Sunday, June 12, 2022

Affordable Postage - Postal History Sunday

Welcome to the 95th entry of Postal History Sunday, featured weekly on the Genuine Faux Farm blog and the GFF Postal History blog.  If you take this link, you can view every edition of Postal History Sunday, starting with this one (the most recent always shows up at the top).  

I took the liberty of scooping everyone's troubles into the compost pile just prior to cleaning out the brooder room this week.  We won't see those things again until I go turn the pile in a couple of weeks.  I suspect they'll look a little bit different by then!

Now that that task is done, let's all pour ourselves a favored beverage and put on those fuzzy slippers.  Everyone is welcome here.  Here's hoping you are open to the possibility of learning something new.

Big Difference - Short Time Period

The British Mail system in the early 1800s determined postage by the number of sheets in a letter combined with the distance the letter traveled.  That distance was initially calculated based on the distance the item was actually carried - even if there might have been a more direct route between the origin and destination.  All I can say is that seems like an invitation for a little creative route-making to me.

The letter shown above was mailed in January of 1806 in Leominster, which was 142 miles away from London.  The destination was Buckingham, which was an additional 57 miles to travel from London.  That's 199 miles this letter was carried from its origin to its destination.  Now, if you are tempted to look up Leominster and Buckingham on a map, you would find that both are North and West of London and a direct route couldn't be much more than 100 miles.  But that's not how things worked at the time.  The letter was sent via London, so it traveled almost 200 miles - and that's how it was going to be charged when it got to its destination!

Distance Rate Progression 1805 - 1811

Not exceeding 15 miles     4d
15 to 30 miles                    5d
30 to 50 miles                    6d
50 to 80 miles                    7d
80 to 120 miles                  8d
120 to 170 miles                9d
170 to 230 miles               10d
230 to 300 miles               11d

If you look at the scrawls on the center of this folded letter you will find both the number "9" and the number "10."  If you do not see those numbers there, that's ok, you just might have to trust that I do see them.  The "10" is the correct postage due, which is the amount required for a letter that had only one sheet of paper that was carried over 170 miles, but no more than 230 miles.  It is possible the "9" was written in error because they were only calculating the distance from Leominster to London initially and they had forgotten the second leg of the trip.  

So, let's take a look at another letter that was sent in 1844 from Burton on Trent to Manchester (both in the United Kingdom), two locations that are only sixty miles apart - if the rate table above was used, we would expect at least 7 pence as postage.  But wait, if it had to go through London, that's more like 300 miles - or 11 pence.

When we look at the folded letter, we find four one penny stamps, providing only four pence in postage.  But, it seems to have been accepted as full payment.  This is an example of how much postage rates had changed by the time we get to 1844.  The distance used to calculate postage was changed to the shortest distance between two locations regardless of how it was carried in 1838 and, in 1840, the distance component was completely removed and a uniform rate of 2 pence per ounce was established.  (Note, this means that rates were no longer calculated "by the sheet," now it was just by weight).

So, this envelope must have weighed more than once ounce, but no more than two ounces.  And, for four pence, it traveled from point A to point B successfully.  If the first letter had been mailed in 1844,it is possible that it would likely have cost only 1 penny, because it weighs less than 1/2 ounce, which was the special rate for light mail.  In only 34 years, the cost of that first letter changed from 10 pence to one penny.  That's an astounding drop in postage costs.

Rowland Hill Promotes Cheap Postage

Sir Rowland Hill is a name that happens to be known by many postal historians and philatelists as he is often credited with the invention of the postage stamp (though this is an over-generalization of how postage stamps came to be - other authors can write on that topic if they would like).  But, more importantly, Hill was on the forefront of postal reforms that led to cheaper postage, making it possible for more of the populace to avail themselves of this service.  He wrote "Post Office Reform: Its Importance and Practicability," and the United Kingdom implemented those reforms in 1840.  The link is to the 3rd edition published in 1837.  

If you aren't up for reading the entire document, here is a summary of the things Hill was proposing & some of the logic (based partially on Hill's own summary on pages 43 & 44).

Hill's argument:

  1. The complex system of postage was inefficient, needlessly increased costs, and provided inadequate service for the postage collected.
  2. The current system was preventing an increase in business for the postal service, despite an increasing population.
  3. The system promoted collection of postage at destination, which often resulted in unpaid postage for refused mail, slow mail delivery, and mistakes due to the complex system.
  4. Significant portions of the mail were not paying for their costs for transit, promoting fraudulent uses of the postal system. 

