THE POSTMASTER-GENERAL AND
THE PERMANENT STAFF
If the Post Office were a private or joint-stock company, the office of
Postmaster-General would be an anachronism; the Secretary would be the
Chairman of the Company, and the Assistant Secretaries would be the
Board of Management. I do not pretend that this is an accurate estimate
of what would happen if the Post Office were disestablished, but there
is no doubt that the duties of the Chairman and Board of Management in a
business undertaking correspond very closely to those performed by the
Secretary of the Post Office and his Assistants.
The State, however, controls the Post Office, and the necessity
therefore arises for the supreme head of the Department to be a member
of the Government of the day, and under this arrangement the position of
the Secretary resembles somewhat that of the general manager of a
company.
Now the part which a Postmaster-General takes in the control of
the Department depends very largely on his own inclination and
strength of character. He is a bird of passage; the changes and
chances of parliamentary life bring about a rapid succession of
Postmasters-General, and the office is often regarded in
Government circles as merely a stepping-stone to higher things.
The Postmaster-General has to defend the policy and conduct of his
Department in Parliament, and he has to pilot through the House in
which he may be sitting all measures relating to the Post Office.
He has magnificent opportunities, and as he is the largest
employer of labour in the country, his policy on all industrial
and working-class questions is a matter of national concern.
We often hear the question asked, “Does a change of Postmaster-General
make any difference to the Post Office?” A change certainly makes
sometimes a great difference to the staff. When Mr. Sydney Buxton became
Postmaster-General in 1905 he immediately took a step which has had
far-reaching consequences. He announced that he would recognise
officially the associations of the employés, and he was prepared to deal
with grievances of the staff through representatives from the
associations. That may or may not have been a step dictated by political
considerations; but my point is that it was done by the personal action
of the Postmaster-General. Moreover, the effect of this policy has been
to set an example to other large employers of labour in the country, and
in dealing with the grievances of their servants many have followed the
lead of the Post Office.
A change of Postmaster-General may also affect considerably the public.
In modern times Mr. Fawcett and Mr. Raikes have been the
Postmasters-General who perhaps made their influence felt most at the
Post Office and in the country. Mr. Fawcett brought to his duties a
knowledge of finance and a keen interest in Post Office problems. He
infused a certain enthusiasm for reforming schemes into the
administrative staff, and the years of his rule were busy and fruitful
of results. He possessed ideas of his own as to what the Post Office
might be to the nation, and his premature death was regretted by none
more keenly than by Post Office servants.
Mr. Raikes, with a personality less pleasing than that of Mr. Fawcett,
was a man of great independence and force of character, and he depended
less for his policy on the permanent staff than has been the case with
most Postmasters-General. He was confronted with many difficulties
arising out of the dissatisfaction of large numbers of the staff; but he
faced all questions with courage and determination, and he too left his
mark on the Department. It is a striking fact that Mr. Fawcett and Mr.
Raikes, who were indefatigable workers, and who both went through times
of great official anxiety, should have died in harness. I do not wish to
imply that all Postmasters-General who survive their term of office are
weak and indifferent chiefs; but these two instances show the enormous
strain which is in modern times put upon a Minister who attempts
seriously to grapple with the multifarious questions and anxieties of
his Department. It must always be remembered, too, in considering what
is expected of a Postmaster-General, that he usually comes to his duties
without any experience of the technical work and routine of the
Department, and if he takes his work very seriously he is perpetually
being obliged to acquire knowledge at very short notice. He has not only
to convince Parliament of the rightness of his policy; he has also to
argue the matter out with the permanent officials, who know all the
ropes, and can obstruct his schemes by their superior knowledge of the
practical difficulties.
Mr. Chamberlain in speaking on one occasion, when Secretary of State for
the Colonies, to a body of Civil Servants, said: “You are aware that the
human race is divided into two great categories—those who are members of
the Civil Service and those who are not. But even the Civil Service may
be subdivided into those who are permanent and non-political and those
who are political and temporary, who come like shadows and so depart. I
have a shrewd suspicion that you could do without us. But I have an
absolute conviction that we could not do without you.”
