§ MR. HENNIKER HEATON (Canterbury)I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, when the rule limiting the prepayment of a telegraphic reply to 2s. was promulgated; and, would any injury result to the Telegraphic Department by the introduction of a rule allowing 10s., in place of 2s., being prepaid for a reply telegram; if not, whether he will permit the public to prepay replies by telegraph to an increased amount above that now fixed.
§ THE SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. R. W. HANBURY,), Prestonas representing the Postmaster General, said: The rule limiting the payment of a reply telegram to 2s. was published in 264 the London Gazette of September 22, 1885. It was found that reply telegrams were being largely used for the free transmission of money by telegraph. A man wishing to back a horse, for instance, sent a reply-paid telegram to a bookmaker asking him to back the horse for the amount of the reply paid. He would send a sovereign by prepaying his reply to that extent, and tell the bookmaker to back the horse for that amount. The Post Office endeavoured to check this abuse by limiting the amount of the reply. Then it was found that money was still being largely transmitted to tipsters in small amounts, and after a race meeting the Post Office sometimes had to pay to a single tipster as much as £100. This abuse, it was thought, could be stopped by saying the Post Office would refund the sender only and not to the addressee. But then it was also found that so many telegrams are sent from racecourses that the tipster finds no difficulty in disposing of his reply-paid forms for cash to friends who want to send telegrams, and that people thus, practically, still are able to make the reply-paid telegrams a medium for the free transmission of money by telegraph. It should be recollected also that these reply telegrams, or rather the recovery of the money paid for them involves a great deal of labour and expense to the Post Office in correspondence, forms, etc.; and the Post Office is therefore anxious to limit this expense as far as possible by not increasing the number of telegrams on which a demand will be made for repaying the money paid on them. I have already stated in the House that the Postmaster General is not aware that inconvenience has arisen from the present restriction. If any per-persons have suffered inconvenience it is, of course, open to them to make a representation to the Department on the subject.