THE RISE OF THE GENERAL POST-OFFICE.
It was reserved for the Stuarts to organize for the first time in
England a regular system of post communication, the benefits of which
should be shared by all who could find the means. England was behind
other European nations in establishing a public letter-post. It was not
until the foreign post had been in existence a hundred years, and until
the foreigners had drawn particular attention to their postal
arrangements by their constant disputes, that the English government
established a general post for inland letters, similar to the one whose
benefits "the strangers" had enjoyed even prior to the reign of Henry
the Eighth. Little progress towards this end was made in the reign of
the first James, if we except a better organization for the conveyance
of official despatches. At the same time, it ought to be stated, that
the improved organization here referred to was the groundwork for the
subsequent public post.
One of the results attendant on the accession[10] of the Scotch king to
the English Crown necessitated important improvements in the system of
horse posts, for which it called loudly. Immediately on his accession,
the high road from Edinburgh to London was thronged night and day with
the king's countrymen. All ordinary communications fell far short of
the demand; so much so, that post messengers riding from the Council at
Edinburgh to the king in London, or _vice versâ_, were stopped whole
days on the road for want of horses, which had been taken by the
Scottish lords and gentlemen rushing forward to the English capital to
offer their congratulations to his majesty. As a remedy, the lords of
the English council issued a proclamation, calling upon all magistrates
to assist the postmasters "_in this time so full of business_," by
seeing to it that they were supplied with "fresh and able horses as
necessitie shall require." They were to be "able and sufficient horses,"
well furnished "of saddles, bridles, girts and stirropes, with good
guides to look to them; who for the said horses shall demand and receive
of such as shall ride on them the prices accustomed" (_Book of
Proclamation_, 1603-1609).
As the general intercourse between the two capitals now promised to be
permanent, and travelling along the North Road increased rather than
diminished, further general orders were published from time to time by
royal proclamation. Two kinds of post were established during the reign
of James the First, both being in operation together towards its close.
They were known as the "_thorough post_," and "_the post for the
packet_." The first, consisting of special messengers who rode "thorough
post," that is, through the whole distance "with horse and guide," was
established in 1603. The couriers were ordered to pay at the rate of
"twopence-halfpenny the mile" for the hire of each horse, and to pay in
advance. Further, they must not ride any horse more than one stage (or
seven miles in summer, and six in winter), except "with the consent of
the post of the stage at which they did not change." For the service of
the second post, or "_the post for the packet_," every postmaster was
bound to keep not less than two horses ready, "with furniture
convenient," when on the receipt of a "packet" or parcel containing
letters, from a previous stage, he was to send it on towards the next
within a quarter of an hour of its receipt, entering the transaction in
"a large and faire ledger paper book." As a further precaution, and in
order to prevent the courier loitering on the road with any important
despatch, each postmaster was required to endorse each single letter
with the exact time of the messenger's arrival, just as we have seen in
the case of the one found in the collection of Archbishop Parker's
correspondence. For the purposes of this packet-post, we find it
arranged that each postmaster should have ready "two bags of leather, at
the least, well lined with baize or cotton, so as not to injure the
letters." It also rested with the different postmasters to furnish the
couriers with "_hornes_ to sound and blowe as oft as the post meets
company, or at least four times in every mile."[11] Thus arose a custom
which, under slightly different circumstances, was strictly observed in
the days of mail-coaches.
It will be readily observed that in the arrangements of the packet-post
there was nothing to prevent its being extensively used, except the
important restrictions which the King put upon its use. During the reign
of James nothing but the despatches of ambassadors were allowed to
jostle the Government letters in the leather bags, "lined with baize or
cotton," of "the post for the packet." It was not until Charles the
First had succeeded his father, that this post came to be used, under
certain conditions, by merchants and private persons.
