these improvements have been achieved, I have had to submit to a
sacrifice of income. Mine is, I believe, the only important office in
the whole department with no scale of increase of salary; but for the
special limitation which my promised promotion would remove, I should
be now in the receipt of £1,500 a year--that is £400 a year less than
Colonel Maberly had during his first five years of office, and £500 a
year less than he has at present.
If Government is still of opinion that it cannot immediately fulfil its
promise, I beg that you will urge my claim at least so far as to press
that a period may now be fixed beyond which the complete performance of
the promise shall not be delayed; and that, seeing the impossibility of
continuing the present state of things, arrangements be at once made
for the nearest approximation to such performance that may be deemed
practicable.
I remain,
My dear Sir,
Yours faithfully,
ROWLAND HILL.
P.S.--I have enclosed a copy of a letter with which you favoured me on
the 27th of November, 1846, and which bears strongly on the case.
HENRY WARBURTON, Esq.
APPENDIX H.
[See p. 215.]
_Letter to Postmaster-General (Lord Canning)._
General Post Office, 18th June, 1853.
MY DEAR LORD,--As your Lordship is already acquainted with many of
the statements I am about to make, you will at once perceive that in
writing at such length my view is in accordance with your understood
wish so to prepare the case for the Chancellor of the Exchequer as to
supersede the necessity of reference to former correspondence on the
subject.
In September 1842, in the midst of what the Treasury was pleased to
consider an able discharge of duties connected with the institution of
my system of Penny Postage, I learnt that my services were no longer
required, and I spent the next four years in private life, except so
much of the year 1843 as was occupied in preparing and laying before a
committee of the House of Commons a full exposition of the operation
of the Post Office as then conducted, in the course of which I
demonstrated that the existing system of management, besides depriving
the public of many reasonable facilities, involved an enormous loss of
revenue.
In December, 1846, my friend Mr. Warburton intimated to me the
desire of Her Majesty's Government again to employ me in developing
and perfecting my plans, and that they were prepared to offer me a
permanent engagement at the Post Office.
Although I was then engaged in avocations more highly remunerative
than the proffered appointment, I at once avowed myself ready to
accept it if I could be assured of sufficient authority to secure the
success of my measures--a stipulation which, while reasonable under
any circumstances, was rendered imperative by my former experience
of the obstructions and injury that improvements were exposed to in
consequence of the state of feeling which prevailed at the Post Office.
I was given to understand that I might count on the support of the
Postmaster-General and the Chancellor of the Exchequer; and that if
I showed that I possessed the requisite administrative powers, (the
subsequent full acknowledgment of which happily relieves me from the
necessity of entering on that part of the subject) I might look forward
to be promoted at no distant period to a position of higher authority,
which was understood at the time and subsequently admitted to mean the
post of sole secretary.
Without for a single moment doubting the sincerity with which these
promises were made, I nevertheless, after much anxious deliberation,
arrived at the conclusion that they were not sufficiently explicit to
justify me in placing myself in a position so liable to failure, which
in the public mind would naturally be attributed to defects in the
system itself, or to mismanagement on my part, rather than to opposing
influences which could not be generally known.
My prospects of effecting improvements under the discouraging
circumstances in which I knew I should be placed did not seem clear
enough to justify me in incurring the risk of becoming myself an
instrument for destroying that universal reliance on the soundness of
my project, which I felt to be my surest means of obtaining ultimate
success.
But I was in the hands of my friends, and I shall not be censured for
deferring to the opinion of such men as Mr. Warburton, Lord Overstone,
Mr. Hawes, and Mr. Raikes Currie.
I consequently entered on my present office, and have now served
under three Postmasters-General; and I gladly avail myself of this
opportunity to express my deep sense of the kindness and confidence
with which I have been treated, and my full recognition of the efforts
made from time to time, with more or less of success, to remove
impediments and to give freer scope to my exertions; but the evils
which I foresaw and which have come upon me in full measure are beyond
the reach of palliatives. The system on which we are proceeding is
radically bad, and stands scarcely more strongly condemned by myself
than by my colleague Colonel Maberly.
Though possessed of secretarial authority, I am, if I may so express
myself, a general almost without an army--when I entered the office I
found, of course, the clerks regarding the senior secretary as having
the first if not the only claim on their services; and without desiring
for a moment to reflect on them or on any one else, I become every day
more convinced that without harmonious views, a joint jurisdiction,
even supposing equality to be fully and practically admitted, is
utterly incompatible with the requirements of the office.
Looking then back upon the events of the six years during which my
promised promotion has been delayed, I feel bound to state that if in
December, 1846, I could have foreseen what has occurred I could not
have accepted the offer then made, nor do I believe that, under like
circumstances, my friends would have advised me to the step.
That much has been done is, of course, not to be denied by me; but it
has been accomplished amidst sore trials, and with risks to health
which my duty to my family would not have allowed me to incur.
Let me then stand acquitted before your Lordship and the Chancellor
of the Exchequer of either impatience or presumption, when I urge in
the strongest manner, consistent with the respect which I owe to my
superiors, my claim to the prompt fulfilment of the understanding on
which alone I consented to take my seat at the Post Office.
As every statement like that which I am called upon by your Lordship to
make is, of necessity, tinctured with egotism, I gladly quit that part
of the task which relates to my own personal interests, and proceed to
show that the change which I claim is equally demanded by the public
service.
In 1847 I was directed by the Postmaster-General to report on the state
of the Money Order Office, which resulted in my recommending several
large retrenchments and other improvements, which were adopted by his
Lordship and the Treasury, but which Colonel Maberly declined to take
the responsibility of carrying into effect; in consequence of which the
secretarial authority of that Department was consigned to me alone.
By a report of Mr. Barth, the head of the Department, which I called
for soon afterwards, it appears that the accounts were then so deeply
in arrear that great doubt was entertained whether they ever could be
made complete, and the expense of their completion, supposing it to
be possible, was estimated at £10,000. No general balance had ever
been struck since the institution of the Department in 1839, and the
liabilities were of unknown amount.
To avoid the great expense of bringing up the arrears, and to insure
the extinction of unknown liabilities, it was found necessary to
obtain an Act of Parliament calling in the outstanding Money Orders.
Concurrent efforts were made to bring up the more recent arrears, and
to prevent the possibility of new ones arising. And eventually the
liabilities of the department were ascertained, and a general balance
was struck, which has since been repeated quarterly.
On a full investigation of the accounts I found that the Department was
not only, as I had anticipated, unprofitable, but involved an annual
loss of no less than £10,000.
I, however, found it practicable to introduce, by successive
improvements, such simplification in the arrangements as, with
increased convenience to the public, and increased accuracy in the
accounts, with better pay and more relaxation to the clerks, to convert
this loss into a gain, which amounted for the year 1850 to £3,236,
and which, under my brother, Mr. Frederic Hill, who has subsequently
carried on the Department in the same spirit of improvement, amounted
last year to £11,664, making an effective saving within five years of
upwards of £21,000 per annum.
As regards the Post Office generally, the amount of saving which may
still be effected is a matter of so much uncertainty, that I hesitate
to offer any estimate. I can only say that it may be assumed, as I
think it may, that every Department of the service can be gradually
improved to the same extent as the Money Order Office (the only one
which has been confided entirely to my care), it follows that in the
course of a few years, not only may the public be better served, and
the men, if necessary, better paid, but savings may be effected to an
extent of about £200,000 a year, in addition to the saving of £100,000
a year, which, if required, I should be prepared to show has already
been made.
But of late a new motive has arisen for the proposed change. The
augmentation of letters is not only in constant progress, but has
for some time moved forward with increasing celerity. Without some
change, no doubt is entertained in the office, that the present
building will soon be not only too small for the transaction of the
business, but so much too small, as that no increase of its limits by
practicable additions will answer the requirements of the service; and
consequently that a most expensive outlay--probably not less than half
a million--will be required for a new Post Office.
If placed, however, in the position contemplated, I shall be enabled,
as I confidently expect, to make, under your Lordship's sanction, such
improvements as will avert this impending necessity for years, if not
remove it altogether.
The result of my experiments in the Money Order Office has been to
show the great power which the simplification of arrangements has in
lessening the quantity of labour, and, as a consequence, the quantity
of space required for its performance.
When, five years ago, I took the secretarial control of the Money Order
department, the building appropriated thereto was fully occupied,
and negotiations were in progress for purchasing land to extend the
accommodations. At present, notwithstanding an increase of business to
the amount of one-third, there is such ample room that no extension is
likely to be required for many years to come.
My knowledge of the other departments of the Post Office enables me
to state, with some confidence, my opinion, that similar improvements
may be extended to those also, and with the like beneficial results.
At the present time, a postponement of building, though but for a few
years, is of great importance. Several projects for bringing railways
into the heart of the metropolis, so as to make them available for mere
local transit, are on foot. And from some years' experience, first as a
director and afterwards as chairman, of the Brighton Railway Company,
I feel justified in predicting that in some shape or other, some such
project will be realized: I also foresee that such change must produce
results in which both the Post Office authorities and the proprietors
of the railways will have a common interest, and from overtures which
have been made to the Department by some of the projectors, I think
it highly probable, that whatever changes in the Post Office may be
thereby rendered necessary or desirable, will not have to be made
altogether, perhaps not mainly, at the cost of Government.
But however this may be, it can scarcely be doubted that the effect
of such railways must be to reduce the value of any outlay made
irrespective of this disturbance in the present system of Metropolitan
communication, since it is hardly possible that any buildings that
might now be put up would be found adapted, either in position or
arrangement, to the altered state of things.
Having now concluded the financial part of the subject, I beg your
Lordship's attention to the new sources of anxiety which have been
opened, and to the possibility of allaying that anxiety by substituting
a unity of executive power for its present divided state.
The vast increase which has taken place of late years in the facilities
for locomotion and the conveyance of merchandise, has led to a
wide-spread desire--I might almost say a clamorous demand--for further
facilities in the transmission of letters. On some points this is the
result of ignorance as to what is practicable or even possible, while
on others it relates to changes which I have long had in view, but
which, under present impediments, I cannot undertake.
The experience of the last thirteen years has satisfied me, that if
our Post Office is to retain its present position, and to remain
the model for those of other nations, and still more if it is to
attain that high perfection to which your Lordship's enlightened
and vigorous administration seems to open the way, we must not only
continue in the course of improvement, but increase our speed. I
do not allude to reduction of rates; but to what, in the present
cheapness of postage, the public mind is much more intent upon,
viz., frequency, celerity, and exact regularity in transmission and
delivery. Inconveniences which, while the whole system of commercial
intercourse was characterised by dearness, infrequency, and slowness,
attracted but little attention, now rise to importance in the eyes of
the sufferer by the effect of comparison, and remedy is demanded with a
promptitude quite unheard of in former times, and which is unattainable
without energetic and cordial co-operation in the higher departments
of the executive, and ready obedience and zealous activity in all the
subordinates.
Having written thus far, and having also carefully considered every
statement and every remark I have made, I feel it my duty to say,
that after all the deliberation required by so grave a question, I
have arrived at the settled conviction that the existing state of
things cannot continue; and I therefore respectfully request that,
in considering the present application, such continuance may not be
regarded as a possible alternative.
