L E GRAND 
 
 TOME SECOND. 
 
IDe.. 
 
 1893 THE FOLDI-PEZZOLI COLLECTION AT MILAN 993 
 
 Their action is distinguished by great spirit, and their forms are well 
 drawn, though rather coarsely painted. In the background is a 
 blue sky crossed by bars of white cloud. On the base of the throne is 
 this inscription : 
 
 EX DEO EST CHAKITAS ET IPSA DEUS EST. 
 
 Although Italian pictures form the chief attraction of this 
 Oallery, it includes a few early Flemish and Grerman works of no 
 mean excellence. Among these, the most important is an altar- 
 piece in the Sola Neva (23). It is divided into five compartments. 
 The central panel is occupied by a picture of the Annunciation. In 
 the side compartments on the right hand are painted St. Oregory 
 and Anthony the Abbot, St. Anthony of Padua, and St. John the 
 Baptist. In those on the left appear the two St. Catherines, St. 
 Francis of Assisi, and St. Jerome. It will be observed that the 
 design of this interesting work is far better than its execution, and 
 some allowance must be made for the restorer’s brush. But the 
 character of the details and the delicate handling of the landscape 
 background—to say nothing of the unrepaired cracks, or rather 
 open joints (of which there are two extending down the whole length 
 of the picture)—are presumptive evidence of genuineness. The 
 draperies are quite in accordance with the taste of early Flemish 
 art, brilliant in colour, crisp and somewhat ‘ papery ’ in fold, but care¬ 
 fully studied. The faces are not remarkable for physical beauty, but 
 realise strong individuality of expression. 
 
 This necessarily condensed description of the principal pictures 
 in the Poldi-Pezzoli collection has been based on notes made during 
 a recent visit to Milan. Perhaps even a brief record of its attractions 
 may induce other English travellers to devote a spare morning to 
 the examination of an interesting, but rarely frequented. Gallery. 
 
 Chaeles L. Eastlake. 
 
994 
 
 THE NINETEENTH CENTURY 
 
 June 
 
 POST OFFICE 
 
 ^PLUNDERING AND BLUNDERING^ 
 
 Six years ago I published in the Times a list of sixty postal reforms 
 and grievances, and since that period no less than thirty-seven of 
 these have been carried out or remedied. 
 
 It may be worth while to continue this process of purging the 
 postal administration of its failings ; and I therefore propose to make 
 public a series of arbitrary decisions by the postal authorities, expound¬ 
 ing and enforcing the regulations in the Post Office Guide. These 
 regulations, tolerably severe in the original text, are made infinitely 
 more oppressive by the official interpretation of them. In the hands 
 of the Secretary to the Post Office and his staff they are as elastic and 
 full of traps as were the statutes against Dissenters in the hands of 
 Lord Jeffreys and his bench of Justices. Perhaps the most distin¬ 
 guishing characteristic of the decisions alluded to is their consistent 
 meanness towards the public, which is even more striking than the 
 ingenuity displayed in whittling down every postal privilege to an 
 irreducible minimum, and hampering every branch of the service 
 with provisoes, vetoes, warnings, and conditions that may trip up the 
 unwary purchaser of a stamp. 
 
 If a man would travel by railway he buys a ticket, takes his seat, 
 and is smoothly whirled away to his destination; but if he would 
 have a letter, newspaper, or parcel transmitted it must be weighed, 
 classified, inscribed with certain particulars, tied up, or left unfastened 
 in a special fashion, and so forth, in accordance with some thirty or 
 forty pages of rules (in small print), not one word of which can be 
 ignored without imminent risk of fine and confiscation. The web of 
 petty ordinances spun by the official spiders at St. Martin’s-le-Grrand 
 is marvellous for tenuity and symmetry, but it is ill calculated to 
 withstand the broom of reform. We are above all things a business 
 people : we pay handsomely for our post office; we look to have the 
 service made as cheap, efficient, and accessible as possible. Hence it 
 continually happens that some indignant Briton, smarting under the 
 scourge of one or other of the innumerable ‘regulations,’ remon¬ 
 strates with the local postmaster, who, blandly indexible, makes the 
 unhappy complainant feel that he is regarded very much as a refrac- 
 
1893 POST OFFICE ‘PLUNDERING (& BLUNDERING^ 995 
 
 i 
 
 CP 
 
 0 
 
 o 
 
 % 
 
 tory tramp in a casual ward. As a rule the sufferer’s wrath finds 
 harmless vent in a naughty word or two ; but sometimes he is weak 
 enough not to know when he is beaten, and he ‘ writes to the Secre¬ 
 tary.’ Such a rash man is then tantalised with dilatory official 
 circulars until he insists on a categorical reply. Upon this his 
 attention is called to one of the regulations, which is quoted for his 
 information, and the local postmaster is pronounced to have done no 
 more than his duty. 
 
 In a recent article Sir Arthur Blackwood wrote that ‘ the British 
 public, seen through Post Office spectacles, is a mean public; ’ and> 
 after loftily ‘ referring to the fact that he and his colleagues are 
 ‘ officers of the Crown,’ he mentions, incidentally, that ‘ the Secretary 
 receives a lot of complaints,’ reprimands the complainants for being 
 dissatisfied with ‘ the usual stereotyped answer that it shall receive 
 consideration,’ but finally, in a burst of candour, observes, ‘ I do not 
 say that we are by any means immaculate, or incapable of improve¬ 
 ment.’ 
 
