Chapter XI: Postmasters (1)

Having brought the postal history of the colonies up to the time Richard Bache succeeded Benjamin Franklin (November, 1776), and whose dismissal gave the latter some grounds of complaint, if not censure, against the appointment of Ebenezer Hazard, who had the office under President Washington, we will carry out the object of these tables, by continuing the list of postmaster-generals from that period.

SAMUEL OSGOOD.—This gentleman was born at Andover, Massachusetts, February 14, 1748; graduated at Harvard College in 1770; a member of the Massachusetts Legislature, and also of the board of war, and subsequently an aid to General Ward; in 1779, a member of the Massachusetts Constitutional Convention; in 1781, appointed a member of Congress; in 1785, first commissioner of the treasury; and September 26, 1789, postmaster-general. He was afterwards naval officer of the port of New York, and died in that city, August 12, 1813.

Early in the first session of the Second Congress two important subjects of a national character received the attention of the representatives of the people: one was establishing a national mint, and the other the organization of the postal system.

The establishing of a mint, however, was delayed, and no special action was taken in that direction until 1790, when Mr. Jefferson, then Secretary of State, urged the matter upon the attention of Congress. In 1792, April 2, laws were enacted for the establishment of a mint. It did not, however, go into full operation until 1795.

The first mint was located in Philadelphia, and remained the sole issuer of coin in the United States until 1835, when a branch was established in each of the States of Georgia, North Carolina, and Louisiana,—in Charlotte, Dahlonega, and New Orleans. These three branches went into operation in the years 1837-38.

A bill for the organization of a post-office system was passed in 1792, simultaneously with that for establishing the mint.

Very soon after the commencement of the first session of Congress a letter was received from Ebenezer Hazard (July 17, 1789), then postmaster-general under the old Confederation, suggesting the importance of some new regulations for that department. A bill for the temporary establishing of a post-office was passed soon afterwards. The subject was brought up from time to time, until the present system was organized in 1792. The postmaster-general was not made a Cabinet-officer until the first year (1829) of President Jackson’s administration.

TIMOTHY PICKERING.—Born at Salem, Massachusetts, July 17, 1746; graduated in 1763; was colonel of a regiment of militia at the age of nineteen, and marched for the seat of war at the first news of the battle of Lexington; in 1775, was appointed judge of two local courts; in the fall of 1776, marched to New Jersey with his regiment; in 1777, appointed adjutant-general, and subsequently a member of the board of war with Gates and Mifflin; in 1780 he succeeded Greene as quartermaster-general; in 1790 he was employed in negotiations with the Indians; August 12, 1791, he was appointed postmaster-general; in 1794, Secretary of War, and in 1795, Secretary of State; from 1803 to 1811 he was senator, and from 1814 to 1817 representative in Congress; died at Salem, June 29, 1829.

JOSEPH HABERSHAM.—Born in 1750; a lieutenant-colonel during the Revolutionary War, and in 1785 a member of Congress; appointed postmaster-general, February 25, 1795; he was afterwards president of the United States Branch Bank in Savannah, Georgia; died at that place, November, 1815.

GIDEON GRANGER.—Born at Suffield, Connecticut, July 19, 1767; graduated at Yale College in 1787, and the following year admitted to the bar; in 1793, elected to the Connecticut Legislature; November 28, 1801, appointed postmaster-general; retired in 1814, and removed to Canandaigua, New York; April, 1819, elected a member of the Senate of that State, but resigned in 1821 on account of ill health. During his service in that body he donated one thousand acres of land to aid the construction of the Erie Canal. Died at Canandaigua, December 31, 1822.

RETURN JONATHAN MEIGS.—Born at Middletown, Connecticut, in 1765; graduated at Yale College in 1785, and subsequently admitted to the bar; in 1788, emigrated to Marietta, Ohio, then the Northwestern Territory; in 1790, during the Indian wars, he was sent by Governor St. Clair on a perilous mission through the wilderness to the British commandant at Detroit; in the winter of 1802-03 he was elected by the legislature the first chief justice of the Supreme Court of the new State; in October, 1804, he was appointed colonel commanding the United States forces in the upper district of the Territory of Louisiana, and resigned his judgeship; in the following year he was appointed one of the United States judges for Louisiana; April 2, 1807, he was transferred to the Territory of Michigan; in October following he resigned his judgeship, and was elected Governor of the State of Ohio, but his election was successfully contested on the ground of non-residence. He was chosen at the same session as one of the judges of the Supreme Court of the State, and at the next session as United States Senator for a vacancy of one year, and also for a full term. In 1810 he was again elected Governor of Ohio, and on the 8th of December resigned his seat in the Senate; in 1812 he was re-elected Governor; on the 17th of March, 1814, he was appointed postmaster-general, which he resigned in June, 1823. Died at Marietta, March 29, 1825.

JOHN MCLEAN.—Born in Morris county, New Jersey, March 11, 1785. His father subsequently removed to Ohio, of which State the son continued a resident. He labored on the farm until sixteen years of age, when he applied himself to study, and two years afterwards removed to Cincinnati, and supported himself by copying in the county clerk’s office while he studied law. In 1807 he was admitted to the bar; in 1812 he was elected to Congress, and re-elected in 1814; in 1816 he was unanimously elected by the legislature a judge of the Supreme Court of that State; in 1822 he was appointed by President Monroe commissioner of the General Land-Office, and on the 26th of June, 1823, postmaster-general; in 1829 he was appointed as one of the justices of the Supreme Court of the United States.

