23. It is obvious therefore that, as far as relates to the letters in question, the proposed change would entirely get rid of Sunday work, as respects the public; while, as respects the department, it would exchange work now dispersed through nearly a thousand offices for concentrated occupation in one—the latter requiring a less proportionate force, and falling on such time as to be dealt with without infringement on the hours of divine service. It is manifest therefore that, as respects general supersession of Sunday work, the balance is in favour of the proposed plan.
24. The advantage, however, by no means rests here. The plan will be an important aid, as will be shown hereafter, to measures for relieving the provincial offices as regards Sunday business in general.
25. As regards the chief office, the force now proposed to be employed on the Sunday would suffice for nearly all the ordinary duties necessarily belonging to that day, and thus it would be possible to defer most of the work now done on the Sunday till after midnight; and thus to avoid any material increase in the Sunday force. This latter change, however, implies the previous consolidation of the inland and district post offices.
26. Nay, were it thought necessary, there are means, arising in part out of the comparative leisure at most country offices on the Saturday, by which Sunday work at the chief office might be reduced considerably below its present amount. As, however, these means involve some complexity, and possibly additional expense, I do not propose them at present. But hereafter, should they prove sufficiently simple to be reduced to practice, and not too expensive for adoption, there can be no doubt that this prevention of the weekly delay or irregularity in the vast correspondence which ordinarily passes through London, so far from involving any increase in the amount of Sunday work, would, independently of its aid to other measures of relief, directly produce a material diminution of the same.
27. I now come to the special question of relief to the provincial offices. The measures in contemplation appear in the following extract from my minute of Dec 6, 1848:—
“That every office in England and Wales be closed for all purposes from ten to five o’clock on the Sunday, except for the receipt and despatch of any mails in the interval; but that a box be left open for the posting of stamped and unpaid letters. Further, that there be only one delivery of letters on that day.”
28. This proposal, having been referred by your Lordship to the English surveyors, has met with their unanimous and earnest concurrence. It appears, however, that although the general rule is to have only one delivery on the Sunday, there are several towns in which there are two. The discontinuance of the additional delivery, although, with one doubtful exception, approved of by the surveyors, might, nevertheless, in the absence of other alterations, produce serious complaint from the public: the Sunday transmission of letters through London, however, would, as regards most towns in England and Wales, withdraw so large a proportion of letters from the second delivery (already very light), that the little delay in the delivery of the residuum would be of no moment. Such withdrawal, however, it must be admitted, is, in relation to public convenience, an objection, pro tanto, to the plan; but, as the delivery of these letters on the Monday morning would be made conjointly with that of many letters now detained till Monday afternoon, or, in some instances, till the next day, the measure, as a whole, would probably give satisfaction even in the comparatively few towns where the delay would occur. Everywhere else it would certainly be felt as a great boon.
29. This change, therefore, being considered as part of the general measure, I have no hesitation in recommending that (with possibly one or two exceptions, which, if necessary, will be submitted hereafter) the second delivery be abolished throughout England and Wales; Ireland and Scotland being left for after-consideration; and that the plan, as proposed in my minute of December 6th, be now carried into effect. The reports of the surveyors are submitted.
30. It may perhaps assist your Lordship in deciding the important question now submitted, if I briefly recapitulate the results, negative as well as positive, of the whole of the measure.
31. First, It will prevent irregularity or delay (often amounting to twenty-four hours) in the transmission of probably 50,000 letters a week.
32. Second, It will add little or nothing to the expenses of the department.
33. Third, It will cause no increase whatever of mail-trains or other means of transmission, to or from London, on the Sunday.
34. Fourth, It will neither bring in nor take out a single London letter, and therefore cannot cause either a Sunday delivery or a Sunday collection in London.
35. Fifth, While it will not affect the number of Sunday collections elsewhere, it will materially reduce the number of Sunday deliveries.
36. Sixth, While, so far as the public is concerned, it will leave matters precisely as they now stand in London and the vicinity, it will tend greatly to reduce Sunday letter-writing and reading elsewhere.
37. Seventh, It is true that as regards the London Post Office, it will, in the first instance require the attendance of about twenty-five persons on the Sunday, but these will not be allowed in the slightest degree to infringe on the hours of divine service; and I am of opinion that eventually even this limited attendance may be avoided, and the Sunday work in the London office reduced much below its present amount. On the other hand, as regards the provincial offices, it will release a very large body of persons now engaged even during the hours of divine service, and will thus afford to many hundreds, perhaps even to some thousands, needful rest, and the opportunity of attending the services of the day.
38. Should your Lordship approve of these proposals, I submit that the necessary application be made to the Treasury.
39. Some important measures of relief to the rural messengers and rural receivers on the Sunday, which have been suggested by Mr. W. Johnson, will still remain for your Lordship’s consideration; but, as they are not essential parts of the main plan, I propose to submit them hereafter in a separate minute.
