This wish of Sir Ralph H. Knox recalls to mind the tribute paid, in 1873, by Mr. Gladstone, to the memory of Joseph Hume, the first as well as the last Member of the House of Commons to acquire a knowledge of the expenditures of the Government which was sufficient to enable the possessor to criticize with intelligence the details of the expenditures of the Government. Said Mr. Gladstone: “…and in like manner, I believe that Mr. Hume has earned for himself an honorable and a prominent place in the history of this country—not by endeavoring to pledge Parliament to abstract resolutions or general declarations on the subject of economy, but by an indefatigable and unwearied devotion, by the labor of a life, to obtain complete mastery of all the details of public expenditure, and by tracking, and I would almost say hunting, the Minister in every Department through all these details with a knowledge equal or superior to his own. In this manner, I do not scruple to say, Mr. Hume did more, not merely to reduce the public expenditure as a matter of figures, but to introduce principles of economy into the management of the administration of public money, than all the men who have lived in our time put together. This is the kind of labor, which, above all things, we want. I do not know whether my honorable and learned friend [Mr. Vernon Harcourt], considering his distinguished career in his profession, is free to devote himself to the public service in the same way as Mr. Hume did. If, however, he is free to do so, I would say to him: ‘By all means apply yourself to this vocation. You will find it extremely disagreeable. You will find that during your lifetime very little distinction is to be gained in it, but in the impartiality of history and of posterity you will be judged very severely in the scales of absolute justice as regards the merits of public men, and you will then obtain your reward.’”433

The British public, needless to say, still is waiting for the man, or men, who shall take upon themselves the invidious but honorable task of stemming the tide to extravagant expenditure, which, in Great Britain, as elsewhere, is the besetting sin of popular government. The British people still are waiting, though, since 1870, they have vastly increased the functions of the Government by nationalizing a great branch of industry, and therefore are more than ever in need of persons who shall emulate the late Joseph Hume.

In conclusion, let us compare with the testimony given in 1902, the testimony given in 1873, before the Select Committee on Civil Services Expenditure.

A Member of the Select Committee of 1873 asked Mr. W. E. Baxter, Financial Secretary to the Treasury: “Am I right in thinking that you do not agree with the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s declaration with regard to the Treasury? I asked him this question: ‘Then it is a popular delusion to believe that the Treasury does exercise a direct control over the expenditure of the Department?’ And the Chancellor replied: ‘I do not know that it is popular, but it is a delusion; I think that it would be much more popular that the Treasury should exercise no control at all.’” Mr. Baxter replied: “I think that the Chancellor stated it too broadly, and would, probably, if he had been Secretary to the Treasury for two or three years, have found that the Treasury did, in point of fact, go back to some extent over the old expenditure as well as try to stop increases.” A moment before, Mr. Baxter had said: “The most unpleasant part, as I find it, of the duty of the Financial Secretary to the Treasury is to resist the constant pressure brought day by day, and almost hour by hour, by Members of Parliament, in order to increase expenditure by increasing the pay of individuals, increasing the pay of classes, and granting large compensations to individuals or to classes.” The Chairman of the Committee queried: “And that pressure, which is little known to the public, has given you, and your predecessors in office, I presume, a great deal of thought and a great deal of concern?” Mr. Baxter replied: “As I said before, it is the most unpleasant part of my duties, and it occupies a very great deal of time which probably might be better spent.” At this point Mr. Sclater-Booth asked: “You spoke of the constant Parliamentary pressure which has been exercised with a view to increasing salaries or compensations, do you allude to proceedings in Parliament as well as private communications, or only to the latter?” Mr. Baxter replied: “I did in my answer only allude to private communications by letter and conversation in the House, because that was in my mind at the time. But of course my answer might be extended to those motions in the House which are resisted without effect by the Government, and which entail great expenditure upon the country.” Mr. Herman queried: “When you speak of the pressure put upon you by Members of Parliament for the increase of pay to classes, and the other points that you named, I suppose that you mean that it is partly party pressure, and that you are more subject to it at the present time than you would be if a Conservative Government were in power?” Mr. Baxter replied: “In my experience it has very little to do with party; men from all quarters of the House are at me from week to week.” “Do you mean to say that men opposed to you in political principles apply to you for that sort of thing now?” “Certainly I should wish it to be distinctly understood that they do not ask this as a favor; they do not ask favors of me. They simply wish me to look into the question of the pay of individuals and of classes of individuals, as they put it, with a view of benefitting the public service…. In very few instances since I have been Financial Secretary to the Treasury have I been asked by anyone to advance a friend, or to do anything in the shape of a favor. The representations are of this sort: ‘Here are a class of public officers who are underpaid. We wish you to look into the matter, and to consider whether or not it would be advantageous to the public service that their salary should be increased.’ I look into it, and I say that I am not at all of that opinion, upon which my friend tells me that he will bring the matter before the House, and show us up.” “And the other evil is one which is rapidly diminishing, and, in fact, is very small now, namely, interference in favor of individuals?” “Very small indeed.”

To a question from Mr. Rathbone, Mr. Baxter replied: “I do not think that the representations in question have much effect; I only stated that the most unpleasant part of my duties was resisting the pressure brought to bear in that way.” Thereupon Mr. Rathbone continued: “They may not have an effect when the Government has a majority of one hundred or so, or when there is no election impending, but do you think they have no effect when, as we have seen in former years for long periods, the Government is carried on, whether by one side or the other, by a very small majority, or when an election is impending?” Mr. Baxter replied: “I have no doubt that they have had the effect in former times in those circumstances.” “Do you think they would be liable to have that effect again if either party should be reduced to that condition?” “It may be so.” “Can you suggest any mode of abating the Parliamentary pressure to which you have alluded, whether it be exercised by public motions or by private influence?” The Financial Secretary to the Treasury replied: “No; it is an evil very difficult to remedy. I think the better plan would be to inform the constituencies on the subject and let them know the practice which so widely prevails, in order that, if inclined to take the side of economy, they may look after their Members of Parliament.” A moment later, Mr. Sclater-Booth asked: “Do you not think from what you have seen of the public service, that the Treasury, existing particularly for that purpose, is the body which must be permanently relied upon to keep down expenditure?” “Decidedly so.” “Even the constituencies can scarcely, as a rule, be appealed to in that sense, can they?” “No; I attach very much more importance to the power of the Treasury than either to the action of the House of Commons, or, I am sorry to say, to the voice of the constituencies.”434

CHAPTER XIX
Conclusion

A large and ever increasing number of us are adherents of the political theory that the extension of the functions of the State to the inclusion of the conduct of business ventures will purify politics and make the citizen take a more intelligent as well as a more active part in public affairs. The verdict of the experience of Great Britain under the public ownership and operation of the telegraphs is that that doctrine is untenable. Instead of purifying politics, public ownership has corrupted them. It has given a great impetus to class bribery, a form of corruption far more insidious than individual bribery. With one exception, wherever the public ownership of the telegraphs has affected the pocket-book interests of any considerable body of voters, the good-will of those voters has been gained at the expense of the public purse. The only exception has been the policy pursued toward the owners of the telephone patents; and even in that case the policy adopted was not dictated by legitimate motives.

The nationalization of the telegraphs was initiated with class bribery. The telegraph companies had been poor politicians, and had failed to conciliate the newspaper press by allowing the newspapers to organize their own news bureaux. The Government played the game of politics much better; it gave the newspapers a tariff which its own advisor, Mr. Scudamore, said would prove unprofitable. No subsequent Government has attempted to abrogate the bargain, though the annual loss to the State now is upward of $1,500,000.

The promise to extend the telegraphs to every place with a money order issuing Post Office was given in ignorance of what it would cost to carry out that promise. But the adherence to the policy until an anticipated expenditure of $1,500,000 had risen to $8,500,000 was nothing more nor less than the purchase of votes out of the public purse. Not until 1873 did the Government abandon the policy that every place with a money order issuing Post Office was entitled to telegraphic service.

When the House of Commons, in March, 1883, against the protests of the Government passed the resolution which demanded that the tariff on telegrams be cut almost in two, the Government should have resigned rather than carry out the order. The Government’s obedience to an order which the Government itself contended would put a heavy burden on the taxpayer for four years, was nothing more nor less than the purchase of Parliamentary support out of the public purse. No serious argument had been advanced that the charge of 24 cents for 20 words was excessive. The argument of the leader of the movement for reduction, Dr. Cameron, of Glasgow, was a worthy complement to the argument made in 1868 by Mr. Hunt, Chancellor of the Exchequer, to wit, that telegraphing ought to be made so cheap that the illiterate man who could not write a letter would send a telegram. Dr. Cameron argued that “instead of maintaining a price which was prohibitory not only to the working classes but also to the middle classes, they ought to take every means to encourage telegraphy. They ought to educate the rising generation to it; and he would suggest to the Government that the composing of telegrams would form a useful part of the education in our board schools.”

