In studying the post-office history of this early period, the inquirer is apt to be misled by some of the terms used; for the words "post," "postmaster," "pacquett," and the like, were not always applied in the modern sense, the word "post" sometimes serving to designate common carriers, and "postmaster" being used indifferently to indicate the Master of the Posts and the postmasters on the roads. The word pacquett was also applied to common carriers. An instance of the last mentioned is given in M'Dowall's _Chronicles of Lincluden_. A letter was written from the abbey on the 24th August 1625, to the "richte noble and verrie guid Lord the Earl of Nithisdaill," in which the following words appear:--They "intreat the richt guid lord to help them suddenly--at once; and more especially that he would procure an order from the King's Treasurer to stay the legal proceedings directed against them, until His Majesty's pleasure in the matter shall have been made known. Because of the urgency of their case, the noble lord is requested to favour them with an answer by a bearer of his own in the event of the ordinary 'pakett' being unavailable." Now the word "pakett" here does not refer to the post, but to the packman--the carrier--with his pack of goods. In what follows we shall endeavour, as far as possible, to use terms that will prevent any confusion of the kind indicated. The reign of Charles I. was one full of abuses. The king required money to maintain the excesses of his Court; his ministers were called upon to find the money; they themselves had to wring it out of the pockets of the people; and its passage through their hands produced such attenuation that but a small portion reached the royal coffers. Clarendon says that of £200,000 drawn from the subject in a year by various oppressions, scarcely £1500 came to the king's use or account. Monopolies in trade were granted for lump sums paid down, offices were bought and sold, no man seemed secure without support of a patron, and patronage was a marketable commodity. It will be remembered that Lord Stanhope's patent covered not only the control of the inland posts, but the posts in foreign parts, _within the kings dominions_. Although Stanhope was not by patent specifically empowered to send or work posts in foreign parts, _out of the kings dominions_, it appears to have been his practice to do so, undertaking, as may be supposed, all the various duties of conveying the king's letters and packets to whatever parts they might be directed. A somewhat similar condition of want of funds as that existing in the reign of Charles distinguished the reign of his father, James I.