Читать книгу The Development of Rates of Postage: An Historical and Analytical Study - A. D. Smith - Страница 6

Table of Contents

In England the postal service, as an organized means for the carrying of the King's despatches, dates back some four hundred years, and as a recognized arrangement for the carrying of letters for the public, some three hundred years. Before the establishment of a regular system of posts, provision had been made for carrying the King's despatches by special messengers, called nuncii or cursores, attached to the royal household.[1] Their function was naturally one of importance, and, from early times, large sums were expended in their maintenance. They were employed on the private and confidential business of the Crown and of members of the royal household, and on affairs of State, both in England and abroad, although their function was primarily to serve the convenience of the King.

This was a system for the conveyance of official despatches only.[2] No public provision was made for the conveyance of letters for private individuals. Such letters were conveyed by servants, by special messengers, or by the common carriers,[3] and there is evidence of the existence of a considerable private correspondence in the frequent issue of writs during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries ordering supervision of the traffic in private letters, the uninterrupted transmission of which was a source of much anxiety to the Crown from fear of the fomenting of sinister and treasonable plots against itself.[4]

The establishment of the nuncii or cursores developed into a regular system. On certain lines of road relay stages were set up, at which the messengers might without delay obtain a change of horses, a system first set up by Edward IV in 1482, during the war with Scotland.[5] Such relay messengers were called "posts," a word borrowed from the French.[6] The term was also applied to the line of route, and the expression "post," or "line of posts," was used to denote a route along which, at certain stages, post-horses were kept in readiness for the use of the King's messengers. Travelling in this way the messengers were able to cover a hundred miles a day. The establishment of lines of regular posts became a feature of the administrative system, and a special officer of the royal household was appointed to control them.

The first recorded Master of the Posts was Brian Tuke, who held the office in 1512. The posts, like the establishment of special messengers, were maintained solely at the cost of the King. The master received a salary from the King (which in a patent issued in 1545 is given as £66 13s. 4d. a year), and also the amount of his expenses incurred in providing for the carrying of letters. The regular postmasters received a daily wage from the King. On lines along which no regular post had been established, but along which it might on occasion be necessary to send special messengers, the townships were obliged to furnish horses for the service of the messengers. Remarks in contemporary papers suggest that no payment was made in such cases, but that horses were supplied gratis for the King's service.[7] There is no record of the early days of Tuke's tenure of the office of Master of the Posts; but in 1533 Thomas Cromwell complained to Tuke concerning the condition of the posts, and the great default in the conveyance of letters.[8]

The posts were in many cases established on account of some special circumstance, and were of a temporary character. The first regular post—that established in 1482 during the war with Scotland—was, of course, temporary; but at much later dates, when "ordinarie," or permanent, posts had been established, such as the post from London to Berwick and that from London to Beaumaris, it was still usual to establish "extra ordinarie" posts "in divers places of the Realme" as occasion might from time to time require, as, for example, during the periods of the sovereign's progresses.[9]

The early posts had a second function, not less in importance than that of providing for the conveyance of the sovereign's despatches, and despatches sent on affairs of State viz. the provision of means by which persons actually travelling on the business of the sovereign, though not bearing despatches, might do so with facility. This second function, the travelling post, continued until the eighteenth century. It is a function which is essentially akin to the provision of a means of intercommunication by means of letters. In many parts of the United Kingdom, and also in other countries, the means provided for the conveyance of the mail are still largely used by persons desiring to travel.[10]

The use of the post-horses by ordinary travellers commenced at an early period. In 1553, when the posts had been in existence only some fifty or sixty years, a rate of a penny a mile for persons riding post was fixed by statute.[11]

