"The Postmaster General has lately established a Penny Post at Manchester, which promises great convenience to the inhabitants of that place, and its vicinity."—(Times, April 17, 1793.)
"The new Penny Post Office is likely to prove such a very great accommodation to the public, that the only wonder is—it has been so long neglected. Instead of the number of deliveries, and the hours of despatch, varying in different parts of the town, as at present, there will be six deliveries, each day, in all parts of the town: by which means, a person living at Mary-le-bonne, may send letters to, or receive letters from, Limehouse, a distance of seven miles, five times a day. Persons putting in letters by nine in the morning at the distance of ten miles from the chief Penny Post Office, and later, at less distant parts, may receive answers from London the same afternoon. There will be three deliveries of letters, in most parts of the country, within the limits of the Penny Post; and there will be two posts, daily, from all parts within the distance of ten miles from Lombard St."—(Times, Feb. 28, 1794.)
"The proposed plan of a new Penny Post is no longer talked of:—It is every day more, and more, wanted, as the present mode is extremely irregular, and insufficient. According to the new plan, the Penny Post was to have gone out seven times a day."—(Times, May 4, 1794.)
"The PENNY POST.
"The late regulations in the Penny Post Office are certainly of the most essential service to the public: but the conduct of the Letter Carriers requires the most minute attention. They wall defraud where they think they can do it with impunity; and as an instance of this, we give the following fact. From any part of the Metropolis, to the Borough of Southwark, and its adjacent parts, is stated to be but One penny per Letter. The Carriers, however, uniformly charged 2d. per Letter. A Complaint of this imposition was made to the Comptroller, by a Gentleman, whose house is in the Blackfriars Road, and an immediate answer was given 'that the Carrier had been severely reprimanded,' and the surcharge had been returned. His removal from that walk, gave his successor, who, perhaps, did not hear of this reprimand, an opportunity to continue the same imposition, and the letters to Blackfriars Road, and in other parts of St. George's Fields, were again charged 2d. The Comptroller was again applied to, and on the next evening, he wrote a letter to the person who sends this for publication, 'that the Carrier was ordered to return the surcharge.' The publication of this circumstance is requisite, as no doubt, similar extortions are practised in other parts of the suburbs. This is a matter that ought to be universally made known, as cent. per cent., even on a penny, is rather too much for a man, illegally, to pay."—(Times, Oct. 27, 1794.)
"Franking," as the privilege of free postage was called, had already assumed dimensions, so as to have become a scandal, which is well exposed in the following notices:—
"Motion respecting Clerks in Office.
"Mr. Dent said ... Public notoriety went to accuse the offices of great abuse of the privilege of franking ... that such abuses did exist, and to give the proofs of them was the object which he proposed to gain by his present motion. He would state to the House some of the abuses. Certain bags came to the Post Office, marked Ordnance, Navy, Treasury Bags, &c., and the letters contained in these bags were furthered without more enquiry. These bags, perhaps, contained a great quantity of letters from the various Clerks: he could produce an instance of a very inferior Clerk, who had franked to a great amount, by placing his initials on the superscription. He had looked attentively over the list of those who had the privilege, and he did not find his name among them.... Among other instances, he would mention a Mr. Lackington, a celebrated bookseller; he had friends in some one of the Offices, and the whole of his Catalogues were franked to different parts of the country. It was also notorious, that some persons had written to their country correspondents, that if they would deal with them, the whole mass of pamphlets published in London should be sent them free of postage: this was done by means of the Clerks in office. In short, there were persons whose salaries amounted to only £300, or £400 per annum, who from their situation, made £1000 or £1200. It surely could not be the intention of the House to permit such malversation, and, therefore, he should move for a Committee to enquire into these facts. Before the late regulation, venison has passed as nimbly, by the post, as it run when alive in its native park. After further conversation, the House divided.—For the Question, 53; Against it, 41.—Majority, 12."
"It would have been extraordinary indeed, if Sir Benjamin Hammett had not opposed the Franking Bill: for we are informed from very good authority, that Letters franked by, and addressed to, him only, are to the amount of £2400 sterling per annum."—(Times, March 11, 1795.)
"Debate on Franking.