Parliament after Parliament, and Government after Government has purchased out of the public purse the good-will of the telegraph employees. Organized in huge civil servants’ unions, the telegraph employees have been permitted to establish the policy that wages and salaries shall be fixed in no small degree by the amount of political pressure that the telegraph employees can bring to bear on Members of the House of Commons. With the rest of the Government employees they have been permitted to establish the doctrine that once a man has landed himself on the State’s pay-roll, he has “something very nearly approaching to a freehold of provision for life,” irrespective of his fitness and his amenableness to discipline, and no matter what labor-saving machines may be invented, or how much business may fall off. To a considerable degree the State employees have established their demand that promotion be made according to seniority rather than merit. In more than one Postmaster General have they instilled “a perfect horror of passing anyone over.” Turning to one part of the service, one finds the civil service unions achieving the revocation of the promotion of the man denominated “probably the ablest man in the Sheffield Post Office.” Turning to another part of the service, one finds the Postmaster General, Mr. Raikes, “for the good of the service” telling an exceptionally able man that “he can well afford to wait his turn.” The civil servants, in the telegraph service and elsewhere, to a considerable degree have secured to themselves exemption from the rigorous discipline to which must submit the people who are in the service of private individuals and of companies. Finally, the civil servants have been permitted to establish to a greater or a lesser degree a whole host of demands that are inconsistent with the economical conduct of business. Among them may be mentioned the demand that the standard of efficiency may not be raised without reimbursement to those who take the trouble to come up to the new standard; that if a man enters the service when the proportion of higher officers to the rank and file is 1 to 10, he has “an implied contract” with the Government that that proportion shall not be altered to his disadvantage though it may be altered to his advantage.

Public opinion has compelled the great Political Parties to drop Party politics with regard to the State employees, and to give them security of tenure of office. But it permits the State employees to engage in Party politics towards Members of Parliament. The civil service unions watch the speeches and votes of Members of the House of Commons, and send speakers and campaign workers into the districts of offending Members. In the election campaigns they ask candidates to pledge themselves to support in Parliament civil servants’ demands. Their political activities have led Mr. Hanbury, Financial Secretary to the Treasury in 1895 to 1900, to say: “We must recognize the fact that in this House of Commons, public servants have a Court of Appeal such as exists with regard to no private employee whatever. It is a Court of Appeal which exists not only with regard to the grievances of classes, and even of individuals, but it is a Court of Appeal which applies even to the wages and duties of classes and individuals, and its functions in that respect are only limited by the common sense of Members, who should exercise caution in bringing forward cases of individuals, because, if political influence is brought to bear in favor of one individual, the chances are that injury is done to some other individual…. We have done away with personal and individual bribery, but there is still a worse form of bribery, and that is when a man asks a candidate [for Parliament] to buy his vote out of the public purse.” The tactics employed by civil servants have led the late Postmaster General, Lord Stanley, to apply the terms “blackmail” and “blood-sucking.” The conduct of the House of Commons under civil service pressure has led Mr. A. J. Balfour, the late Premier, to express grave anxiety concerning the future of Great Britain’s civil service. It has led Mr. Austen Chamberlain, Representative of the Postmaster General, to say that Members of both Parties had come to him seeking protection from the demands made upon them by the civil servants. On another occasion it has led Mr. Chamberlain to say: “In a great administration like this there must be decentralization, and how difficult it is to decentralize, either in the Post Office or in the Army, when working under constant examination by question and answer in this House, no Honorable Member who has not had experience of official life can easily realize. But there must be decentralization, because every little petty matter cannot be dealt with by the Postmaster General or the Permanent Secretary to the Post Office. Their attention should be reserved in the main for large questions, and I think it is deplorable, absolutely deplorable, that so much of their time should be occupied, as under the present circumstances it necessarily is occupied, with matters of very small detail because these matters of detail are asked by Honorable Members and because we do not feel an Honorable Member will accept an answer from anyone but the highest authority. I think a third of the time—I am putting it at a low estimate—of the highest officials in the Post Office is occupied in answering questions raised by Members of this House, and in providing me with information in order that I may be in a position to answer the inquiries addressed to me” about matters which “in any private business would be dealt with by the officer on the spot, without appeal or consideration unless grievous cause were shown.”

The questions of which Mr. Austen Chamberlain spoke, at one end of the scale are put on behalf of a man discharged for theft, at the other end of the scale on behalf of the man who fears he will not be promoted. The practice of putting such questions not only leads to deplorable waste of executive ability, it also modifies profoundly the entire administration of the public service. Lord Welby, the highest authority in Great Britain, in 1902 testified that it was the function of the Treasury to hold the various Departments up to efficient and economical administration. But that the debates in the Commons not only weakened the Treasury’s control over the several Departments, but also made the Treasury lower its standards of efficiency and economy. He added that in the last twenty or twenty-five years both Parties had lost a great deal of “the old spirit of economy,” and that at the same time “the effective power of control in the Chancellor of the Exchequer had been proportionately diminished.” In former times the Chancellor of the Exchequer had been “paramount, or very powerful in the Cabinet.” Upon the same occasion, Sir George H. Murray was called to testify, because “in the official posts he had held, particularly as Private Secretary to the late Prime Minister, Mr. Gladstone, he had had frequent opportunities for observation not only of the reasons for expenditure, but of the control exercised over it in Parliament.” Sir George H. Murray said: “But I think the whole attitude of the House itself toward the public service and toward expenditure generally, has undergone a very material change in the present generation…. Of course, the House to this day, in the abstract and in theory, is very strongly in favor of economy, but I am bound to say that in practice Members, both in their corporate capacity and, still more, in their individual capacity, are more disposed to use their influence with the Executive Government in order to increase expenditure than to reduce it.” Sir John Eldon Gorst testified in 1902: “But although the Civil Service head of the office has a very great motive to make his office efficient, because his own credit and his future depend on the efficiency of his office, he has comparatively little motive for economy. Parliament certainly does not thank him; and I do not know whether the Treasury thanks him very much; certainly his colleagues do not thank him…. I think anybody who has any experience of mercantile offices, such as a great insurance office, or anything of that kind, would be struck directly with the different atmosphere which prevails in a mercantile office and a Government office…. I have no hesitation in saying that any large insurance company, or any large commercial office of any kind is worked far more efficiently and far more economically than the best of the Departments of His Majesty’s Government.”

Sir John Eldon Gorst might have added that the Civil Service head of a Department really had only rather moderate power to enforce economy. Before the Royal Commission of 1888, Lord Welby [then Sir Welby], Permanent Secretary to the Treasury, was asked: “But you would hardly plead the interference of Members of Parliament as a justification for not getting rid of an unworthy servant, would you?” Lord Welby, who had been in the Treasury since 1856, replied: “It is not a good reason, but as a matter of fact it is powerful. The House of Commons are our masters.”

In the hands of a commercial company, the telegraphs in the United Kingdom would yield a handsome return even upon their present cost to the Government. That is proven beyond the possibility of controversy by the figures presented in the preceding chapters. In the hands of the State, in the period from 1892-93 to 1905-06, the operating expenses alone have exceeded the gross receipts by $1,435,000. If one excludes, as not earned by the telegraphs, the $8,552,000 paid the Government by the National Telephone Company in the form of royalties for the privilege of conducting the telephone business in competition with the State’s telegraphs, the excess of operating expenses over gross receipts will become $9,987,000. That sum, of course, takes no account of the large sums required annually to pay the interest and depreciation charges upon the capital invested in the telegraph plant.

On March 31, 1906, the capital invested in the telegraphs was $84,812,000. To raise that capital, the Government had sold $54,300,000 of 3 per cent. securities, at an average price of about 92.3; and for the rest the Government had drawn upon the current revenue raised by taxation. On March 31, 1906, the unearned interest which the Government had paid upon the aforesaid $54,300,000 of securities had aggregated $22,530,000, the equivalent of 26.5 per cent. of the capital invested in the telegraphs. Upon the $30,500,000 taken from the current revenue, the Government never has had any return whatever.

The nationalization of the telegraphs has corrupted British politics by giving a great impetus to the insidious practice of class bribery. It also has placed heavy burdens upon the taxpayers. But that is not all. The public ownership of the telegraphs has resulted in the State deliberately hampering the development of the telephone industry. That industry, had the Government let it alone, would have grown to enormous proportions, promoting the convenience and the prosperity of the business community, as well as giving employment to tens of thousands of people. In the year 1906, only one person in each 105 persons in the United Kingdom was a subscriber to the telephone; and the total of persons employed in the telephone industry was only some 20,000. On January 1, 1907, one person in each 20 persons in the United States was a subscriber to the telephone.

Under the telephone policy pursued by the Government, the National Telephone Company down to the close of the year 1896 for all practical purposes had no right to erect a pole in a street or lay a wire under a street. As late as 1898, not less than 120,000 miles of the company’s total of 140,000 miles of wire were strung from house-top to house-top, under private way-leaves which the owners of the houses had the right to terminate on six months’ notice. Inadequate as it was, the progress made by the National Telephone Company down to 1898 was a splendid tribute to British enterprise.

The necessarily unsatisfactory service given by the National Telephone Company, down to the close of 1898, created a prejudice against the use of the telephone which to this day has not been completely overcome. Again, the Government to this day has left the National Telephone Company in such a position of weakness, that the Company has been unable to brave public opinion to the extent of abolishing the unlimited user tariff and establishing the measured service tariff exclusively. On the other hand, it is an admitted fact that the telephone cannot be brought into very extensive use except on the basis of the measured service exclusively.

The British Government embarked in the telegraph business, thus putting itself in the position of a trader. But it refused subsequently to assume one of the commonest risks to which every trader is exposed, the liability to have his property impaired in value, if not destroyed, by inventions and new ways of doing things. In that respect the British Government has pursued the same policy that the British Municipalities have pursued. The latter bodies first hampered the spread of the electric light, in large part for the purpose of protecting the municipal gas plants; and subsequently they hampered the spread of the so-called electricity-in-bulk generating companies, which threatened to drive out of the field the local municipal electric light plants.