Great abuses grew up round the travelling post, or "thorough post," as it was called.[12] Riders in post frequently failed to pay a reasonable sum for the hire of horses; and since King's messengers, although paying no fixed rates, obtained better accommodation than others, riders in post travelling on their own affairs made no scruple to represent themselves as travelling on public service. Orders directed against these abuses were issued in 1603. Riders in post on the King's affairs, with a special commission signed either by one of the Principal Secretaries of State, by six at least of the Privy Council, or by the Master of the Posts, were to pay at the rate of 2½d. a mile for a horse. All others riding post about their own affairs were to make their own terms with the postmaster, and to pay in advance.[13] The net result was that for all persons riding with the special commission a fixed rate was payable in place of uncertain rates as hitherto, and the postmasters were protected from being imposed upon by persons riding post on their private business. Without the special commission it was useless to pretend to be travelling on the King's affairs. By this proclamation the postmasters were also given the exclusive right of letting horses to travellers.[14] The wages of the postmasters in respect of the "post for the pacquet" were a fixed sum per day, and a certain number of horses had to be kept in readiness, in proportion to the amount of the wages paid. As regards the service for the State, the system of posts was therefore on a complete and definite financial basis. The rates for the thorough post, although not in any way rates of postage in the modern sense, were the first rates applied to the service of the posts (the pay of the postmasters for the packet post being merely wages per diem), and it was to them that the term "postage" was first applied. These rates were in fact the original "postage."

The number of regular posts was in early times quite small.[15] In order to provide a means of reaching other parts of the kingdom with some degree of facility, the municipalities were required to maintain, or at least provide when required, post-horses for the use of the King's messengers.[16] Some municipalities made definite provision of horses: Leicester, for example, maintained "certen poste-horses" (four in number) for the service of the Prince; but if horses were not provided voluntarily, the magistrates and constables were authorized to seize them for the King's service wherever they could be found.[17] Many of the posts continued for a long period to be of a temporary nature. Even in the seventeenth century some which it might be thought would have been important at any time, were regarded as extraordinary posts, and were discontinued with the disappearance of the special circumstances on account of which they had been established.[18]

A third function became attached to the posts, viz. the transmission of private letters. As it is impossible to say at what date the posts began to be used by ordinary travellers, so it is impossible to say at what date they were first used for the conveyance of letters other than those on the affairs of the King or of the State. The universities and municipalities provided services for the carriage of their own letters;[19] but from a very early period the posts were also made use of for the conveyance of unofficial letters. The Master of the Posts received no direct profit from the carrying of such letters,[20] but the price paid to him for the office of Deputy Postmaster was probably thereby increased.[21]

A Proclamation of 26th April 1591 prohibited the conveyance of letters to or from countries beyond the seas by any person other than the ordinary posts and messengers; and referred to previous similar prohibitions. The object of this prohibition, which foreshadowed the monopoly of the carriage of all letters, whether for places within the realm or to or from foreign countries, was alleged to be the redress of disorders among the posts in general, and particularly to prevent inconveniences both to the royal service and the lawful trade of honest merchants.[22] A Proclamation of 1609 repeated this prohibition.[23]

In 1626 a legal struggle was in progress between Matthew de Quester and Lord Stanhope, both of whom claimed to hold a King's Patent conferring the right to carry foreign letters.[24] This litigation led to laxity and omission in the conduct of the foreign service, so that merchants trading abroad were put to great inconvenience. In consequence, in November of that year, the King granted the Merchant Companies permission to arrange for the conveyance of their foreign letters by their own messengers. The high authorities were disturbed by the grant of this permission,[25] and in October 1627 it was revoked "upon weightie reasons of State." Only the Merchant Adventurers were still permitted to use their own messengers, and they and all other merchants were required in times of war and danger to the State to acquaint the Secretaries of State from time to time with what letters they forwarded abroad.

The foreign post continued in an unsatisfactory state, and a reorganization in accordance with a proposition submitted by the Master of the Foreign Posts, Thomas Witherings, was notified in orders issued on the 28th January 1633. In consequence of complaints, both of Ministers of State and merchants, it was decided to send no more letters by the carriers, who came and went at pleasure, but, in conformity with other nations, to erect "stafetti," or packet posts, at fit stages, to run day and night without ceasing. Under this new system the Foreign Postmaster of England undertook, with the consent of the foreign Governments, to provide "stafetti" for the conveyance of foreign letters on the Continent, e.g. he arranged the "stafetti" between Calais and Antwerp.