 At first sight it may appear strange that the public, after paying 
 the department so lavishly that the latter nets an annual profit of 
 between 3,000,000^. and 4,000,000^., should be accused of shabbiness. 
 The explanation lies in the fact that the officials and the public look 
 upon the service from opposite points of view. The unsophisticated 
 taxpayer, as already pointed out, regards it as an organisation which 
 he pays to perform certain work for him. The Secretary appears 
 to think that the Post Office still exists by virtue of the royal 
 prerogative, and poses rather as a benevolent despot than a dutiful 
 retainer. 
 
 It is easy to understand the feehngs of such a magnate when ‘ a 
 lot of complaints ’ come pouring daily into his office from aggrieved 
 outsiders, who pooh-pooh the prerogative, and, not content with 
 such privileges as are graciously conceded to them in the Post Office 
 Guide, actually have the audacity to ‘ ask for more.’ Such conduct 
 he can only stigmatise collectively as ‘ meanness, ’ and his customary 
 repHes to such canaille are worthy of the Grrand Monarque in his 
 palmiest days. 
 
 A large number of these snubbed and baffled petitioners have in 
 the last resort brought their grievances to my notice, in the hope^ 
 perhaps, that the machinery of Parliament might be made available. 
 It will probably be sufficient, however, to direct pubhc attention to a 
 few of these complaints, with a view of discovering on which side the 
 ‘ meanness ’ hes. I propose to select a few representative cases from 
 letters which I have received during the last month or two. 
 
 Let us first take the refusal of the postal authorities to transmit 
 duplicates or imitations of type-writing at the book-post rate. As is 
 weU known, it is possible to print off in a few hours, by Hthography, 
 or the mimeograph, a large number of copies of any type-written 
 
 
996 
 
 THE NINETEENTH CENTURY 
 
 June 
 
 document. The Post Office refuses to carry these copies at the halt- 
 penny rate, on the ground that it cannot distinguish them from 
 original type-written letters. I have laid before the department a 
 plan for protecting the revenue against any such fraud, but of course 
 in vain. My correspondent writes— 
 
 The Edison Mimeograph Company, London, E.C. 
 
 By the regulations of the Post Office, handwriting on the mimeograph will go 
 by book rate, but the imitation of the type-writing the authorities refuse to pass. 
 
 I think that the time has now arrived, seeing that the type-writer is getting so 
 much used, when the authorities could well undertake to distinguish between 
 matter written on a type-writer and matter duplicated by either the printing press 
 or the mimeograph. 
 
 Any intelligent lad can distinguish one from the other. If an 
 absolute safeguard be required, the Post Office authorities have only 
 to require that the copies shall be fastened together, to facilitate com¬ 
 parison. 
 
 Again, I have long urged the department to permit the transmis¬ 
 sion through the post of any card whatever of the regulation size, 
 bearing an adhesive halfpenny stamp. By adopting this plan the 
 Post Office would save many thousands a year, since they would be 
 free from the necessity of providing the material of post cards, the 
 manufacture of which costs 283^. per million. The halfpenny stamps 
 only cost 161, a million. 
 
 I may next give a typical instance of what I may call (borrowing 
 from Sir A. Blackwood’s vocabulary) ‘ Post Office meanness.’ Our 
 postal authorities, not content with an annual profit exceeding 
 3,000,000^., have contrived to turn an honest penny by clipping the 
 post cards which they supply for transmission to foreign countries. 
 To clip a post card—the poor man’s only vehicle of communication 
 with his friends in the colonies—is to my mind hardly less hateful 
 than to clip the coin of the realm. The British post card is sold 
 to us (or was until lately, I am told) composed of 22J- per cent, of 
 clay; and it is at once the smallest and dearest sold in the Postal 
 Union. 
 
 The late Postmaster-Greneral wrote to me that the department 
 had received no complaints on this subject, and that the large cards 
 cost more for carriage. I replied— 
 
 House of Commons. 
 
 Dear Sir James Fergusson,— . . . The impression is generally prevalent that 
 •any complaint to the secretarial department at St. Martin’s-le-Grand will merely 
 produce one or more of those courteously-worded but inflexible printed circulars 
 with which we are all so familiar. To obtain redress or reform public opinion 
 must be brought into play. . . . 
 
 Even if the weight of the old and favourite card were to affect the payments 
 for carriage to any notable extent, they might surely have been brought down 
 preferably by employing a lighter material, or, better still, by inducing foreign 
 governments to revise their scale of transit charges. In the case of a post card 
 
1893 POST OFFICE ^ PLUNDERING (Sc BLUNDERING^ 997 
 
 the writing space is so limited that any diminution of it largely impairs the useful¬ 
 ness of the card. 
 
 • J. HEira^iKER Heaton. 
 
 If the public hits upon any device for accelerating the delivery of 
 correspondence, not bearing the official imprimatur, it is promptly 
 tabooed. Thus a gentleman writes to me from the Carlton Club— 
 
 Formerly I used regularly to send a stamped letter to the railway station and 
 a penny with it, which was handed to the guard, and the guard took it straight on 
 to his destination. Now a regulation has been issued against this, and I have to 
 pay twopence to the railway authorities, besides the penny on the stamped letter. 
 
