SUNDAY RELIEF. (1849-50).
I now come to one of the most painful passages of my whole life.
Perhaps, even had I been in possession of every external advantage, the
trouble and anxiety now approaching would have been very considerable,
but certainly by my anomalous position they were so aggravated as to
become almost more than I could bear. The call constantly made upon me
to check unreasonable demands for augmented force or increased salary
had necessarily raised against me a hostile feeling, which was but
too ready to break out when occasion offered. To explain how such a
contingency occurred, I must go somewhat backward in my narrative.
At the time of my appointment to the Post Office, Sunday was very
far from bringing to the department the amount of rest at present
enjoyed there. Even at the chief office, which was usually spoken of
as completely exempt from Sunday duty, more than twenty persons were
regularly employed during several hours of the day, partly in sorting
out the letters for Government and foreign ambassadors resident in
London, letters technically called "States,"--which had to be delivered
the same day--and partly in doing other work which, under the existing
arrangements, could not safely be deferred until the Monday morning.
Elsewhere offices were, as a rule, open during most of the day, not
only for general purposes, but even for the transaction of money-order
business. Applications, indeed, began to be made by particular towns
for the suspension of this latter duty at their respective offices;
but, owing to the various difficulties and objections by which the
change was beset, and in particular the apprehended risk of opposition
from without, no progress was made until towards the end of 1847. In
that year, in consequence of a memorial presented from Bath by Lord
Ashley (now Earl of Shaftesbury), then one of the members for that
city, the Postmaster-General directed inquiry to be made whether, by
extending the hours on Saturday night, money-order transactions on
the Sunday might not be discontinued without injury to the working
classes. A report on this subject from the surveyor of the district
having come into my hands, I drew up a minute (January 27th, 1848), in
which I advised that for the present, at least, the Bath office should
be closed for money-order business on the Sunday, and I suggested that
in the event of its success a similar arrangement might be extended to
other towns. The Postmaster-General having adopted this recommendation,
the Bath office was closed on the Sunday for money-order business,
though it still remained open for ordinary purposes nine hours on that
day, as before. Even thus limited, however, the alteration excited
a in the minds of those who regarded it as the forerunner of other
restrictions, and within a month a memorial against further change was
presented by Viscount Duncan, the other member for the city, signed by
the mayor and nearly five thousand other persons, "Clergymen, officers
of the navy and army, gentlemen, members of the various professions
and trades, and others." It thus appeared that, important as it was to
afford Sunday relief, any movement for the purpose, if not cautiously
made, might excite opposition, perhaps too strong to be overcome. The
difficulty, too, was increased by unreasonableness and even absurdity
in some of the demands put forth; as, for instance, one for the
complete stoppage on their route of the mail-trains and all other
vehicles in the mail-service, from midnight on Saturday till midnight
on Sunday.
As, however, the Sunday suspension of money-order business at Bath
appeared on trial to produce no public inconvenience, I recommended its
extension, first to Leeds, and afterwards to Birmingham, these towns
having likewise presented memorials on the subject. In both cases my
recommendation was adopted by the Postmaster-General. I now began to
take measures to extend this Sunday closing of the money-order offices
to the whole kingdom. By the beginning of 1849 it was extended to
England and Wales, and thus, in one day, four hundred and fifty offices
were relieved from money-order duty, many of which had been previously
open for that purpose during the whole Sunday, just as on ordinary
days. Three months later, the experiment still proving successful, the
measure was extended to Ireland and Scotland, relieving two hundred and
thirty-four additional offices, and making the Sunday suspension of
money-order business complete.
Meantime, also, I was taking steps for bringing all other Sunday
work in the provincial offices within narrower limits. In October,
1848, I submitted a minute suggesting that inquiry should be made as
to Sunday proceedings at the offices in Scotland (where restriction
had always been carried further than in England), and how far such
arrangements were found satisfactory to the public and the department.
The information thence derived led me to hope that the English offices
might be closed at least during the hours of divine service, and the
Sunday deliveries limited in all cases to one. I consequently suggested
that the opinion of the surveyors should be ascertained on these
points, and at the same time I recommended that the offices should, in
the first instance, be closed from ten to five (except for the receipt
and despatch of any mails in the interval).
The Reports of the surveyors concurred in strongly recommending the
adoption of the proposed improvements; not, however, without showing
some apprehensions of inconvenience, and consequent complaints, from
the proposed restriction to one delivery; for the cases in which
there were more deliveries than one on the Sunday proved then much
more common than I had supposed. Still, I was of opinion that, with
whatever inconvenience the improvements might be attended, they
would be accepted by the public if accompanied by another measure
conferring an equivalent advantage. Such a measure was at that time
under consideration, and had long been regarded as a desideratum,
viz., the transmission of the "forward letters"[60] through London on
the Sunday, with a view to their delivery on the Monday morning; a
measure which I felt confident might be effected, not only without any
addition to Sunday labour, but, even when taken in all its bearings,
with a great reduction of Sunday labour. Nay, more, I saw reason to
believe that, even in the London office, on which alone the labour of
such transmission would fall, the improvement might, in the end, be
made to yield similar relief. This expectation was fully confirmed by
experience.
Accordingly I took an early opportunity of consulting the
Postmaster-General on the subject. I found that he concurred in my
views, but wished to consult Lord John Russell before anything was
done. This was on January 9th, 1849, and six days later he informed
me that Lord John Russell had no objection to consider the question,
and wished to see the proposed plan. I prepared a careful statement on
the subject, which was sent in without delay. A few days later, Lord
John Russell having approved of the plan for transmitting the forward
letters through London on the Sunday, I got my brother Arthur's help,
and threw my memorandum into the form of a minute; and as it fully
explains the grounds on which I proceeded in this matter, I insert it
at length in Appendix D, giving here the following summary.
After referring to the suspension of money-order business on Sunday,
I reported that investigations made showed that a further very
important relief as related to Sunday work might be effected in all
the provincial offices, but that the consideration of this question
was closely connected with the Sunday transmission of letters through
London, a measure which had been urged by various authorities, and
which was the more important, because the number of letters to which it
related had advanced within the last thirteen years by ten-fold.
I next pointed out that the evil of detention had been found so serious
that in several cases the rule had been evaded, either by making use
of other existing channels, or by the actual establishment of Sunday
cross-posts, an expedient which, besides its other evils, obviously
involved additional Sunday work.
After pointing out that the present Sunday duties at the chief office
ordinarily occupied twenty-six persons for six hours, even a greater
force being sometimes required, I proposed, with a view of diminishing
the amount of Sunday work in the department as a whole--provincial as
well as metropolitan--that the existing mail trains should bring up
on the Sunday, in addition to the present bags, the forward stamped
letters, and the forward stamped letters alone, so that there might be
neither any possibility of a Sunday delivery of letters to the London
public nor any unnecessary addition to the Sunday accounts.
In order that the men employed might be able to attend divine service,
I proposed that the whole interval from 10 A.M. till 5 P.M. should be
left perfectly free, and that the same arrangement should be extended,
as far as possible, to the duties already existing.
After glancing at the obvious fact that for any temporary increase in
force required at the chief office, there would be at least a large
and permanent set-off elsewhere, I pointed out that the existing
arrangements led to a great amount of Sunday despatch and delivery
in the provinces, and consequently of Sunday letter-writing and
letter-reading there; so that, taking the whole country through, Sunday
work would be undoubtedly lessened. I further stated that there were
means by which, after the contemplated change, it would be possible to
reduce the Sunday labour even at the chief office considerably below
its actual amount.
I next stated the large reduction in Sunday labour which in a recent
minute I had proposed at the provincial offices of England and Wales,
and again advised its adoption, and its extension in some of its
features to Ireland and Scotland. I added that its effect would be to
"release a very large number of persons now engaged even during the
hours of divine service," and thus to "afford to many hundreds, perhaps
even to some thousands, needful rest, and the opportunity of attending
the services of the day."
This minute was referred by the Postmaster-General to Colonel Maberly,
who, as I had the satisfaction of learning two days later, promptly
declared his intention to report in favour of the measure, saying that
it ought to have been adopted long ago. This he accordingly did, and I
have the pleasure to say that, amidst the troubles which subsequently
arose from the measure, Colonel Maberly stood by his first decision.
About three weeks later the "Lord's Day Society" applied to me to
receive a deputation, with a view to the total cessation of Post
Office business on the Sunday, stating that they were referred to me
by the Postmaster-General. As Lord Clanricarde was then out of town, I
wrote to him for instructions, feeling, meantime, no small perplexity,
because I well knew that, on the one hand, resistance to the expected
demand would expose me to attack, and that, on the other, concession
would soon produce such an uproar throughout the country as must
seriously annoy the Government, and, moreover, raise obstacles to those
practical measures of Sunday relief which were already in progress.
However, the Postmaster-General having expressed a wish that I should
receive the deputation, I called at the Treasury to urge immediate
sanction to my last measures on the subject, but found the Chancellor
of the Exchequer too much occupied to attend to the business.
"_March 30th._--Received the deputation from the 'Lord's Day
Society,' consisting of Mr. Cowan, M.P. for Edinburgh, General
MacInnes, three clergymen, and others. They had prepared a plan
for stopping the mails throughout the kingdom from midnight on
Saturday till midnight on Sunday, but I had no great difficulty
in satisfying most of them that any attempt of the kind would
excite much angry opposition, and consequently that it would be
much better, at first at least, to aim at such improvements as most
people would concur in."
Any impression, however, which I might have made soon faded away, the
Society within three weeks again urging their plan, under the erroneous
notion that they had found an answer to my objection, and pressing me
to undertake it, "as the only man capable of giving it effect." Of
course I could only point out the error and decline their request.
