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
[55] _The Present State of Great Britain and Ireland_, published in
1742, states that at that time compensation was still given for losses
sustained in the penny post. The words are: "If a parcel happen to
miscarry, the value thereof is to be made good by the office, provided
the things were securely inclosed and fast sealed up under the
impression of some remarkable seal." This is an error; and that an error
should be made on the point serves to confirm the view that little was
known of the Post Office and its doings even 150 years ago. That
compensation was not at that time given for losses is beyond all
question. It happens that in that very year, 1742, a Mr. Vavasour
appealed to Whitehall to grant him compensation for the loss of bank
notes to the amount of £20 which had been stolen from a letter in its
transit through the post; and the postmasters-general, after stating
that no precedent existed for granting compensation, implored the
Treasury not to create one. "All persons," they write under date the 4th
of August 1742, "that for their own convenience send notes or bills of
value by the post inclosed in letters do so at their own risque without
any foundation that we know of for recovery of this office in case they
should be stolen or lost by robbery or other accidents. And this we take
to be not only reasonable but just in all construction of law." Again,
in 1778 an action for compensation was brought against the Post Office,
and Lord Mansfield, after delivering the unanimous opinion of the Court
of King's Bench that the postmasters-general were not responsible for
losses sustained in their department, proceeded to observe that no
similar action had been brought since the year 1699. Giles Jacob, in his
_Law Dictionary_, published in the last century, gives this account of
the matter: "It was determined so long ago as 13 Will. III., in the case
of _Lane_ v. _Cotton_, by three judges of the Court of King's Bench,
though contrary to Lord Chief Justice Holt's opinion, that no action
could be maintained against the postmasters-general for the loss of
bills or articles sent in letters by the post."
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