“September 30th.—At —— the postmaster, who gets £15 a year as compensation for [his loss of] late-letter fees has remitted till lately only 7s. or 8s. a year [for such fees]; but on a stir being made the remittances at once advanced to as much per week: the explanation given is that he omitted to demand the fee, not that he fraudulently appropriated it; and on this ground he has escaped dismissal, I think very improperly; but I have not been consulted in either case, and know the facts only from conversation with the Postmaster-General.”
About the same time I was engaged in devising means for a partial introduction of the plan of district offices in the London delivery, but was led to abandon the attempt, in some measure, by the inconveniences attending a partial arrangement, and yet more by fear of serious disorder likely to arise from the imperfect manner in which I knew, by past experience, the necessary instructions would be carried into effect, unless I could myself superintend their execution; and thus it was that several years had to elapse before this great improvement could be made.
Soon after arriving at this conclusion I attempted to remove a strange anomaly which was producing a certain amount of trouble in the office, leading occasionally even to delay in the despatch of the mails. This was that while letters brought to the chief office after 7 P.M. were not received for that night’s mail without an additional fee of sixpence, late newspapers were received up to that hour on payment of a halfpenny:—[38]
“October 5th.—To-day I consulted Bokenham[39] on the expediency of advancing the fee [on newspapers] at seven o’clock, but he strongly advises against it, on the ground of its certain unpopularity with the press.”
So difficult is it to recall concession, however mischievous and absurd. In the end, however, a compromise was adopted which, while it greatly relieved the department, proved satisfactory to the newspaper publishers. I abstain from further narration of mere obstructions, not for want of matter, but because enough has been done to show the difficulties, annoyances, and delays ever crossing the path of my improvements; the like of which must, I fear, be expected by all whose zeal for reform leads them to intrude amidst men of routine.
A trouble of another kind, however, began now to show itself, which later on produced serious consequences. Applications for increase of salary, backed by the recommendation of Colonel Maberly, were referred to me for consideration, the circumstances being such that, without unscrupulous disregard of the public interest, I could do nothing but advise their rejection. I found that in one instance, instead of the applicants being simply informed of the Postmaster-General’s decision, which was in conformity with my opinion, they had also been told—contrary to official rule—of our conflicting recommendations. The consequence was a renewal of the application, accompanied with a letter of thanks to Colonel Maberly, and an appeal from my judgment as being opposed to that of “the Secretary.” I could not but foresee that if, without any opportunity of recommending merited concession, I were to be held up as a bar to concessions recommended by others, I should, in course of time, find myself in a position very unfavourable alike to the maintenance of my just authority and the progress of good measures. After noticing the above facts, my Journal proceeds as follows:—
“October 16th.—I tried to avoid this collision of opinion, representing to the Postmaster-General the probable result when the papers were first referred to me; but his reply was that his opinion coincided with my own, but that he could not act in direct opposition to Maberly’s earnest advice without support from me, consequently I had no escape; luckily the Treasury, as well as the Postmaster-General, take my view of the question.”
Accordingly, I wrote a somewhat severe minute on the subject, and this was approved by the Postmaster-General. I must add that my foreboding was, on both points, justified by the sequel, the usual course being, for a long time, that the duty of rejecting such applications fell almost exclusively upon me, while the popularity that arose when an application was granted was almost engrossed by Colonel Maberly. The natural, nay, inevitable result was that great difficulties were raised in the way of the improvements that I attempted to make.
Under all these circumstances, it is little to be wondered at that, on looking back on the progress made during the first year since my appointment at the Post Office, I was much dissatisfied with what I found, nor could I feel surprised that symptoms of discontent began to appear in the public, which, knowing nothing of impediments, naturally expected the fulfilment of those expectations which my admission to office had raised.