Very recently the British Government has taken measures to protect its telegraphs and its long distance telephone service from competition from wireless telegraphy. It has refused an application for a license made by a company that proposed to establish a wireless telegraphy service between certain English cities. The refusal was made “on the ground that the installations are designed for the purpose of establishing exchanges which would be in contravention of the Postmaster General’s ordinary telegraphic monopoly.” In order to protect its property in the submarine cables to France, Belgium, Holland and Germany, the Government has inserted in the “model wireless telegraphy license” a prohibition of the sending or receiving of international telegrams, “either directly or by means of any intermediate station or stations, whether on shore or on a ship at sea.” In short, the commercial use of wireless telegraphy apparatus the Government has limited to communication with vessels.

In one respect the nationalization of the telegraphs has fulfilled the promises made by the advocates of nationalization. It has increased enormously the use of the telegraphs. But when the eminent economist, Mr. W. S. Jevons, came to consider what the popularization of the telegraphs had cost the taxpayers, he could not refrain from adding that a large part of the increased use made of the telegraphs was of such a nature that the State could have no motive for encouraging it. “Men have been known to telegraph for a pocket handkerchief,” was his closing comment. Mr. Jevons had been an ardent advocate of nationalization. Had he lived to witness the corruption of politics produced by the public ownership of the telegraphs, his disillusionment would have been even more complete.

From whatever viewpoint one examines the outcome of the nationalization of the telegraphs, one finds invariably that experience proves the unsoundness of the doctrine that the extension of the functions of the State to the inclusion of the conduct of business ventures will purify politics and make the citizen take a more intelligent as well as a more active part in public affairs. Class bribery has been the outcome, wherever the State as the owner of the telegraphs has come in conflict with the pocket-book interest of the citizen. One reason has been that the citizen has not learned to act on the principle of subordinating his personal interest to the interest of the community as a whole. Another reason has been that the community as a whole has not learned to take the pains to ascertain its interests, and to protect them against the illegitimate demands made by classes or sections of the community. There is no body of intelligent and disinterested public opinion to which can appeal for support the Member of Parliament who is pressed to violate the public interest, but wishes to resist the pressure. The policy of State intervention and State ownership does not create automatically that eternal vigilance which is the price not only of liberty but also of good government. One may go further, and say that the verdict of British experience is that it is more difficult to safeguard and promote the public interest under the policy of State intervention than under the policy of laissez-faire. Under the degree of political intelligence and public and private virtue that have existed in Great Britain since 1868, no public service company could have violated the permanent interests of the people in the way in which the National Government and the Municipalities have violated them since they have become the respective owners of the telegraphs and the municipal public service industries. No public service company could have blocked the progress of a rival in the way in which the Government has blocked the progress of the telephone. No combination of capital could have exercised such control over Parliament and Government as the Association of Municipal Corporations has exercised. Finally, no combination of capital could have violated the public interest in such manner as the civil service unions have done.

INDEX

• Abolition terms given to persons reorganized out of service, 262, 263;
  • premium on inefficiency, 264
• Absolute dismissal, Power of, in a public department would increase efficiency, 247-248
• Acland-Hood, Sir A., on election losses to supporters of Conservative Ministry, 9;
  • on loss of seats and votes, 242, 243
• Administration, Interference of Members of the House with, 132, 135, 139-140
• Administrative acts, How answers to questions about, are framed, 278
• Allshire, W. H., Pension asked for, by Mr. Crean, M. P., 314
• Ambrose, W., disgusted at civil service pressure, 145
• Ansell, C. J., Complaint by, 286
• Applications or communications, Post Office rule for making, 319-320
• Arnold, ——, promoted by merit, 280-281
• Association of Municipal Corporations controls Parliament more than capital, 392
• Australia, Offensive officials forced out of office in, 228;
  • promotion in, 289
• Auxiliary staff, Grievance of the, 155

• Badcock, J. C., before Tweedmouth Committee, 167-168, 296;
  • on redundant first class newspaper sorters in Post Office, 258-259;
  • on squeezing through, 280;
  • on promotion, 290;
  • on Roberts case, 309;
  • on Worth case, 312;
  • on the malingerers’ grievance, 357-358
• Balcarres, Lord D. L., on election pledges, 9;
  • on specific pledges, 242
• Balfour, A. J., Anxiety of, for the public service, 199-200
• Bartley, Sir G. C. T., intervened for one Canless dismissed as unfit, 313
• Baxter, W. E., on a six-hour day, 324-325;
  • on travelling expenses of county court judges, 354;
  • on pressure brought by Members of Parliament on Financial Secretary, 374-377
• Bayley, Thomas, asks for a Select Committee, 198;
  • motion lost, 201;
  • second motion of, 205;
  • on rights of the House, 211
• Beaufort, ——, postmaster at Manchester, Error of, in granting hours of work, 328
• Belgian State Telegraphs run at a loss, 22;
  • Rate Table, 23n
• Belgium, Percentage of personal and social messages in, 18;
  • number of offices in, 19;
  • figuring cost in, 20;
  • experience of, 21-24, 28;
  • Telegraph introduced in, by British company, 38;
  • Government of, appropriates the new industry, 38;
  • statistics, 42;
  • increased use in, 51;
  • telegrams to inhabitants, 53
• Betting on horse races subsidized, 124-126
• Birmingham, Extension of service in, 77-78
• Blackmail and blood-sucking methods employed, 232, 233, 383
• Blackwood, Sir S. A., recommends new newspaper tariff, 120-121;
  • answers questions on increase of salaries under Fawcett, 136-137;
  • on removal of inefficient employees, 250-251;
  • advice from, refused by Mr. Raikes, 275;
  • on trades union spirit among clerks, 302-303
• Booth, Charles, member of Bradford Committee, 213, 214
• Bortlewick, Sir A., on Parliamentary interposition, 144
• Boulden, Alfred, presented telegraphists’ grievances as to pensions, 356
• Bowles, Gibson, on pressure on members, 203
• Bradford, Sir Edward, Chairman of Bradford Committee, 213, 214
• Bradford Committee, Report, 214-225, 359;
  • question submitted to it, 214;
  • ignores its reference, 214-215;
  • reports its failure, 215;
  • ignored rules of procedure, 216;
  • declared comparison impossible, 216;
  • reported widespread discontent, 218, 221;
  • greater pressure of work, 219;
  • statements unsupported by evidence, 219;
  • recommended large increase of expenditure, 221;
  • not acceptable to Post Office workers, 221;
  • Lord Stanley on, 222-224;
  • rejected by Balfour Government, 225;
  • before the House, 233
• Bradlaugh, Charles, intervenes for promotion of eleven men passed over, 283-285, 296, 305
• Breakdown, Causes of, 217n
• Bribery, Personal, replaced by class, 246, 382
• British and Irish Magnetic Company reported shilling rate unremunerative, 33
• British and Irish Magnetic Telegraph Company formed, 39-40;
  • messages carried by, and receipts, 50-51;
  • Government purchase of, 58
• British Telegraph Company, 39-40
• British telegraphy, History of, 37-41
• Brodrick, Thomas, member of Bradford Committee, 213, 214
• Brown, R. H., Interference for, 296
• Burbridge, R., member of Bradford Committee, 213, 214
• Business methods not applicable in State service, 215, 222, 229-230
• Business ventures, State control of, an untenable doctrine, 378, 390-391
• Buxton, Sydney, moved a Select Committee on Post Office Servants, 241-242;
  • on case of T. Reilly, 308;
  • on number of applications by members of the Commons, 316

