannuation Allowance appeared in the Estimate. If I mistake not, Mr. Clifford Lloyd was employed in Egypt since he was supposed to have retired from the Public Service on account of ill-health. Besides, he has been employed in the Mauritius, fomenting, as far as he could, disturbances of a most trying character between certain of the colonists and the Governor, Sir John Pope Hennessy. In the Mauritius he was, both physically and mentally, most active, and how the name of the gentleman can appear in the Estimate as having been retired from the Public Service on account of ill-health I cannot understand. If the gentleman's name appeared amongst the Compassionate Allowance we might probably understand it. I hope it will not appear in next year's Estimate, because if it does, we shall 1596 have to inquire why we find Mr. Clifford Lloyd in the Public Service.
§ * MR. JACKSONI explained this item to the Committee last year. It is true that this gentleman retired through ill-health. It is true that after he was awarded this Superannuation Allowance his health apparently improved, and he was given fresh employment, but during the time he was employed the pension was suspended. His health broke down again, and, of course, his pension came into force again. I am afraid there can be no doubt that his health is seriously impaired.
§ SIR G. CAMPBELLThis case proves what I said.
§ * THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. W. H. SMITH, Strand, Westminster)The case was debated and explained last year.
§ SIR G. CAMPBELLThat is what I was going to say. The pension was granted last year, and yet it appears in the roll of this year. The case makes abundantly clear the gross abuse made of medical certificates. I have no doubt Mr. Clifford Lloyd's health was, for very good reasons, endangered in Ireland, but after he had served in Egypt and the Mauritius, he was allowed to go back on the old medical certificate.
§ MR. HENNIKER HEATON (Canterbury)Is the right hon. Gentleman quite confident this Superannuation was passed last year?
§ MR. W. H. SMITHYes.
§ * SIR G. CAMPBELLI have another case to mention. I do not know whether this was passed last year. It is the case of the Hon. Sir W. Stuart. He has served only 14 years, and he is to get an annuity of £1,300. The cause is represented by a blank. It is not stated to be ill-health: no cause whatever is given. I should like to receive some explanation of this grant.
§ MR. JACKSONThis Superannuation Allowance was awarded to this gentleman under an Act which governs diplomatic pensions, and the allowance does not exceed the amount he is entitled to.
§ SIR G. CAMPBELLIs that really so? Is there an Act governing diplomatic pensions and allowing a man £1,300 a year after 14 years' service? If so, why is that Act not stated in the proper 1597 column? I beg to move the reduction of the Vote by £1,300.
§ MR. SEXTON (Belfast, W.)I wish to make an inquiry concerning two pensions which caused a great deal of interest in Ireland—one is the pension allowed to Mr. Cornwall.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £259,172, be granted for the said Service."—(Sir George Campbell.)
§ SIR G. CAMPBELLShall I have an opportunity of moving other reductions?
§ Question put, and negatived.
§ Original Question again proposed.
§ SIR G. CAMPBELLThere are two very large pensions allowed on account of abolition of office in the Patent Office. My impression is that there was some discussion on this question last year, but I do not know whether the pensions were voted last year or not. I should like some explanation of this abolition of office under which two gentlemen in the prime of life receive, one a pension of £520, and the other a pension of £300 6s. 8d.
§ MR. JACKSONThese gentlemen were retired following a very careful and full inquiry by a Committee, over which my hon. Friend the Member for Wigtonshire (Sir H. Maxwell) presided. The result of the inquiry and the result of the abolition of office has led to a very large saving in the Patent Office, and, I think, to a more efficient discharge of the duties of the Patent Office. I believe I explained the question last year.
§ SIR G. CAMPBELLI think this question was more or less before the House last year, and I have in my hand a letter from one of the gentlemen whose office was abolished.
§ MR. JACKSONHe objected, no doubt.