Among the improvements that I effected this year, the following is, I conceive, of great importance:—
Exorbitant claims having been advanced and admitted for compensation in respect of abolished fees, perquisites, &c., I made arrangements for such returns as to the current amount of those irregular emoluments as would keep these claims thenceforth within due bounds. The efficiency of this plan will be evident when it is considered that, though at the period of abolition claimants would naturally seek to make this amount appear as large as possible, yet, in ordinary times, when the receipt of large fees might act as a bar to demand for augmented salary, the interest would lie in the opposite direction. All, therefore, that was necessary was to get the ordinary estimate on indisputable record. This had been provided for before I left the Treasury, but, in the interim, the plan had been abandoned.
Finding that any attempt to establish a parcel post, which I had formerly suggested, would raise more opposition in the railway companies than I thought it prudent just then to encounter, I suggested the establishment of a book post, pointing out how much such a measure would promote education, and how acceptable it would be to the public. The Postmaster-General expressed apprehensions of the department being overloaded on magazine days, and I had to point out the means by which all such difficulties could be surmounted. Vehement objections came from the usual quarter, but these were overruled.
Before closing the account of the year, I must mention two attempts at improvements which have met with no success.
Upon an application from Colonel Maberly’s extra clerks for an increase of salary, I proposed instead a regular system of promotion, whereby all vacancies in the establishment should be filled by selection from the extra clerks instead of from without, an arrangement which would have obtained the collateral advantage of submitting every candidate for regular clerkship to a probation in the extra corps. The Postmaster-General seemed favourable to the principle, which, indeed, had been occasionally recognised in practice, but unfortunately I never succeeded in obtaining its adoption as a rule, the real obstacle being, no doubt, that it would have acted as an impediment to patronage.
My second abortive measure I regarded as of great importance, nor has my opinion of it undergone any change; though how far it may be applicable to the circumstances of the present day is another question. Wishing to procure for the Post Office the unrestricted use of all the railway trains, and that at a moderate fixed rate, I suggested that Government, as a means of procuring the ready acquiescence of the railway companies, should include in a bill then preparing for Parliament a provision in their favour, which seemed to me to be in strict accordance with justice, and with the true interests of the public. In my Report[40] on this subject, I first showed that in order to enable the Post Office effectually to serve the public, it was necessary that the department should make far greater use of the railways. Under the existing law, owing to uncertainty as to the rate of payment, the excessive awards frequently made, and other causes, this was impracticable. I therefore proposed that an attempt should be made to obtain an Act empowering the Railway Commissioners, at that time an organised Board, with the present Lord Belper at its head, to take the following steps:—
1st. To issue a general tariff of charges for the conveyance of mails, such tariff to be constructed so as to afford the companies a moderate profit.
2nd. To decide all questions which might arise between the Post Office and any railway company.
3rd. To issue a general tariff of maximum fares for passengers and charges for goods, minerals, &c., to be demanded of the public; and
4th. To revise such general tariffs from time to time.
By way of compensation to the companies, and with a view also to the advantage of the public, I proposed, “subject to such regulations as Parliament may impose for securing fairness towards all parties interested, to adopt a territorial division of the surface of the kingdom, reserving, as open to new companies, any district in which the public interests would be served by the construction of new and independent lines, but assigning to each existing company”—on certain specified conditions—“so much of the district on each side of its line as can be most advantageously served by such company; a provision being made that, if at any time the Railway Commissioners should be of opinion that the public interests require that a railway of a given description should be made within such assigned territory, it shall be competent to the Commissioners to call upon the company to which the district is so assigned to construct the line, with the consent of Parliament; and if the company refuse or neglect so to do within a given time, to offer the line to the public at large.”
I further proposed that these arrangements should apply compulsorily to all companies hereafter to be formed, but that “each existing company should have the option, within a certain period, to accept the same conditions, or to continue in its present condition.”
The following advantages, among others, would, I expected, result from the proposed arrangements:—
1. It would secure the cheap conveyance of the mails, and greatly promote the extension and perfection of the system of Post Office distribution.
2. It would secure the establishment of moderate fares, without resorting to competition, which it is now generally admitted would be as injurious to the public as to the companies.
