SIR ROWLAND HILL AND PENNY POSTAGE.
Miss Martineau, in her history of the _Thirty Years' Peace_, narrates a
somewhat romantic incident to account for Mr. Hill's original relation
to our subject, tracing the fiscal reform with which his name is
indissolubly connected to the "neighbourly shilling" well laid out of a
"pedestrian traveller in the Lake District." Unluckily for the
historian, the incident never happened to Mr. Hill. The repeated motions
of Mr. Wallace in the House of Commons are proved beyond dispute to have
brought home the subject to the consideration of many thoughtful minds,
and amongst those, to one who had scholarly leisure and philosophical
ingenuity to bring to its service.
Born in 1795, and for many years a tutor in his father's school near
Birmingham, Mr. Rowland Hill was, at this time, the secretary of the
Commissioners for conducting the Colonization of South Australia, upon
the plan of Mr. Edward Gibbon Wakefield. At this post, according to the
testimony of the commissioners themselves, Mr. Hill laboured
unweariedly, "evincing," as they said, "considerable powers of
organization." Mr. Hill, in one place,[81] gives a clear account of the
way he prepared himself for the work he took in hand, when once his
attention was arrested by the subject. "The first thing I did was to
read very carefully all the reports on post-office subjects. I then put
myself in communication with the hon. member for Greenock, who kindly
afforded me much assistance. I then applied to the Post-Office for
information, with which Lord Lichfield was so good as to supply me.
These were the means I took to make myself acquainted with the
subject." In January, 1837, Mr. Hill published[82] the results of his
investigations, and embodied his scheme in a pamphlet entitled _Post
Office Reform: its Importance and Practicability_. This, the first
edition, was circulated privately amongst members of the legislature and
official men; the second edition, published two months afterwards, being
the first given to the world. The pamphlet, of which we will here
attempt a _résumé_, immediately created a sensation; especially so in
the mercantile world. Mr. Hill may be said to have started with the
facts to which we have already adverted[83], namely, that the
Post-Office was not progressing like other great interests; that its
revenue, within the past twenty years, instead of increasing, had
actually diminished, though the increase of population had been six
millions, and the increase in trade and commerce had been proportionate.
The increase in the ratio of stage-coach travellers was still more
clear; but this fact need not be pressed, especially as one smart
quarterly reviewer answered, that, of course, the more men travelled,
the less need of writing.
From the data which Mr. Hill was enabled to gather--for accounts of any
sort were not kept as accurately at the Post-Office then as now, and
there were no accounts of the number of inland letters--he estimated the
number of letters passing through the post. He then took the expenses of
management and analysed the gross total amount. He proved pretty
clearly, and as nearly as necessary, that the _primary distribution_, as
he termed the cost of receiving and delivering the letters, and also
the cost of transit, took two-thirds of the total cost of the management
of the Post-Office. Of this sum, the amount which had to do with the
_distance_ letters were conveyed, Mr. Hill calculated at 144,000_l._ out
of the total postal expenditure of 700,000_l._ Applying to this smaller
sum the estimated number of letters--deducting franks and taking into
account the greater weight of newspapers--he gave the apparent _average_
cost of conveying each letter as less than one-tenth of a penny. The
conclusion to which he came from this calculation of the average cost of
transit was inevitable, and that was, that if the charge must be made
proportionate (except, forsooth, it could be shown how the postage of
one-tenth or one-thirty-sixth of a penny could be collected) it must
clearly be uniform, and for the sake of argument, and not considering
the charge as a tax, or as a tax whose end was drawing near, any packet
of an equal weight might be sent throughout the length and breadth of
the country at precisely the same rate.
The justice and propriety of a uniform rate was further shown, but in a
smaller degree, by the fact that the relative cost of transmission of
letters under the old system was not always dependent on the distance
the mails were carried. Thus, the Edinburgh mail, the longest and most
important of all, cost 5_l._ for each journey. Calculating the
proportionate weight of bags, letters, and newspapers, Mr. Hill[84]
arrived at the absolute cost of carrying a newspaper of an average
weight of 1½ oz. at one-sixth of a penny, and that of a letter of an
average weight of ¼ oz. at one-thirty-sixth of a penny. These sums
being the full cost for the whole distance, Mr. Hill assumed, fairly
enough, that the same rating would do for any place on the road. It was
admitted on all hands, that the chief labour was expended in making up,
opening, and delivering the mails; therefore the fact whether it was
carried one mile or a hundred made comparatively little difference in
the expenditure of the office. The expenses and trouble being much the
same, perhaps _even less_ at Edinburgh than at some intermediate point,
why should the charges be so different? But the case could be made still
stronger. The mail for Louth, containing as it did comparatively few
letters, cost the Post-Office authorities, as the simple expense of
transit, one penny-farthing per letter. Thus, an Edinburgh letter,
costing the Post-Office an infinitesimal fraction of a farthing, was
charged one shilling and three-halfpence to the public, while a letter
for Louth, costing the Post-Office fifty times as much, was charged to
the public at the rate of tenpence! Nothing was clearer, therefore, that
if Mr. Hill's propositions were opposed (and his opponents did not
advocate the payment according to the actual cost of transit), that
those who were adverse to them must fall into the absurdity of
recognising as just an arrangement which charged the highest price for
the cheapest business! At first sight it looked extravagant, that
persons residing at Penzance or near the Giant's Causeway, at Watford or
Wick, should pay equal postage for their letters. The intrinsic _value_
of the conveyance of a letter, it must be admitted, is a very different
thing from its _cost_, the value being exactly equal to the time,
trouble, and expense saved to the correspondents, of which, perhaps, the
only _measure_ appeared to be the actual distance. Looked at more
narrowly, however, in the clear light of Mr. Hill's investigations, it
became obvious that it was really "a nearer approximation to perfect
justice"[85] to allow distant places to feel the benefits of the
measure; passing over the little inequalities to which it might give
rise; while all might pay such a sum as would cover the expenses in each
and every case.[86]
Mr. Hill succeeded likewise in proving many of the facts adverted to in
the preceding chapter. He showed that the high rates were so excessive
(not only varied according to distance, but doubled if there was an
enclosure, with _fourfold_ postage if the letter exceeded an ounce in
weight) as greatly to diminish, where they did not absolutely prevent,
correspondence. Not only so, but the high rate created an illicit
traffic, involving all classes of the country in the meshes of a
systematically clandestine trade. These facts and their results on the
public revenue shine out of the pamphlet as clear as noonday.