 In France and Germany in all through trains there is a railway letter box. 
 Why cannot we have such a convenience attached to all our trains in this country ? 
 
 I would go further and ask, why should we not have a letter box 
 on every tram-car and omnibus, to be'cleared at the terminus ? 
 
 Another complaint needs no elaboration. It appears that the 
 Post Office authorities regard the fragment of an old handbill, used for 
 a newspaper wi'apper, as ‘ a communication in the nature of a letter." 
 Hitherto people have used such scraps for the sake of economy. The 
 department discourages such thrifty notions, and requires a new, 
 special wrapping sheet in all cases. 
 
 Next we meet with a piece of brilliantly red tape. An official 
 letter announces that a person may not drop an important letter into 
 the bag of a postman who has just emptied a pillar box. He must 
 march to the next pillar box a yard in front of the postman, and drop 
 in his letter just before the latter comes up. The actual facts of this 
 case were that a gentleman asked a country postman returning from 
 his round to take a letter for him to the post office, as there 
 was no messenger available. Of course, in view of the regulation, 
 the postman declined to run any risk. I cannot see why a postman 
 should not allow his bag to be used, on emergency, as a collecting 
 receptacle for letters. 
 
 Another subject of frequent complaint appears to be the levying 
 of excessive ‘ porterage" charges for telegrams, when the addressee 
 lives outside a certain radius. In some country districts, peopled by 
 farmers, this charge amounts to a denial of the privilege of 
 telegraphic communication with markets, and the outer world 
 generally. It has been proved to me that a boy will often earn far 
 the Government perhaps 10s. for ‘ porterage ’ in a morning, while his 
 weekly wage only amounts to 5s. 
 
 A correspondent has recently recalled my attention to the 
 rapacious charge (against which I have so often protested) of 2d. 
 instead of IcZ. on the receipt for a telegraphic message, the cost of 
 transmission of the message itself being only sixpence, while a penny 
 stamp is sufficient on a receipt for 100^. 
 
 The Post Office will not use its despotic power to soften and 
 refine the manners of the people, and anything in the nature of 
 
998 
 
 THE NINETEENTH CENTURY 
 
 June 
 
 politeness introduced into a paper sent by book post is pounced upon 
 as a pretext for a fine. Such a document must contain only tbe 
 skeletons of sentences; it must demand a debt with brutal frankness, 
 and convey descriptions of quality and indications of route with 
 military brevity and mathematical precision. The subjoined is a 
 case in point:— 
 
 Deptford, London, S.E. 
 
 Dear Sir,—Some few years ago we 'hQ,di printed at the foot of our invoice forms 
 the words, ‘ The above sent to your esteemed order per . . . ’ The Post Office 
 authorities objected to our invoice being sent at circular rate, on the ground that the 
 sihaYQpi'inted words were regarded as of the nature of a letter. We could put simply 
 ‘ sent per . . (which we now do), and it would be allowed to go at circular rate. 
 
 Too often when Parliament encourages the department to adopt 
 a real reform, much of the expected benefit to the pubhc is inter¬ 
 cepted by some pedantic requirement or unconscionable extortion. 
 Thus, when the prmlege of the telegraphic remittance of money was 
 tardily conceded it was made to bristle with charges and commissions. 
 A gentleman writes— 
 
 Smethwick Hall, Staffordshire. 
 
 Dear Mr. Heaton,—I had occasion to make a remittance of 3/. the other day, 
 and paid a commission of and a telegraph charge of Qd. (I 5 . 2d. in all). I found, 
 after three days’ trouble, however, that the expense of the remittance was further 
 increased by a separate and distinct telegram having to be sent to the payee, advis¬ 
 ing that the amount is lying to be claimed at the post office. This brings the 
 cost of the remittance of 3Z. up to Is. Sd., which seems extortionate. 
 
 When the great towns are sucking the population from our rural 
 districts, and we are paying 30,000,000^ a year to the foreigner for 
 dairy and garden produce which British cultivators might supply, it 
 would seem good policy to furnish exceptionally cheap postal facilities 
 to our own countrymen. I have proposed an ‘ Agricultural Parcels 
 Post ’ rate of IcZ. a pound, but the postal officials exhaust themselves 
 in finding objections to it. A gentleman (farming 4,000 acres) has 
 written to me, ‘ I believe that, if properly worked, an Agricultural 
 Parcels Post would do more than anything to make small holdings 
 profitable.’ And others point out that when the present rates have 
 been met the price secured for the articles posted does not cover the 
 cost of production. A collection of these letters will be found in the 
 Mark Lane Express for the 18th of May, 1891. 
 
 The subjoined communication irresistibly recalls the story of the 
 conscientious Scottish innkeeper who would only supply small glasses 
 of punch on Sundays, sternly replying to all remonstrances, ‘We 
 dinna sairve lairge glasses on the Sawbath : ’— 
 
 6 Wedderburn Road, Hampstead, N. 
 
 Dear Sir,—The post office is open all Sunday for the sale of stamps, &c. I 
 asked there this morning (Sunday) for a packet of reply post cards, and was told 
 that ordinary post cards were sold there on Sundays, but not reply post cards. 
 
