[217] “The trace of Marlborough’s neglected education was seen to the last in his reluctance to write. ‘Of all things,’ he said to his wife, ‘I do not love writing.’ To pen a despatch, indeed, was a far greater trouble to him than to plan a campaign. But nature had given him qualities which in other men spring specially from culture. His capacity for business was immense.”—“Green’s Short History of the English People,” p. 691.—Ed.

[218] “Sixth Annual Report,” pp. 38 and 39.

[219] “I must confess,” wrote his eldest brother to one of his friends, “I must confess that the thought of that noble intellect paralyzed and all but extinguished, struck me with a grief of greater intensity than I ever felt before in all the bereavements which have been my lot.”—Ed.

[220] According to the Postmaster-General’s Report for 1879, every transaction costs 7·55d. exclusive of postage; while “the Yorkshire Penny Bank (an old-established, widely-spread and very thriving institution) does its work (I am informed) at 2d. per transaction.”—Ed.

[221] The recent large reduction in cost is owing to the non-charge of postage.—Note by Sir R. Hill in October, 1872.

[222] “Eighth Annual Report,” pp. 12-14.

[223] “Fifteenth Annual Report,” p. 16.

[224] “Eighth Annual Report,” p. 14.

[225] “Eighth Annual Report,” p. 15. Any of my readers desirous of further information on this subject may refer with advantage to an interesting work on the “History of Savings Banks,” by Mr. William Lewins, author of “Her Majesty’s Mails.” (Sampson Low and Co.)

[226] See Vol. I., p. 459.—Ed.

[227] See Vol. II., p. 315.—Ed.

[228] “Ninth Annual Report,” p. 10.

[229] The following passage from Sir C. W. Dilke’s valuable work “Greater Britain,” published since the above was written, throws further light on the retrogressive course in question:—

“Writing for the Englishmen of Old England, it is not necessary for me to defend free trade by any arguments. As far as we in our island are concerned, it is so manifestly to the pocket-interest of almost all of us, and, at the same time, on account of the minuteness of our territory, so little dangerous, politically, that for Britain there can be no fear of a deliberate relapse into protection, although we have but little right to talk about free trade so long as we continue our enormous subsidies to the Cunard liners.

“The American argument in favour of prohibition is in the main, it will be seen, political; the economical objection being admitted, but outweighed. Our action in the matter of our postal contracts, and in the case of the Factory Acts, at all events shows that we are not ourselves invariably averse to distinguish between the political and the economical aspect of certain questions.”—(“Greater Britain,” second edition, p. 69.)

[230] See my Letter of Appointment, Vol. II., p. 224.

[231] In a paper drawn up some years after this passage was written, Sir R. Hill has thus expressed himself as regards Mr. Gladstone:—“There are few public men with whom I have been on such intimate terms, from whom I have received so much kindness, and for whom I entertain so high a respect.”—Ed.

[232] When my plan was published, the lowest General Post rate was fourpence; but while the plan was under the consideration of Government the rate between post towns not more than eight miles asunder was reduced from fourpence to twopence.

[233] In this comparison of revenue, the mode of calculation in use before the adoption of Penny Postage has of course been retained—that is to say, the cost of the packets on the one hand, and the produce of the impressed newspaper stamps on the other, have been excluded. The amounts for 1863 are, to some extent, estimated, the accounts not having as yet been fully made up.

[234] In 1868 the letters had increased more than ten and a-half fold. In 1867 the gross revenue had increased by £2,202,000, and the net revenue by £467,000.

[235] In 1868 the amount transmitted had risen to £19,079,000, or more than sixty fold—(“Fifteenth Report of the Postmaster-General,” p. 4.) [In 1878-79 it had risen to £27,303,000. In the preceding year, however, it had been as high as £29,153,000. See Vol. II. p. 286.—Ed.]

[236] In the Morning Star.—Ed.

[237] See in correction of this mistake, p. 393 and Appendix N.

