Her Majesty's Mails

William Lewins · 1864 · 435 pages

Her Majesty's Mails

William Lewins185

Many striking examples of the great difference in the cost of the two services are furnished in different Post-Office Reports. For instance:[112] In 1844, a coach proprietor in the North of England actually paid to the Post-Office Department the sum of 200l. annually for what he regarded as the privilege of conveying the mails, twice a-day, between Lancaster and Carlisle. Now the Post-Office pays the Lancaster and Carlisle Railway the sum of 18,000l. annually for the same service. The items of charges for mail-conveyance by railway at the present time--if they could have been known by any means, or even guessed at, by the enterprising post-reformer of 1837--might have had the effect of deterring him from offering his suggestions when he did. Certain it is, that the proposals would have had small chance of success, if those who had charge of the fiscal concerns of the country could have known that the sum which would have to be paid by the Post-Office to railway companies alone, in the year 1863, would not fall far short of the whole amount standing for the entire postal expenses of 1839. In 1842 Mr. Hill left the Treasury, and was thus cut off from all active supervision of his measures. The Post-Office authorities found a friend in Mr. Goulbourn, the new Chancellor of the Exchequer, who was known to sympathise with their views. It had been arranged that Mr. Hill should continue his services for some short time longer in his improvised place at the Treasury Offices. The divergence in the views of the new chiefs and the reformer made his position more and more unpleasant. On his being bowed out of office, Mr. Hill petitioned the House of Commons. The petition--which was presented by Mr. Baring, the ex-Chancellor of the Exchequer--described briefly the Post-Office measures of 1839; his own appointment to the Treasury; the fact of his appointment being annulled; the benefit of the new measures in spite of their partial execution; the obstructive policy of the Post-Office officials; and thus concludes:--

© 2026 erasure lab