§ MR. STEADMANI beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster-General, if he is aware that S. A. Stoddart, postman, of Gloucester, who in his first year of established service (in 1895) had 20 late attendances recorded against him, not only had his increment arrested for one year, but has also had withheld from him the stripe to which he claims to have become entitled in 1898, and has been informed that his claim will not again be reported upon until 1901, so that (as his second stripe will only be granted five years after the first) his punishment for late attendances in 1895, which have not since been repeated, represents not only the loss of increment for one year but a permanent fine of 1s. weekly during the time he remains in the service; and will he have inquiry made into the case; and, if the facts be as stated, consider the desirability of lessening this punishment?
§ SIR J. GORST (for Mr. HANBURY)It is the case that Stoddart's increment due on the 28th February 1896 was arrested on account of his irregular attendance during the year up to that date. A good conduct stripe can only be granted at the end of a period of five years' unblemished service; and, in view of his late attendance in the year to February 1896, this condition, it is evident, cannot be complied with in Stoddart's case until 1901.