"_August 7th._--Summoned to the Treasury. Mr. Hayter[61] tells me
that he read my minute on the Sunday work aloud to the Chancellor
of the Exchequer; that both considered it a very able paper, and
that the measure had been sanctioned."
Measures were thus in progress for giving a vast amount of Sunday
relief throughout the country. Much had been already done, more was
in hand, and, judging by the past, I saw reasonable ground to hope
that the completion of this would open the way, as in the end it did,
to yet further benefit. Of course I could not but be aware that the
important change now preparing had in it an element of danger. The
transit of letters through London on the Sunday, if taken alone, would
necessarily be considered as an increase of Sunday work, the more so
as the "practical officers" maintained, contrary to my opinion, that
at least a temporary addition to the present force was essential to
the plan. It was to be feared, therefore, that London would be more
struck with a slight increase of Sunday employment in its own office
than with any decrease, however great, in all the other offices of the
kingdom; and that if London should sound the alarm on a subject where
Englishmen feel rather than think, an angry excitement would spread
throughout the country; an evil so formidable as to require that every
precaution should be taken against it. Above all, it was desirable
that no partial rumour should precede the complete enunciation of the
plan; since its sole chance of ready acceptance, and indeed its true
justifiability, depended upon its character as a whole. Consequently,
every one of those to whom knowledge was necessarily intrusted had been
strictly enjoined to secrecy. Unhappily, there must have been treachery
in the camp; not that I ever had the means of fixing this charge on any
individual, or that I ever was solicitous to do so; but of the fact
itself there was abundant evidence.
On September 27th my wife and I, by way of keeping the twenty-second
anniversary of our wedding, had taken a walk together as far as Hendon,
but after spending some time pleasantly there, we found the rest of our
pleasure marred by rumours of approaching trouble--rumours too well
confirmed on the following day.
"_September 28th._--The newspapers this morning are full of
the most absurd statements as to the Sunday duties' measure,
which, in several, is violently attacked as a desecration of the
Sabbath, and so on. The _Herald_ and the _Record_ profess to
give very circumstantial statements of what I have said and done
in the matter, but these are pure inventions. The clerks in the
Inland Office have signed a memorial to the Postmaster-General,
remonstrating against the measure, as though it were intended to
require their attendance on a Sunday, and expressing a pious horror
of so doing. The facts being that some who have signed the memorial
already attend throughout the day, while the additional duties
will be so arranged as to leave the clerks at liberty from ten
till five; few will be wanted, and those are to be volunteers. A
deputation of these fellows has been to the Bishop of London [Dr.
Blomfield], and it is said to the Lord Mayor also; both of whom
have taken up their case. I fear the whole proceeding is another
manifestation of that insubordination and desire to thwart my plans
which unquestionably exist.... Wrote to the Postmaster-General, who
left London yesterday morning for Portumna, stating how matters
stood, and made arrangements with Tilley [the assistant-secretary]
for the immediate issue of the notices to the public, as the most
effectual means of allaying the storm. They will appear in the
papers to-morrow morning, and will be distributed all over the
kingdom by to-morrow night's mails. A contradiction from authority
which I sent appears in the evening papers."
The statement that the Lord Mayor had proceeded in this questionable
manner proved to be untrue, but of the Bishop's part in the matter
there was no doubt. I could not but think it strange that one who had
himself to exercise authority and maintain discipline should feel
warranted, on an _ex-parte_ statement, without even ascertaining
whether this extraordinary appeal had been preceded by proper
application to the proper authority, should feel warranted, I say, to
give the sanction of his high authority to a proceeding which, in the
case of his own clergy, he would justly have regarded as irregular and
insubordinate.
As usual in difficulties, I sought aid from my own family:--
"_September 29th._--Matthew having fortunately returned home, I
have the advantage of his advice and assistance. We went to the
office together, and in the course of the day were joined by
Arthur. The contradiction and notice have had a good effect, but
the excitement has by no means subsided. The _Times_ has a leader
written evidently by some one who has seen my minute (probably at
the Treasury), partly defending, partly attacking the plan....
Strange enough, there is an able and earnest defence in the
_Morning Post_. Sent a confidential letter to the editor of the
_Times_, supplying the information which he so sadly lacks, and
wrote again to the Postmaster-General. The Lord Mayor has called a
meeting for Wednesday."
"_October 1st._--Went to the Treasury. Hayter treats the opposition
to the new arrangement of Sunday duties as a matter of no
importance. I think he is mistaken. I advise the publication of the
minutes on the subject. He will consult with the Chancellor of the
Exchequer."
In an able article which appeared in the _Times_ about six months
later, and which is quoted in its proper place, the delusion of the day
is justly compared to the infatuation which, two hundred years ago,
overspread England, led to such fearful injustice, and produced so much
unmerited suffering, from the calumnious breathings of so coarse a
miscreant as Titus Oates. Doubtless two centuries had not passed away
for nothing; a great amelioration of manners had taken place, both in
deceivers and in deceived; but, great as was the difference in degree,
the present movement was in kind the same thing again. History once
more repeated itself. Only let the accusation be monstrous enough, the
asseveration sufficiently bold, and the invention of circumstances
tolerably plausible, there is still a large fraction of the public
to whom disproof is for a time impossible of reception; the mist of
error so entirely blinding that the most glaring correctives passed
unnoticed--nay, unseen; while there is another class, perhaps almost
equally large, which hides its better knowledge, overawed by general
prejudice; so that while denunciation is clamorous and confident,
defence is but slow, feeble, and timorous.
"_Same day._--Mr. ----, M.P. for ----, called in consequence of the
note from Matthew. He says that he was about to engage actively
in the opposition, not knowing that the measure was mine; that he
shall now do no more than is necessary to satisfy his constituents,
but that he must go with the stream. The Methodists, he says,
are organising an opposition throughout London, and all the
metropolitan members must join in it. Showed him in confidence my
minute. He strongly advises its immediate publication."
"_October 2nd._--Matthew and I went early to Mr. Hayter's house
to put him in possession of the information afforded by Mr. ----,
keeping back the name of our informant, and to press for the
publication of the minute. He still thinks lightly of the matter,
but he will speak to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who comes
to town to-day to attend a Cabinet Council to decide, as H. says,
'whether we shall go to war with Russia.'"
We afterwards called together on an old and valued friend in the City,
hoping that we might rely on him, as one frequently taking part in
public affairs, to speak in defence of the measure at the meeting
convened by the Lord Mayor.
"We were surprised to find that even he had adopted the current
notions about the plan, and that, after we had in confidence shown
him the minute, he was by no means cordial in his approval.
"_Same day._--Went to the Treasury. The Chancellor of the Exchequer
thinks it unnecessary to publish the minute. Hayter is confident
the Government will not give way; but I fear that as they do
nothing to stem the tide, they will eventually give way to it.
However, I can do no more."
"_October 3rd._--The Lord Mayor came to the office just before
the hour for the City meeting. He gives much such an account of
things as ----, and says that, if Lord John Russell persists, he
will certainly lose his seat for the City. Gave the Lord Mayor some
information to use at the meeting. He told me that the deputation
of clerks did come to him, and that he reprimanded them for so
doing."
The City meeting was unanimous against the measure; the agitation was
evidently very powerful, and the most absurd and erroneous statements
were abroad. One circumstance, however, gave partial explanation of
the stir. We all know that in the heat of debate, as well as in the
heat of wine, suppressed feelings are apt to come forth; and some of
the speeches at this meeting showed, not very obscurely, a motive to
agitation of which I was not previously aware, and which certainly
assorted but ill with the religious considerations so much dwelt upon.
It appeared that, by the existing arrangements, the London merchant
occasionally got his letters from the East or West Indies or other
distant places on Monday morning, while the Liverpool merchant did
not get his till Monday evening; so that there was an interval of
which, by the aid of the telegraph, the London merchant could take
advantage for his special benefit. By the change contemplated, the two
deliveries would be made at the same time, and the local advantage be
therefore lost. I must not be supposed to attribute this low motive
to the meeting generally, still less to the public at large, though
probably it had its influence on more persons than would have been
willing to acknowledge it even to themselves. As we proceed, too, it
will be manifest that other motives were at work of an order but little
more elevated. Meantime, as Government intended, notwithstanding the
clamour, to go forward with the measure, it was necessary promptly to
secure the means.
"_Same day._--Pressed on Tilley the necessity of ascertaining,
without delay, what volunteers could be obtained from the men;
begging at the same time that no compulsion whatever might be used."
Of course the sole ground of complaint from the clerks and
letter-carriers was the expectation, real or pretended, that Sunday
attendance would be compelled. Such an expedient had never entered
into my mind; for, first, I should have held such compulsion too high
a price to pay for the advantage; and, secondly, I anticipated no
difficulty whatever in obtaining volunteers.
"_Same day._--Received a letter from the Postmaster-General,
expressing an opinion that the steps taken will soon put the public
right. Wrote in reply."
Three days later, being asked by Colonel Maberly if it was my intention
that none but volunteers should be taken, and being urged by Mr.
Bokenham (the head of the department immediately concerned) to allow of
compulsion, with a warning that otherwise men would hardly be procured,
I replied that I would rather give up the measure than compel a single
man to attend. On the morrow I had again support from a very important
quarter:--
"_October 5th._--The _Times_ this morning has an able defence,
founded chiefly on the information supplied in my letter to the
Editor."
But pending the beneficial effect which such articles might gradually
produce upon the middle classes, the state of mind in the class whence
letter-carriers and messengers are drawn remained matter of anxiety. On
the day on which the article appeared there was a straw to show which
way the wind was blowing; and however ludicrous the incident appears
now that the storm is passed, it was not half so funny at the moment.