[238] In Sir R. Hill’s Journal for June 23rd there is the following entry:—“Received a letter from Mr. Joseph Parkes, giving a brief account of the negociations with Government on the subject of the Parliamentary grant, in which he states that a Baronetcy, in lieu of the grant, was offered, but declined by my friends. This is the first intimation I have had of the kind. Wrote to say that I fully confirm the views taken by himself and Mr. Forster as to the Baronetcy.”—Ed.

[239] “Projectors see no difficulties, and critics see nothing else.”—Edmund Burke. “Correspondence of Edmund Burke.” Vol. II., p. 332.—Ed.

[240] The above report is taken, with abridgments, from the Times of June 15th, 1864.

[241] “June 9th, 1864.—Yesterday, received at Oxford the Honorary Degree of D.C.L. Undergraduates most enthusiastic.”—Sir R. Hill’s Journal.—Ed.

[242] The following year Sir R. Hill dined at Marlborough House:—“The Prince of Wales,” he wrote, “reminded me of the pleasure he had had, during the previous year, in presenting me with the Albert Medal, on which I told him that he really presented me with an empty box, and explained the cause, viz., that the successive blows required for obtaining high relief of the medal had broken the die before the work was completed. The interval being too short for the engraving of another die, the Council of the Society had judged it better not to delay matters; consequently the presentation took place ‘in dummy.’ The Prince laughed heartily at the story.”—Ed.

[243] See p. 336.

[244] I have lately learnt (1870) with much pleasure, that this improvement has been adopted in the new department of Telegraphy.

[245] In the Postal Union Mr. Frederic Hill’s plan was at length brought to effect.—Ed.

[246] In 1867, proceedings were taken against the Circular Delivery Company “for delivering letters contrary to the privilege of the Postmaster-General.” This Company delivered circulars at a very low rate. “The proper mode of proceeding,” Sir Rowland Hill recorded in his Journal, “would have been to adopt a plan which I long ago frequently discussed with the Assistant-Secretaries, and which has, I believe, been recently proposed in writing by my son, viz., to undertake the delivery of circulars at reduced rates (say a halfpenny), on certain conditions made with a view to the convenience of the Post-Office. * * * “I do not like an enforcement of the monopoly. It covers mismanagement.”—Ed.

[247] In Prussia this is effected by means similar to my plan of secondary distribution (see Vol. I., p. 251). The same means might be resorted to here.

[248] Carlyle’s “Life of Sterling” (edition of 1857), p. 221.

[249] See Vol. II., p. 389.

[250] See Vol. I., p. 438.

[251] Johnson’s “Life of Milton.”

[252] See Vol. II., p. 283.

[253] It is foreign to my present purpose to describe the after administration of the Post Office. I would refer my readers to “The Edinburgh Review,” Nos. 263 and 291, for articles on the Postal Telegraphs.

[254] The journal closes in the year 1869.

[255] The deputation consisted of Mr. Washington Lyon, mover of the resolution; Sir John Bennett, the seconder; Mr. Peter McKinlay, the Chairman of General Purposes Committee; Mr. Scott, F.R.A.S., the Chamberlain; and Mr. Monckton, F.S.A. (now Sir John Monckton), the Town Clerk.

[256] Before sending this letter Sir R. Hill read it to his eldest brother. “I remember,” says one who was present at the time, “Mr. M. D. Hill saying, ‘Mind, Rowland, if you send this, and if they do not do what you ask, you must resign.’ Sir Rowland answered, ‘I know that, and I am ready to resign.’”—Ed.

[257] “Eighth Report of Postmaster-General,” p. 31.

[258] “Eighth Report of Postmaster-General,” p. 20.

[259] The number of free newspapers delivered in the United Kingdom, in 1861, was about 45,700,000.—Vide “Eighth Report of Postmaster-General,” p. 28.—But of these about 4½ millions were newspapers from abroad.

[260] “Seventh Report of Postmaster-General,” p. 12.

