Interior, showing sorters at work, and exterior with net extended for taking in mails, and bag hung ready for delivery while the train is in motion.

As for the cause of dispute, it was not finally disposed of till after the Queen’s marriage, when, on the suggestion of Prince Albert, it was settled that on a change of Ministry the Queen should arrange for the voluntary resignation of any ladies whom, being relations or very intimate friends of leaders in opposition, it might, in the opinion of the Prime Minister, be inconvenient to retain in office.

J. A. Vinter.] [National Portrait Gallery.

SIR ROWLAND HILL,
1795–1879.

Originator of the system of uniform Penny Postage with prepayment by stamps.

It sometimes happens that Ministries which are least conspicuous by the brilliancy of their career or the talents of those who compose them, nevertheless confer the most lasting benefits on the nation. The crowning achievement of the Melbourne administration originated neither with a Minister, nor with one of those permanent officials upon whom Ministers rely to make up for their own inexperience of departmental work, but with a humble school teacher. Nobody at this day connects penny postage with the name of Mr. Spring Rice, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who paved the way for it in the Budget of 1839, but it is inseparably associated with the memory of its inventor, Sir Rowland Hill. The son of a schoolmaster, Rowland had an extraordinary inborn love for arithmetic, and became mathematical master in his father’s school. |The Penny Post.| This natural talent, it is said, was directed to the study of Post Office statistics by an anecdote told of Coleridge, who happened to see a poor woman in the Lake district refuse to accept delivery of a letter from a postman because she could not afford to pay the postage—one shilling. Coleridge, hearing that the letter was from her brother, good-naturedly insisted on paying the fee, notwithstanding the woman’s reluctance; but no sooner was the postman’s back turned than she showed him that the letter consisted of nothing but a blank sheet. It had been agreed between her and her brother that he should send her such a blank sheet once a quarter so long as things went well with him, marking the cover so that she should not require to accept delivery, and that in this way she should get his mute message without need to pay postage. Hill detected the economic fallacy which opened the way to such innocent roguery, and rested not till he had devised means to remedy it. He published his design in pamphlet form in 1837, advancing the bold proposition that the smaller the fee charged for carrying letters the greater would be the multiplication of correspondence, and the larger the profit to the Department. He proposed an uniform charge upon letters of one penny a half ounce, irrespective of distance. It was the application to the public service of a commercial principle by which large fortunes have been repeatedly realised in private business, but the plan was unhesitatingly condemned by the Post Office authorities. The Postmaster-General, Lord Lichfield, spoke of it in the House of Lords as the wildest and most extravagant scheme of all the wild and extravagant ones he had ever listened to. Colonel Maberley, Secretary to the Post Office, declared the experiment was certain to fail, though he was of opinion that no obstruction should be placed in the way of it, lest the Government should afterwards be blamed for not giving it a trial. Lastly, Sydney Smith may be quoted as representing educated public opinion: “A million of revenue is given up,” he said, “to the nonsensical Penny Post Scheme, to please my old, excellent, and universally dissentient friend, Noah Warburton. I admire the Whig Ministry, and think they have done more good things than all the Ministries since the Revolution; but these concessions are sad and unworthy marks of weakness, and fill reasonable men with alarm.”

INTERIOR OF THE GENERAL POST OFFICE AT THE TIME OF THE INTRODUCTION OF PENNY POSTAGE.

Mr. Warburton and Mr. Wallace were the two members of Parliament who most warmly advocated the project of Rowland Hill. But credit is due to the courage shown by Mr. Spring Rice, Chancellor of the Exchequer, who, in the face of a deficit of three-quarters of a million, was bold enough to adopt the scheme and make provision for it in his Budget. Sir Robert Peel and Mr. Goulbourn criticised the proposal mainly on the ground that it involved a risk of loss to the revenue which ought not to be incurred in the existing state of the finances; but on a division the resolution was carried by a majority of 102, and the Bill carrying it into effect subsequently passed without a division. This reform, the offspring of the genius of an obscure mathematical teacher, and so modestly brought to light, has since been adopted by every civilised community in the world. To realise the boon thereby conferred on commercial and general intercourse it is only necessary to recall the postal regulations in force in Great Britain previous to 1839. Letters could not be prepaid; the charge for postage varied according to distance, and also according to the weight, shape, and size of letters. Thus, a letter posted in London for Brighton cost the recipient a fee of eightpence; the rate from London to Aberdeen was 1s.d., and to Belfast 1s. 4d. No wonder, then, that, in a time of expanding trade, the Chancellor of the Exchequer found himself supported in his proposal by countless petitions from commercial centres in favour of cheaper postage. But there was more than this: there was the flagrant injustice of the system of official franks. Members of the Government and of Parliament had the privilege of free postage, not only for their own letters but for those of their friends by simply writing their names on the cover. This privilege had grown to the dimensions of a gross abuse; people who enjoyed the friendship of a Minister were not the least shy of pestering him for franks; the revenue was defrauded, and those who were least able to bear the cost had to pay a high fee in order to recoup the Department for the loss on letters written by wealthy people.