I am sure your Lordship will believe me incapable of dealing lightly
with that connection with the Post Office on which I set so great and
just a value. To devise and bring into operation, so far as it has been
effected, my system of Penny Postage, has been the cherished object of
the best years of my life, interest in its progress, whether I am an
instrument or not in promoting it, will ever retain the firmest hold on
my mind, and would suffice to keep me in any course, but one which I
feel to be inconsistent alike with my private and my public duty.[256]
* * * * *
The Right Hon. VISCOUNT CANNING, &c., &c., &c.
APPENDIX I.
[See p. 238.]
_Memorandum by Sir Rowland Hill on the Net Revenue
of the Post Office._
Much difference of opinion has arisen as to the amount of net revenue
or profit of the Post Office department, _i.e._, the excess of receipt
above expenditure; some estimating it at upwards of £1,500,000 per
annum, others affirming that it is really less than £400,000.
This difference of opinion appears to arise from different views being
entertained on the two following points:--
1. As to whether certain items should be included in the receipt.
2. As to whether certain other items should be included in the
expenditure.
I may premise, that the subject of net revenue has to be viewed in two
aspects. First, as to its absolute amount, and, secondly, as to its
comparative amount when contrasted with the net revenue obtained before
the establishment of Penny Postage. I propose, therefore, to consider
the question from both points of view.
First.--As to the absolute amount of net revenue.
_Under the head of receipt_, the items regarding which there is a
difference of opinion are:--
(_a._) The postage of the Government correspondence.
(_b._) The proceeds of the impressed stamps on newspapers.
(_a._) The postage of the Government correspondence is included in the
ordinary amount of gross receipt, but it is contended by some that it
ought to be excluded.
The amount of Government postage is, on the average,
about £150,000 per annum.[257]
Of which that of the Post Office itself
is about 40,000 "
--------
Leaving for the other Departments abou £110,000 "
The postage of the Post Office itself cannot affect the Net Revenue,
seeing that it is included in the expenditure as well as in the gross
receipt. It may, therefore, be left out of consideration.
As regards the correspondence of the other Government departments,
if it were right to deduct the postage of it from the revenue of the
Post Office, it is obvious that it would also be right to deduct the
cost of its conveyance and delivery from the expenditure of the Post
Office. The net revenue would therefore be reduced, not by the full
sum of £110,000 above mentioned, but by that amount less the cost of
conveyance and delivery; in other words, by the profit the Post Office
obtains on the official correspondence. It is to be borne in mind,
however, that official postage is, in nearly all cases, charged by
weighing the letters not individually, but in the gross; a mode of
procedure which, if applied to private correspondence, would reduce the
rate of charge for such correspondence by about one-half; and although,
owing to the greater average weight of official letters, the reduction
of charge is not so great as one-half, it may be doubted whether the
remaining charge be sufficient to leave any profit to the Post Office,
so that, whether the amount received and the cost incurred for the
conveyance and delivery of official correspondence be, or be not,
included in the calculation, the net revenue of the Post Office could
be but very slightly affected. It may be added that the postage charged
against the various Government departments is actually paid into the
coffers of the Post Office, and is not merely a statistical record.
(_b._) The proceeds of the impressed stamp on newspapers is an item
regarding which the claim of the Post Office to include it in the
receipts is sufficiently established by reference to the fact that,
though this part of the revenue is collected by another department,
the sole purpose for which the stamp is now resorted to is to obtain
for the newspaper the advantage of postal transmission. At the same
time, it may be added, that the proceeds in question, amounting for the
year 1861, to £134,571,[258] are by no means a remuneration for the
service performed. Divided by the number of such newspapers conveyed
(viz., about 41 millions),[259] this amount gives only four-fifths of a
penny per paper; so that, as newspapers weigh on the average 2-1/2 ozs.
each,[260] the rate of charge for a newspaper is less than one-seventh
of that for a letter of the same weight.
An argument in favour of the sufficiency, and even more than
sufficiency, of the postage on newspapers to defray their postal
expense, has been drawn from the fact that the railway companies
actually convey them at a lower rate. But two important circumstances
have to be borne in mind, 1st, that railway companies, instead of
delivering the newspapers individually, merely hand them in bulk to
the newspaper agents; and 2ndly, that the companies make little or no
provision for conveyance to villages and hamlets, thus performing only
the least expensive portion of the service, and leaving the more costly
work to the Post Office.
After what has been said, it must be obvious, that even when newspapers
are prepaid with a postage stamp (the charge being thereby raised
to a penny for each transmission[261]), the payment is too low to
be remunerative. Moreover, the privilege accorded to news papers
indirectly forces another loss on the department, since the difficulty
of discriminating between newspapers and other printed matter has,
in fact, compelled a reduction of the book postage to the same rate.
So that, whereas formerly no book-parcel was carried for less than
sixpence, the charge on light book-parcels is now as low as a penny.
Instead, therefore, of any part of the receipts from newspapers being
withheld from the Post Office, as it is alleged ought to be done, an
equitable adjustment would have the effect of placing to the credit of
the department something additional for the unprofitable service thus
thrown upon it.
_Under the head of expenditure_, the only material item regarding which
a difference of view prevails, is the expense of the packet service,
which expense, it is maintained by some, should be charged to the Post
Office.
The claim that the Post Office should be charged with the _whole_
expense must be considered as barred by the simple fact, that few
of the mail-packets were established either by the Post Office, or
for merely postal purposes, their expense being far beyond what such
requirements could justify. "To assume that those packets were really
established for Post Office purposes is to charge the Government with
the most absurd extravagance. The West India packets, for instance,
were established at a cost of £240,000 per annum, though the utmost
return that was expected from letters was £40,000, leaving the £200,000
a clear deficit.
"Nor is this comparative uselessness for Post Office purposes confined
to the packets to remote places; the great cost, even of the home
packets, results from causes independent of the Post Office."[262]
Indeed, as was stated in the House of Lords by Lord Monteagle, who,
when Chancellor of the Exchequer, arranged the first contracts for the
mail steamers, "the expense of the packet service, which was said to
swallow up the whole of the revenue now derived from the Post Office,
had no more to do with the Penny Postage than the expense of the war in
Afghanistan or China. It was as distinct from the Post Office as the
expense of the army or navy. The great packet communication between
Great Britain and the British North American Colonies was undertaken
upon much higher principles than any connected with mere consideration
of revenue. It was felt by the Government of Lord Melbourne that it
was not wise to allow the only rapid mode of communication between
the British possessions in North America and the mother country to be
dependent upon the means afforded by the United States. Means were
accordingly taken to establish a line of communication of our own.
He admitted that this was not done, except at a very heavy expense;
but it was not right to place that expense to the account of the Post
Office."[263]
Still, it is obvious that, as these packets do postal work, some
portion of their expense ought to be charged to the Post Office, and
the question of _amount_ is what has really to be determined.
Upon this question it is necessary to explain that, upon a suggestion
from the Treasury, viz., that the amount should be "measured in each
case by the amount of ocean postage received,"[264] the following is
the rule observed:--
Whenever the amount of ocean postage is below the cost of the line
of packets by which the service is performed, the Post Office debits
itself, for packet service, with a charge just equal to the ocean
postage received. In the only two lines of packets (viz., those between
England and France, and England and Belgium), in which the ocean
postage exceeds the cost, the department debits itself with the whole
expense of the packet service.
Whatever may be thought of this arrangement, it will scarcely be
maintained that it is too favourable to the Post Office, which, save
in respect of the two packet services just mentioned (which now
jointly yield a surplus of about £56,000 per annum), is debited with
an amount equal to its whole receipts (viz., £470,000), without even
any allowance for the expense it incurs in that portion of the packet
administration which is necessarily carried on within the department.
The Eighth Annual Report of the Postmaster-General[265] contains an
estimate of the net revenue of the Post Office for the year 1861,
prepared on the principles laid down in the foregoing remarks, but
including some less important adjustments shown in the document itself.
The net revenue thus determined is £1,161,985, the whole, save the
£56,000 mentioned above, and about £30,000 derived from money-order
transactions, being the produce of inland postage, which thus yields a
net revenue of about £1,076,000.
Second. I now proceed to consider the question of net revenue as
to its _comparative_ amount, when contrasted with the net revenue
obtained before the establishment of Penny Postage, the object being
to ascertain the loss consequent on the reduction of the rate. When
proposing Penny Postage, I estimated this loss (under different
circumstances, however,) at about £300,000.[266]
The amount of net revenue in the year 1838, the last year throughout
which the old rates were maintained, was, according to the mode of
account then in use, £1,659,510.[267] For the purpose of comparison,
it is obvious that a similar mode of account must be applied to the
present state of things.
Bearing this in mind, we have now once more to consider the two points
affecting receipt, viz., the postage of the Government correspondence,
and the proceeds of the impressed stamps on newspapers, and the one
point affecting expenditure, viz., the expense of the packet service.
_As regards the Government correspondence._
It is alleged that, under the old system, this was carried free. Now
the fact is, that under that system the departments of probably the
largest correspondence, viz., the Customs, the Excise, and the Stamps
and Taxes, paid the postage of all their letters, while some other
departments, though less strictly dealt with, paid at least for their
foreign correspondence. The aggregate of such payments amounted, on the
average, to about £45,000 per annum.[268]
Now, seeing that, since the adoption of Penny Postage, the non-official
correspondence has increased nearly eight-fold, it may well be doubted
whether, had the old system continued, the official correspondence
would not have so increased as to raise the expenditure from £45,000
per annum to at least equality with the £110,000, the present
average.[269]
_As regards Newspapers._
As, under the old system, the proceeds of the impressed stamp did not
enter into the accounts of the Post Office, so, for the purpose of
comparison, they must be excluded now; the only question, therefore,
is, whether the Post Office should now be credited with the revenue
derived from the adhesive stamp as applied to newspapers. This claim
has been contested on the ground that, as under the old system
newspapers were carried free, so the same service should be reckoned
as performed now on the same terms; and it has been naturally supposed
that the effect of recent changes has been to reduce the number of
newspapers transmitted under the impressed stamp, the decrease being
counterbalanced by the use of the adhesive stamp for which, therefore,
in the comparison, no claim should be made.
Now, the fact is that, notwithstanding the option now given, the
number of newspapers freed by the impressed stamp at the present time
is not only as great as the number so conveyed in 1838, but is even
somewhat larger; whilst a considerable increase has also taken place
in the weight and bulk of the individual papers; so that the amount
of gratuitous service, instead of being diminished, has been largely
increased, and consequently, the sum derived from the adhesive stamp
is, to say the least, a mere payment for additional duty.
Again, it is a mistake to suppose that, under the old system, the
conveyance of newspapers was altogether free. In fact, there were
numerous and important exceptions, since the impressed stamp, to
which all newspapers were then subjected, freed the paper only when
transmitted from one post-town to another; moreover, in nearly every
town there were extensive districts beyond the free-delivery, in which
not only letters, but newspapers, were subjected to an additional
charge. From this charge both are now relieved. Again, in addition to
the towns that were then post-towns, there are at present more than
10,000 places having sub-offices. Before the introduction of Penny
Postage, a newspaper transmitted by post between a post-town and, with
few exceptions, any of the 10,000 places which have now sub-offices,
was subjected to a charge of at least one penny; and when transmitted
between any two of the above 10,000 places, with but few exceptions, to
a charge of at least twopence.
