amongst the Romans, the return of one who had gone to sojourn elsewhere, or had been banished or taken by an enemy, to his own country or state. It has been usual to trace the origin of posts to a remote antiquity, certain establishments having something in common with the modern post system, being found to have existed at an early period of the world's history. Herodotus and Xenophon mention that, among the ancient Persians, stations were appointed at intervals along the great roads of the empire, where couriers were constantly kept in readiness to bear despatches and intelligence. Similar institutions, as we learn from Suetonius, were maintained amongst the Romans in the time of Augustus; and some such probably existed much earlier. But although the name of the post may be traced to this source (from the Latin word *positus*, whether as applied to the accommodation and means of transport placed at intervals for the service of the couriers, or to the couriers themselves, placed or posted at the several stations), such institutions obviously bear but a vague resemblance to the post-office of the present times.

The couriers were mere State messengers, the communication only to and from the seat of government; nor, so far as appears, was there any regular machinery for the receipt and delivery of letters, so essential to the idea of a modern post establishment. The posts which were first instituted in the kingdoms of modern Europe, as those by Charlemagne and Louis XI. of France, the Emperor Charles V., and some other sovereigns, differed little, if at all, from those now described. It is indeed probable, that whenever the posts or couriers were appointed to perform their journeys at stated periods (which, as soon as the occasions for employing them became frequent, would be found at once the most economical and effective mode), such a convenient means of conveying correspondence, though primarily intended only for State purposes, would soon come to be used by individuals. Houses of call for the receipt and delivery of letters would in process of time be established by custom, if not by regular appointment; and in this way the modern post system might grow up. The earlier posts instituted in Europe, however, were in general but of temporary duration; their existence being dependent sometimes on occasion, sometimes on the disposition or policy of particular monarchs. In our own country, the insular position of which made our sovereigns less anxious about intelligence from their frontier, nothing of the nature of a public post establishment can be proved to have existed (or with an immaterial exception in the reign of Edward IV.) till that after the modern form was introduced; to explain the rise of which, however, is matter of no difficulty. The conveyance of letters, indeed, is what must inevitably become, in the course of human transactions, as much matter of necessity, as the conveyance of persons or of commodities; and the same circumstances which generate the formation of roads and bridges, and give existence to the trade or occupation of carrier, shipmaster, or innkeeper, must necessarily lead to the employment of the post messenger, under greater or less degrees of system and regularity.

History, more attentive to record the transactions of monarchs than the steps by which communities effect their advancement and improve their conveniences, furnishes little beyond an incidental notice of the modes by which the circulation of correspondence was conducted before it became matter of State regulation. The conveyance and delivery of letters was often part of the usual occupation of travelling pedlars and others, whose business led them to perform stated or frequent journeys. When commerce began to advance, regular conveyances for correspondence were established between some of the principal trading cities, either by the municipal authorities, or by concert of private individuals or associations. A permanent establishment of messengers for the conveyance of letters was attached to the university of Paris from the beginning of the thirteenth century, and indeed was not abolished until the year 1719, long after a general post had been settled in France. Other universities were similarly provided. In some instances powerful and opulent individuals established posts, either as a mercantile speculation, or for the convenience of any district in the prosperity of which they took an interest. But although the conveyance of correspondence was thus brought to some degree of system, or rather prevailed under a variety of systems, even in places where the State authorities had not yet provided any public establishment for this purpose, it is easy to see that communication, especially between distant places, must have been slow, irregular, and insecure. The advantage and even necessity of having a uniform and legalized system of post conveyance could not have failed to present itself to the eyes both of subjects and rulers; although it may be a question whether the sovereigns who first established such systems in their dominions were in general moved so much by large and enlightened views of public benefit, as by the wish to create, according to the practice so usual in that age, a lucrative trading monopoly in behalf of some of their favourites.

The establishment of the modern post system, then, in some of the principal countries of Europe, is not properly to be viewed as of the nature of a political or civil invention, being merely the assumption, on the part of the State, of the conduct of a particular department of human affairs which had grown up with the progress of society, but was now fast outgrowing the means and appliances of private enterprise, and presenting tempting possibilities of aggrandizement to official persons. Everywhere the transmission of letters, and more especially of government despatches, was at first connected with the furtherance of ordinary travel; and (as we shall see hereafter) in many parts of Europe the connection still continues. Our historical review begins at home. After narrating the successive proceedings which have gradually made the British post-office the best in the world, we shall describe its existing regulations and mechanism. It will then remain to give such account of the postal systems of other countries as our limitations may permit.

I. HISTORY OF THE BRITISH POST-OFFICE.

As early as the middle of the thirteenth century, entries occur in the wardrobe accounts of the kings of England of payments to royal messengers for the conveyance of letters to various parts of the country. In entries of the same year (e.g., 1252) these messengers are variously designated. Sometimes the term used is *cohinus*, sometimes *nuncius* or *garcia*. The same three words occur, half a century later, in the wardrobe accounts of Edward I., two of them being employed in the title of the chapter relating to such payments.—*Titulus de Expensis Nunciorum et Cohinorum Regis Eduardi filii Regis Henrici*, &c. In the supervision of these royal messengers lies the germ of the office of postmaster-general.

The first of such officers of whom we can give a distinct account is Sir Brian Tuke, who is described in the records as *Magister Nunciorum, Currorum, sive Postarum*, "both in England and in other parts of the king's dominions beyond the seas." Thomas Cromwell wrote to him, in August 1533, complaining of "great default in conveyance..." of letters," and signifying the king's pleasure "that posts be better appointed." Tuke, in reply, assures the secretary that the cause of the mischief is the insufficiency of the sums assigned for the payment of men and horses. "The king's grace," he writes, "hath no moo ordinary postes, ne of many days hath had, but bitwene London and Calais; and they in no wages, save the post of London in 12d., and Calais 4d., by day; but riding by the journey, whereof most part passe not two in a month; and sens October last the postes northewarde, every one at 12d. by day. Thise in wages be bound but to on horse, which is enough for that wages, albeit some of them have moo. I never used other ordre, but to charge the towneshippes to lay and appoint such a post, as they wol answer for." After some other explanations, the postmaster-general proceeds thus—"Sir, ye know well that, except the hawker horses bitwene Gravesende and Dover, there is no such usual conveyance in post for men in this realme as is in the accustomed places of France and other partes; ne men can kepe horses in redynge without som way to bere the charger, but when placardes be sent for such cause, the constables many tymes be fayne to take horses oute of plowes and cartes, whererin can be no extreme diligence. But, sir, not taking upon me to excuse the postes, I wol advertise you that I have knownen in tymes past folkes whiche, for their owne tharke, have dated their letters a day or two more before they were written, and the conveyers have had the blame." In 1545 Sir Brian Tuke was succeeded by Sir William Paget and John Mason, Esq., as joint postmasters-general, under letters-patent, which grant the office to them during their lives and the life of the survivor, under the same designation as that borne by Sir Brian Tuke, "together with the wages of L66, 13s. 4d. a year," in addition to the expenses incurred in the conveyance of letters, of which accounts were rendered from time to time.

But long subsequent to this appointment of a postmaster-general, the details of the service were frequently regulated by proclamations and by orders in council. Thus, in the curious collection of royal proclamations in the library of the Society of Antiquaries, there is one of Philip and Mary (undated, but apparently of 1553), which regulates the supply of horses for the conveyance of letters to Dover. Again, in July 1556, the Lords of the Council order "that the postes betweene this and the Northe should echo of them keepe a booke, and make entrye of every lettre that he shall receive, the tyne of the delivere thereof unto his hands, with the partes names that shall bring it unto him." Sir John Mason was succeeded in 1567 by Thomas Randolph, and he by Sir John Stanhope (afterwards Lord Stanhope of Harrington) in 1591.

In the year last named appeared "A Proclamation for redresse of disorders in postes which convey and bring to and out of the parts beyond the seas packets of letters." It recites previous attempts to redress such disorders, and "particularly to prevent the inconveniences, both to our own service and the lawfull trade of honest merchants, by prohibiting that no persons whatsoever should take upon them, publicly or privately, to procure, ... bring in, or carry out, any packets or letters to or from the countries beyond the seas, except such our ordinary posts and messengers for those parts as, either by our master of the posts, or the masters of the posts-general of those countries reciprocally, should be found nominated for that kind of service." This prohibition is renewed in more stringent terms, and command is given to all mayors, sheriffs, justices, officers of customs, and officers of the post, "to make diligent search of all mails, budgets, and other carriages of all such disavowed carriers, messengers, or suspected persons, ... and all such so discovered to apprehend and stay."

The accession of James I. to the English throne, by necessitating a more frequent communication between London and Scotland, led to some improvements in the postal arrangements. Some years earlier, special posts had been established by the magistrates of some Scottish towns for the conveyance of their despatches to and from the court in Great Britain. Thus, in 1590, a messenger was appointed by the magistrates of Aberdeen with the title of "council post," and son of a dress of blue cloth bearing the town arms. The James I. new royal orders of 1603, "for thorow posts and carriers riding in post in our affaires," direct (1.) that "in all places where posts are laid for the packet, they also ... shall have the benefit and pre-eminence of letting ... of horses to all riding in post (that is to say) with horn and guide, by commission or otherwise; and to that end shall keep ... or have in readiness ... such ... sufficient post-horses ... as their own abilities will bear, or that the contributory provision of the towns ... shall enable them unto;" (2.) that "it shall be lawful for the posts or the owners of the horses to demand for the hire of each horse, after the rate of twopence-halfpenny the mile, besides the guides' groats, of all such as ride on public affaires. But of all others riding post with horn and guide about their private businesse, the hire and prices are left to the parties' discretion, to agree and compound within themselves." Finally, it is directed that every post shall keep at least two horses for the express conveyance of government letters, shall forward such letters within a quarter of an hour of their receipt, and shall travel at the rate of not less than seven miles the hour in summer and five miles in winter.

In 1619 a new office of "postmaster-general of England Appointed for foreign parts, being out of our dominions," was created by letters-patent of James I., in favour of Matthew de Quester, and Matthew de Quester the younger, the former general of whom, it is recited, "had humbly petitioned us in respect of his many years' service in sending packets in foreign parts, and for that he had beene often occasioned to send speiall messengers beyond the seas in matters of more importance," &c. The new office was regarded by the existing postmaster-general, Charles, Lord Stanhope (who had succeeded his father) as an infringement of his own patent. On a reference to the council, it was declared that "both grants might well stand together, being of distinct places," but the dispute, as we shall see, lasted for many years, and had curious consequences.

After a trial in the King's Bench, which had no definite result, the matter came repeatedly before the Lords of the Council. In 1626 the Council ordered that, "as most of the foreign posts were now well settled by the labour and industry of the said De Quester, ... the Merchants Adventurers and other merchants should attend the board, and show cause why he should not be likewise employed by them for their dispatches into foreign parts without the king's dominions." But on a hearing, "liberty was given as well to all other companies of merchants as to the Merchants Adventurers, to send their letters and dispatches by messengers of their own choosing." A year afterwards this liberty was revoked, except as regarded the Company of Merchants Adventurers only. Lord Stanhope, however, continued by his agents to carry letters abroad, and obtained a warrant prohibiting De Quester from interfering. Sir John Coke, writing to his fellow-secretary, Lord Conway, deplores "the audacity of men in these times, and that Billingsley, a broker by trade (the deputy of Lord Stanhope), should dare to attempt thus often to question the King's service, and to derive that power of foreign letters unto merchants, which in all States is a branch of regal authority. Neither can any place in Christendom be named where merchants are allowed to send their letters by other bodies or posts than by those only which are authorized by the State." Billingsley was imprisoned; but the House of Commons addressed the King for his release. It strikingly shows the confusion of postal affairs at this period to find a statement addressed to the Privy Council by "all the posts of England, being in number ninety-nine poor men," that divers of them "lie now in prison, . . . by reason of their great debts which they are in, for want of their entertainment, they being unpaid ever since the last day of November 1621 till this present time, June 1628;" the arrears amounting to L22,626.

