On the expiry of O'Neale's grant, the office of Postmaster-General
was conferred upon Henry Lord Arlington, the grant in his case being
for a period of ten years, dating from Midsummer 1667. During the
Commonwealth, Arlington, as Sir Henry Bennet, had been a faithful
adherent of the king while in exile on the Continent, and for a time
was his representative at the Court of Madrid. As a statesman, after
the Restoration, he was held in high esteem by Charles, and is well
known as a member of the Cabal. He was a busy man in the affairs of his
country, and, consequently, was unable to fulfil, in person, his duties
at the Post Office. And so we find that he discharged these duties by
deputies, the two men intrusted in the first instance with the work
being his brother, Sir John Bennet, and one Andrew Ellis. Ellis died in
1672, and in his place was appointed his cousin, Colonel Roger Whitley,
who continued to hold the office of Deputy Postmaster-General till the
close of Lord Arlington's first term in 1677. The precise conditions
of Arlington's grant, as regards rent, are not known. The patent roll
sets forth that the sum of £5382, 10s. was to be reserved to the order
of the king as in previous grants, but that the remaining rent payable
by Arlington was to be determined by a tripartite indenture, of the
same date as the patent, to be executed between James Duke of York of
the first part, Henry Lord Arlington and Lord Berkeley of Stratton of
the second part, and Mary Dowager-Viscountess Falmouth of the third
part. The terms of this indenture have not apparently come down to us.
The third party to the indenture was the widow of Viscount Falmouth,
who fell in the battle with the Dutch off Lowestoft, on the 3rd June
1665, and the arrangement here made was probably with the view of
securing her some allowance. Haydn, however, places Lord Arlington's
rent, in 1674, at £43,000, but we are unable to say from what source
these figures are taken. Lord Arlington's advent to the Post Office in
1667 was marked by measures that were held to be very oppressive by the
staff of that office. This is abundantly clear from letters written at
the period by James Hickes, the senior clerk. He writes to Williamson,
secretary to Lord Arlington, with whom he had intimate relations in
connection with the _Gazette_ business, as follows:--"Many postmasters
are in London, or coming up, in order to their future settlements:
understands his lordship's pleasure to be that they must pay a fine;
and has given reasons therefor to those who applied to him for advice,
so as to prevent hard thoughts of his lordship, and prepare them for
quiet submission." The fine here mentioned is a payment that was
demanded for renewal of employment, something after the plan previously
in vogue whereby the deputy postmasters obtained their places by
purchase. To obtain places by purchase was the common practice during
the reigns of James I. and Charles I. Again Hickes writes about
himself, that he "expects little compassion, notwithstanding all his
services and diligence, if Williamson do not stand firm to him." Then,
upon some interference by Sir John Bennet with the clerks sending
letters or news books post-free, Hickes says that "he would rather
withdraw and live on salt and water," and that he refused to pay for
his own letters or news books. He "told Sir John that the governors
had rather blamed the clerks for not corresponding more with the
postmasters to keep things right, as by so doing a correspondence had
been settled with all parts of the kingdom. Told him there was not a
man in the office who did not deserve continuance and encouragement
instead of reduction of salary, and that such severity would ruin
the office." Sir John, "said he could have 40 officers who wanted
employment. Told him that blades with swords at their sides, and velvet
jackets, would not do the business, as some had proved very rogues and
cheats, and were rooted out.... Sir John said that as his lordship had
to pay a greater rent than before, other things must be improved." He
again writes, that "Sir John Bennett tries to reduce the postmasters
to 20s. a mile, which lowers them from £40 to £20 a year; and that he
makes and unmakes contracts, so that they fear they may be removed at
pleasure. The two porters are reduced from 10s. to 6s. a week, and
are no longer to have 6d. for each express sent to Whitehall; the 30
letter carriers are reduced from 8s. to 6s.... Will do his best, though
told he is designed for ruin when he has served their turn," etc. In a
further letter Hickes writes, that he "will wait upon Williamson and
his lordship shortly, and if no more kindness is shown him for services
done, shall take his leave, and rest upon God. Is hardly dealt with,
as whatever care and pains he takes, it contribrites not a candle,
nor a cup of beer as formerly granted; and the taking away of these
poor petty things is the present reward for the most considerable
and advantageous service done. Writes all this to him, as being the
only person to whom he can unbosom himself." We will add but one more
extract, from a later letter written in Hickes' despair. He intimates a
desire to wait upon Williamson, but he pleads that "his service is so
severe that he has not two hours' rest between the post going out and
coming in, and seldom has half an hour's sleep, by which means he is
becoming decrepid and dropsical." Then he adds, that "he will wait with
patience; and if he die without consideration, it will be a comfort
to know that he has discharged his duty faithfully in all hazards and
hardships."
