The Sun.
London, England, 1844-08-07 00:00:00

ADVERTISEMENTS INSERTED in ALL THE TBREE PAPERS, Morning Noon, and Night, tiv,,reby insuring a TOWN and COUNTRY CIRCULATION, at ONE CHARGE.

THE Public are respectfully informed that the
_IL METROPOLITAN ART-UNION is NOW ESTABLISHED,
and that the Committee will fix an early day for the Drawing.
London, August 6, 1844.

OYAL POLYTECHNIC IN sTrr u
•,) CAPTAIN WARNER'S EXPERIMENT.

Inconsequence of the DESTRUCTIVE EXPLOSION off BRIGH-
TON, the Directors of the ROYAL POLYTECIIIC INSTITUTION
yield to the generally expressed wish that Dr. RYAN should adapt
one of his Lectures to the subject of EXPLOSIVE COMPOUNDS.
This Lecture,lillustrated by interesting Experiments, so far as theyean
be shown with perfect safety, will be delivered daily at half-past Three
o'clock, except on Mondays and Saturdays, an 4 in the Evenings of
Monday, Wednesday, and Fridays, at a Quarter to Nine o'clock. On
Mondays and Saturdays, at Four o'clock, Dr. POTT'S PNEUMA-
TIC MODE of forming SUBMARINE FOUNDATIONS in DEEP
WATER, with various interesting Experiments. Professor BACH-
IIOFFNER'S Lectures, and all the other subjects of interest in the
Institution

PROLAPSUS, PILES, FISTULA, &c.
Just published, bound in cloth, price 55., ; by post Is. 6d. extra.
ON the CURE of the DISEASES of the
RECTUM and ANUS ; particularly Prolapses, Piles, Fistula,
Hemorrhoidal Tumours, Excrescences, Ulcers, and Strictures,
WITHOUT CUTTING or CONFINEMENT ; illustrating the origin
and progress of these diseases, and the success of the Author's mode
of treatment in numerous cases, The whole embellished with Plates
from Nature. By Dr. SILVER, Physician Accoucheur, No. 70,
Great Russell-street, Bloomsbury-square, London.
Sold by Sherwood and Co., 137, Strand ; J. 011ivier, 59, Pall-mall ;
Maclachlan, Stewart, and Co., Edinburgh; Fannin and Co., Dublin ;
and also by the Author at his residence.

LAMERT ON DEBILITY, NERVOUSNESS, AND ALL
DISORDERS ARISING FROM EXCESS, &c.
" He who in pleasure's downy arms
Ne'er lost his health or youthfu 'charms,
A hero lives, and justly can
Exclaim, in me behold a man 1"
Just.,publlshed (in a sealed envelope), Tenth Edition, price 3s. 6d.,
or sent by post, free, to any address, 3s. 6d.,
ciikiELF-PRESERVATION : a Popular Essay on
v,y those concealed disorders; originating in youthful excesses,
and terminating in Nervous Debility, Local and Constitutional
Weakness, and all those Sinking., Anxieties, and Tremors, which
afflict the Weak, the Sedentary, and the Delicate. With Practical
Observations on Marriage, and on the Anatomy, Physiology, and
Diseases of the Reproductive Organs, with plain Directions for
their perfect Restoration.
By SAMUEL LAMERT, Consulting Surgeon
9, BEDFORD-STREET, BEDFORD-SQUARE, LONDON,
Matriculated Member of the University of Edinburgh, Honorary
Member of the London Hospita 'Medical Society, Licentiate of
Apothecary's Hall, London,&c.
" The various positions of Lover, Husband, and Parent, the in-
herent privileges of mankind, are frequently marred and prevented
through the follies and frailties of early indiscretions. To such,
among others, this Essay addresses itself; and by its perusal many
questions may be satisfactorily adjusted that admit of ne appeal even
to the most confidential friend."—Stafford Gazette.
" The design of this work will be tolerably obvious from its title,
and we cordially recommend the author and his book to all who are
watering from nervous debility and general weakness."—Wakefield
Journal.
Published by the Author, and sold in London by S. Gilbert, 51 and
52, Paternoster-row; Starie, 23, TichboTne.street, Quadrant, Regent
street; Hannay and Co., 63, Oxford-street; Noble, 114, Chancery-
lane; Gordon, 146, Leadenhall-street ; and by all Booksellers.
At home every day till Three, and from Five tilt Eight.

REMOVED FROM BIRMINGHAM TO LONDON.
Just published, price 2s. 6d. and free by post (in a sealed envelope)
Price 3s. 6d.,
THE SILENT FRIEND ; a Medical Work on
Human Frailty and Physical Decay, its causes, and the
baneful effects of excessive indulgence and infection, illustrated
by engravings, with observations on Marriage, and directions for
the removal of certain disqualifications.

By R. and L. PERRY and CO.
Published by the Authors, and sold at their Residence, 19, Berners.
street, Oxford-street ; also by Strange, 21, Paternoster-row; Purkis,
Compton-street, Soho ,• Noble, 109, Chancery-lane, Crocker, I,
Milford-lane, Strand; Ward, Strand (opposite Exeter-hall) ;
son, 358, Oxford-street (two doors from Argyle-street); Phillips,
264, Oxford-street; J. Gordon, 146, Leadenhall-street, London;
Guest, 51, Bull-street, Birmingham; and by ail Booksellers in
Town and Country:
The CORDIAL BALM of SYRI ACUM is exclusively directed
for the cure of nervous and muscular debility, Impuissance, &e.
Price Ils and 235. per bottle. Sold by all Medicine Vendors, of
whom may be had the " Silent Friend." The Five Pound Cases
may be had as usual.
PERRY'S PURIFYING SPECIFIC PILLS are the most enetua
cure for syphilis and secondary symptoms inboth sexes, price 2s. 9d.
4s. Ca., and 11 s. per box.
Consultation fee, if by letter, U. A minute detail of cases is ne.
cessary. Messrs. Perry are in daily attendance, for Consultation, at
their residence, 19, Berners-street, Oxford-street, London, from
Eleven till Twe, and Five till:Eight, and on Sunds from Ten till
Twelve. One personal visit only is neeessari to effectd apyermanent cure

PLEASING RESULTS.-With the gaiety assumed by
nature in the brightness of the summer season there aro
few disinclined to participate; and in pursuit of those
rational enjoyments personal agremens, in all their
variety, are necessarily objects of desire—those, of
which the perfection and durability are at once obvious
and important, meet their most available preservative in
Gowland's Lotion ; first, as a decided remedy fur all
cutaneous impurities ; and, secondly, as an elegant, mild,
and effective appendage to the toilet, removing every
species of local discolouration, defending the skin from
all the well-known effects of heat upon its surface, and
as contributing largely to continued delicacy and fresh-
nes; 9 the complexion.

