Brian Carnell's Wiki

This page is read only. You can view the source, but not change it. Ask your administrator if you think this is wrong.
<html>
<p class="center">STUDIES IN ECONOMICS AND POLITICAL SCIENCE.</p>

<p class="center"><span class="smcap">Edited by the Hon. W. Pember Reeves, Ph.D</span>.,
<i>Director of the London School of Economics and Political Science</i>.</p>

<p class="center">No. 50 in the Series of Monographs by writers connected with the London
School of Economics and Political Science.</p>

<p class="center">THE DEVELOPMENT OF
RATES OF POSTAGE</p>

<hr />



<h1>                          THE DEVELOPMENT OF
                          RATES OF POSTAGE</h1>

<p class="center">                          AN HISTORICAL AND
                          ANALYTICAL STUDY</p>

<p class="center">                                <span class="smcap">by</span></p>

<p class="center">                    A. D. SMITH, B.Sc. (<span class="smcap">Econ</span>.)</p>

<p class="center">                      <span class="smcap">of the secretary's office,<br />
                      general post office, london</span></p>

<p class="center">                        <span class="smcap">with an introduction by</span></p>

<p class="center">                  THE RIGHT HON. HERBERT SAMUEL, M.P.<br />
                <span class="smcap">Postmaster-General</span> 1910-14 <span class="smcap">and</span> 1915-16</p>

<div class="figcenter" style="width: 200px;">
<img src="https://brian.carnell.com/wiki/_media/etext:a:ad-smith-development-of-rates-of-postage-colophon.jpg" width="200" height="202" alt="" title="Printer&#39;s mark" />
<span class="caption"></span>
</div>

<p class="center">                  LONDON: GEORGE ALLEN &amp; UNWIN LTD.<br />
                RUSKIN HOUSE 40 MUSEUM STREET, W.C. 1</p>

<hr />

<p class="center">[<i>Thesis approved for the Degree of Doctor of
Science</i> (Economics) <i>in the University of London</i>]</p>

<p class="center"><i>First published in 1917</i></p>

<p class="center">(<i>All rights reserved</i>)</p>

<hr />

<p><!-- Page v --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_v" id="Page_v">[Pg v]</a></span></p>
<h2>PREFACE</h2>


<p>This study, which was prepared primarily as a Research
Studentship Report for the University of London, is intended
to be a contribution to the history of rates of postage, and
an attempt to ascertain the principles, economic or otherwise,
on which they are and have been based.</p>

<p>The Postmaster-General accorded me permission to consult
the official records at the General Post Office, London, and
through this courtesy I have been enabled to include a
detailed examination of the economic aspect of the rates
in the inland service in this country, and to place in the
Appendix copies of some original documents which have not
before been printed. Without this permission, which I desire
here to acknowledge, it would, indeed, scarcely have been
possible to undertake the inquiry. It must be made clear,
however, that the work is of entirely private character, and
cannot be taken as in any way expressing the views of the
British Postal Administration.</p>

<p>In 1912, as the holder of the Mitchell Studentship in
Economics at the University of London, I visited Ottawa
and Washington; in 1913 I visited Paris and the International
Bureau at Berne; and in 1914, Berlin. I am much indebted
to the various postal administrations visited, to whom, by
the courtesy of the Postmaster-General, I carried official letters
of introduction in addition to my letters from the University,
for facilities to consult official papers relating to the subject
of investigation, and for assistance from members of the
staff with whom I was brought into contact.</p>

<p>The work was all but completed at the outbreak of
war, but publication has been unavoidably delayed. The
overpowering necessities created by the war have caused
Governments again to look to postage for increased revenue.
<!-- Page vi --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_vi" id="Page_vi">[Pg vi]</a></span>Penny postage itself has been in danger in the country of
its origin. Various war increases of postage have already
been made, both here and abroad, and brief particulars of
the changes in the countries dealt with have been included.
Further proposals for increasing the revenue from postage
will possibly be made, and I am hopeful that these pages,
in which the course of postage is traced, may then be found
of service.</p>

<p>For the privilege of numerous facilities in connection with
my work on the rates in this country I am indebted to
Mr. W. G. Gates, Assistant-Secretary to the Post Office;
and for assistance in my inquiries abroad I am indebted to
Dr. R. M. Coulter, C.M.G., Deputy Postmaster-General, Ottawa,
and Mr. William Smith, I.S.O., at the time of my visit
Secretary to the Canada Post Office; to Congressman the
Hon. David Lewis, of Maryland, and Mr. Joseph Stewart,
Second Assistant Postmaster-General, United States Post
Office; to <span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">M. Vaill&#233;</span>, of the <span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Secr&#233;tariat Administratif</span>, Ministry
of Posts and Telegraphs, Paris; and to <span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">M. Ruffy</span>, Director of
the International Bureau, Universal Postal Union, Berne.</p>

<p>I am especially indebted to Professor Graham Wallas for
valuable suggestions and advice.</p>

<p>
A. D. SMITH.<br />
<br />
<span class="smcap">London School of Economics</span>,<br />
1917.<br />
</p>

<hr />

<p><!-- Page vii --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_vii" id="Page_vii">[Pg vii]</a></span></p>
<h2>CONTENTS</h2>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Table of Contents">
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">&nbsp;</td><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right"><span class="smcap">page</span></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="3"><span class="smcap">Preface</span></td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_v">v</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="3"><span class="smcap">Introduction</span></td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_xi">xi</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">I.</td><td align="left" colspan="2"><span class="smcap">The Rate For Letters</span>&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="left" colspan="2">Letter Post in England</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_1">1</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="left" colspan="2">Letter Post in Canada</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_37">37</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="left" colspan="2">Letter Post in the United States of America</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_59">59</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="left" colspan="2">Letter Post in France</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_78">78</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="left" colspan="2">Letter Post in Germany</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_97">97</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">II.</td><td align="left" colspan="2"><span class="smcap">The Rate For Newspapers</span>&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="left" colspan="2">Newspaper Post in England</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_111">111</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="left" colspan="2">Newspaper Post in Canada</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_136">136</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="left" colspan="2">Newspaper Post (Second-class Mail) in the United States of America</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_148">148</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="left" colspan="2">Newspaper Post in France</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_164">164</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="left" colspan="2">Newspaper Post in Germany</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_173">173</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">III.</td><td align="left" colspan="2"><span class="smcap">The Rate For Parcels</span>&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="left" colspan="2">Parcel Post in England</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_183">183</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="left" colspan="2">Parcel Post in the United States of America</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_191">191</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="left" colspan="2">Parcel Post in France</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_204">204</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="left" colspan="2">Parcel Post in Germany</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_209">209</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">IV.</td><td align="left" colspan="2"><span class="smcap">Minor Rates</span>&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">(i)</td><td align="left">Book Post</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_220">220</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">(ii)</td><td align="left">Samples</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_229">229</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">(iii)</td><td align="left">Commercial Papers</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_238">238</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">(iv)</td><td align="left">Postcards</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_241">241</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">(v)</td><td align="left">Rate for Printed Matter for the Blind</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_244">244</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">(vi)</td><td align="left">Minor Rates in the United States and Canada</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_244">244</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">V.</td><td align="left" colspan="2"><span class="smcap">Local Rates</span></td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_247">247</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">VI.</td><td align="left" colspan="2"><span class="smcap">International Rates</span>&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">(i)</td><td align="left">International Letter Post</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_263">263</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">(ii)</td><td align="left">International Parcel Post</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_277">277</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">VII.</td><td align="left" colspan="2"><span class="smcap">An Analysis Of Cost</span>&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="left" colspan="2">Method</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_283">283</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="left" colspan="2">Cost</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_289">289</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">VIII.</td><td align="left" colspan="2"><span class="smcap">Conclusion</span></td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_312">312</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="3"><span class="smcap">Appendix</span> A&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">I.</td><td align="left">RATES OF INLAND LETTER POSTAGE CHARGED IN ENGLAND, 1635-1915</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_336">336</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">II.</td><td align="left">FOREIGN RATES IN THE BRITISH SERVICE</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_340">340</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">III.</td><td align="left">THE <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">THURN</span> AND <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">TAXIS</span> POSTS IN GERMANY</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_349">349</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">IV.</td><td align="left">PARCEL POST IN CANADA</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_355">355</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">V.</td><td align="left">THE SUPPLEMENTAL SERVICES</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_357">357</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">VI.</td><td align="left">POST OFFICE REVENUE</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_358">358</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">VII.</td><td align="left">GRAPHS</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_368">368</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="3"><span class="smcap">Appendix</span> B&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"></td><td align="left" colspan="2">DOCUMENTS AND EXTRACTS ILLUSTRATING ASPECTS OF POSTAL HISTORY&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">(i)</td><td align="left">Ancient Posts</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_374">374</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">(ii)</td><td align="left"><i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Nuncii</i> and <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Cursores</i></td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_377">377</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">(iii)</td><td align="left">Witherings' Scheme for the Reform of the Posts in England, 1635</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_378">378</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">(iv)</td><td align="left">The Monopoly and the General Farm of the Posts</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_380">380</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">(v)</td><td align="left">The English Post Office in 1681</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_384">384</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">(vi)</td><td align="left">The Cross Posts</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_388">388</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">(vii)</td><td align="left">The Early Posts in North America</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_391">391</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">(viii)</td><td align="left">The Clerks of the Road and the Transmission of Newspapers</td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_403">403</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="3"><span class="smcap">Appendix</span> C&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="left" colspan="2"><span class="smcap">list of authorities</span></td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_412">412</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="3"><span class="smcap">Index</span></td><td align="right"><a href="#Page_425">425</a></td></tr>
</table></div>

<hr />
<p><!-- Page xi --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_xi" id="Page_xi">[Pg xi]</a></span></p>
<h2>INTRODUCTION</h2>


<p>This book contains a collection of facts and an examination
of principles which will be of value to all students of the
subject with which it deals. It is more comprehensive than
any book on rates of postage yet published in the English
language, or, I believe, in any other. It is careful and
unbiased, and although here and there some of the author's
conclusions may not meet with unanimous acceptance, they
cannot fail to stimulate useful discussion on a matter which
is far more important than is often realized.</p>

<p>The whole of our social organization has come to depend
in large degree upon the post. Commerce, in all its departments,
relies upon it. All the variety of associations which
are, in their wide expansion, distinctive of modern civilization
and necessary to its life and energy&mdash;employers' associations,
trade unions, co-operative societies, friendly societies, religious
bodies, political and propagandist organizations of every kind,
local, national, and international&mdash;the whole nervous system
of the modern State, depends upon the quick transmission
of information and ideas; it would never have reached and
could not maintain its present development without cheap,
reliable, and speedy means of communication. The indirect
effects of changes&mdash;even small changes&mdash;in the postal system
are often extensive and almost incalculable.</p>

<p>Where the State itself conducts an industry there is always
a risk that commercial considerations and fiscal considerations
will not be sufficiently distinguished. Charges may be fixed
at a higher point than is warranted by the cost of the services
rendered. The surplus goes to the national revenue. It is
a tax, but a concealed tax, and in the case of postal rates
it is one of the worst kinds of tax, a tax on communications.
<!-- Page xii --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_xii" id="Page_xii">[Pg xii]</a></span>On the other hand, charges may be fixed at a lower point
than will cover the cost of the service. The deficit is a
subsidy, but a concealed subsidy. The halfpenny postage
rate for bulky newspapers, for example, or the extension of
telegraph offices to rural districts, may be socially useful, but
they are unremunerative. The loss that they involve to the
Exchequer may be justifiable, but if so it should be deliberately
incurred. It should not be hidden in the profit that is made
on the letter post. Without a scientific examination into the
actual cost of each part of the postal and telegraphic service,
and into the precise relation of revenue to cost, the charges
may include, haphazard, an excess which is nothing but pure
taxation, the expenditure may include an addition which is
nothing but pure subsidy, and neither the administrator nor
the taxpayer may be aware of the fact.</p>

<p>It is therefore one of the essential duties of the Post Office
to make such examinations, and of students or critics of
postal affairs to check or to supplement them. Mr. A. D.
Smith has made a useful contribution to the application, in
this sphere, of the methods of science to the conduct of
industry; and since the postal service is the most international
of all forms of social activity, it may be expected
that his contribution will be of value, and will have its
influence, far beyond the limits of our own country.</p>

<p>
<b>HERBERT SAMUEL.</b><br />
</p>


<hr />

<p><!-- Page 1 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_1" id="Page_1">[Pg 1]</a></span></p>
<h2>I<br /><br /><br />
THE RATE FOR LETTERS</h2>


<h3>LETTER POST IN ENGLAND</h3>

<p>In England the postal service, as an organized means for
the carrying of the King's despatches, dates back some four
hundred years, and as a recognized arrangement for the
carrying of letters for the public, some three hundred years.
Before the establishment of a regular system of posts, provision
had been made for carrying the King's despatches by
special messengers, called <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">nuncii</i> or <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">cursores</i>, attached to the
royal household.<a name="FNanchor_1_1" id="FNanchor_1_1"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_1" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> Their function was naturally one of importance,
and, from early times, large sums were expended in
their maintenance. They were employed on the private and
confidential business of the Crown and of members of the
royal household, and on affairs of State, both in England and
abroad, although their function was primarily to serve the
convenience of the King.</p>

<p>This was a system for the conveyance of official despatches
only.<a name="FNanchor_2_2" id="FNanchor_2_2"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_2" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> No public provision was made for the conveyance of
letters for private individuals. Such letters were conveyed by
servants, by special messengers, or by the common carriers,<a name="FNanchor_3_3" id="FNanchor_3_3"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_3" class="fnanchor">[3]</a>
and there is evidence of the existence of a considerable private
correspondence in the frequent issue of writs during the
fourteenth and fifteenth centuries ordering supervision of the
traffic in private letters, the uninterrupted transmission of<!-- Page 2 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_2" id="Page_2">[Pg 2]</a></span>
which was a source of much anxiety to the Crown from fear
of the fomenting of sinister and treasonable plots against itself.<a name="FNanchor_4_4" id="FNanchor_4_4"></a><a href="#Footnote_4_4" class="fnanchor">[4]</a></p>

<p>The establishment of the <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">nuncii</i> or <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">cursores</i> developed into
a regular system. On certain lines of road relay stages
were set up, at which the messengers might without delay
obtain a change of horses, a system first set up by Edward IV
in 1482, during the war with Scotland.<a name="FNanchor_5_5" id="FNanchor_5_5"></a><a href="#Footnote_5_5" class="fnanchor">[5]</a> Such relay messengers
were called "posts," a word borrowed from the French.<a name="FNanchor_6_6" id="FNanchor_6_6"></a><a href="#Footnote_6_6" class="fnanchor">[6]</a> The
term was also applied to the line of route, and the expression
"post," or "line of posts," was used to denote a route along
which, at certain stages, post-horses were kept in readiness for
the use of the King's messengers. Travelling in this way the
messengers were able to cover a hundred miles a day. The
establishment of lines of regular posts became a feature of
the administrative system, and a special officer of the royal
household was appointed to control them.</p>

<p>The first recorded Master of the Posts was Brian Tuke,
who held the office in 1512. The posts, like the establishment
of special messengers, were maintained solely at the
cost of the King. The master received a salary from the
King (which in a patent issued in 1545 is given as &#163;66 13s. 4d.
a year), and also the amount of his expenses incurred in
providing for the carrying of letters. The regular postmasters<!-- Page 3 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_3" id="Page_3">[Pg 3]</a></span>
received a daily wage from the King. On lines
along which no regular post had been established, but along
which it might on occasion be necessary to send special
messengers, the townships were obliged to furnish horses for
the service of the messengers. Remarks in contemporary
papers suggest that no payment was made in such cases, but
that horses were supplied gratis for the King's service.<a name="FNanchor_7_7" id="FNanchor_7_7"></a><a href="#Footnote_7_7" class="fnanchor">[7]</a> There
is no record of the early days of Tuke's tenure of the office
of Master of the Posts; but in 1533 Thomas Cromwell complained
to Tuke concerning the condition of the posts, and
the great default in the conveyance of letters.<a name="FNanchor_8_8" id="FNanchor_8_8"></a><a href="#Footnote_8_8" class="fnanchor">[8]</a></p>

<p>The posts were in many cases established on account of
some special circumstance, and were of a temporary character.
The first regular post&mdash;that established in 1482 during
the war with Scotland&mdash;was, of course, temporary; but at
much later dates, when "ordinarie," or permanent, posts had
been established, such as the post from London to Berwick
and that from London to Beaumaris, it was still usual to
establish "extra ordinarie" posts "in divers places of the
Realme" as occasion might from time to time require, as, for
example, during the periods of the sovereign's progresses.<a name="FNanchor_9_9" id="FNanchor_9_9"></a><a href="#Footnote_9_9" class="fnanchor">[9]</a></p>

<p>The early posts had a second function, not less in importance
than that of providing for the conveyance of the
sovereign's despatches, and despatches sent on affairs of State
viz. the provision of means by which persons actually travelling
on the business of the sovereign, though not bearing despatches,<!-- Page 4 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_4" id="Page_4">[Pg 4]</a></span>
might do so with facility. This second function, the travelling
post, continued until the eighteenth century. It is a function
which is essentially akin to the provision of a means of intercommunication
by means of letters. In many parts of the
United Kingdom, and also in other countries, the means
provided for the conveyance of the mail are still largely
used by persons desiring to travel.<a name="FNanchor_10_10" id="FNanchor_10_10"></a><a href="#Footnote_10_10" class="fnanchor">[10]</a></p>

<p>The use of the post-horses by ordinary travellers commenced
at an early period. In 1553, when the posts had been in
existence only some fifty or sixty years, a rate of a penny a
mile for persons riding post was fixed by statute.<a name="FNanchor_11_11" id="FNanchor_11_11"></a><a href="#Footnote_11_11" class="fnanchor">[11]</a></p>

<p>Great abuses grew up round the travelling post, or "thorough
post," as it was called.<a name="FNanchor_12_12" id="FNanchor_12_12"></a><a href="#Footnote_12_12" class="fnanchor">[12]</a> Riders in post frequently failed to
pay a reasonable sum for the hire of horses; and since King's<!-- Page 5 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_5" id="Page_5">[Pg 5]</a></span>
messengers, although paying no fixed rates, obtained better
accommodation than others, riders in post travelling on their
own affairs made no scruple to represent themselves as
travelling on public service. Orders directed against these
abuses were issued in 1603. Riders in post on the King's
affairs, with a special commission signed either by one of the
Principal Secretaries of State, by six at least of the Privy
Council, or by the Master of the Posts, were to pay at the
rate of 2&#189;d. a mile for a horse. All others riding post about
their own affairs were to make their own terms with the
postmaster, and to pay in advance.<a name="FNanchor_13_13" id="FNanchor_13_13"></a><a href="#Footnote_13_13" class="fnanchor">[13]</a> The net result was that
for all persons riding with the special commission a fixed rate
was payable in place of uncertain rates as hitherto, and the
postmasters were protected from being imposed upon by persons
riding post on their private business. Without the special
commission it was useless to pretend to be travelling on the
King's affairs. By this proclamation the postmasters were also
given the exclusive right of letting horses to travellers.<a name="FNanchor_14_14" id="FNanchor_14_14"></a><a href="#Footnote_14_14" class="fnanchor">[14]</a> The
wages of the postmasters in respect of the "post for the
pacquet" were a fixed sum per day, and a certain number of
horses had to be kept in readiness, in proportion to the amount<!-- Page 6 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_6" id="Page_6">[Pg 6]</a></span>
of the wages paid. As regards the service for the State, the
system of posts was therefore on a complete and definite
financial basis. The rates for the thorough post, although
not in any way rates of postage in the modern sense, were the
first rates applied to the service of the posts (the pay of the
postmasters for the packet post being merely wages per diem),
and it was to them that the term "postage" was first applied.
These rates were in fact the original "postage."</p>

<p>The number of regular posts was in early times quite
small.<a name="FNanchor_15_15" id="FNanchor_15_15"></a><a href="#Footnote_15_15" class="fnanchor">[15]</a> In order to provide a means of reaching other parts
of the kingdom with some degree of facility, the municipalities
were required to maintain, or at least provide when required,
post-horses for the use of the King's messengers.<a name="FNanchor_16_16" id="FNanchor_16_16"></a><a href="#Footnote_16_16" class="fnanchor">[16]</a> Some
municipalities made definite provision of horses: Leicester,
for example, maintained "certen poste-horses" (four in
number) for the service of the Prince; but if horses were not
provided voluntarily, the magistrates and constables were
authorized to seize them for the King's service wherever they
could be found.<a name="FNanchor_17_17" id="FNanchor_17_17"></a><a href="#Footnote_17_17" class="fnanchor">[17]</a> Many of the posts continued for a long
period to be of a temporary nature. Even in the seventeenth
century some which it might be thought would have been
important at any time, were regarded as extraordinary posts,
and were discontinued with the disappearance of the special
circumstances on account of which they had been established.<a name="FNanchor_18_18" id="FNanchor_18_18"></a><a href="#Footnote_18_18" class="fnanchor">[18]</a></p>

<p>A third function became attached to the posts, viz. the
transmission of private letters. As it is impossible to say at
what date the posts began to be used by ordinary travellers,
so it is impossible to say at what date they were first used for
the conveyance of letters other than those on the affairs of
the King or of the State. The universities and municipalities
provided services for the carriage of their own letters;<a name="FNanchor_19_19" id="FNanchor_19_19"></a><a href="#Footnote_19_19" class="fnanchor">[19]</a><!-- Page 7 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_7" id="Page_7">[Pg 7]</a></span>
but from a very early period the posts were also made use
of for the conveyance of unofficial letters. The Master of
the Posts received no direct profit from the carrying of such
letters,<a name="FNanchor_20_20" id="FNanchor_20_20"></a><a href="#Footnote_20_20" class="fnanchor">[20]</a> but the price paid to him for the office of Deputy
Postmaster was probably thereby increased.<a name="FNanchor_21_21" id="FNanchor_21_21"></a><a href="#Footnote_21_21" class="fnanchor">[21]</a></p>

<p>A Proclamation of 26th April 1591 prohibited the conveyance
of letters to or from countries beyond the seas by any person
other than the ordinary posts and messengers; and referred
to previous similar prohibitions. The object of this prohibition,
which foreshadowed the monopoly of the carriage of all
letters, whether for places within the realm or to or from
foreign countries, was alleged to be the redress of disorders
among the posts in general, and particularly to prevent
inconveniences both to the royal service and the lawful
trade of honest merchants.<a name="FNanchor_22_22" id="FNanchor_22_22"></a><a href="#Footnote_22_22" class="fnanchor">[22]</a> A Proclamation of 1609 repeated
this prohibition.<a name="FNanchor_23_23" id="FNanchor_23_23"></a><a href="#Footnote_23_23" class="fnanchor">[23]</a></p>

<p>In 1626 a legal struggle was in progress between Matthew
de Quester and Lord Stanhope, both of whom claimed to
hold a King's Patent conferring the right to carry foreign
letters.<a name="FNanchor_24_24" id="FNanchor_24_24"></a><a href="#Footnote_24_24" class="fnanchor">[24]</a> This litigation led to laxity and omission in the
conduct of the foreign service, so that merchants trading<!-- Page 8 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_8" id="Page_8">[Pg 8]</a></span>
abroad were put to great inconvenience. In consequence, in
November of that year, the King granted the Merchant
Companies permission to arrange for the conveyance of their
foreign letters by their own messengers. The high authorities
were disturbed by the grant of this permission,<a name="FNanchor_25_25" id="FNanchor_25_25"></a><a href="#Footnote_25_25" class="fnanchor">[25]</a> and in
October 1627 it was revoked "upon weightie reasons of
State." Only the Merchant Adventurers were still permitted
to use their own messengers, and they and all other merchants
were required in times of war and danger to the State to
acquaint the Secretaries of State from time to time with
what letters they forwarded abroad.</p>

<p>The foreign post continued in an unsatisfactory state,
and a reorganization in accordance with a proposition submitted
by the Master of the Foreign Posts, Thomas Witherings,
was notified in orders issued on the 28th January 1633.
In consequence of complaints, both of Ministers of State
and merchants, it was decided to send no more letters by
the carriers, who came and went at pleasure, but, in conformity
with other nations, to erect "stafetti," or packet
posts, at fit stages, to run day and night without ceasing.
Under this new system the Foreign Postmaster of England
undertook, with the consent of the foreign Governments, to
provide "stafetti" for the conveyance of foreign letters on
the Continent, e.g. he arranged the "stafetti" between
Calais and Antwerp.</p>

<p>For the inland posts the financial arrangements of 1603
remained some thirty years undisturbed, and notwithstanding
that the posts were used by travellers, and for the
general conveyance of private letters, they remained a
charge on the King's revenue. In 1633 the deficit was some
&#163;3,400, and in that year Witherings submitted a plan for
the complete reorganization of the inland posts.<a name="FNanchor_26_26" id="FNanchor_26_26"></a><a href="#Footnote_26_26" class="fnanchor">[26]</a> The new<!-- Page 9 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_9" id="Page_9">[Pg 9]</a></span>
system, which applied only to the "post for the pacquet,"
was to be based on a definite scale of charges. Previously,
there had been no regular system of charging letters carried
for the public, and it is at this point that the modern Post
Office emerges. Up to this time the conveyance of letters for
private individuals, although it may have been a source of
emolument to the postmasters and couriers, was not recognized
by the State as part of the function of the service. Under the
proposed system, a charge was to be made for every letter or
packet, varying in accordance with the distance for which the
letter or packet was conveyed, and its size. The latter was
to be graduated for light letters according to the number of
sheets, and for heavier letters and packets according to weight,
starting from the ounce. Here, therefore, is to be seen at
the inception of "postage" in the modern sense a definite
distinction between the rate charged on the ordinary letter,
the weight and bulk of which are in general insignificant,
and that charged on the larger and heavier packets of deeds,
or what not, which might be forwarded by post.</p>

<p>The reform of the posts on these lines was carried out
by Witherings in October 1635, and constitutes a remarkable
development of the Post Office system. The rates of
charge were as follow:&mdash;</p>

<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Rates of postal charge for distance and letter type, from 1635.">
<tr><th align="center"> Distance of Transmission.</th><th align="center">Single Letter.</th><th align="center">Double Letter.</th><th align="center">Per Ounce.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left"> Not exceeding 80 miles</td><td align="right">2d.</td><td align="right">4d.</td><td align="right">6d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"> Exceeding 80 miles, not exceeding 140 miles</td><td align="right">4d.</td><td align="right">8d.</td><td align="right">9d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"> Exceeding 140 miles</td><td align="right">6d.</td><td align="right">12d.</td><td align="right">12d.</td></tr>
</table></div>

<p>The great change of 1840 modified this system only at two
points, viz. (1) uniformity of rate, that is, the elimination of
the table of distances from the rate-table, and (2) the introduction
of the method of charge according to weight for all
letters and packets.</p>

<p>The monopoly of foreign letters was by this time well
established, and the reason for its existence well defined.
A further proclamation of the 11th February 1637-8 again
declared this monopoly, and proceeded to declare a monopoly
of letters between persons within the realm, the second<!-- Page 10 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_10" id="Page_10">[Pg 10]</a></span>
monopoly being justified, not on the ground of necessity in
order to guard the safety of the State, but on the ground that
commerce and correspondence within the realm would benefit.<a name="FNanchor_27_27" id="FNanchor_27_27"></a><a href="#Footnote_27_27" class="fnanchor">[27]</a>
The real explanation of the new prohibition for inland letters
was no doubt the fact that Witherings had been appointed
Master of the Inland Letter Office for the purpose of bringing
into operation his scheme for reorganizing the posts, and it
was essential to the success of the scheme that he should
have the sole right of carrying letters. There was, of course,
the political reason of danger to the State from free and
uncontrolled transmission of letters, but the feeling in that
respect seems not to have been so strong regarding the
inland letters as regarding the foreign letters. It developed
later, however.<a name="FNanchor_28_28" id="FNanchor_28_28"></a><a href="#Footnote_28_28" class="fnanchor">[28]</a></p>

<p>In 1640 Witherings was displaced on some charge of maladministration,
and the office was given to Philip Burlamachi,
a merchant of the City of London. Witherings did not<!-- Page 11 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_11" id="Page_11">[Pg 11]</a></span>
give up the office without a struggle. For two years he
strove to retain it, but without much success; and in 1642
he assigned his patent to the Earl of Warwick, who continued
the struggle. Burlamachi was backed by Edmund Prideaux,
afterwards Attorney-General. Into the merits or progress of
the contest it is unnecessary to enter. It will be sufficient to
record that the Lords espoused the cause of the Earl of
Warwick and the Commons that of Burlamachi; that the contest
continued some two years; and that in the end the Lords
gave way, and Burlamachi continued Master of the Posts.</p>

<p>The office fell vacant in 1644, and Parliament appointed
Prideaux to the charge of the posts.<a name="FNanchor_29_29" id="FNanchor_29_29"></a><a href="#Footnote_29_29" class="fnanchor">[29]</a> This task he
entered upon with some seriousness, and with considerable
success. He extended the service, but raised the minimum
postage to 6d. From a report submitted by him to the
Council of State in 1649, it appears that he had established
"a weekly conveyance of letters into all parts of the nation,"
and that with the moneys received as postage he had been
able to defray the whole cost of the postmasters of England
with the exception of those on the Dover Road.<a name="FNanchor_30_30" id="FNanchor_30_30"></a><a href="#Footnote_30_30" class="fnanchor">[30]</a> At the time
of his appointment the posts involved a charge to the State
of some &#163;7,000 a year.<a name="FNanchor_31_31" id="FNanchor_31_31"></a><a href="#Footnote_31_31" class="fnanchor">[31]</a> It might therefore be thought that for
Prideaux to be able to carry on the system, to give a despatch
of letters to all parts of the kingdom every week, and at the
same time make the proceeds of postage cover the whole cost,
except for the Dover Road, was a considerable achievement.
The Commons were not, however, altogether satisfied. The
long disputes between the various patentees, and their anxiety
not to lose any part of the business of conveying letters,
made it evident that there was a profit other than the salary
paid by the King, notwithstanding that funds for the maintenance
of the posts were drawn from the Exchequer year
by year. The office of Master of the Posts was bought and
sold. Witherings sold part of his wife's estate to the value
of &#163;105 a year in land to obtain the office. The deputy postmasters
also bought their offices. And in 1642, by vote of
both Houses, Burlamachi had been required to give an account
of the <i>profits</i> of the Letter Office. The Letter Office was in<!-- Page 12 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_12" id="Page_12">[Pg 12]</a></span>
fact not on the simple basis of payment by the messengers
to the Master of Posts of all receipts, payment by the Master
of Posts from the receipts of the ordinary fixed wages of the
deputy postmasters (together with the cost of special expresses)
and of his own salary, and payment from the
Exchequer of the balance necessary to complete such payment.
The deputy postmasters took, and retained for their
own use, the postage received on private letters, paying a
percentage to the Master of the Posts; and they had also
the monopoly, which was very lucrative, of letting horses to
travellers riding post. In view of these profits they were
prepared to purchase from the Master of the Posts the office
of deputy postmaster, and sums received from that source,
together with the percentage of the postage of private letters,
constituted the emoluments of the Master of the Posts,
additional to his salary. The Commons, being no doubt aware
of this, concluded that there ought to be a net revenue from
the Office, and required Prideaux to pay the sum of &#163;5,000
a year.<a name="FNanchor_32_32" id="FNanchor_32_32"></a><a href="#Footnote_32_32" class="fnanchor">[32]</a></p>

<p>Witherings, who by some strange chance seems never to
have been altogether ousted from his offices, but to have
retained that of Master of the Foreign Post, died in 1651,
and there were numerous claimants for the succession to the
office. The Council of State invited all persons with claims
to submit them, and in reporting on the claims, suggested
the farming of the Inland and Foreign Letter Offices. The
question was put to the House of Commons that the whole
business be "recommitted to the Council of State to take into
consideration and present their opinions to the Parliament how
the same may be managed for the best service of the State
and ease of the people." The addition of the words "by
contract or otherwise" was suggested, and accepted by the
House.<a name="FNanchor_33_33" id="FNanchor_33_33"></a><a href="#Footnote_33_33" class="fnanchor">[33]</a> The question was considered by a Committee, who,
having found much difficulty in dealing with the numerous
claims in respect of the Foreign and Inland Letter Offices,
decided on the 7th November 1651, probably as a way out
of the difficulty, to recommend that the offices should be
let to farm. The matter was not hurriedly disposed of. On<!-- Page 13 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_13" id="Page_13">[Pg 13]</a></span>
the 7th May 1653,<a name="FNanchor_34_34" id="FNanchor_34_34"></a><a href="#Footnote_34_34" class="fnanchor">[34]</a> resolutions were passed by the House of
Commons asserting the State monopoly of the carriage of
letters, and directing the Committee appointed to consider
the posts to fix rates for private letters, to obtain tenders
from persons for farming the carrying of letters, and to
recommend what annual sum in their opinion the State should
require in case it were thought well to let the posts to farm.</p>

<p>On the 30th June 1653 the Inland and Foreign Letter Offices
were let to John Manley at a rent of &#163;10,000 a year,<a name="FNanchor_35_35" id="FNanchor_35_35"></a><a href="#Footnote_35_35" class="fnanchor">[35]</a> and
thus was instituted the system of farming, which continued
until 1677 as regards the main posts, and until the late
eighteenth century as regards the bye posts. The rent continuously
increased. Shortly after the Restoration it was
raised to &#163;21,500 a year, and in 1667 to &#163;43,000 a year.</p>

<p>The rate for a single letter, which had been raised by
Prideaux to 6d., was in 1655 or 1656 reduced to 3d., owing
to the efforts and competition of Clement Oxenbridge and
others, who established and maintained rival services for
the carriage of letters. These "interlopers" received scant
consideration from Prideaux, and the services which they
had established were suppressed.<a name="FNanchor_36_36" id="FNanchor_36_36"></a><a href="#Footnote_36_36" class="fnanchor">[36]</a> In 1657 an Ordinance of
the Commonwealth Parliament further reduced the rate to 2d.
for a single letter sent for distances under 80 miles, and 3d. for
distances over 80 miles. The rates were not, however, as low<!-- Page 14 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_14" id="Page_14">[Pg 14]</a></span>
as would appear at first sight. There is the difference in the
value of money to be allowed for; and there is the further
consideration that postage was not charged according to the
direct distance. All the post roads converged on London,
and there were no cross posts. All letters from towns on
one post road for towns on another post road must therefore
pass through London, and all letters passing through London
were subjected to an additional rate of postage;<a name="FNanchor_37_37" id="FNanchor_37_37"></a><a href="#Footnote_37_37" class="fnanchor">[37]</a> that is to
say, they were charged the appropriate rate in respect of the
distance to London, and then, in addition, the appropriate
rate in respect of the distance from London to destination.</p>

<p>The Ordinance of 1657 placed the Post Office system for
the first time on a statutory basis.<a name="FNanchor_38_38" id="FNanchor_38_38"></a><a href="#Footnote_38_38" class="fnanchor">[38]</a> The objects for which
such an Office was required were given as three in number:
first, to maintain certain intercourse of trade and commerce;
secondly, to convey public despatches; and thirdly, to discover
and prevent many dangerous and wicked designs against the
peace and welfare of the Commonwealth. In 1660 an Act
of Parliament was passed, dealing with the Post Office.<a name="FNanchor_39_39" id="FNanchor_39_39"></a><a href="#Footnote_39_39" class="fnanchor">[39]</a>
Essentially it was the Ordinance of 1657, passed as an Act
to give it legal validity under the changed order of things.
The clauses relating to the use of the Post Office as a
means of detecting plots against the State were included in
a modified form, and this function was by no means lost sight
of.<a name="FNanchor_40_40" id="FNanchor_40_40"></a><a href="#Footnote_40_40" class="fnanchor">[40]</a> During the excitement caused by the Popish Plot it was
freely exercised.<!-- Page 15 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_15" id="Page_15">[Pg 15]</a></span></p>

<p>The general farm of the posts was abolished in 1677, and
the administration of the Office undertaken by the Government,
except in the case of the smaller branch posts, in
regard to which the practice of farming was even extended
in the early years of the eighteenth century.<a name="FNanchor_41_41" id="FNanchor_41_41"></a><a href="#Footnote_41_41" class="fnanchor">[41]</a></p>

<p>The revenue yielded by the Office continued to expand. In
1694 it had reached &#163;60,000; and when, for various reasons,
but chiefly to provide for the control of the Post Office in
Scotland, which had been brought under the English authorities
by the Act of Union, a new Post Office Act became
necessary, the Ministers, involved in a protracted war, seized
the opportunity to obtain an increased revenue from the Office.
Under William III this had been thought of.<a name="FNanchor_42_42" id="FNanchor_42_42"></a><a href="#Footnote_42_42" class="fnanchor">[42]</a></p>

<p>The Act of 1711,<a name="FNanchor_43_43" id="FNanchor_43_43"></a><a href="#Footnote_43_43" class="fnanchor">[43]</a> which remained for over fifty years the
principal Act relating to the Post Office, was to be an instrument
of taxation. For some fifty years the Post Office had
been yielding a revenue, constant and increasing, but nevertheless
more or less fortuitous. Its functions had always been
defined as primarily to provide for the transmission of letters,
for the benefit of commerce, and for the safety and security
of the kingdom, by bringing all letters into "one Post Office
settled and established in this Kingdom," and conducted
immediately under the eye of the King's Government. The
amount paid for the farm had increased with the passing
of the years, in measure with the increase of the business
of the Office&mdash;not by any change in the scale of charges,
which remained as fixed in 1660. Now, however, the Office
was made a financial instrument, the proceeds of which
were to be regulated by manipulation of the rates of charge.
The results of the Act of 1711 did not fulfil the anticipations
of its framers. Provision had been made for the disposal
of that increase of revenue which was looked for: "the
full, clear, and entire Weekly Sum of Seven Hundred
Pounds of Lawful Money of <i>Great Britain</i>" was to be
paid out of the revenues of the Post Office "towards<!-- Page 16 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_16" id="Page_16">[Pg 16]</a></span>
the Establishment of a good, sure, and lasting Fund, in
order to raise a present Supply of Money for carrying
on the War and other her Majesty's most necessary
Occasions."<a name="FNanchor_44_44" id="FNanchor_44_44"></a><a href="#Footnote_44_44" class="fnanchor">[44]</a> This &#163;700 was to be paid entirely from the
proceeds of the increase in the rates. The existing revenue
of &#163;111,461 a year was to be disposed of as theretofore. All
pensions and charges on the revenue were to continue, and
were to have preference over the payment of &#163;700 a week.
Of the surplus over and above the &#163;111,461 a year and the
&#163;700 a week, one-third part was to be at the disposal of
Parliament, the rest to be paid into the Exchequer with
the &#163;111,461.</p>

<p>But the increase of revenue was so small that some of these
provisions remained for many years inoperative. The increase
of rate was found burdensome. Merchants resorted to every
available means of avoiding the additional expense.<a name="FNanchor_45_45" id="FNanchor_45_45"></a><a href="#Footnote_45_45" class="fnanchor">[45]</a> A large
clandestine traffic in letters grew up. The very postboys
were found carrying letters outside the mail for what fees
they could obtain. In 1710 the net revenue had been &#163;66,822.
In 1721 it was &#163;99,784, an increase of &#163;32,962. After the
deduction, therefore, of the &#163;700 a week (or &#163;36,400 a
year), the payment of which had preference over all other
payments chargeable on the Post Office revenue, excepting
only the expenses of management, the actual net revenue
of the Post Office available for the purposes prescribed by
the Act was in 1721, &#163;63,384, or less than the revenue
of 1710 by &#163;3,438. The Act provided that one-third of the
surplus of the yield of postage over and above the sum of
&#163;147,861 (&#163;111,461 plus the &#163;700 a week) should be at the
disposal of Parliament for the use of the public; but although
the gross revenue had exceeded that sum, there was no
surplus for the use of the public, the explanation being
that the sum mentioned in the Act, viz. &#163;111,461, was the
amount of gross revenue, which could only serve as a basis
provided the cost of management remained stationary. As a<!-- Page 17 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_17" id="Page_17">[Pg 17]</a></span>
matter of fact, the cost so greatly increased that the net
revenue was not sufficient to provide the sum of &#163;700 a week
and also a revenue equal to that obtained before 1711. As
Mr. Joyce has pointed out, the Treasury had confounded
gross and net revenue.<a name="FNanchor_46_46" id="FNanchor_46_46"></a><a href="#Footnote_46_46" class="fnanchor">[46]</a></p>

<p>The essentially fiscal character of the rates of 1711 is
evidenced by a provision of the Act that from and after the
1st June 1743 the rates charged under the previous Acts
were to be restored.<a name="FNanchor_47_47" id="FNanchor_47_47"></a><a href="#Footnote_47_47" class="fnanchor">[47]</a> But after 1743, although they were
without legal sanction, the rates of 1711 continued in operation,
and by an Act of 1763 they were made perpetual.<a name="FNanchor_48_48" id="FNanchor_48_48"></a><a href="#Footnote_48_48" class="fnanchor">[48]</a></p>

<p>The fifty years following the Act of the 9th of Anne were
uneventful.<a name="FNanchor_49_49" id="FNanchor_49_49"></a><a href="#Footnote_49_49" class="fnanchor">[49]</a> The chief development was in connection with
the cross posts; a development which, although not having
direct reference to the question of the rates of postage, was
yet of importance. At the commencement of the eighteenth
century the main system of the Post Office still centred on
London. All the main post routes radiated from London,
and the great bulk of the letters passing by post were either
for or from London, or passed through London. But there
were, of course, numbers of letters which were not sent to
London at all: letters between two towns on a post road,
or letters between towns on different post roads, which could
be sent direct and not by way of London. These letters
were known as bye letters and cross post letters.<a name="FNanchor_50_50" id="FNanchor_50_50"></a><a href="#Footnote_50_50" class="fnanchor">[50]</a> Since they
were not handled in London, the authorities had not the same<!-- Page 18 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_18" id="Page_18">[Pg 18]</a></span>
means of checking their numbers, and the postmasters'
accounts of postage in respect of them, as could be applied
in London, and grave irregularities arose. The revenue was
continually defrauded by the failure of the postmasters to bring
to account the postage on such letters. No record was made
in respect of many of them, and their transmission became
so notoriously unsafe that illicit means of conveyance were
constantly resorted to. The matter was already so serious
that a special clause was included in the Act of the 9th of
Anne, providing that for the suppression of the abuse any
postmaster found guilty of embezzling the postage of bye
or way letters should forfeit &#163;5 for every letter and &#163;100
for every week during which he continued the practice.<a name="FNanchor_51_51" id="FNanchor_51_51"></a><a href="#Footnote_51_51" class="fnanchor">[51]</a>
Even this penal clause was insufficient to check the abuse,
as owing to the unsatisfactory method of dealing with bye and
way letters there was small risk of detection in fraud.</p>

<p>In 1719 Ralph Allen, then postmaster of Bath, proposed to
the Postmasters-General that the management of the bye and
cross post letters should be leased to him for a term of years,
and offered a rent one and a half times as great as the revenue
from the letters at that time. The offer was accepted, and
the lease, which in the first instance was for seven years,
was renewed from time to time. Allen, whose discovery was
merely that of a method of check on the receipts of the
postmasters from the bye and cross letters, was able to pay
the rent agreed upon, largely to suppress the illicit transmission
of the letters, and to make a handsome profit.<a name="FNanchor_52_52" id="FNanchor_52_52"></a><a href="#Footnote_52_52" class="fnanchor">[52]</a> The<!-- Page 19 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_19" id="Page_19">[Pg 19]</a></span>
chief importance of Allen's work lies, however, not so much
in the fact of his rendering the bye and cross post letters
subject to effective check, as in the fact that in order to
retain his lease he, on each occasion of renewal, undertook the
provision of additional facilities. By this means a daily post
was gradually extended to almost all the post routes.<a name="FNanchor_53_53" id="FNanchor_53_53"></a><a href="#Footnote_53_53" class="fnanchor">[53]</a><!-- Page 20 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_20" id="Page_20">[Pg 20]</a></span></p>

<p>In 1765 the inland rates for short distances were reduced,
and a new standard of charge was introduced. Hitherto, all
charges had been regulated on a mileage basis. For short
distances they were now based on the number of post
stages. For one post stage the rate was made 1d. for a
single letter, for a double letter 2d., for a treble letter 3d.,
and for every ounce 4d.; for two post stages, 2d., and in
proportion for double, treble, and ounce letters.<a name="FNanchor_54_54" id="FNanchor_54_54"></a><a href="#Footnote_54_54" class="fnanchor">[54]</a> The financial
result of the change was unsatisfactory.<a name="FNanchor_55_55" id="FNanchor_55_55"></a><a href="#Footnote_55_55" class="fnanchor">[55]</a></p>

<p>Up to this period the mails were carried by postboys
riding horse. Notwithstanding that on all the chief roads
stage-coaches were running more expeditiously than the
post-horses, the Post Office kept to the old way. The
superiority of the stage-coaches as means for the conveyance
of letters was noticed by Mr. John Palmer, proprietor of the
theatre of Bath,<a name="FNanchor_56_56" id="FNanchor_56_56"></a><a href="#Footnote_56_56" class="fnanchor">[56]</a> who was so greatly impressed with the fact
that he devised a complete and definite plan for the establishment
of a system of mail conveyance by coach. The cost
of the riding post (boy and horse) was 3d. a mile, and Palmer
estimated that the change could be carried out without
involving any increase of cost, especially if, as he proposed,
the coaches carrying the mails should be exempted from toll.
The proposal was severely criticized by the district surveyors
of the Post Office, who reported on it.<a name="FNanchor_57_57" id="FNanchor_57_57"></a><a href="#Footnote_57_57" class="fnanchor">[57]</a> At the Treasury,<!-- Page 21 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_21" id="Page_21">[Pg 21]</a></span>
however, the proposal met with a more favourable reception.
Pitt called a conference on the 21st June 1784, and after
hearing the explanations of Palmer and the criticisms
of the representatives of the Post Office, decided that the
plan should be given a trial. Accordingly, on the 2nd
August 1784 the first mail-coach ran. The experiment,
which was conducted on the Bath Road, proved successful,
and the plan was rapidly extended throughout the kingdom.
The first coach cost 3d. a mile, the same rate as the riding
post; but ultimately the coaches proved to be cheaper than
the horse posts. In 1797 the rate was no more than a
penny a mile.<a name="FNanchor_58_58" id="FNanchor_58_58"></a><a href="#Footnote_58_58" class="fnanchor">[58]</a></p>

<p>Almost simultaneously with the introduction of mail-coaches
there was an increase in the rates of postage, made
solely with a view to increased revenue.<a name="FNanchor_59_59" id="FNanchor_59_59"></a><a href="#Footnote_59_59" class="fnanchor">[59]</a> The alteration was
more or less fortuitous. In his Budget of 1784 Pitt had
proposed a tax on coals which had not been well received,
and the increased postage was substituted. Palmer is said
to have claimed the credit of suggesting the substitution.<a name="FNanchor_60_60" id="FNanchor_60_60"></a><a href="#Footnote_60_60" class="fnanchor">[60]</a>
If so, his faith in his plan was abundantly justified. Notwithstanding
the handicap of increased rates, it was an<!-- Page 22 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_22" id="Page_22">[Pg 22]</a></span>
unqualified success, and the effect on the revenue was
immediate and considerable.</p>

<p>At about this time several horse and cross post mails had
been molested, and it was desired, in response to a considerable
public agitation, to establish mail-coaches on the
minor posts. This would have involved heavy cost, and as
an alternative Freeling (Secretary to the Post Office, afterwards
Sir Francis) suggested that only responsible persons
should be employed&mdash;at this time the post riders, in fact as
well as name, were in many instances mere boys&mdash;and that
the riders should be armed. In order to obtain funds to
meet the cost of this scheme, the rates of postage were again
increased in 1797.<a name="FNanchor_61_61" id="FNanchor_61_61"></a><a href="#Footnote_61_61" class="fnanchor">[61]</a> A further increase was made in 1801 in
order to-provide an additional contribution of &#163;150,000 a year
to the Exchequer.<a name="FNanchor_62_62" id="FNanchor_62_62"></a><a href="#Footnote_62_62" class="fnanchor">[62]</a> The new rates were elaborate and complicated,
comprising no less than thirteen rates for each class
of letter, according to the distance of transmission. Another
increase followed in 1805, when the Post Office was called
upon to provide an additional &#163;230,000 a year.<a name="FNanchor_63_63" id="FNanchor_63_63"></a><a href="#Footnote_63_63" class="fnanchor">[63]</a> This time
the increase was made in a very simple manner, viz. by
increasing the rates of 1801 in every case by 1d. for a single
letter, 2d. for a double letter, 3d. for a treble letter, and
4d. per ounce.</p>

<p>All these increases, made with the avowed intention of
increasing revenue, were successful in their main object.
The net revenue, which in 1796 was &#163;466,457, had risen in
1804 to &#163;956,212, and in 1806 reached the sum of &#163;1,119,429.
The fiscal results seemed, therefore, to justify the Government
in turning again and again to the Post Office when they
were hard pushed to find revenue. This must be the justification
of the further increase of 1812.<a name="FNanchor_64_64" id="FNanchor_64_64"></a><a href="#Footnote_64_64" class="fnanchor">[64]</a> The rates then
established were the highest ever charged in England. The
net revenue rose slightly after their establishment, but never
increased materially. These rates continued in operation until
1839, when they were completely swept away, and new rates
based on principles fundamentally different were established.<!-- Page 23 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_23" id="Page_23">[Pg 23]</a></span></p>

<p>This was the system, due to Sir Rowland Hill, of uniform
rates, irrespective of distance of transmission, first introduced
in the United Kingdom in 1839, and since adopted
throughout the civilized world, not only for inland services,
but for the international service.<a name="FNanchor_65_65" id="FNanchor_65_65"></a><a href="#Footnote_65_65" class="fnanchor">[65]</a> The story of the conception,
advocacy, and adoption of uniform postage is fully told
by Sir Rowland Hill in his <i>History of Penny Postage</i>,<a name="FNanchor_66_66" id="FNanchor_66_66"></a><a href="#Footnote_66_66" class="fnanchor">[66]</a> and
need be only briefly dealt with here. The plan itself is
described in the famous pamphlet, <i>Post Office Reform: Its
Importance and Practicability</i>, which was issued by Sir
Rowland Hill in 1837.</p>

<p>The reform was directly related to the great reform movement
in England of the second quarter of the nineteenth
century, and is a brilliant example of the application of the
deductive method in politics. Sir Rowland Hill was a member
of a Radical family, remarkable even in those days for its
zeal for reform. It was the ambition of all members of the
family to aid as far as possible the great movement; and
all the brothers interested themselves in the study of social
and economic questions, with a view to reform and improvement.<a name="FNanchor_67_67" id="FNanchor_67_67"></a><a href="#Footnote_67_67" class="fnanchor">[67]</a>
In the year 1835 there was a large surplus of revenue,
and the brothers speculated on the direction in which reduction
of taxation might best be made.<a name="FNanchor_68_68" id="FNanchor_68_68"></a><a href="#Footnote_68_68" class="fnanchor">[68]</a> Sir Rowland Hill examined<!-- Page 24 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_24" id="Page_24">[Pg 24]</a></span>
carefully the results of the financial reforms which had been
introduced in recent years, and found that the effect on the
revenue of reductions in the rate of tax showed very considerable
variations. While in some cases, as, for example,
leather and soap, a reduction of the duty by one-half had
reduced the revenue by one-third, a similar reduction of the
duty on coffee had increased the revenue by one-half. From
this Sir Rowland Hill concluded that it was of the utmost
importance to select carefully the taxes to be reduced, and
he cast about for some guiding principle in the light of which
the most suitable tax for reduction might be discovered.
This principle he deduced to be as follows, viz. that the
tax which most called for reduction was that which had
failed most to keep pace with the increasing numbers and
prosperity of the nation.<a name="FNanchor_69_69" id="FNanchor_69_69"></a><a href="#Footnote_69_69" class="fnanchor">[69]</a> Tested in this way, the tax on
letters proved unsatisfactory. While in most other departments
of the revenue the preceding twenty years had been years
of expansion and progress&mdash;as might be anticipated during a
period of peace following great and exhausting wars&mdash;in the
case of the Post Office the period had been one of stagnation.</p>

<p>Attention had already been directed to this fact by Sir
Henry Parnell.<a name="FNanchor_70_70" id="FNanchor_70_70"></a><a href="#Footnote_70_70" class="fnanchor">[70]</a> Between the years 1815 and 1835 the
duty on stage-coaches had increased from &#163;218,000 to nearly
&#163;500,000 a year. During the same period the revenue of
the Post Office, both gross and net, had not increased at
all&mdash;in point of fact, it had slightly decreased. If it had
kept pace with the increase of population, the annual net
revenue would have increased by half a million. If it had<!-- Page 25 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_25" id="Page_25">[Pg 25]</a></span>
increased in the same proportion as the duty on stage-coaches,
the revenue of 1835 would have exceeded that
of 1815 by no less than &#163;2,000,000. These facts convinced
Sir Rowland Hill that a reduction of the rates of postage
was urgently necessary; and apart from financial considerations,
the moral and intellectual results which would follow
a facilitation of intercourse appealed powerfully to a reforming
Radical.<a name="FNanchor_71_71" id="FNanchor_71_71"></a><a href="#Footnote_71_71" class="fnanchor">[71]</a> Having arrived at the conviction that the Post Office
offered most scope for his zeal, he found no lack of material
to work upon. A Commission of Inquiry into the Revenue
Departments had reported on the Post Office in 1829. A
Commission of Inquiry on the Post Office had been sitting
for some years, and had made numerous voluminous reports.
Sir Rowland Hill set to work to make a careful study of the
information contained in these reports, and as the result of
this study evolved a complete plan for the reform and reorganization
of the whole Post Office system, a plan involving
the transformation both of the theory of Post Office finance,
and of the methods of practical working.<a name="FNanchor_72_72" id="FNanchor_72_72"></a><a href="#Footnote_72_72" class="fnanchor">[72]</a></p>

<p>His inquiries led him to examine the cost of the Post Office
service as a whole, and its relation to the work performed by the
Post Office in respect of individual letters, or, as he termed it,
"the natural cost of conveying a letter."<a name="FNanchor_73_73" id="FNanchor_73_73"></a><a href="#Footnote_73_73" class="fnanchor">[73]</a> The investigations<!-- Page 26 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_26" id="Page_26">[Pg 26]</a></span>
and calculations made in this connection elucidated a fact of
first importance, viz. that the cost of the conveyance of a
letter from one town to another was exceedingly small, being
on the average no more than nine-hundredths of a penny&mdash;in
the case of a mail from London to Edinburgh the cost of
conveyance was no more than one-thirty-sixth of a penny.
This fact was developed. It was shown that not only was
the cost for conveyance for the average of distance exceedingly
small, but that it did not vary with the distance. The variation
was rather in the inverse proportion to the number of
letters enclosed in a mail.<a name="FNanchor_74_74" id="FNanchor_74_74"></a><a href="#Footnote_74_74" class="fnanchor">[74]</a> Thus, while the average cost of
the conveyance of a letter from London to Edinburgh was one-thirty-sixth
of a penny, the cost of the conveyance of a letter
for a shorter distance was often greater, owing to the small
number of letters included in the mail. On these facts rests
the whole case for uniformity of rate irrespective of distance:<a name="FNanchor_75_75" id="FNanchor_75_75"></a><a href="#Footnote_75_75" class="fnanchor">[75]</a><!-- Page 27 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_27" id="Page_27">[Pg 27]</a></span>
and they are sufficient to demonstrate that the principle is
fundamentally sound.</p>

<p>The proposal for a uniform rate was the outstanding feature
of the plan, but there were others of importance. It was a
chief merit that the plan might be introduced without causing
any serious diminution of net revenue, and the object of the
further proposals was so to modify and simplify the working
methods of the service as to enable the increased traffic which
a low uniform rate would inevitably bring into the post to be
dealt with without a proportionate increase in working expenses.</p>

<p>A vast increase in the number of letters must occur if the
revenue was to be maintained, and this increase was confidently
anticipated. With the existing rates there was a
very large clandestine traffic in letters outside the Post Office,
and it was calculated that a low uniform rate would effect
the complete suppression of that traffic, and attract all letters
into the post. But in order to maintain the net revenue,
it was essential to simplify effectively the methods of working.
This simplification was to be secured by the introduction of
the system of prepayment, and the principle of charging by
weight.</p>

<p>Covers and sheets of paper bearing the revenue stamp already
impressed were to be sold at all post offices. The postage
label, which has become so characteristic a feature of post
office business throughout the civilized world, was proposed
as an expedient to meet a certain exceptional case. If any
person bringing a letter to the post should not be able to
write the address on the stamped cover in which the letter
was to be enclosed, Sir Rowland Hill suggested that "this
difficulty might be obviated by using a bit of paper just large
enough to bear the stamp, and covered at the back with a
glutinous wash, which the bringer might, by applying a little
moisture, attach to the back of the letter, so as to avoid the
necessity for redirecting it."<a name="FNanchor_76_76" id="FNanchor_76_76"></a><a href="#Footnote_76_76" class="fnanchor">[76]</a></p>

<p>Letters prepaid in either of these ways were to pass through
the post as franks,<a name="FNanchor_77_77" id="FNanchor_77_77"></a><a href="#Footnote_77_77" class="fnanchor">[77]</a> i.e. without change or record. By this
method a great reduction in the work of the Post Office<!-- Page 28 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_28" id="Page_28">[Pg 28]</a></span>
would be effected. Under the existing system it was necessary
to record and charge forward on the postmasters all
letters the postage of which was to be collected on delivery,
and these letters formed the vast majority. All such labour
would be dispensed with. The increase of the number of
letters was to be further encouraged by the provision of
additional facilities, such as the establishment of day mails
and increased frequency of deliveries in towns.<a name="FNanchor_78_78" id="FNanchor_78_78"></a><a href="#Footnote_78_78" class="fnanchor">[78]</a></p>

<p>It has sometimes been thought that Sir Rowland Hill's
theory included the proposition that the increase of the
number of letters varied in inverse proportion to the reduction
of rate effected, that is to say, that if the rate were
reduced by one-half, the number of letters posted would be
doubled; if the rate were reduced by two-thirds, the number
of letters posted would increase threefold.<a name="FNanchor_79_79" id="FNanchor_79_79"></a><a href="#Footnote_79_79" class="fnanchor">[79]</a> This is not the
case. His estimate was that with the reduction of postage
in the United Kingdom to the uniform rate of one penny,
i.e. an average reduction of seven-eighths (from about eightpence),
an immediate fourfold increase in the number of letters
might be anticipated. This estimate was framed with regard
to the circumstances existing in the United Kingdom at the
time, and there is no other rule applicable to the relation
between reduction of postage and resultant increase of postal
traffic than that it is relative to the particular circumstances
of time and place. Especially, it may be said, where postage
is already low, further reduction is hardly likely to result in
largely increased traffic.</p>

<p>In brief, Sir Rowland Hill calculated that by the adoption of
his proposals for the modification of methods of working, the<!-- Page 29 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_29" id="Page_29">[Pg 29]</a></span>
letter postage in the United Kingdom might be reduced to the
uniform rate of one penny irrespective of distance, without
causing loss to the net revenue of more than &#163;300,000 a year.</p>

<p>The pamphlet, <i>Post Office Reform: Its Importance and Practicability</i>,
in which the plan was embodied, was first issued
privately in January 1837 for circulation in political and official
circles, to which Sir Rowland Hill had access, partly through
the celebrity of his family on account of their school system,
but chiefly through his brother Matthew Davenport Hill, then a
member of Parliament. In February 1837 the author was invited
to give evidence before the Commissioners for Post Office Inquiry.<a name="FNanchor_80_80" id="FNanchor_80_80"></a><a href="#Footnote_80_80" class="fnanchor">[80]</a>
The proposals were not, however, viewed favourably by
the Government, and were resolutely opposed by the Postmaster-General
and many of the high authorities of the Post Office.<a name="FNanchor_81_81" id="FNanchor_81_81"></a><a href="#Footnote_81_81" class="fnanchor">[81]</a></p>

<p>Finding it impossible to impress the official mind, Sir
Rowland Hill issued the pamphlet to the public,<a name="FNanchor_82_82" id="FNanchor_82_82"></a><a href="#Footnote_82_82" class="fnanchor">[82]</a> and it met
with immediate, widespread, and influential support. The
Press, Chambers of Commerce, and other bodies actively supported
propaganda for the adoption of the scheme.<a name="FNanchor_83_83" id="FNanchor_83_83"></a><a href="#Footnote_83_83" class="fnanchor">[83]</a> Public
meetings in support of it were held in all parts of the country,
and numerous petitions in its favour were submitted to
Parliament. So strong was the public feeling that in November
1837 the Government were constrained to appoint a Select
Committee of the House of Commons for the express purpose<!-- Page 30 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_30" id="Page_30">[Pg 30]</a></span>
of considering Sir Rowland Hill's proposals. This Committee
took a vast amount of evidence. The contentions of Sir
Rowland Hill were in the main sustained by this evidence, and
the Committee recommended (but only by the casting vote of
its chairman) the adoption of a uniform rate. They were not,
however, satisfied that the net revenue would be maintained
if the uniform rate were made as low as one penny, and they
therefore recommended the rate of twopence.<a name="FNanchor_84_84" id="FNanchor_84_84"></a><a href="#Footnote_84_84" class="fnanchor">[84]</a> The Committee
reported in August, 1838, but no immediate steps were
taken by the Government to carry out their recommendations.
The condition of the national finances was not so healthy as
in 1837, when the proposals were first broached, and they did
not improve in the following years.<a name="FNanchor_85_85" id="FNanchor_85_85"></a><a href="#Footnote_85_85" class="fnanchor">[85]</a> The doubt as to the
financial result of the scheme therefore made its early adoption
in the normal course unlikely. The reform was, however,
warmly taken up by the Radicals,<a name="FNanchor_86_86" id="FNanchor_86_86"></a><a href="#Footnote_86_86" class="fnanchor">[86]</a> and in 1839 party exigencies
enabled them to insist on the introduction of uniform penny
postage as the price of their support in Parliament.<a name="FNanchor_87_87" id="FNanchor_87_87"></a><a href="#Footnote_87_87" class="fnanchor">[87]</a></p>