For the inland posts the financial arrangements of 1603 remained some thirty years undisturbed, and notwithstanding that the posts were used by travellers, and for the general conveyance of private letters, they remained a charge on the King's revenue. In 1633 the deficit was some £3,400, and in that year Witherings submitted a plan for the complete reorganization of the inland posts.[26] The new system, which applied only to the "post for the pacquet," was to be based on a definite scale of charges. Previously, there had been no regular system of charging letters carried for the public, and it is at this point that the modern Post Office emerges. Up to this time the conveyance of letters for private individuals, although it may have been a source of emolument to the postmasters and couriers, was not recognized by the State as part of the function of the service. Under the proposed system, a charge was to be made for every letter or packet, varying in accordance with the distance for which the letter or packet was conveyed, and its size. The latter was to be graduated for light letters according to the number of sheets, and for heavier letters and packets according to weight, starting from the ounce. Here, therefore, is to be seen at the inception of "postage" in the modern sense a definite distinction between the rate charged on the ordinary letter, the weight and bulk of which are in general insignificant, and that charged on the larger and heavier packets of deeds, or what not, which might be forwarded by post.

The reform of the posts on these lines was carried out by Witherings in October 1635, and constitutes a remarkable development of the Post Office system. The rates of charge were as follow:—

Distance of Transmission.	Single Letter.	Double Letter.	Per Ounce.
Not exceeding 80 miles	2d.	4d.	6d.
Exceeding 80 miles, not exceeding 140 miles	4d.	8d.	9d.
Exceeding 140 miles	6d.	12d.	12d.

The great change of 1840 modified this system only at two points, viz. (1) uniformity of rate, that is, the elimination of the table of distances from the rate-table, and (2) the introduction of the method of charge according to weight for all letters and packets.

The monopoly of foreign letters was by this time well established, and the reason for its existence well defined. A further proclamation of the 11th February 1637-8 again declared this monopoly, and proceeded to declare a monopoly of letters between persons within the realm, the second monopoly being justified, not on the ground of necessity in order to guard the safety of the State, but on the ground that commerce and correspondence within the realm would benefit.[27] The real explanation of the new prohibition for inland letters was no doubt the fact that Witherings had been appointed Master of the Inland Letter Office for the purpose of bringing into operation his scheme for reorganizing the posts, and it was essential to the success of the scheme that he should have the sole right of carrying letters. There was, of course, the political reason of danger to the State from free and uncontrolled transmission of letters, but the feeling in that respect seems not to have been so strong regarding the inland letters as regarding the foreign letters. It developed later, however.[28]

In 1640 Witherings was displaced on some charge of maladministration, and the office was given to Philip Burlamachi, a merchant of the City of London. Witherings did not give up the office without a struggle. For two years he strove to retain it, but without much success; and in 1642 he assigned his patent to the Earl of Warwick, who continued the struggle. Burlamachi was backed by Edmund Prideaux, afterwards Attorney-General. Into the merits or progress of the contest it is unnecessary to enter. It will be sufficient to record that the Lords espoused the cause of the Earl of Warwick and the Commons that of Burlamachi; that the contest continued some two years; and that in the end the Lords gave way, and Burlamachi continued Master of the Posts.

The office fell vacant in 1644, and Parliament appointed Prideaux to the charge of the posts.[29] This task he entered upon with some seriousness, and with considerable success. He extended the service, but raised the minimum postage to 6d. From a report submitted by him to the Council of State in 1649, it appears that he had established "a weekly conveyance of letters into all parts of the nation," and that with the moneys received as postage he had been able to defray the whole cost of the postmasters of England with the exception of those on the Dover Road.[30] At the time of his appointment the posts involved a charge to the State of some £7,000 a year.[31] It might therefore be thought that for Prideaux to be able to carry on the system, to give a despatch of letters to all parts of the kingdom every week, and at the same time make the proceeds of postage cover the whole cost, except for the Dover Road, was a considerable achievement. The Commons were not, however, altogether satisfied. The long disputes between the various patentees, and their anxiety not to lose any part of the business of conveying letters, made it evident that there was a profit other than the salary paid by the King, notwithstanding that funds for the maintenance of the posts were drawn from the Exchequer year by year. The office of Master of the Posts was bought and sold. Witherings sold part of his wife's estate to the value of £105 a year in land to obtain the office. The deputy postmasters also bought their offices. And in 1642, by vote of both Houses, Burlamachi had been required to give an account of the profits of the Letter Office. The Letter Office was in fact not on the simple basis of payment by the messengers to the Master of Posts of all receipts, payment by the Master of Posts from the receipts of the ordinary fixed wages of the deputy postmasters (together with the cost of special expresses) and of his own salary, and payment from the Exchequer of the balance necessary to complete such payment. The deputy postmasters took, and retained for their own use, the postage received on private letters, paying a percentage to the Master of the Posts; and they had also the monopoly, which was very lucrative, of letting horses to travellers riding post. In view of these profits they were prepared to purchase from the Master of the Posts the office of deputy postmaster, and sums received from that source, together with the percentage of the postage of private letters, constituted the emoluments of the Master of the Posts, additional to his salary. The Commons, being no doubt aware of this, concluded that there ought to be a net revenue from the Office, and required Prideaux to pay the sum of £5,000 a year.[32]