POST-OFFICE ESPIONAGE.

COMMONS' REPORT.

The Committee of Secresy appointed to inquire into the state
of the law in respect of the detaining andopening of letters
at the General Post-office, and into the mode under which
the authority given for such detaining and opening has
been exercised, and to report their opinion and observa-
tions thereupon to the House, and to whom several peti-
tions were referred ;—have examined the matters to them
referred, and have agreed to the following report :
Your Committee, in performance of the duty which the
House has devolved upon them, of inquiring into the state
of the law respecting the detaining and opening of letters
at the General Post-office, beg to state in the outset that
although the wording of the 33d and 36th chapters of the
Ist of Victoria, which now mainly regulate the Post-office,
is, in respect of the matter in hand, somewhat different from
that of the 10th chapter of the 9th of Anne, for which they
were substituted,,yet that there appears to be no such vari-
ance between the statutes of those two periods respectively,
as to prevent your Committee from assuming, for the con-
veniext of their inquiry, that the same powers are con-
ve7ed or recognised in all.
the inquiry, therefore, what the state of the law now is
respecting such detention and opening, is reduced to the in-
quiry what the state of the law was, respecting the same
matter, immediately on the passing of the statute of Anne,
unless in the intervening period, the principles which regu-
late the interpretation of Acts in general should have under-
gone modification, or cases should have been decided in the
superior courts of law which might have a bearing on the
construction to be given to this particular Act. With that
reservation, the law on the matter in question was the same
in 1711 that it is in 1844.

In preference to discussing the purely legal question, how
far the statute of Anne, in recognising the practice, on the
part of Secretaries of State, of issuing warrants to open
letters, rendered it lawful for the Secretaries of State to issue
such warrants, your Committee propose, so far as they have
materials for that purpose, to give the history of this prac-
tice, prior and subsequent to the passing of that statute;
these materials being such as ought not to be overlooked in
investigating the grounds on which the exercise of this au-
thority rests.
In these early researches your Committee will have occa-
sion to inquire into the condition of the posts in this country
at various periods of our
_history, and into the connection
that subsisted between them and the supreme authorities of
the country. In these inquiries your Committee have been
assisted by Sir Francis Palgrave, of the Rolls Office, by
Messrs. Lechmere and Leman, of the State Paper Office, and
by Mr. Reeve, of the Council Office.
It does not-appear at what precise period the Crown under-
took to be the regular carrier of letters for its subjects.
The Crown, doubtless, found it necessary at a very early
period, to the exercise of the functions of sovereignty, to be
able to convey with speed and security its own dispatches
from one part of the realm to another, and from and to parts
beyond the seas ; and for that purpose it appointed certain
messengers or runners, called the posts. These posts were
also employed for the personal convenience of the Sovereign,
and the individuals composing the royal court. In course of
time, a master of the posts was appointed, and the first of
these on record was Brian Tuke, Esq., afterwards Sir Brian
Tuke, Knight, who held that office in 1516, and whose letter
to Thomas Cromwell, respecting the performance of its duties,
dated 17th August, 1533, is given in the appendix. The
joint successors of Sir Brian Tuke were Sir William Paget,
Knight, Privy Councillor, and one of Henry the Eighth's chief
secretaries, and John Mason, Esq., secretary for the French
tongue. Tho letters patent, dated 12th November, 1545,
conveying to them this office, grant to them, during their
lives and the life of the survivor, the office of master of the
messengers, runners, orttiosts, as well within the kingdom
of England as in parts beyond the seas in the King's
dominions, together with the wages or fee of 661. 13s. 4d.
a-year, to be held by themselves or their sufficient deputy
or deputies, &c. ; but, besides his fee, the Master of the Posts
received from the Crown the amount of his expenses for con-
veying letters, of which he rendered in an account, many
samples of which are given in the appendix. There is a
succession of patents (including recitals of patents), granting
the same office, at the same fee, to other parties for life, in
the times of Elizabeth, James 1., and Charles I.
With regard to correspondence conveyed by other messen-
gers than their own, our monarchs viewed it with great
suspicion ; but it was especially towards letters arriving
from or going to parts beyond the seas that their vigilance
seems to have been directed. The frequency, of disputed
successions to have.
Crown, and the constant jealousy enter-
tained of the Court of Rome, will assist in explaining their
desire to prevent such correspondence. All letters coming
from beyond the seas were directed to be seized ; but in
the time of Edward 11., to whose reign the first record of this
kind belongs, the King's bailiffs, in assisting the admiral
of the fleet to search for letters, were forbidden under
the pretext of such powers, to attack or oppress any mer-
chants or others crossing the seas. The open seizure by
Wolsey, in 1525, of the dispatches sent from this country
by the ambasador of the Emperor Charles V., is a proof
of the extraordinary jealousy with which foreign corre-
spondence was regarded, and of the vigilance with which it
was watched.

After the grant of the office of Master of the Posts to any
new person, a royal proclamation always followed, to notify
the new appointment. Consequent on the grant of the office
by Queen Elizabeth, in the year 1590, to John Stanhope,
Esq., there is a proclamation, prohibiting all persons what-
soever from gathering up, receiving, bringing, or carrying
out of the realm any letters or packets, without the allowance
of the masters and comptrollers of the posts, or their deputies.
All mayors, bailiffs, &c., are ordered to make diligent
search for all mails, &c., of all such disavowed carriers, &c.,
or suspected persons, coming into or going out of the realm
with packets of letters ; and all such to apprehend, &c.,
keeping them in safe custody, until, by the view of their
writings, sentup to the Privy Council, it be seen and Advised
what further shall be done with them." ExcePtion is
made of the dispatches of her Majesty's principal secre-
taries, of ambassadors, and of others sufficiently authorised.'
Similar prohibitions are contained in the proclamations an-
nouncing the appointment of new postmasters in the two
subsequent reigns.
The practice probably began at an early period, and after-
wards grew into a regular custom, of allowing private per-
sons to avail themselves of the King's posts for transmitting
their correspondence. This probably became a perquisite to
the postmasters, while, at the same time, it gave to Ministers
of State the power of narrowly inspecting the whole of the
written communications of this country.