But this was not all. The expenses of the department, or the _secondary
distribution_, might be much reduced by simplifications in the various
processes. The existing system resulted in a complicated system of
accounts, involving great waste of time as well as offering inducements
to fraud. The daily work of exposing letters to a strong light, in order
to ascertain their contents, also offered a constant temptation to the
violation of the first duty of the officers of the State, in respect to
the sanctity of correspondence. If, instead of charging letters
according to the number of sheets or scraps of paper, a weight should be
fixed, below which, whatever the contents of a letter, a certain rate be
charged, much trouble would be saved to the office, not to speak of any
higher reason. Again, he suggested that if anything could be done to
expedite the delivery of letters by doing away with the collection of
postage from door to door, a great object would be gained; that five or
six times the number of letters might be delivered with the existing
machinery, and this even in less time than under the old system. The
only requisite was, that some plan for the prepayment of letters should
be devised, so that the Post-Office might be relieved from the duty of
charging, debiting, &c. and the letter-carriers from collecting the
postage. The Post-Office authorities had had the question of prepayment,
by means of some kind of stamp or stamped covers, under consideration
prior to this time. The Commissioners of Post-Office Inquiry deliberated
on the measure in the early part of 1837 (after Mr. Charles Knight had
suggested a penny stamp, or stamped cover, for collecting the now
reduced postage on newspapers), considering it very favourably. Hence it
arose that that part of the proposals relating to prepayment by stamped
labels or covers, formed part of Mr. Hill's scheme, and was considered
with it.
Mr. Hill, in his able pamphlet, exhausted the subject. By a variety of
arguments, he urged upon the nation a trial of his plans--begged for an
unobstructed and cheap circulation of letters, expressing his most
deliberate conviction,[87] that the Post-Office, "rendered feeble and
inefficient by erroneous financial arrangements," was "capable of
performing a distinguished part in the great work of national
education," and of becoming a benefaction and blessing to mankind. He
left the following proposals to the judgment of the nation:--(1) A large
diminution in the rates of postage, say even to one penny per letter
weighing not more than half an ounce. (2) Increased speed in the
delivery of letters. (3) More frequent opportunities for the despatch of
letters. And (4) Simplification in the operations of the Post-Office,
with the object of economy in the management. The fundamental feature in
the new scheme was, of course, the proposal that the rate of postage
should be uniform, and charged according to weight.
No wonder that the scheme, of which, in our own order, we have just
attempted an outline, roused feelings of delight and approbation from
the people at large, throughout the length and breadth of the land.
Still less is it a matter of surprise that the Government and the
Post-Office authorities, in charge of the revenue, should stand aghast
at the prospect of being called upon to sanction what they considered so
suicidal a policy. Lord Lichfield, the Postmaster-General at the time,
speaking for the Post-Office authorities, as to its practicability,
described the proposal in the House of Lords,[88] "of all the wild and
visionary schemes which I have ever heard of, it is the most
extravagant." On a subsequent occasion, his opinion having been
subjected for six months to the mellowing influence of time, he is less
confident, but says that, if the plan succeeds (in the anticipated
increase of letters), "the walls of the Post-Office would burst--the
whole area on which the building stands would not be large enough to
receive the clerks and the letters."[89] On the one side, many
well-known names[90] were ranked in opposition, who believed that the
scheme, among other drawbacks, would not only absorb the existing
revenue, but would have to be supported by a ruinous subsidy from the
Exchequer. On the other side of the question, however, there were many
intelligent writers and great statesmen ready to advocate the sacrifice
of revenue altogether, if necessary, rather than not have the reform;
while an immense number believed (and Mr. Hill himself shared in this
belief) that the diminution would only be temporary, and should be
regarded as an _outlay_ which, in the course of years, would yield
enormous profits. "Suppose even an average yearly loss of a million for
ten years," says a celebrated economist of the period; "it is but half
what the country has paid for the abolition of slavery, without the
possibility of any money return. Treat the deficit as an outlay of
capital. Even if the hope of ultimate profit should altogether fail, let
us recur to some other tax ... any tax but this, certain that none can
operate so fatally on all the other sources of revenue. Letters are the
_primordia rerum_ of the commercial world. To tax them at all is
condemned by those who are best acquainted with the operations of
finance." Nor was Mr. Hill to be cried down. He admitted, as we have
said, that his plans, if carried out, would result in a diminution of
revenue for a few years to come. On the reliable _data_ which he had
collected, he calculated that, for the first year, this decrease might
extend to as much as 300,000_l._; but that the scheme would pay in the
long run, and pay handsomely, he had no manner of doubt whatever. His
case was strengthened by all previous experience. The number of letters
would increase in the ratio of reduction of postage. In 1827, the Irish
postage-rates were reduced, and an immediate increase of revenue to a
large extent was the result. The rate for ship-letters was reduced in
1834. In four years the number increased in Liverpool from fifteen to
sixty thousand; in Hull from fifteen to fifty thousand. The postage of
letters between Edinburgh and the adjacent towns and villages was
reduced in 1837 from twopence to a penny. In rather more than a year the
number of letters had more than doubled.