In 1632 the foreign postmastership was assigned by the De Questers to William Frizell and Thomas Withering.

The substitution was approved by the King, and was notified by a royal proclamation in July 1632. Amongst other recitals, this document sets forth the King's consideration "how much it imports his state and this realm, that the secrets thereof be not disclosed to foreign nations, which cannot be prevented if a promiscuous use of transmitting . . . foreign letters and packets should be suffered, which will also be no small prejudice to . . . merchants in their trading." Here we get a glance at one of the motives of the jealous monopoly of postal communication,—a motive which found still plainer expression in Sir John Coke's letter to Lord Conway, cited above, when he wrote, "Your Lordship best knoweth what account we shall be able to give in our places of that which passeth by letters in or out of the land, if every man may convey letters, under the covers of merchants, to whom and what place he pleaseth."

Coke seems to have solved the difficulty in his own fashion, for, a few years afterwards, an English letter-writer tells his correspondent in Scotland, "I hear the posts are waylaid, and all letters taken from them and brought to secretary Cooke."

In June 1635 Withering submitted to the king a proposition (still preserved in the State-Paper Office), "for settling of stafets or paquet-posts betwixt London and all parts of his Majesty's dominions, for the carrying and re-carrying of his subjects' letters," which contains some curious incidental notices of the then state of the internal communication of the kingdom. The nett charge to the Crown of the existing posts is stated to be L3400 per annum. Letters, it is said, "being now carried by carriers or footposts 16 or 18 miles a day, it is full two months before any answer can be received from Scotland or Ireland to London. If any of his Majesty's subjects shall write to Madrid in Spain, he shall receive answer sooner and surer than he shall out of Scotland or Ireland." By the new plan it is proposed that all letters for the northern road, for example, "be put into one portmante that shall be directed to Edinburgh, and for all places of the said road, . . . with particular bags directed to such postmasters as lie upon the road near to any city or town corporate." The postage is to be, according to distance, "3d., 4d., 6d., and to Scotland more." The journey from London to Edinburgh is to be performed within three days; so that, says the proposer, "the posts being punctually paid, the news will come sooner than thought." The scheme was approved of on the 31st July 1635 by "a proclamation for the settling of the letter office of England and Scotland." This proclamation provides for eight main postal lines—namely, the Great Northern Road; to Ireland by Holyhead; to Ireland by Bristol; to the marches of Wales by Shrewsbury; to Plymouth; to Dover; to Harwich; and to Yarmouth. The postage of a single letter is fixed at 2d., if under 80 miles; 4d., if between 80 and 140 miles; 6d., if above 140 miles; 8d., if to Scotland. And it is signified to be his Majesty's pleasure that from the beginning of this service no other messengers or foot-posts shall carry letters to any places so provided, "except common known carriers, or a particular messenger to be sent on purpose with a letter by any man for his own occasions, or a letter by a friend;" on pain of exemplary punishment. In February 1638 another royal proclamation ratified an agreement between Withering and M. Denoveau, "postmaster to the French King," for the conveyance of the mails into France by Calais, Boulogne, Abbeville, and Amiens.

But in 1640 the active postmaster is accused of "divers the post-abuses and misdemeanours," and his office is sequestered into the hands of Philip Burlamachi of London, merchant, who is to execute the same under the inspection of the principal secretary of state. Withering then assigns his patent to Robert Rich, Earl of Warwick. A long contest ensues in both Houses of Parliament. Lord Stanhope petitions the House of Lords, and asserts that his surrender of his prior patent was compulsory, he having been summoned to the council table, and obliged, before he was suffered to depart, to subscribe somewhat then penned upon your petitioner's patent by the lord keeper Coventry. These complaints and debates gave repeated occupation to both Houses during the memorable period from 1641 to 1647, and were diversified by several affrays, in which violent hands were laid upon the mails; "one Mr Prideaux," afterwards attorney-general, actively assisting on one occasion in the seizure of that from Plymouth, as it was being carried into the post-office which had been opened by the Earl of Warwick, "near the Royal Exchange." On another occasion the Chester mail, according to the depo-sitions of the earl's officers, was met at the foot of Highgate Hill by five persons "on great horses, with pistols, habited like troopers, who demanded of these deponents, Who had the letters? saying they must have them?" and who kept their word. These incidents occur in 1642. In 1644 the Lords and Commons, by a joint ordinance, appoint Edmund Prideaux "to be master of the posts, messengers and couriers." In 1646 the opinion of the judges is taken on the validity of Withering's patent (assigned to Lord Warwick), and they pronounce "that the patent of the Inland Letter Office was well created; that the clauses of restraint in the said patent are void and not good in law; that, notwithstanding these clauses be void, the patent is good for the rest." It is evident, therefore, that any prohibition to carry letters must be by act of Parliament, to have force of law.

In 1650 an attempt was made by the Common Council of London to organize a new postal system on the great roads, to run twice a week. This scheme they temporarily carried into effect as respects Scotland. But Mr Attorney-General Prideaux speedily obtained the intervention of the Council of State. He drew up a paper in which he thus summed up his own proceedings in postal matters:—

"By authority of the Parliament, I erected postages for the service of the State. For defraying the charges of the several postmasters and easing the State of it, I published that there should be a weekly conveyance of letters into all parts of the nation. With the benefit which came by..." the postage of letters, I have taken off from the State the charge of the postmasters of England (except Dover road), which is above L7000 by the year." Pridoux seems to have been especially wrath with the Common Council of London for their audacity in having "employed a natural Scott into the North." He urged on the Council of State, that if the new enterprise be permitted, "besides intrenching on the rights of the Parliament, it will distract that course which is now settled, . . . and another way must be thought on for payment of the postmasters." Both Houses resolved: (1) "That the offices of postmasters, inland and foreign, are, and ought to be, in the sole power and disposal of the Parliament. (2.) That it be referred to the Council of State to take into consideration all existing claims in relation thereto. Of these there were no less than five under the various patents which had been granted and assigned. Ultimately, the posts, both inland and foreign, were farmed to John Manley for L10,000 a year, by an agreement made in 1653. The rates of postage and the rights and duties of postmasters were settled, under the Protectorate, by an act of Parliament of 1657, c. 30. In 1659 the item, "By postage of letters in farm, L14,000," appears in a Report on the Public Revenue.

During the rule, both of Parliament and of Protector, the practice of opening letters, on suspicion of plots, continued. Foreign mails were repeatedly stopped, and committees nominated to open and read letters. On one occasion, a message having been sent to the Lords, the answer was returned, "that they did yield to the opening of letters, but it would be very inconvenient if often used."

On another occasion a formal complaint against the practice was made to the Lords by the Venetian ambassador; and the House resolved, "that four members of this House be forthwith sent to the ambassador to disavow the action, and to endeavour to give him all satisfaction, by declaring how sensible they are of it, as tending to the breach of public faith and the law of nations." Nevertheless, the act of 1657 expressly enumerates among the advantages of a post-office, that "it hath been found by experience, . . . the best means . . . to discover and prevent many dangerous and wicked designs which have been, and are daily contrived, against the peace and welfare of this Commonwealth, the intelligence whereof cannot well be communicated but by letter of script." And the numerous "intercepted letters" which appear amongst the Thurloe State Papers, sufficiently show how extensively those advantages were turned to account.

The government of the Restoration continued to farm the post-office upon conditions very similar to those imposed by the act of 1657, but for a larger sum. Henry Bishop was the first postmaster-general, and he contracted to pay to the King a yearly rent of L21,500. The new arrangements were embodied in the act 12 Charles II., c. 35, entitled "An Act for Erecting and Establishing a Post-Office." A clause proposing to frank all letters addressed to or sent by members of Parliament during the session was carried, on a division, after considerable debate, in the course of which Sir Heneage Finch characterized it as "a poor mendicant proviso, and below the honour of the House." Even the Speaker, on putting the motion from the chair, paused to say, "I am ashamed of it." The Lords struck it out of the bill, and the Commons agreed to their amendment. But the indenture enrolled with the letters-patent contains a proviso for the free carriage of all letters to or from the King, the great officers of state, "and also the single inland letters only of the members of the pre-

sent Parliament during the continuance of this session of this Parliament." It is also provided that the lessees shall permit the secretaries of state for the time being, or either of them, from time to time, to have the survey and inspection of all letters at their discretion. Bishop was succeeded by Daniel O'Neile in 1662, on similar terms. In the consequent "proclamation for quieting the postmaster-general in the execution of his office," which was issued, as usual, on the 25th May 1663, it is commanded "that no postmasters or other officers that shall be employed in the conveying of letters, or distributing of the same, or any other person or persons, . . . except by the immediate warrant of our principal secretaries of state, shall presume to open any letters or paquets not directed unto themselves."

By an act of the 15th Charles II. ("An Act for Setting the Profits of the Post-Office on H.R.H. the Duke of York, and his Heirs-Males"); and by a subsequent proclamation issued in August 1683, "for prevention of treasonable correspondences and other inconveniences arising by the infringement of the said act," it is directed that the postmaster-general shall "take effectual care for the conveyance of all bye-letters, by establishing correspondences . . . in all considerable market-towns with the next adjacent post-stage, and all persons whatsoever, other than the postmaster-general, are warned that they presume not to prepare or provide any horses or furniture to let to hire, . . . where any post-roads are or shall be settled or established, unless the postmaster or his deputies shall first fail to provide and furnish the persons riding post with sufficient horses and furniture within half an hour after demand."

It was during the possession of the post-office profits by the Duke of York that a London penny post was established by the enterprise of William Dockwra, who described himself as a London merchant. A suit was commenced against him at the duke's instance, and a verdict, casting him in damages, was obtained in the King's Bench. Soon after the Revolution he was one of the multitude of petitioners for redress at the hands of the House of Commons, by whom his case was recommended to the king, who, in 1690, granted him a pension of L500 a year for a limited term, and in 1697 appointed him "comptroller of the penny post." But in the following year a long list of charges was exhibited against him by the "officers and messengers," which led to his removal. At this time parcels were carried as well as letters. One of the allegations against Dockwra runs thus:—"Hee stops under spetious pretences most parcelis that are taken in, which is great damage to tradesmen, by loosing their customers, or spoiling their goods, and many times hazard the life of the patient when phisick sent by a doctor or apothecary."

Dockwra's example was imitated in 1708 by Mr Povey, who took "upon himself to set up a foot-post under the name of the 'halfpenny carriage,' appointed receiving-houses, and employed several persons to collect and deliver letters for hire within the cities of London and Westminster, and borough of Southwark, . . . . . . to the great prejudice of the revenue," as was represented by the then postmaster-general to the Lords of the Treasury. Povey was compelled to desist.

At this period the postal system of Scotland was distinct from that of England. It had been so re-organized early in the reign of Charles II., who, in September 1662, had appointed Patrick Graham of Inchbrakie to be postmaster-general of Scotland for life, at a salary of L500 Scots. But it would seem, from the proceedings of the Scottish Privy Council, that the rights and duties of the office were ill defined.

---

1 Journals of the House of Commons, vii. 627. 2 Scobell, Acts and Ordinances, 1656, p. 511. 3 Commons' Journals, viii. 217, 223; xxiv. 262; Parliamentary History, xxiii. 58. 4 The Case of the Officers of His Majesty's Penny Post-Office, 1698 (printed in Ninth Report of the Commissioners on the Post-Office Department, Appendix, 72, 73). fined; for immediately after the appointment of Grahame, the Council commissioned Robert Mein, "merchant and keeper of the letter-office in Edinburgh," to establish posts between Scotland and Ireland; ordained that Linlithgow, Kilsyth, Glasgow, Kilmarock, Dumbarton, Ballintrae, and Portpatrick, should be stages on the route, and granted him the sum of L200 sterling, to build a packet-boat to carry the mail from Portpatrick to Donaghadee." And in 1665 we have a privy seal by which the postmaster of Haddington, William Seton, is granted a salary exceeding that of the postmaster-general, namely, L600 Scots a year.