WILLIAM T. BARRY.—Born in Fairfax county, Virginia, March 18, 1780; graduated at the College of William and Mary. He was admitted to the bar, and in early life emigrated to Kentucky. In 1828 he was a candidate for Governor of that State, and defeated by a small majority after one of the most memorable contests in its annals; appointed postmaster-general March 9, 1829; in 1835, appointed minister plenipotentiary to Spain, and died at Liverpool, England, on his way to Madrid.

Mr. Barry was the first postmaster-general who had the honor of being one of the Cabinet. Whether such a movement has benefited the postal department or not can only be ascertained by a reference to its records. As these present more the appearance of political names, figures, changes, removals, and a confusion of all the elements which make up a party, it is doubtful if the public mind is prepared to view the postal department in any other light than that of one of the revolving political luminaries of the country. A reference, however, to some statistics furnished in this work, and an occasional reference to its not being a self-sustaining institution, may probably throw some light upon the subject.

We have avoided, through motives of nationality rather than of choice, any direct allusion to frauds in the postal department. “When Judge McLean left the department it was,” said his friends, “in a thriving condition.” Such was not the case. From “The Aurora,” edited by the late William Duane, bearing date January 10, 1835, we take the following statement:—

“It would be a hopeless task to seek the _qualities_, _actions_, _evidence of fitness_, or _principles_ of Mr. McLean. We know he was a member of Congress: can any one _discover_ any thing which he did there? He was appointed postmaster-general to cover the _retreat_ of R. J. Meigs, who should have been removed three years before.

“And what did he do in the general post-office? Why, the men who had practised the most enormous abuses, which had been proved by _blanching evidence_ before Congress, he retained in the prosecution of their _former business_.

“The reproach is no doubt to be shared with Congress, which, on the occasion of the investigation of the sale of post-office drafts, suffered the inquiry to be stifled after attempts had been made, without success, on some poor men to suppress the truth, and who were discharged for their fidelity, whilst others were retained whose memories, like the memorable Italian delator, was _non mi ricordo_!

“Mr. McLean entered the general post-office when it was whelmed in abuses and in debt. Accounts in that office had not been brought up, or cash accounts balanced, for several years; and, in fact, no true _account_ of the affairs of the post-office department at that period had ever appeared.

“Mr. McLean was a mere walking-stick for the _directors_ of his predecessor. He made some efforts to bring up the business, and some laws were passed to oblige accountability; but he left the general post-office as he found it, deep in debt,—saddling his successor with the burden, and leaving the system in such disorder as to render it necessary for Mr. Barry to organize the department wholly anew, were it only to extricate it from the hands of those men who had thrown it all into confusion.”[38]

Mr. Barry, in his address to the people, speaking of the department as it came from the hands of Mr. McLean to him, says,—

“The late postmaster-general, in his report dated November 17, 1828, shows that, instead of saving $500,000, the expenses of his department from the 1st of July, 1827, to the 1st of July, 1828, were upwards of $25,000 more than all its revenues for the same period, and that he had entered into contracts to take effect from the 1st of January, 1829, which involved the department in an expense, for the period of only six months from the 1st of January to the 1st of July, 1829, of $40,778.55 more than all its revenue for the same time; and that the expenses of the department for the year commencing the 1st of July, 1828, were $74,714.15 more than its revenues, and that the excess of expenditure, together with the losses sustained, had diminished the finances of the department within one year to the amount of $101,266.03. In this state of things I had no agency. It was produced before I came into office.”

AMOS KENDALL.—Born at Dunstable, Massachusetts, August 16, 1789; graduated at Dartmouth College in 1811; about the year 1812, removed to Kentucky, and in 1815 was appointed postmaster at Georgetown in that State; in 1816 he assumed the editorial charge of the “Argus,” published at Frankfort, in the same State, which he continued until 1829, being most of the time State printer; in 1829 he was appointed fourth auditor of the United States Treasury; and May 1, 1835, postmaster-general. He resigned the latter office in 1840, and has, since the introduction of the electric telegraph, been mainly employed in connection with enterprises for its operation. He is yet living.

A GLANCE OVER HIS POSTAL OPERATIONS.

The years 1834, ’35, and ’36 were remarkable for an almost epidemic species of madness on the subject of slavery, or, rather, upon the question of the immediate emancipation of the slaves throughout the South. That this was carried to extremes by both parties there can be no doubt, and that very extremity became the chief cause of the rebellion of the South. The question has been settled by the North that although the South had all she could claim consistently under an _uncertain clause_ of the Constitution, she had no right to make slavery a fiendish monster, that was to ride iron-shod over all the Free States in the Union, and silence the voice of Christianity in its peaceful attempts to lessen its evils. As a relic of the long past, one of the dark pages from Saxon history, the institution of slavery, as sustained in the South, was a deep, damning, dark spot on a land that boasted of principles based on three cardinal precepts, “virtue, liberty, and independence,”—a misnomer in its Constitution and laws.

While the fanatical portion of the Northern abolitionists were striving to impress upon the South the enormity of their crime in sustaining slavery, the South was equally virulent in its condemnation of their mode of doing so. Meetings were held all over the country, speeches made, and passion swayed the judgment to the total extinction of common sense. The South accused the North of encouraging amalgamation; the North indignantly denied it, and with much logic proved that it was a _Southern virtue altogether_.

