§ MR. A. K. LOYD (Berks, Abingdon)I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, (1) whether his attention has been drawn to the case of Corporal Heber 406 Fowler, of West Challow, Wantage, Berks, who after serving six years and 32 days in the 1st Royal Berks Regiment of Foot, and earning the Egyptian war medal 1882, and the Khedive bronze star, a certificate that his conduct and character while with the colours were good, and two good conduct badges, and after completing his service of 5 years and 333 days in the reserve, received notice through the officer commanding the 49th Regimental Depôt that a vacancy had occurred for a rural postman at Ascot, and, after applying for the post, was directed by the postmaster at Ascot to report himself there on 19th June 1893; (2) whether he is aware that in order to comply with such notice Corporal Fowler broke up his home at West Challow, and left the service, of Mr. Sherwill, under whom (with a short break of three months) he had been employed since 1888 as groom at 12s. a week; (3) is he aware Corporal Fowler discharged the duties at Ascot as temporary rural postman for about nine months, to the satisfaction of the postmaster and of the neighbourhood generally, and then passed an examination by the Civil Service Commissioners for admission to the permanent post; (4) will he explain on what grounds the Civil Service Commissioners on 1st March 1894 announced to him that they had withheld their certificate on the ground that they were unable to certify that his character was such as to qualify him for public employment, and is he aware that from that time to the present Corporal Fowler has been refused any information of the particular in which his character was considered unsatisfactory, or any opportunity of being heard in his own defence, and has in consequence been refused, by the Inspector General of Recruiting, permission either to rejoin, the colours or to be admitted to Government employ; and (5) whether the Postmaster General will reconsider his decision in the matter?
§ MR. HANBURYThe attention of the Postmaster General has been drawn to the case, and the facts are generally as stated in the first and third paragraphs of the hon. Member's Question. On the subject of the second paragraph the Postmaster General has no information. It is not for the Postmaster General to review or explain the action of the Civil 407 Service Commissioners, and as he has come to no decision on, the subject, it is obviously not for him to reconsider the case.