Witherings, who by some strange chance seems never to have been altogether ousted from his offices, but to have retained that of Master of the Foreign Post, died in 1651, and there were numerous claimants for the succession to the office. The Council of State invited all persons with claims to submit them, and in reporting on the claims, suggested the farming of the Inland and Foreign Letter Offices. The question was put to the House of Commons that the whole business be "recommitted to the Council of State to take into consideration and present their opinions to the Parliament how the same may be managed for the best service of the State and ease of the people." The addition of the words "by contract or otherwise" was suggested, and accepted by the House.[33] The question was considered by a Committee, who, having found much difficulty in dealing with the numerous claims in respect of the Foreign and Inland Letter Offices, decided on the 7th November 1651, probably as a way out of the difficulty, to recommend that the offices should be let to farm. The matter was not hurriedly disposed of. On the 7th May 1653,[34] resolutions were passed by the House of Commons asserting the State monopoly of the carriage of letters, and directing the Committee appointed to consider the posts to fix rates for private letters, to obtain tenders from persons for farming the carrying of letters, and to recommend what annual sum in their opinion the State should require in case it were thought well to let the posts to farm.

On the 30th June 1653 the Inland and Foreign Letter Offices were let to John Manley at a rent of £10,000 a year,[35] and thus was instituted the system of farming, which continued until 1677 as regards the main posts, and until the late eighteenth century as regards the bye posts. The rent continuously increased. Shortly after the Restoration it was raised to £21,500 a year, and in 1667 to £43,000 a year.

The rate for a single letter, which had been raised by Prideaux to 6d., was in 1655 or 1656 reduced to 3d., owing to the efforts and competition of Clement Oxenbridge and others, who established and maintained rival services for the carriage of letters. These "interlopers" received scant consideration from Prideaux, and the services which they had established were suppressed.[36] In 1657 an Ordinance of the Commonwealth Parliament further reduced the rate to 2d. for a single letter sent for distances under 80 miles, and 3d. for distances over 80 miles. The rates were not, however, as low as would appear at first sight. There is the difference in the value of money to be allowed for; and there is the further consideration that postage was not charged according to the direct distance. All the post roads converged on London, and there were no cross posts. All letters from towns on one post road for towns on another post road must therefore pass through London, and all letters passing through London were subjected to an additional rate of postage;[37] that is to say, they were charged the appropriate rate in respect of the distance to London, and then, in addition, the appropriate rate in respect of the distance from London to destination.

The Ordinance of 1657 placed the Post Office system for the first time on a statutory basis.[38] The objects for which such an Office was required were given as three in number: first, to maintain certain intercourse of trade and commerce; secondly, to convey public despatches; and thirdly, to discover and prevent many dangerous and wicked designs against the peace and welfare of the Commonwealth. In 1660 an Act of Parliament was passed, dealing with the Post Office.[39] Essentially it was the Ordinance of 1657, passed as an Act to give it legal validity under the changed order of things. The clauses relating to the use of the Post Office as a means of detecting plots against the State were included in a modified form, and this function was by no means lost sight of.[40] During the excitement caused by the Popish Plot it was freely exercised.