3. It would secure the completion of the railway system at the least expenditure of capital, and in a manner most conducive to economy in working.
4. It would repress rash and unprincipled speculation; and
5. It would relieve Parliament from the drudgery of investigating hastily-devised and useless projects.
As regards the interests of the companies, I pointed out that—
1. It would relieve them from the ruinous expenditure now necessary to defend their property from aggression.
2. It would enable them to take advantage of the cheapness of labour or materials, and abundance of capital, gradually to extend the ramifications of their lines to all places capable of affording a remunerative traffic.
And, finally, it would greatly benefit both the public and the companies, by enabling the directors and other officers to devote their time and energy (now mainly absorbed in Parliamentary contests) to the internal management of their affairs, thus conducing to economy, and to the comfort and safety of their passengers.
All these important results, I was of opinion, would be obtained without any sacrifice on the part of the public or of the companies.
In a Report, the primary object of which was to facilitate the use of railways by the Post Office, it may appear out of place to deal with the questions of charges for passengers and goods, railway extension, &c., but I found one part of the subject so linked with every other as to render separate treatment impracticable.
Had this plan been adopted when originally proposed (more than twenty[41] years ago), the following results, I firmly believe, would have been obtained:—
1st. The postal system would have been enormously improved.
2nd. The conveyance of passengers and goods would have been considerably cheapened.
3rd. The railway system would have been far more extended than it now is.
4th. A vast waste of capital would have been avoided. And,
5th. Railway property, instead of being almost a byword for depression and insecurity, would, under tolerable management, have been placed on a firm basis.
Unhappily, the advantage which would have been gained by the adoption of my plan is now for ever lost. The contests it might have prevented during the last twenty years have done their disastrous work; but the future remains, and I believe it still possible to amend our railway system and even to adopt a plan more comprehensive than the one just described. My views on the subject appear in a separate Report, which I made as a member of the Commission on Railways appointed in the year 1865, the substance of which, I may remark, will be found in a summary appended thereto.[42]
I have now brought the year 1847, the first which I passed at the Post Office, to a general close. I have yet to speak of proceedings relative to one improvement, which, however, was not carried into effect until the following year. I narrate this at some length, not only because of its importance, but also because it serves well as a specimen of my course of proceeding during the long period which I passed in the anomalous position to which I had been appointed.
The Postmaster-General having requested me to examine the state of the Money Order Department, with a view to its improvement and extension, I succeeded in devising a plan which, while it effected many improvements, provided for a very large extension, and that without increasing the number of accounts with the chief office. I learnt now that a plan which I proposed when at the Treasury would have simplified operations exceedingly, but that its adoption, though earnestly pressed by Mr. Jackson (then at the head of the department), had been successfully resisted; and that, though some part of this plan had been superseded by other improvements, much yet remained which Mr. Jackson thought would be highly useful.
In my consequent preparations I was impeded frequently for hours, sometimes for days, by the want of necessary papers, the registration and arrangement being so defective that, according to the registering clerk, his death would leave the office in absolute perplexity. When the papers came they were sometimes exceedingly imperfect, the omission being in one instance that of a very important report; and of course fresh delays occurred while these omissions were supplied. Again, when, in reference to a proposed measure of economy, I called upon the head of the department and his immediate subordinate to support my views by expressing in writing opinions which they had given in conversation, they excused themselves by pleading that they should thereby incur serious displeasure.
The omitted report was one made some time before by Mr. Jackson, recommending an improvement calculated to save the department between £2,000 and £3,000 per annum. Taking up this rejected measure, I was enabled, after long elaboration, to procure its adoption, and in a few months more its beneficial results were placed beyond question; the head of the department reporting that the accounts were more complete and the checks more efficient, and that the annual saving was even greater than had been reckoned upon, amounting to nearly £3,500.
In the meantime, however, these various obstructions, combined with the fact that both in public estimation and by Colonel Maberly’s distinct renunciation I was now solely responsible for the right administration of this special department, led me to take a decided step. I accordingly wrote a minute, proposing that all minutes and instructions regarding the Money Order Department of England and Wales should proceed exclusively from myself; that all reports from the department should be addressed to me; in short, that the secretarial control of that department should thenceforth be entirely in my hands.
