Mr. Hill, in his able pamphlet, exhausted the subject. By a variety of arguments, he urged upon the nation a trial of his plans—begged for an unobstructed and cheap circulation of letters, expressing his most deliberate conviction,[87] that the Post-Office, "rendered feeble and inefficient by erroneous financial arrangements," was "capable of performing a distinguished part in the great work of national education," and of becoming a benefaction and blessing to mankind. He left the following proposals to the judgment of the nation:—(1) A large diminution in the rates of postage, say even to one penny per letter weighing not more than half an ounce. (2) Increased speed in the delivery of letters. (3) More frequent opportunities for the despatch of letters. And (4) Simplification in the operations of the Post-Office, with the object of economy in the management. The fundamental feature in the new scheme was, of course, the proposal that the rate of postage should be uniform, and charged according to weight.

No wonder that the scheme, of which, in our own order, we have just attempted an outline, roused feelings of delight and approbation from the people at large, throughout the length and breadth of the land. Still less is it a matter of surprise that the Government and the Post-Office authorities, in charge of the revenue, should stand aghast at the prospect of being called upon to sanction what they considered so suicidal a policy. Lord Lichfield, the Postmaster-General at the time, speaking for the Post-Office authorities, as to its practicability, described the proposal in the House of Lords,[88] "of all the wild and visionary schemes which I have ever heard of, it is the most extravagant." On a subsequent occasion, his opinion having been subjected for six months to the mellowing influence of time, he is less confident, but says that, if the plan succeeds (in the anticipated increase of letters), "the walls of the Post-Office would burst—the whole area on which the building stands would not be large enough to receive the clerks and the letters."[89] On the one side, many well-known names[90] were ranked in opposition, who believed that the scheme, among other drawbacks, would not only absorb the existing revenue, but would have to be supported by a ruinous subsidy from the Exchequer. On the other side of the question, however, there were many intelligent writers and great statesmen ready to advocate the sacrifice of revenue altogether, if necessary, rather than not have the reform; while an immense number believed (and Mr. Hill himself shared in this belief) that the diminution would only be temporary, and should be regarded as an outlay which, in the course of years, would yield enormous profits. "Suppose even an average yearly loss of a million for ten years," says a celebrated economist of the period; "it is but half what the country has paid for the abolition of slavery, without the possibility of any money return. Treat the deficit as an outlay of capital. Even if the hope of ultimate profit should altogether fail, let us recur to some other tax ... any tax but this, certain that none can operate so fatally on all the other sources of revenue. Letters are the primordia rerum of the commercial world. To tax them at all is condemned by those who are best acquainted with the operations of finance." Nor was Mr. Hill to be cried down. He admitted, as we have said, that his plans, if carried out, would result in a diminution of revenue for a few years to come. On the reliable data which he had collected, he calculated that, for the first year, this decrease might extend to as much as 300,000l.; but that the scheme would pay in the long run, and pay handsomely, he had no manner of doubt whatever. His case was strengthened by all previous experience. The number of letters would increase in the ratio of reduction of postage. In 1827, the Irish postage-rates were reduced, and an immediate increase of revenue to a large extent was the result. The rate for ship-letters was reduced in 1834. In four years the number increased in Liverpool from fifteen to sixty thousand; in Hull from fifteen to fifty thousand. The postage of letters between Edinburgh and the adjacent towns and villages was reduced in 1837 from twopence to a penny. In rather more than a year the number of letters had more than doubled.

Mr. Hill's proposals were instantly hailed with intense satisfaction, especially by the mercantile and manufacturing classes of the community. Whatever might be said in Parliament, public opinion in the country was decided on the question, that if the success of the new scheme was sufficient to cover the charges of the Post-Office establishment, it ought by all means to be carried out. Scarcely ever was public sympathy so soon and so universally excited in any matter. The progress of the question of post-reform was in this, and some other respects, very remarkable, and shows in a strong light how long a kind of extortion may be borne quietly, and then what may be accomplished by prompt and conjoint action. Before Mr. Hill's pamphlet appeared no complaints reached the Legislature of the high rates of postage. During the year in which it did appear five petitions reached the House of Commons, praying that its author's scheme might at least be considered. In the next year 320, and in the first half of the year 1839 no fewer than 830, petitions were presented in favour of the measure. Within a few, the same number were sent up to the House of Lords. During the agitation, it is calculated that no less than 5,000 petitions reached St. Stephen's, including 400 from town-councils and other public bodies—the Common Council of London, and the Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge, among the number.