Rowland Hill.
February 3, 1849.
APPENDIX E.
[See p. 126.]
Letter to Postmaster-General deprecating Compulsory Employment
on the Sunday.
(Private and Confidential.)
General Post Office, October 18th, 1849.
My dear Lord,—I am greatly alarmed at your Lordship’s note, and earnestly entreat that you will not authorize Mr. Bokenham to compel the attendance of a single man. During your Lordship’s absence in Ireland, the excited state of the public mind made it necessary to take a decided course relative to this matter; and as it was always intended and fully understood by Mr. Bokenham that none but volunteers were to be employed on the Sunday duties, I did not hesitate to contradict the report which had been most unjustly raised to the effect that the men, notwithstanding conscientious objections to the work, were to be forced to engage in it.
The pledge which, under the circumstances, I felt warranted and compelled to give, I trust your Lordship will enable me fully to maintain.
I am still ready to undertake the responsibility of the sorting by volunteers, provided your Lordship will give me the powers which, by your approval of my minute of the 15th inst., were conferred on Mr. Bokenham. I submit, therefore, that there can be no necessity for resorting to any compulsion; and considering the manner in which the public has held me responsible for this measure, I trust I may be permitted to say that, so far as my own feelings are concerned, I would rather abandon the improvement altogether than run the risk of compelling any one to do that to which he has a conscientious objection.
Until I received your Lordship’s note I had no conception of any difficulty or hesitation on Mr. Bokenham’s part. Mr. Tilley was present when Mr. Bokenham expressed his readiness to undertake the duty on the conditions stated in my minute of the 15th. Mr. Tilley read the minute a few hours later, and confirmed the accuracy of its statements.
I need hardly say that I shall carefully follow the advice with which your Lordship has honoured me; but, as I am most anxious that this matter should be settled without delay, I beg that should you be unable to fulfil your intention of coming to town to-morrow, I may be favoured with immediate instructions to wait upon you at Brighton.
I have, &c.
Rowland Hill.
The Most Noble the Marquis of Clanricarde,
&c., &c., &c.
APPENDIX F.
[See p. 134.]
Anonymous Letter from a Sub-Sorter.
October 11th, 1849.
Sir,—Before taking up too much of your time, it is but fair to state that I shall not conform to the usage of society nor to the regulations of the Post Office. My communication will be anonymous, and, as you perceive, in the handwriting of a female. The dangers which beset the “usual channel,” have forced me to take this course in offering an observation or two on the opposition to the extension of Sunday duty. This opposition in the office is not really against the duty, but is a strong attempt to level the author of Penny Postage, and was originated in Mr. ——’s room! The Clerks received the cue, and artfully led the Subsorters, Letter-carriers, and Messengers to believe that the duty was to be performed without pay. The Inspector of Letter-carriers lent assistance by expressing a determination to resign if the order came into operation. Old tales of cutting down of salaries on railway lines were revived, and anecdotes manufactured telling of meanness in private matters. The men saw what was expected from them, and were soon employed on their walks in announcing their doleful prospects and looking up mawworms to protest against such a prophane decree. Of the success of this plan out of doors, Sir, you are aware. In the office, the pretensions to piety are quite sickening. Fellows who have broken nearly every commandment are now fearful of causing ever so slight a flaw on the fourth. Still, there are plenty of men willing and able to carry out your object if certain of protection. That this is wanted, the following instance will show. The first man who made application for the Sunday duty was told it must be in writing. Before, however, he could put the few words required to paper, it was known all over the office. A system of annoyance was commenced, strong enough to deter him from proceeding further in the matter. He was hooted at inside the building and insulted in the street.
Last night a report was in circulation that the morning despatch had been abandoned from the difficulty of obtaining hands. I hope, Sir, that this will not be the case with the evening duty, but that you will persist in the determination to benefit the public, in spite of in door opposition and out-of-door twaddle. Never mind if every letter is not got off on the first attempt—it will soon improve. Give the clerks an intimation that if they refuse this modification, it will be offered to the Subsorters on the same terms. They are afraid of us now. Educated in a better school—the Newspaper Office—for becoming officially dexterous, we could beat them at their own duties, and not one of them could accept a challenge to play the return match at those which we perform.
I will not trespass longer on your patience than to state that the hostility, portrayed by Mr. M. D. Hill in 1839 as likely to exist, is now in full vigour. In the ten years which have elapsed since then, they have not become reconciled to the name of Rowland Hill, but hate it worse than ever. The soothing system is of no use. A stronger motive in future must rule the Inland Office.
I am
Sir, most respectfully,
My poverty and not my will consenting to the omission of my name,
A Subsorter.
