The Sun.
London, England, 1850-05-31 00:00:00

FRIDAY EVENING,

SUNDAY LABOUR IN THE POST-
OFFICE.
(Prom the Times.)
A journal of which a perfect copy may be procured
by half-past four every Monday morning cannot be
expected to advocate " the total cessation of Sunday
labour in the Post-office." If all Sunday labour is
forbidden, then we are participes crintinis, and even if
we were allowed the Jewish mode of reckoning the
day—viz., from sunset to sunset, we should still
find considerable difficulty in doing what is ex-
pected of us, without infringing on the Sabbatical
hours. Our evening contemporaries, indeed, and
some of the " weeklies," might preach Sab-
batical observances without the like inconsis-
tency; but we in return might appeal, and
we do appeal, to the common sense, the uni-
versal usage, and the immemorial tradition of
the country. The English custom is so decidedly
and so manifestly against a literal and Jewish ob-
servance of the Sundry, that few persons can sub-
scribe to Lord Ashley's proposition without strange
forgetfulness or reckless hypocrisy. There are
few persons in this metropolis who do not use a
carriage, or an omnibus, or a steamer, whenever
it suits their convenience or their pleasure on a Sun-
day. There are few persons who do not have a hot
dinner on Sunday, if their means allow it, and keep
their servants at home for the purpose of cooking it;
there are few persons of a humbler class who hesitate
to send a dish to a bakehouse, or to purchase refresh-
ments at a public-house or a shop on Sunday; there
are few who will not pay a toll on this day ; or who,
on an emergency, will not write a note, and send a
special messenger with it. Nor can we pretend to
quarrel with the liberty claimed by the English public
in these matters. The English particularly resent the
bondage of a rigorous exterior. They are not the
people to draw their blinds, and spend a fine Sunday
afternoon in demure and solitary tippling. They
abhor seemings. Accordingly, their Sunday observ-
ance is honest and transparent. Asa general rule,
they take a moderate degree of recreation on Sunday,
and do as much work as will save a good deal more
work, or contribute to the cheerful enjoyment of the
day. If they were more capable of hypocrisy, perhaps
they would adopt a more formal profession.
We are justified, therefore,
in
the practice and
public opinion of the country in deinanding for the
public service no stricter Sabbatical rule than as great
a cessation of labour as is compatible with public con-
venience, or as will not produce serious inconveniences.
It may not be easy, indeed, to lay down the rule ; for
it would undoubtedly puzzle ninety-nine hundredths
of the respectable householders of this metropolis to
say what is their rule of Sabbatical observance. The
question for the conscience in this matter is not so
much the antecedent rule as the propriety of this or
that existing practice. Show us the practice, and we
are prepared with an opinion upon it. We are pre-
pared to defend the use of a village bakehouse on a
Sunday, because a hot dinner contributes to the cheer-
fulness of the day, and it is better that one public oven
should be heated than twenty private ones. We are
prepared to defend a walk into the country, and an
occasional excursion further and faster than our legs
will carry us, on Sunday, because this also tends to
ally holiness with cheerfulness, and because, in the
neighbourhood of large cities, the respectable class are
a species of police over the less respectable, and show
an example of innocent and quiet recreation. From
all accounts, the Sunday is much better observed in
the suburbs of London than in the suburbs of Edin-
burgh and Glasgow, where the line between the ob-
servers and the non-observers is much wider than
here, and where the observers sit at home doing what
they best know themselves, and the non-observers
have a monopoly of the out-door recreation. If the
general practice of respectable Englishmen is any
guide, we cannot think it positively sinful that half-
a-dozen clerks should' go to a post—office early in the
morning or late in the evening, open and make up a
few bags, and so enable many thousands of their
fellow-creatures to receive letters, perhaps of great
importance, on Monday morning, instead of having
to wait another day.
The nature and the results of the recent change at
the Post-office, about which heaven and ' earth were
moved for some weeks, have been repeatedly described
to our readers, and it is unnecessary now to add any-
thing to the full explanation given last night by the
Chancellor of the Exchequer. There never was such
a bubble as the agitation we refer to, as far as regards
its statements and its terrors. As for its motives, the
less said about them the better. But who would have
thought that all that nonsense about " Sabbath dese-
cration," about" the commencement of Sunday labour
in the Post-office," about " the point of the wedge,"
about " postal tyranny," about " official persecution,"
and about Mr. Rowland Hill's secret and steady
design to vitiate the morals and undermine the faith
of this country, was all about a plan which has
actually relieved 8,000 persons in the country of a
good deal of Sunday labour, and reduced the persons
employed' in the General Post-office from 27 to 4
throwing so little labour, even on them, that no person
in the Post-office need now neglect Divine service ?
Lord Ashley himself, who possesses far too much
candour for the people who prey on his scruples or
his good nature, does justice to the recent changer,
and cheerfully vindicates them from calumnious mis-

representation. It might, however, be wished that
the petitions he presents, and makes the foundation
of his case, were equally candid and truthful.
Without intending it, the Noble Lord has made
himself the harmless vehicle of as great a flood of
nonsense, not to say worse, as was ever poured into
the House.

The motion was carried by 93 against 63 ; a result
easily accounted for by the agitation which has been
got up on the one hand, or, on the other hand, by
the very little zeal manifested in some quarters to
support Government, where it may decently be left
to its fate. Lord Ashley, it must be admitted, has
considerably modified the otherwise impracticable
character of his resolution, by confining its im-
perative expressions to the non-collection and de-
livery of letters, and leaving the non•transmission of
letters to the issue of an inquiry. For our own
part, we believe that the cause of religion would
be better consulted by leaving every part of the
subject to the discretion of a department which
has shown a more active spirit of reform, and a more
hearty desire to consult the wishes of the people, than
any other branch of the public service. 'We confess
to a considerable degree of disgust at seeing so many
persons demanding from the State, in the name of
God and his commandments, that which they won't
themselves,
as may be seen at every church door
metropolis, not to speak of still more gratui-
tous Sabbath desecrations. If there is to be a certain
d ino this
amount of concession to the raw political conscience,
we presume the first part of the resolution, relating
to the collection and delivery of letters, will be taken
into consideration, though any strict and universal
ruthisle on
o pointf
privatew i
channelsl e lead to abundantfor
the
conveyanceevasions,
ofand
letters. But let that pass for the present. As for
oether object of the resolution, the non-transmis-
sionof letters during the whole twenty-four Sabba-
tical bout the whole kingdom, we
anticipate no other benefit from such an arrangement
than a deluge of petty questions, the moral of which
will be that the first and great commandment of Chris-
rtt ohlee the
othours, and throughout
tianity is a Rabbinical Sabbath.