Sir WILLIAM MULOCK.
That is not the case we have before us at the present moment.
Mr- LANCASTER. I am able to understand that quite well. I know this is not the case that we have before us but we are dealing with the question of taking an active part in politics such as would justify the interference of the Postmaster General. I thihk it is only fair to the postmasters who at' bne time in their lives have belonged to one' or both sides of politics that they should understand where they are in reference to these matters. On the general principle, applying it to both sides of politics, suppose that" a' postmaster acted as a scrutineer at a parliamentary election and did nothing else would that be considered as interference or not ? - The hon. Postmaster General need not be ammtbat I am goiiig at this session
Subtopic: THOMAS PREST.