"The excitement against the measure (or rather against that which
has been falsely stated to be the measure), and I fear against
myself individually, is becoming popular. To-day Sir John Easthope
saw in the street a boy [selling ginger-beer] with a placard round
his hat inscribed 'Anti-Rowland Hill Pop.'"
The following day, however, brought more support from the press:--
"_October 6th._--The _Morning Chronicle_ has an able defence of the
measure, so had the _Globe_ of last night; indeed, the whole of the
daily press, except the _Morning Herald_ (which is rabid) and the
_Standard_, is, I believe, on the right side."
This was immediately followed by support from a quarter of yet more
direct importance:--
"_Same day._--Received a summons to attend the Chancellor of the
Exchequer at half-past twelve. Maberly also was summoned. We were
shown into separate waiting-rooms, and Maberly was called in first.
In about a quarter of an hour I was called in also. Hayter was
present. The Chancellor of the Exchequer and Hayter both spoke in
strong terms of the excellence of the measure and the folly of the
opposition.... After some discussion and inquiry, the Chancellor
of the Exchequer wrote a letter to Lord John Russell, containing a
brief statement of the main facts of the case, which he read to us,
at the same time adding that Lord John will decide whether to give
way to the clamour or not."
At the same conference I had to report that as yet only three
volunteers had come forward for the new work; but, again expressing my
strong objection to compulsion, I mentioned a device for simplifying
the sorting by which I was confident the work might be performed by
unpractised hands. Though Colonel Maberly still preferred compulsion,
the Chancellor of the Exchequer authorized an experimental trial of the
plan, which, with the aid of two of my nephews, I made without delay,
and in two days carried so far as to obtain satisfactory results; a
fact, doubtless, not lost on the regular force.
"_October 9th._--In the course of the day went to the Treasury to
report progress. Saw Hayter, who sent in a note to the Chancellor
of the Exchequer (a Cabinet sitting at the time) containing my
report."
"_October 10th._--The Chancellor of the Exchequer sent for me, Lord
John Russell having decided that the minute shall be published
forthwith.... I fear the publication will be too late. A large
deputation waits on Lord John Russell and the Chancellor of the
Exchequer to-morrow, and the Postmaster General is summoned to
town."
"_October 11th._--The minute appears in all the morning papers
except the _Times_."
The time appointed for the actual change being now close at hand,
definite and binding arrangements were indispensable. The duties
were accordingly divided by mutual agreement amongst Mr. Tilley, Mr.
Bokenham, and myself. I was, however, confident of success, as by this
time a large number of volunteers had come forward, so that we had to
make a selection, the men chosen being principally from the secretary's
office. The readiness to volunteer from this division of the service
proceeded, as I had the gratification to learn, from a step taken by
Colonel Maberly, who, calling his clerks together, addressed them in
a speech in which he pointed out that the department was in danger
through unjust attacks, and called upon them to stand forth in its
defence.
"In the evening the Postmaster-General came to the office, having
arrived in town late last night, and met the deputation. Reporters
were present, and reports will, no doubt, appear in the morning
papers. The deputation, the Postmaster-General says, pressed for a
postponement of the measure, pleading that they had scarcely had
time to read the minute; and after they left it was decided to
delay the change for a fortnight.... We discussed the question of
compulsion, towards which I find the Postmaster-General inclined;
but here again I found him uninformed as to the facts of the case.
He was not aware either that the clerks now engaged on Sunday are
volunteers, or that a sufficient number of men for the new duties
had come forward. I entreated him not to resort to compulsion,
telling him that I had authorised others to say that none would be
employed except volunteers, and pointing out that any compulsion
would give the men a real grievance, whereas at present their case
rested entirely on misrepresentation."
"_October 12th._--The best report on the deputation is in the
_Morning Chronicle_, which also contains an able leader in favour
of the measure."
On the morrow I conferred again with the Postmaster-General relative
to the arrangements in question, when he communicated to me, in strict
confidence, that he feared there was a decided leaning towards the
insubordinate men on the part of certain important officials whom he
named.
"We again discussed the question of compulsion, and the
Postmaster-General promised that no compulsion should be resorted
to if the work could be done by volunteers on Bokenham's plan or on
mine."
After recording these transactions, my Journal thus continues:--
"It is impossible to notice all the proceedings of the week, nor
is it necessary. The accounts of meetings to protest against the
measure, and the gross falsehoods which have been promulgated in
order to get up a case, will be found in the _Morning Herald_;
... the real facts appearing in my published minute, and in the
statements of Ministers on receiving the deputation of Wednesday."
It is remarkable that while the only firm stand against compulsion
was made by myself, it was upon me that the blame of this imaginary
compulsion was chiefly laid; against me that the most unscrupulous
asseverations were uttered, and the bitterest reproaches directed. I
had been for a long time earnestly and successfully engaged in reducing
the Sunday labour of the department throughout the United Kingdom.[62]
Hundreds of persons, through measures adopted on my recommendation,
had been released from the greater part of their Sunday duty. I had,
in fact, been strenuously, though quietly, doing the very work of the
Lord's Day Society; and, now, because a further important measure in
the same direction required a small temporary addition to the Sunday
force of the London office alone, this even being so arranged as that
all engaged would be released from duty an hour before the usual time
for the commencement of Divine Service, I was denounced as the chief
enemy of the due observance of the Sunday, and charged with a wicked
intention to compel, whereas, on the contrary, I was doing my very best
to prevent compulsion. These attacks, too, so painful and injurious
to myself, were no less endangering the great measure of relief which
I was striving to carry through. As I have said, the public could not
yet think--it only felt. Under such circumstances I was bound to be
most heedful lest any act or even acquiescence on my part, real or
apparent, might give, or seem to give, ground, however slight, for just
imputation.
Mr. Bokenham had twice applied to me to obtain for him a peremptory
order from the Postmaster-General to carry out the measure; adding
that, if this were done, he felt sure his men would come forward from
good-feeling towards himself. This I had, of course, refused; but it
now occurred to me (October 13th) that, if the order were accompanied
with permission to select volunteers, not only from within the office,
but also, if necessary, from the world at large, Mr. Bokenham's desire
might be safely granted, since it was impossible that, with so wide
a choice, there should be the slightest difficulty in obtaining the
necessary aid. Upon my explaining this proposed course to Mr. Bokenham,
he expressed his desire to have it carried out. I learned from him,
however, much to my chagrin, that he received a verbal order to compel
attendance; but upon my stating to him the Postmaster-General's promise
to the contrary, he said he should apply for further instructions
before taking any steps. I accordingly wrote a minute in which I stated
my unabated confidence in my plan of sorting, and my readiness to
undertake the responsibility of its execution if the Postmaster-General
should so decide. Having shown this to Mr. Tilley, who had been present
throughout the conversation, and who at once vouched for the accuracy
of the statements contained therein, I went straight to Brighton,
obtained without difficulty the requisite powers for Mr. Bokenham, and
the Postmaster-General's approval of the whole minute, he "viewing it
as a very satisfactory mode of reconciling the voluntary principle with
a peremptory order to Bokenham, and expressing himself much indebted to
me for the trouble I had taken."
All now seemed to be satisfactorily arranged for action; but three days
later new doubts arose, the Postmaster-General informing me that Mr.
Bokenham had withdrawn from his engagement to me, and that he himself
had thought it necessary to issue a positive order, upon which he had
no doubt the new duty would be executed, and, as he confidently hoped,
by volunteers. After mentioning that he had overlooked the phrase in my
minute relative to volunteers from without, he advised that, supposing
Mr. Bokenham should express no distrust of his power, I should now
leave the matter in his hands. I could not but feel anxious lest his
lordship's authorisation to Mr. Bokenham should include that compulsion
which I so strongly deprecated. When I got sight of the instructions
referred to in his letter, I found that I was not mistaken. I at once
replied (see Appendix E), informing him how I had become pledged to
the opposite course, declaring myself still ready to undertake the
responsibility of the sorting by volunteers, provided I received the
powers which had been conferred on Mr. Bokenham, and repeating my
earnest desire that the improvement should be abandoned altogether
rather than we should "run the risk of compelling any one to do that to
which he has a conscientious objection."
My anxiety on the subject was not without reason:--
"_October 19th._--The _Morning Herald_ has a leader, letter, and
advertisement, stating that the voluntary plan has been withdrawn
(hitherto this paper has repeatedly denied that the work was to be
voluntary), and that compulsion will be resorted to. The leader, of
course, attributes all this to me.
"The Postmaster-General came to town. He again hesitates; will
immediately consult Lord John Russell. I pressed for an immediate
decision.... The Postmaster-General intimates that when the
excitement is over there must be a searching inquiry, and a change
in the organisation of the office favourable to my interests; but
expectations of the kind have been so frequently raised only to be
disappointed, that such intimations produce little effect on my
mind."
Lord John Russell, in the main, confirmed my view as to the employment
of volunteers exclusively. The Postmaster-General informed me that
he had spoken seriously to Mr. Bokenham, and hoped for good results.
I pointed out to the Postmaster-General that, though his order for
the execution of the plan was peremptory, yet, considering the ample
field given for obtaining volunteers, it could not possibly enjoin
compulsion; with which conclusion he agreed.
Meantime the work of agitation did not relax:--
"_October 22nd._--Inflammatory appeals to the public, representing
us as resorting to compulsion, are placarded, among other places,
on the boards for official notices at some of the churches."
Still, whatever the present pain, I was confident of succeeding in
the end, provided there was no flinching; but it was of the first
importance to have a complete and definite understanding as to the
mode of action. Vacillation must be brought to an end, if possible,
and, fortunately, it was decided the next day that I should undertake
the duty, with authority to raise volunteers in and out of the office.
I consequently began at once to make needful arrangements, when Mr.
