§ Mr. HUGH BARRIEasked the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that the person who has been appointed to the sub-postmastership of Ballintoy is the owner of a public-house, and that he proposes to conduct postal business on the licensed premises; whether it is contrary to the rules of the Post Office for officers of the Department to be connected directly or indirectly with the ownership or management of an inn or public-house; and will the newly appointed sub-postmaster be allowed to carry on the post office in licensed premises?
§ Mr. HUGH BARRIEalso asked whether the daughter of the late sub-postmaster at Ballintoy, Miss Jane E. Donnelly, was the only candidate who fulfilled the Department's regulations, both as to lengthened service and suitable premises; whether, on her father's death, she was immediately put in charge of the office by the surveyor of the district, and satisfactorily conducted it for over five months; and will he state on what grounds she has been passed over in favour of a local publican without any postal experience?
§ Mr. BUXTONIt is the general rule that officers of the Post Office should not be connected with the ownership or management of an inn or public-house. But it is occasionally necessary to make an exception to this rule in the case of a, sub-postmaster. The recently appointed sub-postmaster of Ballintoy, who is the proprietor of a good-class hotel, was selected because in all the circumstances of the case he was considered the most desirable of the three candidates for the position. Care has been 249 taken that persons approaching the post office shall not pass through, or near, the premises where drink is sold.
§ Mr. BARRIEMay I ask the right hon. Gentleman what were the circumstances to which he referred in his answer?
§ Mr. BUXTONUnfortunately in this particular case a good deal of local feeling prevailed in favour of the different candidates, and it appeared to me, looking at the amount of local feeling, that to appoint either would not have been conducive to the public advantage or to the Post Office. In these circumstances, and there being only one other candidate, I felt bound to appoint him.
§ Mr. WILLIAM MOOREHas the right hon. Gentleman seen a report of a public meeting at which this transaction was condemned?
§ Mr. BUXTONOh, yes, I saw the report.
§ Mr. MOOREAs that opinion is general in the North of Ireland to those in possession of the facts, will the right hon. Gentleman grant a full inquiry by an impartial Commission into the circumstances which led to the present appointment?
§ Mr. BUXTONI do not see why people should be so solicitous for public inquiry into the appointment of a sub-postmaster. I went into the whole case, and as there was so much local feeling on both sides I concluded it would not be in the interests of the public service or of the Post Office to appoint either of the candidates. I regret this feeling should have been aroused, and I regret to have had to appoint the third candidate with the disqualification of licensed premises. But the whole case of this sub-postmaster is a tempest in a teapot.
§ Mr. BARRIEIs it not the case that the right hon. Gentleman originally appointed a candidate not mentioned to-day, and found later that the person was not qualified, and that he has now made a second appointment, passing over the only person who had 18 years' previous experience?
§ Mr. BUXTONThe first suggestion was that another postmistress should be appointed. She was not really appointed. Then this local friction arose.
§ Mr. LEIF JONESIs there a separate entrance to the post office, so that people need not pass through the public-house?
§ Mr. BUXTONI must have notice of that question.
§ Mr. JOHN CULLINANIs the person who has been appointed a Unionist?
§ Mr. BUXTONI do not know.