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
And yet they were private letters, letters which had passed under the
seal of confidence. It is by no means the least strange part of a
strange and painful business that it appears never to have crossed the
mind of either Walsingham or Chesterfield that this was a class of
evidence which could not with propriety be used. Bonnor, not content
with the letters he had already produced, searched his correspondence
through from the time that he and Palmer became connected with the Post
Office, and hailed any additional testimony he was able to collect
against his former friend and benefactor with fiendish delight. He
literally revelled in the shameless task he had set himself to perform.
Evidence-hunting he called it. "We shall not only prove all that has
been asserted," he wrote, "but a great deal more; and on the grand point
of his premeditating a thorough and complete confusion in the business
of the inland office, for the declared purpose of thereby disgracing the
postmasters-general, I have proof that for strength and conviction no
holy writ can exceed. But," he added, "I have a great deal to work up
yet."
As soon as the unholy brief was completed, a second interview took place
with the minister. Pitt appears again to have said little, even less
than on the previous occasion. He had been deceived. The
postmasters-general must take their own course. The rest is soon told.
Two official minutes were prepared, the one in Lombard Street and the
other at Whitehall. By the postmaster-generals' minute Palmer, the
insubordinate Post Office servant, was dismissed.[69] By the minister's
minute Palmer, the distinguished Post Office reformer, was granted a
pension equal to double the amount of his salary. His salary was £1500,
and he derived another £1500 a year from his percentage. The pension
which Pitt conferred upon him was £3000. To this was added later on,
after an interval of many years, a Parliamentary grant of £50,000.
[69] Even in such a detail as the manner of dismissal, Pitt shewed his
usual consideration for Palmer. By the minister's direction Palmer was
not to be dismissed in so many words. The postmasters-general were
simply to make out another nominal list of the establishment, and from
this list Palmer's name was to be excluded.
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