The History of the Post Office, from Its Establishment Down to 1836Joyce, Herbert
History
The History of the Post Office, from Its Establishment Down to 1836
Joyce, Herbert
Postal service -- Great Britain -- History
As with the clandestine traffic, so with the abuse of the franking
privilege. In isolated cases, where the abuse was more than usually
glaring, the postmasters-general would write to the erring member a
letter of mild expostulation, affecting to believe him more sinned
against than sinning;[42] but even if this had any effect in the
particular instance, to stem the torrent was beyond their power. In
Great Britain alone the postage represented by the franked letters,
excluding those which were or which purported to be on His Majesty's
service, amounted in 1716 to what was for that time, relatively to the
total Post Office revenue, the enormous sum of £17,500 a year. In
Ireland the members followed the example of their English colleagues, if
indeed they did not improve upon it. In 1718 the Irish Parliament sat
for three months, and in 1719 it sat for nine months; and it was only
during the session, and for forty days before and after, that letters
could be franked. Cornwallis and Craggs had now been some years at the
Post Office; and yet, with all their experience of the extent to which
the abuse of franking was carried, they were startled to see the effect
which the duration of Parliament had upon the receipts. In 1718 the
gross revenue of the Irish Post Office--and in the gross revenue was
reckoned the postage on members' letters, the postage which these
letters would have paid if they had not been franked--amounted to
£14,592, and the net revenue to £3066. In 1719, although the gross
revenue rose to £19,522, an amount higher by £4930 than in the preceding
year, the net revenue fell from £3066 to £753. Such was the effect upon
the revenue of a difference of six months in the duration of the two
Parliaments.
[42] Here are two letters they wrote:--
To Mr. CULVERT.
_Nov. 1, 1714._
SIR--As the three inclosed letters are directed to you in several places
we have reason to think that some persons have presumed to take the
liberty of your name. This practice is so great an abuse upon this
office, and so very prejudicial to His Majesty's revenue, that we must
desire you'll be pleased to send such letters inclosed that don't belong
to you to the office to be charged; and we are very well assured you'll
discourage the like practice for the future.
--We are, sir, your most humble servants,
T. FRANKLAND
J. EVELYN.
To Sir RICHARD GROSVENOR, Bart.
_April 29, 1715._
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account