<p>On the 10th January 1840, therefore, the reform was
introduced.<a name="FNanchor_88_88" id="FNanchor_88_88"></a><a href="#Footnote_88_88" class="fnanchor">[88]</a> The new rate was one penny for each of the
first two half ounces, and twopence for each additional<!-- Page 31 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_31" id="Page_31">[Pg 31]</a></span>
ounce. The results were disappointing financially. The
reduction in net revenue in the first year was one million
pounds sterling (from &#163;1,500,000 to &#163;500,000), instead of
&#163;300,000 as forecasted. The number of letters, also, was
doubled only, instead of quadrupled (in 1839, 82 millions, in
1840, 169 millions). But the numbers continued to increase
rapidly, in agreeable contrast to the stagnation under the
old system. By 1847 they had quadrupled; by 1860 they
had reached 564 millions; and the expansion has since been
continuous.<a name="FNanchor_89_89" id="FNanchor_89_89"></a><a href="#Footnote_89_89" class="fnanchor">[89]</a> The gross revenue of 1839 was equalled in 1850,
and the net revenue of 1839 was reached in 1863. It has
since gone on increasing. The plan was not an immediate
financial success: neither was it a complete financial failure,
as sometimes alleged.<a name="FNanchor_90_90" id="FNanchor_90_90"></a><a href="#Footnote_90_90" class="fnanchor">[90]</a> The recovery of revenue was slow,
but it was constant; and ultimately the plan has abundantly
justified itself as a financial arrangement.</p>

<p>The changes in the British letter rates since 1840 have not
been numerous or fundamental. The limit of weight for
letters, viz. 16 ounces, fixed in 1840, was abolished in 1847.
In 1865 the progression of weight and charge above one ounce
was made a penny the half-ounce. In 1871 the rates were
reduced. Letters up to 1 ounce in weight became transmissible
at the penny rate; for the second ounce, and for
every succeeding 2 ounces up to 12 ounces, the rate was<!-- Page 32 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_32" id="Page_32">[Pg 32]</a></span>
made &#189;d.; and for letters weighing more than 12 ounces, 1d.
the ounce, including the first ounce. In 1885 the rate of
&#189;d. for every 2 ounces after the second ounce was continued
without limit; and in 1897, on the occasion of the Diamond
Jubilee of Queen Victoria, a further reduction of the rate
for heavier letters was made. The scale of 1d. for the first
4 ounces, and &#189;d. for each succeeding 2 ounces, was then
introduced. This method of effecting a reduction was dictated
largely by a desire to simplify the rates of postage. It admitted
of the abolition of the Sample Post, and of the Book
Post (except as regards packets not exceeding 2 ounces in
weight), and thus removed a source of confusion and loss of
time both to the staff and the public.</p>

<p>In recent years postal traffic of all kinds has increased rapidly.
The growth in numbers is shown by the following table:&mdash;</p>


<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Table of the increase in postal traffic between 1880 and 1914.">
<tr><th align="center">Year.</th><th align="center" colspan="2">Total number of Postal <br />Packets dealt with in the <br />United Kingdom.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1880-1</td><td align="right">1,682,000,000</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1890-1</td><td align="right">2,623,988,000</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1900-1</td><td align="right">3,723,817,000</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1905-6</td><td align="right">4,686,182,000</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1910-11</td><td align="right">5,281,102,000</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1913-14</td><td align="right">5,920,821,000</td><td align="left"><a name="FNanchor_91_91" id="FNanchor_91_91"></a><a href="#Footnote_91_91" class="fnanchor">[91]</a></td></tr>
</table></div>

<p>The ordinary letter, however, remains the characteristic of
Post Office business and the sheet-anchor of postal finance.
The vast proportion in point of numbers still consists of
packets of small weight.<a name="FNanchor_92_92" id="FNanchor_92_92"></a><a href="#Footnote_92_92" class="fnanchor">[92]</a> In 1913-14, of a total traffic of<!-- Page 33 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_33" id="Page_33">[Pg 33]</a></span>
some six thousand million packets (including parcels), nearly
three thousand five hundred millions passed at the letter rate
of postage (less than 14 per cent. of which exceeded 1 ounce
in weight), one thousand millions at the postcard rate,
another thousand millions at the &#189;d. packet rate (none exceeding
2 ounces in weight). The average weight of the two
hundred million newspapers was just over 4 ounces, and of the
hundred and thirty million parcels, some 2 to 3 pounds. Of
the total traffic (including parcels), more than four thousand
millions, consisting in general of ordinary letters and postcards,
were under 1 ounce in weight; and of the remaining two
thousand millions (including parcels) only some five hundred
millions exceeded 4 ounces in weight.</p>

<p>The Post Office, in addition to its ordinary function of
providing for the transmission of letters and packets, undertakes
a number of subsidiary services. There are, of course, the
telegraphs and telephones, the money order, postal order, and
Savings Bank business, which have for many years been an
integral part of the business of the Post Office. In recent
years the Post Office has also undertaken the issue of
certain local taxation licenses, and the payment of Old Age
Pensions and Army Pensions. Now it has undertaken the
sale of War Loan Stock, Exchequer Bonds, and War
Savings Certificates. Apart from the telegraphs, telephones,
and Savings Bank, however, these services form only a small
part of the work of the Post Office. While the total cost of
the ordinary postal services (i.e. excluding telegraphs, telephones,
and Savings Bank) was in 1913-14 some &#163;17,000,000,
the cost of the subsidiary services was only about a million.</p>

<p>The staff of officers has increased as follows:&mdash;</p>

<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Table of the increase of Post Office staff numbers between 1880 and 1914.">
<tr><th align="center">Year.</th><th align="center">Male.</th><th align="center">Female.</th><th align="center">Total.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1880-1</td><td align="center">&mdash;</td><td align="center">&mdash;</td><td align="right">80,000</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1890-1</td><td align="right">93,046</td><td align="right">24,943</td><td align="right">117,989</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1900-1</td><td align="right">137,807</td><td align="right">35,377</td><td align="right">173,184</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1905-6</td><td align="right">154,351</td><td align="right">41,081</td><td align="right">195,432</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1910-11</td><td align="right">166,073</td><td align="right">46,741</td><td align="right">212,814</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1913-14</td><td align="right">188,794</td><td align="right">60,659</td><td align="right">249,453</td><td align="left"><a name="FNanchor_93_93" id="FNanchor_93_93"></a><a href="#Footnote_93_93" class="fnanchor">[93]</a></td></tr>
</table></div>

<p><!-- Page 34 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_34" id="Page_34">[Pg 34]</a></span></p>

<p>Concurrently with the increase of the number of officers,
the rate of wages has been revised on several occasions, as
the result of the recommendations of Parliamentary and other
Committees appointed to consider the question of Post Office
wages. The cost of the increases of wages which have been
granted as the result of these revisions, calculated on the
basis of the staff at the dates of the respective revisions,
without allowance for subsequent growth of force, is some
&#163;3,674,950 per annum.<a name="FNanchor_94_94" id="FNanchor_94_94"></a><a href="#Footnote_94_94" class="fnanchor">[94]</a> The increase of the number of
officers has, of course, increased the ultimate cost of each
successive improvement in pay and conditions of service.</p>

<p>The increased wages of the staff have naturally counterbalanced
to some extent the economies resulting from the
large increase of business. Since the first of these revisions,
the Fawcett of 1881-2, the wages of the staff have absorbed
a larger percentage of the total revenue of the postal services,<a name="FNanchor_95_95" id="FNanchor_95_95"></a><a href="#Footnote_95_95" class="fnanchor">[95]</a>
and the cost for staff per packet handled has increased from<!-- Page 35 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_35" id="Page_35">[Pg 35]</a></span>
.288d. in 1880-1 to .329d. in 1890-1, and .418d. in 1913-14.<a name="FNanchor_96_96" id="FNanchor_96_96"></a><a href="#Footnote_96_96" class="fnanchor">[96]</a>
During the same period the cost of conveyance of postal
packets has decreased from .131d. per packet other than a
parcel in 1880-1, to .119d. in 1890-1, and .080d. in 1913-14.<a name="FNanchor_97_97" id="FNanchor_97_97"></a><a href="#Footnote_97_97" class="fnanchor">[97]</a>
The total cost of dealing with a postal packet other than a
parcel has in recent years shown a small decrease. The cost
in 1913-14 has been estimated at .520d.<a name="FNanchor_98_98" id="FNanchor_98_98"></a><a href="#Footnote_98_98" class="fnanchor">[98]</a></p>

<p>The gross revenue of the postal services, i.e. excluding
telegraphs and telephones, has increased from &#163;7,130,819 in
1880-1 to &#163;9,851,078 in 1890-1, and &#163;21,928,311 in 1913-14.
The net revenue from postal services has increased from
&#163;2,720,784 in 1880-1 to &#163;3,163,989 in 1890-1, and &#163;6,642,067
in 1913-14. The expansion of net revenue has not kept pace
with the increase in the total number of packets passing
by post. Since 1880 the total numbers have increased some
3&frac12;-fold, and the net revenue some 2&frac12;-fold.<a name="FNanchor_99_99" id="FNanchor_99_99"></a><a href="#Footnote_99_99" class="fnanchor">[99]</a> The relation<!-- Page 36 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_36" id="Page_36">[Pg 36]</a></span>
between the gross revenue and the total expenditure on the
postal services, which in recent years has not shown any large
variation, fluctuates in the neighbourhood of 70 per cent.<a name="FNanchor_100_100" id="FNanchor_100_100"></a><a href="#Footnote_100_100" class="fnanchor">[100]</a></p>

<div class="blockquot"><p><span class="smcap">Note.</span>&mdash;On the 1st November 1915, in order to secure increased revenue for
war purposes, the inland letter rate was increased to the following:&mdash;</p></div>


<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="New inland letter rate introduced 1st November 1915.">
<tr><td align="left">For packets not exceeding 1 ounce in weight</td><td align="right">1d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">For packets between 1 ounce and 2 ounces</td><td align="right">2d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">For every succeeding 2 ounces</td><td align="right">&frac12;d.</td></tr>
</table></div>

<div class="blockquot"><p>Under the existing abnormal circumstances it is difficult to form a satisfactory
estimate of the result of this increase. Numerous contrary forces are in operation.
The growth of the Army and the dislocation of private business resulting from
the war have had important effects on the number of letters posted. Large
numbers of letters are exchanged with men in the Army, but, on the other hand,
all letters from troops on active service pass free of postage. It has been
estimated that in the first five months the new rates yielded an increased
revenue of nearly half a million.&mdash;See Postmaster-General's statement, 3rd July
1916 (<i>Parl. Debates (Commons</i>), vol. lxxxiii. cols. 1231-2).</p></div>

<hr />
<p>
<!-- Page 37 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_37" id="Page_37">[Pg 37]</a></span></p>


<h3>LETTER POST IN CANADA</h3>

<p>When Canada came into British hands after the capture
of Quebec, no postal arrangements existed in the province.
The population numbered only some 60,000, excluding the
Indians, and with so small a number spread over so vast a
territory it was not to be expected that any Post Office
establishment of the ordinary type could be maintained.<a name="FNanchor_101_101" id="FNanchor_101_101"></a><a href="#Footnote_101_101" class="fnanchor">[101]</a>
Very soon, however, the English merchants interested in
the Canadian trade urged upon the British Government the
necessity for a regular service from New York to Quebec,
and in this they were supported by the Governor of the
province. The Government instructed the Deputy Postmasters-General
in America to take steps for the establishment
of the post, and they accordingly proceeded to Quebec. There
they met a young Scotsman, Hugh Finlay, who offered to
conduct a regular post between Quebec and Montreal, undertaking
all risks, for a commission of 20 per cent, on all
revenue collected on the post,<a name="FNanchor_102_102" id="FNanchor_102_102"></a><a href="#Footnote_102_102" class="fnanchor">[102]</a> and, in addition, a monopoly of
licensing persons to provide horses and conveyances for the
use of travellers&mdash;the old monopoly which had existed for so
long in England as a source of emolument to the postmasters.
Finlay contracted for the conveyance of the mail with a
number of men, to whom he made over the exclusive right
of furnishing travellers on the route. In addition to this
privilege, these men, who were styled <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">ma&#238;tres de poste</i>,
were remunerated by payment at the rate of 6d. a league
(2d. a mile) for providing horses and carriages for the couriers.
Between Quebec and Montreal, a distance of 180 miles, there<!-- Page 38 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_38" id="Page_38">[Pg 38]</a></span>
were twenty-seven <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">ma&#238;tres de poste</i> and two post offices, viz.,
Three Rivers and Berthier. On the whole route, which was
not of the easiest, there was not a single inn; there were
six ferries to cross, that at Three Rivers being three miles
wide, and one near Montreal nearly three-quarters of a
mile. There was a service twice a week in each direction,
and the journey occupied about forty hours, the courier who
left Quebec at five o'clock on Monday afternoon arriving
at Montreal on Wednesday morning, and the courier leaving
Montreal on Thursday evening reaching Quebec on Saturday
morning.</p>

<p>The statutory authority for the establishment of posts in
Canada, as in other parts of North America, was section 4
of the Act of the 9th of Anne. This Act, however, failed
to prescribe for North America rates of postage for letters
passing greater distances than 100 miles. Hence, for the post
from Quebec to Montreal no legal rate was ascertainable. The
rate actually charged was 8d. for a single letter, and so in
proportion for double, treble, and ounce letters, which was
not an excessive charge, seeing that the legal charge for
distances up to 100 miles was 6d. for a single letter. It
proved sufficient, however; the whole scheme was completely
successful and greatly appreciated by the colonists. To link
this local post with the service from England, the Postmasters-General
at New York arranged a connecting post to run
monthly in connection with the arrival and departure of the
English packets. They realized that the number of letters
likely to be carried by such a post would be small and would
not yield a revenue nearly equal to the expenses, the more
so as, in any case, a comparatively high rate of postage would
be payable on account of the great distance, and in recommending
its establishment, they suggested moderate rates of charge.<a name="FNanchor_103_103" id="FNanchor_103_103"></a><a href="#Footnote_103_103" class="fnanchor">[103]</a></p>

<p>The Act of 1765 provided reduced rates of postage for North
America. "The vast accession of territory gained by the late
Treaty of Peace," and the establishment of new posts in
America, for which rates of postage could not be ascertained<!-- Page 39 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_39" id="Page_39">[Pg 39]</a></span>
under the existing law,<a name="FNanchor_104_104" id="FNanchor_104_104"></a><a href="#Footnote_104_104" class="fnanchor">[104]</a> made a new Act necessary, and the
rates prescribed in that Act were fixed under the enlightened
principle that moderate rates might yield increased revenue.<a name="FNanchor_105_105" id="FNanchor_105_105"></a><a href="#Footnote_105_105" class="fnanchor">[105]</a>
The rate which would apply to Canada, for the greatest
distances, was fixed at 8d. for a single letter for not more
than 200 miles, and 2d. for each 100 miles beyond 200 miles&mdash;double
letters double rates, treble letters treble rates, ounce
letter four times the single rate, in the usual way.</p>

<p>In January 1774 Finlay was appointed joint "Deputy-General
for the Northern District of America" in the room
of Dr. Franklin. He was allowed to retain, for the time
being, the benefits of the Post Office at Quebec, which, in
the words of the letter of appointment, he had been "so
instrumental in bringing to a degree of perfection."<a name="FNanchor_106_106" id="FNanchor_106_106"></a><a href="#Footnote_106_106" class="fnanchor">[106]</a> The
disturbances of 1775 in the coast colonies soon affected the
post to Canada. In September of that year, the prospect
of getting mails through from Canada to New York was
so slight that Finlay was anticipating the suspension of
all communication with the rest of the world during the
whole of the winter, unless letters could be conveyed to
Halifax. The couriers were frequently held up by armed
men and robbed, and by November matters had become so
serious that all postal arrangements in the province were
stayed. Quebec was besieged throughout the winter and
spring. After its relief Finlay tried to set up the posts
again, but unsuccessfully, as the Governor refused to re-establish
the monopoly of the <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">ma&#238;tres de poste</i>, on the
ground that travellers in Canada were very well accommodated
in horses and conveyances and did not desire its
re-establishment. Without it Finlay was unable to maintain
a service, and no posts existed during the remaining
period of the war.</p>

<p>After peace had been restored, Finlay represented the
matter so strongly that the monopoly was re-established.
The posts were again set up, and Finlay was appointed
Deputy Postmaster-General of Canada, Nova Scotia, and<!-- Page 40 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_40" id="Page_40">[Pg 40]</a></span>
New Brunswick. The mails for Canada were still sent by
way of New York, as before the war, but for military reasons
it was important that a mail route should be established from
Halifax, the military headquarters, to run altogether within
British territory. In 1787 a fortnightly post (monthly in
winter) was accordingly established between Quebec and
Halifax.<a name="FNanchor_107_107" id="FNanchor_107_107"></a><a href="#Footnote_107_107" class="fnanchor">[107]</a> The mail went by River du Loup, near the
Grand Portage, where the courier from Quebec handed over
his mail to the courier from Fredericton; by the Madawaska
to the Grand Falls; thence by boat to Fredericton.
A fresh courier went by boat from Fredericton to the mouth
of the St. John's River. Here the mail was transferred to
a sloop of about 34 tons burthen for conveyance across
the Bay of Fundy to Digby, whence the route lay by
Annapolis. The total distance from Quebec to Halifax was
633 miles, and the time required for the trip varied from
twenty-one to thirty-one days.</p>

<p>A mail route from Montreal into Upper Canada was also
established, but this was rather a military post, intended to
serve the military stations and frontier settlements. The
mail was despatched only once a year and was, in consequence,
known as the "yearly express." The route followed
was by the St. Lawrence from Montreal to Matilda,
Augusta, and Kingston; across Lake Ontario to Niagara;
thence to Detroit Fort, at the base of Lake St. Clair, and
across Lake Huron to Michilimackinac, at the head of Lakes
Huron and Michigan. After continuing some six years this
post was curtailed and went no farther than Niagara.<a name="FNanchor_108_108" id="FNanchor_108_108"></a><a href="#Footnote_108_108" class="fnanchor">[108]</a></p>

<p>In 1800 Finlay was succeeded in the deputy ship by John
Heriot. The population had now increased to 450,000, but
there were only twenty post offices in the whole of the five
provinces. Heriot's patent gave him authority to establish
new routes and offices, but, in accordance with the general
policy, only when in his opinion their establishment would
be likely to benefit revenue. The rates at this time were,
of course, nominally based on the Act of the 5th George III,
but as the routes had never been properly measured, the
distances on which the rates were actually based were<!-- Page 41 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_41" id="Page_41">[Pg 41]</a></span>
largely a matter of conjecture. The posts were said, however,
to have paid their way and even to have yielded a
surplus revenue, which was transmitted to England.<a name="FNanchor_109_109" id="FNanchor_109_109"></a><a href="#Footnote_109_109" class="fnanchor">[109]</a></p>

<p>The administration of the posts rested ultimately with the
Postmasters-General in London. The service could be extended
only by their authority, and the colonists found that the
Deputy in the colonies, being bound by his instructions from
the Postmasters-General, was unable to extend and improve
the service in the manner which they themselves thought
desirable. A large number of immigrants entered the
provinces, especially Upper Canada, during this period, and
settlements were springing up in remote districts far away
from the post routes. Heriot was admonished from London
that in considering the provision of new services he must
look to the revenue to be anticipated as well as to the convenience
of the public, and to adopt no scheme involving
sacrifice of revenue. His instructions forbade the opening
of any post office or post route unless the anticipated revenue
was sufficient at least to pay the postmaster and courier.
He found that these restrictions prevented him from providing
a service in any degree adequate to the demands of the settlers,
or indeed adequate to their real needs. It was essential that
the settlers in the remote districts should be kept in touch
with civilization. They could not be allowed to pass beyond
the reach of the Government. They must be kept in contact
with the means provided for the administration of the law.<!-- Page 42 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_42" id="Page_42">[Pg 42]</a></span>
For these reasons it was essential to provide post accommodation,
although in the nature of the case it could not
be expected that a revenue sufficient to cover the cost would
be obtained. All these considerations were pressed on the
Deputy, and he was so far persuaded as sometimes, in response
to urgent local representations, to depart from his
specific instructions. But such cases usually led to a
reprimand. The natural result was that the province was
driven itself to undertake by grants from the public funds
the provision of many local services which it deemed essential.</p>

<p>Thus grew up the anomalous system under which the
colonies made large grants in aid of the service, but were
unable to exercise any substantial control over its administration.
The more important routes were self-supporting and
were controlled entirely from England. In order to obtain
extensions of the service the colonists, through the Governor,
requested the establishment of certain services, undertaking
that, if the revenue derived from these services should prove
insufficient to meet the expenditure, the balance should be
made up by the colony. A regular post was established in
1801 between Quebec and York (Toronto) under a guarantee
of this kind. The colonists naturally wished to have some
controlling voice in the administration; but the Deputy, holding
office under the Imperial authorities, was not bound to concede
to them any rights over the administration of the service, however
great sums they might pay towards its maintenance&mdash;a
situation which was sure to lead to difficulties. Whether or
not serious trouble occurred depended in large degree on the
character of the Deputy.<a name="FNanchor_110_110" id="FNanchor_110_110"></a><a href="#Footnote_110_110" class="fnanchor">[110]</a> In later years there was considerable
friction and much irritation on the part of the colonists.</p>

<p>In Nova Scotia the system of grants in aid was developed
to an even greater extent than in Upper Canada. When
Sir George Provost became Governor in 1808, there were
only five post offices in Nova Scotia&mdash;Halifax, Windsor,
Horton, Annapolis, and Digby&mdash;and they were all on the
line of the Quebec post. Sir George was anxious for an
extension of the posts on military rather than general
grounds, and he asked the postmaster of Halifax, John<!-- Page 43 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_43" id="Page_43">[Pg 43]</a></span>
Howe, to establish several new routes. Howe was inclined
to favour the projected posts, but Heriot realized that they
could not be expected to yield a revenue equal to their
cost, and he informed the Governor that his instructions
from England prevented compliance with the request. Sir
George Provost thereupon induced the Legislature to
appropriate a sufficient sum for the establishment of the
posts. The Governors of New Brunswick and Prince
Edward Island followed this example, with the result that
a large part of the Post Office establishment in these
provinces was outside the jurisdiction of the Imperial
authorities.</p>

<p>This development is noteworthy. It has always been
found in Canada that for a large part of the country the
circumstances are such that a postal service adequate to
the necessities of the inhabitants cannot be self-supporting,
but the Legislature has never hesitated to make grants from
general taxation in order to provide means of communication.
In the early days the question of post office communication
was intimately bound up with the question of general means
of communication, and was usually treated in connection
with the making or maintenance of roads. For a long
period the posts in Canada were maintained not solely for
the transmission of letters, but to a great extent on account
of collateral advantages. They were largely military in
character, and were identified with the military routes.<a name="FNanchor_111_111" id="FNanchor_111_111"></a><a href="#Footnote_111_111" class="fnanchor">[111]</a></p>

<p>In 1816 Daniel Sutherland was appointed Deputy Postmaster-General
for Canada, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick.
Under his administration the development of the service
was pushed forward, and so far as was found consistent
with the interests of revenue, new offices and routes were
established. But in 1820 there were still no more than
forty-nine post offices in the whole of British North America,
distributed thus: in Lower Canada twenty offices, in Upper<!-- Page 44 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_44" id="Page_44">[Pg 44]</a></span>
Canada nineteen, in Nova Scotia six, in New Brunswick
three, and in Prince Edward Island one. The progress
was from this time somewhat more rapid. By 1824 the
number of offices in the Canadas alone had risen to sixty-nine,
and during the next ten or fifteen years the growth,
both of Post Office accommodation and of Post Office revenue,
was more rapid than the growth of population.</p>

<p>The settlers were not, however, completely satisfied. Their
complaints were to some extent laid against the administration
of the office&mdash;they claimed, for example, that gross overcharges
of postage were being made, through incorrect computation
of the distances on the post roads&mdash;but they became more
and more dissatisfied that the control of the whole of the
service and its officers should rest with the Postmaster-General
in England. The question was, of course, to a large
extent political, and one only among the several general
grievances of the colonists at this period, which caused so
much anxiety to the Home authorities.</p>

<p>As early as 1819 a movement began in Upper Canada to
obtain the transference of the administration to the provincial
authorities. A Committee of the House of Assembly considered
the abuses of the existing Post Office system, and on presentation
of their report, in March 1820, the House passed a
resolution condemning the administration of the service. The
question continued to receive a good deal of attention. The chief
complaint of the colonists was that a net revenue was year
by year transmitted to London. There is no doubt that a
balance was paid over to the Imperial administration year
by year, but it is questionable whether any of this balance
was a net revenue on the local service.<a name="FNanchor_112_112" id="FNanchor_112_112"></a><a href="#Footnote_112_112" class="fnanchor">[112]</a> The colonists chose
so to regard it. They advanced the contention that the legal
right of the Imperial Government to levy postage rates
in the colonies at all was doubtful, because postage was a
tax; and the raising of money by authorities outside the
colonies was a direct infringement of their own constitution,
which provides that "no tax shall be levied on the people
of this country except such as shall be appropriated for the
public use and accounted for by the Legislature,"<a name="FNanchor_113_113" id="FNanchor_113_113"></a><a href="#Footnote_113_113" class="fnanchor">[113]</a> and of
the Declaratory Act, in which Great Britain disclaimed the<!-- Page 45 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_45" id="Page_45">[Pg 45]</a></span>
right to impose upon a colony any duty, tax, or assessment,
except where necessary for the regulation of commerce.<a name="FNanchor_114_114" id="FNanchor_114_114"></a><a href="#Footnote_114_114" class="fnanchor">[114]</a> The
Government were advised by the Law Officers that it would
not be wise to contest the point, and proceeded to consider
a measure for placing the establishment on a more satisfactory
basis.</p>

<p>If the Home Government could have agreed to hand over
the entire administration of the office in British North
America to the local Legislatures, there would have been
an end of the matter. But such a course would have left
the interior provinces at the mercy of those on the seaboard
as to the conveyance across those colonies of the mails
to and from England. Although there was no desire to
continue the appropriation to the Imperial revenue of any
surplus which might arise on the service in North America,
it was felt to be highly desirable that the Imperial Government
should retain control over the administration of the office,
particularly in the matter of fixing the rates of postage, since
by that means excessive charges for transit across other
provinces would be prevented. But in controlling the
administration from London there was the difficulty that any
alteration of the rates of postage by Act of the British
Parliament might be an infringement of the rights of the
colonists under the Declaratory Act of 1778. Accordingly,
all intention of direct legislation by the British Parliament
was abandoned, and in 1834 an Act was passed,<a name="FNanchor_115_115" id="FNanchor_115_115"></a><a href="#Footnote_115_115" class="fnanchor">[115]</a> repealing the
Act of the 5th George III, on which the whole Post Office
establishment of North America rested, conditionally on the
passing by the Legislatures of all the provinces of a Bill for
the regulation of the colonial Post Office service, which had
been prepared in London. This Bill provided that the
ultimate control of the whole service in British North
America should remain in the hands of the Postmaster-General
in London, but that the rates of postage should be
fixed by the local Legislatures, and any surplus of revenue
over expenditure should be divided between the provinces.</p>

<p>Nova Scotia was prepared to accept the Bill, but only with
modifications which would have prevented its adoption as the
basis of a general service throughout the five provinces. New<!-- Page 46 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_46" id="Page_46">[Pg 46]</a></span>
Brunswick and both Upper and Lower Canada rejected the
Bill. The Assembly of Lower Canada substituted a Bill of
its own.<a name="FNanchor_116_116" id="FNanchor_116_116"></a><a href="#Footnote_116_116" class="fnanchor">[116]</a> The Legislative Council were indisposed to accept
the substituted Bill,<a name="FNanchor_117_117" id="FNanchor_117_117"></a><a href="#Footnote_117_117" class="fnanchor">[117]</a> and in March 1836 adopted an Address
to his Majesty, explaining that in their view it would be
exceedingly difficult, if not impracticable, to secure the
co-operation between the separate Post Office establishments
of the several provinces essential for the attainment of the
purpose of the original measure, and they pointed for illustration
to the United States, a country where, notwithstanding
a keen regard for State rights, the whole control and management
of the Post Office department had been delegated to the
Federal Government. Since the Post Office establishment
was a most effective means for strengthening the ties
connecting the several provinces, as well as an essential aid
and convenience of commerce, they deemed the best course
to be the retention by the Imperial Parliament of the exclusive
power of legislating for the control and management of the
Post Office in all parts of the Empire. In March of the
following year, there being still no prospect of the adoption
of the Bill by the provinces, the House of Assembly and
Legislative Council of Upper Canada adopted a joint Address
to his Majesty, substantially identical with that adopted a
year earlier by the Legislative Council of Lower Canada. It
was clear that little progress was to be anticipated.<a name="FNanchor_118_118" id="FNanchor_118_118"></a><a href="#Footnote_118_118" class="fnanchor">[118]</a><!-- Page 47 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_47" id="Page_47">[Pg 47]</a></span></p>

<p>In 1840 a Commission was appointed. Its attention was
directed more especially to the faulty administration of the
office and the excessive rates of postage. To remedy the
former, and to make the administration more amenable to
local control, they suggested placing the Deputy Postmaster-General
under the control of the Governor-General in all
matters which did not conflict with the authority of the
Postmaster-General in England. As to postage, they were
satisfied that the rates at that time in operation were too high.
They considered that the rates should be such as would yield
a revenue sufficient to meet the expenses of the department,
and no more; and in their view, if the revenue improved after
the establishment of such rates, which there should be no
difficulty in calculating, the proper course would be either to
grant further facilities or further to reduce the rates. There
should not in any case be a net revenue of any magnitude.
The Commissioners themselves made an estimate of the rate
which should fulfil the requirements they had detailed. In so
doing they proceeded on much the same lines as Sir Rowland
Hill in his pamphlet <i>Post Office Reform: Its Importance and
Practicability</i>. They had no difficulty in answering the demand
for penny postage in British North America, a demand based
on its successful inauguration in England. The circumstances
in the two countries were not comparable. England, small
and densely populated, the first industrial and commercial
nation of the world, could not in such a matter be compared
with a country of vast extent, sparsely peopled and almost
entirely agricultural. While Sir Rowland Hill had been able
to show that in the case of letters conveyed for comparatively
long distances in England the actual cost of carriage was only
one thirty-sixth part of a penny, the Commissioners found
that in British North America the actual average cost of
conveyance was no less than 3d., and the actual average total
cost of dealing with letters no less than 5&#189;d. Uniformity of
rate at a penny, which had been justified in England on<!-- Page 48 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_48" id="Page_48">[Pg 48]</a></span>
existing facts of the service, could therefore find no similar
justification in North America.</p>

<p>There could, however, be no doubt that with a reduction
of the rate, which then averaged 8&#189;d. a letter, the number of
letters would be very greatly increased and the cost per
letter consequently reduced. The public were in the habit
of making use of every available means other than the post
for forwarding their letters. Steamboats which carried a
mail would carry outside the mail many times the number
of letters that were enclosed in the mail. Teamsters, stage
drivers, and ordinary travellers all carried large numbers of
letters, and in cases where no such opportunity offered,
persons had been known to enclose the letter in a small
package, which could be sent as freight at less charge than
the rate of postage on the single letter. If, therefore, all
these letters, and the many additional letters which would be
written if transmission were cheap and easy, were sent in
the mails, the cost of the service would not be by any means
proportionately increased, and the average cost per letter
would be very greatly reduced. It would still, however, have
been considerably more than a penny. Their conclusions were
less satisfactory in regard to the rates actually recommended.
They proposed a graduation according to distance of no less
than five stages, starting with as short a distance as 30 miles.
For this the rate was 2d., and the scale rose to 1s. for distances
over 300 miles. The only virtues of the rates were that they
were lower than those in operation in the United States and
were to be charged by weight.<a name="FNanchor_119_119" id="FNanchor_119_119"></a><a href="#Footnote_119_119" class="fnanchor">[119]</a></p>

<p>The chief recommendations of this report were carried
out under the authority of the Colonial Office. The weight
basis for determining rates of postage was adopted, and the
Deputy Postmaster-General's authority was restricted. His
privilege of sending newspapers free of postage was also taken
away, and in compensation he was given a salary of &#163;2,500
a year&mdash;personal to himself, and high on account of his long
enjoyment of the lucrative newspaper privilege. That for
his successor was fixed at &#163;1,500 a year. The agitation in
the provinces in regard to the Post Office continued during<!-- Page 49 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_49" id="Page_49">[Pg 49]</a></span>
the succeeding years, but it was less vehement and concerned
itself more with the question of rates than with questions of
administration.</p>

<p>In 1842 a member of the headquarters staff of the British
office (Mr. W. J. Page) was commissioned to examine and
reorganize the service in the Maritime Provinces, with the
object more especially of introducing such measures of reform
as should bring the expenditures of the department in those
provinces within the revenue. His reports throw a flood
of light on the state and methods of the service.<a name="FNanchor_120_120" id="FNanchor_120_120"></a><a href="#Footnote_120_120" class="fnanchor">[120]</a> He
found extraordinary anomalies in the methods of charging
postage, in the methods of remunerating the Deputy-Postmasters,
the couriers, and the Way Office keepers, and in
the relations subsisting between the Post Office and the
local Legislatures. The financial arrangements of the office
were in a condition which can only be described as chaotic.
Postage was, of course, chargeable on the total journey of
the letter. But in Nova Scotia letters were charged with
a new rate at each office through which they passed, and
postage became an excessive charge on all letters which
passed through two or three offices. Deputy-Postmasters
were paid a percentage, usually 20 per cent., on the amount
of postage collected by them, but their chief remuneration in
many cases arose from the right which they exercised of
franking all their private and business correspondence, a
consideration which they had principally, if not exclusively,
in view in taking up their appointments. Many of the
deputies were lawyers or other professional men. The
privilege was nominally subject to the limitation of four single
letters, or two double letters, or one packet of an ounce by
each mail; but this limitation was very generally disregarded.
To such an extent was this the case that one-half of many
mails consisted of free letters.</p>

<p>Couriers received fixed wages, which were either paid
by the Deputy Postmaster-General out of the general funds
of the department, or from grants in aid, given by the Legislature
specifically for the support of the respective routes.
Way Office keepers received no remuneration from the
department: in many instances the existence of the Way<!-- Page 50 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_50" id="Page_50">[Pg 50]</a></span>
Offices was unknown at Halifax. This was explained in
great part by the manner in which such offices were usually
established. A courier travelling a particular line of road
received from the despatching postmaster a number of "way
letters," or letters for persons living on or near his route.
Partly for his own convenience, and partly for the accommodation
of the persons addressed, the courier would leave packets
of the letters at some house on the route, and the occupant
would collect the postage on behalf of the courier. In course
of time the courier induced the postmaster to make up the
letters for this particular place separately, and to open a private
account with the householder, who thus became an agent for
the postmaster, and the house became a Way Office. The
keepers of these Way Offices usually charged a fee of 2d. on
each letter received or sent. The Post Office was not in any
way concerned in the transactions, except that in some cases,
where it was not always possible for the Way Office keeper to
obtain his fee in advance, the practice grew up, with the co-operation
of the Deputy-Postmaster, of charging forward the
unpaid Way Office keeper's fee as unpaid forward "postage."
Some of the Way Office keepers also claimed and exercised the
same rights of franking as the Deputy Postmasters. Others
were paid on the basis of a percentage of 20 per cent. of
the postage collected; and in such cases some of the keepers
still collected their fee of 2d., and some did not.</p>

<p>When letters were sent from one Way Office to another&mdash;as
was frequently the case, since often there were several Way
Offices in succession&mdash;a fresh fee was charged; and a letter
might be charged four or five twopenny fees and no postage,
the fees all being appropriated by the Way Office keepers
and nothing finding its way to the Post Office revenue.
Indeed, the Post Office department received scarcely any
revenue from the Way Offices, and no sort of control over
them was even attempted.</p>

<p>The House of Assembly was in the habit of establishing
post routes, and of voting increases in the salaries of existing
couriers, the resulting expense of which was to be paid by
the Post Office. The action of the Legislature was often
taken on the presentation of memorials from persons interested,
or on the initiative of a member specially interested<!-- Page 51 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_51" id="Page_51">[Pg 51]</a></span>
in Post Office matters with some axe to grind. The Legislature
would vote, say, &#163;10 or &#163;20, for a courier to some
remote place, for which the number of letters was negligible&mdash;perhaps
a dozen in a year, perhaps two a week and a few
newspapers. The resolution of the House would then be
forwarded to the Postmaster-General, who by virtue of his
delegated authority established the route, the cost over and
above the amount voted by the House being drawn from
Post Office funds. The whole system was permeated with
jobbery, and the House used to become more than usually
active in these matters as the elections approached. In Cape
Breton, in 1841, the expenses of the couriers amounted to
some &#163;604, and the revenue, after deducting the commission
of the three postmasters in the island, was some &#163;308&mdash;the
explanation being that the member for the island was one
of the leaders in Post Office matters in the Legislature.</p>

<p>Internal correspondence was at this time literally nonexistent,
many of the couriers conveying only newspapers
(which in general went free), and fee letters (that is, letters
charged only with the Way Office keeper's fee, and no
postage). Except in five towns (Halifax, Yarmouth, and
Picton in Nova Scotia; and St. John and Fredericton in New
Brunswick) there was no provision for the delivery of letters
except at the post office window. In those towns, delivery was
made in the first instance at the post office, but all letters
which were not called for within a short time after the arrival
of the mail, were sent out for delivery throughout the town
by letter carrier. An additional charge of 1d. per letter was
made by the carrier, and retained by him as his remuneration.
In some cases 1d. was charged also for the delivery of
newspapers; in others this penny was charged only where
the receivers could be induced to pay; and in some cases newspapers
were delivered free. At Halifax two letter carriers
were employed, and their total weekly earnings were estimated
at &#163;4 10s., indicating 1,080 as, approximately, the weekly
number of letters and newspapers received. At Fredericton
a charge of 1d. was made on letters and on newspapers,
but the amount was taken by the postmaster, who paid a
weekly wage to the carrier. The postmaster estimated his
annual receipt at about &#163;19 10s., corresponding with a weekly<!-- Page 52 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_52" id="Page_52">[Pg 52]</a></span>
average of 90 letters and newspapers delivered in Fredericton.
He paid the carrier &#163;14 10s. per annum.</p>

<p>Up to 1827 there were no internal posts in Prince Edward
Island. The only post office in the province was at Charlottetown.
In 1827 the Legislature resolved to establish an
inland service, and appointed couriers to travel weekly for
the conveyance of letters. Way Office keepers were also
nominated at various places. A uniform rate of 2d. for single
letters, and &#189;d. for newspapers published in the island, was
fixed for transmission within the island, and, in consideration
of the whole expense being borne by the Provincial Treasury,
the Deputy Postmaster-General of Nova Scotia and New
Brunswick agreed to the retention by the province of the
net revenue. The Way Office keepers received as their remuneration
20 per cent. on the postage collected, with the
privilege of franking for transmission within the island. The
province made a small grant, at first &#163;20 per annum and
later &#163;30, in aid of the administration of the posts.</p>

<p>The first wish of the Home authorities was to bring the
expenditure within the revenue, and after he had been in the
colony some two months Mr. Page submitted a scheme
which should remove the deficit in Nova Scotia, then over
&#163;1,000 a year.<a name="FNanchor_121_121" id="FNanchor_121_121"></a><a href="#Footnote_121_121" class="fnanchor">[121]</a> This scheme, which was not lacking in
boldness, proposed the discontinuance of no less than twenty-four
couriers, and reduction of the frequency of the mail in
two other cases, involving towns of some importance.</p>

<p>On the 6th July 1843 the Post Office of New Brunswick
was separated from that of Nova Scotia and a large number
of services abolished. Following on these drastic measures,
the New Brunswick Legislature, in 1844, adopted a joint
Address to his Majesty, praying for redress. They asked
for a reduction of letter rates, for the abolition of newspaper
rates, and for the application of all surplus revenue
to the extension of facilities for inter-provincial communication,
adding that in consideration of the introduction of these
changes the Legislature would guarantee to provide such sums
as might from time to time be necessary to defray the expenses
of the department. The reply of the Colonial Office was that
the prayer of the petition could not be granted, since other<!-- Page 53 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_53" id="Page_53">[Pg 53]</a></span>
provinces were involved; but that, so long as the province
guaranteed the charges, the proposal as regards newspapers,
taken by itself, was unobjectionable.</p>

<p>The Home authorities, seeing that in Nova Scotia and
New Brunswick the service still showed a deficit year by
year, remained indisposed to introduce reduced rates; but
when Lord Clanricarde was appointed Postmaster-General
there was a change of policy. Lord Clanricarde came to the
conclusion that the time was ripe for a reduction of rates in
British North America, although he was convinced that such
a reduction would entail heavy postal deficits in all the
provinces. It would be for the provincial Legislatures to
make good these deficits, and he concluded it was therefore
expedient that the full control of the service should be handed
over to the provincial authorities, subject to certain conditions
imposed with the view of preventing friction between the
provinces over the transit across the sea-board provinces of
mails for or from the interior.</p>

<p>Lord Elgin, Secretary of State for the Colonies, suggested
to the Governor-General<a name="FNanchor_122_122" id="FNanchor_122_122"></a><a href="#Footnote_122_122" class="fnanchor">[122]</a> that one or two members of the
Executive Councils of Canada, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick,
and Prince Edward Island should meet at Montreal
to discuss the question and mature a plan, which could be
submitted to the respective Legislatures, for the assumption
by the provinces of the administration of the Post Office.
A conference was arranged, and a plan for the establishment
of a uniform system throughout the British North American
Colonies elaborated.</p>

<p>The conference made clear that in the repeated remonstrances
against the "transfer of assumed surplus receipts"
to the revenue of the British office there was no desire on
the part of the provinces to make the Post Office a source
of revenue, or, indeed, to call into question the prudent
management of the Imperial Government; but that the
remonstrances were prompted by a growing conviction of
the great importance of an efficient postal system as a factor
in their social and commercial welfare, and as "a means in
a new country of extending civilization." The provinces
were impressed by the great social and moral benefits which<!-- Page 54 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_54" id="Page_54">[Pg 54]</a></span>
had followed the introduction of cheap postage in the Mother
Country, and were anxious to extend to their own land
the benefits of the system, which had already been introduced
by their great neighbour. The delegates were satisfied that
the most suitable rate would be 3d. the half ounce, uniform,
irrespective of distance; but, thinking it likely that some
of the provinces might be unwilling entirely to disregard
distance, they recommended that an option be suggested for
any province that wished so to do to charge double rates
for distances greater than 300 miles. They recommended
the establishment throughout British North America of a
uniform system and rate of postage, with as little local
modification as the circumstances of the various provinces
might demand. But for two main reasons they were opposed
to a common administration: (1) they considered that the control
by each province of its postal establishment would be
a powerful aid to economy in administration, would prevent
imprudent extensions of postal accommodation, and would
prevent also any feeling of jealousy between the provinces
with regard to the application of the funds of the establishment
to the extension of services in the respective provinces;
(2) they thought the various provinces would be more likely
to accept a system under local control, each province defraying
the entire cost of its service, and retaining all postage
collected within its limits, whether prepaid or post-paid.<a name="FNanchor_123_123" id="FNanchor_123_123"></a><a href="#Footnote_123_123" class="fnanchor">[123]</a></p>

<p>The Home authorities accepted the recommendations of
the conference, subject to a few slight modifications in non-essentials,
and an Act, passed in 1849, authorized provincial
Legislatures to establish posts within their respective territories,
but gave them no authority over the posts between
the colonies and places abroad.<a name="FNanchor_124_124" id="FNanchor_124_124"></a><a href="#Footnote_124_124" class="fnanchor">[124]</a></p>

<p>The transfer of the Post Office systems to the provincial
Governments was accomplished in 1851.</p>

<p>Delegates from all the colonies met to consider the arrangements
to be made for conducting the office under the new
conditions. With the example of England before them, as
before the world, the delegates were anxious for a uniform
rate, and for a low uniform rate. They realized, however,<!-- Page 55 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_55" id="Page_55">[Pg 55]</a></span>
that conditions vastly different from those prevailing in
England prevailed in British North America. With their
great distances and their thinly settled districts, with the
rigours of the American climate and the generally poor state
of the roads, it could not be anticipated that rates which had
been found successful in England, with its comparatively small
area and dense population, with its less difficult climate and
its better facilities for intercommunication, would prove equally
successful. In the end a compromise was adopted&mdash;uniformity
of rate, but a rate moderately high, viz. 5 cents.<a name="FNanchor_125_125" id="FNanchor_125_125"></a><a href="#Footnote_125_125" class="fnanchor">[125]</a></p>

<p>A period of great development ensued, especially in the
Maritime Provinces. Under the stimulus of the reduction
of the rate to the new uniform charge of 5 cents per &frac12; ounce,
in place of a charge graduated by distance which had
averaged over 8d. a letter, the number of letters increased
so rapidly that in four years the gross revenue had recovered
its former level.<a name="FNanchor_126_126" id="FNanchor_126_126"></a><a href="#Footnote_126_126" class="fnanchor">[126]</a> But in both Nova Scotia and New
Brunswick the account regularly showed a heavy deficit, in
partial explanation of which there was the fact that both
Governments carried newspapers in the mails free of charge.
In Canada, with a larger number of commercial communities,
the results were somewhat better. But even there the accounts
showed a deficit until 1859. From that year there was an
annual surplus until 1865, when the heavy charges for conveyance
of the mails by railway began to tell.</p>

<p>These conditions continued until the confederation of the
British North American Colonies in 1867. The control of
the Post Office was within the powers assigned to the
new Dominion Government. The Government was desirous
of not falling behind other countries in the provision of
Post Office services, and it was necessary for political
reasons to take advantage of every available means for
facilitating intercommunication between the different parts
of the Dominion. Shortly after confederation, therefore, a
Bill to establish and regulate a Federal Dominion Post
Office was brought before the Dominion Parliament.</p>

<p>A reduction of the letter rate of postage from 5 cents to<!-- Page 56 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_56" id="Page_56">[Pg 56]</a></span>
3 cents per &frac12; ounce was proposed, and a rate of postage
on newspapers. In some of the provinces newspapers had
previously been carried by the posts free of charge; and the
establishment of a rate of postage for them was to some extent
bound up with the reduction of the letter rate, since with
the lower rate for letters the free transmission of newspapers
would have proved so great a strain on the revenue, that
either the Government would have been compelled to make
larger grants in aid, or services would have to be withheld
in districts where it was desirable they should be provided.
Some members were disposed to think the better course
would have been to retain the old rate for letters and to
allow newspapers to pass free, as had long been the practice
in the Lower Provinces; and the imposition of a rate on
newspapers was characterized as a tax on the dissemination
of public intelligence and a retrogressive step towards old
and exploded abuses.<a name="FNanchor_127_127" id="FNanchor_127_127"></a><a href="#Footnote_127_127" class="fnanchor">[127]</a></p>

<p>Other members desired to follow the English example and
reduce the letter rate to 2 cents, the equivalent of a penny;
but this was deemed impracticable on account of the different
conditions under which the Post Office was conducted in
Canada, where the mails were carried very long distances
through a sparse population.<a name="FNanchor_128_128" id="FNanchor_128_128"></a><a href="#Footnote_128_128" class="fnanchor">[128]</a> In the United States, where
the circumstances were more nearly comparable, the rate was
still 3 cents. With a rate of 3 cents in Canada, as proposed,
it was anticipated that there would be a considerable deficit,
but that the deficit would soon disappear.<a name="FNanchor_129_129" id="FNanchor_129_129"></a><a href="#Footnote_129_129" class="fnanchor">[129]</a> It was alleged
that there was no demand for a reduction and that everybody
was willing to pay 5 cents; but the real objection was
not to a reduction in the letter rate <i>per se</i>. The objection
arose from the assumption, fairly well grounded, that the
reduction was only possible if accompanied by the establishment
of a postage on newspapers, to which a number of<!-- Page 57 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_57" id="Page_57">[Pg 57]</a></span>
members were strongly opposed. The rate of 3 cents for
&frac12;-ounce letters was, however, adopted. In three years the
yield of postage at 3 cents surpassed the former yield at
5 cents.<a name="FNanchor_130_130" id="FNanchor_130_130"></a><a href="#Footnote_130_130" class="fnanchor">[130]</a></p>

<p>In 1898 a Bill for modifying rates of postage was introduced.
The main propositions of the Bill were (1) to reduce the letter
rate to 2 cents per ounce, and (2) to impose a postage on
newspapers. Since 1867 there had been several changes in
newspaper postage, and for about nineteen years newspapers
had been passing through the post in Canada free of any
charge for postage.<a name="FNanchor_131_131" id="FNanchor_131_131"></a><a href="#Footnote_131_131" class="fnanchor">[131]</a> The postal service was at this time being
carried on at some loss to the general Dominion revenue,
and, as in 1867, the proposal to charge postage on newspapers
was made to counterbalance any loss of revenue which might
result from the reduction in the letter rate of postage. It
was hoped that with this counterbalance any such loss would
soon be made good, and that, indeed, the Post Office would
become a self-sustaining department.<a name="FNanchor_132_132" id="FNanchor_132_132"></a><a href="#Footnote_132_132" class="fnanchor">[132]</a></p>

<p>The arguments in Parliament were almost identical with
those of 1867, when the previous similar proposals as regards
the letter and newspaper rates were before it. Stress was,
however, now laid on the contention that letter-writing was
the pursuit of the wealthy, and of business and commercial
men, who were well able to pay for their correspondence,
while the newspapers were sent mainly to the farmers of the
country, who wrote few letters. The Government were
proposing at this time to raise a million dollars by a tax on
sugar, a course denounced as an imposition by the Government
on the poorer classes, to whom sugar is a necessity,
while the reduction of postage would present the wealthier
classes with some $650,000 a year.<a name="FNanchor_133_133" id="FNanchor_133_133"></a><a href="#Footnote_133_133" class="fnanchor">[133]</a></p>

<p>The reduction was carried, and the 2-cent rate has proved
successful. The gross revenue recovered within four years.<a name="FNanchor_134_134" id="FNanchor_134_134"></a><a href="#Footnote_134_134" class="fnanchor">[134]</a>
The number of letters has largely increased, especially in<!-- Page 58 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_58" id="Page_58">[Pg 58]</a></span>
recent years, largely, no doubt, in consequence of the growing
commercial prosperity. The total number, which in 1876 was
some 41 millions, had in 1913 increased to 633 millions. The
financial result has also proved satisfactory. The Post Office
service in Canada as a whole in 1913 showed a profit of some
$1,200,000, and there is no doubt that the greater part of
this profit was derived from letters.</p>

<div class="blockquot"><p><span class="smcap">Note.</span>&mdash;In 1915 a war-tax of &frac12;-d. was imposed on all letters and postcards.
On the assumption that the numbers posted would not be appreciably diminished,
the increase of revenue was estimated at $6,000,000 a year, and this estimate
has been realized.</p></div>

<hr />
<p><!-- Page 59 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_59" id="Page_59">[Pg 59]</a></span></p>

<h3>LETTER POST IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA</h3>

<p>The New England colonies had not been long established
when the public authorities first took cognizance of the
arrangements for the distribution of letters. In 1639 the
general court of the Massachusetts Bay colony made an
order for the establishment of a service in respect of letters
for or from places abroad. A house-to-house delivery of
letters received from abroad at the low uniform rate of 1d.
would seem to have been contemplated.<a name="FNanchor_135_135" id="FNanchor_135_135"></a><a href="#Footnote_135_135" class="fnanchor">[135]</a> At various intervals
during the latter half of the century, Post Offices were established
in most of the other colonies&mdash;in Virginia in 1657, in
New York in 1672, in Connecticut in 1674, in Philadelphia
in 1683, and in New Hampshire in 1693.<a name="FNanchor_136_136" id="FNanchor_136_136"></a><a href="#Footnote_136_136" class="fnanchor">[136]</a> These Post Offices
were set up in the various colonies by legal enactment, but
they were in general local and municipal in character. In
the circumstances of the case they could at that time hardly
have been otherwise. The colonies were independent of each
other in administrative matters, and seldom acted together
for any purpose. The population relatively to the extent of
the colonies was extremely small, the settlements were
scattered, and the roads were mere trails.<a name="FNanchor_137_137" id="FNanchor_137_137"></a><a href="#Footnote_137_137" class="fnanchor">[137]</a> In general there
was very little intercourse between the various colonies. Such<!-- Page 60 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_60" id="Page_60">[Pg 60]</a></span>
intercommunication as was carried on usually went by means
of coastwise vessels or by occasional travellers. The one
exception was a post route from New York to Boston, established
in 1672 to go monthly. The system established in
Virginia in 1657 was of a primitive character, being merely
a requirement that every planter should furnish a messenger
to convey the mail to the next plantation, under penalty of
forfeiting a hogshead of tobacco in default.</p>

<p>In 1688, by an Order in Council, the establishment of a
Post Office in Jamaica, and such other of his Majesty's plantations
in America "as shall be found convenient," was authorized.
On the 17th February 1692 the Crown granted a patent
to Thomas Neale (then Master of the Mint) vesting in him
the American post, with full power and authority to erect
post offices in the chief parts of the American colonies "for
the receiving and despatching of letters and pacquets, and to
receive, send, and deliver the same under such rates and
sums of money as the planters shall agree to give." It
was no light matter to obtain the acquiescence of all the
colonies in the exercise of general rights as regards the Post
Office in North America, especially as they had previously
been free to make their own arrangements in this respect.
Neale was himself never in North America, but his deputy
there, Andrew Hamilton, who was a very capable man, was
able not only to secure the acceptance by the colonies of a
general postal system under Neale's patent, but to obtain from
some of them small grants in aid.</p>

<p>Most of the colonies passed Acts authorizing the establishment
of Post Offices under the provisions of the patent;
and the principle of postal monopoly was introduced in these
enactments.<a name="FNanchor_138_138" id="FNanchor_138_138"></a><a href="#Footnote_138_138" class="fnanchor">[138]</a> The General Assembly of Virginia authorized a
Post Office in the colony, believing such an office to be
of "generall concernement and of great advantage for the
increase and preservation of trade and commerce therein, for<!-- Page 61 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_61" id="Page_61">[Pg 61]</a></span>
thereby speedy and safe despatch may be had."<a name="FNanchor_139_139" id="FNanchor_139_139"></a><a href="#Footnote_139_139" class="fnanchor">[139]</a> The rates
of postage were as follows:&mdash;</p>

<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Table of rates of postage in Virginia 1693.">
<tr><td align="left">Every letter not exceeding one sheet</td><td align="left">For distance not exceeding 80 English miles</td><td align="left">3d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Ditto two sheets</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">6d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Every pacquet of writs and deeds</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">12d. per ounce weight.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Every letter not exceeding one sheet</td><td align="left">Above distance of 80 English miles</td><td align="left">4&#189;d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Ditto two sheets</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">9d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Every pacquet of writs and deeds</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">18d. per ounce.</td></tr>
</table></div>

<p>The rates established in the other colonies were similar but
not identical.</p>

<p>The new postal service under the authority of the patent
was commenced on the 1st May 1693. A post was set up
from Portsmouth, New Hampshire, to Boston, Saybrook, New
York, Philadelphia, Maryland, and Virginia. Five stages were
fixed, and a rider was appointed to each stage. In summer
the service was performed weekly, and in winter fortnightly.
At the commencement, as may be readily understood, the
conditions were somewhat difficult.<a name="FNanchor_140_140" id="FNanchor_140_140"></a><a href="#Footnote_140_140" class="fnanchor">[140]</a> But with the growth of
population and commerce, conditions improved. The service
to the South was for many years subject to general irregularity
and temporary suspension, especially at times of flood.</p>

<p>The Post Office in America has from its first establishment
as a general system, as distinguished from the merely local
or municipal posts, had to reckon with two factors which
have been of great importance in relation to all the main
services&mdash;a vast extent of territory and a sparse population.
The rates were higher than those in operation in England,<!-- Page 62 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_62" id="Page_62">[Pg 62]</a></span>
but at first, and for many years, the revenue was insufficient
to defray the expenses. The finance of the American Post
Office consequently differed fundamentally from that of the
English office.</p>

<p>Neale was required by the terms of his patent to render
an account at the end of three years of the receipts and
expenditures of the American post. His first account was not,
however, rendered until 1698. It showed that the expenses
up to May 1697 were &#163;3,817, and the receipts &#163;1,457, there
being thus a loss of &#163;2,360. The account was accompanied
by a statement prepared by Hamilton, explaining the great
advantages to the trade and commerce of the colonies, as
well as to their security, which the Post Office provided;
showing how necessary in consequence was the continuance
of the office, and recommending that definite rates of postage
for the whole territory be fixed by statute. Other regulations
for the conduct of the system were also suggested, as the
existing arrangement, involving such serious loss to the
patentee, could not be continued indefinitely. Neale contented
himself with a brief remark to the effect that whenever his
Majesty should see fit to take the conduct of the posts into
his own hands, he (Neale) would be glad to surrender his
patent&mdash;of course, for a consideration.<a name="FNanchor_141_141" id="FNanchor_141_141"></a><a href="#Footnote_141_141" class="fnanchor">[141]</a></p>

<p>The Postmasters-General opposed the suggested increase
of rates on general grounds, their experience having taught
them that "the easy and cheap corresponding doth encourage
people to write letters, and that this revenue was but little
in proportion to what it is now, till the postage of letters
was reduced from sixpence to threepence."</p>

<p>Neale died shortly afterwards, and his rights in the patent
were transferred to his creditors, who were Hamilton himself
and an Englishman named West. Hamilton died in 1703,
and his widow carried on the posts for some two or three
years. In 1706 she and West endeavoured to obtain an
extension of the term of the patent; so that, although the
posts had been conducted for some years at heavy loss, both
by Hamilton and by his widow, the conditions had improved,
and there was now reasonable anticipation of a profit from
the office. The view of the Postmasters-General, however,<!-- Page 63 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_63" id="Page_63">[Pg 63]</a></span>
ultimately prevailed, and in 1707 the patent was bought back
for the Crown for the sum of &#163;1,664. When, a few years
later, a general Act of Parliament was found necessary, the
opportunity was taken to place the American posts on a
definite statutory footing.<a name="FNanchor_142_142" id="FNanchor_142_142"></a><a href="#Footnote_142_142" class="fnanchor">[142]</a></p>

<p>The preamble recites that posts had at great charges been
established on the mainland of North America through most
of her Majesty's plantations and colonies, and the Postmasters-General
were authorized to establish a "Chief Letter Office"
in New York, and other chief offices at some convenient
place or places in each of the colonies in America, and to
appoint deputies for the "better managing, ordering, collecting,
and improving the Revenue" granted by the Act. Rates
for the transmission of letters between England and America
were fixed, and detailed rates for transmission between specific
towns within the North American colonies. The rates between
London and America were 1s. for a single letter, 2s. for a
double letter, and so on. For transmission within the colonies
the rates were, broadly, for distances under 60 miles, 4d. the
single letter, 8d. the double letter, and so on; distances under
100 miles, for a single letter 6d., and so in proportion for
double and treble and ounce letters.</p>

<p>These rates were, in general, higher than those which had
been fixed by the colonies under the Neale patent, but for
several years they did not produce sufficient revenue to meet
expenses. In 1722 the Postmasters-General were for the first
time able to say that in the future the Post Office in North
America, even if it yielded no net revenue, would no longer
involve a charge, and there was a good prospect of a profit.
The Act of 1765 provided rates for the longer distances and
made a general reduction of nearly 30 per cent. The rates now
became, for a single letter, for conveyance for any distance not
exceeding 60 miles, 4d.; from 60 to 100 miles, 6d.; from 100
to 200 miles, 8d.; for each additional 100 miles, 2d.<a name="FNanchor_143_143" id="FNanchor_143_143"></a><a href="#Footnote_143_143" class="fnanchor">[143]</a> In the
intervening period the chief events had been the appointment
of Benjamin Franklin, in 1737, to be Postmaster of Philadelphia,
and in 1753, to be joint Postmaster-General for<!-- Page 64 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_64" id="Page_64">[Pg 64]</a></span>
British North America, and the acquisition of Canada in
1763. The latter event had, indeed, been one of the reasons
assigned for the passing of the Act of 1765.<a name="FNanchor_144_144" id="FNanchor_144_144"></a><a href="#Footnote_144_144" class="fnanchor">[144]</a></p>

<p>Under Andrew Hamilton the posts had run only along the
coast, the great main route extending from Portsmouth, N.H.,
through Boston and New York to Maryland and Virginia.
Under his son, John Hamilton, who succeeded him in the
office, the posts were pushed inland as occasion offered or
circumstances demanded, and for these extensions John
Hamilton adopted the principle of establishing routes in
those cases where the postage was sufficient to maintain
them. On such a basis the system could not, however, be
very largely developed. The circumstances of the country
made any great extension impossible, and in 1766 the posts
still went mainly along the sea coasts.<a name="FNanchor_145_145" id="FNanchor_145_145"></a><a href="#Footnote_145_145" class="fnanchor">[145]</a></p>

<p>Franklin was dismissed in 1774. The Crown Post Office
was continued in North America, but about this time a
competing system arose. For some years there had been
friction in the colonies between the authorities and the
publishers of newspapers. The anomalous English system
of the distribution of newspapers free by post by certain
favoured individuals had been introduced in America. The
favoured officials were the American Postmasters-General,
and for that reason the office was much sought after by
publishers. Both Franklin and Hunter, who were joint
Postmasters-General (Franklin from 1753 to 1774, and Hunter<!-- Page 65 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_65" id="Page_65">[Pg 65]</a></span>
from 1753 to his death in 1761), were printers, and Franklin's
dismissal is sometimes attributed to a desire on the part of
the British Government to hamper the distribution of his
publications, and so restrict their influence. Great efforts
were at this time made by the Crown authorities in America
to prevent the dissemination of ideas contrary to the British
ascendancy. As early as 1757 the Governor of Pennsylvania
endeavoured to prevent the publication of improper
intelligence in newspapers, and suggested that special instructions
should be given to the Postmasters-General. The
feeling against the newspapers grew with the developments
of the years that followed, and by 1774 much trouble was
being caused by the Crown Postmasters to the publishers
of newspapers. Many were toning down their comments
in order to retain the privilege of free transmission, but
some began to look for other means of distributing their
papers. William Goddard of Baltimore, publisher of the
<i>Maryland Journal</i>, suggested the establishment of "an
<i>American</i> Post Office on constitutional principles," and visited
various colonies in the early part of the year 1774 with
the object of enlisting support for his project. He received
a good measure of approval, and on the 30th April 1774
subscriptions were invited from the public towards the
establishment of an American Post Office. The scheme of
this Post Office was that subscriptions should be invited
for its establishment and maintenance, and "for the necessary
defence of post officers and riders employed in the
same"; and that the subscribers in each colony should appoint
a committee from among themselves, whose business should
be to appoint postmasters at places where offices had hitherto
been kept or might be judged necessary, "and to regulate
the postage of letters and packets, with the terms on which
newspapers are to be carried."<a name="FNanchor_146_146" id="FNanchor_146_146"></a><a href="#Footnote_146_146" class="fnanchor">[146]</a></p>