It was during the reign of James the First that the Government secured,
and kept for a hundred years, certain privileges with respect to the
hiring of post-horses. We have seen that the royal couriers, travelling
with despatches by either of the two posts, had priority of claim to
sufficient horses and proper accommodation on their journeys. They also
settled, by order in Council, that any person, whether travelling on the
business of the Government or not, should, if furnished with warrants
from the Council, have prior claim to private individuals, over
post-horses and proper entertainment, demanding them in the name of the
King. In a warrant of Council, for instance, dated Whitehall, May 12,
1630, we find the Privy Council ordering all postmasters to furnish Sir
Cornelius Vermuyden with horses and guides to enable him to ride post
from London to Boston, and thence to Hatfield, where he was engaged in
draining the royal chase for the King.[12]
Little as James the First did towards establishing an inland post,
though with materials so ready to his hand, in the posts of which we
have spoken, yet he deserves some credit for setting on foot a general
post for letters to foreign countries. It would seem that the abuses
complained of by English merchants, with regard to letters coming _from_
abroad, had been lessened by the appointment of an English Postmaster
for the Foreign Office, but not so with letters _sent_ abroad: hence the
independent foreign post projected by the King. In another of the very
numerous proclamations of his reign, it is stated that the King had
created the office of Postmaster-General for Foreign Parts, "being out
of our dominions, and hath appointed to this office Matthew de Quester
the elder, and Matthew de Quester the younger." The duties of this new
office are stated to consist in the "sole taking up, sending, and
conveying of all packets and letters concerning his service, or business
to be despatched into forraigne parts, with power to grant moderate
salaries." These appointments interfering in some way with his
department, gave great offence to Lord Stanhope, the English "Chief
Postmaster," and mutual unpleasantness sprung up between the officers of
the two establishments. A suit was instituted in the law courts, and
whilst it was pending, both offices got completely disarranged, some of
Lord Stanhope's staff going without salary for as long as eight years;
"divers of them," as we find it given in a petition to the Council, "lie
now in prison by reason of the great debt they are in for want of their
entertainment." The dispute was not settled until after Charles the
First had become king--namely, in 1632--when Lord Stanhope was induced
to retire from the service as "Chief Postmaster," the De Questers at the
same time assigning the office they had jointly held to William Frizell
and Thomas Witherings. A royal proclamation was thereupon issued, to the
effect that the King approved of the above assignment. "The King," it
went on to say, "affecting the welfare of his people, and taking into
his princely consideration how much it imports his state and this realm,
that the secrets thereof be not disclosed to forraigne nations, which
cannot be prevented if a promiscuous use of transmitting or taking up of
forraigne letters and packets should be suffered, forbids all others
from exercising that which to the office of such postmaster pertaineth,
at their utmost perils."
Witherings seems to have made good use of his time, for in 1635, or only
three years from the date of his appointment, he saw the great necessity
which existed for some improvement in the postal resources of the
country, and proposed to the King to "settle a pacquet post between
London and all parts of His Majesty's Dominions, for the carrying and
recarrying of his subjects' letters." In this memorial, which justly
entitles him to a front rank in the number of great postal reformers,
Witherings stated some curious facts relating to the service of those
days. "Private letters," it was said, "being now carried by carriers or
persons travelling on foot, it is sometimes full two months before any
answer can be received from Scotland or Ireland to London." "If any of
his Majesty's subjects shall write to Madrid in Spain, he shall receive
answer sooner and surer than he shall out of Scotland or Ireland."
Witherings proposed that the existing posts should be used; that the
journey between London and Edinburgh should be performed in three days,
when--"if the post could be punctually paid--the news will come _sooner
than thought_." Witherings' memorial had the desired effect on the
Council, who at once set about making the machinery already in use
applicable for a general post for inland letters. In 1635 they issued a
proclamation, in which they state that there had not been hitherto any
constant communication between the kingdoms of England and Scotland, and
therefore command "Thomas Witherings, Esquire, His Majesty's Postmaster
for forraigne parts, to settle a running post or two, to run night and
day between Edinburgh in Scotland and the City of London, to go thither
and back again in 6 days." Directions were also given for the management
of the correspondence between the principal towns on the line of road.
_Bye_ posts shall be connected with the main line of posts, by means of
which letters from such places as Lincoln, Hull, Chester, Bristol, or
Exeter, shall fall into it, and letters addressed to these and other
places shall be sent. Other bye posts are promised to different parts of
the country. All postmasters on the main line of posts, as well as those
of the bye posts, were commanded to have "always ready in their stables
one or two horses." The charges settled by James I. were ordered to be
the charges under the new system, "2½_d._ for a single horse, and
5_d._ for two horses per mile." In a subsequent proclamation two years
afterwards, a monopoly of letter-carrying was established, which has
been preserved ever since, in all the regulations of the Post-Office. No
other messengers or foot posts shall carry any letters, but those who
shall be employed by the King's "Chief Postmaster." Exceptions were
made, however, when the letters were addressed to places to which the
King's post did _not_ travel; also, in the case of common known
carriers; messengers particularly sent express; and to a friend carrying
a letter for a friend. These exceptions, trifling as they were, were
withdrawn from time to time, as the Post-Office became more and more one
of the settled institutions of the country. As it was, the prohibitory
clauses caused great dissatisfaction in the country. The middle of the
seventeenth century was certainly a bad time for introducing a measure
that should bear any appearance of a stretch of the royal prerogative.
That no one but the servants of the King's Postmaster should carry
private letters was regarded as an unwarrantable interference with the
liberty of the subject; so much so, that in 1642 a Committee of the
House of Commons was appointed to inquire into that part of the measure.
