In May, 1906, Mr. J. Ward, a Member of the Select Committee on Post Office Servants, 1906, asked the Postmaster General "whether his attention had been called to the dismissal of E. C. Feasey, of Walsall, who had been an efficient officer in the postal service for 17 years ... and whether he will reconsider the question of the man's reinstatement?" Mr. Buxton replied: "I have looked into the circumstances connected with the dismissal by my predecessor of E. C. Feasey, formerly a town postman at Walsall. I find that Feasey had a most unsatisfactory record.... I am not prepared to consider the question of reinstatement."[355] In March, 1906, the Postmaster General, in reply to Mr. Nannetti, M. P., said: "The Reports and statements in the Corcoran case were fully considered at the time [1901], and I can see no good purpose in reopening the matter after a lapse of five years."[356] In April, 1906, Mr. Wiles,[357] M. P., intervened on behalf of the head messenger in the Secretary's Office at the General Post Office, London. Under the administration of Lord Stanley, Postmaster General, an allowance of 4 shillings a week given the head messenger at the time of his appointment, had been withheld from October, 1900, to October, 1905. Mr. Sydney Buxton replied: "I have already had this case under my consideration. The allowance of 4 shillings a week is being granted, but unfortunately the allowance cannot be made retrospective." Mr. Wiles had been elected to Parliament in January, 1906, having defeated Sir Albert K. Rollit, who, for many years, had made a specialty of championing the cause of Post Office employees who had a grievance. * * * * * [Sidenote: _Deplorable Waste of Executive Ability_]