This was the beginning of the rebellion: here were the seeds grown, watered, and nurtured by hatred, envy, and malice. The South had planted its poisonous root on a free soil, and it came in contact with its more wholesome brother: the one began to pale before the venom of the other, blasting it like “a mildew’d ear.” It is not our purpose to give a history of these eventful years, nor the consequence attending the operations of the Northern opposition party to slavery against Southern arrogance and presumptuous domination. The question, however, had to be decided at one time or another; and in 1860 it was answered by the thunder sound of cannon and flashes from millions of rifles.

The South became very indignant against the post-office department, which it accused of an abuse of power, by _permitting_ what they called “incendiary publications” to pass through the office to individuals in the South. The Federal Government was called upon to correct this “prostitution of its laws,” which was calculated to affect its (the South’s) peculiar “domestic institution,” and if persisted in would be the CERTAIN DESTRUCTION OF THE UNION.

In answer to repeated complaints made to Amos Kendall, Esq., the then postmaster-general, both from Southern men and Northern advocates of slavery, he stated distinctly that he had no legal authority to exclude newspapers from the mail, nor prohibit their carriage or delivery on account of their character and tendency, real or supposed. Indeed, this would be assuming a power over the liberty of the press which might be perverted and abused to an extent highly injurious to our republican system of government.

In 1835, Amos Kendall received a letter from the postmaster at Charleston, stating that he had detained in the office certain inflammatory newspapers, circulars, pamphlets, &c., the distribution of which he thought was calculated to do much harm in the State; in fact, a meeting was called in that city of its citizens upon the subject of these “incendiary documents,” when it was publicly stated that “_arrangements had been made with the postmaster, by which no seditious pamphlets shall be issued or forwarded from the post-office in this city_”! The committee consisted of the following-named gentlemen, who had waited upon the postmaster, and hence his letter to the postmaster-general:—General Hayne, John Robinson, Charles Edmonston, H. A. Desaussure, James Robertson, James Lynah, Edward R. Laurens. The following is an extract from Mr. Kendall’s letter to the postmaster at Charleston: similar replies to other postmasters from the Southern States were also forwarded, as it appeared to have been a preconcerted Southern action. Of this there can be no doubt; for the Charleston letter bore date July 29, 1835, the Richmond August 8, New Orleans July 15, and Georgia July 10. Mr. Kendall says,—

“But I am not prepared to direct you to forward or deliver the papers of which you speak. The post-office department was created to serve the people of each and all of the _United States_, and not to be used as the instrument of their _destruction_. None of the papers detained have been forwarded to me, and I cannot judge for myself of their character and tendency; but you inform me that they are in character ‘the most inflammable and incendiary, and insurrectionary in the highest degree.’

“By no act or direction of mine, official or private, could I be induced to aid knowingly in giving circulation to papers of this description, directly or indirectly. We owe an obligation to the laws, but a higher one to the communities in which we live; and if the _former_ be perverted to destroy the _latter_, it is patriotism to disregard them. Entertaining these views, I cannot sanction, and will not condemn, the step you have taken. Your justification must be looked for in the character of the papers detained, and the circumstances by which you are surrounded.”

“The surroundings” in and near all Southern post-offices are those which the institution of slavery inaugurates. Letters from certain Eastern States were subject to an espionage somewhat similar to that by which a detective policeman tracks an unsuspecting culprit from haunt to haunt, acquiring a perfect knowledge of his habits and the character of his associates. Letters were opened by a sort of steaming process, read and their contents noted, carefully sealed again, and delivered to the person to whom they were directed. If the contents of the letter came under the denunciatory head, the individual to whom it was addressed received intimation from the Order of “The Regulators,” a society formed for the purpose of finding out abolitionists, to leave the city in twenty-four hours.

The writer of this resided in the city of New Orleans at that period, and he knew of the existence of one established as far back as 1829: it was called the “Regulators.” It was not only formidable in numbers, but equally so in a political point of view. This order has since been merged in that of the “Golden Circle.” One of the obligations of the “Regulators” was, and is in the new “junto,” to this effect:—

“I do promise that I will use my best exertions to find out any and every one who in any way favors abolitionism, and who attempts to instruct or enlighten a slave, either by teaching him his letters, or by giving him religious instruction,” &c.

Under this oath men were driven from the South, and in some instances _tarred and feathered_! In 1834 the writer knew an old gentleman from Boston, who, ignorant of the _exclusive_ slave-laws of the State, was compelled to quit New Orleans for simply talking to an old black man about religion and teaching him his letters, so that he might read the word of God: this, too, in a Christian land,—a land of freedom![39]