At present a newspaper, even without the impressed stamp, if posted
at any one of the 11,400 places at which head or sub-offices are now
established, provided only that it does not exceed 4 ozs. in weight, is
delivered at any other for a single penny.
No doubt, the number of newspapers directly charged with postage is
larger now than under the old system; but as the charge is far from
being remunerative, this is anything but a gain to the department.
_As regards the expense of the Packet Service._
For the year 1838, the last year, as has been said, throughout which
the old rates were maintained, the Post Office accounts, excepting a
trifling amount of arrears, contain no charge for packet service, that
service having been transferred from the Post Office to the Admiralty,
partly in 1823, and the remainder in 1837,[270] so that, for the
purpose of comparison, such charge must of course be excluded from the
present account.
In the Postmaster-General's Report for 1861 is a table (p. 31)
prepared with a view to a comparison such as that now under
consideration. It is proper to state, however, that a certain change
of circumstances has led to a corresponding change in the mode of
presenting the account. Formerly, when the year's disbursements were
almost identical with its liabilities, their unmodified appearance in
the account was sufficient for practical purposes; but, of late years,
when, owing to unavoidable irregularities in the large payments made to
railway companies, the disbursements and liabilities have often been
largely at variance, the latter have been presented in the account
in preference to the former, as obviously affording better means for
determining the net revenue of the year.
The amount arrived at by this mode of proceeding is £1,525,311, or
£134,199 less than the net revenue of 1838.
It may, perhaps, be objected to the above comparison, that the revenue
derived from the packets is greater now than heretofore, and that
equity requires a corresponding adjustment of the account. There can
be no doubt that the revenue in question has considerably increased,
although such increase is not wholly attributable to the improvements
in the packet service. If, however, the adjustment thus called for
should be made, equity would require corresponding adjustments on other
points. Thus, allowance would have to be made, 1st, for a considerable
amount of net revenue formerly accruing from various colonial post
offices, as, for instance, those of British North America and the
West Indies, which have recently been made independent. 2nd, for the
great increase in the expense of conveying the mails, which increase,
contrary to all that might have been expected, has arisen from the
establishment and extension of the railway system. And, 3rd, for the
additional expenditure caused by a general increase of salary and
by a reduction of individual labour, both made to remedy admitted
evils under the old system. It would, indeed, be very difficult, if
not wholly impracticable, now to ascertain the result of all these
adjustments; but it may safely be maintained that it would leave the
account at least as favourable to the Post Office as at present.
ROWLAND HILL.
December 18, 1862.
APPENDIX J.
[See p. 279.]
_Conveyance of Mails by Railway. Memorandum thereon._
As doubts appear to exist as to the expediency of proceeding with the
proposed Railway Bill, at least in the present comprehensive form,
I have been induced to consider whether the object in view may not
be attained by other means; and I am inclined to think that this may
be done not only without the opposition, but even with the cordial
co-operation of the railway companies; and that, concurrent with this,
an important saving of revenue may be effected.
The means which I would suggest are that the Exchequer Loan
Commissioners be authorised and required to advance loans, within
certain limits, to such railway companies as can give ample security,
on the following conditions:--
1st. The amount of loan in each case to be proportionate to the postal
service performed by the company. If thought necessary it might also
be limited to a certain percentage on the sum which the company is
legally empowered to borrow.
2nd. The rate of interest to be the market rate at the time as
determined by the terms on which the Government may actually raise the
necessary loan. At the present time this would probably be about three
and a quarter per cent.
3rd. The company to engage to carry the mails according to a fixed
tariff of rates to be framed beforehand by the Post Office. Such
tariff to include all possible varieties of service, whether by trains
"under notice," or otherwise; and the rates to be calculated so as,
under ordinary circumstances, to afford the companies a small profit.
4th. All the existing powers of the Postmaster-General to be
maintained, and some additional powers to be secured, _e.g._, the
right to demand trains exclusively devoted to the mail service. The
right to levy certain fines for irregularity on condition of paying
certain premiums for punctuality. The right to erect the apparatus for
the exchange of bags.
5th. The engagement to be for three years certain, terminable
afterwards by either party on twelve months' notice.
The following table exhibits the amount of debentures issued by the
several companies enumerated, and the average rates of interest on
such debentures, as shown by the last published accounts.[271] It
also exhibits the sum which each company would save if the _whole_
of their loans were raised at three and a quarter per cent., and the
amount, according to the latest award, payable by the Post Office for
postal service. A comparison of the two last items shows that if the
Government advanced the whole of the loans, the companies in question
would be considerable gainers, even though they carried the mails for
nothing. Such an arrangement, however, is not contemplated, and the
comparison is made merely with a view of showing the capabilities of
the plan.
The companies have been selected, not with a view of exhibiting the
results in a favourable light, but simply because they have a large
postal service.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Railway Company. |Total amount|Average |Saving of the | Amount annually
|of Debenture|rate of | Companies | payable by the
| Loans. |Interest.| by | Post Office for
| | | paying only | Conveyance of
| | |3-1/4 per cent.| the Mails under
| | | |the latest awards
| | | | or agreements.
------------------+------------+---------+---------------+------------------
| £ |Per Cent.| £ | £
Caledonian | 2,262,426 | 4.5 | 28,280 | 23,710
Great Western | 10,083,710 | 4.57 | 133,104 | 18,252
London and North-}| 10,975,589 | 4.3 | 115,243 | 56,500
Western }| | | |
London and South-}| 2,400,416 | 4.31 | 25,444 | 14,780
Western }| | | |
Midland | 4,151,556 | 4.28 | 42,761 | 23,412
North-Eastern | 6,833,642 | 4.36 | 75,853 | 34,380
South-Eastern | 2,709,468 | 4.61 | 36,848 | 14,624
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The annual payments for the railway postal service amount to about
£400,000. The general adoption of the above plan would (the service
remaining the same) reduce this amount probably to about £150,000.
To obtain the concurrence of the companies it would be necessary,
probably, for the Government to advance gradually, as the existing
bonds fall due, about £30,000,000 in the aggregate, or rather less
than two-fifths of the present amount of railway debentures. This
advance, taking the saving of the companies at only one per cent. on
the average, would reduce their expenses by £300,000. And as their
receipts from the Post Office would be reduced, say by £250,000, the
balance would give a direct gain to the companies of £50,000 per annum.
But I am assured by gentlemen well informed on the subject, that the
companies would also be benefited indirectly as regards the terms on
which they would be enabled to raise the remainder of their loans.
The question naturally arises, why, seeing that a larger advance
(say of £45,000,000 instead of £30,000,000) would probably suffice
to relieve the Post Office of _all_ payments for railway service, I
have not proposed the larger amount? The reason is that I have not
felt justified in asking Government to do more than is necessary to
supply the defects of early legislation, by placing the Post Office
in a position similar to that in which it would probably have stood,
had its interests (and through it those of the public) received due
attention from the legislature when railways were first established. It
is unnecessary to add that, should Government feel disposed to extend
the advances to railways beyond the limit I have proposed, the saving
which would result from such extension might go to the further relief
of the Post Office, or be carried direct to the credit of the general
revenue of the state, as Government might determine. In arriving at
this conclusion, I have not overlooked the importance of neutralising
the unwillingness sometimes manifested by the companies now under
agreement with the Post Office to afford additional service without
additional pay. Against this inconvenience I consider the Post Office
may be tolerably well secured by making the agreement terminable by the
Government, without notice, in the event of the conditions not being
fully performed by the company.
I may add that advances, such as those now suggested (except that
they were unfortunately unaccompanied by any stipulations as to the
postal service), have already been made to several of the Irish railway
companies.
Should the above plan be adopted by Government, I have little doubt
that almost every railway company would speedily avail itself of the
advantages it affords; and, if so, while both parties would be saved
the trouble, expense, delay, and uncertainty of arbitrations, the
Postmaster-General would be enabled, more effectually even than by the
proposed bill, to grant many important postal facilities earnestly
desired by the public, which he is now obliged to withhold, a most
acceptable boon would be conferred on the railway companies, and a
large saving--estimated above at £250,000 a year--would be effected in
the Post Office expenditure.
R. H.
6th January, 1857.
APPENDIX K.
[See p. 291.]
_Minute relative to Panama Route to Australia._
_The Postmaster-General._
1. In my minute of the 15th instant, on the subject of the Treasury
Minute of the 11th (referred to your Lordship for report), I
recommended that the consideration of that part of the Treasury Minute
which relates to an additional postal service to Australia, by way of
Panama, should be postponed, in order to admit of the immediate call
for tenders for the continuance of the service by way of Suez.
2. Your Lordship and the Treasury having been pleased to adopt this
recommendation, and the advertisements for tenders for the latter
service having been issued, I now beg to submit my views on the
proposed additional monthly service by way of Panama.
3. The question is divisible under two heads--
1st. Whether it is necessary that the postal communication with
Australia should be more frequent than at present, viz., once a
month? and
2nd. If so, is the Panama route the best for the additional mails?
4. As regards the first of these questions, I need not remind your
Lordship that the sea postage of all the correspondence with the
Australian colonies, including New Zealand, falls very far short of
the cost of even a single line of packets. Such cost under the late
contract having been £185,000 a year, while the total sea postage
cannot be estimated at more than about £50,000 a year.
5. Having regard to the enormous additional loss which would result
from the establishment of a second line of packets, and bearing in mind
that the dissatisfaction so strongly felt, both here and in Australia,
is not as to the infrequency of communication so much as to its
irregularity, I am of opinion that the wishes of the public, whether
at home or in the colonies, would be more effectually met by doing all
that is practicable to improve the existing monthly service than by
doubling the frequency of communication.
6. As regards the second question, viz., as to the best route for the
additional line of packets (should Government decide to establish one),
the points for consideration appear to be mainly as to the ports to
which the distances shall be reckoned, and the comparative length of
route.
7. The advocates of the Panama route generally select Sydney as the
right port; but this is manifestly unfair, inasmuch as, while by the
Panama route it is the nearest of the continental Australian ports,
by the Suez route it is the most distant. Neither can this port claim
preference by amount of correspondence, since the enclosed statement
of the correspondence between this country and the several Australian
colonies, including New Zealand, shows that that of New South Wales is
only 23 per cent. of the whole, while that of Victoria is as much as 58
per cent. The latter colony is also centrally situated, having Tasmania
on the south, South Australia and Western Australia on the west, and
New South Wales and New Zealand on the east. It is clear, therefore,
that Melbourne is the port to which the distances should be reckoned.
8. It will, of course, be for the Admiralty to state exactly the
comparative lengths of the two routes; but, from the best information I
have been able to obtain, it appears that the distance to Melbourne is
less by way of Gibraltar and Suez than by way of Panama, to the extent
of about 1,500 nautical miles, making a difference, according to the
average speed of the packets, of at least six days in favour of the
Suez route.