The subject was also frequently mentioned in Parliament; notwithstanding
which, the Government strictly adhered to the clause.[13]
The first rates of postage for the new service were fixed at _twopence_,
for a single letter, for any distance under 80 miles; 4_d._ up to 140
miles; 6_d._ for any longer distance in England; and 8_d._ to any place
in Scotland. Of course the distances were all reckoned from London.
The control of the English letter-office was entrusted to the Foreign
Postmaster-General, who had suggested the new undertaking. Witherings
held the joint offices for five years, when in 1640 he was charged with
abusing both his trusts, and superseded by Philip Burlamachy, a London
merchant. It was arranged, however, that Burlamachy should execute the
duties of his offices under the care and inspection of the principal
Secretary of State. And now began a quarrel which lasted incessantly
from 1641 to 1647. When the proclamation concerning the sequestration of
his office was published, Witherings assigned his patent to the Earl of
Warwick. Mindful of this opportunity, Lord Stanhope, the "Chief
Postmaster" under the King's father, who had surrendered his patent some
years before, now came forward and stated that the action had not been
voluntary, but, as we learn from his petition to the House of Lords, he
"was summoned to the Council table, and obliged, before he was suffered
to depart, to subscribe somewhat there penned upon your petitioner's
patent by the Lord Keeper Coventry." Lord Stanhope found a staunch
friend and adherent in Mr. Edmund Prideaux, a member of the House of
Commons, and subsequently Attorney-General to the Commonwealth. Two
rival offices were established in London, and continued strife was
maintained between the officers of the two claimants. On one occasion,
Prideaux himself helped to seize the Plymouth mail which had just
arrived in London, and was proceeding to the office of the Earl of
Warwick near the Royal Exchange. Burlamachy and the Government failed to
restore peace. In the Commission on the Post-Office, to which we have
already referred, the subject was taken up, but the resolution of the
Committee only rendered matters more complicated. The Committee, though
Prideaux contrived to be made Chairman of it, declared that the
sequestration of two years before "was a grievance and illegal, and
ought to be taken off," and Mr. Witherings restored to office. The
Commission decided against the Government, both as regards the
sequestration and the monopoly of letter-carrying, which the King
proclaimed in 1637. Both questions were left in abeyance for two years,
when, in 1644, the Parliamentary forces having begun to gain an
ascendancy over those of the King, the Lords and Commons by a joint
action appointed Edmund Prideaux, the Chairman of the Committee of 1642,
"and a barrister of seven years' standing," to the vacant office. It is
somewhat amusing to note how the monopolizing tendencies of the Crown,
denounced but two years ago by the Parliament, were now openly advocated
and confirmed by an almost unanimous vote of both Houses. The resolution
establishing Prideaux in the office states,[14] that the Lords and
Commons, "finding by experience that it is most necessary for keeping of
good intelligence between the Parliament and their forces, that
post-stages be erected in several parts of the kingdom, and the office
of Master of the Post and Couriers being at present void, ordain that
Edmund Prideaux shall be and hereby is constituted Master of the Posts,
Couriers, and Messengers." Prideaux must have been an energetic and
pains-taking manager. He was very zealous and greatly improved the
service, "establishing," says Blackstone, "a weekly conveyance of
letters to all parts of the country, thereby saving to the public the
charge of maintaining postmasters to the amount of 7,000_l._ per annum."
It seems to have been clearly seen in Parliament that the Post-Office
would eventually pay its own expenses, and even yield a revenue; for, in
deciding on Prideaux's proposal, their object is stated quite concisely
in one of the clauses sanctioning it:--"That for defraying the charges
of the several postmasters, _and easing the State of it_, there must be
a weekly conveyance of letters to all parts of the country." For twenty
years previously the establishment of the post had been a burden to the
extent of three or four thousand pounds a year on the public purse.
Prideaux at first was allowed to take the profits of his office, in
consideration of his bearing all the charges. In 1649, five years after
his appointment, the amount of revenue derived from the posts reached
5,000_l._ and a new arrangement was entered into. The practice of
farming the Post-Office revenue began from the year 1650, and lasted, as
far as regards some of the bye posts, down to the end of the last
century. In 1650 the revenue was farmed for the sum of 5,000_l._
In the year 1649 the Common Council of London deliberately established a
post-office for inland letters in direct rivalry to that of the
Parliament. But the Commons, although they had loudly denounced the
formation of a monopoly by the Crown, proceeded to put down this
infringement of the one which they had but lately secured to themselves.
The City authorities, backed, as they were in those days, by immense
power, stoutly denied that the Parliament had any exclusive privilege in
the matter. They could see no reason why there should not be "another
weekly conveyance of letters and for other uses" (this latter clause
most probably meaning conveyance of parcels and packets). Though pressed
to do so, "they refused to seek the sanction of Parliament, or to have
any direction from them in their measure."[15] "The Common Council," it
is further stated by way of complaint, "have sent agents to settle
postages by their authority on several roads, and have employed a
natural Scott, who has gone into Scotland, and hath there settled
postmasters (others than those for the state) on all that road."