The general farm of the posts was abolished in 1677, and the administration of the Office undertaken by the Government, except in the case of the smaller branch posts, in regard to which the practice of farming was even extended in the early years of the eighteenth century.[41]

The revenue yielded by the Office continued to expand. In 1694 it had reached £60,000; and when, for various reasons, but chiefly to provide for the control of the Post Office in Scotland, which had been brought under the English authorities by the Act of Union, a new Post Office Act became necessary, the Ministers, involved in a protracted war, seized the opportunity to obtain an increased revenue from the Office. Under William III this had been thought of.[42]

The Act of 1711,[43] which remained for over fifty years the principal Act relating to the Post Office, was to be an instrument of taxation. For some fifty years the Post Office had been yielding a revenue, constant and increasing, but nevertheless more or less fortuitous. Its functions had always been defined as primarily to provide for the transmission of letters, for the benefit of commerce, and for the safety and security of the kingdom, by bringing all letters into "one Post Office settled and established in this Kingdom," and conducted immediately under the eye of the King's Government. The amount paid for the farm had increased with the passing of the years, in measure with the increase of the business of the Office—not by any change in the scale of charges, which remained as fixed in 1660. Now, however, the Office was made a financial instrument, the proceeds of which were to be regulated by manipulation of the rates of charge. The results of the Act of 1711 did not fulfil the anticipations of its framers. Provision had been made for the disposal of that increase of revenue which was looked for: "the full, clear, and entire Weekly Sum of Seven Hundred Pounds of Lawful Money of Great Britain" was to be paid out of the revenues of the Post Office "towards the Establishment of a good, sure, and lasting Fund, in order to raise a present Supply of Money for carrying on the War and other her Majesty's most necessary Occasions."[44] This £700 was to be paid entirely from the proceeds of the increase in the rates. The existing revenue of £111,461 a year was to be disposed of as theretofore. All pensions and charges on the revenue were to continue, and were to have preference over the payment of £700 a week. Of the surplus over and above the £111,461 a year and the £700 a week, one-third part was to be at the disposal of Parliament, the rest to be paid into the Exchequer with the £111,461.

But the increase of revenue was so small that some of these provisions remained for many years inoperative. The increase of rate was found burdensome. Merchants resorted to every available means of avoiding the additional expense.[45] A large clandestine traffic in letters grew up. The very postboys were found carrying letters outside the mail for what fees they could obtain. In 1710 the net revenue had been £66,822. In 1721 it was £99,784, an increase of £32,962. After the deduction, therefore, of the £700 a week (or £36,400 a year), the payment of which had preference over all other payments chargeable on the Post Office revenue, excepting only the expenses of management, the actual net revenue of the Post Office available for the purposes prescribed by the Act was in 1721, £63,384, or less than the revenue of 1710 by £3,438. The Act provided that one-third of the surplus of the yield of postage over and above the sum of £147,861 (£111,461 plus the £700 a week) should be at the disposal of Parliament for the use of the public; but although the gross revenue had exceeded that sum, there was no surplus for the use of the public, the explanation being that the sum mentioned in the Act, viz. £111,461, was the amount of gross revenue, which could only serve as a basis provided the cost of management remained stationary. As a matter of fact, the cost so greatly increased that the net revenue was not sufficient to provide the sum of £700 a week and also a revenue equal to that obtained before 1711. As Mr. Joyce has pointed out, the Treasury had confounded gross and net revenue.[46]

The essentially fiscal character of the rates of 1711 is evidenced by a provision of the Act that from and after the 1st June 1743 the rates charged under the previous Acts were to be restored.[47] But after 1743, although they were without legal sanction, the rates of 1711 continued in operation, and by an Act of 1763 they were made perpetual.[48]

