In the first year of penny postage, notwithstanding all the confident prophecies to the contrary from those who might have been supposed to have had means of judging, the net proceeds of the Post-Office were between four and five hundred thousand pounds, whilst the number of letters actually sent was tripled. Against a million and a half yearly revenue of the previous year, there certainly appeared an enormous deficit; but till all other arguments were exhausted, it ought not to have been considered either evidence or proof of the failure of cheap postage. In the first instance, the Post-Office authorities said the scheme would not pay its expenses: a year sufficed to prove their mistake. It was then said that the revenue sacrificed would never be recovered, and accidental circumstances, of which we shall presently speak, favoured for a time this view: the argument, however, was based on erroneous views, as subsequent events have sufficiently shown. Bad as things appeared, there were, nevertheless, many significant signs at the end of two years that the gross revenue under the old would soon be reached under the new system, and even prospects that the past net revenue might still be recoverable. Both these anticipations have now been entirely realized. With a tenfold—nay, in many cases, a hundredfold—gain to different classes of the community—with the Post-Office supplying more situations by thousands than under the ancien régime, the old gross revenue was passed in 1850-1, and the net revenue was reached last year. Moreover, every complaint under this head has long since been silenced. Many considerations went to hinder the early growth of the revenue; and it is to some of these considerations that we must now turn for a moment.

It is of primary importance that the reader should remember that Mr. Hill, in his pamphlet and elsewhere, expressed a decided opinion that the maintenance of the Post-Office revenue depended upon the carrying out of all his plans.[110] In a speech which he delivered at Wolverhampton, September 7th, 1839, he said: "The mere reduction in the rates of postage will, of course, greatly increase the number of letters; but much will still depend on the extent to which the facilities for despatching letters are improved by a careful employment of the many economical and speedy modes of conveyance which now exist, and by a solicitous attention to all the minute ramifications of distribution. If, on the one hand, due attention is paid to the increasing demands of the public for the more frequent and more speedy despatch of letters, and, on the other hand, pains are taken to keep down the cost of management, though some temporary loss of revenue will arise, I see no reason to fear that the loss will be either great or permanent." Mr. Hill's proposals, it will be remembered, were embraced under four principal heads. The first, a uniform and low rate of postage, was fully carried out; but it was the only part of the measure which was realized at this time. The second, increased speed in the delivery of letters; and the third, consisting of provisions for greater facility in the despatch of letters, were not attempted, or, if attempted, only in the slightest degree. With regard to the simplifications of the operations of the Post-Office, which formed the fourth great item, little or nothing was done, though that little was rendered easy of accomplishment by the uniformity of postage-rates. Not only was the scheme not fairly worked, and the improvements only partially carried out, but they were crippled in their operation by officials who, if not hostile, were half-hearted and far from anxious for a successful issue. The natural difficulties in the way of the measure were numerous enough without the addition of official opposition. Trade was flourishing when the Postage Bill was carried; it was fearfully depressed in the first year of penny postage. It is well, as Miss Martineau points out, that none foreknew the heavy reverse which was at hand, and the long and painful depression that ensued after the passing of the Act, for none might then have had the courage to go into the enterprise.

This circumstance, accounting, as it does, for some of the deficit in the first and second years, also served to test the real principles of the reform.[111] Mr. Hill's plan, though given over to the apathy and vis inertiæ of the authorities—to "the unwilling horses of the Post-Office," as Mr. Baring subsequently designated them—really worked well, though at a loss, when everything else was working ill. Moreover, the tendency of cheap communication to improve the general revenue of the country was clearly apparent so early as 1842; and this is a fact which ought not to be lost sight of for a moment. The reduction of postage-rates was to the community a reduction of taxation; the capital released was driven into other and perhaps more legitimate channels. The Exchequer lost revenue from one source, but it gained it in other ways, as a consequence on the outlay at the Post-Office. In 1842, there was an acknowledged loss to the Post-Office revenue of 900,000l. In the same year, no serious defalcation appeared in the general accounts of the country, notwithstanding the extent of the depression in trade.