These words apply exactly to the relations of a Postmaster-General to
his staff. And the staff would reply to such words that while they do
the work whether their political chief is present or not, he has
frequently the capacity to inspire them, and he has the public
reputation which confers distinction on the Department. He can at least
modify the dull rule of the permanent official.
Many distinguished men have held the position of Secretary of the Post
Office. Of these no one was more indefatigable or rendered greater
services to the Department than Sir Francis Freeling in the early years
of the nineteenth century. To him was chiefly due the speeding up of the
mail coach service. The acceptance of the position by Sir Rowland Hill
gave a distinction to the office which it has never since lost. He was
followed by Sir John Tilley, who was the last Secretary to be appointed
from the staff of the Post Office. The men who have been appointed since
his day have usually come from posts outside in which they have made a
name. Sir Arthur Blackwood was Secretary for sixteen years, and he came
from the Treasury. The Treasury always keeps a watchful eye on the Post
Office, which is a revenue-earning Department, and the somewhat
extravagant outlay on the purchase of the telegraphs was not at all
pleasing to the Treasury. So Sir Arthur Blackwood, steeped in Treasury
traditions, was sent to watch over the Post Office. He was known outside
the Department as a religious enthusiast and an active philanthropist.
He was a man of fine presence and great personal charm—he had been known
in society in his youth as “Beauty Blackwood,” and though in matters of
religion he gave the impression of being extremely rigid and unbending,
he was as an official exceedingly wily and diplomatic. The late Sir
Spencer Walpole, who succeeded him, had previously been Governor of the
Isle of Man; he was a writer, and had published a _History of England
from 1815_.
The Assistant Secretaries have included several men who were not only
able administrators, but who were known outside the walls of the office.
In another chapter I have spoken of Mr. Frank Ives Scudamore, C.B., who
was one of the most remarkable men who ever served in the Post Office.
Mr. Herbert Joyce, C.B., was an Assistant Secretary, and he wrote a
_History of the Post Office_ which is the standard work on the subject.
Mr. F. E. Baines, C.B., was also an able administrator. He rendered
valuable services during the period of the transfer of the telegraphs
and in the organisation of the parcel post. He was an official with
ideas, and he possessed what is rare in a permanent official, the
quality of enthusiasm. He has published two books, _Forty Years at the
Post Office_ and _On the Track of the Mail Coach_, which are important
contributions to the history of the Post Office. Mr. H. Buxton Forman,
C.B., who was long associated with the foreign business of the
Department, is known also as the editor and biographer of Keats, and as
the author of several works dealing with the Keats and Shelley circles.
The Comptroller and Accountant-General is the keeper of the purse at St.
Martin's le Grand. He is practically the financial adviser of the
Postmaster-General, and his Department keeps the accounts.
Centralisation is the great feature of Post Office business, and in
nothing is this more marked than in financial matters. The postmasters'
accounts throughout the whole of the country pass through the office,
and the money needed to carry on the work is advised to the postmasters
by the Accountant-General's Department. The balance-sheet of the Post
Office is a formidable document. Take, for instance, the year ending
31st March 1910. The receipts from all sources amounted to £23,625,710,
while the expenditure was £19,845,746, and the net revenue was therefore
£3,779,964. Bear in mind that these huge sums are made up for the most
part of very small items and daily accounts, and you will have some idea
of the work performed in the Accountant-General's Department. All
salaries and pensions are also paid from this office. Mr. Herbert
Samuel, the Postmaster-General, wittily described the work of this
branch of the Service at a departmental dinner in 1911:—
“The Department was always there, watching the flow of money through the
Post Office system, ready to pounce on anything wrong, just as certain
corpuscles in our blood were ready to deal with any foreign substance in
our systems. In fact, the staff of the Accountant-General's Department
were the guardian corpuscles of the Post Office system, and without them
the Post Office could not be maintained in health and efficiency. Over
200 millions of public money passed through the hands of Post Office
officials, and it was the duty of the Department to see that it did pass
through. (Laughter.) Every year some 20 millions of money were spent on
Post Office work, and it was their duty to see that those 20 millions
were properly spent. Of course the Accountant-General's Department
itself cost a large sum of money, and he was not sure that it would not
be cheaper to be cheated. (Loud laughter.) It was the duty of their
Department to throw upon the scaring proposals of imaginative men—not
the cold light of reason, that was done by the Solicitor's
Department—(laughter)—but the even colder light of arithmetic. (Cheers
and laughter).” I quote from a report in the _Civilian_.