APPENDIX G.
[See p. 164.]
Letter to Mr. Warburton.
Hampstead, November 16th, 1850.
My dear Sir,—As you have kindly undertaken to see the Chancellor of the Exchequer on my behalf, I beg to trouble you with a brief recapitulation of the case.
You will recollect that in my late correspondence with the Postmaster-General I took the liberty to remind his Lordship of the promise under which I was induced to accept my present post, of the serious obstacles to improvements as well as of the great danger of insubordination in the office arising from my present anomalous position, and of the acknowledged fulfilment of the only condition on which my promotion was to depend.
It is now four years since the promise was made—two years have elapsed since I first claimed its performance; and though no objection is raised to the justness of the claim, no steps have been taken towards its practical acknowledgment. Additional circumstances, which I shall shortly state, now compel me to press for an immediate change.
According to present arrangements, Colonel Maberly has a staff of about fifty clerks, formed into departments, each department having a head, familiar with all the details thereof, and capable, under instructions, of preparing nearly all the necessary minutes, thus relieving Colonel Maberly himself of what would otherwise be an insupportable amount of drudgery. As regards the Money Order Department, I am similarly circumstanced; but for the transaction of general business, though I believe most of the difficult cases, particularly the obnoxious ones, devolve upon me, my whole staff consists of but three clerks, at comparatively low salaries. Nor could I be supplied with an efficient corps, save at the unwarrantable expense of several thousands a year—i.e., an amount making some approach to the actual cost of Colonel Maberly’s staff.
Neither would it avail to withhold the above cases from me, as all are more or less connected with those improvements which it is my especial duty to effect and maintain.
Viewing my position as temporary, I have endeavoured to meet the exigence by great personal exertion, and by obtaining competent assistance at my own cost, in which latter course, limited and imperfect as any such arrangements must necessarily be, I have already expended several hundred pounds.
Still I am obliged to investigate each case myself, and substantially to prepare the necessary minutes; and when, in addition to all this, it is considered that from the first I have rarely had less than five or six important and difficult improvements in hand at once, I scarcely need assure you that the labour has been very severe. Indeed it has proved quite too much for my health, and, according to the opinion of my medical attendant (Mr. Hodgson) it has induced a disorder, which, though yet but incipient, threatens the most serious consequences, unless promptly and effectually checked.
Effectual rest, the remedy prescribed, however, is incompatible with my present position. For though the Postmaster-General has most kindly acceded to every request I have made for leave of absence, yet, seeing that I have no assistant capable of undertaking my duties (as is done for Colonel Maberly by the assistant-secretary) any partial rest thus obtained entails a serious accumulation of work at its close. These are the considerations which oblige me to press for immediate change, though independently of them, and even of the promise adverted to above, I trust a consideration of what has been effected during the last four years will show my claim to be well founded.
To pass over numerous improvements, many of which have failed to excite attention, not so much from any want of importance, as from their smoothness in operation (the only case of trouble being the recent improvement in the Sunday duties, when a temporary outcry arose from a cabal within the office), I may particularise the reform of the Money Order Department, the only department consigned to my charge, a reform by which, with increased convenience to the public, increased accuracy in the accounts, better pay, and more relaxation to the clerks, a saving has been effected, already amounting, all things duly considered, to a total of about £37,000, and which is now going on at the rate probably of about £13,000 a year, with a clear prospect of increase.
This, however, constitutes but a small portion of what, even with the very limited means at my command, I have been able to save positively or negatively in the Post Office generally.
In addition to the injury to health involved in the labour by which these improvements have been achieved, I have had to submit to a sacrifice of income. Mine is, I believe, the only important office in the whole department with no scale of increase of salary; but for the special limitation which my promised promotion would remove, I should be now in the receipt of £1,500 a year—that is £400 a year less than Colonel Maberly had during his first five years of office, and £500 a year less than he has at present.
If Government is still of opinion that it cannot immediately fulfil its promise, I beg that you will urge my claim at least so far as to press that a period may now be fixed beyond which the complete performance of the promise shall not be delayed; and that, seeing the impossibility of continuing the present state of things, arrangements be at once made for the nearest approximation to such performance that may be deemed practicable.
I remain,
My dear Sir,
Yours faithfully,
Rowland Hill.
P.S.—I have enclosed a copy of a letter with which you favoured me on the 27th of November, 1846, and which bears strongly on the case.
Henry Warburton, Esq.
APPENDIX H.
[See p. 215.]
Letter to Postmaster-General (Lord Canning).
General Post Office, 18th June, 1853.
My dear Lord,—As your Lordship is already acquainted with many of the statements I am about to make, you will at once perceive that in writing at such length my view is in accordance with your understood wish so to prepare the case for the Chancellor of the Exchequer as to supersede the necessity of reference to former correspondence on the subject.