The employment of the posts for carrying the letters of
the subjects of the Crown is recognised in a proclamation,
dated 1594-consequent on the before recited grant by Queen
Elizabeth to John Stanhope' Esq., of the office of Master of
the Queen's Posts. The Lord Treasurer and others are
thereby directed to notify to all merchants, both strangers
and others, in the city of London, that they are not to take
upon them to employ any disavowed persons to convey their
letters, but are to use such only as are lawfully appointed
for that purpose. The same direction is repeated in a procla-
mation of James 1., dated 1609. In the year 1628, in an
address from the House of Commons to Charles 1., it is
stated that the deputy of the King's postmaster, appointed
to carry the letters from the Crown beyond the seas, was
likewise employed for the same purpose by the English
merchants.
With regard to inland letters, in a document obtained
from the State Paper-office, and dated 1635, it is stated that
the King's postmasters carried the subjects' letters, but up to
that time had never reaped any benefit from it.
The officer who has been hitherto mentioned as the King's
postmaster, was the master of the posts within the King's
dominions, at home or beyond the seas. To him, however,
had hitherto belonged the transmission of letters both at
home avid abroad; but in 1619 a new Patent-office was esta-
blished by James 1., called that of the Postmaster of England
for foieign parts out of the King's dominions. The patent
gave rise to a long legal contest between Lord Stanhope, who
held the former of these two offices, and Matthew de Ques-
ter, the new patentee. During these proceedings, lest the
merchants of London should sustain inconvenience from in-
terruption to their foreign correspondence, an order was
issued permitting them to convey their letters to and from
parts beyond the seas,_ by messengers of their own choosing;
and moreover, the Lords of the Council, to whom the dis-
pute had been referred, advised De Quester, by letter, not to
give any interruption to the conveyance and reconveyance of
the merchants letters. On the subject of this letter, the Secre-
tary of State, Sir John Coke, wrote to his co-Secretary of
State, Lord Conway, calling the power of sending foreign let-
ters a branch of the royal authority, affirming that no place
in Christendom can be named where merchants are allowed
to send their letters by other posts than those authorised by
the State; that his colleague best knew what account they
shall be able to give in their places of that which passeth
by letters in or out of the lang,, if every man may convey
letters, under the covers of merchants, to whom and what
place he pleaseth, &c. The order, " upon weighty reasons of
State," was afterwards limited to the Company of Merchant
Adventurers alone, and they were only to convey their let-
ters to the towns of Hamburgh and Delf, and they were to
give bond to carry no other letters than those concerning the
Company ; no one was to be appointed messenger to the Com-
pany, unless approved of by the Secretaries of State; the
other companies of merchants were to send their dispatches
by De Quester only ; and, in times of war and danger to the
State, the said Company, and all other companies of mer-
chants, if required, were to acquaint the Secretaries of State,
from time to time, with their letters and dispatches into fo-
reign parts. In the end, by the influence of the Crown, Lord
Stanhope was made to surrender his patent. De Quester's
patent came into possession of one Thomas Witherings, who
suggested to the Crown a plan for the entire re-organisation
of the inland posts, which, instead of producing at that time
any revenue to the State, were a burden to it of 3,4001. per
annum. The plan proposed consisted essentially of three
parts—the establishment of fixed rates of postage ; substi-
tuting horse posts, which were to travel at the rate of 120
miles in twenty-four hours, instead of foot posts, which tra-
velled at the rate of 18 miles ; and giving to the public gene-
rally the use of the Post-office. This plan was adopted;
Witherings was appointed to the office; and thus became
centered in the same person the offices of Postmaster for in
land and for foreign letters. In 1635 and 1637 appeared two
proclamations, to notify and give effect to the new plan of
Mr. Witherings; and in both these there were clauses pro-
hibiting any other than Mr. Witherings, or his deputies, from
carrying letters.
In 1640, on a charge of divers abuses and misdemeanours
committed by Witherings in the execution of his said two
offices, they were sequestered into the hands of Philip Bur-
lamachi, of London, merchant, who was to execute the same
under the care and oversight of the principal Secretaries of
State; and without tracing at this day the disputes which
the conflicting pretensions of different individuals to the pos-
session of then offices gave rise in the year 1642, it will be
sufficient to say that, shortly afterwards, the management of
the affairs of the Post-office fell into the hands of Mr. Pri-
deaux, who was Chairman of the Committee appointed by
the House to consider the inland department of the Post-
office, and was afterwards, under the Commonwealth, At-
torney-General to the State. Mr. Prideaux was appointed
Master of the Vests, in 1644, by the authority of both Houses
of Parliament.
The validity of the clause in the grant to Witherings of
the inland letter office, prohibiting any but the persons ap-
pointed by the patentee from receiving or delivering letters
at any; place where the patentee should settle posts, was
brought in question, in 1646, before a Committee of the

House of Lord. Two of the Judges were appointed assist-
ants to the Committee, and were expressly ordered to report
their opinion as to all such particulars concerning the vali-
dity of the patent as the Committee might think fit to ask
them, and they reported, " That the inland;letter-office patent
was well erected ; that the clauses of restraint, in the said
patent, are void and not good in law; that notwithstanding
these clauses be void, yet the patent is good for the rest."
The foreign letter-office patent was not referred to the con-
sideration of the Committee.