<p>Meantime the committees of safety and the Assemblies of
the various colonies made certain provision for the transmission
of mails, both within and between the colonies. In<!-- Page 66 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_66" id="Page_66">[Pg 66]</a></span>
May 1775 the New York Committee appointed a sub-committee
to inquire of the postmaster, Mr. Foxcroft, the reason for
the recent discharge by him of the post riders. The postmaster's
explanation was that the last four mails between
New York and Boston had been held up and violated on
the journey, and he had discharged the post riders on the
ground that it was no longer safe to send them with mails.
The committee thereupon themselves immediately arranged for
the despatch of mails from New York, and a few days later
issued a notice "to acquaint the publick that a constitutional
Post Office is now rising on the ruins of the parliamentary one."</p>

<p>In the course of the next few months several provincial
congresses passed resolutions establishing Post Offices in
the respective colonies. Massachusetts fixed rates of postage
at 5&#188;d. for a single letter for not more than 60 miles, and
increased rates for greater distances. The whole matter was
at the same time under the consideration of the Continental
Congress sitting at Philadelphia. Goddard had, from the
first establishment of the constitutional Post Office, expected
Congress to assume control.<a name="FNanchor_147_147" id="FNanchor_147_147"></a><a href="#Footnote_147_147" class="fnanchor">[147]</a> In May, Congress appointed a
committee to consider the matter, and on the 26th July,
having received the committee's report, agreed to resolutions
providing for the establishment of a Post Office. Benjamin
Franklin, who had been a member of the committee, was
unanimously chosen to be the first Postmaster-General. It
was provided that the remuneration of the deputies should,
in general, be 20 per cent. on the sums they collected, the
rate which had usually been paid under the parliamentary
system.<a name="FNanchor_148_148" id="FNanchor_148_148"></a><a href="#Footnote_148_148" class="fnanchor">[148]</a> Postage of letters was to be 20 per cent. less than
those appointed by Act of Parliament. It was feared that
such rates would prove too low, and the proceeds of the office
be insufficient to support the necessary riders; and as people
were in general well satisfied with the rates lately paid, or
at least had made no complaints regarding them, the lowering
of the rates was deferred.<a name="FNanchor_149_149" id="FNanchor_149_149"></a><a href="#Footnote_149_149" class="fnanchor">[149]</a><!-- Page 67 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_67" id="Page_67">[Pg 67]</a></span></p>

<p>The parliamentary post continued for some years, concurrently
with the constitutional post, as the new independent
Post Office was called. On the 7th October 1775 a debate
arose in Congress as to the expediency of stopping the
"parliamentary or ministerial posts." The stopping of the
post was desired chiefly as a means for hindering the correspondence
of their enemies. Inaction in the matter was
advocated by some who professed to find the royal post
of great convenience; and by others who, although desirous
of seeing the parliamentary post stopped, thought it unnecessary
to take active measures against it, since it would soon
cease in any case.</p>

<p>On Christmas Day, 1775, the Secretary to the Post Office
in New York issued a notification to the public that, in
consequence of the decision of a provincial convention at
Annapolis not to permit the parliamentary post to travel
through the province, that mail would be discontinued, and
the letters held at New York at the disposal of the persons to
whom they were addressed. The parliamentary post did not,
however, altogether die. As late as 1779 the Secretary in
London wrote to the Deputy-General at New York that
the Postmasters-General were glad to find that a number of
letters were being brought to the Post Office to be delivered,
and as they hoped that method would be continued, the deputy
would, no doubt, soon have sufficient funds to pay the expenses
of the establishment. But in 1780 the Postmasters-General
were concerned to find that the whole postage would not
defray the cost of management, a circumstance attributed to
the fact that the mails were often seized on arrival and
carried first to the headquarters of the Army. In consequence
of this, a great part of the letters were never delivered at all.
Very little postage could be collected, and the Postmasters-General
addressed strong representations to Lord George
Germain, his Majesty's principal Secretary of State.<a name="FNanchor_150_150" id="FNanchor_150_150"></a><a href="#Footnote_150_150" class="fnanchor">[150]</a></p>

<p>In 1776, in view of the great necessity, for the safety of
the colonies, that means should be provided for the frequent
and rapid transmission of intelligence, further dispositions
with regard to the posts were made by the Congress.
Riders were appointed for every twenty-five or thirty miles<!-- Page 68 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_68" id="Page_68">[Pg 68]</a></span>
on the several post roads. They were required to proceed
through their respective stages three times a week. They
were to set out immediately on the receipt of the mail and
were to travel "by night and by day, without stopping," until
they had delivered the mail to the next rider. It was found
that the revenue produced by the existing rates of postage
fell far short of the expenses, and on the 17th October 1777
the rates were raised by 50 per cent. The difficulties of the
administration continued, and various committees of inquiry
were appointed. In April 1779 one of these committees
recommended the doubling of the rates, a course which met
with approval from patriotic Americans.<a name="FNanchor_151_151" id="FNanchor_151_151"></a><a href="#Footnote_151_151" class="fnanchor">[151]</a></p>

<p>Even this increase was not sufficient. In October of that
year there was a balance of &#163;375 18s. 6d. due to the
Postmaster-General, and arrears of &#163;17,666 1s. 3d. to the
post riders. For the discharge of these liabilities and for
the continuance of the functions of the office a draft on the
Treasurer was authorized. In December 1779 a further grant
was found to be absolutely necessary in order to maintain
the service, and the sum of $30,000 was voted.<a name="FNanchor_152_152" id="FNanchor_152_152"></a><a href="#Footnote_152_152" class="fnanchor">[152]</a> The establishment
of express riders which had been maintained in
conjunction with the postal service was at the same time
abolished, and the rates of postage raised 20 per cent. on those
paid in 1775. But the cost still outran the revenue, and in
May 1780 sums amounting to $100,000 were voted in aid of
the service. The finances of the posts became involved in
further difficulties through the general depreciation of money,
and Congress found it necessary in December 1780 to make
good the depreciation on the pay of post riders, and to raise
their nominal pay to double the sum received before the war.<a name="FNanchor_153_153" id="FNanchor_153_153"></a><a href="#Footnote_153_153" class="fnanchor">[153]</a><!-- Page 69 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_69" id="Page_69">[Pg 69]</a></span></p>

<p>Several minor changes of the rates of postage were made in
this period. In December 1780 the Congress fixed the rates
on letters at half the rates paid at the commencement of the
war: and in October 1781 at the actual rates charged at the
commencement of the war. But, whatever the rates, during
the war they never produced sufficient revenue to meet
expenses, and the controlling factor in the administration of
the service was the necessity for a means of circulating the
earliest intelligence of the movements of the enemy, and of
their ally, in order to make the best disposition of their
own forces.</p>

<p>By the Articles of Confederation Congress was vested with
the sole and exclusive rights and power of establishing a Post
Office for the United States; and, deeming "the communication
of intelligence with regularity and despatch from one
part to another of the United States essentially requisite to
the safety as well as the commercial interest thereof," in
1782 revised all the regulations made theretofore in respect
of the Post Office, and reduced them to one Act. The Postmaster-General
was required to cause the mail to be carried
with all care and despatch at least once in every week to
and from each of the stated post offices, and was given a
monopoly of "letters, packets, or other despatches." Postmasters
were to be paid such commission as the Postmaster-General
might think their services merited, not exceeding
20 per cent. of the postage collected by them. Rates of
postage on single letters were fixed as follows:&mdash;</p>


<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Table of single letter postage rates in the United States in 1782.">
<tr><th align="center">Distance.</th><th align="center" colspan="4">Rate.<a name="FNanchor_154_154" id="FNanchor_154_154"></a><a href="#Footnote_154_154" class="fnanchor">[154]</a></th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Not exceeding 60 miles</td><td align="center">1</td><td align="center">dwt.</td><td align="right">8</td><td align="center">gr.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Exceeding 60 miles, not exceeding 100 miles</td><td align="center">2</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">0</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Exceeding 100 miles, not exceeding 200 miles</td><td align="center">2</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">16</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
</table></div>

<p class="blockquot">
And so on, advancing 16 grains for every hundred miles.
</p>

<p>For all letters for or from Europe by packet or despatch
vessels, the charge was 4 dwt. The rates were doubled for
double letters; trebled for treble letters; and a packet weighing
an ounce was charged equal to four single letters, and
in that proportion if a greater weight. In the event of a
surplus of Post Office revenue over expenses, the Postmaster-General<!-- Page 70 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_70" id="Page_70">[Pg 70]</a></span>
was required to pay the amount to the Treasurer
of the United States "until the sums of money heretofore
advanced by the United States for the support of the General
Post Office, with the interest thereon at 6 per cent. per
annum," should be repaid, after which any such surplus was
to be devoted to the establishment of new post offices or
other improvements of the service. If the necessary expenses
were found to exceed the revenue, the excess was to be paid
to the Postmaster-General by the Treasurer of the United
States.<a name="FNanchor_155_155" id="FNanchor_155_155"></a><a href="#Footnote_155_155" class="fnanchor">[155]</a> Cross posts were farmed in much the same way as
the cross posts and bye posts had been farmed in England,<a name="FNanchor_156_156" id="FNanchor_156_156"></a><a href="#Footnote_156_156" class="fnanchor">[156]</a>
and the farmers were bound by contract not to charge rates
in excess of those fixed by the ordinance.<a name="FNanchor_157_157" id="FNanchor_157_157"></a><a href="#Footnote_157_157" class="fnanchor">[157]</a></p>

<p>After the adoption of the Constitution an Act of the
Constitutional Congress became necessary. The President, in
recommending to Congress the provision of the Post Office and
post roads on a liberal and comprehensive scale, referred to
the political importance of such a service as aiding the
diffusion of a knowledge of the laws and proceedings of the
Government,<a name="FNanchor_158_158" id="FNanchor_158_158"></a><a href="#Footnote_158_158" class="fnanchor">[158]</a> a consideration which was paramount in
determining the attitude of the United States Government
towards the posts. It was held to be a first duty of the
Government to afford every possible means for the dissemination
of intelligence&mdash;general intelligence for the information
and education of the people, and more especially political
intelligence for the education of the people as citizens of
the Republic. They were making, it was their legitimate
boast, a tremendous experiment in politics. They were essaying
to demonstrate to the world whether a people had the
genius to govern itself, whether democracy and the republic
were abstract political ideas only, or whether they could be
made actual living things. The English Commonwealth had
failed. The French Revolution had come after their own
and was still in doubtful case. They could therefore neglect
no means likely to strengthen the foundation of their own
Republic, and in this view must consider seriously the
question of providing effective means for the enlightenment<!-- Page 71 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_71" id="Page_71">[Pg 71]</a></span>
of the sovereign people on all matters pertaining to the
executive Government and the Legislature.<a name="FNanchor_159_159" id="FNanchor_159_159"></a><a href="#Footnote_159_159" class="fnanchor">[159]</a> In order to
secure the dissemination of such intelligence members of
Congress were given extensive powers of franking both letters
and newspapers.</p>

<p>On the question of rates, opinion in Congress was divided.
Although at the time the gross revenue of the Post Office was
small, some members anticipated an increase sufficient to
yield a net revenue, as in England and most other European
countries; whilst others, with more wisdom, pointed out the
vital difference in the case of America on account of "its
great extent and uncultivated state, as well as from a thousand
other causes."<a name="FNanchor_160_160" id="FNanchor_160_160"></a><a href="#Footnote_160_160" class="fnanchor">[160]</a> The new rates were based on eight
zones of distance. For distances under 30 miles the charge
for single letters was 6 cents; for distances over 450 miles
the charge was 25 cents; every double letter, double rates;
every triple letter, triple rates; and every packet weighing
1 ounce avoirdupois, the rate of four single letters for each
ounce.</p>

<p>The rates for letters fixed by the Act of 1792 continued
some thirty years, except for slight modifications in 1799
and 1816, and except for a brief period at the time of the
war of 1812-14 with Great Britain. The Government then
attempted to obtain an increased revenue from the Post Office,
and the rates of postage were increased 50 per cent. The
effect on the revenue and on the business of the country
was, however, so disastrous that the increased rates were
maintained only for about a year.<a name="FNanchor_161_161" id="FNanchor_161_161"></a><a href="#Footnote_161_161" class="fnanchor">[161]</a></p>

<p>In 1825 the laws relating to the Post Office were codified.
The codifying Act placed on the Postmaster-General the
duty of establishing such post offices, and appointing such
postmasters on the post roads as should appear to him
expedient, and of providing for the carriage of the mail
on all post roads that were or might be established by law,<a name="FNanchor_162_162" id="FNanchor_162_162"></a><a href="#Footnote_162_162" class="fnanchor">[162]</a>
with such frequency as he should think proper, "<i>having</i><!-- Page 72 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_72" id="Page_72">[Pg 72]</a></span>
<i>regard to the productiveness</i>" of the routes, the means of
the department, and other circumstances. Errors and irregularities
crept into the service; but they were for the
most part the result of "the representations and pressing
solicitations of the citizens," sustained by members of Congress
from almost every section of the country, of the
extension of the franking privilege, of the desire of the
head of the department "to extend the benefits of mail
facilities and stage-coach accommodations to every portion
of the community," and of legislation extending the transportation
of the mail over unproductive routes. The deficits
which resulted were not regarded altogether as an evil, because
the public had greatly benefited by the measures which had
produced them.<a name="FNanchor_163_163" id="FNanchor_163_163"></a><a href="#Footnote_163_163" class="fnanchor">[163]</a> Despite the solicitude of Congress the
revenue failed to recover, and in 1837 and several succeeding
years showed a deficit.</p>

<p>Sir Rowland Hill's pamphlet <i>Post Office Reform: Its
Importance and Practicability</i> attracted attention in America,
and as early as 1839 the question of applying the principle
of uniformity of rate to the American service was under
consideration. The rate proposed was not, however, 2 cents,
the equivalent of a penny, but 5 cents. Sir Rowland Hill
himself expressed the opinion that owing to the widely
different circumstances penny postage might not be applicable
to the United States, but that, as the American people did not
look for a revenue from their Post Office, a low general rate
might be feasible.<a name="FNanchor_164_164" id="FNanchor_164_164"></a><a href="#Footnote_164_164" class="fnanchor">[164]</a></p>

<p>Although a low and uniform rate was not immediately
adopted, the example of Great Britain had great influence.<a name="FNanchor_165_165" id="FNanchor_165_165"></a><a href="#Footnote_165_165" class="fnanchor">[165]</a>
There was considerable public agitation in favour of reduction
of rates, and in many respects the circumstances resembled
those obtaining in England before the reform. The high
rates of postage led to constant and widespread evasion,
advantage being taken of all available private means for the
transmission of letters, and an association formed in New<!-- Page 73 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_73" id="Page_73">[Pg 73]</a></span>
York to work for the adoption of reduced postage held meetings
in the large cities. In 1844 the finances of the department
were in a more nourishing condition. For four years the
service had been able to maintain itself. The state of the
public Treasury had prevented any material change in previous
years, but as difficulties under that head had ceased, the
Government recommended the introduction of low rates&mdash;gradually,
in order to prevent any serious dislocation of the
finance of the department.<a name="FNanchor_166_166" id="FNanchor_166_166"></a><a href="#Footnote_166_166" class="fnanchor">[166]</a> A statute was accordingly passed
which, while not introducing uniform postage, went a great
way in that direction. There were to be only two distance
charges, viz. for distances not exceeding 300 miles, or greater
than 300 miles, respectively. The new rate for ordinary letters
was 5 cents for distances not exceeding 300 miles, and 10 cents
for any greater distance. This statute also introduced the
principle of charge by weight instead of by sheets, the half-ounce
being taken as the unit weight.<a name="FNanchor_167_167" id="FNanchor_167_167"></a><a href="#Footnote_167_167" class="fnanchor">[167]</a><!-- Page 74 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_74" id="Page_74">[Pg 74]</a></span></p>

<p>The reduction resulted in so great a fall in the revenue
that in the first year at the reduced rates there was a deficit
of between one and two million dollars. In calling attention
to this deficit, the President, in his Message to Congress, said
that no principle had been more generally acquiesced in by
the people than that the Post Office should sustain itself, but
Congress had "never sought to make it a source of revenue
except for a short period during the last war with Great
Britain." At the same time the service should not become
a charge on the general Treasury, and it would be necessary
either to curtail the existing service or so to modify the Act
of the previous March as to improve the revenue. As curtailment
of service was out of the question, revision of the rates
was recommended.<a name="FNanchor_168_168" id="FNanchor_168_168"></a><a href="#Footnote_168_168" class="fnanchor">[168]</a></p>

<p>But the rates were not revised. Revision in an upward
direction was, indeed, hardly feasible. The public agitation
for low rates continued after the passing of the Act of 1845.
Many citizens were convinced that the system already adopted
in England might be introduced in the United States. The
benefits which had resulted in England in the way of commercial,
social, and moral betterment were largely dwelt upon.
The chief demand was for a uniform rate, which now meant
simply the abolition of the increased charge for distances over
300 miles. There was, of course, Sir Rowland Hill's calculation
in regard to cost of conveyance, which showed the futility of
any attempt to make distance the basis of charge; and the
further consideration that the actual cost of transit for each
letter sent in a mail varies not in accordance with the distance
travelled, but inversely as the number of letters contained
in the mail. Moreover, it was not considered just that the
letters of the people of the populous Eastern States should<!-- Page 75 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_75" id="Page_75">[Pg 75]</a></span>
be taxed in order to provide unremunerative mail services
to the remote and newly settled Western States.<a name="FNanchor_169_169" id="FNanchor_169_169"></a><a href="#Footnote_169_169" class="fnanchor">[169]</a></p>

<p>Under the old high rates the revenue had not increased
in proportion to the increase of population, but since the
reduction of 1845 the increase was so much more rapid that
even with the reduced rates the revenue was greater than ever
before. The Government preferred rates of postage which
were too low to rates which were too high, arguing that in
the former case the great mass of the people would benefit,
whilst in the latter case the benefits would extend only to
a few.<a name="FNanchor_170_170" id="FNanchor_170_170"></a><a href="#Footnote_170_170" class="fnanchor">[170]</a> The need for some further reduction was well illustrated
by the fact that the ordinary charge for transporting
a barrel of flour from Detroit to Buffalo was at this time
the same as the charge for carrying in the same conveyance
a letter weighing half an ounce, viz. 10 cents.</p>

<p>In 1851 an Act reduced to 3 cents the rate of postage on
letters not going over 300 miles, with a fourfold charge on
Pacific mails, on account of the great expense incurred by
the department. It was estimated that the expense of such
mails was four times as great as in the case of ordinary mails,
but the proposal met with opposition.<a name="FNanchor_171_171" id="FNanchor_171_171"></a><a href="#Footnote_171_171" class="fnanchor">[171]</a></p>

<p>In 1863 mail matter was classified in three groups: (1) letters,
(2) regular printed matter, (3) other miscellaneous matter. The
charge for letters (first-class mail matter) was made 3 cents
a half ounce irrespective of distance. The rate was reduced<!-- Page 76 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_76" id="Page_76">[Pg 76]</a></span>
to 2 cents a half ounce in 1883, in deference to the wish
and determination of the public, supported by a very decided
vote in Congress. It was anticipated that the revenue would
not suffer severely, but that, as in the case of the earlier
reductions, there would be an increase in the number of letters.
It was also anticipated that many letters sent unsealed at
1 cent would be transferred to the sealed post, thus yielding
an additional cent. The number of groups or classes of mail
matter had been increased to four in 1879, and the department
was now asked to consider whether by rearranging the third
and fourth class matter additional revenue could be obtained
from such matter in order to diminish the deficiency resulting
from the reduction of letter postage. The department was
unable to suggest any method for achieving this object; but
the contemplated reduction was not delayed. The condition
of the Treasury was good, "there being money enough to
meet any deficiency, even if it were as large as the maximum
($8,550,000)," estimated on the basis of the number of letters
then passing by post without allowance for any increase.<a name="FNanchor_172_172" id="FNanchor_172_172"></a><a href="#Footnote_172_172" class="fnanchor">[172]</a> The
actual loss of revenue consequent on the reduction was only
$1,660,000. A large stimulus was given to general correspondence,
and, as anticipated, to the use of the sealed letter
in place of postcards or unsealed circulars, whereby the department
reaped considerable profit. In 1885 the allowance for
weight was raised, and the rate became 2 cents for each ounce
or fraction of an ounce.</p>

<p>Since that date the rate has not been changed, although
from time to time proposals have been made for a reduction
to 1 cent. The public and the department realize that the
2-cent rate is immensely profitable. It not only sustains
the service for letters: it enables the department to carry
the heavy burden of both the second-class matter and the
expensive rural delivery service, both of which involve heavy
deficits, and still to show only a comparatively small,
though fluctuating, deficit.<a name="FNanchor_173_173" id="FNanchor_173_173"></a><a href="#Footnote_173_173" class="fnanchor">[173]</a> As early as 1890 the question of
1 cent letter postage had attained considerable prominence.<!-- Page 77 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_77" id="Page_77">[Pg 77]</a></span>
Many newspapers were advocating the reduction, and numerous
associations and conventions had declared for it. The
Postmaster-General, Mr. Wanamaker, himself declared that
great numbers of the people believed in 1 cent postage and
wanted it, and that the existing rate yielded a large profit
which would permit of a reduction of letter postage if it
could be devoted to that purpose.<a name="FNanchor_174_174" id="FNanchor_174_174"></a><a href="#Footnote_174_174" class="fnanchor">[174]</a> In 1891 Mr. Wanamaker
expressed the view that in time not only would 1 cent postage
be successfully demanded, but that the time was not far off;
although he himself thought that many other improvements
and extensions ought to be provided before such reduction was
made, and that it would not be just and fair to the service,
upon which much effort had been spent in order to make it
self-supporting, to heap upon it a burden of millions from
which it could not recover for years.<a name="FNanchor_175_175" id="FNanchor_175_175"></a><a href="#Footnote_175_175" class="fnanchor">[175]</a></p>

<p>The question was by no means lost sight of.<a name="FNanchor_176_176" id="FNanchor_176_176"></a><a href="#Footnote_176_176" class="fnanchor">[176]</a> With the
department showing a deficit in most years, pressure could not
be brought to bear for a reduction of postage which could only
result in throwing a heavy charge on the public Treasury.
Should, however, the department succeed in its efforts to
obtain a higher rate of charge on second-class matter, and
such higher charge results as satisfactorily to the revenue
as the department anticipates, there can be little doubt that
reduction of letter postage would soon follow.<a name="FNanchor_177_177" id="FNanchor_177_177"></a><a href="#Footnote_177_177" class="fnanchor">[177]</a></p>

<hr />
<p><!-- Page 78 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_78" id="Page_78">[Pg 78]</a></span></p>


<h3>LETTER POST IN FRANCE</h3>

<p>The Roman posts in France disappeared in the confusion
which followed the incursions of the barbarians. Charlemagne
repaired the roads to Germany, to Italy, and to Spain,
in the early part of the ninth century, and established on
them a system of relays; but with the passing of the Carlovingian
Empire these arrangements fell into decay. The
feudal system which arose after the break-up of the Empire
was little adapted for the encouragement of posts. Its
tendencies were rather towards disintegration and isolation.
Although some of the services survived, there was for centuries
no general system of posts in France.<a name="FNanchor_178_178" id="FNanchor_178_178"></a><a href="#Footnote_178_178" class="fnanchor">[178]</a> During this
period the chief means of communication were provided by
the monasteries, which maintained regular intercourse between
their various establishments scattered throughout France, Spain,
Germany, and other countries; by travelling merchants, and
by journeymen.</p>

<p>When a regular service of posts was again established in
France, it was provided, not by the State, but by the
University of Paris, which in the twelfth and thirteenth
centuries increased in importance and renown, and attracted
large numbers of students from all parts of France, and from
foreign countries. In order to provide a means of communication
between the students and their homes, the University
obtained from the King authority to employ for the purpose
messengers, to whom were accorded certain special privileges.
Thus, in 1296, the messengers of the University were
exempted from payment of tolls, or of fees for entry into
towns. At first they travelled on foot, but at a later date on
horseback or by carriage. The system developed regularity<!-- Page 79 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_79" id="Page_79">[Pg 79]</a></span>
and rapidity, and in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries was
employed, although without authority, by the public generally.<a name="FNanchor_179_179" id="FNanchor_179_179"></a><a href="#Footnote_179_179" class="fnanchor">[179]</a></p>

<p>This service continued until 1720, when the privileges of
the University were suppressed, monetary compensation
(120,000 fr.) being paid from the revenue of the posts.<a name="FNanchor_180_180" id="FNanchor_180_180"></a><a href="#Footnote_180_180" class="fnanchor">[180]</a></p>

<p>An ordinary postal service was re-established by Louis XI in
1464.<a name="FNanchor_181_181" id="FNanchor_181_181"></a><a href="#Footnote_181_181" class="fnanchor">[181]</a> Relay stations were set up on the main routes, four
leagues apart. At each station four or five horses were provided
by the postmasters, who were required to convey the
royal despatches without special remuneration. For conducting
the royal couriers from stage to stage, however, payment
was made at the rate of 10 sous for each stage for every horse.</p>

<p>In 1527 the postmasters were given the exclusive right of
furnishing horses for the use of couriers. In order to provide
accommodation for travellers, a system of relays was established
in 1597, in addition to the ordinary posts.<a name="FNanchor_182_182" id="FNanchor_182_182"></a><a href="#Footnote_182_182" class="fnanchor">[182]</a> The stages
were fixed at distances varying from twelve to fifteen leagues,
and the charge for a horse was 20 sous for each stage. This
system was amalgamated with the posts in 1602, and the
functions for which the relays had been established were
exercised by the posts until after the Revolution. They were
definitely abandoned to private enterprise in 1797.</p>

<p>The transmission of ordinary letters for private individuals
was not at first contemplated,<a name="FNanchor_183_183" id="FNanchor_183_183"></a><a href="#Footnote_183_183" class="fnanchor">[183]</a> but it became common for the
royal messengers to carry letters for the public. The conveyance
of private letters was first definitely provided for by
the State in 1576. In that year a special system of messengers
was established, whose function was to convey legal documents
between the Parliament and the inferior courts, and was<!-- Page 80 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_80" id="Page_80">[Pg 80]</a></span>
limited to the period during which Parliament was sitting.
These messengers were required to carry letters for private
individuals at the following rates:&mdash;</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0"
summary="Postage rates for private letters conveyed by messenger in France, 1576.">
<tr><td align="left">For a single letter</td><td align="left">10</td><td align="center">deniers</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">For a packet of three or four letters</td><td align="left">15</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">For packets of letters weighing an ounce or more</td><td align="left">20</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>irrespective of distance.<a name="FNanchor_184_184" id="FNanchor_184_184"></a><a href="#Footnote_184_184" class="fnanchor">[184]</a></p>

<p>Under Richelieu the ordinary posts were given a regular
organization. Fixed days of departure and arrival were
appointed; offices were established in the towns; and in
1627 the first general table of rates was issued.<a name="FNanchor_185_185" id="FNanchor_185_185"></a><a href="#Footnote_185_185" class="fnanchor">[185]</a> Previously
the rate was fixed mutually between the couriers and the
senders or receivers of letters.<a name="FNanchor_186_186" id="FNanchor_186_186"></a><a href="#Footnote_186_186" class="fnanchor">[186]</a></p>

<p>For single letters the tariff of 1627 prescribed rates of 2 sous
for transmission between Paris and Dijon, and 3 sous for
transmission between Paris and Lyons, Paris and Bordeaux,
Paris and Toulouse. For letters composed of more than one
sheet, but less than &frac12; ounce in weight, the rate varied from
3 to 5 sous; and for larger packets the rate was from 5 to 8
sous per ounce. In 1637 the posts were given the monopoly
of the carriage of letters.<a name="FNanchor_187_187" id="FNanchor_187_187"></a><a href="#Footnote_187_187" class="fnanchor">[187]</a></p>

<p>In the first years the posts had been a charge on the State, but
at about this time they were let at farm, and proved a fruitful
and growing source of revenue to the State. By 1672 the annual
rent of the farm had risen to 1,700,000 livres, and in 1791, the
last year of the farm, the net revenue was about 12,000,000 fr.</p>

<p>A new tariff was established in 1676, as follows:&mdash;</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Table of postal tariff in France, 1676.">
<tr><th align="center">Distance.</th><th align="center" colspan="6">Letters</th><th align="center" colspan="2">Packets.</th></tr>
<tr><th align="left"></th><th align="center" colspan="2">Single.</th><th align="center" colspan="2">With Envelope.</th><th align="center" colspan="2">Double.</th><th align="center" colspan="2">Per ounce.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Less than 25 leagues</td><td align="right">2</td><td align="center">sous</td><td align="right">3</td><td align="center">sous</td><td align="right">4</td><td align="center">sous</td><td align="right">6</td><td align="center">sous</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">From 25 to 60</td><td align="right">3</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">4</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">5</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">9</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">From 60 to 80</td><td align="right">4</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">5</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">6</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">12</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Above 80 leagues</td><td align="right">5</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">6</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">9</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">15</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
</table></div>

<p><!-- Page 81 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_81" id="Page_81">[Pg 81]</a></span></p>

<p>The progression for distance was in decreasing proportion.</p>

<p>In 1703 the rates were raised mainly in order to provide
funds to meet the expenses of the wars of Louis XIV. Two
reasons were assigned: the necessity for increased revenue,
and the necessity for remedying certain defects in the
existing rates, in regard to the distances and the progression
of weight&mdash;the charges should be proportionate to the
actual distance traversed by the couriers; and the existing
rate of charge for ounce letters was therefore unjust, because
it required at least six single letters to make up a weight
of 1 ounce.<a name="FNanchor_188_188" id="FNanchor_188_188"></a><a href="#Footnote_188_188" class="fnanchor">[188]</a></p>

<p>As a matter of fact, the new rates fixed in 1703 did
not vary exactly with distance. The number of zones was
doubled, and the distances were reckoned according to the
number of stages, and the routes actually followed by the
couriers. The charge for a single letter varied from 3 to
10 sous.</p>

<p>These rates remained in force until 1759, when a variety of
causes led to a further increase of rates. The Seven Years'
War had made an increase of taxation necessary; there had
been a depreciation of money, and an increase in the cost
of all commodities, which had resulted in an increase of the
expenses of conducting the posts. Under the tariff of 1759
the eight zones of 1703 were maintained, and the rate for
single letters varied from 4 to 14 sous, with an additional
rate of 1 sou for all letters enclosed in an envelope. The
principle of charge according to weight was introduced for
letters weighing less than 1 ounce, which up to this time
had been charged only according to the number of sheets.
Double letters weighing more than &frac14; ounce and less than
&frac12; ounce, were rated at 7 sous for the first zone, and for the
other zones a "rate 2 sous less than the ordinary rate for
double letters." Packets were charged by the ounce, and the
rate per ounce was four times that for a single letter. As
with the tariff of 1703, distances were calculated according to
the route actually followed by the couriers.</p>

<p>No further modification of the rates was made until after
the Revolution. The lease of the posts was due to expire<!-- Page 82 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_82" id="Page_82">[Pg 82]</a></span>
on the 31st December 1791, and it was decided that the
Legislature should rectify the tariff before the date at which
the posts would revert to the State.<a name="FNanchor_189_189" id="FNanchor_189_189"></a><a href="#Footnote_189_189" class="fnanchor">[189]</a> A rectification was
accordingly announced by the decrees of the 17th-22nd
August 1791. This revision slightly increased the rates of
1759. The initial rate of 4 sous for single letters circulating
within the same <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">d&#233;partement</i> was retained; the rate for letters
circulating in the same <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">arrondissement</i> was fixed at 3 sous;
between <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">d&#233;partements</i> the rate was increased, and varied from
5 to 15 sous, according to distance of transmission; and the
number of zones was increased to eleven.<a name="FNanchor_190_190" id="FNanchor_190_190"></a><a href="#Footnote_190_190" class="fnanchor">[190]</a></p>

<p>Distances were no longer to be reckoned according to the
length of the route actually traversed, but from point to point
as the crow flies. The points were not, however, the actual
points of posting and of delivery. In each department a point
was fixed upon, and the rate for all letters posted or delivered
in the <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">d&#233;partement</i> was calculated as from that point; so that
for a given weight the same rate was payable on all letters
exchanged between the same two <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">d&#233;partements</i>. This system,
though comprising a very large number of rates, was much
simpler than the earlier systems. Any one town or village
now had only 82 rates for each step in the scale of rates,
whereas under the previous system a special rate must be
calculated for every other town or village in France. To
assist the application of this tariff, a map showing the central
point fixed upon for each of the 82 <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">d&#233;partements</i>, and the
distances from each central point to all others, was prepared
and supplied to every post office in France.</p>

<p>The tariff of 1791 also abolished the method of charge
according to the number of sheets, and substituted the simpler
method of charge according to weight alone. The maximum
weight for a single letter was fixed at &frac14; ounce, and for heavier
letters the rates were&mdash;</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0"
summary="Postage rates for letters heavier than one quarter ounce, France 1791.">
<tr><td align="center">From</td><td align="left">&frac14;</td><td align="center">oz. to</td><td align="left">&frac12;</td><td align="center">oz.</td><td align="left">1&frac12; times</td><td align="center">the rate for a single letter</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center"> "</td><td align="left">&frac12;</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">&frac34;</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">twice</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center"> "</td><td align="left">&frac34;</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">1</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">3 times</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center"> "</td><td align="left">1</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">1&frac14;</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">4 times</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>and so on, the increase being one single rate for each<!-- Page 83 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_83" id="Page_83">[Pg 83]</a></span>
&frac14; ounce increase of weight. The rate for letters circulating
within the same town remained 2 sous an ounce.</p>

<p>This tariff continued in operation only for a short period.
In these troubled times the public services fell into complete
disorder, and the control of the posts by the Government
did not prove a success. When in farm the rent had been
comparatively large; but under State management, even with
the increased rates of 1791, the finances were altogether unsatisfactory.
In 1791 there had been a profit of 12 millions.
Soon there was a deficit: in 1793 it was found necessary to
allow 4 millions in aid. Further increases in the rates followed.
In 1795<a name="FNanchor_191_191" id="FNanchor_191_191"></a><a href="#Footnote_191_191" class="fnanchor">[191]</a> they were made 2 livres 10 sous, 5 livres, 7 livres
10 sous, or 10 livres, according to distance, but, like most
other very high postage rates, failed of their purpose. Instead
of increasing revenue, they almost destroyed correspondence.
Transmission by private means became widespread.<a name="FNanchor_192_192" id="FNanchor_192_192"></a><a href="#Footnote_192_192" class="fnanchor">[192]</a> Other
circumstances&mdash;the general insecurity of the times, and the
violation of the secrecy of letters by officers of the Government&mdash;contributed
to this development. At the end of six
months the rates were lowered to 3, 5, 7, and 9 decimes,
according to distance, but these rates were still high. The
posts were reconstituted under the Consulate and the
Empire, and further minor changes introduced, the object
held in view in all these changes being chiefly to secure
a revenue sufficient to meet the expenditures of the
service.</p>

<p>The last tariff under the old system of charge according
to distance was introduced in 1827.<a name="FNanchor_193_193" id="FNanchor_193_193"></a><a href="#Footnote_193_193" class="fnanchor">[193]</a> The number of zones,
which in 1810 had been increased to fourteen, in order to
provide for the extended territory resulting from the French
conquests, was reduced to eleven. The rates ranged from
20 centimes to 1 fr. 20 for single letters, and the weight
limit for a single letter was fixed at 7 grammes. Distances
were reckoned as the crow flies. In 1829 a postal service was
established in the rural communes, and an additional rate of
1 decime imposed on all letters received or delivered in the
communes.<a name="FNanchor_194_194" id="FNanchor_194_194"></a><a href="#Footnote_194_194" class="fnanchor">[194]</a> This surcharge was abolished in 1846. As in<!-- Page 84 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_84" id="Page_84">[Pg 84]</a></span>
England, the charges imposed on letters sent for considerable
distances were exceedingly heavy. The charge on a letter
from Paris to Marseilles, weighing 15 grammes, was no less
than 2 fr. 20.</p>

<p>Attention was soon directed to Sir Rowland Hill's proposals
for the reform of the English system. Before the reform had
been introduced in England, the French Government were
urged to improve the French service on the lines proposed by
Sir Rowland Hill. In July 1839 M. Lherbette, member of
the Chamber of Deputies, suggested the introduction of a
Government measure, and in this he met with considerable
support. The Government, however, contented themselves
with remarking that it would be better to await the result
of the projected reform in England.</p>

<p>In the following years the question was frequently raised
in the French Parliament, on the Budget, or on reports and
petitions, and there was considerable public feeling in favour
of the reform. In 1843, 65 <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">conseils g&#233;n&#233;raux</i> presented
petitions in favour of reduced postage. In 1844 M. de St.
Priest made a proposal to reduce the number of zones to
two, and to fix the rate of postage at 20 centimes for
distances up to 40 kilometres, and 30 centimes for greater
distances. A parliamentary Commission, appointed to examine
this proposal, made an estimate of the actual cost to the Post
Office of the transmission of letters, and found that while the
cost of a letter going 40 kilometres (postage 20 centimes)
was 9&#183;75 centimes, the cost of a letter going 900 kilometres
(postage 1 fr. 20) was 14&#183;75 centimes. The Commission reported
in favour of a uniform rate of 20 centimes, but the
proposal was not adopted. Other proposals for the introduction
of a reformed system were made in February 1846 and
January 1848.</p>

<p>It was left to the Republican Government of 1848 to
introduce the reform.<a name="FNanchor_195_195" id="FNanchor_195_195"></a><a href="#Footnote_195_195" class="fnanchor">[195]</a> The National Assembly had under<!-- Page 85 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_85" id="Page_85">[Pg 85]</a></span>
consideration at the same time two propositions for effecting
the reform&mdash;that of M. de St. Priest, and that of
the Government itself, both proposing a uniform rate of
25 centimes for single letters. These propositions were
referred to a parliamentary Commission, of which M. de
St. Priest was a member, and the report of the Commission,
which recommended the reform, was adopted by the
Assembly.</p>

<p>The Government Bill to give effect to the recommendation
of the Commission was opposed in the National Assembly,
mainly on the ground that the benefit of the reduction of rate
would accrue almost entirely to the business and commercial
interests and not to the general public; and on the ground
that a letter was a parcel, and should be charged like any
other parcel, according to its weight and according to the
distance transmitted. The Government's justification for
the proposal rested chiefly on the moral and social benefits
which would result,<a name="FNanchor_196_196" id="FNanchor_196_196"></a><a href="#Footnote_196_196" class="fnanchor">[196]</a> and they contended that if, as the
opposers of the reduction had argued, commercial letters
comprised seven-eighths of the total number of letters passing
by post, such an extraordinary fact itself did not show that
advantage from reduced rates would accrue only to business
interests. It showed the injustice of the existing rates, and
would never have existed if the postage on letters had not
been higher in France than in any other country in the
world. The Commission had, moreover, made a calculation
of the actual cost of conveying and delivering letters, which
showed that the average cost per letter was from 10 to 12
centimes.</p>

<p>The Government estimated that the number of letters
would double in the first year (i.e. would increase from<!-- Page 86 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_86" id="Page_86">[Pg 86]</a></span>
55 millions<a name="FNanchor_197_197" id="FNanchor_197_197"></a><a href="#Footnote_197_197" class="fnanchor">[197]</a> to 110 millions), and the result would therefore
be a diminution of 3,125,000 fr., or 6 per cent. of the total
receipts. This would represent the total loss, since the
Minister of Finance assured the Assembly that, after the most
minute and persistent inquiries, he had received from the
postal administration definite statements that no increase in
expenses would be caused by the increase in the number of
letters&mdash;a result explained by the fact that the increase of
traffic would be appreciable only in certain large towns; in
other places the result would simply be that the postmen
would each have a few more letters to carry. Moreover,
under the new system the manipulation of correspondence
would be much simplified and facilitated.<a name="FNanchor_198_198" id="FNanchor_198_198"></a><a href="#Footnote_198_198" class="fnanchor">[198]</a></p>

<p>Fr&#233;d&#233;ric Bastiat proposed to the Assembly, as an amendment,
a postage of 5 centimes on letters up to 10 grammes, and
1 fr. for packets from 10 to 100 grammes. He said that the
transmission of thought, of communications between men, was
the very essence of society, from which arose wealth, business,
civilization, and taxes themselves. Consequently, to him it
appeared an anomaly to place a tax on such communication.<a name="FNanchor_199_199" id="FNanchor_199_199"></a><a href="#Footnote_199_199" class="fnanchor">[199]</a></p>

<p>On the economic aspect of the question he contended that a
rate of 5 centimes would provide sufficient revenue to meet
the expenses of the service.<a name="FNanchor_200_200" id="FNanchor_200_200"></a><a href="#Footnote_200_200" class="fnanchor">[200]</a><!-- Page 87 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_87" id="Page_87">[Pg 87]</a></span></p>

<p>The Government were not convinced, and maintained their
original proposal, which was carried. The new rates were&mdash;</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0"
summary="Letter rates in France from 1849.">
<tr><td align="left">Letters not exceeding 7&frac12; grammes</td><td align="left">20 centimes</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">From 7&frac12; grammes to 15 grammes</td><td align="left">40 centimes</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">From 15 grammes to 100 grammes</td><td align="left">1 fr.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Over 100 grammes</td><td align="left">1 fr. for each 100 grammes, or fraction of 100 grammes</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>The special rates for local letters were continued, viz.&mdash;</p>

<div class="blockquot"><p>Letters <span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">"de Paris pour Paris"</span> not exceeding 15 grammes, 15 centimes;
Letters circulating in the limits of the same post office not exceeding
15 grammes, 10 centimes.</p></div>

<p>The reform, which took effect on the 1st January 1849, was
much less sweeping than the reform of 1840 in England&mdash;the
initial rate was 20 centimes, corresponding to a twopenny rate&mdash;and
the results were naturally less striking in France.
They were nevertheless quite considerable. The total number
of letters posted increased from 113,500,000 in 1848 to
148,600,000 in 1849, an increase of 31 per cent., compared with
increase of 122 per cent. in the first year in England. The
gross revenue from letters and other packets fell from
48,816,861 fr. in 1848 to 36,582,009 fr. in 1849, a decrease of
11,234,852 fr. The net revenue fell from 16,960,773 to
6,862,920 fr. Thus there remained a substantial surplus.</p>

<p>Both the gross and net revenue recovered in much less time
than in England, as might have been expected, since the
falling off had not been nearly so great. Moreover, in<!-- Page 88 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_88" id="Page_88">[Pg 88]</a></span>
1850, on account of financial stress,<a name="FNanchor_201_201" id="FNanchor_201_201"></a><a href="#Footnote_201_201" class="fnanchor">[201]</a> the initial uniform rate
was raised to 25 centimes, and the rate for letters of from
7&frac12; grammes to 15 grammes, to 50 centimes. The result of
this was a set-back to the total numbers, which were only
148,500,000 in 1850, but an improvement in the gross and net
revenue. By 1853 the net revenue had reached 17,176,229 fr.,
and by 1854 the gross revenue had reached 50,019,801 fr.</p>

<p>In 1854 the initial rate for single letters was again reduced
to 20 centimes, and the change was immediately reflected
in the total number of letters. In 1852 the number was
167,100,000, and in 1853, 170,400,000, an increase of 2 per
cent. In 1854 the number was 195,900,000, an increase of
15 per cent. over the number for 1853.</p>

<p>Minor modifications were made in 1861 and 1862. The
next important change followed the war of 1870. It was
necessary to increase existing taxes wherever possible, and
to impose fresh taxes, in order to meet the heavy charges on
the national exchequer resulting from the war. The possibility
of obtaining an increased revenue from increased rates
of postage was not overlooked. In 1871 the Government
presented a Bill for the purpose, solely as a fiscal measure.<a name="FNanchor_202_202" id="FNanchor_202_202"></a><a href="#Footnote_202_202" class="fnanchor">[202]</a></p>

<p>New rates as follows were established:&mdash;</p>

<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Letter rates in France from 1871.">
<tr><td align="left">Letters not exceeding 10 grammes</td><td align="right">25</td><td align="center">centimes</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">From 10 to 20 grammes</td><td align="right">40</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">From 20 to 50 grammes</td><td align="right">70</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Over 50 grammes</td><td align="right">50</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">for each 50 grammes, or fraction of 50 grammes</td></tr>
</table></div>

<p>For local letters not exceeding 15 grammes the rate of
15 centimes was continued.</p>

<p>The results of this increase of rates are somewhat difficult
to determine with any degree of precision. Other circumstances
affected the number of letters, such as the loss of
Alsace-Lorraine (an industrial province), the establishment
of postcards in 1873, and the reduced means of the people by
reason of increased taxation. The number of letters, which
in 1869 was 313,360,723, was in 1872 only 292,466,678, and<!-- Page 89 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_89" id="Page_89">[Pg 89]</a></span>
the figures for 1869 were not regained until 1877. If the
numbers are adjusted by reckoning the loss of Alsace-Lorraine
to have resulted in a decrease in numbers proportionate to
the numbers of its population, that is, one twenty-third of
the total population of France, and adding the normal increase
of 9 millions a year, the number in 1872 would have been 325
millions, whereas it was in point of fact 292 millions. The
reduction was even greater in the following years. In 1873
the total number fell to 285,350,341.</p>

<p>The financial result was no more satisfactory. The
revenue in 1869 was 60,989,454 fr. In 1872 it had risen to
72,615,276 fr., an increase of 20 per cent. only, while the
rates had been raised 25 per cent. for letters from office to
office and 50 per cent. for local letters. In 1873 the yield
was less. It was, indeed, little more than would have resulted
from the old rates if the normal increase of numbers
under those rates had continued, although it may be doubted
whether this would have been the case in view of the heavy
financial strain imposed by the war of 1870. In any case, the
financial result of the increase of rates, which pressed heavily
on commercial and social intercourse, was extremely small.<a name="FNanchor_203_203" id="FNanchor_203_203"></a><a href="#Footnote_203_203" class="fnanchor">[203]</a></p>

<p>But if the rates were higher in France than in other
countries, there were yet some aspects in which the French
service was in advance.<a name="FNanchor_204_204" id="FNanchor_204_204"></a><a href="#Footnote_204_204" class="fnanchor">[204]</a> Compared with England, for
example, the uniform rate covered a much greater extent
of territory, and a daily delivery of letters was afforded to
every hamlet, and even to every isolated house, throughout
that greater territory.<a name="FNanchor_205_205" id="FNanchor_205_205"></a><a href="#Footnote_205_205" class="fnanchor">[205]</a> This service was provided by a
body of 19,010 rural postmen, the number of rural postmen
in England at this time being only 6,000. Facilities for
the posting of letters were also more extended in France:
the number of posting-boxes was 45,000, as compared with
some 22,000 in the United Kingdom.<a name="FNanchor_206_206" id="FNanchor_206_206"></a><a href="#Footnote_206_206" class="fnanchor">[206]</a><!-- Page 90 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_90" id="Page_90">[Pg 90]</a></span></p>

<p>It was always desired to withdraw the increase of 1872
as soon as the financial situation would allow. This course
was hastened by the establishment in 1874 of the Universal
Postal Union, of which France became a member. The
international rate for ordinary letters adopted by the Union
was 25 centimes. As a result the internal rates of France
were much higher than the rates for letters posted in
France for places in other countries of the Union. Such
a situation could not continue, and in August 1875 the
internal rates were reduced. The new rates were:&mdash;</p>

<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0"
summary="Reduced internal letter rates in France from 1875.">
<tr><td align="left">Letters not exceeding 15 grammes</td><td align="right">25</td><td align="center">centimes</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">From 15 to 30 grammes</td><td align="right">50</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">From 30 to 50 grammes</td><td align="right">75</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Over 50 grammes</td><td align="right">50</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">for each 50 grammes, or fraction of 50 grammes</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>The special local rates were retained.</p>

<p>The letter rate still remained comparatively high, and in
the following year numerous proposals were put forward in
Parliament for a reduction. In November 1876 the Government
proposed the reduction of postage on ordinary letters
to 20 centimes, and on postcards to 10 centimes, the special
rates for local letters being continued. These proposals were
referred to the Budget Commission, who expressed the opinion
that the time had arrived for the introduction of complete
uniformity of rate,<a name="FNanchor_207_207" id="FNanchor_207_207"></a><a href="#Footnote_207_207" class="fnanchor">[207]</a> and recommended a uniform initial rate
for letters of 15 centimes for 15 grammes, and a uniform
rate of 10 centimes for postcards.</p>

<p>Further consideration of the proposals was interrupted by
the dissolution of the Chamber. In the next session, M.
Caillaux, Minister of Finance, adopted the report of the
Commission, and in April 1878 the rate for letters was
reduced to 15 centimes for each 15 grammes, or fraction of<!-- Page 91 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_91" id="Page_91">[Pg 91]</a></span>
15 grammes. The general rate was thus brought to the
level of the local rate, which now disappeared.</p>

<p>The results of this reform were eminently satisfactory. The
total number of letters, which had during the years 1872
to 1877 increased by only 4,365,412, or some one and one-third
per cent. per annum, increased from 318,659,158 in 1877
to 403,853,626 in 1879, or 26 per cent. in two years, and
from 1879 to 1889 the rate of increase was 6.6 per cent. per
annum. The Government had estimated that the reduction
would involve a loss to the revenue of some 15 millions for
the first year. The actual loss was 15,323,571 fr.</p>

<p>These figures are figures of gross revenue. The figures for
net revenue are less satisfactory, both in character and in the
amounts indicated. Their character is unsatisfactory because
the expenses of the postal and telegraph departments were
not separate; and the figures for net revenue therefore
represent the net revenue on the whole service, both postal
and telegraph, and not merely for the postal traffic alone.
At this time, however, the telegraph business was small
comparatively, and the figures indicate generally the result
of the reform. In 1877 the net revenue was 47,706,293 fr.
In 1878 it fell to 29,343,953 fr., and in 1879 to 21,084,699 fr.,
from which date there was a gradual, but steady, recovery.
In 1888 it had reached 48,811,146 fr. 25, an amount higher
than that of 1877, and in 1889 the net revenue passed
53 millions, a sum never before reached in France.<a name="FNanchor_208_208" id="FNanchor_208_208"></a><a href="#Footnote_208_208" class="fnanchor">[208]</a></p>

<p>The rate fixed in 1878, although marking a considerable
reduction of the previous rate, was felt to be unsatisfactory.
One of the principal reasons invoked as justifying the suggestion
for a further reduction of the rate, was that the number of
letters actually posted in France was much less than the
number posted in other countries. This circumstance was
attributed partly to the high initial rate, and partly to
the fact that the progression of charge was directly proportionate
to the increase of weight. The initial rate was
in point of fact much higher than the corresponding rate in
other countries. The Press often called attention to the
unfavourable position in France in this respect, and developed<!-- Page 92 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_92" id="Page_92">[Pg 92]</a></span>
public opinion strongly in favour of a reduction. Representations
from business houses, chambers of commerce, and
<i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">conseils g&#233;n&#233;raux</i> were constantly received by Parliament.
The question was frequently advanced in the Legislature,
and numerous suggestions for legislation were put forward
by members. Thus, in 1897 M. Chassaing proposed, among
other reforms, the reduction of the letter rate to 10 centimes
for each 15 grammes. Although admitting the desirability of
granting the boon, the Budget Commission were unable to
recommend that course on account of the serious effect on the
net revenue which must be anticipated.<a name="FNanchor_209_209" id="FNanchor_209_209"></a><a href="#Footnote_209_209" class="fnanchor">[209]</a></p>

<p>In 1900 M. Millerand, Minister for Commerce, Industry,
Posts, and Telegraphs, in a report to the President,<a name="FNanchor_210_210" id="FNanchor_210_210"></a><a href="#Footnote_210_210" class="fnanchor">[210]</a> recommended
a reduction of the rate on the grounds that it would
give satisfaction to the public, and, at the same time, increase
appreciably the number of letters transmitted by post. He
suggested the following scale:&mdash;</p>

<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0"
summary="Proposal for reduced postage rates in France, 1900.">
<tr><td align="left">Letters not exceeding 15 grammes</td><td align="right">10</td><td align="center">centimes</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">From 15 to 50 grammes</td><td align="right">15</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Over 50 grammes</td><td align="right">5</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">for each 50 grammes, or fraction of 50 grammes</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p><!-- Page 93 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_93" id="Page_93">[Pg 93]</a></span></p><p>Such a reduction would bring the rate of letter postage down
to the level of the existing rate for postcards; and M. Millerand
regarded the reduction of the latter rate to 5 centimes
as an inevitable corollary, and a reform which might safely
be made.<a name="FNanchor_211_211" id="FNanchor_211_211"></a><a href="#Footnote_211_211" class="fnanchor">[211]</a> Assuming this further reduction, and applying
the proposed reduced rates to the statistics of existing
traffic&mdash;ignoring both the probable increase of traffic and the
increase of expenses which would result from the increase of
traffic&mdash;it was estimated that the loss to revenue would be&mdash;</p>

<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0"
summary="Estimated loss of revenue from proposed reduction in postage rates in France, 1900.">
<tr><td align="left"></td><th align="center">fr.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">On single letters</td><td align="right">34,071,584</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">On heavy letters</td><td align="right">4,707,836</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">On charged letters</td><td align="right">404,787</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">On postcards</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">2,569,787</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">Total</td><td align="right">41,753,994</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>The reduction of revenue would be 35.6 per cent. of the total
yield.</p>

<p>The reform of 1878 had entailed an increase of working
expenses of about 37 millions (5&frac12; millions of capital cost,
and 31&frac12; millions of annual expenses). The increase of traffic
from the proposed reform would, however, be 17 per cent.
less than the increase after 1878 (because the reduction was
five-fifteenths of the rate instead of six-fifteenths as in 1878),
and the increase of cost would therefore be proportionately
less. Calculated on this basis, the increase was estimated at
31,037,829 fr. (4,920,000 fr. capital expenses and 26,117,829 fr.
annual).</p>

<p>In all, therefore, the reduction would involve a loss of
revenue of 41,753,994 fr., and an increase of expense of
31,037,829 fr.&mdash;a total loss of 72,791,823 fr.<a name="FNanchor_212_212" id="FNanchor_212_212"></a><a href="#Footnote_212_212" class="fnanchor">[212]</a></p>

<p>In order as far as possible to replace this loss, M. Millerand
proposed to abolish the special tariff for <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">papiers d'affaires</i>
and subject them to letter postage, and also to increase the
rates on small packets of printed matter, other than newspapers<!-- Page 94 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_94" id="Page_94">[Pg 94]</a></span>
and periodicals.<a name="FNanchor_213_213" id="FNanchor_213_213"></a><a href="#Footnote_213_213" class="fnanchor">[213]</a> The deficit to be looked for in the
first year would then be 16,233,833 fr., and might be estimated
to disappear in the eighth year. The gross revenue would
recover in the third year. The Government was not, however,
prepared to sacrifice the revenue, and the proposal was
deferred.</p>

<p>The question still continued to receive attention in the
country and in Parliament.<a name="FNanchor_214_214" id="FNanchor_214_214"></a><a href="#Footnote_214_214" class="fnanchor">[214]</a> At length, in view of the
persistent agitation,<a name="FNanchor_215_215" id="FNanchor_215_215"></a><a href="#Footnote_215_215" class="fnanchor">[215]</a> the Government in 1906, on the recommendation
of the Budget Commission, resolved to face the
inevitable loss of revenue and make the reduction. The result
was in many ways satisfactory. The number of packets sent
at the letter rate of postage increased very considerably. A
large quantity of traffic was diverted from the cheaper open
post to the letter post, in order to obtain the advantage of
secrecy, some large business houses sending at the letter
rate millions of communications which would, under the old
rates, have been sent by the open post. In 1905, before
the reduction, the number of packets passing by post
was 2,371,000,000. In 1907 the number had increased to
2,720,000,000, and in 1908 to 2,802,000,000. The loss of net
revenue was nevertheless very great. The gross revenue was
diminished by some 12 millions, and the expenses increased
by 21&frac12; millions. The net revenue fell from 91,750,000 fr. in
1905 to 59,750,000 fr. in 1906.</p>

<p>The reduction of 1906 placed France in a position of equality
with most other nations as regards the initial rate for<!-- Page 95 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_95" id="Page_95">[Pg 95]</a></span>
letters. Indeed, the French rate was slightly lower than
that in several other countries. Thus, the equivalent of
the German and Austrian initial rates was 12&#183;2 centimes, of
the Swedish 13&#183;8 centimes, and of the English 10&#183;5 centimes.
But as regards the weight allowed for the initial rate,
and also as regards the rates for heavier letters, the position
was still unsatisfactory. The maximum weight allowed to
pass at the initial rate was 15 grammes, and the rate for a
letter of 250 grammes was 1 fr. 70.<a name="FNanchor_216_216" id="FNanchor_216_216"></a><a href="#Footnote_216_216" class="fnanchor">[216]</a> In Germany the rate for
a letter of that weight was 24&#183;4 centimes, in England 26&#183;2
centimes, and in Switzerland 10 centimes. Attention was
therefore now directed to a modification of the scale of
rates for the heavier letters. The Budget Commissions of 1908
recommended the reform.<a name="FNanchor_217_217" id="FNanchor_217_217"></a><a href="#Footnote_217_217" class="fnanchor">[217]</a> In their view the unfavourable
comparison with other countries in this respect could be
justified neither by logic nor by regard to the interests of
the Treasury. Logically, a rate of postage ought to be proportionate
to the cost of the service performed, and this was
far from varying in accordance with the weight of postal
packets.<a name="FNanchor_218_218" id="FNanchor_218_218"></a><a href="#Footnote_218_218" class="fnanchor">[218]</a></p>

<p>The number of heavy letters was, moreover, small proportionately,
and the effect on the Treasury of a reduction of
rate for such letters would be slight. Indeed, it was thought
an increase of revenue might be anticipated, since, in addition
to the natural increase resulting from the reduction, there
would, as in 1906, be a tendency for many packets sent by
the open post to be sent under the advantage of the closed
post. It was urged that the reduction should be accompanied<!-- Page 96 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_96" id="Page_96">[Pg 96]</a></span>
by certain modifications in the minor rates, which would
lead to a desirable simplification of rates: the special rate for
commercial papers should be abolished, and the general rate
for postcards should be made 5 centimes; the whole of the
reforms being carried out at the same time, in order that
the increases might be seen in their proper relation to the
compensating reductions. Otherwise the public might forget
the benefits, and resent the increases. The net loss of revenue
was estimated at 4 million francs.<a name="FNanchor_219_219" id="FNanchor_219_219"></a><a href="#Footnote_219_219" class="fnanchor">[219]</a></p>

<p>The law of the 8th April 1910 increased the unit of weight
for letters to 20 grammes. For the heavier letters the rates
were: from 20 to 50 grammes, 15 centimes; from 50 to 100
grammes, 20 centimes; and so on, adding 5 centimes for each
50 grammes or fraction of 50 grammes up to the maximum
weight allowed, viz. I kilogramme. The special rate for
commercial papers over 20 grammes in weight was
abolished. The privileged rate was retained for packets
weighing not more than 20 grammes, Parliament refusing
to agree to its total abolition.</p>

<div class="blockquot"><p><span class="smcap">Note.</span>&mdash;On the 1st January 1917, as a war measure, the general letter rate
was raised from 10 centimes to 15 centimes.</p></div>

<hr />
<p><!-- Page 97 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_97" id="Page_97">[Pg 97]</a></span></p>


<h3>LETTER POST IN GERMANY<a name="FNanchor_220_220" id="FNanchor_220_220"></a><a href="#Footnote_220_220" class="fnanchor">[220]</a></h3>

<p>A system of messengers (<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Boten-Anstalten</i>) existed in
Brandenburg as early as the first half of the sixteenth century,
and in 1604 a master of the messengers (<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Botenmeister</i>) was
appointed, whose duty was to control the sending and receiving
of all despatches.<a name="FNanchor_221_221" id="FNanchor_221_221"></a><a href="#Footnote_221_221" class="fnanchor">[221]</a> The incorporation of Prussia and Cleve in
the Mark of Brandenburg rendered necessary the improvement
and extension of the messenger service, and in 1614 the
Elector John Sigismund appointed twenty-four messengers,
who were paid at a fixed rate, according to the length of
the route traversed. Thus, for the Strasburg, Cologne, and
<span lang="de" xml:lang="de">D&#252;sseldorf</span> routes the payment was 10 thalers, and for the
Cracow, <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">K&#246;nigsberg</span>, and Mainz routes, 8 thalers. Once a
year they were supplied with an outfit of clothing. When
not travelling, they were required to report themselves
every hour to the <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Botenmeister</i>, and to hold themselves in
readiness at all times to set out if necessary without delay.
The journeys were made according to set times, and the
messengers, who carried both letters and parcels, were provided
with a way-bill, on which the times of arrival at and
departure from the various points were entered. The <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Boten-Anstalten</i>
really comprised two kinds of undertakings&mdash;the
so-called <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Post-boten</i> and the <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Landkutschen</i>. The former were
the ordinary messengers; the latter a kind of stage-coach
system, which carried both passengers and merchandise.<a name="FNanchor_222_222" id="FNanchor_222_222"></a><a href="#Footnote_222_222" class="fnanchor">[222]</a> The
rates of charge were based on the actual length of the
journey, and also upon any accidental circumstance which<!-- Page 98 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_98" id="Page_98">[Pg 98]</a></span>
might have a relation to the question, such as high general
prices.<a name="FNanchor_223_223" id="FNanchor_223_223"></a><a href="#Footnote_223_223" class="fnanchor">[223]</a></p>

<p>In 1634 a riding post between <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">C&#246;ln a. d. Spree</span> and Crossen
was established, and shortly afterwards a similar post to
Glogau, in order to provide a means of communication
between the Government and the Swedish Army. For the
same purpose in 1635 a daily messenger service (<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Botenpost</i>)
was established from <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Tangerm&#252;nde</span> to Berlin, and in 1646
a military post (<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Dragonerpost</i>) was established between Berlin
and Osnabruck, in connection with the conference preceding
the signing of the Treaty of Westphalia.</p>

<p>All these services were for the conveyance of the Court
and Administrative correspondence only. The <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Botenmeister</i>
nevertheless frequently undertook the conveyance of private
letters, for which special charges were made, and often the
messengers themselves clandestinely carried private letters.</p>