9. Though the contrary has often been assumed, even Sydney is nearer
by the Suez route than by the Panama route, and that to the extent
of about 300 nautical miles; so that the only colony which would be
brought nearer by the adoption of the Panama route is New Zealand,
whose correspondence, however, amounts to only six per cent. of the
whole.
10. The comparative absence of storms in the Pacific may, to some
extent, counterbalance greater distance, but not, I presume, so far
as to leave any doubt that the communication viâ Suez will remain the
quickest--to Melbourne at least. This, however, is a point on which, no
doubt, the Admiralty will report.
11. But, by the foregoing statement, the superiority of the Suez route
is by no means fully shown, since, as respects the mails sent through
France, the time is further shortened by four days and a-half:[272]
while the Panama route admits of no such acceleration.
The real advantage, therefore, of the Suez route, when speed is
important, cannot be estimated, as regards Melbourne, at less than ten
days. And as the saving, _viâ_ France, of course extends to all the
Australian colonies, it may be doubted whether even New Zealand would
be materially benefited by adopting the Panama route.
12. Again, by a slight sacrifice of time (not more, probably, than
one or two days) the Suez route might be made to take in either Point
de Galle or the Mauritius; thus in either case affording important
postal facilities, not only to the colony so included, but also to
this country and to the Australian colonies in their correspondence
therewith. The Panama route affords no similar facilities.
13. But the Suez route has also an important pecuniary advantage over
that by Panama. Our mails are conveyed across the Isthmus of Suez by
the Egyptian Government, for a fixed annual payment, which amounts
to not more than fourpence per pound weight; whereas the charge by
the railway company for crossing the Isthmus of Panama is elevenpence
per pound, in addition to which we have to pay the local government
the exorbitant rate of one shilling an ounce for letters for the mere
privilege of passing through their territory. These charges would add,
say twopence, to the postage of each newspaper, and sixpence to the
postage of each half-ounce letter. Or, should the quarter-ounce scale
be applied, then threepence for each quarter-ounce letter, making a
total charge of ninepence; so that there could be no cheap mail by this
route, the letters viâ Panama being all charged as highly as those sent
through France.
14. There is still another circumstance which should not be overlooked
in a comparison between the two routes--at both ends of the Suez route
the electric telegraph is being rapidly extended. It already reaches
from England to Malta; and, even if not yet completed, is in rapid
progress from Sydney _viâ_ Melbourne to Adelaide. Already, therefore,
as regards the transmission of news, the distance to and from Sydney
by this route is reduced by one-fourth; and, supposing that at any
future time the telegraph should be extended on the one side to Point
de Galle, and on the other to King George's Sound (neither, perhaps,
an improbable event), that distance would be so greatly reduced that
Sydney would be brought (by telegraph) within fifteen days of London.
15. The Panama route, as yet, possesses no similar advantage; and even
if the difficulties of crossing the Atlantic be mastered, and the
telegraph extended to Panama, there will yet remain the whole time
occupied in crossing the Pacific--probably more than thirty days.
16. These several considerations appear to be conclusive as to the
decided superiority of the route by Suez over that by Panama; and
consequently, even if a monthly service be deemed insufficient, the
additional packets should be placed on the Suez route.
17. Should similar views be adopted in the Australian colonies--as I
expect they will when the facts of the case are understood--the several
governments, excepting that of New Zealand, and perhaps that of New
South Wales, will probably decline to provide their share of the cost
of any service which may be attempted by way of Panama. It is very
important, therefore, that, as indicated in the Treasury Minute, the
concurrence of the colonies should be ascertained before any tender is
finally accepted.
18. But if, as fairness seems to require, it be made a condition of
the tender that the total time from London to Melbourne, _viâ_ Panama,
shall not exceed that which may be allowed _viâ_ France and Suez, then
it may be doubted if any responsible parties will be found to undertake
the contract.
19. In another minute, when submitting a letter from the Treasury on
the subject of postal communication with British Columbia, I propose
to consider the question (raised in that letter) as to the best mode
of conducting the service on this side the Isthmus of Panama; but, as
the effect on the Australian service would be much the same whether one
of the two monthly lines now existing be employed (and that service is
so direct that little would, I presume, be gained by adopting another
route), or whether a new and independent service be established, I do
not consider it necessary to trouble your Lordship on this point at
present.
20. Should your Lordship concur in these views, I would suggest that a
copy of this minute, accompanied by a letter from yourself, expressive
of such concurrence, be forwarded to the Treasury.
(Signed) R. H.
27th September, 1858.
Approved.
(Signed) C.
29th September, 1858.
APPENDIX L.
[See p. 293.]
_Letter to Lord Canning, Governor-General of India._
October 24th, 1857.
DEAR LORD CANNING,--I hope it may do some little to relieve your
Lordship's anxiety to learn that Government has adopted a plan of mine
for giving to Calcutta and Madras four mails a month, to and from
England, instead of two.
The plan is fully described in the enclosed copy of a minute; but, to
save you the trouble of reference, I beg to say that the principle of
the measure is as follows:--Leaving the Calcutta, Madras, and China
mails, whether _viâ_ Southampton or Marseilles, unaltered, I despatch
the Bombay mail from hence, _viâ_ Marseilles, about a week (a quarter
of a month) after the despatch of the Calcutta mail by that route; and
arrange the despatch from Bombay of the return mail, so that it may
reach London, _viâ_ Marseilles, also about a week after the arrival of
the Calcutta mail by that route.
Under this arrangement, the despatch across the peninsula, between
Calcutta and Bombay, being fitted, in each direction, to the Bombay
line of packets, will afford to Calcutta two good mails, each way,
per month, _viâ_ Bombay, in addition to the two per month she now has
by her own packets; and, as to cross the peninsula requires about a
week, the arrivals, as well as the departures, will be at nearly equal
intervals, _i.e._, one per week, or rather quarter of a month.
Madras will enjoy a similar advantage.
Bombay will not benefit by the change (except by electric telegraph
to and from Madras). On the contrary, she will be somewhat injured in
respect of her _slow_ mails, which must be conveyed between Southampton
and Malta or Alexandria, by the Calcutta, or by the Australian packets,
whichever will serve best, there to await the arrival of the Bombay
packets; but, as the payment of an additional postage of threepence
will not only avoid this delay, but will save several days, as
compared with the existing state of things, I attach little importance
to the objection.
As the plan involves comparatively little additional service, the
Peninsula and Oriental Company have undertaken it for a further payment
of £16,000 a year. I cannot, as yet, say when the change will be made.
I beg your Lordship will not think of replying to this letter. If
the plan prove acceptable to you, a word to that effect from your
private secretary will be welcome, more especially if he can add that
your health, and that of Lady Canning,--to whom I beg to be most
respectfully remembered--have not greatly suffered from the terrible
anxieties to which you must have been exposed.
Under the trying circumstances to which I have alluded, I venture to
think that your Lordship will not consider it obtrusive if I assure you
that you have the earnest sympathy of every one at the Post Office--of
every one at least who had the honour of knowing you--a sympathy
accompanied, however, by the most entire conviction that under your
able and energetic administration all that is possible to restore order
and to prevent future outbreak will be accomplished.
In our small way we have done our best to expedite the arrival of the
Indian mails. The last was conveyed from Paris to London, viâ Boulogne
and Folkestone, all circumstances being favourable, in eight and a-half
hours.
I have, &c.,
(Signed) ROWLAND HILL.
The Right Hon.
VISCOUNT CANNING
&c. &c. &c.
APPENDIX M.
[See p. 347.]
_Proposed Reduction in the Postage on Newspapers
and other Printed Matter._
Of the importance of distributing our cheap and excellent newspapers
and other periodicals and serials over the whole face of the country
there can be but one opinion amongst enlightened men. The aim of this
memorandum is to show to what extent, and by what means, this great
end can be attained, without undue sacrifice of other equally great
interests.
With respect to the allegations made as to the cheaper conveyance
of such matter in other countries, it is important to remark that
no argument can be safely drawn from them, even when they are
found literally correct, without careful examination into all the
appertaining circumstances.[273]
And here it may be observed, that forty years ago our own journals,
though laden with heavy duties, viz., the stamp duty and those on
advertisements and paper, were constantly spoken of as carried free. An
anomaly the more remarkable because if addressed anywhere beyond the
narrow limits of what was termed the "free delivery," every newspaper
bore a postal charge. It scarcely need be said that to the "freedom" of
those earlier days, no one, least of all the applicants in this case,
would wish to return.[274]
It must, therefore, be inquired as respect the countries referred to--
1st. Whether the postage be in addition to a stamp duty.
2nd. Whether the post office undertakes house-to-house delivery, and
that free of charge.
3rd. What are the restrictions as to weight, as to writing or other
marks, and as to time and place of posting. Whether, in short, the
cheap transmission be not made under regulations which would not be
tolerated here.
4th. Whether the governments concerned have not either the free use of
the railways for the conveyance of mails, or at least their use on very
much lower terms than are conceded here.
5th. Whether lowness of postage on printed matter be not obtained at
the cost of high postage on letters.
6th. What in the countries referred to is the fiscal result of the
postal system? whether, as here, the production of a large net revenue
(whose diminution would have to be made good by some other impost);
whether, as in various other countries, a bare self-support, or, as
in the United States, a deficiency to be supplied from the general
taxation.
7th. Whether, in fine, there be not some circumstance, or set of
circumstances, which vitiates the example.
It is at least highly probable that when the various examples held
up have been subjected to the proposed scrutiny, their validity will
shrink into very small dimensions.
Without, however, laying too much stress either way on foreign example,
it is manifestly important to consider the present question in relation
to other home interests; in recognising the claims of newspapers we
must not forget those of letters; the less so as the former are already
by far the more favoured class of the two, the allowance of weight of a
newspaper being eight-fold that of a letter. It must be borne in mind,
therefore, that in case of any surplus in revenue, equality, if not
priority of claim, whether for increased weight, increased facilities,
or other advantage, may be fairly set up in favour of letters; further,
that this claim is prodigiously strengthened by the fact that it is to
letters alone (almost exclusively to home letters) that the Post Office
is indebted for its net revenue.
Returning, however, for the moment to the separate question of
newspapers, it must be remarked that any lowering of that unit of
charge which has hitherto been strictly maintained is open to so many
objections as to demand that the change, if made, should be made with
extreme caution.
1st. The postal conveyance of printed matter--especially of newspapers,
since these admit of no delay--is, even at the present rates, under
existing circumstances, unremunerative, a fact which becomes very
intelligible when the eight-fold allowance of weight is considered, and
which of itself overthrows the expectation held out by some that the
fiscal loss by reduction would be compensated by increase in the number
of packets sent.
2nd. The proposed reduction, if made simply, would inevitably lead to
increased demands on the part of the railway companies, and that upon
two grounds, (_a_) augmented weight of the mails, and (_b_) alleged
interference with their parcel traffic. All this will be found to have
followed the reduction to the present rates.
3rd. The temptation to use printed matter as a cover, or fraudulent
substitute for written letters, which even now is unduly strong,
would, without safeguards far beyond any yet known, be enormously
strengthened.