The rate of speed at which ordinary correspondence travelled in those days may be estimated from the fact, that the express conveying intelligence of the death of Charles II., on the 6th of February, was received in Edinburgh at one o'clock on the morning of the 10th. In 1693 the Scottish Parliament again re-organized the post-office, and fixed the rates of postage at 2d. for a single letter to Berwick, or any place within 50 miles of Edinburgh; 3d. from 50 to 100 miles; 4d. to any place in Scotland above 100 miles; and also established a weekly post between Scotland and Ireland. In 1698 Sir Robert Sinclair of Stevenson had a grant from King William of the whole revenue of the Scottish post-office, in addition to a pension of L300 per annum, "to keep up the post." But he speedily resigned the grant. Six years later, however, we find George Main, jeweller in Edinburgh, accepting a lease of that revenue at a yearly rent of L1194 sterling, subject to certain deductions for the conveyance of public expenses, and also to an allowance of L60 a year for the Irish packet. Main appears to have paid to the postmaster at Haddington, L50; to him in Canongate, L35; to him at Cockburnspath, L50; and to the clerk to the post-office, L25. His lease was for three years, and would seem not to have invited renewal, as we find him acting in 1708 at a yearly salary of L200 sterling. At this date the Edinburgh post-office employed seven persons, and its entire cost was L364 a year (postmaster, L200; accountant, L50; clerk, L50; clerk-assistant, L25; three letter-carriers, each L13).

Our colonial post-office at this period was naturally more rudimental still. Perhaps the earliest official notice of it is to be seen in the following paragraph from the records of the General Court of Massachusetts in 1639:

"It is ordered that notice be given that Richard Fairbanks his house in Boston is the place appointed for all letters which are brought from beyond the seas, or are to be sent thither to be left with him; and he is to take care that they are to be delivered or sent according to the directions; and he is allowed for every letter a penny, and must answer all miscarriages through his own neglect in this kind."

That court, in 1667, was petitioned to make better postal arrangements, the petitioners alleging the frequent "loss of letters whereby merchants, especially with their friends and employers in foreign parts, are greatly damned; many times the letters are imputed and thrown upon the Exchange, so that those who will may take them up; no person, without some satisfaction, being willing to trouble their houses therewith." In Virginia the postal system was yet more primitive. The colonial law of 1657 required every planter to provide a messenger to convey the despatches as they arrived to the next plantation, and so on, on pain of forfeiting a hogshead of tobacco for default.

The government of New York in 1672 established "a post to goe monthly from New York to Boston," advertising "those that bee disposed to send letters; to bring them to the secretary's office, where, in a lockt box, they shall be preserved till the messenger calls for them; all persons paying the post before the bagg be sealed up." Thirty years later this monthly post had become a fortnightly one, Post Office as we see by the following paragraph in the Boston News-Letter:

"By order of the postmaster-general of North America. These are to give notice, That on Monday night, the 6th of December, the Western Post between Boston and New York sets out once a fortnight, the three winter months of December, January, and February, and to go alternately from Boston to Saybrook, and Hartford, to exchange the mayle of letters with the New York Ryder; the first turn for Saybrook, to meet the New York Ryder on Saturday night the 11th currant; and the second turn he sets out at Boston on Monday night the 20th currant, to meet the New York Ryder at Hartford, on Saturday night the 25th currant, to exchange Mayles; and all persons that sends letters from Boston to Connecticut from and after the 13th inst., are hereby notified first to pay the Postage on the same."

This office of postmaster-general for America had been created in 1692. The rates of postage were,—for 80 miles or under, 4½d.; from New York to Philadelphia, 9½d.; to Virginia, 12½d. For a long time the expenses of the office exceeded the income. Until after 1704 there was no regular post further east than Boston, or further west than Philadelphia. In that year Lord Cornbury, writing to the government at home, says,—"If I have any letter to send to Virginia or to Maryland, I must either send an express, who is often retarded for want of boats to cross those great rivers they must go over, or else for want of horses; or else I must send them by some passengers who are going thither. The least I have known any express to take hence to Virginia has been three weeks." Shortly after the date of this letter stage-coaches were established between Boston and New York, and Boston and Philadelphia; but no post-office was established in Virginia until 1732; nor did any postal revenue accrue to Great Britain from the colonies until 1753.

We have now traced the postal communications of different portions of the British empire from their earliest beginnings until the eve of the passing of that act of the 9th of Queen Anne, which consolidated them into one establishment, and which, as to organization, continued to be the great charter of the post-office until the advent of Mr Rowland Hill. This act largely increased the powers of the postmaster-general. It re-organized the chief letter-offices of Edinburgh, Dublin, and New York, and settled new offices in the West Indies and elsewhere. It established three rates of single postage,—viz., English, 3½d. if under 80 miles, and 4½d. if above; and 6½d. to Edinburgh or Dublin. It continued to the postmaster-general the sole privilege "to provide horses to persons riding post." And it gave, for the first time, parliamentary sanction to the power, formerly questionable, of the secretaries of state with respect to the opening of letters, by the following clause:—"And whereas abuses may be committed by wilfully opening, embezzling, detaining, or delaying letters or packets, to the great discouragement of trade, commerce, and correspondence: for prevention thereof be it enacted . . . that from and after the 1st day of June 1711, no person or persons shall presume . . . to open, detain, or delay . . . any letter or letters . . . after the same is or shall be delivered into the general or other post-office, . . . and before delivery to the persons to whom they are directed, or for their use, except by an express warrant in writing under the hand of one of the principal secretaries of state, for every such opening, detaining, or delaying."

---

1 Lang, Historical Summary of the Post-Office in Scotland, 4, 5. 2 Register of the Privy Seal of Scotland, I. 331 (ibid.) 3 Lang, ut supra, 8. 4 Miles, History of the Post-Office (Banker's Magazine, N.S., vii. 358, seq.) 5 Buckingham, Specimen of Newspaper Literature (Boston, 1850), I. 16, 17. 6 Miles, ut supra. Nine years after the passing of this act, the cross-posts were farmed to a Mr Allen, who made great improvements in their management, upon an agreement that the new profits so created should be his own during his lifetime. His schemes were so successful that he is said to have netted during forty-two years an average profit of nearly £12,000 a year. The nett revenue for the post-office, which, as we have seen, had been £10,000 in 1653, and £21,500 in 1663, had increased in 1685 to £65,000. For the succeeding ten years it was almost stationary. At the passing of the act of Anne it had reached £90,223, the gross income being £111,426. In twelve years (1724) the latter had increased to £178,071, but the nett revenue was only £96,339. Then followed a series of supplementary enactments having for their object the increase of postal rates, the regulation of franking, and the prevention of illicit conveyance. Very little attention seems to have been bestowed on the increase of postal facilities, and the results corresponded. In 1754 the gross income was but £214,300, and the nett revenue £97,365. The falling in of Allen's lease in 1764 gave a considerable increase (the nett produce rising from £116,182 to £157,571), but after five years this was followed by a decrease, which, with slight intermission, continued until the introduction of the mail-coach system of John Palmer in 1784.

The precise figures will be shown by the following table, which we abridge from the parliamentary returns of 1805:

| Decennial Periods | Gross Produce of the First and Last Year | Net Revenue of the First and Last Year | Average Nett Yearly Revenue of the Decennium | |-------------------|----------------------------------------|--------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------| | 1724-33 | £178,071 10 | £95,022 11 | | | | £171,283 18 | £92,146 6 | | | | £170,334 3 | £91,701 11 | | | 1734-43 | £159,625 5 | £93,173 7 | | | | £150,461 8 | £92,146 6 | | | | £149,413 7 | £91,701 11 | | | 1744-53 | £205,636 5 | £89,716 5 | | | | £214,300 10 | £89,716 5 | | | | £278,999 5 | £87,011 0 | | | 1754-63 | £225,325 5 | £87,011 0 | | | | £310,129 11 | £87,011 0 | | | | £313,032 14 | £157,247 0 | | | 1764-73 | £398,624 6 | £150,508 7 | | | 1774-83 | £159,625 1 | £150,508 7 | |

The system of burdening the post-office revenue with pensions, nearly all of which had not the slightest connection with the postal service, was begun in characteristic fashion by Charles II., who granted to Barbara, Duchess of Cleveland, £4700 a year, and to the Earl of Rochester £4000 a year, out of that revenue. The example was followed, until, in 1694, the list of pensions so chargeable stood thus:

Post-Office of Great Britain.—Pensions Charged on Revenue.

| Earls of Rochester | £4,000 | | Duke of Cleveland | 4,700 | | Duke of Leeds | 3,400 | | Duke of Schomberg | 4,000 | | Earl of Bath | 2,500 | | Lord Keeper | 2,000 | | William Dockwra (until 1697) | 500 | | Total | £21,200|

Queen Anne granted a pension of £5000 to the Duke of Marlborough, charged in like manner. For many years past the amount of these pensions has been £10,307 a year. In 1856 it was £29,310, but of that sum £19,003 was expended in the purchase of part of the pension enjoyed by the heirs of the Duke of Schomberg. In March 1857 the existing pensions ceased to be payable by the post-office, and became chargeable to the Consolidated Fund.

The first important and enduring impulse to the development of the latent powers of the post-office, both as a public coach system and as a source of revenue, was given by the shrewdness and energy, not of a postmaster or other official person, but of the manager of the Bath theatre, Mr John Palmer. Palmer's notice was attracted to the subject in October 1782. His avocations had made him familiar with that great western road which was still in such peculiar favour, alike with people of fashion and with the gentlemen of the highway. No road in England was so much travelled by the wealthy, and on none were they eased of their superfluities with so polite an air. In the intervals of this more agreeable department of their calling, the highwaymen relieved their ennui by a sedulous attention to the mails. So habitual were the robberies of the post, that they came to be regarded by its officials as among the necessary conditions of human affairs. They urged on the public the precaution of sending all bank-notes and bills of exchange in halves, and pointed the warning with a philosophical remark, that "there are no other means of preventing robberies with effect, as it has been proved that the strongest carts that could be made, lined and bound with iron, were soon broken open by a robber." Another functionary, who had reflected on the matter still more deeply, suggested that "when desperate fellows had once determined on a mail robbery, the consequence would be murder in case of resistance."

At this period, in addition to the recognised perils of the roads, the postal system was characterized by extreme irregularity in the departure of mails and delivery of letters; by an average speed of about three miles and a half in the hour; and by a rapidly-increasing diversion of correspondence into illicit channels. As our table shows, the nett revenue, which had averaged £157,000 during the ten years ending with 1778, averaged but £150,000 during the ten years ending with 1788. Yet when Mr Palmer suggested that by building mail-coaches of a construction expressly adapted to run at a good speed, by horning them liberally, and attaching an armed guard to each coach, the public would be greatly benefited, and the post-office revenue considerably increased, one official person expressed his regret "that the author of the plan should not first have been informed of the nature of the business," and boldly asserted that the constant endeavours which had long been directed towards the improvement of postal affairs, "in all situations and under all circumstances, has made them now almost as perfect as can be, without exhausting the revenue arising therefrom." Another predicted that the new methods, if adopted, "will fling the whole commercial correspondence of the country into confusion, and will justly raise such a clamour as the postmaster will not be able to appease."

