Ilminster Fifth Clause Post from Hinton St George

Hiton St George was in the Ilminster Fifth Clause Post from 1828 and used a boxed "No.3" handstamp.  The example below is from April 1830.

Bits of Bristol

This post strays a bit out of Somerset into Bristol, though this first cover from December 1814 is going to Sidcot in Somerset.  Sidcot was a receiving house on the road to Axbridge, opened in 1805 for the Fifth Clause Post.  The wrapper has a manuscript "1d" on the reverse for the Fifth Clause post from Bristol to Sidcot.

This next piece is part of a parcel, with a large address label for Hellyar & Crinks, and with a Parcel Post label for Victoria Street, Bristol with a handstamp dated November 1897.

Finally, here is a Post Office form used to requisition licenses by the postmaster of Inns Court Green, Bristol in November 1960.  The postmaster is requesting two books of gun licenses and two of TV licenses.

This is the reverse of the form, showing a nice Bristol slogan cancel.

Cross Penny Post, Dunster in 5th Clause Post, Old-Down in Bath Penny Post

Weston-super-Mare had the boxed "No.2" receiving house handstamp in the Cross Penny Post.  Here is an example from September 1831.

Dunster had the boxed "No.4" receiving house handstamp in the Taunton Fifth Clause Post up to 1828 (Mr Luttrell of Dunster Castle objecting to any conversion to Penny Post because he would then have to pay for his newspapers' delivery in the post).  This example is from April 1825.

Here is an example of the Dunster undated circular handstamp from August 1846 with the date written in manuscript inside the handstamp.

This pre-printed insturance letter was initially sent to "Wells, Somerset or Stratton near Chilcompton, Bath" and then returned from Old Down to London in July 1830.

Ilminster Fifth Clause Post

Here is a nice example of the framed Ilminster Fifth Clause Post handstamp with the boxed "No.3" of Hinton St George.  Hinton St George was also in the Crewkerne Fifth Clause Post and used the boxed "No.3" in both posts.

Dunster in the Taunton Fifth Clause Post

The entire below was sent from Dunster to Westminster in December 1815, at which time Dunster was in the Taunton Fifth Clause Post.  The entire weighed over an ounce so was charged at five times the single letter rate.  When I first wrote it up I could not quite understand why it was charged five times the General Post rate from Taunton to London (5 x 10d = 4/2d) rather than five times the rate from Dunster to London (5 x 11d = 4/7d), particularly as the DUNSTER/183 mileage handstamp implied that it was over 180 miles from London.

Then I realised that the sender of the entire should have pre-paid the Fifth Clause Post charge from Dunster to Taunton, leaving just the General Post charge from Taunton to Westminster - which is what we see.

From other Taunton Fifth Clause entires, the rate for the Taunton Fifth Clause Post seems to be the same as for the General Post - however that may not be correct for multiple sheet or weight items.

Another puzzle is why the "DUNSTER / 183" handstamp (in use 1810-1816 according to the BCC) was issued when Dunster was under the Taunton Fifth Clause Post rather than being in the General Post.  My hypothesis is that, at least for single sheet letters, the rate that had been agreed for the Taunton Fifth Clause Post was to match the General Post rate.  This would mean that the mileage, as per the Dunster handstamp, could be used to calculate the total postage charge, and this could be marked up and charged to the recipient (as it would match the General Post rate based on distance that had been approved by Parliament)

However this does not work for multiple sheet or heavy letters.  The Fifth Clause Post charges are said to not increase with the number of sheets, or with weight unless the weight was greater than four ounces.  In this case that might mean that the extra Fifth Clause Post charge from Dunster to Taunton was just 1d.  As the total (Fifth Clause plus General Post) charge wouldn't match the legally-approved General Post rate it could not be marked up and charged to the recipient (the Post Office would not be able to justify it if the recipient queried it as the Fifth Clause rate had just been agreed with the local inhabitants rather than being passed by Parliament).

Taunton Fifth Clause Post - "No.4"

Dunster was Receiving House No.4 in the Taunton Fifth Clause Post and remained in the Fifth Clause Post until February 1829 when the Taunton Penny Post was reorganised, because Mr Luttrell of Dunster Castle objected to any prior conversion to a Penny Post (he would have had to pay for his franked letters and newspapers).

