peculiarity in the postage on letters passing between Boston and New York. It differed according to the direction the letter was conveyed. A letter from New York to Boston cost twelvepence; while ninepence was the charge from Boston to New York. This is one of the consequences of the separate negotiations carried on by Hamilton with the different legislatures.

The Massachusetts act fixed the charge on the letters for delivery in Boston; and the New York act on the letters for New York. From Virginia, to Philadelphia, New York and Boston, the charges were ninepence, twelvepence and two shillings respectively. All the acts concurred in the stipulation that letters on public business should be carried free of charge.

The foregoing contains the substance of the acts passed by New York and Pennsylvania. Massachusetts went a step further. To that legislature it appeared desirable to put a binding clause requiring Hamilton to give a satisfactory service. Massachusetts was as willing as the others to grant a monopoly of letter carrying to Hamilton, but it was of opinion that the exclusive privilege should carry an obligation with it. The postal service was being established as a public convenience; and if Hamilton was to have the power to prevent any person else from providing the convenience, he should be bound to meet the public requirements himself.

The Massachusetts legislature, after authorizing Hamilton to settle a post office in Boston, fixing the postal charges, and conferring a monopoly on him, accordingly added a clause binding Hamilton to maintain constant posts for the carriage of letters to the several places mentioned in the act; to deliver the letters faithfully and seasonably; and it imposed a fine of £5 for each omission.

In order that the public might be in a position to detect any delays in the delivery of letters after they reached a post office, the postmaster was required to mark on each letter the date on which it was received at his office. New Hampshire followed Massachusetts in adding this clause to its post office acts.

The four acts were sent to London, and laid before the king in council, as all colonial acts were. The acts of New York, Pennsylvania and New Hampshire passed council and became law. On the advice of the governors of the post office, the Massachusetts act was disallowed.[17]

The grounds for the discrimination against Massachusetts are difficult to understand. The Massachusetts act undoubtedly contained departures from the terms of the patent. But they were such departures as might be expected when an act is drawn up, by a person unlearned in the law, who, having the patent before him, aims at substantial rather than at literal conformity therewith. There can be no question that the drafts presented to the several assemblies were prepared by one person. Their practical identity establishes the fact.

There can be equally little doubt that the draftsman was Hamilton himself. The governors of the post office, who framed the objections,[18] noted first that the patent provided that the appointment of Neale's deputy should, at his request, be made by the postmaster general; whereas the Massachusetts act appeared to appoint Andrew Hamilton postmaster general of the colonies, independently of the postmaster general of England, and not subject to the patent.

The patent required Neale to furnish accounts at stated intervals to enable the treasury to establish the profits from the enterprize. It also stipulated for the cancellation of the patent in certain eventualities. Both these terms are omitted from the act. Insufficient care was taken in safeguarding the post office revenue, and no provision was made for a successor in case of the removal of Hamilton from his position.

The points to which the post office drew attention were, as will be seen, far from wanting weight; and if they had not been pressed against the Massachusetts bill alone, would have excited little comment. But the Massachusetts general court noted and resented the discrimination. When Neale was informed of the disallowance, he begged the governors of the post office to prepare a bill which they would regard as free from objections, and to lend their efforts to have it accepted by Massachusetts.[19]

A bill was drawn up; and Lord Bellomont, the governor of New England, was instructed to invite the favourable consideration of the Massachusetts legislature to it.[20] The bill was laid before the general court on June 3, 1699, and it was ordered to be transcribed and read.[21]

Five days later it came up for consideration, but it was resolved that the committee on the bill should "sit this afternoon,"[22] and it appeared in the assembly no more. The rejection of the bill, however, was of little or no practical consequence. The post office was too great a convenience to be refused; and so it was established and conducted as if the bill were in operation, except that it had no monopoly in that colony.

But the legislature, which was evidently desirous of extending in its own way all reasonable aid to Hamilton, passed an order in 1703[23] requiring shipmasters to deliver all letters they brought with them from oversea at the post office of the place of their arrival, for which they were to receive a halfpenny each from the postmaster. Massachusetts equally with the other colonies made an annual grant to the post office for the conveyance of its public letters.

So far the narrative deals only with the northern colonies. The proposition for a post office, however, was submitted to Virginia and Maryland as well. It would seem, however, that the mode of approaching these governments differed from that taken in laying the proposition before the northern colonies. In case of the northern colonies Hamilton dealt with the legislatures in person. The draft bill which he prepared was submitted as a basis for discussion. So far as it went it was accepted, and Hamilton agreed to such additions as the legislatures considered necessary in view of local circumstances.

Virginia and Maryland were approached quite differently. They were advised of the scheme not by Hamilton, but by the English court. In the minutes of council of both governments,[24] it is recorded that the proposition was laid before them in a letter from the queen. This fact will account for the very different consideration the proposition