§ MR. BRADLAUGH (Northampton)asked the Postmaster General, Whether he will consent to the appointment of a Select Committee of this House to inquire into the specific charge against Postmaster Brame, of opening a letter in transit through the Ryde Post Office, such letter being addressed to one J. Rabson, Mount Street, Ryde; whether he has received two statements in writing from Robert Fry and Edgar Hunt, containing specific and detailed allegations that Postmaster Brame had given an order through the chief clerk, Mr. Bright, that all letters addressed to John Rabson were to be detained; whether a Post Office clerk, Brady, on or about October 26, wrote out a notice of such order and posted it in the sorting room at Ryde Post Office; whether, on October 26, a letter addressed to John Rabson was actually opened by Postmaster Brame, read by him, and re-sealed; whether, on this letter being handed for delivery to letter carrier James Young Newnham, another letter carrier, Edward Fairhall, drew Newnham's attention to the fact that the letter had been opened; whether, thereupon, letter carrier Newnham refused to take the letter until he received special instructions from Head Clerk Bright; and, whether the Postmaster General will lay the Correspondence upon the Table?
§ THE POSTMASTER GENERAL (Mr. RAIKES) (Cambridge University)I have received statements in writing from Robert Fry and Edgar Hunt containing specific and detailed allegations that Mr. Brame, the Postmaster of Ryde, had given an order that all letters addressed to John Rabson, clerk in the Ryde Post Office, were to be detained, and that on the 26th of October Mr. Brame actually opened, read, and re-sealed a letter addressed to Rabson. I have caused a searching investigation to be made on the subject, and the facts elicited are as follows:—At the request of a police constable in the Post Office service, who had arrested Rabson on a charge of felony, the chief clerk, Mr. Bright, put up a notice in the sorting office, which was written out by the clerk Brady, that all letters for Rabson were to be detained. The intention was 1504 that they should be handed to the constable for conveyance to Rabson, who was then in prison. On the 26th of October, the day after Rabson had been committed for trial, the first and only letter for him since his arrest arrived. It was addressed to him, "care of the Post Office," and not, as the hon. Member appears to have been informed, to "Mount Street, Ryde." This letter was immediately taken into the Postmaster's room, where the police constable happened to be, and was shortly afterwards returned to the sorting office, with an intimation that, as Rabson had been released on bail, the letter should be delivered at his residence. It was at once given to the proper postman, Newnham, and its delivery was, therefore, in no way delayed. Edward Fairhall, another postman, states that he drew Newnham's attention to certain marks on the envelope, which seemed to him to suggest that it might have been opened. Newnham, while denying in Fairhall's presence that the latter intervened in the matter, says that he noticed that the envelope was slightly torn, and asked Mr. Bright for instructions as to what he should say to the addressee. But no one is able to say that the envelope did not present precisely the same appearance when it had been first sent into the Postmaster's room; and there is, therefore, no evidence to refute the emphatic declarations of the Postmaster and the police constable, who are both of long service and good character, that the letter was not any way violated while in their possession, or with their knowledge. A postman, who is stated by Mr. Hunt in his letter to me to have said in the presence of others that he had actually seen the Postmaster open the letter, read it, and re-seal it, has declared in the most solemn manner, and is prepared to verify his statement on oath, that he neither saw anything of the kind nor told Mr. Hunt that he had seen it. Mr. Hunt has been informed of this postman's evidence, and he has declined to avail himself of an offer that it should be repeated in his presence, or to produce the other persons before whom he alleged that this specific allegation had been made. The hon. Member will understand that I make no charge against either Mr. Fry or Mr. Hunt of having wilfully made any false charge. But I am disposed 1505 to believe that an exaggerated view of the case grew up in Mr. Hunt's mind from the undoubted order given to detain Rabson's letters, together with the suspicious appearance of the envelope. I do not think the Postmaster acted as prudently as might have been desired in the matter; but I do not hesitate to accept his positive assurance that he did not open the letter in question. I do not believe that any further information can be elicited by a Parliamentary inquiry.