In September 1842, in the midst of what the Treasury was pleased to consider an able discharge of duties connected with the institution of my system of Penny Postage, I learnt that my services were no longer required, and I spent the next four years in private life, except so much of the year 1843 as was occupied in preparing and laying before a committee of the House of Commons a full exposition of the operation of the Post Office as then conducted, in the course of which I demonstrated that the existing system of management, besides depriving the public of many reasonable facilities, involved an enormous loss of revenue.
In December, 1846, my friend Mr. Warburton intimated to me the desire of Her Majesty’s Government again to employ me in developing and perfecting my plans, and that they were prepared to offer me a permanent engagement at the Post Office.
Although I was then engaged in avocations more highly remunerative than the proffered appointment, I at once avowed myself ready to accept it if I could be assured of sufficient authority to secure the success of my measures—a stipulation which, while reasonable under any circumstances, was rendered imperative by my former experience of the obstructions and injury that improvements were exposed to in consequence of the state of feeling which prevailed at the Post Office.
I was given to understand that I might count on the support of the Postmaster-General and the Chancellor of the Exchequer; and that if I showed that I possessed the requisite administrative powers, (the subsequent full acknowledgment of which happily relieves me from the necessity of entering on that part of the subject) I might look forward to be promoted at no distant period to a position of higher authority, which was understood at the time and subsequently admitted to mean the post of sole secretary.
Without for a single moment doubting the sincerity with which these promises were made, I nevertheless, after much anxious deliberation, arrived at the conclusion that they were not sufficiently explicit to justify me in placing myself in a position so liable to failure, which in the public mind would naturally be attributed to defects in the system itself, or to mismanagement on my part, rather than to opposing influences which could not be generally known.
My prospects of effecting improvements under the discouraging circumstances in which I knew I should be placed did not seem clear enough to justify me in incurring the risk of becoming myself an instrument for destroying that universal reliance on the soundness of my project, which I felt to be my surest means of obtaining ultimate success.
But I was in the hands of my friends, and I shall not be censured for deferring to the opinion of such men as Mr. Warburton, Lord Overstone, Mr. Hawes, and Mr. Raikes Currie.
I consequently entered on my present office, and have now served under three Postmasters-General; and I gladly avail myself of this opportunity to express my deep sense of the kindness and confidence with which I have been treated, and my full recognition of the efforts made from time to time, with more or less of success, to remove impediments and to give freer scope to my exertions; but the evils which I foresaw and which have come upon me in full measure are beyond the reach of palliatives. The system on which we are proceeding is radically bad, and stands scarcely more strongly condemned by myself than by my colleague Colonel Maberly.
Though possessed of secretarial authority, I am, if I may so express myself, a general almost without an army—when I entered the office I found, of course, the clerks regarding the senior secretary as having the first if not the only claim on their services; and without desiring for a moment to reflect on them or on any one else, I become every day more convinced that without harmonious views, a joint jurisdiction, even supposing equality to be fully and practically admitted, is utterly incompatible with the requirements of the office.
Looking then back upon the events of the six years during which my promised promotion has been delayed, I feel bound to state that if in December, 1846, I could have foreseen what has occurred I could not have accepted the offer then made, nor do I believe that, under like circumstances, my friends would have advised me to the step.
That much has been done is, of course, not to be denied by me; but it has been accomplished amidst sore trials, and with risks to health which my duty to my family would not have allowed me to incur.
Let me then stand acquitted before your Lordship and the Chancellor of the Exchequer of either impatience or presumption, when I urge in the strongest manner, consistent with the respect which I owe to my superiors, my claim to the prompt fulfilment of the understanding on which alone I consented to take my seat at the Post Office.
As every statement like that which I am called upon by your Lordship to make is, of necessity, tinctured with egotism, I gladly quit that part of the task which relates to my own personal interests, and proceed to show that the change which I claim is equally demanded by the public service.
In 1847 I was directed by the Postmaster-General to report on the state of the Money Order Office, which resulted in my recommending several large retrenchments and other improvements, which were adopted by his Lordship and the Treasury, but which Colonel Maberly declined to take the responsibility of carrying into effect; in consequence of which the secretarial authority of that Department was consigned to me alone.
By a report of Mr. Barth, the head of the Department, which I called for soon afterwards, it appears that the accounts were then so deeply in arrear that great doubt was entertained whether they ever could be made complete, and the expense of their completion, supposing it to be possible, was estimated at £10,000. No general balance had ever been struck since the institution of the Department in 1839, and the liabilities were of unknown amount.
To avoid the great expense of bringing up the arrears, and to insure the extinction of unknown liabilities, it was found necessary to obtain an Act of Parliament calling in the outstanding Money Orders. Concurrent efforts were made to bring up the more recent arrears, and to prevent the possibility of new ones arising. And eventually the liabilities of the department were ascertained, and a general balance was struck, which has since been repeated quarterly.
