The Washington times., 1901-11-03
FRANKING IN. ENGLAND.
Vagaries of the System Which Has
Been Abolished.
British Members of Parliament Now
Compelled to Pay Postage ON All
MniI Mafter-Some Abuses which
Brought About the Laws Repeal.


MniI Mntter-Some Abuses Which
Brought About the Laws Repeal.
Among the numerous privileges which
time has swept away, it might have been
considered that the right of members of
Parliament to pass their letters free
through the post had disappeared past the
possibility of recall, and the proposal at
the close of last session to resuscitate the
right of "franking' must have come to
many people with a shock of surprise. The
suggestion recalls to mind all the vaga-
ries of the franking system, which, Ike
other anomalies of our English constltA-
ton. awake in our minds today a sort OF
affectionate amusement, rather than any
fervor of indignation.
Up to the time of the abolition OF the
privilege il was part of the amiable ds-
ties of courteous member OF Parma
rnent to pass his friends letters as well
as his own through the post gratis When
he paid visits to the houses of ms rela-
tives and acquaintances he left number
of franks behind, TO be used as required
His generosity cost him nothing, and the
prices charged for postage on cross routes
were so high that the saving to MS
friends pockets was considerable. Ordi-
nary franks were valid for one or two
ounces only, but certain more highly priv
ileged ones carried no Limitation as TO
weight. and the story is told OF piano
travelling free as letter under franking
signature. But of course, a rule it
was chiefly the well-to-do classes VINO
could count members of Parliament
among their friends, and the postal tax
was risidIy exacted from those letter re-
ceivers who could least afford it. Poor
people who wanted news of their relatives
at less cost than the legitimate rates
sometimes resorted TO forgivable trickery.
Rowland HILL in his pamphlet urging the
necessity of postoffice reform. relates how
Coleridge, walking in the lake district,
caue across q woman in the act of re-
fusing letter from her son, on the
ground that she had no shilling TO pay
for II. Coleridge gave her the shilling, but
when the letter carrier had gone the
woman told him that the letter was
mere signal to tell her that her son was
well; il was never meant to be taken lii'
and as matter of fact consisted OF noth-
ing but blank sheet addressed TO her-
self.
more elaborate code of signaling was
adopted by Rowland Hill himself. In his
time newspapers were allowed TO go free
whether written by himself or not II
had been intended that. as in the case oil
letters the names should be genuine sig
natures in the handwriting of the franker
but by degrees-chiefiy through the pres
sure exerted by enterprising booksellers
and paper distributors upon complaisaht
polticians-the names on the papers de-
generated into a perfectly empty form
till some printers boldly discarded writ
ing. and had the name of a political lead
er printed on their wrappers. Newspapers
virtually all travelled free. The laXity
with respect to them must be attrlbuted
to the heavy vested interests involved,
and is all the more remarkable when it
IS rendered that in England TO forge
the frank on a letter was an offence pun
ished with much severity. The Hill fam
fly took advantage OF the economical
form of communication afforded, and
when Rowland, i'll and out of spirits,
took q Scotch tour TO recruit his health,
he arranged to send his family frequent
bulletins by means of papers. He took
with him a stock of old papers, and the
family being strong Radicals, it was set
tied that a Liberal name should stand for
q good and a Conservative for a bad re-
port, gradations in health being indicated
to nicety by the shades Of political
opinion in the person whose name was
selected for the frank - Sir Francis Bur
dett,'" he says in his autobiographical
sketch, was to imply vigorous health
while probably Lord Eden would al
most have brought one of my brothers
after me in anxiety and alarm"
The practice of fraEking dates almost
from the formal institution Of the post
office The act to which the postoffice
may be said TO owe its existence dates
back to 1851. during the time of the Com
monwealth. In this year a bill was intro
duced into Parliament 10 grant members |
the right Of passing their letters free |
through the post but il was thrown out |
by the Lords. On the Restoration new |
act, virtually repetition of that Of 1851, |
ensured the existence of the postofhce, and /
in the same year members were granted |
the franking privilege by the Crown. No |
recognition of the right by Parliament is /
TO be found until en- act passed under |
George III, just over a hundred years
later, which was intended to limit the
number of franked letters. Up to this time
the profits Of the posjoffice belonged to
the Crown, and it was therefore within
the province of the Crown to remit the
cost Of postage to any favored class But
at the time of the act Of George III the
revenue accruing from the postoffice had
been surrendered to the public during the
life of the sovereign in exchange for a
civil list charged upon the Consolidated
Fund. The King was no longer cornpe-
tent to grant any dispensation from the
ordinary postage tax, and the matter had
to be referred to Parliament The new
act made no change as to the weight of
letters allowed to pass. which had been
fixed at two ounces; while the old rule
that members might frank letters during
the Parliamentary session or for forty
days before or after was still maintained
The new restrictions were that the whole
address of every franked letter. and not
merely the name Of the franking mem
Der, was now to be in his own handwrit-
Ing. and that In the case of letters des-
patched TO members only those were TO
be passed free which were directed to his
usual residence or to the place at which
he was actually staying, TO either OF
the houses of Parliament
The act was Intended 10 check the cur
rent abuses. but far from limiting the
number of free letters, il seems to have