Prideaux took care to learn something from the rival company. He lowered
his rates of postage, increased the number of despatches, and then
resolutely applied himself to get the City establishment suppressed.
Prideaux, who had now become Attorney-General, invoked the aid of the
Council of State. The Council reported that, "as affairs now stand, they
conceive that the office of Postmaster is, and ought to be, in the sole
power and disposal of Parliament." After this decision the City posts
were immediately and peremptorily suppressed, and from this date the
carrying of letters has been the exclusive privilege of the Crown.
Though the Government succeeded in establishing the monopoly, public
opinion was greatly against the measure. The authorities of the city of
London, as may well be imagined, were incessant in their exertions to
defeat it, not only at that time, but on many subsequent occasions.
Pamphlets were written on the subject, and one book, especially,
deserves mention, inasmuch as its author bore a name now memorable in
the annals of the British Post-Office. In 1659 was published a book,
entitled _John Hill's Penny Post; or a vindication of the liberty of
every Englishman in carrying merchants' or other men's letters against
any restraints of farmers of such employment_. 4_to._ 1659.
Under the Protectorate, the Post-Office underwent material changes.
Whilst extending the basis of the Post-Office, Cromwell and his Council
took advantage of the State monopoly to make it subservient to the
interests of the Commonwealth. One of the ordinances published during
the Protectorate sets forth that the Post-Office ought to be upheld, not
merely because it is the best means of conveying public and private
communications, but also because it may be made the agent in
"discovering and preventing many wicked designs, which have been and are
daily contrived against the peace and welfare of this Commonwealth, the
intelligence whereof cannot well be communicated except by letters of
escript." A system of espionage was thus settled which has always been
abhorrent to the nature and feelings of Englishmen. But perhaps we ought
not to judge the question in the light of the present day. And we would
do justice to the Council of the Commonwealth. The Post-Office now for
the first time became the subject of parliamentary enactments, and the
acts passed during the interregnum became the models for all subsequent
measures. In the year 1656 an Act was passed, "to settle the postage of
England, Scotland, and Ireland," and henceforth the Post-Office was
established on a new and broad basis.[16] It was ruled that there
"shall be one General Post-Office, and one officer _stiled_ the
Postmaster-Generall of England, and Comptroller of the Post-Office."
This officer was to have the horsing of all "through" posts and persons
"riding post." "Prices for the carriage of letters, English, Scottish,
and Irish," as well as foreign, and also for post-horses, were again
fixed. All other persons were forbidden "to set up or employ any
foot-posts, horse-posts, or packet-boats." Two exceptions, however, were
made under the latter head, in favour of the _two universities_, "who
may use their former liberties, rights, and privileges of having special
carriers to carry and recarry letters as formerly they did, and as if
this Act had not been made." The _Cinque Ports_ also must "not be
interfered with, and their ancient rights of sending their own post to
and from London shall remain intact."
At the Restoration this settlement of the Post-Office was confirmed in
almost all its particulars. The statute 12 Car. II. c. 35 re-enacts the
ordinance of the Commonwealth, and on account of its being the earliest
recognised statutory enactment, is commonly known as the "Post-Office
Charter." It remained in full force until 1710. The following is the
important preamble to the statute in question: "Whereas for the
maintainance of mutual correspondencies, and prevention of many
inconveniences happening by private posts, several public post-offices
have been heretofore erected for carrying and recarrying of letters by
post to and from all parts and places within England, Scotland, and
Ireland, and several posts beyond the seas, the well-ordering whereof is
a matter of general concernment, and of great advantage, as well for the
preservation of trade and commerce as otherwise."
It does not appear _why_ Prideaux's connexion with the Post-Office was
dissolved, nor yet exactly _when_. Probably his more onerous duties as
first law officer of the Government demanded all his time and energy.
However it was, we hear no more of him after his victory over the then
formidable City magnates. During the remaining years of Cromwell's life,
the revenues of the Post-Office, wonderfully augmented by Prideaux's
management, were farmed for the sum of 10,000_l._ a year to a Mr. John
Manley. During Manley's tenure of office, the proceeds must either have
increased with marvellous rapidity, or the contracts were under
estimated; for when, in 1659, Manley left the Post-Office, he calculated
that he had _cleared_ in that and some previous years the sum of
14,000_l._ annually. A Parliamentary Committee instituted a strict
scrutiny into the proceeds of the office in the first year of
the Restoration, at which period it became necessary that a new
Postmaster-General should be appointed. It was agreed by the members of
this Committee to recommend that a much higher sum be asked from the
next aspirant to the office, inasmuch as they found that Mr. Manley,
instead of over-estimating his receipts, had erred on the other side,
and that they could not have come far short of the annual sum of
20,000_l._ The result of the Committee's investigation was, that Mr.