Incidentally, Hickes mentions in one of these plaintive letters that
his salary as senior clerk was £100 a year. He also indicates that Sir
John Bennet[4] was no favourite with the staff; for he says of him,
that when he comes into the office "it is with such deportment and
carriage that no king can exceed."
These letters afford a fair idea of the measures which were being
applied to the service under Lord Arlington's Postmaster-Generalship.
The paucity of information left to us of the internal working of the
Post Office in its earlier years, is doubtless due to the fact that
the books in use under the various Farmers of the Post were removed at
the termination of each farm, being the property of the farmer, and
in most cases these books have disappeared with time. Fortunately,
however,[5] one set of books remains, that referring to the period
from 1672 to 1677, when, under Lord Arlington, Colonel Roger Whitley
was Deputy Postmaster-General. These books contain the correspondence
with the deputy postmasters throughout, the country, and afford much
interesting information as to the state of the posts in that limited
term.
Colonel Roger Whitley, as appears by the _Historical Manuscripts
Commission Reports_, was either the individual of that name who, when
Governor of Aberystwith Castle, had to surrender to the Parliamentary
troops, or a son of that person. He was, at anyrate, an attendant upon
King Charles II. during his exile, and, in the semblance of a Court
then maintained, he held the position of a member of the Privy Chamber.
A letter is extant in which the king begs from Whitley the loan of
£100. At the Restoration, Whitley received the appointment of Harbinger
to the King, and now the appointment of Deputy Postmaster-General. It
is not improbable that he was a Cheshire man, from the facts that his
daughter was married to Sir John Mainwaring of Peover, in that county,
and that Colonel Whitley himself, or his son, was Mayor of Chester in
1693. During the time of Whitley's Deputy Postmaster-Generalship, he
represented Flint in the House of Commons. Andrew Marvell says of him
that by the farm of the Post Office "he got a vast estate."
In some loose sheets prefaced to the first volume of Whitley's office
letter-books, referring apparently to the year 1667, is a schedule
showing a rearrangement of the salaries of the deputy postmasters in
the country, when Lord Arlington assumed the farm of the Post Office.
The fragment of the document on the opposite page shows how the matter
was arranged.
For the renewal of their deputations under the new Postmaster-General,
the postmasters were mulcted in a fine or payment equal to one
year's salary as adjudged to be proper to the several offices, the
rate allowed being about 30s. per mile per annum. Now, as the mails,
as a rule, at this time travelled three times a week, the rate per
single-journey mile carrying the mail works out at about twopence and
one-third of a penny.
It is worthy of note, that on the admission of the deputy postmasters
to office they were required to pay, in addition to the fine above
referred to, fees for their deeds of deputation amounting to £3, 10s.
These fees went to the clerks at head-quarters, among whom they were
divided, as a payment, apparently, for the drafting and preparing the
necessary papers. This must have been a heavy tax upon the postmasters,
the sum mentioned being equivalent in value to at least £14 of our
present money.
CHESTER ROAD.
