knowledge not only as to whether certain places are post-towns or not, but as to the particular line of road to which every one of the 700 post-towns belong. Frequent practice will certainly accomplish much; but it may be doubted whether, amid such a multitude of facts, any amount of practice will afford that perfect familiarity which is essential to a high degree of accuracy and dispatch. If the alphabetic arrangement were adopted, it is probable that the first operation, after the letters arrived at the Central Office, would be, to bring all letters for the same post-town together; they would then be put into the bags, and the bags assorted for the roads. Possibly experience may show that even more progress in the assortment might be made at the Receiving-houses. Much would be accomplished by providing separate boxes for a few of the largest towns, as Dublin, Glasgow, Edinburgh, Liverpool, Manchester, Birmingham, and Bristol. If this were done, a very considerable portion of the whole number of letters would be finally assorted; for in these towns, and in London, nearly one-half of the Post Office revenue is collected.[1]
No. 3.
RECEIPTS FOR LETTERS.
There is an important improvement, the mention of which was reserved for the Appendix, because it is not essentially connected with those great changes which it has been the main object to recommend.
The evidence given before the Commissioners of Revenue Inquiry shows the great desirability of some plan which would render it practicable and easy for the Post Office to give, when required, receipts for letters sent to the post.
In many instances such a plan would be the means of tracing lost letters: oftentimes it would protect the Post Office from needless applications and unfounded complaints; and it would oppose
- ↑ Tables of Revemue, &c., 1834, p. 44.