During the month of February, 1838, Mr. Wallace moved for a Select Committee of the Commons to investigate and report upon Mr. Hill's proposals; but the Government resisted the motion.[91] They intimated that the matter was under their consideration, and they intended to deal with it themselves. But the community were dissatisfied. They continued to petition till Ministers were compelled to show a greater interest in the subject, which they did "by proposing little schemes, and alterations, and devices of their own, which only proved that they were courageous in one direction, if not in another."[92] Meanwhile, the "Merchandise Committee"—formed of a number of the most influential and extensive merchants and bankers in London, with Mr. Bates, of the house of Baring & Co. for chairman—was called into existence through the manifested opposition to reasonable reform. Large sums were subscribed by this committee for the purpose of distributing information on the subject by means of pamphlets and papers, and for the general purposes of the agitation. So great and irresistible, in fact, was the pressure applied in this and other ways, that the Government found it impossible any longer to refuse an inquiry. A month or two after Mr. Wallace's motion, Mr. Baring, the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, proposed a Committee "to inquire into the present rates or modes of charging postage, with a view to such reduction thereof as may be made without injury to the revenue; and for this purpose, to examine especially into the mode recommended, of charging and collecting postage, in a pamphlet by Mr. Rowland Hill." It was noticed that most of the members nominated by the Chancellor of the Exchequer were favourable to the Government, all but two—Lord Lowther and Sir Thomas Fremantle—having voted for the Ballot. The Conservatives did not grumble, however, as on this subject the Government was conservative enough. The Committee sat sixty-three days, concluding their deliberations in August, 1838. They examined all the principal officers of the Post-Office and the Stamp Department, and eighty-three independent witnesses of different pursuits and various grades. The Post-Office authorities were specially invited to send any witnesses they might choose; and as the Postmaster-General and the Secretary of the Post-Office objected to the penny rate as likely to be ruinous to the revenue, and to the principle of uniformity as unfair and impossible, we may be certain that the witnesses sent were judiciously chosen. The examination was by no means ex parte, but seems to have been carried on with the greatest fairness. Those members of the Committee who were particularly pledged to the protection of the revenue, as well as Lord Lowther—who had a thorough knowledge of the subject from having sat on a previous Commission—appear to have missed no opportunity of sifting the opinions and the statements of each witness. The members of the Committee did their work, altogether, with zeal, great discrimination, and ability. The plan and the favourable witnesses stood the scrutiny with wonderful success; and Mr. Hill himself bore up, under what George Stephenson regarded as the greatest crucial test to which mortal man can be subjected, with tact and firmness, fully proving, in evidence, the soundness of the conclusions on which judgment had to be passed.

We may say here, as we have not before referred to the circumstance, that it was necessary to make it clear to the Committee, the amount of increase in correspondence necessary to the success of the scheme. In opposition to the views of official men,[93] Mr. Hill held that a fivefold increase in the number of letters would suffice to preserve the existing revenue, and he hazarded a prediction that that increase would soon be reached. As regarded the means of conveyance, he showed that the stage-coaches, &c. already in existence could carry twenty-seven times the number of letters they had ever yet done; and this statement passed without dispute. The evidence was clear and convincing as to the vast amount of contraband letters daily conveyed; and no less certainly was it shown that, if Mr. Hill's schemes were carried out, the temptation to evasion of postage would be at once abolished, inasmuch as there would then be no sufficient inducement to resort to illegal mediums. A Glasgow merchant stated before the Committee, that he knew five manufacturers in that city whose correspondence was transmitted illegally in the following proportions, viz.—(1) three to one; (2) eighteen to one; (3) sixteen to one; (4) eight to one; and (5) fifteen to one. Manchester merchants—among whom was Mr. Cobden—stated that they had no doubt that four-fifths of the letters written in that town did not pass through the Post-Office. No member of the Committee had any idea of the extent to which the illicit conveyance of letters was carried. A carrier in Scotland was examined, and confessed to having carried sixty letters daily, on the average, for a number of years—knew other carriers who conveyed, on an average, five hundred daily. He assured the Committee that the smuggling was alone done to save the postage. "There might be cases when it was more convenient, or done to save time, but the great object was cheapness." The labouring classes, especially, had no other reason. "They avail themselves of every possible opportunity for getting their letters conveyed cheaply or free." In his opinion, the practice could not be put a stop to until the Post-Office authorities followed the example that was set them in putting down illicit distillation in Scotland. "I would reduce the duty, and that would put an end to it, by bringing it down to the expense of conveyance by carriers and others." Mr. John Reid—an extensive bookseller and publisher in Glasgow—sent and received, illicitly, about fifty letters or circulars daily. "I was not caught," he said, "till I had sent twenty thousand letters, &c. otherwise than through the post." He constantly sent his letters by carriers; he also sent and received letters for himself and friends, inclosed in his booksellers' parcels. Any customer might have his letters so sent, by simply asking the favour. It also came out in evidence, that twelve walking-carriers were engaged exclusively in conveying letters between Birmingham and Walsall and the district, a penny being charged for each letter. The most curious modes of procedure, and the oddest expedients[94] for escaping postage, were exhibited during the sitting of the Committee. One, largely patronized by mercantile houses, consisted in having a number of circulars printed on one large sheet, when, on its arrival at a certain town, a mutual friend or agent would cut it up, and either post or deliver the parts. Nay, matters had been brought to such a state, that a leading journal, commenting on the matter of illicit letter-conveyance just previous to the sittings of the Committee, went the length of saying, that, "fortunately for trade and commerce, the operation of the Government monopoly is counteracted by the clandestine conveyance of letters."... "The means of evasion are so obvious and frequent, and the power of prevention so ineffectual, that the post has become only the extraordinary, instead of the usual, channel for the conveyance of letters." Notwithstanding this testimony, the evidence of the Post-Office officials on this and the other heads of inquiry betrayed fully the usual degree of official jealousy of interference, and quite an average amount of official partiality. Thus, Colonel Maberly argued, that if the postage of letters were reduced to a penny it would not stop smuggling: in which case they might as well have smuggling under the one system as the other. But his zeal on this point overcame his discretion. "For," he continued, "1,000 letters might still be sent as a coach-parcel for seven shillings, whereas the Post-Office charge for them would be four guineas." But the gallant colonel seems altogether to have forgotten that the item of delivery is, after all, the chief item in all Post-Office charges. A few more examples of the statements of the authorities may here be given. Thus, the Secretary said, relative to an increase of letters, that "the poor were not disposed to write letters" (10,851). He thought that, during the first year, the letters would not double, even if franking were not abolished (2,949). "If the postage be reduced to one penny, I think the revenue would not recover itself for forty or fifty years." Lord Lichfield said that he had ascertained that each letter then cost "within the smallest fraction of twopence-halfpenny" (2,795). With regard to the principle of the uniform rate, Colonel Maberly thought it might be "desirable, but impracticable" (10,939). "Most excellent for foreign postage, but impracticable for inland letters" (3,019). He also said that the public would object to pay in advance whatever the rate (10,932-3).