§ SIR G. CAMPBELLYes; he did not want to be abolished at all. It seems to me that this is a very heavy burden to put on the taxpayers, but I will not press it further. Now, let me point out that there is an extraordinary epidemic of ill-health in the prison establishments. 1598 I find a long list of gentlemen who, having served only 10 years, are retired, not on account of reorganisation or any change made in prison management, but on account of ill-health. Take the case of the Rev. R. Bullock. He has served 10 years, he has retired on the ground of ill-health, and he has been awarded a pension of £98. Perhaps the Secretary to the Treasury will tell us how it happens there has been this extraordinary epidemic of ill-health amongst the prison officials of the United Kingdom?
§ MR. JACKSONThis matter I endeavoured to explain clearly the last time the Vote was before the Committee. The hon. Member will remember that under the Prisons Act the pensions to which the officers who served under the local authority and took service under Government were entitled, were to be apportioned, according to the service, partly on the local authority and partly on the Government. The gentleman whom the hon. Member has mentioned is 58 years of age, and the 10 years represent his services under Government.
§ SIR G. CAMPBELLI admit that explanation; but the hon. Gentleman has not attempted to explain the extraordinary epidemic of ill-health amongst prison officials.
§ A LORD OF THE TREASURY (Sir H. MAXWELL, Wigton)Perhaps I can give the hon. Gentleman a satisfactory explanation. Every medical certificate comes before me before the pension is granted. In all these cases I make most particular inquiries; in fact, a pension is not granted until I am fully satisfied of the bona fides of the case.
§ SIR G. CAMPBELLI have no doubt the hon. Baronet has done his duty, but still he is liable to be deceived. Were these gentlemen examined by a public medical officer?
§ MR. JACKSONYes, all of them.
§ MR. SEXTONIs there any pension or allowance paid to G. C. Cornwall, formerly the Secretary to the Post Office in Ireland? He left the Service under circumstances of a most extraordinary character which——
§ MR. JACKSONI understand the Post Office pensions do not appear in this Vote at all.
§ MR. SEXTONThen in the case of Corrie Condon. He was in Dublin Castle, and left the Service under circumstances of a most unprecedented character.
§ MR. JACKSONI am told he has been dead two years.
§ MR. SEXTONWhat is the nature of the information the hon. Gentleman possesses?
§ MR. JACKSONI have it on the best authority; but if the right hon. Gentleman wishes details, I will get them.
§ MR. SEXTONCan the hon. Gentleman assure us that the payment of the pension has ceased?
§ MR. JACKSONYes, Sir.
§ SIR G. CAMPBELLI find there has been an immense number of pensions granted in the Courts of Justice. A clerk, 33 years of age, received a salary of £481. He served 11 years, and got a pension of £61. Another clerk, 36 years of age, received a pension of £185; another clerk, 46 years of age, was awarded a pension of £266; another clerk, 50 years of age, got £371; and all these pensions were granted on the ground of reorganisation of office. In the Board of Trade Department, I notice many pensions ranging from £200 to £400, and these, too, were granted on the ground of reorganisation of the Registry Office.
§ MR. JACKSONThe reorganisation of the Registry Office followed upon the Report of a Committee, and I believe the saving was from £10,000 to £12,000 a year. I believe there never was a better reorganisation of an Office. The work was transferred to another Department, with the result I have stated. Really, if I may venture to say so, unless the hon. Gentleman is willing to trust to the administration of the Department and their desire to carry out the work in an economic way, it will be absolutely impossible to make any arrangements at all or carry out any reorganisation for the benefit of the Public Service. The payments made in these instances are such as the recipients can fairly claim; they are not exceptional terms, large Savings are effected, and I am quite sure the work of the Office is economically administered.
§ SIR G. CAMPBELLI am not willing to trust Government officials in the 1600 matter, for I know what gross jobbery takes place in regard to reorganisation of Offices. Men are retired in the prime of life, others are promoted, and pensions are created. What is wholly lost sight of is the principle that when a man in the prime of life has his Office abolished he ought to be found employment in another office; he ought not to have a vested right to compensation. I am not prepared to say there is a case for the reduction of the Vote, but there is much in it that requires explanation, and this I hope another year it will receive.