There were special as well as general considerations entering into the question of the acknowledged deficiency in the revenue. It is clear that Mr. Hill—who did not foresee that so much money would be sacrificed, and who was sanguine of recovering it at no distant date—likewise could have had but an indefinite idea of the vast amount of extra machinery which would be called into operation by the full development of his plans; the extent of the measures that must follow if the country was to be equally privileged with cheap correspondence; and the concessions that would have to be granted when the wedge was driven in by this, his principal measure. As one only of the causes leading to the extra heavy expenses of the Post-Office department, we may mention the changes in the system of mail-conveyance consequent on the introduction of railways. Dating from 1838, railways had been gradually absorbing all the stage-coach traffic. Mr. Hill, when making his original proposals, calculated that the number of chargeable letters might be increased twenty-four fold without overloading the mails, and without any material addition to the sums paid to contractors. So great and important—we would almost say vital—was the question of speed to the Post-Office, that railways were almost immediately brought into requisition, although the cost of the carriage of the mails was, at the outset, doubled, tripled, and even quadrupled! Many striking examples of the great difference in the cost of the two services are furnished in different Post-Office Reports. For instance:[112] In 1844, a coach proprietor in the North of England actually paid to the Post-Office Department the sum of 200l. annually for what he regarded as the privilege of conveying the mails, twice a-day, between Lancaster and Carlisle. Now the Post-Office pays the Lancaster and Carlisle Railway the sum of 18,000l. annually for the same service. The items of charges for mail-conveyance by railway at the present time—if they could have been known by any means, or even guessed at, by the enterprising post-reformer of 1837—might have had the effect of deterring him from offering his suggestions when he did. Certain it is, that the proposals would have had small chance of success, if those who had charge of the fiscal concerns of the country could have known that the sum which would have to be paid by the Post-Office to railway companies alone, in the year 1863, would not fall far short of the whole amount standing for the entire postal expenses of 1839.

In 1842 Mr. Hill left the Treasury, and was thus cut off from all active supervision of his measures. The Post-Office authorities found a friend in Mr. Goulbourn, the new Chancellor of the Exchequer, who was known to sympathise with their views. It had been arranged that Mr. Hill should continue his services for some short time longer in his improvised place at the Treasury Offices. The divergence in the views of the new chiefs and the reformer made his position more and more unpleasant. On his being bowed out of office, Mr. Hill petitioned the House of Commons. The petition—which was presented by Mr. Baring, the ex-Chancellor of the Exchequer—described briefly the Post-Office measures of 1839; his own appointment to the Treasury; the fact of his appointment being annulled; the benefit of the new measures in spite of their partial execution; the obstructive policy of the Post-Office officials; and thus concludes:—

"That the opinion adopted by Her Majesty's Government, that the further progress in Post-Office improvements may be left to the Post-Office itself, is contrary to all past experience, and is contradicted by measures recently adopted by that establishment.

"That, notwithstanding the extreme depression of trade which existed when the penny rate was established, and has prevailed ever since; and notwithstanding the very imperfect manner in which your Petitioner's plans have been carried into effect, the want of due economy in the Post-Office, the well-known dislike entertained by many of those persons to whom its execution has been entrusted, and the influence such dislike must necessarily have upon its success, yet the results of the third year of partial trial, as shown by a recent return made to the House of Lords, is a gross revenue of two-thirds, and a net revenue of one-third, the former amount.

"That your Petitioner desires to submit the truth of the foregoing allegations to the severest scrutiny, and therefore humbly prays your honourable House will be pleased to institute an inquiry into the state of the Post-Office, with the view of adopting such measures as may seem best for fully carrying into effect your Petitioner's plans of Post-Office improvement, and thus realizing the undoubted intentions of the Legislature."

The prayer of the petition was granted, and its proceedings are duly chronicled.[113] The object of this committee was "to inquire into the measures which have been adopted for the general introduction of a penny rate of postage, and for facilitating the conveyance of letters; the results of such measures, as far as relates to the revenue and expenditure of the Post-Office and the general convenience of the country; and to report their observations thereon to the House." Before proceeding to give any account of the further measures brought under discussion in connexion with this committee, we must give, in a few sentences, a résumé of the principal improvements which had actually been carried out during the interval of the sittings of the two committees.

  1. The uniform rate of one penny for a letter not above half an ounce, with weight adopted as the standard for increase of charge.
  2. The value of a system of prepayment was established,[114] the necessary facility being afforded by the introduction of postage-stamps. Double postage was levied on letters not prepaid in London only.
  3. Day-mails were established on the principal railway-lines running out of London, thus giving some of the principal towns in the provinces one additional delivery, with two mails from the metropolis in one day.
  4. An additional delivery was established in London, and two were given to some of the suburbs.
  5. Colonial and foreign rates for letters were greatly lowered, the inland rates—viz. the rates paid for those letters passing through this country—being abandoned altogether in some cases, as Mr. Hill had recommended.
  6. The privilege of franking, private and official, was abolished, and low charges made for the transmission of parliamentary papers.
  7. Arrangements were made for the registration of letters.
  8. The Money-order Office was rendered available to a fourfold extent. And—
  9. The number of letters increased from 75 millions in 1838-9, to 219 millions in 1842-3.[115]