At one time this pertinacious opposition seemed likely to succeed. But, through the intervention of Lord Camden, the plan was brought under the personal notice of Mr Pitt. No sooner was the minister convinced of its merits than he insisted on its being tried. The experiment was made in August 1784. In the following year Mr Palmer, writing to Mr Pitt, says (and his assertion is fully borne out by the documents subsequently submitted to Parliament):— "In the progress of this business I have had every possible opposition from the office." Yet its success exceeded all anticipation. The following table will show the rapid progress of the revenue under the new arrangements:— Post-Office of Great Britain.—Gross and Nett Income, 1784–1808.

| Year | Gross Income | Nett Revenue | |------|--------------|--------------| | 1784 | 420,161 | 196,163 | | 1785 | 463,743 | 281,409 | | 1786 | 471,176 | 285,975 | | 1787 | 474,347 | 278,599 | | 1788 | 509,131 | 298,980 | | 1789 | 514,638 | 318,610 | | 1790 | 533,198 | 331,179 | | 1791 | 575,079 | 355,960 | | 1792 | 585,432 | 356,920 | | 1793 | 627,692 | 391,658 | | 1794 | 716,608 | 431,980 | | 1795 | 745,868 | 414,548 | | 1796 | 811,539 | 479,487 | | 1797 | 863,624 | 541,833 | | 1798 | 950,476 | 613,250 | | 1799 | 1,012,731 | 657,388 | | 1800 | 1,683,950 | 720,981 | | 1801 | 1,144,900 | 755,299 | | 1802 | 1,289,197 | 880,069 | | 1803 | 994,970 | 721,347 | | 1804 | 1,320,582 | 944,929 | | 1805 | 1,317,842 | 944,928 | | 1806 | 1,566,651 | 1,068,397 | | 1807 | 1,558,166 | 1,129,283 | | 1808 | 1,552,037 | 1,100,605 |

The three years in this instructive table to which asterisks are affixed convey a special lesson, which seems to have passed unheeded at the time, although it has since been turned to good account. In each of those years additional rates of postage were imposed, and in each of the succeeding periods the estimated produce of the additional tax failed to be realized. The revenue, indeed, continued to increase with the growth of trade and population, but the proportional rate of that increase was checked. It had been at first proposed to reward Mr Palmer by a grant for life of two and a half per cent. on a certain proportion of the increased nett revenue, which would eventually have given him some L10,000 a year; but this proposition fell through, in consequence either of technical difficulties created by the Post-Office Act, or of the opposition of the post-office authorities. Mr Pitt, however, appointed Palmer to be "Comptroller-General of Postal Revenues," an office which was soon made too hot for him to hold. He obtained a pension of L3000 a year; and ultimately, by the act 53 Geo. III., c. 157, after his case had received the sanction of five successive majorities against government, an additional sum of L50,000. Every sort of obstruction was placed in the way of his reward—the claim to which was pending in Parliament during six years—in exact harmony with the course which had been pursued at the outset of the scheme. And this was done in the face not alone of nearly a million annually added to the public revenue, but of the fact, that during a quarter of a century the mails had been conveyed over an aggregate of some seventy millions of miles without the occurrence of one mail robbery throughout the period.

Scotland shared in the advantages of the mail-coach system from the first. Shortly before its introduction, the local penny post was set on foot by the keeper of a coffee-shop in the hall of the Parliament House, Peter Williamson by name. He employed four letter-carriers, in uniform, and provided them with bells; appointed receivers in various parts of the town; and established hourly deliveries. The officials of the post, when the success of the plan had become fully apparent, gave Williamson a pension, and absorbed his business, the acquisition of which was subsequently confirmed by the act 34 Geo. III., c. 17. A dead-letter office was established in 1784. The entire staff, which, as we have seen, consisted in 1708 of seven persons, now comprised twenty-five, at a cost of L1406. In 1796 the number of functionaries had increased to forty, and the cost to L3278. But in Ireland the old state of things continued until the present century. In 1801 only three public carriages in the whole country conveyed mails. There were, indeed, few roads of any sort, and none on which coaches could travel faster than four miles an hour. At this period the gross receipts of the Irish post-office were L50,040; the charges of management and collection were L59,216, or at the rate of more than 70 per cent.; whilst in Scotland the receipts were L100,651, and the charges L16,896, or somewhat less than 17 per cent.

In the American colonies postal improvements may be dated from the administration of Franklin, who was virtually the last colonial postmaster-general, as well as unquestionably the best. In one shape or other he had forty years' experience of postal work, having been appointed postmaster at Philadelphia as early as October 1737. He notified his appointment in his own newspaper in these words:—"Notice is hereby given, that the post-office of Philadelphia is now kept at B. Franklin's in Market Street, and that Henry Pratt is appointed riding postmaster for all stages between Philadelphia and Newport in Virginia, who sets out about the beginning of each month, and returns in 24 days, by whom gentlemen, merchants, and others may have their letters carefully conveyed." &c. When appointed postmaster-general in 1753, Franklin betirrified himself for the improvement of his department, in that practical painstaking way with which he was wont to guide any plough he had once put his hand to, whatever the ground it had to work in. He visited all the chief post-offices throughout Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York, and New England, looking at everything with his own eyes. His administration cannot be better summed up than we find it to be in a sentence or two which he wrote soon after his dismissal. Up to the date of his appointment, he says:—"The American post-office had never paid anything to that of Britain. We (i.e., himself and his assistant) were to have L600 a year between us, if we could make that sum out of the profits of the office. To do this, a variety of improvements were necessary; some of these were inevitably, in the beginning, expensive; so that in the first four years the office became above L500 in debt to us. But it soon after began to repay us; and before I was displaced by a freak of the minister's, we had brought it to yield three times as much clear revenue to the crown as the post-office of Ireland. Since that imprudent transaction, they have received from it—not one farthing."

The interval between the development of Mr Palmer's improved methods (as far as that development was permitted by the authorities), which we take to be pretty nearly contemporaneous with the parliamentary settlement of his claims, and the still more important reforms introduced thirty years afterwards by Mr Rowland Hill, is chiefly Office Revenue, 1828-30. marked by the growth of the packet system, under the influence of steam navigation, and by the elaborate investigations of the revenue commissioners of 1826 and the following years. Undoubtedly, the inquiries of these commissioners attracted a larger share of public attention to the management of the post-office than had theretofore been bestowed on it; but if anything had been wanted to throw into bolder relief Mr Hill's intelligent and persevering exertions, these reports supply the want in ample measure.

The lucubrations of the commissioners have the merit of repletion,—they fill three large folios; but the most friendly critic could scarcely find in them any other. Clumsy in arrangement, resilient in the treatment of the various branches of the service, and crowded with petty details, they afford the best possible contrast to the lucid order and vigorous reasoning of Mr Hill's Post-Office Reform. Nor is it the least curious infelicity of the Revenue Reports of 1826–30, that whilst the functionaries of the post-office are criticised in them with a keen severity, which is so salient as to wear an appearance at times of almost personal hostility, the truth, that a liberal increase of public facilities would be likely to benefit the revenue much more materially than small economies in salaries and perquisites, does not seem once to have dawned on the minds of the commissioners. Even in dealing with a new accommodation actually provided,—that of the money-order office,—whilst taking just exception to the unofficial character of its management, they incline rather to its abolition than its reform.

As early as 1788 the cost of the packets employed by the post-office attracted parliamentary attention. In that year the "Commissioners of Fees and Gratuities" reported that, in the preceding seventeen years, the total cost of this branch had amounted to L1,038,133; and they naturally laid stress on the circumstance, that "many officers of the post-office were owners of such packets, even down to the chamber-keeper." At this time part of the packet service was performed by hired vessels, and part by vessels which were the property of the crown. The commissioners recommended that the latter should be sold, and the entire service be provided for by public and competitive tender. The subject was again inquired into by the Finance Committee of 1798, which reported that the recommendation of 1788 had not been fully acted upon, and expressed its concurrence in that recommendation. The plan was now to a considerable extent enforced. But the war rapidly enhanced the expenditure. The average, L61,000, of 1771–87 had increased, in 1797, to L78,439; in 1810 to L105,000, in 1814 to L160,603. In the succeeding years of peace the expense fell to an average of about L85,000. As early as 1818 the Rob Roy plied regularly between Greenock and Belfast; but no use was made of steam navigation for the postal service until 1821, when the postmaster-general established crown packets. The expenditure under the new system, from that date to 1829 inclusive, was thus reported by the Commissioners of Revenue Inquiry in 1830:

### Post-Office of Great Britain.—Cost of Packet Service, 1820–29.

| Year | Cost | |------|------| | 1820 (last year of exclusive sailing-packets) | 85,000 | | 1821 (first year of steam-packets) | 134,868 | | 1822 | 115,429 | | 1823 | 93,725 | | 1824 | 116,662 | | 1825 | 110,838 | | 1826 | 144,592 | | 1827 | 159,250 | | 1828 | 117,269 | | 1829 | 108,304 |

The general administration of postal affairs, during the period now under review, was still characterized by repeated advances in the letter-rates, and the last twenty years of it by a stationary revenue. The following table will show the gross receipts, the charges of collection and management, and the nett revenue (omitting fractions of a pound). We repeat the figures for the year 1808 for the purpose of comparison:

### Post-Office of Great Britain.—Gross and Nett Income, 1808–1837.

| Year | Gross Income | Charges of Collection, &c. | Rate per cent of Charges | Nett Revenue | Population of United Kingdom | |------|--------------|---------------------------|--------------------------|-------------|-----------------------------| | 1808 | L1,522,007 | 451,631 | 29 | L1,070,366 | | | 1815–1816 | 2,193,741 | 594,045 | 27 | L1,599,547 | 19,452,000 | | 1818–1819 | 2,209,212 | 719,622 | 311 | L1,489,590 | | | 1820–1821 | 2,182,235 | 636,290 | 28 | L1,556,945 | 20,928,000 | | 1824–1825 | 2,095,259 | 655,914 | 265 | L1,439,345 | 22,302,000 | | 1828–1829 | 2,306,735 | 747,479 | 328 | L1,559,256 | | | 1838–1839 | 2,346,278 | 686,768 | 277 | L1,611,020 | 25,695,000 |

Before passing to the reform of 1839, we have now to revert to that important feature in postal history,—the interference with correspondence for judicial or political purposes. We have already seen,—(1.) That this assumption had no parliamentary sanction until the enactment of the pre-employment royal proclamations in directing a special warrant for each opening or detention of correspondence. It is a significant gloss on the statute to find that for nearly a century (namely, until 1798 inclusive) it was "not the practice to record such warrants regularly in any official book."

Of the use to which the power was applied, the State Trials afford some remarkable instances. At the trial of Bishop Atterbury, for example, in 1723, certain letters were offered in evidence which a clerk of the post-office deposed on oath "to be true copies from the originals, which were stopped at the post-office, and copied, and sent forward as directed." Hereupon Atterbury very naturally asked this witness, "If he had any express warrant under the hand of one of the principal secretaries of state for opening the said letters." But on this question the lords, after debate, resolved,—"That it is the opinion of this House that it is inconsistent with the public safety, as well as unnecessary for the prisoner's defence, to suffer any further inquiry to be made, upon this occasion, into the warrants which have been granted by the secretaries of state for the stopping and opening of the letters which should come and go by the post, or into the methods that have been taken by the proper officers at the post-office in obedience to such warrants." Twenty-nine peers recorded their protest against this decision. But the inflamed majority went the further length, when it was proposed to cross-examine the Rev. Edward Willes, one of his Majesty's post-office decipherers, of again resolving,—"That it is the opinion of this House, that it is not consistent with the public safety to ask the decipherers any questions which may tend to discover the art or mystery of deciphering."