In consequence of this, the Postmaster-General wrote a minute on the subject, which, however, being modified by the Chancellor of the Exchequer,[43] to whom it was shown in draft, still left things in an unsatisfactory state. Upon my pointing out the insufficiency of the measure, Lord Clanricarde proposed that I should myself see the Chancellor of the Exchequer. While awaiting this interview, which took place about a fortnight later, I felt so much doubt as to the result, and consequently as to my ability to retain office, that I deemed it my duty to explain to my private secretary and my only clerk that they might have to look out for other appointments.
When at length I saw the Chancellor of the Exchequer difficulties seemed to vanish. He had no objection to the Money Order Department being placed under my exclusive management, having merely disapproved of the mode in which it was proposed that the change should be effected. He at once recognised the danger of divided responsibility, and, in short, undertook to arrange the whole matter with the Postmaster-General. Four days later the Postmaster-General informed me that he had decided to place the Money Order Department entirely under my management, but that he wished to consider further as to the mode. He thought of speaking to Maberly, with a view, if possible, of doing the thing quietly. My new powers were called into requisition the same day by a little symptom of insubordination in the Money Order Department. Confident of authority, I now felt justified in giving such warning to the offender[44] as produced instant submission, with abundance of promise for the future.
The difficulty, however, was not yet solved, for I presently found that the Postmaster-General, instead of himself drawing the minute transferring the secretarial authority over the Money Order Department to me, had remitted the task to Colonel Maberly. The result was such an instrument as would have both crippled my authority and lowered me in the eyes of each of the some twenty officers to whom the minute was to be communicated.[45] Unfortunately this minute, without any opportunity being allowed for objection, had been confirmed, not only by the Postmaster-General but also by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The course I took was to draw up a new minute, in the name, not of Colonel Maberly, but of the Postmaster-General himself, substantially the same as regarded the powers that were given me, but free from all offensive expression and unnecessary restriction. This I submitted to the Postmaster-General, urging its adoption; but, though he admitted the objectionable character of some parts of Colonel Maberly’s minute, I saw that he was disappointed and annoyed at my application.
In my renewed difficulty, I perceived that I must further consider my ground:—
“December 17th, 1847.—Called on Mr. Cobden; described my position at the Post Office, and asked his advice as to the course I should adopt; more especially seeking his opinion as to whether I should be justified in public opinion in resigning my appointment, if circumstances should induce me so to act. He thinks that, except on some great and simple question, I should not be justified in resigning, as, though harassed by the obstacles thrown in my way by Maberly, I have nevertheless been able to introduce important improvements; his advice, therefore, is patience. He recommends that I should see other M.P.’s, and represent to them Maberly’s conduct, with a view of forming a party in the House; . . . but I replied that I considered such a course would be justly viewed as a breach of confidence, though I felt at liberty to consult my personal friends, among whom I counted himself. He proffered assistance in any way, and promised to take an opportunity of speaking to the Chancellor of the Exchequer as to the necessity of extending my powers.”
The same day, having learnt that a circular to postmasters and others, to give effect to the new money-order arrangements, was in the printer’s hands, I sent my private secretary to apply for a suspension of proceedings until the Postmaster-General’s further pleasure should be known. This brought the Postmaster-General’s private secretary with a copy of the circular, in which, as I expected, I found an unnecessary and offensive restriction.[46] All the officers to whom it was addressed were informed that, while they were to obey me in matters connected with the Money Order Department, they were not to obey me on any other subject. My subordinates were thus called on to watch my proceedings, while a disposition on my part was implied to do that which, from the first, I had most scrupulously avoided. I also learnt that copies had already been sent to Dublin and Edinburgh. I insisted on their recall. Mr. Cornwall, after conferring with Colonel Maberly, promised the withdrawal of the objectionable clause, hoping that I would then raise no further obstacle to the issue of the circular. I was obliged, however, still to object to this, as the circular would give effect to the minute against which I had protested, and thus pledge me to duties without awarding me the necessary power.