Mr. Hill's proposals were instantly hailed with intense satisfaction,
especially by the mercantile and manufacturing classes of the community.
Whatever might be said in Parliament, public opinion in the country was
decided on the question, that if the success of the new scheme was
sufficient to cover the charges of the Post-Office establishment, it
ought by all means to be carried out. Scarcely ever was public sympathy
so soon and so universally excited in any matter. The progress of the
question of post-reform was in this, and some other respects, very
remarkable, and shows in a strong light how long a kind of extortion may
be borne quietly, and then what may be accomplished by prompt and
conjoint action. Before Mr. Hill's pamphlet appeared no complaints
reached the Legislature of the high rates of postage. During the year in
which it did appear five petitions reached the House of Commons, praying
that its author's scheme might at least be considered. In the next year
320, and in the first half of the year 1839 no fewer than 830, petitions
were presented in favour of the measure. Within a few, the same number
were sent up to the House of Lords. During the agitation, it is
calculated that no less than 5,000 petitions reached St. Stephen's,
including 400 from town-councils and other public bodies--the Common
Council of London, and the Society for the Diffusion of Useful
Knowledge, among the number.
During the month of February, 1838, Mr. Wallace moved for a Select
Committee of the Commons to investigate and report upon Mr. Hill's
proposals; but the Government resisted the motion.[91] They intimated
that the matter was under their consideration, and they intended to deal
with it themselves. But the community were dissatisfied. They continued
to petition till Ministers were compelled to show a greater interest in
the subject, which they did "by proposing little schemes, and
alterations, and devices of their own, which only proved that they were
courageous in one direction, if not in another."[92] Meanwhile, the
"Merchandise Committee"--formed of a number of the most influential and
extensive merchants and bankers in London, with Mr. Bates, of the house
of Baring & Co. for chairman--was called into existence through the
manifested opposition to reasonable reform. Large sums were subscribed
by this committee for the purpose of distributing information on the
subject by means of pamphlets and papers, and for the general purposes
of the agitation. So great and irresistible, in fact, was the pressure
applied in this and other ways, that the Government found it impossible
any longer to refuse an inquiry. A month or two after Mr. Wallace's
motion, Mr. Baring, the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, proposed a
Committee "to inquire into the present rates or modes of charging
postage, with a view to such reduction thereof as may be made _without
injury to the revenue_; and for this purpose, to examine especially into
the mode recommended, of charging and collecting postage, in a pamphlet
by Mr. Rowland Hill." It was noticed that most of the members nominated
by the Chancellor of the Exchequer were favourable to the Government,
all but two--Lord Lowther and Sir Thomas Fremantle--having voted for the
Ballot. The Conservatives did not grumble, however, as on this subject
the Government was conservative enough. The Committee sat sixty-three
days, concluding their deliberations in August, 1838. They examined all
the principal officers of the Post-Office and the Stamp Department, and
eighty-three independent witnesses of different pursuits and various
grades. The Post-Office authorities were specially invited to send any
witnesses they might choose; and as the Postmaster-General and the
Secretary of the Post-Office objected to the penny rate as likely to be
ruinous to the revenue, and to the principle of uniformity as unfair and
impossible, we may be certain that the witnesses sent were judiciously
chosen. The examination was by no means _ex parte_, but seems to have
been carried on with the greatest fairness. Those members of the
Committee who were particularly pledged to the protection of the
revenue, as well as Lord Lowther--who had a thorough knowledge of the
subject from having sat on a previous Commission--appear to have missed
no opportunity of sifting the opinions and the statements of each
witness. The members of the Committee did their work, altogether, with
zeal, great discrimination, and ability. The plan and the favourable
witnesses stood the scrutiny with wonderful success; and Mr. Hill
himself bore up, under what George Stephenson regarded as the greatest
crucial test to which mortal man can be subjected, with tact and
firmness, fully proving, in evidence, the soundness of the conclusions
on which judgment had to be passed.