The practice thus sanctioned appears to have been pushed to such lengths as to elicit in April 1735 a strong protest and censure from the House of Commons. In the preceding February "Complaints were made by several members in relation that their letters were not only charged at the post-office, to opening but that they were often broke open and perused by the letters clerks; that the practice of breaking open letters was become frequent, and was so publicly known that the very end for which that liberty was given to the postmaster was entirely disappointed; for the intention being at first..." to discover any treasonable correspondence that might be carried on against the government, that intention was rendered altogether vain, because, by the practice of opening letters being so frequent and so well known, it was certain that no man would carry on any treasonable correspondence by means of the post-office; so that the liberty given to break open letters... could now serve no purpose but to enable the idle clerks about that office to pry into the private affairs of every merchant and of every gentleman in the kingdom." A committee of inquiry was appointed, and after receiving its report, the House resolved: "That it is an high infringement of the privileges of the... Commons of Great Britain in Parliament for any postmaster, his deputies, or agents, in Great Britain or Ireland, to open or look into, by any means whatever, any letter directed to or signed by the proper hand of any member, without an express warrant in writing under the hand of one of the principal secretaries of state for every such opening and looking into; or to detain or delay any letter directed to, or signed with the name of any member, unless there shall be just reason to suspect some counterfeit of it, without an express warrant of a principal secretary of state for every such detaining or delaying." That the expressions used in debate were fully borne out by post-office practices there is abundant evidence. In the subsequent proceedings of the famous "Committee of Secrecy on the conduct of Robert, Earl of Orford," it appeared by the testimony of the secretary of the post-office, that within ten years only there had been paid by the government to that officer, without voucher or account, the sum of L45,675, and that "the greatest part of this money is for defraying the expense of a private office for the inspecting foreign correspondence.... That the annual expenses of this office are as follows:—To the chief decipherer, Dr Willes, for himself and his son, L1,000; to the second decipherer, Mr Corbiere, L800; to the third decipherer, Mr Lampe, L500; to the fourth decipherer, Mr Zolman, L200; to the chief clerk, L650; to four other clerks, L300 each; to the comptroller of the foreign office, L60; and to the doorkeeper, L50. There are incidental charges for seals, &c.," it is added, "which may amount to L100;... the overplus, which may amount to L90, is divided between the two postmasters and the secretary." For his twenty years' services in this "private office" the Rev. Dr Willes was rewarded, first, with the deanery of Lincoln, and afterwards with the bishopric of St David's.

As must always happen in like cases, the example spread downwards. So little attention was paid to the requirements of the act of Queen Anne, or the warnings of the House of Commons, that the very bellmen took to scrutinizing the letters given them for their bags. "When I have got all my letters together," deposed one of these functionaries at the trial of Dr Hensley in 1758, "I carry them home and sort them. In sorting them, I observed that the letters I received of Dr Hensley were generally directed abroad, and to foreigners; and I, knowing the Doctor to be a Roman Catholic,... advised the examining clerk at the office to inspect his letters." This witness, in answer to the questions, "How came you to know Dr Hensley was a Roman Catholic? What had you to do with his religion?" clinched his evidence thus:—"We letter-carriers or postmen have great opportunities to know the characters and dispositions of gentlemen... from their servants, connections, and correspondents. But, to be plain, if I once learn that a person who lives a genteel life is a Roman Catholic, I immediately look on him as one who, by education and principle, is an inveterate enemy to my king, my country, and the Protestant religion." Sometimes the political motives for examination were diversified by merely polite acquiescence in the wishes of a friend. Thus, in 1741, "at the request of A., a warrant issued to permit the eldest son of A. to open and inspect any letters which the youngest son of A. might write to either of two females, one of whom that youngest son had imprudently married." What remains to be said of the more recent contents of this discreditible chapter in our postal history will be found in a subsequent page. The incidents of 1844 are yet fresh in memory.

Mr Rowland Hill's pamphlet of 1837 took for its starting-point the fact, that whereas the postal revenue showed for the past twenty years a positive, though slight, diminution, it ought to have showed an increase of L507,700 a year, in order to have simply kept pace with the growth of population; and an increase of nearly four times that amount, in order to have kept pace with the growth of the analogous though far less exorbitant duties imposed on stage-coaches. The population in 1815 was 19,552,000. In 1835 it had increased to 25,605,000. The stage-coach duties had produced in 1815, L217,671. In 1835 they produced L498,497. The nett revenue arising from the post-office in 1815 was L1,557,291. In 1835 it had decreased to L1,540,300.

In 1837 there did not exist any accurate account of the number of the letters transmitted through the general post-office. Mr Hill, however, was able to prepare a sufficiently approximate estimate from the data of the London district post, and from the sums collected for postage. He thus calculated the number of chargeable letters at about 88,600,000; that of franked letters at 7,400,000, and that of newspapers at 30,000,000, giving a gross total of about 126,000,000. At this period the total cost of management and distribution was L696,569. An analysis of the component parts of this expenditure assigned L426,517 to cost of primary distribution, and L270,052 to cost of secondary distribution and miscellaneous charges. A further analysis of the primary distribution expenditure gave L282,308 as the probable outgoings for receipt and delivery, and L144,209 as the probable outgoings for transit. In other words, the expenditure which hinged upon the distance the letters had to be conveyed was L144,000, and that which had nothing to do with distance was L282,000. Applying to these figures the estimated number of letters and newspapers, 126,000,000, passing through the office, there resulted a probable average cost of \( \frac{1}{10} \)ths of a penny for each, of which \( \frac{3}{10} \)ths was cost of transit, and \( \frac{4}{10} \)ths cost of receipt, delivery, &c. Taking into account, however, the much greater weight of newspapers and franked letters as compared with chargeable letters, the apparent average cost of transit became, by this estimate, but about \( \frac{1}{10} \)ths, or less than the tenth of a penny.

A detailed estimate of the cost of conveying a letter from London to Edinburgh, founded upon the average weight of the Edinburgh mail, gave a lower proportion still, since it reduced the apparent cost of transit, on the average, to the thirty-sixth part of penny. Mr Hill inferred that if the charge for postage be made proportionate to the whole expense incurred in the receipt, transit, and delivery of the letter, and in the collection of its postage, it must be made uniformly the same, from every post-town to every other post-town in the United Kingdom, unless it could be shown how we are to collect so small a sum as the thirty-sixth part of a penny. And, inasmuch as it would take a ninefold weight to make the expense of transit amount to one farthing, he further inferred that, taxation apart, the charge ought to be precisely the same for every packet of moderate weight, without reference to the number of its inclosures.

At this period the rate of postage actually imposed (beyond the limits of the London district office) varied from 4d. to 1s. 8d. for a single letter, which was interpreted to mean a single piece of paper not exceeding an ounce in weight; a second piece of paper or any other inclosure, however small, constituted a double letter. A single sheet of paper, if it at all exceeded an ounce in weight, was charged with fourfold postage. The average charge on inland general post letters was nearly 9d. for each letter. Apart from the evils of an excessive taxation, with its multifarious results in checking communication, hampering trade, and creating an illicit traffic in letters which involved systematic deception, the effects upon the postal service itself were most injurious. On the one hand, a complicated system of accounts, involving both great waste of time and great temptation to fraud in their settlement; on the other, a constant invitation to the violation of that first duty of postal officers, respect for the sacredness of correspondence, by making it part of their daily work to expose letters to a strong light expressly to ascertain their contents.

These mischief's it was proposed wholly to remove by enacting "that the charge for primary distribution,—that is to say, the postage on all letters received in a post-town, and delivered in the same or in any other post-town in the British Isles,—shall be at the uniform rate of one penny for each half-ounce; all letters and other papers, whether single or multiple, forming one packet, and not weighing more than half an ounce, being charged one penny; and heavier packets, to any convenient limit, . . . being charged an additional penny for each additional half-ounce." And it was further proposed that stamped covers should be sold to the public at such a price as to include the postage, which would thus be collected in advance.

By the public generally, and pre-eminently by the trading public, the plan was received with great favour. By the functionaries of the post-office it was at once denounced as ruinous, and ridiculed as visionary. Lord Lichfield, then postmaster-general, said of it in the House of Lords,—"Of all the wild and visionary schemes which I have ever heard of, it is the most extravagant." On another occasion he assured the House that if the anticipated increase of letters should be realized, "the mails will have to carry twelve times as much in weight, and therefore the charge for transmission, instead of £100,000 as now, must be twelve times that amount. The walls of the post-office would burst; the whole area in which the building stands would not be large enough to receive the clerks and the letters."

But in the course of the following year (1838) petitions were poured into the House of Commons. A select committee was appointed, which held nearly seventy sittings, and examined eighty-three witnesses, in addition to the officers of the department. Its report (one of the most instructive and best arranged works of its class, as the report of the revenue commissioners was one of the worst), after carefully stating the questions which had to be considered, and the course of inquiry which had been pursued, thus proceeded:—"The principal points which appear to your committee to have been established in evidence are the following:—(1.) The exceedingly slow advance and occasionally retrograde movement of the post-office revenue during the . . . last twenty years; (2.) The fact of the charge of postage exceeding the cost in a manifold proportion; (3.) The fact of postage being evaded most extensively by all classes of society, and of correspondence being suppressed, more especially among the middle and working classes of the people, and this in consequence, as all the witnesses, including many of the post-office authorities, think, of the excessively high scale of taxation; (4.) The fact of very injurious effects resulting from this state of things to the commerce and industry of the country, and to the social habits and moral condition of the people; (5.) The fact, as far as conclusions can be drawn from very imperfect data, that whenever on former occasions large deductions in the rates have been made, these reductions have been followed in short periods of time by an extension of correspondence proportionate to the contraction of the rates. And, as matters of inference from fact and of opinion—

(i.) That the only remedies for the evils above stated, are a reduction of the rates, and the establishment of additional deliveries, and more frequent despatches of letters.

(ii.) That owing to the rapid extension of railroads, there is an urgent and daily-increasing necessity for making such changes.

(iii.) That any moderate reduction in the rates would occasion loss to the revenue, without in any material degree diminishing the present amount of letters irregularly conveyed, or giving rise to the growth of new correspondence.

(iv.) That the principle of a low uniform rate is just in itself; and when combined with prepayment and collection by means of a stamp, would be exceedingly convenient and highly satisfactory to the public.

During the session of Parliament, which followed the presentation of this report, about 2000 petitions in favour postal law of penny postage were presented to both Houses, and at length the chancellor of the exchequer brought in a bill to enable the Treasury to carry it into effect. The measure was carried in the House of Commons by a majority of 100, and became law on the 17th August 1839. A new but only temporary office under the Treasury was created to enable Mr Hill to superintend (although, as it proved, under very inadequate arrangements) the working out of his plan. The first step taken was to reduce, on the 5th December 1839, the London district postage to 1d., and the general inland postage to 4d. the half-ounce (except as respected places to which letters were previously carried at lower rates, those rates being continued). On the 10th January 1840 the uniform penny rate came into operation throughout the United Kingdom; the scale of weight advancing from 1d. for each of the first two half-ounces, by gradations of 2d. for each additional ounce, or fraction of an ounce, up to 16 ounces. The postage was to be prepaid, or charged at double rates. Parliamentary franking was abolished. Postage stamps were introduced on the 6th May following. The facilities of despatch were soon afterwards increased, especially by the establishment of day mails.