+-----------+------------+-----------------------+-----------+-----------+
| Miles | | | | Salaries |
| (up and | | | Old | according |
| down). | Stages. | Postmasters' Names. | Salary. | to Derby |
| | | | | Road. |
+-----------+------------+-----------------------+-----------+-----------+
| | | | £ s. d. | £ s. d. |
| | | | | |
| 10 Single | London | J. Bennett | 30 0 0 | 10 0 0 |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| 10 and 10 | Barnet | Walter Yorke | 40 0 0 | 20 0 0 |
| 10 " 10 | St. Albans | Sarah Simpson | 40 0 0 | 20 0 0 |
| 7 " 10 | Dunstable | Robert Joxon | 40 0 0 | 17 0 0 |
| 13 " 7 | Brickhill | John Younger | 40 0 0 | 20 0 0 |
| 10 " 13 | Towcester | Andrew Snape | 40 0 0 | 23 0 0 |
| 14 " 10 | Daventry | Valentine Suckborough | 40 0 0 | 24 0 0 |
+-----------+------------+-----------------------+-----------+-----------+
--------------+---------------------------+------------+
Salary | | |
according to | | |
judgement. | | Fines. |
| | |
-------------+----------------------------+------------+
£ s. d. |{ Viz. for riding, £15 } | £ s. d. |
|{ per annum, and £6 } | |
21 0 0 |{ per annum for sending } | 21 0 0 |
|{ his horse each } | |
|{ night to the office. } | |
30 0 0 | | 30 0 0 |
30 0 0 | | 30 0 0 |
25 10 0 | | 25 10 0 |
30 0 0 | | 30 0 0 |
34 10 0 | | 34 10 0 |
36 0 0 | | 36 0 0 |
-------------+----------------------------+------------+
The letters of Roger Whitley on subjects relating to the appointment of
deputies, to the riding work, the packet services, and to his dealings
with the public, are interesting in many ways. They are somewhat
curious in language and style, and show a quaint relationship existing
between himself and his subordinates. To the country postmasters,
Whitley ordinarily subscribed himself, "your very loving friend," "your
assured loving friend," and the like. The salaries of the postmasters
were usually arranged after negotiation by letter, and, in many cases,
by a subsequent visit from a friend on behalf of the postmasters.
Whitley rather discouraged visits from the deputies themselves on the
subject of salaries, and the object of the friend's visit is not very
clear.
While Lord Arlington had reduced the scale of pay in 1667 to something
like 30s. a mile per annum, the scale was further reduced under Whitley
to about 20s. a mile. The postmasters were not entirely remunerated
by salary. They enjoyed privileges not allowed to other innkeepers,
which brought them profits and immunities. They had the old monopoly
of providing horses for persons riding post, at the fixed rate of 3d.
per mile, with 4d. per stage for the guide. They were exempt from
serving in the militia and in certain other public capacities, and
they frequently had relief from the quartering upon them of soldiers.
This exemption did not, however, apply to the regiments of Guards.
In some cases, also, they were favoured with a couple of _Gazettes_
weekly, out of which they probably made something by attracting
thereby customers to their inns, or by circulating them in their towns
and districts. From these various sources did the postmasters receive
a return for their services to the posts. Beyond this, however, the
riding work brought travellers to their houses; and if the wages paid
by the Deputy Postmaster-General were not high, the deputy postmasters
probably "took it out" of the public. At anyrate, Colonel Whitley had
himself some experience of high charges, as appears by a remonstrance
made by him to one of his postmasters, as follows:--"I much admire to
have a bill of charges sent after me (for I use not to leave any place
till these be defrayed), especially since my son paid all that could
be demanded, which was judged by all that had skill in these affairs
to be extreme (or rather unreasonably) dear. Mr. Davies, I made use of
your house out of civility and kindness to you, but did not expect
your exactions. I could have had better entertainment, on better terms,
elsewhere. Consider well of it; and as I have always been civil and
just to you, so let me receive the like from you."
The postmasters were very dilatory in sending up their moneys to
the head office, and admonitory letters were daily sent out urging
upon them greater punctuality. These varied in terms from a gentle
reminder to the veriest threat. The following is a fair specimen of
the latter:--"By yours of the 8th you promise to pay the money due for
last quarter when you receive this quarter's accounts. I am resolved no
man shall be employed by me (in this office) that does not clear every
quarter immediately after it is due. Wherefore, I once more require
you to send up your money upon the receipt of this letter, or I will
endeavour to get it some other way, and find a more punctual man for
the employment.--Your loving friend."
Whitley was greatly troubled, or had every reason to be troubled, by
the very frequent delays of the mails. It would be tedious to cite case
after case, and more interest will be found to lie in the terms of
Whitley's letters, two of which run as follows:--
* * * * *
"To Mr. Sadler, Postmaster of Marlborough.