The result of Mr. Cornwall’s application was communicated to me in a private letter from the Postmaster-General, by which I learnt that, though he intended to draw a fresh minute in place of Colonel Maberly’s, he had found nothing to object to in the circular, and consequently had directed its issue without further delay. He added that his own view was confirmed by that of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, of whose opinion he sent me a memorandum. By this, however, I perceived that the nature of my objection had been misunderstood, probably by both.
My Journal proceeds as follows:—
“On inquiry I found that the circular about to be despatched retained the objectionable clause. It was not, I think, asking too much to be heard before any irretrievable step was taken.”
However, the Postmaster-General’s intention was soon fulfilled; and the new minute (written in his own hand) differed in no material point from the draft which I had prepared. I had also some little satisfaction in finding that, though the circular had now been issued, yet, in the new minute, all authority for the offensive part of it had been removed. Anxiety as to my true position relative to the Money Order Department being now sufficiently relieved I advanced in good spirits, and at once entered on my new duties.
“December 23rd.—The newspapers are reporting the new arrangement, each after its own fashion. The Times and Chronicle have useful notices on the subject; the Morning Post tells the world that I have been promoted to the superintendence of the Money Order Office, but carefully quotes the circular to show that my authority is confined thereto.”
Unfortunately, in coming for the first time close to any department one always has to learn abuses:—
“January 8th, 1848.[47]—It is distressing to find that forgeries and other frauds connected with money orders are frequent. . . . I have already had to deal with six or eight cases of this kind.”
The subjoined is a striking instance of the economy that may be produced in large operations by even a small change. I found that although the old money-order forms were supplied at a very low rate (about ten for a penny), yet, by reducing the size, I could save about £700 per annum; and this notwithstanding an improvement in the form, which the Comptroller of the Stationery Office alleged would involve an additional expense of nearly £1500 a-year. To remove this objection, however, I had to resort to a mechanical device derived from former experience in constructing my printing machine.[48] This saving was soon afterwards followed by a larger one, consequent on reduction in the size of the “letter of advice” and the abolition of what were called duplicate advices. Both these economical measures had the collateral advantage of diminishing labour in the chief office, while the total annual saving in stationery alone, even on the consumption at that time, was thus raised to about £2500.[49]
Not less important was it to obtain prompt and complete accounts. One desideratum was a complete registration of papers, the necessity for which happened to be exemplified in the midst of my arrangements on the subject by the discovery, in the desk of the late chief clerk at a town in Yorkshire, of more than forty unanswered letters from the chief office, some of them already six months old. Money-order accounts in the London office, too, I found in great disorder; arrears so long as, in the opinion of the head of the department, would require for bringing them up a force of thirty-five men for four years; in other words, an outlay of at least £10,000, with a doubt whether even then the outstanding money orders could be correctly ascertained. To avoid so great an outlay, I suggested an Act of Parliament protecting the department, after due notice, from legal claims on orders issued before 1847. This course was in the end adopted, though the practice was still to discharge any claim which appeared to be just; nor do I remember that the restriction ever led to complaint.
At the same time there was prospect of great economy:—
“February 16th, 1848.—Jackson now thinks that other improvements now in progress will enable the Money Order Office to undertake all the additional work likely to arise in the next two or three years, including the extension of the system throughout England and Wales, without any increased force. If so, the effective saving will be enormous.”
It may be added that this expectation was confirmed by the event.
“March 8th, 1848.—The Postmaster-General, in speaking of the many improvements which I have effected, remarked the singular absence of all complaints from the public, though some [of the improvements] are more or less restrictive.”
Among the means formerly taken to account for the existence of a revenue under what it regarded as the ruinous system of penny postage, the Post Office had uniformly maintained that a large profit was obtained in the Money Order Department. A return now made to Parliament showed that, so far from this being the case, the expenditure of the previous year, the last before that department came under my control, exceeded the receipts by about £10,000.