• Cable between Dover and Calais, 39
• Cameron, Dr. Charles of Glasgow, and rates for messages, 5;
  • resolution offered by, 105n;
  • remarks on, 105-107;
  • opposed, 107;
  • on increase of business without increase of cost, 107-108;
  • his resolution passed, 108;
  • increase of mileage and operators under, 108;
  • Bill to give effect to, and results, 108-110;
  • argument of, 380
• Campbell, John, Intervention by, to reopen case eight years old, 314
• Campbell-Bannerman, Sir Henry, on election pledges, 10, 242-243
• Capital, Very little new, invested after 1865, 40-41
• Capital invested, how raised, 89;
  • sums on which revenue would have paid interest, 90, 104
• Cavendish, Lord Frederick, debate on Fawcett revision of wages, 132;
  • letter on agitation in postal service for increased wages, 133-134
• Chamberlain, Joseph Austen, on promotions and concessions, 203-205;
  • would not throw responsibility on House of Commons, 206-207;
  • had personally considered all complaints made to him, 207;
  • petty grievances, 208-209;
  • members had asked him to protect them from pressure of employees, 209;
  • opposed to thrusting details on a Committee, 210;
  • proposed to get advice of business men on scale of wages of four classes, 210;
  • names the Bradford Committee, 213;
  • asks for a non-party vote, 234-236;
  • replies to Mr. Nannetti’s interventions, 293-294;
  • on decentralization of administration in Post Office, 318-320, 383-384;
  • rule for making applications, 319-320;
  • on wages of postmen at Newton Abbott, 329;
  • refuses to force retirements, 339;
  • on duties of secretaries of the Treasury, 361-362;
  • on pressure for expenditure, 368-369
• Chambers of Commerce, British, Demands of, for lower charges on telegraphic messages, 3-4, 81;
  • agitation by, for State purchase of telegraph properties, 13
• Chancellor of the Exchequer, Influence of, weakened, 364, 384-385
• Charges, lower, and better service, Promise of, 19;
  • irrespective of distance, 19
• Cheeseman, ——, dismissed for political activity, 183
• Childers, H. C. E., opposed reduction of charges for telegrams, 107
• Churchfield, Charles, Misrepresentations made by, 159-160;
  • on the Roberts case, 309-310
• Citizen, Upbuilding the character and intelligence of the individual, 12
• Civil Establishments, Royal Commission on, Testimony of Sir Charles Du Cane before, on dismissal of incompetent public employees, 249-250
• Civil servants, Problem of a large body of, in a Democracy, 3;
  • in revenue departments, enfranchised, 6, 96;
  • organized for political influence, 7;
  • culmination of demands of, on House of Commons, 8;
  • on efforts of, to secure exemption from business standards of efficiency and discipline, 10-11;
  • undue influence of in House of Commons, 11-12;
  • danger from increasing number of, not considered, 6, 94;
  • disfranchised in three departments, 94;
  • G. W. Hunt on, 96-97;
  • Mr. Gladstone on, 97-98;
  • circularize members of Parliament, 147;
  • warned by Postmaster General, 148;
  • right of appeal conceded to, 148;
  • campaign of education, 158-160;
  • positions as, sought and retained, 161-162;
  • Government compromises with, 163;
  • too much political pressure from, 177, 188-189;
  • disfranchisement of suggested, 178;
  • concessions to by Norfolk-Hanbury Committee, 180;
  • demand right to agitate, 183-187;
  • Commons the Court of Appeal for, 184-185, 205;
  • disfranchised at their own request, 185;
  • ask new judgment on old facts, 188;
  • have friends in the Commons, 190;
  • Commons reminded of their votes, 196;
  • pressure from, intolerable, 197, 203, 238-239;
  • hosts of non-economical demands granted to, 381;
  • political activities of, 382
• Civil Service should be kept out of politics, 234-236;
  • a Prime Minister on the, 237-238;
  • spirit of the, 323-359;
  • implied contract between the State and the, 324, 381
• Civil Service head of an office can alone influence expenses, 369;
  • not thanked for services, 369, 385, 386
• Civil Service pressure, The Treasury on, 132-134;
  • evidence as to in 1888, 137-140;
  • Earl Compton’s part in, 142-143, 145;
  • W. Ambrose disgusted at, 145
• Civil Service unions, Intervention of, in behalf of the individual, 245, 246;
  • opposed promotion by merit, 267-268;
  • active in election campaigns, 382;
  • more injurious to public interest than any combination of capital, 392
• Civil Services Expenditure, Select Committee on, 1873, Testimony of Sir Wm. H. Stephenson before, on dismissal of State servants, 247;
  • testimony given before, 373
• Claims of the telegraph companies, 72
• Class, R. W. Hanbury on a new social, 188
• Class bribery displacing personal, 246;
  • a result of public ownership, 378, 387, 391
• Class grievances, Spirit of trades unionism evoked for, 303
• Class influence in House of Commons the great reproach of the Reformed Parliament, 6-7, 97-98
• Class interests, The Commons the champion of, 366-368
• Class legislation to be avoided, 12
• Cleghorn, J., on power of the Treasury, 370-371
• Clerks, Lower division, Salaries of, 170n
• Clery, ——, dismissed for political activity, 183, 185;
  • on political pressure, 186
• Cochrane-Baillie, C. W. A. N., Query of, on press telegrams, 122
• Commission on Civil Establishments, The Royal, on pressure for increased wages, 137-140
• Committee of the Indoor Staff, Report of, the basis for the Raikes’ revision of wages, 41;
  • not approved by civil servants, 142-143
• Committee on Revenue Department Estimates, Questions of chairman of, on salary increase under Fawcett, 136-137
• Committee to ascertain profits of telegraph companies, 72
• Competition, Alleged wastefulness of, 53-54
• Compton, Earl W. G. S. S., a representative of Post Office employees, 142;
  • demands a Select Committee, 143, 145, 151;
  • intervened for a sorter reduced for cause, 314
• Consolidation of telegraph companies, Argument for, 54-55;
  • the companies’ proposal, 56
• Continuous counting of sporting messages, 125-126
• Cooke and Wheatstone’s inventions purchased, 38
• Cornwell, ——, Case of, 257
• Cost, No explanation of discrepancies between estimates and actual, 80
• Counter men, Risk allowance for, 349
• Crompton episode, The, 291-292
• Crosse, F. T., complains against promotion by merit, 284-285;
  • on retention of pensioners in service, 340
• Customs Revenue Department, Complaints about promotion in, 288n

• Danish Government reports on users of telegraph, 17
• Davies, H. A., on right to fixed rate of promotion, 335-336
• Davis, R. H., on action of Post Office authorities, 228
• Davis, R. S., announces concessions made by Postmaster General, 10
• Day, Implied contract for six hour, 324-328;
  • W. E. Baxter on, 324-325;
  • Sir R. E. Welby on, 335-326;
  • H. H. Fowler on, 326;
  • Sir T. H. Farrer on, 327-328
• Decentralization of administration, Necessity of, in Post Office, 318-320, 383
• Depreciation of plant, Cost of, 79
• Discipline, Proper, should be preserved, 149;
  • typical cases of enforced leniency in, 306-318
• Discontent in Postal and Telegraph Service, 150-151, 158;
  • emphasized by A. K. Rollit, 174-176;
  • widespread, 218;
  • premium on, 222
• Disfranchisement of civil servants suggested, 178
• Disraeli, Benjamin, on civil servants, 95-96, 184
• Disraeli Ministry, Concessions of the, 4;
  • made inadequate investigation of cost of nationalization, 57-58;
  • replaced by the Gladstone Ministry, 73;
  • protest of, against enfranchising civil servants in revenue departments, 6, 95-96
• Dobbie, Joseph, intervenes against dual duty at Glasgow, 347-348
• Dockyard laborers not disfranchised, 96
• Dual duty men, 285-286
• Du Cane, Sir Charles, on getting rid of incompetent public employees, 249-250;
  • on promotion by merit in the Customs, 273
• Duplex telegraphy, 93

• Eastern Telegraph Cable Company, Work required by, 169
• Economist, The, on nationalization, 61;
  • on Bradford Committee Report, 216
• Economy, Parliament has never an influence for, in expenditure for education, 320;
  • change of public opinion toward, 364-365;
  • a voice in defence of, wanted, 367-368, 373
• Edinburgh, Extension of service in, 78
• Edinburgh Chamber of Commerce leads in demand for lower charges, 3, 5, 81
• Electoral disabilities, Acts for relief of, 184n
• Electric and International Telegraph Company, Rates, 29-30n;
  • organized, 38;
  • first dividend declared, 39;
  • growth of, and prices of stock190;
  • paid ten per cent., 41;
  • messages carried by, and receipts, 50;
  • Government purchase of, 58;
  • earnings of the, 60, 74, 85;
  • shares of, did not rise, 70
• Electric light, Spread of the, hampered, 389
• English companies, Experience of, 29-35
• Equality, Mechanical, demanded, 341;
  • not opportunity, 343
• Examination of first class telegraphists for promotion, 330-331
• Executive ability, Deplorable waste of, by intervention, 318-319, 383-384
• Executive’s power of dismissal, Curtailment of, 245-266;
  • power of promotion curtailed, 267-301
• Expense, Enormous increase of, 146, 151, 160-161, 180, 200
• Expenses, operating, Cost of, to State, 49;
  • estimated cost of, 84-85;
  • under-estimated by one-half, 88-89;
  • proportion of, to gross revenue, 89n;
  • augmented, 103;
  • average per telegram, 103n;
  • increase through raise in wages, 105
• Extension of telegraph service, 77-80;
  • estimated cost of, 49;
  • estimated vs. actual expenditure for, 78-79;
  • effect of, unremunerative, 99

• Farrer, Sir T. H., on real difficulty of public service in getting rid of bad men, 253-255, 256;
  • declared promotion by routine the real evil, 271;
  • put proper men at the top, 272;
  • on a six or seven hour day, 327-328
• Fawcett, Henry, increased pay of telegraph operators, 131;
  • on increased salaries of telegraph employees, 135-136;
  • horror of passing over any one, 279, 306;
  • created class of telegraph clerks, 328;
  • class of senior telegraphists, 329
• Fawcett Association, Pledge contained in circular issued by the, 148n
• Fawcett Revision of wages, 1881, 131, 137, 152;
  • increased expenditures from, 160-161
• Fay, Samuel, member of Bradford Committee, 213, 214
• Feasey, E. C., Intervention for, by J. Ward, 316-317
• Fergusson, Sir James, on political circulars issued by civil servants, 147-148;
  • issues a warning, 148;
  • on proper discipline, 149;
  • on conditions in the Civil Service, 163;
  • on employees taking part in politics, 183-184
• Financial failure of State telegraphs, Reasons for, 99, 103-110
• Financial Secretary, Duties of the, 361, 363
• Fischer, H. C., before Tweedmouth Committee, 167-168, 169-170;
  • on examination of telegraphists, 330-331;
  • on optional retirement at fifty, 356
• Fisher, Hayes, on public expenditure, 365
• Foreign experience in State operation, 17;
  • summary, 28
• Foreign messages profitable in Belgium, 22;
  • in Switzerland, 24
• Foreman, B. J., Pension asked for, by L. Sinclair, 314
• Foster, M. H., on claims for reversionary rights, 70-71
• Fowler, Sir H. H., on the tone in the House, 278;
  • protests against Postmaster General sitting in House of Lords, 304;
  • on a six or seven hour day, 326
• Fowler, W., on contingent liabilities, 75, 76
• France, Government of, appropriates the telegraph, 38;
  • increased use in, 51
• France, Percentage of personal and social messages in, 18;
  • number of offices in, 19, 20
• Freehold of provision for life, Employee of the State has, 247, 380
• French experience, 26, 28
• French State telegraphs run at loss, 26

