The result had been that the Civil Servants themselves had requested Lord Rockingham to disfranchise them. Mr. Hanbury continued with the statement that, in 1892, Sir James Fergusson had dismissed Mr. Clery for ignoring his order forbidding Civil Servants to "circularize" parliamentary candidates. Thereupon Mr. Clery, at Newcastle-on-Tyne, had said to a political meeting of postmen: "They must approach the House of Commons on its weak side; they must influence Members through their susceptibilities as opportunity presents itself when candidates appeal to their respective constituencies. A man is never more amenable to reason than when making a request." Mr. Hanbury continued: "What private employee is able to say: 'I am the permanent servant of my employer; I have a share in declaring who that employer shall be; I will attack him on his weak side when he comes up for re-election, and then I will use my power? I will bring organized pressure to bear throughout the constituencies, and I will make this bargain: that if he will not vote for an increase in my pay, or diminish my duties, then I will not give him my vote.' 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 to buy his vote out of the public purse. There are three great things which distinguish our permanent public service. There is, in the first place, the remarkable loyalty with which they serve both parties in the State. Then there is the permanency of their employment. Again, a great feature of that service is that no longer is it a question of favoritism, but promotion by merit is the rule. Those three great features have been slowly built upon this foundation--the elimination altogether of the element of political partisanship from the service. I hope nothing will be done to break down those foundations, on which alone the public service can rest--a service which, for its efficiency, its loyalty, and its high sense of public duty, I do not think is surpassed. I doubt whether it is equalled or even approached." Mr. Woods' Motion was lost by a vote of 163 to 86. It was supported almost exclusively by the Opposition, only three Government supporters voting for it.[185] [Sidenote: _Mr. Steadman demands a Select Committee_] In the House of Commons, on February 20, 1899, Mr. Steadman[186] moved: "And we humbly represent to Your Majesty that, in view of the great discontent existing among employees of the Postal and Telegraph Services, immediate inquiry should be made into the causes of complaint."[187] Mr. Steadman had been elected to the House of Commons by a majority of twenty votes. [Sidenote: _Parliament not competent to judge_]