§ MR. BRADLAUGH (Northampton)asked the Postmaster General, If he has inquired into the claim set up by the Department to refuse to deliver letters at the addressee's actual residence when the words "and Co." form part of the direction, unless the name of the firm is painted or shown upon the premises?
§ THE POSTMASTER GENERAL (Mr. RAIKES) (Cambridge University)I have now seen the case to which the hon. Member refers. It is not one of re-direction, but one in which the address of the letters appeared hardly to correspond with the place at which the business could be carried on; and it was under these circumstances that some indication of the business was required to be exhibited. No letters were, however, withheld from delivery. The hon. Member will, I think, agree that it is the duty of the Post Office to exercise special precautions for the protection of the public in any cases where there appeared to be such a doubt.
§ MR. BRADLAUGHasked, Whether it was not the case that these particular letters had been detained for more than two days.
§ MR. RAIKESsaid, that they had been detained while inquiry was going on. It was necessary to make some such inquiry, to prevent the public from being deceived.