On a full investigation of the accounts I found that the Department was not only, as I had anticipated, unprofitable, but involved an annual loss of no less than £10,000.
I, however, found it practicable to introduce, by successive improvements, such simplification in the arrangements as, with increased convenience to the public, and increased accuracy in the accounts, with better pay and more relaxation to the clerks, to convert this loss into a gain, which amounted for the year 1850 to £3,236, and which, under my brother, Mr. Frederic Hill, who has subsequently carried on the Department in the same spirit of improvement, amounted last year to £11,664, making an effective saving within five years of upwards of £21,000 per annum.
As regards the Post Office generally, the amount of saving which may still be effected is a matter of so much uncertainty, that I hesitate to offer any estimate. I can only say that it may be assumed, as I think it may, that every Department of the service can be gradually improved to the same extent as the Money Order Office (the only one which has been confided entirely to my care), it follows that in the course of a few years, not only may the public be better served, and the men, if necessary, better paid, but savings may be effected to an extent of about £200,000 a year, in addition to the saving of £100,000 a year, which, if required, I should be prepared to show has already been made.
But of late a new motive has arisen for the proposed change. The augmentation of letters is not only in constant progress, but has for some time moved forward with increasing celerity. Without some change, no doubt is entertained in the office, that the present building will soon be not only too small for the transaction of the business, but so much too small, as that no increase of its limits by practicable additions will answer the requirements of the service; and consequently that a most expensive outlay—probably not less than half a million—will be required for a new Post Office.
If placed, however, in the position contemplated, I shall be enabled, as I confidently expect, to make, under your Lordship’s sanction, such improvements as will avert this impending necessity for years, if not remove it altogether.
The result of my experiments in the Money Order Office has been to show the great power which the simplification of arrangements has in lessening the quantity of labour, and, as a consequence, the quantity of space required for its performance.
When, five years ago, I took the secretarial control of the Money Order department, the building appropriated thereto was fully occupied, and negotiations were in progress for purchasing land to extend the accommodations. At present, notwithstanding an increase of business to the amount of one-third, there is such ample room that no extension is likely to be required for many years to come.
My knowledge of the other departments of the Post Office enables me to state, with some confidence, my opinion, that similar improvements may be extended to those also, and with the like beneficial results. At the present time, a postponement of building, though but for a few years, is of great importance. Several projects for bringing railways into the heart of the metropolis, so as to make them available for mere local transit, are on foot. And from some years’ experience, first as a director and afterwards as chairman, of the Brighton Railway Company, I feel justified in predicting that in some shape or other, some such project will be realized: I also foresee that such change must produce results in which both the Post Office authorities and the proprietors of the railways will have a common interest, and from overtures which have been made to the Department by some of the projectors, I think it highly probable, that whatever changes in the Post Office may be thereby rendered necessary or desirable, will not have to be made altogether, perhaps not mainly, at the cost of Government.
But however this may be, it can scarcely be doubted that the effect of such railways must be to reduce the value of any outlay made irrespective of this disturbance in the present system of Metropolitan communication, since it is hardly possible that any buildings that might now be put up would be found adapted, either in position or arrangement, to the altered state of things.
Having now concluded the financial part of the subject, I beg your Lordship’s attention to the new sources of anxiety which have been opened, and to the possibility of allaying that anxiety by substituting a unity of executive power for its present divided state.
The vast increase which has taken place of late years in the facilities for locomotion and the conveyance of merchandise, has led to a wide-spread desire—I might almost say a clamorous demand—for further facilities in the transmission of letters. On some points this is the result of ignorance as to what is practicable or even possible, while on others it relates to changes which I have long had in view, but which, under present impediments, I cannot undertake.
The experience of the last thirteen years has satisfied me, that if our Post Office is to retain its present position, and to remain the model for those of other nations, and still more if it is to attain that high perfection to which your Lordship’s enlightened and vigorous administration seems to open the way, we must not only continue in the course of improvement, but increase our speed. I do not allude to reduction of rates; but to what, in the present cheapness of postage, the public mind is much more intent upon, viz., frequency, celerity, and exact regularity in transmission and delivery. Inconveniences which, while the whole system of commercial intercourse was characterised by dearness, infrequency, and slowness, attracted but little attention, now rise to importance in the eyes of the sufferer by the effect of comparison, and remedy is demanded with a promptitude quite unheard of in former times, and which is unattainable without energetic and cordial co-operation in the higher departments of the executive, and ready obedience and zealous activity in all the subordinates.
