6

fault-finding, and I no longer hear 'Bessie, Bessie, come and put by your workbox! Bessie, where is the key of the garden gate?' Bessie, you left the tap running in the bath, and here is the water tumbling down stairs;' and, dear papa, 'Bessie, the clerk says you never brought back the key of the vestry, and I can't get my surplice.'

"When I look back at, and think over, what I have neglected to do, I only wonder how I could have been so selfish as to persevere in giving pain to those who loved me so dearly."

"I never felt until now what a trial I must have been to all who love me; and how papa and aunt bore with me I cannot tell. I was always sorry for vexing them: weak, useless sorrow, doing no good. on for years in the same way, but for the accident that lames my pet for life. Every time he limps to meet me, I shall feel-”

I might have gone

Bessie could not tell what she might feel, but bent her head very low over her braiding; and worked on.

Dear Bessie! her good resolutions, and the bravery with which she adhered to them, and buffeted her thriftless ways, made her, indeed, a conqueror; for there is no conquest so glorious as that we obtain over ourselves.

Aunt Linda did not quite believe she would be able to overthrow the giant, who blights and destroys so much domestic comforts and worldly prosperity; but I knew the resolve "to do" would, in her case, give the power. It was not so much in herself she trusted: the poor Irish girl's lesson of faith had entered her heart. The vigilance she exercised over herself was so strict, at last, she could not go to sleep without recalling what she had done and left undone during the day. And once-a bitter night at Christmas-time, when I was visiting at the Rectory-I met her, in her night-dress, stealing back to the drawing-room, to replace some books she had forgotten on the table.

"It is sometimes a struggle," she said, while her teeth chattered, and she looked very "bluish ""it's a struggle still; but as my good Biddy says: 'Myself won't let myself alone while there's anything to be done that ought to be done.' It was high time to put an end to

Bessie's Beginnings !'

N taking a survey of times past, we find that the Corporation of the city of Bristol (as duly stated in the municipal accounts), made a payment of one penny to the carrier for carrying a letter to London. The Mayor and Aldermen of that ancient city, probably, had little idea they would ever be traced out by any after antiquarian, as the originators, or even be recorded as the employers, of a system of Penny Postage.

The "Penny," in connection with the "Post," although not quite in connection with the Post-Office, may be found in an Act, 2nd & 3rd of Edward VI., cap. 3, wherein the charge authorized to be made for post-horses impressed for the service of the king, was declared to be

one penny per mile. In 1591, we find Queen Elizabeth issuing "A Proclamation for redresse of disorders in postes which convey and bring to and out of the parts beyond the seas packets of letters."

On the accession of James I., in 1603, new orders were issued by the king "for thorow posts and carriers riding in post in our affaires." Lord Stanhope was at this time Postmaster-General. In 1619, James I. created

a new office of" Postmaster-General of England for foreign parts, being out of our dominions;" and appointed by letters patent, Matthew De Quester and Matthew De Quester the younger, to the office. This appointment gave rise to a long lawsuit between Lord Stanhope the Postmaster-General, and the De Questers, which led to such great confusion in postal affairs, that "all the postes in England, being in number ninety-nine poor men," petitioned the Privy Council for payment of arrears due to them for eight years; and stated that divers of them "lie now in prison by reason of the great debts they are in for want of their entertainment." These arrears are said to have amounted to upwards of £22,000.

The foreign Postmastership was assigned by the De Questers, in 1632, to William Frizell and Thomas Witherings, and this assignment was approved by King Charles I. in a Royal Proclamation issued in July, 1632. Three years after this, Witherings made a proposal to the king "for settling staffets, or pacquet-posts, betwixt London and all parts of His Majesty's dominions, for the carrying and re-carrying of his subjects' letters." In his memorial, Witherings stated some curious facts in relation to the condition of the postal service in those days. Letters, it is said, "being now carried by carriers, or foot-posts, sixteen or eighteen miles a day, it is full two months before any answer can be received from Scotland or Ireland, to London. If any of His Majesty's subjects shall write to Madrid, in Spain, he shall receive answer sooner and surer than he shall out of Scotland or Ireland." The journey from London to Edinburgh was proposed to be performed within three days, so that, according to Mr. Witherings, "the posts being punctually paid, the news will come sooner than thought."

In 1635, a Royal Proclamation was issued, ordaining that a post or two should be settled "to run night and day between London and Edinburgh, to go thither and come back again in six days; and to take with them all such letters as shall be directed to any post-town in or near that road;" and by the same authority cross-posts were also established for certain places. The charge made for postage was twopence for a single letter for any distance under eighty miles, fourpence up to 140 miles, sixpence for any longer distance in England, and eightpence to any place in Scotland.