• Garland, C. H., on service rendered by T. Bayley, 228
• Giffen, Robert, on pensions to men reorganized out of service, 264
• Gladstone, W. E., on class influence in House of Commons, 6-7, 97-98;
  • on securing pledges from candidates, 149;
  • rescinds Fergusson’s warning, 150;
  • tribute of, to Joseph Hume, 371-374
• Gladstone Ministry, 73
• Glasgow, Extension of service in, 78
• Glasgow postmaster’s mistake, 269-270
• Godley, Sir A., member of Tweedmouth Committee, 163, 165
• Goldsmid, J., on overmanning offices, 371
• Gorst, Sir John Eldon, on expenditure of public money on education, 320;
  • on mismanagement arising from intervention of House of Commons, 322;
  • on power of Treasury to make inquiries not exercised, 369;
  • on efficiency in business and government offices, 370, 385-386
• Goschen, G. J., on the evidence before Select Committee, 65-66;
  • on reversionary rights of the railways, 66-67;
  • questioned Mr. Scudamore on his estimates, 86-87
• Government, The problem of, and its solution, 12
• Government, The, ignorant of relations between telegraph companies and railways, 57-58;
  • obliged to purchase reversionary rights, 64;
  • should have resisted demands of railways, 69;
  • its estimate of total sum, 72.
• Government clerks, Scale of wages for, recommended by Playfair Commission, 130
• Governments, The visible helplessness of, 359
• Gower, G. G. Leveson, Questions of, on promotion, 269
• Graves, Edward, on promotion for ability, 270
• Green, James, on cases of Richardson and Walker, 290-291
• Grievance, Abolition of a, in turn a grievance, 342
• Grievances, Typical, 306-318
• Grimston, Robert, on consolidation of telegraph companies, 54-55
• Groves, J. G., Intervention by, 315
• Guarantees required for new telegraph offices, 99, 100-101;
  • check on log-rolling, 101;
  • agitation for reduction of, 102-103

• Hamilton, Sir Edward, on support of Treasury in House of Commons, 368
• Hanbury, R. W., on penny postage, 124;
  • to Postmaster General, 172-173;
  • on political pressure, 176-179;
  • cost of concessions, 180;
  • on political influence and pressure, 184-187, 382;
  • on Steadman’s motion, 187-189;
  • on wages of employees, 192;
  • opposed new Committee, 193, 197;
  • denounces Civil Service pressure as intolerable, 197;
  • on “soft heartedness” on the part of heads of departments, 253;
  • on framing answers to questions from members, 278;
  • would represent Postmaster General in House of Commons only conditionally, 304
• Harcourt, Sir W., on Post Office employees, 238-239
• Hardie, J. Keir, on concessions of Tweedmouth Committee, 202-203;
  • intervention by, 299-300, 314;
  • for specific retirements, 339
• Harley, H., offers telegraphers chance to learn postal work, 344-345
• Harrison, ——, Case of, 159
• Hartington, Marquis of, presents a Bill for purchase money, 73;
  • on the bargain, 73-74, 76;
  • erroneous estimates of, 73, 79, 80-81, 87n
• Harvey, A. S., on probationary period of service, 260;
  • on trades union spirit, 302
• Hay, C. G. D., Intervention by, for telegraphists, 337-338
• Heaton, J. H., on political patronage, 237-240;
  • censured by constituents, 240
• Hegnett, ——, promoted by merit. Interference in case of, 284
• Helsby, ——, promoted by merit. Interference in case of, 284
• Henderson, A., intervened for one Chandler, 348
• Hill, E. B. L., Testimony before Tweedmouth Committee, 137;
  • against and for amalgamation of telegraphers into one class, 343
• Hill, Lewin, on yielding to Civil Service pressure, 142;
  • on increased expenditures, 160n;
  • on Civil Service positions, 162n;
  • no service like the public service, 166-167;
  • recommendation to Tweedmouth Committee, 167;
  • on comparison of postmen with other classes of employment, 257-258;
  • on messenger boys in Post Office Department, 261
• Hobhouse, C. E. H., Intervention by, 300
• Hobson, Mr., postmaster at Glasgow, obliged to promote by seniority, 269;
  • mistake of, 270
• Holidays, Tweedmouth Committee on, 350;
  • Sir R. E. Welby on, 351;
  • news distributors’ complaint about, 352-353
• Horse races, Betting on, subsidized, 124-26
• House of Commons, Intervention of members of, on behalf of public servants, 10-11;
  • the Court of Appeal for civil servants, 184-185, 205, 382;
  • reminded of civil servants’ votes, 196;
  • omnipotent, 199;
  • responsibility resting on, 200;
  • members of coerced, 203;
  • asked to purchase votes, 232;
  • thirty threatened with loss of seats, 239-240;
  • majority of members pledged, 241;
  • under pressure from the Civil Service unions, curtails Executive’s power to dismiss incompetent and redundant employees, 245-266;
  • intervention of on behalf of individuals through Civil Service unions, 246;
  • is master of public departments, 252-253;
  • pressure of members on heads of departments, 253-255;
  • the tone in the, 277;
  • stimulus of a question in the, 286;
  • stands for extravagance, 360-377;
  • the champion of class interests, 366;
  • debates in, weaken hands of Treasury, 368, 384;
  • constant pressure from, on Financial Secretary for class interests, 373-377
• Hume, Joseph, W. E. Gladstone’s tribute to, as a defender of economy in expenditure, 371-374
• Hunt, G. W., calls Mr. Scudamore author of Bill to acquire telegraphs, 14;
  • on uses of telegraph, 17;
  • on estimated cost of and revenue from the telegraphs, 58;
  • on the terms of purchase, 63;
  • on purchase of reversionary rights, 64;
  • on civil servants, 96-97

• Incompetents, Difficulty of removing, 247-257, 259;
  • reorganized out of service on pensions, 262-263;
  • cost of pensions to, 263;
  • juniors doing work of, 270
• Indictment against telegraph companies, 15
• Individual grievances, Interference for, 303
• Industry, A ready-made, acquired, 5
• Inland messages, Loss on, in Belgium, 21-22;
  • in Switzerland, 24-26
• Inland telegrams, Low rates on, 21;
  • losses incurred by, 22
• Inland traffic, Attempt to develop in Belgium, 21-22;
  • in Switzerland, 25
• Inquiry, Scope of the, 3-12
• Inspection of education, 320-322
• Inspectors, Educational, Difficulties of, 321-322
• Inter-Departmental Committee on Post Office Establishments named, 163-164
• Intervention through House of Commons on behalf of individuals, 245-247, 251;
  • in matters of promotion, 267-268;
  • by Members an obvious difficulty, 274;
  • types of, 294-296;
  • on behalf of individual employees, how managed, 304-335;
  • special cases of, by members of House of Commons, 293-301, 313-318;
  • number of, 316;
  • waste of executive ability from, 318-319;
  • mismanagement arising from, 322
• Irons, H. B., complains of prospects for promotion, 333
• Isle of Man cable bought, 81

• Jackson, ——, of Kilkenny, Interference for, 298
• Jersey and Guernsey cable bought, 81
• Jevons, W. S., on the increased use of telegraphs, 52;
  • on cost of extension, 79;
  • disillusionment of, 93, 390
• Jobbery not the great evil of the service, 271
• Johnson, H., Interference for, 296
• Jones, W., intervenes for telegraph clerks at Oxford, 346-347;
  • Lord Stanley’s reply to, 347
• Joyce, H., on promotions for merit over men not qualified, 279-281;
  • on case of Robinson, 281-282;
  • on Wykes case, 283;
  • on the Bradlaugh episode, 285;
  • on the Webster case, 307
• Joyce, Michael, Intervention by, 296-297
• Judges, County Court, Travelling expenses of, 354

• Kearley, H. E., demands a Select Committee, 151-154;
  • declares promotion of telegraphists blocked, 153;
  • statement of, declared misleading by Mr. Morley, 154-155;
  • grievances of the auxiliary staff, 155
• Kensington, ——, Case of, 290
• Kerry, C. H., before Tweedmouth Committee, 168;
  • on wages and speed of telegraphists, 168-169
• Knox, Sir Ralph H., on extravagance in House of Commons, 366-368;
  • defenders of economy needed, 371

• Lacon, telegraphist at Birmingham, Case of, 195-196
• Laissez-faire, 12;
  • Alleged breakdown of, 36-56;
  • a better policy for the public interest than State intervention, 391
• Lawson, H. L. W., on interference of members of Parliament in dismissals from service, 252;
  • on spirit of trades unionism among clerks, 303-304;
  • interventions by, 313;
  • for telegraphists, 336-337
• Learners, Promotion of, 291
• Leeds, Extension of service in, 77-78
• Leeman, G., cross-questions Mr. Scudamore, 65-66n, 68n, 92;
  • on Mr. Scudamore’s estimates of cost of reversionary rights of railways, 68-69, 76
• Letter sorters, Scale of wages for, 349-350
• Letter sent, Scudamore’s misleading comparison of telegrams with, 52-53
• Liberal Party supported demands of civil servants, 8-9
• Lickfold, J. R., on medical certificates, 356-358
• Lingen, Lord R. R. W., on difficulties in public departments due to triennial change of Government, 256-257;
  • on trouble to secure efficiency, 272
• Log-rolling by members of House of Commons, 10-11
• London and Provincial Telegraph Company, 40;
  • rates charged by, 40;
  • Government purchase of, 58
• London Central Telegraph Office, Employees not drawn from, 169-170
• London District Telegraph Company unsuccessful as result of low rates charged, 33-35;
  • rate table, 34n;
  • notice of, 40
• London local telegraph system enlarged, 77
• London Trades Council, Complaints from, 159
• Lowe, Robert, on the immense price paid, 74-75;
  • division of the service under, 271