 It is impossible to contemplate with patience the effects of the 
 
1893 POST OFFICE ^PLUNDERING & BLUNDERING^ 999 
 
 regulations respecting the registration of newspapers. In order that 
 a publication may be ‘ registered,’ and thus become transmissible by 
 post at the cheap halfpenny rate, two Seventeenth-century conditions 
 must, amongst others, be complied with. 
 
 ^ 1. ‘ The publication must consist wholly or in great part of poli¬ 
 tical or other news, or of articles relating thereto, or to other current 
 topics, with or without advertisements. 
 
 2. ‘ It must be printed and published in the United Kingdom, 
 and in numbers at intervals of not more than seven days.’ 
 
 Both of these absurd rules, based upon a legislative enactment, 
 would long ago have been abohshed, with the newspaper stamp duty, 
 the tax on paper, and other hateful imposts, if the departmental 
 chiefs had only taken a firm stand with the Treasur}'’. 
 
 The effect of them is not only to confer valuable bounties on the 
 proprietors of daily newspapers—no man objects to that—but to 
 place a formidable obstacle in the path of those who disseminate 
 useful and entertaining information in larger proportion than 
 accounts of current events. A paper consisting wholly of market 
 prices is in effect subsidised, while a religious, scientific, or educa¬ 
 tional periodical is fined at each appearance. Many proprietors of 
 periodicals actually pad their columns with bald discussions of ‘ cur¬ 
 rent topics,’ so as to become qualified for registration. Thus the 
 editor of the British and Colonial Druggist says— 
 
 You may, perhaps, be amused to hear that when special issues of this journal 
 take place we are obliged to increase the weight of each copy by about two ounces, 
 in order that it may go at the newspaper rate. 
 
 Again, Messrs. Oscar Sutton and Co., of Preston, say— 
 
 It is necessary to take out the tiny tissue paper pattern that is given as a 
 supplement once a month with the Queen to prevent surcharge. It is stated on 
 the front page of the Queen : ‘ Postage without pattern, one halfpenny; with pattern, 
 or hd. 
 
 Sir Arthur Blackwood, in the article referred to, is particularly 
 severe towards those members of the public who object to some of 
 the estabhshed charges for telegraphic transmission. The following 
 communication from a person well acquainted with the subject will, 
 
 1 fear, once more stir up his wrath :— 
 
 If a member of the public addresses a telegram to, say, Harrison, Coleman 
 Street, London, E.C., the name will be traced in the directory and the message 
 delivered. If it were addressed Harrison, 3 Coleman Street, E.C., and Harrison’s 
 were at 2, it would be charged Qd. for ‘ amended address,’ though well known. 
 
 It has been pointed out how jealously the officials watch for any¬ 
 thing resembling ‘ a communication in the nature of a letter ’ on the 
 cover of a newspaper. In one case brought to my knowledge the 
 matter of fact details, ^ Published every Saturday. One penny. Offices: 
 
 2 Bridge Street. Works : Bankside, Darwen,’ were printed on the 
 
1000 
 
 TRE NINETEENTH CENTURY 
 
 June 
 
 cover; and for bearing this announcement, intended for the eyes of 
 all mankind, each newspaper was pronounced liable to full letter 
 postage. Surely absurdity could hardly be carried farther. When 
 a man pays letter rate, he pays for the privacy of his communication; 
 there is no other consideration for the extra charge. In this case 
 there was no attempt at concealment, and the matter printed was an 
 essential part of the contents. The fine cannot be regarded as a 
 punishment intended to keep the address on the cover free from 
 other matter; for it is distinctly divided from the space reserved 
 for the address by two ruled lines; and, moreover, the sender of a 
 newspaper is already permitted to write or print on the cover ‘ a 
 reference to any page of, or place in, the newspaper.’ It seems un¬ 
 reasonable that one may write on the cover, ‘ See round seventeen of 
 “ Great Fight,” top of p. 4,’ or, ‘ See Gladstone’s peroration, bottom 
 of p. 5,’ and not, ‘ Published every Saturday. One penny.’ 
 
 Again, the ‘ name and address of the sender ’ may, according to 
 the Post Office Guide, be inscribed on the cover. In this case the 
 publisher was the sender, yet he is not allowed to add his address. 
 Into this trap many an unlucky publisher must have fallen. 
 
 Only yesterday (March 15) I received the following— 
 
 31 Parliament Hill Road, N.W. 
 
 Sir,—I recently received a copy of the Scottish Leader newspaper for which I 
 was charged letter rated 3c?. because the halfpenny stamp was affixed partly to the 
 wrapper and partly to the newspaper. The Post Office authorities maintained 
 that this closed the newspaper against inspection. This does seem a very vexatious 
 regulation, and I pray you to urge its abolition. 
 
 Another draconic ordinance is the one providing that double the 
 deficiency shall be exacted from the receiver of an insufficiently paid 
 letter. Being unable to punish the real offender, the sender, the 
 postal officials visit his negligence on the innocent receiver. So the 
 Arab in the story, having been beaten by his master, revenged him¬ 
 self by kicking a stray dog, which, being afraid to retaliate, bit a 
 passing child. There can be no justification for levying more than 
 the actual deficiency, as is done in Canada and other colonies. 
 
 Let a victim be heard. 
 