The Royal Proclamation signified it to be His Majesty's pleasure, that from the beginning of this new service, no other messengers or foot-posts shall carry letters to places provided for under the scheme, "except common known carriers, or a particular messenger to be sent on purpose with a letter by any man for his own occasions, or a letter by a friend," on pain of exemplary punishment.

In 1640, Witherings was accused of "divers abuses and misdemeanours" and was superseded. Philip Burlamachi, a London merchant,

was then appointed Postmaster, and it was ordained that he should execute his office under the inspection of the Secretary of State. When Thomas Witherings was superseded, he assigned his patent to the Earl of Warwick. These changes led to numerous quarrels, and the whole controversy and its complications appear to have occupied the attention of both Houses of Parliament for a considerable period. Lord Stanhope, who had surrendered his patent, petitioned the House of Lords, asserting that his surrender had not been voluntary, as he had been "summoned to the Council-table and obliged, before he was suffered to depart, to subscribe somewhat there penned upon your petitioner's patent by the Lord Keeper Coventry." From 1641 to 1647 these Post-Office quarrels gave occasion for frequent discussions in both Houses of Parliament, and numerous affrays took place between the adherents of the several parties; Mr. Edmund Prideaux, a member of the House of Commons, and afterwards Attorney-General to the Commonwealth, having actively assisted on one occasion in seizing the Plymouth Mail, as it was being taken to the Earl of Warwick's Post-Office, near the Royal Exchange in London.

In 1644, Prideaux was appointed, by joint action of Lords and Commons, to be Master of the Posts, Messengers and Couriers. He was very zealous in his new office, and greatly improved the postal service; establishing "a weekly conveyance of letters into all parts of the Nation."

The Common Council of London, in 1650, attempted to set up a postal system on the main roads, to run twice a week; but Prideaux, having invoked the aid of the Council of State, the City Post-Office was put down." The Post-Office was subsequently farmed to John Manley for £10,000 a year; and in 1659 this farming brought in £14,000, as appears by the journals of the House of Commons. The farming was continued, under Charles II., to Henry Bishop, who was the first Postmaster-General under the Restoration, and who contracted to pay the king a yearly rent of £21,500. The Act 12 Car. II. c. 35, entitled "An Act for Erecting and Establishing a Post-Office," settled the arrangements of the department. The debates on this bill are very interesting, especially on the question of franking by Members of Parlia ment, one member declaring it to be "a poor mendicant proviso, and below the honour of the House;" even the Speaker declared he was ashamed of it.

Charles II. commenced the practice of granting pensions out of the Post-Office revenue, and this system was followed until 1694, when the list stood thus :

:

Queen Anne granted £5,000 a year to the Duke of Marlborough, which was also charged upon the Post-Office. The message from the Queen to the Commons on this occasion was presented to the House on 10th December, 1702, and was signed by the Queen herself. It is both brief and interesting, and runs thus :

"ANNE R.

"The Earl of Marlborough's services to Her Majesty, and to the publick, have been so eminent, both in his command of the army, and in his having established an entire confidence and good correspondence between Her Majesty and the States-General, that she has thought fit to grant the title of a Duke of this Kingdom to him, and to the heirs male of his body; and also a pension of £5,000 per annum upon the revenue of the Post-Office, for the support of his honour, during Her Majesty's natural life. If it had been in Her Majesty's power, she would have granted the same term in the pension as in the honour; and she hopes you will think it so reasonable in this case, as to find some proper methods of doing it."

After the reading of this message, the Commons, it is said, "seemed for some time to be in amaze, and kept so long silent that the Speaker stood up, and looked round to see if anybody would speak to it. At length the ice was broken by a member, who said, that though he had accepted of an employment at Court, yet he never did it with a design that his mouth should be sowed up in that house, when anything was offered that he thought detrimental to his country.' The debate became very warm, and eventually the sense of the House took the form of an Address to the Queen, in reply, which was presented on 21st December, 1702.

The Address reiterated Her Majesty's sentiments with regard to the Duke, and expressed the grief of the House that they could find any instance where they were unable to comply with the Queen's proposals to them; but they represented their apprehensions of making a precedent for future alienation of the Crown revenues, "which had been so much reduced by the exorbitant grants of the last reign." They assured the Queen that they were "infinitely pleased to find that the only way to obtain Her Majesty's favour was to deserve well from the public," and they assured her that whenever she should think fit to reward such merit it would be to their entire satisfaction.

In 1662, Bishop was succeeded by Daniel O'Neill, as farming Postmaster-General, and "A proclamation for quieting the Postmaster-General in the execution of his office,” was issued in 1663. It ordained that “no Postmaster or other person, except by the immediate warrant of our principal Secretary of State, shall presume to open letters or pacquets not directed unto themselves." An Act, 15 Car. II., settled the profits of