Having written thus far, and having also carefully considered every statement and every remark I have made, I feel it my duty to say, that after all the deliberation required by so grave a question, I have arrived at the settled conviction that the existing state of things cannot continue; and I therefore respectfully request that, in considering the present application, such continuance may not be regarded as a possible alternative.
I am sure your Lordship will believe me incapable of dealing lightly with that connection with the Post Office on which I set so great and just a value. To devise and bring into operation, so far as it has been effected, my system of Penny Postage, has been the cherished object of the best years of my life, interest in its progress, whether I am an instrument or not in promoting it, will ever retain the firmest hold on my mind, and would suffice to keep me in any course, but one which I feel to be inconsistent alike with my private and my public duty.[256]
* * * * * *
The Right Hon. Viscount Canning, &c., &c., &c.
APPENDIX I.
[See p. 238.]
Memorandum by Sir Rowland Hill on the Net Revenue of the
Post Office.
Much difference of opinion has arisen as to the amount of net revenue or profit of the Post Office department, i.e., the excess of receipt above expenditure; some estimating it at upwards of £1,500,000 per annum, others affirming that it is really less than £400,000.
This difference of opinion appears to arise from different views being entertained on the two following points:—
1. As to whether certain items should be included in the receipt.
2. As to whether certain other items should be included in the expenditure.
I may premise, that the subject of net revenue has to be viewed in two aspects. First, as to its absolute amount, and, secondly, as to its comparative amount when contrasted with the net revenue obtained before the establishment of Penny Postage. I propose, therefore, to consider the question from both points of view.
First.—As to the absolute amount of net revenue.
Under the head of receipt, the items regarding which there is a difference of opinion are:—
(a.) The postage of the Government correspondence.
(b.) The proceeds of the impressed stamps on newspapers.
(a.) The postage of the Government correspondence is included in the ordinary amount of gross receipt, but it is contended by some that it ought to be excluded.
| The amount of Government postage is, on the average, about | £150,000 | per annum.[257] |
| Of which that of the Post Office itself is about | 40,000 | " |
| ———— | ||
| Leaving for the other Departments about | £110,000 | " |
The postage of the Post Office itself cannot affect the Net Revenue, seeing that it is included in the expenditure as well as in the gross receipt. It may, therefore, be left out of consideration.
As regards the correspondence of the other Government departments, if it were right to deduct the postage of it from the revenue of the Post Office, it is obvious that it would also be right to deduct the cost of its conveyance and delivery from the expenditure of the Post Office. The net revenue would therefore be reduced, not by the full sum of £110,000 above mentioned, but by that amount less the cost of conveyance and delivery; in other words, by the profit the Post Office obtains on the official correspondence. It is to be borne in mind, however, that official postage is, in nearly all cases, charged by weighing the letters not individually, but in the gross; a mode of procedure which, if applied to private correspondence, would reduce the rate of charge for such correspondence by about one-half; and although, owing to the greater average weight of official letters, the reduction of charge is not so great as one-half, it may be doubted whether the remaining charge be sufficient to leave any profit to the Post Office, so that, whether the amount received and the cost incurred for the conveyance and delivery of official correspondence be, or be not, included in the calculation, the net revenue of the Post Office could be but very slightly affected. It may be added that the postage charged against the various Government departments is actually paid into the coffers of the Post Office, and is not merely a statistical record.
(b.) The proceeds of the impressed stamp on newspapers is an item regarding which the claim of the Post Office to include it in the receipts is sufficiently established by reference to the fact that, though this part of the revenue is collected by another department, the sole purpose for which the stamp is now resorted to is to obtain for the newspaper the advantage of postal transmission. At the same time, it may be added, that the proceeds in question, amounting for the year 1861, to £134,571,[258] are by no means a remuneration for the service performed. Divided by the number of such newspapers conveyed (viz., about 41 millions),[259] this amount gives only four-fifths of a penny per paper; so that, as newspapers weigh on the average 2½ ozs. each,[260] the rate of charge for a newspaper is less than one-seventh of that for a letter of the same weight.
An argument in favour of the sufficiency, and even more than sufficiency, of the postage on newspapers to defray their postal expense, has been drawn from the fact that the railway companies actually convey them at a lower rate. But two important circumstances have to be borne in mind, 1st, that railway companies, instead of delivering the newspapers individually, merely hand them in bulk to the newspaper agents; and 2ndly, that the companies make little or no provision for conveyance to villages and hamlets, thus performing only the least expensive portion of the service, and leaving the more costly work to the Post Office.
After what has been said, it must be obvious, that even when newspapers are prepaid with a postage stamp (the charge being thereby raised to a penny for each transmission[261]), the payment is too low to be remunerative. Moreover, the privilege accorded to news papers indirectly forces another loss on the department, since the difficulty of discriminating between newspapers and other printed matter has, in fact, compelled a reduction of the book postage to the same rate. So that, whereas formerly no book-parcel was carried for less than sixpence, the charge on light book-parcels is now as low as a penny. Instead, therefore, of any part of the receipts from newspapers being withheld from the Post Office, as it is alleged ought to be done, an equitable adjustment would have the effect of placing to the credit of the department something additional for the unprofitable service thus thrown upon it.
