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
The _Times_ had long protested against the intolerable delay which
foreign newspapers sustained at the Post Office. Especially had it
protested against the absurdity of a system which, while withholding the
newspapers themselves, yet permitted a summary of their contents to be
published. But it had still more personal grounds of complaint. Letters
for the _Times_, sealed letters addressed by permission to the
Under-Secretaries of State, were excluded from the Foreign Office bag
and kept back for the general delivery because, forsooth, the clerks at
the Post Office were pleased to feel sure that these letters contained
foreign newspapers, and feared that by forwarding them they would damage
their own interests.
Such were the amazing liberties taken with correspondence in those days.
No wonder that the _Times_ proceeded to resent the outrage. In its issue
of the 9th of May 1807 appeared an article which, after charging the
Post Office with extortions and with sacrificing public convenience to
the avarice of individuals, proceeded to declare that its administration
was a disgrace to the Government. Freeling's indignation knew no bounds.
That the charge was just never seems to have occurred to him. In his
view it was nothing less than a libel--a libel of the most malignant
character. Never had man been more cruelly wronged than himself. The
postmasters-general, Lords Sandwich and Chichester, had been only four
days in office, and their chief-officer was as yet unknown to them.
Obviously the intention was to damage this officer's reputation in the
eyes of his new masters. But this intention should be frustrated. A
criminal information should be filed. No; not a criminal information,
for thus the aggressor's mouth would be closed. It should be a civil
suit or action at law; and then the aggressor would be at liberty to
tell his own tale, and all the world should see how little justification
there was for his aspersions.
At this time it was not known to Freeling that letters for the _Times_
sent under cover to the Under-Secretaries of State were being diverted
from the ordinary course; and when, a little later on, the fact of
diversion became known to him, the terms in which he expressed his sense
of the impropriety were such as even the aggrieved newspaper would
probably have held to leave nothing to be desired. But to apologise and
arrest proceedings--these were things which would appear not to have
come within the sphere of contemplation. An action had been begun, and
it must proceed to the bitter end. A righteous cause is not necessarily
one that can be defended at law. Such would seem to have been the case
in the present instance, for when the action came on for trial, the
_Times_ failed to appear, and judgment went by default.
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