The Engineer-in-Chief is a man whose duties have developed enormously
during recent years. The telegraph and the telephone demand mechanical
genius and considerable scientific attainments. A huge army of engineers
is maintained to keep the telegraph and telephone plant in proper
condition, and to organise new lines. The position of Engineer-in-Chief
has been held by Sir William Preece and Sir John Gavey, and both men
have big reputations in the scientific world. Sir William Preece has
done much to popularise the knowledge of the working of electricity by
his writings.
The Surveyor's establishment is responsible for the supervision of the
post offices in town and country. Each Surveyor is responsible for a
certain district of the country, and he has to arrange for the
periodical visitation of every post office in his visit, and to have the
accounts checked. The Assistant Surveyor is “the bus jumper” of the Post
Office. The Surveyor also deals generally with the organisation of the
service in his part of the country. Anthony Trollope, whom we have
mentioned in a previous chapter, was a Surveyor of the Post Office in
Ireland for many years.
I have passed rapidly in view the various posts held by men who are the
chief official advisers of the Postmaster-General. But of course there
is a Solicitor to the Post Office, and in a business undertaking which
is constantly entering into new contracts, and dealing with claims from
the public, the position is no sinecure.
There remain the big clerical establishments of the Head Offices for me
to deal with. How can I best describe their functions in the service? In
the early part of the nineteenth century, a letter was addressed to the
Secretary of the Post Office by the Lord Salisbury of that time in these
words:—
“Pray send me word by the Bearer whether the Place in my disposal in
the Bye Letter Office is fit for a Gentleman's Son.
SALISBURY.
“_20th Feb. 1820._”
The Secretary replied:—
“MY LORD,—I consider the place in the Bye Letter Office to be fit for
a Gentleman's Son, if that Gentleman be poor and wants to provide for
his children. At all events it is an appointment for none but the son
of a respectable man.
“I have the honour to be, &c.,
“F. FREELING.”
This rebuke to the haughty Cecil was richly merited, and Sir Francis
Freeling deserves credit for standing up for his office. His _esprit de
corps_ was aroused, and he was not the man to remain silent when
discredit was thrown on the Post Office. But the doubt as to the fitness
of the Post Office service for the sons of gentlemen exists to-day among
people who associate the Post Office only with the sticking on of stamps
and the delivery of letters. And even in the eyes of the Treasury the
Post Office has suffered because of its commercial associations, and the
great spending departments, such as the War Office and the Admiralty,
have usually received more honours and attention.
In the old days, when places in the Civil Service were filled by the
nominees of peers and politicians, there was no competition to enter the
Post Office so long as positions could be found in West End offices.
There was usually an uncomfortable suspicion in the candidate's mind
that the Post Office required a full day's work from every man. There
was a Commission of Revenue Inquiry in 1823. One of the Commissioners
questioned the Secretary of the Irish Post Office thus:—
“It appears one of the surveyors, Mr. Bushe, avowedly does no duty at
all. When he received his office, did you or not consider him as
receiving an office with certain duties attached to it?”
“Certainly.”
“Did you ever call upon him to perform his duty?”
“I did indeed call upon him to do his duty once, and his answer was that
he would never do any, for that he held his office during good
behaviour, and was determined therefore to do nothing wrong.”
“Did you suggest to him that doing nothing at all was perfectly
consistent with good behaviour?”
The Secretary's answer was evasive, and we are forced to the conclusion
that he thought Mr. Bushe's position reasonable. It appeared also that
though Mr. Bushe performed no duties, he exercised his privilege of
sending his letters free. Mr. Bushe might have had a distinguished
career in some of the other public offices at that date, and he might
have been rewarded with a title on retirement. But even in 1823 he was
out of place at the Post Office. It was evidently no place for a
gentleman's son.
The clerical establishment of the Post Office consists almost entirely
of men and women who have entered the service through open competition.
A limited number belong to the Higher Division of the Service, having
passed the examination for that body, but the majority of men clerks
have entered the service through the Second Division, and if they have
attained to higher posts it has been by seniority or merit. Promotion is
slow, and while human nature in the higher officials remains in an
imperfect state, advancement does not always fall to the most deserving.