<p>In 1618 the <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Botenmeister</i> of Berlin established a special
messenger route for the conveyance of private letters
(<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Ordinari-Boten-Cours</i>)
from Berlin to Leipzig and Hamburg, and
at about the same time the <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Botenmeister</i> of <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">K&#246;nigsberg</span> established
a similar route to Danzig. In other large towns
messenger services for the conveyance of ordinary letters
were established by private individuals, but these services
were often inefficiently conducted. The messengers followed
no fixed route, and the services were irregular and unsafe.
They were at best only makeshifts.</p>

<p>As the result of a variety of circumstances, the establishment
of regular posts became a necessity in the time of the
Great Elector. The extension of the Brandenburg territory,
and the political developments, rendered it desirable to adopt
all possible means for binding together the entire territory.
Regular posts would also contribute to the national welfare
and assist industry and commerce, although there was little
prospect that at the outset they would prove profitable.<a name="FNanchor_224_224" id="FNanchor_224_224"></a><a href="#Footnote_224_224" class="fnanchor">[224]</a> In
1646 a riding post between <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">K&#246;nigsberg</span> and Danzig was
established; shortly afterwards a post between Berlin and
<span lang="de" xml:lang="de">K&#246;nigsberg</span>, and thereafter others. In 1649 the control of all the
posts was definitely assumed by the Electoral administration.<a name="FNanchor_225_225" id="FNanchor_225_225"></a><a href="#Footnote_225_225" class="fnanchor">[225]</a><!-- Page 99 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_99" id="Page_99">[Pg 99]</a></span></p>

<p>In general the posts went twice weekly; stages were
erected for the exchange of horses and postilions. At first,
postilions were changed every twelve (German) miles,<a name="FNanchor_226_226" id="FNanchor_226_226"></a><a href="#Footnote_226_226" class="fnanchor">[226]</a> and
horses every four (German) miles. Later, the stages for the
changing of horses were reduced to three miles. The usual
speed of the posts, travelling day and night, was one mile
an hour, and punctuality was insisted on.<a name="FNanchor_227_227" id="FNanchor_227_227"></a><a href="#Footnote_227_227" class="fnanchor">[227]</a> The journey
from Berlin to <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">K&#246;nigsberg</span> occupied four days, and that
from <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">K&#246;nigsberg</span> to Cleve ten days.<a name="FNanchor_228_228" id="FNanchor_228_228"></a><a href="#Footnote_228_228" class="fnanchor">[228]</a> There was at first no
delivery service, and all letters must be obtained at the
post office, where the people were consequently in the
habit of congregating to await the arrival of the post.<a name="FNanchor_229_229" id="FNanchor_229_229"></a><a href="#Footnote_229_229" class="fnanchor">[229]</a> The
postage was retained by the Postmaster as the remuneration
for his services. For the actual management and conduct
of the service he drew on the State funds to the extent
of some 6,000 thalers annually, and all official despatches
were consequently conveyed free. This charge diminished,
however, with the years, and in course of time the service
came to yield a profit to the State. In the Postmaster's
patent granted in 1661 it was provided that a portion of the
proceeds of postage should be accounted for to the State
treasury.<a name="FNanchor_230_230" id="FNanchor_230_230"></a><a href="#Footnote_230_230" class="fnanchor">[230]</a></p>

<p>The rates of postage were at first fixed according to ancient
custom, but they were on several occasions reduced. The
postage on a letter not exceeding half an ounce in weight
sent from Berlin to Wutzkow, from Breslau to Wutzkow, or<!-- Page 100 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_100" id="Page_100">[Pg 100]</a></span>
from Berlin to Frankfort, was 2 groschen, and from Berlin
to Magdeburg, 1&frac12; groschen.<a name="FNanchor_231_231" id="FNanchor_231_231"></a><a href="#Footnote_231_231" class="fnanchor">[231]</a></p>

<p>With the growth of commerce and the establishment of
the travelling post and parcel post, the service became more
and more successful financially. In 1695 the expenses represented
some 50 per cent. of the gross revenue. By 1712
they had fallen to some 41 per cent. The gross revenue was
at the same time rapidly increasing. The net revenue, which
was, of course, increasing still more rapidly, was in 1695 about
62,000 thalers, and by 1712 had risen to some 137,000 thalers.</p>

<p>The rates of postage were modified in 1699, and again in
1712; but as the old rates were retained as the basis of
both revisions, the charges remained for fifty years substantially
unchanged. A letter from Berlin to Hamburg now cost
2&frac12; groschen, to Bremen 3 groschen, to Dresden 2 groschen, to
Frankfort-on-Main 3 groschen, and so on.</p>

<p>During the next fifty years prices were gradually, but
steadily, rising in Prussia. The Seven Years' War produced
a sudden and very considerable rise in the prices of all
agricultural products. And not only did the purchasing
power of money fall owing to the scarcity and high price
of provisions, but its value also decreased through depreciation.<a name="FNanchor_232_232" id="FNanchor_232_232"></a><a href="#Footnote_232_232" class="fnanchor">[232]</a>
The cost of conducting the postal service rose
correspondingly, and the financial difficulties were increased
owing to the falling off of traffic consequent on the war.
At the end of 1761 the King was asked to agree to a
contribution in aid, but assistance was not forthcoming.
Something had to be done; and on the 27th January 1762,
in common with the general increase of taxation, the rates
for parcels and for value letters were increased 100 per cent.;
the travelling post rates, which varied from 3 to 4 groschen
per mile, were increased by 1 groschen per mile; and the fees
for guides, which were about 6 groschen per station, by about
2 groschen per station. The letter rate remained unchanged.<a name="FNanchor_233_233" id="FNanchor_233_233"></a><a href="#Footnote_233_233" class="fnanchor">[233]</a><!-- Page 101 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_101" id="Page_101">[Pg 101]</a></span></p>

<p>In the early part of 1766 a new tariff was introduced.
The rates for parcels fixed in 1762 were maintained, and
new and higher rates for letters were introduced. The increase
in the general rates varied from about 15 per cent.
to about 50 per cent. The minimum, which for letters
passing between many neighbouring places had formerly been
only 6 pfennigs, was increased to 1 groschen.</p>

<p>The raising of the rate led to a large amount of fraud, and
caused much public inconvenience. The revenue did, indeed,
increase in the first year quite appreciably; but in the second
and third years, instead of the normal yearly increase, there
was a notable decrease. Complaints against the new rates
were widespread, and it was alleged that the increased charges
embarrassed commerce. In 1770 the rates for heavy letters,
printed matter, and documents were reduced again to those
of 1712. The rates had previously been based on a variety
of considerations,<a name="FNanchor_234_234" id="FNanchor_234_234"></a><a href="#Footnote_234_234" class="fnanchor">[234]</a> but this miscellaneous basis was now put
aside and a uniform system established, the same letter rate
being applied throughout the State.</p>

<p>The coinage edict of 1821, by which the thaler was divided
into 30 silver groschen instead of 24 groschen as previously,
made necessary an alteration of the postage charges, and
amended rates were established on the 1st January 1822.
No account was taken of a less amount than a half-groschen,
and odd amounts were reckoned at the next half-groschen
above, with the result that in certain cases the rate became
higher than formerly.</p>

<p>A reduction of the rates of postage was in contemplation,
but while the discussions on the proposals were in
progress, the State finances became somewhat straitened. It
became necessary to look about for fresh revenue, and a
Commission appointed to consider the question recommended<!-- Page 102 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_102" id="Page_102">[Pg 102]</a></span>
that more revenue should be obtained from the Post Office.
The Postmaster-General pledged himself to bring up the
surplus from 700,000 or 800,000 thalers, where it then stood,
to a million, and, if possible, to 1,200,000 thalers. Accordingly,
in 1824 the rates of postage were revised, and, in general,
increased. In many cases the increase was as much as 20 per
cent., and the tariff as a whole was the highest ever fixed in
Prussia. The chief characteristics of this important change
were that letter and parcel rates were reckoned according to
the direct distance (<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Luftlinie</i>) between the post offices, and not
according to the distance by way of the post routes, or the
time occupied on the journey, or any of the other considerations
which had previously entered into the reckoning. All
special rates for individual routes and places were abolished.</p>

<p>The new rates were, for a single letter not exceeding
&frac34; loth (? ounce) in weight&mdash;</p>

<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Letter rate in Prussia from 1824.">
<tr><td align="center">Up to</td><td align="right">2</td><td align="left" colspan="3">miles</td><td align="left">1</td><td align="center">silver groschen</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">From</td><td align="right">2</td><td align="center">miles to</td><td align="right">4</td><td align="center">miles</td><td align="left">1&frac12;</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">4</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">7</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">2</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">7</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">10</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">2&frac12;</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">10</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">15</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">3</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">15</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">20</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">4</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">20</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">30</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">5</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
</table></div>

<p class="blockquot">and for each 10 miles further, 1 silver groschen more.</p>


<p>A map of distances was prepared, and every post office was
furnished with a table compiled from this map, showing the
distances between that office and all other post offices in
Prussia, together with the corresponding rates of postage.<a name="FNanchor_235_235" id="FNanchor_235_235"></a><a href="#Footnote_235_235" class="fnanchor">[235]</a>
Formerly, direct rates of postage existed only between a
limited number of post offices, and letters for any other places
were charged an additional rate (<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Binnenporto</i>) in respect of
the distance not covered by the ordinary rate. This charge
was now abolished. Each post office could calculate the rate
to any other post office by means of its table of rates. There
was, however, an additional charge (<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Landporto</i>) in the case
of places at which there was no post office, but which were<!-- Page 103 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_103" id="Page_103">[Pg 103]</a></span>
situated on the post routes. It was arranged that letters
might be despatched to or from such places so long as the
post-messenger was not thereby delayed on his journey, and
for the forwarding of any such letters to or from the nearest
post office the lowest rate of postage was charged, reckoned
as from the nearest post office. Letters up to 1 ounce in
weight were sent by riding post. Letters exceeding 1 ounce
in weight were sent by parcel post (<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Fahrpost</i>), and were charged
the corresponding rate, unless the sender expressly requested
transmission by riding post.</p>

<p>For the longer distances the rates were higher than previously.
The rate for the greatest distance within the Prussian
postal territory, which under the old rates was 18 silver
groschen for a single letter&mdash;that is, for a letter up to ? ounce
in weight&mdash;was now 19 silver groschen. The reduction was
greatest for letters going only short distances. The rate for
the shortest distances was reduced from 1&frac12; silver groschen to
1 silver groschen. But the higher rates applied to letters
passing between the great centres, and these formed the
greater part of the whole number. In addition, the progression
of the scale of weights was made very rapid. From the earliest
days of the Post Office in Prussia the progression of weight
had been by the half-ounce, and this had not been changed
even in 1766. The scale was now made&mdash;</p>

<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Postage rate for letters in excess of three eighths of an ounce, Prussia from 1824.">
<tr><td align="center">From</td><td align="right">? oz.</td><td align="center">to</td><td align="right">&frac12;</td><td align="center">oz.</td><td align="left">1&frac12;</td><td align="center">times the rate</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">&frac12;</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">&frac34;</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left" colspan="2">twice the rate</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">&frac34;</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">1</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">2&frac12;</td><td align="center">times the rate</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">1</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">1&frac14;</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">3</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">1&frac14;</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">1&frac12;</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">3&frac12;</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">1&frac12;</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">1&frac34;</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">4</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
</table></div>

<p class="blockquot">and so on for each quarter-ounce a half rate more.<a name="FNanchor_236_236" id="FNanchor_236_236"></a><a href="#Footnote_236_236" class="fnanchor">[236]</a>
</p>

<p>The year 1824 was also noteworthy for the experimental
establishment in the district of the Frankfort-on-Oder post
office of a rural delivery system. This was the first step
towards the general extension of the rural delivery throughout
Prussia. The experiment was successful, and the system
was extended in the following year. For delivery by the rural<!-- Page 104 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_104" id="Page_104">[Pg 104]</a></span>
letter-carriers an additional charge was made for each letter,
according to the following scale:&mdash;</p>

<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Scale of additional charges for rural letter-carriers, Prussia 1824.">
<tr><td align="center">For distances not exceeding</td><td align="left">1&frac12;</td><td align="center">miles</td><td align="left">1</td><td align="center">silver groschen</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">2</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">2</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">3</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">2&frac12;</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>For the longer distances the rates of 1824 were found to
be oppressive for ordinary letters, and burdensome to commerce
and literature. Financially also the increase was not
a success. For 1824, the last year of the old rates, the surplus
was 823,229 thalers, an increase of 100,325 thalers over the
surplus of 1823. The surplus for 1825, the first year of the
new rates, was 1,121,616 thalers, an increase of 298,387
thalers over the surplus of 1824. Apparently, therefore, the
new rates had produced an immediate increase of net revenue.
This was, however, not the case. While the actual proceeds
of postage in 1824 were 73,152 thalers greater than in 1823,
the proceeds of postage in 1825 were only 80,890 thalers
greater than in 1824.<a name="FNanchor_237_237" id="FNanchor_237_237"></a><a href="#Footnote_237_237" class="fnanchor">[237]</a> The increased yield of postage was
therefore quite small. And even this small increase disappeared
in 1826. For that year the yield of postage was only
40,547 thalers greater than in 1825, and in 1827 there was an
actual falling off of 41,942 thalers. The increase of net revenue
was therefore attributable to other causes. Thus, for example,
in 1825, by some means or other, a reduction of no less than
136,160 thalers was effected in the expenses of the service.</p>

<p>The rates were soon found to need amendment. Changes
were made in the subsidiary rates, the rates for commercial
papers, for magazines, etc., but the letter rate remained
unchanged until 1844, when a considerable reduction was
made. The following rates for a single letter (not exceeding
? ounce in weight), were established:&mdash;</p>

<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Reduced scale of postage rates for single letters, Prussia 1844.">
<tr><td align="left" colspan="5">Not exceeding 5 miles</td><td align="left">1</td><td align="center">silver groschen</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">From</td><td align="right">5</td><td align="center">miles to</td><td align="right">10</td><td align="center">miles</td><td align="left">1&frac12;</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">10</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">15</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">2</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">15</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">20</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">2&frac12;</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">20</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">30</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">3</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">30</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">50</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">4</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">50</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">100</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">5</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="5">For each further 100 miles within the Prussian administration</td><td align="left">6</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p><!-- Page 105 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_105" id="Page_105">[Pg 105]</a></span></p>

<p>These rates were applied to letters, printed matter sent
under band, and letters containing samples of merchandise.
It was estimated that this change would reduce the gross
receipts from postage by 700,000 thalers, and the net revenue
for 1845 was estimated at 700,000 thalers instead of 1,400,000
thalers. The actual decrease in 1845 in the gross receipts
from postage was, however, only 302,563 thalers, and the
actual falling off in net revenue only 346,208 thalers. The gross
revenue soon recovered, and in 1847 exceeded that of 1844.<a name="FNanchor_238_238" id="FNanchor_238_238"></a><a href="#Footnote_238_238" class="fnanchor">[238]</a></p>

<p>The Prussian administration, while not prepared to introduce
complete uniformity of rate irrespective of distance, were
yet desirous of simplifying the rates, and of removing from
them any trace of the fiscal tradition, so far as this course
could be followed without involving serious sacrifice of net
revenue.<a name="FNanchor_239_239" id="FNanchor_239_239"></a><a href="#Footnote_239_239" class="fnanchor">[239]</a></p>

<p>In September 1848 the distinction between the letter rate
and the rate for printed matter and documents was abolished,
and on the 1st October 1848 the following scale of weights for
all letters, publications, etc., was introduced, viz.:&mdash;</p>

<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Scale of weights for letters, publications etc., Prussia 1848.">
<tr><td align="left" colspan="3">Not exceeding</td><td align="right">?</td><td align="center">oz.</td><td align="left">1</td><td align="right">rate (i.e. 1 sgr.)</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">From</td><td align="right">?</td><td align="center">oz. to</td><td align="right">&frac12;</td><td align="center">oz.</td><td align="left">1&frac12;</td><td align="left">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">&frac12;</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">&frac34;</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">2</td><td align="left">rates</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">&frac34;</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">1</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">2&frac12;</td><td align="left">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">1</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">4</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">3</td><td align="left">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">4</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">8</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">4</td><td align="left">"</td></tr>
</table></div>

<p class="blockquot">and over 8 ounces 4 rates, until the charge was less than double parcel rate.</p>


<p>The rates were still based on the old theory of distance.
The Prussian administration feared that a complete reform<!-- Page 106 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_106" id="Page_106">[Pg 106]</a></span>
of the rates on the English model would have a disastrous
effect on the postal revenue, and so upset the equilibrium of
the State finance. They had, of course, the experience of
England to guide them, and they had not failed to note the
large reduction of net revenue which the adoption of the
reform of 1840 had entailed. In the following year, however,
a great step was taken in the direction of the new system.
By the law of the 21st December 1849 the following simplified
rates of postage, to take effect from the 1st January 1850, were
established:&mdash;</p>


<p class="blockquot">For a single letter not exceeding &frac12; oz. (1 zollloth)&mdash;</p>


<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Single letter rates, Prussia 1850.">
<tr><td align="left">Up to 10 miles</td><td align="right">1</td><td align="left">silver groschen</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">10 miles to 20 miles</td><td align="right">2</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">All other distances</td><td align="right">3</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p class="blockquot">For a letter weighing&mdash;</p>


<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Postage rates for letter greater than one half ounce, Prussia 1850.">
<tr><td align="center">From</td><td align="left">&frac12;</td><td align="center">oz. to 1</td><td align="left">oz.</td><td align="center">2</td><td align="left">rates</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">1</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">1&frac12;</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">3</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">1&frac12;</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">2</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">4</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">2</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">4</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">5</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">4</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">8</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">6</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
</table></div>

<p class="blockquot">
and so on, until the rate became less than the parcel rate (1 zollloth = 1? loth).<br />
</p>

<p>The reductions in Prussia were in all cases made with
careful regard to the possible financial results. The desire
to remove all trace of the fiscal tradition did not extend to
a desire to relieve the Post Office of its revenue-producing
function, and the actual loss of net revenue which resulted
in Prussia from the introduction of cheap postage was much
less than the loss in England.<a name="FNanchor_240_240" id="FNanchor_240_240"></a><a href="#Footnote_240_240" class="fnanchor">[240]</a> The set-back to the revenue
consequent on the reduction of 1844 was recovered in 1847;
the set-back consequent on the reduction of the rates of
value letters and parcels in 1848 (on the average some 66?
per cent.) was recovered in 1852; and that occasioned by the
reform of the 1st January 1850 was recovered in 1853. But the
reform of 1850, which retained the three distance charges,
was far from being a complete reform of the character of
that in England.<!-- Page 107 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_107" id="Page_107">[Pg 107]</a></span></p>

<p>No change of importance was made in the ordinary letter
rate between 1850 and 1860. In the latter year the maximum
weight for packets passing by letter post was fixed at
half a pound (15 loth).<a name="FNanchor_241_241" id="FNanchor_241_241"></a><a href="#Footnote_241_241" class="fnanchor">[241]</a> A further step towards simplicity
and reduction of the letter rate was taken in 1861,<a name="FNanchor_242_242" id="FNanchor_242_242"></a><a href="#Footnote_242_242" class="fnanchor">[242]</a> when
the weight scale was revised and the three steps established
in 1849 abolished, two only being substituted. Letters up
to half an ounce in weight were to pass at the single
rate, and letters exceeding that weight at double rate. The
three distance zones were maintained.</p>

<p>The special fee for delivery which was collected from the
addressee by the post office of destination was still in force.
It was, of course, in effect, an increase of the normal rate
of postage, and as such it lay as a heavy burden on the
letter traffic. In the case of packets of printed matter not
exceeding half an ounce in weight it amounted to 100 per
cent. on the normal rate. It was, moreover, disproportionate
to the cost of the service of delivery.<a name="FNanchor_243_243" id="FNanchor_243_243"></a><a href="#Footnote_243_243" class="fnanchor">[243]</a> Since 1850 the Prussian
administration had incessantly urged the abolition of
the charge. Special charges for delivery had already been
abolished in England, in France, and in other of the larger
States. The efforts of the administration were, however,
frustrated by the Minister for Finance, who was unable, from
regard to the needs of the national exchequer, to abandon
the revenue obtained from this source. These financial
considerations delayed the abolition of the charge by at least
a decade.<a name="FNanchor_244_244" id="FNanchor_244_244"></a><a href="#Footnote_244_244" class="fnanchor">[244]</a> The existence of the charge was found to be
especially unfortunate in regard to foreign letters, since its
collection was regarded by foreign administrations as an
addition to the ordinary postage and consequently an evasion
of the terms of agreements under which foreign rates had
been fixed. The charge was ultimately abolished in 1862.<a name="FNanchor_245_245" id="FNanchor_245_245"></a><a href="#Footnote_245_245" class="fnanchor">[245]</a>
In order to avoid inconvenient reduction of revenue, it was
arranged that the abolition should be effected gradually: for
certain classes of traffic as from the date of the coming into
force of the Act, for other classes as from the 1st July 1863,
and for the remainder as from the 1st July 1864.<!-- Page 108 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_108" id="Page_108">[Pg 108]</a></span></p>

<p>The political events of the years 1864 and 1866 occasioned
far-reaching modifications of the postal service in Germany.
After the expulsion of Austria from the German league,
Prussia took over the administration of the postal service
in the duchies of the Elbe. Prussia had also absorbed the
kingdom of Hanover. The territory of the Prussian postal
administration was thus largely extended; and in addition
the Prince of <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Thurn</span> and <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Taxis</span> relinquished in favour of
the Crown of Prussia the control which he had exercised
over the postal service in eighteen States.<a name="FNanchor_246_246" id="FNanchor_246_246"></a><a href="#Footnote_246_246" class="fnanchor">[246]</a></p>

<p>The North-German Union was established in 1867, and
the postal arrangements for the whole territory of the
Union were unified. Up to this time ten independent
postal administrations had existed in this territory,<a name="FNanchor_247_247" id="FNanchor_247_247"></a><a href="#Footnote_247_247" class="fnanchor">[247]</a> and
the rates of these administrations differed in various particulars.
The Prussian rates were applied temporarily to all
postal traffic passing between the old and new Prussian
territories, and the rates of the Union service were applied
to traffic passing between the territories forming the North-German
Union.</p>

<p>The continuance of these conditions was not consistent
with a unified administration of the postal affairs of the
whole North-German Union, and a reform of the rates
became necessary. Germany was in 1867 almost the only
one of the great States of the world which still maintained
a scale of rates of postage for letters graduated according
to distance. Prussia had already repeatedly endeavoured to
introduce the principle of uniformity of rate irrespective of
distance which had been adopted by all others, or at least to
secure further simplification; but advance in this direction
had always been hindered by financial considerations.<a name="FNanchor_248_248" id="FNanchor_248_248"></a><a href="#Footnote_248_248" class="fnanchor">[248]</a> The
political developments now opened the way for a thorough
reorganization of the rates, and this was achieved by the
law of the 4th November 1867. This law, which took
effect from the 1st January 1868, established uniform
rates for letters, irrespective of distance, of the following<!-- Page 109 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_109" id="Page_109">[Pg 109]</a></span>
amounts&mdash;1 sgr. (= 10 pf.) for letters not exceeding half
an ounce in weight, and 2 sgr. for all letters of greater
weight.</p>

<p>After the refounding of the German Empire in 1870, there
was fresh legislation in regard to the Post Office.<a name="FNanchor_249_249" id="FNanchor_249_249"></a><a href="#Footnote_249_249" class="fnanchor">[249]</a> Among
other changes, the limit of weight for the single letter was
fixed at 15 grammes, and the limit of maximum weight at
half a pound. This law also abolished the charge for rural
delivery, a long-desired reform which had been frequently
urged upon the Reichstag. In order to assist further the
interests of residents in the country, it was arranged that
on payment of a monthly fee of 5 sgr. letters might be
handed to and delivered by the post messenger, in a closed
pouch, at places on his route.</p>

<p>The rates established under this law have remained in
operation substantially unchanged up to the present time.
The most important modification was made in 1900, when
the maximum limit of weight of the single letter was raised
from 15 to 20 grammes. Under these rates the letter post
has developed continuously. In 1872 the total number of
letters passing by post within the territory of the Imperial
Post Office was 422 millions, and in 1910 the number had
increased to 2,026 millions. As in other countries, the letter
rate has proved extremely profitable. The net revenue of
the Imperial Post Office in 1872 amounted to 4&#183;7 million
Marks, and in 1910 to 88 million Marks. In Germany,
however, the railways are State-owned, and the Imperial
Post Office is not required to pay to the railways a full
equivalent for the services performed. The value of the
service performed by the railways on behalf of the Post
Office for which no charge is made against the Post Office
is not definitely known.<a name="FNanchor_250_250" id="FNanchor_250_250"></a><a href="#Footnote_250_250" class="fnanchor">[250]</a> The newspaper traffic, the parcel
post, and the Imperial Telegraph Service are carried on
at heavy loss. The Post Office also performs numerous
services, such as those in connection with the National
Insurance schemes, for which it receives no monetary credit;
and there is no doubt that taken by itself the letter traffic<!-- Page 110 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_110" id="Page_110">[Pg 110]</a></span>
is largely profitable at the existing rates, even when full
allowance has been made for all legitimate charges against
the service.</p>


<h4><span class="smcap">Note on Rural Delivery</span></h4>

<p>Until the eighteen-thirties there was no State provision
for the letter traffic in country districts. Residents in
the country must deliver all their letters at, or fetch them
from, the nearest post office, which was done on market-day
or by messengers. In 1824 a beginning was made in Prussia
by the introduction experimentally of a delivery service at
certain post offices. In the following years the number of
rural deliverers and the number of posting-boxes in the
villages were increased, and a uniform delivery fee (<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Landbestellgeld</i>)
of 1 silver groschen instituted. The delivery fee
was abolished on the 1st January 1872 (law of 28th October,
1871). This meant the abandonment of a yearly revenue
of 1&frac12; million Marks.</p>

<p>In spite of the increase in the number of post offices there
were still in 1880 as many as 19 million people, the greater
half of the whole nation, and 17,000 localities, outside the
limits of the postal service.<a name="FNanchor_251_251" id="FNanchor_251_251"></a><a href="#Footnote_251_251" class="fnanchor">[251]</a></p>

<p>In 1880 a great step forward was taken. The number of
rural deliverers was largely increased, and also the number
of postal stations in the country (<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Posth&#252;lfstellen</i>).<a name="FNanchor_252_252" id="FNanchor_252_252"></a><a href="#Footnote_252_252" class="fnanchor">[252]</a> A daily
delivery was extended to the greater number of places, the
rural routes in most cases being so arranged that the deliverer
returned by the same route, thereby enabling an
answer to be sent the same day to letters received on the
outward journey.<a name="FNanchor_253_253" id="FNanchor_253_253"></a><a href="#Footnote_253_253" class="fnanchor">[253]</a></p>

<hr />
<p><!-- Page 111 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_111" id="Page_111">[Pg 111]</a></span></p>


<h2>II<br /><br /><br />
THE RATE FOR NEWSPAPERS</h2>


<h3>NEWSPAPER POST IN ENGLAND</h3>

<p>In England newspapers have enjoyed special privileges in
regard to transmission by post since about the middle of the
seventeenth century. The origin of the privilege is to be
looked for in the special circumstances under which the early
newspapers, and the newsletters and newsbooks from which
they were derived, were issued, and the means by which the
news included in them was obtained.</p>

<p>At that period the post was the chief means by which
news could be collected or distributed. The newsletters
were distributed by post,<a name="FNanchor_254_254" id="FNanchor_254_254"></a><a href="#Footnote_254_254" class="fnanchor">[254]</a> and the news which they contained
was for the most part obtained through the agency of
the Post Office from correspondents in various parts of the
country. It was, indeed, an important part of the function
of the Post Office to furnish news to the Court, and to the
other departments of State, as well as to the general public.<a name="FNanchor_255_255" id="FNanchor_255_255"></a><a href="#Footnote_255_255" class="fnanchor">[255]</a><!-- Page 112 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_112" id="Page_112">[Pg 112]</a></span></p>

<p>In 1659 General Monck appointed Henry Muddiman, a
journalist who had already issued the <i>Parliamentary Intelligencer</i>
and the <i>Mercurius Publicus</i>, to write on behalf
of the Royalist cause. In consideration of his services he
was, after the Restoration, given the privilege of free transmission
for his letters.<a name="FNanchor_256_256" id="FNanchor_256_256"></a><a href="#Footnote_256_256" class="fnanchor">[256]</a> This gave him an advantage over
other journalists, and his newsletters and newsbooks became
extremely popular. In 1663, however, he was supplanted
by Roger L'Estrange, a Royalist who had not to that time
been properly recompensed for his faithfulness. L'Estrange
was an able writer, who after the passing of the Licensing
Act of 1662 had been requested to draw up proposals for
the regulation of the Press. As a reward for his services in
that connection he was given the office of Surveyor of the
Press, his remuneration being the sole privilege of writing
and publishing newsbooks and advertisement. L'Estrange
also secured the privilege of free postage from Lady Chesterfield,
one of the farmers of the Post Office.<a name="FNanchor_257_257" id="FNanchor_257_257"></a><a href="#Footnote_257_257" class="fnanchor">[257]</a></p>

<p>L'Estrange's privilege put an end to Muddiman's newsbooks,
but in no way interfered with his newsletters and his
right to free postage. He was able, therefore, to continue<!-- Page 113 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_113" id="Page_113">[Pg 113]</a></span>
his newsletters, and did so with great success. After the
Restoration Muddiman had attached himself to Sir Edward
Nicholas, one of the principal Secretaries of State, and his
Under-Secretary, Joseph Williamson, from whom he had
been in the habit of obtaining part of his news. Williamson
was a grasping man, who became jealous of the success of
the newswriters, and finding that L'Estrange was unpopular,
conceived the idea of getting the control of the whole
business into his own hands. He therefore suggested that
Muddiman should go to Oxford, where the Court had
removed owing to the plague, and publish a new journal in
opposition to L'Estrange. While Muddiman was at Oxford,
Williamson would obtain by an agent in the Post Office,
James Hickes, the names of all his correspondents.<a name="FNanchor_258_258" id="FNanchor_258_258"></a><a href="#Footnote_258_258" class="fnanchor">[258]</a> The
plan was eminently successful, and on the 16th November 1665
the <i>Oxford Gazette</i> appeared, to be transformed a few months
later, with its twenty-fourth issue (5th February 1665-6), into
the <i>London Gazette</i>. Muddiman, however, gained knowledge
of Williamson's designs regarding his correspondents, and
on the 8th February 1666 left the <i>Gazette</i>. Williamson
thereupon took control of its publication, and, with the
assistance of Hickes, continued its issue. He appointed
correspondents in all the leading seaports, and in a few
other English towns, and also in continental cities, who
were required to furnish accounts of passing events. In
return for their services the correspondents received regularly
copies of the <i>Gazette</i>. Both the letters from correspondents
and the <i>Gazettes</i> which were their reward passed free of
postage.<a name="FNanchor_259_259" id="FNanchor_259_259"></a><a href="#Footnote_259_259" class="fnanchor">[259]</a> The regular supply of a copy of the <i>Gazette</i> was
so great a privilege that it was often regarded as sufficient
wages for a post-messenger or even a deputy-postmaster.<a name="FNanchor_260_260" id="FNanchor_260_260"></a><a href="#Footnote_260_260" class="fnanchor">[260]</a><!-- Page 114 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_114" id="Page_114">[Pg 114]</a></span></p>

<p>This became a recognized practice before the end of the
seventeenth century, and the privilege was regarded as
forming part of the ordinary emoluments of the deputy-postmasters.<a name="FNanchor_261_261" id="FNanchor_261_261"></a><a href="#Footnote_261_261" class="fnanchor">[261]</a>
The <i>Gazettes</i> were sent out from London by
officers known as Clerks of the Road, under the frank of
these officers; and the privilege of franking these <i>Gazettes</i>
became extended so that the Clerks of the Road ultimately
became entitled to frank any newspaper to whomsoever
addressed.<a name="FNanchor_262_262" id="FNanchor_262_262"></a><a href="#Footnote_262_262" class="fnanchor">[262]</a> In the eighteenth century the Clerks of the
Road developed the exercise of their privilege. They accepted
subscriptions and undertook the supply of newspapers
generally throughout the country. They became, in fact,
newsagents. Their newspaper business was something quite
apart from their duties as officers of the Post Office. It
was conducted in a separate building, by a separate staff,
and they found it very lucrative.<a name="FNanchor_263_263" id="FNanchor_263_263"></a><a href="#Footnote_263_263" class="fnanchor">[263]</a> The postage on newspapers
at the letter rate would have been prohibitive. Hence
newspapers either went under frank or did not go by post
at all, and the whole business of distribution through the
post fell into the hands of the Clerks of the Road. Their<!-- Page 115 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_115" id="Page_115">[Pg 115]</a></span>
profits were in part applied to the discharge of certain payments&mdash;the
salaries of some of the inferior clerks and some
charitable payments&mdash;in connection with the Post Office.<a name="FNanchor_264_264" id="FNanchor_264_264"></a><a href="#Footnote_264_264" class="fnanchor">[264]</a></p>

<p>In 1764 the privilege was explicitly recognized by statute,<a name="FNanchor_265_265" id="FNanchor_265_265"></a><a href="#Footnote_265_265" class="fnanchor">[265]</a>
but the same Act gave a severe blow to the whole system
by authorizing members of Parliament to send newspapers
free of postage. The members did not confine the exercise
of the privilege to newspapers sent by or to them for their
own use, but granted orders for free postage to booksellers
and newsagents on a liberal scale.<a name="FNanchor_266_266" id="FNanchor_266_266"></a><a href="#Footnote_266_266" class="fnanchor">[266]</a> The booksellers naturally<!-- Page 116 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_116" id="Page_116">[Pg 116]</a></span>
cut the prices charged by the Clerks of the Road. The
charge of the latter had been &#163;5 a year for a daily paper,
and &#163;2 10s. a year for an evening paper. The booksellers
in 1770 advertised a charge of &#163;4 a year for a daily paper,
and &#163;2 a year for an evening paper.<a name="FNanchor_267_267" id="FNanchor_267_267"></a><a href="#Footnote_267_267" class="fnanchor">[267]</a> As a result a large
part of the traffic went to the booksellers, and the profits of
the Clerks of the Road fell so rapidly that it was soon found
necessary to relieve them of the charges on their profits.<a name="FNanchor_268_268" id="FNanchor_268_268"></a><a href="#Footnote_268_268" class="fnanchor">[268]</a></p>

<p>Efforts were made to check the abuse of the privilege of
franking of newspapers held by members of Parliament under
the Act of 1764. An Act of 1802 (42 Geo. III, cap. 63)
required not only that the member should sign the newspaper
packets, but that the whole superscription, together
with the date of posting and the name of the post-town in
which the paper was intended to be posted, should be in
his handwriting. The member must, moreover, himself be
in the post-town where the paper was posted on the date
shown on the paper. These regulations were not long
maintained. They were probably too stringent to be enforced,
and in the course of a few years the appearance on
the newspaper or wrapper of any member's name, whether
written by himself or by any other person, or even printed,
was sufficient to secure free transmission through the post.
In 1825 the conditions were definitely repealed, and newspapers
became legally entitled to free transmission by post.<a name="FNanchor_269_269" id="FNanchor_269_269"></a><a href="#Footnote_269_269" class="fnanchor">[269]</a></p>

<p>There were reasons why the Government and the Post
Office did not suppress the extension of the privilege
accorded to newspapers. At this time heavy general taxes<!-- Page 117 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_117" id="Page_117">[Pg 117]</a></span>
were imposed on newspapers&mdash;the paper duty, the advertisement
duty, and the stamp duty.</p>

<p>These charges had been first imposed in the early years of
the eighteenth century, when newspapers were changing
character, and they were in the nature of restrictions on the
liberty of the Press, a continuation of the restrictions which
had previously been maintained by means of Licensing Acts.<a name="FNanchor_270_270" id="FNanchor_270_270"></a><a href="#Footnote_270_270" class="fnanchor">[270]</a>
Newspapers were at that time ceasing to be mere chronicles
of events, and were beginning to publish comments and to
criticize persons and parties. A Bill to impose a tax of 1d.
a copy on all periodical publications was brought into Parliament
in 1701, but was abandoned owing to the opposition
of the newspaper proprietors, who represented that they were
in the habit of selling their papers at a &#189;d. a copy.<a name="FNanchor_271_271" id="FNanchor_271_271"></a><a href="#Footnote_271_271" class="fnanchor">[271]</a> In 1712
a message from the Crown, adverting to the undesirable
character of the new development of newspaper enterprise,
recommended that a remedy be found without delay. The
result was the imposition of a stamp duty of &#189;d. the sheet
on all newspapers of a sheet and a half.<a name="FNanchor_272_272" id="FNanchor_272_272"></a><a href="#Footnote_272_272" class="fnanchor">[272]</a> The privileges with
regard to their transmission by post were, however, in no
way interfered with.</p>

<p>In 1776 the tax was raised to 1&#189;d. a copy, in 1789 to 2d.,
in 1794 to 2&#189;d., and in 1815 to 4d., at which amount it stood
until 1836. In 1819 onerous restrictions with regard to registration,
bonds, and sureties were imposed, mainly with the
view of preventing the issue of publications of undesirable
character.<a name="FNanchor_273_273" id="FNanchor_273_273"></a><a href="#Footnote_273_273" class="fnanchor">[273]</a><!-- Page 118 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_118" id="Page_118">[Pg 118]</a></span></p>

<p>In consideration of these charges the Government were
prepared to allow free transmission by post. Moreover, the
franking privilege of the Clerks of the Road was favoured
as an economy. They argued that as these officers received
considerable sums from their newspaper business their salaries
from the Post Office were correspondingly low, and if the
newspaper business were taken from them it would be
necessary for the Post Office to make good the loss in income
which they would suffer.<a name="FNanchor_274_274" id="FNanchor_274_274"></a><a href="#Footnote_274_274" class="fnanchor">[274]</a> It would seem that there
was at this time no conception of charging a rate of postage
on newspapers; and so far the authorities were right in
thinking the abolition of the privilege would cause an addition
to the expenses of the Post Office, in compensation for which
there would be no increase in revenue. Whatever were the
taxes paid to other departments, it was clearly in the financial
interest of the Post Office, so long as newspapers passed
free by post, to retain a system which enabled certain of its
officers to obtain part of their income from special arrangements
for the distribution of the newspapers, instead of from
Post Office funds.</p>

<p>The Clerks of the Road still held an advantage over the
ordinary newsagents. The local postmasters acted as their
agents, and they had, moreover, the important privilege of
posting their papers later. Newsagents were not permitted
to post after seven o'clock, but the Clerks of the Road could
post as late as eight o'clock. They were able, therefore, to
retain a considerable business. In 1829 it was estimated
that as many as one-eighth of all the newspapers sent out
from London were sent by the Clerks of the Road.<a name="FNanchor_275_275" id="FNanchor_275_275"></a><a href="#Footnote_275_275" class="fnanchor">[275]</a> The
privilege of late posting was withdrawn in 1834, and their
business then ceased.<a name="FNanchor_276_276" id="FNanchor_276_276"></a><a href="#Footnote_276_276" class="fnanchor">[276]</a><!-- Page 119 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_119" id="Page_119">[Pg 119]</a></span></p>

<p>It seems anomalous that at the same time that the Government,
with the object of restricting the publication and
distribution of newspapers, imposed a heavy stamp duty and
a duty on advertisements, they should have assisted, by
allowing free transmission by post, the distribution of such
newspapers as were able to survive the impositions; but the
heavy taxes were intended to prevent the issue of cheap
newspapers, and expensive papers could only find sale among
those who were not attracted by dangerous doctrines, political
or otherwise.<a name="FNanchor_277_277" id="FNanchor_277_277"></a><a href="#Footnote_277_277" class="fnanchor">[277]</a> In the view of the Government this aristocratic
character ensured, moreover, a high moral tone in
the Press. Without such taxes the English Press might
become a moral danger and might conceivably sink to the
level of the American Press of the day, which, according to
some eminent persons, was very low indeed.<a name="FNanchor_278_278" id="FNanchor_278_278"></a><a href="#Footnote_278_278" class="fnanchor">[278]</a> The question
of free transmission by post received little attention. Chief
interest was centred on the allegation that the stamp duty
so raised the price of legitimate newspapers as to place them
beyond the reach of any but the well-to-do.</p>

<p>The question of allowing the free publication of newspapers,
or of, at least, reducing the heavy burdens under which they
lay, became urgent after the passing of the Reform Act of
1832.<a name="FNanchor_279_279" id="FNanchor_279_279"></a><a href="#Footnote_279_279" class="fnanchor">[279]</a> The increase in the number of people directly
interested in political affairs through the extension of the
franchise, and the awakened general interest in social and
economic problems, not only produced a great demand for<!-- Page 120 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_120" id="Page_120">[Pg 120]</a></span>
newspapers, but made necessary provision for the dissemination
of accurate political intelligence.<a name="FNanchor_280_280" id="FNanchor_280_280"></a><a href="#Footnote_280_280" class="fnanchor">[280]</a> Numerous unstamped
papers, which found a ready sale, were issued in various parts
of the country, in defiance of the law. Thus, in London,
one of these papers, <i>The Poor Man's Guardian</i>, an able and
"Socialistic" paper, bore on its title-page a notification that
it was deliberately published contrary to law, in order to
test "the power of right against might."<a name="FNanchor_281_281" id="FNanchor_281_281"></a><a href="#Footnote_281_281" class="fnanchor">[281]</a></p>

<p>The Government took strong action against such publications.
Numerous prosecutions were undertaken, and a
large number of persons in various parts of the country were
imprisoned; but the circulation of the papers could not be
checked. Popular sentiment was largely on the side of the<!-- Page 121 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_121" id="Page_121">[Pg 121]</a></span>
publishers and sellers of unstamped papers, sympathy being
so strong that frequently subscriptions for their benefit were
raised.<a name="FNanchor_282_282" id="FNanchor_282_282"></a><a href="#Footnote_282_282" class="fnanchor">[282]</a></p>

<p>It became apparent very soon after the passing of the
Reform Act that the heavy duty could not be maintained.
It was indeed so high, and the sale of the unstamped
publications was so great, that in the years after 1831 there
was an actual diminution in the yield of the stamp duty.
In 1836 the Government were constrained to deal with the
question. They introduced a Bill providing for the reduction
of the duty from 4d. a sheet to 1d. a sheet. The Chancellor
of the Exchequer said that the reduction was simply a
concession to public necessity and expediency. If the duty
were maintained at its then existing level, public feeling
against it would increase, and might lead to a general disposition
to encourage illegal publications. The reduction
would, moreover, assist the moral improvement of the people.</p>

<p>The reduction of the duty was not carried without opposition.
<i>The Times</i>, which had attained its position under
the old duties, and the other great newspapers then successfully
conducted, were opposed to the reduction, foreseeing
the possibility of the rivalry of new and cheap competitors.<a name="FNanchor_283_283" id="FNanchor_283_283"></a><a href="#Footnote_283_283" class="fnanchor">[283]</a>
An attempt was made to argue that the benefit would not
accrue to the public, since the public did not in general buy
newspapers but went to the public-house to hear them read.
Such persons would still go to the public-house, and would
therefore derive no benefit from the reduced price: the
advantage would be with the publican. On the other hand,
it was anticipated that the reduction of the duty would<!-- Page 122 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_122" id="Page_122">[Pg 122]</a></span>
so cheapen the newspapers that they would be brought
within reach of all. Mr. Spring Rice said he knew that
"the newspaper was one of the great attractions to take
the poor man from home to visit the public-house; if,
therefore, the adoption of this proposition tended to keep
the poor man at home, it would afford a great moral aid to
the improvement of the people."<a name="FNanchor_284_284" id="FNanchor_284_284"></a><a href="#Footnote_284_284" class="fnanchor">[284]</a> The moral uplifting of the
poor man was a mighty shibboleth in those days, and one
which gave a power to these arguments.</p>

<p>The rates fixed by the Act of 1836 were 1d. for
the first sheet, not exceeding 2,295 superficial square inches,
and a halfpenny for a second sheet not exceeding 1,148
square inches. The existing provisions with regard to registration
and sureties were continued. They were considered
of importance, in view of the likelihood of the establishment
of cheap irresponsible papers which might be found publishing
slanderous and scurrilous, if not blasphemous, statements.</p>

<p>There is little doubt that the Government had in mind a
wish still to keep some restriction on the Press, and the
Radicals always took that view. The penny duty undoubtedly
had the effect of preventing the issue of really
cheap newspapers.<a name="FNanchor_285_285" id="FNanchor_285_285"></a><a href="#Footnote_285_285" class="fnanchor">[285]</a> Although in Parliament the Government
argued that they were entitled to the penny as a
postage charge,<a name="FNanchor_286_286" id="FNanchor_286_286"></a><a href="#Footnote_286_286" class="fnanchor">[286]</a> it is unlikely that they did not realize how
illogical it would be to charge a penny stamp duty on every
copy of a newspaper that was printed, in order to secure
the free transmission by post of such copies as the publisher
might wish to distribute by that means.<a name="FNanchor_287_287" id="FNanchor_287_287"></a><a href="#Footnote_287_287" class="fnanchor">[287]</a> The proportionate<!-- Page 123 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_123" id="Page_123">[Pg 123]</a></span>
numbers of newspapers sent or not sent by post would not
be the same for all publications. Such a provision was
therefore bound to work unequally. Moreover, the new duty
meant that it would still be impossible to issue a newspaper
at the price of one penny, and the cheap newspaper was
still barred. The duty was in fact still a restrictive tax;
and by those who were opposed to all "taxes on knowledge,"
of which the newspaper duty had been considered one,
the question was never regarded as settled by this reduction.<a name="FNanchor_288_288" id="FNanchor_288_288"></a><a href="#Footnote_288_288" class="fnanchor">[288]</a></p>

<p>The official Whigs did not say much on the question of
the restrictive character of the duty. The Radicals were not
so careful to hide the repressive side. While not suggesting
that the Government (with whom they voted) desired the
continuance of a restrictive duty, they roundly accused the
Opposition of desiring to restrain the dissemination of
intelligence, "in order to keep up their influence over a<!-- Page 124 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_124" id="Page_124">[Pg 124]</a></span>
certain class of people, and at the same time to perpetuate
the ignorance which had hitherto hung about them."<a name="FNanchor_289_289" id="FNanchor_289_289"></a><a href="#Footnote_289_289" class="fnanchor">[289]</a></p>

<p>After the passing of the Act with its definite postal
privilege for newspapers coming within its provisions,
questions arose as to the status with regard to transmission
by post of certain publications which were not newspapers
of the ordinary type, but rather of the nature of critical or
literary reviews. The proprietors of these publications desired
to transmit by post a part of their issues. They were not,
however, prepared to pay at the letter rate by the ounce, but
wished to bring under the Stamp Act that portion of their impression
which would pass by post, and pay duty accordingly
on those copies only. This course was agreed to by the
Government in 1838,<a name="FNanchor_290_290" id="FNanchor_290_290"></a><a href="#Footnote_290_290" class="fnanchor">[290]</a> subject to a maximum limit of weight
per copy of 2 ounces. The privilege was at first conceded
only to periodicals, termed "class" newspapers, dealing with
a particular subject and addressed to a certain class of the
community, such as, for instance, papers relating to law,
medicine, or architecture. It was restricted to papers
dealing with what might be termed the higher intellectual
subjects. These were held to form fair ground of exemption;<!-- Page 125 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_125" id="Page_125">[Pg 125]</a></span>
but other specialist papers relating to subjects less intellectual
then appeared; such as papers relating to turf news, or
reporting cases before the police courts. These papers being
entirely devoted to one subject, it became a question whether
the privilege of stamping only a part of their impression
could be given them. Instead of attempting any sort of discrimination
in such cases, the Government made one general
rule that all papers devoted to the discussion of one subject
should be accorded the privilege. Thereupon a great variety
of such papers came into existence, and very soon some
of them began to include in their issues matter which could
only be regarded as news of a general character. This raised
a further question: how much such general news should be
regarded as destroying the "class" character of the publication.
The Government found themselves in a difficulty. If the
law was not rigorously enforced, the papers paying the tax
raised a great outcry against the injustice to themselves;
and if the law was enforced in respect of those "class"
publications which published general news, there was a great
outcry against the discrimination between the "class" papers.<a name="FNanchor_291_291" id="FNanchor_291_291"></a><a href="#Footnote_291_291" class="fnanchor">[291]</a></p>

<p>The whole position in regard to these papers became
unsatisfactory and anomalous.<a name="FNanchor_292_292" id="FNanchor_292_292"></a><a href="#Footnote_292_292" class="fnanchor">[292]</a> It was, in point of fact,
found impossible to enforce the law. The outbreak of the
Crimean War led to a development which reduced the whole
position to absurdity. Publications were issued giving the
latest and fullest available intelligence from the seat of
war. These publications confined themselves strictly to the
subject of the war. They published nothing on any other
topic; and on that ground, although devoted entirely to the
publication of news of burning interest, they claimed to be
exempt from the newspaper duty in common with all other
"class" newspapers.<a name="FNanchor_293_293" id="FNanchor_293_293"></a><a href="#Footnote_293_293" class="fnanchor">[293]</a><!-- Page 126 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_126" id="Page_126">[Pg 126]</a></span></p>

<p>In the Session of 1854 the House of Commons passed a
Resolution, although it was opposed by the Government,
affirming that the laws in reference to the periodical press and
newspaper stamp were "ill-defined and unequally enforced," and
that the subject demanded the early consideration of Parliament.
The Government gave the matter their attention. Mr. Gladstone,
then Chancellor of the Exchequer, prepared a plan which
was embodied, with modifications, in a Bill introduced in the
following Session by his successor. This Bill provided for the
abolition of the duty except on such copies as it might be
desired to send by post. The proposal was welcomed as the
abolition of the last of the taxes on knowledge, and a liberation
of the Press.<a name="FNanchor_294_294" id="FNanchor_294_294"></a><a href="#Footnote_294_294" class="fnanchor">[294]</a> The only serious opposition to the Bill was
made on the ground that in the exceptional circumstances of
the time&mdash;the nation being engaged in a war&mdash;the loss of
revenue could be ill-afforded; and that the withdrawal of the
duty would lower the moral character of the Press, and open
the way for seditious and blasphemous publications and for
unrestrained libellous attacks on the Government, on public
authorities, and private individuals.<a name="FNanchor_295_295" id="FNanchor_295_295"></a><a href="#Footnote_295_295" class="fnanchor">[295]</a> The Government justified<!-- Page 127 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_127" id="Page_127">[Pg 127]</a></span>
their proposals on the ground that the administration of
the existing law had become exceedingly difficult, and that the
resolution of the previous session condemning the ambiguity
of the existing law and the unsatisfactory character of its
administration left them little choice in the matter.<a name="FNanchor_296_296" id="FNanchor_296_296"></a><a href="#Footnote_296_296" class="fnanchor">[296]</a></p>

<p>An amendment to the Bill of 1855, proposing the reduction
of the stamp duty to &#189;d., which was in effect providing for
the transmission of newspapers by post at the uniform rate of
&#189;d., was opposed by the Government. There was no desire to
make the postage of newspapers a source of revenue. On this
point there was general agreement. At the same time there
was no disposition to carry newspapers at less than cost.
Sir Rowland Hill, in the course of his evidence before the
Committee of 1851, had said that the Post Office could
profitably carry newspapers at a penny,<a name="FNanchor_297_297" id="FNanchor_297_297"></a><a href="#Footnote_297_297" class="fnanchor">[297]</a> and that it was
unlikely that they could be carried profitably for a halfpenny.<!-- Page 128 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_128" id="Page_128">[Pg 128]</a></span>
Members of the Government and other members of the House
were convinced that a halfpenny rate would involve a loss, and
they opposed the amendment on that ground.<a name="FNanchor_298_298" id="FNanchor_298_298"></a><a href="#Footnote_298_298" class="fnanchor">[298]</a></p>

<p>The Act 16 &amp; 17 Vict. cap. 63 (1853) had reduced the stamp
duties on newspapers,<a name="FNanchor_299_299" id="FNanchor_299_299"></a><a href="#Footnote_299_299" class="fnanchor">[299]</a> and repealed the duties on advertisements.
A further Act (the Newspaper Stamp Duties Act of
1855, 18 &amp; 19 Vict. cap. 27), repealed the stamp duty, as
such, in respect of newspapers, and provided that periodical
publications conforming to certain conditions should be
entitled to free transmission by post, if "printed within the
United Kingdom on paper stamped for denoting the rate of
duty now imposed by law on newspapers." The chief conditions
were that the publication should be issued at intervals
not exceeding thirty-one days, should bear the title and date of
publication at the top of every page, and should not be printed
on or bound in pasteboard or cardboard. The maximum limit
of weight for publications not strictly newspapers, which in
1854 had been raised to 3 ounces, was now abolished, and
newspapers and all other stamped periodical publications were<!-- Page 129 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_129" id="Page_129">[Pg 129]</a></span>
made subject to the same restrictions as to number of sheets
and extent of letterpress, etc. Concurrently with the passing
of this Act, the book post rates were reduced with the view
of permitting the transmission of unstamped newspapers at
low rates of postage.<a name="FNanchor_300_300" id="FNanchor_300_300"></a><a href="#Footnote_300_300" class="fnanchor">[300]</a></p>

<p>Under the Act of 1855, stamp duty at the rate payable at
that time under the existing law must be paid in order to
secure the privilege of free transmission of newspapers by post.
The duty was chargeable according to the number of sheets;
and in the case of some leading newspapers, such as <i>The Times</i>
and the <i>Illustrated London News</i>, amounted to 1&#189;d. per copy
for each issue. The proprietors of these publications in 1858
approached the Post Office with the view of obtaining a
reduction of the charge for the transmission of their papers
by post. This request was submitted by the Post Office, and
was met by the Government in a liberal spirit. In view of the
importance now attached by Parliament to the free circulation
of newspapers, as shown by the removal of taxation from them,
an object of scarcely inferior importance to the circulation
of letters, it was now decided that since the whole of the
existing system rested on the assumption that the free circulation
of newspapers in general was an object of importance,
and one to be attained even at a disproportionate cost to the
Post Office, a line should not be drawn so as to exclude from
the lowest rate one paper, and that paper the one with the
largest circulation. Such was the result of the existing
limitation to 4 ounces of the weight of newspapers which
might be carried by the post for 1d., and the limit was
therefore raised from 4 ounces to 6 ounces.</p>

<p>In 1866 the question was raised in the House of Commons
whether the Post Office charge could be reduced, especially
in view of the fact that railway companies were distributing
newspapers at a uniform rate of &#189;d. a copy. In 1869 the
question was again raised in Parliament. A resolution
was moved in favour of an inland rate of &#189;d. for 2 ounces
on printed matter, and a postage of &#189;d. on newspapers. It
was urged that the concession would be of special value in
rural districts: it would indeed "be hard to say what the
effect might be in time on the social condition of the people."<!-- Page 130 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_130" id="Page_130">[Pg 130]</a></span>
In several continental countries newspapers were already
transmissible by post at very low rates. Against the possible
objection that by introducing a rate lower than the 1d. rate
they were jeopardizing its maintenance for letters, and that
the proposal might therefore lead to a general &#189;d. rate, it
was argued that so far from that being the case, the best
way of ensuring the permanence of the 1d. rate was to
grant the concession asked.<a name="FNanchor_301_301" id="FNanchor_301_301"></a><a href="#Footnote_301_301" class="fnanchor">[301]</a></p>

<p>The Marquess of Hartington, the Postmaster-General, was
unable to accept the motion because he thought such proposals,
before being assented to by the House, should be
thoroughly looked into to discover whether there was a reasonable
probability that the loss of revenue would or would not
be a permanent loss, and the Post Office should be given ample
time to consider whether the additional duties which would be
thrown upon it could be undertaken with due regard to other
services, which were of greater importance than the transmission
of circulars or newspapers. The influx of a largely
increased number of circulars and newspapers would cause
serious embarrassment in the practical working of the Post
Office, and might impair the efficiency of the service in respect
of letters. The primary business of the Post Office being the
"rapid and punctual transmission of letters," such a result
would give just cause for dissatisfaction.</p>

<p>The Marquess of Hartington asked that the motion should
not be pressed. The Chancellor of the Exchequer told the
House that he had not got &#163;300,000 to give away. Mr.
Gladstone also emphasized the seriousness of the financial
aspect of the proposals, and assured the House that the
Government honestly intended to investigate the question,
however much their suggestion for deferring a vote upon it
might look like a pretext for evading it altogether. But when
the Chancellor of the Exchequer moved the previous question,
the motion was lost by a large majority. A main contention
of the advocates of the reduction of rate was that in many<!-- Page 131 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_131" id="Page_131">[Pg 131]</a></span>
foreign countries&mdash;in France, in Belgium, in Switzerland, in
the United States&mdash;extremely low rates of postage for newspapers
were in operation, and what was possible in those
countries ought to be possible in England.</p>

<p>Following this vote in the House of Commons the matter
was further considered at the Post Office, and in the next
session an Act was passed providing that any newspaper conforming
to certain conditions, the chief of which were that it
should be issued at intervals of not more than seven days
and should consist wholly or in great part of political or other
news or of articles relating thereto or to other current topics,
should be entitled to transmission by post at the rate of &#189;d.
per copy irrespective of weight. The privilege of retransmission
was withdrawn.<a name="FNanchor_302_302" id="FNanchor_302_302"></a><a href="#Footnote_302_302" class="fnanchor">[302]</a></p>

<p>The statutory basis of the newspaper post has remained
unchanged since 1870, and the provisions of the Act of 1870
were included in the Post Office Act of 1908, which contains
the present authority for the privilege. There has been some
necessary interpretation by the Post Office of the definition
of a newspaper as given in the Act. The chief points on
which difficulty has arisen are (1) as to the amount of
news-matter required in a publication, and (2) as to the
character of the matter which can be accepted as news-matter.
The Act provides that the publication should
consist "wholly or in great part of political or other news or
of articles relating thereto, or to other current topics." This<!-- Page 132 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_132" id="Page_132">[Pg 132]</a></span>
requirement is considered to be satisfied if as much as one-third
of the publication consists of matter accepted as news.
The proportion, when fixed, was based on an examination of
the proportion of news-matter contained in the average newspaper,
and represents the actual proportion then generally
met with. There is no provision regarding the proportion
to be maintained between the size of a newspaper within the
meaning of the Act and its supplement, but, under the
accepted interpretation of the statute, a newspaper may
contain a supplement of equal size, and that supplement may
consist wholly of advertisements. The result of this is that
publications containing a proportion of only one-sixth of
news-matter may pass at the newspaper rate of postage. As
to the second requirement, a strict interpretation of the
regulation is not insisted on, and, in general, articles, pictures,
or drawings relating to any matters of current or topical
interest are accepted.</p>

<p>This lack of precision in the provisions of the Act, and the
consequent difficulty of framing or enforcing regulations
restricting the privilege within even reasonable limits, have
been largely taken advantage of, especially in recent years,
by the publishers of trade and fashion papers, with the result
that publications weighing in some cases as much as 3 pounds
are sent through the post at the usual newspaper rate of a
halfpenny. Nor are the enormous weight of these papers, and
the large proportion of advertisement matter, the only objections.
The news-matter on which they rely as entitling them to
the newspaper privilege is often of the most doubtful character,
consisting largely of accounts of shop sales or of commercial
exhibitions, with lengthy descriptions of the articles displayed.</p>

<p>This abuse of the privilege is, however, confined to a comparatively
small proportion of the newspapers entitled to
transmission at the newspaper rate. With the fall in the
price of paper, and the improvements in printing methods
and machinery, all newspapers have tended to increase in
size. But in general the increase has been small. In 1855 the
average weight of newspapers passing by post was 3&#183;1 ounces,<a name="FNanchor_303_303" id="FNanchor_303_303"></a><a href="#Footnote_303_303" class="fnanchor">[303]</a>
and in 1913 it had increased to 4&#183;1 ounces. The number
of papers entitled to the privilege which could be regarded as<!-- Page 133 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_133" id="Page_133">[Pg 133]</a></span>
excessively heavy is not more than about 50 (out of a total of
some 2,200),<a name="FNanchor_304_304" id="FNanchor_304_304"></a><a href="#Footnote_304_304" class="fnanchor">[304]</a> and although practically all these papers are
published in London, and are largely distributed through the
post, they do not form more than a small proportion of the
total number of packets passing by newspaper post. But
such of these publications of vast bulk and weight as are sent
at the newspaper rate derive a great advantage&mdash;an advantage
measured by the heavy loss incurred by the Post Office in
respect of each such publication.<a name="FNanchor_305_305" id="FNanchor_305_305"></a><a href="#Footnote_305_305" class="fnanchor">[305]</a></p>

<p>Many of the moderately heavy papers, such as the ordinary
sixpenny London newspapers, are for the most part in
compliance both with the letter and the spirit of the regulations,
and their transmission at the &#189;d. rate is not,
perhaps, open to serious objection. But there can be little
doubt that if the possibility of developments in the publication
of trade journals such as have occurred, had been foreseen,
some provision would have been made for the prevention
of the transmission at heavy loss to the Post Office of large
numbers of publications which are, in effect, trade catalogues.
While the newspaper post involves a very considerable loss,
it affords the public a useful facility, and one which is
largely availed of for the purpose the Act of 1870 was
intended to assist, viz. the dissemination of intelligence.<a name="FNanchor_306_306" id="FNanchor_306_306"></a><a href="#Footnote_306_306" class="fnanchor">[306]</a></p>