• McDonald, G., on grievances of news distributors, 355
• Macdonald, J. A. M., questions Mr. Gladstone on Civil Service pressure, 149;
  • demands a Select Committee, 150;
  • motion for, lost, 151
• M’Dougall, ——, promoted by merit, 283-284
• MacIver, David, on complaints of telegraphists, 131-132
• Maddison, F., on a non-official committee, 191
• Magnetic Telegraph Company, 39-40
• Malingerers’ grievance, J. R. Lickfold on the, 357;
  • J. C. Badcock on, 357-358;
  • S. Walpole to witness on, 358
• Manchester, Extension of service in, 78
• Manners, Lord John, on Glasgow postmasters’ mistake, 269-270
• Mears, ——, Case of, 160
• Member of Parliament, Should interference of, in behalf of public employee, lead to dismissal? 248;
  • influence of, may annul power of dismissal in public departments, 251
• Members of House of Commons intervene in cases of discipline, 302-322
• Members of Parliament and the rank and file, 303
• Mercer, ——, Interference for, 297
• Merchants, General, used telegraphs little, 16
• Messages, Annual increase in, 16;
  • relating to personal affairs an important part of traffic 17-18;
  • annual increase of, in United Kingdom, 51;
  • Mr. Scudamore’s estimated increase of, 83-84;
  • fully realized 87;
  • traffic of, 104;
  • increase in number of, 110, 111;
  • sent to individual newspapers, 122n;
  • annual loss on newspaper, 119-120, 122, 123;
  • delivered to newspapers, 124n;
  • remained nearly stationary, 153n;
  • increase of, 181
• Mileage of telegraph lines in United Kingdom, 43-44, 45n;
  • of extension, 80, 81n;
  • increase of, through reduction of tariff, 108
• Mitford, F., Power of dismissal in public departments may be annulled by pressure from individual members of Parliament, 251
• Money order issuing Post Office, A telegraph office promised at every, 20
• Money order post offices and telegraph facilities compared, 48
• Monk, Charles James, introduced and carried Bill to enfranchise revenue officers, 6, 96;
  • Mr. Gladstone on the Bill, 6-7
• Morgan, ——, Case of, 290
• Morley, Arnold, Postmaster General, 149;
  • on a Select Committee, 150-151;
  • reply to Mr. Kearley on promotions, 154-155, 157-158;
  • on civil service positions, 161-162;
  • on make up of Select Committee, 162-163;
  • on the Post Office for revenue, 166;
  • Lords Commissioners of the Treasury to, 172-173;
  • on passing over men not qualified, 279, 306
• Mowatt, Sir F., member of Tweedmouth Committee, 163, 165, 177
• Municipalities and National Government as violators of permanent interests of the people, 391-392
• Murphy, Dennis, Interference for, 297
• Murray, Sir George H., on change in attitude of House of Commons on expenditures, 366, 385

• Nannetti, J. P., questions promotion of two female telegraphists, 293-295;
  • interventions by, 295, 297, 317
• National Expenditure, Select Committee on, Evidence before in 1892, on intervention of House of Commons in Departments of State, 363
• National Joint Committee of the Postal Association, Resolution of, against the Bradford Committee, 212
• National Telephone Company, Obstacles to development by, 388-389
• National Union of Teachers, brings influence against inspectors, 321
• Nationalization of the telegraphs, 4;
  • Scotch as leaders in, 5, 13;
  • argument for, 13-35;
  • has increased the use of telegraphs, 390
• Newnes, Sir G., Intervention by, 298
• News distributors complain about Saturday holiday, 352-353;
  • other grievances laid before Tweedmouth Committee, 355-356
• Newspaper sorters, No work for first class, since 1886, 258-259
• Newspapers, Subscription charges to, for press bureau, 113-115;
  • favored nationalization, 115;
  • maximum rate demanded by, 116;
  • yielded by Scudamore, 117;
  • report of Committee on, 118-119;
  • loss on service to, 119-120, 122, 123;
  • messages delivered to, 124n;
  • given an unprofitable tariff, 379
• Nicholson, A. S., on grievances of telegraphists, 334-335
• Non-paying telegraph offices, Guarantees required for, 99, 100-101;
  • misleading tables regarding, 101-102
• Norfolk-Hanbury Committee recommended further concessions, 179-180;
  • work done by, 197;
  • did not give satisfaction, 218;
  • increased expenses from, 221
• Norfolk-Hanbury compromise, 359
• North, A. W., Grievance of, as to female telegraphist, 356
• North, Lord Frederick, ordered civil servants to support the Government, 185
• Northcote, Sir Stafford, Disillusionment of, 100
• Norton, Capt. C. W., an aggressive champion of civil servants, 11;
  • on technical examination of telegraphists, 190;
  • moves a reduction in expenses, 201;
  • charges Government with breach of faith, 201-202;
  • motion lost, 205;
  • on rights of postal servants as voters, 211-212;
  • moved reduction of Post Office Vote, 233;
  • on Civil Service agitation, 233-234;
  • motion lost, 236;
  • vote, 236n;
  • made a Junior Lord of the Treasury, 237;
  • intervention by, 296;
  • for senior telegraphists, 338, 339

• O’Brien, P., Intervention by, 297-298;
  • for retirements, 339
• O’Connor, James, Intervention by, 353
• Official documents, List of, used as authorities, 14n
• Operators, Increase in number of, to meet reduction of tariff, 108
• Overseers in postal service, Relief from duty of, 352
• Oxford telegraph clerks secure intervention against dual duty, 346-347

• Palmer, G. W., intervened for learners punished for carelessness, 315
• Parliament warned against Government’s estimates, 65-69, 76;
  • enacted Purchase Bill, 72;
  • responsible for telegraph deficits, 91-92;
  • reduced tariff on telegrams, 91;
  • not competent to judge, 188-189;
  • has never an influence for economy, 320.
  • See also House of Commons
• Parliamentary committees, Titles of reports of, 14n
• Parliamentary Secretary, Duties of the, 361-362
• Parties, Both political, committed to nationalization, 4
• Party, Neither, in open alliance with civil servants, 7
• Patey, C. H. B., on guaranteed offices, 102;
  • on operating expenses, 103;
  • on loss for newspaper service, 119-120, 122;
  • on telegraph flimsy, 121-122
• Penny postage precedent, cited by Mr. Scudamore, 82-83;
  • profit from, 124, 220
• Pensioners, Retired, recalled to service, 340;
  • protest against before Tweedmouth Committee, 340
• Pension system no remedy for getting rid of incompetents, 256
• Pensions, State’s system of, contrasted with system of London and North Western Railway, 264
• Pensions to the incompetent, Cost of, 263
• Permanent Secretary, Duties of the, 363
• Personal bribery replaced by class bribery, 246
• Playfair, Sir Lyon, Testimony of, before Royal Commission on Civil Establishments, 139-140;
  • on infrequency of promotion by merit, 274;
  • on writers, 353-354
• Playfair Commission, Scale of wages for government clerks recommended by, 130
• Pledge contained in circular issued by the Fawcett Association, 148n
• Plummer, Sir W. R., intervenes for retirements, 338-339
• Political influence, Effect of, on Post Office administration, 305-306
• Political pressure not all in one direction, 138;
  • too much from civil servants, 178, 231-233, 234-235
• Politics forces the Government’s hand, 58-59
• Post Office, The, a revenue department, 166;
  • denied by A. K. Rollit, 174;
  • technical work of the, 188;
  • no part of its duty to make a profit, 205;
  • net revenue from, 220;
  • expenses increased, 221
• Post Office Department, Complaint of stagnation of promotion in, 152;
  • Tweedmouth Committee on, 171;
  • apparent net profits of, 227n;
  • compelled to deal leniently with violators of rules, 306-320
• Post Office employees denied by the Conservative Ministry a Select Committee on their pay and position, 8;
  • vote with Liberals, 9;
  • and secure the Committee, 9;
  • press House of Commons for increase of wages and salaries, 127-164;
  • Circular of, objected to by Lord Stanley, 223
• Post Office officials can only recommend for promotion, 276
• Post Office Servants, Select Committee on, 359
• Postal clerks and telegraphists, Comparative chances for promotion of, 344-345;
  • Bradford Committee on, 348
• Postal servants, Are, fairly paid, 217;
  • expenditure demands of, called for, 221;
  • not satisfied with Bradford Committees’ recommendations, 221, 229;
  • demands were “blackmail” and “blood-sucking,” 231-232, 233;
  • largely in hands of agitators, 238-240;
  • and the general election of 1906, 240-241
• Postal Telegraph Clerks’ Association, a powerful political organization, 9;
  • concessions granted to, 10;
  • demands adoption of the Bradford Committee Report, 226-227;
  • meetings of, 228-229, 241
• Postal telegraph offices, Increase of, 101;
  • misleading tables regarding, 102-103
• Postmaster General, Concessions made by, 10;
  • and the party following, 277;
  • limitations of power of, to promote or to remove, 286-287;
  • interviewed first in cases of intervention by a member of Parliament, 304
• Postmasters general, Anxieties of, regarding promotions, 279, 280, 306
• Postmasters, Demands of, from Tweedmouth Committee, 288;
  • salaries of, and volume of business, 288
• Postmen, W. C. Steadman on grievances of the, 194-195;
  • Thos. Bayley asks for a Committee on, 198
• Postmen, London, Abolition of classification of, 341-242
• Preece, W. H., on ignorance of telegraphers, 157;
  • offers increased pay for technical knowledge, 270
• Press Bureau maintained by telegraph companies, 113;
  • charges for service, 113-115
• Press hampers heads of departments in matter of promotions, 268
• Price, R. J., sought to intervene in House in a case of promotion, 280
• Private enterprise, Adequate results of, 41-42
• Private enterprise in telegraphy broken down, 36, 37;
  • Mr. Scudamore’s arguments to prove, 45;
  • his errors show his failure, 49
• Probationers, Difficult to dismiss, 260
• Problem of government, The, and its solution, 12
• Promotion, Employees claim a vested right to, 153;
  • misleading table of, 154, 158;
  • Tweedmouth Committee, on, 170-172;
  • Bradford Committee on, 230;
  • E. Graves on preference for, 270;
  • by routine the real evil, 27, 274;
  • tact and honesty needed in, 272;
  • selection of officers for, an invidious task, 306;
  • right to fix rate of, claimed, 335-336
• Promotion by merit hardly takes place, 274;
  • recommended by the Royal Commission, 275;
  • regulations for, 276n;
  • political element in, 277;
  • anxieties of postmasters general regarding, 279;
  • cases of, cited, 279-285;
  • opposed by rank and file, 289;
  • complaints against, 289-301
• Promotion by seniority the great evil, 274;
  • demand for, widely established, 381
• Promotions revoked through pressure from members, 283;
  • secured for men reported as “not qualified” by influence of C. Bradlaugh, 283-285
• Prussia, Effect of reduced rates on increase of messages in, 17, 18
• Public interest promoted by activities of speculator and dividend seeker, 37
• Public opinion, Change of, in matters of public expenditure, 363-366;
  • no body of intelligent and disinterested, 391
• Public ownership a parasite, 37
• Public service, British, an attractive haven of refuge, 10-11;
  • no service like the, 166-167, 229;
  • three distinguishing features of the, 186-187;
  • Prime Minister Balfour’s anxiety for the, 199-200;
  • future of the, in peril, 199;
  • reduced to a dull level of mediocrity, 268
• “Public Service” messages, Allowance for value of, 26-27
• Purchase by the State, Threat of, arrested extensions, 41
• Purchase of the telegraphs, 57-76;
  • Bill introduced for, 57;
  • estimated price, 58;
  • provisions of Bill, 59;
  • the Economist on, 61;
  • Scudamore on the terms of, 62;
  • Hunt on, 63;
  • amount asked for, 73;
  • Robert Lowe on government monopoly, 74-75
• Purchase price of telegraphs estimated, 58, 63;
  • of reversionary rights of railways, 64

