So that, according to the practice of which I complained, the Post Office was made chargeable with heavy expenses, incurred not only without its request, but without its consent or even knowledge. The inexpediency of such proceedings happened to receive further illustration on the same day; Mr. Cunard calling upon me (of course now too late) to say that he had come to England for the purpose of proposing to undertake the West Indian mails at half the price then paid for their conveyance, thus tantalising us by proving that an opportunity had been lost of saving £120,000 per annum.
In a return called for by the House of Lords, I found that the number of letters for the year had been arrived at by treating the year as consisting of twelve months of four weeks each, so that the total given was that for forty-eight weeks instead of fifty-two. It would have been hardly fair to mislead the House of Lords without doing the same good office to the House of Commons. Accordingly, upon the Lower House calling for a return of the amount of transit postage paid to France, the sum reported, without any note to prevent misunderstanding, instead of being the total amount, was merely the balance of account between the two Offices. After recording this fact, my Journal proceeds as follows:—
“It is a very rare thing for a return to reach me which does not contain some egregious error.”
Fortunately I saw the return before its issue, and it was of course corrected.
“July 18th, 1850.—Every now and then something almost incredibly absurd and mischievous in the management of the Post Office turns up. Some investigations in which I have lately been engaged have brought to light the astounding fact that for the payment of a large part of our expenses (hundreds of thousands a year probably) we have no vouchers, and yet there is a pretence of auditing our accounts. The fact is, that the salaries and wages of the clerks, letter-carriers, &c., at the country offices, together with heavy expenses for carrying mails, &c., are paid by the postmasters, and allowed in their accounts, but no evidence is required that the payments are actually made; and instances have occurred in which postmasters have gone on taking credit year after year for payments on account of mails, &c., which have been suppressed. The postmasters at —— and —— were both detected in this fraud.”
The following shows that, six months later, blundering remained unabated:—
“January 23rd, 1851.—A balanced account of revenue for the quarter ending 10th October last has been sent to me containing a gross error; an advance from the English to the Irish Office being so managed as apparently to increase the balance in hand for the United Kingdom by £40,000!”
“January 25th.—The Accountant General persists in it that his account is correct. (I wish it were; a means would then have been devised by which we might readily increase the balance in hand to any extent.) He will, however, alter it, if I ‘desire it!’—as though it could be a matter of choice whether the balance can be increased by £40,000 or not.”
FOREIGN AND COLONIAL EXTENSION.