 I can’t be expected to spend an additional \d. on a foreign post card to demand 
 this overcharge of hd. from the party who has let me in for it, particularly as she 
 is my wife’s aunt, who sends me the formal announcement of her daughter’s 
 approaching marriage with a young captain. 
 
 I should, perhaps, willingly pay the post office 2^c?. for this interesting news, 
 but why 5c?. ? 
 
 We now approach the subject of the Express Letter Service, 
 which was forced upon the postal authorities by public opinion, and 
 which they undertook with about as much grace and cheerfulness as 
 a bucking horse displays while being saddled and mounted. Not 
 only are the porterage charges, as in the case of telegrams, far too 
 
1893 POST OFFICE ^PLUNDERING & BLUNDERING^ 1001 
 
 high in comparison with the wages paid to the messengers, but the 
 service is hampered with the necessity of filling up a complicated 
 form, writing certain words on a particular part of the cover, and, 
 above all, attending at some post office to hand the message over the 
 counter. This last provision is puerile and vexatious. Why cannot 
 an express letter be stamped with a special crimson stamp, or a 
 • stamped crimson envelope used, and posted in the nearest pillar box 
 overnight, so as to be delivered the first thing in the morning, as in 
 every country wherein common sense governs the postal administra¬ 
 tion ? I append a pregnant note from a correspondent:— 
 
 England. I sent express letter, addressed to City. Found nearest post office 
 did not forward express letters, tiad, of course, to take it to one that did, which, 
 was some considerable distance away. Had to pay I 5 . postage. 
 
 Belgium. Express letter would only require to be posted in the first bus 
 passing. Postage, ^d. 
 
 Among the regulations which seem to have been ingeniously 
 devised for the sole purpose of worrying trade is that fixing the 
 minimum of the pattern or sample post at lii. A book packet 
 weighing two ounces may be sent for but a sample weighing 
 two ounces costs \d. An enterprising manufacturer, who desires to 
 scatter broadcast small shreds of linen as patterns, has thus to face 
 an expenditure for postage of nearly four guineas per thousand 
 shreds. He naturally shrinks from submitting to such extortion, 
 and refrains from pushing his trade. 
 
 It is to be regretted that the postal authorities have fixed so high 
 a charge as twopence for the registration of a letter. Out of the 
 total of 1,767^ millions of letters posted last year only 12,000,000, 
 or 1 in 417, were registered. With a penny fee this number would 
 be at least trebled, and the heavy loss in stolen postal orders, to say 
 nothing of the temptation to the employees, would be done away 
 with. 
 
 If there be one direction in which, by general consent, the 
 authorities have neglected their duty, it is in the postal service of 
 rural and especially outlying districts. From all directions complaints 
 pour in of the neglect with which country residents are treated. 
 Letters take a day to reach them from London, while London letters 
 reach Paris or Brussels in eight hours. There are but one delivery 
 and one collection a day—always at the most inconvenient hours. 
 Thus I know of one case in which the outgoing post starts twenty 
 minutes before the incoming one has arrived, so that nobody writing 
 to that village can expect a reply until the next da}^, or third day. 
 It is unwise to add to the disadvantages of provincial life. We all 
 lament the crowding of country folk into the congested centres of 
 population; and here is the Post Office doing its best to drive the 
 remaining population of our hamlets and farm-houses into the 
 towns. 
 
 VoL. XXXIII—No. 196 3 X 
 
1002 
 
 THE NINETEENTH CENTURY 
 
 June 
 
 There is, moreover, a growing tendency in the postal administra¬ 
 tion to neglect the less remunerative branches of the service. It 
 seems to be an established rule, for instance, that remote and sparsely 
 peopled localities should not be supplied with a telegraph office 
 unless the householders will guarantee the department a certain sum 
 per annum, and the consequence is that nobody who wishes to keep 
 in touch with the markets or to feel the pulse of trade wiU reside in 
 such districts. Such a policy intensifies the discomforts incidental 
 to residence in out-of-the-way places, keeps away capital, and drives 
 the labouring population into the towns in search of work. Here 
 are a few words from a country rector about this matter:— 
 
 Ayering Rectory, Stroud, Gloucestershire. 
 
 ^Ve have a population of 894, mostly within a mile of our village office, and 
 yet we have to send a distance of three miles for a telegram message, a savings 
 bank, or a money order, while our own post office, close at hand, could afford us 
 all these needed facilities. 
 
 The Secretary of the General Post Office requires a guarantee of 28/. before he- 
 will grant us a telegraph office. 
 
 One of the most obstinately persistent postal perversities is the 
 dead set made at all kinds of ‘ halfpenny business,’ as it is elegantly 
 called. This is probably connected with the Secretary’s mistaken 
 belief that there is a loss on all such business. Not content with 
 refusing to Englishmen the privilege enjoyed by foreigners of send¬ 
 ing any card of the proper size through the post with a halfpenny 
 stamp on it, the authorities have drawn up a bewildering list of forty- 
 six different charges for post cards, the smallest being three farthings 
 for a single card. The term ‘ halfpenny post card ’ is, in fact, a mis¬ 
 nomer in this country; our Post Office knows of a three-farthing 
 post card (the smallest and dearest in the world), but nothing so 
 vulgar as a halfpenny can be tolerated. History repeats itself. When 
 postage stamps were introduced, the haughty clerks of the depart¬ 
 ment formally remonstrated against the indignity of being required 
 to sell these tiny adhesive labels, at a penny each, across a counter,, 
 like any common grocer or draper. One would have expected this 
 wealthy administration, whose thousands of croupiers are raking in 
 gold for it by millions, would disdain to wring an extra farthing 
 from a poor man or woman applying for a post card. But, as we all 
 know, a commercial corporation has neither a nose to be pulled nor 
 a conscience to be pricked. 
 