Henry Bishop was only appointed to the vacant place on his entering into
a contract to pay to Government the annual sum of 21,500_l._ In
estimating the increase of Post-Office revenue from year to year, it
must be borne in mind that a considerable item in the account was
derived from the monopoly in post-horses for travelling, which monopoly
had been secured under Cromwell's ordinances, and re-secured under 12
Car. II. c. 35. By this Act, no traveller could hire horses for riding
post from any but authorized postmasters.[17] This statute remained in
force, under some limitations, till 1779.
Many matters of detail in the arrangements of the Post-Office were
discussed in Parliament during the first three years of the Restoration.
Long-promised bye-posts were now for the first time established; the
circulation of the letters, meaning by that the _routes_ the mails shall
take, and many such subjects, best settled of course by the authorities,
weary the reader of the Journals of the House of Commons about this
date. In December, 1660, for instance, we find the House deliberating on
a proviso tendered by Mr. Titus to the following effect:--"Provided also
and be it enacted, that a letter or packet-post shall once every week
come to Kendal by way of Lancaster, and to the town of Penrith in
Cumberland by way of Newcastle and Carlisle, and to the City of Lincoln
and the borough of Grimsby likewise;" and we are glad to find that this
reasonable proviso, to give these "_out-of-the-way places_" the benefit
of a weekly post, was agreed to without cavil. We notice one important
resolution of the session of this year, setting forth that, as the
Post-Office Bill has been carried through the Houses satisfactorily,
"such of the persons who have contributed their pains in improvement of
the Post-Office, be recommended to the King's Majesty for consideration,
to be had of the pains therein taken accordingly." Let us hope (for we
find no further mention of the matter) that all concerned got their
deserts. Tardy as the English people were, compared with their
continental neighbours, in rearing the institution of the post, the
foundation of an establishment was now laid which has, at the present
time, far distanced all competitors in its resources and in the matter
of liberal provisions for the people. Even before the days of penny
postage, the Duke of Wellington, than whom no man was supposed to know
better the postal regulations of the Continent, gave it as his
deliberate opinion, that "the English Post-Office is the only one in
Europe which can be said to do its work." In rewarding, therefore, those
who contributed so much to this success at this early period of the
history of the establishment, King Charles would simply pay an
instalment of the debt which future generations would owe to them.
Mr. Bishop was only left undisturbed for two short years. As it was
evident that the revenue of the office was increasing, the House of
Commons took advantage, at the close of his second year of office, to
desire his Majesty that "no further grant or contract of the Post-Office
be again entered into till a committee inspect the same and see what
improvements may be made on the Revenue, as well as in the better
management of the department." They pray that the office may be given to
the highest bidder. His Majesty replies that he has not been satisfied
with the hands in which it has been. Notwithstanding that a measure was
carried requiring the officers of the Post-Office in London and
the country to take the oaths of allegiance and supremacy, and
notwithstanding that these oaths were properly subscribed, his
Majesty is not at all satisfied, "for the extraordinary number of
_nonconformists and disaffected persons_ in that office," and is
desirous of a change. The term being expired, his Majesty "will have a
care to see it raised to that profit it may fairly be, remembering
always that it being an office of much trust as well as a farm, it will
not be fit to give it to him that bids most, because a dishonest or
disaffected person is likeliest to exceed that way." There can be no
manner of doubt now, that the King's words on this occasion were meant
to prepare the minds of his faithful Commons for the successor which he
had by this time fully resolved upon. Two months subsequently to the
above message to the Commons, the entire revenue of the Post-Office is
settled by statute, 15 Car. II. c. 14, upon James, Duke of York, and his
heirs male in perpetuity. This arrangement existed only during the
lifetime of Charles, for when, at his death, the Duke of York ascended
the throne, the revenue of the Post-Office, which had by that time
reached to 65,000_l._ a-year, again reverted to the Crown. No means were
spared to make the Post-Office fruitful during the remainder of the
years of Charles II. Not only were direct measures sanctioned, but
others which had only a bearing on the interests of the Post-Office were
introduced, and easily carried through the Houses. Now, for the first
time, in 1663, the _Turnpike Act_ made its appearance on our
Statute-book, and we may gather from the preamble to this useful Act
some of the impediments which at that time existed to postal
communication. It sets forth that the great North Road--the main artery
for the post-roads and our national intercourse--was in many parts "very
vexatious," "almost impassable," and "very dangerous." The Act provided
for needful improvements, and was the beginning of legislation on that
subject.