[261] It is true that some few newspapers exceed the limit of weight (4 ozs.) which is carried for one penny, and they are therefore charged higher rates; but, on the other hand, two or more of the lighter newspapers—the aggregate weight of which does not exceed the 4 ozs.—are frequently sent under the same cover, and only one penny is charged on the packet. The average postage of each newspaper, when prepaid with the postage stamp, will therefore, in all probability, not exceed one penny per transmission.

[262] “Report of Select Committee on Postage (1843),” Mr. R. Hill’s evidence, p. 46.

[263] “Hansard”—Debate in Lords, June 21, 1842.

[264] Letter to Postmaster-General, 10th January, 1860.

[265] Pp. 20-22.

[266] “Second Report of Select Committee on Postage (1843),” question 11,070.

[267] “Eighth Report of Postmaster-General,” p. 31.

[268] “Eighth Report of Postmaster-General,” p. 31.

[269] The £45,000 and £110,000 charged for Government postage (exclusive of that of the Post Office itself) for the year 1838 and the present time, do not show the whole amounts received, the charges on the official foreign correspondence being omitted from the first amount, and that for the official bye and cross post letters from both. In the “Second Report of the Select Committee on Postage” (Appendix, p. 115) is a table showing with greater accuracy the amounts received for postage on the official inland correspondence for each year from 1833 to 1837. The amounts given above, however, will suffice for comparison.

[270] “Report of Select Committee of Lords (1847),” question 352.

[271] “Railway Intelligence for the Period,” ending 31st December, 1856. Published “under the Sanction of the Committee of the Stock Exchange.”

[272] Now (1868) 6½ days.

[273] This caveat is abundantly justified by information published in the “Journal of the Society of Arts” (October 28th, 1870), by which it appears that in North Germany, one of the countries pointed to for our example, newspapers are subject to a regular stamp duty, such as was formerly paid in England, but the amount of which is not easily stated, since it depends upon the size of the paper and other circumstances; and, further, that the compulsory stamp has not the franking power it possessed here, so that the postage constitutes an additional charge; and it is with the sum of these two charges that our postage should in fairness be compared. But the postage alone (⅔d. for rather less than 1½ oz., with a proportionate increase for greater weights) is higher than that which was charged in this country on many papers of large circulation, e.g., the Times (with its supplement of four pages, or, under the impressed stamp, with its supplement of eight pages), the Spectator, the Economist, and the Athenæum. While, besides exemption from stamp duty, other important advantages were enjoyed by the British, as compared with the North German, papers, e.g., under the adhesive stamp, permission to write upon them anything except a letter, and, with the like exception, to enclose with them either one or more additional newspapers, or other printed or written matter, on paying book postage according to the total weight; or again, under the impressed stamp, the power of repeated retransmission. But, above all, the right to resort to other and cheaper means of conveyance, a right barred in North Germany by postal monopoly. In short, all things considered, there can scarcely be a doubt, that even before the reductions of 1870, our much depreciated newspaper arrangements were more favourable, alike to publishers and the public, than those of North Germany, which are held up as our example. Further, that the North German Post Office, instead of having to pay, like the British Post Office, £600,000 a year for the railway conveyance of its mails, has the use of all railways without subjecting itself to any charge whatever, though its operations include parcels up to the individual weight of twenty pounds; lastly, that with all these advantages, and with a higher postage rate on the prevailing class of letters, the North German Post Office, though serving a population about equal to our own, yields in annual net revenue only about £60,000, while the British Post Office, with all its burdens and its lower rate of postage, yields, even if debited with the whole expense of the mail packet service, more than £1,400,000, of course relieving taxpayers to that extent.—Vide Fifteenth Report of the Postmaster-General—the latest issued—p. 14).

[274] Full information of this subject may be found in a minute of mine dated 13th July, 1858, and included in a Parliamentary Return, No. 302, 1860.

[275] This was written at a time when, as yet, there were no halfpenny stamps.—Ed.