But on the important point of simplification in the internal economy of the post-office, with the object of reducing its cost without diminishing its working power, very little was done. In carrying out the new measures, the officers were, as the chancellor of the exchequer (Mr Baring) expressed it on one occasion, "unwilling horses." Nor need a word more be said in proof of the assertion than is contained in a naïve passage of Colonel Maberly's evidence before the Postage Committee of 1843:—"My constant language to the heads of the departments was,—This plan we know will fail. It is your duty to take care that no obstruction is placed in the way of it by the heads of the department, and by the post-office. The allegation, I have not the least doubt, will be made at a subsequent period, that this plan has failed in consequence of the unwillingness of the government to carry it into fair execution. It is our duty, as servants of the government, to take care that no blame eventually shall fall on the government through any unwillingness of ours to carry it into proper effect." And, again,—"After the first week, it was evident, from the number of letters being so much below Mr Hill's anticipations, that it must fail, inasmuch as it wholly rested upon the number of letters; for without that you could not possibly collect the revenue anticipated." Very formidable are the prophets who can scarcely, under the limitations of average humanity, avoid promoting in their daily avocations, the fulfillment of their own prophecies.

The plan then had to work in the face of rooted mistrust on the part of the workers. Its author was (for a term of two years, afterwards prolonged to three) the officer, not of the post-office, but of the Treasury. He could only recommend measures the most indispensable through the chancellor of the exchequer; and when Mr Goulburn succeeded Mr Baring, the chancellor was very much of Colonel Maberly's way of thinking. It happened, too, that the trial of Mr Hill's scheme had to be carried through at a period of severe commercial depression.

Nevertheless, the results actually attained in the first two years were briefly these:—(1.) The chargeable letters delivered in the United Kingdom, exclusive of that part of the government correspondence which theretofore passed free, had already increased from the rate of about 75,000,000 a year to that of 208,000,000; (2.) The London district post letters had increased from about 13,000,000 to 23,000,000, or nearly in the ratio of the reduction of the rates; (3.) The illicit conveyance of letters was substantially suppressed; (4.) The gross revenue, exclusive of repayments, yielded about a million and a half per annum, which was 63 per cent. on the amount of the gross revenue in 1839, the largest income which the post-office had ever afforded. These results at so early a stage, and in the face of so many obstructions, amply vindicated the policy of the new system. But by its enemies that system was loudly declared to be a failure, until the progressive and striking evidence of year after year silenced opposition by an exhaustive process.

In the summer of 1844 public attention was aroused in a remarkable manner to a branch of post-office administration which theretofore had been kept almost wholly out of sight. The statement, that the letters of a political refugee, long resident in England, and highly respected by all who knew him, whether sympathizing or not in his plans and aspirations, had been systematically opened, and their contents communicated to foreign governments, by Sir James Graham, then secretary of state for the home department, aroused a storm of indignation throughout the country. Men of all parties felt that this was an abuse of power, and a national degradation. The tragedy of Cosenza made a thorough investigation into the circumstances a public necessity.

The consequent parliamentary inquiry of August 1844, after retracing the earlier events connected with the exercise of the discretional power of inspection which Parliament had vested in the secretaries of state in 1710, elicited the fact, that in 1806, Lord Spencer, then secretary for the home department, introduced for the first time the practice of recording in an official book all warrants issued for the detention and opening of letters; and the additional fact, that from the year 1822 downwards, the warrants themselves had been preserved. The whole number of such warrants issued from 1806 to the middle of 1844 inclusive, was stated to be 323, of which no less than 53 had been issued in the years 1841-44 inclusive, a number exceeding that of any previous period of like extent, even in the days of Sidmouth and Castlereagh. It further appeared that the whole recorded number of warrants from the beginning of the century was 372, and that they affected the correspondence of 724 persons. The committee further stated, that eight of the warrants so issued "applied each to some particular object, but were not restricted to any definite number of persons." In plainer words, those eight warrants were in flagrant violation of the express words of the statute.

The 372 warrants of the period 1799-1844 the committee proceeded to classify under the following heads:

Post-Office of Great Britain.—Classification of the Subject-Matters in relation to which Warrants were issued for the Opening of Letters, 1799-1844.

| Bank of England | 12 | |----------------|----| | Bankruptcy | 2 | | Murder, theft, fraud, &c. | 144 | | Forged frank | 1 | | Treason, sedition, &c. | 77 | | Uncertain | 89 | | Prisoners of war | 13 | | Revenue | 5 | | Foreign correspondance | 20 |

Total: 372

The reader will not omit to observe that, within a period scarcely co-extensive with the official career of some living persons, eighty-nine warrants for the violation of correspondence had been issued by British secretaries of state for "uncertain" objects. The humiliation of such a record is complete when we place beside it a passage in one of the letters addressed to Mazzini by Attilio Bandiera, not the least memorable of the Neapolitan victims at Cosenza:—

"Fidiamo sempre sulla nota lealtà delle poste inglesi, potete indirizzar qui al mio nome le vostre lettere."

It will need better regulations on this head than yet obtain to make the "noted integrity" of the English post-office again an article of European faith.

The committee of 1844 proceeded to report, that "the warrants issued during the present century may be divided into two classes—1st, Those issued in furtherance of criminal justice, and usually for the purpose of obtaining a clue to the hiding-place of some offender, or to the mode in which letters, or place of concealment of property criminally abstracted. 2d, Those issued for the purpose of discovering the designs of persons known or suspected to be engaged in proceedings dangerous to the State, or (as in Mazzini's case), deeply invading British interests, and carried on in the United Kingdom, or in British possessions beyond the seas. With regard to both these classes of warrants, the object in issuing them has been, in many cases, to ascertain the views, not of the party receiving, but of the party sending the letter. In issuing these warrants, the mode of proceeding is as follows:—(1.) In the case of criminal warrants, they do not originate with the Home Office. The application is made in the first instance to that one of the two under-secretaries of state who is of the legal profession; and the usual course is for the applicant to state the circumstances in writing; but if the case be very urgent, owing to the time being too short before the departure of the post, to draw out a written statement, that condition is sometimes dispensed with. If the under-secretary accedes to the application, he submits the case to the principal secretary of state, with whose approval a warrant is drawn by the head clerk of the domestic department under the instructions of the under-secretary, and is then signed by the principal secretary. A record of the date of the warrant is kept under lock and key, in a private book, to which the two under-secretaries and the above-mentioned head clerk have access. To the applicant information is given, according to circumstances, of the post-mark or address merely, or of the contents of the letters detained, or,

---

1 Report from the Secret Committee on the Post-Office (1844), p. 11. 2 Ricerche del fratello Bandiera e dei loro compagni di martirio in Cosenza (Parigi, 1844), p. 47. if the case require it, the original letter is put into his hands. (2.) In the case of warrants of the second description, they originate with the Home Office. The principal secretary of state, of his own discretion, determines when to issue them, and gives instructions accordingly to the under-secretary, whose office is then purely ministerial. The mode of preparing them, and keeping record of them in a private book, is the same as in the case of criminal warrants. There is no record kept of the grounds on which they are issued, except so far as correspondence preserved at the Home Office may lead to infer them. . . . . The letters which have been detained and opened are, unless retained by special order, as sometimes happens in criminal cases, closed and re-sealed, without affixing any mark to indicate that they have been so detained and opened, and are forwarded by post according to their respective superscriptions.

The committee of 1844 made no propositions for the regulation or control of this power. Its members content themselves with repeating the remark made a century before, as to the improbability that evil-intentioned persons, knowing that the secretary of state has occasionally recourse to the opening of letters, will venture to communicate their plans by post, but they make a different application of it. They acknowledge that, if this opinion be well founded, the importance of retaining the power as a measure of detective police is diminished. They suggest, however, that to withdraw the power would be to advertise "every criminal and conspirator against the public peace" that he may use the post-office with unhesitating confidence. They also suggest that to regulate the power might perhaps "have an indirect effect in giving an additional sanction to the power in question, and thereby possibly extending its use;" with many other remarks of the like seesaw tendency. Our own clear conviction is, that the documentary evidence in this report is conclusive of the duty of the legislature to do at least these three things:—(1.) To enact that no warrant whatever shall issue except on written information upon oath; (2.) To enact that every such information shall be recorded in the secretary of state's office, with the date of the warrant, the period during which it remained in force, and the results obtained. (3.) To require a yearly statement of the number of warrants issued, and their respective grounds, with such reservations as to names and details as a wise discretion may dictate (without violating the spirit of the requirement), to be laid before Parliament. These precautions would, at all events, enable us to dispense with those platitudes about "deeply-involved British interests," and the like, which are better calculated for the meridian of Naples than for that of London.

No department of the post-office has advanced more rapidly of late years than has its "money-order office." This branch of the business was for more than forty years the private enterprise of three post-office clerks, who were known as "Stow and Company." It was commenced in History of 1792, with the more especial object of facilitating the safe conveyance of small sums to soldiers and sailors, but was soon extended to all classes of small remitters, although still on a very humble scale. The postmaster-general sanctioned the scheme without interposing in the management. Each of the three partners advanced L.1000 to carry it on; and each of them seems, during the greater portion of the period, to have derived about L.200 a year in profit. In 1830 the amount of remittances from London was but about L.10,000. The percentage was eightpence in the pound, out of which had to be defrayed the salaries of clerks, the commission to the country postmasters, and the profits of the partners. On the 6th December 1838 the office became an official department under the postmaster-general; the then partners receiving due compensation. The commission was reduced to a fixed charge of 1s. 6d. for sums exceeding L.2 and under L.5, and of 6d. for all sums not exceeding L.2. In 1840 these rates were reduced to 6d. and 3d. respectively. The number and aggregate amount of the orders issued in each year since the re-organization are as follows:

### Post-Office of Great Britain—Number and Amount of Money-Orders

| Year | Number of Orders Issued | Aggregate Amount of Orders Issued | |------|------------------------|----------------------------------| | 1839 | 188,921 | 313,124 | | 1840 | 587,797 | 960,915 | | 1841 | 1,552,845 | 3,127,977 | | 1842 | 2,111,680 | 4,357,177 | | 1843 | 2,501,623 | 5,112,840 | | 1844 | 2,808,803 | 5,695,395 | | 1845 | 3,176,196 | 6,413,331 | | 1846 | 3,515,079 | 7,071,058 | | 1847 | 4,031,185 | 7,903,177 | | 1848 | 4,203,651 | 8,151,294 | | 1849 | 4,248,891 | 8,152,643 | | 1850 | 4,439,713 | 8,494,498 | | 1851 | 4,661,025 | 8,880,420 | | 1852 | 4,947,825 | 9,438,277 | | 1853 | 5,216,909 | 9,916,195 | | 1854 | 5,466,214 | 10,494,411 | | 1855 | 5,807,412 | 11,009,279 | | 1856 | 6,178,982 | 11,805,562 | | 1857 | 6,389,703 | 12,180,273 |

The following table will show the amount of money-orders issued and paid in the principal towns of the kingdom, individually, in the year 1857:

### Post-Office of Great Britain—Money-Orders Issued and Paid in Certain Towns

| Name of Town | Population (1851) | Amount Issued | Amount Paid | |--------------|-------------------|---------------|-------------| | 1. London | 2,932,336 | L. | L. | | 2. Liverpool | 375,955 | 1,684,524 | 3,016,547 | | 3. Manchester| 316,213 | 364,472 | 367,688 | | 4. Birmingham| 232,841 | 278,506 | 380,550 | | 5. Bristol | 137,292 | 124,666 | 204,022 | | 6. Newcastle-on-Tyne | 37,784 | 106,018 | 134,871 | | 7. Leeds | 273,613 | 92,959 | 134,990 | | 8. Sheffield | 135,310 | 86,778 | 93,959 | | 9. Hull | 84,090 | 82,457 | 169,671 | | 10. Nottingham| 57,407 | 76,995 | 69,503 | | 11. Portsmouth| 72,095 | 74,466 | 62,541 | | 12. Southampton| 35,305 | 70,974 | 66,394 | | 13. Bath | 54,240 | 63,284 | 63,458 | | 14. Plymouth | 59,221 | 62,395 | 64,936 | | 15. York | 40,359 | 54,446 | 56,279 | | 16. Cheltenham| 35,051 | 52,499 | 41,562 | | 17. Wolverhampton| 119,748 | 50,355 | 33,919 | | 18. Leicester | 60,584 | 46,916 | 48,101 | | 19. Bradford (Yorkshire)| 149,413 | 45,874 | 43,599 | | 20. Derby | 46,659 | 46,924 | 40,988 | | 21. Norwich | 68,195 | 44,506 | 52,885 | | 22. Chester | 40,688 | 44,030 | 57,892 | | 23. Preston | 69,542 | 40,412 | 36,237 | | 24. Coventry | 36,812 | 35,140 | 24,084 | | 25. Macclesfield| 39,048 | 16,840 | 11,948 | | 26. Newcastle (Staffs.)| 10,569 | 15,795 | 8,752 |

---

1 Report of 1844, ut supra, 14–17. 2 Evidence of Mr Robert Watts (1829), 612–14; Eighteenth Report of Commissioners of Revenue Inquiry, 85, 95. In 1848 the money-order office involved a loss of £5,745 by excess of expenses over the amount of poundage. In 1849 a profit accrued of £322, which has gradually increased, year by year, until in 1857 it amounted to £24,175.