4th. As the power of mechanically exchanging bags _en route_ is, as
mentioned by the Postmaster-General in the House of Commons, but
limited, augmentation in weight may, by rendering stoppage necessary,
retard the progress of the mails.
Under the first of the above heads it must be added that the sound
commercial principle on which the Post Office should be conducted--the
full establishment of which was kept steadily in view, and towards
which a nearer and nearer approach was made so long as I held the
office of secretary--is that each part of the business should be at
least self-supporting; every deviation from this principle not only
producing direct injury to fiscal results, but becoming prolific as
an example. Further, that deviation as respects printed matter is the
more objectionable because, as the Post Office has there no monopoly of
conveyance, the inevitable result is to saddle it with whatever has to
be conveyed at a loss, while aught that is profitable is sure to pass
into other hands.
In relation to the third head, that concerning temptation to fraud, it
may be remarked that, if the change can be so made as to render fraud
under its operation impracticable, objection on this score will of
course be removed; and, further, that if the modification necessary for
securing this can be made at the same time to reduce labour at the Post
Office as regards this special duty, ground for reduction in charge may
be established.
Thus then we come to a consideration of means; and, first, it is
assumed that the application under review relates only to the _primary_
distribution of newspapers, &c., viz., that from the hands of the
publishers or of the vendors; and it is for that alone that just
provision seems practicable or is here attempted.
Now it is well known that such distribution in towns, as now performed
by news vendors themselves, is very inexpensive, partly because the
cost of railway conveyance is less to them than to the Post Office,
partly because the delivery is generally performed by boys, but
_mainly because the newspapers are not individually addressed_, each
copy of a particular paper serving as well for one individual as
another. The first and perhaps only desideratum, therefore, is a means
for performing the same duty, viz., the distribution of papers not
individually addressed at small cost in the rural districts.
Now the need of individual addresses may be superseded in the country
by use of the means found available in towns: in other words, if lists
similar to those which doubtless guide the boys in the town delivery
be put into the hands of the Post Office rural messengers, the latter
will be able to perform the duty of distribution with as little
difficulty as the former.
Supposing this plan to be adopted, it becomes practicable to save
labour in the Post Office to a much greater extent than at first sight
appears.
At present, newspapers posted for rural districts have to be assorted
from a mass of papers for all parts of the United Kingdom, and, indeed,
of the world. Such as are for a distance have to undergo a like
operation at one or more offices on their way to that where, by a final
assortment, they are arranged according to the walks of the several
messengers. Lastly, of course, each paper has to be delivered according
to its particular address.
Now, upon the proposed plan, the publishers or the news vendors of
the metropolis, or other centre, instead of folding, addressing, and
posting the journals intended for the rural districts, would, as is now
done to a great extent--naturally send them in bulk, in the parcels
containing journals for the post towns; an arrangement which would
relieve the Post Office, not only of the first assortment, but also of
the duty of conveyance; thereby avoiding at once increased difficulty
as to exchange of bags, and also interference or quasi interference,
with parcel-traffic, unless in the acceptable way of augmentation; and
the provincial news vendors, on receiving these parcels, would, while
themselves dealing with the journals intended for town-delivery, and
for such of the rural districts as they might prefer to serve, convey
the remainder, still unfolded and unaddressed, to the local post
office (which they would have previously supplied with corresponding
lists, variable, say once a month), thus superseding the intermediate
assortments; and, lastly, the postmasters would only have to arrange
the journals, by number and kind, according to the rounds of the
messengers; thus reducing the trouble of even the final assortment to a
minimum.
Still further to lessen trouble to the Post Office, as likewise for
just security, it would be well to require that payment for the month
should be made in advance, viz., on delivery of the lists. It would
also be necessary to rule that the sum to be so paid should in no case
be below a certain amount.
And thus, by an actual reduction in Post Office labour, unattended with
any counterbalancing disadvantage, the desired reduction in postage
would be warranted.
It is obvious that papers thus dealt with would present no temptation
to fraud, since the absence of particular address would altogether
prevent their being used as substitutes for letters.
On the plan set forth above, if taken as a whole, I think it would be
safe and justifiable to reduce the charge for what I have called the
primary distribution of newspapers, &c., to one halfpenny the four
ounces, that is to say to one-half the present rate.
Security against fraud generally, it may be pointed out, would be
immeasurably increased if the proposed boon were accompanied with the
entire abolition of the impressed stamp, the use of which, besides
maintaining a constant temptation to dishonesty, demands, on the
part of the Post Office and the public, the observance of a highly
complicated set of rules, involving so much trouble that they are
constantly violated with impunity.
This change, however, would have to be accompanied with the issue of a
three-halfpenny adhesive stamp[275] (a measure actually contemplated
some years ago) to supply the place of the impressed stamp of the same
value now used by newspapers which, like the _Times_ or _Illustrated
London News_ occasionally range in weight between four and six ounces.
The use of the new stamp might very properly be extended to all other
printed matter of like weight.
Before touching on further possibilities as respects newspapers, I
return to the subject of letters, in relation to which much additional
improvement is desirable. This might be arranged under the following
heads:--
(_a_) Increase in the number of deliveries; at least in the large
towns.
(_b_) The extension of periodic (not necessarily daily) delivery
to every house, however remote, as in France, Prussia, and
Switzerland; an improvement important, not only to commercial
interests and social intercourse, but to jurisprudence,
legislation, and political action.
(_c_) The establishment on one or two of the great routes--say
after a trial for a short distance--of a mode of conveyance far
more rapid than any yet employed, but delayed on account of its
great expense, viz., tubular conveyance; by the use of which, in
the opinion of the eminent engineers, Mr. C. H. Gregory and Mr.
E. A. Cowper (as set forth by them in a report to myself dated
October, 1859), a speed of from 120 to 150 miles an hour might
be attained, though at a total annual cost (interest of capital
inclusive) of about £800 per mile, from which, however, there would
be a set-off of probably about two-thirds for present expenses
saved. The use of such conveyance so far as Crewe on the one hand
and Dover on the other, would bring Dublin, Edinburgh, Glasgow and
Paris wholly within the reach of the London night mail, at the
same time, of course, greatly lessening the effective distance to
all places beyond. It would also, for reasons not necessary to be
stated here, both facilitate the frequent despatch of mails, and
aid greatly in the prompt distribution of newspapers to places
directly or indirectly served; would, for instance, make it
practicable to place the London morning newspapers on the breakfast
tables of Birmingham, Liverpool and Manchester.
(_d_) Increase in the standard of weight, say, from half an ounce
to an ounce, a change which would reduce the postage of heavy
letters by about a half, besides avoiding much weighing of letters
and vexatious overcharge for excess of weight.
(_e_) A reduced rate of postage, on certain conditions, for
circulars. In most towns there is a time in every day at which the
work in the post office is light, as also a delivery at which the
amount of letters, &c., might be considerably increased without
inconvenience, and circulars so posted as best to suit these
opportunities, provided always they came in sufficient numbers and
were taken to the head office, might reasonably be dealt with on
lower terms, perhaps at half the present rate.
A plan in accordance with what is here set forth was drawn up by my
son, Mr. Pearson Hill, and laid before the Secretary of the Post
Office some time ago, but, as I understand, awaits decision. His
plan is limited to local distribution; but, should it be adopted
and prove successful, I should be ready to suggest means for giving
it general effect.
Now beneficial concessions in the case both of letters and newspapers
would be greatly facilitated by the establishment of more equitable
and more equable arrangements than the present between the Post Office
and the railway companies. Opportunity for this is likely soon to
arise through inevitable demand for the extension to railway traffic
of that abolition of tax on locomotion which is now imminent in
respect of other modes of conveyance, a concession which may fairly
be accompanied with the legal enactment of the tariff of charges, and
other modifications in the laws affecting the Post Office proposed in
paragraphs 23 and 24 of my Report on Railways, dated 7th May, 1867,
which forms part of the Report of the Royal Commission on Railways laid
before Parliament in the same year.
Perhaps, also, means may be devised for such further improvement of the
apparatus used in exchanging bags as to remove the present objection to
increased weight.
Supposing these two important advantages to be secured, the Post
Office would then be able, without injustice to other interests, to
receive the newspapers (of course still in bulk and unaddressed, though
assorted according to districts and accompanied with respective lists)
directly from the metropolitan or other central publishers or vendors,
and to forward them, without further intervention, to their ultimate
destination; thus, in effect, reducing still further the charge for
their distribution throughout the country.
As reduction in labour, not only to the Post Office but also to
senders, will obviously attend every reduction in number of packets,
perhaps two or more publishers or vendors may, under either of the
above arrangements, send combined packets, lists, &c., a course which
will not in any way impede or modify distribution.
The operation of the plans recommended in this paper would, I believe,
open the way to additional advantages which it would now be premature
to mention.
ROWLAND HILL.
June 12, 1869.
APPENDIX N.
[See p. 394.]
_Letter to the Lords of the Treasury--Superannuation Grant._
Hampstead, 17th March, 1864.
MY LORDS,--The Postmaster-General, as requested by your Lordships, has
done me the favour to furnish me with a copy of your minute of 11th
instant, granting me a special superannuation allowance on retiring
from my office as Secretary to the Post Office, and conveying to me the
very favourable opinion, which your Lordships are pleased to express,
of the manner in which I have discharged my duties.
It cannot be necessary to assure your Lordships of the deep
gratification with which I have received so handsome and elaborate a
recognition of my services. I have only to beg that you will be pleased
to accept my most respectful thanks.
In a document so highly complimentary, I hesitate to notice what would
appear to be an admission, inadvertently made, to the effect that the
adoption of the uniform penny postage was urged by others before the
development of my plans. This, I assure your Lordships, is an error;
and, as uniformity of rate constitutes the main feature of my plan, I
am naturally anxious to place before you the real facts of the case.
I trust, therefore, you will pardon me if I request attention to the
enclosed memorandum on the subject.
I need scarcely add that, should the expectations of my medical
friends, of improved health from rest, be realised, and any occasion
arise in which it may appear to your Lordships that my assistance or
advice in further postal improvements may be of advantage, I shall feel
honoured by being permitted to place them at your disposal.
I have, &c.,
ROWLAND HILL.
The Right Hon.
The Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty's Treasury,
&c., &c., &c.
MEMORANDUM.
A low and uniform rate of postage forms the most essential feature of
my plan of postal reform, and I have no hesitation in stating that its
conception originated wholly with myself. To guard against future error
I ask permission to place on record a brief statement of facts.
The principle of uniformity of rate, now that it has been in successful
operation for nearly a quarter of a century, appears, perhaps, simple
and obvious; but so far from its having been, as it is sometimes
supposed, the happy thought of a moment, it was the result of most
laborious investigation on my part. Indeed, a slight consideration
will show that its conception necessarily involved a previous
discovery--viz., that the cost per letter of mere transit within the
limits of the United Kingdom was practically inappreciable, or, at
least, that it was not dependent mainly on distance; being, in fact,
quite as much dependent on the number of letters contained in the
particular mail as on the distance that mail was carried. Indeed,
it was shown, from careful investigation, that the cost of mere
conveyance, even for so great a distance as from London to Edinburgh,
was only the thirty-sixth part of a penny per letter. From this and
other facts, it followed that a uniform rate was more just than one
varying according to distance. The convenience of uniformity was
obvious.