It may be observed, however, in extenuation even for such seeming high-handed measures, that as slavery was an acknowledged institution rearing itself up on the Constitution, and that some 4,000,000 of human creatures were chained to it, it was absolutely necessary to keep them in ignorance of any sympathy existing for their degraded state either in the North or the South, lest such sympathy should excite them to resistance. Hence every thing that was calculated to throw light on their benighted pathway, and strengthen any lingering preconceived idea that they were men and not beasts of burden, was kept studiously away from them. As long as this country sanctioned the existence of slavery, just so long was she justified in protecting those States sustaining it from any outbreak on the part of its victims. It was an evil that came in under the Constitution, and it was an evil it was bound to sustain. The anti-slavery party North carried their views far beyond common sense and simple reason; and this led to Southern opposition. But the more enlightened people viewed both parties as acting wrong, and in opposing the first they as strongly repudiated the acts of the latter. And what has been the consequence? The South, alone in its crime, alone in its inhuman traffic, alone in its crushing power to make men beasts of burden,—even lower in the animal scale than the animal itself,—like Lucifer, rebelled against its country and its God. Thus, slaveholders became barbarians by the very act of attempting to rivet the chains of bondage on man and his country. That rebellion recreated in our midst a new order, or rather carried out the very spirit of the Declaration of Independence, declaring that these united colonies are, and of right ought to be, “FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES.” There can be no such thing as freedom, if its meaning be linked to the chains of slavery. There is no true freedom for an American to boast of, if one portion of the land sustains slavery and laughs at the sound of the lash as it lacerates the back of a bondsman in the nineteenth century. Age of Christianity! age of refinement! age of letters! What a misnomer!

This feeling, which had a tendency to divide the South from the North, was gradually assuming a dangerous aspect. It was a feeling antagonistical to that which prevailed in the North. The one was allied to the age of barbarism, the other to the highest order of civilization. The worst passions of bad men were working the evil; they engendered hatred and malice; and the rising popularity of the North for its intelligence, its institutions, its educational system, its arts, its sciences, and, in fact, all that a high state of intellectual knowledge produces, added fuel to the hellish fire that was burning in the Southern breast.

They could boast of only one institution, and that was slavery. This institution sent forth

“the piercing cry
Which shook the waves and rent the sky:
E’en now, e’en now, on yonder western shores
Weeps pale Despair, and writhing Anguish roars;
E’en now on Afric’s groves, with hideous yell
Fierce Slavery stalks, and slips the dogs of hell;
From vale to vale the gathering cries rebound,
And sable nations tremble at the sound!”

The South actually could boast of but this one institution: for all others, either of commerce, agriculture, education, arts or sciences, they were indebted to the North. And yet they rebelled!

The moment men, as well as nations, feel their own insignificance and witness the rising greatness of others, that moment they begin to plot mischief. Treason is the offspring of disappointment and a desire for power. Defeated ambition not unfrequently steps in, and out of such elements rebellions are made. Lucifer, therefore, may be quoted as the personification of the treason of Jeff Davis.

The South also made the discovery that slave labor, devoted only to one object, was demoralizing the soil, as it had already demoralized society. Northern men and Northern manners did not suit their ideas of refinement, and thus the social relations became unpleasant.

Every foot of ground neglected or simply used for one especial purpose was gradually wearing out. The census of 1850 furnishes the following facts connected with the decadency of the Southern soil.

Three hundred and thirty-five thousand natives of Virginia emigrated from the State of Virginia and found homes elsewhere. South Carolina sent forth 163,000. North Carolina lost 261,575,—equal to thirty-one per cent. As regards Maryland, the extreme poverty of her soil can be directly traced to man’s neglect of what kind Nature sent him, that by the “sweat of his brow” he should cultivate and enjoy.

If we were to trace the cause of this, it would be found to have originated in the sterility of the soil, the absence of free labor and agricultural knowledge. Southern men are not favorably disposed towards Northern improvements in any department, no matter whether it be trade, commerce, or agriculture: hence they have no such farms South as they have North, even in portions of their country where the soil is equally susceptible of improvement.

The South stated distinctly, speaking through her secret councils, using their own language, “_that it could only hope for the real enjoyment of its rights in a_ SOUTHERN CONFEDERACY”!

Mr. Kendall’s letter to the postmaster was applauded by the Southern press, and most severely censured by that of the North. One editor said, “There was but one course for the postmaster-general to pursue in relation to the distribution of the documents at Charleston, and that is, to have directed his subordinate officer to follow the statutes as laid down, and leave the result to the law. Instead of this, he tells him that it is _patriotism sometimes to disregard the law_!”

It is said the law is defective: it may have been in 1835; but the South, by its own vile act, has made that law so clear that there is not the least doubt but every Southern postmaster hereafter, whatever his political opinions may be, will be fully able to understand it.

Perhaps no man exerted himself more to make the postal department honored and respected than did Amos Kendall. He was, consequently, making rules and regulations organizing the several departments, and watching each and every operation with a shrewd and business eye to its interest.

In 1835, under the heading of the “Organization of the Post-Office Department,” he published fifty-six rules and regulations, concluding with the following remarks, _apart from a political basis_:—

“The postmaster-general looks to all those under his direction and control for a cheerful and vigorous co-operation in the management of the business of the department, by which they will not only render an essential service to their country, but assuredly promote their own happiness and extend their individual reputation. It will give him pleasure, and it is his fixed purpose, to advance, as occasion may offer, all such as by their industry, fidelity, and correct deportment may give character to the department and enable him to discharge honorably the important duties with which he is intrusted.”

Mr. Kendall and, in fact, all postmaster-generals in their reports invariably speak of advancing the interest of honest and trustworthy employees; but we believe that unless this important and much-desired consideration is carried out by _political influence, anxious expectants will never enjoy the benefits arising from it_.