The fifty years following the Act of the 9th of Anne were uneventful.[49] The chief development was in connection with the cross posts; a development which, although not having direct reference to the question of the rates of postage, was yet of importance. At the commencement of the eighteenth century the main system of the Post Office still centred on London. All the main post routes radiated from London, and the great bulk of the letters passing by post were either for or from London, or passed through London. But there were, of course, numbers of letters which were not sent to London at all: letters between two towns on a post road, or letters between towns on different post roads, which could be sent direct and not by way of London. These letters were known as bye letters and cross post letters.[50] Since they were not handled in London, the authorities had not the same means of checking their numbers, and the postmasters' accounts of postage in respect of them, as could be applied in London, and grave irregularities arose. The revenue was continually defrauded by the failure of the postmasters to bring to account the postage on such letters. No record was made in respect of many of them, and their transmission became so notoriously unsafe that illicit means of conveyance were constantly resorted to. The matter was already so serious that a special clause was included in the Act of the 9th of Anne, providing that for the suppression of the abuse any postmaster found guilty of embezzling the postage of bye or way letters should forfeit £5 for every letter and £100 for every week during which he continued the practice.[51] Even this penal clause was insufficient to check the abuse, as owing to the unsatisfactory method of dealing with bye and way letters there was small risk of detection in fraud.

In 1719 Ralph Allen, then postmaster of Bath, proposed to the Postmasters-General that the management of the bye and cross post letters should be leased to him for a term of years, and offered a rent one and a half times as great as the revenue from the letters at that time. The offer was accepted, and the lease, which in the first instance was for seven years, was renewed from time to time. Allen, whose discovery was merely that of a method of check on the receipts of the postmasters from the bye and cross letters, was able to pay the rent agreed upon, largely to suppress the illicit transmission of the letters, and to make a handsome profit.[52] The chief importance of Allen's work lies, however, not so much in the fact of his rendering the bye and cross post letters subject to effective check, as in the fact that in order to retain his lease he, on each occasion of renewal, undertook the provision of additional facilities. By this means a daily post was gradually extended to almost all the post routes.[53]

In 1765 the inland rates for short distances were reduced, and a new standard of charge was introduced. Hitherto, all charges had been regulated on a mileage basis. For short distances they were now based on the number of post stages. For one post stage the rate was made 1d. for a single letter, for a double letter 2d., for a treble letter 3d., and for every ounce 4d.; for two post stages, 2d., and in proportion for double, treble, and ounce letters.[54] The financial result of the change was unsatisfactory.[55]

Up to this period the mails were carried by postboys riding horse. Notwithstanding that on all the chief roads stage-coaches were running more expeditiously than the post-horses, the Post Office kept to the old way. The superiority of the stage-coaches as means for the conveyance of letters was noticed by Mr. John Palmer, proprietor of the theatre of Bath,[56] who was so greatly impressed with the fact that he devised a complete and definite plan for the establishment of a system of mail conveyance by coach. The cost of the riding post (boy and horse) was 3d. a mile, and Palmer estimated that the change could be carried out without involving any increase of cost, especially if, as he proposed, the coaches carrying the mails should be exempted from toll. The proposal was severely criticized by the district surveyors of the Post Office, who reported on it.[57] At the Treasury, however, the proposal met with a more favourable reception. Pitt called a conference on the 21st June 1784, and after hearing the explanations of Palmer and the criticisms of the representatives of the Post Office, decided that the plan should be given a trial. Accordingly, on the 2nd August 1784 the first mail-coach ran. The experiment, which was conducted on the Bath Road, proved successful, and the plan was rapidly extended throughout the kingdom. The first coach cost 3d. a mile, the same rate as the riding post; but ultimately the coaches proved to be cheaper than the horse posts. In 1797 the rate was no more than a penny a mile.[58]

Almost simultaneously with the introduction of mail-coaches there was an increase in the rates of postage, made solely with a view to increased revenue.[59] The alteration was more or less fortuitous. In his Budget of 1784 Pitt had proposed a tax on coals which had not been well received, and the increased postage was substituted. Palmer is said to have claimed the credit of suggesting the substitution.[60] If so, his faith in his plan was abundantly justified. Notwithstanding the handicap of increased rates, it was an unqualified success, and the effect on the revenue was immediate and considerable.

At about this time several horse and cross post mails had been molested, and it was desired, in response to a considerable public agitation, to establish mail-coaches on the minor posts. This would have involved heavy cost, and as an alternative Freeling (Secretary to the Post Office, afterwards Sir Francis) suggested that only responsible persons should be employed—at this time the post riders, in fact as well as name, were in many instances mere boys—and that the riders should be armed. In order to obtain funds to meet the cost of this scheme, the rates of postage were again increased in 1797.[61] A further increase was made in 1801 in order to-provide an additional contribution of £150,000 a year to the Exchequer.[62] The new rates were elaborate and complicated, comprising no less than thirteen rates for each class of letter, according to the distance of transmission. Another increase followed in 1805, when the Post Office was called upon to provide an additional £230,000 a year.[63] This time the increase was made in a very simple manner, viz. by increasing the rates of 1801 in every case by 1d. for a single letter, 2d. for a double letter, 3d. for a treble letter, and 4d. per ounce.