I may add that when I first entered on the investigations preparatory
to the construction of my plan, I myself had no conception of the
practicability of a uniform rate, and that the discovery referred to
above was as startling to myself as it proved when announced to the
public at large.
A reference to my original pamphlet--a copy of which is, I presume,
still in your Lordships' possession--or to my evidence before the
Select Committee of 1838, appointed to inquire into the practicability
of my plans, will show the various steps by which I arrived at the
conclusion that a uniform penny rate was at once just and practicable.
There is but one other person, so far as I am aware, to whom the
suggestion of a uniform penny rate has, with even the slightest
plausibility, ever been assigned--I refer to the late Mr. Wallace,
formerly Member for Greenock, and Chairman of the Select Committee on
Postage in 1838; but though Mr. Wallace frequently urged, among other
useful reforms, a great reduction in the postal charges, I can say from
personal knowledge that he had no idea whatever of a uniform rate
until after the publication of my pamphlet. Indeed, this sufficiently
appears from his speech in Parliament in July, 1836, the last occasion
on which, before the publication of my pamphlet, he referred to the
rates of postage. The following is an extract from "Hansard" (Vol.
xxxv., 3rd series, p. 422):--
* * * * *
"At the same time the rates of postage ought to be reduced. It would be
proper not to charge more than 3_d._ for any letter sent a distance of
50 miles; for 100 miles, 4_d._; 200 miles, 6_d._; and the highest rate
of postage ought not to be more than 8_d._ or 9_d._ at most."
* * * * *
Further evidence upon this point is also in my possession, which can be
submitted, should it be deemed necessary.
ROWLAND HILL.
Hampstead, 17th March, 1864.
FINIS.
THOS. DE LA RUE AND CO. PRINTERS. BUNHILL ROW LONDON.
INDEX
A
Abbott, Mr., vol. ii. 300
Aberdeen, Earl of, vol. ii. 217, 218, 222-225, 287
Accounts. See Post Office
Admiralty, vol. ii. 369. See also Packet Service
Ady, Joseph, vol. ii. 82
Airy, Sir G. B., correction of statement about M. Biot, vol. i. 499;
R. H.'s letter to him, 506;
letters to R. H., 507, 509;
signs R. H.'s recommendation for the Royal Society, vol. ii. 359;
present at his funeral, 431
Alarum water-clock, vol. i. 83, 157
Algeria, vol. ii. 311
Algerine ambassador, vol. i. 172
Allen, Ralph, vol. ii. 9
Alton, vol. ii. 276
Amiens, peace of, vol. i. 19, 38
Angas, Mr. G. F., vol. i. 221
Anson, General, vol. i. 279
Applegarth, Mr., vol. i. 224
Architecture, study of, vol. i. 61, 128
Argyll, Duke of, vol. ii. 349;
Government loans to railways, vol. ii. 279, 280;
Civil Service examination, 303;
his character;
facility of composition, 355;
signs recommendation of R. H.'s admission to Royal Society, 359;
provisionally Postmaster-General, 361;
letters to R. H., 344, 356;
R. H.'s letters to him, 280, 302, 330;
out of England at the time of R. H.'s funeral--his affection towards
him, 430
Arithmetic, mental, vol. i. 92, 128
Armstrong, Sir W., vol. i. 242
Armstrong, Mr., vol. ii. 49, 72
Arnold, Dr., vol. i. 100, 101, 115, 124
Arnott, Dr., vol. i. 210
Ashburton, Lord, vol. i. 279, 469;
evidence before Parliamentary Committee (1838) 310, 317, 321;
letter to R.H., 362
Ashford, Mary, vol. i. 85
Ashley, Lord (Earl of Shaftesbury), presents a memorial from Bath, vol.
ii. 108;
motion for abolition of Sunday duty, 155, 156, 158, 160, 163;
writes to R. H., 156;
partial retractation, 150, 159
Ashurst, Mr., vol. i. 294, 486
Assassination, threats of, vol. ii. 327
Assay Office, Birmingham, vol. i. 55
Astronomy, vol. i. 57-59, 68, 69, 495-508
Attwood, Mr., vol. i. 150
Auditing, Post Office, vol. i. 454, vol. ii. 186, 313
Australia, colonisation, vol. i. 217, 219;
correspondence, 485, vol. ii. 10, 396;
mails, 242, 289-292, 310, 373, 480;
postage charges, 243, 310, 371
Austria, postal reform, vol. ii. 35, 252
Ayr, vol. ii. 230
B
Baines, Mr. Edward, vol. ii. 331, 346
Baines, Mr. Frederick, vol. ii. 251
Ballaghaderin, vol. i. 413
Bancroft, Mr., vol. ii. 92
Banning, Mr., vol. ii. 54, 307
Banwell, vol. i. 306
Bar Beacon, vol. i. 97
Barbauld, Mrs., vol. i. 54
Baring, Sir Francis (Lord Northbrook), vol. i. 355, 371, 374, 376,
380, 381, 384, 386, 390, 391, 392, 401, 406, 411, 416, 424, 426,
428, 429, 432, 434, 435, 450, 451, 466, vol. ii. 358, 384;
first interview with R. H., vol. i. 365;
gives R. H. appointment in Treasury, 369;
doubts of prepayment and use of stamp, 382, 396, vol. ii. 86;
does not care for a little unpopularity, vol. i. 389;
long hours of work, 385, 398, 415, 417, 431;
remark on the French Government, 410;
friendship with R. H. and trust in him, 422, 423, 437-441, 490,
vol. ii. 388, 397, 411;
budget of 1841, vol. i. 436;
resigns office, 439;
consulted by R. H., 475-477;
presents R. H.'s petition, 483;
defends publication of correspondence, 485;
moves for return on rural distribution, 486;
speeches in House of Commons, 489, vol. ii. 351, 397;
congratulates R. H. on his appointment, vol. ii. 225;
opinion of R. H. 388-390, 411;
heads deputation to Lord Palmerston, 395;
letters to R. H., vol. i. 369, 439, 475, vol. ii. 86;
letters from R. H., vol. i. 440, 542, vol. ii. 85
Barth, Mr., vol. ii. 179, 462
Bath, vol. ii. 108
Bates, Mr., vol. i. 294
Beasley, Mr. Michael, 57, 61, 62, 79, 134;
his "utility," 63
Beecher, Major, vol. ii. 360
Belgium, postal reform in, vol. ii. 94;
postal treaty, 252, 318
Belper, Lord, vol. ii. 66
Benevolent Society, vol. i. 109
Bentham, Jeremy, reads "Public Education," sends two Greeks to Hazelwood
and a contribution to the Magazine, vol. i. 171;
visits Bruce Castle, 172;
suggests "a sucker from Hazelwood School," 180;
his "greatest happiness" principle, 193;
concentration of responsibility, vol. ii. 405
Bentinck, Mr., the last of the assailants of Penny Postage, vol. ii. 350
Bentley, Dr., vol. ii. 235
Berlin, vol. ii. 340
Biot, M., vol. i. 499
Birmingham riots, vol. i. 2, 11, 33, 47;
Philosophical Institution, 12, 80;
Mercury newspaper, 17;
volunteers, 38;
gun-making, 38;
tokens, 40;
police, 42;
exhibitions, 75;
Hampden Club, 139;
New Hall Hill meeting;
legislatorial attorneys;
exclusive musical society, 149;
represented in Parliament, 150;
Sunday question, vol. ii. 109, 128;
brass trade, vol. ii. 272;
pneumatic tubes, 340;
raises a statue to R. H., 387, 389, 428
Blair, Dr., vol. i. 98
Blomfield, Bishop, vol. ii. 116
Board of Trade, vol. ii. 251, 281
Board of Works, vol. ii. 269
Bodkin, Sir W., vol. ii. 327
Bokenham, Mr., vol. i. 385, 400, vol. ii. 62, 120-141, 155, 180, 190,
260, 327, 330, 453
Bookbinding, vol. i. 54
Book post, a kind of, in France in 1839, vol. i. 376;
established in England, vol. ii. 65, 87, 382, 397;
Foreign and Colonial, 244, 311
Booth, Mr., vol. ii. 281
Booth the forger, vol. i. 40
Boulogne, vol. ii. 294
Bowring, Dr. (Sir John), vol. i. 174, 382
Bradley, the letter-carrier, vol. ii. 79
Brankston, Mr., vol. i. 308
Brebner, Mr., vol. ii. 171
Brewin, Mr., vol. i. 301, 305, 308
Brierley Hill, vol. i. 282
Bright, Mr. John, vol. i. 477
Brighton, vol. ii. 22, 269, 285
Brighton Railway. See Railways.
Brindley, vol. ii. 250
Bristol, vol. i. 307, vol. ii. 57
British Association, vol. ii. 244
Brooks, Mr., vol. ii. 91
Brougham, Lord, interested in Hazelwood, vol. i. 173;
intends to found a school on the Hazelwood Plan, 180;
R. H. prepares for him "Home Colonies," 202;
approves of Owen's plan, 210;
R. H. addresses to him a letter on pauper education, 218;
character described by R. H., 219;
interest in Penny Postage, 288, vol. ii. 225;
presents City petition in its favour, vol. i. 289;
conduct on R. H.'s dismissal, 467, 468, 473;
story of "I is the plaintiff," 492;
takes part in the Sunday question, vol. ii. 149, 159;
speech on R. H.'s retirement, 398
Brown, Mr. (Sir William), vol. i. 310, 317, 336, vol. ii. 198
Bruce Castle, vol. i. 181, 201, 204, 214
Bunsen, Chevalier, negotiates postal treaty, vol. ii. 208, 252;
at the Queen's drawing room, 245
Burdett, Sir Francis, vol. i. 180, 240
Burgoyne, Sir John, vol. i. 277
Burke, Edmund, vol. ii. 398, 431
Burns, Robert, vol. i. 19
Burritt, Mr. Elihu, vol. ii. 319
Butler, Samuel, vol. i. 2
C
Caermarthen, vol. ii. 190
Calcutta, vol. ii. 272, 293
Cambridge, University of, vol, i. 67
Campbell, Thomas, vol. i. 149
Campbell, Lord, vol. ii. 330
Canada, vol. ii. 244, 316
Canning, Earl, vol. ii. 242, 275, 358;
pillar letter-box at Allahabad, vol. i. 417;
postage rate during Crimean War, 436;
Postmaster-General, vol. ii. 213;
question of R. H.'s promotion, 215-225;
railway legislation, 229;
Packet Service Commission, 238-240, 370;
promotion by merit, 249, 301;
his character, 263, 353-355;
appointed Governor-General of India, 353;
article on him in the "Edinburgh Review," 354;
letters to R. H., 218, 224;
R. H.'s letters to him, 215, 217, 225, 460, 478
Canning, Lady, vol. ii. 222
Canterbury, vol. i. 136, 218
Cape of Good Hope, vol. ii. 289
Cardwell, Mr. (Viscount Cardwell), vol. ii. 228
Carlyle, Mr. vol. i. xiv., vol. ii. 411
Cartwright, Major, vol. i. 150
Caxton Exhibition, vol. i. 229
Census, First, vol. ii. 260
Chadwick, Mr. Edwin, vol. i. 210, vol. ii. 336
Channel Islands, vol. ii. 259
Chantrey, Sir Francis, vol. i. 145
Charter House, vol. i. 101
Chartists, vol. ii. 84
Chester, vol. i. 140
Chetwynd, Mr., vol. ii. 333
Christmas-boxes, vol. ii. 325, 328.