Bokenham, informing me that for certain reasons it would be easier for
him to obtain volunteers than he had supposed, expressed a desire to
try again. The next day he undertook in writing to discharge the duty
by the aid of volunteers alone. This offer, with a minute of my own, I
despatched to the Postmaster-General, again at Brighton, who wrote me
word next day that he had approved my minute "with great satisfaction."
"_October 25th._--Called with Matthew on the Hon. [and Rev.]
Grantham Yorke, Rector of St. Philip's, Birmingham, who is come to
town partly to learn the real facts of the Sunday duties question
(he called yesterday at the Post Office, but I was unable to see
him). He takes a very liberal view of the question, and will defend
the measure at a town's meeting, to be held next Tuesday, in
Birmingham."
This promise Mr. Yorke handsomely fulfilled, and not without good
effect, though public feeling was still too strong to allow of
immediate success.
On the same day that I saw Mr. Yorke there were more inflammatory
notices at the churches; but to these no printer's name was attached.
It was no wonder that symptoms of direct insubordination began to
appear in the department. The gas in Mr. Bokenham's office was on one
occasion suddenly put out, and one of the volunteers for the Sunday
duty was hooted. I could not but feel great anxiety as to the issue,
since an open outbreak would have thrown all into confusion; nor can
I deem it even now needless to point out that when any considerable
portion of the public, acting upon an _ex-parte_ statement, and hastily
assuming that that which is not promptly denied must needs be true,
takes upon itself to countenance discontent in an important Government
department, it must, at least, produce in the department itself great
anxiety and the waste of much valuable time, and may expose the
whole country to the risk of most serious inconvenience. Some months
afterwards the Postmaster-General admitted that he was now satisfied
that we should have had a strike in the Inland Office if the men had
had the slightest pretext for it; and that if he had forced any one to
attend on Sundays, which he says ---- pressed him to do, it would, no
doubt, have furnished the pretext.
On the following day I became aware of one source of misconception
among the men, and, through them, among the public. Mr.
Bokenham admitted that, when he communicated to his clerks the
Postmaster-General's positive order for the Sunday transmission, he
withheld the minute that limited the service to volunteers, and thus
raised, and in some degree justified, the cry that compulsion would be
employed.
Meanwhile the trouble thus excited in St. Martin's-le-Grand was
extending to the provincial offices, at one of which the postmaster had
gone so far as to issue, under his own signature, a hand-bill against
the measure.[63] Meanwhile one postmaster, at least, took a very
different course:--
"The postmaster at Plymouth has written to say that in his office
alone thirty men, including letter-carriers, will be relieved. He
describes the measure as one of the most important 'in the annals
of the Post Office.'"
All such support was very important at a time when opposition was so
strong, and, I must add, so unscrupulous:--
"_October 27th._--The Committee of the Lord's Day Society has
issued a copy of my minute of February 3rd, with comments thereon
of a very offensive character. They insinuate doubts as to the
minute having been written in February, and express their belief
that I originally proposed a Sunday delivery.
"_Same day._--Worse placards than ever at the churches. Sent in a
memorandum to Colonel Maberly informing him that at a church in
Gresham Street a placard is exhibited exhorting the men to strike."
The following is the text of this strange exhortation:--
"TO THE CLERKS, SORTERS, CARRIERS, AND OTHER
AGENTS OF THE POST OFFICE.
"FELLOW MEN! especially to ye 'who fear God and work
righteousness,'--
"You ought, you must obey God rather than man!
This is the victory which overcometh the world, our faith.
Trust in the Lord, and do good, and verily ye shall be fed.
"Strike!--Every one of ye to a man. Strike!--Make a passive
resistance to the adversaries of your souls. Strike! and let Mr.
Rowland Hill, and Lords Clanricarde and John Russell, see that
there is One mightier than they whose commands you reverence
supremely.
"Unite if you can, but let no man defer to the timid or
compromising spirit of a fellow-servant.
"Honour and observe the Word of God.
"Unless _you_ stand, the public cannot at this juncture do much
more than they have done.
"Stand ye, and _then_ the entire nation, every one in it whose
voice is habitually raised up to the King of kings, will hold you
up, and _in due time_ will strive for the freedom of every postal
servant throughout the kingdom on the Sabbath day; but _you_ must
be bold in the name of the Lord, in order to engage His mighty
favour and the sympathy of His people universally.
"What an impudent daring is this by creatures of mere circumstance
and pomp.
"God is defied, and the genuine execrating outcry of a Christian
nation is set at naught!
"It is to be hoped that our Queen will be solicited to cast such
men out from her councils and executive; _they_ are the men who
endanger the State; for, most assuredly as there is a God who
taketh vengeance, so will this realm be visited if the sins of it
should be so enormously added unto; and the Lord's people (who are
the saving salt of it) will be constrained to say. 'Even so, Lord,
so let Thine enemies perish.'
"Fellow Christians of every denomination! continue to pray for the
oppressed, they shall have a holy fortitude themselves to cast from
them the bands of the oppressor.
"6, Finsbury Pavement,
"Friday, 26th October, 1849."
As usual, in these exhortations to bold defiance, the printer's name
was cautiously suppressed.
While so much was doing to abuse the public mind, official reserve
prevented my taking the most direct means for its correction:--
"_Same day._--The Postmaster-General objects to my sending the
proposed information to the newspapers; he thinks it will be better
to wait and see what they say, contradicting it if necessary. I
cannot convince him of the practical impossibility of correcting an
erroneous impression when once adopted by the public."
After all that has been described, the reader will not be surprised at
the next passage from my Journal. I must first state, however, that
ere this the time for hesitation was past, the labour of preparation
concluded, and the day of actual trial come:--
"_October 28th.--Sunday._--Very ill--confined to my bed nearly
the whole day. I have no doubt my illness has been caused by the
anxieties of the last month."
Ill though I was, nevertheless I was eagerly desirous of information as
to the success of the first experiment, particularly as to whether the
force engaged had proved, as I expected, ample. I had ascertained the
previous day "that no more carriages, drivers, guards, &c., would be
employed in conveying the bags from and to the stations than heretofore
on a Sunday; the only difference will be that four-wheeled carriages
with two horses will be substituted for two-wheeled carriages with one
horse." Mr. Bokenham wrote up from the office that the work not having
been quite completed by ten o'clock, though twenty minutes more would
have sufficed, he had requested ten of the force to return in the
evening to finish; a necessity arising, however, from the fact that the
number of letters was 18,000 or 20,000 more than usual on the Sunday.
He added, that, "the men were all in excellent humour, and exerted
themselves to their utmost."
On the following day, when, though better, I was unable to leave
home, I looked with anxiety into the morning papers to learn what
would be the complexion of their reports in the absence of that
information which I had been forbidden to supply; and, with concern,
I found my unsatisfactory anticipations confirmed. Even the _Times_,
which had hitherto given us so much support, headed its article with
"_Commencement_ of Sunday labour in the Post Office;" made it appear
that it was intended to make a despatch by the day mails, but that the
attempt failed; represented the attendance as compulsory, and stated
that not less than fifty men were employed in the additional duties,
the actual number being only twenty-five. Handbills, too, were publicly
distributed by letter-carriers, attacking not only me, but also the
Postmaster-General, and even the Government.
Amidst so many difficulties on one side it was natural that those on
the other should be overlooked. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had
written to me saying that he did not see the necessary connection
between Sunday relief in the provinces and the Sunday transmission of
letters through London; intimating, in short, that we might retain the
one and abandon the other. In reply, I informed him that I could not
have ventured to propose the one change without the other, reminded him
that there were two parties to be considered in the matter, referred
for further explanation to my minute of the previous February, repeated
my conviction that by the use of proper means the additional force
at the Chief Office could be altogether dispensed with, reported
satisfactory results thus far, and forwarded, as evidence of relief at
the provincial offices, the letter lately received from the postmaster
of Plymouth.
On the day after writing this letter, being still confined to the
house, I received a note from the Postmaster-General, informing me that
he was much pressed to issue an order for compelling attendance, and
that he wished me to consider the question before he next came to the
office. On going myself to the office on the following day, I learnt
that a larger Sunday force had been applied for by Mr. Bokenham, partly
with a view to completing the work in the morning, and partly to enable
him to work the men on alternate Sundays only. He wished the number to
be raised to forty, which, by alternation, would be in effect five less
than the number I had proposed; yet I hesitated to agree to the change,
knowing how the matter would be misrepresented abroad.
"_November 2nd._--In the evening the Postmaster-General came to
the office, and reported that Lord John Russell concurred in the
importance of avoiding compulsion. The final settlement is deferred
till Monday."
Even the authority of the Premier, however, did not remove all
difficulties, for on my suggesting to Mr. Bokenham that he should offer
a new inducement to volunteers, he again urged that, instead of this, I
should consent to a compulsory attendance in rotation. Upon my refusal,
he asked permission to warn the men that, unless there were sufficient
volunteers, compulsion would be resorted to; offering, as I still
refused, to do this in his own name, without implicating me. Of course
I stood firm to my point.
When the second Sunday had passed much as the first, I again offered,
with a view to avoid further importunity, to undertake the work myself;
but scarcely had I done this when a new difficulty arose, for which,
however, I was not altogether unprepared. An eminent printer, who had
offered me the aid of fifty of his men, deemed it prudent to withdraw,
as he saw reason to believe that if he persisted in his offer it would
lose him some important custom.[64] At the same time I was warned by
anonymous letters (of one of which a copy is given in Appendix F), of
treacherous conduct within the office, and upon my reporting this to
the Postmaster-General, learnt that he had received the same warning
in a letter not anonymous.[65] I had come to him, however, prepared
with a memorandum showing the results for which I was ready to make
myself responsible, and also the conditions which I deemed essential
to success; and, of course, I stood quite prepared to go on. My offer
was the more opportune as Mr. Bokenham, who arrived in the midst of our
conversation, informed the Postmaster-General, when I had withdrawn,
that he could not remain responsible for the new work, even on the
Sunday next ensuing. My offer, therefore, was, with some modification,
accepted. I felt more confident in the charge, because I had devised
a means of reducing the number of bags--the chief difficulty on the
previous Sunday--from six hundred to one hundred, and because I had
learnt from Mr. Tilley that all such volunteers as he had spoken to had
renewed their engagement. He himself was ready to go on, and even Mr.