Postmaster-General Blair made similar promises, which, like those of others, were not fulfilled, and the writer of this, among others, was told that an addition to their salary would follow Postmaster-General Blair’s promises. The presumption, however, was that there was not a man in the whole postal department who came up to the postmaster-general’s idea of what constituted “honesty” in its connection with the department. This, however, we do know, that the noisy, ignorant politicians, those who exercised an influence over frequenters of rum-shops, were the men who received the most attention from these functionaries. Postmaster-General Blair, in his Annual Report of the Post-Office Department, 1862, winds up with these words:—

“It is my purpose to adhere firmly to my determination to displace incompetency and indifference wherever found in official position under my control, without any discrimination in favor of appointments which I may myself have made under misinformation of facts. The postal business must be conducted, if successful, upon the same principles which control the operations of the upright and sagacious man of business. The department should adhere to those officers who have administrative talents and are faithful to its interests, and should remove those who take no interest in the efficiency of its service.”

This is exactly the argument we have used in another portion of this work in favor of those who are faithful to the interest of the government and have acquired a thorough knowledge of their duties. We hope the suggestions of Mr. Blair will be _practically_ carried out.

Mr. Kendall had to contend against a powerful political party which was brought to bear upon his time and patience. The latter was severely tried during the session of Congress, March, 1839. To all the attacks, however, which were made upon him, and the various attempts to accuse him of political partiality in his appointments, he answered with a clearness and boldness which fully proved that the attempt to make political capital out of his supposed malfeasance in office was at best but a “weak invention of the enemy.”

It was stated that he retained in office a postmaster, “a wretch who was guilty of forgery and counterfeiting, and who escaped the fangs of the law only by turning state’s evidence,” although he had been fully informed of the facts and knew the character of the man, and that his reason for retaining him (such a villain) in office was that he was an active and determined partisan. To this statement Mr. Kendall replied as follows:—

“These charges appear to have been made on the 28th of February last. Lucius D. Smith, postmaster at New Lebanon, Oneida county, New York, the individual referred to, was removed from office on the 21st of January last, and the appointment of his successor was officially announced in the ‘Globe’ on the 1st of February last. He had, therefore, been removed more than a month when these charges were uttered on the floor of the House.”

In another portion of this work we have alluded to the fact of the postal department being made a political one. It is one of those institutions that is allied to the general interest of all parties; and for the maintenance of that interest its political influence should not extend throughout all its ramifications. It is true, the heads of the department in many instances, being mere ciphers, might be with propriety politically disposed of; but the workers in the office—the active business-men—should not step out from their duties to take part in the active workings of the party at the expense of the postal interest. And yet, under the present system, these men _must labor_ in their “political vocation” or lose their position. Their presence at ward-meetings, their being elected delegates, their lost time at the polls, are all for their chances of retaining place for four years. Then they pass away into other business, forgotten by those who used them as their tools while in office. What are such men, when subject to a system like this, but _political paupers_? We do not say that men in the post-office should not be the friends and supporters of the party in power: on the contrary, they are expected to be. But cannot a man be the friend and supporter of the government under any administration apart from his political bias, more particularly if he is placed in a position of honor and trust not easily supplied by another, without being subject to instant dismissal? Previous to 1860 this should have been a governmental axiom; but the rebellion changed the whole system, because there arose a divided sentiment in relation to the union of States, originating the treasonable idea that secession was a constitutional principle. Men who advocated this doctrine were not considered worthy a place of trust: hence, in the different post-offices throughout the loyal States, the oath of allegiance was administered to the employees,—a most important movement; for a disloyal clerk would have been a powerful auxiliary to the rebel cause. Although during the rebellion—nay, even up to its very close—portions of the press were favorably disposed towards traitors, the post-office made no distinction in its distribution of newspapers: unlike the South in its days of _slavish_ triumph and during the incipient stages of the rebellion, it exercised no espionage even over the Copperhead presses of the North,—an oversight on the part of our government for which it has dearly paid; for it led to the assassination of Abraham Lincoln, by furnishing to the South the information of its having friends in the North. His death, however, only accelerated the downfall of all their plans and the final surrender of all their armies.

And here, although perhaps out of place in a work like this, we ask how an editor, dipping his pen in the black blood of treason and tracing the dark lines of crime along the columns of his paper could claim postal protection while aiming to destroy the very power under which he claimed the right to publish his incendiary sheet?

That press should cease to be considered a part and portion of an institution when its columns maintain the right not only to utter treason, but to claim on constitutional grounds, according to its idea, the privilege of expressing sentiments calculated to destroy the union of the States.[40]

We have alluded to the frequent changes that are made in our post-offices: we annex parallel passages from the English post-office administration and that of our own:—

ELEMENTS OF THE BRITISH SYSTEM.

In the English postal system there are potential elements which render it a success, while in ours it is a failure.

One of these elements is that the _personnel_ of their postal administration is more permanent, and the establishment is placed purely on a business footing. It is administered by experienced men. Once thoroughly instructed in the laws, the regulations, and their duties, the department measures their claims to office by their continued fidelity and attention to its interests. In some branches of the service, candidates are admitted upon both a physical and mental examination of their qualifications. A medical officer examines the aspirants for clerkships and for the places of carriers and laborers. Post-office savings-banks are connected with the establishment. Provision for life-assurance, the premiums being deducted from weekly or monthly wages, is also a part of their system. They thus combine nearly all interests to procure a permanent and faithful devotion to duty.

ELEMENTS OF THE AMERICAN POST-OFFICE.