Shared from the Postal Museum site on 6/9/22

Hill's proposal: 
  1. Make postage a uniform rate, regardless of distance, to make calculations simpler.  Hill actually proposed a 1 penny per half ounce rate, which the British Post ALMOST adopted with their 2 pence per ounce & a special 1 penny for light letters under a half-ounce.
  2. Collect postage in advance, to avoid fraud & simplify delivery.
Hill's expected results:
  1. Efficient operation could allow for more trips to carry and deliver mail - hence providing better services for its customers.
  2. Simplification of the process would actually result in more business and better revenue growth for the postal service.

If you are interested in a very short bio and a portrait of Hill, you will find them at this location in the National Portrait Gallery.  Or, you can view this presentation by the National Postal Museum. 

Pressures from Private Enterprise

It is tempting to claim that the situation in the United States followed that of the United Kingdom, but that misses some of the fundamental differences between the two.  First, and foremost, there is the simple matter that the US covered a much wider territory with a population that was spread out over that area.  As a result, the cost of covering the entirety of the nation actually was sufficient to make it difficult to cover costs with postage revenue.  As a matter of fact the US Postal Service had run a deficit for the decade leading up to big changes in 1847.

Like the UK, the United States combined distance and the number of sheets in a piece of letter mail to determine the postage due and most mail was sent postage due.  The letter shown above was mailed on August 30, 1819 from Cincinnati, Ohio to Newburyport, Massachusetts, a distance of 915 miles (more or less).  A clear marking reads "25" at the top left, which indicates the postage Stephen W Marston would have to pay for the privilege of receiving this missive.  The rate per sheet was 25 cents if it traveled over 400 miles.

So, you can see similarities in how postage was calculated.  

  1. There were different postage amounts for different distances of travel.
  2. Each postage rate would be multiplied for each sheet - up to a point, then weight was used.
  3. Mail was typically sent unpaid, with postage to be collected from the recipient.

Unlike the UK, the US Postal Service also had to deal with competition from a number of private posts that were springing up to offer their services at rates that were lower.

One such private post was established by James W. Hale and provided mail delivery routes in 1843 centered around New York and Boston.  Hale had a postage stamp designed in 1844, printing them in sheets of twenty.  Patrons could purchase a single stamp for 6 cents, which would pay for mail service between Hale's offices.  To encourage repeat business, a person could buy a whole sheet of 20 stamps for one dollar (5 cents per stamp).  

And, since I am ever the promoter (um... no, I'm not so good at that), if you would like to learn more about the item shown above it was featured in this prior Postal History Sunday).

In addition to the competition from private posts, the US had its own "Rowland Hill" in the form of one Barnabas Bates.  Bates was a vocal proponent for cheap postage who also leaned on the argument that increased use of the mails would make up for revenue lost with lower prices.  In fact, once the United Kingdom enacted their postage reform in 1840, this provided data on which Bates and members of the Cheap Postage Movement could hold up as an example.  

Joshua Leavitt is credited with 'The Finances of Cheap Postage" in Hunt’s Merchants Magazine, published in 1849.  The article points out that in 1839, there were 76 million letters mailed in the UK.  In 1848, the number of letters mailed was nearly five times greater (347 million).  Gross revenue was practically the same while the cost per letter was significantly less.  Bates and company had a pretty good model to point to with the successful British reform pushed forward by Rowland Hill.

Another point Bates liked to emphasize was the fact that a rate structure based on the number of sheets essentially required that postal workers were partaking in a "system of espionage" since they had to open mail if they were to properly determine the number of sheets.

Reform in the United States came in stages with postage rates being reduced to five cents for distances no more than 300 miles and ten cents for distances over 300 miles.  Five and ten cent stamps were, finally, issued in 1847 (an example is shown above).  In 1851, the rates were decreased to 3 cents and a three cent coin was actually minted to make it easier to pay the postage.  But, it would not be until 1863 that the uniform rate of 3 cents would be used throughout the US.

It could be argued that it was during this period that the US Postal Service was defined as a public service.  As such, it was not required that it be profitable business because the real profit was in providing reliable communications to all members of a nation whose people were often located in places where the volume of mail never would provide sufficient volume to be profitable.

Mail Between Nations Follows Suit

While much of the reduction in postage started with internal (or domestic mails) in the 1840s, there were many new postal agreements that adopted some of the same principles of simplifying postage rates, making the rates more affordable and promoting prepayment of postage.

