HC Deb 26 August 1895 vol 36 c794

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he is aware that a letter sent by Sir Edward Russell, from Liverpool, addressed to Mr. Wheeler, High Street, Oxford, was marked by the postal officials to the effect that the address was insufficient, and returned for that reason to the sender, although the tradesman in High Street named Wheeler is one of the best known citizens of Oxford, and who constantly receives letters addressed as above; and whether the Postmaster General will direct that proper pains be taken to deliver letters to well known persons.


It is the case that a letter addressed "Mr. Wheeler, High Street, Oxford," and intended, as it since proves, for Mr. Wheeler, of No. 106, High Street, was returned as in-sufficiently addressed. The explanation is that there is another tradesman named Wheeler at 56, High Street, Oxford, to whom the address High Street (without number) would equally apply, and that, in consequence of letters for one tradesman falling into the hands of the other, irritation has been caused. In such cases, in the absence of some mutual agreement, the practice of the department is to decline to decide between the claimants, and to treat the letters as insufficiently addressed. I may add that since the date of the question, an agreement has been arrived at, and that the ambiguously addressed letters in question are to be offered in the first instance to Mr. Wheeler of No. 106. As regards the concluding words of the question, I am not prepared to admit, on behalf of the Postmaster General, that the suggested directions are called for. ["Hear, hear!"]