MR. H. T. KNATCHBULL-HUGES-SEN (Kent, Faversham)I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether there has been a deficit or a surplus in the wages earned in the smithery at Sheer-ness on the prices fixed by the Service during the time the check system has been in operation; and whether he will grant a Return of the wages earned week by week in the smithery at Sheer-ness during that period?
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE ADMIRALTY (Lord G. HAMILTON, Middlesex, Ealing)From the 1st April, 1890 (12 months) three men have been checked a total sum of 19s. 3d., two men at one fire 16s. 9d., and the man at another fire 129 2s. 6d. Both these fire parties had been short of their wages three weeks running. The two men alluded to were deficient in the three weeks 39s. 1d. the other fire with the one man in the three weeks 20s. 9d. The first two men were on check measurement daring the year 23 weeks, and they were short on the whole time 25s. The remainder of the year they were on task and job, when they earned their money easily, using the same scheme of prices, observing that during the year the entire shop have been short of their day pay on three separate weeks. No men have received more than their day pay whilst employed on check measurement.
MR. H. T. KNATCHBULL-HUGES-SENThe noble Lord has not answered the first part of the question—whether there has been a deficit or a surplus?
§ LORD G. HAMILTONI do not quite understand the question. There is no specific sum allotted to any trade, but on wages there is a certain scheduled list of prices upon which men work.