Bokenham, though shrinking from the chief responsibility, was, like
Mr. Tilley, willing to undertake the share of duty allotted to him
according to our first arrangement.[66] The only remaining doubt was
whether the Premier might not decide upon a complete abandonment of the
plan.
"_November 6th._--Saw the Postmaster-General by appointment at
his own house in the evening. Lord John Russell, whom he met at
the Cabinet Council at Windsor, did not hesitate a moment. The
agreement of yesterday was therefore confirmed."
This was, however, with one modification, viz., that if the office
did not supply the requisite number of volunteers, the deficiency
should be made up from other Government departments. Happily no such
necessity arose, as the number of volunteers from the office itself
who presented themselves on the conditions I had been authorised to
offer, was more than necessary. Seeing this, Mr. Bokenham for the
third time undertook the duty, at first only for the next Sunday, but
within two days for permanence. Accordingly the next Sunday, though
the additional force still did not exceed twenty-five men, the number
of letters, however, being somewhat less than the week before, the
whole work was completed in the morning, so as to release all engaged
in it by ten o'clock for the whole day. In short, the difficulty had
so completely passed away that three days afterwards Mr. Bokenham
came to inquire if I should be likely to make any change in duties
during the next three Sundays, as he wished to leave town; and upon
my doubting the safety of his withdrawal at such a time, gave it as
his opinion that there was no danger. Among the circumstances tending
to this satisfactory result was, doubtless, an authority which I had
obtained from the Postmaster-General to form a permanent corps of
volunteers, principally from other Government offices, who were to
receive a month's pay whether called upon for actual service or not.
The Stamp and Record Offices alone were ready to supply thirty-five
men, or ten more than needful. I could not, however, fully share in Mr.
Bokenham's confidence. Only four days before, inflammatory handbills
had been distributed within the office, one being deposited at each
sorter's place, while a sub-sorter was selling, at a halfpenny per
copy, an abusive song attacking myself; proceedings which, as the
Postmaster-General remarked in calling for investigation, showed that
there must be great neglect in the discipline of the office.
There continued, likewise, a daily issue of placards, which were
exhibited chiefly on the churches and in certain shop-windows, one of
these latter being nearly opposite my room. A few of these placards
were avowedly issued by the Lord's Day Society, but most of them were
anonymous. All had the appearance of being concocted more or less in
the Post Office, and all evinced an utter disregard of truth. I retain
to this day a collection of these mendacious papers, which, though
large, is nevertheless incomplete. The strike among the men urged in
some of them never went further than the refusal, on the part of the
guards, on one occasion, to assist in placing the bags in the carriages
at the Post Office; in consequence of which, even before I knew the
fact, they were all suspended from employment by the Postmaster-General.
However, as the Sunday duty was now permanently off my hands, I had
leisure to direct my attention towards those measures for diminishing
its amount, which formed an integral part of my plan. One of these
was so to arrange the work as to have the greatest practicable amount
of sorting done in the travelling offices on the railways; the
earlier portion ending by five on Sunday morning, and the latter not
beginning till nine on Sunday evening. The pursuit of this object
led to a singular device. One portion of the correspondence passing
through London on the Sunday, viz., that from towns too near to London
to allow of time for sorting on the way, seemed incapable of being
brought within this arrangement; but while I was preparing a minute on
the subject, in which my brother Arthur was assisting me, I suddenly
startled him, so he now reports, by exclaiming: "A light breaks in upon
me." I had just conceived the first notion of the device referred to
above, which, strange as it may seem, really answers its purpose very
well. This was that the _down_ mail-trains on Saturday night should
take up these letters at the different towns on their respective
routes, thus conveying them, in the first instance, in a direction
opposite to their final destination, but subsequently transferring
them to the up-trains for conveyance to town. Thus the down night
train to Liverpool would receive successively the up-mails of St.
Albans and Watford, and on arrival at a more remote town would transfer
them all to the up-train, which would carry them back to London. By
this arrangement the required opportunity for sorting the letters
was obtained. Indirect as is the route, no time whatever is lost to
the public, which to this day, I believe, remains quite unaware that
letters are carried away from London by one night train only to be
brought back by another. Another point for relief was a Sunday morning
delivery in the suburbs of London, employing about four hundred men,
against which, amidst all the hubbub of the time, not a word had been
said.[67] It occurred to me that, as a means of immediately reducing
the work, the district cross posts might be dispensed with on Sundays,
which could be done without inconvenience.
The Postmaster-General was delighted with an arrangement that reduced
Sunday work in the London district, and at once agreed to putting down
the cross posts--a change which released eleven men. He was inclined,
indeed, as a punishment to the agitators, to abolish the Sunday morning
delivery without giving anything in its place; but, upon my advice,
this project was abandoned. Accordingly, carrying out a plan of
relief which I had suggested, as a more general measure, when at the
Treasury,[68] I proposed to substitute a late Saturday night delivery
in the nearer suburbs for that on Sunday morning. By this plan more
than a hundred men would be forthwith released from Sunday duty in
the metropolitan district alone, while further investigation promised
additional benefit. Within a fortnight I was able to submit a minute
recommending the measure in detail; and to this the Postmaster-General
gave his sanction, though he sadly wished to punish the public in the
manner I have mentioned.
Further measures of relief soon followed:--
"_November 30th._--At home finishing a minute on the sorting of
Sunday letters. I have again improved the plan, so as to have most
of the sorting done in the country on Saturday night and Sunday
morning [of course very early, viz., before the passing of the up
mails]. Four or five men working in London on the Sunday will, I
expect, suffice."
"_December 1st._--Smith tells me that he shall be able to include
every place in the six mile circle in the measure of Sunday relief.
Nearly two hundred persons will thus be released from Sunday duty
in the metropolitan district."
On the same day, I wrote a minute pointing out the means for reducing
the number of bags, as already spoken of. On learning from Mr.
Tilley that some reports on this subject were lying in the office, I
sent for them, and found that they were in reply to a minute of the
Postmaster-General, written nearly two months before on information
given by me. These reports represented my plan as quite practicable,
and as saving "nearly half the labour of making-up and despatching the
bags;" but orders had been given that no change should be made; and
the reports had not even been submitted to the Postmaster-General. Of
course I went forward with the improvement, which was carried into
effect about six weeks later.
Meantime, there had appeared, from very different quarters, and on
very different grounds, two able defences of our late proceedings:
one from the late General Peyronnet Thompson, in the form of a series
of letters to the _Sun_ newspaper, and the other from the Rev. Dr.
Vaughan, Head Master of Harrow School. General Thompson, for the most
part, subordinated the question of the day to one of a more general
character, viz., the obligation on Christians to observe the Mosaic
law; but Dr. Vaughan perceived that, as the former question did not
involve the latter, it was better to discuss it separately. His paper
is remarkably forcible and terse. Such support from so high a quarter
at so critical a time was invaluable. I quote his concluding passage:--
"Let these evils [those of Sunday labour] be met on their proper
ground, and at the proper time. Let the good sense and the
religious feeling of the country be appealed to when the danger
really threatens. At present it is as remote as ever. It will not
be brought one step nearer by _this_ measure. But it _may_ be
increased by a premature and unreasonable outcry, to be succeeded,
as usual, by a very natural recoil."
To accelerate the process of Sunday relief, I thought it would be
well to assemble all the surveyors for England and Wales, and to
discuss with them, _viva voce_, questions usually dealt with by
tedious correspondence. The meeting took place in December. The
business occupied several successive days, and the results were highly
satisfactory, the more so as all their recommendations were made
unanimously. In short, the opportunity thus afforded for receiving
information, obtaining opinions, and explaining my own views and
intentions, proved so beneficial to the service, that in important
cases I resorted again and again to similar meetings. I always found
the intercourse both profitable and pleasant. It increased the interest
of the surveyors in the work of improvement, and, by the collision of
many opinions,[69] broke down prejudices and overthrew obstacles. I may
say, once for all, as regards the effect on myself, that, though these
discussions led to no change in principles, they often modified actual
measures. I cannot conclude this brief account of the meeting without
mentioning a singular fact which I learnt in the course of it--a fact
from which much more might be inferred. Amongst the circuitous courses
long maintained for carrying mails forward on the Sunday, without
using the forbidden route through London, it appeared that letters
posted at Kingston-on-Thames on the Saturday night for Barnet were
conveyed by way of Exeter; thus travelling more than four hundred miles
instead of five-and-twenty!
Meanwhile, I thought that the time had arrived for effecting an
additional Sunday relief which I had contemplated from the first. Under
the old arrangement there had always been performed on the Sunday
certain work which properly belonged to the Monday; the reason for this
proceeding being that the amount of duty accumulated on the Monday by
the Sunday suspension of business was, without such relief, more than
could be dealt with. The relief, however, that arose from the Sunday
transit of letters had made it beyond question practicable for Monday
to execute all its own work. That it should be made to do it I had
advised in the very outset, feeling confident that it could do it;
but I had been met not only with the usual declaration that the thing
was impracticable, but with objections so plausible that, for once, I
abated self-confidence, and supposed that the practical officers must
be right. To my great surprise, on now moving in the matter, I found
that, to a considerable extent, the impracticable change had already
been effected, though, unluckily, no corresponding reduction had been
made in the Sunday force. Such a reduction I began, therefore, to urge;
and before the close of the year Mr. Bokenham had reluctantly consented
to reduce his Sunday force by eleven men. He gave, at the same time,
promise of further reduction on the following Sunday, if practicable;
a question soon settled, for the Postmaster-General sanctioned, on
the second day of the next year (January 2, 1850), minutes reducing
the Sunday force in the London Office from twenty-six men, the number
ordinarily employed for many years, to three; ten or eleven, however,
being employed either before five o'clock in the morning or after eight
o'clock at night in the mail carriages.