<p>The rate has proved too high to secure a large postal
traffic in newspapers. The total number passing by post
within the United Kingdom in 1913 was some 200 millions,
which, in days when individual daily newspapers publish as
many as a million copies of every issue, is only an insignificant
portion of the newspaper traffic of the country. It is
also only a small portion of the total postal traffic, which
in the same year amounted to some 6,000 millions. In
this respect there has been a great transformation. Under
the old conditions newspapers were distributed almost exclusively
by post, and formed a large proportion of the total<!-- Page 134 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_134" id="Page_134">[Pg 134]</a></span>
number of postal packets and by far the greater bulk of all
the mails,<a name="FNanchor_307_307" id="FNanchor_307_307"></a><a href="#Footnote_307_307" class="fnanchor">[307]</a> while now they form only an inconsiderable
proportion both in bulk and number. The Post Office has
no monopoly of the distribution of newspapers, and for the
most part newspaper publishers themselves provide for the
distribution of by far the larger part of their issues. In all
the large towns this is the case.<a name="FNanchor_308_308" id="FNanchor_308_308"></a><a href="#Footnote_308_308" class="fnanchor">[308]</a> Private enterprise can of
course compete wherever the traffic would be profitable, and
private agencies provide satisfactorily for the distribution of
the vast proportion of newspapers, it being found practicable
throughout a large part of the country to place newspapers
on sale at the published price; and in all such cases payment
of postage, which in the days of the halfpenny newspaper
represents an additional charge of 100 per cent.
on the published price, is out of the question. Only those
for the more remote towns and country districts are left
to the Post Office; but the newspaper traffic by post, although
conducted at a loss, comprises so small a part of the whole
postal traffic, that the result on the finances of the Post
Office is not serious. If, however, such an unremunerative
rate were applied to a class of traffic likely to assume large
proportions the result would be financially disastrous, and
this is the answer to such suggestions as those of Mr. Wells
to extend the newspaper rate to other classes of printed
matter.<a name="FNanchor_309_309" id="FNanchor_309_309"></a><a href="#Footnote_309_309" class="fnanchor">[309]</a><!-- Page 135 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_135" id="Page_135">[Pg 135]</a></span></p>

<p>In 1913 the privilege of transmission at the &#189;d. rate
was extended to colonial newspapers, registered for the
purpose in this country.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Note.</span>&mdash;On the 1st November 1915, as part of the war increases of
postage, the
rate on newspapers was altered to &#189;d. for every 6 ounces or part of 6 ounces.</p>

<hr />
<p><!-- Page 136 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_136" id="Page_136">[Pg 136]</a></span></p>


<h3>NEWSPAPER POST IN CANADA</h3>

<p>No special provision for the transmission of newspapers had
been made in the Act of 1765 which first prescribed rates of
postage for the Canadian territories. Consequently, if sent
in the mails, they were, in strictness, liable to postage at
the ordinary rates for letters and packets. Those rates would
generally have amounted to at least a shilling a copy, and
would therefore have prevented altogether the distribution of
newspapers by post. Postage was in practice waived, newspapers
being allowed to pass by post on payment of a small
charge quarterly to the Deputy Postmaster-General, who
retained the proceeds as a perquisite of his office. The
amount was at first a mere trifle; but in later days it
formed the greater part of his emoluments. The precise date
at which this arrangement was established is uncertain. It
certainly existed in Nova Scotia in 1770, and probably commenced
on the first publication of a newspaper in Canada.<a name="FNanchor_310_310" id="FNanchor_310_310"></a><a href="#Footnote_310_310" class="fnanchor">[310]</a>
The rates charged were low, and were varied from time to
time at the will of the Deputy Postmaster-General. The
following, which were charged in Canada in 1840, may,
however, be regarded as typical:&mdash;</p>

<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Typical postage charges for newspapaer deliveries, Canada 1840.">
<tr><td align="center">For a</td><td align="left">weekly</td><td align="center">paper</td><td align="left">1s. 0d.</td><td align="center">currency</td><td align="center">a quarter</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center"> "</td><td align="left">bi-weekly</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">1s. 3d.</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center"> "</td><td align="left">tri-weekly</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">1s. 6d.</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center"> "</td><td align="left">daily</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">2s. 3d.</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>In the Maritime Provinces the rates were somewhat lower,
the charge for a weekly paper being only 2s. 6d. a year.</p>

<p>These amounts were payable by the proprietor of the paper,
and were accepted only in respect of papers sent regularly.<!-- Page 137 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_137" id="Page_137">[Pg 137]</a></span>
Papers mailed casually by persons other than publishers,
and denominated "transients," were charged 1d. currency
each. The publishers thought even these moderate charges
objectionable, and the feeling against them was increased
when it became known that they rested on no legal authority,
but solely on the custom of the office and the sanction of
Sir Francis Freeling; and that the proceeds, instead of being
accounted for as part of the general Post Office revenue,
were appropriated by the Deputy Postmaster-General. They
were also objected to as arbitrary and inequitable, since papers
were charged the same rate whether they were conveyed
20 miles or 200 miles. As letters were at that time charged
on a scale of rates graduated according to distance, the
application of the principle of uniformity to the newspapers
was naturally not appreciated; and in view of the heavy
charges incurred for transportation it could not have been
justified on economic grounds.</p>

<p>The resentment against the charge first took definite form
in the Lower Provinces. In 1830 a Mr. Ward, a publisher,
petitioned the Nova Scotian House of Assembly to be relieved
from the charges on his newspapers. A Committee
of the House, which considered the matter, found that under
the Imperial Acts it was no part of the duty of the Deputy
Postmaster-General to receive or transmit newspapers, other
than those received from Great Britain, and that the Deputy
was therefore justified in making the charge complained of.
They found also that sixty years earlier the Deputy made a
yearly charge of 2s. 6d. on each newspaper sent by post, and
that at that time all editors acquiesced in the charge. At the
same time the Committee regarded the charge as so undesirable
that they recommended the House should grant a sum
to remunerate the Deputy for his services in transmitting
newspapers, in order that the charges might be abolished.</p>

<p>The Deputy Postmaster-General in the Lower Provinces
was himself a publisher, and it was alleged that he was
interested directly or indirectly in every newspaper published
in Nova Scotia, with the exception of two, with the result
that, while all the newspapers in which he was interested
passed free of postage, the two outsiders were made to pay.
The Deputy Postmaster-General himself seemed to think<!-- Page 138 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_138" id="Page_138">[Pg 138]</a></span>
the arrangement was best kept in the background. When
questioned by the House of Assembly, he adopted a reticent
attitude and made equivocating statements. He gave particulars
purporting to show the amounts paid as postage in
respect of certain newspapers controlled by him, and on
further interrogation by the House of Assembly admitted
that the journals paid no postage.</p>

<p>Meanwhile, publishers in both Lower and Upper Canada
also were working for the abolition of the Deputy Postmaster-General's
privilege. In December 1830 a publisher
of Montreal, Mr. R. Armour, approached Sir Francis Freeling,
declaring that the subject might eventually involve a
question of high constitutional importance, viz. "to what
extent the Post Office of Great Britain is authorized by
law to regulate the internal Post Office establishments
of the Colony, and to draw a Revenue therefrom." He
received no satisfaction from Sir Francis Freeling, who
replied that the charges were "the long established and
authorized perquisite of the Officer in question (the Deputy
Postmaster-General) and that all Newspapers circulated by
post in British North America otherwise than under his
privilege are liable by Law to the charge of the full rates
of Postage."</p>

<p>Mr. Armour then petitioned the local Legislature, and
towards the end of the year a Committee of the House of
Assembly was appointed to consider the whole question of
the management of the Post Office in the province of Lower
Canada. The Committee found it impossible to obtain any
useful information concerning the finances of the service
from the Deputy Postmaster-General, Mr. T. A. Stayner,
whose attitude was a source of much irritation, resulting in
great intensity of feeling both against the privilege of the
Deputy and the administration of the service from London.</p>

<p>In 1832 the publishers in Upper Canada, who were working
in concert with the publishers of Lower Canada, also succeeded
in obtaining the appointment of a Committee of the
House of Assembly. This Committee, in its Report,
challenged the legality of any postage charge whatever
raised in the province under authority of the British Postmaster-General<!-- Page 139 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_139" id="Page_139">[Pg 139]</a></span>.</p>

<p>In 1833 the publishers in Nova Scotia submitted a petition
to the King, but obtained no satisfaction.<a name="FNanchor_311_311" id="FNanchor_311_311"></a><a href="#Footnote_311_311" class="fnanchor">[311]</a></p>

<p>In the Lower Provinces there was a sentiment in favour
of the free transmission of newspapers, which had been
encouraged, if not originally induced, by the circumstance
that for a considerable period the holder of the office of
Deputy Postmaster-General for those provinces, Mr. Howe,
took little trouble to enforce the payment of that postage
which, when paid, was his perquisite, preferring to forgo the
proceeds rather than incur the risk of odium which might
attach to any attempt to enforce his privilege.<a name="FNanchor_312_312" id="FNanchor_312_312"></a><a href="#Footnote_312_312" class="fnanchor">[312]</a></p>

<p>In 1842 Mr. Edmund Ward, the publisher of the <i>Federation
Sentinel</i>, petitioned the Lieutenant-Governor and House of
Assembly in New Brunswick for the abolition of the postage
rate on newspapers, on the grounds that it was illegal,
a tax on knowledge, and of no benefit to the public
revenue, since the proceeds were retained by an official
already adequately remunerated for his services. The petition
was submitted to the Home authorities; and the Solicitor
to the Post Office advised that, since the Act of 1837 repealed
the Act of the 4th of George III, cap. 34, the charge on
newspapers made by the Deputy Postmaster-General in North
America rested on no legal basis, and long established usage
and custom was the only justification for allowing newspapers<!-- Page 140 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_140" id="Page_140">[Pg 140]</a></span>
to pass by post at less than the legal rate. The House of
Assembly in New Brunswick also took up the question on
their own account. Like the Nova Scotians, they were
anxious to facilitate the distribution of newspapers. They
regarded the charge for postage as an odious tax on knowledge,
and in 1844, in a joint Address to his Majesty, recommended
its abolition.</p>

<p>In 1842 the House of Assembly of Nova Scotia also
petitioned for the abolition of postage on newspapers and
pamphlets, contending that the proceeds of the postage rate,
which was collected from the country districts, on which it
lay as a heavy burden, did not benefit the general revenue,
since they were appropriated by the Deputy Postmaster-General,
and that the newspapers were well-nigh the only
vehicle of information in the province. In reply, the British
authorities pointed out that since pamphlets were charged
as letters in England, the Treasury could not sanction free
transmission in the colonies; moreover, even with the existing
rate, the number of newspapers sent by post was
increasing so rapidly that it was becoming a matter of some
difficulty, on account of the bad condition of the roads in
the province, to provide for their transmission from place
to place. Free transmission was therefore not conceded;
but in July 1844 certain changes were made in the general
system of rates, and the Deputy Postmaster-General's newspaper
privilege was withdrawn, a uniform rate of &#189;d. per
sheet for transmission to any point in Nova Scotia, New
Brunswick, Canada, and Prince Edward Island being
established.</p>

<p>When the Post Office service throughout British North
America was unified and transferred to provincial control,
the then existing rates of postage on newspapers and
pamphlets were continued, but power was reserved to each
Legislature to authorize transmission within its respective
province free of postage. By virtue of this power Nova Scotia
in 1852 abolished altogether the rate of postage on newspapers,
taking pride in the fact that they were the first
authority in British North America to grant the boon. New
Brunswick soon followed suit. But the result of this, coupled
with the reduction in letter postage at the unification, was<!-- Page 141 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_141" id="Page_141">[Pg 141]</a></span>
adverse to the finances of the service in these provinces.
For several years the accounts showed a deficit, which
was met by the provinces cheerfully as a contribution of
no less value than contributions made for roads, bridges,
and schools.<a name="FNanchor_313_313" id="FNanchor_313_313"></a><a href="#Footnote_313_313" class="fnanchor">[313]</a></p>

<p>In connection with the changes introduced at the time of
the Confederation, a charge for the transmission of newspapers
by post was made general throughout the federated
area. The charge met with considerable opposition from
the Maritime Provinces, which thus lost the boon of free
transmission.<a name="FNanchor_314_314" id="FNanchor_314_314"></a><a href="#Footnote_314_314" class="fnanchor">[314]</a> It was justified as nothing more nor less
than a simple charge for freight, the remission of which would
be to offer a bounty to a particular industry. The possibilities
of usefulness of the Post Office would, it was argued, be greatly
reduced if the service were loaded with the burden of the
gratuitous distribution of newspapers throughout so vast a
country; since, if from the diminution of revenue which such
a course must produce, the department were forced to look
to Parliament for assistance, Parliament would be disposed to
discourage the establishment of new offices in the thinly
settled districts, where it was of the greatest importance
that they should be found.<a name="FNanchor_315_315" id="FNanchor_315_315"></a><a href="#Footnote_315_315" class="fnanchor">[315]</a></p>

<p>The arguments of members from the Maritime Provinces
were somewhat diverse. They said there was an essential
distinction between letters and newspapers, in that letters
were private communications between individuals, while newspapers
were in some measure the organs of communication
between the Government and the people, and furnished the
only means by which to acquire that acquaintance with the
law which everybody was presumed to possess. Newspapers<!-- Page 142 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_142" id="Page_142">[Pg 142]</a></span>
occupied a similar position to that of schools, and presented
one of the easiest channels of enlightenment. In many cases,
for the ordinary folk no other means of education were
open. On them the tax would be an imposition which
might be contrasted, it was said, with the favour accorded
to the commercial and wealthy classes by the reduction in the
postage on letters.</p>

<p>It was further argued that in the existing state of the
Dominion, owing to the presence of a certain amount of
sectional feeling and mutual hostility between different portions
of the country, which could be attributed largely to
the lack of that sort of information which newspapers could
provide, it would be folly to hinder the freest possible
distribution.<a name="FNanchor_316_316" id="FNanchor_316_316"></a><a href="#Footnote_316_316" class="fnanchor">[316]</a> Moreover, a postage charge would fall unequally.
The large towns and thickly populated areas would
be able to obtain their papers by means of the railroad or
other agency at little cost; but the outlying districts, which
ought to be treated with special favour by the Legislature,
would have no alternative to the payment of postage. The
large newspapers would be able to distribute their issues
by express, while the smaller ones would be compelled to use
the post. The "tax" would yield only some $25,000 a
year in Nova Scotia; and for such a paltry sum it surely
could not be wise to levy this "tax upon knowledge," which
"of all the heavy burdens laid upon Nova Scotia was the
most oppressive."<a name="FNanchor_317_317" id="FNanchor_317_317"></a><a href="#Footnote_317_317" class="fnanchor">[317]</a></p>

<p>These arguments were ineffective, and a rate which averaged
half a cent a copy was imposed. In 1875 the rate was
modified, and made a bulk rate of 1 cent a pound, an
extremely low rate. The average weight of newspapers at
that time was so small that, in the case of certain typical
papers selected by the Government for the purpose, it was
found that the numbers required to make up a pound were
from ten to fifteen. In 1874 the total yield under the old rate
had been only some $36,000. The new rate was therefore<!-- Page 143 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_143" id="Page_143">[Pg 143]</a></span>
likely to yield only some $6,000 a year, and the advocates
of free transmission argued that as such a small sum would
hardly be worth the trouble of keeping the accounts, the
Government, having gone so far, might well have taken a
step further and abolished altogether the postage on newspapers.
The Government defence was that the rate proposed
was the lowest possible, and to mail free the papers
published in the various parts of the Dominion would be to
impose too heavy a burden upon the public treasury.<a name="FNanchor_318_318" id="FNanchor_318_318"></a><a href="#Footnote_318_318" class="fnanchor">[318]</a></p>

<p>The Canadian people had only to wait a few years for the
boon. In 1882 an Act was passed "to provide for the free
transmission of Canadian newspapers within the Dominion."
No discussion on the measure took place in Parliament,
and authoritative statements of the reasons inducing the
adoption of so generous a policy are not to be obtained;<a name="FNanchor_319_319" id="FNanchor_319_319"></a><a href="#Footnote_319_319" class="fnanchor">[319]</a>
but in well-informed quarters it is held that, in general, the
leniency shown to newspapers is not due solely to the acceptance
by Parliament of the arguments usually advanced in
their favour, plausible and convincing as they probably are
to many minds, but has always been dictated more or less
by fear of the political power wielded by them; or, what is
really the same thing, as a result of direct pressure at Ottawa
by the newspaper proprietors, based on their influence with
the electors or the chiefs of parties, and exercised in their
own interests.<a name="FNanchor_320_320" id="FNanchor_320_320"></a><a href="#Footnote_320_320" class="fnanchor">[320]</a></p>

<p>In this view, the ultimate step taken in 1882 marked no
concession to popular sentiment, but the climax of the power
of the newspaper interest, and a consummation for which
they had long striven.</p>

<p>At the same time the total abolition of postage on newspapers<!-- Page 144 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_144" id="Page_144">[Pg 144]</a></span>
was in accord with the widespread feeling, which had
from an early period found expression in the Legislatures of
the Canadian provinces: the feeling that newspapers are of
great educational value, especially in new countries and in
countries with an extended franchise, such as had been the
Canadian provinces almost from their first organization; that
in such countries it was necessary to educate the sovereign
people; and that newspapers afforded the best and most
practicable way.<a name="FNanchor_321_321" id="FNanchor_321_321"></a><a href="#Footnote_321_321" class="fnanchor">[321]</a></p>

<p>During the period of free transmission, which continued
some seventeen years, the number and gross weight of
newspapers sent through the post increased enormously, and
the privilege was considerably abused. Numerous publications
were constantly appearing demanding free transmission,
and in many cases they were of very questionable character;
that is to say that, while conforming to the letter of the
requirements of the law, they were often not genuine newspapers
at all, but mere vehicles for the distribution of trade
advertisements. The vast increase in the cost of dealing with
the quantity of newspapers sent through the mails became
a question for serious consideration. Heavy demands were
being made by the railway companies for increases in the
amount of their remuneration for the conveyance of mails, on
the ground of the increase in tonnage due to the very large
numbers of newspapers being sent. The actual statistics of
the Post Office traffic in Canada are illuminating on this
point. In 1897 the total weight of newspapers passing in the
mails was 16,500,000 pounds, and the estimated number of
newspapers 175,000,000. For the same year the total number<!-- Page 145 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_145" id="Page_145">[Pg 145]</a></span>
of letters passing through the post was 123,000,000, and their
total weight 5,000,000 pounds.<a name="FNanchor_322_322" id="FNanchor_322_322"></a><a href="#Footnote_322_322" class="fnanchor">[322]</a></p>

<p>In 1898 the Canadian Government desired to reduce the
internal letter postage, which still stood at 3 cents, to the
almost universal rate of 2 cents;<a name="FNanchor_323_323" id="FNanchor_323_323"></a><a href="#Footnote_323_323" class="fnanchor">[323]</a> but the loss of revenue
which such a reduction would entail was so great that they
were driven to seek fresh revenue to meet the deficiency.
In view of the abuses of the newspaper privilege, and the
generally unsatisfactory position which had developed, this
was thought to be a suitable occasion for the reimposition of
postage on newspapers.<a name="FNanchor_324_324" id="FNanchor_324_324"></a><a href="#Footnote_324_324" class="fnanchor">[324]</a> The rate proposed was &frac12; cent a
pound. Opposition to the change was made on the same
grounds as in 1867: that newspapers were the real educators
of the people, that the dissemination of intelligence, particularly
of political intelligence, was of the utmost importance,
and that no impediment should be put in the way of their
freest possible distribution.</p>

<p>The great necessity for a new source of postal revenue
made it impossible, however, to continue the free privilege in
its entirety, and the &frac12;-cent bulk rate was carried. The free
privilege was continued for local papers distributed within a<!-- Page 146 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_146" id="Page_146">[Pg 146]</a></span>
radius of ten miles, in order to enable the country papers to
compete with the papers of the large towns. The country
papers are very jealous (and perhaps somewhat fearful) of
the great city papers, although the telegraph has given the
country papers an advantage in point of time. This is of
great value in a country of enormous distances&mdash;especially in
the case of daily papers&mdash;but is yet not of vital importance in
the case of weekly newspapers, which do not rely so much
on late news. The competition of the weekly papers of the
great cities is severe; and the radius of competition even of
their daily papers is considerable. The letter-carriers of Ottawa
were at that time daily engaged in carrying free enormous
quantities of newspapers published in Montreal or Toronto.<a name="FNanchor_325_325" id="FNanchor_325_325"></a><a href="#Footnote_325_325" class="fnanchor">[325]</a></p>

<p>The rate fixed in 1898 was not intended to be permanent;
and in 1900, when the revenue had become sufficiently
buoyant to warrant the step, a Bill was introduced to reduce
the postage on newspapers to ? of 1 cent a pound for transmission
in the province or territory of distribution. The
general purpose of the Bill was to reduce the rate for
limited distances, and the province or territory was adopted
as the most convenient unit of area. Newspapers were being
posted literally by the ton, and the department thought it
unreasonable to convey car-loads of such mail from ocean to
ocean for the same rate as for any shorter distances within
a province.<a name="FNanchor_326_326" id="FNanchor_326_326"></a><a href="#Footnote_326_326" class="fnanchor">[326]</a> The Bill passed the Lower House, although it
was severely criticized as introducing the vicious principle of
provincial legislation; and "a serious aggravation of the
tyrannical injustice" was that a distinctive tax would be
placed on city publications, while preferential privileges
would be given to country newspapers.<a name="FNanchor_327_327" id="FNanchor_327_327"></a><a href="#Footnote_327_327" class="fnanchor">[327]</a><!-- Page 147 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_147" id="Page_147">[Pg 147]</a></span></p>

<p>The Postmaster-General explained that with a bulk rate
it was possible to make nice distinctions of rate in regard
to distance travelled, which would be quite out of the
question with a rate such as that for letters charged separately
on each individual item; the charge for the transportation
of a letter for a short distance would be so small
that no division of coin could be found to correspond to it, but
with matter mailed by the ton and wagon-load, and paid for by
the ton and wagon-load, the charge could well be adjusted for
distance: but he admitted that he had made no calculation as
to whether the ? cent a pound would cover the cost of newspapers
within the bounds of each province.<a name="FNanchor_328_328" id="FNanchor_328_328"></a><a href="#Footnote_328_328" class="fnanchor">[328]</a> The Bill was
rejected by the Senate on account of the undesirability on
general political grounds of introducing any sort of distinctions
based on the provincial boundaries.</p>

<p>The proposal was revived in another form in 1903. It
was then proposed to reduce the postage to &frac14; cent a pound
on newspapers when the distance of transmission did not
exceed 300 miles. The Postmaster-General said definitely in
Parliament that the rate would not cover the cost, and,
further, that the reduction would involve a loss of revenue
of from $50,000 to $75,000 a year on a total revenue from
newspapers of from $100,000 to $125,000.<a name="FNanchor_329_329" id="FNanchor_329_329"></a><a href="#Footnote_329_329" class="fnanchor">[329]</a> The reduction was
carried; and in 1908 the reduced rate of &frac14; cent a pound was
extended to all newspapers passing within the Dominion,
when posted in bulk. The privilege is availed of by the
publishers of many periodicals which are virtually nothing
more than advertising media; but this abuse has not assumed
serious proportions, and with the finances of the department
in a flourishing state, it has not been felt necessary to curtail
the privilege, although it involves great loss.<a name="FNanchor_330_330" id="FNanchor_330_330"></a><a href="#Footnote_330_330" class="fnanchor">[330]</a></p>

<hr />
<p><!-- Page 148 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_148" id="Page_148">[Pg 148]</a></span></p>

<h3>NEWSPAPER POST (SECOND-CLASS MAIL)
IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA</h3>

<p>A system for the distribution of newspapers by post,
analogous, though not identical, with that which grew up
in Great Britain, existed from an early period in America.
There the privilege of franking newspapers was a perquisite,
but it was not the perquisite of one officer, as in England.
All postmasters exercised the privilege as part of their general
privilege of franking all their correspondence, the arrangement
being part of their emoluments as postmasters; and post-masterships
were much sought after by newspaper publishers,
who were thereby enabled to obtain free of charge the advantage
of the distribution of their publications by what in most
cases was the best, if not the only, available means.</p>

<p>The most notable example was Benjamin Franklin, who
was for nearly forty years connected with the Post Office in
North America, first as Postmaster of Philadelphia, and
afterwards as joint Postmaster-General for the northern
part of North America, and who, throughout this period,
was able to circulate his publications by post free of charge.
The Post Office, especially in regard to the exercise of this
privilege, is regarded by Americans as having been an
important factor making for a general understanding between
the colonies, and a conception of the possibility of common
action.<a name="FNanchor_331_331" id="FNanchor_331_331"></a><a href="#Footnote_331_331" class="fnanchor">[331]</a> As early as 1757 the Crown authorities in the
colonies were looking with a jealous eye on the unrestricted
distribution of newspapers, and were contemplating measures
for preventing the dissemination of objectionable ideas.<a name="FNanchor_332_332" id="FNanchor_332_332"></a><a href="#Footnote_332_332" class="fnanchor">[332]</a><!-- Page 149 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_149" id="Page_149">[Pg 149]</a></span></p>

<p>As the friction between the colonies and the Mother
Country grew in the years that followed, the Crown postmasters
became more and more active in their endeavours to
hamper the distribution by post of newspapers which published
improper intelligence, or proclaimed improper political doctrines.
In 1774 Franklin was dismissed, and his dismissal has
been ascribed to a desire to impede the distribution of his
publications.<a name="FNanchor_333_333" id="FNanchor_333_333"></a><a href="#Footnote_333_333" class="fnanchor">[333]</a></p>

<p>There is no doubt that the Crown authorities attempted
through the postmasters to prevent the distribution of colonial
newspapers, and it was this action which led in the first
instance to the suggestion for the establishment of an independent
American Post Office.<a name="FNanchor_334_334" id="FNanchor_334_334"></a><a href="#Footnote_334_334" class="fnanchor">[334]</a> The resolutions of the
Continental Congress by which the American office was
established in 1775 did not provide for the transmission of
newspapers. Nor does the ordinance of the 21st October
1782 prescribe any rates for their transmission; but licenses
the postriders to carry them, presumably outside the mail, the
charges made by them for the service to be retained by
the riders as a perquisite.</p>

<p>The statute of 1792 first fixed rates for newspapers, as
follows: 1 cent a copy when sent for distances less than
100 miles, and 1&frac12; cents a copy when sent for distances greater
than 100 miles. This charge was opposed in Congress, and
efforts were made to legalize free transmission by extending,
so as to cover the transmission of newspapers, the general
privilege of franking conferred by the Bill on members of
Congress, on the ground that as the Government of the
country was a government of opinion, which always depended
ultimately on the suffrages of the people, much greater
reliance was to be placed on the confidence of the people
than on any other circumstance. Such confidence could<!-- Page 150 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_150" id="Page_150">[Pg 150]</a></span>
only result from the fullest information, which the people had
a right to expect, not only as regards the actions of the
Government but as regards the principles on which they
were grounded.<a name="FNanchor_335_335" id="FNanchor_335_335"></a><a href="#Footnote_335_335" class="fnanchor">[335]</a></p>

<p>Some members were disposed to approach the question from
the financial side, and contended that the rates proposed
were not sufficient to discharge the expense of the service.
The middle way between economic rates and free transmission
was finally adopted.</p>

<p>An Act of 1794 amended the rates on newspapers and
provided a further special rate for magazines and pamphlets.
Newspapers might now pass from any one place to any other
within the same State for 1 cent; magazines and pamphlets
at 1 cent a sheet for distances not exceeding 50 miles; 1&frac12; cents
a sheet for distances over 50 miles and not exceeding 100 miles;
and 2 cents a sheet for any greater distance. A suggestion
was made in Congress to reduce the newspaper rate to half a
cent for distances not exceeding 100 miles, and 1 cent for
any greater distance; on the ground that it was desirable to
encourage the distribution of newspapers from the seat of
Government and the large towns, since such papers must
contain more complete information than the country publications,
which could only publish selections from the metropolitan
papers. There was, however, a feeling that country papers
performed a useful function and should be encouraged.</p>

<p>The rates on magazines were altered in 1825 to 1&frac12; cents a
sheet for any distance not exceeding 100 miles and 2&frac12; cents
for any greater distance, when published periodically and sent
to subscribers; and 4 cents on each sheet for distances under
100 miles, and 6 cents a sheet for any greater distance, when
not published periodically. In 1845 the free privilege for<!-- Page 151 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_151" id="Page_151">[Pg 151]</a></span>
newspapers was first introduced, those of not more than
1,900 square inches in size, posted by the editors or publishers,
being allowed to pass free within 30 miles of the place of
publication. Smaller newspapers, if conveyed more than 30
miles, were charged the rates fixed by the Act of 1794 (which
had been re-enacted by a statute of 1825); and newspapers of
greater size were charged a uniform rate of 2 cents without
regard to distance. Pamphlets, magazines, periodicals, and
all printed or other matter, were to be charged by weight:
2&frac12; cents for the first ounce, and 1 cent for each additional
ounce or fraction of an ounce, without regard to distance.</p>

<p>The free privilege for local newspapers was withdrawn in
1847, except as regards copies exchanged between publishers.
The latter privilege was continued from a desire to assist the
country publisher, who seems always to have had friends in
Congress, and who was in the habit of obtaining much of the
information published in his papers from the great Atlantic
cities, and other large towns which were centres of political
or other interests. The free privilege was not long withheld.<a name="FNanchor_336_336" id="FNanchor_336_336"></a><a href="#Footnote_336_336" class="fnanchor">[336]</a>
An Act of 1851 again extended it to all weekly newspapers
sent from the office of publication to <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">bona fide</i> subscribers
within the county where published, provided the newspaper
did not exceed 3 ounces in weight; with a scale of postages
graduated according to distance for papers sent out of the
county where published. A graduated scale for pamphlets,
periodicals, magazines, and all other printed matter, was also
established by this Act. In the following year a rate of 1 cent
was fixed for each newspaper, periodical, unsealed circular, or
other article of printed matter, not exceeding 3 ounces in
weight, sent to any part of the United States; and for every
additional ounce or fraction thereof, 1 cent additional. In 1861<!-- Page 152 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_152" id="Page_152">[Pg 152]</a></span>
the rate of postage on any newspaper, periodical, unsealed
circular, or other article of printed matter, not exceeding
3 ounces in weight, conveyed over the overland route between
any State or Territory east of the Rocky Mountains and any
State or Territory on the Pacific, was made 1 cent. The letter
rate between the same areas was 10 cents per &frac12; ounce.</p>

<p>A statute of 1863 classified mail matter, defining three
groups. Newspapers, magazines, and pamphlets fell into the
second group, which comprised all printed matter issued at
stated intervals, but different rates were fixed for different
sections of such matter. On printed matter issued weekly
and sent to regular subscribers, the rate was 5 cents a quarter
for publications not exceeding 4 ounces in weight, with an
additional rate for every additional 4 ounces or fraction thereof.
If issued seven times a week, the rate was 35 cents a quarter
for every 4 ounces. If issued less frequently than weekly, the
charge was 1 cent a copy not exceeding 4 ounces in weight,
and small newspapers might be sent in packages and charged
the same rates by weight. On transient<a name="FNanchor_337_337" id="FNanchor_337_337"></a><a href="#Footnote_337_337" class="fnanchor">[337]</a> second-class matter,
and miscellaneous matter of the third class&mdash;the third class
included all other printed matter&mdash;the rate was fixed at 2 cents
for each 4 ounces or fraction thereof.</p>

<p>The rates of 1863 were slightly modified in 1872, and a
local delivery rate of 1 cent was established for newspapers.
Two years later a new method of charging postage on newspapers
and periodicals posted by publishers or newsagents was
introduced. Instead of being charged on each individual packet,
postage was to be charged on the gross weight of the newspapers
posted by a publisher, irrespective of the number of
separate packets to be handled. The rate was 2 cents a
pound on newspapers and periodicals published weekly, and
3 cents on those issued less frequently than once a week.
These rates only applied to such newspapers and periodicals
as were mailed from a known office of publication, or news
agency, to regular subscribers or newsagents, and did not
apply to those for local delivery. By a statute of 1876
publications designed primarily for advertising purposes, or
for circulation free, or at nominal rates, were made third-class<!-- Page 153 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_153" id="Page_153">[Pg 153]</a></span>
matter, and thus excluded from the privilege. In 1879
the present rate of 1 cent a pound (bulk rate) and a revised
classification were established. Matter was admitted to the
second class on the following conditions:&mdash;</p>

<div class="blockquot"><p><i>First.</i>&mdash;It must regularly be issued at stated intervals as frequently as four
times a year, must bear a date of issue, and must be numbered consecutively.</p>

<p><i>Second.</i>&mdash;It must be issued from a known office of publication.</p>

<p><i>Third.</i>&mdash;It must be formed of printed paper sheets, without board, cloth,
leather, or other substantial binding, such as distinguish printed books for
preservation from periodical publications.</p>

<p><i>Fourth.</i>&mdash;It must be originated and published for the dissemination of information
of a public character, or devoted to literature, the sciences, arts,
or some special industry, and having a legitimate list of subscribers; <i>provided</i>,
<i>however</i>, that nothing herein contained shall be so construed as to admit to
the second-class rate regular publications designed primarily for advertising
purposes, or for free circulation, or for circulation at nominal rates.</p></div>

<p>In 1894 the privilege was extended so as to include under
certain conditions the periodical publications of benevolent or
fraternal societies; and again in 1900, to include the periodical
publications issued by State departments of agriculture.</p>

<p>It was provided by the statute of 1879 that a supplement
may be enclosed with a second-class publication, without subjecting
it to extra postage, provided that it is germane to the
publication which it supplements, that is to say, is matter
supplied in order to complete that to which it is added or
supplemented, but omitted from the regular issue for want of
space or time, or for greater convenience. It must, however,
in every case be issued with the publication.</p>

<p>Since the establishment of these conditions and rates, there
has been a steady and growing increase in the amount of
second-class matter sent through the mails. In 1879, under
the old rates, the total weight sent at the pound rate was
51,125,500 pounds. In the following year the total weight
was 61,822,629 pounds; and by 1910 the total had increased
to 817,772,900 pounds, that figure representing an increase of
no less than 94,539,718 pounds on the total for 1909.</p>

<p>During the whole of this period the accounts of the Post
Office in the United States had in two years only (in 1882 and
1883) shown a surplus of revenue over expenditure. In view
of the vast quantity of matter sent in the mails at very low
rates, the question naturally suggested itself whether, seeing<!-- Page 154 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_154" id="Page_154">[Pg 154]</a></span>
that it was necessary year by year to call on the public
treasury for funds to meet the deficiency in the Post Office
accounts, it would not be practicable, and equitable, to obtain
an increased revenue from this class of traffic. The fact that
considerable abuses of the second-class mail privilege had
grown up made consideration of the question the more
necessary.</p>

<p>Periodicals obtained so great a privilege as compared with
ordinary books, that publishers sought devious ways to obtain
the advantage of the pound rate. Books termed a "library"
were issued periodically, with a frequency sufficient to meet
the requirements of the Act, numbered in series, and devoted
to literature or science; were issued from a known office of
publication, and with a list of subscribers. Complying thus
with all the requirements of the Act, there seemed no ground
on which these publications could be refused admission to the
second-class privilege, and they were accordingly entered. The
practice grew, and a multitude of libraries, comprising books
on every conceivable subject, were distributed through the
mails as second-class matter. The Act permitted the posting
of sample copies, and as no limit to the number of such copies
was fixed, the mails were burdened with vast quantities of
sample copies of publications which, while complying with the
letter of the statute, as did the "libraries," were in reality
mere advertising media. The subscription list was extremely
small in comparison with the number of sample copies sent
out, and in many cases the subscriptions had been obtained by
the offer of premiums at least equal in value to the subscriptions.
Another abuse appeared. Under the law, copies of
newspapers and periodicals mailed under the second-class
privilege which were found to be undeliverable were, when
returned to the publisher, liable to postage at the rate of
1 cent for each 4 ounces; but newsagents had the right to
send second-class mail to one another, and in order to avoid
the higher rate on returned copies, the publishers arranged a
scheme by which the copies were returned by one newsagent
to another newsagent whose office was near by the publisher's
office. These abuses assumed such proportions that in 1889
the Postmaster-General, Mr. Wanamaker, brought them to
the notice of Congress and asked a remedy. Nothing was<!-- Page 155 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_155" id="Page_155">[Pg 155]</a></span>
done, however. In 1892 Mr. Wanamaker again complained
of the same gross abuses, and especially of the book abuse,
which had then become, he said, "a practice of so long
standing that it has crystallized into law, allowing to paper-covered
books which are simply numbered, and dated, and
designated as periodicals, though in reality not so, the privileges
of genuine periodicals."<a name="FNanchor_338_338" id="FNanchor_338_338"></a><a href="#Footnote_338_338" class="fnanchor">[338]</a> He also attacked with vigour
the sample-copy abuse.<a name="FNanchor_339_339" id="FNanchor_339_339"></a><a href="#Footnote_339_339" class="fnanchor">[339]</a></p>

<p>Several Postmasters-General caused estimates to be made
of the actual cost to the Post Office of the handling and transmission
of the second-class mail. An estimate made in 1894
indicated the cost of transportation for all mail matter as
8 cents a pound, and on that basis second-class matter at
that time involved a loss of nearly 17 million dollars for transportation
alone. In 1897 the total loss on account of the
second-class mail was estimated at 26 million dollars. A
further estimate made in 1901 indicated that the cost of
transportation of second-class matter was at least 5 cents
a pound, and that the cost of handling was a further 2 cents,
giving a total cost of 7 cents a pound on matter for which
postage at the rate of only 1 cent a pound was paid.<a name="FNanchor_340_340" id="FNanchor_340_340"></a><a href="#Footnote_340_340" class="fnanchor">[340]</a></p>

<p>In 1905 Postmaster-General Cortelyou submitted an estimate
which put the loss on second-class matter at some
$27,000,000 a year; and he recommended that the whole
question should be considered by Congress, and a law enacted<!-- Page 156 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_156" id="Page_156">[Pg 156]</a></span>
which should simplify the tests by which mail matter was
classified.</p>

<p>These vigorous and oft-repeated recommendations of successive
Postmasters-General, though not resulting in legislation,
at length achieved a result in the appointment in 1906
of a joint Commission of Congress on second-class mail matter.
The Commission held meetings in New York, and took evidence
from the Post Office department and from representatives of
each national organization of publishers in the United States.
Their report, presented in January 1907, was in no sense
conclusive. Their chief difficulties had arisen from the impossibility
of obtaining from the department any statistics as to
the cost of mail matter class by class&mdash;a difficulty which is
inherent in Post Offices conducted on the modern system of
accounting for postage of all classes by postage labels of the
same type, and handling all classes of matter promiscuously;
and their chief recommendations were that the department
should take fresh statistics with regard to all mail matter,<a name="FNanchor_341_341" id="FNanchor_341_341"></a><a href="#Footnote_341_341" class="fnanchor">[341]</a> and
make an analysis of operating expenses with a view to apportionment
between the various classes of mail matter. The
Commission was so dissatisfied with the department's position
with regard to the ascertainment of a proper division of the
total expenses, that they recommended the appointment of a
further Commission to examine thoroughly "the whole
business system" of the Post Office, and particularly to determine,
if possible, firstly, the actual cost of all the postal
services; secondly, the proper apportionment of that cost
between the various classes of mail matter; and thirdly, what
modifications of the system of bookkeeping and accounting
were desirable.<a name="FNanchor_342_342" id="FNanchor_342_342"></a><a href="#Footnote_342_342" class="fnanchor">[342]</a></p>

<p>By a statute of the 2nd March 1907, Congress authorized
the appointment of a joint Commission "to make an investigation
into the business system of the Post Office and postal
service." The same gentlemen who had composed the Commission
of 1906 were appointed to the new Commission, but
its labours led to no practical result.<!-- Page 157 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_157" id="Page_157">[Pg 157]</a></span></p>

<p>The other recommendation of the Penrose-Overstreet Commission,
viz. that further statistics should be obtained with
regard to second-class matter, was also adopted by Congress,
and the statute authorizing the Commission on business
methods also authorized the taking of statistics of the weight,
number of pieces, and average haul of all classes of mail matter,
separately, and the average load of all cars by which it was
forwarded by railway.<a name="FNanchor_343_343" id="FNanchor_343_343"></a><a href="#Footnote_343_343" class="fnanchor">[343]</a> With the statistics so obtained as a
basis,<a name="FNanchor_344_344" id="FNanchor_344_344"></a><a href="#Footnote_344_344" class="fnanchor">[344]</a> the department undertook the task, which, as stated by
the Commission of 1906, had previously been impossible of
performance, of calculating the actual working cost assignable
respectively to the various classes of mail matter. A Committee,
which was appointed in October 1908, and reported
in November 1909, arrived at the conclusion that the cost
of dealing with second-class mail matter was about 9 cents
a pound. The whole subject was before the Committee on
the Post Office and Post Roads of the House of Representatives
in January and February 1910. Many representatives of
the publishing interest attended and gave evidence, and the<!-- Page 158 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_158" id="Page_158">[Pg 158]</a></span>
department's calculations were subjected to examination and
criticism.<a name="FNanchor_345_345" id="FNanchor_345_345"></a><a href="#Footnote_345_345" class="fnanchor">[345]</a></p>

<p>Congress and the Executive were still, however, unable to
arrive at a satisfactory conclusion on the question, and on the
4th March 1911 a joint resolution of Congress authorized the
appointment of a further Commission on second-class mail
matter, this time not a Congressional Commission. A judge,
the president of a university, and a business gentleman were
appointed to the Commission, which held sessions in New
York in the latter part of the year, and took evidence from the
Post Office department and representatives of the publishing
interests. They found that the data available were insufficient
to enable them to determine the total cost to the Post Office of
the services performed in respect of second-class mail matter;
but they were able to estimate the cost in regard to certain
items of the expenses of the Post Office. The cost under
those headings, which must, of course, be less than the total
cost, they found as 5&frac12; cents a pound for ordinary paid-at-the-pound-rate
matter and 5 cents a pound for free and transient
matter.<a name="FNanchor_346_346" id="FNanchor_346_346"></a><a href="#Footnote_346_346" class="fnanchor">[346]</a> That part of the general expenses of the service
which the Commission were unable to assign satisfactorily
between the various classes of mail matter was estimated by
the Post Office department to amount to over 2 cents a pound
for second-class mail matter.<a name="FNanchor_347_347" id="FNanchor_347_347"></a><a href="#Footnote_347_347" class="fnanchor">[347]</a> On this basis, of course, a heavy
increase in the rate of postage would be warranted; but in
view of the uncertainty of the effect of the competition of the
express companies which would result from a large increase in
the rate of postage, of the fact that the publishers' business
established in faith of constancy of the postage would seriously
suffer from such a sudden increase, and of the well-known
policy of encouraging distribution of educational literature,<a name="FNanchor_348_348" id="FNanchor_348_348"></a><a href="#Footnote_348_348" class="fnanchor">[348]</a>
the Commission hesitated to recommend any large increase,
and contented themselves with recommending that the rate be
raised from 1 to 2 cents a pound.<!-- Page 159 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_159" id="Page_159">[Pg 159]</a></span></p>

<p>Given that the actual cost of the handling and transporting
of second-class mail matter is on the average 9 cents a pound
(regarding which the department is quite satisfied) and a rate
of postage for such matter of 1 cent a pound, the department
has, on the face of things, a strong case; and it is not necessary
to ascribe other motives in order fully to explain and justify
the course it has adopted. But the publishers felt that they
were not favourably regarded by the Republican Administration.
They claim, and the claim is admitted in influential
quarters immune from pressure from them, that they are
largely responsible for the establishment of the insurgent
wing of the Republican party, whose action against the late
Administration proved so disastrous to the fortunes of the
party. In the course of these political activities they have
made enemies; and they conclude that in the Republican party,
many of whose members have been disgraced, if not indeed
driven from public life, there has arisen a strong feeling
against the publishers. The activity of the department against
the second-class rate is alleged to have begun after the publication
of articles in the magazines exposing the corruption in the
cities, and incidentally reflecting on members of the Republican
party. Moreover, the department's most drastic recommendations
have been directed not against second-class matter as a
whole, but against the periodicals; and they have been made
under the guise of preventing, as contrary to the intent of
the statute, the dissemination at the second-class rate of vast
quantities of advertising matter. Thus, the department has
recommended that that portion of periodicals which consisted
solely of advertising matter should be charged at a higher
rate than the rest of the publication (which would be allowed
the second-class rate), while nothing at all was proposed as
regards ordinary newspapers, a discrimination which cut the
publishers of the periodicals deeply.</p>

<p>The representations of the Post Office department, extending
over some twenty years, and of most decisive and emphatic
character, have not yet succeeded in obtaining legislation for
the reform of the second-class mail scheme; but some few
years back the department arrived at the conclusion that the
authority of the existing law was sufficient to enable the more
flagrant abuses to be checked, if not eliminated. A series<!-- Page 160 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_160" id="Page_160">[Pg 160]</a></span>
of rulings were thereupon promulgated, and by this means
some of the worst abuses have been removed, such as, for
example, the transmission as second-class matter of "libraries,"
issued as periodicals. These rulings were resented by the
publishing interests, with whom it was a source of great
complaint that the interpretation of the statute defining
second-class mail matter was left to arbitrary decision by
officials of the department.<a name="FNanchor_349_349" id="FNanchor_349_349"></a><a href="#Footnote_349_349" class="fnanchor">[349]</a> The intense feeling in America
against any sort of bureaucracy, and especially against a
bureaucracy of the central Government, leads to a natural
jealousy of the exercise of this power, and as a remedy the
suggestion was advanced that provision should be made, first,
for questions of the interpretation of the Act to be decided
in the first instance by a permanent Commission located at
Washington, on which the publishers should be represented;
and secondly, that there should be an appeal from the decisions
of this Commission to the ordinary courts of justice.</p>

<p>The department admits that its position with regard to the
interpretation of the statutes is unsatisfactory. Under the
existing system, all manner of questions are asked regarding
the private business of the publisher, and the decisions from
Washington are often delayed.<a name="FNanchor_350_350" id="FNanchor_350_350"></a><a href="#Footnote_350_350" class="fnanchor">[350]</a> But as against the contention
of the department, which was for an amendment of the law, the
publishers contended that the law, while no doubt not altogether
perfect, was in the main sound and just, and the rate
of postage of 1 cent a pound was as great a boon as was ever
conferred by Congress. They denied that it was in any sense
a subsidy.<a name="FNanchor_351_351" id="FNanchor_351_351"></a><a href="#Footnote_351_351" class="fnanchor">[351]</a> They also denied the existence of a deficiency,<!-- Page 161 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_161" id="Page_161">[Pg 161]</a></span>
and contended that so far from its being true that the Post
Office business involved a loss, there was each year a profit of
millions of dollars. This result they arrived at by estimating
the cost to the Post Office of the distribution of Government
free matter, and the cost of the rural free delivery, which they
added together, setting the total against the deficit shown in
the published accounts of the department. By this means a
balance of profit was obtained for each year. The estimated
postage payable at the usual rates in respect of the free matter
was of course an item legitimately to be added to gross
revenue; but it was doubtful whether the cost of the rural
delivery service could be deducted from gross expenses, as
the publishers insisted, on the ground that the service was
"extraordinary."</p>

<p>The publishers made a further allegation. At that time
the express companies cut even the very low existing cent-a-pound
rate on second-class mail matter for short distances,
and if that rate were raised the range of their competition
would be extended. With a 2-cent rate a much greater proportion
of the traffic would inevitably fall to them. This
would, of course, be very advantageous to the companies, to
whom, as to railways, any increase in the volume of traffic
handled would be welcome. These express companies had for
many years been faithful supporters of the Republican party,
and behind the suggestion to increase second-class rates the
publishers were convinced there was a desire on the part of
the leaders of the party to reward their faithful allies.<a name="FNanchor_352_352" id="FNanchor_352_352"></a><a href="#Footnote_352_352" class="fnanchor">[352]</a></p>

<p>But perhaps the chief contentions of the publishers, which
the Post Office was bound to some extent to admit, and would
in any case find it difficult to meet, were the claim that newspapers
create a vast quantity of first-class mail; and the claim
that since the payment made to the railway companies in<!-- Page 162 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_162" id="Page_162">[Pg 162]</a></span>
respect of the transportation of the mail is based on a sliding
scale, decreasing as the volume of traffic increases, the weight
of second-class matter brings down appreciably the rate actually
to be paid.</p>

<p>Some who appeared before the Commission of 1911 were
inclined to go beyond these general contentions as to the
relative claims of second-class matter, and to assail the whole
administration of the department from the economic standpoint;
challenging especially the relations with the railway
companies, and arguing that the payment made for the conveyance
of mails was not equitable when compared with the
charges made by the companies for similar services performed
for the express companies.</p>

<p>Notwithstanding these contentions, there can be no question
that the transmission of the second-class mail at the
present rates involves the department in heavy loss; and that
Congress, not unaware of this, attaches importance to the
advantages which a low rate for such matter confers. The
Commission were satisfied on both points. It is, however,
doubted by many whether the effect of this privilege has been
altogether salutary from the educational point of view. It has
encouraged to an almost incredible extent the publication of
periodical magazines, and many of these magazines are of a
high order of merit as periodical publications. The United
States leads the world in the publication of this kind of
matter.<a name="FNanchor_353_353" id="FNanchor_353_353"></a><a href="#Footnote_353_353" class="fnanchor">[353]</a> But the reading matter which is found in these
publications is to a large extent light and trivial. The publication
of serious intellectual works has shown little advance
in recent years,<a name="FNanchor_354_354" id="FNanchor_354_354"></a><a href="#Footnote_354_354" class="fnanchor">[354]</a> and there is a fairly widespread feeling in<!-- Page 163 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_163" id="Page_163">[Pg 163]</a></span>
America that the two developments are connected. But that
is a matter difficult to determine.</p>

<p>In any case, many people are proud of the development in
periodicals, and the department, in spite of its efforts, has so far
failed to secure any increase of rate. Although the Postmaster-General
and the President<a name="FNanchor_355_355" id="FNanchor_355_355"></a><a href="#Footnote_355_355" class="fnanchor">[355]</a> adopted the recommendations of
the Commission of 1911, and urged their consideration on
Congress, Congress has not taken action, and has, indeed,
forbidden the department to extend certain arrangements for
the use of freight trains for the transmission of second-class
matter, whereby a saving of expense could be secured,
a phenomenon probably explicable by the constitution of
American politics.<a name="FNanchor_356_356" id="FNanchor_356_356"></a><a href="#Footnote_356_356" class="fnanchor">[356]</a></p>

<hr />
<p><!-- Page 164 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_164" id="Page_164">[Pg 164]</a></span></p>

<h3>NEWSPAPER POST IN FRANCE</h3>

<p>In France, printed matter, whether issued periodically or
otherwise, seems always to have enjoyed a lower rate of
postage than the written letter. Before the Revolution
there was diversity of practice as regards the rate of postage
charged on newspapers. Some privileged papers paid only
5 or 6 deniers the sheet, while others paid 8 deniers. All the
rates were purely arbitrary. When the Committee on Public
Taxation of the National Assembly considered the question of
fixing the rate for newspapers, they considered not only how
to regularize the rate, but also whether they could raise it.
Viewed from the economic standpoint, the rate was thought
by some to be inadequate.<a name="FNanchor_357_357" id="FNanchor_357_357"></a><a href="#Footnote_357_357" class="fnanchor">[357]</a> The Committee was satisfied
that not only would the new rates cover the cost of the
service, but that there would also be a slight profit, although
they felt it would not be proper, or even possible, to make that
part of the business of the Post Office a really lucrative source
of revenue.<a name="FNanchor_358_358" id="FNanchor_358_358"></a><a href="#Footnote_358_358" class="fnanchor">[358]</a></p>

<p>The decree of 17-22 August 1791 established the rate of<!-- Page 165 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_165" id="Page_165">[Pg 165]</a></span>
8 deniers per sheet for daily newspapers (and other daily
publications), and 12 deniers per sheet for other periodical
publications. Pamphlets or unbound books were charged a
sou the sheet. Bound books were not allowed to pass by
post. It is unlikely that these rates were remunerative.
They were modified several times during the next few years;
but although the modifications were in the direction of
increase, the rates for newspapers still compared very favourably
with the rates for letters.<a name="FNanchor_359_359" id="FNanchor_359_359"></a><a href="#Footnote_359_359" class="fnanchor">[359]</a></p>

<p>A law of 6 messidor, an IV (1795), established a rate of
5 centimes for newspapers and other periodical publications
delivered in the place of publication, and 10 centimes for
all other destinations; but this discrimination was removed
by the law of 4 thermidor, an IV, which substituted a general
rate of 4 centimes the sheet. An attempt was made by the
administration to raise the rates on newspapers and books.
As regards newspapers the proposal was, however, rejected by
the <span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Conseil des Anciens</span>.</p>

<p>In 1796 a new rate for newspapers and other periodical
publications was established, viz. 4 centimes for each sheet.
For other printed matter the rate was fixed at 5 centimes per
sheet.<a name="FNanchor_360_360" id="FNanchor_360_360"></a><a href="#Footnote_360_360" class="fnanchor">[360]</a> This law failed to prescribe the limits of size of the
sheets according to which postage was to be charged, an
omission supplied by an ordinance of the 5th March 1823,
which fixed the dimension of the sheet at 24 centimetres by 38.
The newspapers interested tried to resist this restriction, contending
that the ordinance was illegal, because the laws of
1796 prescribed no limit and the Government could not impose
one by ordinance: for such a purpose a new law was
necessary.</p>

<p>The law of the 27 frimaire, an VIII (17th December 1799),
had established a scale of charges according to weight, and the<!-- Page 166 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_166" id="Page_166">[Pg 166]</a></span>
rates were fixed according to the distance actually traversed,
under the arrangements then existing. This restriction, which
was unfortunate, because the services existing during the
Revolutionary period were not of a character to serve as a
basis for the future, was felt to be onerous, and numerous
complaints were lodged by communes which felt themselves
placed under a disadvantage.</p>

<p>In 1827 the rates were revised and placed on a more stable
basis.<a name="FNanchor_361_361" id="FNanchor_361_361"></a><a href="#Footnote_361_361" class="fnanchor">[361]</a> The principle first established in 1791, of charge
according to the distance between two places reckoned as the
crow flies, was re-established; and a provision was inserted in
the law to meet the difficulty which had arisen as to the
legality of the ordinance of 1823, purporting to fix the size of
the sheets on which the postage on printed matter was
calculated. Postage on newspapers and periodicals was made
5 centimes for each sheet of 30 square decimetres for all
destinations; but the charge was reduced by one-half for
newspapers and periodicals circulated within the department
where they were published, the reduced rate being established
with the view of protection of the country Press, whose subscribers
were in general local, against the competition of the
Parisian Press. In 1830 the rate of 5 centimes the sheet for
newspapers and other periodical publications was reduced to
4 centimes. The rates of 1827 remained otherwise unchanged.</p>

<p>In 1850 the newspaper tax and the postage were assimilated&mdash;that
is to say, newspapers were subjected only to one tax,
and payment of that tax secured the right of transmission by
post. The tax was at the rate of 5 centimes per sheet of
72 square decimetres or less for newspapers published in the
departments of Seine and Seine-et-Oise, and 2 centimes for
those published elsewhere. All newspapers on which a tax of
5 centimes was paid, were entitled to free transmission by
post throughout France. Those on which a tax of 2 centimes
was paid, were entitled to free transmission by post within
the department in which they were published and the
adjoining departments. In order to obtain transmission by
post throughout France, an additional sum of 3 centimes per
paper must be paid on these latter newspapers.<a name="FNanchor_362_362" id="FNanchor_362_362"></a><a href="#Footnote_362_362" class="fnanchor">[362]</a> The Minister
of Justice, in introducing the measure in the National Assembly,<!-- Page 167 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_167" id="Page_167">[Pg 167]</a></span>
explained that it would serve a double purpose: on
the one hand it would give an increase of revenue of some six
millions a year; and on the other it would safeguard society
against detestable doctrines, because it would fall specially on
those evil newspapers and books<a name="FNanchor_363_363" id="FNanchor_363_363"></a><a href="#Footnote_363_363" class="fnanchor">[363]</a> which were circulated at a
low price in town and country, propagating prejudices and
error, exciting the passions and corrupting the conscience of
the public.<a name="FNanchor_364_364" id="FNanchor_364_364"></a><a href="#Footnote_364_364" class="fnanchor">[364]</a></p>

<p>Louis Napoleon Bonaparte, in 1852, desirous that there
should be no obstacle in the way of his ultimate assumption
of absolute power and the Imperial crown, issued a decree
further restricting the Press in France. The publication of
newspapers or periodicals dealing with political or economic
questions, unless authorized by the Government, was forbidden;
and the rates of postage in force prior to the law of
1850 were imposed on newspapers, in addition to the tax
imposed by that law.<a name="FNanchor_365_365" id="FNanchor_365_365"></a><a href="#Footnote_365_365" class="fnanchor">[365]</a> The same principles led to the discrimination
introduced in 1856 between political and non-political
papers. The former were subjected to a higher rate
of postage than newspapers of a non-political character,
because the Government felt it to be necessary that there
should be some moderating influence to check the effect of
political journals in times of intense political excitement, and
adopted this expedient.<a name="FNanchor_366_366" id="FNanchor_366_366"></a><a href="#Footnote_366_366" class="fnanchor">[366]</a></p>

<p>The rates for printed matter had for a long period caused
considerable confusion, and given rise to many complaints
from members of the public. They were still determined
according to the linear surface of the sheets, a method which
was found to cause considerable embarrassment and difficulty
in its practical application. To all other classes of postal
traffic the more logical and more convenient principle of
charge according to weight had already been applied, and in<!-- Page 168 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_168" id="Page_168">[Pg 168]</a></span>
1856 this principle was applied also to printed matter of all
descriptions. Weight was made the basis of the charge, without
reference to superficies or to distance, except that for
political reasons the privilege of half-rates for newspapers
circulating in the department in which they were published
was continued.<a name="FNanchor_367_367" id="FNanchor_367_367"></a><a href="#Footnote_367_367" class="fnanchor">[367]</a> The reduction of the actual rates made by
this law was slight, and was estimated not to have any
appreciable effect on the total revenue. In any case the
question was "regarded less from the financial point of view
than from the point of view of the satisfaction which it
would give to the needs of commerce and industry and of
private intercourse in general."<a name="FNanchor_368_368" id="FNanchor_368_368"></a><a href="#Footnote_368_368" class="fnanchor">[368]</a> The new rate was 1 centime
for each 10 grammes, with a minimum of 4 centimes for
political, and 2 centimes for non-political newspapers.</p>

<p>This reduction of rate, together with the reduction for other
printed matter, for samples, and for commercial papers, resulted
in a large increase in the number of bulky packets sent by post.
In order to ensure prompt delivery, it was found necessary
in Paris to separate to some extent the letter-post traffic from
the traffic sent at the lower rates, and the principle of providing
a separate staff of postmen for the delivery of newspapers,
magazines, samples, etc., was introduced.<a name="FNanchor_369_369" id="FNanchor_369_369"></a><a href="#Footnote_369_369" class="fnanchor">[369]</a> The application of
this principle has since been extended, and the two kinds of
traffic are now dealt with in Paris altogether separately, by
separate staffs of officers.</p>

<p>The newspaper rates were next revised in 1878. The discrimination
between political and non-political newspapers<!-- Page 169 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_169" id="Page_169">[Pg 169]</a></span>
was abolished, but the privilege accorded to local newspapers
was continued. The new rates were:&mdash;</p>

<div class="blockquot"><p>1. Two centimes for the first 25 grammes and 1 centime for each further
25 grammes or fraction of 25 grammes for newspapers published in the departments
of Seine and Seine-et-Oise and circulating outside the department where
published; and for newspapers published in other departments and circulating
outside the department where published and the adjacent departments.</p>

<p>2. One centime for the first 25 grammes and &frac12; centime for each additional
25 grammes or fraction of 25 grammes for newspapers published in the departments
of Seine or Seine-et-Oise and circulating within the department where
published.</p>

<p>3. One centime for the first 50 grammes and &frac12; centime for each additional
25 grammes or fraction of 25 grammes for provincial papers other than those of
Seine and Seine-et-Oise, circulating within the department where published or
adjacent departments.</p></div>

<p>The existing rate for inland newspapers, which is based on
the law of the 16th April 1895, is as follows:&mdash;</p>

<div class="blockquot"><p>Two centimes for each copy up to 50 grammes, and 1 centime for each
25 grammes or fraction of 25 grammes above 50 grammes.</p></div>

<p>Only half these rates is charged when the papers circulate
within the department in which they are published or the
adjacent department.</p>

<p>In 1908<a name="FNanchor_370_370" id="FNanchor_370_370"></a><a href="#Footnote_370_370" class="fnanchor">[370]</a> the rates in respect of newspapers sorted and bundled
according to the offices of destination and the post routes, were
reduced to 1 centime for the first 50 grammes and 1 centime
for each additional 25 grammes or fraction of 25 grammes&mdash;half
this rate being charged for papers circulating within the
department of publication or the adjacent departments.</p>

<p>The value of a centime is roughly one-tenth of a penny.
It is hardly necessary, therefore, to point out that these rates
are divorced entirely from economic considerations, and are
to be explained only on political and administrative grounds.<a name="FNanchor_371_371" id="FNanchor_371_371"></a><a href="#Footnote_371_371" class="fnanchor">[371]</a><!-- Page 170 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_170" id="Page_170">[Pg 170]</a></span>
It has been estimated that in 1895 the loss on printed matter
of all kinds was 36 million francs.</p>

<p>In France, as in other countries, the privilege of transmitting
periodical publications at a specially low rate of postage
was much availed of for the transmission of advertising
matter, of publications which were essentially of the character
of catalogues or prospectuses rather than newspapers properly
speaking. A law of 1908,<a name="FNanchor_372_372" id="FNanchor_372_372"></a><a href="#Footnote_372_372" class="fnanchor">[372]</a> passed with a view, among other
things, of minimizing this abuse of the privilege, restricted
the application of the reduced rate to publications issued
not less frequently than once a month. The new regulation
had good results, restricting, as was desired, the number of
periodical publications not legitimately entitled to the privilege.
It had also a result which was regarded by Parliament
as undesirable: it shut out from the privilege the numerous
quarterly journals of scientific and learned societies.<a name="FNanchor_373_373" id="FNanchor_373_373"></a><a href="#Footnote_373_373" class="fnanchor">[373]</a></p>

<p>By the same law the minimum rate of postage for small
packets of printed matter sent under loose band, the <i>imprim&#233;s
non urgent</i>, was raised from 1 centime to 2 centimes.
The result of this was a little unsatisfactory. In order to
evade the higher charge, advertisers took to printing in newspapers,
circulating at 1 centime, announcements formerly sent
out separately as loose leaflets, a man&#x0153;uvre which struck
doubly: not only was the legitimate rate of postage evaded,
but instead of dealing with the matter as non-urgent at its
convenience, the Post Office was obliged to treat it in the<!-- Page 171 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_171" id="Page_171">[Pg 171]</a></span>
same way as all other newspaper matter&mdash;that is, to give it
the benefit of equal treatment with matter sent at the
letter rate.</p>


<h4><span class="smcap">Note on Supplements.</span></h4>

<p>A decree of the 24th November 1860 gave to the two
Chambers the constitutional right of discussing the policy of
the Government at home and abroad, and as a natural corollary
of this it was desired to secure the untrammelled publication
and distribution of reports of the debates. This was attained
by exempting from postage the supplements of journals when
they were devoted entirely to the reproduction of the official
reports of the proceedings of the Chambers, the <i>motifs des
projets de lois</i>, reports of parliamentary commissions, or official
documents deposited by the Government at the office of the
Chambers.</p>

