THE LONDON POST OFFICE 1850 – Part One

In this series, we turn to the words of Mr. Charles Dickens which appeared in the March 30, 1850 edition of the publication he edited, Household Words. The following article is chock full of details about how the Post Office operated in Victorian London and also about the mail and other items it processed on a daily basis.

The piece follows the progress of two gentlemen who make a visit to the Post Office –

 

Great National Post-Office in St. Martin’s-le-Grand

Most people are aware that the Great National Post-office in St. Martin’s-le-Grand is divided into halves by a passage, whose sides are perforated with what is called the ” Window Department.” Here huge slits gape for letters, whole sashes yawn for newspapers, or wooden panes open for clerks to frame their large faces, like giant visages in the slides of a Magic Lantern; and to answer inquiries, or receive unstamped paid letters. The southern side is devoted to the London District Post, and the northern to what still continues to be called the “Inland Department,” although foreign, colonial, and other outlandish correspondence now passes through it. It was with the London District Branch that the two gentlemen first appeared to have business.

Having been led through a maze of offices and passages more or less dark, they found themselves—like knights-errant in a fairy tale—” in an enormous hall, illumined by myriads of lights.” Without being exactly transformed into statues, or stricken fast asleep, the occupants of this hall (whose name was Legion) appeared to be in an enchanted state of idleness. Among a wilderness of long tables, and of desks not unlike those on which buttermen perform their active parts of legerdemain in making ” pats”—only these desks were covered with black cloth—they were reading books, talking together, wandering about, lying down, or drinking coffee—apparently quite unused to doing any work, and not at all expectant of ever having anything to do, but die.

In a few minutes, and without any preparation, a great stir began at one end of this hall, and a long train of private performers, in the highest state of excitement, poured in, getting up, on an immense scale, the first scene in the ” Miller and his Men.” Each had a sack on his back; each bent under its weight; and the bare sight of these sacks, as if by magic, changed all the readers, all the talkers, all the wanderers, all the liers-down, all the coffee-drinkers, into a colony of human ants.

For the sacks were great sheepskin bags of letters tumbling in from the receiving-houses. Anon they looked like whole flocks suddenly struck all of a heap, ready for slaughter; for a ruthless individual stood at a table, with sleeves tucked up and knife in hand, who rapidly cut their throats, dived into their insides, abstracted their contents, and finally skinned them. “For every letter we leave behind,” said the bagopener, in answer to an inquiry, ” we are fined half-a-crown. That’s why we turn them inside out.”

The mysterious visitors closely scrutinised the letters that were disgorged. These were from all parts of London to all parts of London and to the provinces and to the far-off quarters of the globe. An acute postman might guess the broad tenor of their contents by their covers:—business letters are in big envelopes, official letters in long ones, and lawyers’ letters in none at all; the tinted and lace-bordered mean Valentines, the black-bordered tell of grief, and the radiant with white enamel announce marriage. When the despatch of the Fleet-street receiving-house appeared the visitors tracked it, and the operations of the clerk who separated the three bundles of which it consisted were closely followed. With the prying curiosity which now only began to show itself, one of the intruders took a copy of the bill which accompanied the letters. It set forth in three lines that there were so many ” Stamped,” so many ” Prepaid,” and so many ” Unpaid.”

The clerk counted the stamped letters like lightning, and a flash of red gleaming past showed the inquirers that one of their epistles was safe. Suddenly the motion was stopped; the official had instinctively detected that one letter was insufficiently adorned with the Queen’s profile, and he weighed and taxed it double in a twinkling. Having proved the number of stamped letters to be exactly as per account rendered, he went on checking off the prepaid, turning up the sender’s green missive in the process. He then dealt with the unpaid, amongst which the lookers-on perceived their yellow one. The cash column was computed and cast in a single thought, and a short-hand mark, signifying ” quite correct,” dismissed the Fleet-street bill upon a file, for the leisurely scrutiny of the Receiver-General’s office. All the other letters, and all the other bills of all the other receiving-houses, were going through the same routine at all the other tables; and these performances are repeated ten times in every day, all the year round, Sundays excepted.

” You perceived,” said one of the two friends, “that in the rapid process of counting our stamped letter gleamed past like a meteor, whilst our money-paid and unpaid epistles remained long enough under observation for a careful reading of the superscriptions.”