The increase in the number of postal deliveries, and in that of the receiving-houses and branch-offices, together with the numerous improvements introduced into the working economy of the post-office, when Mr Rowland Hill at length obtained the means of fully carrying out his reforms by his appointment as secretary, speedily gave a more vigorous impulse to the progress of the nett revenue than had theretofore obtained. During the seven years, 1845–51 inclusive, the average was but £810,951. During the seven years, 1852–57 inclusive, the average was £1,166,448. The following table shows the details for the entire period from 1838, the last complete year of the old rates of postage, to 1857 inclusive:

### Post-Office of Great Britain.—Number of Letters; Gross and Nett Income, 1838–57.

| Estimated No. of Year Ending | Gross Income | Cost of Management | Nett Revenue | Postal charges charged on Government | |-----------------------------|--------------|--------------------|--------------|-------------------------------------| | | L | L | L | L | | Jan. 5, 1838 | 2,239,737 | 687,313 | 1,552,424 | 38,528 | | 1839 | 2,246,278 | 686,768 | 1,559,509 | 45,156 | | 1840 | 2,290,763 | 756,090 | 1,633,704 | 44,277 | | 1841 | 2,259,495 | 838,677 | 1,420,818 | 90,761 | | 1842 | 2,259,495 | 838,677 | 1,420,818 | 90,761 | | 1843 | 2,278,145 | 977,504 | 1,300,641 | 122,161 | | 1844 | 2,160,387 | 980,650 | 619,737 | 116,503 | | 1845 | 2,103,067 | 985,110 | 719,957 | 101,290 | | 1846 | 1,837,576 | 1,125,294 | 712,282 | 101,290 | | 1847 | 1,963,857 | 1,136,745 | 825,112 | 106,354 | | 1848 | 2,181,910 | 1,106,020 | 984,495 | 121,290 |

Summary: Briefly, under the penny rate the number of letters has become sixfold what it was under the exorbitant rates of 1838. When the change was first made the increase of letters was in the ratio of 122½ per cent. during the year. The second and third years showed an increase on each preceding year respectively of about 16 per cent. During the next fourteen years the average increase was at the rate of about 6 per cent. per annum; and this rate is still maintained. And although this enormous increase of business, coupled with the increasing preponderance of railway mail conveyance, invaluable but costly, has carried up the post-office expenditure from £757,000 to £1,720,000, yet the nett revenue of 1857 is within £300,000 of the nett revenue of 1839. These are the direct results. The indirect advantages which have attended postal reform are beyond calculation.

During the year 1857 the number of newspapers delivered in the United Kingdom was about 71,000,000; and that of book packets (the cheap carriage of which is one of the most serviceable and praiseworthy of the recent improvements) about 6,000,000.

Under this head it only remains to show, as concisely as possible, the extent of postal correspondence between Great Britain and the principal British colonies and foreign countries, individually. The following table, for the year 1856, will afford this information as nearly as it is yet attainable:

### Post-Office of Great Britain.—Statistics of Colonial and Foreign Correspondence, 1856.

| Name of Colony or State | Letters Outwards | Letters Inwards | Letters Inwards and Outwards | Newspapers and Books Outwards | Newspapers and Books Inwards | Newspapers and Books Inwards and Outwards | |------------------------|------------------|----------------|----------------------------|------------------------------|----------------------------|------------------------------------------| | African, West Coast of | 22,809 | 22,836 | 51,636 | 22,834 | 4,632 | 27,516 | | Australia | 913,733 | 250,554 | 1,164,287 | 1,242,466 | 185,450 | 1,427,916 | | Belgium | 325,811 | 576,375 | 902,186 | 202,740 | 185,450 | 388,200 | | Brazil | 66,252 | 89,076 | 155,332 | 123,408 | 60,084 | 183,492 | | Bremen | 57,166 | 49,538 | 106,704 | 19,608 | ... | ... | | Canada | 358,284 | 396,915 | 755,199 | 908,028 | 424,416 | 1,332,444 | | Ceylon | 28,722 | 37,542 | 66,264 | 114,084 | 22,122 | 136,206 | | East Indies | 610,482 | 647,800 | 1,258,282 | 979,068 | 220,687 | 1,199,755 | | France | 2,184,916 | 2,021,610 | 4,206,526 | 718,296 | 614,304 | 1,332,600 | | German Postal Union | 911,957 | 635,145 | 1,547,102 | 586,968 | 184,380 | 771,348 | | Hamburg | 385,445 | 257,649 | 643,094 | 149,592 | 127,868 | 277,460 | | Holland | 263,922 | 179,827 | 443,750 | 81,636 | 44,808 | 126,444 | | Hong Kong | 72,522 | 78,232 | 150,754 | 104,900 | 59,252 | 164,152 | | Lisbon, Oporto, and Gibraltar | 171,846 | 161,088 | 332,934 | 74,162 | 4,860 | 80,262 | | Mauritius | 20,730 | 16,530 | 37,260 | 45,164 | 29,250 | 64,414 | | Mediterranean | 234,788 | 175,056 | 409,842 | 92,802 | 9,430 | 102,222 | | Sweden | 26,015 | 17,253 | 43,268 | 4,776 | 3,264 | 8,040 | | United States | 1,733,745 | 1,547,054 | 3,280,799 | 1,063,584 | 872,664 | 1,936,248 | | West Indies and Pacific| 322,716 | 281,700 | 604,416 | 672,412 | 122,496 | 694,908 |

1 Miles, History of the Post-Office, ut supra, 349. The principal acts which regulate the management of the post-office of the United Kingdom, are those of 1 Vict., c. 32-36, "An Act to Repeal the several Laws relating to the Post-Office;" "An Act for the Management of the Post-Office;" "An Act for Consolidating the Laws relative to Offences against the Post-Office," &c.; and 2 Vict., c. 98, "An Act to provide for the Conveyance of the Mails by Railways;" 3 and 4 Vict., c. 98, "An Act for the Regulation of the Duties of Postage;" 7 and 8 Vict., c. 49, "An Act for the better Regulation of Colonial Posts;" 10 and 11 Vict., c. 85, "An Act for giving further facilities for the Transmission of Letters by Post, and for the Regulating the Duties of Postage thereon, and for other purposes relating to the Post-

Post-Office of Great Britain.—Staff of Chief Office, 1858.

| No. of Persons | |----------------| | Postmaster-general | 1 | | Secretary and assistant secretaries | 3 | | Private secretary to postmaster-general | 1 | | Secretary's office— | | 1 chief clerk; 51 clerks (in three classes); 20 supplementary clerks; 4 paper-keepers | 76 | | Surveyors' department— | | 13 surveyors; 25 clerks; 13 stationary clerks; 38 clerks in charge | 89 | | Mail office— | | 1 Inspector-general; 1 deputy inspector-general; 1 chief clerk; 13 clerks; 3 inspectors of mails; 1 supervisor of mail-bag apparatus | 28 |

The number of post-offices in the United Kingdom, on the 31st December 1857, was 11,101. Of these, 810 were head post-offices, and 10,291 sub-post-offices. The number of street and road letter-boxes was 703. The distance over which mails are daily conveyed within the United Kingdom is, in the aggregate, 129,480 miles: of which

Post-Office of Great Britain.—Conveyance of Mails, 1857 (Inland Service).

| Countries | Mails Conveyed by Railways | Mails Conveyed by Coaches | Mails Conveyed on Foot | Inland Mails Conveyed by Packets and Boats | |-----------|-----------------------------|--------------------------|-----------------------|------------------------------------------| | England | 23,620 | 19,097 | 24d. | 1451 | | Ireland | 2,850 | 8,603 | 1d. | 52 | | Scotland | 3,702 | 5,297 | 21d. | 1376 | | United Kingdom | 30,172 | 32,997 | 24d. | 2879 |

The post-office expenditure for 1857 was as follows:

Post-Office of Great Britain.—Expenditure, 1857.

| Heads of Service | Amount in 1857 | Amount in 1856 | |------------------|---------------|---------------| | 1. Salaries, pensions, &c. | L. 948,575 | L. 909,094 | | 2. Hereditary pensions by statute | 1,573 | 29,310 | | 3. Buildings | 29,367 | 33,330 | | 4. Conveyance of mails— | | By railways | L. 422,943 | | | By coaches, &c. | 167,823 | | | By mail packets and private ships | 12,298 | | | 5. Manufacture of postage stamps, &c. | 603,064 | 553,509 | | 6. Rents, taxes, clothing expenses, law expenses, and miscellaneous expenses | 109,672 | 108,922 |

The fifth item in this abstract—"Manufacture of postage stamps"—has been of late years reduced (relatively to the number consumed), and the process much improved, by the perforating machine invented by Mr Henry Archer, and purchased of him for the public, in pursuance of the recommendation of a select committee of the House of Commons which sat in 1852. That committee reported its inability to decide on the conflicting evidence which had been offered to it, "as to the greater or less security against forgery afforded by copper-plate engraving than by surface printing;" but it adopted the opinion which had been previously expressed by the Commissioners of Inland Revenue, "that the application of the perforating machine would afford additional security against forgery, inasmuch as the accurate perforation of counterfeit sheets would be a work of great difficulty, and sheets not accurately perforated would at once excite suspicion if offered for sale."

The item "Salaries and pensions" is necessarily, and wisely, an increasing one. As respects a large proportion of the staff, there is an annual increment of salary, and an annual expenditure in defraying the cost of substitutes during the absence of the officers on their regular holiday, or on account of ill health. On this recently-established practice of annual vacations there is an instructive passage in a report addressed in 1857 to the postmaster-general by Mr Bokenham, comptroller of the circulation department:—"The attendance of the clerks during the year," writes this officer, "has been good, and an improvement has shown itself in their general health. This is highly satisfactory, and the decreased amount of absence from illness may, I think, greatly be traced to the good effects the annual holiday has produced upon them, in the temporary relaxation which it gives from their labours. The Saturday half-holiday, too, has not been without its influence. The duty certainly has not suffered by the establishment of that measure. Both for the ordinary business of the week, and for any extra work that has required to be done (and in the district branch the pressure has been very great), the officers have cheerfully attended beyond the regular official hours, in order that no arrears might accrue. The privileges are felt to be most valuable, and every effort will be made by the officers to retain them."

No improvement of detail has tended more importantly to accelerate the delivery of letters than has the establishment of "railway post-offices"—now a familiar sight, although still a subject of public curiosity as to their methods of working. By Mr Ramsay's ingenious apparatus, letter-bags are dropped into a net attached to the official carriage, without checking the speed of the train, and their contents are rapidly assorted into the range of boxes or "pigeon-holes" appropriated to the respective towns on the line, and thence into the proper bags, which in many cases are left, as they were received, whilst the train continues at full speed. Plans for sorting letters on board ship were long impeded by technical difficulties; but in 1857 these were surmounted, and the object was successfully attained in the packets which convey the Australian mails between Alexandria and Southampton. It has since been adopted in other lines of packets, and will doubtless become general.