• Raikes, H. C., scheme of increased wages for telegraph employees, 140-141;
  • rebukes the House for interference, 144;
  • on the management of his Department, 145-147;
  • on personal attention of Postmaster General given to cases of dismissal, 257;
  • explains a case of promotion by seniority, 275-276, 306
• Raikes’ Revision of wages and salaries, 1890-91, 140-147, 152;
  • increased expenditures from, 160-161
• Railway companies, M. H. Foster’s views on reversionary rights of, 70-71;
  • Government’s proposition to, 71;
  • cost of the reversionary rights, 75-76;
  • wires released to, 78
• Railways, Reversionary rights of the, in the telegraphs, 57;
  • purchase of the, necessary, 64;
  • Mr. Goschen on, 66-67;
  • Mr. Scudamore’s estimates for, erroneous, 68-69;
  • leases of way-leaves, 69-70
• Rates for messages, Control of, lost by the Government, 5, 91, 92;
  • effect of reduction of, on increase of telegrams, 18;
  • charged by British companies, 19;
  • irrespective of distance, not remunerative, 28, 31-35;
  • Mr. Scudamore’s forecasts on, 83-84
• Reformed Parliament, Class influence the great reproach of the, 6-7, 97-98
• Reilly, Thomas, Case of, 308
• Reorganization out of service, 262-266
• Representation of the People Bill, 94
• Reuter’s Telegram Company, Property of, purchased, 73
• Revenue, Estimated gross, 84;
  • net, 86;
  • proved appalling blunders, 87;
  • receipts, 88-89;
  • and interest on capital, 90-91n;
  • net from messages, 104;
  • large loss in, 109-110, 111;
  • a diminished balance of, and increased expense, 146-147, 181
• Revenue Department Estimates, Select Committee on, Report on deficit in Telegraph Department, 110-111
• Revenue officers, Enfranchisement of proposed, 94;
  • opposed by Disraeli, 95;
  • carried by Mr. Monk, 96;
  • G. W. Hunt on, 96-97;
  • favored by Gladstone, 97, 184
• Reversionary rights of railway companies, 69-70;
  • sum paid for, 75;
  • estimate of, and cost, 76
• Richardson, ——, Case of, 290-291
• Right, The Sole, to transmit messages by electricity acquired by the Government, 5
• Roberts, ——, auxiliary postman, Case of, 308-309
• Robinson, postman at Liverpool, appointed inspector, 281;
  • case cited as a grievance to Tweedmouth Committee, 282
• Rockingham, Marquis of, disfranchised revenue servants at their own request, 184, 185
• Rollitt, Sir Albert K., on demands of telegraphists, 155;
  • on examinations for promotion, 156;
  • moved reduction of salary of Post Master General, 173;
  • endorses complaints, 174-176;
  • demands a Committee of business men, 176;
  • withdrew amendment, 179;
  • reminds Commons of civil servants’ votes, 196;
  • charges breach of contract, 202;
  • record of, 224;
  • supported Norton’s motion, 234
• Ronalds, Mr., attempts to interest British Government in telegraphy, 37
• Rothschild, Baron F. de, on civil servants, 143
• Royal Commission of 1888 declared promotion by seniority the great evil, 274
• Rutherford, W. W., a merchant in politics, 227

• Salary, see Wages
• Salisbury Government succeeded by the Gladstone, 149
• Samuel, H., intervenes for telegraph clerks at Oxford, 346
• Saunders, Mr., on gratuitous sporting messages, 124-125
• Schackleton, D. J., Intervention by, 353
• School Board of London, Influence of, 321
• Schwann, C. E., Intervention by, 298-299
• Scudamore, F. I., commissioned to report on private and State telegraphs, 4, 13;
  • report of, 14-22;
  • reports based on incomplete returns, 42-45;
  • errors in his figures, 44-45, 79, 80;
  • standards of service, 45-48;
  • errors of estimate of cost of extension and operation, 49;
  • misleading comparison of telegrams with letters, 52-53;
  • failure of his evidence, 54;
  • argued for State monopoly, 55-56;
  • previously opposed the same, 56n;
  • on a Post Office system of telegraphs, 61-62;
  • on the terms of purchase, 62;
  • estimated cost, 63, 64;
  • cross-examination of, 65-66n, 68n;
  • ignorant of relations between telegraph and railway companies, 68;
  • report on reorganization of telegraphs, 78n;
  • estimate of revenue, 63, 81-82;
  • influence over two ministries, 81;
  • argues from penny postage, 82;
  • revenue forecasts, 83-87;
  • increase of messages, 84;
  • gross revenue, 84;
  • working expenses, 84-85;
  • stood by his estimates, 86-87;
  • revenue predictions of, appalling blunders, 87;
  • responsible for, 92;
  • to committee of newspaper proprietors, 115-116;
  • yields to newspaper demand, 117
• Select Committee on Post Office Servants, Composition of, and reference to, 243;
  • asks for reappointment, 244
• Service, Mr. Scudamore’s standards of, 45-48
• Service, Change in conditions of, resisted, 351-353
• Shares, Proposed way of selling, 56
• Shaw-Lefevre, G. J., on the reduction of the tariff on telegrams, 108-110
• Shehan, D. D., Intervention by, 297
• Shephard, J., Complaints of, before Tweedmouth Committee, 289-290, 295-296
• Sloan, T. H., Intervention by, 300-301, 313
• Smith, J. S., on the Webster case, 307;
  • on Woodhouse case, 310-311
• Smith, Llewellyn, member of Tweedmouth Committee, 164, 165, 177
• Smith, W. H., on the purchase of the telegraphs, 60
• Smyth, Thomas, Intervention of, for Thomas Reilly, 308
• Sorters of foreign letters, Option of vested interest for, 332-333;
  • complaint from second class, 333
• Speculator and dividend seeker, The mere, 37
• Split duties, Complaint about, 155
• Sporting messages sent gratuitously, 125;
  • to so-called hotels, 126
• Staff appointments the salt of the Service, 271n
• Staff of men highly trained in the school of competition, 5
• Stanley (of Alderly), Lord E. J. S., ordered report on Post Office Telegraph Service, 13;
  • on Bradford Committee’s Report, 222-224, 229-230;
  • would not receive circulars from members of House, 223;
  • cost of recommendations, 224, 230;
  • made own investigation and granted increased pay, 225, 230;
  • would bear responsibility, 233;
  • congratulated on his retirement, 244;
  • on promotion for merit, 301;
  • on dual duty, 347
• Stansfeld, James, on difference between public and private establishment, 248-249
• State, Result of extending the functions of the, 12
• State employment means life employment, 247
• Statistics of telegraph lines and facilities, 42-45
• Steadman, W. C., demands a Select Committee on causes of complaint, 187;
  • motion lost, 189;
  • moved reduction of Postmaster General’s salary, 189;
  • lost, 193;
  • third demand, 193;
  • lost, 198;
  • cites special cases of grievance, 195-196;
  • on this question business, 315-316
• Stephenson, Sir Wm. H., on dismissal of State servants, 247-248;
  • on cost of pensions of incompetents, 263;
  • on promotions, 268
• Superannuation Act, Committee on operation of, 262
• Swiss experience, 24-26, 28
• Switzerland, Reports on users of telegraph in, 17;
  • effect of reduction of rates, 18;
  • telegraph introduced in, 38;
  • appropriated by the Government, 38;
  • statistics, 42;
  • increased use in, 51;
  • telegrams to inhabitants in, 53