“That delay,” said an intelligent official, “is occasioned because the latter are unstamped. Such letters cause a great complication of trouble, wholly avoided by the use of Queen’s heads. Every officer through whose hands they pass—from the receiving-house-keeper to the carriers who deliver them at their destinations—has to give and take a cash account of each. If the public would put stamps on all letters, it would save us, and therefore itself, some thousands a year.”

” What are the proportions of the stamped to the prepaid and unpaid letters which pass through all the post-offices during the year?”

” We can tell within a very near approximation to correctness: 337,500,000 passed through the post-offices of the United Kingdom during last year, and to every 100 of them about 50 had stamps; 46 were prepaid with pennies; and only 4 were committed to the box unpaid.”

While one of the visitors was receiving this information, the other had followed his variegated letters to the next process; which was that of stamping on the sealed face, in red ink, the date and hour of despatch. The letters are ranged in a long row, like a pack of cards thrown across a table, and so fast does the stamper’s hand move, that he can mark 6000 in an hour. While defacing the Queen’s heads on the other side, he counts as he thumps, till he enumerates fifty, when he dodges his stamp on one side to put his black mark on a piece of plain paper. All these memoranda are afterwards collected by the president, who reckoning fifty letters to every black mark, gets a near approximation to the number that have passed through the office.

 

Part Two Coming Soon!

ROYAL WEDDING UPDATE

Just a little over two months to go until this year’s most anticipated wedding day arrives, so here’s a round-up of some of the news and a bit of the speculation surrounding the royal nuptials –

Here’s the lowdown on Harry’s childhood friend, Violet von Westenholz who, it’s finally been revealed, was the matchmaker who actually introduced Harry to Meghan

Meghan has finally chosen a designer for her wedding dress – but who is it?!

Entertainment Tonight further speculates about the dress and ceremony and offers up some Will & Kate news while they’re at it.

 

Town and Country Magazine ponders the royal wedding invites

Speaking of which, it seems that Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York, won’t be getting one.

Hello Magazine explains the seating plan for the church service. 

It’s been rumoured that the Spice Girls may make their comeback at the wedding reception. Two days ago, Mel B fueled those rumours during an appearance on “The Real,” but the world awaits definitive confirmation.

And on Wednesday, William and Kate and Harry and Meghan made their first joint appearance together on behalf of The Royal Foundation.

Breaking just a few hours ago, Harry and Meghan have announced that they will invite 2,640 members of the public inside the Castle grounds in order to watch the carriage procession. 

And finally, learn why Meghan won’t be wearing the crown jewels until after the wedding. 

Are you as excited as we are?!

 

THE NAME OF THE ROOM – WHERE PRECISELY IS THE NECESSARY?

by Louisa Cornell

Having covered the all-important drawing room and the equally vital kitchen areas of your average Regency era English country house, I thought it imperative we visit… The Necessary. Anyone who has read their British history knows this era was on the cusp of modernity in many areas. Plumbing was one of them. Sort of. For those who write and even those who read Regency era romance I offer a brief primer on where your hero or heroine might go… to Go.

The Water Closet or WC – Nicest of our options.

By way of introduction, there was actually a flushing toilet in Britain as early as 1591. John Harington, godson of Queen Elizabeth I, invented and installed the first water closet in his own home. He called his new invention Ajax and even wrote a book describing how it was built and how it functioned. A pan had an opening at its bottom closed by a leather faced valve. A system of handles, levers and weight poured the water from the cistern and opened the valve.

It didn’t really catch on, but by 1775 Alexander Cummings took a patent for his flushing closet which was very similar to Ajax. The main drawback in Ajax was the water seepage through the primitive valve. In 1777, Samuel Prosser used a ball valve to stop the seepage of water from the tank. This was the prototype for the water closets seen in some Regency era stately homes and London townhouses.

Some of the problems with this facility were –

  1. There tended to be only one in each house. Large house, one water closet, cold dark nights. Take a good candle, warm slippers, and do not wait until the last minute!
  2. Only in the wealthiest and most modern-thinking houses would the water closet be found on the floor with the family bedchambers. So, marry really well or… See Number 1 above.
  3. The most logical location for the water closet would be on the ground floor at the back of the house where water was already being pumped inside aka the kitchens. Which means one ran the risk of running into or even tripping over sleeping servants on your way to the water closet.
  4. Negotiating a wooden toilet seat, in the dark, in homes where rat catchers were employed to keep the vermin population in check. Do not skimp on paying either the rat catcher or the estate carpenter. Just saying.

