§ MR. BOTTOMLEY (Hackney, S.)I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to a Report recently issued by a committee of the Board of Customs recommending that the watchers of the port of London should be quartered in different huts from those occupied by their superior officers, on the ground, amongst others, that they belong to a lower social class; whether he has seen a protest, signed by 500 watchers, in which it is pointed out that they comprise men who have held responsible positions in the Navy, Army, and police, and hold certificates for good conduct and life pensions, and that their duties bring them into hourly contact with their superior officers, and demanding an apology for what they regard as an insult to their body; and whether it is proposed to act upon the committee's recommendation, or what other steps, if any, are to be taken in regard to it.
§ THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. HOBHOUSE,) Bristol, E.The Board of Customs inform me that the statement referred to is an 1663 expression of opinion contained in an exhaustive and valuable Report from a Departmental Committee appointed by them to advise as to the necessity for improvements in the office accommodation in the port of London. As copies of the Committee's Report were distributed to supervising officers only, and it has not been made public, I am at a loss to understand how access to it has been obtained by the watchers. I have received through the hon. Member privately a copy of the protest referred to, but I understand that it has not been submitted by the men to the Board. In these circumstances I cannot undertake to consider it. I may point out, however, that the desirability of providing separate accommodation for persons in responsible and subordinate positions is generally recognised by private employers as well as in public departments, and that I do not see any reason for interfering with the discretion of the Board in a matter of this kind.
§ MR. CROOKSasked if the presentation of the memorial would be prejudicial to the men.
§ MR. HOBHOUSEI do not think so.