The Committee next had their attention called to still more important facts, viz. that the number of letters conveyed illegally bore no proportion to the number which were not written at all on account of the high rates of postage. On the poor the Post-Office charges pressed grievously, and there seemed no other course open to them than that, if their letters could not be received without the payment of exorbitant rates, they must lie in the hands of the authorities. It is only necessary to compare the income of a labouring man with his pressing wants to see that it was idle to suppose that he would apply his little surplus to the enjoyment of post-letters other than in cases of life and death. The Committee were absolutely flooded with instances in which the Post-Office charges seriously interfered with the wants and reasonable enjoyments of the poor. On the general question involved, nearly all the witnesses, of whatever rank or grade, evidenced that the public, to an enormous extent, were deterred from writing letters and sending communications, which otherwise, under a cheaper tariff, they would write and send. That this part of the case was proved may be concluded from the language of the Committee themselves:—"The multitude of transactions which, owing to the high rates of postage, are prevented from being done, or which, if done, are not announced, is quite astonishing. Bills for moderate amounts are not drawn; small orders for goods are not given or received; remittances of money are not acknowledged; the expediting of goods by sea and land, and the sailing or arrival of ships not advised; printers do not send their proofs; the country attorney delays writing to his London agent, the commercial traveller to his principal, the town-banker to his agent in the country. In all these, and many other cases, regularity and punctuality is neglected in attempts to save the expenses of exorbitant rates of postage."

On all the other parts of the scheme, and on the scheme itself as a whole, the Committee spoke no less decisively. Generally and briefly, they considered that Mr. Hill's strange and startling facts had been brought out in evidence. They gave their opinion that the rates of postage were so high as materially to interfere with and prejudice trade and commerce; that the trading and commercial classes had sought, and successfully, illicit means of evading the payment of these heavy charges, and that all classes, for the self-same reason, corresponded free of postage when possible; that the rate of postage exceeded the cost of the business in a manifold proportion; and that, altogether, the existing state of things acted most prejudicially to commerce and to the social habits and moral condition of the people. They conclude, therefore,—

  1. That the only remedy is a reduction of the rates, the more frequent despatch of letters, and additional deliveries.
  2. That the extension of railways makes these changes urgently necessary.
  3. That a moderate reduction in the rates would occasion loss, without diminishing the peculiar evils of the present state of things, or giving rise to much increased correspondence, and,
  4. That the principle of a low, uniform rate, is just in itself, and when combined with prepayment and collection by stamp, would be exceedingly convenient and highly satisfactory to the public.

So far, their finding, point by point, was in favour of Mr. Hill's scheme. They reported further that, in their opinion, the establishment of a penny rate would not, after a temporary depression, result in any ultimate loss to the revenue. As, however, the terms of their appointment precluded them from recommending any plan which involved an immediate loss, they restricted themselves to suggesting an uniform twopenny rate.