<p>The Press law of the 11th May 1868 extended the exemption
to supplements devoted to the extent of one half to the
publication of reports of parliamentary debates or documents,
but only on condition that the supplements contained no
advertisements. The privilege was continued by the law of
1878.<a name="FNanchor_374_374" id="FNanchor_374_374"></a><a href="#Footnote_374_374" class="fnanchor">[374]</a> In order to obtain the privilege the supplements must
be printed on sheets detached from the main publication, but
they must be enclosed with the publication. They must not
exceed in size that part of the paper subject to postage, and
if sent separately, they are liable to postage at the ordinary
rate. In 1869 the official reports of parliamentary debates
were exempted from postage when sent by the printer to the
editors of country papers, or by those editors to their subscribers,
if enclosed with the local paper.</p>

<p>M. Jaccottey's view is that in order to conform to the spirit
of the law, the rate for periodicals ought to be confined to
newspapers and other periodical publications devoted to letters,
science, and arts; and that it is an abuse of the privilege that
commercial advertising should avail itself of the privilege by,
say, publishing at regular intervals successive editions of library<!-- Page 172 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_172" id="Page_172">[Pg 172]</a></span>
catalogues, or by borrowing the titles of illustrated journals,
their outside covers, and the methods of distribution, and inserting
in them prospectuses which are not of the nature of
periodicals.<a name="FNanchor_375_375" id="FNanchor_375_375"></a><a href="#Footnote_375_375" class="fnanchor">[375]</a></p>

<p>Ordinary supplements may be enclosed in newspapers.
They are weighed with the paper, and postage is charged
according to the total weight. If sent separately, they are
regarded as a number of the paper, and postage is charged
accordingly. In order to obtain the benefit of the privileged
rate, all supplements must bear printed indication of the fact
that they are supplements, and must bear the title and date of
the main paper.<a name="FNanchor_376_376" id="FNanchor_376_376"></a><a href="#Footnote_376_376" class="fnanchor">[376]</a></p>

<p>These definitions were amplified by the administration in
1896 by an instruction (No. 468) which provided that detached
advertisement sheets of any sort, issued exceptionally (feuilletons,
fiction, stop press news, late articles, pictures, artistic
engravings, or others), which are the genuine production of the
publication, whatever the size and shape or pagination, ought
to be regarded as fulfilling the conditions prescribed by law
for supplements and to be admitted to the privilege of the
reduced rate.</p>

<hr />
<p><!-- Page 173 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_173" id="Page_173">[Pg 173]</a></span></p>


<h3>NEWSPAPER POST IN GERMANY</h3>

<p>From the time of their first publication in Germany, newspapers
have been distributed through the post. Little is
known of the precise arrangements under which they were
at first transmitted, but there is no doubt that they were
accorded privileged conditions as compared with ordinary
letters. The postmasters were themselves largely interested
in the publication of newspapers.<a name="FNanchor_377_377" id="FNanchor_377_377"></a><a href="#Footnote_377_377" class="fnanchor">[377]</a> By 1712 the conduct of
newspaper businesses by postmasters had become recognized
as a common and long-established arrangement.<a name="FNanchor_378_378" id="FNanchor_378_378"></a><a href="#Footnote_378_378" class="fnanchor">[378]</a></p>

<p>The distribution of the newspapers was largely made
through the post, and a rate of charge, built up of two
elements, came into existence. The first element was the
"discount" (<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">der Rabatt</i>). This was a payment made by the
publisher to the postmaster as remuneration for the work
of the latter in connection with the posting and despatch of
the papers and the collection of subscriptions. This discount
was arranged between the postmaster and the publisher, and
generally took the form of a fixed percentage proportion of
the published price (<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Erlasspreis</i>). The second element was
the "percentage" (<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">die Provision</i>). This was in addition to
the published price. It was collected from the addressee, and
belonged partly to the postmaster at the place of destination
and partly to the postmaster at the place of publication.<a name="FNanchor_379_379" id="FNanchor_379_379"></a><a href="#Footnote_379_379" class="fnanchor">[379]</a>
The rates were fixed by the postmasters at their discretion,
and gross irregularities and anomalies in the rates resulted.<!-- Page 174 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_174" id="Page_174">[Pg 174]</a></span>
Public complaint arose, and it was found necessary for the
State to assume control of the traffic and fix definite rates of
charge. This course was first adopted in Prussia in 1821,
when the following rates were established<a name="FNanchor_380_380" id="FNanchor_380_380"></a><a href="#Footnote_380_380" class="fnanchor">[380]</a>:&mdash;</p>

<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Rates for newspaper deliveries, Prussia 1821.">
<tr><td align="left">4</td><td align="left">pf.</td><td align="center">for each</td><td align="left">whole</td><td align="center">sheet of the</td><td align="center">primary</td><td align="center">publication</td><td align="center">(<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Hauptblattes</i>)</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">2&frac12;</td><td align="left">pf.</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">half</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1&frac12;</td><td align="left">pf.</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">quarter</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1&frac12;</td><td align="left">pf.</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">whole</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">supplement</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1</td><td align="left">pf.</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">half</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>This method of charge did not, however, prove altogether
satisfactory, because the term "sheet" was not defined with
any degree of precision. It was thought that a better basis
for the rate might be found in the price at which the newspapers
were sold to the public, because, it was argued, the
price must stand in exact proportion to the number and size
of the copies, and also to their real value. Accordingly, in
1848 the rate was fixed generally at 25 per cent. of the
published price.<a name="FNanchor_381_381" id="FNanchor_381_381"></a><a href="#Footnote_381_381" class="fnanchor">[381]</a> At a somewhat later date this rate was
reduced to 12&frac12; per cent. of the published price in the case
of newspapers appearing less frequently than four times a
month.<a name="FNanchor_382_382" id="FNanchor_382_382"></a><a href="#Footnote_382_382" class="fnanchor">[382]</a> In 1871 the minimum yearly rate payable in respect
of any newspaper was fixed at 4 sgr.<a name="FNanchor_383_383" id="FNanchor_383_383"></a><a href="#Footnote_383_383" class="fnanchor">[383]</a></p>

<p>The application of this tariff resulted in many cases in
considerable discrepancies between the amount charged and
the service rendered. The improvements in the manufacture
of paper and in the methods of printing, particularly the
introduction of the rotary press, had cheapened the processes
of production, and led to a great expansion of the newspaper
trade. With this expansion came a more than proportionate
expansion of the business of advertising. The result was that,
as in England and America, the newspapers increased in<!-- Page 175 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_175" id="Page_175">[Pg 175]</a></span>
bulk; but so far from there being a corresponding increase
in price, there was in point of fact a very considerable
decrease. Moreover, advertisements became a more important
source of revenue than the subscriptions themselves. A
rate of charge based on the selling price, which might have
been reasonable when newspapers were produced under the
old conditions, was totally inapplicable under the altered
circumstances.<a name="FNanchor_384_384" id="FNanchor_384_384"></a><a href="#Footnote_384_384" class="fnanchor">[384]</a></p>

<p>The financial results proved extremely unsatisfactory.
From the causes indicated, the average weight of the individual
copies of newspapers continued to increase, while at
the same time the price (and with the price, the postage)
continued to decrease.</p>

<p>In 1897 the administration of the Imperial Post Office
estimated that the total cost of the transmission of newspapers
by post in Germany, for staff, post offices, transport,
equipment, etc., was 6,178,362 M., or about 66/100 pf. per
copy.<a name="FNanchor_385_385" id="FNanchor_385_385"></a><a href="#Footnote_385_385" class="fnanchor">[385]</a> The number of newspapers transmitted by post
in Germany was at that time about a thousand millions
annually, and the total postage received in respect of them
was less than 5 million M., or on the average about<!-- Page 176 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_176" id="Page_176">[Pg 176]</a></span>
&frac12; pf. per copy;<a name="FNanchor_386_386" id="FNanchor_386_386"></a><a href="#Footnote_386_386" class="fnanchor">[386]</a> in the case of a number of papers the postage
was as little as 1/12 pf. per copy.<a name="FNanchor_387_387" id="FNanchor_387_387"></a><a href="#Footnote_387_387" class="fnanchor">[387]</a> The annual loss to the
administration on account of the newspaper traffic was therefore
on the average 16/100 pf. per copy, or a total of about
1,600,000 M. a year.</p>

<p>For many years the question was before the Budget
Commission of the Reichstag, and a change soon followed
the publication of this estimate. New rates, based on entirely
new principles, were established in 1899.</p>

<p>When the Act establishing the new rates was in preparation,
the Imperial Post Office administration based their
proposals mainly on the principle that the charges should
cover the cost of the service rendered.<a name="FNanchor_388_388" id="FNanchor_388_388"></a><a href="#Footnote_388_388" class="fnanchor">[388]</a> The original proposals
to the Reichstag were accordingly calculated to secure an
increased revenue of 1&frac14; million M. The Budget Commission,
however, so modified the proposals as to reduce this
amount to 300,000 M., and further modifications were
made in the Reichstag itself, with the result that under the
new rates the administration was left to work with an even
greater loss than formerly.<a name="FNanchor_389_389" id="FNanchor_389_389"></a><a href="#Footnote_389_389" class="fnanchor">[389]</a></p>

<p>The large publications of the great cities, supported as they
were to a large extent by the advertisements they carried,
had obtained a wide circulation, to the prejudice of the<!-- Page 177 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_177" id="Page_177">[Pg 177]</a></span>
provincial Press.<a name="FNanchor_390_390" id="FNanchor_390_390"></a><a href="#Footnote_390_390" class="fnanchor">[390]</a> With a view to affording some measure
of protection to the provincial Press as against the Press
of the large cities, proposals were made in the Reichstag for
the adoption of a zone rate for newspapers on the ground that
the cost to the Post Office for distributing newspapers at great
distances was appreciably greater than the cost of distribution
in the case of newspapers sent short distances only, and that
a zone rate would therefore be just.<a name="FNanchor_391_391" id="FNanchor_391_391"></a><a href="#Footnote_391_391" class="fnanchor">[391]</a> The authorities were
not, however, prepared to adopt this proposal, which they
characterized as retrograde and unnecessary.<a name="FNanchor_392_392" id="FNanchor_392_392"></a><a href="#Footnote_392_392" class="fnanchor">[392]</a> They considered
that if the rate were raised for the longer distances
the traffic would be taken away from the Post Office by
private enterprise, and if the rate for the shorter distances
were further lowered, the revenue from newspapers would be
still further, and undesirably, reduced.</p>

<p>The new scheme of rates of 1899 was based on three considerations:
the length of time covered by the subscription,<!-- Page 178 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_178" id="Page_178">[Pg 178]</a></span>
the frequency of issue, and the weight of the newspaper; and
the rates were reckoned in the following way:&mdash;</p>

<div class="blockquot"><p>(<i>a</i>) Two pf. for each month of sending.</p>

<p>(<i>b</i>) 15 pf. yearly for papers appearing once weekly or less frequently, and 15 pf.
yearly more for each further publication weekly.</p>

<p>(<i>c</i>) 10 pf. yearly for each kilogramme of the yearly weight, subject to a free
weight of 1 kilogramme yearly for each of so many editions as the rate (<i>b</i>) is
applied to.<a name="FNanchor_393_393" id="FNanchor_393_393"></a><a href="#Footnote_393_393" class="fnanchor">[393]</a></p></div>

<p>The weight for any year was to be fixed according to the
actual weight of the numbers of the paper during the previous
year, and for new publications the rate was to be applied
quarterly on the basis of the weight of such numbers as had
appeared. The publisher was required to deposit with the
Post Office a complete copy of each issue for the purpose of
calculating the weight charge.</p>

<p>Financially, the result of the rates has been unsatisfactory;
the amendments of the proposals of the postal administration
which were made by the Reichstag could hardly have had any
other effect. From the year 1871 to the year 1902 the increase
in the number of newspapers was 508 per cent. (1871, 202?
millions; 1902, 1,157 millions), but the increase in newspaper
postage was only about 378 per cent. (1,760,326 M. in 1871
and 6,659,735 M. in 1902); and if the cost of the service remained
approximately the same as in 1897, which there is
little reason to doubt, the loss to the administration was about
a million Marks.</p>

<p>In the case of a number of papers a higher rate of postage
became payable; but in the case of some of the expensive
illustrated and scientific publications the new rate represented
a considerable reduction. Thus, in one case, the rate became
2 M. 9 pf. instead of 96 pf. yearly, while in another the rate was
reduced from 7 M. 20 pf. to 50 pf. yearly.<a name="FNanchor_394_394" id="FNanchor_394_394"></a><a href="#Footnote_394_394" class="fnanchor">[394]</a></p>

<p>But the reduction of rate did not represent the whole disadvantage.
The greater part of the issue of illustrated and<!-- Page 179 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_179" id="Page_179">[Pg 179]</a></span>
scientific journals and trade papers had formerly been distributed
through the ordinary channels of the publishing trade.
Now that the postage rates were in many cases so largely
reduced, it became cheaper in those cases to distribute a
larger number by post, and this course was naturally adopted.
Increase in the number sent by post in such circumstances
simply resulted in increased financial loss.</p>

<p>An indication of the extent of the privilege which the newspapers
enjoy as compared with other printed matter may be
obtained by comparing the revenue which was actually
obtained from the newspapers with the revenue which would
have been obtained from the same number of packets of
ordinary printed matter of similar size and weight. In 1900,
in the inland service in Germany, some 440 million packets
of ordinary printed matter were transmitted, and the postage
on them amounted to 21,133,499 M. If the 1,150 million
newspapers had yielded postage in the same proportion, they
would have brought in a revenue of some 55 millions of
Marks, whereas in actual fact they yielded only some 6&frac12;
millions.<a name="FNanchor_395_395" id="FNanchor_395_395"></a><a href="#Footnote_395_395" class="fnanchor">[395]</a></p>

<p>The present rate rests on the two grounds of frequency
of issue and weight of copies. It is therefore in practice
more difficult to apply than the former rate based simply
on the price, since the weight factor is variable and requires
exact determination in every case. Moreover, the Reichstag
forbade rounding up of the weight, which would be essential
if a rate in even pfennigs were to be ascertained. The calculation
of the actual rate must be carried to the second decimal
place in pfennigs, and a rounding up of broken pfennigs is
permitted only at the final settlement for the regular subscription
period. This complexity has, of course, added largely to
the cost of administration, without a corresponding increase
in revenue.</p>

<p>It is anticipated that with the growth of the newspaper
traffic the loss to the postal administration will tend to
increase rather than to diminish. There is, however, no
disposition to restrict the privilege accorded to newspapers.
The attempt made by the administration in 1899 to secure
an increased revenue from them was, as explained, frustrated<!-- Page 180 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_180" id="Page_180">[Pg 180]</a></span>
by the Reichstag. Since 1852 the Post Office has held the
monopoly of the distribution of political newspapers, and the
general advantage resulting from such an effective control
of the dissemination of public intelligence no doubt explains
the continuance of so favourable and unremunerative a rate.<a name="FNanchor_396_396" id="FNanchor_396_396"></a><a href="#Footnote_396_396" class="fnanchor">[396]</a></p>


<h4><span class="smcap">Note on Delivery Fees for Newspapers.</span></h4>

<p>House-to-house delivery of newspapers was introduced in
1828, the lowest charge (i.e. in addition to ordinary postage)
being 30 pf. quarterly.</p>

<p>In 1872 a uniform delivery fee was fixed for town and
country. For papers appearing weekly or less frequently the
charge was 15 pf., for papers appearing two or three times
weekly 25 pf., for papers appearing four to seven times weekly
40 pf., and for papers appearing more frequently than seven
times weekly 50 pf. quarterly. The system of charging delivery
fees has been continued, and those at present in operation
are:&mdash;</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Newspaper delivery charges from 1872 in Prussia.">
<tr><th colspan="4"></th><th align="center" colspan="2">For<br /> each copy<br /> monthly</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>a</i>)</td><td align="center">For newspapers</td><td align="center">delivered</td><td align="left">less frequently than once a week</td><td align="right">2</td><td align="left">pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>b</i>)</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">once a week</td><td align="right">4</td><td align="left">pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>c</i>)</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">twice a week</td><td align="right">6</td><td align="left">pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>d</i>)</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">thrice a week</td><td align="right">8</td><td align="left">pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>e</i>)</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">four times a week</td><td align="right">10</td><td align="left">pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>f</i>)</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">five times a week</td><td align="right">12</td><td align="left">pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>g</i>)</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">six or seven times a week</td><td align="right">14</td><td align="left">pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>h</i>)</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">eight times a week</td><td align="right">16</td><td align="left">pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>i</i>)</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">nine times a week</td><td align="right">18</td><td align="left">pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>k</i>)</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">ten times weekly</td><td align="right">20</td><td align="left">pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>l</i>)</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">eleven times weekly</td><td align="right">22</td><td align="left">pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>m</i>)</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">twelve to fourteen times weekly</td><td align="right">24</td><td align="left">pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>n</i>)</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">fifteen times weekly</td><td align="right">26</td><td align="left">pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>o</i>)</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">sixteen times weekly</td><td align="right">28</td><td align="left">pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>p</i>)</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">seventeen times weekly</td><td align="right">30</td><td align="left">pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>q</i>)</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">eighteen times weekly</td><td align="right">32</td><td align="left">pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>r</i>)</td><td align="left" colspan="3">For official gazettes</td><td align="right">2</td><td align="left">pf.<a name="FNanchor_397_397" id="FNanchor_397_397"></a><a href="#Footnote_397_397" class="fnanchor">[397]</a></td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>The delivery fees are collected in advance for the complete
subscription period. In 1910 the amount collected for delivery
in towns was 19,604,234 M., and for delivery in the country
districts 5,770,896 M.<!-- Page 181 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_181" id="Page_181">[Pg 181]</a></span></p>


<h4><span class="smcap">Note on Special Supplements.</span></h4>

<p>Special advertisement supplements were permitted to be
sent by post together with newspapers by the order of 30th
September 1871. These supplements in form or character
must not be similar to the main newspaper. They must
not be printed at the same office, and no charge might be
made for their insertion. A special supplement must not
exceed one sheet and must not be bound. The newspapers
in which they were inserted must bear a notification to that
effect in a prominent position. All copies of the supplement
must be submitted to the Post Office and the postage paid in
advance. They were then stamped at the office of posting,
and if not posted within three days the postage might be
forfeited. The rate for each supplement was 1/12 sgr.<a name="FNanchor_398_398" id="FNanchor_398_398"></a><a href="#Footnote_398_398" class="fnanchor">[398]</a></p>

<p>The number of such supplements was not as great as was
anticipated, the chief reason for which was that the postage
was still too high and the regulations too complicated.</p>

<p>In 1873 the rate was reduced to &frac12; pf. for each copy, with a
reduction of 50 per cent. when as many as 7,200 copies were
posted at the same time. The obligation to submit all copies
to the Post Office for stamping, and the requirement to post
them within three days thereof, were at the same time
removed, and the simple obligation to give previous notice<!-- Page 182 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_182" id="Page_182">[Pg 182]</a></span>
of posting substituted. The obligation to indicate on the
newspapers that a special supplement was enclosed was also
withdrawn.</p>

<p>In 1874 the regulations were further relaxed. Special
supplements were allowed to be printed at the same office
as the newspaper, and charges for the advertisement might
be made.<a name="FNanchor_399_399" id="FNanchor_399_399"></a><a href="#Footnote_399_399" class="fnanchor">[399]</a> The limit of size was extended to two sheets,
at which it remains.<a name="FNanchor_400_400" id="FNanchor_400_400"></a><a href="#Footnote_400_400" class="fnanchor">[400]</a></p>

<p>In 1900 (20th March) the rate was changed to &frac14; pf. for
each 25 grammes weight for each supplement. The number
of special supplements in 1910 was 214 millions.</p>

<hr />
<p><!-- Page 183 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_183" id="Page_183">[Pg 183]</a></span></p>


<h2>III<br /><br /><br />
THE RATE FOR PARCELS</h2>


<h3>PARCEL POST IN ENGLAND</h3>

<p>The London Penny Post established by William Dockwra
in 1680 was in some degree a parcel post, but throughout
the country no sort of parcel post service existed until the
introduction of the regular system in 1883. The weight limit
for packets sent by Dockwra's post was at first fixed at
1 pound, but it was afterwards extended.<a name="FNanchor_401_401" id="FNanchor_401_401"></a><a href="#Footnote_401_401" class="fnanchor">[401]</a> The Penny Post
was employed to such an extent for the transmission of
bulky packets and parcels that delivery was retarded, and it
was found necessary to reduce the number of such parcels.
The privilege of sending parcels even of 1 pound weight was
accordingly withdrawn in 1765.<a name="FNanchor_402_402" id="FNanchor_402_402"></a><a href="#Footnote_402_402" class="fnanchor">[402]</a> The letter rate charged by
the ounce was sufficiently high to restrict effectively the number
of packets of large size entrusted to the post.<a name="FNanchor_403_403" id="FNanchor_403_403"></a><a href="#Footnote_403_403" class="fnanchor">[403]</a> In their
Report of 1797 on the Post Office, the Select Committee on
Finance recommended a reduced rate for the heavier packets<!-- Page 184 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_184" id="Page_184">[Pg 184]</a></span>
and small parcels, in order to encourage their transmission by
post, but the suggestion met with no favour.<a name="FNanchor_404_404" id="FNanchor_404_404"></a><a href="#Footnote_404_404" class="fnanchor">[404]</a> For many
years afterwards the official view was that it was desirable to
confine the post to light packages, and that any increase in
the number of heavy packets would disorganize the service,
which existed to provide for the expeditious transmission of
light letters. Its arrangements had been made with this
object, and to load it with a large number of heavy packets
would be subjecting it to an unfair strain, under which it would
inevitably break down.<a name="FNanchor_405_405" id="FNanchor_405_405"></a><a href="#Footnote_405_405" class="fnanchor">[405]</a> So long as the delivery of parcels is
provided for by foot (or cycle) post, it is impossible to raise
indefinitely the limit of weight for individual parcels.</p>

<p>The establishment of the Book Post in 1847 was, of course,
a step in the direction of a general Parcel Post. The Post
Office having by this means become the carrier of small
parcels containing goods of a certain class, the demand for
a post for parcels of any kind of goods was inevitable. In
the 'sixties there was considerable agitation for extended
parcel post facilities. The familiar argument was advanced
that the Post Office had already an establishment for the
collection and delivery of letters in some twelve thousand
districts, and that this establishment might be used, to the
great advantage of the public, to afford any additional services
within its capacity; that, as all the main establishment<!-- Page 185 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_185" id="Page_185">[Pg 185]</a></span>
charges were paid&mdash;rent, salaries, etc.&mdash;an additional service
could be rendered without adding proportionately to the
expenses. It was urged also that the sample post rate was
too high and was fenced by troublesome regulations; that the
book rate was also too high; that there was no reason why
the book trade should be favoured; that in respect to the
mass of the people the charges were so high as to impose on
the transmission of small articles the same sort of prohibition
that was placed on the transmission of letters under the old
postal system; that a comprehensive system could not be
carried out by the railways until the railways would co-operate;
that even if the railways did co-operate they had
not means at their disposal equal to those of the Post Office;
that a parcel post system was already in operation in several
continental countries; and that, in fine, by the establishment
of a similar service in this country an immense boon would be
conferred on the public.</p>

<p>The Post Office was, however, not favourably disposed
towards the idea. It was proposed to meet the agitation to
some extent by reducing the rates of postage on the heavier
letters, and thus to carry small parcels under the guise of
letters. This proposal was not, however, carried through.
In 1871 the rates for letters of medium weight were reduced,
but those on letters above 12 ounces were retained at a height
which could only be regarded as prohibitive.<a name="FNanchor_406_406" id="FNanchor_406_406"></a><a href="#Footnote_406_406" class="fnanchor">[406]</a></p>

<p>The public agitation in favour of a parcel post service continued;
and when in 1878 a large number of the railway
companies announced that they proposed to convey small
parcels over any part of their lines at low uniform rates,
attention was called to the fact in the public Press, and
suggestions made that the Post Office should co-operate by
undertaking the delivery of the parcels. The official view
was now somewhat more favourable to the idea. An international
parcel post service had been established in 1880 in
connection with the Universal Postal Union, and this fact
had strengthened public opinion in favour of a parcel post
service in this country. It was recognized that such a service
would afford undoubted advantages to the public, especially
in rural districts. It would provide facilities which private<!-- Page 186 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_186" id="Page_186">[Pg 186]</a></span>
enterprise had not seen fit to undertake. It would provide
a service reaching to all parts of the country, for which there
was no other equally suitable machinery.</p>

<p>The Post Office could not, however, in establishing a parcel
post service, act as freely as in its arrangements for the conduct
of the letter service. The conveyance of the parcels from place
to place was likely to prove a serious undertaking, and for
such conveyance the Post Office was dependent on the railway
companies. In the case of letter mails the cost for conveyance
is a very minor part of the total expenses of the service,
but when negotiations with the railway companies were
begun it was soon found that such would not be the case
with parcel mails. The companies, regarding the parcel traffic
as to a large extent their own proper business,<a name="FNanchor_407_407" id="FNanchor_407_407"></a><a href="#Footnote_407_407" class="fnanchor">[407]</a> were not
disposed to agree to easy terms, and there was the further
difficulty that numerous companies had to be satisfied, since
it was desired to establish the system under an agreement
which should include all the principal companies.<a name="FNanchor_408_408" id="FNanchor_408_408"></a><a href="#Footnote_408_408" class="fnanchor">[408]</a> From the
first, the question of the remuneration of the companies was
approached from a point of view totally different from that
in which their remuneration for the ordinary letter mails was
regarded. Letter mails are conveyed as entities, and the
company have never been concerned with the number of
letters enclosed in the mail or the amount of postage paid.
They arrange for the conveyance of a given number of mails,<!-- Page 187 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_187" id="Page_187">[Pg 187]</a></span>
and are remunerated accordingly. But with parcels the
question was approached as one for the determination of
just remuneration of the companies for conveying, not mails
containing parcels, but single parcels. And the question to
be settled was what proportion of the postage paid on the
individual parcels should go to the companies. In view of
the heavy expenses of every description which would be
incurred and of the large number of heavy letters which
would be transferred to the parcel post, causing a considerable
reduction of revenue, the Post Office declined to accept
less than half the total receipts, and after some demur the
companies agreed. The rates of postage proposed were two
in number&mdash;for parcels not exceeding 2 pounds in weight,
6d.; for parcels not exceeding 4 pounds in weight, 1s.</p>

<p>Difficulties arose subsequently as to the amount of freedom
of action to be left to the Postmaster-General and the duration
of the agreement. The first proposal was for an agreement
in perpetuity, and the draft agreement gave the
companies what was called a "partnership interest" in the
parcel post business. It was, however, regarded as essential
that the parcel post business should be no less under the
control of the Postmaster-General than the existing letter
post, and that, on the expiration of any agreement made with
the railway companies, the statutes relating to the conveyance
of letter mails by railway should apply to parcel mails.</p>

<p>After the failure of the first scheme, negotiations with the
railway companies were suspended, but the public agitation
for a parcel post was daily gathering strength, and in
February 1882 the Postmaster-General again approached the
companies. The new proposals were somewhat different
from those originally made. A scale with four rates (3d.
for 1 pound, rising to 1s. for 7 pounds) was now suggested
by the Post Office, largely in deference to the strong disposition
of the railway companies in favour of an increased
number of rates. The low initial rate of 3d. for 1 pound
was now proposed on the ground that a large proportion of
the business to be done would be between the large towns
and the rural districts. For the development of such
business a low initial rate was essential; and as such parcels
would not be likely to be to any large extent railway borne,<!-- Page 188 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_188" id="Page_188">[Pg 188]</a></span>
the Post Office would obtain almost the whole of the proceeds
of the postage. It was, moreover, now taken into reckoning
that a considerable increase in the number of letters would
result, since numerous communications relative to parcels
posted would pass, and the revenue would thus benefit
indirectly. The letter service would benefit, too, in other
ways: it would be relieved of heavy packages; and the
existence of a parcel post service would justify the provision
of more efficient services in rural districts. The rates proposed
were in general very much higher than those at the
time existing in Germany, France, Switzerland, and Belgium,
and they were estimated to yield a profit.</p>

<p>In the further negotiations serious difficulty was encountered
on two points only: (1) the proportion of postage
to be paid to the companies, and (2) the length of time for
which the agreement should be made. The earlier agreement
had been for an equal division between the Post Office
and the railway companies of the postage paid on all parcels.
It was now decided that payment could only be made in
respect of parcels actually conveyed by railway. The companies
thereupon asked a higher proportion. They anticipated
that parcel post traffic would be largely long-distance traffic,
involving in many cases transfers on the journey; and although
they expected to retain a good deal of the short-distance
traffic, they could only achieve this by reducing their rates
generally, especially the rates for small parcels. After some
higgling, they agreed under protest to accept 55 per cent. of
the postage on all such parcels as should be conveyed by
railway. They also agreed to the limitation of the duration
of the bargain, and the term was fixed at twenty-one years.</p>

<p>The agreement was embodied in the Post Office (Parcels)
Act of 1882.<a name="FNanchor_409_409" id="FNanchor_409_409"></a><a href="#Footnote_409_409" class="fnanchor">[409]</a> The companies parties to the arrangement
undertook the service of conveying the post parcels from the
vehicles of the Postmaster-General at the despatching railway
station to the vehicles of the Postmaster-General at
the station of destination&mdash;that is to say, they undertook all
handling of parcel mails on railway stations and transfer to
and from trains and from train to train where necessary&mdash;in
consideration of payment of 55 per cent. of the postage paid<!-- Page 189 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_189" id="Page_189">[Pg 189]</a></span>
on all parcels conveyed by railway for the whole or part of
their journey, the Post Office being required to keep a
record of the amount of postage paid on every such parcel.
The remuneration was to be paid to the Railway Clearing
Committee in London, by whom it would be distributed
between the various companies. The agreement was to continue
for twenty-one years, and thereafter until terminated by
either party. The Postmaster-General retained the power of
revising the rates of postage, but in the event of such revision
the companies might claim revision of the terms of their remuneration
(even during the first twenty-one years). In any
case, on the termination of the agreement, the statutes governing
the conditions under which ordinary mails are conveyed
by railway, and the determination of the remuneration of
railway companies in respect of such conveyance, were to
apply equally to the conveyance of parcel mails by railway.</p>

<p>The Postmaster-General has twice exercised his right of
revising the rates of postage, and in each case the rates
were lowered. The companies have not exercised their right
to ask for a revision of the terms of their remuneration,
and the provisions of the Act therefore continue in operation.
In the first complete year of the service (1884-5) the
number of parcels conveyed was some 23 millions. The
increase in the traffic has been large and constant. In
1912-13 the total number of parcels exceeded 130 millions.</p>

<p>The service affords a great public convenience, and the
simplicity of its rates is an undoubted boon. The uniform
rate has, however, proved unsatisfactory in some respects. At
all points at which the traffic would be profitable, the Post
Office is open to the competition of private enterprise; but
for that part of the traffic for which the uniform rate must
inevitably be unprofitable (unless it be fixed so high as to
be exorbitant for short-distance and average-distance traffic)
there will naturally be no competition. The number of local,
or short-distance, parcels is consequently small, and the
number of parcels sent for long distances, to remote places,
is comparatively large. No great use is, however, made of the
post for the transmission of parcels of agricultural produce
from rural districts. There is a moderate traffic in butter and
eggs from Ireland to England, and in cream from the West of<!-- Page 190 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_190" id="Page_190">[Pg 190]</a></span>
England. Proposals for the introduction of a specially low rate
for agricultural products have frequently been considered, but
there are obvious objections to the establishment of a special
rate for a special class of traffic. Moreover, for parcels from
country districts the present uniform rate is often ludicrously
low. The cost of preparing and packing each separate small
consignment for transmission by post is, however, considerable,
and only the affluent are able to indulge in that method
of obtaining food supplies.<a name="FNanchor_410_410" id="FNanchor_410_410"></a><a href="#Footnote_410_410" class="fnanchor">[410]</a> The exceptional character of the
Post Office traffic in parcels, and the small degree in which
the rates of charge measure the utility of the service of
transportation which they cover, are well illustrated by the
statistics of the traffic, which indicate that the total numbers
are unaffected by fluctuations in general trade, and that the
reductions of the rates which have been made since the
establishment of the service have had no appreciable effect
on the volume of traffic.<a name="FNanchor_411_411" id="FNanchor_411_411"></a><a href="#Footnote_411_411" class="fnanchor">[411]</a> The actual rates for the heavier
parcels are probably more profitable than the rates for light
parcels, since the principle of degression is not much recognized
in the scale of rates. This view is confirmed by the fact that
the post is little used for heavy parcels, the average weight of
a post parcel being no more than 2&#183;8 pounds. It is, as a
matter of fact, not improbable that the parcel post service
as a whole is conducted at heavy loss.<a name="FNanchor_412_412" id="FNanchor_412_412"></a><a href="#Footnote_412_412" class="fnanchor">[412]</a></p>

<div class="blockquot"><p><span class="smcap">Note.</span>&mdash;As a war measure the rates were increased on 1st November 1915 by
1d. at each step in the scale, and are now as follow:&mdash;</p></div>


<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="United Kingdom Post Office parcel rates from November 1915.">
<tr><td align="left" colspan="6">Parcels not exceeding 1 lb</td><td align="right">4d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Exceeding</td><td align="right">1</td><td align="center">lb.,</td><td align="center">not exceeding</td><td align="right">2</td><td align="center">lb.</td><td align="right">5d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">2</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">3</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">6d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">3</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">5</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">7d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">5</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">7</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">8d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">7</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">8</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">9d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">8</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">9</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">10d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">9</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">10</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">11d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">10</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">11</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">1s.</td></tr>
</table></div>

<hr />
<p><!-- Page 191 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_191" id="Page_191">[Pg 191]</a></span></p>


<h3>PARCEL POST IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA</h3>

<p>Several causes operated to prevent the early establishment
in the United States of a parcel post system. The two factors
of extent of territory and sparsity of population, which had
from the first so greatly influenced the policy of the Government
towards the Post Office, were of much greater importance
in regard to a parcel post system. The weight of the individual
letter is very small, and as the cost of transportation
depends in most cases entirely on weight, the system of
uniform rates which had been introduced in England had not
been found impossible of adoption in the United States. But
with parcels, cost of transportation is an appreciable item for
every parcel, and in a country of vast distances there must be
an appreciable variation in the actual cost for each parcel.
Consequently, any uniform rate which would render the service
self-supporting must be measurably above the rate which
would suffice for local and short-distance traffic, and measurably
below the rate which would be necessary for long-distance
traffic. Private agencies would therefore cut such a rate and
absorb all the short-distance traffic, while the long-distance
traffic would be left to the Post Office, and would be carried at
a loss. This had been found to be the case with second-class
matter, where weight is an important factor, and also with the
fourth-class matter. The establishment of a parcel post system,
therefore, would involve a reconsideration of the fundamental
principles on which the rates of postage were in general based.</p>

<p>The creation, in 1863, of a third class of miscellaneous
mail matter<a name="FNanchor_413_413" id="FNanchor_413_413"></a><a href="#Footnote_413_413" class="fnanchor">[413]</a> was virtually the establishment of a limited
parcel post. The rate, for third-class matter, 2 cents for
each 4 ounces or fraction thereof, was increased in 1879 to<!-- Page 192 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_192" id="Page_192">[Pg 192]</a></span>
1 cent an ounce. These rates were comparatively high; and as
the limit of weight was 4 pounds, the traffic naturally never
assumed large proportions. With the establishment in 1880
of an international parcel post in which the United States
participated, although having no real internal parcel post, it
was inevitable that the question of establishing a system equal
in scope to those of other countries should arise. For forty
years there was a demand, becoming more general and insistent,
for the establishment of such a general parcel post.</p>

<p>Active official support was first given to the proposals for
a parcel post in 1890 and 1891 by Postmaster-General
Wanamaker, who explained that although the demand for
such a system was widespread, the greatest pressure came
from "interior places," which were, in fact, really most in
need of it, because they had no facilities for obtaining small
packages of merchandise from the towns.<a name="FNanchor_414_414" id="FNanchor_414_414"></a><a href="#Footnote_414_414" class="fnanchor">[414]</a> Opposition to any
sort of parcel post came then, as always, from the express
companies, who, although not able or not desirous of affording
a service to all parts, were much concerned at the prospect of
losing traffic. Mr. Wanamaker proposed to propitiate them
by transferring to them a considerable amount of traffic deemed
by him to belong properly to the express companies, viz., traffic
carried by the Post Office for the other Executive departments
free of charge, under "penalty frank,"<a name="FNanchor_415_415" id="FNanchor_415_415"></a><a href="#Footnote_415_415" class="fnanchor">[415]</a> and comprising many
packages of considerable weight and bulk. Mr. Wanamaker
also desired to put a stop to the transmission, as second-class
matter, of periodicals which were really ordinary books, by
transferring such traffic to the express companies. Although
in favour of a full parcel post system, and recognizing that
there was a strong desire in the country for the boon, Mr.
Wanamaker was not prepared to advocate its immediate establishment.
He thought other reforms should take precedence;
such as free-delivery extension, postal telegraph, postal telephone,
and 1 cent postage on land and sea, all of which, except
the extension of free delivery, are still waiting adoption.</p>

<p>A number of postmasters criticized the suggestions of the
Postmaster-General in 1890 regarding parcel post, but most of<!-- Page 193 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_193" id="Page_193">[Pg 193]</a></span>
them had, by 1891, expressed themselves in favour of a full
parcel post system, and according to Mr. Wanamaker the
remainder were "probably interested express agents." The
situation was in some respects unsatisfactory. It was a
common practice for business firms to contract with express
companies to carry large quantities of small packages at a rate
per package just below the rate of postage. The express
companies took such of the packages as they thought fit to
handle, and left the Post Office to carry the remainder, all
long-distance traffic, and unprofitable both to the express
companies and to the Post Office. But the companies were
secured by their profit in the short distances. Naturally,
therefore, they offered strenuous opposition to the establishment
of a parcel post.<a name="FNanchor_416_416" id="FNanchor_416_416"></a><a href="#Footnote_416_416" class="fnanchor">[416]</a></p>

<p>With the establishment of rural mail delivery there arose a
new demand for a parcel post. Persons living on the rural
routes desired to take advantage of the new service for the
delivery of small parcels of merchandise of all kinds, food-stuffs,
tobacco, dry goods, etc., which they would order from
the local store-keeper by post or by telephone. The rate then
payable on such parcels was the general rate for fourth-class
matter, viz. 16 cents a pound, which for parcels of goods of
small intrinsic value was prohibitive. In response to this
demand, the first definite proposals for a parcel post<a name="FNanchor_417_417" id="FNanchor_417_417"></a><a href="#Footnote_417_417" class="fnanchor">[417]</a> were
put forward by the department in 1904, when the establishment
of a special rate of 3 cents a pound was suggested, with
a maximum limit of weight of 5 pounds, for parcels from any
distributing office for rural routes to any patron on the routes
from that office. Such a rate "would be a great convenience
to the patrons and become a source of revenue to the department."
The rate of 3 cents was estimated to be ample
remuneration in such cases, because there would be no expense
for railway transportation, and as it would be merely employing
a system already established, there would be no additional<!-- Page 194 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_194" id="Page_194">[Pg 194]</a></span>
expense for delivery: the rural carriers could easily perform
the service.<a name="FNanchor_418_418" id="FNanchor_418_418"></a><a href="#Footnote_418_418" class="fnanchor">[418]</a> They had at first been allowed to carry express
packages, but the privilege had been subsequently withdrawn.
They were, however, still authorized by law to carry merchandise
for hire, on behalf of patrons of the rural routes, and
to carry passengers. In general, their work for the Post
Office only employed them to the extent of 30 percent, of their
full capacity, and a large unutilized margin therefore existed.</p>

<p>The proposal was again advanced in following years. Postmaster-General
Meyer interested himself in the question, and
advocated in speeches in various parts of the country the
immediate adoption of a parcel post system. In 1907 he
suggested the introduction of a local parcel post service experimentally.
He made at this time numerous treaties with
foreign countries for parcel post services between those
countries and the United States, at a general rate of 12 cents
a pound. The result was that parcels could be posted at
any town in the United States for transmission to places
in, say, Europe or Australia, at the rate of 12 cents a pound,
but could only be posted for transmission to another town
in the United States on payment of a rate of 16 cents a
pound. When this situation was realized, there was naturally
a good deal of irritation, and the existence of such an anomaly
was made an argument for a domestic service.<a name="FNanchor_419_419" id="FNanchor_419_419"></a><a href="#Footnote_419_419" class="fnanchor">[419]</a></p>

<p>The preferential rate obtained by parcels going abroad
continued to be a strong argument in favour of a general
parcel post, and members of Congress constantly referred to
it in the discussions on the subject.</p>

<p>There was, moreover, and still is, an important body of
opinion which goes much further than the advocacy of a
parcel post system. In that view, the express companies are
the enemy or, at any rate, the oppressive character of the
express rates is viewed so seriously that no solution of the
present difficulties of the country, and especially of the "high
cost of living" problem, is thought possible short of a complete<!-- Page 195 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_195" id="Page_195">[Pg 195]</a></span>
express service run by the general Government. Relief will
only be found under some system which will bring the
producer of the necessaries of life into direct relationship
with the consumer,<a name="FNanchor_420_420" id="FNanchor_420_420"></a><a href="#Footnote_420_420" class="fnanchor">[420]</a> in order that the enormous middleman's
charges be eliminated and the consumer obtain the produce
at a price not greatly above the actual cost of production. The
railways refuse to handle shipments less than 100 pounds, and
their minimum charge is 25 cents. The ordinary consumer
who requires consignments of much less than 100 pounds'
weight has no use for such a service. For shipments of less
weight, the only service available is the express service, the
minimum rate for which, in general 25 cents, is too great for
farm products, which are usually of low value and could not
bear a rate of 25 cents. The express service, which is restricted
to the railway system, has, moreover, no means of
reaching that vast body of the people, estimated at some
40,000,000, who are living on the farms, and who alone are
able to supply the desired traffic in food-stuffs. The Government
has in recent years, at heavy expense, extended to some
20 millions of people the benefits of free mail delivery, and
the intention of the advocates of a Government express service,
a "postal express," is that the State should take over the
express companies, paying them fair compensation for their
property, and work their service in conjunction with the rural
mail delivery. By this means an extensive service could be
provided at reasonable rates of charge.<a name="FNanchor_421_421" id="FNanchor_421_421"></a><a href="#Footnote_421_421" class="fnanchor">[421]</a></p>

<p>In February 1908 Bills were introduced in the Senate to
increase the limit of weight of fourth-class matter, and to
provide a rural delivery parcel post for merchandise and other
articles mailed on rural delivery routes. Legislation did not,
however, result.</p>

<p>Meantime, the feeling in favour of a parcel post was
spreading, more especially in the farming districts. In
November 1911 a Sub-Committee of the Senate Committee
on Post Offices and Post Roads was appointed to examine<!-- Page 196 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_196" id="Page_196">[Pg 196]</a></span>
the practicability of establishing a parcel post system. The
Sub-Committee was appointed on a resolution of the Senate,
moved by Senator Jonathan Bourne, Jr., the Chairman of the
Senate Committee on Post Offices and Post Roads, and there
is indication that the adoption of the system had already
been practically decided upon, the real question before the
Sub-Committee being that of its practicability as an immediate
proposition. The Post Office representatives advocated a
limited experimental introduction of parcel post on rural
routes and in the city delivery offices. They were impressed
with the radical differences between the United States and
most other countries where parcel post was in operation, and
hesitated to recommend the introduction of a general service.
But the members of the Sub-Committee had in mind to
introduce as soon as practicable a complete system by the
method of enlarging the scope of the fourth-class regulations
and reducing the rates of postage. Numerous witnesses
appeared before the Sub-Committee, representing general
societies of business men, such as the National Dairy Union,
the Associated Retailers of St. Louis, Me., and the Retail
Dry Goods Association of New York; educational or social
societies, such as the American Library Association, the
Postal Progress League, and the Knights of Labour; farmers'
societies, such as the State Granges and the Farmers' Educational
and Co-operative Union of America. Several farmers,
lawyers, and other gentlemen appeared to give their own
personal views. The chief opposition to the parcel-post
came from the representatives of the retailers, who stand
in constant fear of losing their business to the mail-order
or catalogue houses. The business of these houses is very
large, amounting in the aggregate to nearly $200,000,000
per annum, and there is perhaps some reason for the local
merchants' apprehensions. The bulk of the mail-order traffic
is, however, distributed as freight. But the country merchants
were much alarmed, and there were doleful prophecies of the
results of a parcel post. The local merchant was represented
as the mainstay of the country-side. He it was who sustained
the country town, which afforded so valuable a local market
for the farmer. He it was to whom alone that same farmer
could look for credit to tide him over bad times. He it was<!-- Page 197 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_197" id="Page_197">[Pg 197]</a></span>
who made the country town a social centre where the farmer
might come into touch with civilization and refinement.
And on the continuance of the prosperity of the country
merchant depended the continuance of the army of travelling
salesmen, without whose patronage railroads would be
driven to reduce the number of trains, hotels would go out
of business, and throughout the country accommodation for
travellers would be found extremely poor. In short, parcel post
would reduce the country merchant to the same condition as
the small shopkeeper in Europe; and the country towns
would become mere hamlets and deserted villages.<a name="FNanchor_422_422" id="FNanchor_422_422"></a><a href="#Footnote_422_422" class="fnanchor">[422]</a></p>

<p>The parcel post was, of course, as likely in 1912 to prove
a blow to the express companies as in the earlier years when
they had so strongly resisted any proposal for its introduction.
In face, however, of the strong and widespread movement in
the country in its favour, they realized that they would be
unable always successfully to resist its establishment, and no
open opposition to the proposals of 1912 was encountered from
them. They did not appear before the Senate Sub-Committee.</p>

<p>The Sub-Committee saw no insuperable difficulty in the
way of introducing a general system at once. Moreover, they
were impressed by the fact that a parcel post system was
in operation in most other countries of the world, even in
Australia, a country slightly larger in area than the United
States and much more sparsely populated, where the two
factors which so radically distinguished the United States
from most other countries in which a parcel post had been
established were met with in even greater degree.</p>

<p>When the questions of the desirability and practicability of
establishing a system had been decided, there still remained
the difficult and important question of the scheme of rates of
charge on which the system should be based. Some of the<!-- Page 198 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_198" id="Page_198">[Pg 198]</a></span>
witnesses before the Sub-Committee advocated a uniform rate,
representing that a graduated rate was undesirable and would
be unacceptable, as giving a special privilege to certain sections
of the people. A more general opinion was that a flat
rate would be unsound economically. With such a rate, the
express companies would step in and take all the profitable
traffic; and it would, moreover, be necessary to fix the rate
so high as to render it prohibitive for goods of low value and
for the purpose of moving traffic on the rural routes. In a
country of vast extent the actual cost to the Government for
the transportation of parcels of the same weight would differ
widely in proportion to the distance for which they were
conveyed in the mails, and the differences would be sufficiently
great to render it easily possible to graduate a scale of postage
approximately in accordance with the distance and the actual
cost. The department estimated the cost of transportation
for mail matter to be 1&#183;32 cents for each 200 miles, and
taking this as a basis, differential rates in respect of transportation
were arrived at for a series of zones.</p>

<p>The charge for handling, i.e. for collection, delivery, administrative
and all other incidental services, was calculated as
an altogether separate item. The Sub-Committee had the
evidence of Mr. John L. Newbold, a gentleman of long experience
in a transport business which dealt mainly with small
parcels for delivery within the limits of the City of Washington,
and was therefore in a high degree comparable to delivery
service which would be performed by the Post Office in respect
of parcels. Mr. Newbold offered to contract with the Government
to handle all post parcels for delivery within the City
of Washington at 5 cents a parcel, with a limit of weight of
25 pounds. Estimates by similar delivery companies in New
York City indicated the cost to them of packages up to
25 pounds, which was a little over 5 cents per package. The
department's estimate of the handling cost of fourth-class
matter showed a cost of a fraction under 3 cents for the first
pound, with an approximate increase of 20 per cent. for each
additional pound.</p>

<p>These data furnished a basis for calculating rates of postage,
when the limitation of the zones had been determined, a
matter of some little difficulty. The first, and most obvious,<!-- Page 199 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_199" id="Page_199">[Pg 199]</a></span>
suggestion was that the zones should be reckoned as from each
post office, but in view of the fact that there were some
60,000 post offices in the United States, grave practical
difficulties would arise with a scheme providing for special
rates from each post office. It was then thought the State
might be adopted as the unit of area, but the States differ so
widely in area that such a system would have resulted inequitably,
giving equal postage charges for very unequal
services. A citizen in Texas or New York State, for example,
would be able to send his parcel many times as far as a citizen
of Massachusetts or Delaware. The same objection applied,
though not in so great degree, to the county as a unit of area.
Moreover, these units would be liable to arbitrary change.
Failing the discovery of any satisfactory unit based on the
political divisions, recourse was had to purely theoretical
divisions, based on the imaginary lines of latitude and longitude.
The actual degree parallels were rejected as the
limits of the units of area because, within the quadrangle
formed by them, there would be a maximum zone distance
of some 80 miles; while at the same time, for transmission
between two places perhaps only two miles apart but lying
on different sides of the line, postage would be chargeable
as for the second zone. This difficulty was overcome by an
ingenious suggestion, which emanated from the department,
to divide the degree quadrangles in four, that is, into squares
of 30 minutes dimension, and to allow the sending of parcels
at the first zone rate from or to places in every contiguous
quadrangle.</p>

<p>Under this method, which was adopted, the United States
is divided into 3,500 units of area, which are definite, never-changing,
and practically uniform in size, the slight difference
in area depending on the distance from the Equator being
negligible. Each unit is given an index number, and all post
offices in the unit have the same index number. Each unit
has its own zone limits, which apply equally to every office in
the unit. So that in order to discover for what zone postage
is to be charged between two places, it is only necessary to
ascertain what are the zone limits for the units of area in
which the places are respectively situated. A simple reference
to a guide showing in what unit of area the post office of<!-- Page 200 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_200" id="Page_200">[Pg 200]</a></span>
destination falls, and a consultation of the zone map of the
office at which the packet is posted, that is, a map showing
the boundaries of each zone measured from the unit of area in
which the office is situated as centre, gives in a very short
space of time the rate applicable to the parcel.</p>

<p>A simplification of rates and regulations is always attended
by a diminution of the difficulties of administration, by
economy of actual working, and by convenience to the public.
In connection with the proposed parcel post the department,
with these objects in view, suggested the abolition of the
separate class for printed matter, and its amalgamation with
the parcel post matter, thus reducing the number of classes
of mail matter to three. The Chairman of the Senate Sub-Committee
adopted this suggestion, and embodied it in the
Bill which he prepared and introduced in the Senate on the
16th May 1912, retaining, however, a rate of 1 cent per
ounce up to 4 ounces, in order to provide for circular matter
which, under the third-class rate, passed at 1 cent for 2 ounces.
This was apparently a doubling of the rate, but as the average
weight of circulars is under 1 ounce, in actual practice the
great bulk of them would continue to pass at 1 cent. This
provision would, however, raise the rate on all catalogues and
circulars weighing more than 1 ounce; and although 90 per
cent. of the number of pieces of third-class matter actually
posted are under 4 ounces in weight and would have fallen
under the proposed special rate, and 50 per cent. are under
1 ounce in weight and would have passed for the same amount
as under the existing third-class rate, viz. 1 cent, this provision
of the Bill was strenuously opposed by printers and
catalogue houses. Not regarding the consolidation of the two
classes as in any way essential to the establishment of a
parcel post system, the Senate Committee on Post Offices and
Post Roads, when they came to consider the Bill, decided to
eliminate that feature.</p>

<p>In general this Bill represented the conclusions of the
Sub-Committee, and, apart from the foregoing change, was
substantially accepted by the Senate Committee. The only
other amendments made were an increase of the number of
zones from six to eight, with the view of "protecting the local
merchant in the field of his business," and a slight raising of<!-- Page 201 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_201" id="Page_201">[Pg 201]</a></span>
the rates for the shorter distances, partly from a fear that the
rates proposed in the Bill would not be self-sustaining, and
partly from a desire further to protect the local retail merchant
against the catalogue houses.</p>

<p>The essential provisions of the Bill, as thus amended, were
embodied in the Post Office Appropriation Bill for the fiscal
year 1913, were accepted by Congress, and became law on the
24th August 1912. The actual zones and rates fixed were as
follows:&mdash;</p>

<ul>
<li>First zone: All territory within quadrangle or unit of area and every contiguous
quadrangle.</li>
<li>Second zone: All units of area outside the first zone within a radius of,
approximately, 150 miles from the centre of a given unit of area.</li>
<li>Third zone: The same within a radius of, approximately, 300 miles.</li>
<li>Fourth zone: The same within a radius of, approximately, 600 miles.</li>
<li>Fifth zone: The same within a radius of, approximately, 1,000 miles.</li>
<li>Sixth zone: The same within a radius of, approximately, 1,400 miles.</li>
<li>Seventh zone: The same within a radius of, approximately, 1,800 miles.</li>
<li>Eighth zone: All units of area outside the seventh zone.</li>
</ul>

<p>The rates were:&mdash;</p>

<div class="blockquot"><p>On rural route: 5 cents for the first pound or fraction of a pound, and 1 cent
for each additional pound or fraction of a pound.</p></div>




<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="United States Post Office parcel post rates, from August 1912.">
<tr><th></th><th align="center" colspan="2" valign="middle">First Pound.</th><th align="center" colspan="2">Each<br /> additional<br /> Pound.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">First zone</td><td align="right">5</td><td align="left">cents.</td><td align="right">3</td><td align="left">cents.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Second zone</td><td align="right">6</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">4</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Third zone</td><td align="right">7</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">5</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Fourth zone</td><td align="right">8</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">6</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Fifth zone</td><td align="right">9</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">7</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Sixth zone</td><td align="right">10</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">9</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Seventh zone</td><td align="right">11</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">10</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Eighth zone</td><td align="right">12</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">12</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>Although, of course, with the body of the people the main
arguments had been the ordinary contentions of the advantage
of such a system as providing a most convenient facility for
persons in all parts of the States, and especially in the rural
districts, whereby they would be able by the utilization of
existing machinery to have articles of all descriptions brought
to their doors, yet in Congress the argument was largely based
on the possibility of finding in the parcel post a means of
reducing the "high cost of living," a problem which is giving
much anxiety to politicians in America. By means of the
parcel post, producer and consumer are to be brought into<!-- Page 202 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_202" id="Page_202">[Pg 202]</a></span>
direct relations the one with the other. All middlemen and
their profits will be eliminated, and either the producer will
get more for his products or the consumer will pay less&mdash;which
of these will happen does not appear: probably in some
degree both are hoped for.</p>

<p>The experience of England may not be any indication of
what will happen in America. But it is certain that in
England the produce sent direct from farm to consumer,
whether eggs, butter, or poultry, is not obtained by the
consumer at less cost than he could buy it in his own town.
There is an advantage, but it rests solely in quality. The
products obtained from the farm are more fresh, are probably
better altogether, but the price is not less. In England these
considerations have been sufficient to prevent the wholesale
use of the parcel post for food-stuffs. It is, in fact, in general
used for such traffic only by those people to whom a little
extra expense is not an object of consideration. The conditions
in America seem, however, to be substantially different
from those in this country, and a large development of parcel
post business of this character is anticipated.<a name="FNanchor_423_423" id="FNanchor_423_423"></a><a href="#Footnote_423_423" class="fnanchor">[423]</a></p>

<p>On the 15th August 1913 the limit of weight was increased
to 20 pounds in the local, first, and second zones; and on
1st January 1914 the limit in local, first, and second zones was
further increased to 50 pounds, and in the remainder of the
zones to 20 pounds. On the 16th March 1914 books and
printed matter were admitted to the fourth class, or parcel
post, with a rate of postage of 1 cent for each 2 ounces up
to 8 ounces, the ordinary parcel post pound rates to apply to
packets exceeding 8 ounces in weight.<!-- Page 203 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_203" id="Page_203">[Pg 203]</a></span></p>

<p>The service, as a whole, has been enormously successful. It
is estimated that in the second year the post office was handling
parcels at the rate of 800,000,000 annually, a figure which may
be compared to its advantage with that for the United Kingdom.
In the United Kingdom the annual number of parcels
posted is some 130,000,000, say three per head of the total
population as compared with eight per head in the new service
in the United States.</p>

<hr />
<p><!-- Page 204 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_204" id="Page_204">[Pg 204]</a></span></p>

<h3>PARCEL POST IN FRANCE</h3>

<p>The conveyance of parcels of merchandise, which had been
undertaken by the early posts in France, was abandoned to
private enterprise in 1795.<a name="FNanchor_424_424" id="FNanchor_424_424"></a><a href="#Footnote_424_424" class="fnanchor">[424]</a> When, therefore, proposals were
made for the establishment of an international parcel post
service, France was without an internal service of the kind.
She became, nevertheless, a party to the Convention of 1880,
which established an international service,<a name="FNanchor_425_425" id="FNanchor_425_425"></a><a href="#Footnote_425_425" class="fnanchor">[425]</a> availing herself
of the privilege reserved to those countries without an inland
parcel post service, of arranging for their obligations under
the terms of the Convention to be assumed by railway and
steamship companies. A contract was concluded with the
administration of the State railways, the six great railway
companies, and the shipping companies in receipt of subsidies
for the conveyance of mails, under which those bodies undertook
to conduct a service on behalf of the postal administration
in accordance with the provisions of the Convention.
They were to receive in its entirety the prescribed territorial
transit rate of 50 centimes on every parcel, but not the surtax
of 25 centimes.<a name="FNanchor_426_426" id="FNanchor_426_426"></a><a href="#Footnote_426_426" class="fnanchor">[426]</a> The payment of 50 centimes per parcel was
to be divided by the companies among themselves if the parcel
was conveyed by more than one party, and constituted the
full remuneration for the entire service performed, including
the customs formalities. The contracting companies were
required to print at their own cost a list of places served, and
to keep the list available for reference by members of the
public.</p>

<p>The establishment of an international service of this kind
necessitated the provision of facilities for the transmission of<!-- Page 205 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_205" id="Page_205">[Pg 205]</a></span>
ordinary inland parcels within France.<a name="FNanchor_427_427" id="FNanchor_427_427"></a><a href="#Footnote_427_427" class="fnanchor">[427]</a> The companies were
accordingly required to undertake also the transportation of
inland parcels upon their railways and the delivery of inland
parcels in localities adjoining their lines under the same conditions
and for the same remuneration as in the case of parcels
in the international service. A difficulty existed in the fact
that small parcel traffic (<i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">l'envois par messagerie</i>) was subject
to special taxation.<a name="FNanchor_428_428" id="FNanchor_428_428"></a><a href="#Footnote_428_428" class="fnanchor">[428]</a> These taxes frequently exceeded the
charge for transmission, and in some cases the value of the
parcel itself. In order to encourage the use of the service,
these taxes were reduced or modified by a series of laws at a
sacrifice of revenue exceeding two and a half million francs
a year. The service, which was established on the 1st May
1881, did not include the whole of France, but extended only
to localities served by the State railways, the six contracting
companies, and certain subsidiary companies which contracted
for the business with the larger companies. The maximum
limit of weight was fixed at 3 kilogrammes, and the rates of
postage were 60 centimes for parcels transported from railway
station to railway station, and 85 centimes for parcels delivered
at the residence of the addressee. The service became immediately
popular, the number of parcels posted during 1881 being
at the rate of over half a million a month.</p>

<p>Soon after its establishment the service was extended to
the smaller subsidiary lines, and to districts not served by
railway. The latter extension, which it was not found easy
to arrange, was provided for by introducing into the contracts
for the conveyance of the ordinary mails in those districts a
clause empowering the administration to require the contractor
to convey post parcels for a remuneration of 15 centimes per<!-- Page 206 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_206" id="Page_206">[Pg 206]</a></span>
parcel&mdash;the amount to be increased to 25 centimes for parcels
delivered at residence.</p>

<p>The Lisbon Congress (1885) raised the limit of weight in the
international service from 3 kilogrammes to 5 kilogrammes,
but a corresponding increase was not made in the internal
French service until 1892. The maximum limit of weight
was raised to 10 kilogrammes in 1897, and the following rates
of postage are now in operation:&mdash;</p>


<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Rates of parcel post in France.">
<tr><th align="center" valign="middle">Weight.</th><th align="center" valign="middle">Delivered at<br /> Railway Station.</th><th align="center" valign="middle">Delivered at<br /> Residence or<br /> Poste Restante.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left"></td><td align="center">fr.</td><td align="center">fr.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Not exceeding 3 kg.</td><td align="center">0&#183;60</td><td align="center">0&#183;85</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">3-5kg.</td><td align="center">0&#183;80</td><td align="center">1&#183;05</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">5-10 kg.</td><td align="center">1&#183;25</td><td align="center">1&#183;50</td><td align="left"><a name="FNanchor_429_429" id="FNanchor_429_429"></a><a href="#Footnote_429_429" class="fnanchor">[429]</a></td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>Cumbersome parcels are charged rates 50 per cent. greater
than the ordinary rates.<a name="FNanchor_430_430" id="FNanchor_430_430"></a><a href="#Footnote_430_430" class="fnanchor">[430]</a> Parcels redirected or returned to
sender are subject to an additional rate of postage, and to a
tax (<i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">droit de timbre</i>) of 10 centimes.<a name="FNanchor_431_431" id="FNanchor_431_431"></a><a href="#Footnote_431_431" class="fnanchor">[431]</a></p>

<p>Parcels for despatch are accepted only at the railway stations
or offices of the companies or by their agents. They are
delivered at the stations of the companies or at their offices
in towns or at the offices of their agents, to be called for,
or they are delivered at residence; but the latter service is
undertaken only when a delivery service organized by the
companies, or their agents, for their own purposes already
exists.</p>

<p>Parcels are accepted for localities not served directly by the
contracting companies, but such parcels are conveyed only to
the point served by railway nearest to the place of destination.
It is left to the public to provide for their further transmission.
In the case of parcels delivered only at the railway station, an
advice of delivery is sent to the addressee by the company or
their agents within twenty-four hours of the receipt of the<!-- Page 207 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_207" id="Page_207">[Pg 207]</a></span>
parcel. This advice is sent by post, and the postage, 5 centimes,
is recovered from the addressee. If parcels are not
called for within eight days, the sender is asked to give
instructions regarding their disposal.</p>