According to the law as expounded by the two judges, no
person, under the authority of letters patent from the Crown,
could, without an Act of Parliament, lawfully set up any ex-
clusive title to carry mails of letters from one part of the
kingdom to another. It appears that in 1650 the Common
Council of the city of London, not satisfied with the footing
on which Mr. Prideaux, then Attorney-General, had placed
the posts, of conveying letters into all parts of the nation
only once a week, endeavoured of their own authority to settle
posts on the several roads, which were to run twice a week;
and this they had actually done in the whole line of the road
to Scotland. On a report to that effect from the Council of
State, the Parliament resolved, " that the offices of post-
masters, inland and foreign, are and ought to be in the sole
power and disposal of the Parliament;" and they referred it
to the Council of State to consider how those offices might
best be settled; and in the meantime to take orders for the
present management thereof. r -
These offices continued, until 1653, to be managed by Mr.
Prideaux. They were farmed in 1653, and in 1655. the ma-
nagement of them was entrusted to Mr. Secretary Thurloe,
on his giving security for the then present rent of 10,0004 a
year.
In 1657, a Bill for the settling of the postage or England,
Scotland, and Ireland was laid, by order of the Protecto'r,
before his Parliament, and passed with some amendments.
It provided for the establishing one genbrul post-office, and
one postmaster-general, to be appointed under letters patent
by the Lord Protector and his successors, such officer and his
deputies (with certain reservation) to have exclusively autho-
rity to carry inland and foreign letters, and of horsing all
thorough posts, and persons riding by post to and from any
post-roads, with power to levy certain rates for conveyance
of letters and horsing of posts; imposing penalties on any
persons other than the postmaster-general or his deputies,
who shall set up posts for the conveying of letters or horsing
of posts; providing for the forwarding by post of ship letters,
for the exercise of superintendence over the postmaster by
the Lord Protector and his successors, and giving power to
the Lord Protector and his successors to farm the post-office
for life, or for any term not exceeding eleven years.
After the restoration Charles 11. granted, by letters patent,
AugUst 14, 1660, to Henry Bishopp, for the term of seven
years, the office of the master of running messengers, formerly
held by Lord Stanhope and others, &c. ; and by a separate
indenture, dated September 1, agreed to farm to the said H.
Bishopp, for the term of seven years, all powers and profits
expressed in the "pretended" Act of 1657, for the annual
rent of 21,5001., payable quarterly. The said Bishopp agreed,
at the rates stated in the said " pretended" Act of Parliament,
and no higher rates, to defray the whole charges of main-
taining the said office ; the King agreeing that the Parlia-
ment shall be moved speedily and effectually to pass an Act
of Parliament, in the due and usual form, for settling the said
postage and the profits thereof on his Majesty, as part of his
said Majesty's revenue.
On the 12th of September, 1660, it was ordered by the
Lords and Commons, in Parliament assembled, that the office
of postmaster, and the postage and carriage of letters, domestic
and foreign, should continue to be exercised by the came
persons now employed therein by his Majesty, their agents
and servants, according to the same rates and rules now prac-
tised, and without the interruption of any person or persons
whatever, until the 6th day of November next ensuing. And
in December, 1660, an Act was passed agieeing nearly, mu-
tatis mutandis in its enacting clauses with that of 1657.
The passing of this Act was followed by a proclamation
for quieting Bishopp in the execution of his office. On his
surrendering it in 1663, it was granted to Daniel O'Neale,
one of the grooms of the chamber, who farmed it for the re-
mainder of Bishopp's original term, and on the same condi •
tions. A proclamation followed O'Neale's appointment. An
Act passed in 1663, for settling the profits of the Post-office
on the Duke of York and his heirs male ; and two proclama-
tions followed, one in 1669, the other in 1683, for enforcing
the due execution of the said Acts. On the expiry of O'Neale's
lease, in 1667, Lord Arlington was appointed Postmaster-
General, and a proclamation followed for quieting him in the
execution of his office. No statute for altering the manage-
ment of the Post-office, or the rates of postage, was passed
during the reign of James IL and Wm. 111., nor until the 9th
year of Anne.
In reviewing that period of the history of the country
which commences with 1641, your Committee beg'to notice
the following incidents, as bearing on the subject of their
inquiry.
Repeated stoppages of the foreign mails were made by the
orders'of the two Houses, and Committees were appointed,com-
posed of the Members of both Houses, to open and read the
letters stopped. On one of those occasions Mr. Pym re-
ported the answer of the Lords to a message -from the Com-
mons to stop the foreign mails, " that they did yield to the
opening of letters ; but it would be very inconvenient if
often used."

The opening and detention of the letters coming from
France and Antwerp in Nov. 1641, led to a complaint to the
King and to the Lords from the ambassador of the republic
of Venice.

The preamble to the Act of Cromwell's Parliament for
settling the postage of England, Scotland, and Ireland, enu-
merates among the advantages of the post, that it is the
best means " to discover and prevent many dangerous and
wicked designs which have been and are daily contrived
against the peace and welfare of the Commonwealth, the in-
telligence whereof cannot well be communicated but by letter
of escript."
It scarcely needed this evidence to prove that during the
Protectorate recourse was had to the expedient of opening
letters. This fact is sufficiently apparent from the number
of letters designated as "intercepted letters," in the State
correspondence of Secretary Thurloe.
No preamble similar to that which the Act of Cromwell
contains, appears in the statute of Charles 11., for erecting
and establishing a Post-office. But in the lease granted to
Bishopp, of the profits to arise from the Post-office under the
Act, which Parliament was to be moved by his Majesty
speedily and effectually to pass, it is agreed that the lessee
shall permit and suffer the said Secretaries of State for the
time being, or either of them, from time to time, and at all
times during the proposed term, to have the survey and in-
spection of all letters within the office or offices aforesaid, at
their or either of their discretion. And the same power is
reserved to the Secretaries of State in the lease granted to
Bishopp's successor, O'Neale.
In the proclamation which immediately followed the pass-
ing of the statute of 1660-1, the practice of opening, by au-
thority of the Secretary of State, letters lawfully conveyed, is
not mentioned ; but in the proclamation which fbllowed the
appointment of Bishopp's successor, O'Neale, the words occur
which correspond to those afterwards introduced into the
statute of Anne :