The entire below is from 1826 from Dunster to Wiveliscombe and is charged 7d, the charge that would be made if the letter had travelled in the General Post all the way from Dunster to Wiveliscombe.

Taunton Fifth Clause Post - "No.3" continued

Apart from the prepaid example in the previous post, my examples of letters from Torre to destinations outside of the Fifth Clause Post are all charged at the General Post rate from Taunton - which would match with what is supposed to take place, that the sender has to pay the Fifth Clause Post fee, whatever that is.  There is no indication on any of these entires on what such a fee might have been.

Taunton Fifth Clause Post - "No.3"

... to continue from the previous post, here is an entire from Torre, the Receiving House with the boxed "No.3" handstamp.  It was sent entirely within the Fifth Clause Post, from Torre to Taunton, and was charged 5d - which happens to be the General Post rate for the 15-20 miles that matches the distance from Torre to Taunton.

The following is another item that may help pin down the Taunton Fifth Clause Post rates.  It is from Torre ("No.3") to Wiveliscombe but has been prepaid.  The postal charge was 6d, which again matches the General Post rate for the total distance from Torre to Wiveliscombe via Taunton.  It is also possible that it could be made up a different way, with a 4d charge for the General Post from Taunton to Wiveliscombe and a 2d charge for the Fifth Clause Post.

Finally, here are four more examples of "short" letters from Torre in the Taunton Fifth Clause Post - they are all charged 5d as in the first example - matching the rate for 15-20 miles in the General Post.

 

Taunton Fifth Clause Post - "No.2"

As indicated in the previous post, there are not likely to be any Taunton Fifth Clause Post letters with a boxed "No.1" handstamp because Gore Inn, Bishop's Lydeard was converted to a Penny Post in 1817 (at least by May 1817) which was around when the boxed handstamps were issued.

Receiving House No.2 was at Monksilver.  Fifth Clause Post items from Monksilver are rare and the receiving house handstamp strikes poor.

The following two are both from September 1819 and are both signed "H. Trevelyan".  Harriet Trevelyan was the wife of George Trevelyan, the Archdeacon of Taunton from 1817, whose family seat was Nettlecombe Court, one mile from Monksilver.  The other diagnostic is that the top of the "2" in the handstamp is rounded, whereas the "3" in the Torre "No.3" handstamp is flat, which makes it possible to rule out the more common handstamp.

 

The final diagnostic on the second of the two entires is the postal rate.  The letter did not go in the General Post (ie. it was a "short" letter) from Monksilver to Taunton and was charged 4d.  This happens to be the General Post rate for less than 15 miles, which matches the distance from Monksilver to Taunton ... in the next post I'll show why this may be significant !

Taunton Fifth Clause Post

The next set of posts to this blog are going to be on Taunton, firstly on the Fifth Clause and Penny Posts pre- and post- the 1828 reorganisation, and then, probably, on the handstamps.  This will be an updated version of what I've already posted.  These posts are in memory of Tony Osmond, a long-time collector of Taunton material, who sadly died at the end of 2013.

Taunton's Fifth Clause Post was established in January 1808 from Taunton to Minehead, with Receiving Houses at Handy Cross, Monksilver, Torre and Dunster.  Gore Inn near Bishop's Lydeard was probably also a Receiving House.

In 1817 the Receiving House at Handy Cross was closed as the number of letters were 'trifling', and by the middle of 1817 at the latest, Gore Inn near Bishop's Lydeard was converted to a Penny Post.  It was also around 1816-17 that boxed handstamps were issued, "No.1" to Gore Inn (which may have become a Penny Post by the time the handstamp was issued), "No.2" to Monksilver, "No.3" to Torre and "No.4" to  Dunster.

In April 1823 the Torre and Monksilver Receiving Houses were converted to Penny Posts.  Dunster remained Fifth Clause because of objections from Mr Luttrell of Dunster Castle.  This lasted until February 1829 when Dunster became a bye-office so letters were charged according to the General Post rate based on the mileage to the town.

The first example I have from the Taunton Fifth Clause Post does not have any markings to indicate this.  It is from 1814, so before the boxed Receiving House handstamps were issued.  It was written in Chapel Cleeve, 3 miles north of the Torre Receiving House.