"I can no longer endure your shameful neglect of the mails. I have
grievous complaints from Bristol of the prejudice they receive thereby;
and find that it is 7, 8, 9, or 10 hours commonly betwixt you and
Chippenham, which is but 15 miles, and ought to be performed in 3
hours. This is a most abominable shame and scandal to the office; and
I tell you, Mr Sadler, in few words (for I will not any more trouble
myself to write you on the subject), that if this be not speedily
amended, but the like abuse be committed again, you may expect a
messenger for you to answer it before those that will be impartial
judges and just rewarders of such shameful neglects. Be advised to look
better about your business, or you will suffer for it."
* * * * *
"To Mr Ballard, Monmouth.
"I am tormented with complaints from the gentlemen of Glamorgan and
Monmouthshires, of the neglect and slow coming of the mails to these
parts. I observe the labels, after they have passed Gloucester,
commonly omitted to be dated, that it may not so easily be discovered
where the fault lies. I have writ so often on this subject that I am
weary of it; and admire you should be so little concerned, when it is
evident you are so far from performing your duty as you ought, and are
obliged to do. I acknowledge to have much respect for you, but cannot
suffer the public to be wronged by anyone I employ. I pray let this
neglect be amended, or it will make a breach; consider well of it."
The threat held out in the former of these two letters of a messenger
being sent for the postmaster was really a serious affair, for it meant
the taking the postmaster into custody, and his being probably involved
in expenses to the extent of £20 before he could obtain release.
It might be supposed that the farming of the posts was a most
unbusinesslike way of carrying on the work of the public conveyance
of letters. But there is another side to the question; and arguments
are not wanting that, for the development of the service, the farming
was, in some respects at anyrate, a very satisfactory arrangement. The
work was committed to the hands and control of a single individual, who
was unfettered by Treasury or other restrictions, and who was bound
to find a sum sufficient for the payment of his rent. He was further
under the influence of a personal interest in the way of securing a
profit to himself, and as a consequence, while his tenure lasted, he
put forth his utmost endeavour to make his office useful to the public,
and to extend its scope. Further, upon each increase of rent came a new
incentive to fresh exertions in the way indicated, and the growth of
the Post Office was steady and rapid.
Whitley was a man of a very conciliatory nature: his letters attest
it. He was always anxious to please the public. In disputes over
irregularities, and matters relating to alleged overcharges, he was
most indulgent. In a letter of apology to Dr. Bathurst, President
of Trinity College, Oxford, he writes:--"I will not permit him (the
postmaster) to dispute, but submit my interest to your pleasure, being
assuredly safe therein. I have ordered him to wait on you, and not
only to do you right in this matter, but conform with your demands in
all things; and I humbly beseech you to have that goodness and charity
for me as to believe me of another composition than to be guilty of
such low unworthy practices, but own me as one that is ambitious
of the honour of being esteemed, your," etc. To the postmaster of
York he writes in a strain advising like conciliatory dealings with
the public. "I cannot imagine," says he, "why you should not think
yourself sufficiently empowered by my last and former letters to do
right to the merchants in all their just demands; nay further, to
gratify them sometimes in little disputes (though they be in the
mistake) rather than exasperate and disoblige gentlemen that support
the office by their correspondence. If you reflect on my last letter,
you will find that I refer it to you and them to do with me (almost)
what you please.... I hope when you acquaint these gentlemen with
what I write, it will give them satisfaction, especially seeing I make
them chancellors in their own case." In a like matter of dispute at
Norwich, Whitley writes to the postmaster:--"I know their own ingenuity
will prompt them to consider the usefulness of this office to their
commerce, and how we work and travail night and day for them.... I
never found, in all my experience, that I lost anything by submitting
to the justice and civility of conscientious men." A similar strain
of patient forbearance towards the public runs through the whole of
Whitley's correspondence.
Whitley was at all times alive to the interests of the office and
himself, by giving additional facilities for the sending of letters.
