The Commissioners of Post-Office Inquiry,—consisting of Lord Seymour, Lord Duncannon, and Mr. Labouchere,—who were charged with an "inquiry into the management of the Post-Office," had already concluded their sittings, and had decided upon recommending Mr. Hill's plan as far as it concerned the "twopenny post" department; that being the only branch then under consideration. "We propose," say they, and the words are significant, "that the distinction in the rates and districts, which now applies to letters delivered in the twopenny and threepenny post, shall not in any way affect correspondence transmitted under stamped covers; and that any letter not exceeding half an ounce shall be conveyed free within the metropolis, and the district to which the town and country deliveries extend, if inclosed in an envelope bearing a penny stamp."

With these important recommendations in its favour, the scheme was submitted to Parliament. It had met with so much approval, and the subject seemed so important, that the Government took charge of the measure. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had the project of a uniform rate of postage embodied in a Bill, which passed in the session of 1839. This Act, which was affirmed by a majority of 102 members, conferred temporarily the necessary powers on the Lords of the Treasury. Many of the Conservative party opposed the Government proposals. Sir Robert Peel's chief argument against the change was, that it would necessitate a resort to a direct tax on income. In order, however, to strengthen the hands of the Government, now that the question was narrowed in all minds to the single one of revenue, the majority in the House of Commons pledged themselves to vote for some substituted tax, if, upon experiment, any substitute should be needed.—(Hansard, vol. xlix.)

No one out of Parliament, at any rate, who read Mr. Hill's pamphlet attentively, but was convinced of the practicability of the measure, and the careful perusal of the evidence collected by the Committee appointed, determined any waverer as to the necessity of its being adopted. Still there existed serious misgivings in the country as to the steps which the Melbourne administration must soon announce. That there were some few objections to Mr. Hill's plan, and some difficulties about it, cannot be doubted; the nation at large had decided for it, however, and some of the principal men in the country, not favourable to the existing ministry, decided for it also. The Duke of Wellington was "disposed to admit that that which was called Mr. R. Hill's plan, was, if it was adopted as it was proposed, of all the plans, that which was most likely to be successful."[95] The Duke of Richmond pressed upon the ministers, that if they gave their sanction to any uniform plan, it should be to Mr. Hill's, "for that alone, and not the twopenny postage, seems to me to give hope of ultimate success."[96]

On the 12th of November, 1839, the Lords of the Treasury issued a minute, under the authority of the Act before referred to, reducing the postage of all inland letters to the uniform rate of fourpence.

The country, generally, was greatly dissatisfied. Mr. Hill's measure was what was required, and the fourpenny rate was in no respect his plan, nor did it even touch the question of the practicability of the uniform postage proposed by the reformer. This quarter measure of the Government did not even suffice to exhibit the benefits of a low rate of postage; was consequently a most improper test, and likely to be prejudicial to the interest of the penny post. The increase of letters was in no place more than fifty per cent., whilst the decrease in the Post-Office revenue was at the rate of forty per cent. In London, for instance, the diminution of receipts was at the lowest computation, 450l. a day, and the number of letters were only just doubled. The plan did not abolish the franking system. It did not abolish smuggling, inasmuch as a letter might be sent illicitly for a penny. How, therefore, it was argued, can it be expected that in the interior of the country, at any rate, and without Custom House officers, or any other responsible officers, a duty of 300 per cent. can be levied on the carriage of an article so easily transported as a letter? For a few weeks all was dissatisfaction. More than that, business men trembled for the success of the whole scheme, and lest the Government should return to the old régime. The Treasury Lords were convinced, however, that they had made a mistake, and they resolved to give the measure a full and fair trial. On the 10th of January, 1840, another minute was issued, ordering the adoption of a uniform penny rate. By adopting Mr. Hill's plan, the Government simply placed itself in the position of a trader, who declared that he intended for a time to be satisfied with a part of his former profits; but hoped eventually to secure himself against loss by increased business, greater attractiveness, and diminished cost of management. In six months, the policy of the Government was acknowledged on all hands to be the correct one, for on the 10th of August the Treasury had its minute confirmed by the Statute 3 & 4 Vict. chap. 96. The Quarterly Review,[97] as an exception to the general feeling, stigmatizes the measure "as one of the most inconsiderate jumps in the dark ever made by that very inconsiderate assembly." It is "distinguished by weakness and rashness," &c. But the judgment of posterity is sadly against the reviewer.

