HC Deb 24 March 1891 vol 351 c1765
MR. R. POWER (Waterford)

I beg to ask the Postmaster General if his attention has been called to the case of James Whittaker, town postman at Waterford, dismissed for alleged abusive language to a policeman, which language James Whittaker denies having used, and states that he can bring evidence to that effect; and whether, inasmuch as the case against Whittaker rests on the unsupported word of a policeman, while Whittaker who is an employé of the Post Office of nine years' standing and good character, can produce evidence in his favour, he will cause further inquiry to be made into the case?


James Whittaker was dismissed, not for abusive language to the police—which as the hon. Member states, Whittaker denies having employed—but for obstructing the police in the discharge of their duties. Whittaker had been appointed less than three months before the occurrence took place, and was still on probation. I shall be willing, however, if Whittaker expresses his sincere regret for his conduct, to allow him to resume duty, on probation, as an auxiliary postman.