We may say here, as we have not before referred to the circumstance,
that it was necessary to make it clear to the Committee, the amount of
increase in correspondence necessary to the success of the scheme. In
opposition to the views of official men,[93] Mr. Hill held that a
fivefold increase in the number of letters would suffice to preserve the
existing revenue, and he hazarded a prediction that that increase would
soon be reached. As regarded the means of conveyance, he showed that the
stage-coaches, &c. already in existence could carry twenty-seven times
the number of letters they had ever yet done; and this statement passed
without dispute. The evidence was clear and convincing as to the vast
amount of contraband letters daily conveyed; and no less certainly was
it shown that, if Mr. Hill's schemes were carried out, the temptation to
evasion of postage would be at once abolished, inasmuch as there would
then be no sufficient inducement to resort to illegal mediums. A Glasgow
merchant stated before the Committee, that he knew five manufacturers in
that city whose correspondence was transmitted illegally in the
following proportions, viz.--(1) three to one; (2) eighteen to one; (3)
sixteen to one; (4) eight to one; and (5) fifteen to one. Manchester
merchants--among whom was Mr. Cobden--stated that they had no doubt that
four-fifths of the letters written in that town did not pass through the
Post-Office. No member of the Committee had any idea of the extent to
which the illicit conveyance of letters was carried. A carrier in
Scotland was examined, and confessed to having carried sixty letters
daily, on the average, for a number of years--knew other carriers who
conveyed, on an average, five hundred daily. He assured the Committee
that the smuggling was alone done to save the postage. "There might be
cases when it was more convenient, or done to save time, but the great
object was cheapness." The labouring classes, especially, had no other
reason. "They avail themselves of every possible opportunity for getting
their letters conveyed cheaply or free." In his opinion, the practice
could not be put a stop to until the Post-Office authorities followed
the example that was set them in putting down illicit distillation in
Scotland. "I would reduce the duty, and that would put an end to it, by
bringing it down to the expense of conveyance by carriers and others."
Mr. John Reid--an extensive bookseller and publisher in Glasgow--sent
and received, illicitly, about fifty letters or circulars daily. "I was
not caught," he said, "till I had sent twenty thousand letters, &c.
otherwise than through the post." He constantly sent his letters by
carriers; he also sent and received letters for himself and friends,
inclosed in his booksellers' parcels. Any customer might have his
letters so sent, by simply asking the favour. It also came out in
evidence, that twelve walking-carriers were engaged exclusively in
conveying letters between Birmingham and Walsall and the district, a
penny being charged for each letter. The most curious modes of
procedure, and the oddest expedients[94] for escaping postage, were
exhibited during the sitting of the Committee. One, largely patronized
by mercantile houses, consisted in having a number of circulars printed
on one large sheet, when, on its arrival at a certain town, a mutual
friend or agent would cut it up, and either post or deliver the parts.
Nay, matters had been brought to such a state, that a leading journal,
commenting on the matter of illicit letter-conveyance just previous to
the sittings of the Committee, went the length of saying, that,
"_fortunately_ for trade and commerce, the operation of the Government
monopoly is counteracted by the clandestine conveyance of letters."...
"The means of evasion are so obvious and frequent, and the power of
prevention so ineffectual, that the post has become only the
_extraordinary_, instead of the usual, channel for the conveyance of
letters." Notwithstanding this testimony, the evidence of the
Post-Office officials on this and the other heads of inquiry betrayed
fully the usual degree of official jealousy of interference, and quite
an average amount of official partiality. Thus, Colonel Maberly argued,
that if the postage of letters were reduced to a penny it would not stop
smuggling: in which case they might as well have smuggling under the one
system as the other. But his zeal on this point overcame his discretion.
"For," he continued, "1,000 letters might still be sent as a
coach-parcel for seven shillings, whereas the Post-Office charge for
them would be four guineas." But the gallant colonel seems altogether to
have forgotten that the item of _delivery_ is, after all, the chief item
in all Post-Office charges. A few more examples of the statements of the
authorities may here be given. Thus, the Secretary said, relative to an
increase of letters, that "the poor were not disposed to write letters"
(10,851). He thought that, during the first year, the letters would not
double, even if franking were not abolished (2,949). "If the postage
be reduced to one penny, I think the revenue would not recover
itself for forty or fifty years." Lord Lichfield said that he had
ascertained that each letter then cost "within the smallest fraction of
twopence-halfpenny" (2,795). With regard to the principle of the uniform
rate, Colonel Maberly thought it might be "desirable, but impracticable"
(10,939). "Most excellent for foreign postage, but impracticable for
inland letters" (3,019). He also said that the public would object to
pay _in advance_ whatever the rate (10,932-3).
The Committee next had their attention called to still more important
facts, viz. that the number of letters conveyed illegally bore no
proportion to the number which were not written at all on account of the
high rates of postage. On the poor the Post-Office charges pressed
grievously, and there seemed no other course open to them than that, if
their letters could not be received without the payment of exorbitant
rates, they must lie in the hands of the authorities. It is only
necessary to compare the income of a labouring man with his pressing
wants to see that it was idle to suppose that he would apply his little
surplus to the enjoyment of post-letters other than in cases of life and
death. The Committee were absolutely flooded with instances in which
the Post-Office charges seriously interfered with the wants and
reasonable enjoyments of the poor. On the general question involved,
nearly all the witnesses, of whatever rank or grade, evidenced that the
public, to an enormous extent, were deterred from writing letters and
sending communications, which otherwise, under a cheaper tariff, they
would write and send. That this part of the case was proved may be
concluded from the language of the Committee themselves:--"The multitude
of transactions which, owing to the high rates of postage, are prevented
from being done, or which, if done, are not announced, is quite
astonishing. Bills for moderate amounts are not drawn; small orders for
goods are not given or received; remittances of money are not
acknowledged; the expediting of goods by sea and land, and the sailing
or arrival of ships not advised; printers do not send their proofs; the
country attorney delays writing to his London agent, the commercial
traveller to his principal, the town-banker to his agent in the country.