The elements which make up our postal department are those which politics create. These are constantly changing, and every change produces its own creatures. The very resignations are the consequences of these changes, and not of the desire to secure other employment. Men would rather owe to themselves the right of leaving a position than submit to the pompous notice from an official, commencing with, _“Your services are no longer required,” &c._

The number of resignations alone during the year ending on the 30th of June, 1862, was 2902, the removals 2786, out of 19,973 officers in the loyal States and districts. The resignations were nearly fifteen per cent. of the whole number, and resignations and removals combined about twenty-eight per cent. of the whole number. The new appointees must acquire a practical postal education before they can promptly and accurately discharge their duties. It is evident that a system so liable to constant and large changes in its administration must be defective in many elements of completeness. The theory of our government requires a direct official responsibility to the executive head, and that the term of office should be limited to the proper discharge of that responsibility. The principle is correct. But the proper compensatory principle requires retention of good officers, as truly as it requires the discharge of incompetent incumbents. This principle can be carried into effect only when public sentiment shall be so clear and uniform as to make itself felt by all public representatives influencing appointments.

NUMBER OF POST-OFFICES.

The number of post-offices established on the 30th of June, 1865, including suspended offices in Southern States, was 28,832; number subject to appointment by the President, 702; by the postmaster-general, 28,170; number of persons engaged, 85,000.

APPOINTMENTS

Made to fill vacancies caused by resignations 3,575
Removals 925
Deaths 229
Changes of names and sites 132
Establishment of new offices 586
—————
Total appointments 5,447

The number of offices in the late disloyal States is 8902, of which 1051 were reopened on November 15, 1865.

Number of route-agents, 387; aggregate compensation, $229,522. Number of local agents, 51; aggregate compensation, $30,949. Number of special agents, 33; aggregate compensation, $82,790. Number of baggage-masters, 110; aggregate compensation, $6600. Number of postal railway-clerks, 64; aggregate compensation, $75,000.

JOHN MILTON NILES.—This gentleman was born in Windsor, Connecticut, August 20, 1787, and was bred to the bar, and went to Hartford in 1816 to practise law; in 1817 he was there concerned in publishing the “Times,” which he edited for a time; in 1820 he was appointed postmaster at Hartford by President Jackson, and held the office until made a Senator in Congress in 1835, in which position he remained until 1839; in 1840 he was appointed postmaster-general by President Van Buren; in 1842 he was again elected to the United States Senate, served six years, retired to private life, and died May 31, 1856.

FRANCIS GRANGER.—Born at Suffield, Connecticut, December 1, 1792; graduated at Yale College in 1811; admitted to the bar in May, 1816; he was elected a member of the New York Legislature in 1825, and again in 1826, 1827, 1829, and 1831; in 1828 he was a candidate for the office of Lieutenant-Governor, but was defeated; and in 1830 and again in 1832 he was run for Governor with the same result; in 1834 he was elected to Congress; in 1836 he was a candidate for Vice-President, and received the electoral votes of the States of Massachusetts, Vermont, New Jersey, Delaware, Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky; he was again elected to Congress in 1838 and in 1840; appointed postmaster-general March 6, 1841, but resigned the following September. His successor in Congress thereupon resigned, and Mr. Granger was again elected to that body. On the 4th of March, 1843, he finally retired from public life.

Francis Granger, immediately on entering upon the duties of his office, made the same discovery as had others before him,—that the postal department was not self-sustaining. Had the postmaster-general been acquainted with the business of the office before entering upon its duties, he would have been fully enabled to reconcile the warring elements of statistics and figures which the books of the office presented. The post-office department is not a self-sustaining one, nor will it be until there is a reconstruction of the whole system. In several portions of this work we have alluded to some of the causes tending to such deficiencies, and pointed out the remedy. As this remedy, however, is connected with certain abuses not unknown to high officials, it is questionable if any action will ever be taken upon it. Mr. Granger says, “When first entering upon my official duties, my attention was forced to the constant demands for payment beyond the ability of the department to pay; and, with a view to ascertain as nearly as might be its undisputed liabilities and probable means, on the 21st of March [1841] last a letter was addressed to the Auditor of the Treasury for the post-office department, requesting from him information on those subjects.”

Mr. Granger became considerably enlightened, no doubt, when the auditor furnished him with the following, which he recognized thus:—“By an examination of that statement, it will be seen that there was due and unpaid to contractors of ascertained balances on the 1st of January last the sum of $447,029, a considerable portion of which has been paid from the revenues of the quarter ending on the 31st of March. A report from the auditor upon the outstanding contracts will undoubtedly increase this amount of indebtedness to a total exceeding _half a million_ of dollars: in addition to which, heavy demands are frequently made on the department upon unliquidated claims.” ... “Under these circumstances,” he asks, “how is the department to be sustained under its present embarrassments? and what are its financial hopes for the future?”

“He also states that the amount demanded by railroad companies for transportation of the mails is more than two hundred per cent. higher than is paid for coach service upon the roads connecting links between different railroad companies upon the same main route, and that, too, where the night-service upon the railroads is less than that performed in coaches.” He illustrates this by the following:—“Boston is one of the most important points of railroad concentration in the Union. Its business prosperity is proverbial; and yet in that city the quarter ending the 31st of March shows, as compared with the corresponding quarter of the year before, a decrease in postage receipts of _three thousand one hundred and ninety-five dollars_, being double the amount of diminution to be found within the same time in any other post-office in the nation, with the single exception of Philadelphia, which is another great _terminus_ of railroad communication.”

