ADJOURNMENT. (Hansard, 7 April 1892)

§ (12.42.) DR. TANNER (Cork Co., Mid)
May I ask the Secretary to the Treasury why it is he objects to give the Return I have asked for of a copy of the correspondence relating to the acceleration of the mail service between Dublin and Queenstown? As a matter of fact, this is a matter of material interest to the commercial community of Cork. I am not speaking for any political section, but for the people of the City of Cork, and I ask what is the objection.

§ MR. SPEAKER
If objection is taken to giving the Return the question cannot be now discussed.

§ DR. TANNER
With all submission, Sir, I thought I was entitled to make these remarks on the Motion for Adjournment, but if I am out of Order I will at once sit down. I merely wish to say, on the Motion for Adjournment, and seeing the right hon. Gentleman in his place, that I shall be glad to know what reason there is for refusing the publication of the correspondence on this very simple matter, but a matter very important to the poor and struggling commercial community in the City and County of Cork. Why should the right hon. Gentleman object? Many questions have been put on the subject, and we receive many communications asking us to try and secure some solution of the difficulty, some remedy for this stop-gap and impossible position for business in Cork. I know we are all tired with our evening's work; but Irish Members, and notably those representing Cork, are called upon to request some distinct answer from the right hon. Gentleman beyond that very inappropriate, if I may so say, answer—that he objects to giving this Return. I think the citizens of Cork may fairly claim to know this. The House will excuse me, late though it is, if I ask 967 the right hon. Gentleman why it is he interferes to prevent this information being given—information desired by all sections in Cork, be they Tories, Liberals, or Nationalists?

§ (12.45.) THE SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Sir JOHN GORST,) Chatham
I can only repeat what I have said at Question time—that there is no correspondence on the subject which, in the opinion of Her Majesty's Government, could be laid on the Table of the House with advantage to the Public Service.

§ (12.45.) DR. CLARK (Caithness)
I may be allowed to say, as one of the Tellers for the minority of 70 in the last Division, that many of us, disagreeing as we did with the terms of the Motion, were prevented from moving and supporting a direct Amendment as we desired, and had no course left open to us but to vote against the Motion. We regret very much that we were unable to amend the Motion inadequate terms; and of course if the Motion had been lost we should have brought forward a Motion of a more drastic character. I only desire to say this to prevent any false impression getting abroad as to our action in voting against the Motion.

§ (12.46.) MR. MAURICE HEALY (Cork)
May I ask the Secretary to the Treasury if his remarks and objection to the publication of the correspondence just referred to relate to the correspondence between the Post Office and the Treasury, or to the correspondence between the Post Office and the Great Southern and Western Railway Company? It may be undesirable to publish the correspondence between the two Government Departments. I can understand this may be of a confidential character, but the same objection does not apply to the correspondence between the Post Office and the Great Southern and Western Railway Company. Will the right hon. Gentleman be prepared to give that part of the correspondence?

§ (12.48.) SIR J. GORST
If the hon. Member will put down notice of his question I shall be prepared to give him an answer.

§ (12.48.) MR. CONYBEARE (Cornwall, Camborne)
We put down many 968 questions, and do not elicit answers. I do not understand what conception of his duty the right hon. Gentleman may have when he constitutes himself judge and authority as to what is or is not desirable to place before the House in the matter of information. Upon matters of public importance we want information, and it is scarcely sufficient to be told on the ipse dixit of the right hon. Gentleman that it is not in the interest of the Public Service that we should have it. The Departmental correspondence may be confidential in character; but without wishing to dogmatise, I do say that it is not fair to refuse information such as would be given in the correspondence between the Post Office and the company. I wish to protest against the assumption by the right hon. Gentleman, or any Member of the Government, that such information cannot be given in the interest of the Public Service.

§ (12.50.) MR. T. M. HEALY (Longford, N.)
I wish to associate myself with what has been said by the hon. Member for Caithness (Dr. Clark), but, at the same time, I may take leave to say that I think the terms of the admonition employed by Mr. Speaker largely made up for the inadequacy of the Resolution proposed by the Government.

§ (12.51.) MR. FLYNN (Cork, N.)
I wish to add my opinion that in asking for the correspondence referred to just now we make a most reasonable request. We want to show the country how the South of Ireland is treated in this matter of mail service. While £19,000 is advanced for the service to the North of Ireland we ask some £3,000 for an accelerated service between Queenstown and Dublin. The Postmaster General admitted to a deputation that the request was reasonable, but he said there was a Treasury difficulty. Now, we want to influence the Treasury if we can, and to give them the opportunity to justify their action if they can. I hope the Treasury will see the importance of the matter, which we shall continue to press.