HC Deb 21 June 1897 vol 50 c433
MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General (1) whether sub-postmasters are the only section of the 140,000 servants of the Post Office for whom the Department do not provide a substitute at the public expense during annual leave or during sickness and (2) whether, when a clerk is sent from the head office to take charge for the sub-postmaster, the sub-postmaster is almost invariably called upon to pay considerably more for the relief than he has himself been paid for the same period, and in addition also held responsible by the Department for all the clerk does or omits?

MR. HANBURY

Substantially the answer to the first part of the hon. Member's Question is in the affirmative. It must be remembered that, unlike other officers of the Department, the sub-postmasters, as a rule, are not required to give their whole time to the service, but are at liberty to attend to private business. Those who must devote their whole time, to the work of the Department are allowed leave at the public expense. Generally speaking, in the absence of a sub-postmaster who has a private business, the work of the Post Office is carried on by his assistant or some member of his family, and it is not necessary for him to obtain the services of another officer; but when it is necessary he has to pay for them, and no doubt it is often the case that the temporary payment is at a higher rate than his own salary for the same period. He is, of course, still held responsible for the business of the office.