All postmasters were freed from excise and all public services, with the exception of the postmaster of the city of New York, who was exempt only from public services. Any persons or “body politick or corporate others than the P. M. Gen. aforesaid” presuming to “carry, recarry or deliver letters for hire, other than as before excepted, or to set up or imploy any foot-post, horse-post or pacquet boat whatsoever” for the carrying of letters or pacquets, or providing “horses and furniture for the horses of any through posts, or persons riding post with a guide and horn,” should forfeit £100 current money, one-half going to the governor and the other half to the postmaster-general. All letters and pacquets brought by ship or vessel were to be delivered to the postmaster of New York or to his servants, provided “that no letters going up or coming down Hudson’s river and going to or from Long Island shall be carried to the post-office, everything herein contained to the contrary notwithstanding,” this clause, together with that regarding exemption from public service and excise, being amendments by the council to the bill as presented by the house.
The act was in force for three years,[30] and in 1695 (July 2d and 3d) a bill was passed for continuing the act three years longer, “every article,[31] rule and clause therein mentioned to remain in full force and effect.”
In 1699 (May 5) the act was again continued,[32] this time for two years, the new bill stating that “the advantage which the inhabitants of this province daily have, the mutual correspondence which they have with their neighboring collonies and plantations and for the promoting of trade and wealth of each other, encourage to the continuance of the same.” In 1702[33] the act coming again before the Assembly and Council was continued for four and one-half years from 1700; and in 1705[34] (July 5, 6, 8 and 10, and August 14) it was re-continued for three years from October, 1704.[35]
Concerning the passage of this act Lord Cornbury wrote to the Lords of Trade that it was absolutely necessary; otherwise the post to Boston and Philadelphia would be lost.[36]
At the meeting[37] of the first session of the eleventh Assembly at Fort Anne, August 20, 1708, Governor Cornbury in his opening speech said:[38] “I can’t omit putting you in mind that Act for encouraging a Post Office is expired; that it is of so general Advantage that I hope you will revive it.” The next month (September 3, 7, 10, 13, and 18, 1708) the act was considered and passed. At a meeting of the council in New York,[39] June 21, 1709, one of the members was ordered to go to the assembly and “desire them to provide for and settle a Post from Albany to Westfield for holding a Correspondence Between Boston and Albany for the service of the present Expedition the Province of Massachusetts Bay having already settled a Post from Boston to Westfield;” but action was not taken before 1715.
The letters of this period throw light upon the condition of the post with regard to regularity and frequency.
The Earl of Bellomont writing from New York[40] to Secretary Popple in London, May 25, 1698, says: “The sure way of conveying letters to me is by way of Boston, whence the post comes every week to this place;” and Lord Cornbury writes to the Lords of Trade,[41] December 12, 1702: “But I entreat your Lordspps to consider that but few ships goe directly from this port to England, So that I must depend upon the Boston and Philadelphia posts for conveying my letters to such ships as may be going to England; and sometimes both these Conveyances faile;” and again in a letter to the Lords of Trade, June 30, 1704:[42] “I beg your Lordspps to consider likewise the difficulty I lye under, with respect to opportunity’s of writing into England, which is thus—The post that goes through this place goes Eastward as far as Boston, but Westward he goes no further than Philadelphia and there is no other post upon all this Continent, so that I have any letters to send to Virginia or to Maryland I must either send an Express who is often retarded for want of boats to cross those great rivers they must go over or else for want of horses, or else I must send them by some passengers who are going thither. The least I have known any Express take to go from hence to Virginia, has been three weeks, so that very often, before I can hear from Coll: Nicholson what time the fleet will sail and send my packets, the fleet is sailed. I hope we shall find a way to remedy that shortly, for Coll: Nicholson and Coll: Seymour have wrote me word that they will be here in September, and I do then intend to propose to them the settling of a Post, to go through to Virginia.... I must further acquaint Your Lordspps that our letters do not come safe by the way of Boston, I have had several letters by that way which have been broken open.”
Cornbury’s scheme, as he tells us in another letter to the Lords of Trade, written November 6, 1704,[43] was to lay a tax in each province by act of assembly, for defraying the charges of the post, which might then have gone from Boston to North Carolina, but his failure to meet the men with whom he proposed to discuss it, thwarted the plan.
June 9, 1693, Massachusetts passed in council[44] an act for encouraging the post office, selecting Boston as the place for the general letter office, the master to be appointed by Hamilton. Rates to Europe or to any place beyond the seas, were fixed at 2d., to different places within the colonies, they varied according to distance; from Boston to Rhode Island they were 6d., to the Connecticut colonies 9d., to New York 12d., to Eastern Pennsylvania or to Western Jersey 15d., and to Maryland or to Virginia 2s. A fine of 40s. in the current money of the colony, was imposed upon those who carried or delivered letters without authority, one-half the fine recurring to their majesties for the support of the government of the province, and one-half to the postmaster-general for suing and prosecuting for same. Non-delivery or neglect of maintaining a constant post was fined 5s., one-half going to their majesties and one-half to the party aggrieved; the ferryman “neglecting, refusing or delaying conveyance,” also forfeited 5s. The postmaster was to pay the shipmaster one-half penny for each letter or pacquet brought, but all letters of public concern for their majesties’ service were to be free of charge.
That the first few years of the post in Massachusetts were not very lucrative, is shown by the numerous complaints of grievances and petitions of Duncan Campbell, appointed by Hamilton deputy postmaster.[45] The charges are thrice the income, he complains, and begs that a salary be given, urging the example of the governor and assembly of New York in voting £50 per annum for the support of the office in that province. This petition meeting with no response, he asked for freedom from public rates, taxes and excise for retailing strong drink, and in 1694 (June 20) obtained a grant of £25 per annum from the public treasury of the province for two years. In 1696 (May 27) he petitioned for a renewal of the act encouraging a post office and also for a continuation of the postmaster’s salary. The salary was voted (July 1, 1696), but no steps taken toward reviving the Post Office Act, for in 1703 (May 26) John Campbell[46] renewed the petition to the general court stating that the act had not been in force after 1696, and praying that since Hamilton was out of purse to the extent of £1,400 restitution might be made by a continuance of the privilege to his heirs.[47] The same petition was presented to Governor Joseph Dudley and to the council and representatives in General Assembly two months later (June 3, 1703), but with no result as far as renewal was concerned. Five years later (Nov. 3, 1708), a committee was appointed to inquire what allowance should be made for encouraging the post office, but up to the time of Queen Anne’s Act in 1710 no decision had been reached.