The postal charge does not include anything for the Fifth Clause Post because the Fifth Clause Post charges were supposed to be paid by the sender.  When a Fifth Clause Post was set up it was agreed and underwritten by the (principal) inhabitants so that the Post Office would not bear any losses.  As part of this, the charging scheme for the Post was agreed (it did not have to be a straight 1d like the Penny Post).  A consequence was that the local inhabitants were supposed to pay the costs of the Fifth Clause Post directly as they were the ones that had agreed them.

Dunster Fifth Clause & Penny Post - postal charge problems !

In 1826 Dunster was still a Fifth Clause Post of Taunton.  The entire below has the boxed "No.4" handstamp (only known used in 1826) along with a Dunster mileage mark.  I originally thought that it should have been charged 1d for the 5th Clause Post to Taunton plus 4d for the up to 15 miles from Taunton to Wiveliscombe (ten or thirteen miles depending on whether it went via Wellington) making 5d - not the "7" which is clear on the front.

However, on examination of other Taunton Fifth Clause Post letters, they all seem to either omit the 5th Clause Post charge (correctly, because the sender is supposed to pay the 5th Clause Post charge) or they charge as if the whole distance had been in the General Post - which is what has happened in this case.

In February 1829 Dunster was made a Sub-Office to Taunton so postal charges to/from Dunster were based on the General Post rate rather than being in the Taunton Fifth Clause Post.

The entire below has a "Dunster / Penny Post" handstamp and is charged 6d to go to Wiveliscombe. If the entire went via the route I would expect, that is from Dunster to Taunton and then back out to Wiveliscombe, the distance is around 30 miles (actually a little over) which would translate to at most 6d in the General Post rate (probably 7d as in the entire above) - this does not leave anything for the Dunster Penny Post.

Without the Dunster handstamp one would imagine that it would have gone from the Washford Receiving House to Taunton for 1d in the Taunton Penny Post, and then been charged 4d in the General Post for the less-than 15 mile from Taunton to Wiveliscombe, making 5d in total.

Can anyone give me a clue why the first entire is charged based on the General Post all the way and why the second entire has the Dunster Penny Post handstamp and is charged so little ?

Bristol 5th Clause and Penny Posts

Although Bristol is not in Somerset, it had Fifth Clause and Penny Posts that extended into Somerset as well as into South Gloucestershire.  The map below shows the Bristol local posts c. 1830.

I'm afraid that I've suffered from "scope creep" so the next posts are going to cover Bristol posts in both Somerset and Gloucestershire - I've covered some of these before so there will be a small amount of repitition.

I'll start with the 5th Clause Posts - Bristol had two, one to the south to Axbridge from 1805 to 1816 that I've already covered briefly here, and one to the north to Thornbury.

Here are some entires from the 5th Clause Post to Thornbury, the 2nd and 3rd sheets showing two different Bristol 5th Clause Post handstamps.  The Bristol Postal History Group have identified five different 5th Clause handstamps that were only used on the Thornbury ride.

 

 

Taunton Fifth Clause and Penny Posts

Taunton had a Fifth Clause Post from January 1808, some Penny Posts from1823, and a major reorganisation of the Penny Posts in 1828.  For the full details join the S&DPHG and read the Journal articles (!) but here is a brief synopsis.

I have one  entire that appears to be from the Taunton Fifth Clause Post - unfortunately no Taunton FC handstamp but they are very rare (rarity H according to the BCC), but it does have a boxed "No.3" Receiving House handstamp (Torre).

From the early Penny Post period, here is an item with a Taunton Penny Post handstamp from 1824, apparently originating in Stogumber, with a scan of the back of the entire.

And here is an entire from 1827 with a boxed "No.3" Receiving House handstamp (Torre).

Castle Cary postal rate puzzle

I cannot understand the postal rate for the entire shown below.  The entire seems to have gone from Castle Cary to Shaftesbury by the Shaftesbury Fifth Clause Post yet is charged 5d (initial charge was 4d which was then crossed out and replaced by 5d).  The entire is a single sheet and does not appear to have any enclosures.
Why was it charged 5d ?