In all these, and many other cases, regularity and punctuality is
neglected in attempts to save the expenses of exorbitant rates of
postage."
On all the other parts of the scheme, and on the scheme itself as a
whole, the Committee spoke no less decisively. Generally and briefly,
they considered that Mr. Hill's strange and startling facts had been
brought out in evidence. They gave their opinion that the rates of
postage were so high as materially to interfere with and prejudice trade
and commerce; that the trading and commercial classes had sought, and
successfully, illicit means of evading the payment of these heavy
charges, and that all classes, for the self-same reason, corresponded
free of postage when possible; that the _rate_ of postage exceeded the
_cost_ of the business in a manifold proportion; and that, altogether,
the existing state of things acted most prejudicially to commerce and to
the social habits and moral condition of the people. They conclude,
therefore,--
1. That the only remedy is a reduction of the rates, the more
frequent despatch of letters, and additional deliveries.
2. That the extension of railways makes these changes urgently
necessary.
3. That a _moderate_ reduction in the rates would occasion loss,
without diminishing the peculiar evils of the present state of
things, or giving rise to much increased correspondence, and,
4. That the principle of a low, uniform rate, is _just in itself_,
and when combined with prepayment and collection by stamp, would be
exceedingly convenient and highly satisfactory to the public.
So far, their finding, point by point, was in favour of Mr. Hill's
scheme. They reported further that, in their _opinion_, the
establishment of a penny rate would not, after a temporary depression,
result in any ultimate loss to the revenue. As, however, the terms of
their appointment precluded them from recommending any plan which
involved an immediate loss, they restricted themselves to suggesting an
uniform _twopenny_ rate.
The Commissioners of Post-Office Inquiry,--consisting of Lord Seymour,
Lord Duncannon, and Mr. Labouchere,--who were charged with an "inquiry
into the management of the Post-Office," had already concluded their
sittings, and had decided upon recommending Mr. Hill's plan as far as it
concerned the "twopenny post" department; that being the only branch
then under consideration. "We propose," say they, and the words are
significant, "that the distinction in the rates and districts, which now
applies to letters delivered in the twopenny and threepenny post, shall
not in any way affect correspondence transmitted under stamped covers;
and that any letter not exceeding half an ounce shall be conveyed free
within the metropolis, and the district to which the town and country
deliveries extend, _if inclosed in an envelope bearing a penny stamp_."
With these important recommendations in its favour, the scheme was
submitted to Parliament. It had met with so much approval, and the
subject seemed so important, that the Government took charge of the
measure. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had the project of a uniform
rate of postage embodied in a Bill, which passed in the session of 1839.
This Act, which was affirmed by a majority of 102 members, conferred
temporarily the necessary powers on the Lords of the Treasury. Many of
the Conservative party opposed the Government proposals. Sir Robert
Peel's chief argument against the change was, that it would necessitate
a resort to a direct tax on income. In order, however, to strengthen the
hands of the Government, now that the question was narrowed in all minds
to the single one of revenue, the majority in the House of Commons
pledged themselves to vote for some _substituted_ tax, if, upon
experiment, any substitute should be needed.--(_Hansard_, vol. xlix.)
No one out of Parliament, at any rate, who read Mr. Hill's pamphlet
attentively, but was convinced of the practicability of the measure, and
the careful perusal of the evidence collected by the Committee
appointed, determined any waverer as to the necessity of its being
adopted. Still there existed serious misgivings in the country as to the
steps which the Melbourne administration must soon announce. That there
were some few objections to Mr. Hill's plan, and some difficulties about
it, cannot be doubted; the nation at large had decided for it, however,
and some of the principal men in the country, not favourable to the
existing ministry, decided for it also. The Duke of Wellington was
"disposed to admit that that which was called Mr. R. Hill's plan, was,
if it was adopted as it was proposed, of all the plans, that which was
most likely to be successful."[95] The Duke of Richmond pressed upon the
ministers, that if they gave their sanction to any uniform plan, it
should be to Mr. Hill's, "for that alone, and not the twopenny postage,
seems to me to give hope of ultimate success."[96]
On the 12th of November, 1839, the Lords of the Treasury issued a
minute, under the authority of the Act before referred to, reducing the
postage of all inland letters to the uniform rate of _fourpence_.