By the new arrangements for sorting letters on their Accelera-journey, and by other improvements in postal economy of still more recent, a remarkable acceleration has taken place postal de- in the deliveries in almost all parts of the kingdom, as well as in London. The extent of this acceleration in the me-tropolis will be briefly and strikingly shown by the follow-ing percentage table:

Post-Office of Great Britain.—Acceleration of Metropolitan First Morning Delivery, 1856–58.

| Delivery completed | First Six Weeks of Year | First Six Weeks of Year | First Six Weeks of Year | |--------------------|-------------------------|-------------------------|-------------------------| | | (Delivery commenced | (Delivery commenced | (Delivery commenced | | | 7.30 A.M.) | 7.30 A.M.) | 7.30 A.M.) | | At (or before) | Per Cent. | Per Cent. | Per Cent. | | 9.0 | 5 | 65 | 93 | | Between 9.0 and | 14 | 18 | 6 | | 9.15 | | | | | 9.30 | 25 | 10 | 1 | | 9.45 | 23 | 5 | | | 9.50 | 16 | 2 | | | 10.0 | 8 | | | | 10.15 | 9 | | | | 11.0 | | | |

The cities and towns of the United Kingdom which yield a postal revenue next in importance to that of the English metropolis are Liverpool, Manchester, Glasgow, Dublin, Edinburgh, Birmingham, and Bristol. The details in the years 1856 and 1857 were respectively as follows. The staff and local expenses are those of 1854:

Post-Office of Great Britain.—Local Statistics, 1856–57.

| Cities and Towns | Population in 1854 | No. of Clerks, Receivers, &c. | No. of Letter-Carriers | Local Expenses | Postal Revenue | |-----------------|-------------------|-------------------------------|------------------------|---------------|---------------| | 1. London | 2,382,336 | 149 | 82 | L14,029 | L834,927 | | 2. Liverpool | 375,955 | 160 | 123 | L12,755 | L801,379 | | 3. Manchester | 316,213 | 123 | 134 | L10,696 | L85,301 | | 4. Glasgow | 329,097 | 124 | 109 | L63,441 | L89,765 | | 5. Dublin | 258,361 | 124 | 109 | L55,103 | L60,391 | | 6. Edinburgh | 160,302 | 82 | 74 | L56,270 | L59,177 | | 7. Birmingham | 232,841 | 90 | 64 | L38,849 | L42,107 | | 8. Bristol | 137,828 | 117 | 53 | L29,967 | L31,264 |

During the inquiry into the organization of the post-office which was instituted by the Treasury in 1854, a proposition was brought under consideration for discontinuing the metropolitan offices at Edinburgh and Dublin, and placing the Scottish and Irish business immediately under the central office. But it was clearly established, on careful investigation, that the proposed change was an undesirable one, for these reasons amongst others:—(1.) The management of remittances and accounts requires that receivers should be stationed in Edinburgh and in Dublin respectively; (2.) A dead-letter office is requisite in those capitals, inasmuch as the delay of transmission to London and the probable deficiency of local knowledge at the chief office would be alike prejudicial to the public service. (3.) The existing plan admits of the settlement of many questions arising in the ordinary course of business more expeditiously, and therefore more satisfactorily, than could be effected in London.

On the general question of appointments in the service of the post-office, the Treasury committee of 1854 Rules as reported its opinion "that the postmaster-general should appoint lay down strict rules for the examination of all candidates ments in for admission, either into the class of clerks, or into that of sorters and letter-carriers, in order to test their capa-city; . . . . that the limits of age for admission should be seventeen and twenty-three, in the case of all candidates for letter-carrierships, sorterships, or clerkships, who have not previously been in the service of the department;" and that "a medical examination should also take place in order to ascertain that the candidate has no physical or mental defect or disease which is likely to incapacitate him for the public service." They also proposed that the appointment of local postmasters should be transferred from the Treasury to the postmaster-general. Many other changes and rearrangements were recommended, which it is not needful here to notice.

Most of the recommendations of the committee received the approval both of the Lords of the Treasury and of the

---

1 Report [to the Treasury] upon the Post-Office (1854), pp. 33–35. postmaster-general, and have been carried into effect. But, on the proposed limit of age for admission to the service of letter-carriers and sorters, the Treasury minute observed that it was too low:—“My lords advert first to the trustworthy character of the duty, requiring, at least, considerable steadfastness of character and habits, which may not be easily secured at so early an age; and they also advert to the fact, that the limit of age for admission into other parts of the public service for which the officers are drawn from similar classes of society, and where the duties are not of a character requiring so much trust, extends to the age of thirty. My lords are therefore of opinion that it is desirable that a latitude should be given to the postmaster-general in the selection of this class of officers up to the age of twenty-seven.

“The only other point in the report,” continues the minute, “which my lords desire to modify is that which proposes to transfer the appointment of local postmasters from this board to the postmaster-general. My lords entirely concur with the committee that it would be beneficial to the public service, and advantageous to the post-office department, that the postmaster-general should have an opportunity of rewarding meritorious servants by promoting postmasters to more important towns where vacancies occur, and by appointing deserving officers in country post-offices, as well as in the chief office in London, to the charge of local post-offices. But it appears to my lords that this principle can only be applied with advantage to a class of post-offices where, from their importance and the amount of the emolument, the office is held as a separate and distinct employment, and that it would be inapplicable in all cases where the post-office is held in conjunction with a private business or profession, in which case it is obviously necessary that the appointment must be conferred upon a local person. In the latter cases, my lords are of opinion that it is for the public interest that the appointments should continue to be made as at present, after consulting, through the recommendation of the member for the county or town, the convenience and wishes of the population.” For these reasons it was decided that the Treasury should continue to appoint provincial postmasters in places where the net income shall not exceed L175 a year, and that in all other cases the appointment shall lie with the postmaster-general.

The existing rates of postage and public regulations of the department stand thus (February 1859):

1. All inland letters must be paid in advance by postage stamps, as follows:—For a letter weighing not more than ½ oz., 1d.; more than ½ oz., but not exceeding 1 oz., 2½.; more than 1 oz., but not exceeding 2 oz., 4½.; more than 2 oz., but not exceeding 3 oz., 6½.; and so on, ½d. being charged for every additional ounce. Inland letters which are posted wholly without stamps are returned to the writer. This parliamentary regulation came into operation on the 10th February 1859.

2. If insufficiently stamped, the deficient postage is charged with an additional rate of one penny. Thus, an inland letter, weighing more than half an ounce, but not more than an ounce, and bearing a single stamp, is charged twopence. But in the case of letters which have to be re-directed, the unpaid additional postage is charged at the ordinary rate. Unless three-quarters at least of the postage of a letter exceeding four oz. be prepaid, the letter is not forwarded.

3. Petitions and addresses to her Majesty, forwarded direct, are exempt from postage; and such petitions and addresses, as also petitions to either House of Parliament, if sent to a member of either house, are also exempt, provided they do not weigh more than 2 lb., and are without covers, or in covers open at the sides or at the ends.

4. All periodical publications, including newspapers, published in the United Kingdoms, at intervals not exceeding thirty-one days, and which bear an impressed stamp denoting stamp-duty of the value of 1d. at least, may be transmitted and re-transmitted through the post free of postage; but the stamp must be exposed to view; the cover must be open at the ends; it must contain no enclosure or writing of any kind; and, in case of a second transmission, the previous address, if written on the paper, must be cut out. For transmission abroad newspapers must be registered at the post-office, and the postage must be prepaid in postage stamps; the impressed stamp counts for nothing beyond the British Islands.

5. Parliamentary papers, open at the ends, are carried within Parliament House at the rate of 1½. for every 4 oz., or fractional part thereof, whether prepaid or not; but they must be marked “Parliamentary proceedings” on the cover.

6. Books, newspapers, &c., at the ends or sides, are charged at the Book-rate of 1½. for 4 oz., and 2½. for every 8 oz.; but the packets rate proceeds by halves, i.e., 2½. being charged for 8 oz., or fractional part of 8 oz. A book packet may contain any number of separate books or other publications (including newspapers, letters, and printed matter of every kind), prints, or maps, and any quantity of paper, parchment, or vellum. And the books, &c., may be either printed, written, or plain, or any mixture of the three. All legitimate mounting, binding, or covering, is allowed, as also rollers in the case of prints or maps; but no book packet may contain any letter or communication in the nature of a letter otherwise than wholly in print, nor anything which is sealed or otherwise closed against inspection, nor must it exceed 2 feet in length, width, or depth.

7. Registration of inland letters or book packets may be made by Registrars at the prepayment in stamps of a fee of 6½., in addition to the ordinary postage. Such registration makes it practicable to trace a letter from receipt to delivery. A receipt must be obtained by the sender at the post-office window, and a receipt is required from the receiver by the letter-carrier on delivery.

It is held by the post-office authorities that even registration does not render the postmaster-general responsible to the sender, but leaves intact the old legal doctrine, that post-office responsibilities of common carriers do not extend to postmasters, as was decided in the case of Lane v. Cotton. The post-office establishment is regarded as a branch of the public police, created by statute, and controlled by the government. Postmasters enter into no contract with individuals, and receive no hire, like common carriers, in proportion to the risk and value of the letters under their charge, but only a general compensation from government. The same doctrine was asserted in the case of Whitfield v. Lord Le Despencer, which was an action to recover the value of a bank-note stolen by one of the sorters out of a letter in the post-office. But a deputy-postmaster is answerable in a private suit for individual acts of misconduct or negligence, as for wrongfully detaining a letter an unreasonable time. And all subordinate officers are responsible to the postmaster-general, who may require them to make good to the sufferers any loss sustained through their neglect or breach of duty.

8. Parliamentary notices may be forwarded by post if posted at Parliament offices as transact money-order business. The postage and the tarry notices registration fee of 6½. on each must be prepaid either in money or stamps. The words “parliamentary notice” must appear legibly on each, and with them must be presented lists in duplicate to be examined at the post-office window.

9. For Colonial letters, 6½. the half-ounce. This rate now extends Colonial to every British colony or dependency. To the following places pre-letter-postment is optional:—India, Canton, Cape Coast Castle, Cape of Good Hope, Ceylon, Gold Coast, Long Island (at an advanced rate), New Brunswick, Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, Sierra Leone. To all others it is compulsory.

10. For Foreign letters the rates are too numerous for much detail. To France the rate is 4½. per quarter-ounce, if prepaid; letters double, if not prepaid. To Belgium, to most parts of Germany via Belgium, to Holland, 8½. per half-ounce; to Sardinia, via France, and to Spain, 6½. per quarter-ounce; to the Papal States, to Greece, and to Naples, 11½. per quarter-ounce; to the United States, 1½. the half-ounce, and so on.

11. To Belgium, France, Algeria, to Prussia via France, and to Foreign the French offices in Turkey, Syria, and Egypt, registered newspapers papers are conveyed at the rate of 1½. for 4 oz., 2½. for 8 oz., and book, and 2½. for every additional 8 oz., or fractional part thereof, packets. Other printed papers are 3½. for 4 oz., 6½. for 8 oz., and so on, for every additional 8 oz., and so on. Prepayment is compulsory. To Sardinia, Spain, the Balearic and Canary Islands, the

---

1 See the cases Lane v. Cotton in Lord Raymond’s Reports, i. 646; Whitfield v. Lord Le Despencer in Cowper’s Reports, 754; and Browning v. Goodchild, in Wilson’s Reports, iii. 443.