MR. W. F. D. SMITH (Strand, Westminster)I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether he is aware that a parcel posted by Messrs. Minister to Mr. E. Stovel at Toronto, on the 8th April was, after some delay, returned to the senders because it was said to be insufficiently stamped, although stamped in compliance with the directions given in the current Post Office Guide; and whether, under these circumstances, compensation for the loss incurred by Messrs. Minister will be given, and in future care be taken that the directions in the Post Office Guide shall coincide with those given to local postmasters?
§ MR. A. MORLEYIt is the case that the parcel referred to was returned in the circumstances stated; and the postage prepaid on the parcel has since been refunded to Messrs. Minister & Company. The law does not impose on the Post Office the payment of consequential damages in such a case; nor have I any funds available for the purpose, and I regret that I cannot, therefore, compensate Messrs. Minister & Company. The mistake arose from the fact that unforeseen delay occurred in carrying out a reduction of the rate which, when the Post Office Guide was sent to press, was expected to come into force by the date of publication.