When, earlier in these proceedings, I wrote to the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, telling him that I thought an additional expenditure of £500
a-year would enable me to adopt measures indicated in my minute of the
previous February for bringing the Sunday force within its original
limits, his answer was that, if necessary, I might take £1500.
"_December 28th._--Another minute has been sanctioned, subject to
the approval of the Treasury, which will abolish certain day-mails,
cross-posts, and double despatches, now rendered useless by the
discontinuance of the second delivery on the Sunday at provincial
offices. In addition to this the receipt of inland letters will be
confined to the stamped and unpaid, and, as a general result, the
offices throughout England and Wales will close from 10 a.m. for
the rest of the day, instead of opening again at 5 p.m. as they now
do.... By these means additional rest, averaging from three to five
hours, will be given at the provincial post offices."
My recommendation for transferring the Sunday morning delivery in
the suburbs of London to Saturday night was also carried into effect
this day, and I may add that that which was thus found practicable on
Saturday night was at length acknowledged to be so on all other nights;
and thus was established that late suburban delivery which is still
maintained, much to the convenience of the public.
So ended the year 1849, amidst clouds which, though still dark enough
to remind me of the storm that had been raging for the last three
months, and to warn me that more disturbance might yet come, were at
least beginning to break.[70]
I have already referred to hostility in the office as the chief source
of the great trouble which had befallen the department in general, and
me in particular. If there had not been a mutinous spirit amongst the
men, attacks from without, however annoying, could not have produced
that grievous anxiety which arose from the knowledge of treason within.
This, I may remark, was the third distinct cabal formed with a view to
drive me from office. Like the two former ones, and one more yet to be
mentioned, it was so timed as to take advantage of a temporary weakness
in my position; a weakness caused on this occasion by my having
ventured, in quest of a great good, to encounter popular feeling.
I cannot conclude this portion of my narrative without remarking how
near the great measure of Sunday relief was to being defeated by
public clamour that arose out of the hasty acceptance of mendacious
statements from insubordinate officers. At the City meeting in the
previous October it had been maintained that the temporary addition of
twenty-five men would not only be made permanent, but would soon be
swollen to six hundred. Within four months of this prediction, not only
had the whole addition been dispensed with, but also the original force
of twenty-six men had been reduced to fourteen. Of these, moreover,
four only worked during the day, while of the remainder, who were
employed in the several travelling offices, five ceased work at about
five o'clock on Sunday morning, and the remaining five did not begin
work until about eight o'clock on Sunday night. The main results are
summed up in a Report which I made to the Postmaster-General on the
28th of January, 1850, and which was afterwards printed by order of the
House of Commons.[71] Of this a notice from an impartial quarter will
appear later in this narrative.
In the mean time, Dr. Vaughan, of Harrow, had published a second letter
in defence of our proceedings. It was written in reply to a violent and
unscrupulous attack by a brother clergyman and schoolmaster. This able
paper sums up as follows:--
"I have now discharged, however imperfectly, the task imposed upon
me by circumstances which I must still deplore. Earnestly, most
earnestly, do I desire the thankful and reverent observance of the
Lord's Day, with which I believe our national as well as individual
welfare to be closely, inseparably linked. Deeply do I lament the
condition of those weary and comfortless labourers who are cut
off from the inestimable blessings to be derived from its holy
rest. It is because I believe that many of the provincial officers
of our national Post Office are involved in this calamity, and
that the present measure contemplates, and in part effects, their
emancipation, that I have condemned the blind hostility with which
it has been assailed, and laboured to expose the misrepresentations
by which that hostility has been fostered."[72]
The complainants had now so far extended their demands as in effect to
abandon their former ground, the cry now being for the total abolition
of Sunday postal work of all kinds.[73] The Postmaster-General having
called upon the Secretaries to report on this demand, I presented my
report on the 5th of January, and it was printed, with other documents,
by order of the House of Commons.[74] The following is a summary of its
contents:--
I first recognise the great relief that would be given to the
department by such total suspension, and then proceed to show why I had
not ventured to recommend it. I drew a distinction between collection
and delivery on the one hand, and conveyance on the other, pointing
out that the former could be suspended in any particular place without
materially affecting the convenience of any other place, while the
latter could not be so suspended even on a portion of a single line
of mail without affecting the convenience of every place which that
line served, whether directly or indirectly; so that while the former
suspension might be adopted in detail, according to the wish of each
particular place, supposing this to be really ascertained, the latter
would require a much more general concurrence. I advised that wherever
Sunday delivery by letter-carriers was abolished, the abolition
should extend also to delivery at the window, and I suggested that,
where delivery was retained, individuals might be allowed to protect
themselves against it by giving in a written notice to that effect at
the post office.
In respect of conveyance, I thought it possible that if the demand
became sufficiently general, it might in time become practicable to
suspend those branch posts that served many places, and that with
the concurrence of the public this might be gradually done to a very
great extent; but I saw no hope of such a state of things as would
justify the interruption of the mails on the trunk lines, which were
indispensable alike to the purposes of Government and the convenience
of the public. On this latter point I showed in considerable detail
what an enormous amount of derangement such suspension would produce.
I showed that to suspend all operations of the Post Office for the
twenty-four hours of Sunday must necessarily involve the interruption
of the mails for more than twenty-four hours, and that this would make
it impossible for them to start at midnight on Sunday from the point at
which they stopped at midnight on Saturday. The derangement that would
result would produce inconvenience at place after place throughout
each line, for it would not only alter the hours of delivery, but also
disturb arrangements with the branch mails, cross mails, and rural
posts, throughout the greater part of the kingdom, the whole evil being
doubled by its necessarily applying to mails in both directions. I
showed further, that as the stoppage of the mails would not imply the
stoppage of the mail trains, since passengers would never consent to
such an interruption, there would be no cessation of traffic, while the
relief even to the servants of the Post Office would be but nominal,
since it would be found indispensable to an efficient responsibility
that the bags when at rest, just as when in motion, should remain under
the custody of the guards, who would thus have to continue on duty
throughout the day of rest.
With regard to the amount of public inconvenience which would arise
from the interruption, I showed that, supposing but one letter in a
thousand to contain tidings of pressing importance, there would be,
at the then existing rate of correspondence, nearly a thousand cases
per week in which delay would painfully interfere with the feelings of
relatives and friends, or lead to serious trouble or loss; and that the
necessity so produced would inevitably lead to a revival of contraband
conveyance, detrimental alike to Sunday observance and the interests of
the office.
In conclusion, I pointed out that by the measures then in progress,
combined with others carried into effect during the previous year,
improvements were now in such a state of advancement that in a few
days the Sunday duty throughout England and Wales would be reduced to
probably little more than half its original amount; while this great
benefit would be obtained in such a manner as not only not to impair,
but greatly to promote, the public convenience.
"_January 21st._--The Postmaster-General is highly pleased at my
Report on the proposed total abolition of Sunday duties, which is
to be sent to Lord John Russell for use in debate. I have advised
that its statements, which necessarily run into considerable
detail, should be checked by the practical men."
So far as I remember, however, no error was discovered.
Shortly after this time symptoms of a better understanding on the
part of the public began to appear, more defenders arising in various
quarters, and even those who made extreme demands taking a more
moderate tone. But whatever assurance I might now have as to improved
feeling in the public, an ordeal which I was about to go through still
seemed formidable. I had had the pain to learn that Mr. Wallace, who
had done so much for the public and for myself, had fallen into
pecuniary difficulties, so that his friends in Scotland were raising a
subscription for his benefit. A public meeting had been resolved upon,
and I was earnestly requested to attend, which I promised to do, though
with considerable misgiving as to the sort of reception I was likely
to meet with. My doubts were nowise removed by a letter received from
my uncle, Provost Lea, of Haddington, who, having been apprised of my
expected visit by the Scotch newspapers, wrote in the most earnest
terms to deprecate the attempt, warning me that the feeling against
me northward of the Tweed was so strong that he feared I should be
literally torn to pieces by the mob. Though I made great allowance for
the apprehensions of an affectionate relative and kind-hearted old man,
I certainly thought it very likely that hisses and groans might be
more abundant than applause. Be this as it might, the journey, being a
matter of duty, had to be taken, and on March 6th I went to Glasgow.
On the following morning, before proceeding to Greenock, I paid a visit
to the large ship-yard of Messrs. Napier, employing several hundred
men. When I was about to leave, the foreman of a gang of workmen
busily employed in constructing a large iron vessel came forward and
demanded in a loud voice, "Three cheers for Rowland Hill;" a call
responded to by what seemed to my gratified ears a unanimous shout.
Thus encouraged, I went to Greenock. The meeting was held in a large
church, the chairman occupying the pulpit; a usual arrangement, as I
was assured, in Scotland. On rising to speak I was received, so said
the newspapers, "with enthusiastic applause;" the same being repeated
when I sat down.[75] Of what I said I will merely remark that justice,
gratitude, and sympathy for my suffering friend, combined to draw from
me my best efforts. On the following day, after inspecting the post
office both at Greenock and Glasgow, I set out on my return, very
agreeably disappointed in the expectations with which I had gone forth.