The country, generally, was greatly dissatisfied. Mr. Hill's measure was
what was required, and the fourpenny rate was in no respect his plan,
nor did it even touch the question of the _practicability_ of the
uniform postage proposed by the reformer. This quarter measure of the
Government did not even suffice to exhibit the benefits of a low rate of
postage; was consequently a most improper test, and likely to be
prejudicial to the interest of the penny post. The increase of letters
was in no place more than fifty per cent., whilst the decrease in the
Post-Office revenue was at the rate of forty per cent. In London, for
instance, the diminution of receipts was at the lowest computation,
450_l._ a day, and the number of letters were only just doubled. The
plan did not abolish the franking system. It did not abolish smuggling,
inasmuch as a letter might be sent illicitly for a penny. How,
therefore, it was argued, can it be expected that in the interior of the
country, at any rate, and without Custom House officers, or any other
responsible officers, a duty of 300 per cent. can be levied on the
carriage of an article so easily transported as a letter? For a few
weeks all was dissatisfaction. More than that, business men trembled for
the success of the whole scheme, and lest the Government should return
to the old _régime_. The Treasury Lords were convinced, however, that
they had made a mistake, and they resolved to give the measure a full
and fair trial. On the 10th of January, 1840, another minute was issued,
ordering the adoption of a uniform penny rate. By adopting Mr. Hill's
plan, the Government simply placed itself in the position of a trader,
who declared that he intended for a time to be satisfied with a part of
his former profits; but hoped eventually to secure himself against loss
by increased business, greater attractiveness, and diminished cost
of management. In six months, the policy of the Government was
acknowledged on all hands to be the correct one, for on the 10th of
August the Treasury had its minute confirmed by the Statute 3 & 4 Vict.
chap. 96. The _Quarterly Review_,[97] as an exception to the general
feeling, stigmatizes the measure "as one of the most inconsiderate jumps
in the dark ever made by that very inconsiderate assembly." It is
"distinguished by weakness and rashness," &c. But the judgment of
posterity is sadly against the reviewer.
A Treasury appointment was given to Mr. Hill to enable him to work out
his plans, or, in the wording of the said appointment, "to assist in
carrying into effect the penny postage." He only held his office about
two years, for when the Conservative party came into power in 1841, he
was politely bowed out of it on the plea that his work was finished;
that his nursling had found its legs, and might now be taken into the
peculiar care of the Post-Office authorities themselves. A study of the
past history of the Post-Office might have enlightened the minds of the
members of the Executive Government as to the advisability or otherwise,
of leaving entirely the progress of Post-Office improvement in the hands
of the authorities. Mr. Hill intreated the new premier, Sir Robert Peel,
to let him remain at any pecuniary sacrifice to himself, but
his entreaties were unavailing. He must watch his scheme from a
distance.[98]
Speaking of the hindrances which Mr. Hill met with in official circles,
we are reminded of a pamphlet which appeared shortly after this period,
evidently from some Post-Office official, "_On the Administration of the
Post-Office_." This precious pamphlet has been long consigned to
well-merited oblivion, and we only rescue it for a moment from the limbo
of all worthless things, to show the spirit which then actuated some of
those in office. It reminds us forcibly of the criticism which Mr.
Palmer's scheme called forth from the leading spirits of the Post-Office
of his day. The pamphlet, illogical and abusive throughout, laid it down
as a principle that "the Post-Office is not _under any obligation_ to
convey the correspondence of the public." Again, that "the Post-Office
is a Government monopoly for the benefit of the public revenue, and
exists for the _sole_ purpose of profit." Then there are praises for the
old, and abuses for the new _régime_. "The celerity, the certainty, the
security with which so vast a machine executed such an infinite
complexity of details, were truly admirable!" Mr. Hill comes in for a
good share of detraction. He is counselled to leave his "pet scheme" to
the "practical men" of the Post-Office. In the following flowery
language he is recommended "to behold it (his project) as a spectator
from the shore, viewing his little bark in safety, navigated by those
who are practically best acquainted with the chart, wind, and waves."
Mr. Hill's popularity outside the Post-Office contrasted favourably with
the estimation in which he was held inside. The whole community had
become impressed with the value of his measures and the important
services he had rendered. Spurred on to exertions by the treatment he
had received at the hands of an administration, which, to use the fine
expression of Lord Halifax in reference to another public benefactor,
"refused to supply the oil for a lamp which gave so much light," a
public subscription was opened throughout the country, which, joined in
by all classes, was quickly represented by a handsome sum. The money,
which amounted to over thirteen thousand pounds, and which was only
considered an expression of national gratitude, and by no means a full
requital for his services, was presented to him at a public banquet got
up in London under the auspices of the "Merchandise Committee." In an
address which accompanied the testimonial, Mr. Hill's measure of reform
was pronounced one "which had opened the blessings of a free
correspondence to the teacher of religion, the man of science
and literature, the merchant and trader, and the whole British
nation--especially the poorest and most defenceless portions of it--a
measure which is the greatest boon conferred in modern times on all the
social interests of the civilized world." Mr. Hill's bearing on the
occasion in question is described as most modest and unassuming. He
expressed his gratitude for the national testimonial in few but telling
phrases. He delicately alluded to his proscription from office,
regretting that he could not watch the progress of his measure narrowly,
and pointed out improvements which were still necessary to give complete
efficiency to his reform. Mr. Hill gave ample credit to those who had
sustained him in his efforts to carry his plans through Parliament, and
especially named Messrs. Wallace and Warburton, members of the special
Committee of 1838, Mr. Baring the Ex-chancellor of the Exchequer, and
Lords Ashburton and Brougham.
