§ Mr. NEWMANasked the Postmaster-General whether his attention had been drawn to the delivery, on 28th March, to a wrong address of a registered letter addressed Messrs. C. Clarke and Company, High Street, Chasetown; whether he was aware that this letter contained a formal notice abandoning a county court action brought against them, and that owing to their not receiving the same Messrs. Clarke attended at the court, and on the non-appearance of plaintiffs, who had sent the letter, were awarded costs amounting to £2 11s. l0d.; and, seeing that the non-receipt of such registered letter was entirely owing to the carelessness of his own officials, whether he would provide for the parties who had been mulcted in damages as a consequence being reimbursed from the public funds?
§ Mr. HERBERT SAMUELThis letter was duly taken to the right address, but no one's attention could be gained there. It was then handed to a tradesman next door, understood to be a brother of the addressees. It ought to have been taken back to the Chasetown Office, and sent out again at the next delivery, if not called for meanwhile. I am sorry the rule was not adhered to, though it was broken in order to meet what was thought to be the convenience of both senders and addressees. I am unable to accept liability for the costs which were awarded against the senders.
§ Mr. NEWMANWhat advantage does an individual get for registering a letter which does not contain money or valuables?
§ Mr. HERBERT SAMUELSecurity in transmission.
§ Mr. NEWMANBut in this case he the not get security in transmission.
§ Mr. HERBERT SAMUELThe letter was delivered to the correct address, but no one was there to receive it.