HC Deb 23 March 1891 vol 351 c1659
MR. HOBHOUSE (Somerset, E.)

I beg to ask the Postmaster General if he will explain why, although the parcel was properly insured, all compensation has been refused for the loss of a sum of £8 17s. 7d., which was stolen, in transitu, from a parcel sent by post from West Pennard to London, on the 19th January last, and insured at the Glastonbury Post Office; if, in spite of application being made at the time, the Post Office authorities have been wholly unable to discover the thief; if he is aware that the money was collected in West Pennard Church for the purpose of relieving distress among the London poor; and if, under the circumstances, he will re-consider his decision, and order some compensation to be paid?


In reply to the hon. Member, I have to state that compensation has been refused on the ground that the parcel contained money—money being expressly excluded from insurance under the Regulations of the Parcel Post. The parcel when insured was not known by the Post Office servant who received it to contain money. If this had been made known by the sender, the insurance fee would not have been accepted. The thief, I regret to state, has not been discovered. I understand that the money was collected for the purpose named. I regret that it is out of my power to direct that compensation should be paid.