A summary of the improvements effected thus far in this department will be found in a letter addressed by me to the Postmaster-General on January 3rd, 1849, which is given in the Appendix.
Some incidents of the years 1847 and 1848, which for convenience I have hitherto omitted, are yet worthy of record:—
Carelessness in Remittance.
“May 27th, 1847.—Mr. Ramsey (missing-letter clerk) brought me a packet containing whole bank-notes to the amount of £1500, so carelessly made up that they had all slipped out; and to add to the carelessness the packet was imperfectly addressed to some country house in Herefordshire, no post town being named. It had found its way, after much delay, into the post office at Ross, and had been sent to London by the postmistress. Instances of such carelessness are not infrequent.”
I may add that, some years afterwards, there was sent to the office for the book-post a large sum in bank-notes, the ends of the packet being left open, according to book post rule, so as to expose the contents. It is much to be wished that all persons inclined to such carelessness would pause to think how grievous is the temptation to which the humbler servants of the Post Office are thereby exposed.
Attempted Robbery.
“July 7th, 1847.—There was a serious attempt this morning (fortunately unsuccessful) to rob a letter-carrier who was taking out a large number of bankers’ parcels for delivery. It is said in the office that they contained nearly half-a-million of money.”
The circumstances of this extraordinary proceeding are thus described in the “Annual Register”:—
From the “Annual Register” for 1847. Chronicle, p. 82.
“July 7. Murderous Attack on a Letter-Carrier.
“A most atrocious attack was made upon one of the letter deliverers employed by the General Post Office, named Bradley. He is one of those whose particular duty it is to make the early delivery at the different bankers and merchants in Lombard Street of what are called the ‘registered letters.’ He had received his bag of letters as usual from the chief office, St. Martin’s-le-Grand, at eight o’clock, and was proceeding through Mitre Court, which leads from Wood Street to Milk Street. After passing through the gate, which at night closes the entrance to the court in Wood Street, he noticed two or three men in the passage, one of whom suddenly locked the gate; and when Bradley had nearly reached the iron posts in the middle of the court he was struck a violent blow with a life-preserver, which stunned him for a moment; he nevertheless called out for assistance, keeping his bag of letters firmly grasped in his hand and under his arm. The villains, alarmed by his cries, rapidly made off into Milk Street, leaving behind them their deadly weapon. Bradley was severely injured about the head, and being an old man, was, in consideration of his resistance to this attack, allowed to retire on full pay. A reward of £300 was offered for the detection of the perpetrators; but as Bradley could give no description of them, and no other person had observed them, the police did not get any clue to their detection.”
I am glad to learn (1867) that this faithful veteran is still living.
Singular Frauds.
In the early days of money-order transactions, it was the lenient custom of the office, in cases where an order had been paid to a forged signature, still to pay it to the right party. This dangerous indulgence did not fail to become known to the knavish class, who made profitable use of the opportunity. Thus two persons, perhaps lodging at the same house, would purposely arrange that an order obtained in favour of one should fall into the hands of the other; and when the latter, by forging the signature of the former, had obtained payment, the former, applying in his own name, and showing that the signature given was not his, was able to obtain payment a second time. To put a stop to this systematic fraud, which had become a thing of daily practice, it became necessary so to modify the existing law as to provide that when an order had once been paid, even though to the wrong person, no legal claim should remain against the Post Office. In accordance with the old practice, the order was still paid where it appeared that the blame rested with the Post Office itself. This new rule, though regarded by many as a great stretch of power, not only put an immediate stop to the fraud against which it was directed, but produced so little complaint from any quarter as to make it clear that the previous indulgence had been almost as superfluous as it was dangerous. Nevertheless the exceptional authority of the Postmaster-General was soon afterwards put in requisition in the following case:—
In a large provincial town a person applied in haste at the post office, stating that on his way thither he seemed to have dropped an order which he was bringing for payment; at the same time giving in his name, and begging that no order might be paid to that name until his return, as he would go back to his house to examine whether he might perchance have left it there. Some time after his departure, however, a second person came to the window, saying that Mr. —— had recovered the order, having in fact left it at home, and had sent him with it to obtain payment, he himself being unexpectedly detained. The clerk, satisfied with this plausible statement, fitting in so well with antecedent circumstances, delivered the money accordingly, but was startled a few minutes later by the reappearance of the first claimant, with the declaration that, as he had not been able to find the order at home, it must of course have been lost, and a request that nothing might be done until a new order was obtained. Upon the clerk’s reporting what had meanwhile occurred, and mentioning the new rule, the applicant, after some remarks not particularly flattering to postal sagacity, announced his intention to appeal in the highest quarter. The decision there made was that in so extraordinary a case the strict rule should not be fully maintained, but that the department must, nevertheless, be secured from loss. This was thrown in equal shares on the two parties immediately concerned, each having shown negligence, the one in losing the order, the other in paying it against injunction.