§ DR. CLARK (Caithness)Nearly all the men are 60 years of age, and I do not see how you can take these clerks and settle them in a new office.
§ SIR G. CAMPBELLThey are all ages, from 33 upwards.
§ Question put, and agreed to.
§ 2. £7,000, to complete the sum for Merchant Seamen's Fund Pensions, &c.
§ 3. £65,500, to complete the sum for Pauper Lunatics, Scotland.
§ MR. CALDWELL (Glasgow, St. Rollox)I must say I think there is much unfairness in the manner in which Scotland is treated this year as compared with England. England in the current financial year has not only the probate duty but the licence duty, but in Scotland we have the old system of grants.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ 4. £4,005, to complete the sum for Pauper Lunatics, Ireland.
§ * MR. FLYNNI observe there is an increase of £4,545 in this Vote, and as indicating an increase in the number of pauper lunatics, this affords little consolation to the Irish people. But I call attention to the Vote for the purpose of expressing my opinion that the Treasury would not be called upon to make such a large contribution if asylums had more efficient local control. We have before complained of the want of local representation on the Board. Such quasi representation as there is, is by nomination of the Lords Lieutenant of the Counties.
THE CHAIRMANThe only question before the Committee is the grant of four 1601 shillings per head in aid of the maintenance of pauper lunatics. It is not possible to enter into the question of administration or control.
§ * MR. FLYNNThe point I wished to raise was that the contribution would not be so heavy if there was more efficient control. However, I will call attention to the subject on another occasion; it is certainly a matter that deserves the consideration of the Treasury.
§ MR. MOLLOY (King's County, Birr)Has anything been done in relation to the question which was raised last year or the year before as to the boarding-out of pauper lunatics? The hon. Gentleman will remember that strong recommendations were made in that direction.
§ MR. JACKSONThere have been some communications on the subject. I will ascertain and give the hon. Gentleman every information.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ 5. £7,658, to complete the sum for Hospitals and Infirmaries, Ireland.
§ MR. SEXTONAs the Chief Secretary and the Solicitor General for Ireland are both absent it might be convenient for the hon. Member for Dover to give us some explanation of the intention of the Government in regard to this Vote. The hon. Gentleman confines himself too much to correspondence. We should be glad to have a "taste of his quality" in Debate. I consent to the Vote with reluctance, because the distribution of the grant is made upon a scheme settled 35 years ago, and which bears no relation to the needs of the City of Dublin and the relative value of the work done by the hospitals concerned. It will be found, on reference to the list of those who have local knowledge, that it is an antiquated settlement and does not meet the requirements of to-day. It is very well known that the Government have had a Bill on the stocks for some time for a capitalisation and redistribution of the grant, and we have waited anxiously for the effectuation of a settlement. Perhaps the Secretary to the Treasury can now make some decisive announcement? We pay £700 to a draftsman, and I think we may claim some work from him. I believe a Bill has been partly drawn up and that its provisions substantially carry out the recommendations of the Com- 1602 mission on the subject. If that is so I assume that the Bill would pass with general assent, certainly with the assent of Irish Members. I understand that the persons concerned have been given to understand there is an intention to present a Bill, and only this morning I had a letter from a gentleman interested, expressing how keenly the delay is felt. I am sure I may appeal to the compassionate nature of the Secretary to the Treasury, and I would press him to even now bring in the Bill, and I think I can assure him it would go through its various stages without difficulty. It will be a small concession at the end of a Session barren of results for Ireland.
§ MR. JACKSONI may say that I had hoped to introduce the Bill earlier in the Session; it is drafted, and I believe just about ready. I will endeavour, after what the right hon. Gentleman has said, to introduce it, and try to pass it, this year. Of course that can only be done if the Bill receives practically the unanimous support of the House.
