Captain CRAIGasked the Secretary to the Treasury whether he can state if a Treasury Minute of old date still applies to every Civil servant, warning him that dismissal may be the consequence of bankruptcy, as insolvency would be considered by the Treasury as primâ facie evidence of unfitness for employment under the Crown; whether such Treasury Minute refers to new appointments to the Trea- 506 sury; if so, can he state whether any of the three persons lately appointed as advisers to the Chancellor of the Exchequer in respect of the Land Clauses of the Finance Bill were in the hands of the Receiver during 1908, either in their own names or in the name of the firm which they adopted for trading purposes; and, if so, will he give the names and full particulars?
§ Mr. FLYNNIs it in order to make this Question Paper a vehicle of constant reflection upon private Members?
§ Mr. SPEAKERI do not see anything objectionable in asking whether the Regulations have been complied with or not.
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEA Treasury Minute of 30th November, 1868, which is still in force, deals with the case of members of the Permanent Civil Service who may become involved in serious pecuniary embarrassment. The three gentlemen referred to are not permanent members of the Civil Service and, consequently, the Minute is not applicable in their case. I think, however, that I ought to state, in view of the implication in the question, that no one of these gentlemen has at any time been in the hands of the Official Receiver either in his own name or in that of the firm with which he is connected.
§ Mr. H. BELLOCWill the Government or some Member of the Government undertake to inquire why this particular allegation has been made against a private gentleman in one quarter of the House?