Under the head of expenditure, the only material item regarding which a difference of view prevails, is the expense of the packet service, which expense, it is maintained by some, should be charged to the Post Office.
The claim that the Post Office should be charged with the whole expense must be considered as barred by the simple fact, that few of the mail-packets were established either by the Post Office, or for merely postal purposes, their expense being far beyond what such requirements could justify. “To assume that those packets were really established for Post Office purposes is to charge the Government with the most absurd extravagance. The West India packets, for instance, were established at a cost of £240,000 per annum, though the utmost return that was expected from letters was £40,000, leaving the £200,000 a clear deficit.
“Nor is this comparative uselessness for Post Office purposes confined to the packets to remote places; the great cost, even of the home packets, results from causes independent of the Post Office.” [262]
Indeed, as was stated in the House of Lords by Lord Monteagle, who, when Chancellor of the Exchequer, arranged the first contracts for the mail steamers, “the expense of the packet service, which was said to swallow up the whole of the revenue now derived from the Post Office, had no more to do with the Penny Postage than the expense of the war in Afghanistan or China. It was as distinct from the Post Office as the expense of the army or navy. The great packet communication between Great Britain and the British North American Colonies was undertaken upon much higher principles than any connected with mere consideration of revenue. It was felt by the Government of Lord Melbourne that it was not wise to allow the only rapid mode of communication between the British possessions in North America and the mother country to be dependent upon the means afforded by the United States. Means were accordingly taken to establish a line of communication of our own. He admitted that this was not done, except at a very heavy expense; but it was not right to place that expense to the account of the Post Office.” [263]
Still, it is obvious that, as these packets do postal work, some portion of their expense ought to be charged to the Post Office, and the question of amount is what has really to be determined.
Upon this question it is necessary to explain that, upon a suggestion from the Treasury, viz., that the amount should be “measured in each case by the amount of ocean postage received,”[264] the following is the rule observed:—
Whenever the amount of ocean postage is below the cost of the line of packets by which the service is performed, the Post Office debits itself, for packet service, with a charge just equal to the ocean postage received. In the only two lines of packets (viz., those between England and France, and England and Belgium), in which the ocean postage exceeds the cost, the department debits itself with the whole expense of the packet service.
Whatever may be thought of this arrangement, it will scarcely be maintained that it is too favourable to the Post Office, which, save in respect of the two packet services just mentioned (which now jointly yield a surplus of about £56,000 per annum), is debited with an amount equal to its whole receipts (viz., £470,000), without even any allowance for the expense it incurs in that portion of the packet administration which is necessarily carried on within the department.
The Eighth Annual Report of the Postmaster-General[265] contains an estimate of the net revenue of the Post Office for the year 1861, prepared on the principles laid down in the foregoing remarks, but including some less important adjustments shown in the document itself.
The net revenue thus determined is £1,161,985, the whole, save the £56,000 mentioned above, and about £30,000 derived from money-order transactions, being the produce of inland postage, which thus yields a net revenue of about £1,076,000.
Second. I now proceed to consider the question of net revenue as to its comparative amount, when contrasted with the net revenue obtained before the establishment of Penny Postage, the object being to ascertain the loss consequent on the reduction of the rate. When proposing Penny Postage, I estimated this loss (under different circumstances, however,) at about £300,000.[266]
The amount of net revenue in the year 1838, the last year throughout which the old rates were maintained, was, according to the mode of account then in use, £1,659,510.[267] For the purpose of comparison, it is obvious that a similar mode of account must be applied to the present state of things.
Bearing this in mind, we have now once more to consider the two points affecting receipt, viz., the postage of the Government correspondence, and the proceeds of the impressed stamps on newspapers, and the one point affecting expenditure, viz., the expense of the packet service.
As regards the Government correspondence.
It is alleged that, under the old system, this was carried free. Now the fact is, that under that system the departments of probably the largest correspondence, viz., the Customs, the Excise, and the Stamps and Taxes, paid the postage of all their letters, while some other departments, though less strictly dealt with, paid at least for their foreign correspondence. The aggregate of such payments amounted, on the average, to about £45,000 per annum.[268]
Now, seeing that, since the adoption of Penny Postage, the non-official correspondence has increased nearly eight-fold, it may well be doubted whether, had the old system continued, the official correspondence would not have so increased as to raise the expenditure from £45,000 per annum to at least equality with the £110,000, the present average.[269]
As regards Newspapers.
