4th EARL OF TANKERVILLE | Correspondence on corruption in the Post Office, 1786, and other family papers
Estimate: 1,000 - 1,500 GBP
TANKERVILLE, CHARLES BENNET, 4TH EARL OF, POSTMASTER GENERAL
Correspondence relating to corruption in the Post Office and other family papers, comprising:
i) a bundle of c.40 letters relating to the 4th Earl of Tankerville's accusations of Lord Carteret's complicity in "a notorious system of corrupt management and influence which are grown inveterate in the Post office", ultimately resulting in Tankerville's forced resignation at Postmaster General, including letters by Pitt, Carteret (5), the 1st Earl of Clarendon (5), and the postal reformer John Palmer, with copies of further letters and retained draft letters by Tankerville, June-December 1786
ii) Charles, 3rd Earl of Tankerville (1716-67), bundle of c.22 letters to him, including one by the 4th Earl of Sandwich, on an ambassadorial appointment (1765), otherwise chiefly Chillingham estate correspondence, 1760s
iii) Henry Bennett, brother of the 4th Earl, commission as Captain in the First Regiment of Foot, signed by George III (1791); a third person letter by the Duke of Gloucester relating to "the dismissal of Major General Bennett from his family"; and a series of copy letters by various parties concerning this dismissal, 1798-99
Charles, 4th Earl of Tankerville (1743-1822) was joint Postmaster General with Henry, Lord Carteret, until they fell out over claims of illicit payments. Tankerville's intemperate attacks on other members of the administration made his resignation inevitable, but the subsequent public enquiry eventually led to attempts to tackle endemic corruption in the post office.
Please see shipping calculator link: click here
Condition is described in the main body of the catalogue, where appropriate.
The lot is sold in the condition it is in at the time of sale. The condition report is provided to assist you with assessing the condition of the lot and is for guidance only. Any reference to condition in the condition report for the lot does not amount to a full description of condition. The images of the lot form part of the condition report for the lot provided by Sotheby's. Certain images of the lot provided online may not accurately reflect the actual condition of the lot. In particular, the online images may represent colours and shades which are different to the lot's actual colour and shades. The condition report for the lot may make reference to particular imperfections of the lot but you should note that the lot may have other faults not expressly referred to in the condition report for the lot or shown in the online images of the lot. The condition report may not refer to all faults, restoration, alteration or adaptation because Sotheby's is not a professional conservator or restorer but rather the condition report is a statement of opinion genuinely held by Sotheby's. For that reason, Sotheby's condition report is not an alternative to taking your own professional advice regarding the condition of the lot.