Letter-franking also commenced in this year. A Committee of the House of
Commons which sat in the year 1735 reported, "that the privilege of
franking letters by the knights, &c. chosen to represent the Commons in
Parliament, began with the creating of a post-office in the kingdom by
Act of Parliament." The proviso which secured this privilege to members
cannot now be regarded otherwise than as a propitiatory clause to induce
a unanimous approval of the bill in general. The account[18] of the
discussion of the clause in question is somewhat amusing. Sir Walter
Earle proposed that "members' letters should come and go free during the
time of their sittings." Sir Heneage Finch (afterwards Lord Chancellor
Finch) said, indignantly, "It is a _poor mendicant_ proviso, and below
the honour of the House." Many members spoke in favour of the clause,
Sir George Downing, Mr. Boscowen, among the number, and Sergeant
Charlton also urged "that letters for counsel went free." The debate
was, in fact, nearly one-sided; but the Speaker, Sir Harbottle
Grimstone, on the question being called, refused for a considerable time
to put it, saying he "felt ashamed of it." The proviso was eventually
put and carried by a large majority. When the Post-Office Bill, with its
franking privilege, was sent up to the Lords, they threw out the clause,
_ostensibly_ for the same reasons which had actuated the minority in
the Commons in opposing it, but _really_, as it was confessed some years
afterwards, because there was no provision made in the Bill that the
"_Lords' own letters should pass free_." A few years later this
important omission was supplied, and both Houses had the privilege
guaranteed to them, neither Lords nor Commons now feeling the
arrangement below their dignity.
Complaint is made for the first time this year, that letters have been
opened in the General Post-Office. Members of Parliament were amongst
the complainants. The attention of the Privy Council having been called
to the subject, the King issued a proclamation "for _quieting_ the
Postmaster-General in the execution of his office." It ordained that "no
postmaster or other person, except under the immediate warrant of our
principal Secretary of State, shall presume to open letters or packets
_not_ directed unto themselves."
Two years before the death of Charles II. a penny post, the only
remaining post-office incident of any importance during his reign, was
set up in London for the conveyance of letters and parcels. This post
was originated by Robert Murray, an upholsterer, who, like many other
people living at the time, was dissatisfied that the Post-Office had
made no provision for correspondence between different parts of London.
By the then existing arrangements, communication was much more easy
between town and country than within the limits of the metropolis.
Murray's post, got up at a great cost, was assigned over to Mr. William
Docwray, a name which figures for many succeeding years in post-office
annals. The regulations of the new penny post were, that all letters and
parcels not exceeding a pound weight, or any sum of money not above
10_l._ in value, or parcel not worth more than 10_l._, might be conveyed
at a charge of _one penny_ in the city and suburbs, and for _twopence_
to any distance within a given ten-mile circuit. Six large offices were
opened at convenient places in London, and receiving-houses were
established in all the principal streets. Stowe says, that in the
windows of the latter offices, or hanging at the doors, were large
placards on which were printed, in great letters, "Penny post letters
taken in here." "Letter-carriers," adds the old chronicler, "gather them
each hour and take them to the grand office in their respective
circuits. After the said letters and parcels are duly entered in the
books, they are delivered at stated periods by other carriers." The
deliveries in the busy and crowded streets near the Exchange were as
frequent as six or eight times a day; even in the outskirts, as many as
four daily deliveries were made.
The penny post was found to be a great and decided success. No sooner,
however, was that success apparent, and it was known that the
speculation was becoming lucrative to its originator, than the Duke of
York, by virtue of the settlement made to him, complained of it as an
infraction of his monopoly. Nor were there wanting other reasons,
inducing the Government to believe that the penny post ought not to be
under separate management. The Protestants loudly denounced the whole
concern as a contrivance of the Popish party. The great Dr. Oates hinted
that the Jesuits were at the bottom of the scheme, and that if the bags
were examined, they would be found full of treason.[19] The city
porters, too, complained that their interests were attacked, and for
long they tore down the placards which announced the innovation to the
public. Undoubtedly, however, the authorities were most moved by the
_success_ of the undertaking, and thereupon appealed to the Court of
King's Bench, which decided that the new post-office, with all its
profits and advantages, should become part and parcel of the royal
establishment. Docwray was even cast in slight damages and costs. Thus
commenced the _London District Post_, which existed as a separate
establishment to the _General Post_ from this time until so late as
1854. It was at first thought that the amalgamation of the two offices
would be followed by a fusion of the two systems; but this fusion, so
much desired, and one we would have thought so indispensable, was not
accomplished (from a number of considerations to be adduced hereafter),
although the object was attempted more than once.
About a year after the new establishment had been wrested from him, Mr.