All these increases, made with the avowed intention of increasing revenue, were successful in their main object. The net revenue, which in 1796 was £466,457, had risen in 1804 to £956,212, and in 1806 reached the sum of £1,119,429. The fiscal results seemed, therefore, to justify the Government in turning again and again to the Post Office when they were hard pushed to find revenue. This must be the justification of the further increase of 1812.[64] The rates then established were the highest ever charged in England. The net revenue rose slightly after their establishment, but never increased materially. These rates continued in operation until 1839, when they were completely swept away, and new rates based on principles fundamentally different were established.

This was the system, due to Sir Rowland Hill, of uniform rates, irrespective of distance of transmission, first introduced in the United Kingdom in 1839, and since adopted throughout the civilized world, not only for inland services, but for the international service.[65] The story of the conception, advocacy, and adoption of uniform postage is fully told by Sir Rowland Hill in his History of Penny Postage,[66] and need be only briefly dealt with here. The plan itself is described in the famous pamphlet, Post Office Reform: Its Importance and Practicability, which was issued by Sir Rowland Hill in 1837.

The reform was directly related to the great reform movement in England of the second quarter of the nineteenth century, and is a brilliant example of the application of the deductive method in politics. Sir Rowland Hill was a member of a Radical family, remarkable even in those days for its zeal for reform. It was the ambition of all members of the family to aid as far as possible the great movement; and all the brothers interested themselves in the study of social and economic questions, with a view to reform and improvement.[67] In the year 1835 there was a large surplus of revenue, and the brothers speculated on the direction in which reduction of taxation might best be made.[68] Sir Rowland Hill examined carefully the results of the financial reforms which had been introduced in recent years, and found that the effect on the revenue of reductions in the rate of tax showed very considerable variations. While in some cases, as, for example, leather and soap, a reduction of the duty by one-half had reduced the revenue by one-third, a similar reduction of the duty on coffee had increased the revenue by one-half. From this Sir Rowland Hill concluded that it was of the utmost importance to select carefully the taxes to be reduced, and he cast about for some guiding principle in the light of which the most suitable tax for reduction might be discovered. This principle he deduced to be as follows, viz. that the tax which most called for reduction was that which had failed most to keep pace with the increasing numbers and prosperity of the nation.[69] Tested in this way, the tax on letters proved unsatisfactory. While in most other departments of the revenue the preceding twenty years had been years of expansion and progress—as might be anticipated during a period of peace following great and exhausting wars—in the case of the Post Office the period had been one of stagnation.

Attention had already been directed to this fact by Sir Henry Parnell.[70] Between the years 1815 and 1835 the duty on stage-coaches had increased from £218,000 to nearly £500,000 a year. During the same period the revenue of the Post Office, both gross and net, had not increased at all—in point of fact, it had slightly decreased. If it had kept pace with the increase of population, the annual net revenue would have increased by half a million. If it had increased in the same proportion as the duty on stage-coaches, the revenue of 1835 would have exceeded that of 1815 by no less than £2,000,000. These facts convinced Sir Rowland Hill that a reduction of the rates of postage was urgently necessary; and apart from financial considerations, the moral and intellectual results which would follow a facilitation of intercourse appealed powerfully to a reforming Radical.[71] Having arrived at the conviction that the Post Office offered most scope for his zeal, he found no lack of material to work upon. A Commission of Inquiry into the Revenue Departments had reported on the Post Office in 1829. A Commission of Inquiry on the Post Office had been sitting for some years, and had made numerous voluminous reports. Sir Rowland Hill set to work to make a careful study of the information contained in these reports, and as the result of this study evolved a complete plan for the reform and reorganization of the whole Post Office system, a plan involving the transformation both of the theory of Post Office finance, and of the methods of practical working.[72]