It was the custom after 1609 to follow the appointment of every new Postmaster-General with a proclamation assigning him and his deputies the sole privilege of carrying all letters and reading anathema upon all interlopers.[737] Thus King James favoured Stanhope, his Postmaster-General, with a grant of monopoly.[738] On de Quester's appointment as Foreign Postmaster-General a proclamation was issued, forbidding any but his agents from having anything to do with foreign letters.[739] In spite of the improvements which he inaugurated, we find him asking the King a few years later to renew his patent of monopoly and his request was granted.[740] He was evidently suffering from competition. But the Merchant Adventurers' Posts were not yet dead and their Postmaster, Billingsley, abetted by the House of Commons,[741] gave de Quester so much trouble that he was imprisoned by the Council's order.[742] [737] Letters carried by a friend or special messenger or a common carrier were excepted. [738] _Rep. Com._, 1844, xiv, 601, app., p. 42 (20). [739] _Ibid._, 1591-94, p. 401. [740] _Ibid._, 1627-28, pp. 511-22. [741] The House had already shown its interest in postal affairs by summoning postmasters before the Committee of Grievances in 1624 (_Jo. H. C._, 1547-1628, pp. 689-774). [742] _Cal. S. P. D._, 1628-29, p. 177. In the meantime the postmen on the London-Plymouth road had petitioned the Council that they alone should carry the letters and despatches of the merchants over their road. They said they had so improved the service between London and Plymouth that letters were now despatched between the two cities in three days and an answer might be received within one week from the time of first writing. Their complaint was against a certain Samuel Jude, who had undertaken the conveyance of the London merchants' letters. Jude himself acknowledged this, but said that he had never meddled with the "through" post by which he meant the travellers' post.[743] [743] _Ibid._, 1625-49, p. 367; 1629-31, p. 200.