 The following letter calls attention to another example of the 
 mischievous effects of Post Office blundering. It will be seen that, 
 owing to the excessive charges made for the conveyance of parcels 
 over small distances, trade is diverted from small country towns to 
 the metropolis, and the postal revenue is, on the whole, a loser. My 
 correspondent’s pathetic picture of the half-ruined tradesman seeking 
 half-bricks, not to throw at his persecutors, but in order to make his 
 
1893 POST OFFICE ‘PLUNDERING & BLUNDERING^ 1003' 
 
 parcels more ponderous, and so defeat the regulations, ought to touch 
 the hearts of the tyrants at St. Martin’s-le-Grrand. Here is his 
 letter :— 
 
 I am a tradesman in a country town which is the centre of a large agricultural 
 district. Our customers in agricultural districts are widely scattered—say six, 
 seven, or more miles in each direction. 
 
 Supposing a customer of mine wants a particular article which can he got either 
 from a local tradesman or from London; a 7-lb. parcel would cost a shilling in 
 coming from London. In this case the railway company would get 55 per cent, 
 of the shilling, the remainder going to the Post Office. If the customer sent to the 
 local tradesman—say, six miles—it would cost a shilling, just the same amount as 
 from London, but the Post Office would get the whole shilling. This is, how’ever, 
 not the only difficulty, for the customer would receive the parcel from London as 
 soon as he would from the local tradesman. 
 
 A postman said that if I would make it (my parcel) over 11 lbs. weight with a 
 brick or stone he would take it for threepence. Lately, however, an inspector has- 
 been here and given strict orders that all parcels under 11 lbs. must go through 
 the post. 
 
 ANffiy should tradesmen be put to the trouble and annoyance of having to seek 
 bricks and stones to over-weight parcels ? AVe are handicapped in the race with 
 large centres, like London, Manchester, &c. Uniformity of rates, as of anything 
 else, is very beautiful in theory, but does not always work so well in practice, and 
 this I venture to suggest is a case in point. Are the Post Office people the masters- 
 of the public, or are they servants of the public ? I think it ought not to be a 
 very difficult thing to adopt a local rate for short distances. 
 
 It should be possible to transmit postal orders from one part of 
 the Empire to another. This reform, which is urgently needed in 
 the interests of trade, and of the poorer classes here and in the 
 colonies, seems to be highly obnoxious to the postal authorities. 
 The Colonial Governments would willingly agree to adopt a uniform 
 type of postal order, such as is used throughout the United Kingdom. 
 There is no great difficulty in the matter, for we already receive from^ 
 and pay postal orders to at least seven British possessions, including, 
 India. I may add that British orders are payable at Malta and 
 Gibraltar. I should like to point out also that, while it costs only a. 
 penny to remit ten shillings from Hong Kong, India, or Newfound- 
 land to England, it costs sixpence to remit ten shillings from 
 England to Hong Kong, India, or Newfoundland. 
 
 There is one common feature in all the diversified petty tyrannies 
 practised by the Post Office on the public: they all tend to swell the 
 postal revenue. The dodge exposed in the next missive is particu¬ 
 larly neat, and specially profitable. 
 
 My servant yesterday at Charlbury post office asked for a postal order for 3^, 
 They said they had none, and persuaded her to take one for 2s. and one for H., 
 and pay poundage, thus gaining As it was t/ieir fault, not hers, ihe<' 
 should either have given her two for I 5 . 6cl. each, or, at any rate, not chaiped 
 more than Id. This is not the first time this trick has been played there. 
 
 A correspondent calls my attention to another grievance. The 
 
1004 
 
 THE NINETEENTH CENTURY 
 
 June 
 
 Post Office charges for the despatch of parcels to India Scl. per 
 pound, and to Australia 9cZ. per pound, while the shipping agents 
 only charge 3cZ. per pound. The only possible explanation of such 
 an excess charge is that the Post Office would rather not be 
 troubled with parcels for the colonies, although it is worth the while 
 of private firms to advertise for the carrying of such j)arcels. 
 
 In yet another instance are our officinls lagging behind the age. 
 I allude to the unnecessarily high charge made for commission 
 on foreign and colonial money orders of small amount. The 
 smallest fee which the department condescends to accept is 6d., 
 which covers the transmission of a sum not exceeding 21. Now it fre¬ 
 quently happens that a person residing in this country wishes to order 
 a, newspaper or other small article from a foreign country, or some 
 place in the colonies ; or he may wish to ask a question and prepay 
 postage on the reply. He has to pay in commission six times the 
 price of the desired newspaper, or if he would buy a sixpenny maga^ 
 2 ine the commission increases the cost of it about 100 per cent. 
 The effect of this fleecing is to kill small trade of the description 
 alluded to, and to place a further obstacle in the way of the circula¬ 
 tion of the best colonial and foreign literature in this country. That 
 it is sheer rapacity which prescribes these heavy fees is proved by the 
 simple fact that very much lower—in fact, quite fair and reasonable— 
 rates are charged by France in such cases. ' 
 
 F. M., Boulogne, writes :— 
 
 Fancy some one in England, requiring an answer to a letter, having to obtain 
 a post-office order for ^d. and to pay If I sent you bs. from here it would 
 cost me 6 fr. 30 plus 10 cts. 6 fr. 40 = 5*’. \^d. 
 
