Page:The life and letters of Sir John Henniker Heaton bt. (IA lifelettersofsi00port).pdf/316

 I write to ask why should the Post Office not be liable just the same as any other common carrier for all goods lost or stolen while being carried. It's too ridiculous that a taxpayer should both suffer from democrat confiscation and the remains of Norman tyranny. if any private person ran the Post Office, would they be exempted? And even if the Post Office was blameless, would not the interest of the taxpayer be to get the benefit of the principle of mutual insurance against loss? Of all people the Government should be the easiest, not the hardest, to make liable for any loss they are connected with.

Fortunately I am specially protected by Act of Parliament from against such rapacity.

No doubt if Carter Paterson, or some other carrying firm attempted to protect themselves in this manner the public would desert them, and decline to deal any longer with them. But I enjoy a monopoly, and these grumblers should attack that, not me.

You may remember that at our last interview I presented you with some thousands of reply-paid telegraph forms on each of which the public had paid sixpence or more. Our rule is not to allow them to be used after two months have elapsed, and to refuse to return the money to sender or receiver. The letter in my hand is from the Member of Parliament whom I named. He has a sort of talent for inventing postal grievances, which he brings the public to believe they are suffering from; and under our earliest Postmaster-General he might have been in danger of the Tower. Nothing, as you will observe, is too trivial to escape his censure: