The Life of Sir Rowland Hill and the

1847-8] MONEY ORDERS. 8 1
his name, and begging that no order might be paid
to that name until his return, as he would go back
to his house to examine whether he might perchance
have left it there. Some time after his departure,
however, a second person came to the window, saying
that Mr. had recovered the order, having in fact
left it at home, and had sent him with it to obtain
payment, he himself being unexpectedly detained.
The clerk, satisfied with this plausible statement,
fitting in so well with antecedent circumstances, delivered
the money accordingly, but was startled a few
minutes later by the reappearance of the first claimant,
with the declaration that, as he had not been able to
find the order at home,
it must of course have been
lost, and a request that nothing might be done until a
new order was obtained. Upon the clerk's reporting
what had meanwhile occurred, and mentioning the
new rule, the applicant, after some remarks not particularly
flattering to postal sagacity, announced his
intention to appeal in the highest quarter. The de-
cision there made was that in so extraordinary a case
the strict rule should not be fully maintained, but that
the department must, nevertheless, be secured from
loss. This was thrown in equal shares on the two
parties immediately concerned, each having shown
negligence, the one in losing the order, the other in
paying it against injunction.
Esquires in Low Life.
An angry letter was received at the General Office
relative to alleged misconduct in an officer at the
Charing Cross office, who had refused to pay a
money order, because of irregularity in the signature
of the payee. The complainant reported that the
ground of objection was that when he gave his sig-
VOL. II. G