CHARLES A. WICKLIFFE.—Born at Bardstown, Kentucky, June 8, 1788, and was admitted to the bar at an early age. He was twice elected to the State legislature during the war of 1812; he twice volunteered in the Northwestern army, and was present at the battle of the Thames; in 1820 he was again elected to the legislature; in 1822 he was elected to Congress, and was four times re-elected. During his service in that body he was appointed by the House as one of the managers in the impeachment of Judge Peck. Upon leaving Congress in 1833, he was again elected to the legislature, and upon its assembling was chosen Speaker. In 1834 he was elected Lieutenant-Governor of the State; and in 1839, by the death of Governor Clark, he became acting Governor. He was appointed postmaster-general September 13, 1841. In 1849 he was chosen as a delegate to the Constitutional Convention of Kentucky; and under the new Constitution he was appointed as one of the revisers of the statute laws of the State.

This gentleman’s views of the postal department were more practical and business-like than those of his predecessor. He says in his report, dated December 2, 1841, “As has already been remarked, the original design in the establishment of the post-office department was that its income should be made to sustain its operations. That principle ought never to be abandoned. Whilst the department should not be regarded as a source of revenue to the nation, it never should become an annual charge to the treasury. Upon assuming the discharge of the duties pertaining to the office of postmaster-general, my first object was to investigate its financial condition; and it becomes my duty to inform you that I did not find it in that prosperous state which the demands upon it require.

“The income of this department is liable to be affected by the fluctuations of the business of the country. It is increased or depressed in proportion to the increase or depression of that business.”

Mr. Wickliffe also took another sensible view of the department: he says, “Besides this cause of fluctuation in its income, other causes of a reduction, more or less in every year, may be found in the increased facilities which the travel upon railroads and steamboats furnishes for the transmission of letters and newspapers by private conveyance; secondly, in the great extension, to say nothing of the abuse, of the FRANKING PRIVILEGE; thirdly, in the recent establishment of what are called private expenses upon the great mail-routes of the United States; fourthly, in the frauds practised upon the department in evading by various devices the payment of the postage imposed by law.”

CAVE JOHNSON.—Born January 11, 1793, in Robertson county, Tennessee. His opportunities for education were limited, but made available to the greatest extent. In his youth he acted as deputy-clerk of the county, his father being clerk. He was thence led to the study of the law. In 1813 he was appointed deputy-quartermaster in a brigade of militia commanded by his father, and marched into the Creek nation under General Jackson. He continued in this service until the close of the Creek War in 1814. In 1816 he was admitted to the bar; in 1817 he was elected by the legislature one of the attorneys-general of the State, which office he held until elected a member of Congress in 1829. He was re-elected in 1831, 1833, and 1835, defeated in 1837, again elected in 1839, 1841, and 1843. Appointed postmaster-general March 5, 1845. In 1849 he served for a few months as one of the circuit judges of Tennessee, and in 1853 was appointed by the Governor and Senate as President of the Bank of Tennessee, at Nashville.

JACOB COLLAMER.—Born at Troy, New York, about 1792, and removed in childhood to Burlington, Vermont, with his father; graduated at the State University at that place in 1810; served during the year 1812 a frontier campaign as a lieutenant in the service of the United States; admitted to the bar in 1813; practised law for twenty years, serving frequently in the State legislature. In 1833 he was elected an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the State, from which position he voluntarily retired in 1842. In the course of that period he was also a member of a convention held to revise the Constitution of the State. In 1843, elected to Congress to fill a vacancy, and re-elected for a full term in 1844, and again in 1846. Appointed postmaster-general March 7, 1849,—thus forming one of the Cabinet of President Taylor. He resigned in 1850, with the rest of the Cabinet, on the death of the President, and was soon afterwards reappointed on the Supreme bench of his State, which office he held until 1854, when he was elected a Senator in Congress from Vermont for six years from 1855; and in 1861 he was re-elected for the term ending in 1867, serving as chairman of the Committee on Post-Offices and Post-Roads, also that on the Library, and as a member of several other important committees. He received the degree of LL.D. from the University of Vermont and from Dartmouth College, New Hampshire.

He died on the 9th of November, 1865, at Woodstock, Vermont, in the seventy-fourth year of his age. Mr. Collamer was one of the most distinguished of our statesmen, and one of the oldest members of the Senate.

NATHAN KELSEY HALL.—Born at Skaneateles, New York, March 28, 1810; removed to Aurora, in the same State, in 1826, and commenced the study of the law with Millard Fillmore; removed with the latter to Buffalo in 1830; admitted to the bar in 1832; appointed First Judge of the Court of Common Pleas in 1841; in 1845 elected a member of the State legislature, and in 1846 a member of Congress. He was appointed postmaster-general July 20, 1850, and in 1852 United States Judge for the Northern District of New York.

It was during his administration that the change was made in the rates of postage, by making letter-postage three cents to every part of the United States, except California and the Pacific Territories,—the weight of letter one-half ounce, and prepaid.

SAMUEL DICKENSON HUBBARD.—Born at Middletown, Connecticut, August 10, 1799; graduated at Yale College in 1819. He was admitted to the bar in 1822, but subsequently engaged in manufacturing enterprises. He was mayor of the city of Middletown, and held other offices of local trust. In 1845 he was elected a member of Congress, and re-elected in 1847. He was appointed postmaster-general September 14, 1852. Died at Middletown, October 8, 1855.