Circular Delivery Company, vol. ii. 405
Circumlocution Office, vol. ii. 48
Cirencester, vol. i. 301
Civil Service Commission. See Commission
Civil Service Examinations. See Competitive Examinations
_Civil Service Gazette_, vol. ii. 322-324
Clanricarde, Marquis of, vol. ii. 51, 56, 57, 59, 66, 70, 72, 78, 90, 92,
97, 98, 108, 109, 111, 113, 120-129, 131-136, 138, 139, 141, 145,
147, 149, 150, 157, 158, 160, 173, 174, 176, 181-187, 194, 203,
204, 209, 213, 214,
218, 241, 259, 358;
appointed Postmaster-General, vol. ii. 38;
appointment of R. H. as his secretary, 39, 40, 45, 46;
abused by mail-cart driver, 47;
not afraid of a novel course of action, 55;
appealed to by R. H., 49, 54, 55, 58, 60, 64, 72-75, 96, 99, 100-106,
162-164, 168, 170, 175, 193, 196;
confidence in R. H., 59, 99, 165, 174, 195, 199, 200, 201, 216, 222;
ceases to be Postmaster-General, 200;
letters to R. H., 102, 445;
letters from R. H., 437, 443, 453;
speech on R. H.'s retirement, 398
Clark, Dr., vol. i. 401
Clark, Mr. Francis, vol. i. 278
Clark, Mrs. Francis (Caroline Hill), marriage, vol. i. 47;
her fine character, 195;
departure for Australia, vol. ii. 143;
R. H.'s letter to her, 335
Clark, Mr. Thomas, vol. i. 47
Clayton Tunnel, vol. ii. 22
Clerk, Sir George, Bart., vol. i. 444, 445, 447, 454, 465, 485;
announces in Parliament R. H.'s dismissal, 467;
Chairman of Committee of Inquiry, 492;
R. H.'s letter to him, 493
Clerks, Post Office, classification of, vol. ii. 179, 184, 249, 308;
improved condition of, 179, 190, 257, 308, 345, 381;
clerks in charge, 180
Clowes, Mr. W., vol. i. 230
Coach Company, project for, vol. i. 205, 520
Cobbett & Co., vol. i. 21
Cobden, Mr., offers to assist in publishing R. H.'s pamphlet, vol. i. 276;
examined before Parliamentary Committee, 301, 307, 324;
consulted by R. H., vol. ii. 73, 166, 170, 197;
letters to R. H., vol. i. 382, 477, 478, vol. ii. 31, 194, 198;
congratulates R. H. on his appointment, 225
Colbourn, Zerah, vol. i. 92, 512
Colby, General, vol. i. 268, 319, 332
Colchester, Lord, vol. ii. 291, 316, 324, 334, 344;
"an excellent Postmaster-General," 344;
his character, 356, 358
Cole, Mr. (Sir Henry Cole, K.C.B.), vol. i. 210, 374, 426, 436;
his ingenuity, 295;
editor of _Post Circular_, 339;
his valuable services, 447
Coleridge, S. T., his Pantisocracy, vol. i. 213;
paid poor woman's postage, 239
College, R. H.'s plan for establishing a great one, vol. i. 87, 104
Colonial Postage, vol. ii. 241-245, 310, 316, 317, 371
Commission, South Australian, vol. i. 220
Commission of Revenue Inquiry, vol. i. 246, 258, 315, 527
Commission of Post Office Inquiry, vol. i. 259, 268-274, vol. ii. 60
Commission of Post Office Inquiry in the East Indies, vol. ii. 245, 317
Commission for Regulating Salaries, vol. ii. 89, 184, 221;
its report, 246-249, 301
Commission on Sunday Labour, vol, ii. 160
Commission, Lord Canning's (Packet Service), vol. ii. 238, 370, 402
Commission on Railways, Royal, vol. ii. 69, 283, 416, 491
Committee, School, vol. i. 108, 116
Committee, Mercantile, vol. i. 294, 353, 462, 474, 484, vol. ii. 29
Committee of Enquiry, Select (1843), vol. i. 489, vol. ii. 1, 50
Committee on Postage, Select (1837-8), vol. i. 287, 295
Committee on Railway and Canal Bills (1853), vol. ii. 228
Common Council of London, vol. i. 280, 289, vol. ii. 428
Competitive Examinations--their evils, vol. ii. 249, 300, 303
Compton, Mr., vol. i. 4
Conference of Teachers, vol. i. 114
Congresbury, vol. i. 306
Constitution, Origin of the, vol. i. 115
Contract Work, economy of plan of, vol. ii. 286-288, 403
Conway, vol. i. 297
Coode, Mr., vol. i. 209, 210
Cooke, Mr. T. B., vol. ii. 311
Cornwall, Mr., vol. ii. 48, 211
Corporal Punishment, vol. i. 112
Cotton, Sir R., vol. ii. 312
Court Dress, vol. ii. 207
Court of Justice, School, vol. i. 107, 109, 110
Covent Garden Theatre--its loyal audience, vol. i. 143
Cowan, Mr., vol. ii. 113
Cowper, Professor, vol. i. 224, 524
Cowper, Mr. E. A., vol. ii. 337-339, 489
Creswick, Mr., vol. i. 118
Crimean War--proposed increase of postal rate, vol. i. 435;
soldiers' letters and remittances, vol. ii. 310, 316
Croker, Mr. J. W., vol. i. 377
Cube Roots, vol. i. 92, 512
Cubitt, Sir William, vol. ii. 236, 237
Cunard, Sir Edward, vol. ii. 186, 371
Cupar-Fife, vol. i. 442
Currency, vol. i. 40
Currie, Mr. Raikes, vol. i. 268, 325, 327, vol. ii. 216, 225, 461
D
_Daily News_, vol, ii. 241
Dalhousie, Earl of, vol. ii. 188
Davidson, Mr., Vol. i. 309
De Foe, vol. ii. 424
De La Rue, Dr. Warren, vol. i. 419, 501, 508
De Lys, Dr., vol. i. 499
De Morgan, Professor, vol. ii. 88
De Quincey, Thomas, interested in Hazelwood, vol. i. 173;
reviews "Public Education," 174, 178
Denman, Mr. (Lord Denman), vol. i. 150
Deal, vol. i. 276
Derby, Earl of, vol. ii. 200, 203, 206, 228, 241
Derbyshire, R. H.'s Tour in, vol. i. 137
Devonport, vol. ii. 289, 314
Dickens', Charles, reply to the "Edinburgh Review," vol. ii. 48;
article on the Post Office, 192;
article on the Money Order Office, 253
Dickinson, Mr., vol. i. 316
Diet, Experiments in, vol. i. 143, 147
Dilke, Sir C., vol. i. 210
Dilke, Sir C., vol. ii. 272, 375
Dillon, Mr. John, vol. i. 300, 313
Disraeli, Mr. (Earl of Beaconsfield), vol. ii. 174
Dockwra, Mr., vol. ii. 9
Donovan, Mr., vol. i. 401
Dover--Castle, vol. i. 133;
proposed tubular conveyance to, vol. ii. 338
Drawing, R. H.'s prize for, vol. i. 74
Drouet, Mr., vol. ii. 252
Dublin in 1821, vol. i. 160;
postal service, vol. ii. 258, 274, 337, 340
Dubost, Mr., vol. ii. 93
Dudley, vol. i. 282
Duncan, Viscount, vol. ii. 108
Duncannon, Lord (Earl of Bessborough), vol. i. 268, 272, 289, 290,
357, 360
Duncombe, Mr. Thomas, vol. ii. 28, 38
Dundee, vol. ii. 269
Dunlop, Mr., vol. i. 308
E
Early Rising, vol. I. 143
East Indies, vol. i. 303. See also India
Easthope, Sir John, vol. ii. 120
Ebrington, Lord (Earl Fortescue), vol. ii. 336
Edgeworth, Mr. Lovell, vol. i. 160, 162-167
Edgeworth, Miss, R, H.'s debt to her, vol. i. 50, 164, 421, 502;
introduction to her, 163;
reads "Public Education," speaks of her father, 165;
letter to R. H., 421;
scientific errors, 502
Edgeworth-Town assisting school, vol i. 160, 162-167.