§ DR. CLARKIf there is anything that Ireland wants, it is at once given. If there is anything Scotland asks for, it is at once refused. Here is a proposal to grant money for Irish hospitals. What is the claim for Imperial money to be devoted to that purpose, while in Scotland and in England we have to depend on our local subscriptions?
§ MR. MOLLOYI hope the Secretary to the Treasury will introduce the Bill. I am sure it will receive general assent. Do not let him be deterred by the fear of the opposition of my hon. Friend near me. I think I may undertake that he shall be taken away into the country.
§ MR. SEXTONI am sure my hon. Friend will not take such an unjustifiable course as his words would seem to indicate. I am sure, looking back over a period of 10 years, he will find that by votes and voice Irish Members have always supported the just demands of Scotland,—and the demands of Scotland are always just. Never have we interfered to prevent the allocation of Imperial money to Scotch uses, and I hope my hon. Friend will not pursue a policy so much at variance to that we have pursued towards Scotland, and disturb the relations between Scotch and Irish Members which have been maintained 1603 for many years. This redistribution was recommended by a Royal Commission some years ago. I have confidence in the good intentions of my hon. Friend, and would beg the Secretary not to be disturbed on his account.
§ * MR. MURPHY (Dublin, St. Patrick's)I think that the effect of the recommendations of the Commission went not only to redistribution, but to an actual reduction of the grant. I am sure that those who are interested in this matter would be willing to accept a smaller sum if it were allocated in a manner in which the money would be more usefully employed. It would facilitate the passing of the Bill if, having in view the possibility of amendment, we could see its provisions without delay.
§ DR. CLARKOf course, until I see the Bill I do not know what course I may deem it my duty to take. I only wished to point out the difference in the way in which the Treasury treat Ireland and Scotland. I said last night that Ireland is the spoiled favourite of the Treasury, and this is an instance of that.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ 6. £6,533, to complete the sum for Savings Banks and Friendly Societies Deficiency.
§ DR. CLARKI see there is £12,019 more to be paid under this Vote than last year, and this after the statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer that the sum would decrease year by year, and that there would be no increase in the liability. I do not see the use of doing anything to make good these sums to Savings Banks. I think when we instituted the Post Office Banks all others should have been placed in the position of any other joint stock banks, and give the market rate.
§ * MR. JACKSONI do not remember that my right hon. Friend said that this particular subhead was going to decrease every year, except in the sense that it would be gradually wiped out. As I understand, this year the increase is largely due to the fact that interest received on investments has diminished. Everybody knows that the rate of interest obtained now is much less than it was. As regards Friendly Societies, the Chancellor of the Exchequer has the 1604 power to use the Sinking Fund, and did use it, to pay off large advances. It comes to the same thing in the long run
§ Vote agreed to.
§ 7. £939, to complete the sum for Miscellaneous Charitable and other Allowances, Great Britain.
§ DR. CLARKI observe that there are still certain Spaniards residing in this country who receive allowances for services rendered 70 or 80 years ago, though I see, after the discussion of last year, the item for the aged Canadian Indian, £6, has disappeared. But in regard to these annual payments, and the amounts for the repair of the bridge at Berwick, and the grant to the Bishop of Sodor and Man, would it not be well that they should be commuted and be done with?
§ * MR. JACKSONI agree that these small sums ought to be wiped out, and, following out the discussion we had last year, I did raise the question, but it was deferred in view of the question of which notice was given by the hon. Member for Northampton in relation to pensions and allowances.
§ MR. HENNIKER HEATONI dare say the information has been given before, but can the hon. Gentleman explain the item of £1,000 as compensation to Universities for the loss of the privilege of printing and vending almanacks?
§ MR. JACKSONThe explanation is that formerly under Royal Charters the Universities enjoyed the sole privilege of printing almanacks, and when this was thought to be inconvenient in the public interest, an allowance was made, and the privilege taken away. It is one of those items that, with others, ought to be commuted.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ 8. £1,474, to complete the sum for Miscellaneous Charitable and other Allowances, Ireland.
§ Vote agreed to.