" And we do further charge and command that no post-
masters or other officers, that shall be employed in the con-
veying of letters, or distributing of the same, or any other
person or persons of quality or condition soever they be,
except by the immediate warrant of our principal Secretaries
of State, shall presume to open any letters or packets not
directed unto themselves, or that they, or any other persons
whatsoever, do stop any mayl in the passage to or from Lon-
don, or any other place whither the same is consigned and
directed, but shall truly and faithfully deliver the same,
not
without any Opening, concealing,
repeated o r retarding
th
the subsequent
delivery
thereof." These words are
proclamations of 1667, 1669, 1683, and 1685.
As to letters unlawfully conveyed, it is directed in the pro-
clamations of 1660-1, and 1667, that they be seized and sent
to
zPrivyedn and
consideredCounciln t
to
o s
o;
lettersni
en
ofthoseot of
od
dangerous
Secretariesln6B6e9r 0,
ul
5683
consequence,
, oaf and t 1
State,
, ot
arh
nat
to
the Privy Council, to the end. that the persons conveying or
sending them may be proceeded against, according. to law ;
in that of 1663, that they be seized and carried to the
betheysbea
General Post-office, " there to be disposed of for the benefit
of all such of his Majesty's loving subjects as may be con-
cerned therein."
Although, after quoting the cited clauses from the leases
granted to Bishopp and O'Neale, and the words from the
proclamation of 1663, no reasonable doubt can be en-
tertained that the Governments of the different Monarchs
who reigned between 1660 and .1711, had frequently re-
course to the practice of opening letters, yet the only instance
during that period that has come under the notice of your
Committee, is that of Coleman, one of the victims of the
Popish plot.
Your Committee now come to the period subsequent to
the passing of the 9th of Anne, the first statute which re-
cognised the practice of opening letters, now under consi-
deration.
Before they proceed to avail themselves of the information
laid before them, which has proved to them that the 40th
and 41st sections of this Act did not remain a dead letter, they
will notice several occasions in the last century on which,
both in Parliament and in courts of judicature, this practice
was brought distinctly under public attention.
About eleven years after the passing of the Act, viz., in the
year 1722-3, in the course of the proceedings had on passing
the bills of pains and penalties against the Bishop of Ro-
chester, and his two associates, Kelly and Plunket, the prin-
cipal evidence adduced against the parties accused was that
of post-office clerks and others, who, in obedience to warrants
from the Secretary of State, had detained, opened, copied,
and deciphered letters to or from those parties. In the Com-
mittee on the Bill against Atterbury, in the House of Peers,
the clause of the statute of Anne was referred to and com-
mented on by the bishop's counsel, who raised a doubt whe-
ther the copying of a letter were sanctioned by the Act ; but
in no one of these three cases was any question raised as to
the legality of the warrants,
In 1735, complaint being made in the House of Commons
by certain of the Members, that their letters had been opened
and read by the clerks of the Post-office, on the pretence of
ascertaining whether or no the franks of those Members were
counterfeited, and a copy of his Majesty's warrant, whereby
letters of Members and certain public functionaries were per-
mitted to pass free from postage, being read, it was ordered
that the copy of the said warrant beveferred to the considera-
tion of a committee, and that they do examine the matter
thereof, and report the same, with their opinions thereon, to
the House ; and on the committee making its report, the
House resolved, inter alia, "That it is a high infringement of
the privileges of the knights, citizens, and burgeses chosen to
represent the Commons of Great Britain in Parliament. for
any postmaster, his deputies or agents, in Great Britain or
Ireland, to open or look into, by any means whatsoever, any
letter directed to or signed by the.proper hand of any Mem-
ber without any express warrant in writing under the hand
of one of the principal Secretaries of State for every such
opening and looking into, or to detain or delay any letter
directed to or signed with the name of any Member, unless
there shall be good reason to suspect some counterfeit of it,
without an express warrant of a principal Secretary of State,
as aforesaid, for every such detaining or delaying.'
Sir Robert Walpole and Mr. Pelham are said to have
agreed to the appointment of this committee, on an under-
standing that it should not inquire into anything that might
tend to discover the secrets of Government. In 1742, how-
ever, the secrets of Sir Robert Walpole's Government were
somewhat rudely pried into by the secret committee ap-
pointed "to inquire into the conduct of the Earl of Orford,
during the last ten years of his being First Lord of the Tree..
sury, and Chancellor and 'Under Treasurer of his Majesty's
Exchequer."

That committee, in its report, gave a description of the es-
tablishment for inspecting letters, as maintained by the Go-
vernments over which Sir Robert Walpole had presided; but
abstained from stating on what particular occasions that es-
tablishment had been made available. _ .

It appears from the information laid before your Committee,
that under the pressure of the rebellion of 1745, which fol-
lowed almost immediately on the downfal of the administra-
tion of Sir Robert Walpole, his successors issued warrants
for stopping and opening post letters of a very general and
unlimited character.

In the year 1758, Dr. Hensey, a physician, was tried on a
charge of high treason, being accused of a treasonable corre-
spondence with the enemy. The principal evidence on which
he was convicted was that of a letter-carrier and a Post-office
clerk, the latter of whom had opened Dr. llensey's letters,
and delivered them to the Secretary of State.
In 1764, a Select Committee of the House was appointed
to inquire into the abuses of franking letters; and the chair-
man, Mr. Dyson, was directed by the Committee to move
the House, "That it be an instruction to the Committee,
that they have power to inquire into the abuses committed
at the Post-office by opening inland letters ;" the motion,
however, was negatived.
The last instance that has come to the knowledge of your
Committee, in which this power was exercised under cir-
cumstances of public notoriety, is that of the trial of Horne
Tooke for high treason, in 1795. A letter written to him by
Mr. Joyce, a printer, was intercepted at the Post-office, and
was stated by the prisoner to have been the immediate occa-
sion of his apprehension. On his requiring its production,
it was produced in Court by the Crown officers, and given in
evidence.
It is now so long since any public trial'has taken place, in
which facts ascertained by opening and detaining letters at
the Post-office have been adduced in evidence, that it seems
to have been nearly forgotten by the public that such a
practice ever existed.
Your Committee, having gone through the proofs of a more
public character, and ascertained that the Governments of past
times have authorised the detaining and opening of post letters,
and given notoriety to the exercise of that authority, and
that the fact has, on several occasions, been brought under
the notice of Parliament and courts of law, proceed now to
show (from evidence of a more secret, and confidential
nature) to what extent this practice has been carried on, by
the same authority, during the past and present centuries.
Before entering, however, on this head of inquiry, they con-
sider it proper to observe, that they have had before them,
with few exceptions, every person now living who has held
the seals of Secretary of State for Home or Foreign Affairs,
since the year 1822, as well as two noblemen who have dis-
charged the office of Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, and several
persons who have held confidential situations under them ;
and they have further examined the present Postmaster-
General, the Secretaries of the Post-office for England and
Ireland, together with several of the most confidential offi-
cers in every branch of the Foreign-office, the Home-
office, and the Post-office ; and that all these witnesses,
without exception, have made to your Committee the most
full and unreserved disclosures so much so as to have
rendered it superfluous for your Committee to examine any
other witnesses. _ _