Edinburgh, vol. ii. 258, 302; cost of
conveying a letter to, vol. i. 249, 280, 339;
Sunday agitation, vol. ii. 149;
Mails, 273, 337;
volunteer corps, 334
"Edinburgh Review," vol. i. 68;
reviews "Public Education," 121, 174, 178;
article on Penny Postage, 378, 390;
article on "Little Dorrit" and the "Circumlocution Office," vol. ii. 48;
article on Lord Canning, 354
Eldon, Earl of, vol. i. 212, 240, vol. ii. 35
Electrical Machine, vol. i. 55, 81
Electricity, lectures on, vol. i. 55, 80, 134
Elgin and Kincardine, Earl of, vol. ii. 308;
"an excellent Postmaster-General," 344;
his account of Lord Canning, 354;
his character, 357, 358;
letter to R. H., 359;
resignation, 361
Elgin, vol. i. 288
Ellenborough, Lord, vol. ii. 35
Emery, Mr., vol. i. 306
Emigrant ships, vol. i. 221
Empson, Professor, vol. i. 268
Enclosures, charge by, vol. i. 238, 282, 295
Envelopes, vol. 1. 393, 418, 419
Estcott, Mr., vol. ii. 8
Esquires in low life, vol. ii. 81
Estlin, Mr., vol. ii. 29
Euclid, vol. i. 11, 60
Eversley, Viscount, vol. ii. 91
Excursion trains, vol. ii. 21
"Exhibitions," School, vol. i. 91, 93, 113, 127, 170
Exhibition, Great (1851), vol. i. 26; vol. ii. 259
Express trains, vol. ii. 21
F
"Facts and Estimates," vol. i. 347, 534
Fagan, Mr., vol. ii. 154
Family council, vol. i. 191, 192, 262
Family fund, vol. i. 188-190
Faraday, Professor, vol. i. 3, 402
Female labour, vol. ii. 403
Ferguson, James, vol. i. 12
Fielding, Henry, vol, i. 3
Fights regulated, vol. i. 118
Fire at Hazelwood, vol. i. 95, 151;
origin of, 158; question of insurance, 158
Fire, precautions against, at Post Office, vol. ii. 268
Fitzgerald, Lord, vol. i. 460
Flood, walk through a, vol. i. 138
Forge, model of a, vol. i. 45
Forger, a, vol. i. 40
Forster, Mr. John, vol. i. 230, 525
Forster, Mr. Matthew, a steady friend, vol. ii. 149, 388, 394;
on the Sunday question, 157, 158;
Mr. Parkes's letter to him, 388
Foster, John, the essayist, vol. i. 141
Fourdrinier, vol. i. 224
France, revolution of 1789, vol. i. 19; peace with, 38, 134;
Mrs. Hill's uneasiness at being so near to its coast, 133;
postal revenue, 245;
reduction of postage in, 341, vol. ii. 93, 188, 252;
Post Office inspected by R. H. vol. i. 376;
early use of post-paid envelopes in, 377;
pillar letter-boxes, 417, vol. ii. 259;
treaty with, vol. i. 410, vol. ii. 6, 183, 214, 317;
assistance during Indian Mutiny, vol. ii. 293;
gratuitous conveyance of a mail, 350;
reduction in postage to France, 311;
proposed use of tubular conveyance for mail, 338;
universal delivery, 406
Frankland, Sir F., vol. ii. 312
Franklin, Benjamin, vol. i. 8, 12
Franks (Post Office) on newspapers, vol. i. 240;
abuses of, 240, 322, vol. ii. 350;
number of, vol. i. 321;
"Worth to some Mercantile Houses," 355;
abolished, 385, 388;
official franking, 355, 388, vol. ii. 351, 471;
revived, vol ii. 351
Freshwater Bay, vol. i. 146
Frölich, Count, vol. i. 173
Frome, General, vol. i. 221
G
Gaisford, Dean, vol. i. 17
Galt, Mr., vol. ii. 283
Galton, Mr. Tertius, vol. i. 499
Galton, Captain, vol. ii. 236, 251
Galway line of mail-packets, vol. ii. 183
Gardiner, Mr., vol. 1. 375
Garibaldi, vol. ii. 417
Garrick trained in careful habits, vol. i. 34;
his house in the Adelphi, 223
Gas, streets lighted by, vol. 1. 42, 160
Germany, vol. i. 253, vol. ii. 252, 259, 318, 484
Gibbon, Edward, "the tyranny of lawyers," vol. i. 9;
"independence, that first earthly blessing," 67;
"a man designed to think as he pleased, &c.," 213;
his early training, 217
Gibson, Mr. Milner, vol. ii. 198
Gilchrist, Dr., vol. i. 174
Gladstone, Mr., budget of, 1854, vol. i. 436;
budget of 1853, vol. ii. 214;
R. H.'s promotion, 215-225;
Government railway loans, 279, 280;
Savings Banks, letter to Mr. Sikes, 332;
newspaper postage, 345-347;
foreign and colonial postage, 372;
support to R. H. and confidence in him, 362, 376, 377, 379;
R. H.'s resignation, 378;
R. H.'s high regard for him, 379;
pension and parliamentary grant to R. H., 388-391, 399;
treasury minute, 391, 411;
R. H.'s letters to him, 384, 393, 399;
his letters to R. H. 362, 400;
description of R. H.'s services and plan, 411, 419.
Glasgow "family boxes," vol. i. 302;
testimonial to R. H., 442;
R. H.'s visit, vol. ii. 148;
Bridewell, 171;
mails, 273, 337;
library, 308;
pneumatic tubes, 340
_Globe_, The, vol. ii. 120
Godby, Mr., vol. ii. 191, 194
Gordon, Mr., vol. i. 395, 416
Gouger, Mr., vol. i. 216
Goulburn, Mr., vol. i. 350, 439, 446, 455, vol. ii. 5, 14, 33, 358;
motion against Penny Postage, vol. i. 351;
"talks nonsense," 436, 490;
Chancellor of the Exchequer, 441, 443;
suspends Mr. Baring's minute, 452;
appealed to by R. H., 454, 456-459, 463-465;
does not answer R. H.'s letters, 465;
dismisses R. H., 466-471;
publishes garbled correspondence, 482;
condemns R. H. for publishing the whole correspondence, 485;
excuses his own conduct, 488;
answered by Mr. Baring, 489
Gould, Mr., vol. ii. 268
"Grace Dogger" packet, vol. ii. 312
Graham, Sir James, vol i. 473;
has Mazzini's letters opened ("Grahamizing"), vol. ii. 28;
packet-service account, 238
Granville, first Earl, vol. i. 410;
second Earl, his speech on the parliamentary grant to R. H., vol. ii.
398, 399;
present at his funeral, 431
Grasset, Mr., vol. ii. 93
Graves, Mr., vol. ii. 347
Gravesend, vol. i. 282
Gray, Dr., vol. ii. 29
Greeks at Hazelwood, vol. i. 171, 172
Green, Mr. J. R., vol. ii. 356
Greenock, vol. i. 260, 527, vol. ii. 148
Gregory, Mr., Evidence before Railway Commission, vol. ii. 283;
report on tubular conveyance, 337-339, 489
Grenfell, Mr. P., vol. ii. 17
Grey, Earl, vol. ii. 244
Grote, George, interest in Hazelwood School, vol. i. 172, 173;
a supporter of penny postage, 263, 279
Guarantee, mutual, vol. ii. 307
Guards, mail, vol. i. 161, 453, vol. ii. 89, 257
Guest, Dr., vol. i., 12, 55
Gunboat, French, vol. i. 38
Gunpowder, vol. i. 242
H
Habeas Corpus Act suspended, vol. i. 22, 139;
damned in ignorance, 144
Hagley, vol. i. 62, 97, 134
Hall, Captain Basil, vol. i. 173;
Describes Hazelwood in "Edinburgh Review," 122;
letter to R. H., suggests gummed envelopes, 418
Hampden, John, vol. i. 1
Hampden Club, vol. i. 139
Hamburg, treaty with, vol. i. 382
Hardinge, Viscount, vol. ii. 222
Hardwicke, Earl of, vol. ii. 213, 228, 229, 238, 358;
Postmaster-General, vol. ii. 203;
a disciplinarian, 204, 207;
"two kings in Brentford," 205, 209;
"intends to be Postmaster-General," 206;
dinner party, 207;
peculiar spelling, 210;
patronage, 211;
dislike of "Hill's book-post," 245
Hare, Mr. Thomas, vol. i., 24, 223
Harmony, New, vol. i. 206
Harness, Colonel, vol. i. 452
Harrowby, Earl of, vol. ii. 149
Hatchard, Mr., vol. ii. 190
Hawes, Mr. (Sir Benjamin), vol. i. 483;
interest in Penny Postage, 288;
a member of the Ministry of 1846, vol. ii. 37;
induces R. H. to accept appointment, 41, 216, 461;
R. H.'s letter to, 43, 166, 437
Hayter, Mr. (Sir William), secretary to the Treasury--R. H. and he "get
on swimmingly," vol. ii. 114;
the Sunday question, 114, 117, 118, 121, 154;
learns from R. H. the abuses as to promotion, 184;
forgets his own regulations--R. H.'s letter to him, 299;
Post Office Mutual Insurance, 305
Hazelwood. See School.
Head, Sir Francis, vol. ii. 192
Health of Post Office staff, vol. ii. 302
Henderson, Dr., vol. ii. 29
Hennessy, Mr., vol. ii. 398
Henslow, Professor, vol. ii. 145
Henson, Mr. G., vol. i. 305, 308, 309
_Herald, Morning_, vol. i. 483, vol. ii. 115, 120, 123, 160
Hermit's Cave, vol. i. 169
Herries, Mr., vol. i. 435
Herries, Sir W., vol. ii. 218, 222-224
Herschel, Sir William, vol. i. 58, 497
Highgate, vol. i. 282
Hill, James, "a substantial freeholder," vol. i. 2
Hill, John, tract on "A Penny Post" (1659), vol. ii. 29
Hill, John, a volunteer against the young Pretender, vol. i. 3, 6
Hill, Mr. Alfred; writes an historical sketch of the Post Office, vol.
ii. 310
Hill, Mr. Arthur; a young trader, vol. i. 50;
a young actor and author, 77;
injures his eyesight, 127;
visits the Edgeworths, 160;
his brother's successor in the school, 203;
the Arthur Hill lifeboat, 203;
constant aid to his brother, preface, 234, 292, 487, vol. ii. 99, 111,
116;
his eighty-first birthday, 430
Hill, Mr. Edwin; a night alarm, vol. i. 37;
makes a model forge, 45;
at the assay office, 55;
his courage, 154;
family arbitrator, 187;
a partner in the school, 187;
joins Sir J. Lefevre's society, 210;
helps in the printing machine, 225;
superintendent of stamp machinery, 392, 405;
invents envelope-folding machine, 419;
attestations to his services, 539;
consulted by his brother, vol. ii. 99
Hill, Mr. Frederic, vol. i. 169, 263, vol. ii. 213;
in his boyhood fond of calculating, vol. i. 128;
his great services as an inspector of prisons, 215, and vol. ii. 171;
consulted by his brother, vol. ii. 99;
consults Mr. Cobden, 166;
appointed assistant-secretary to the Post Office, 176, 196;
reforms the system of mail packet contracts, 240, 369-373;
adjusts the salaries of the rural postmasters, 245;
his views on patronage and promotion, 246;
manages the Money Order Department, 253, 463;
his measure for early deliveries, 258;
aids his brother in the more difficult part of his duties, 265;
his able and zealous assistance, 266;
originates the annual reports, 267;
remodels the central office, 268;
his evidence before the Royal Commission on Railways, 283;
introduces contract work, 286;
a supporter of promotion by merit, 301;
draws up a plan for life insurance, 305;
tries to introduce the contract system into the savings banks, 364;
his reward for faithful services, 374;
wishes to employ female labour in the office, 403
Hill, Mr. Howard, his untimely death, vol. i. 8, 14, 195, 203;
his fine character, 196
Hill, Mr. Matthew Davenport, vol. ii. 91, 465;
life of him by his daughters, vol. i. preface xiv.;
describes his father, vol. i. 9, 19, and his mother, 30;
account of the Birmingham riots, 33;
a night alarm, 37;
a young trader, 49;
reforms his father's school, 63, 87, 88;
gives lessons at another school, 64, 65;
advice on a point of law, 86;
goes to the bar, 87, 126;
drills boys for "exhibition day," 91;
writes "Public Education," 103;
discussions with his brother, 105, 106;
lectures on electricity, 134;
defends Major Cartwright, 150;
M.P. for Hull, 220, 240;
introduces his brother to Mr. Parker, 243;
talk with Lord King, 362;
letter on Mr. Baring's offer, 366, vol. ii. 456;
article in "Edinburgh Review," vol. i. 378, 390;
assists his brother on his dismissal, 467, 469, 473, 477
--and in the Sunday agitation, vol. ii. 116, 118;
letter on his brother's illness, 361;
his brother's letters to him, vol. i. 175, 179, 185, 191, 220, vol.
ii. 417;
letters to his brother, vol. i. 176, 367, vol. ii. 417
Hill, Mr. Pearson, vol. ii. 176, 194, 417, 424;
his account of his father's printing press, vol i. 226;
appointment in the Post Office, vol. ii. 191;
improves the mail-bag apparatus, 237;
invents a stamping machine, 331;
his plan for the delivery of circulars, 405, 490;
his marriage, 426