562 P O S P O S It) the same person, the right of way is extinguished, but may under certain circumstances revive on the separation of the owner ship. (4) Possession is very important as an element in deter mining the title to goods under 13 Eliz. c. 5, the Bills of Sale Act, 1878 (41 and 42 Viet. c. 31, ss. 4, S), and the Bankruptcy Act, 18S3 (46 and 47 Viet. c. 52, s. 44). It may be said that as a general rule retention of possession by the transferor on an absolute assignment or a colourable delivery of possession to the transferee is strong prima facie evidence of fraud. " Apparent possession " is denned by section 4 of the Bills of Sale Act. (5) Possession of goods or documents of title to goods is generally sufficient to enable agents and others to give a good title under the Factors Acts (see FACTORS). (6) In criminal law the question of possession is important in founding the distinction between larceny and embezzle ment. If the goods are in the possession of the master and ho gives them to the custody of his servant for a specific purpose, and the servant steals them, it is larceny ; if they have never come into the master s possession, as if a clerk receives money on his master s behalf, it is embezzlement. Recent possession of stolen goods is always regarded as a presumption that the person in whose pos session they are stole them or received them knowing them to have been stolen. In the case of a charge of receiving stolen goods evidence may be given that there was found in the possession of the accused other property stolen within the preceding period of twelve months, 34 and 35 Viet. c. 112, s. 19. (For possession in criminal law, see Stephen, Digest of the Criminal Law, note xi. ). (7) Actions of possession of ships fall within the jurisdiction of the Admiralty Division. This jurisdiction in the case of British vessels depends upon the Admiralty Court Act, 1861 (24 Viet. c. 10, s. 8), in the case of foreign vessels (in which the jurisdiction is rarely exercised) upon the general powers of the court as a maritime court. The doctrines of adverse possession (in the old English sense, which was not identical with the Roman law, for the real owner must have actually or by fiction been disseised) and of posscssio fratris are now of only antiquarian interest. The Statutes of Limitation, 3 and 4 Will. IV. c. 27 and 37 and 38 Viet. c. 57, have super seded the first. The only question now is, not whether possession has been adverse or not, but whether twelve years have elapsed since the right accrued (see LIMITATION). The maxim "posscssio fratris de feodo simplici sororem facit esse hseredem " (Coke upon Littleton, 14b) has been altered by the rules of descent introduced by 3 and 4 Will. IV. c. 106, under which descent is traced from the purchasei. At one time possessory suits were occasionally maintained in England, and more frequently in Ireland, for the quieting of possession after proof of three years possession before the filing of the bill. But such suits are now obsolete (see Neill v. Duke of Devonshire, 8 Appeal Cases, 146). There was one character istic case in old English law in which possession was maintained by means of what was called " continual claim," made yearly in due form, where the person having the right was prevented by force or fear from exercising it (Coke upon Littleton, 253b). Continual claim was abolished by 3 and 4 Will. IV. c. 27, s. 11. Scotland. In Scotland possessory actions still exist eo nomine. Actions of molestation, of removing, and of maills and duties are examples. A possessory judgment is one which entitles a person who has been in possession under a written title for seven years to con tinue his possession (Watson,Zaw Dict.,s.v." Possessory Judgment"). United States. Here the law in general agrees with that of England. But in Maryland, New Hampshire, North Carolina, and Vermont the doctrine of possessio fratris apparently still exists (Bouvier, Law Diet., " Possessio Fratris"). Possessory rights are taxed in some of the States. Louisiana follows Roman law closely. Possession of incorporeal rights (to use the unscientific language of the Code) is called quasi-possession, and the division of possession into natural and civil is maintained (Civil Code, 3389-3419). In addition to the authorities cited may be mentioned Smith, Diet, of Anti- quities,s.v. "Possessio"; Markby, Elements of Law, ch. viii. ; Holland, Elements of Jurisprudence, ch. xi. ; Holmes, The Common Law (lect. vi.). (J. Wf.) P S T-0 F F I C E rP HE germ of the modern postal systems of the world is I to be looked for, obviously, in the earliest organized establishment of a staff of Government couriers. When, or under what precise circumstances, such an establishment was first made available by a state for the carriage of the letters of private persons there is no satisfactory evidence to show. That there must have been, even in early times, a connexion, more or less authorized, between the trans mission of public and of private correspondence is highly probable. Even financial reasons would soon dictate a formal permission to Government couriers to carry letters for individuals under regulation and restriction, of course although at the outset such a practice may well have been rather connived at than allowed. In the postal system of Spain and the German empire there is express record of such a permission in the month of April 1544 ; and within fifteen or sixteen years that permission had grown into a legalized and regulated monopoly, whence the counts of Taxis drew part of their profits as post masters-general. For the purposes of this article, how ever, it is enough to note that in Great Britain existing private letters of the 15th century some, perhaps, of the 14th bear endorsements which show that they were con veyed by relays of men and horses maintained under the control of the Government, and primarily intended for its special service. In several Continental states the univer sities had inland postal establishments of a rudimentary sort at an early date. The university of Paris, for exam ple, organized a postal service almost at the beginning of the 13th century, and it lasted in a measure until the year 1719. In various parts of Europe mercantile guilds and brotherhoods were licensed to establish posts for commer cial purposes. But everywhere as far as the accessible evidence extends foreign posts were under state control. GREAT BRITAIN. Early History (c. 1533-1836). As early as the middle of the 13th century entries occur in the wardrobe accounts of the kings of England of payments to royal messengers variously designated "cokinus," "nuncius,"or "garcio" for the conveyance of letters to various parts of the country. In the super vision of these royal messengers lies the germ of the office of postmaster-general. The first English postmaster ofSix- whom a distinct account can be given is Sir Brian Tuke, teen who is described (1533) in the records as "Magister Nun- c< ciorum, Cursorum, sive Postarum," "both in England and in other parts of the king s dominions beyond the seas." But long subsequent to this appointment of a postmaster- general the details of the service were frequently regulated by proclamations and by orders in council. Thus, in the curious collection of royal proclamations in the library of the Society of Antiquaries there is one of Philip and Mary (undated, but apparently of 1555) which regulates the supply of horses for the conveyance of letters to Dover. 1 Again, in July 1556 the lords of the council ordered "that the postes betweene this and the Northe should eche of them keepe a booke, and make entrye of every lettre that he shall receive, the tyme of the deliverie thereof unto his hands, with the parties names that shall bring it unto him." Much of the business of the foreign postal service to and from England during the earlier years of Queen Elizabeth was managed by the incorporated "merchant strangers," who appointed a special postmaster amongst themselves. When that office chanced to fall vacant in 1568 they quarrelled about a successor; and the quarrel cost them their privilege. 2 The accession of James I. to the English throne, by Ur necessitating a more frequent communication between J I London and Scotland, led to improvements in the postal 1 In his able account of this remarkable collection the late Mr Robert Lemon has overlooked the proclamation here referred to, prob ably from its want of a date, his own arrangement being chronological. 2 F. Windebauk to Sir W. Cecil : "All the Italians were unwilling to give their voices to Raphael, . . . but inclined to favour Godfrey " (])om. Cor. Eliz., xlviii. 65, State Paper Office). Raphael was a
German, Godfrey an Englishman.