I must not close this account without mentioning that the result of the
subscription was the purchase of an annuity of £500 for Mr. Wallace's
life.
On the 19th of the month the question of the total abolition of Sunday
duty was shortly discussed in the House of Lords; Lords Malmesbury,
Clanricarde, and Brougham speaking against the measure, while the
Bishop of Oxford and Lord Harrowby spoke cautiously in its favour. On
the same day my friend Mr. Matthew Forster, at my request, moved in the
Commons for the several reports on the question of Sunday duty. To this
motion the Government at once acceded. I cannot mention Mr. Forster
without adding that the friendliness which he had shown me from my
first acquaintance with him continued with steady increase to the end
of his life; that, in short, I stand indebted to him and to his family
for much kindness and much valuable aid.
Two days later, the Postmaster-General having offered to a deputation
from Edinburgh a Parliamentary Committee on the subject, this proposal
(at the recommendation of the Secretary to the Lord's Day Society) was
declined; a conclusive proof of conscious weakness.
"_April 10th._--This morning's _Herald_ contains an account of a
meeting at Exeter Hall to petition for total abolition. Few men
of weight appear to have been present, and the whole proceedings
were in a subdued tone. One of the speakers, in describing what I
have done, spoke of it as a step in the right direction. Their
resolutions, of course, contain various misrepresentations."
It was evident that the agitation was rapidly subsiding, and two days
later I was able to administer an additional sedative; my report of
January 28th, showing the progress made in Sunday relief, being at
length printed, I sent out five hundred copies in various directions,
feeling sure that the statements therein contained, however unavailing
to such as resolutely kept their eyes shut, would have no small effect
upon the more candid.
A week later I record progress:--
"_April 20th._--The returns are producing their effect. I have
received numerous letters congratulating me on the result."
I also began to conjecture as to the probability of formal
retractation by those, so many in number, who had assailed and
misrepresented our measures in tirades, whether from the press,
pulpit, at public meetings, or otherwise. My recorded summary is
"I don't expect it." Up to that time, so far as I am aware, there
had been but two retractations. Lord Ashley, in a private letter to
the Postmaster-General, had declared that the country was under the
greatest obligations to him for the Sunday relief already afforded.
Of the journals that had attacked me one had frankly acknowledged
its error. Though, doubtless, many instances of such reparation may
have occurred unknown to me, it is remarkable that neither record nor
memory supplies me with a third instance either then or afterwards.
The one paper thus honourably distinguished is the _Leeds Mercury_,
which had been throughout a staunch supporter of postal reform, but had
too hastily yielded credence to bold and plausible allegations. The
_Times_, which, though it was sometimes mistaken in matters of detail,
had, on the whole, given highly valuable support during the late trial,
published on April 25th the following admirable exposition and defence
of the whole proceeding:--
"Historians and essayists delight in flattering the self-opinion of
their contemporaries by extraordinary anecdotes of popular delusion
in less enlightened times. A kind of indefinite satisfaction
appears to be derived from contrasting the inferiority of previous
generations. The confidence with which for many years together
5,000,000 English Protestants believed themselves in bodily peril
from 100,000 Catholics is a favourite instance of the kind.
The 'loss of our eleven days' is another; when, upon a simple
correction of the calendar, grave divines actually lectured from
the pulpit on the blasphemous wickedness of interfering with the
course of time, and denounced the profanity which brought every
sinner in the kingdom nearly a fortnight closer to his end. Mr.
Macaulay, too, informs us that the post when first established was
the object of violent invective, as a manifest contrivance of the
Pope to enslave the souls of Englishmen; and most books of history
or anecdote will supply stories equally notable. But we really
very much doubt whether any tale of ancient times can match the
exhibition of credulity which occurred in our own country, and
under our own eyes, within these last twelve months.
"We need not enter upon any narrative. Every reader's recollection
will carry him back to last Christmas, when, from one end of the
kingdom to the other, there was a loud and steady outcry against
a projected 'desecration of the Sabbath.' Mr. Rowland Hill was
introducing 'Sunday labour' into this decorous and religious
country. He had succeeded in inserting 'the small end of the
wedge.' He had asked for twenty-five additional clerks on Sunday,
and a few months would see this pressed labour indefinitely
multiplied, and all ideas of Sabbath observance contemptuously
forsworn. Such was the belief even amongst intelligent people.
Meetings were held in all great towns to record a protest against
the iniquity; and, when the resistance proved unsuccessful, it was
plainly asserted that the national character was for ever gone. As
for the promoter of the measure, he was a forsaken reprobate, who
looked only to the acceleration of day-mails, without the smallest
heed to the fourth commandment. We have before us at this moment a
sheet of letter-paper, headed by an engraving of 'Rowland Hill's
new Chapel, St. Martin's-le-Grand, under which title is depicted
the General Post Office on a Sunday morning, with all the symbols
of unholy industry and bustle. However, the measure in question
was carried out, and we will now--from the official returns on
the subject--inform the reader in plain unadorned language how it
originated, what it contemplated, and what it has actually brought
to pass.
"More than two years ago the attention of the Post Office
authorities was directed towards the means of _abridging Sunday
labour_ in the various offices, and inquiries were instituted
with this object. While they were in progress, Mr. Hill succeeded
to the secretaryship of a certain department, which brought the
subject under his immediate care, and he promoted with all his
efforts the advancement of the great end in view. Opinions were
not altogether concurrent on the matter, but a step was at length
taken, and on Sunday, the 6th of February, 1848, the post office
at Bath was closed for money-order business on that day. The
experiment succeeded, and on the 13th of August in the same year
the regulation was extended to Leeds, and, six weeks later to
Birmingham--still without inconvenience or complaint. Fortified by
these results, the authorities conceived themselves competent to
push still further their great object of _abridging Sunday labour_,
and the arrangements above mentioned were, at the commencement of
last year, extended to all offices in England and Wales, so that
four hundred and fifty offices were _relieved of a material portion
of their Sunday duties_ in a single day. Three months more saw the
same indulgence conceded to Ireland and Scotland, by which two
hundred and thirty-four additional offices experienced the same
relief.
"Pending these trials and successes, Mr. Rowland Hill conceived a
plan for _abridging Sunday labour_ still more considerably, and,
indeed, to a great extent, abolishing it altogether. The duties
hitherto suspended had been those of the Money Order Department
alone; but a scheme was now entertained of greatly limiting Sunday
deliveries, and of absolutely closing the offices between the hours
of ten and five; or, in other words, from the commencement of the
morning service in churches till the close of the afternoon. With
this proposed limitation of deliveries was combined a regulation,
long known to be desirable, for the transmission of a certain
class of letters _through London_ on a Sunday, which would, it
was thought, by giving very considerable accommodation at a small
cost of labour, tend to reconcile the public to the cessation
of those Sunday deliveries which were now to be stopped. It was
this proposal which caused the outcry. Mr. Hill asked but for the
temporary service of twenty-five clerks as a present means of
relieving twenty times that number; and he showed his reasons for
anticipating that no measure could ultimately be more effective in
_abridging Sunday labour_ altogether than that now proposed. All
this was in vain. He was, as our readers know, decried, denounced,
and stigmatized as a Sabbath-breaker and apostate; although his
very proposition was actually one of a well-considered series for
diminishing Sunday labour throughout the kingdom.
"Now, let the results be marked, for certainly never was popular
delusion more conspicuously displayed. To begin with the particular
incident complained of:--Mr. Hill had always stated that the
necessity for the extra labour would be brief, whereas his
assailants declared that the expedient would inevitably tend to
nationalize Sabbath-breaking and demoralize the whole State. On
Sunday, the 28th of October, the additional force of twenty-five
men was first employed; on the 6th of January following it was
reduced to thirteen; on the 13th of the same month to three; and
on the very next Sunday it was dispensed with altogether, having
effected its objects within the space of three months. So much for
the 'evil' done. Now let us see what good was brought by it.
"By the device and execution of these measures five hundred and
seventy-six provincial post offices have experienced a total
positive relief of about seven and a quarter hours each Sunday, and
upwards of four thousand dependent offices have received a similar
relief of about seven hours. Estimated in relation to individuals,
the effect of the measures _has been to give to five thousand
eight hundred and twenty-nine persons an average Sunday relief of
five and three-quarter hours each_; that is to say, nearly six
thousand people have been relieved from nearly six hours work
every Sunday by the operation of a scheme which was denounced as
a deliberate encouragement to Sabbath-breaking and profanity. Nor
have the results ended here, for, as if to complete the exposure,
the new arrangements have actually led to a discontinuance even
of that existing labour which they were described as augmenting
in perpetuity. The Sunday force regularly employed in the Post
Office _before_ the famous provisions of Mr. Rowland Hill's scheme
amounted to twenty-seven men. On the first day of operations under
the new system this, to the scandal and horror of the public, was
increased to fifty-two. To be sure some four thousand or five
thousand were relieved in other quarters by the same regulation;
but this little compensation was altogether overlooked in the great
iniquity. But what followed? Not only was this additional force
dispensed with _in toto_ before three months had passed, but its
labours had even contributed to lighten the lot of those who still
remained. So well did the new arrangements act, that the work of
the _original_ force began gradually and steadily to diminish, and
we are now officially told that 'the whole Sunday force ordinarily
employed in the London office will be reduced to five or six men,
which, even with the addition of the ten clerks employed in the
mail trains (and their duties will intrench but little on the
observances of the Sunday), _will make a total force of little more
than half that employed before the 28th of October last_.' So that
the very expedient which, notwithstanding its beneficial effects
elsewhere, was obstinately condemned on the simple ground of its
augmenting Sunday labour in a particular office, has actually
resulted, not only in completely effecting all its proposed ends,
but in diminishing by nearly one-half the identical labour which it
appeared for a moment to augment.