<p>The control of the service in districts served by railway rests
entirely in the hands of the railway companies. The postal
administration takes no part directly in its management, but
co-operates with the companies by affording certain small
facilities in regard to parcels. For example, on payment of
the usual delivery fee of 25 centimes a parcel may be delivered
from the railway station to the local post office, where it will
be retained in the poste restante. In districts not reached by
the railway or their agents, the management of the service
falls on the postal administration. The service in such districts
is, however, far from complete. There are in France
some 36,000 communes, but the parcel post service extends
only to some 12,000 railway stations, and only at about one-half
of these can parcels be delivered at the residence of the
addressee.<a name="FNanchor_432_432" id="FNanchor_432_432"></a><a href="#Footnote_432_432" class="fnanchor">[432]</a> To a limited extent a service is given in certain
localities not directly served by railway. In these cases, which
are arranged only with the concurrence of the companies,
the service is conducted by the ordinary road carriers.<a name="FNanchor_433_433" id="FNanchor_433_433"></a><a href="#Footnote_433_433" class="fnanchor">[433]</a>
The extension of the service in the rural districts is one of
the problems which face the postal administration.<a name="FNanchor_434_434" id="FNanchor_434_434"></a><a href="#Footnote_434_434" class="fnanchor">[434]</a></p>

<p>A local parcel post service was established in Paris in 1881
by arrangement with the Compagnie des Messageries Nationales,
but it did not prove profitable, and was discontinued in<!-- Page 208 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_208" id="Page_208">[Pg 208]</a></span>
1887. A new service was set up in 1890. The contractor is
required to make two deliveries on week-days and one on
Sundays and feast days (<i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">les jours f&#233;ri&#233;s</i>), and to maintain an
office in each arrondissement. The system has, however,
developed. Three daily deliveries are now given, and nearly
500 offices have been opened. The rate of postage is 25 centimes
for parcels not exceeding 5 kilogrammes, and 40 centimes
for parcels between 5 and 10 kilogrammes.</p>

<p>The total number of inland parcels posted during the year
1913-14 was about 52 millions.</p>

<hr />
<p><!-- Page 209 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_209" id="Page_209">[Pg 209]</a></span></p>

<h3>PARCEL POST IN GERMANY</h3>

<p>In the days of the horse-posts it was obviously undesirable
to burden the mails with weighty packages, and the transmission
of parcels by post was from the first discouraged in
Germany, although not forbidden. Parcels were charged as
letters by the half-ounce, a sufficiently high rate to prevent
the use of the posts for their transmission to any inconvenient
degree. The first Imperial posts did not, indeed, undertake the
transmission of parcels. The business was left to private
enterprise, and was conducted by the <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Boten-Anstalten</i>. The
posts themselves were, however, made use of for the transmission
of parcels of merchandise for private individuals at
least as far back as the Thirty Years' War. Owing to the
dislocation of industry and commerce during that war and
the high rates of postage charged, the number of parcels was
extremely small, and their transmission was confined to
limited areas.<a name="FNanchor_435_435" id="FNanchor_435_435"></a><a href="#Footnote_435_435" class="fnanchor">[435]</a></p>

<p>As early as 1635 the messengers were allowed to carry
parcels so long as their travelling was not thereby impeded,<a name="FNanchor_436_436" id="FNanchor_436_436"></a><a href="#Footnote_436_436" class="fnanchor">[436]</a>
and in 1652 a regular parcel service was in operation between
Basel and Zurich, Schaffhausen, Lindau, and Ulm. In 1660
the Great Elector ordered that no parcels should thenceforward
be carried by the posts free of postage. This may
perhaps be taken as the origin of a recognized parcel post
service in Prussia.<a name="FNanchor_437_437" id="FNanchor_437_437"></a><a href="#Footnote_437_437" class="fnanchor">[437]</a></p>

<p>The rates charged were at first based on the numerous
diverse circumstances which governed the early letter rates.<!-- Page 210 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_210" id="Page_210">[Pg 210]</a></span>
They were increased in the event of any rise in the price
of provender, and varied according to the mode of transmission
and according as the parcels were sent by day or night, in
fine weather or in bad weather.<a name="FNanchor_438_438" id="FNanchor_438_438"></a><a href="#Footnote_438_438" class="fnanchor">[438]</a> In some cases the rate
was varied according to the nature of the contents of the
parcels.</p>

<p>In 1699 a tariff, under which the rates were regulated
according to the distance and without reference to the mode
of transmission, was established between certain offices in
Prussia, and in 1712 this tariff was extended generally. The
rate from Magdeburg to Stendal was 3 groschen per pound,
to Leipzig 5 groschen per pound, and to Berlin 7 groschen
per pound. In 1713 the summer and winter rates were
abolished in Prussia. The rate for ordinary parcels from
Berlin to Hamburg was 1 groschen per pound, from Berlin
to Magdeburg 7 pf. per pound, from Berlin to Frankfort
4 pf. per pound, from Berlin to Leipzig 1 groschen
per pound, etc. For provisions the rates were reduced
by one-half, and for fancy goods the rates were doubled,
a method of charge which gave rise to many practical
difficulties.</p>

<p>In Saxony, by an ordinance of the 27th July 1713, parcels
were divided into four classes, as follows:&mdash;</p>

<div class="blockquot"><p>1. Packets of Documents (<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Akten-Pakete</i>). The letter rate was applied to these
in the following manner:&mdash;</p></div>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Parcel rate (for documents), Saxony, from 1713">
<tr><td align="left">1-4</td><td align="center">pound parcels were charged as</td><td align="left">2&frac12;</td><td align="center">ounces</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">4-6</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">3</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">6-8</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">5</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
</table></div>


<div class="blockquot"><p>2. Money and fancy goods&mdash;</p></div>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Parcel rate (for money and fancy goods), Saxony, from 1713">
<tr><td align="right" colspan="2"></td><td align="center" colspan="4">For the value of</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">1-3</td><td align="center">miles</td><td align="right">100</td><td align="center">thaler current</td><td align="right">2</td><td align="center">groschen</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">4-6</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">100</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">3</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">7-9</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">100</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">4</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
</table></div>


<div class="blockquot"><p>and so on up to 30 miles. (<span class="smcap">Note.</span>&mdash;<i>Distances are given in German miles
throughout.</i>)<!-- Page 211 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_211" id="Page_211">[Pg 211]</a></span></p>

<p>3. Commercial goods&mdash;</p></div>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Parcel rate (for commercial goods), Saxony, from 1713">
<tr><th align="center" rowspan="2" valign="middle">Weight.</th><th align="center" colspan="10">Miles.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="right">1-3</td><td align="right">4-6</td><td align="right">7-9</td><td align="right">10-12</td><td align="right">13-15</td><td align="right">16-18</td><td align="right">19-21</td><td align="right">22-24</td><td align="right">25-27</td><td align="right">28-30</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">Pounds.</td><td align="right">Gr.</td><td align="right">Gr.</td><td align="right">Gr.</td><td align="right">Gr.</td><td align="right">Gr.</td><td align="right">Gr.</td><td align="right">Gr.</td><td align="right">Gr.</td><td align="right">Gr.</td><td align="right">Gr.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">1</td><td align="right">1</td><td align="right">2</td><td align="right">3</td><td align="right">4</td><td align="right">5</td><td align="right">5</td><td align="right">6</td><td align="right">6</td><td align="right">7</td><td align="right">8</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">2</td><td align="right">2</td><td align="right">3</td><td align="right">4</td><td align="right">5</td><td align="right">6</td><td align="right">7</td><td align="right">8</td><td align="right">8</td><td align="right">10</td><td align="right">11</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">3</td><td align="right">2</td><td align="right">3</td><td align="right">5</td><td align="right">6</td><td align="right">8</td><td align="right">9</td><td align="right">10</td><td align="right">12</td><td align="right">14</td><td align="right">15</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">10</td><td align="right">5</td><td align="right">7</td><td align="right">9</td><td align="right">13</td><td align="right">17</td><td align="right">23</td><td align="right">24</td><td align="right">32</td><td align="right">38</td><td align="right">44</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">100</td><td align="right">14</td><td align="right">24</td><td align="right">34</td><td align="right">50</td><td align="right">58</td><td align="right">70</td><td align="right">79</td><td align="right">90</td><td align="right">110</td><td align="right">124</td></tr>
</table></div>


<div class="blockquot"><p>The weight was calculated for each pound up to 10 pounds, then for 15 pounds
and 20. For parcels weighing more than 20 pounds the rate increased for each
10 pounds.</p>

<p>4. Valuable goods, e.g. gold, silver, cloth of gold, brocade, were charged
double the rate for commercial goods.</p></div>

<p>In 1741 a parcel rate was established in Brunswick and
L&#252;neburg, based simply on weight and distance, without
reference to the nature of the contents.<a name="FNanchor_439_439" id="FNanchor_439_439"></a><a href="#Footnote_439_439" class="fnanchor">[439]</a></p>

<p>The Prussian rates of 1712 continued in force until 1762,
when a general revision of postal rates was necessitated by the
financial difficulties resulting from the outbreak of the Seven
Years' War. The rates for ordinary commercial transport in
Prussia rose to such a degree that the post, still working on
rates fixed in 1712, became the cheapest means of transport.</p>

<p>Consequently the parcel post traffic increased, but it was
found that the expenses of the service were not covered by
the revenue derived from the parcels. The rates were accordingly
increased on the simple plan of raising them all by 100
per cent. (except in Ostfriesland, where the increase was 50 per
cent.). A further revision of the rates was made in 1766.
Apart from the fact that the rates were further increased,
this revision was in many respects beneficial, since it introduced<!-- Page 212 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_212" id="Page_212">[Pg 212]</a></span>
a uniform and definite rate for the whole country.<a name="FNanchor_440_440" id="FNanchor_440_440"></a><a href="#Footnote_440_440" class="fnanchor">[440]</a>
In 1770 the rates of 1712 were restored.</p>

<p>Up to this time the rates had been based partly on the actual
length of the post routes, partly on the time occupied by the
post-messengers in traversing the routes. They therefore varied
according as the roads were good or bad.<a name="FNanchor_441_441" id="FNanchor_441_441"></a><a href="#Footnote_441_441" class="fnanchor">[441]</a> In 1801 a mathematical
measurement of the roads of Prussia was made, and
thereafter the time factor was eliminated and the rates based
on distance only. The distance was measured, not in a direct
line, but by way of the post routes.</p>

<p>The events of the Napoleonic period resulted in a great
increase of prices in Prussia, and in order to meet the
additional expense of conducting the posts, the rates were
increased by 50 per cent. between 1805 and 1811, but the
general basis of charge remained unchanged. In 1824 important
modifications were introduced. The discrimination
according to the nature of contents of parcels was abolished,
and the rates were based solely on considerations of weight and
distance of transmission. Further, the distance between post
offices was no longer to be reckoned according to the distance
by way of the post routes, but according to the direct distance.<a name="FNanchor_442_442" id="FNanchor_442_442"></a><a href="#Footnote_442_442" class="fnanchor">[442]</a>
The general parcel rate was fixed at 3 pf. per pound for each
5 miles, with a minimum charge of twice letter rate for parcels
not exceeding 4 pounds in weight, and three times letter rate
for parcels weighing more than 4 pounds. In the case of
several parcels directed to the same place, the postage was
reckoned according to the total weight. The Postmaster-General
was authorized to increase the rates in the event of
a rise in the cost of forage.<a name="FNanchor_443_443" id="FNanchor_443_443"></a><a href="#Footnote_443_443" class="fnanchor">[443]</a></p>

<p>A special rate, in addition to ordinary postage, was also
introduced in respect of parcels directed to or sent from offices for<!-- Page 213 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_213" id="Page_213">[Pg 213]</a></span>
which no normal rate had been fixed. In 1826 a reduction of
postage by 10 per cent. was authorized where the total yearly
weight of parcels was between 10,000 and 20,000 pounds, and
of 15 per cent. where the total yearly weight exceeded 20,000
pounds. This reduction was, however, abolished in 1848.</p>

<p>With the introduction of railways and the transformation of
the transportation industry which ensued, the rates of 1824 were
found to be too high. In 1842 they were accordingly reduced
by one-half, experimentally, but only in respect of parcels sent
on certain railway routes. In 1847 this reduction was extended
to all railway routes,<a name="FNanchor_444_444" id="FNanchor_444_444"></a><a href="#Footnote_444_444" class="fnanchor">[444]</a> and in 1848 the rate for parcels not
conveyed exclusively on railway routes was reduced to 2 pf. per
pound for each 5 miles. The distinction was, however, found
inconvenient and was removed in 1852.<a name="FNanchor_445_445" id="FNanchor_445_445"></a><a href="#Footnote_445_445" class="fnanchor">[445]</a> A general rate of
1&frac12; pf. per pound for every 5 miles was then established, with a
minimum postage of twice letter rate, and a provision that odd
ounces, which had previously been ignored, should be charged as
a full pound, and that when several parcels were directed to the
same address the postage must be reckoned for each parcel singly.</p>

<p>Under the German-Austrian Postal Union, established in
1850, it was at first arranged that separate parcel rates should
be charged by each administration to and from the frontier,
according to its own inland rates. Later the rate was fixed
at 2 pf. per pound for each 5 miles, to be charged by each
administration concerned in the transmission. In 1857 one
definite parcel rate was established for the whole territory
of the Union, graduated according to direct distance, viz. 2 pf.
per pound for each 4 miles, with minima of from 1&frac12; to 7 sgr.
The whole revenue from parcels was credited to a common
fund and divided according to certain percentages.</p>

<p>A new parcel rate, based on weight and distance only,
was established at the founding of the North German Union
in 1867. The method of calculating the distance of transmission
for the purpose of determining the postage charge
was also modified. The then existing arrangement in Prussia,
based on the regulations of 1824, provided that the rate should
in all cases be reckoned according to the actual distance
between the post offices concerned. Under this method, when
a new post office was established, a parcel rate for every other<!-- Page 214 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_214" id="Page_214">[Pg 214]</a></span>
post office must be calculated, causing much labour and wasting
much time. This method was now abandoned. The whole
territory of the North German Union was divided into
imaginary squares, with sides 2 miles in length, the points
of intersection of the diagonals being taken as the centres
from which all distances were calculated.<a name="FNanchor_446_446" id="FNanchor_446_446"></a><a href="#Footnote_446_446" class="fnanchor">[446]</a> The rates between
any offices in two different squares were made identical. Such
a method rendered unnecessary the calculation of a special rate
of postage for every post office, and also rendered unnecessary
any fresh calculations of rates in respect of any new post
offices. The progression of distances was by stages of 5 miles
up to 30 miles, of 10 miles from 30 to 100 miles, and of
20 miles thereafter, the increase in the length of the steps
being justified on the ground that the cost of transportation
does not increase in direct proportion to the distance.<a name="FNanchor_447_447" id="FNanchor_447_447"></a><a href="#Footnote_447_447" class="fnanchor">[447]</a> The
rate was 2 pf. per pound for each step in the scale of distances.</p>

<p>The rate of 1867 was applied to the Imperial Post Office
by the law of 28th October 1871. This tariff, with its comparatively
small progressions of distances, was found inconvenient,
especially with the large growth of the traffic. The
rates had, moreover, been found too high for small parcels
sent over long distances. In point of fact, by far the greater
part of parcels under the weight of 5 kilogrammes were less
than 2&frac12; kilogrammes in weight. New parcel rates were
accordingly introduced on the 1st January 1874.<a name="FNanchor_448_448" id="FNanchor_448_448"></a><a href="#Footnote_448_448" class="fnanchor">[448]</a> For all
parcels not exceeding 5 kilogrammes in weight, uniform rates
were established, on the ground that an increase of postage
according to the distance of transmission was unjustifiable
in the case of light parcels.<a name="FNanchor_449_449" id="FNanchor_449_449"></a><a href="#Footnote_449_449" class="fnanchor">[449]</a> For the first 10 miles the
rate was 25 pf., and for all other distances 50 pf. A zone
tariff based on six zones of distance was established for
parcels of greater weight than 5 kilogrammes. For the first
5 kilogrammes such parcels were charged the uniform rate
applicable to parcels not exceeding 5 kilogrammes in weight,<!-- Page 215 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_215" id="Page_215">[Pg 215]</a></span>
and the following table shows the charges for the weight
exceeding 5 kilogrammes:&mdash;</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Parcel rates, German Imperial Post Office, from 1874.">
<tr><th align="center" colspan="5">Distance.</th><th align="center" colspan="2">For each kg. after<br /> the first 5 kg.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="center">Zone</td><td align="right">I</td><td align="left" colspan="3">Not exceeding 10 miles</td><td align="left">&frac12;</td><td align="left">sgr. (5 pf.)</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center"> "</td><td align="right">II</td><td align="left">From</td><td align="left">10-20</td><td align="left">miles</td><td align="left">1</td><td align="left">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center"> "</td><td align="right">III</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">20-50</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">2</td><td align="left">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center"> "</td><td align="right">IV</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">50-100</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">3</td><td align="left">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center"> "</td><td align="right">V</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">100-150</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">4</td><td align="left">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center"> "</td><td align="right">VI</td><td align="left">Over</td><td align="left">150</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">5</td><td align="left">"</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>For cumbrous and unwieldy parcels an additional charge
not exceeding 50 per cent. of the ordinary postage might be
made. With the increase of traffic it was found impossible to
forward all the parcels by the postal trains, and the Post Office
was only permitted to send a limited quantity of parcels by the
ordinary express trains.<a name="FNanchor_450_450" id="FNanchor_450_450"></a><a href="#Footnote_450_450" class="fnanchor">[450]</a> In 1880 it was arranged that parcels
which must be delivered without delay&mdash;e.g. those containing
fish or flowers&mdash;should be forwarded by express train on payment
of a special fee of 1 Mark each. In 1886 this additional fee
was made applicable to all urgent parcels, whatever the contents.</p>

<p>The tariff of 1873 has proved too high both for heavy and
for very light parcels, and some curious anomalies result from
the combination of zone rates and uniform rates. A parcel
of 5 kilogrammes sent for any distance greater than 10 miles
costs 50 pf. Eight parcels of 5 kilogrammes each could,
therefore, for 4 Marks be sent for any distance; but if
made up into one parcel of 40 kilogrammes the postage
would be 7 Marks 50 for places in the third zone (20 to
50 miles), and for places in the sixth zone (over 150 miles)
no less than 18 Marks.<a name="FNanchor_451_451" id="FNanchor_451_451"></a><a href="#Footnote_451_451" class="fnanchor">[451]</a> It is therefore to the advantage of<!-- Page 216 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_216" id="Page_216">[Pg 216]</a></span>
the public to divide a heavy parcel, though such a proceeding
obviously increases the cost to the administration of its
handling and transmission. The despatch of heavy parcels by
post is naturally discouraged, and the proportion of such
parcels is decreasing.<a name="FNanchor_452_452" id="FNanchor_452_452"></a><a href="#Footnote_452_452" class="fnanchor">[452]</a> Of the total number of parcels sent
by post in 1900, more than 88 per cent. were less than 5 kilogrammes
in weight, and the number of greater weight than
10 kilogrammes formed less than 3 per cent. The average
amount of postage per parcel on parcels falling in Zones III,
IV, V, and VI is not appreciably greater than that on parcels
falling in Zone II.<a name="FNanchor_453_453" id="FNanchor_453_453"></a><a href="#Footnote_453_453" class="fnanchor">[453]</a> The number of heavy parcels in the higher
zones is, therefore, negligible,<a name="FNanchor_454_454" id="FNanchor_454_454"></a><a href="#Footnote_454_454" class="fnanchor">[454]</a> and is least in the highest zones.<a name="FNanchor_455_455" id="FNanchor_455_455"></a><a href="#Footnote_455_455" class="fnanchor">[455]</a><!-- Page 217 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_217" id="Page_217">[Pg 217]</a></span></p>

<p>In the case of very light parcels also the rate is excessive.
The number of parcels under 1 kilogramme in weight, which
in 1870 formed about 30 per cent. of the total, fell in 1874 to
26.6 per cent., in 1878 to 21.8 per cent., and in 1910 to 12.616
per cent.<a name="FNanchor_456_456" id="FNanchor_456_456"></a><a href="#Footnote_456_456" class="fnanchor">[456]</a> Similarly the rates for the longer distances are too
high generally, and the number of parcels falling under the
higher zone rates is extremely small. In 1887, 42.5 per cent.
of the total number of parcels were delivered within the first
zone, and 84 per cent. within the first three zones, those in
the sixth zone forming only .064 per cent.<a name="FNanchor_457_457" id="FNanchor_457_457"></a><a href="#Footnote_457_457" class="fnanchor">[457]</a> Notwithstanding
these defects in the scheme of rates, the total number of
parcels has largely increased,<a name="FNanchor_458_458" id="FNanchor_458_458"></a><a href="#Footnote_458_458" class="fnanchor">[458]</a> and the cheapness of many of
the rates has led to the development of a traffic in certain
food-stuffs, and has encouraged numerous localized industries.<a name="FNanchor_459_459" id="FNanchor_459_459"></a><a href="#Footnote_459_459" class="fnanchor">[459]</a><!-- Page 218 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_218" id="Page_218">[Pg 218]</a></span></p>

<p>In view of the small number of heavy parcels it has been
suggested that the post should be restricted to parcels not
exceeding 10 kilogrammes in weight, parcels of greater weight
being left to the railways.<a name="FNanchor_460_460" id="FNanchor_460_460"></a><a href="#Footnote_460_460" class="fnanchor">[460]</a> This would result in the exclusion
of about 3 per cent. only of the parcels. The proposal
is, however, objected to on the ground that the postal
service for such parcels ought not to be withdrawn unless
the railways can afford as punctual, speedy, and cheap a
service as the Post Office;<a name="FNanchor_461_461" id="FNanchor_461_461"></a><a href="#Footnote_461_461" class="fnanchor">[461]</a> an argument which is sound
only if the present rate is profitable to the Post Office
(which is doubtful), or otherwise so long as it is assumed
that the Post Office ought to continue the present service
for the public advantage, regardless of considerations of cost
and revenue.</p>

<p>To meet the difficulty with light parcels a lower rate has
been proposed for parcels under 1 kilogramme in weight,
but a further modification in favour of parcels between
1 kilogramme and 5 kilogrammes in weight is deprecated as
involving an undesirable complication of the uniform rates.<a name="FNanchor_462_462" id="FNanchor_462_462"></a><a href="#Footnote_462_462" class="fnanchor">[462]</a>
The parcel post business is conducted as part of the general
Post Office business, and consequently it is not possible to
eliminate from the general expenses of the whole service the
expenses incurred in dealing with parcels. It cannot be said,
therefore, whether either the light parcels or the heavy parcels,<!-- Page 219 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_219" id="Page_219">[Pg 219]</a></span>
the short-distance parcels or the long-distance parcels, are or
are not profitable to the administration, or, indeed, whether
the parcel post service as a whole is a remunerative service
or otherwise; but German writers on the subject hold the
opinion that the cost of the service exceeds the revenue
derived from it.<a name="FNanchor_463_463" id="FNanchor_463_463"></a><a href="#Footnote_463_463" class="fnanchor">[463]</a></p>

<hr />
<p><!-- Page 220 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_220" id="Page_220">[Pg 220]</a></span></p>


<h2>IV<br /><br /><br />
MINOR RATES</h2>


<h3>(I) BOOK POST</h3>


<h4><span class="smcap">United Kingdom</span></h4>

<p>In 1847 Sir Rowland Hill proposed the provision of special
facilities for the transmission by post in the United Kingdom
of books and other printed matter. He thought such a
concession expedient as a matter of policy, especially in
view of the "state of the public mind on the important
subject of education." A low rate of postage would facilitate
the transmission of scientific and literary reports and other
documents "tending to the extension and diffusion of knowledge,"
and would be highly prized by the Literary and
Scientific Societies, which were a feature of those days.
Private families, especially the rural clergy, would also in
that way be enabled to obtain valuable publications otherwise,
to them, unattainable. Sir Rowland Hill recognized
that there were objections to the granting of a special rate
for a special class of matter; but he argued that, in effect,
the proposal was nothing more than an extended application
of an existing principle, applied to newspapers and
Parliamentary Proceedings, and (in regard to certain places
abroad) ordinary periodical publications.<a name="FNanchor_464_464" id="FNanchor_464_464"></a><a href="#Footnote_464_464" class="fnanchor">[464]</a></p>

<p>The rate proposed was 6d. per pound, which was virtually
the rate charged on newspapers, with this difference to its
advantage, that, whereas 6d. paid on newspapers would represent
six packets to be dealt with separately, 6d. paid under
the proposed book post rates would be in respect of one<!-- Page 221 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_221" id="Page_221">[Pg 221]</a></span>
packet only. The high minimum charge of 6d. was proposed
as a security against fraud: with such a minimum there would
be no temptation to send a packet as a cover for a written
communication. As a measure of economy it was proposed
to send the packets by the day mails as far as possible, by
this means avoiding loading heavily the important night mail
trains and adding to their cost; and it was anticipated that
the rates proposed would yield some profit to the revenue.</p>

<p>Objection was raised on the ground that the post ought
to be confined to small packets as far as possible, and should
convey large letters and packets only when necessity was
urgent: heavy packets would impede the work of the Post
Office, and would cause inconvenience in many ways, especially
as regards foot-messengers;<a name="FNanchor_465_465" id="FNanchor_465_465"></a><a href="#Footnote_465_465" class="fnanchor">[465]</a> but, as it was not
thought likely that any very great number of book packets
would be posted, the objection was not upheld, and the
cheaper rate was introduced. At first various restrictions
were imposed, and considerable public dissatisfaction resulted,
especially in regard to certain of the regulations.
These regulations were consequently relaxed in 1853 so as
to allow practically any printed matter to pass at the book rate.
In 1855 the rate was reduced,<a name="FNanchor_466_466" id="FNanchor_466_466"></a><a href="#Footnote_466_466" class="fnanchor">[466]</a> and in 1856 circulars were
admitted at the privileged rate. As a result of this the
number of book packets increased rapidly. In 1855 the total
number was 3,000,000; in 1856 the number increased to
6,000,000; and in 1862 reached 14,000,000. In 1866 the
rates for heavier packets were further reduced. The rate
for packets over 8 ounces in weight became 1d. for each
4 ounces, instead of 2d. for each 8 ounces.</p>

<p>In 1870, when the &#189;d. rate for newspapers and for
postcards was established,<a name="FNanchor_467_467" id="FNanchor_467_467"></a><a href="#Footnote_467_467" class="fnanchor">[467]</a> an important change in the book
post was made. As the result of pressure from the public
and a vote in the House of Commons in favour of a reduction,
carried against the wishes and recommendation of<!-- Page 222 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_222" id="Page_222">[Pg 222]</a></span>
the Government,<a name="FNanchor_468_468" id="FNanchor_468_468"></a><a href="#Footnote_468_468" class="fnanchor">[468]</a> the rate on book packets was reduced
to &#189;d. for every 2 ounces.</p>

<p>Since 1870 the regulations governing admission to the book
post have been modified from time to time, chiefly in the
direction of enabling the formal documents of commerce to pass
at the reduced rate. All documents admitted to the privilege
must conform to certain requirements, and it is obvious that
all such documents must be open to inspection by the Post
Office. It is therefore an indispensable requirement that the
documents be sent in open covers. Thus arises that curious
distinction between the "closed" post and the "open" post,
a lower rate of postage being given to packets containing
articles or documents of a certain description, on condition that
the contents are open to inspection by the postal authorities.</p>

<p>In 1897 the ordinary letter rate was made 1d. for the
first 4 ounces, and &#189;d. for each additional 2 ounces. The
book post, therefore, disappeared, except as regards packets
not exceeding 2 ounces in weight; and in 1904 its name
was changed to the "Halfpenny Packet Post." It is available
for practically all the formal documents of commerce,
and, in addition, many other packets of miscellaneous
character, and remains a most important branch of Post
Office traffic.<a name="FNanchor_469_469" id="FNanchor_469_469"></a><a href="#Footnote_469_469" class="fnanchor">[469]</a> In 1913-14 the number of halfpenny packets<!-- Page 223 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_223" id="Page_223">[Pg 223]</a></span>
(excluding postcards) was no less than 1,172 millions, or about
one-fifth of the total number of packets passing by post in
the United Kingdom.</p>

<p>When on the 1st November 1915 the postage on letters
over 1 ounce in weight was increased, the book post was
re-established as it had existed prior to 1897, except for
unimportant modifications of the regulations. It had been
proposed to abolish altogether the &#189;d. rate of postage,<a name="FNanchor_470_470" id="FNanchor_470_470"></a><a href="#Footnote_470_470" class="fnanchor">[470]</a> but
in view of strong representations from the printing trade,
and of the hostility of the general public, this proposal was
abandoned.</p>

<hr />


<h4><span class="smcap">France</span></h4>

<p>Particulars of the earlier rates of postage charged on printed
matter in France cannot now be ascertained, but they appear
always to have been lower than the rates for letters. Before
the Revolution an octavo book could be sent for any distance
for 12 sous, and the postage on circulars was less than a
centime.<a name="FNanchor_471_471" id="FNanchor_471_471"></a><a href="#Footnote_471_471" class="fnanchor">[471]</a></p>

<p>By the decrees of 17-22 August 1791, a rate for daily
newspapers of 8 deniers the sheet was established, and a
rate of 12 deniers the sheet for other newspapers and for
periodical publications. During the succeeding years the
rates were modified a number of times. In 1796 the following
rates were established:&mdash;</p>

<ul>
    <li>4 centimes the sheet for newspapers;</li>
    <li>5 centimes the sheet for unbound books, catalogues, and prospectuses.<a name="FNanchor_472_472" id="FNanchor_472_472"></a><a href="#Footnote_472_472" class="fnanchor">[472]</a></li>
</ul>

<p>A distinction was always made between ordinary printed
matter and periodical publications.</p>

<p>In 1827 the size of the sheet which was the basis of the
charge was fixed at 25 square decimetres. The system of
charge by weight was applied to printed matter in 1856,
with the following rates:&mdash;</p>

<ul>
   <li>&nbsp; 1 centime for each 5 grammes up to 50 grammes</li>
   <li>10 centimes from 50 to 100 grammes</li>
   <li>&nbsp; 1 centime for each 10 grammes beyond 100 grammes.</li>
</ul>
<p><!-- Page 224 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_224" id="Page_224">[Pg 224]</a></span></p>

<p>These rates were increased by some 50 per cent. in 1871.
After the establishment of the Universal Postal Union the
rates in the internal service were in some cases higher than
those in the international service, and it became advantageous
to commercial men to post their packets abroad. The French
administration were then required under the international
convention to distribute them in France without receiving
any postage.<a name="FNanchor_473_473" id="FNanchor_473_473"></a><a href="#Footnote_473_473" class="fnanchor">[473]</a> This anomalous situation was put an end to
in 1878, when the following rates were established:&mdash;</p>


<p>When sent under band&mdash;</p>
<ul>
    <li>1 centime for each 5 grammes up to 20 grammes</li>
    <li>5 centimes from 20 grammes to 50 grammes;</li>
    <li>5    <span class="ditto">"</span>     for each 50 grammes or fraction of 50 grammes thereafter.</li>
</ul>
<p>
When sent in open envelopes&mdash;<br />
<br />
<span style="margin-left: 2em;">5 centimes for each 50 grammes or fraction of 50 grammes.</span><br />
</p>

<p>The rates have since been reduced, and are now as follow:&mdash;</p>

<ul>
     <li>2  centimes for packets not exceeding 15 grammes in weight</li>
     <li>3     <span class="ditto">"</span>     between 15 grammes and 50 grammes</li>
     <li>5     <span class="ditto">"</span><span class="ditto">"</span>    50 grammes and 100 grammes</li>
     <li>5     <span class="ditto">"</span>     for each 100 grammes or fraction of 100 grammes thereafter.</li>
</ul>

<p>The number of packets of printed matter has increased
rapidly, as the subjoined table shows:&mdash;</p>

<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Increase in number of printed packets in France between 1877 and 1889.">
<tr><th align="left"></th><th align="center">Number of Packets<br /> of Ordinary<br /> Printed Matter</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1877</td><td align="center">195,148,116</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1883</td><td align="center">315,315,725</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1889</td><td align="center">406,252,198</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>The administration are given power to delay the despatch
or transmission of packets of ordinary printed matter should
circumstances render that course desirable.</p>

<p>In 1827 a special rate of 5 centimes for those delivered
locally, and 10 centimes for others, was conceded to certain
formal printed documents, such as notifications of births,
marriages, or deaths. In 1856, to these were added prospectuses,
catalogues, prices current, and <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">cartes de visite</i>.
These documents must be sent under band or in open
envelopes. The special rates on these classes of packets<!-- Page 225 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_225" id="Page_225">[Pg 225]</a></span>
have been continued. Under an order of the 26th November
1909 the rate for <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">cartes de visite</i> was made 2 centimes when
sent under band, but formulas of courtesy must not appear
on the cards. <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Cartes de visite</i> sent in open envelopes are
still charged 5 centimes.</p>

<hr />

<h4><span class="smcap">Germany</span></h4>

<p>In Prussia the order of 1712 did not provide a special rate
for ordinary printed matter sent by letter post. A reduced
rate of two-thirds that for ordinary merchandise was, however,
provided for books and other similar matter,<a name="FNanchor_474_474" id="FNanchor_474_474"></a><a href="#Footnote_474_474" class="fnanchor">[474]</a> under
the name of <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Schriften- und Aktentaxe</i>, when sent by parcel
post.<a name="FNanchor_475_475" id="FNanchor_475_475"></a><a href="#Footnote_475_475" class="fnanchor">[475]</a></p>

<p>In 1821 special rates were prescribed for various classes of
printed matter sent under band (<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Versendung unter Kreuzband</i>),
viz. books, music, catalogues, prospectuses, prices-current,
printed circulars, as follow&mdash;</p>

<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Printed matter rates in Prussia from 1821.">
<tr><td align="left">For each ordinary sheet of printed matter or for eight sheets small octavo size</td><td align="right">8</td><td align="left">pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">For a &emsp; half sheet</td><td align="right">5</td><td align="left">pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"><span class="ditto">"</span> quarter sheet</td><td align="right">4</td><td align="left">pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"><span class="ditto">"</span> sheet of music</td><td align="right">10</td><td align="left">pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"><span class="ditto">"</span> half sheet of music</td><td align="right">5</td><td align="left">pf.<a name="FNanchor_476_476" id="FNanchor_476_476"></a><a href="#Footnote_476_476" class="fnanchor">[476]</a></td></tr>
</table></div>

<p>The sheets were to be sent under band, and the name of
the sender and the number of sheets were to be written on
the outside. The sending of written matter in such packets
was forbidden, under penalty of a fine of ten times letter
postage on a packet of the same size. In 1824 the rate for
matter sent under band (printed lottery winning lists, etc.,
were now included) was made a quarter letter rate, and, like
other rates, was made chargeable according to direct distance
of transmission. When, in 1850,<a name="FNanchor_477_477" id="FNanchor_477_477"></a><a href="#Footnote_477_477" class="fnanchor">[477]</a> the rates for letters were
revised and reduced, the rate for matter sent under band<!-- Page 226 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_226" id="Page_226">[Pg 226]</a></span>
was continued at a quarter letter rate, and became (for
1 loth Zollgewicht = 1? loth Prussian)&mdash;</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Printed matter rates for Prussia from 1850.">
<tr><td align="left">Up to</td><td align="left">10</td><td align="center">German miles</td><td align="left">&frac14; sgr.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">10 to</td><td align="left">20</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">&frac12; sgr.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Over</td><td align="left">20</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">&frac34; sgr.</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>With the exception of the name and address of the
addressee no writing was permitted on these packets,
but by the order of the 29th May 1848 the writing of
the name and address of the sender and the date was permitted.</p>

<p>With the increase in the number of packets sent under
band at the reduced rate, there grew up an increasing abuse
of the privilege by the enclosure in such packets of written
communications. In order to check this, it was provided in
1843 that when any large number of such packets were
posted by the same person, a few of the packets should be
examined in the presence of the sender. No penalty was
at first imposed; but in 1850 it became necessary to take
action, and the royal order of the 12th June 1804, prescribing
a penalty of 10 thalers in cases where a letter was enclosed
in a packet passing at a rate less than letter rate, was made
applicable to the case of packets sent under band; and the
regulation of the 15th December 1821, prescribing a surcharge
of ten times letter rate for a packet of like weight, was made
applicable to cases where a communication was written on
the printed sheet sent at the reduced rate.<a name="FNanchor_478_478" id="FNanchor_478_478"></a><a href="#Footnote_478_478" class="fnanchor">[478]</a></p>

<p>In 1850, when the German-Austrian Postal Union was
founded, a uniform rate of 4 silverpfennigs for each loth
was introduced for packets sent under band. Following the
establishment of the Union, the Prussian administration (&#167; 50
of law of 5th June 1852) fixed a uniform rate for its own
service of 6 silverpfennigs for each loth. For local packets
sent under band (<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Stadtpost-Kreuzbandsendungen</i>) a rate of
1 sgr. for each packet was introduced, reduced to 4&frac12; pf. for
each packet when as many as 100 packets were posted at
the same time, or 6 pf. each when from 25 to 100 were
posted at one time. The definition of printed matter entitled<!-- Page 227 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_227" id="Page_227">[Pg 227]</a></span>
to the privilege<a name="FNanchor_479_479" id="FNanchor_479_479"></a><a href="#Footnote_479_479" class="fnanchor">[479]</a> was now enlarged.<a name="FNanchor_480_480" id="FNanchor_480_480"></a><a href="#Footnote_480_480" class="fnanchor">[480]</a> The penalty for misuse
of the privilege was made a surcharge of four times the
amount of the postage, but not less than 5 thalers, which
might be increased fourfold on repetition of the offence. In
1854 the maximum charge for packets sent under band was
fixed at six times letter rate, in order to get rid of the anomaly
of a higher charge on heavy packets sent under band than on
letters.<a name="FNanchor_481_481" id="FNanchor_481_481"></a><a href="#Footnote_481_481" class="fnanchor">[481]</a> The fact that packets under band could be sent
for 4 pf. throughout the territory of the Union, but that for
transmission within the Prussian territory the charge was
6 pf., and that in consequence Prussian commercial men
were posting their packets abroad in large numbers, led to
a reduction of the rate in 1856 to 4 pf. for each loth.<a name="FNanchor_482_482" id="FNanchor_482_482"></a><a href="#Footnote_482_482" class="fnanchor">[482]</a></p>

<p>The large increase of traffic which resulted made desirable
a simplification of the definition of packets entitled to the
privilege. Only communications of general application could
pass, and the officials found themselves often in doubt as to
the application of the existing definition. Thus, notices of
the despatch of goods, invitations, or printed letters could
not be sent at the privileged rate, while, e.g., notices of
marriages could. So far as the Union was concerned, in
1860 the privilege was limited to documents reproduced by
mechanical means.<a name="FNanchor_483_483" id="FNanchor_483_483"></a><a href="#Footnote_483_483" class="fnanchor">[483]</a> The maximum limit of weight was
reduced from 16 loth to &frac12; pfund (15 loth). This definition
was introduced in the Prussian inland service in 1861. The
rate of postage was also modified in that year. The rate
of 4 pf. for each loth was retained, but with the proviso
that the charge on packets sent under band should not
exceed twice letter rate. This effected a great reduction of
charge for the heavier packets. Whereas previously the rate
for a packet under band weighing 10 loth, sent more than
10 German miles, had been 18 sgr., it now became 6 sgr.<a name="FNanchor_484_484" id="FNanchor_484_484"></a><a href="#Footnote_484_484" class="fnanchor">[484]</a> In
1865 a special rate of 4 pf. for printed matter sent in the form<!-- Page 228 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_228" id="Page_228">[Pg 228]</a></span>
of an open card was introduced in Prussia.<a name="FNanchor_485_485" id="FNanchor_485_485"></a><a href="#Footnote_485_485" class="fnanchor">[485]</a> The simplification
of definition and reduction of rate resulted in a large
increase of traffic.</p>

<p>In 1867, when the North German Postal Services were
unified, the penalty for abuse of the privilege was reduced
to a surcharge of four times letter rate, but not less than
a thaler; and the law of 1871, founding the Imperial Post
Office, abolished the fine because it had been found that the
offences were for the most part committed through ignorance
of the regulations. Slight changes were made in the
regulations under which printed matter was admitted to the
privilege, but no change was made in the rates of charge.</p>

<p>The law regarding the Imperial Post Office (28th October
1871) left the fixing of rates for printed matter to the Imperial
Chancellor. The maximum limit of weight was raised from
&frac12; pound (250 grammes) to 1 pound (500 grammes). The
rates of postage were ? sgr. for each 40 grammes up to
250 grammes, with a maximum of 2 sgr.; from 250 to 500
grammes, 3 sgr.<a name="FNanchor_486_486" id="FNanchor_486_486"></a><a href="#Footnote_486_486" class="fnanchor">[486]</a> The large increase of traffic resulting from
the reductions in the rates for printed matter and for samples
caused practical difficulties, and in 1873<a name="FNanchor_487_487" id="FNanchor_487_487"></a><a href="#Footnote_487_487" class="fnanchor">[487]</a> the acceptance of
letters, postcards, printed matter, and samples was to be
only in the <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Briefkasten</i>.</p>

<p>In 1874<a name="FNanchor_488_488" id="FNanchor_488_488"></a><a href="#Footnote_488_488" class="fnanchor">[488]</a> the limit of weight for printed matter was raised
to 1 kilogramme, and the rate was made&mdash;</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Printer matter rates for the German Imperial Post Office from 1874.">
<tr><td align="left" colspan="2">Not exceeding 50 grammes</td><td align="right">3</td><td align="left">pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">50 to 250</td><td align="left">grammes</td><td align="right">10</td><td align="left">pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">250 to 500</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">20</td><td align="left">pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Over 500</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">30</td><td align="center">pf.</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>In 1879 (order of 8th March) the definition of printed
matter was further extended.<a name="FNanchor_489_489" id="FNanchor_489_489"></a><a href="#Footnote_489_489" class="fnanchor">[489]</a></p>

<p>The tariff of 1874 raised by about 50 per cent. the postage
on packets between 50 and 100 grammes. Against this protests
were made, especially since the rate for the transmission<!-- Page 229 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_229" id="Page_229">[Pg 229]</a></span>
of such packets for the furthest points of the Universal
Postal Union was no greater than the rate for transmission
within Germany. In 1890 the rates were modified, packets
between 50 and 250 grammes being divided into two groups,
50 to 100 grammes, and 100 to 250 grammes. The rate
for the first was made 5 pf., for the latter it remained 10 pf.
The increase of the maximum limit of weight has led to
practical difficulties.<a name="FNanchor_490_490" id="FNanchor_490_490"></a><a href="#Footnote_490_490" class="fnanchor">[490]</a></p>

<p>This traffic has attained large proportions. In 1910 the
number of packets of printed matter passing in the inland
service was nearly a thousand millions.<a name="FNanchor_491_491" id="FNanchor_491_491"></a><a href="#Footnote_491_491" class="fnanchor">[491]</a></p>

<hr />


<h3>(II) SAMPLES</h3>


<h4><span class="smcap">United Kingdom</span></h4>

<p>In England, letters containing samples and patterns were
from the first establishment of the Post Office charged with
double postage. In 1753, arising out of the general dissatisfaction
with the Post Office felt at that time by the
trading public, the legality of the double charge was contested.
Merchants, while admitting that any letter containing
a pattern or sample which should weigh as much
as an ounce must pay at the ounce rate, contended that,
if weighing less than an ounce, the letter should be charged
according to the number of sheets of paper, and that the
pattern which was enclosed should be ignored.<a name="FNanchor_492_492" id="FNanchor_492_492"></a><a href="#Footnote_492_492" class="fnanchor">[492]</a> The Act of
the 9th of Anne prescribed the postage on "every single
letter or piece of paper" not of the weight of one ounce,
and prescribed that "a double letter" should pay double<!-- Page 230 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_230" id="Page_230">[Pg 230]</a></span>
rate.<a name="FNanchor_493_493" id="FNanchor_493_493"></a><a href="#Footnote_493_493" class="fnanchor">[493]</a> The contention of the merchants was that the enclosure
of a pattern or sample did not convert a single letter
into a double letter, and that to constitute a double letter
there must be a second sheet of paper&mdash;a contention which
is sound enough if postage be regarded as a tax on communications
and not as a mere charge for the conveyance
of a packet. At Bristol, Manchester, and Gloucester, legal
proceedings were taken against local postmasters for demanding
and receiving more than the legal postage. In
each case a special verdict, in almost identical terms, was
given, and the Postmasters-General were advised by the
Attorney-General that the decision was likely to go against
the Crown if they brought up one of the verdicts for
argument. In their difficulty they resorted to Parliament,
and obtained specific statutory authority for an additional
charge in respect of patterns and samples.<a name="FNanchor_494_494" id="FNanchor_494_494"></a><a href="#Footnote_494_494" class="fnanchor">[494]</a></p>

<p>This state of affairs continued until 1795, when samples
were given a definite statutory privilege. Under an Act of
that year it was provided that a packet of patterns or samples
might pass as a single letter on condition that it did not
exceed 1 ounce in weight, that it was open at the sides,
and that it contained no writing other than the name and
address of the sender and the price.<a name="FNanchor_495_495" id="FNanchor_495_495"></a><a href="#Footnote_495_495" class="fnanchor">[495]</a> This privilege was
continued by the Act of 1801.<a name="FNanchor_496_496" id="FNanchor_496_496"></a><a href="#Footnote_496_496" class="fnanchor">[496]</a> In 1805 an additional
penny was charged on all such packets.<a name="FNanchor_497_497" id="FNanchor_497_497"></a><a href="#Footnote_497_497" class="fnanchor">[497]</a> In 1812 a further
addition to the postage was made, viz. an addition of 2d.
for every "letter, packet, or cover not exceeding an ounce
in weight" and containing a pattern or sample, if "closed
or not open at the sides," or an addition of 1d. if<!-- Page 231 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_231" id="Page_231">[Pg 231]</a></span>
open at the sides.<a name="FNanchor_498_498" id="FNanchor_498_498"></a><a href="#Footnote_498_498" class="fnanchor">[498]</a> By the consolidating Act of 1837 it
was provided that packets or covers containing patterns or
samples and not exceeding an ounce in weight, if open at the
sides and without any "letter or writing in, upon, or within
such packet or cover," other than the name and address of
the sender and the price, should be charged as single
letters, but "letters not open at the sides containing
patterns or samples and not exceeding 1 ounce in weight"
were to be charged as double letters.<a name="FNanchor_499_499" id="FNanchor_499_499"></a><a href="#Footnote_499_499" class="fnanchor">[499]</a> In 1839 the Treasury
were empowered to fix rates of postage for all letters by
weight,<a name="FNanchor_500_500" id="FNanchor_500_500"></a><a href="#Footnote_500_500" class="fnanchor">[500]</a> and in 1840 rates of postage, charged according to
weight alone, "without reference to the number of sheets
or pieces of paper, or enclosures," were legalized.<a name="FNanchor_501_501" id="FNanchor_501_501"></a><a href="#Footnote_501_501" class="fnanchor">[501]</a> This Act
contained no special provision in respect of packets containing
samples or patterns.</p>

<p>On the 1st October 1863, with the declared object of
benefiting trade and commerce by affording facilities for the
cheap transmission of <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">bona fide</i> trade patterns and samples
of merchandise throughout the country, an "Inland Pattern
and Sample Post" was established. Since the Post Office,
and the Post Office alone, had the means of conveying such
articles at a moderate rate of charge to and from all parts
of the country, including even the most remote, it was
thought some special concession ought to be made. The
privilege was, however, restricted within narrow limits, as
it was feared that a large increase in the number of
moderately heavy packets would impede the work of the
Post Office. It would, moreover, seriously affect the amount
of the payments to railway companies for the conveyance
of mails, a matter of grave anxiety to the Post Office
at that time.<a name="FNanchor_502_502" id="FNanchor_502_502"></a><a href="#Footnote_502_502" class="fnanchor">[502]</a> The privilege was therefore restricted to
genuine samples, and no article of intrinsic value might be
sent at the reduced rate.</p>

<p>The original rates were:&mdash;</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="United Kingdom Inland Pattern and Sample Post rates from 1863.">
<tr><td align="center">Under</td><td align="right">4</td><td align="center">ounces</td><td align="right">3d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">8</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">6d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">16</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">1s. 0d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">24</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">1s. 6d.</td></tr>
</table></div>

<p><!-- Page 232 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_232" id="Page_232">[Pg 232]</a></span></p>
<p>The computations of the financial effects of the rates were
made&mdash;as was usual in such cases&mdash;by estimating the effect
on the gross revenue, taking into account the probable
increase in the number of packets, and estimating also what
additional expense would be incurred in dealing with the additional
traffic.<a name="FNanchor_503_503" id="FNanchor_503_503"></a><a href="#Footnote_503_503" class="fnanchor">[503]</a> The main financial principle seems to have
been that as the letter rate was enormously profitable, a
reduced rate for a comparatively small volume of traffic
could be given without involving actual loss, and without
any serious result on the net revenue.</p>

<p>In 1864 the rates were reduced by one-third. In 1865
the exclusion of articles of intrinsic value was abandoned;
but there was no relaxation of the essential condition that
the articles must be <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">bona fide</i> samples. In 1866 there was
a further slight modification of the rates. The number of
packets sent at the privileged rate increased from half a
million in 1864 to a million in 1865, and by 1868 the
number had reached three millions.</p>

<p>The facilities afforded by this post were taken advantage
of to a large extent for the forwarding of small packets of
goods on sale or in execution of an order. It was estimated
that at least half the packets were not genuine samples at
all, but contained goods of this kind; and the definite restriction
of the post to its original purpose of carrying trade
samples and patterns was deemed necessary. This was
provided for in the Act of 1870, the rate of postage being
at the same time reduced to &#189;d. for every 2 ounces.</p>

<p>The enforcement of the restriction gave rise to considerable
public dissatisfaction. It was apparent that fairly general use
had been made of the sample post for the transmission of
small parcels of all kinds of goods. Many persons living in
remote parts of the country were in the habit of obtaining
supplies of goods of various kinds by this means; and it was
alleged that by the facilities afforded by this post some
industries, such as lace-making, were actually created in
certain districts, or at any rate were greatly helped. The
post was also much used for the sending of small personal
gifts.</p>

<p>Public agitation against the restriction became so strong<!-- Page 233 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_233" id="Page_233">[Pg 233]</a></span>
that the postal authorities, although apparently holding the
view that a general parcel post was indefensible in principle,
became fearful that, unless the public were given some concession
on this point, an attack might be made on the 1d.
rate for ordinary letters. Such an attack, if successful,
would of course have been fatal to Post Office revenue. It
was proposed, therefore, to make definite provision for the
transmission by post at low rates of postage of small
packets containing articles other than samples. A rate for
small parcels, whatever the contents, would at the same
time remove the difficult and unsatisfactory task of deciding
what was or was not a sample or pattern. These objects
might be secured by a general reduction of the rates for
inland letters; and this course was ultimately adopted, after
some hesitation from fear of the effect on the revenue. The
rates on the heavier inland letters were accordingly reduced
by Treasury Warrant of 16th August 1871, and the sample
post at the same time abolished.<a name="FNanchor_504_504" id="FNanchor_504_504"></a><a href="#Footnote_504_504" class="fnanchor">[504]</a></p>

<p>In the early 'eighties there was a strong demand from the
public for the re-establishment of the sample post. The
advantage to trade was emphasized, and attention was
called to the existence of a privileged rate for samples on
the Continent and in the international service. The existence
of a low sample rate in the international service led,
indeed, to a curious development. As samples which, if
posted in this country, would be charged 2d., could be posted
on the Continent for foreign transmission at a charge of 1d.,
several firms in England were in the habit of sending large
numbers of sample packets in bulk to Belgium, where they
were posted at the 1d. rate addressed to places in England.
The result of this man&#x0153;uvre was that, instead of receiving
the inland postage of 2d. for these packets, the British Post
Office performed practically the same service in respect of<!-- Page 234 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_234" id="Page_234">[Pg 234]</a></span>
them as if they had been posted in England, but received
nothing, since under the Postal Convention the whole of the
postage on foreign letters is retained by the country of
origin. It was estimated that there was in this way a loss
to revenue of &#163;1,000 a year.</p>

<p>It was in great part the existence of this anomaly which
led to the re-establishment of the sample post in 1887.
No exact estimate was made of the cost of dealing with
sample packets, but the authorities stated that the rates
proposed, viz. under 4 ounces 1d., over 4 ounces and under
6 ounces 1&#189;d., and over 6 ounces and under 8 ounces 2d.
(8 ounces to be the maximum weight), would be remunerative,
and that any immediate loss to revenue in consequence of
the reduction in rates would therefore be likely soon to be
made up. This statement must, however, have been based
on general considerations and estimates. In the following
year the Secretary to the Post Office (Sir Arthur Blackwood)
told a Select Committee of the House of Commons that
the Post Office had not any return of the cost per million
letters, or any return of that kind by quantity, and that the
Post Office could not give the actual cost per million letters.<a name="FNanchor_505_505" id="FNanchor_505_505"></a><a href="#Footnote_505_505" class="fnanchor">[505]</a></p>

<p>The post, which was re-established in the interests of
trade and could only be used by traders, was continued
until 1897, when the Jubilee reductions brought down the
postage on ordinary letters to the level of the sample rate.</p>

<p>The sample post was never more than a very minor part
of the Post Office business. In 1865, when the total number
of letters passing by post was some 700 millions, the number
of samples was one million. In 1870 the number of samples
was four millions. In 1896, the last year of its existence
as a special rate, the number of samples was nine
millions. In that year the number of letters, etc., was some
3,000 millions.</p>

<p>As a result of the increase of letter postage on the heavier<!-- Page 235 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_235" id="Page_235">[Pg 235]</a></span>
letters, as a war measure, it has been deemed necessary to
re-establish the inland sample post. On the 1st November
1915 the post was accordingly re-established substantially as
it existed prior to 1897. The rates of postage are the same,
and the regulations practically unaltered.</p>

<hr />


<h4><span class="smcap">France</span></h4>

<p>In France, by the decree of 17-22 August 1791 (Article 16),
samples were accorded a privileged rate of one-third letter
postage, with the reservation that in no case could the postage
charged be less than that on a single letter. In 1848, when
a low uniform rate for letters was adopted, it was thought
that the privilege given to samples need not be continued.
The suppression of the special privileged rate was found
almost to exclude samples from the mails, and in 1856 they
were again given a privilege by the extension to them of
the rates and conditions applied to printed matter.<a name="FNanchor_506_506" id="FNanchor_506_506"></a><a href="#Footnote_506_506" class="fnanchor">[506]</a> The
limit of weight for samples was fixed at 3 kilogrammes, and
the limit of each dimension at 45 centimetres; but these
limits were found to be too great. The post became encumbered
with large packets which it could not enclose in
the mails, and which, as a matter of fact, it had not the
means of dealing with. Consequently, in 1858 the limit of
weight was reduced to 300 grammes, and the maximum
dimension to 25 centimetres.<a name="FNanchor_507_507" id="FNanchor_507_507"></a><a href="#Footnote_507_507" class="fnanchor">[507]</a> It was still found, however,
that packets of samples gave rise to considerable embarrassment
in the service. Their irregular size rendered stamping
more difficult, and their volume and the unsatisfactory manner
in which they were made up for the post caused inconvenience,
especially in the travelling offices, where space is
limited.</p>

<p>The object in view in establishing the sample rate had
been to encourage trade by the distribution of trade samples,
and not to found a new general means of conveyance for
small parcels. But commercial houses were not slow to take
advantage of the means afforded for the distribution of small<!-- Page 236 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_236" id="Page_236">[Pg 236]</a></span>
packages of goods. At first it was made a condition of
acceptance at the privileged rate that the articles should
bear the name of the dealer or maker, but this precaution
was abandoned before long.<a name="FNanchor_508_508" id="FNanchor_508_508"></a><a href="#Footnote_508_508" class="fnanchor">[508]</a></p>

<p>A minimum rate of 1 centime for packets not exceeding
5 grammes in weight had been fixed in 1856. This proved
too low, and in 1871 the minimum was raised to 30 centimes,
which proved to be too high. The number of samples, which
in 1869 had been 9,751,970, fell in 1872 to 3,461,981.<a name="FNanchor_509_509" id="FNanchor_509_509"></a><a href="#Footnote_509_509" class="fnanchor">[509]</a> In
December 1873 this rate was reduced by one-half, and in
August 1875 the rate was fixed at 5 centimes for each
50 grammes. Under this rate the numbers increased rapidly:
5,267,964 packets were sent through the post at the sample
rate in 1874, and by 1889 the numbers had risen to 25,731,985.
The present rate is 5 centimes per 50 grammes, with a maximum
limit of 500 grammes. The number of sample packets
in the year 1912-13 was about 78 millions.<a name="FNanchor_510_510" id="FNanchor_510_510"></a><a href="#Footnote_510_510" class="fnanchor">[510]</a></p>

<hr />


<h4><span class="smcap">Germany</span></h4>

<p>Samples were first given a privilege in Prussia in 1825.<a name="FNanchor_511_511" id="FNanchor_511_511"></a><a href="#Footnote_511_511" class="fnanchor">[511]</a></p>

<p>Packets containing samples were then given single letter
rate up to 1&frac12; loth, and half the letter rate for heavier
packets. They must either be sent enclosed in a letter or
attached to a letter, and the letter must not exceed &frac34; loth
in weight.</p>

<p>In 1850 the following rates for samples were established:&mdash;</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Sample post rate in Germany (Prussia) from 1850.">
<tr><td align="left">Not exceeding 10 German miles</td><td align="right">1</td><td align="center">silver groschen</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">10 to 20 German miles</td><td align="right">2</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Over 20 <span class="ditto">"</span></td><td align="right">3</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
</table></div>
<p class="blockquot">and for heavier packets, half letter rate.</p>


<p>Under the Austro-German Postal Union, established on the
6th April 1850, the ordinary rate for single letters was<!-- Page 237 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_237" id="Page_237">[Pg 237]</a></span>
charged in the case of samples for each 2 loth, according to
distance. In 1852 the Prussian internal rates for samples
were brought into accord with those of the Union. Samples
must be sent in unsealed covers and must be easily recognizable
as such. The maximum weight was 16 loth, and the
maximum charge was not to exceed six times letter rate.</p>

<p>In 1853 a further privilege was conceded. When sent
together with a letter, samples might be enclosed in sealed
covers; but in order to enable the administration to maintain
a control over the use of the privilege, the postal officials
were empowered at discretion to require the sender to open
such packets.<a name="FNanchor_512_512" id="FNanchor_512_512"></a><a href="#Footnote_512_512" class="fnanchor">[512]</a></p>

<p>In 1860, when the Austro-German Postal Union was
renewed, the limit of weight for samples was reduced to
&frac12; pound (15 loth). Following this reduction the Prussian
rates for samples were reduced in 1861: for samples weighing
more than 2 loth only the rate for a double letter (according
to distance) was to be charged. The reduction was not
followed by any large increase in the number of sample
packets. Every sample must still be accompanied by a
letter, a circumstance which made the application of the
sample rate heavy. With a view to the further encouragement
of the traffic this requirement was removed in 1863,
and the despatch of samples under band, in envelopes, little
bags, or similar covers, authorized. New rates were introduced
as follows: 4 pf. for each 2&frac12; loth. To prevent abuse
of the privilege it was provided that no article of marketable
value could be sent at the reduced rate. The packet must
be marked to show that it contained a sample, and might
also bear the name and address of the senders, the trade
mark, and the number of samples and prices.</p>

<p>In 1871 the rate for the Imperial Postal Service was made
? sgr. for each 40 grammes with a maximum of 2 sgr. Practical
difficulties arose from the great increase of traffic which
followed this reduction of rate. Large packets and packets
of awkward shape were posted, causing practical difficulties,
especially in the sorting carriages, and it was found necessary
to decline to accept samples over the counter, and to forbid
the acceptance of samples in roll form. The sample rate<!-- Page 238 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_238" id="Page_238">[Pg 238]</a></span>
was, moreover, complicated as compared with the letter rate.
While there were but two rates for letters, there were five
for samples, viz. 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20 pf. In 1875 the
sample rate was simplified by the introduction of a single
rate of 10 pf. for all sample packets, with a maximum limit
of weight of 250 grammes.</p>

<p>The maximum limit of weight was raised in 1898 to 350
grammes, and in 1914 to 500 grammes. The present rates
for samples are:&mdash;</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Sample rates for Germany.">
<tr><td align="left">Not exceeding 250 grammes</td><td align="right">10 pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">250-500 grammes</td><td align="right">20 pf.</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>Prepayment is compulsory.</p>

<p>The sample post traffic has increased, but has not attained
large proportions compared with letters. In 1878 the number
of samples was 4,389,000 and in 1913-14, 87 millions (inland
service). The minimum rate (10 pf.) is high compared with
the minimum rates for ordinary printed matter and newspapers,
and a minimum rate of 5 pf. has been suggested.<a name="FNanchor_513_513" id="FNanchor_513_513"></a><a href="#Footnote_513_513" class="fnanchor">[513]</a></p>

<hr />


<h3>(III) COMMERCIAL PAPERS</h3>


<h4><span class="smcap">United Kingdom</span></h4>

<p>Letter postage was found to be high for the formal
documents of commerce, and from very early times there
has been a disposition to accord an exceptionally low rate
to such documents. The Act of 1660 conferred a special
privilege on merchants' accounts not exceeding one sheet of
paper, bills of exchange, invoices, and bills of lading. They
were to be "without rate in the price of letters," that is
to say, no account was to be taken of them. This privilege
was continued by the 9th of Anne.<a name="FNanchor_514_514" id="FNanchor_514_514"></a><a href="#Footnote_514_514" class="fnanchor">[514]</a> The Postmasters-General
contended that the privilege was granted in the
case of letters for foreign transmission only, but the merchants
affected to interpret the Act as applying in the
case of inland letters also. They naturally pointed out that<!-- Page 239 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_239" id="Page_239">[Pg 239]</a></span>
restriction of the privilege to foreign letters imposed on traders
within the realm a burden of postage not imposed on traders
beyond the sea,<a name="FNanchor_515_515" id="FNanchor_515_515"></a><a href="#Footnote_515_515" class="fnanchor">[515]</a> and the Postmasters-General found so much
difficulty in maintaining the additional charge in the case
of inland letters that they were ultimately driven to apply
to Parliament, in 1720, for the express sanction of law.<a name="FNanchor_516_516" id="FNanchor_516_516"></a><a href="#Footnote_516_516" class="fnanchor">[516]</a>
From this time commercial or other papers obtained no
special advantage over ordinary letters in the inland service;
and in 1801, when the Post Office was endeavouring by all
possible means to increase its net revenue, the privilege in
the case of foreign letters was withdrawn.<a name="FNanchor_517_517" id="FNanchor_517_517"></a><a href="#Footnote_517_517" class="fnanchor">[517]</a></p>

