§ MR. FIELD (Dublin, St. Patrick)To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that Mr. C. Clarke, employed in the Statistical Office, Customs, was informed by Treasury letter, dated 4th June, 1907, that no application for his exceptional promotion would be considered until he had withdrawn certain charges which he had made; what was the date on which Mr. Clarke formally withdrew his charges, and how long after that date was he nominated for exceptional promotion; whether Mr. Clarke was induced to send in his withdrawal by promises made to him by his superior officers that if he took that course his name would be submitted for nomination for exceptional promotion; what was the nature of the charges made by Mr. Clarke and against whom were they directed; whether he is aware that Mr. Clarke has been unable to take up the superior post to which he has been nominated owing to the refusal of the Civil Service Commissioners to grant him the necessary certificate, and will he say how many times have they refused and on what grounds; whether it is intended to continue to present Mr. Clarke to the Commissioners until he succeeds in obtaining their certificate; to what class of officers in the Statistical Office does Mr. Clarke belong; is it the practice to select a number of specially meritorious men in that class for the discharge of superior duties, such as checking, for which certain monetary allowances are granted, and have all previous promotions from the class to superior appointments been made exclusively from the 1174 ranks of these selected men; and whether, in view of the distrust in the system of selection for promotion shared by all classes in the Statistical Office, he will cause an independent investigation to be made into the circumstances of the nomination of Mr. Clarke for promotion over the heads of officers who are his seniors and of whom a number are specially entrusted with duties recognised by grants of monetary allowances as being officially superior to those performed by Mr. Clarke.
(Answered by Mr. Hobhouse.) The officer referred to is one of 121 assistant clerks who signed a Memorial addressed to the Treasury in which an unfounded allegation of breach of faith as regards promotion was made against His Majesty's Government. It is not the case that an intimation was made to this officer individually as is suggested, but a general reply was sent to the memorialists to the effect stated in the Question. Mr. Clarke withdrew his signature to the Memorial on 13th September last, but it is not true that he was induced to do so on any promise whatever. He was nominated for the position of port clerk on 3rd December following, and has been examined twice by the Civil Service Commissioners, but on both occasions has failed to qualify. It is the ordinary practice of the Civil Service Commissioners to allow two trials and it is not proposed to allow him a third. The monetary (i.e., checking) allowances in the Statistical Office are assigned in strict order of seniority to those assistant clerks who are certified to be efficient and of good character, but the possession of a checking allowance does not imply that the holder is of such exceptional merit as will justify the Board in recommending him for promotion to a superior appointment. No clerk with an allowance was qualified for such advancement when Mr. Clarke was nominated.