Esquires in Low Life.
An angry letter was received at the General Office relative to alleged misconduct in an officer at the Charing Cross office, who had refused to pay a money order, because of irregularity in the signature of the payee. The complainant reported that the ground of objection was that when he gave his signature he appended the term Esq., adding, “The silly fellow does not know that in a certain rank of life every one signs himself Esq.”
Complaints.
It is curious, and would at first sight seem inexplicable, that acceleration of the mails, though effected solely for the public benefit, often too at great cost, and always with much trouble, led in some instances to angry complaint. Perhaps the most whimsical instance of this was that of a lady in a northern town, at which the night mail from London had previously arrived somewhat too late for the last delivery of the day, so that the letters could not be distributed until the following morning, whereas by this acceleration they were delivered the same evening. The allegation was that, whereas complainant used always to get her letters early in the morning, she never received them now till late at night.
Joseph Ady.
Among miscellaneous incidents of the year 1848 the following may be mentioned. The office and the public had long been troubled with a restless adventurer named Joseph Ady, a man who maintained the language and dress of a Quaker, but who, I apprehend, was no real member of the Society of Friends. This person was for ever posting a number of letters to inform individuals that he knew of something to their advantage, which, for a stated fee, he was ready to mention. As all these letters were unpaid, and many consequently rejected, Mr. Ady was called on to pay no small amount of postage; but, by representations of his poverty, age, and feeble health, and promises to offend no more, he had again and again obtained very lenient treatment; while no sooner was he out of one scrape than, by a return to his former practice, he plunged into a new one. On one occasion, having been let off lightly on condition of his entering into a formal written engagement not to repeat the offence, he showed the inveteracy of his habit by inserting after his signature words to the following effect:—
“If Mr. Peacock [the solicitor to the Post Office] is any relation to the Mr. Peacock who, about twenty years ago, lived at [such a place], I can, on receiving the usual fee of twenty-one shillings, tell him something to his advantage.”
Presently afterwards he resorted to a new device. This was to post his letters, really unstamped, but each one bearing the mark as of a stamp removed, so as to furnish ground for an asseveration, of course ready at hand, that a stamp had really been affixed to each. It is needless to say that so shallow a pretext was of no avail, and a conviction was obtained against him which threw him into prison, and though, by his usual wiles, he soon contrived to obtain release, he seemed at length to feel himself beaten, gave up his singular trade, and, indeed, soon afterwards died.
Communication by Telegraph.
The following entry records as a wonder what would now be regarded as a very trivial incident:—
“April 4th, 1848.—The payment of a money order has been countermanded from Manchester by electric telegraph.”[50]
Chartist Movement.
The Chartist movement of the year 1848 affected the Post Office as well as other public departments:—
“April 6th.—Went to the Mansion House to be sworn in a special constable with all the other officials. Serious apprehensions are entertained of an attack from the Chartists on Monday next, when they hold a great meeting on Kennington Common, and intend to march in procession to the Houses of Parliament to present their petition. Arms are being provided for the Post Office, which is being put into a state of defence, in common with other Government offices.”