Docwray was appointed, under the Duke of York, to the office of
Controller of the District-Post. This was doubtless meant as some sort
of compensation for the losses he had sustained.[20]
In 1685, Charles II. died, and the Duke of York succeeding him, the
revenues of the Post-Office, of course, reverted to the Crown.
Throughout the reign of the second James, the receipts of the
Post-Office went on increasing, though (the King being too much engaged
in the internal commotions which disturbed the country) no improvements
of any moment were made. The only subject calling for mention is, that
James first commenced the practice of granting pensions out of the
Post-Office revenue. The year after he ascended the throne, the King,
acting doubtless under the wishes of the "merry monarch," that provision
should be made for her, granted a pension of 4,700_l._ a-year to Barbara
Villiers, Duchess of Cleveland, one of the late King's mistresses, to be
paid out of the Post-Office receipts. This pension is still paid to the
Duke of Grafton, as her living representative. The Earl of Rochester was
allowed a pension of 4,000_l._ a-year from the same source during this
reign. In 1694, during the reign of William and Mary, the list of
pensions[21] paid by the Post-Office authorities stood thus:--
Earl of Rochester £4,000
Duchess of Cleveland 4,700
Duke of Leeds 3,500
Duke of Schomberg 4,000
Earl of Bath 2,500
Lord Keeper 2,000
William Docwray, till 1698 500
Docwray's pension began in 1694, and was regarded as a further
acknowledgment of his claims as founder of the "District-post," or the
"Penny-post," as it was then called. He only held his pension, however,
for four years, losing both his emoluments and his office in 1698, on
certain charges of gross mismanagement having been brought against him.
The officers and messengers under his control memorialized the
Commissioners of the Treasury, alleging that the "Controller doth what
in him lyes to lessen the revenue of the Penny Post-Office, that he may
farm it and get it into his own hands;" also, that "he had removed the
Post-Office to an inconvenient place to forward his ends." There appears
to have been no limit as to the weight or size of parcels transmitted
through the district-post during Docwray's time, but the memorial goes
on to say that "he forbids the taking in of any band-boxes (except very
small) and all parcels above a pound; which, when they were taken in,
did bring a considerable advantage to the Post-Office;" that these same
parcels are taken by porters and watermen at a far greater charge,
"which is a loss to the public," as the penny-post messengers did the
work "much cheaper and more satisfactory." Nor is this all. It is
further stated that "he stops, under spetious pretences, most parcells
that are taken in, which is great damage to tradesmen by loosing their
customers, or spoiling their goods, and many times hazard the life of
the patient when physick is sent by a doctor or an apothecary."[22] It
was hinted that the parcels were not only delayed, but misappropriated;
that letters were opened and otherwise tampered with: and these charges
being partially substantiated, Docwray, who deserved better treatment,
was removed from all connexion with the department.
It was only towards the close of the seventeenth century, that the
Scotch and Irish post establishments come at all into notice. The first
legislative enactments for the establishment of a Scotch post-office
were made in the reign of William and Mary. The Scotch Parliament passed
such an act in the year 1695. Of course the proclamations of King James
I. provided for the conveyance of letters between the capitals of the
two countries; and although posts had been heard of in one or two of the
principal roads leading out of Edinburgh, even before James VI. of
Scotland became the first English king of that name, it was only after
the Revolution that they became permanent and legalized. Judging by the
success which had followed the English establishment, it was expected
that a Scotch post would soon pay all its expenses. However, to begin,
the King decided upon making a grant of the whole revenue of the Scotch
office, as well as a salary of 300_l._ a year, to Sir Robert Sinclair,
of Stevenson, on condition that he would keep up the establishment.[23]
In a year from that date, Sir Robert Sinclair gave up the grant as
unprofitable and disadvantageous. It was long before the Scotch office
gave signs of emulating the successes of the English post, for, even
forty years afterwards, the whole yearly revenue of the former was only
a little over a thousand pounds. About 1700, the posts between London
and Edinburgh were so frequently robbed, especially in the neighbourhood
of the borders, that the two Parliaments of England and Scotland jointly
passed acts, making the robbery or seizure of the public post
"punishable with death and confiscation of moveables."
Little is known of the earlier postal arrangements of Ireland. Before
any legislative enactments were made in the reign, it is said, of
Charles I., the letters of the country were transmitted in much the same
way as we have seen they were forwarded in the sister country. The
Viceroy of Ireland usually adopted the course common in England when the
letters of the King and his Council had to be delivered abroad. The
subject is seldom mentioned in contemporary records, and we can only
picture in imagination the way in which correspondence was then
transmitted. In the sixteenth century, mounted messengers were employed
carrying official letters and despatches to different parts of Ireland.