Of the number and nature of warrants for opening and de-
taining post letters issued by Secretaries of State, from the
year 1712 to the year 1798 inclusive, your Committee are able
to render only a very incomplete account, compiled partly
from the books of the Home Department, partly from the re-
cords at the State Paper-office. It appears that, during that
term of years, it was not the practice to record such war-
rants regularly in any official book.
That this account is what the Committee describe it to
be, very incomplete, is manifest from the small number of
warrants that enter into it, considering the length of the
term of years. From 1712 to 1798 inclusive, a term of 87
years, the number of warrants, of which any account has
been obtained, is but 101; and of that number eleven only
belong to the last twenty eventful years of the term, in-
cluding the period of the French Revolution. In this ac-
count, moreover, certain cases are not included, in which it is
known, from reports of public trials, and other independent
sources of evidence, that letters were opened and detained,
such as those of Atterbury, Plunket, Kelly, Hensey, and

Horne Tooke.
From the commencement of the present century, if not
from an earlier period, down to the present time, the prac-
tice has been, with very few exceptions, for such warrants
to issue only from the Home-office, although another Se-
cretary of State has occasionally signed the warrant in the
absence of the Secretary of State for the Home Department.
From 1799 inclusive to the end of the year 1805, a record
has been preserved of the warrants issued from the Home-
office, which, from the circumstance that the annual average
which it exhibits agrees nearly with the annual average of
the warrants issued in subsequent years, appears to the Com-
mittee to be nearly a complete record; they have, however,
no other mode of testing its accuracy. It was not until the
period, in the year 1806, when the late Earl Spencer became
Secretary of State for Home Affairs, that the practice was
introduced at the Home-office of recording the issuing of
every such warrant in a private book belonging, not to the
head of the department, but to the office, and always acces-
sible to the two Under-Secretaries of State and the Chief
Clerk of the Domestic Department : and that practice has
been continued, the Committee believe, without interruption,
till the present time. Still, there is no check by, which to
test the completeness of the entries made in that book until
the close of the year 1822, from which period the original
warrants themselves are 'preserved at the Post-office, the
earlier warrants having been destroyed on the removal of the
Post-office from Lombard-street to its present site in St.
Martin's-le-Grand.
After these explanations of the authenticity of the lists
which have been submitted to their consideration, they pro-
ceed to give, first, an abstract of the warrants, so far as they
have been able to make up an account, from 1713 to 1798 in-
clusive ; secondly, an, abstract of the warrants for detaining
and opening letters issued by the Home Department since the
commencement of the year 1799 to Midsummer, 1844.
ANNUAL NUMBER OF WARRANTS IN EACH YEAR, FROM 1712
TO 1798, SO FAR AS AN ACCOUNT OF THE SAME COULD BE
MADE pr.

4 Number 4 Number . Number
2 of War-
.: of War- Year. of War-
rants. P-4 rants. rants.
- -
1712 1 1744 3 1768
1713 2 1745 7 1770
1723 1 1746 1 1772
1730 1 1749 1 1773
1731 2 1751 1 1774
1734 3 1752 1 1776
1735 4 1753 6 1777
1736 3 1754 1 1778
1737 3 1755 1 1782
1738 7 1756 1 1783
1739 5 1763 3 1784
1740 1 1764 1 From 1788 1
1741 4 1765 1 to 1798 j 6
1742 2 1766 4
1743 4 1767 2 Total No lOl

The above warrants classed under certain heads :—Bank
of England, 8; Bankruptcy, 5; Murder, theft, fraud, &c.,
14 ; Prisoners of war, 1 ; 'Revenue 10; Foreign correspond-
ence, 35 ; Treason, sedition, &c., 5 ; Libel, 2 ; Forgery, 1 ;
Debtor absconding from creditors, 2 ; Private case, 1; Un-
certain, 17.—Total, 101.

ANNUAL NUMBER OF WARRANTS IN EACII TEAR,
FROM 1799 TO 1844.

Year. iNumber. I Year. Number.! Year. Number.
----1'
1799 9 1815 2 1831 17
1800 11 1816 0 1832 5
1801 7 1817 11 1833 4
1802 6 1818 9 1834 6
1803 7 1819 6 1835 7
1804 2 1820 6 j 1836 7
1805 7 1821 1 1837 4
1806 9 1822 12 1838 8
1807 13 1823 7 1839 16
1808 2 1824 2 1840 7
1809 11 1825 6 1841 18
1810 6 1826 8 1842 20
1811 8 1827 8 1843 8
1812 28 1828 4 1844 7
1813 8 1829 5
1814 3 1830 14 372
Total number of persons named in the above warrants, 724.