We shall have frequent occasion as we advance, to mention Mr. Hill's
name in connexion with Post-Office history during the past twenty years;
but we may here notice the remaining particulars of Mr. Hill's
_personal_ history. On the restoration of the Whigs to power in 1846,
Mr. Hill was brought back into office, or rather first placed in office
at St. Martin's-le-Grand, as secretary to the Postmaster-General, the
present Marquis of Clanricarde. In 1854, on Colonel Maberly's removal to
the Audit Office, Mr. Hill attained the deserved honour of Secretary to
the Post-Office under the late Lord Canning--the highest fixed
appointment in the department, and second only in responsibility to that
of Postmaster-General. In 1860 Mr. Hill was further honoured with the
approval of his sovereign, and few will question it, when we say it was
a worthy exercise of the royal prerogative, when he was called to
receive the dignity of Knight Commander of the Bath.
The arduous exertions, extending over a quarter of a century, and the
ever-increasing duties of the Secretary of the Post-Office have, within
the last few years, begun to tell upon the physical system of Sir
Rowland Hill, and have more than once caused him to absent himself from
the post which he has made so honourable and responsible. During the
autumn of last year he obtained leave of absence from active duty for
six months--his place being filled by Mr. Tilley, the senior assistant
secretary of the Post-Office--a step which was generally understood to
be preparatory to his resignation, should no improvement be manifest in
his health. Now (March, 1864) his retirement is announced, and he leaves
us and passes "not into obscurity, but into deserved repose." May he be
long spared to enjoy the rest and quiet which he has so well earned, and
the gratitude and sympathy which must be universally felt for him. His
early work, that would have been Herculean, even if he had not been
assailed by foes without and foes within, must have caused him immense
labour of hand and labour of brain; the carrying out also of many
important subsequent measures, which may be said to have followed as
necessary corollaries of his great reform, must have occasioned him an
amount of bodily and mental toil and excitement of which the "roll of
common men" have neither experience nor conception. Not to speak of his
services to commerce, Sir Rowland Hill, more than any living
individual, has succeeded in drawing close the domestic ties of the
nation, and extending in innumerable ways the best interests of social
life. He deserves well of his country, and we are only giving expression
to a feeling which is uppermost at this moment in most men's minds, when
we add the hope that a debt of gratitude may soon be discharged by some
gracious national tribute.[99]
The Executive Government, on its part, has shown a just and highly
appreciative estimate of Sir Rowland Hill's remarkable services in the
provision which has been made for him on his retirement. By a Treasury
minute, dated March 11th, 1864, advantage is taken of the special clause
in the Superannuation Act, relating to extraordinary services, to grant
him a pension of three times the usual retiring allowance. The language
in which this resolution is couched--doubtless from the pen of Mr.
Gladstone--is unusually complimentary for this class of official
documents. After recounting Sir Rowland Hill's eminent services--the
facts of which are based upon a statement just presented by the veteran
reformer himself, (see Appendix H)--and stating the amount of his
pension if treated on the ordinary superannuation allowance, the Lords
of the Treasury say that they consider the present a fitting case for
special arrangement. "Under the circumstances, it may justly be averred
that my Lords are dealing on the present occasion with the case not
merely of a meritorious public servant, but of a benefactor of his race;
and that his fitting reward is to be found not in this or that amount of
pension, but in the grateful recollection of his country. But my Lords
discharge the portion of duty which belongs to them with cordial
satisfaction, in awarding to Sir Rowland Hill for life his full salary
of 2,000_l._ per annum." Lord Palmerston has further given notice that
he will move in the House of Commons, that the pension be continued to
Lady Hill, in the event of her surviving her husband.[100]
One thing only mars the gracefulness of the minute in question. A vague
and indefinite attempt is made towards partitioning the merit of the
original suggestion of the penny postage scheme between Sir R. Hill and
some other nameless projector or projectors. On the contrary, we have
not been more definitely led to any conclusion in the range of postal
subjects which have claimed our attention, than to the one which gives
to Sir Rowland Hill the entire merit of the suggestion, and the chief
merit in the carrying out, of penny-post reform. It would, of course,
have been impossible to carry out and perfect the system without the
cordial assistance and co-operation of the other principal officers of
the Post-Office; for the past twenty years that assistance seems to have
been faithfully rendered; and Sir Rowland Hill, in retiring, pays a just
tribute to those who have laboured to promote the new measures, and into
whose able hands they have now fallen.
FOOTNOTES:
[81] _Select Committee of Postage_, 1843, p. 133.
[82] Miss Martineau, quoting from the _Political Dictionary_, vol. ii.
p. 563, says that Mr. Hill first offered his scheme to the Government of
Lord Melbourne before it was presented to the country. However this may
be, Mr. Hill makes no mention of the fact in his frequent appearances
before Committees of the House of Commons, &c.
[83] _Post-Office Reform_, p. 2, third edition.
[84] _Post-Office Reform_, p. 14, third edition.
[85] _Our Exemplars, Poor and Rich_, edited by Matthew Davenport Hill.
London, 1851, p. 317.
[86] _The Westminster Review_, July, 1860, p. 78, in an able but
exceedingly _ex parte_ article on "The Post-Office Monopoly," doubts
whether Mr. Hill's system is a near approximation to perfect justice,
being, in its opinion, "by no means the _summum bonum_ of letter-rates."