JAMES CAMPBELL.—Born September 1, 1813, in the city of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; admitted to the bar in 1834, at the age of twenty-one years; in 1841, at the age of twenty-eight, he was appointed Judge of the Common Pleas Court for the city and county of Philadelphia, which position he occupied for the term of nine years; in 1851, when the Constitution of the State was changed, making the judiciary elective, he was nominated by a State convention of his party as a candidate for the Supreme Court of the State, but was defeated after a warmly-contested and somewhat peculiar contest, securing, however, 176,000 votes; in January, 1852, he was appointed Attorney-General of Pennsylvania, which he resigned to assume the duties of postmaster-general: he was appointed to that office on the 8th of March, 1853.

There was no particular feature in the postal department to render this gentleman’s name in its connection popular during his term of office. It is somewhat curious, however, that the administrations of Franklin Pierce and James Buchanan—_both peculiarly political_—should have furnished to the Southern Confederacy more prominent men who were engaged with them in office than did all the other administrations combined. Is this accident, design, or the effect of their political education under their reign?

AARON VAIL BROWN.—Appointed postmaster-general under James Buchanan’s administration in 1857; was born August 15, 1795, in Brunswick county, Virginia; graduated at the University of North Carolina, at Chapel Hill, in 1814; studied law and soon commenced practice in Nashville, Tennessee; he was partner in the law business of the late President Polk; served in almost all the sessions of the legislature of Tennessee between 1821 and 1832; he was a member of the House of Representatives from 1839 to 1845, and was in that year elected Governor of Tennessee.

In his first report as postmaster-general, made December 1, 1857, he very modestly stated that, “entering on the administration of the Post-Office Department,” he “ventured on no new theories, nor attempted any innovations on the well-tried system established and practised upon” by his predecessors.

It was during his administration that the route from New York to New Orleans was considerably improved and transportation facilitated;[41] also the mail-service on the Mississippi River below the Ohio was materially changed and improved.

The overland mail-service to California by the Southern route by contract became an agitating subject, and under proposals approved by an act of Congress, March 3, 1857, various bids were made by parties for carrying the mail. The contract was made on the 16th of September, 1857, with certain parties, at a cost of $600,000 per annum. (_See Report for the year 1857._)

JOSEPH HOLT succeeded Aaron Vail Brown, who died March, 1858, in alluding to which Mr. Holt uses the following language:—

“POST-OFFICE DEPARTMENT,
December 3, 1859.

“SIR:—In the month of March last, the sudden decease of my enlightened and deeply-lamented predecessor, immediately preceded as it was by the death of the Third Assistant Postmaster-General,—so long and so honorably connected with the administration of the postal revenues,—filled this department with discouragement and gloom. Associated with this double calamity came another, which awakened painful anxieties, not only from its intrinsic magnitude, but from the fact that the history of the government, from its foundation, furnished no parallel for such a disaster. My allusion is, of course, to the failure of Congress to pass the customary appropriation bill for the support of the Post-Office Department, whereby, with all its responsibilities resting upon it and the fulfilment of all its duties demanded by the country, it was still deprived of the use of its own revenues, and thus, necessarily, of all means of complying with its engagements to the faithful officers toiling in its service. The ordeal so unexpectedly prepared for it was, in all its aspects, as novel as it was perplexing; and disquieting apprehensions were naturally felt for the result.”

This was rather discouraging to Mr. Holt, who, however, displayed much business tact and perseverance under the circumstances, for he immediately issued the following notice:—

“TO POSTMASTERS AND OTHER AGENTS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE POST-OFFICE DEPARTMENT.

“Congress having failed to make the necessary appropriation at its last session for the publication of a Manual of Post-Offices, Laws, and Regulations, now greatly needed, and the department not having sufficient clerical force at its disposal for the preparation of such a work, I have deemed it proper, in accordance with the course pursued by two of my predecessors, to purchase, for the use of the department, the necessary number of copies of a private edition, having first caused an examination to be made as to its correctness.

“The volume now sent is adopted as official, and you will be guided by it accordingly.

“J. HOLT, _Postmaster-General_.

“POST-OFFICE DEPARTMENT, May 15, 1859.”

The consequences resulting from the failure of Congress to make the necessary appropriation alluded to by Mr. Holt were materially felt by those who in good faith had performed their duty, by being compelled to obtain advances on their claims at a fearful sacrifice. Mr. Holt, alluding to this, says,—

“It is to be feared, however, that those whose circumstances obliged them to dispose of these securities have in many cases been compelled to submit to a heavy discount. I would most earnestly urge upon Congress the necessity of making an early appropriation to meet all the existing liabilities of the department. As the faith of the government has been broken, not only should the principal of these debts be promptly paid, but interest on them should also be allowed. In many instances this may prove but an imperfect indemnity for the damage which the creditors of the department have actually sustained; but this much, at least, is due, from the gravest considerations of public justice and policy, and cannot, in my judgment, be withheld without national dishonor.”

HORATIO KING was postmaster-general for a short time. He had, of course, no opportunity of displaying those qualities which a long connection with the postal department had enabled him to acquire. The appointment of Montgomery Blair, which was a settled matter, as the successor of Mr. Holt, limited his services. Glancing over official postal documents, we find his name frequently coupled with important matters in the department. It was during his short service as postmaster-general that the celebrated additional articles were made to those of the convention of March 2, 1857, between the post-office of the United States and the general post-office of France. (_See Report of the Postmaster-General for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1861._)

MONTGOMERY BLAIR.—This gentleman was appointed postmaster-general in 1861, forming one of the Cabinet under the administration of Abraham Lincoln.