As, under the old system, the proceeds of the impressed stamp did not enter into the accounts of the Post Office, so, for the purpose of comparison, they must be excluded now; the only question, therefore, is, whether the Post Office should now be credited with the revenue derived from the adhesive stamp as applied to newspapers. This claim has been contested on the ground that, as under the old system newspapers were carried free, so the same service should be reckoned as performed now on the same terms; and it has been naturally supposed that the effect of recent changes has been to reduce the number of newspapers transmitted under the impressed stamp, the decrease being counterbalanced by the use of the adhesive stamp for which, therefore, in the comparison, no claim should be made.
Now, the fact is that, notwithstanding the option now given, the number of newspapers freed by the impressed stamp at the present time is not only as great as the number so conveyed in 1838, but is even somewhat larger; whilst a considerable increase has also taken place in the weight and bulk of the individual papers; so that the amount of gratuitous service, instead of being diminished, has been largely increased, and consequently, the sum derived from the adhesive stamp is, to say the least, a mere payment for additional duty.
Again, it is a mistake to suppose that, under the old system, the conveyance of newspapers was altogether free. In fact, there were numerous and important exceptions, since the impressed stamp, to which all newspapers were then subjected, freed the paper only when transmitted from one post-town to another; moreover, in nearly every town there were extensive districts beyond the free-delivery, in which not only letters, but newspapers, were subjected to an additional charge. From this charge both are now relieved. Again, in addition to the towns that were then post-towns, there are at present more than 10,000 places having sub-offices. Before the introduction of Penny Postage, a newspaper transmitted by post between a post-town and, with few exceptions, any of the 10,000 places which have now sub-offices, was subjected to a charge of at least one penny; and when transmitted between any two of the above 10,000 places, with but few exceptions, to a charge of at least twopence.
At present a newspaper, even without the impressed stamp, if posted at any one of the 11,400 places at which head or sub-offices are now established, provided only that it does not exceed 4 ozs. in weight, is delivered at any other for a single penny.
No doubt, the number of newspapers directly charged with postage is larger now than under the old system; but as the charge is far from being remunerative, this is anything but a gain to the department.
As regards the expense of the Packet Service.
For the year 1838, the last year, as has been said, throughout which the old rates were maintained, the Post Office accounts, excepting a trifling amount of arrears, contain no charge for packet service, that service having been transferred from the Post Office to the Admiralty, partly in 1823, and the remainder in 1837,[270] so that, for the purpose of comparison, such charge must of course be excluded from the present account.
In the Postmaster-General’s Report for 1861 is a table (p. 31) prepared with a view to a comparison such as that now under consideration. It is proper to state, however, that a certain change of circumstances has led to a corresponding change in the mode of presenting the account. Formerly, when the year’s disbursements were almost identical with its liabilities, their unmodified appearance in the account was sufficient for practical purposes; but, of late years, when, owing to unavoidable irregularities in the large payments made to railway companies, the disbursements and liabilities have often been largely at variance, the latter have been presented in the account in preference to the former, as obviously affording better means for determining the net revenue of the year.
The amount arrived at by this mode of proceeding is £1,525,311, or £134,199 less than the net revenue of 1838.
It may, perhaps, be objected to the above comparison, that the revenue derived from the packets is greater now than heretofore, and that equity requires a corresponding adjustment of the account. There can be no doubt that the revenue in question has considerably increased, although such increase is not wholly attributable to the improvements in the packet service. If, however, the adjustment thus called for should be made, equity would require corresponding adjustments on other points. Thus, allowance would have to be made, 1st, for a considerable amount of net revenue formerly accruing from various colonial post offices, as, for instance, those of British North America and the West Indies, which have recently been made independent. 2nd, for the great increase in the expense of conveying the mails, which increase, contrary to all that might have been expected, has arisen from the establishment and extension of the railway system. And, 3rd, for the additional expenditure caused by a general increase of salary and by a reduction of individual labour, both made to remedy admitted evils under the old system. It would, indeed, be very difficult, if not wholly impracticable, now to ascertain the result of all these adjustments; but it may safely be maintained that it would leave the account at least as favourable to the Post Office as at present.
Rowland Hill.
December 18, 1862.
APPENDIX J.
[See p. 279.]
Conveyance of Mails by Railway. Memorandum thereon.
As doubts appear to exist as to the expediency of proceeding with the proposed Railway Bill, at least in the present comprehensive form, I have been induced to consider whether the object in view may not be attained by other means; and I am inclined to think that this may be done not only without the opposition, but even with the cordial co-operation of the railway companies; and that, concurrent with this, an important saving of revenue may be effected.
The means which I would suggest are that the Exchequer Loan Commissioners be authorised and required to advance loans, within certain limits, to such railway companies as can give ample security, on the following conditions:—