§ MR. CONYBEARE (Cornwall, Camborne)asked the Postmaster General, Whether it is the fact that on the midnight duty, in the registered letter branch of the General Post Office, the "hand to hand" check system is not pursued; whether, during the last six months, several registered letters have been lost on that duty; whether it is the case that a junior sorter, named Cox, was required to perform a sorter's duty, without any pecuniary consideration being granted to him for the increased responsibility thereby entailed upon him, and was made responsible for the less of a registered letter, and fined 10s., notwithstanding the fact that there was no proof of it having ever been in his possession; and, whether he will take steps to insure the safer transmission of registered letters, in the interests of the public, and in justice to the Post Office officials?
§ THE POSTMASTER GENERAL (Mr. RAIKES) (Cambridge University)In reply to the hon. Member, I have to 1607 state that when large numbers of registered letters are dealt with, it is impossible to make the charge and discharge in writing for each individual letter; but the acceptance of a certain number of registered letters by one officer from another officer without question is held to discharge the latter from farther responsibility. It was the duty of the officer named by the hon. Member to ascertain the number of registered letters which he had to take over, and to check this number at the actual time he received them by the entries in a certain book. This he neglected to do; and when he subsequently checked the registered letters charged to him, the one now lost was missing. For this neglect of duty he was fined. The officer in question was paid an additional allowance of 2s. a-week in consideration of his employment on registered letter duty. The Regulations for dealing with registered letters are sufficient if properly carried out.