The advantages were –

  1. One didn’t have to leave the house.
  2. The maid didn’t have to empty it every time it was used.
  3. Some of them worked well enough to completely eliminate the smell and possibility of disease from the house.

The Chamber Pot – Great for your Heroine, Not so great for her maid!

A chamber pot was a bowl or container and could be as fancy or as basic as the owner deemed necessary. Some resembled black iron cook pots with a lid. Others were beautifully decorated porcelain vessels, often matching the decor of the bedchamber or the pitcher and bowl on the bedchamber washstand. It is safe to say a chamber pot might be found in every bedchamber in every stately home and town house in England during the Regency era. I daresay even servants had chamber pots in their bedchambers. Why wouldn’t they? They certainly had enough experience emptying them.

As the name denotes, a chamber pot might be found in any sort of chamber. The French were horrified to discover that British men kept a chamber pot in the dining room so as not to interrupt their after dinner brandy and cigars with a trip to the privy or water closet. Yes, you heard me correctly. A chamber pot. In the dining room. It might be stored behind a screen or even in a cabinet of the sideboard. And apparently gentlemen had no compunction about pulling the chamber pot out and using it whilst their fellow gentlemen watched. Frat boys have been around considerably longer than we knew.

For the ladies, during most social events a withdrawing room was designated. This was not a permanent fixture in a home, although some particularly busy homes might make it so. Perhaps a small parlor or a room not in constant use by the family would be set up with a screen and a chamber pot, chairs or comfortable divans for ladies to rest away from the party, a wash stand equipped with a pitcher of water and a bowl in which to wash one’s hands and face, along with towels and face cloths. A full length mirror and the talents of a maid who could repair a torn hem or flounce might also be offered. A vanity with cosmetics and a maid who excelled at dressing hair might be included. Of course there would be a maid whose job it was to empty the chamber pot and clean it so the next lady might use it. As far as all extant sources state, using the chamber pot was not a spectator sport for the ladies. Of course, ladies had the advantage of not having to remove any clothing in order to use the chamber pot. During the Regency era ladies did not wear the sort of confining panties or drawers we do today. Only loose women wore drawers, which means French women did it first. Wicked girls!

When in the actual bedchamber, chamber pots might be kept under the bed, behind a screen or even hidden in a sort of cabinet. They might be installed in a sort of toilet chair in a dressing room as well. No matter where they were stored, it was the duty of a maid to empty said chamber pot and return it clean to be used again.

          

 

 

 

                  

 

Ladies were even afforded a more portable option for when they traveled to venues at which a withdrawing room might not be made available – the bourdaloue.

For an informative and fun article on the bourdaloue please check out this link.

There were advantages and disadvantages to the use of a chamber pot.

Advantages –

  1. One did not have to leave the room, let alone the house at night to use it.
  2. One might use it without alerting the entire house, let alone a ballroom full of guests one was using it.
  3. A maid emptied it outside of the house, thus ridding the house of any smell or possibility of disease.

Disadvantages –

1. It might be in one’s chamber a while before it was emptied.

2. Maneuvering to use it might be problematic.

3. If one was a maid or footman working in one of these homes… do I really need to explain that disadvantage?

The Privy – You Might Be a Regency Redneck If… Oh! Wrong Post!

By the early 19th century, before the advent of sewer systems, each London house and most country houses would have what was called a ‘cesspool,’ a pit about four feet wide and six feet deep, above which the home’s privy was located. Liquid waste would be absorbed back into the soil at the bottom of the hole, but solid waste had to removed by the night soil man, who would come around at night (opening a cesspool during the day was illegal, as the smell was considered to be too horrifying) and climb down into the cesspool to shovel out the accumulated muck. Rest assured these cesspools probably accumulated their fair share of other household rubbish as well. More than one murder was discovered when someone bent to the task of removing solid waste from the cesspool. Shudder.

The privy was a fixed out house with no water supply or drain and usually located some distance away from the house. A fixed wooden seat with a rounded hole was placed directly over the cesspit. Occasionally privies were attached to the side of a building, projecting out from a top floor, or reached through on outdoor entry on the ground floor of a service wing. These were sometimes called garderobes, a leftover term from the medieval period. More often than not they were placed at some distance from the main house at the far end of a garden or yard.