"A charge of one penny for the carriage of all letters of a certain
_weight_ within the United Kingdom, irrespective of distance, is
eminently arbitrary."... "No one in London who has written two letters,
one to a friend residing in the same town as himself, and another to one
in Edinburgh, can have failed, in affixing the stamps to them, to
observe the unfairness of charging the same sum for carrying the one 400
yards and the other 400 miles, when the cost of transmission must in the
one case be so much more than in the other." These quotations plainly
show that Mr. Hill's early arguments have been lost upon the reviewer.
If Mr. Hill demonstrated one thing more plainly than another, it was
that the absolute cost of the transmission of each letter was so
infinitesimally small, that if charged according to that cost, the
postage could not be collected. Besides, it is not certain that the one
letter would cost the Post-Office more than the other. Moreover, to the
sender the value of the conveyance of the local letter was equal to its
cost, or he would have forwarded it by other means. No doubt a strong
argument might be based on these grounds, as to the justice of a lower
rate for letters posted and delivered in the same town. Such a measure
might be supported on Mr. Hill's principles; but the apparent anomaly is
surely no argument against a State monopoly of letter-carrying.
[87] _Post-Office Reform_, p. 8.
[88] _Mirror of Parliament_, 15th June, 1837.
[89] _Ibid._ 18th December, 1837.
[90] Rev. Sydney Smith, Mr. McCullagh.
[91] Hansard, xxxviii. p. 1099.
[92] Miss Martineau, vol. ii. p. 429.
[93] Lord Lichfield said it would require a twelvefold increase, "and I
maintain," said he, "that our calculations are more likely to be right
than his."--(_Report_, 2821.)
[94] Mr. Hill related some of these in his pamphlet. Thus, at page 91,
we read:--"Some years ago when it was the practice to write the name of
a Member of Parliament for the purpose of franking a newspaper, a friend
of mine, previous to starting on a tour into Scotland, arranged with his
family a plan of informing them of his progress and state of health,
without putting them to the expense of postage. It was managed thus: he
carried with him a number of old newspapers, one of which he put into
the post daily. The postmark, with the date, showed his progress; and
the state of his health was evinced by the selection of the name, from a
list previously agreed upon, with which the newspaper was franked. 'Sir
Francis Burdett,' I recollect, denoted vigorous health." Better known is
the anecdote of a postal adventure of Samuel Taylor Coleridge, already
adverted to at the commencement of the present chapter. The story is
told originally, in Mr. Hill's pamphlet also:--Once, on the poet's
visits to the Lake district, he halted at the door of a wayside inn at
the moment when the rural postman was delivering a letter to the barmaid
of the place. Upon receiving it she turned it over and over in her hand
and then asked the postage of it. The postman demanded a shilling.
Sighing deeply, however, the girl handed the letter back, saying she was
too poor to pay the required sum. The poet at once offered to pay the
postage, and in spite of some resistance on the part of the girl, which
he deemed quite natural, did so. The messenger had scarcely left the
place, when the young barmaid confessed that she had learnt all she was
likely to learn from the letter; that she had only been practising a
pre-conceived trick: she and her brother having agreed that a few
hieroglyphics on the back of the letter should tell her all she wanted
to know, whilst the letter would contain no writing. "We are so poor,"
she added, "that we have invented this manner of corresponding and
franking our letters."
[95] Select Committee on Postage, 1843.
[96] _Ibid._
[97] October, 1859, Art 9. See also Raikes' _Diary_, vol. iii.
[98] "Lord Lowther," so Mr. Hill was told, "was a steady friend to Post
reform, and was well acquainted with the department." Without doubt the
new Postmaster-General's feelings, however ridiculous, were consulted in
this matter. Mr. Hill's anxiety for the general scheme, and for
subsequent minor proposals, was quite natural. When refused the Treasury
appointment, he asked to be taken into the Post-Office there to see his
plans worked out. Lord Lowther, when he comes to speak on the proposal,
somewhat indignantly asks the Treasury Lords if "the character and
fortunes of the thousands employed in the Post-Office are to be placed
at the mercy of an _individual_ who confesses that he is 'not very
familiar with the details of the methods now practised.'" "It is easy to
imagine," continued Lord Lowther, "the damage the community might
sustain from _his tampering_ with a vast machine interwoven with all the
details of Government and necessary to the daily habits and events of
this great Empire!" The matter is not one of "detail," but of
"principle;" if their Lordships want this or that carried into
execution, they have only to say so, and Lord Lowther will see that it
is done, "though it may be in opposition to my own opinion."
[99] We find that Birmingham, at which town Sir Rowland Hill spent some
of the earlier years of his life, has been the first to move in the
matter. At a meeting held March 3, a statue was voted to cost 2,000_l._
to be placed in the new public hall. A petition to the House of Commons
was likewise adopted.
[100] This motion has twice been deferred, owing, it is said, to
representations made by members of both sides of the House of Commons. A
few days ago, an influential deputation from the House met the First
Lord of the Treasury at his official residence, the members of which
strongly urged, that in place of the deferred pension to Lady Hill, a
Parliamentary Grant, sufficient though reasonable, be made to Sir
Rowland Hill at once. It is considered certain that, when the House
resumes after Easter, Lord Palmerston will propose a grant, most
probably, of 30,000_l._