asking for some information about our police force, I was told that we have only one policeman on duty from six in the morning till nine at night on the west side of York buildings, which includes all St. Leonards down to Bopeep, a distance which, in starting from Hastings, prevents his completing his beat in less than four hours”]
It may be further explained, as helping to make clear the foregoing bracketed interpolation, that it being the rule in post-offices to read upward the addresses on letters, it follows that any letter with the address “Eversfield place, Hastings”, would be put in the Hastings letter-bag, and if addressed “Eversfield place , St. Leonards”, it would be put into the St. Leonards bag, and would be duly delivered from the St. Leonards post-office, the whole of the district west of the Infirmary or Hospital being then, as now, in the St. Leonards postal delivery. If addressed “Hastings” the letter would be regarded as “missent”, and would not be delivered until a few hours after the earlier delivery. This arrangement was well known to the inhabitants, as having existed for many years; yet one or two persons who were among the agitators for abolishing the St. Leonards office persisted in having their letters and newspapers addressed as “Eversfield place, Hastings”, with the object of showing existing arrangements to be inconvenient. It did not take a long time for the post-officials to discover both the move and the actors therein; and, as after events proved, the officials were staunch in their determination not to be influenced by such proceedings. Whilst, however, rejecting in toto the demand for one general office in the borough – and that at Hastings – instead of the two then existing, the Postmaster-General granted a second day mail, whereby all letters posted in St. Leonards for Hastings before one o’ clock, would be delivered the same afternoon, and vice versa. But this additional facility was not welcomed by the agitators for only one office. What they had secretly planned – as will plainly appear further on – was to claim as Hastings that which for over twenty years had been known as St. Leonards, without any protestation, and without any legal power to alter it. The postal arrangements were such as to support the original appellation; hence the desire of the little band of autocrats to remove what they regarded as an obstacle in their way, and by the extinction of the St. Leonards post-office to compel the coveted district to be served from Hastings. The contention went on, and a Hastings correspondent of the News, denounced the action of the originators. In a letter dated June 25th, 1854, the said correspondent, calling himself “Up Street” wrote – “Sir, - the complications of the Post-office movement seem to be endless. No sooner have the disagreeable discussions on the removal of the office westward appear to have drooped a little, than another more serious affray looms in the future still further west. Report has it that our new office is to embrace the district between Verulam place and the Archway in addition to what it had before. Hereupon the St. Leonards people start up alarmed. Nor can we wonder at it. Why unnecessarily stir up strife and rob St. Leonards of the most growing part of its acknowledged territory – namely the buildings -