The conflicting qualifications of seniority and merit have their own
times and seasons for application. At one time seniority is emphasised:
at another time merit: on the whole the man who possesses both has the
best chance.
The Civil Service is not a field which provides scope for a variety of
different characters and temperaments. Forty-nine out of fifty posts are
of a more or less routine character, and the men who succeed are often
those whose minds move with ease in a groove, or they are men who, by
long practice and severe discipline, have trained their minds to act
with the finish and regularity of a machine. Some of the most successful
men in the lower branches of the Service, when promoted to positions
where some initiative and diplomacy are required, are obvious failures.
The very name “permanent official” is with some people a byword for
red-tapeism, obstinacy, circumlocution, and want of imagination, and
this is often due to the fact, that owing to their training in the lower
branches, many of these men belong to the type who make excellent
servants but indifferent masters. Officialism enters into the very
tissue of their being. They have allowed it to grow upon them until it
has sucked up every trace of healthy variety or originality they may
have formerly possessed, and though they be promoted to high places and
obtain large salaries, they too often bring the service to discredit in
the eyes of the public. It is not because they do not possess sufficient
zeal: it is rather because they are righteous overmuch.
Some time ago there was a discussion in the _Grand Magazine_ entitled
“The Secret of Success in the Civil Service,” conducted by men such as
Sir George Kekewich, Sir Algernon West, Sir Spencer Walpole, Lord Welby,
and others. All these men had held high positions in the Service, and
their opinions on “the secret” ought to be of some interest to us. But
there was no agreement among them. Sir George Kekewich suggested that if
you are “socially desirable” everything is open to you. Sir Henry
Primrose thought that intelligence is useful, if it is accompanied by
good health and industry. Sir Spencer Walpole, with doubtless pleasant
recollections of the ways of postal agitators, suggested that a capacity
for expressing themselves marks successful Civil Servants. Lord Welby
advised perseverance and the patience to wait, while Sir Francis Mowatt
recommended trustworthiness and the will to succeed. And he was the only
one of the writers to suggest that the confidence of a man's fellows is
an important item. His words are wise, and I quote them: “He must
determine that his colleagues shall regard him as a good fellow. It is a
term not easy to define, but we all know what it means. A good fellow
does not give himself airs, is courteous to all he works with or comes
in contact with, helps and encourages his juniors, and sets his face
against all that he knows to be bad form.” Let us take off our hats to
Sir Francis Mowatt. We have no patience with those who talk official
platitudes in retirement.
Sir George Kekewich was, however, the only practical man of the whole
bunch. He said that “jobbery will never be eliminated from the Civil
Service, nor the most efficient men placed at its head, nor the way
opened for merit from the very bottom to the very top, until there is
established a proper Board of Promotion.”
In a previous number of the same magazine was published a series of
explanations of “Success in Literature” by prominent literary men, and
it was interesting to notice how candid and genuine and modest were the
confessions compared with those of the distinguished Civil Servants. The
Civil Servant, even when he is a retired official, seems unable to use
his pen without experiencing the necessity to be cautious and
commonplace. We can almost hear him saying to himself: “The Civil
Service, as we know it, is an organised hypocrisy. But we must not give
the show away: we must talk to the public as we used to talk to our
subordinates: we must uphold the supremacy of the copybooks.”
As far as I can make out from the admissions of the leading lights of
all the professions in this country, the Civil Service is the only
career which secures advancement from the very bottom to the very top,
as the reward of a simple observance of the law of right and wrong. The
lawyer, the artist, the literary man, and the doctor, all admit in these
discussions that a certain degree of artfulness, social influence, and
eagerness to take advantage of other folks' weakness, are conducive to
success in the different professions; it is only when we come to examine
the claims of the Civil Service that we find leading authorities
unanimous on the point, that stern and unbending uprightness is the sole
road to success. It is an astonishing claim, and it almost takes our
breath away. The air men breathe in the Civil Service seems too light
and rare to support human life. We are on the mountain top when the
Civil Service chiefs talk to us. Even the Church confesses to a wise
respect for private patronage, and curates are advised to marry into
bishops' families. But nothing helps men in the Service except diligent
attention to their duties. It was stated by an official witness before a
parliamentary commission that there was nothing, except, perhaps, the
intervention of a member of Parliament, to prevent a sorter rising to be
chief of his Department. The road exists, and to walk along it requires
only ability and perseverance. But the most that we can fairly say about
such a matter is that the thing is possible, but the immense numbers who
make up the Post Office staff render promotion into the higher ranks
accessible only for the few. The influences which keep a man down or
send him up, irrespective of merit, are as strong in the Post Office as
they are in other business undertakings. For one thing, the age limit
does not allow sufficient time for the exercise of those qualities of
patience and perseverance, which we are told in books on Self-Help are
necessary in order to attain our ambitions.