This would give a little more thatk eight warrants, on the
average, per year, and about two persons, on the average, for
each warrant. Among the warrants there are eight, applied
each to some particular object, but not restricted to any de-
finite number of persons.
The above warrants classed under certain heads :-Bank
of England, 13 ; Bankruptcy, 2 ; Murder, theft, fraud, &c.,
144 ; Treason, sedition, &c., 77 ; Prisoners of war, 13 ; Re-
venue, 5 ' • Foreign Correspondence, 20 • letters returned to
writers, 7 ; address copied, 1; forged frank, 1; uncertain,
89. Total, 372.
The Secretaries of State who have signed the warrants re-
ferred to in the two preceding abstracts, are named in the
following list, arranged in the order of date :-
1712-13. The Earl of Dart- 1804-6. Lord Hawkesbury,
mouth. and 1807.9.
1713. The Right Hon. W. 1806-7. Earl Spencer.
Bromley. 1807. Right Hon. C. W. W.
1722. Lord Visct. Townshend. Wynn.
1730-46. Lord Harrington. 1809-12. The Right Hon. R.
1735-1754. DnkeofNewcastle. Ryder.
1749. Duke of Bedford. 1812-21. Lord Vise. Sidmouth.
1752-3. The Earl of Holder- 1822-30. The Right Hon. Sir
ness. R. Peel.
1755. The Right Hon. Sir T. 1822-3. Right Hon. G. Can-
Robinson. ning.
1756. The Right Hon. H. Fox. 1823. Earl Bathurst.
1763. The Earl of Halifax. 1827. Lord Vis. Goderich.
1765-7. The Right Hon. Ge- - Right Hon. W. S.
neral Conway. Bourne.
1766. Duke of Richmond. - Marq. of Lansdowne.
1766-7. The Earl of Shel- 1830-4. Lord Via. Melbourne.
burne. 1833-40. Lord Palmersson.
1770. The Earl of Sandwich. 1834. Lord Vis. Duncannon.
1770-4. The Earl ofßochefort. - Duke of Wellington.
1776-7. Lord Vis. Weymouth. 1834-5. Right Hon. H. Gold-
-1778. The Earl of Suffolk. burn.
1782-3. The Right Hon. T. 1835-9. Lord John Russell.
Townshend. 1838. Lord Glenelg.
1782. The Right Hon. C. J. 1839-41. The Marq. of Nor-
Fox. manby.
1784. Marq. of Carmarthen. 1841-4. The Right lion. Sir
1799-1801. Duke of Portland. James Graham.
1801-3. Lord Pelham. 1844. Earl of Aberdeen.
1803. Right Hon. C. Yorke.
Among the warrants of the last century some few have
been discovered that were issued on grounds which would now
be considered highly objectionable, and would not be sanc-
tioned by recent practice. We proceed to give some speci-
mens of the earliest warrants.
The earliest, dated Sept. 20, 1712, is as follows :-
To the Postmaster-General,-Her Majesty is pleased to
order that all letters directed to Mr. Thomas Perrin (and
three others named) be sent to the Commissioners of the
Customs for their perusal, as is desired by the inclosed letters
from Mr. Carkess. This method is taken in order to dis-
cover their effects ; and you are to comply with it as far as is
consistent with law and the duty of your office.
DARTMOUTH.
In 1741, at the request of A., a warrant issued, to permit