In contrast the entire here is charged 6d appropriately - 5d for 15-20 miles from Shaftesbury to Sherbourne plus 1d for the Fifth Clause Post (although strictly speaking the sender should have paid for the 5th Clause Post).

Castle Cary in the Shaftesbury Fifth Clause Post

A recent acquisition, I think this is the last Fifth Clause Post cancel for Bruton and Castle Cary under the Shaftesbury, Shepton Mallet and Wincanton Fifth Clause Posts and for Wincanton under the Shaftesbury Post.

The sheet below shows an entire from Castle Cary ("No.2" Receiving House) to Sherborne via the Shaftesbury Fifth Clause Post, sent in June 1829 (a few months before Castle Cary switched to the newly-established Wincanton Fifth Clause Post - see previous post).

Castle Cary in the Wincanton Fifth Clause Post

From 1823 Castle Cary (and Bruton) was in the Shaftesbury Fifth Clause Post (for mail to London) and in the Shepton Mallet Fifth Clause Post (for mail to the north).  From 1830 the Wincanton Fifth Clause Post was used rather than the Shaftesbury Post  (Wincanton had become a Post Town as a result of a new post route).

Castle Cary was Receiving House No.2 in all the Fifth Clause Posts (Shaftesbury, Shepton Mallet and Wincanton).  The following two sheets show examples in the Wincanton Fifth Clause Post, one with an unframed "Wincanton / 5th Cl:Post" handstamp from 1830 and one with a framed  handstamp from 1831.

The use of the unframed handstamp for Castle Cary post is unusual;  this handstamp was normally used at Bruton but in the early months of the Wincanton Fifth Clause Post, before the framed handstamp arrived, it is thought that the handstamp was usued centrally at Wincanton for post from both towns.

 

Shepton Mallet Fifth Clause Post (to/from Bruton, Castle Cary)

A Fifth Clause Post to/from Shepton Mallet was established in 1823 serving Bruton and Castle Cary for mail to the north (mail to the south and to London went via Shaftesbury 5th Clause Post until 1830 when it went via the Wincanton 5th Clause Post).

The following pages show examples of the 5th Clause Post to and from Bruton ("No.1" Receiving House"), and from Castle Cary ("No.2" Receiving House). (Apologies for some duplication with the previous post !).

 

Bruton Fifth Clause Posts (from Shepton Mallet, Shaftesbury, Wincanton)

The Shaftesbury Fifth Clause Post was set up in 1823 serving Bruton, Castle Cary and Wincanton, for mail to London and the south.  At a similar time the Shepton Mallet Fifth Clause Post was set up serving Bruton and Castle Cary, for mail to the north.  It is not thought that Wincanton came under the Shepton Mallet 5th Clause Post.

In 1830 Wincanton became a Post Town (because it was then on the post road) and started a Fifth Clause Post serving Bruton and Castle Cary for mail to London and the south, replacing the Shaftesbury 5th Clause Post.

The following sheets show examples of Bruton in (a) the Shaftesbury 5th Clause Post, (b) the Shepton Mallet 5th Clause Post, and (c) the Wincanton 5th Clause Post.

 

Wincanton under Shaftesbury 5th Clause Post

Bruton, Castle Cary and Wincanton were under the Shaftesbury 5th Clause Post, which was set up in 1823.  Bruton and Castle Cary were also in the Shepton Mallet 5th Clause Post, mail going northward via Shepton Mallet while mail for London and the south went via Shaftesbury.

The following two sheets show that Wincanton, unlike Bruton and Castle Cary, was very unlikely to have been in the Shepton Mallet 5th Clause Post.

Both sheets contain entires from Wincanton to Wells, the first in 1824 and the second in 1829, both with postage charges of 10d from Wincanton to Wells, being made up of 1d in the 5th Clause Post from Wincanton to Shaftesbury plus 9d in the General Post (from Shaftesbury to Salisbury, Bath and to Wells being about 85 miles).  If the post had gone via Shepton Mallet the charge would only have been 1d for the 5th Clause Post plus 4d in the General Post (from Shepton Mallet to Wells being six miles) or 5d in total.

 

Castle Cary inhabitants overcharged for their Post ?

