§ MR. P. J. O'BRIEN (Tipperary, N.)asked the Postmaster General if it was true that when a probationer lineman of the Engineer's Department, Post Office Telegraphs, at Gloucester, recently reported his Inspector for uttering forged wage-receipts, the inquiry was held by a friend of the accused, and resulted only in his transfer to Haverfordwest, while the complainant was punished by the loss of his annual increment and severely cautioned; and whether he would explain the circumstances of the case to the House?
§ *MR. RAIKESNo, Sir; it is not true. The inspector in question, who had been guilty of irregularities in his accounts, but not, so far as appeared, with a view to his own profit, was not only transferred to Haverfordwest—he was also reduced to a lower position with lower pay. Neither was the complainant punished by the loss of his increment, for he had none to lose; and I have been unable to ascertain that he received any caution. Whether the officer who investigated the case was a friend of 1010 the accused or not I do not know, but it is the fact that he was his superior officer, and as such the proper person to make the investigation, and I have no reason to suppose that it was not conducted with ability and impartiality.