HC Deb 09 May 1905 vol 145 cc1466-8

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—(Sir A. Acland-Hood.)

MR. DALZIEL (Kirkcaldy Burghs)

said he understood the right hon. Gentleman the Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury was rather annoyed the previous evening because he was asked an important Question without proper notice. He therefore desired to repeat the Question he put on that occasion, as he understood the right hon. Gentleman was in a position to give the information, namely, whether there was not at the present moment a vacancy in the post of Junior Lord of the Treasury, and whether he would give the House any explanation as to the extraordinary delay that had taken place in filling the vacancy.


said he understood there was a vacancy and he could assure the hoi. Gentleman that steps would be taken to fill it.

MR. McKENNA (Monmouthshire, N.)

suggested that the right Answer to the Question was that the post would not be filled until the Government decided whether or not they could avoid a dissolution. By June 2nd the Government had strong hopes that the opposition raised by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham would come to a head or would be withdrawn: Not until they were satisfied that they could carry on the Government after that date would they attempt to fill the vacant post of Junior Lord of the Treasury. It was hardly reasonable to expect the Government to fill the post now, because they would have to call upon one of their hon. friends to spend £1,000 or £1,500 to contest a by-election with every probability of losing the seat.

MR. LABOUCHERE (Northampton)

said there was another point in the matter. They had been without a Junior Lord of the Treasury for two months, but they had managed to get on with out him, and the country had heen saving all that time at the rate of £1,000 per annum. Was there any use in continuing the appointment? He was informed that when a gentleman was appointed Junior Lord of the Treasury he appeared once at the Treasury; he went there at the commencement and an official went in and said, "Will your Lordship allow your secretary to enter your room?" This done, the official said, 'Will your Lordship allow your secretary to take a seat? "The secre tary then took a seat at the table, and cleared out the Junior Lord, and he never went there again. This seemed to him to be a waste of £1,000 a year. Nd doubt the right hon. Gentleman thought the result of the Brighton election was an evil, but still good would come out of evil if this Ministry, which had wasted so much money, were to make a death-bed repentance and do away with the office of Junior Lord of the Treasury.

Forward to