HC Deb 20 July 1896 vol 43 cc120-1
MR. T. HARRINGTON (Dublin, Harbour)

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, with regard to the recent promotions in the Sorting Department of the General Post Office, Dublin, when Mr. Sanderson was appointed chief clerk over the heads of five officers who had longer service, Mr. Forrest, who replaced Mr. Sanderson, was promoted over six who were his seniors; Mr. Dagg who replaced Mr. Forrest was promoted over four who were his seniors in the service; Mr. Gilligan over 12 seniors; and Mr Mansfield over 46 of longer standing in the service, will he explain why Mr. Wagner, who had held the appointment of postmaster in Killarney, was taken into the Sorting Department and placed over many officers of long standing in the service; whether, in these cases, the tabular statement prescribed in the Book of Instructions, giving the names and dates of appointment, and reason for passing over any officer, was duly furnished; and, if he can say whether the reasons set forth in this statement for passing over these officers were ever brought under the notice of the officers themselves?

THE SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. R. W. HANBURY,) Preston

It was a matter of regret to the Postmaster General to be obliged to go outside the Dublin Sorting Office in order to fill the vacancy on the First Class of Assistant Superintendents in that office to which Mr. Wagner has been appointed; but after special and exhaustive inquiry had been made, it was found that there was no one in the subordinate classes who was both fit for the appointment and willing to accept it. Amongst those classes there was certainly one, and probably more than one officer, who was in all respects fit, but he was unwilling to accept the appointment because it would necessarily involve his removal from sorting duty on board the Kingstown and Holyhead Mail Packets, a duty which carries considerable emoluments. The usual Tabular Statements with details respecting each of the officers passed over, as well as each of those promoted were furnished in this case. It is not the practice to communicate to officers passed over reasons for their not being promoted; beyond the fact that the officers promoted were considered to be better qualified.