Lord Hampton's (Sir John Pakington's) appointment, at the age of
77, to be Chief Commissioner of the Civil Service Com- mission was sharply and justly criticised by Mr. Mundella and Mr. Lowe on Monday night. Mr. Mundella moved the reduction of the vote by £500,—the increase of salary granted to Lord Hamp- ton. Lord Hampton was a peer who could not give the whole of his time, as Sir Edward Ryan had done, to the discharge of his duties, and yet he was to have £2,000 a year instead of £1,500, while a colleague with £1,200 would do the work. Sir Stafford North- cote had no difficulty in showing that since the paid office of Chief Commissioner was first filled up, and a "tentative" salary allotted to it, an immense increase of the work, and of work of a very responsible kind, had accrued ; and for anything we meow, that may be an adequate reason for giving the Chief Com- missioner £2,000 a year, but it is certainly not a reason for putting so aged a man as Lord Hampton into this responsible and highly- paid post. As Mr. Lowe remarked, the work of the Commission might easily be done by one first-rate man, though it is far pre- ferable to have two, to secure impartiality. But for three Commis- sioners there can be no excuse. And it is a mere mode of inventing a pension for Lord Hampton, to raise the salary preliminarily to naming a man of Lord Hampton's age and ante- eedents as the person to whom that salary is to be paid. Mr. Mundella was beaten by a majority of 33,-159 to 126. One hundred and fifty-nine Members voted for a great increase of ex- pense to secure a great decrease of efficiency.