The 1845 letter shown below was featured in one of the earlier Postal History Sundays (October 2020), so if you want to read the details, take the link.  In short, this item cost 140 centimes to mail, a rate that was determined primarily by the distance it traveled to go from Bruxelles, Belgium to Bordeaux, France.  The amount was collected from the recipient.


But, once we get to 1849 (just four years later), France and Belgium's postal rates between the two nations becomes much less expensive and much simpler.  This same letter would have cost 100 centimes LESS in 1849, 29% of what it was in 1845.

Letter Rates - Belgium to France 
Effective Date Rate Unit
Oct 1, 1849  40 centimes 7.5 grams
Apr 1, 1858  40 centimes 10 grams
Jan 1, 1866  30 centimes 10 grams
Jan 1, 1876 (GPU)  30 centimes 15 grams
May 1, 1878 (UPU)  25 centimes 15 grams
Oct 1, 1907 (UPU) 25 ctm / 15 ctm15 g / add'l 15 g

In fact, postage rates could be effectively lower even when the postage rate for a simple letter did not change.  In 1858, the weight per unit was increased, but the cost per unit remained at 40 centimes.  And, as mail volumes increased and mail systems became more efficient, the costs continued to decline.

Above is a letter that must have weighed more than 10 grams, requiring double the rate of postage (80 centimes).  It was mailed from Ypres, Belgium to Paris, France in 1865.

Less Effort = Less Postage

The old approach to calculate postage based on distance had a lot to do with assumptions about how much effort was required to get a letter from point A to point B.  If a posted item traveled a longer distance, it almost certainly would need to be handled by a larger number of people - all of whom wanted paying.  And, in fact, this had been an accurate assessment of the state of things in the 1700s, and perhaps into the early 1800s.  

During this period of postal reform, there were actually a few cases where postal systems recognized that there were even lower costs for certain types of mail and they opted to reflect those reduced costs with special postage rates.  For example, mail exchanged between border communities in two countries often enjoyed reduced postage rates that were similar to internal (domestic) rates of mail.  The letter shown below was mailed in Milano, Italy to Magadino, Switzlerland, where the rate would normally have been 40 centesimi rather than the 20 centesimi paid by the postage stamp because this letter qualified for the special border rate.

And, local mail often benefited from a lower postage rate, such as this letter than was sent from Geneve, Switzerland TO Geneve, Switzerland.  The cost was five centimes, which was half the normal postage rate at the time.

And, in the United States, a person might be able to pay a one cent "drop letter" rate if they dropped the letter at the post office and the recipient had to come to the the post office to pick it up.  I will say, as a person who has lived in rural towns for much of my life, I wish this was still in effect.  It often seemed odd to pay full postage for a letter that was just going to be walked five feet to the recipients post office box.  The ultimate irony was the day I mailed something to the PO Box number that was only three boxes to the left of my own.

And, yes, I had to pay the full postage rate to do it.  Even so, postage rates are still quite cheap in the US.  I guess if the fifty cents (or less) the letter cost meant more to me, I could have sat at the post office and waited until the recipient came to pick up their mail.  Then I could have just handed it to them.  After all, my time isn't worth more than the cheap postage on a letter - or is it?

Bonus Material

If you would like to read more about Barnabas Bates, Van Dyk Macbride wrote a book in 1847 titled Barnabas Bates, the Rowland Hill of American: A Story of the Fight for Cheap and Uniform Postage in the United States.  It is a relatively short read (28 pages).

Tom Lera uploaded a copy of a petition by Bates that included signatories such as Horace Greeley.  This can be viewed at ResearchGate at this location.

If you want the best (in my opinion) online resource for historical internal postage rates for the United Kingdom, look no further than the Great Britain Philatelic Society.

Thanks for joining me today.  I hope you have a great remainder of the day and a wonderful week to come.

2 comments:

  1. Rob, In your 1806 cover you write "It is possible the "9" was written in error because they were only calculating the distance from Leominster to London initially". At the time I think it was usual to rate a letter going through London at the 'to London' rate, and then rerate it to its final destination. This was even though letters passing through London since 1797 were charged only once for total distance travelled. WW

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for the additional information. I always appreciate getting more input - especially when an item is a bit further from my own area of concentration. That's part of the joy of postal history, it is unlikely I will ever run out of things to learn.

      Delete