"We think the reader will admit that, upon the whole, the
outcry by which such a measure as this was represented as a
profane and godless scheme for abolishing the observance of the
Sabbath, has no equal in history for prodigious and incredible
absurdity. Even vaccination, we believe, was never described as
a device for actually perpetuating small-pox, whereas the most
judicious and effective step in a series of measures expressly
designed to abridge Sunday labour has been thus, in the middle
of the nineteenth century, represented, taken, and accepted
as a deliberate stratagem for destroying the holiness of the
Sabbath-day. That the spirit which facilitated the delusion was, in
itself, honourable to the country, we freely admit, but that the
common sense of Englishmen should be so strangely misled is a fact
not very creditable to the national intelligence, or satisfactory
to the national pride."
Good effects also were soon manifest in another quarter of great
importance:--
"_April 30th._--Last night Mr. Hayter, in reply to a question from
Mr. Fagan as to when the Sunday arrangements would be extended to
Ireland, spoke of them as having given universal satisfaction; an
expression which appears to have been well received in the House."
In one quarter alone the former wrong was steadily persisted in:--
"_May 9th._--The Lord's Day Society has issued a manifesto in reply
to our reports and minutes. It is more offensive and unprincipled
than even their former publications."
Meantime, as it was necessary, according to long-established practice,
to allow some latitude in respect of the force to be summoned on the
arrival of an extraordinary mail, I experienced no little difficulty
in keeping this liberty within reasonable limits. Thus, though I
found that one man was sufficient for dealing with four thousand ship
letters, five men had been called in (on Sunday May 12th) to deal with
seventeen hundred. I was consequently obliged to require from Mr.
Bokenham a report advising a definite rule for preventing such excess;
and this being obtained, matters thenceforth went on more smoothly.
In short, the measures for Sunday relief being in the course of this
month extended to Scotland and Ireland, I regarded the arrangement as
complete.
This agreeable impression, however, was soon afterwards disturbed by
Lord Ashley's giving notice of a motion for an address to Her Majesty,
praying for measures to be taken to stop the collection and delivery
of letters and the transmission of mails on the "Lord's Day;" in other
words, for the total abolition of Sunday duty.
"_May 23rd._--The Lord's Day Society has issued a circular,
urging members to support Lord Ashley's motion. It stands for
the 30th instant. It professes to give a history of the demand
for total abolition, and of the relief afforded, and, of course,
misrepresents facts."
I could not but think that the Society, in its zeal for enforcing
upon others a strict observance of the fourth commandment, too often
deferred to a more convenient season its own observance of the ninth.
Being called upon by the Chancellor of the Exchequer to supply such
information as would be needful for meeting Lord Ashley's motion,
I drew up a memorandum, which, after mentioning further measures
increasing the number of persons relieved to about eight thousand,
concludes as follows:--
"In reference to the question of total abolition of Sunday duty it
should be remarked--
"First, that its advocates wholly overlook the interests of the
poor. To be obliged to resort, as has been proposed in case of
need, to the electric telegraph, or to a shilling postage, would be
a severe tax upon the poor man; and,
"Secondly, that the Government, having a monopoly of the delivery
of letters, cannot refuse to deliver them except in places where
the demand is practically unanimous. Numerous small places (about
four hundred probably) have preferred such a request, and it has
been complied with. Several, however, finding the non-delivery
inconvenient, have requested that the delivery may be resumed; and
it has been resumed accordingly."
While the above was in preparation I received a letter from Lord
Ashley, urging me to hold out expectations that Government would make
further reductions in the Sunday duty, admitting that we "had already
done a great deal," and, oddly enough, inferring therefrom that we
could do much more. Not agreeing in this conclusion, I was obliged to
decline giving the pledge required.
On the following day, viz., that fixed for the motion, I had my first
interview with the Premier, waiting upon him by his desire. After a
time the Chancellor of the Exchequer came in; both agreed that the
motion must be resisted, but I left them in fear that they were not
sufficiently prepared for the encounter; I was desired to be under the
gallery of the House of Commons. The following entry in my Journal
records what occurred:--
"_May 30th._--At five o'clock went to the House of Commons...
owing partly to Lord Ashley having omitted the most objectionable
part of his motion (the stoppage of the mails), and still more, I
fear, to the cowardice of the members, ... the motion was carried,
by ninety-three to sixty-eight."
"_May 31st._--Called on the Postmaster-General [then recovering
from a dangerous illness] to report last night's proceedings. The
_Times_, which gives the best account of the debate, has also an
excellent leader."
In consequence of this resolution of the House, I was summoned by the
Postmaster-General and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who wished
to consult me as to the course to be taken. While thinking it better
to give way in the main, they seemed inclined to take an exception
in favour of "delivery at the window;" but against this exception I
strongly protested, our experience in Scotland having shown that it
would involve more labour, to say nothing of unseemly crowding, than
delivery in the ordinary manner. "I suggested that, as the motion
proposes the appointment of a Commission to inquire into the stoppage
of the mails, the Commission should also inquire into the stoppage of
the deliveries and collections. Nothing was decided, as the Chancellor
of the Exchequer has to consult Lord John Russell."
"_June 6th._--While at the Treasury, ---- came in. On my laughing
at him for his vote on the Sunday question, he admitted that
he was ashamed of it, adding that he did not expect to be in a
majority. I believe that many of the votes were given under similar
expectations."[76]
"_June 7th._--Mr. Forster [M.P. for Berwick] called to consult me
as to his endeavouring to re-open the Sunday question. I advised
him to do nothing without previously consulting the Chancellor of
the Exchequer."
"_June 8th._--Lord John Russell, in reply to Mr. Forster, stated
that he would not support any motion for the reversal of the
resolution of the House on the subject of Sunday duties."
I scarcely need say that I heartily concurred in his lordship's
decision. If the public really desired, at the sacrifice of its own
convenience, to confer so great a boon on the Post Office as that
implied by the terms of the resolution, it would have been very
ungracious in Government to intercept the concession. If otherwise, it
was but just that the responsibility of error should rest on the House
of Commons, which had interfered in the matter. Accordingly, when, a
few days later, Mr. Forster wrote to ask for assistance with reference
to a bill which he proposed to introduce to legalize the conveyance
of letters on Sunday by private hand--a measure, of the abstract
justice of which no one can doubt--I thought it better to decline
taking any part in opposition to the decision of the House. Mr. Forster
persevered, but his motion was negatived without a division.
As Her Majesty,[77] following of course the advice of her Ministers,
formally announced to the House that its wishes would be complied with,
notice was forthwith issued from the Chief Office, totally forbidding
delivery, and notifying that, though letters might be deposited in the
receiving boxes as usual, they would remain "unsorted and untouched
until the Monday." It was added, that postmasters contravening these
orders would be "most severely punished."
It is remarkable that whereas the late hubbub had been all raised
against the Sunday transmission of letters through London, Lord
Ashley's motion _contained no reference whatever to this innovation_;
and though in the public notice just mentioned it was distinctly
announced that such transmission would be continued, the announcement
produced no revival of the outcry, and the innovation gradually came to
be regarded as part of the natural course of proceeding.
It did not fare so well with the innovation adopted at the request of
the House of Commons:--
"_June 21st._--Last night there was a further discussion in the
House of Commons as to the Sunday duties, on an attempt by Mr.
Locke to get a window delivery. It is evident that the reaction has
commenced."
"_June 22nd._--Last night Lord Brougham raised the question as to
the legality of stopping the Post Office business on the Sunday;
and many of the daily and weekly papers of this morning are loud in
their condemnation of the measure."
Public inconvenience was, of course, to be estimated in some degree by
the effect of the change on the amount of correspondence; the change,
it should be observed, first took effect on Sunday, June 23rd:--
"_June 25th._--[_Tuesday._]--The stoppage of business on the Sunday
reduced yesterday morning's arrival in London by about 80,000
letters, increasing the mid-day arrival by about 18,000, and this
morning's by about 16,000--causing, therefore, a diminution of
about 47,000 letters in London alone."
Mr. Locke's motion, which came on on July 9th,[78] was set aside in
favour of an amendment moved by Lord John Russell, and carried by a
large majority, praying Her Majesty to cause an inquiry to be made
whether the amount of Sunday labour in the Post Office might not
be reduced without completely putting an end to the collection and
delivery of letters, &c., on Sundays.[79]
The Commission appointed to give effect to this amendment consisted of
the Postmaster-General, Mr. Labouchere (afterwards Lord Taunton), and
Mr. (afterwards Sir) Cornewall Lewis. Their recommendation, promptly
arrived at, but expressed after much deliberation, was, in fact, though
not in form, that the office should revert to the arrangements which
existed previously to the resolution of the House, carried on the
motion of Lord Ashley.[80] I endeavoured, though in vain, to obtain
a more distinct avowal as to the real purport of the advice, feeling
convinced that the juster and bolder course was also the more politic.
This opinion was soon confirmed by the manner in which the Report was
received by the public press, all the daily papers agreeing in its true
interpretation, and the _Morning Herald_ attacking the Commissioners
for the indirectness of their proceeding. A fortnight later, however,
viz., on September 1st, the recommendation was carried into effect,[81]
and though a modification as regards the rural messengers, which
had been recommended by the Commission, was, on the advice of the
surveyors, adopted by the Postmaster-General, even this change excited
so much public dissatisfaction as to produce its partial abandonment.
Thus the whole question of Sunday duties was finally settled, after
having kept the department, and particularly myself, in grievous
trouble and anxiety for more than sixteen months. During the whole
of this period the improvements in the general management of the
department--which it was my duty and earnest desire to introduce--were
to a great extent necessarily delayed. Moreover, a spirit of
insubordination was excited, which, being unfortunately backed both in
and out of Parliament, gave much trouble later on.