Writing to the postmaster of Oxford, he says:--"In my opinion, the
College butlers may be useful to you in receiving and dispersing
letters, etc., and I wish you would be in a good correspondence with
them; and let your letter-carriers call there for letters, to be sent
to London, immediately before the post goes away, as well as to bring
letters to them when the post comes in." It was seen that a field for
extended business presented itself at Tunbridge Wells. Accordingly
Whitley seizes the opportunity and makes the necessary arrangements,
giving the postmaster advice and instructions as follows:--"I have
ordered the mails to go from hence sooner than ordinary, that the
letters may be at Tunbridge early in the morning; wherefore fail not
to be there ready to receive them, and then make all possible haste
with them to the Wells, that the gentry may have them before they go to
their lodgings." This arrangement would doubtless appeal to the love
of gossip in the frequenters of the Wells, who would naturally have
some rivalry to receive the most recent _items_, and to discuss them
while they lingered over the morning cup. The post-master was further
ordered to call every post-day "on Mr. Miles, confectioner on the Walk,
who will deliver you what letters he receives for London or elsewhere."
During the season the posts ran daily between London and Tunbridge.
The by-letters occasioned uneasiness to Whitley, because he was
entirely in the hands of the postmasters for the accounting of them. He
thus defines them:--"By by-letters I mean all letters of your stage and
branch sent by your agents or boys, to any place but London or beyond
it." The revenue from this class of letters was a matter of arrangement
between the Deputy Postmaster-General and the country postmasters, the
former finding it a convenient plan to farm this correspondence to
the postmasters. Whitley distrusted the returns of by-letters made by
his agents, as the following letters to Postmasters show:--"I wonder
at your great mistake in your by-letters; the account you give me
amounts to much more by the year, and yet I have good reason to believe
(I speak it without any disrespect or reflection on you) that I have
not account of the fourth part of your stage. Your servants may be
negligent, and boys abuse you; however, I am at the loss; but resolve,
where I find any injustice of that kind hereafter, to sue the bond, and
doubt not but some postmasters will be so kind and honest as to give me
true information." Again, "I find a great decay in our by-letters of
late. I hope you are a person of more integrity than to design (by this
means) to beat down the price. Do not do it; I have other measures to
go by; you will but wrong yourself as well as me. You do not offer the
third part of the value. However, to avoid suspicion, the trouble of
accounts, and possibly suits at law, I will let you have it for thirty
pounds the year (Hull gives fifty), and take the benefit of by-letters
into the bargain. You know I could have other chapmen." Colonel
Whitley may have had painful experience of law suits, for he expresses
himself to one of his postmasters in the following strain:--"Being
forced by Mr. Vaughan's ill-payment to have recourse to the law to get
my money, I cannot meet with a sincere attorney, but they juggle and
will not serve the writ, pretending they cannot; wherefore, relying
much on your kindness and ingenuity, and having no other way to get my
right, I send the enclosed writs to you." He gives directions as to the
serving of them, and adds, that "it will be an extraordinary kindness
to me."
On the 5th July 1673, Whitley wrote his views on the subject of
conformity to the postmaster of Belford (Mr. Carr) in the following
safe terms. In some respects the letter is amusing. It runs:--"I think
it not only convenient but necessary for every postmaster to conform
to the late law about the sacrament and oaths; not that it will anyway
concern me or this office, only in the safety and wellbeing of those
that relate to it. I pray consult the law itself, being too nice a
point for me to give my opinion of, and the judges themselves are shy
in the matter; but on the one hand you are sure not to err, therefore
that is the safest way." The postmaster of Ware having, by a like
omission, got himself into trouble, is thus written to:--"I am sorry
to hear that information is given into the Exchequer of your neglect
in not taking the oath of allegiance and supremacy and the test lately
ordained by Parliament.[6] I fear this may be troublesome to you, it
being unsafe for anyone to bear an office that will not conform to the
laws established."
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 4: Andrew Marvell says of Bennet that he "got of the poor
indigent Cavaliers' money £26,000, and other wayes near £40,000 more."]
[Footnote 5: The property of Sir Philip Mainwaring, Bart., of Peover
Hall, Knutsford, by whose courtesy they have been consulted.]
[Footnote 6: The declaration required was in the following terms:--"I
do believe that there is not any transubstantiation in the Sacrament of
the Lord's Supper, or in the elements of bread and wine, at or after
the consecration thereof, by any person whatsoever."]