Just to stop any campaigns for reimbursement, this was in the 1820s.

First some background.  In the early 1820s Castle Cary became part of two 5th Clause Posts, one from Shaftesbury (for mail from the south and London) and one from Shepton Mallet (for mail to the north.

The map above shows the route for the mail that came via Shaftesbury which is the route that this relates to.

A 5th Clause Post was so-called because it was enacted in the 5th clause of the Act of George III, Cap. VII in 1801, and allowed the Post Office greater flexibility in setting charges to cover the expense of establishing local posts. The postal charge for the local post could be set by agreement or 'convention' with the local inhabitants, who agreed to cover any deficiency between the revenue coming in from the local post and the costs going out.

I've been reading up about this in the Somerset & Dorset Postal History Group Journal, where there is a whole article about the intricacies of the post and the different handstamps.  I then found another article about the Castle Cary Penny Post handstamp, which seems to have been used sparingly between 1824 and 1827 (just after the 5th Clause Posts had been set up).  This second article had details of 5 entires with this Penny Post handstamp - including the postage charges.

All the entires were from London, the postal rates did not change over the period, so you would expect the charges to be the same (or double or triple for double or treble letters).  Well, they weren't. The table below shows the details of the entires, with the postal charge in the right-hand column.

Date	Other marks	From	To	Charge
25.11.1824	"No.2"	London	Ditcheat	1/6d  (double)
early 1825	"No.2"	London	Ansford	9d
24.6.1825	"No.2"	London	Castle Cary (Mr Mathews)	10d
20.5.1826	"No.2"	London	Ditcheat	1/8d
5.3.1827	"No.2"	London	Ditcheat	1/8d

OK, so what should it cost ?

One would expect the mail coming from London to come to Shaftesbury in the General Post, and the charge for that is what you'd expect to see on the front of the entires.  Shaftesbury was deemed to be 104 miles from London (it had a mileage handstamp "Shaftesbury / 104").  Between 1812 and December 1829 the rate for 80-120 miles was 9d. so that is what one would have expected to see.  The London postal clerks would not know any details of local postal matters like the 5th Clause Post so there wouldn't be any charge for that included.  It would be up to the Castle Cary Receiving House to get the money for the postage from the recipient, and they would demand the extra 1d for the 5th Clause Post then.

The first two entires in the table above show this postage charge, 9d for a single letter and 1/6d for a double letter (one with two sheets of paper).

Alternatively, it is possible that a letter could have gone from London to Shepton Mallet and then to Castle Cary via the Shepton Mallet Fifth Clause Post.  Shepton Mallet was 135 miles from London so would have incurred a 10d. (120-170 miles) charge (or 1/8d. for a double letter).

The remaining three examples have been given a 10d. General Post charge (or 1/8d. for a double letter).  This was not a total charge that included the Fifth Clause Post because the double letter charge was double the single letter one (and the Fifth Clause 1d. did not double with the number of sheets).  This is compatible with a route via Shepton Mallet.

So, did the post route to Castle Cary change from via Shaftesbury to via Shepton Mallet ?  Or did perhaps the time of day a letter was posted determine which mail coach was used ?  If this was the case the inhabitants of Castle Cary were at the mercy of the Post Office as to what they got charged for a letter.

My second thought on looking at the postal rates is that there is alternative explanation for the higher charges seen on the later three entires, that it was due to human error.

It appears that before the 5th Clause Posts were introduced that Castle Cary was a Post Town, and based on its mileage handstamp was deemed to be 145 miles from London.  The postal rate for 120-170 miles was 10d. and this appears to be what the last three entires were charged (or 1/8d. for a double letter).  Did the London Post Office clerks for the later entires remember Castle Cary at 145 miles from London, and calculate the charge should be 10d. ?  ... rather than looking up Shaftesbury and doing the first calculation ?

The other markings on the entires (the "No.2" cancel) show that the entires did come via the 5th Clause Post. So one must assume that the Receiving House demanded a further 1d. for the 5th Clause Post.

Thus out of a sample of 5 entires, 3 (60%) look like they were charged more than they could have been, by 1d. or 2d, perhaps because they went the long way, via Shepton Mallet, or just perhaps because a Post Office clerk was working the charge out based on old postal routes.