At Colonel Maberly’s suggestion, I placed my own clerks, and those of the Money Order Office, in all about two hundred and thirty, under his command; thus making a total force of upwards of thirteen hundred men.
“April 8th.—Iron bars are being put to the lower windows, and special precautions taken against fire. Goldsmiths’ Hall, and other buildings which command the entrances to the Post Office, will be occupied with our people. These preparations, and the excitement they produce, are a sad hindrance to business.”
“April 10th.—In coming to the office accompanied the Chartist procession down Holborn Hill, crossing it without difficulty at the bottom. The lower windows and doors of the office are defended by bars of iron and planks. Upwards of thirteen hundred of our people, a large portion of whom are well armed, are divided into small parties, each with its officer, and written instructions have been issued for their guidance. The excitement is too great for much work to be done. About one o’clock the Postmaster-General told me that Fergus O’Connor was arrested, but this afterwards proved to be a mistake. Another report, which for a while received credit, spoke of the disaffection of the Guards, but about two o’clock certain information arrived to the effect that the meeting had quietly dispersed, and that the threatened processions were abandoned. Soon after four I left, but the clerks and others were detained till the mails had been despatched. On my return home I noticed much excitement in the streets, and nearly all the shops were closed.”
GENERAL PROGRESS.
Having narrated the transfer of the Money Order Department to my superintendence, I now proceed to more general transactions, and for their description give the following letter to Mr. Baring:—
“General Post Office, January 24th, 1848.
“My dear Sir,—I think the enclosed will interest you. You will not fail to remark the effect of the do-nothing policy of 1842, and of all, except the latter part, of 1843. The great increase in subsequent years is owing mainly to the extension of the rural distribution, which goes on with such rapidity that in the last year we brought more than one thousand places within the range of the Post Office system. No one would now question the policy of the measure which you proposed, except, perhaps, on the ground that it did not go far enough.
“The increased facilities afforded of late years are proving far more profitable than even I had anticipated.
“The revenue of the past year will probably be about £2,220,000 gross, and £1,030,000 net. The gross revenue is as large as it was in 1834, and within 5 per cent. of what it was in 1837. The current year will probably give an amount equal to 1837, thus realising my anticipations of gross revenue. The net revenue will be about £200,000 less than I calculated; but in my opinion the expenses have been needlessly increased to that extent. The same gross revenue as in 1837 was, according to my calculation, to be the result of a five-fold increase of letters; it will have been brought about by a 4⅔-fold increase.
“Faithfully yours,
“Rowland Hill.”
ENCLOSURE.
Estimate of the Number of Chargeable Letters delivered in the United Kingdom in each year from 1839 to 1847.[51]
| Annual Increase | |||
| Per-centage | |||
| Year. | Number of | Number of | reckoned on |
| Letters. | Letters. | the No. for | |
| 1839. | |||
| Millions. | Millions. | Per cent. | |
| 1839 | 76[52] | . . . | . . . |
| 1840 | 169 | 93 | 123 |
| 1841 | 196½ | 27½ | 36 |
| 1842 | 208½ | 12 | 16 |
| 1843 | 220½ | 12 | 16 |
| 1844 | 242 | 21½ | 28 |
| 1845 | 271 | 29½ | 39 |
| 1846 | 299½ | 28 | 37 |
| 1847 | 322 | 22½ | 30 |
“January 28th.—Received a very gratifying note from Mr. Baring in reply to the above, in which, though not quite concurring in my comparison of net revenue, he says, ‘There is still a great store of undeveloped letter-writing in the country, and I am sanguine enough to believe your estimate as to number will be wrong by being much under the mark.’ He adds, with characteristic frankness, ‘What has surprised me most is the quiet way in which the people here take to the prepayment and stamping. I was always much afraid of that part of the plan, and am glad to find myself wrong.’”
The following are further extracts from Mr. Baring’s letter:—