This was certainly a large instalment of the improvements which the promoters of penny-post reform hoped to see realized; but, at the same time, it was only an instalment. The committee for which Mr. Hill had petitioned must now judge for themselves whether all had been done that might and ought to have been done to enhance the merits of the measure, and make it as profitable to the country as possible. In addition, it was requisite that they should consider several further suggestions which Mr. Hill had, since the introduction of his plan, proposed as likely to improve it, as well as hear him on some of the objections that had been raised to it. Thus, with regard to the latter, the Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr. Goulbourn) had stated; just before the committee was appointed, that "the Post-Office did not now pay its expenses." This statement was startling, inasmuch as Colonel Maberly himself had given 500,000l. or 600,000l. as the proceeds of the penny postage rates in the advent year of the measure. But Mr. Hill resolved the difficulty. The inconsistency was explained quite simply, that in a return furnished by the Post-Office, the whole of the cost of the packet-service—a little over 600,000l.—was charged against the Post-Office revenue. Though the cost of the packets had not been charged against the Post-Office for twenty years previously, this new item was here debited in the accounts to the prejudice of the scheme; and Mr. Goulbourn, who disclaimed any hostility to the new measure, thought himself justified, under the circumstances, in making the statement in question.

Again: It was strongly and frequently urged that correspondence was less secure than under the old system. It was said by the Post-Office officials, that the system of prepayment operated prejudicially against the security of valuable letters. Under the old régime it was argued, the postman was charged with a certain number of unpaid letters, and every such letter, so taxed, was a check upon him. "What security," it was now asked, "can there be for the delivery of letters for which the letter-carriers are to bring back no return?" With prepaid letters, it was said, there was great temptation, unbounded opportunity for dishonesty, and no check. To some extent, and so far as letters containing coin or other articles of value were concerned, there were some grounds for these remarks. It is a great question whether, in the case of valuable letters, the dishonest postman would be discouraged from a depredation by the thought that he would have the postage of the letter to account for; but still, freedom from all such considerations, under the new system, would clearly seem to increase the risks which the public would have to run. Previously to the penny postage era, all letters containing, or supposed to contain, coin or jewellery, were registered gratuitously at the Post-Office as a security against their loss. Under the new system, it was considered impracticable to continue the service, and the Post-Office authorities, with the sanction of the Treasury, dropped it altogether. The Money-order Office was available; the fees had been greatly reduced, and the officials, in warning persons against sending coin in letters, strongly recommended that this Office should be used for the purpose. Still, the number of coin-letters increased, and the number of depredations increased with them, to the great prejudice of the measure. Mr. Hill, whilst in the Treasury, recommended a system of registration of letters, which appears to have been somewhat similar to a plan proposed by the Post-Office authorities themselves in 1838. A system of registration was the result; but the rate of charge of one shilling per letter was enough in itself to render the entire arrangement nugatory. In October, 1841, Lord Lowther proposed to the Treasury that they should let him put down the evil in another way, viz. that they should allow him to use his powers, under the 3 & 4 Vict. c. 96, sec. 39, to establish a compulsory registration of letters supposed to contain coin or jewellery, and to make the charge for such compulsory registration a shilling per letter. The Treasury Lords referred the proposal to Mr. Hill. He concurred in the opinion of the Postmaster-General, and thought the principle of compulsory registration quite fair. He pointed out, however, in a letter to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, many objections to the plan, and contended that, so long as the registration fee was fixed at the high rate of a shilling, inducements enough were not held out to the public to register their letters voluntarily. Mr. Hill, therefore, suggested that the fee should be at once lowered to sixpence, to be reduced still further as soon as practicable. The public, under a lower rate, would have little excuse for continuing a bad practice; but if it was continued, restrictive measures might then be tried, as the only remaining method of protecting the public from the consequences of their own imprudence. The sixpenny rate would, he thought, be remunerative; nor would the letters increase to a much greater number than that reached under the old system when they were registered gratuitously. This subject was still under discussion when the special committee was granted, when, of course, all the proposals relative to the registration of letters were laid before it and investigated. Strong objections were made to Mr. Hill's proposition to lower the rate. It was contended that the number of registered letters would so increase, that other Post-Office work could not be accomplished. The Postmaster-General, for example, contested the principle of registration altogether, admitting, however, that it was useful in reducing the number of ordinary letters containing coin, and the consequent temptations to the officers of the Post-Office. Like many of the additional proposals, this subject was left undecided; but no one at this date questions the propriety of the recommendations made under this head. The charge for registration has, within the last few years, been twice reduced, with benefit to the revenue, and no hindrance to the general efficiency of the Post-Office. Not only so, but the compulsory registration clause is now in active operation.