But it is easy to be cynical and to make jokes on the subject of
promotion in the Civil Service. The fact remains that in spite of all
disadvantages the clerical work of the Post Office is performed in a
very efficient manner. There is, perhaps, less wastage of time and force
in the Post Office than in any other public institution. And the Post
Office clerk has many compensations. He has definite hours of work; he
has security for leisure time and security of tenure; he has a good
annual holiday; and above all he has the promise of a pension. In some
departments his work is extremely interesting; in others it is
abominably dull. And good work is always appreciated by his chiefs and
by the public. In these commercial days we define the word
“appreciation” only in terms of £ _s._ _d._; we are in danger of losing
the full meaning of the word. The fact is, every decent man craves for
appreciation by his fellows; it is the noblest thing about him; and a
man who professes to be superior to this craving, and demands only
payment in hard cash, has the experience of centuries against him. For
this reason the _esprit de corps_ of the Post Office service is most
marked. Lord Rosebery some years ago endeavoured to make “efficiency” a
battle-cry for the nation; but so far as the clerical work of the Post
Office is concerned he was preaching to the converted. The Post Office
man simply smiled as the self-righteous man does in church when he
thinks how admirably suited the sermon is to his sinful neighbours. But
when self-righteousness is the act of a body and not of an individual it
is called _esprit de corps_, and becomes not a sin but a virtue.
If the high officials of the Post Office have included men who are known
in other than Civil Service circles, this is equally true of the
clerical establishment. Among them have been authors, artists,
sculptors, and musicians. “The extra subject” may or may not help them
in their official careers; it certainly enables them to sustain with
greater philosophy the routine and the disappointments of office life.
Mr. Alfred Parsons, R.A., was a Savings Bank clerk early in his career;
so was during many years Mr. W. W. Jacobs, the author of _Many Cargoes_
and _Sea Urchins_.
A growing proportion of the permanent clerical staff consists of
women. At present they are restricted mainly to the account work of
the Department; they keep the ledgers of the Savings Bank, they do
work in the Money Order and Postal Order offices, and in the
Accountant-General's Department. Their scales of pay are as a rule
considerably lower than those of the men clerks, and hitherto they
have been employed by the State mainly on account of economy. But the
women have great ambitions; they have an association, the chief demand
of which is equal pay for men and women, and entrance to the Service
by the same examination. The advance and success of the woman's
movement have had a great influence on the ambitions and hopes of the
women clerks, and female employment in the Post Office is probably
entering on a new phase. The economical advantage to the State is
already not so marked as it used to be, as the commencing salaries of
large numbers of the male staff have been reduced, and there is one
department at least where the women in their earlier years of service
are paid higher salaries than are large numbers of the men. If this
latter policy is pursued it means the beginning of a revolution and
the upsetting of the old-fashioned social order. The women do their
work excellently, and they only ask to be allowed to establish their
claim to be able to perform the highest duties that are given to
clerks in the Post Office. The women also, it will be seen, are
becoming possessed by _esprit de corps_, the note of the permanent
staff of the General Post Office.
I have only one word to say in conclusion. _Esprit de corps_ is a virtue
I have claimed for the permanent staff; but this virtue, like all
others, has its defects, and one of these is the state of mind which it
induces in an official, to look at his Department as an organisation
which has already done a maximum amount of good for the public. If you
mildly suggest that much remains to be accomplished, he is apt to regard
your remark as a want of confidence in himself. It is this attitude on
his part which often explains the bad reputation which the term
“permanent official” occupies in the minds of the public.