The Sun.
London, England, 1849-12-01 00:00:00

ebeitniall

LONDON, SATURDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1849

Again we have occasion to refer to the fanatical
effJrts of the Sabbatarians, in reference to the
obstruction of all improvement in the Post•office
department. Our revival of this vexed question is
induced by the appearance of an admirable pamphlet
on the suNect (recently issued from the establishment
of the eminent publisher, Mr. MURRAY), written by
a reverend gentleman, of great ability, the Head
Master of Harrow School, and late a Fellow of

Tq,inity College, Cambridge* So calm, so clear, so
argumentative, so just, amiable, and conclusive are
the remarks made by this intelligent divine upon the
theme of so much angry discussion, that we must be
allowed to transcribe from the pages of his brochure
several of its most felicitous passages—thereby en-
abling him to speak for himself, in his own fashion
and En his own language. Having himself refused
to sign a parochial remonstrance against the proposed
changes in the Post-office Establishment, Dr.
VAUGHAN conceives himselfjes'ified in addressing his
friends through the medium of this printed letter,
for the purpose of showing them that such a refusal
on his part is anything but incompatible with an
earnest and reverential regard for, what is called, the
national observance of the Sunday. To demonstrate
this position he takes, as the basis of his argument,
the original minute submitted by Mr. ROWLAND
lIILL to the Postmaster-General during the course of
last February---a document which is open to general
examination, and which therefore it is impossible to
garble for the sake of bolstering up a sophistry.
Now what is the exact purport of that minute and
what are its avowed intentions ? Dr. VAUGHAN,
upon this point, thus expresses himself, and to his
commentaries upon the scheme of Mr. ROWLAND
HILL we would here demand most especial attention.
He says :
" The measure now impugned (the transmission,
namely, of certain provincial and foreign letters through
London on the Sunday) is not an isolated one. It is but
ono part of a more general scheme. And what is the
object of that scheme, as described in the minute re-
fereed to ? The reduction of the Sunday duties of the
Post-office. The securing of the utmost possible amount
of Sunday rest to all connected with the Post office.
What, again, was the first part of the same mea-
sure? What was that earlier step, taken by the same
[ersons in the same direction, of which the present
change is a consequence ? The total suspension
of all money-order business on Sunday throughout Eng-
land and Wales. And what are some of those
ulterior mealures, to which the attention of the origi-
nators of this is next to be directed? The deferring of
work now done on the Sunday till after midnight. The
reduction of Sunday work, even at the chief office, con-
siderably below its present amount. Important mea-
sures of relief to the rural messengers and rural re-
vivers on the Sunday. What, finally, is the declared
object of the present alteration? Further relief from
Sunday labour in the provincial post offices; and thus
the diminution of Sunday work in the department as a
whole. So far from its being correct to state this as a
merely accidental result of the measure, it is its very
object and purpose, to which all else is subordinate and
subsidiary."
In continuation of these remarks, he asks if such
facts as those just enumerated ought not "to preclude,
at least, a precipitate sentence of condemnation ?"
Assuredly there is not a casuist in the land but would
shrink from openly avowing that it is fair to impute
to any one not merely " motives which be disavows,
but motives of which he professes the very opposite."
Forced, then, to accept these as the only rational,
and indeed admissible grounds of argument, the most
virulent and prejudiced Sabbatarian will be com-
pelled to learn (with the Rev. Dr. VAUGHAN) the
object of the minute of Mr. ROWLAND HILL from
its author, and, consequently, to arrive at the same
identical conclusions.
Subsequently our learned and respected pamphleteer
gainsays very happily, and denies very logically the
objection, that the changes prove practically injurious
by causing more harm than it obviates, by intro-
ducing more Sunday labour than it supersedes.
Granting, he maintains, that at the outset the altera-
tion may actually appear to increase the
Sunday duties at the Post•office (as it literally
does to a certain extent in London), it should
nevertheless be remembered that the additional at-
tendance found to be necessary in St. Martin's-le-
Grand is voluntary—that it is not permitted to in-
fringe upon the hours of Divine service either during
the morning or the afternoon—and that Sunday
labours for the reception and assortment of letters
having been previously tolerated, the changes are in
no respect innovations. Besides, he inquires, even
regarding the addition of twenty-five clerks to those
already employed on Sundays at the central estab-
lishment as an evil, "is it counterbalanced by any
greater good ?" Upon this particular he proceeds—
" It is necessary to t,,ko a national view of such a
question. The Post-office system throughout England
is one, not many. The London office, and the provin-
cial offices, are but sev -ral parts of one connected whole.
The question, therefore, is, net whether this office, or
that office, separately regarded, will be a gainer or a loser
by the change; but whether, on the whole, the
u.lTAregate of gain or loss will preponderate; whether, so
to say, the Post-office of England, as distinguished from
that of London separately, or that of York or of Man-

" AiLetter on the Itte Post-offi.A Agitation. By
Charles John Vaughan, D.D., &e., &e." Byo., pp, 16.
Murray; Lundon. 1849.