§ Mr. Barnebywished to nut a question to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with respect to the postage stamps and covers. The orders in council with respect to them stated that the stamps would be sold to the public at a penny each, and the covers at a penny farthing. Now the fact was, that the stamp distributors at the west-end of the town were charging one shilling and twopence a dozen for the stamps, and they refused to sell covers under three- 1317 half-pence. Was the Chancellor of the Exchequer aware of this, and if not, was it his intention to make inquiries on the subject? as he thought that the system to which he had adverted was an imposition on the public.
§ The Chancellor of the Exchequerthought the hon. Member must be under some mistake when he stated that this course was pursued by stamp distributors. He thought that he had confounded them with persons who had taken out a license to sell stamps.
§ Mr. Barnebystated that he considered the subject of so ranch importance, that he had written to the commissioners of stamps on the subject.
§ The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that it rested with the public, as to whether they would purchase the stamps from the proper distributors, or from those only who were licensed to sell stamps.
§ Mr. Barnebywanted to know whether those persons who were authorized by the Stamp-office to sell stamps, were permitted to charge eight or sixteen per cent, profit?
§ The Chancellor of the Exchequerwould answer that question at once. The officers of the stamp department sold at a certain fixed price, but other parties who had the power of sale by licence, sold at any price they could get, or the public were unwise or foolish enough to give.
§ Sir R. Peelwished to ask whether it were intended to retain permanently that ornamental engraving which appeared on the outside of the covers. He had the highest respect for the talents of the artist by whom it had been produced, and it was not his intention at all to call in question its merits as a work of art. It was a different question, however, whether it was convenient, and he therefore wished to know whether the multiplication of figures was any security against forgery? for if not, he thought it would be for the convenience of the public that the engraving should be curtailed so as to afford more space for the address. He certainly thought it would be better to select a portion of the engraving; but, in saying this, he begged again to state, that he did not call into question its merit as a work of art, although he very much doubted its utility.
§ The Chancellor of the Exchequerlikewise would not go into a discussion of the merit of the covers as a work of art. Hon. 1318 Members in the House seemed decided in opinion upon that point. He begged, however, to state, that whatever opinion the House might have formed, those persons who had been appointed to give a judgment upon the design, had come to a different conclusion from that which appeared to be the general opinion. It might be desirable to make some alteration in the engraving, and he certainly thought too much space was occupied with the figures. There would be scarcely any expense in changing it, but of course the object of the engraving on the cover was to afford as much check as possible against forgery.