 One cannot help sympathising with the irritation of the com¬ 
 plainant who next steps forward. In order to get a post card into an 
 envelope, with a view to enclose it to a correspondent for a reply, he 
 cut off' a little of the margin, and the officials pounced on this act of 
 ^ mutilation ’ as an excuse for fining the recipient \d. (the letter 
 rate). Any complaint would, of course, merely produce a printed 
 formal letter, referring to regulation No. 2 on the subject of post 
 <jards, which forbids any cutting of a post card. But what right 
 have the officials to issue such a regulation ? After they have sold 
 the post card it becomes the purchaser’s property, and one fails to 
 «ee why he cannot trim off the ends and so reduce the size of it 
 before posting it. It is absurd to pretend that uniformity of size and 
 shape is essential in the case of a post card any more than of an 
 •envelope; and envelopes, as we know, are of the most diversified sizes 
 .and fantastic patterns. Moreover, there are already two different sizes 
 of post cards, the inland and the foreign. To cap all, we have only 
 to remember that cards bearing communications in identical terms 
 will be carried by the Post Office for a halfpenny each, though of 
 (fifty differejDit .shapes and sizes, while the size of the official post card 
 
1893 POST OFFICE ^PLUNDERING & BLUNDERING^ 1005 
 
 must not be altered. The only possible inference is that there exists 
 at St. Martin’s-le-Grand a fanatical hatred of ‘ halfpenny business/ 
 as low, common, unremunerative, &c., and this is why I dwell on what 
 may at first sight appear a minor grievance. But who has not ex~ 
 perienced the annoyance of finding that he has no envelope at hand 
 large enough to hold a post card, which the authorities will persist in 
 issuing of the old-fashioned oblong shape, as if determined that it 
 shall not fit the modern square envelope ? 
 
 My friend writes— 
 
 I paid the \d. and sent the post card so marked to the General Post Office, 
 saying that I did not know there was any rule against cutting a post card, and 
 that if there was it ought to be expunged, as what harm can it do to the post card. 
 Post Office, or postal revenue ? 
 
 The recent attempt to patch up the postal order system will only 
 make the rent worse. Postal orders are fast displacing money orders 
 for the transmission of small sums. Thus in the last ten years the^^ 
 annual commission on money orders has sunk from 217,000^. to 
 130,000^., while that on postal orders has risen from 44,000L to 
 nearly 229,000^. The one drawback is that the public will not take 
 the trouble to fill up postal orders, or to keep particulars of them, 
 and consequently thieves still tear open and destroy large batches of 
 letters in order to obtain blank postal orders, just as the diver 
 destroys hundreds of oysters to secure half a dozen pearls. The wise¬ 
 acres who control these matters would remedy the evil by inflicting 
 additional penalties on careless persons for neglect to fill in the 
 names of the payee and the paying office. They hope thus to 'pre-- 
 vent the public from posting or transmitting blank postal orders from 
 hand to hand, instead of buying a fresh postal order for each trans¬ 
 action. Now, inasmuch as the Post Office has the use of the money 
 paid for the order during several days, and a small paper currency^ 
 while not affecting the banks, is of great service to the public, this 
 is by no means a generous policy. But the true policy, evidently, is 
 to adopt a safer method of transmission. 
 
 This may probably be found in the Continental system of the 
 ‘ Mandat-Carte,’ which has proved so successful in Switzerland and 
 Germany. The transmitter purchases a post card, on which spaces 
 are marked to be filled in with the name of the payee, &c., and a 
 short message. He then hands it over the counter with the amount 
 to be transmitted, and the clerk gives him a receipt. The letter- 
 carrier who takes the card to the payee also takes the money, and 
 obtains a receipt, so that the transaction is complete, and no risk is 
 involved from first to last. 
 
 Some time ago I presented to the then Postmaster-General a 
 memorial, signed by 210 Members of Parliament, asking that the 
 hour, as well as the date of collection, &c., might be stamped on all 
 postal matter. This is done, with much advantage to the interests 
 
1006 
 
 THE NINETEENTH CENTURY 
 
 June 
 
 of business, in several British colonies and foreign countries, and was 
 formerly done in England (in 1818). The postal authorities, how¬ 
 ever, refuse to make this concession, the reason of their refusal 
 doubtless being that it enables the public to trace, check, and con¬ 
 trol the movements of correspondence—in other words, to bring 
 home unerringly to the officials any negligence of which they may 
 have been guilty. 
 