A.'s eldest son to open and inspect any letters which A.'s
youngest son might write to two females, one of whom that
youngest son had imprudently married. Two warrants, in
1734, are issued, each at the instance of the creditors of a
party who has absconded, it not being alleged that any posi-
tive fraud had been practised. One, issued in 1735, appears
to have arisen out of a political libel ; another, in 1755, con-
cerns a noted political libeller of the day, Dr. Shebbear.
One, in 1746, arises out of a robbery in bank bills, the pro-
perty of the Chamberlain of the City of London ; all letters
sent by post to Holland are to be examined ' • and if any
letter appears to contain any of the stolen bills it is to be
opened, and on suspicion of any letter containing anything
that may lead to a discovery, that letter is to be stopped,
opened, and inspected. Two warrants, in 1738, and one in
1741, concern the practice, then in constant operation, of en-
listing recruits for Ireland for the Irish brigade in France.
The following two general warrants, to which the com-
mittee before made allusion, were issued in the eventful
year 1745
Secretary the Duke of Newcastle to the Postmaster Gene-
ral, September 20, 1745 :—To open and detain all (such)
letters, packets, or papers, printed or otherwise, as shall come
to the General or other Post-office, suspected to contain
matters of a dangerous tendency; and to transmit them to
the office of the Secretary of State.
Secretary the Duke of Newcastle to the assistants of the
Yarmouth and Chester roads, October 8, 1745 :—To open,
inspect, and detain all such letters and packets as shall come
lo their offices, suspected to _contain treasonable correspon-
dence ; and to transmit them to the Secretary of State.
In 1783 the following warrant was issued:--
Whitehall, 10th February, 1783.
To his Majesty's Postmasters-General.
My Lord and Sir—l am to desire, and do hereby authorise
you to stop and open all such letters as are, or shall come
to your hands, addressed to Lord George Gordon, at least
such as may be supposed to come from the regiment,
now on their march from to the northward,
and any letters from his Lordship to that quarter; and to
send me all the said letters as soon as possible after you shall
have so stopped and opened them; and for so doing this shall
be your warrant.
THOMAS TOWNSHEND,
Secretary of State for the Home Department.
To Lord Tankerville and the Right Hon. Henry
Fred. Cartwright, joint Postmasters-General.
Coming to the warrants of the present century, your Com-
mittee have noticed among them, issued during certain pe-
riods of the last war, some few E a very general nature. In
1800 and 1801 orders were given to the Postmaster-General
to open all letters addressed to persons in France, Flanders,
and Holland, and all letters addressed to Dover, supposed to
contain letters addressed to France. Flanders, and Holland.
As regards intestine commotion, your Committee found
that a warrant was issued in 1799, to open the letters of
seventeen persons at Manchester and Birmingham ; one in
1809, to open the letters of eighteen persons in Manchester
and Liverpool. In 1812, warrants were directed to the
several postmasters of Nottingham, Manchester, and Glasgow,
directing them to open all such letters passing through these
several post-offices as should appear to A. B. (naming in each
warrant some particular individual) to be of a suspicious na-
ture, and likely to convey seditious and treasonable informa-
tion, or to contain money intended to be applied to the pur-
pose of promoting seditious or other disturbances. A warrant,
nearly similar to the preceding, was issued in 1813, to the
postmasters of Wareham and Weymouth, in Dorsetshire,
and one to the same purpose, in 1817, to the postmaster of
Nottingham. Among the names of persons not now living,
whose letters were directed to be opened previously to the
year 1822, are found those of Despard, Thistlewood, and
Watson ; and that of Mr. Hunt, once Member of Parliament
for Preston.
With regard to the warrants issued during the last 22 years
and a half, your Committee have not observed among them
a single warrant indefinite as to the number of persons coming
within its scope. In every case the names are specified, and
in one instance only does the number exceed 6. As regards
this period, your Committee would have abstained from
giving particular information concerning any warrant and
from naming a single individual whose letters have been di-
rected to be opened, but for the notice which has been taken
of the mode of executing certain warrants, and the mention
which has been made of the names of the parties included in
certain others ; these being the circumstances which mainly
led to the inquiry which your Committee has been appointed
to conduct. On these cases, therefore, your Committee con-
sider it their duty to report particularly.
The warrants referred to are the following :-
1. During the outbreak in the manufacturing and mining
districts, which took place in August, 1842, in the week of the
greatest anxiety, a clerk was sent down from the London
Post-office, with directions, under the authority of a Secre-
tary of State's warrant, to open the letters of six parties
named therein, all taking a prominent part in the disturb-
ances of that period. In the same week the same clerk was
directed, under authority of two other such warrants, to open
the letters of ten other persons named, and a fortnight later
to open the letters of one other person, Making seventeen in
all. Most of the persons whose letters :were ordered on this
occasion to be opened were indicted, and many both indicted
and convicted, before the Special Commission appointed to
try the parties concerned in those disturbances. With one
exception these warrants were issued between the 18th and
the 25th of August, 1842, and they were all cancelled on the
14th of October.
About the same time two clerks were sent down to two pro-
vincial towns, each with directions, under authority of a
Secretary of State's warrant, to open and examine the letters
addressed to one individual in each town ; but in one of these
cases there were no letters to open. One clerk employed on
this duty returned to his ordinary business after a week's
absence, the other after an absence of five weeks.
2. In the autumn of 1843, during the disturbances which
took place in South Wales, two clerks were sent down from
the Post-office, into the disturbed districts, with directions,
under authority of a warrant from the Secretary of State, one
to inspect the letters of one person at a particular town, the
other to inspect the letters of another person at another town ;
and subsequently, under authority of a different warrant, this
second clerk was sent to a third town, there to inspect the
letters of a third person. In all three instances the persons
whose letters were to be inspected were specifically named in
the warrant. One of these warrants was in force eighteen,
the other seven days.
It is these facts, probably, that have given rise to the re-
port of a commission or commissions having visited the ma-
nufacturing districts, charged with a general authority to
open and inspect letters.
3. The third of these cases is that of a warrant to open
and detain the letters addressed to Mr. Mazzini. This
warrant was issued on the Ist of March, and cancelled on
the 3d of June, in the present year. Throughout that
period the intercepted correspondence was transmitted un-
read from the Home-office to the Secretary of State for
Foreign, Affairs. The facts of the case so far as your Com-
mittee feel themselves at liberty to disclose them, appear to
be as follows :
Representations had been made to the British Govern-
ment, from high sources, that plots, of which Mr. Mazzini
was the centre, were carrying on upon British territory to
excite an insurrection in Italy, and that such insurrection,
should it assume a formidable aspect, would, from peculiar
political circumstances, disturb the peace of Europe. The
British Government, considering the extent to which Bri-
tish interests were involved in the maintenance of that
peace, issued on their own judgment, but not at the sug-
gestion of any foreign Power, a warrant to open and detain
Mr. Mazzini's letters. Such information deduced from those
letters as appeared to the British Government calculated to
frustrate this attempt was communicated to a foreign
Power; but the information so communicated was not of a
nature to compromise, and did not compromise, the safety of
any individual within the reach of that foreign Power; nor
was it made known to that Power by what means, or from
what source that information had been obtained.
4. A warrant to open and detain all letters addressed to
Mr. Worcell and to Mr. Stolzmann was issued on the 17th of
April, 1844, and cancelled on the 20th of June.
5. A warrant to open and detain all letters addressed to
Mr. Grodicki, at Paris, and to another foreign gentleman,
was issued on the 3d of June, 1844, and cancelled on the 13th
of the same month.
The last two warrants rested on grounds connected with
the personal safety of a foreign Sovereign entrusted to the
protection of England. It appears to your Committee that,
under circumstances so peculiar, even a slight suspicion of
danger would justify a Minister in taking extraordinary mea-
sures of precaution. The Committee have not learned that
there appeared in the letters that were detained anything to
criminate the gentlemen whom the Committee have very re-
luctantly named.
The Committee think it may be desirable for them to make
known that the above three warrants are the only warrants
to open the letters of foreigners which the present Govern-
ment has issued.
The warrants issued during the present century may be
divided into two classes :-
Ist. Those issued in furtherance of criminal justice, and
usually for the purpose of obtaining a clue to the hiding-place
of some offender, or to the mode or place of concealment of
property criminally abstracted ; and these, for brevity's sake,
the Committee will term criminal warrants.
2d. Those issued for the purpose of discovering the designs
of persons known or suspected to be engaged in proceedings
dangerous to the State, or (as in Mazzini's case) deeply in-
volving British interests, and carried on in the United King-
dom, or in British possessions beyond the seas.
With regard to both these classes of warrants, the objects
in in issuing them has been, in many cases, to ascertain
views, not of the party receiving, but of the party sending,
the letter.
follows :
In issuing these warrants, the mode of proceeding is as
1. In the case of criminal warrants,
they do not originate
with the Home-office. The application
is made, in the first
winhstoanisce,of to that
atinperoo
State
otuyintd4r;Ssieica.lretoaurires;
iosffo!r
the time being too short,
case be very urgent, owing tobefore
applicant to state the circumstances in writing ; but if the
ffestbsieontw;
the departure of the post, to draw out a written statement,
that condition is sometimes dispensed with. The general
object of this class of warrants has been already stated ; and
the principle which governs the issuing of them appears to
be, not to make them subservient to private and family con-
cerns, or to the support of a civil right, where an action only
could be maintained, as in many cases of fraud or bank-
ruptcy ; but to reserve the exercise of the power to those
cases exclusively where crime has been committed, and in
respect to which there is good ground to believe that cor-
respondence is going on with a particular party' which is
likely to lead to detectian. If the Under-Secretary accedes
to the application, he submits the case to the Principal Se-
cretary of State ; with whose approval a warrant is drawn
by the head clerk of the domestic department, under the in-
structions of the Under-Secretary, and is then signed by the
Principal Secretary of State. A record of the date of the
warrant is kept under lock and key, in a private book, to
which the two Under-Secretaries and the above-mentioned
head clerk have access. To the applicant information is
given, according to circumstances, of the post -mark or
address merely, or of the contents of the letters detained ;
or, if the case require it, the original letter is put into his
hands.
2. In the case of warrants of the second description, they
originate with the Home-office. The Principal Secretary of
State, of his own discretion, determines when to issue them,
and gives instructions accordingly to the Under-Secretary,
whose office is then purely ministerial. The mode of pre-
paring them, and keeping record of them in a private book,