HC Deb 23 February 1911 vol 21 cc2070-1
EARL of RONALDSHAY

asked the Postmaster-General if he is aware that during the month of January a newspaper packet from Australia addressed to Mr. E. C. Tilley, 38, Kitchener Road, East Finchley, London, N., was surcharged the sum of 4d.; that Mr. Tilley refused acceptance of the packet on these conditions; and that when he subsequently made inquiries with regard to the packet and the reason for the surcharge he was informed that the packet could not be found; and, if so, what steps, if any, he proposes to take in the matter?

Mr. HERBERT SAMUEL

I find that Mr. Tilley's inquiries with regard to the packet in question were not received until some days after his refusal to accept it, and that in the meantime, being of no intrinsic value, it had been destroyed in ordinary course. There is no reason to suppose that the surcharge was not correctly made, and the matter seems to call for no further action on my part.

EARL of RONALDSHAY

Are we to understand from the right hon. Gentleman that if an addressee refuses to receive a package at the time of delivery on the ground that, in his opinion, he is surcharged unfairly, the Post Office are then entitled to destroy the package?

Mr. HERBERT SAMUEL

All packages which are of no intrinsic value and which are not delivered, are kept for seven days, and then destroyed. If any complaint is made in the meantime about the packet the matter is looked into. This person not only refused to pay the surcharge, but made no complaint until after the time had elapsed for destruction.

Mr. WILLIAM REDMOND

Might not a longer period than seven days be allowed? Seven days seems rather short.

Mr. HERBERT SAMUEL

I will consider that.