 Another case of hardship to a poor man and meanness on the 
 part of the Post Office was this : On the 30th of September last M. 
 bought two halfpenny newspaper wrappers from the Post Office for 
 \^d. He found he had no use for them, and wishing to send 
 a letter he cut the two halfpenny stamps from the wrappers and 
 pasted them on it. This was against postal regulations, and the 
 receiver of the letter was fined 2d. —viz. a penny postage, a penny 
 fine—and, in addition, the postal authorities stamped over and 
 •destroyed the two halfpenny stamps, for which the sender had paid 
 the Government \\d. 
 
 jMr. E. A. Phipson, Selby Oak, Birmingham, also writes— 
 
 It really requires a lifetime to find out all the tricks wliicli tlie ingenious 
 ■officials of the Post Office take such pains in devising to entrap the innocent 
 .public. Only to-day I discovered that if a letter is sent in a newspaper wrapper 
 ■the embossed stamp does not count. 
 
 \ 
 
 E. P. A. writes— 
 
 Another mean trick has been played by the postal authorities at St. Martin’s- 
 le-Grand in excepting post cards from the new regulation for free redirection. Why 
 •on earth should the Post Office have such a spite against post cards, which might 
 pay better than anything else, if not so ignorantly hampered and restricted ? One 
 card (mind) costs \d., not ^d., if one has not change. 
 
 At this point I propose to summarise under various heads some 
 miscellaneous complaints and suggestions which have come under 
 my notice, and which have been collected from various sources. 
 
 When a telegraph clerk makes a mistake in transmission, and an 
 important word in the message is thereby rendered unintelligible, 
 the department charges for a repetition of the entire despatch, 
 instead of charging for the undecipherable word. What would be 
 said of a cobbler who charged the price of a pair of new boots for 
 p)utting on a patch ? 
 
 The telegraphic money order system should be simphfied; the 
 charges should be reduced at least to the Indian rates; and, above 
 all, in order to prevent fraud, mistake, and delay, the money should, 
 .as in India, be sent with the telegram to the residence of the 
 ^addressee. 
 
 At some post offices the fee for a private box is 21. 2s., as the fee 
 goes to the Crown. At others it is 1^. Is., and goes to the post¬ 
 master. There should be a uniform charge, not exceeding 11. Is. 
 
1893 POST OFFICE ^ PLUNDERING dc BLUNDERING’ 1007 
 
 The Postmaster-General would render a vast service to trade if he 
 would persuade the Chancellor of the Exchequer to sanction the 
 institution of the ‘ cash on dehvery ’ system, for which many of my 
 correspondents are sighing. Under this the postman who delivers a 
 parcel of goods at the same time receives the price of them, which is 
 then paid over by the Post Office to the tradesman who sends them, 
 a small commission being deducted. Every shopkeeper would hail 
 the introduction of this plan, which is in full force in several great 
 countries, including India. In Egypt, indeed, the Post Office 
 actually collects biUs and debts on commission. The advantages are 
 obvious. Here is a picked, trained, trustworthy civil servant passing 
 every door in the kingdom at least once a day. He is accustomed to 
 the collection of fines for deficient postage, under rules which render 
 mistake or fraud impossible. All that is required is an extension of 
 this existing system to the parcel post, and in a moment five-sixths 
 of our tradesmen would be made independent of vans, porters, 
 messengers, and carriers, while customers would receive their 
 purchases more quickly. A post card would convey an order to a shop, 
 and by return of post the book, or other article demanded, would, 
 ' without further trouble to the sender of the post card, be laid on his 
 table. 
 
 Many thousands of commercial men would rejoice to see a parcel 
 post established to the United States, of whose foreign trade about 
 oO per cent, is done with the United Kingdom. Yet an American 
 can send parcels by post to the Bahamas, Barbadoes, British 
 Honduras, Jamaica, and other British possessions. In view of the 
 vast interests involved our officials should leave no stone unturned to 
 secure this privilege for us. 
 
 Beginning at the fountain-head, one would like to see the Post 
 Ojffice Guide itself reformed in the direction of simplicity, and on 
 the principle of consulting above all things the public convenience. 
 It should be reaUy a ‘ Guide,’ and not an examination paper full of 
 ‘ springes to catch woodcocks.’ If a model be required the United 
 States Mail Postal Guide may be recommended, which is full of sug¬ 
 gestions calculated to save the 'public from falling into error, or 
 suffering worry and delay. 
 
 It is a favourite allegation of the postal authorities that they 
 would be happy to concede this or that privilege to the pubhc if 
 some wickedly worded Act of Parliament did not stand in the way of 
 their benevolent intentions. Now, if it were not presumptuous to 
 introduce my own humble personality, I would here undertake to get 
 through Parhament in a week any amending Bill which would reheve 
 the pubhc from such vexations and disabilities as have been pointed 
 out. Parliament is always anxious to pass without debate every 
 suggestion in the interests of the public made by the Postmaster- 
 General. 
 
1008 
 
 THE NINETEENTH CENTURY 
 
 June 
 
 Before bringing this article to a close I should like to point out 
 that most of the grievances here summarised were brought to the 
 knowledge of the department years ago, and are still ‘ under con¬ 
 sideration/ It is obvious, therefore, that any criticisms with which 
 they are prefaced can have no application whatever to the present 
 Postmaster-General, who only came into office last autumn. 
 
 I now leave my readers to decide whether ‘ a mean public ’ has not 
 still much to complain of at the hands of the Post Office. 
 
 J. Henniker Heaton.