A Treasury appointment was given to Mr. Hill to enable him to work out his plans, or, in the wording of the said appointment, "to assist in carrying into effect the penny postage." He only held his office about two years, for when the Conservative party came into power in 1841, he was politely bowed out of it on the plea that his work was finished; that his nursling had found its legs, and might now be taken into the peculiar care of the Post-Office authorities themselves. A study of the past history of the Post-Office might have enlightened the minds of the members of the Executive Government as to the advisability or otherwise, of leaving entirely the progress of Post-Office improvement in the hands of the authorities. Mr. Hill intreated the new premier, Sir Robert Peel, to let him remain at any pecuniary sacrifice to himself, but his entreaties were unavailing. He must watch his scheme from a distance.[98]

Speaking of the hindrances which Mr. Hill met with in official circles, we are reminded of a pamphlet which appeared shortly after this period, evidently from some Post-Office official, "On the Administration of the Post-Office." This precious pamphlet has been long consigned to well-merited oblivion, and we only rescue it for a moment from the limbo of all worthless things, to show the spirit which then actuated some of those in office. It reminds us forcibly of the criticism which Mr. Palmer's scheme called forth from the leading spirits of the Post-Office of his day. The pamphlet, illogical and abusive throughout, laid it down as a principle that "the Post-Office is not under any obligation to convey the correspondence of the public." Again, that "the Post-Office is a Government monopoly for the benefit of the public revenue, and exists for the sole purpose of profit." Then there are praises for the old, and abuses for the new régime. "The celerity, the certainty, the security with which so vast a machine executed such an infinite complexity of details, were truly admirable!" Mr. Hill comes in for a good share of detraction. He is counselled to leave his "pet scheme" to the "practical men" of the Post-Office. In the following flowery language he is recommended "to behold it (his project) as a spectator from the shore, viewing his little bark in safety, navigated by those who are practically best acquainted with the chart, wind, and waves."

Mr. Hill's popularity outside the Post-Office contrasted favourably with the estimation in which he was held inside. The whole community had become impressed with the value of his measures and the important services he had rendered. Spurred on to exertions by the treatment he had received at the hands of an administration, which, to use the fine expression of Lord Halifax in reference to another public benefactor, "refused to supply the oil for a lamp which gave so much light," a public subscription was opened throughout the country, which, joined in by all classes, was quickly represented by a handsome sum. The money, which amounted to over thirteen thousand pounds, and which was only considered an expression of national gratitude, and by no means a full requital for his services, was presented to him at a public banquet got up in London under the auspices of the "Merchandise Committee." In an address which accompanied the testimonial, Mr. Hill's measure of reform was pronounced one "which had opened the blessings of a free correspondence to the teacher of religion, the man of science and literature, the merchant and trader, and the whole British nation—especially the poorest and most defenceless portions of it—a measure which is the greatest boon conferred in modern times on all the social interests of the civilized world." Mr. Hill's bearing on the occasion in question is described as most modest and unassuming. He expressed his gratitude for the national testimonial in few but telling phrases. He delicately alluded to his proscription from office, regretting that he could not watch the progress of his measure narrowly, and pointed out improvements which were still necessary to give complete efficiency to his reform. Mr. Hill gave ample credit to those who had sustained him in his efforts to carry his plans through Parliament, and especially named Messrs. Wallace and Warburton, members of the special Committee of 1838, Mr. Baring the Ex-chancellor of the Exchequer, and Lords Ashburton and Brougham.