GROSS INSTANCE OF POSTAL DEPARTMENT MISMANAGEMENT.

Auckland Examiner, Volume IV, Issue 274, 20 June 1860, Page 2

GROSS INSTANCE OF POSTAL DEPARTMENT MISMANAGEMENT.

The man Tancred gets eight hundred a year, and for what ?

This question should be answered by Governor Wait-a-bit, or some “cute” responsible minister. Though rather awkwardly rude in form it is pointedly pertinent in substance, and deserves official answer; but to official mind no question can be more abhorrent. It was put with angry vehemence by a sufferer from postal mismanagement who lately broke in upon us with—“ Mr. Editor, the neglect cf our post office employes, is disgraceful, and should be exposed ” “True,” we observed, “ their disgraceful neglect concerns the public, and the public ought to know all about it; but are you sure they have been disgracefully neglectful.” “ Sure, quite sure,” rejoined our rather excited informant. “All circumstances of the case have fallen under my own observation, I wish no more than exact truth to be published, and therefore you need not fear as regards the matter before usthatyou will, through acting on misinformation, do injus tice either to the public or the post office.” He then proceeded in effect, as follows :—

Davison and Sewell, blacksmiths of this town, agreed to purchase the business of Mackay and Terry, purchase money payable by instalments. Davison entered into this arrangement believing certain sums must arrive from England before he would be called to meet his share of responsibility. By the last mail two hundred pounds were expected, and by last mail exactly that sum had been forwarded to him. It was contained in a registered letter which, of course, Messrs. Davison and Sewell were most anxious to receive, more especially as upon that registered letter depended the fulfilment or the forfeiture of bond entered into with Mackay and Terry. Great was their disappointment when told at the Post Office no English letter for Mr. Davison had arrived. Day after day enquiry was made ; and day after day very same negative answer was given. Yet the letter sought—the registered letter containing that two hundred pounds which, if received in due time, would have enabled Messrs. Davison and Sewell to meet their engagements—was all the while lying in some post office pigeon hole or some post office pocket. Not until Monday last did it turn up. Meanwhile legal measures were taken against Messrs. Davison and' Sewell for non-fulfilment of contract.

What will Governor Browne say to this? Through most disgraceful negligence on the part of certain governmet employees Messrs. Davison and Sewell are commercially discredited—perhaps commercially ruined. Their loss must be great. Who will make good that loss? Tancred is Postmaster General, and should be made personally responsible for Post Office mismanagement. Will Governor Browne put Postmaster General Tancred under stoppages ? Will he deduct from the salary of, thatmodel placeman, what Messrs. Davison aud Sewell have lost through postal mismanagement? Surely, a Postmaster General with eight hundred per annum should be equal to his work.

Of Post Office subordinates we complain not. They will work well or ill, as they may be well or ill looked after and directed. A capable Postmaster General would secure for us the very best possible postal arrangements. But Tancred was not Postmaster General on account of superior capacity for Post Office work No, he got the appointment because, in addition to being son in law of his father in law illustrious—by—voting Major Richmond, he is a political toady of rare breed. Who can tell the good thing lie has done? !Who can repeat the bright thing he has said ? But ministers had need of him, and profitable place not being available for him, they determined to create one. The colony stood in no immediate need of a Postmaster General, but ministers stood in great and pressing need of dull, but safe Tancred, so they made him Postmaster General at eight hundred per annum. Job more flagrant, or more xu'gar, never was perpetrated even by our Staffords and Whitakers. Did the public protest against it. No, all but ourselves were silent. Mrs. Slipslop held her peace, for to break with ministers or offend Wait-a-bit she had no mind. Red Cat would have come out strong against the ministerial creation of a place that a ministerial toady might fill it, but for his aversion to democratic vulgarism and unprofitable “ puddle stirring.”