The advantages to this arrangement were… let me think. Surely there was…

  1. The privy was away from the house.
  2. More often than not the owners paid for the services of the night soil man, thus the servants did not have to empty it. At least in the city. In the country, it is a safe bet there was some poor servant assigned to this task.

The disadvantages were –

  1. It was away from the house. Long walk, no matter the weather or the time of night. Much more likely to encounter the sort of animals who prefer to occupy a privy.
  2. Do we really need to list all of the disadvantages of using a privy?

There you have it. The name of the room we call a bathroom or restroom, or at least the various places and things one might use to accomplish the same purpose. Everyone who is perfectly happy to read or write about the Regency era, but has some reservations about actually living during the era, please raise your hand. You’re excused.

MORE ROYAL WEDDING GOWNS

by Victoria Hinshaw

Originally posted in February, 2011

This is really just a collection of pretty wedding pictures and  gorgeous dresses.  But, since it’s on our minds, these days, why not?  Some of these brides are related to the U.K. royals, others from European families. At right is Crown Princess Victoria of Sweden with her husband, Daniel   Wrestling.  They were married in Stockholm in June, 2010.

The dress is elegantly simple and looks perfect on Princess Victoria. Only the tiara — though it looks more like a crown — is elaborately decorated.

Crown Princess Victoria Ingrid Alice Désirée was in 1977.  She will become Queen of Sweden upon the death of her father, King Carl XIV Gustav. through her father, Victoria is related to the British royals and actually occupies a position in the line of U.K. royal succession.  Now known as HRH Prince Daniel, Duke of Vastergotland, Victoria’s husband is her former personal trainer and ran a company owning several gyms.

Another Scandinavian royal wedding was in Copenhagen Denmark on May 14, 2005, when HRH Crown Prince Frederik married Mary Donaldson, an Australian.  They recently had twins, in January, 2011, a boy and a girl. Their older siblings are Prince Christian, born in 2005, and Princess Isabella, born in 2007.

Crown Princess Mary made a beautiful bride and her dress was picture perfect.  The overskirt draping makes graceful detailing near the hem, rather an unusual but pleasing feature.

 

Hollywood royalty was united with royalty from the tiny but rich principality of Monaco when film star Grace Kelly married Prince Rainer in 1956.

The very nigh neckline of the gown amused many observers who were well aware of Kelly’s reputation for behaving entirely contrary to her look of a perfectly-proper ice queen.  Princess Grace, mother of three royal children, died in a car crash in 1982. The Prince died in 2005.

 

David Armstrong-Jones, Viscount Linley, married Hon. Serena Stanhope in October of 1993 at St. Margaret’s, Westminster. He runs a thriving furniture business with a showroom in Pimlico which is quite fun to visit.  Fashion observers noted how the gown, by Bruce  Bobbins, resembled the neckline design of  Princess Margaret’s gown from 1960. The Viscount is Margaret’s eldest child. The Linleys have two children, Charles, born 1999, and Margarita, born 2002.

 

 

The very next year, Princess Margaret’s daughter Lady Sarah Armstrong-Jones married  actor Daniel Chatto at St Stephen Walbrook in the City of London on July 14,  1994. Her gown by Jasper Conran is elegantly traditional, though the venue for the ceremony was unusual for a member of the royal family.  The Chattos have two sons, born in 1996 and 1999.

The last of Queen Elizabeth II’s sons to wed was Prince Edward. He married Sophie Rhys-Jones in 1999 at St. George’s Chapel, Windsor Castle, below.  They are titled the Earl and Countess of Wessex. The gown was designed by Samantha Shaw. The Wessexes have two children, Lady Louise, born 2003, and James, Viscount Severn, born in 2007.
 

The Queen’s eldest grandchild, Peter Phillips, married Canadian Autumn Kelly at St. George’s Chapel, Windsor Castle, on May 17, 2008.  The strapless dress was certainly au courant with its lace shrug, or bolero, if you wish. It was designed by Sassi Holford, one of the leading bridal gown providers in Britain.    The tiara worn by Autumn was the “something borrowed” — from Anne, Princess Royal,  Autumn’s new mother-in-law.

The Queen’s first great grandchild was born to Autumn and Peter on December 29, 2010, named Savannah.