Private noblemen also employed these "intelligencers," as they were then
and for some time afterwards called, to carry their letters to other
chiefs or their dependents. The Earl of Ormond was captured in 1600,
owing to the faithlessness of Tyrone's "intelligencer," who first took
his letters to the Earl of Desmond and let him privately read them, and
afterwards demurely delivered them according to their addresses.[24]
Charles I. ordered that packets should ply weekly between Dublin and
Chester, and also between Milford Haven and Waterford, as a means of
insuring quick transmission of news and orders between the English
Government and Dublin Castle. We have seen that packets sailed between
Holyhead and Dublin, and Liverpool and Dublin, as early as the reign of
Elizabeth. Cromwell kept up both lines of packets established by
Charles. At the Restoration, only one--namely, that between Chester and
Dublin--was retained, this being applied to the purposes of a general
letter-post. The postage between London and Dublin was 6_d._, fresh
rates being imposed for towns in the interior of Ireland. A new line of
packets was established to make up for that discontinued,[25] to sail
between Port Patrick and Donaghadee, forming an easy and short route
between Scotland and the north of Ireland. For many years this mail was
conveyed in an open boat, each trip across the narrow channel costing
the Post-Office a guinea. Subsequently, a grant of 200_l._ was made by
the Post-Office in order that a larger boat might be built for the
service. This small mail is still continued.
FOOTNOTES:
[10] The special messenger who informed James of Queen Elizabeth's death
accomplished a great feat in those days. Sir Robert Carey rode post,
with sealed lips, from Richmond in Surrey to Edinburgh in less than
three days.
[11] _Notes and Queries_, 1853.
[12] This instance, showing the usage, gives us an insight into the
amount of control under which these public servants were held. Sir
Cornelius was in the bad grace of the people of the district through
which he had to pass, on account of being a foreigner; so at Royston
Edward Whitehead refused to provide any horses, and on being told he
should answer for his neglect, replied, "Tush! Do your worst. You shall
have none of my horses, in spite of your teeth."--_Smiles._
[13] Blackstone, in speaking of the monopoly in letter traffic, states
that it is a "provision which is absolutely necessary, for nothing but
an exclusive right can support an office of this sort; many rival
independent offices would only serve to ruin one another."--_Com._ vol.
i. p. 324.
[14] Journals of the House of Commons, 1644.
[15] Journals of the House of Commons, 21st March, 1649.
[16] In Burton's _Diary_ of the Parliament of Cromwell, an account is
given of the third reading of the new Act, which is important and
interesting enough to be here partly quoted. "The bill being brought up
for the last reading--
SIR THOMAS WROTH said: 'This bill has bred much talk abroad since
yesterday. The design is very good and specious; but I would have some
few words added for general satisfaction: to know how the monies shall
be disposed of; and that our letters should pass free as well in this
Parliament as formerly.'
LORD STRICKLAND said: 'When the report was made, it was told you that it
(the Post-Office) would raise a revenue. It matters not what reports be
abroad, _nothing can more assist trade and commerce than this
intercourse_. Our letters pass better than in any part whatsoever. In
France and Holland, and other parts, letters are often laid open to
public view, as occasion is.'
SIR CHRISTOPHER PACK was also of opinion, 'That the design of the bill
is very good for trading and commerce; and it matters not what is said
abroad about it. As to letters passing free for members, _it is not
worth putting in any act_.'
COLONEL SYDENHAM said: 'I move that it may be committed to be made but
probationary; _it being never a law before_.'" The bill was referred to
a Committee, and subsequently passed nearly unanimously.
[17] Lord Macaulay states that there was an exceptional clause in this
act, to the effect, that "if a traveller had waited half an hour without
being supplied, he might hire a horse wherever he could."--_History of
England_, vol, i.
[18] Cobbett's Parliamentary History, vol. ix.
[19] Macaulay's History of England, vol. i. pp. 387-8.
[20] Under William and Mary, Docwray was allowed a pension, differently
stated by different authorities, of 500_l._ and 200_l._ a year.
[21] Amongst the Post-Office pensions granted in subsequent reigns,
Queen Anne gave one, in 1707, to the Duke of Marlborough and his heirs
of 5,000_l._ The heirs of the Duke of Schomberg were paid by the
Post-Office till 1856, when about 20,000_l._ were paid to redeem a
fourth part of the pension, the burden of the remaining part being then
transferred to the Consolidated Fund.
[22] Stowe's Survey of London.
[23] Stark's Picture of Edinburgh, p. 144.
[24] "Letters and Despatches relative to the taking of the Earl of
Ormond, by O'More. A.D. 1600."
[25] In 1784, the line of Milford Haven packets was re-established, the
rates of postage between London and Waterford to be the same as between
London and Dublin, _viâ_ Holyhead. The packets were, however, soon
withdrawn.