• Table of ages and wages of provincial telegraphists, 141n
• Tariff on telegrams reduced, 91, 92;
  • cut almost in two, 109;
  • Government should have resisted vote to cut in two, 379
• Tariffs and growth of traffic, 50-53
• Taylor, postman of Sterling, Case of, 195
• Telegrams, Proportion of, to letters sent, 18;
  • tariff on, reduced by House of Commons, 91, 92;
  • cut almost in two, 109
• Telegraph of no use in times of peace, 37
• Telegraph clerks, Lack of knowledge of technics by, 270-271;
  • demanded reduction of hours, 328;
  • intervention for at Halifax, 348
• Telegraph companies, Indictment of, 15;
  • proposal of the, 56;
  • unpopular, 61;
  • sums to be paid to, 72n
• Telegraph deficit, Aggregate, 90;
  • Parliament responsible for, 91-92
• Telegraph Department, Report on deficits in, with statistics, 110-111, 181;
  • not earning operating expenses, 220
• Telegraph employees, Good-will of, purchased out of public purse, 380
• Telegraph lines, Cost of rearranging and extending, 45, 49;
  • estimated, 58
• Telegraph messages, and revenue from, 104-5, 111n
• Telegraph offices in United Kingdom, 19;
  • non-paying, 102n
• Telegraph service, Extension of, 77-80;
  • actual cost, 78
• Telegraph stations, Number of, in 1865, 44;
  • distances from Post Office, 47;
  • open to the public, 81n;
  • number of increased, 104
• Telegraph systems of United Kingdom and those of Belgium and Switzerland, Distinction between, 36;
  • comparative use of, 51-52
• Telegraphists, Average weekly wages paid to, by companies, 127-128;
  • wages increased after transfer to Post Office, 129;
  • Lord Cavendish on organized agitation by, 133-134;
  • table of ages and wages of, 141n;
  • Earl Compton on grievances of the, 143;
  • cost of concessions to, 145, 172;
  • promotion of, blocked, 153-154;
  • demand of, 155-156;
  • neglected to improve themselves, 157;
  • false statements by, 158-160;
  • C. H. Kerry on work required of, 168-169;
  • maximum salary of, raised, 170-172;
  • complaints of, endorsed by A. K. Rollit, 174-176;
  • threaten to strike, 174;
  • concessions to, 180;
  • grievance of examination, 190;
  • charge of breach of contract, 194, 201-202;
  • senior, promoted from first class, 329;
  • by examination, 330-331;
  • first class complained of grievance, 331, 333;
  • increase in promotions, 334;
  • complaint, 334-335;
  • intervention for second class by H. L. W. Lawson, 336-337;
  • Capt. Norton intervenes for, 338;
  • demand amalgamation into a single class, 342-343;
  • reject opportunities and demand more pay, 344-345;
  • seek intervention to prevent transfer as sorters, 346-348;
  • grievances as to pensions, 356
• Telegraphs, Purchase of the, 3, 57-76;
  • high price paid, 4-5;
  • estimated cost and revenue, 58;
  • terms of the purchase, 59-60;
  • Scudamore and Hunt on, 62-63;
  • estimated revenue, 63, 82;
  • transferred to Post Office Department, 75;
  • actual cost of to Government, 75;
  • cost of extension and rearrangement, 78-79;
  • earnings, 1880-81, 104;
  • become self-supporting, 104-105;
  • failed to earn operating expenses, 110;
  • might have remained self-supporting, 112;
  • subsidize newspaper press, 113-124;
  • rate charged, 117;
  • Committee on increased cost of service, 118-119;
  • subsidize pool-rooms, 124-126;
  • extension of, a purchase of votes out of the public purse, 379;
  • would yield a profit in hands of a commercial company, 386
• Telegraphs more freely used in Switzerland and Belgium than in the United Kingdom, 53, 81
• Telephone, Competition from, 181
• Telephone industry hampered by the State, 387-389, 392
• Telephone royalties included in gross receipts, 89
• Times, The, on Bradford Committee Report, 216-217
• Tipping, E. J., on the Crompton case, 292
• Towns, English and Welsh, Telegraphic facilities in, 48648n, 45-48
• Trades union spirit, Development of a, 302-304
• Tradesman, Small, did not use telegraph, 16
• Traffic, Growth of, and tariffs, 50-53
• Transit messages profitable in Belgium, 22;
  • in Switzerland, 24
• Treasury, The, on Civil Service pressure, 132;
  • organization and work of the, 360-363;
  • power of public opinion on, 363-365;
  • power of, not exercised, 369, 370-371;
  • importance of, 377, 384
• Treasury, Lords Commissioners of the, on accepting recommendations of Tweedmouth Committee, 172-173
• Trenan, E., on lack of knowledge of technics in telegraph clerks, 270
• Tribunal, A permanent non-political suggested, 232
• Turner, ——, Case of, 159
• Tweedmouth Committee, Testimony before, 137, 141-142;
  • membership of, 163-164, 165;
  • Report, 165-181;
  • L. Hill before the, 166-167;
  • H. C. Fischer, 167-168;
  • C. H. Kerry, 168-169;
  • recommendations of, 170-172;
  • recommendations of accepted, 172;
  • sharply criticized by A. K. Rollit, 173-176;
  • a one-sided tribunal, 211;
  • did not give satisfaction, 218;
  • increase of expenses by, 221;
  • testimony showing leniency of Post Office Department with offenders, 306-318;
  • special grievances cited to the, 289-291;
  • on risk allowances, 349;
  • on pay for letter sorters, 349-350;
  • on holidays, 350;
  • grievances laid before, 355-359;
  • evidence before, shows the visible helplessness of governments, 358-359

• United Kingdom, Telegraph facilities in 1865, 43-44;
  • telegrams to inhabitants in, 53
• United Kingdom Electric Telegraph Company, organized with uniform tariff irrespective of distance, 29;
  • extent of lines, 30;
  • shilling rate abandoned, 31-32;
  • rates, 31n;
  • rates increased, 32
• United Kingdom Telegraph Company, 40;
  • Government purchase of, 58
• Universal Private Company, Property of, purchased, 73
• Uren, J. G., on transfers of postmasters, 287;
  • on blocking officers by pensioners, 340

• Vacancy, suburban, Interference in the filling of a, 299-300
• Verney, Sir Harry, moves enfranchisement of revenue officers, 94
• Vested rights doctrine of the Civil Service, 153, 155;
  • sundry, 349-351; 381
• Vincent, Sir Edgar, on dismissal of incompetent officers, 259-260

• Wages and salaries of employees raised by political pressure, 91-92, 105, 110, 137-140;
  • caused decrease of revenue, 109;
  • average weekly, paid to telegraphists by companies, 127-128;
  • increase in after transfer to Post Office, 129;
  • Fawcett revision of, 131;
  • Lord Cavendish on, 133-134;
  • Raikes revision of, 140-147;
  • increased expenditures from, 160-161, 172, 180;
  • no justification for raising maximum, 168;
  • Tweedmouth Committees’ recommendations on, 170-171;
  • adopted, 172;
  • further raise of, by Norfolk-Hanbury Committee, 180;
  • cost of, 180-181;
  • continued pressure for increase, 182-213;
  • comparative, 230
• Walker, J. R., passed over, 291
• Walpole, Spencer, member of Tweedmouth Committee, 163, 165, 177;
  • on punishment of a postman for intoxication, 311;
  • on Roberts case, 309;
  • on Worth case, 312;
  • on the malingerers’ grievance, 358
• Ward, J., member of Select Committee, Intervention by, 316-317
• Wastefulness of the Government’s operation, 5;
  • inherent, 103;
  • diminution of, 104
• Weaver, H., on the newspaper tariff, 118-119
• Webster, letter carrier, disciplined for misconduct, 307-8
• Welby, Sir Reginald E., Testimony of, before Royal Commission on Civil Service pressure, 137-138;
  • on power to remove incompetent employees, 251-253, 259;
  • on probationary period, 260-261;
  • on pensions, 263;
  • on abolition terms, 264;
  • on a six or seven hour day, 325-326;
  • on vacations, 351;
  • on power of public opinion on Treasury control of expenditures, 363-365;
  • on power of Treasury to limit number of clerks, 370-371
• West, Sir Algernon E., Testimony of, before Royal Commission on Civil Service pressure, 138-139;
  • result of reorganization made by, 265;
  • on promotion by merit, 273-274
• Whips, Government, 361-362
• Whitehall system of inspection inefficient, 320-322
• Wiles, T., Intervention by, 317
• Wireless telegraphy restricted from competition with government telegraph monopoly, 389-390
• Women telegraphists, Promotion of, questioned, 293-294
• Wood, ——, Interference in behalf of, 294-295
• Wood, Sir Charles, on reduction in number of Junior Lords, 362
• Woodhouse, ——, postman at Norwich, Case of, 310-311
• Woods, Samuel, Motion of, for right to agitate, 183-187;
  • lost, 187
• Work, Maximum of, provided for, 219
• Writers and their importance, 353-354
• Wykes, ablest man in Sheffield office, displaced after promotion, 283, 305, 381