Lady Rose Windsor, daughter of the Duke of Gloucester (cousin of Queen Elizabeth II), was married to George Gilman, on July 19, 2008 at the Queen’s Chapel, St. James Palace.  The gown is lovely and the tiara one loaned from the royal collection, but finding the name of the dress designer was impossible — all the press reports focused on what Kate Middleton was wearing.

 

In addition to the wedding of Kate and Prince William, 2011 also saw the wedding of Zara Phillips, daughter of Anne, Princess Royal, and rugby star Mike Tindall on July 30.

A GARMENT BY ANY OTHER NAME

by Kristine Hughes Patrone

Recently, an article about the Raglan Sleeve brought home to me just how many garments and styles are named for people or places related to British History. Of course I’d been aware of the Raglan Sleeve prior to the article, but as I always think of Raglan as he was – FitzRoy Somerset, the Duke of Wellington’s ADC, private secretary and nephew-in-law (below) – I hadn’t readily connected the dots.

  

Fitzroy James Henry Somerset, later known as 1st Baron Raglan (below), was with Wellington at the Battle of Waterloo as a 23 year old aide-de-camp and suffered an injury caused by a musket ball that necessitated the amputation of his right arm. As the field surgeon was disposing of the limb, Raglan is purported to have cried out, “I say, bring me back my arm!” Those nearby thought he was delirious, until he explained  that the ring his wife had given him was still on the finger. She might be alright with his losing an arm, but she’d never forgive his losing the ring.

FitzRoy Somerset afterwards taught himself to write with his left hand and continued his military service and his work with Wellington. He also went on to wear a signature overcoat adapted with the sleeves set into a wide, loose armhole by the Aquascutum firm, with both sleeves continuing in one piece up to the neck, less defined shoulder seams and a more deconstructed appearance.

 

The Raglan coat remains a popular men’s style, while the Raglan sleeve is now a permanent part of our fashion lexicon thanks to the baseball t-shirt.

 

 

The cardigan sweater was named after James Brudenell, 7th Earl of Cardigan, who led the Charge of the Light Brigade at the Battle of Balaclava during the Crimean War. Fashion lore tells us it was modelled after the knitted wool waistcoat typically worn by British officers.

The Cardigan sweater remains a staple of men’s wear, while Coco Chanel is credited with popularizing the feminine version of the look.

 

The Spencer coat dates from the 1790’s when, legend has it, George Spencer, 2nd Earl Spencer, got too close to an open fire and burnt the tails of his coat, prompting him to order his tailor to make him a jacket sans tails. The Spencer is a shorter, double breasted, waist-length coat, alternately called a mess jacket, as the style was taken up by officers in the British army, as seen below.

 

 

Fans of period dramas will recognize the Spencer as being a popular ladies’ garment during the Regency era.

 

The Macintosh, or Mackintosh, raincoat was invented by Scotsman Charles Macintosh as a waterproof coat made from an early rubberized fabric and first made it’s appearance in 1824.

The “mack” has nowadays evolved into the trench coat, but to be considered a true Mack, the coat should be made from waterproof material.

The Duke of Windsor did not invent the Windsor knot, or tie. That’s right. It was his father, King George V, who favoured wide tie knots and had his tailor cut his ties from a wider cloth, so that the knot would be wider than the traditional four-in-hand knot style that was preferred at the time.

 

Wellington boots were “invented” by the Duke of Wellington, who directed his bootmaker, Lobb, to cut down traditional leather Hessian boots in order to make them more comfortable when riding on horseback for long periods of time. Today, Wellington boots are more often made of rubber and are indispensable for outdoor wear.

 

 

The Blücher is a type of oxford (closed shoe) in which the tongue and vamp (the front part of the shoe) are cut in one. The Blücher is named after the 18th century Prussian field marshal Gebhard Leberecht von Blücher, who commissioned a boot with side pieces lapped over the front in an effort to provide his troops with improved footwear.

The Blücher shoe.

The d’Orsay shoe or slipper refers to any shoe that has a closed heel and toe but which is cut down to the sole at the sides. It can be made with a heel of any type and any style of vamp (front). The style is one of several fashions named after the Count d’Orsay, a fashionable dandy living Paris in the mid-1800s, who went on to marry Lady Blessington.

Today, the term “d’Orsay shoe” is used to describe any women’s shoe that exposes the arch of the foot.

Can you think of any other fashion terms named after persons from history? If so, please share them with us with a comment.