HC Deb 06 February 1854 vol 130 cc271-2
MR. J. BALL

said, he wished to ask the hon. Secretary of the Treasury whether, according to the regulations of the Post Office department, inquiry is instituted into each case of the non-arrival of mail trains within a reasonable interval from the hour fixed by the contracts made with the several railway companies; and whether sufficient means exist for instituting strict inquiry in such cases, and verifying the facts by sworn testimony? Also whether any, and what, means had been taken by the authorities of the Post Office to render the London and North-Western Railway Company liable for the frequent and great irregularity in the arrival of the mail trains passing over that line; and whether the contracts for the conveyance as mails by railway companies are so framed of to make the latter liable to a pecuniary penalty in cases where the non-arrival of the mail train is caused by the act of servants of the railway company, as, for instance, the despatch of a slow goods train from a station immediately before the hour fixed for the arrival of the mail train?

MR. J. WILSON

said, that in reply to the first question, he had to state that whenever irregularities in the arrival of the mails took place, a letter was addressed by the Post Office authorities to the secretary of the railway company, requiring to be furnished with information as to the cause of the delay. It was the duty of the mail guard to note the time of the arrival of the mail at each station; but at present there was no way of verifying the facts with respect to any delays that took place by means of sworn testimony. It should, in justice to the railway companies, be stated that the irregularities complained of were sometimes caused by the Post Office, and to meet this the Postmaster General had proposed to some of the leading companies that a system of mutual fine should be established, so that the Post Office should pay a fine if the irregularity was caused by them, and, on the other hand, the railway company should be amerced if the fault was theirs. That arrangement had not, however, been yet carried into effect. There was no doubt that the contracts entered into with the various railway companies did make them liable in a pecuniary penalty for irregularities in the conveyance of the mails; but the Postmaster General felt that it would not be desirable, if it could be avoided, to enter into litigation with the railway companies. If, however, he was unable to secure that regularity which the country had a right to expect, he might be induced to apply to Parliament for greater powers with respect to the companies than he at present possessed.

MR. SPOONER

said, he wished to know who was to pay the fines—the Postmaster General or the public?

MR. J. WILSON

thought the hon. Gentleman would feel that it was no part of the duty of the Postmaster General to pay the fines incurred by the officers of the public in the discharge of public duties. In the town with which the hon. Gentleman was well acquainted—Birmingham—the number of letters had increased by several thousands per week, as compared with last year; and when it was recollected that the letters in the country generally had increased 70,000 per week, as compared with the number only a few weeks ago, it was quite clear that it was impossible at once to perfect arrangements for avoiding all the delays attendant upon this great increase of business.

MR. SPOONER

But who is to pay the fines incurred by the Post Office?

MR. WILSON

They must be borne by the Post Office revenue.