§ MR. JOYNSON-HICKS (Manchester, N.W.)To ask the Postmaster-General whether the Tweedmouth Committee ascertained that before the punishment 2065 of an officer in the Post Office Department the precise nature of the charge brought against him was explained to him in writing, and that he was allowed to make, on his own behalf, a written explanation; whether the recommendation of the Committee that this practice should be strictly adhered to is still in force in his Department; if so, whether he will explain why the recommendation was not applied in the case of Mr. A. Dick, compulsorily transferred from Glasgow to Manchester, in 1907; whether he will now give him an opportunity to furnish a written explanation on the charges brought against him; and, if not, whether he will state his reasons for failing to carry out the recommendation of a committee whose findings were accepted by the then Postmaster-General.
(Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) The rule referred to by the Tweedmouth Committee is still in force. The circumstances leading to Mr. Dick's transfer from Glasgow were of a kind so completely within his own knowledge that the application of the rule became a mere formality, which could not have affected the result. It should, nevertheless, have been complied with. The omission has since been repaired; and Mr. Dick has defended himself verbally and in writing without convincing me that he was treated unjustly. Mr. Dick's conduct since his transfer has been satisfactory; and he was informed more than a year ago that I was prepared to sanction, under certain conditions, his re-transfer to Glasgow.