<p>The introduction of a specially low rate for commercial
documents was considered in the 'thirties of last century
by the Treasury Commissioners of Inquiry into the Management
of the Post Office, who recommended the adoption of
a general &#189;d. rate.<a name="FNanchor_518_518" id="FNanchor_518_518"></a><a href="#Footnote_518_518" class="fnanchor">[518]</a> Nothing came, however, of this suggestion.</p>

<p>The privilege to commercial papers has since been restored
by little and little as extensions of the book post, established
in 1847 (<i>q.v.</i>), and at the present time most of the
formal documents of commerce not exceeding 2 ounces in
weight pass at the reduced rate of &#189;d.</p>

<hr />


<h4><span class="smcap">France</span></h4>

<h4>(<i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Papiers d'Affaires</i>)</h4>

<p>In the French service commercial papers (<i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">papiers d'affaires</i>)
constitute a special category of postal packets. Documents
included under this heading may be described briefly as papers<!-- Page 240 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_240" id="Page_240">[Pg 240]</a></span>
and documents, whether wholly or partly written, containing
communications which are not of a personal character.</p>

<p>Until 1856 such papers were charged at the same rate
as letters. This rate was found to be burdensome,<a name="FNanchor_519_519" id="FNanchor_519_519"></a><a href="#Footnote_519_519" class="fnanchor">[519]</a> and in
1856 a rate of 1 centime for each 10 grammes was established&mdash;the
same rate as that for samples and ordinary printed
matter&mdash;but the minimum charge was fixed at 50 centimes.
In 1871 the rate was altered to correspond with that for
samples. It now became 30 centimes for the first 50 grammes,
and 10 centimes for each further 50 grammes. As a consequence
of the adhesion of France to the Universal Postal
Union, the rate, together with that for samples, was changed
in 1875 to 5 centimes for each 50 grammes. The discarding,
in the case of <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">papiers d'affaires</i>, of the principle of a
minimum charge equal at least to the minimum charge for
letters, had unfortunate results. It has been found extremely
difficult always to distinguish between documents entitled to
be regarded as <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">papiers d'affaires</i> and documents which are of
a personal character, and therefore subject to letter postage.
The privilege is at present restricted to packets weighing not
more than 20 grammes, and the rate of postage is 5 centimes.
Packets weighing more than 20 grammes are subject to
letter postage.</p>

<p>The number of packets passing as <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">papiers d'affaires</i> increased
rapidly, but still forms only an inconsiderable fraction
of the total number of postal packets. In 1856 the number
was 39,747; in 1889 it exceeded 15 millions; and in 1913 it
reached 58 millions.</p>

<p>It is necessary to issue a long and detailed list showing
the kinds of documents admissible at the reduced rate, and
the difficulty of administering the rate is considerable.</p>

<hr />


<h4><span class="smcap">Germany</span><br /><br />
(<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Gesch&#228;ftspapiere</i>)</h4>

<p>After the abolition of the old Prussian <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Schriften- und
Aktentaxe</i><a name="FNanchor_520_520" id="FNanchor_520_520"></a><a href="#Footnote_520_520" class="fnanchor">[520]</a> in 1861, neither the North German Bund nor<!-- Page 241 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_241" id="Page_241">[Pg 241]</a></span>
the Imperial administration granted a special rate for
wholly or partly handwritten communications which were
not of the nature of personal and individual correspondence.
Either letter or parcel rate must be paid on such packets.
In the international service the rate for such was the same
as the rate for printed matter, and the unfavourable position
in the inland service in this respect gave rise to public
complaints. In 1900, therefore, a special class of packets,
named <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Gesch&#228;ftspapiere</i>, was introduced in the internal service
of the German Imperial administration. Papers partly or
wholly written, but not of the nature of private or personal
communications, were admissible at a reduced rate of postage.<a name="FNanchor_521_521" id="FNanchor_521_521"></a><a href="#Footnote_521_521" class="fnanchor">[521]</a>
Except for local traffic the new rates were:&mdash;</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Rates for commercial papers in Germany from 1900.">
<tr><td align="left">Not exceeding 250 grammes</td><td align="right">10 pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">250-500 grammes</td><td align="right">20 pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">500 grammes to 1 kilogramme (maximum)</td><td align="right">30 pf.</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>Compared with the total postal traffic the number of packets
passing at the reduced rate is quite small, but it is increasing,
and is sufficiently large to indicate that the privilege affords
a considerable advantage to the public.</p>

<p>The number of packets of <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Gesch&#228;ftspapiere</i> was:&mdash;</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Number of packets of commercial papers in Germany between 1904 and 1913.">
<tr><td align="left">1904</td><td align="right">10,793,620</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1907</td><td align="right">16,789,260</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1910</td><td align="right">23,632,220</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1913</td><td align="right">34,328,950</td></tr>
</table></div>

<hr />


<h3>(IV) POSTCARDS</h3>

<p>The idea of postcards originated with Dr. H. von Stephan,
who submitted a proposal for their introduction at the meeting
of the delegates of the German Postal Union at Karlsruhe in<!-- Page 242 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_242" id="Page_242">[Pg 242]</a></span>
1865. Dr. von Stephan had realized that the ordinary form
of the letter missive, although most suitable in many ways for
many kinds of correspondence, was not always convenient.
Much commercial correspondence might be conducted with
briefer and less formal communications, and for such short and
urgent messages a simple and less costly means would be
welcomed.</p>

<p>The proposal was therefore for the issue of cards which
should be addressed on the front, and at the back should bear
the written message.<a name="FNanchor_522_522" id="FNanchor_522_522"></a><a href="#Footnote_522_522" class="fnanchor">[522]</a> The cards should be transmitted unenclosed.
The proposal was not well received by the
delegates. It was, however, revived in 1869 by Professor
Herrmann of Vienna, who brought it to the notice of the
Austrian postal administration. It was viewed favourably
by that administration, and the cards were introduced in the
Austrian service on the 1st October 1869, being sold at the
price of 5 kreuzer. The innovation was an immediate success,
nearly three million cards being sold in the first three months;
and following on this success the cards were soon introduced
in most other countries.</p>

<p>Except in France, and for the first two years in Germany,
the rate charged has from the first been one-half the
minimum rate for letters. In France the minimum for postcards
bearing ordinary messages has never been less than
10 centimes.<a name="FNanchor_523_523" id="FNanchor_523_523"></a><a href="#Footnote_523_523" class="fnanchor">[523]</a> This reduction of 50 per cent. cannot be justified<!-- Page 243 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_243" id="Page_243">[Pg 243]</a></span>
on any ground of cheaper handling. The manipulation and
conveyance of postcards is perhaps slightly less expensive
than that of ordinary light letters, but any such difference is
small, and in point of fact postcards are usually regarded as
causing a little more trouble in the process of sorting. For
all practical purposes it may safely be assumed that postcards
and ordinary light letters involve approximately the same
cost for their handling and transmission.<a name="FNanchor_524_524" id="FNanchor_524_524"></a><a href="#Footnote_524_524" class="fnanchor">[524]</a> This difference in
the rates of postage charged on ordinary light letters and
postcards, respectively, is therefore either a standing evidence
of the fiscal character of the rate for light letters, or of the
uneconomic character of one or other of the rates, or of both.</p>

<p>The postcard has proved immensely popular. Its use for
formal and unconfidential communications is a great convenience.
By avoiding the necessity for folding and enclosing
in envelopes, time is saved in the making up of correspondence
for the post; and the saving in postage when a quantity
is sent out is very considerable. The cards are a convenience
also in the practical working of the Post Office service. Their
use diminishes both the weight and bulk of the mails; on
account of their lightness and uniformity of size and shape
large numbers can be packed together in small space. In this
respect they contrast strongly with the irregularly shaped
packets of books or of general merchandise, which represent
the maximum of encumbrance to Post Office working. The
introduction of the picture postcard gave a great impetus to
the use of this means of correspondence. Except in France,
the traffic has assumed large dimensions. In the United
Kingdom in 1913-14 the total number of postcards was about
926,000,000, while the total number of packets passing at the
letter rate was about 3,478,000,000.<a name="FNanchor_525_525" id="FNanchor_525_525"></a><a href="#Footnote_525_525" class="fnanchor">[525]</a></p>

<hr />
<p><!-- Page 244 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_244" id="Page_244">[Pg 244]</a></span></p>

<h3>(V) RATE FOR PRINTED MATTER FOR THE BLIND</h3>

<p>The low rate for matter printed in raised type for the use of
the blind is a purely philanthropic concession.<a name="FNanchor_526_526" id="FNanchor_526_526"></a><a href="#Footnote_526_526" class="fnanchor">[526]</a></p>

<p>In the United Kingdom the rates are:&mdash;</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="United Kingdom printed matter rate for the blind.">
<tr><td align="left">For a packet</td><td align="left">not exceeding</td><td align="left">2</td><td align="left">ounces</td><td align="left" colspan="2">in weight</td><td align="right">&#189;d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">exceeding</td><td align="left">2</td><td align="left">ounces</td><td align="left">and not exceeding</td><td align="left">5 lb.</td><td align="right">1d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">5</td><td align="left">lb.</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">6 lb</td><td align="right">2d.</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>It will be noted that the initial penny rate is maintained
(the 2 ounces for &#189;d. being merely the ordinary printed matter
rate), but a comparison with the ordinary parcel post rates
(see Chapter III) will show that if, as there is reason to
believe, those rates are unremunerative, the rates for literature
for the blind must involve a heavy loss on each packet. The
number of packets is, however, only some 300,000 per annum.</p>

<p>Similar low rates are in operation in other countries. In
the United States packets containing matter of this kind are
carried free.</p>

<hr />


<h3>(VI) MINOR RATES IN THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA</h3>

<p>In the United States and Canada a special method of differentiating
rates of postage has been adopted. All postal traffic
is termed "mail matter," and is classified in four groups, to
each of which is applied an appropriate rate. The classification,
which is almost identical in the two countries, is based
partly on the general character of the packets (size, shape,
etc.), but more largely on certain general principles of
administration, and on the intrinsic value of the contents.
Thus the ordinary letter, which is the most important and
valuable traffic, is placed in the first class of mail matter,
and is charged the highest rate. Newspapers and periodicals,
which are regarded as of great importance in aiding the
education and enlightenment of the people, are placed in the<!-- Page 245 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_245" id="Page_245">[Pg 245]</a></span>
second class of mail matter and are given the lowest rate.<a name="FNanchor_527_527" id="FNanchor_527_527"></a><a href="#Footnote_527_527" class="fnanchor">[527]</a>
Books and all other printed matter, commercial papers, postcards,
etc., are regarded as of less importance than letters,
and are deemed to be less entitled to encouragement from the
State in their distribution, but still entitled to preferential
treatment as compared with packets containing miscellaneous
articles. They are accordingly placed in the third class of
mail matter, and are given a rate intermediate between that
of the first class and that of the second. All other articles
sent by post&mdash;the residuum of postal packets&mdash;are placed
together in a fourth class of mail matter, to which is applied
a rate higher than the third-class rate, but considerably
lower than the first-class rate.<a name="FNanchor_528_528" id="FNanchor_528_528"></a><a href="#Footnote_528_528" class="fnanchor">[528]</a></p>

<p>The rates for first-class matter (letters) and second-class
matter (newspapers and periodicals) in the United States
have been dealt with. They may be repeated here for
purposes of comparison: the rate for letters is 1 cent for
each 2 ounces or fraction of 2 ounces; the rate for newspapers
is 1 cent a pound or fraction thereof when sent from
publisher to subscriber&mdash;when sent otherwise the rate is
1 cent for every 4 ounces. On third-class matter the rate
is 1 cent for each 2 ounces or fraction thereof, and on fourth-class
matter the rate is 1 cent for every ounce or fraction
of an ounce. With the view of encouraging agriculture,
seeds, cuttings, bulbs, scions, roots, and plants are given
the same rate as ordinary printed matter in the third class.</p>

<p>In Canada the rate of postage on first-class matter is
2 cents per ounce or fraction of an ounce, except on postcards,
for which the rate is 1 cent, and local or "drop"
letters, on which the rate is also 1 cent (<i lang="la" xml:lang="la">supra</i>, p. <a href="#Page_255">255</a>). On<!-- Page 246 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_246" id="Page_246">[Pg 246]</a></span>
second-class matter the rate is &frac14; cent a pound when posted
by publishers to subscribers, otherwise 1 cent for each
4 ounces or fraction thereof. On general third-class matter
(including samples) the rate is 1 cent for each 2 ounces or
fraction thereof: a special rate of 2 cents for the first 4 ounces
and 1 cent for each additional 4 ounces or fraction thereof
is given for seeds, cuttings, roots, bedding-plants, scions, or
grafts. The object of this privilege is evident. The rate
on fourth-class matter is 1 cent for each ounce or fraction
thereof.</p>

<p>These rates have not been calculated with reference to
the cost of the service in each case. Classification was
introduced in the United States Postal Service as far back as
1863, but until 1906 no attempt had been made to apportion
the total cost between the various classes. The estimate then
made showed that the second-class mail involved a heavy loss,
probably equal to six or seven times the rate of postage.<a name="FNanchor_529_529" id="FNanchor_529_529"></a><a href="#Footnote_529_529" class="fnanchor">[529]</a></p>

<hr />
<p><!-- Page 247 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_247" id="Page_247">[Pg 247]</a></span></p>


<h2>V<br /><br /><br />
LOCAL RATES</h2>


<h3><span class="smcap">United Kingdom</span></h3>

<p>Local postal services, providing for the delivery of local
letters at reduced rates of postage, existed in the United
Kingdom over a long period. The first service was established
in London in 1680. Up to this time the business
of the Post Office had been restricted to the transmission of
letters between the post towns, and no rate of postage existed
except in respect of letters sent over appreciable distances.<a name="FNanchor_530_530" id="FNanchor_530_530"></a><a href="#Footnote_530_530" class="fnanchor">[530]</a>
The idea of a local service seems to have originated with a
Mr. Robert Murray; but the London local post was actually
established by William Dockwra, "a merchant, a Native and
Citizen of London, formerly one of his Majesty's Sub-Searchers
in the Custom House of London." Other citizens
of London were concerned in the undertaking, which was
established without reference to the authorities of the Post
Office, and was intended to be purely a private commercial
undertaking.<a name="FNanchor_531_531" id="FNanchor_531_531"></a><a href="#Footnote_531_531" class="fnanchor">[531]</a></p>

<p>Under Dockwra's scheme London, with Westminster and
the suburbs, was divided into seven districts or "precincts,"
in each of which was a "sorting house." Scattered over
the City and suburbs were from four hundred to five hundred
receiving houses for the taking-in of letters. Messengers
called at the houses for letters every hour. Letters and
parcels not exceeding 1 pound in weight or &#163;10 in value
were accepted and conveyed at the uniform charge of 1d.,
payable in advance.<!-- Page 248 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_248" id="Page_248">[Pg 248]</a></span></p>

<p>The service was not restricted to letters for delivery within
the London area and the surrounding district. Letters which
were to be transmitted through the General Post<a name="FNanchor_532_532" id="FNanchor_532_532"></a><a href="#Footnote_532_532" class="fnanchor">[532]</a> were accepted
at any of the receiving offices, and conveyed to the
General Post Office in Lombard Street; and letters received in
London by the General Post were delivered by the penny
post, if for places outside the General Post delivery.<a name="FNanchor_533_533" id="FNanchor_533_533"></a><a href="#Footnote_533_533" class="fnanchor">[533]</a> This
facility proved of much advantage to the public, and led to a
large increase in the number of General Post letters. When
well established, Dockwra's new system proved profitable
and attracted the attention of the authorities of the General
Post Office. They contended that the service was an infringement
of the monopoly conferred on the Postmasters-General
by the Act of 1660,<a name="FNanchor_534_534" id="FNanchor_534_534"></a><a href="#Footnote_534_534" class="fnanchor">[534]</a> and in 1683, at the instance of
the Duke of York, in whom were vested the profits of the
General Post Office, an action was brought against Dockwra
to restrain him from continuing a breach of the privilege of
the Postmasters-General. Dockwra was ordered by the court
to pay nominal damages, and was forbidden to continue his
penny post.</p>

<p>The post was not, however, abolished, but was taken over
and managed by the Postmasters-General. Although the
service had been decided to fall within their monopoly, the
rates charged rested on no legal authority. No statute
authorized the conveyance anywhere of letters at the rate of
1d. No authority existed for any rate below the minimum
General Post rate of 2d., under the Act of 1660, a state of
affairs which continued until the passing of the Act of 1711.
A penny rate of postage was then fixed for all letters "passing
or repassing by the carriage called the Penny Post, established
and settled within the cities of London and Westminster,
and borough of Southwark, and parts adjacent, and to be
received and delivered within 10 English miles distant from
the General Post Office in London."<a name="FNanchor_535_535" id="FNanchor_535_535"></a><a href="#Footnote_535_535" class="fnanchor">[535]</a> At first the service
had included only the cities of London and Westminster, the<!-- Page 249 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_249" id="Page_249">[Pg 249]</a></span>
borough of Southwark, and the immediate suburbs; but the
residents in the neighbouring towns and villages, recognizing
the advantage of the system, soon asked that it might be
extended to include their respective localities, voluntarily
agreeing to pay an additional penny on delivery, on each
letter. This further charge was at first appropriated by
the messengers as their remuneration; but as the amount
received by them in this way was found to exceed what
might fairly be regarded as reasonable wages, the second
penny was in 1687 made part of the ordinary revenue of
the Post Office. There was, however, no legal authority
for the collection of this additional charge, which remained
a voluntary payment until 1730.<a name="FNanchor_536_536" id="FNanchor_536_536"></a><a href="#Footnote_536_536" class="fnanchor">[536]</a></p>

<p>The limit of weight for packets sent by the penny post
was also extended, parcels of considerable size and weight
being accepted. The rate of postage, however, remained
uniform at a penny. One of the charges against Dockwra
in later years, when he was dismissed from the office of
Comptroller of the Penny Post, to which he had been
appointed under William III, was that he forbade the
taking in of any but very small band-boxes, and all parcels
over 1 pound in weight.<a name="FNanchor_537_537" id="FNanchor_537_537"></a><a href="#Footnote_537_537" class="fnanchor">[537]</a></p>

<p>The penny post was found to be a great convenience to
Londoners and dwellers in the vicinity.<a name="FNanchor_538_538" id="FNanchor_538_538"></a><a href="#Footnote_538_538" class="fnanchor">[538]</a> It facilitated both
local intercourse and, through its connection with the
General Post, general intercourse with all parts of the
country. It was also advantageous in a way which was
not satisfactory to the Postmaster-General. For some years
before its establishment there had been much difficulty from
the evasion of postage resulting from the illicit transmission of
letters. Carriers, especially, made a business of the conveyance
of letters. The difficulty had been so serious that in the reigns<!-- Page 250 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_250" id="Page_250">[Pg 250]</a></span>
both of Charles II and of James II special officers had been
appointed whose duty it was to search any person or vehicle
suspected of carrying clandestine mails. The establishment
of the penny post led to a very large development of this
traffic. Previously, when the carriers arrived with the letters,
there was no means at their disposal for effecting distribution
and delivery within London, other than by themselves
delivering the letters individually, or by employing special
messengers, or, in the last resort, by employing the General
Post, to avoid whose charge was the whole object of entrusting
letters to the carriers. The penny post removed
this difficulty, and the public were not slow to avail themselves
of the opportunity afforded.<a name="FNanchor_539_539" id="FNanchor_539_539"></a><a href="#Footnote_539_539" class="fnanchor">[539]</a></p>

<p>The penny post did not, however, mark the limit of possibility
in the way of cheap postal facilities. In 1708 Charles
Povey established a halfpenny post in London, and found
this low rate profitable. His undertaking, like that of
Dockwra, proved to be an infringement of the monopoly of
the Postmasters-General, and was suppressed within a few
months, although Povey was very reluctant to discontinue
his service.<a name="FNanchor_540_540" id="FNanchor_540_540"></a><a href="#Footnote_540_540" class="fnanchor">[540]</a></p>

<p>The London penny post was for a long period the only local
post in the kingdom. Its advantages were, however, generally
recognized, and the Post Office Act of 1765<a name="FNanchor_541_541" id="FNanchor_541_541"></a><a href="#Footnote_541_541" class="fnanchor">[541]</a> gave to the
Postmasters-General power to establish penny posts in any
town where that course seemed to them expedient. Under
this authority numerous penny posts were established in all
parts of the country. As many as 202 such penny posts were
established between 1830 and 1837. They were established
only when it could be reasonably anticipated that the yield of<!-- Page 251 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_251" id="Page_251">[Pg 251]</a></span>
the penny postage would cover the expenses of the service;
but when once established they were not usually discontinued,
even if the revenue fell below the expenses.<a name="FNanchor_542_542" id="FNanchor_542_542"></a><a href="#Footnote_542_542" class="fnanchor">[542]</a> Like the
London penny post, these local services included the area
surrounding the town in each case. For transmission within
a penny post area the rate of postage was 1d.; for transmission
to another such area the general rate was charged in addition;
and another penny was charged in respect of the second
penny post.</p>

<p>The conveyance of parcels ceased in 1765. The Act of
that year<a name="FNanchor_543_543" id="FNanchor_543_543"></a><a href="#Footnote_543_543" class="fnanchor">[543]</a> forbade the transmission by the penny post of any
packet over 4 ounces in weight unless it had passed, or was
intended afterwards to pass, by the General Post. During
all this period, however, the people of London enjoyed an
efficient postal service which in point of lowness of charges
was in advance of anything they have enjoyed since, unless
the privileges of the postcard and the halfpenny post, that is,
of a rate half the minimum (and only) rate of the penny post,
can be set against the cheap transmission of considerable
packages by the old service.</p>

<p>A further Act of 1794<a name="FNanchor_544_544" id="FNanchor_544_544"></a><a href="#Footnote_544_544" class="fnanchor">[544]</a> empowered the Postmasters-General
at their discretion to extend the limits of the post beyond the
10-mile circle prescribed by the Act of 1711. No additional
postage was imposed on letters delivered beyond the 10-mile
circle. Under the Act of 1730 the charge would be 2d. An
additional rate of 1d. was, however, imposed on all letters
posted within the extended limits and beyond the 10-mile
circle; and also on all letters posted without the original limits
of the penny post and delivered within those limits, i.e. the
cities of London and Westminster, and the borough of Southwark,
with their suburbs. By this Act prepayment of postage,
hitherto compulsory in the penny post, was made optional.</p>

<p>An Act of 1801<a name="FNanchor_545_545" id="FNanchor_545_545"></a><a href="#Footnote_545_545" class="fnanchor">[545]</a> raised to 2d. the rate for letters passing by
the penny post, whether or not they were to pass by the
General Post, within the original limits of the penny post.
For letters passing by the penny post, posted or delivered
outside the original limits, no additional rate was prescribed.<!-- Page 252 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_252" id="Page_252">[Pg 252]</a></span>
The charge was already 2d.; and the rate of postage on letters
passing by the London local post therefore now became
uniformly 2d. Henceforward the service was known as the
"twopenny post."</p>

<p>The Act of 1801 contained an important clause (clause 5) of
general application, providing that the Postmasters-General
might at discretion undertake the conveyance and delivery
of letters "directed to persons abiding in towns, villages, and
places (not being post-towns)," for such sums as might be
agreed upon between the Postmasters-General and the inhabitants.
Under this provision it was found possible to
extend the service to a considerable number of places.<a name="FNanchor_546_546" id="FNanchor_546_546"></a><a href="#Footnote_546_546" class="fnanchor">[546]</a></p>

<p>An Act of 1805<a name="FNanchor_547_547" id="FNanchor_547_547"></a><a href="#Footnote_547_547" class="fnanchor">[547]</a> imposed an additional charge of 1d., making
3d. in all, on letters sent by the twopenny post and not
passing by the General Post, directed to or sent from places
beyond the limits of the General Post delivery; and on every
letter passing by the General Post and directed to places
beyond the limits of the General Post delivery, and delivered
by the twopenny post, an additional charge of 2d.<a name="FNanchor_548_548" id="FNanchor_548_548"></a><a href="#Footnote_548_548" class="fnanchor">[548]</a> There
were now, in reality, two local posts in the London area&mdash;the
twopenny post, for letters transmitted between places within
the limits of the delivery of the General Post; and the threepenny
post, for letters directed to or sent from places within
the limits of the local service, but beyond the limits of the
General Post delivery. In 1831 the limits of delivery of
the twopenny post were extended to include all places
within a radius of 3 miles of the General Post Office;
and in 1833 the limits of the threepenny post were extended
to include all places beyond the 3-mile limit, and not
exceeding 12 miles from the General Post Office.<a name="FNanchor_549_549" id="FNanchor_549_549"></a><a href="#Footnote_549_549" class="fnanchor">[549]</a> No further
modifications of importance were made before the establishment
of uniform penny postage.<!-- Page 253 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_253" id="Page_253">[Pg 253]</a></span></p>

<p>The introduction of a uniform rate of postage for the whole
country of 1d., only half the lowest rate which had been
charged in the London local post, obviously made unnecessary
the continuance of that post, and also of the penny posts
scattered up and down the country; or rather extended to
the whole country the benefit of rates based on items of
local cost only, since the system of uniform postage irrespective
of distance rests on the recognition of the preponderating
cost of the local or terminal services, and the relatively
insignificant cost per letter of the service&mdash;conveyance from
place to place&mdash;which depends on the distance of transmission.</p>

<p>Financially the London penny and twopenny posts were
always successful. Under the penny rate the profits had
approached half the gross receipts&mdash;in 1800 they were 43 per
cent.&mdash;and under the twopenny rate at once rose to more than
60 per cent., in 1825 reaching 67 per cent. The net revenue,
which in 1801 under the penny rate was &#163;16,286, had in 1837
under the twopenny rate risen to &#163;73,334.<a name="FNanchor_550_550" id="FNanchor_550_550"></a><a href="#Footnote_550_550" class="fnanchor">[550]</a></p>


<h3><span class="smcap">Canada</span></h3>

<p>Special local rates have from quite early dates been in
operation in America. If in England the lowest rate fixed for
General Post letters had been found too high to afford reasonable
accommodation for the public in London and other cities,
it may well be imagined that the lowest rate in Canada,
gauged as it was to the needs of a service which should cover<!-- Page 254 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_254" id="Page_254">[Pg 254]</a></span>
a country of vast area and ill-provided with roads, would be
found altogether high for local letters. Moreover, in most
places no sort of delivery service existed. Local letters could
only be placed in the post office to be called for by the persons
to whom they were addressed. In Canada the actual cost of
the conveyance of the mail was consequently disproportionately
high compared with other expenses of the service, and
the justice of a lower rate for such letters as obtained no
benefit from that expenditure naturally suggested itself. The
lowest rate fixed by the Act of 1765 for transmission within
Canada of a single letter was 4d., and, rather than charge such
a rate on local letters, the deputies in Nova Scotia allowed
such letters to be deposited in the post office free.</p>

<p>At Confederation a special rate for local letters of 1 cent
per &frac12; ounce was established. At this time there was still no
authorized house-to-house delivery of letters in any part of
Canada, and local letters were actually what they are always
termed, viz. "drop" letters. They were letters dropped into
the post office letter-box and handed out at the office to the
addressee on application. When in 1875 delivery by letter-carrier
was introduced in certain towns, the drop-letter rate
was not disturbed. It was thought, however, that a postage
charge of 1 cent was not sufficient to cover the cost of the
service of delivery at the place of address, performed by an
expensive establishment of letter-carriers; and in 1889, on that
ground, though much against the wishes of the mercantile
community, the rate was raised to 2 cents an ounce in cities
and towns where the system of delivery by letter-carrier was
established, the existing rate of 1 cent per &frac12; ounce being continued
in other cities and towns.</p>

<p>The ordinary letter rate was still 3 cents. This change
therefore left all local letters with a lower rate than ordinary
letters.<a name="FNanchor_551_551" id="FNanchor_551_551"></a><a href="#Footnote_551_551" class="fnanchor">[551]</a></p>

<p>The 2-cent rate proved to be too high. Much dissatisfaction
resulted, and evasions were constant. In defiance of the<!-- Page 255 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_255" id="Page_255">[Pg 255]</a></span>
law, which conferred on the Postmaster-General the monopoly
of the carriage of letters, merchants made arrangements for
the transmission and delivery by their private messengers of
their letters for local delivery. The evil assumed such proportions
that the suppression of the private carriage of local
letters was deemed out of question, and the Government
concluded that the only satisfactory solution of the difficulty
was the re-introduction of the general 1 cent drop-letter rate.<a name="FNanchor_552_552" id="FNanchor_552_552"></a><a href="#Footnote_552_552" class="fnanchor">[552]</a>
So great was the number of drop letters sent otherwise than
through the Post Office that no actual loss of revenue was
anticipated from a reduction of the rate, which should bring
back those letters to the post. This anticipation was more
than realized. In a very short time after the passing of the
Act of 1898 legalizing the reduction to 1 cent, the gross
revenue from local letters surpassed that obtained under the
2-cent rate.</p>


<h3><span class="smcap">France</span></h3>

<p>In 1658 a local service (<i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">la petite poste</i>) was established in
Paris by M. Velayer. He obtained from the King the exclusive
privilege of erecting letter-boxes, which were opened
three times daily, in various parts of the city,<a name="FNanchor_553_553" id="FNanchor_553_553"></a><a href="#Footnote_553_553" class="fnanchor">[553]</a> and set up
an office in the royal palace at which tickets bearing the
words "Port-pay&#233; le ... du ... de l'an 1653" might be
purchased at the price of a sou. No money was paid to the
letter-carrier by persons posting or receiving letters. A label
was affixed to the letter, which was then delivered without
further charge.<a name="FNanchor_554_554" id="FNanchor_554_554"></a><a href="#Footnote_554_554" class="fnanchor">[554]</a> The service was not a success and was
discontinued.<!-- Page 256 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_256" id="Page_256">[Pg 256]</a></span></p>

<p>In 1759 a local postal service was re-established in Paris
by M. de Chamousset. The new service was avowedly in
imitation of the London penny post. The rate was 2 sous
for a letter not exceeding 1 ounce in weight, delivered in
Paris, and 3 sous if delivered in surrounding villages not
served by the general post. This venture proved more
successful than the earlier service of M. Velayer. At the
outset it employed about two hundred men, and the profits
for the first year were 50,000 livres. But its founder, M.
de Chamousset, met with no better fate than Dockwra, the
founder of its prototype. Such large profits could not escape
the notice of the Government, and the service was taken
over by the King, Chamousset being given a pension of
20,000 livres as its inventor.<a name="FNanchor_555_555" id="FNanchor_555_555"></a><a href="#Footnote_555_555" class="fnanchor">[555]</a> The service was continued,
and its success led to the establishment of similar local
services in other towns&mdash;Bordeaux, Lille, Lyons, Nancy,
Marseilles, Montpellier, Nantes, Rouen, Strasburg, etc.<a name="FNanchor_556_556" id="FNanchor_556_556"></a><a href="#Footnote_556_556" class="fnanchor">[556]</a></p>

<p>The ordinary letter rate in France remained at a moderately
high level until a comparatively late date, and a special
rate for local letters continued until 1878. In that year the
ordinary rate for letters was reduced to 15 centimes, the
level of the existing local rate, and since that time local
letters have enjoyed no special privilege in France.</p>


<h3><span class="smcap">Germany</span></h3>

<p>In Germany the delivery of local letters in towns was for a
long period conducted as a private undertaking of the postmaster
or letter-carrier. Between 1842 and 1852 it was made<!-- Page 257 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_257" id="Page_257">[Pg 257]</a></span>
a branch of the general postal service, and the delivery charge
(<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Ortsbestellgeld</i>), which, in general, had been retained by the
letter-carrier as wages, was, in the latter year, made payable
to the general revenue. An arrangement was also made for
the acceptance and delivery of local letters, at the rate of
1 sgr.<a name="FNanchor_557_557" id="FNanchor_557_557"></a><a href="#Footnote_557_557" class="fnanchor">[557]</a> If the letters were called for at the post office (and
the service of delivery at the house therefore not performed)
the rate was reduced to &frac12; sgr.; and when one person posted
as many as one hundred local letters at the same time,
the rate for each letter was no more than 4&frac12; pf. (reduced in
1860 to 4 pf.), including delivery at residence. When as
many as fifty were posted at one time, the rate was reduced
to &frac12; sgr. By a regulation of the 21st December 1860
the limit of weight for the single letter was, however,
raised to &frac12; pound, and a rate of 2 sgr. imposed on heavier
letters, but the rates were not otherwise materially changed.
The law of 16th September 1862 abolished the delivery fee
on ordinary letters. In 1865<a name="FNanchor_558_558" id="FNanchor_558_558"></a><a href="#Footnote_558_558" class="fnanchor">[558]</a> the rate for local packets
of printed matter was reduced to 4 pf.</p>

<p>When, at the foundation of the North German Union in
1867, the postal rates were reorganized, the question of
the local rates proved to be one of some little difficulty,
since the existing rates differed very considerably in the
different parts of the Union. The Prussian rates were
high as compared with the rates in some other States;
and any rate which could be applied generally was likely
to represent a considerable reduction of the Prussian rates,
but a considerable increase of the rates in other States.
The reorganization of the local rates was consequently
delayed. After much discussion a new local rate for places
in the former Prussian postal territory (excepting Berlin
and Hamburg) was established:<a name="FNanchor_559_559" id="FNanchor_559_559"></a><a href="#Footnote_559_559" class="fnanchor">[559]</a> for ordinary letters &frac12; sgr.,
for printed matter and samples ? sgr. In Hanover the
local letter rate was made ? sgr.; in Brunswick &frac14; sgr.;
and in Cassel, Erfurt, Frankfort-on-Main, and Hamburg
similar rates were established.<a name="FNanchor_560_560" id="FNanchor_560_560"></a><a href="#Footnote_560_560" class="fnanchor">[560]</a></p>

<p>From the 1st January 1875 a uniform rate of 5 pf. for<!-- Page 258 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_258" id="Page_258">[Pg 258]</a></span>
local letters was introduced throughout the Imperial postal
territory. The rate was irrespective of weight, but there
was a maximum limit of 250 grammes. All other local
packets (postcards, printed matter, and samples) were subject
to the ordinary rates of postage. No special local rate
was fixed for parcels: the lowest zone rate was payable,
and was, of course, in effect a local rate. The general
application of the new letter rate would, in certain cases,
have resulted in increased rates, and in those cases (Constance,
Darmstadt, and Karlsruhe) a rate of 3 pf.&mdash;the
equivalent of the previously existing rate&mdash;was established.
In Berlin, in view of the specially expensive arrangements
for the delivery of letters, the rate of 10 pf. for local letters
remained in force.<a name="FNanchor_561_561" id="FNanchor_561_561"></a><a href="#Footnote_561_561" class="fnanchor">[561]</a></p>

<p>For the delivery of local parcels no charge had previously
been made beyond the rate of local postage, although in
respect of all packets from outside a delivery charge was
collected. From the 1st January 1875, however, local parcels
were made liable to a delivery charge.<a name="FNanchor_562_562" id="FNanchor_562_562"></a><a href="#Footnote_562_562" class="fnanchor">[562]</a> In general, the local
rates introduced on the 1st January 1875 remained for more
than a quarter of a century unchanged, but in course of time
difficulties in their administration developed. The order of
the 18th December 1874 had prescribed a special local rate
for letters only; for all other kinds of postal traffic the
ordinary rates remained applicable. Consequently, a local
postcard was charged the same postage as a letter weighing
250 grammes; similarly the rates for printed matter or
samples for local delivery were high when compared with
the rate for local letters. Such rates were, moreover,
anomalous when compared with the rates for long-distance
traffic, which, for postcards, printed matter, and samples, were
much less than for letters. In fact, for local delivery printed
matter and samples had only to be placed in sealed covers
in order to pass at the rate of 5 pf.</p>

<p>In many of the larger towns the delivery of local letters was
undertaken by private enterprise at rates much lower than
those of the Imperial Post Office. The undertakings secured
a very large proportion of the local traffic, and found even<!-- Page 259 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_259" id="Page_259">[Pg 259]</a></span>
these low rates very profitable. Moreover, the large increase
in the number of post offices, and the withdrawal of numerous
places from the areas assigned to certain offices, had led, in
many cases, to great difficulties in deciding whether letters
were subject to the general or the local rate of postage.<a name="FNanchor_563_563" id="FNanchor_563_563"></a><a href="#Footnote_563_563" class="fnanchor">[563]</a></p>

<p>The regulations governing local traffic were accordingly
revised under the law of the 20th December 1899. Local
rates were considerably reduced in amount, and were made
applicable to all traffic passing between a town area and
the neighbouring area (<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Nachbarorts-Verkehr</i>),<a name="FNanchor_564_564" id="FNanchor_564_564"></a><a href="#Footnote_564_564" class="fnanchor">[564]</a> by which the
advantage of these rates was greatly extended. In order to
enable the Post Office adequately to fulfil its public functions,
as the phrase went, it was thought necessary, in view of the
development of the private undertakings, to confer upon it the
exclusive right to deal with local traffic. At first the proposal
was to extend the monopoly only to closed letters, but
the Reichstag widened the prohibition, and forbade private
undertakings to conduct arrangements for the transmission of
letters, sealed or unsealed, postcards, printed matter, or
samples addressed to particular persons.<a name="FNanchor_565_565" id="FNanchor_565_565"></a><a href="#Footnote_565_565" class="fnanchor">[565]</a></p>

<p>The traffic left open to private enterprise, viz. the delivery
of unaddressed open letters, parcels, newspapers, and magazines,
was regarded by most of the proprietors as insufficient
to warrant the continuance of their undertakings,
and on the 1st April 1900 almost all the private establishments
of this kind were discontinued. The proprietors were,
however, compensated by the State for the loss of their
profits.<a name="FNanchor_566_566" id="FNanchor_566_566"></a><a href="#Footnote_566_566" class="fnanchor">[566]</a> The first undertaking of this kind had been
established in Berlin in the 'seventies, under the title <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Brief-&nbsp;
und Druckschriften-Expedition</i>. Its success led to the
establishment in Berlin and various other places of similar<!-- Page 260 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_260" id="Page_260">[Pg 260]</a></span>
undertakings, some of which were profitable, but most of
which were unsuccessful. The cheaper rates, however,
attracted a considerable volume of traffic, and at the time
of their suppression some seventy-seven such undertakings
were in existence. Most of them were not of long standing,
only fourteen of the seventy-seven having been founded in the
'eighties, forty having been founded in the years 1895-6-7, in
a period of speculation resulting from the high dividends
paid by the Berliner Packetfahrt-Aktiengesellschaft. The
size of the undertakings varied largely. In some cases the
whole business was conducted by the members of a family;
in others as many as a hundred men were employed; and in
the case of the Berliner Packetfahrt-Aktiengesellschaft the
letter traffic alone employed a thousand men. The amount
of traffic dealt with was considerable, and large additions
to the postal staff were found necessary.<a name="FNanchor_567_567" id="FNanchor_567_567"></a><a href="#Footnote_567_567" class="fnanchor">[567]</a> Some of the
employees of the private establishments were taken over by
the Imperial Postal Administration, and a sum of 1&frac12; million
marks was paid as compensation to employees who were not
taken over.</p>

<p>Although special provision had been made in the statute
with regard to the amount of compensation to be paid to
the proprietors, the determination of the actual amount was
a matter of some difficulty, owing largely to the unsatisfactory
and unreliable manner in which the accounts of
many of the undertakings had been kept.<a name="FNanchor_568_568" id="FNanchor_568_568"></a><a href="#Footnote_568_568" class="fnanchor">[568]</a> In several cases
also the owners asked exorbitant amounts.</p>

<p>After much negotiation the sum to be paid was finally
decided. It amounted to some six million marks. In order
to get rid of the private establishments for the handling of
private letters, etc., the Imperial Administration therefore
paid in all (i.e. including the compensation to the employees
of the private undertakings) a sum of about 7&frac12; million
marks.<a name="FNanchor_569_569" id="FNanchor_569_569"></a><a href="#Footnote_569_569" class="fnanchor">[569]</a><!-- Page 261 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_261" id="Page_261">[Pg 261]</a></span></p>

<p>The new rates were as follow<a name="FNanchor_570_570" id="FNanchor_570_570"></a><a href="#Footnote_570_570" class="fnanchor">[570]</a>:&mdash;</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="German Imperial Post Office local postage rates from 1900.">
<tr><td align="left" colspan="6">(<i>a</i>) Letters&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; &emsp;</td><td align="right" colspan="2">Not exceeding</td><td align="right">250</td><td align="left">grammes in weight</td><td align="right">5 pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="5">(<i>b</i>) Postcards</td><td align="right">2 pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="6">(<i>c</i>) Printed matter&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; &emsp;</td><td align="right" colspan="2">Not exceeding</td><td align="right">50</td><td align="left">grammes</td><td align="right">2 pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; &emsp;</td><td align="right">50</td><td align="left">grammes to</td><td align="right">100</td><td align="left"><span class="ditto">"</span></td><td align="right">3 pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; &emsp;</td><td align="right">100</td><td align="left"><span class="ditto">"</span></td><td align="right">250</td><td align="left"><span class="ditto">"</span></td><td align="right">5 pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; &emsp;</td><td align="right">250</td><td align="left"><span class="ditto">"</span></td><td align="right">500</td><td align="left"><span class="ditto">"</span></td><td align="right">10 pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; &emsp;</td><td align="right">500</td><td align="left"><span class="ditto">"</span></td><td align="right">1,000</td><td align="left"><span class="ditto">"</span></td><td align="right">15 pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="6">(<i>d</i>) Commercial papers&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; &emsp;</td><td align="right" colspan="2">Not exceeding</td><td align="right">250</td><td align="left">grammes</td><td align="right">5 pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; &emsp;</td><td align="right">250</td><td align="left">grammes to</td><td align="right">500</td><td align="left"><span class="ditto">"</span></td><td align="right">10 pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; &emsp;</td><td align="right">500</td><td align="left"><span class="ditto">"</span></td><td align="right">1,000</td><td align="left"><span class="ditto">"</span></td><td align="right">15 pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="6">(<i>e</i>) Samples&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; &emsp;</td><td align="right" colspan="2">Not exceeding</td><td align="right">250</td><td align="left">grammes</td><td align="right">5 pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; &emsp;</td><td align="right">250</td><td align="left">grammes to</td><td align="right">350</td><td align="left"><span class="ditto">"</span></td><td align="right">10 pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="6">(<i>f</i>) Mixed packages of (<i>c</i>), (<i>d</i>), and (<i>e</i>)&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; &emsp;</td><td align="right" colspan="2">Not exceeding</td><td align="right">250</td><td align="left">grammes</td><td align="right">5 pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; &emsp;</td><td align="right">250</td><td align="left">grammes to</td><td align="right">500</td><td align="left"><span class="ditto">"</span></td><td align="right">10 pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; &emsp;</td><td align="right">500</td><td align="left"><span class="ditto">"</span></td><td align="right">1,000</td><td align="left"><span class="ditto">"</span></td><td align="right">15 pf.</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>These rates applied throughout the Imperial postal territory,
including Berlin, which thus for the first time obtained
the advantage of local rates; and in 1902 they were extended
to all places which had a post office for only part of the
year, such as small watering-places, summer resorts, and
beauty spots.<a name="FNanchor_571_571" id="FNanchor_571_571"></a><a href="#Footnote_571_571" class="fnanchor">[571]</a></p>

<p>The result of the reduced rates was not satisfactory financially.
It was not, of course, possible to calculate with any
exactness the actual cost of the service performed by the
Post Office in respect of local traffic; but such estimates as
the administration were able to make tended to show that
the cost exceeded the revenue, and that the local business
was therefore conducted at some loss.<a name="FNanchor_572_572" id="FNanchor_572_572"></a><a href="#Footnote_572_572" class="fnanchor">[572]</a> Consequently, when
in 1906 Imperial requirements made it necessary to obtain
an increased revenue from the Post Office, the administration
placed the burden on the local traffic, although not
without some opposition in the Reichstag. On the 1st July
1906 the rates for local traffic, with the exception of the<!-- Page 262 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_262" id="Page_262">[Pg 262]</a></span>
rate for local letters, were made the same as the general
rates for transmission throughout the Imperial postal
territory.</p>

<p>The rate for letters remained as formerly, 5 pf. for letters
not exceeding 250 grammes in weight.<a name="FNanchor_573_573" id="FNanchor_573_573"></a><a href="#Footnote_573_573" class="fnanchor">[573]</a></p>

<hr />
<p><!-- Page 263 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_263" id="Page_263">[Pg 263]</a></span></p>


<h2>VI<br /><br /><br />
INTERNATIONAL RATES</h2>


<h3>(I) INTERNATIONAL LETTER POST</h3>

<p>The adoption in numerous countries of the principle of
uniformity of rate for inland postal traffic, and the enormous
simplification of the system of rates and of their practical
administration which it achieved, led naturally to an endeavour
to effect a like simplification of the rates for postal
traffic exchanged between the various countries. The rates in
operation varied enormously, not only as between different
countries, but frequently in respect of letters passing between
the same two countries.<a name="FNanchor_574_574" id="FNanchor_574_574"></a><a href="#Footnote_574_574" class="fnanchor">[574]</a><!-- Page 264 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_264" id="Page_264">[Pg 264]</a></span></p>

<p>The arrangements for the exchange of such traffic between
different countries had been conducted under conventions and
agreements entered into by the countries immediately concerned,
and the rates to be charged were prescribed by these
conventions or agreements. Foreign rates were often built
up by the addition of a rate for the transmission abroad
to the ordinary rate chargeable for the inland transmission.
The fact that numerous rates were chargeable for one and
the same letter in respect of its transmission within the same
country thus naturally made the rates charged for transmission
abroad likewise numerous. In many cases there
was an additional variation in the rate of postage between
two countries according as one or other route was followed.
And not only were the international rates of postage high
and complicated. The methods employed for accounting
between the countries respectively concerned in regard to
the proceeds of postage on international letters were equally
complicated and burdensome.</p>

<p>In 1850 the necessity for some simplification of the
arrangements for the interchange of correspondence led to
the formation of the Austro-German Postal Union by Prussia
and Austria. The chief feature of the arrangement was the
adoption of a common rate of postage for the whole territory
of the Union, moderate in amount, and based on a small
number of zones of distances. The advantages resulting
from the Union were soon apparent. Other German States<!-- Page 265 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_265" id="Page_265">[Pg 265]</a></span>
joined, and within a short time the question of extending
it to foreign countries was mooted. At a Conference held
in Berlin in 1851, a general European Postal Union was
adumbrated.</p>

<p>The first definite suggestion for the general re-organization
of international postal traffic on a common basis came,
however, from America. In 1863, Mr. Blair, Postmaster-General
of the United States, in a note to the postal administrations
of the world, suggested the assembling of a Congress
representative of all nations for the discussion of the subject.
The proposal was favourably received by fifteen administrations,<a name="FNanchor_575_575" id="FNanchor_575_575"></a><a href="#Footnote_575_575" class="fnanchor">[575]</a>
representing nine-tenths of the commerce and
nineteen-twentieths of the correspondence of the world.
The representatives of these administrations (with the exception
of Ecuador) met at Paris in May 1863.</p>

<p>The Conference was not empowered to enter into any
definite arrangement for the amelioration of the system of
international postal traffic. Its function was simply to discuss
and proclaim general principles applicable to the conduct of
the traffic, with a view to their ultimate adoption by the
nations of the world. The discussions centred on the three
fundamental questions of uniformity of weights, uniformity of
rate, and simplification of accounting.<a name="FNanchor_576_576" id="FNanchor_576_576"></a><a href="#Footnote_576_576" class="fnanchor">[576]</a> Thirty-one articles of
agreement were adopted.<a name="FNanchor_577_577" id="FNanchor_577_577"></a><a href="#Footnote_577_577" class="fnanchor">[577]</a> These articles recommended, <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">inter
alia</i>, the adoption for ordinary letters of a unit of weight and
a progression of weight of 15 grammes; and for corrected
proofs, samples, and documents not in the nature of a letter,
a unit and progression of 40 grammes. The Conference was
convinced that transit charges were often an invincible
obstacle to the establishment of a really advantageous international
system, and recommended that the transit rate for
each country should never exceed half the postage reckoned at
the inland rate of the country traversed, and that for small<!-- Page 266 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_266" id="Page_266">[Pg 266]</a></span>
countries it should be even less. For sea transit the
Conference recommended that in no case should the charge
against an administration in respect of such transport
be greater than the actual charge made on the country of
destination by the shipping agency by whom the mails were
conveyed.</p>

<p>Although its conclusions were without the sanction of
authority, the Conference was nevertheless of great assistance
to the development of an international system. It brought
into prominence the obstacles in the way of international
postal intercourse, and the difficulties which must be removed
before a common system could be founded. And it formulated
general principles which might with advantage be observed in
the making of fresh agreements between individual countries,
and might serve as a basis for a common agreement. Its conclusions
were, as a matter of fact, so used in numerous
instances.</p>

<p>Towards the end of 1868 Dr. von Stephan, of the postal
administration of the North German Union, published in
the official journal of the Union a definite project for a
postal union between all civilized nations, and proposed a
discussion of the project at a universal Congress. The
proposal was taken up by the administration of the North
German Union. The diplomatic arrangements for calling a
Conference were, however, interrupted by the Franco-German
War of 1870. After the conclusion of peace, the
proposal was again taken up, and the Swiss Government
undertook the task of inviting the administrations of the
chief countries to send representatives to a Congress at
Berne. The invitation was readily accepted, and the Congress
met in 1874.</p>

<p>The proposal submitted to the Conference was that the
Union should cover the following categories of postal
traffic:&mdash;</p>

<p>
(1) Letters.<br />
(2) Postcards.<br />
(3) Newspapers and other printed matter.<br />
(4) Samples.<br />
(5) Commercial papers.<br />
</p>

<p>Each contracting State should fix its own international<!-- Page 267 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_267" id="Page_267">[Pg 267]</a></span>
rates, under the limitation that for letters the rate should
not exceed 4d., or 40 centimes; and for newspapers or other
printed matter, for samples or commercial papers, should
not be less than 1d., or 10 centimes. There should be no
division of postage, but each State should retain the postage
which it collected. Each State should give liberty of transit,
and transit charges should be abolished, except in the case
of extraordinary charges or services.<a name="FNanchor_578_578" id="FNanchor_578_578"></a><a href="#Footnote_578_578" class="fnanchor">[578]</a></p>

<p>The proposals which gave rise to most discussion were
those for the establishment of a uniform rate, and for the
gratuitous transit of mails across the territory of intermediate
countries. The vast number of rates actually existing
was made an argument in favour of the uniform rate;
and a low rate was recommended on the ground that it
was well known that, although low rates imposed a temporary
monetary loss, they were in a broad view profitable to
the finances of the State.<a name="FNanchor_579_579" id="FNanchor_579_579"></a><a href="#Footnote_579_579" class="fnanchor">[579]</a> It was urged that as all rates
were already tending to equality, the Congress, by establishing
uniformity, would only be advancing by a few years an
existing tendency. The principle of uniformity of rate and
of weight was adopted unanimously, the rate of charge being
fixed at 25 centimes, and the unit of weight, and progression
in the scale of weight, at 15 grammes. The rate of charge,
25 centimes (with the reservations<a name="FNanchor_580_580" id="FNanchor_580_580"></a><a href="#Footnote_580_580" class="fnanchor">[580]</a>), was arrived at by
consideration of the case of the most unfavourably situated
country as regards conditions of transit, viz. a case in which
there would be five intermediate countries, and consequently
five transit rates. As most, if not all, of the countries
represented had already adopted inland penny postage, this
rate, assuming 10 centimes (or 1d.) to be a reasonable charge
for the inland service at both ends, left 15 centimes (1&#189;d.)<!-- Page 268 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_268" id="Page_268">[Pg 268]</a></span>
to cover the cost of transmission from country of origin
to country of destination; and there was in addition the
optional margin up to 32 centimes which might be taken
advantage of, if a charge of 25 centimes was thought by
any administration to be too little. A proviso was added
that for all sea transits exceeding 300 nautical miles a
surtax not exceeding half the general rate of the Union
might be added to the postage charge, whether for letters,
samples, printed matter, or commercial papers.</p>

<p>A reduced rate for commercial papers, samples of
merchandise, newspapers, books, pamphlets, catalogues, etc.,
was adopted without discussion, the delegates no doubt basing
their action on the existence of similar reduced rates in many
countries. The minimum rate for such packets was fixed
at 7 centimes, and the unit of weight and the progression
of weight at 50 grammes. The maximum weight for
samples was fixed at 250 grammes, and that for other
articles at 1,000 grammes. A proposal to increase the weight
for samples was opposed by Dr. von Stephan on the ground
that it would cause practical inconvenience in the post
offices.</p>

<p>M. Radoikovitch, the Serbian delegate, proposed a modification
of the progression of rate. He suggested that the packets
should be divided into two categories&mdash;those not exceeding
300 grammes, and those over 300 grammes in weight. For
the lighter packets he proposed a progression of 50 grammes,
and for the heavier packets a greater progression. For the
sake of simplicity it was considered preferable to retain the
single progression, and the proposal, which met with no
support, was withdrawn.<a name="FNanchor_581_581" id="FNanchor_581_581"></a><a href="#Footnote_581_581" class="fnanchor">[581]</a> All packets (samples, etc.) sent at
the lower rate must be sent under band or in open envelopes,
or made up in such a way as to admit of their being easily
examined.<a name="FNanchor_582_582" id="FNanchor_582_582"></a><a href="#Footnote_582_582" class="fnanchor">[582]</a></p>

<p>The proposal for gratuity of transit was advanced with a
view to simplification of the administration of the Union. Its
adoption would have made all countries independent, so far
as expenses and accounting were concerned, of intermediate
countries, and would have assisted the adoption of a low<!-- Page 269 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_269" id="Page_269">[Pg 269]</a></span>
rate of postage. It was, however, resolutely opposed by
those countries which, owing to their geographical situation
and the means of communication which they controlled, were
called upon to serve as intermediaries to a special degree.
The case of Belgium was of particular importance. It
naturally resulted from her situation that she was called upon
to perform for other countries a transit business much greater
than that performed by other countries for Belgium. The
net revenue accruing to the Belgian administration from this
source was very considerable.<a name="FNanchor_583_583" id="FNanchor_583_583"></a><a href="#Footnote_583_583" class="fnanchor">[583]</a> France and Italy were in a
somewhat similar position, mainly owing to the transmission
of the mails between England and India by the overland
route. France rejected entirely the principle of gratuitous
transit.</p>

<p>It was feared that if an administration derived no benefit
from transit traffic it might be led to discourage it, to the
detriment of general facilities for the transmission of mails,
and the Congress arrived at the conclusion that some method
of specially remunerating all countries for transit services
ought to be devised. A simple reservation as regards special
expenses caused by transit traffic was objected to on the
ground that in most cases the international traffic was forwarded
by the ordinary means and no special expense was
caused&mdash;the real causes of Post Office expenses being the
services of despatch and delivery.<a name="FNanchor_584_584" id="FNanchor_584_584"></a><a href="#Footnote_584_584" class="fnanchor">[584]</a> Indeed, it was contended
on this ground that the transit of international mails could not
be regarded as a service rendered.</p>

<p>Agreement was reached on most of the points raised by the
proposals, and a Convention constituting an International
Postal Union, under the title "L'Union g&#233;n&#233;rale des Postes,"<a name="FNanchor_585_585" id="FNanchor_585_585"></a><a href="#Footnote_585_585" class="fnanchor">[585]</a><!-- Page 270 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_270" id="Page_270">[Pg 270]</a></span>
was signed on the 9th October 1874, to become operative on
the 1st July 1875. The chief provisions of the Convention in
regard to the rates of postage were as follows:&mdash;</p>

<div class="blockquot"><p>(1) The rate of postage for the Union was fixed&mdash;</p>

<p>(<i>a</i>) At 25 centimes for single letters, with liberty for each country, as might
be necessary on account of its monetary system or for other reasons, to fix a
higher or lower rate, provided that such rate was not greater than 32 centimes,
and not less than 20 centimes.</p>

<p>The unit of weight for a single letter was fixed at 15 grammes, and the scale
of progression was by steps of 15 grammes.</p>

<p>(<i>b</i>) For postcards, half the rate for letters.</p>

<p>(<i>c</i>) For printed matter, samples, and commercial papers the unit rate was
fixed at 7 centimes, with liberty for each country to fix a rate not exceeding
11 centimes or less than 5 centimes.</p>

<p>The unit weight was fixed at 50 grammes, and the progression of weight was
by steps of 50 grammes. The maximum limit of weight for samples was fixed
at 250 grammes, and for printed matter and commercial papers at 1,000
grammes.<a name="FNanchor_586_586" id="FNanchor_586_586"></a><a href="#Footnote_586_586" class="fnanchor">[586]</a></p>

<p>(2) In cases where letters were forwarded by sea for distances over 300 miles,
a surtax not exceeding half the general Union rate of prepaid postage might be
added to the normal rate.</p>

<p>(3) The proposal as to the division of postage was accepted, with slight
amplification.</p>

<p>(4) Transit payments, that is, rates of payment by one administration to
another administration in respect of the transmission of closed mails over the
territory of the second administration by means which it provided, were fixed at
2 fr. per kilogramme for mails containing letters and postcards, and 25 centimes
per kilogramme for mails containing other articles. The rates were increased to
4 fr. and to 50 centimes, respectively, when the distance of transmission
exceeded 750 kilometres on the territory of one administration. In the case
of sea transits exceeding 300 nautical miles, the despatching country was
required to pay to the administration which provided the service, the expenses
of the transportation, not exceeding 6 fr. 50 per kilogramme for letters and
50 centimes per kilogramme for other articles.</p></div>

<p>In November 1875 the Indian Post Office administration
applied for admission to the Union. A further Conference at
Berne was thereupon called to consider this request. Representatives
of a large majority of the signatories of the Treaty
of 1874 attended the Conference, and other questions were
raised. France, Spain, and Holland asked for the admission of
their respective colonies; Brazil submitted a declaration of
adhesion; and Great Britain intimated that Canada and<!-- Page 271 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_271" id="Page_271">[Pg 271]</a></span>
Newfoundland would submit applications. The original Union
had been limited to the European countries, Turkey (including
Turkey-in-Asia), Russia-in-Asia, Northern Africa, Egypt, and
the United States of America; and these further developments
widened the problem before the Congress. Instead of merely
considering the question of admitting India, it was called upon
to face the possible extension of the Union to the remotest
parts of the globe.</p>

<p>The question of transit rates, particularly of transit rates
by sea, became therefore one of very great importance and
difficulty, since it was necessary to fix such rates as would
permit of the maintenance of that uniformity and lowness of
the rates of postage which were the fundamental bases of the
Union. On this point there were prolonged and difficult discussions.
The French delegates submitted a proposal for the
application of the treaty of Berne to all quarters of the globe,
with a uniform transit rate of 6 fr. 50 per kilogramme for
letters and 50 centimes for printed matter, etc.<a name="FNanchor_587_587" id="FNanchor_587_587"></a><a href="#Footnote_587_587" class="fnanchor">[587]</a></p>

<p>The countries which maintained the more important and
costly maritime services were not, however, prepared to submit
to the loss of revenue which the adoption of the proposed
transit rates would entail.<a name="FNanchor_588_588" id="FNanchor_588_588"></a><a href="#Footnote_588_588" class="fnanchor">[588]</a></p>

<p>Germany submitted a scheme for classifying all countries
of the world outside the Union into four groups with four
graduated maritime transit rates of 6 fr. 50, 25 fr., 40 fr. and
60 fr. per kilogramme, respectively, for letters, and 50 centimes,
1 fr., 1 fr., and 2 fr. per kilogramme for printed matter, etc.,<a name="FNanchor_589_589" id="FNanchor_589_589"></a><a href="#Footnote_589_589" class="fnanchor">[589]</a>
a proposal which was opposed as contrary to the fundamental<!-- Page 272 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_272" id="Page_272">[Pg 272]</a></span>
principle of uniformity, and calculated to give rise
to difficulties and complications. Moreover, the zones, being
reckoned as from Europe, were not applicable as between
the distant countries themselves, e.g. between Mexico and the
West Indies.<a name="FNanchor_590_590" id="FNanchor_590_590"></a><a href="#Footnote_590_590" class="fnanchor">[590]</a></p>

<p>The Conference was able to arrive at an agreement only
as regards the admission of British India and the French
Colonies in Asia, Africa, America and the Pacific. The entry
of these territories was fixed for the 1st July 1876, and
the general international rates of postage and transit rates,
fixed under the Convention of 1874, were made applicable to
the new territories of the Union, except that for transit by
sea for distances exceeding 300 nautical miles a surtax equal
to the full postage rates (32 centimes and 11 centimes) was
authorized, instead of a surtax of half rates fixed under the
original treaty; and the transit rates in respect of mails for
or from these territories for distances of more than 300
nautical miles were made 25 fr. per kilogramme for letters
and postcards, and 1 fr. per kilogramme for printed matter,
samples, and commercial papers.</p>

<p>The later Congresses have added numerous services to those
provided under the original scheme, such as, e.g., reply-paid
postcards. For the most part, however, these additional
services are of minor importance, and concern only a small
part of the international traffic,<a name="FNanchor_591_591" id="FNanchor_591_591"></a><a href="#Footnote_591_591" class="fnanchor">[591]</a> the bulk of which still passes
under the main divisions established at the first Congress.</p>

<p>In connection with the rates applied to those classes of
the traffic there are three chief points of importance&mdash;the
initial charge, the scale of weights, and the transit rates.
The question of modifying the international letter rate,
which had remained unchanged since the foundation of the
Union, was raised at the Washington Congress in 1897.
The Austrian delegate proposed, not indeed that the initial
charge should be reduced below 25 centimes, but that the
maximum weight allowed for the single letter should be
increased from 15 grammes to 20 grammes. The British and<!-- Page 273 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_273" id="Page_273">[Pg 273]</a></span>
French delegates opposed the proposal.<a name="FNanchor_592_592" id="FNanchor_592_592"></a><a href="#Footnote_592_592" class="fnanchor">[592]</a> The French delegates
said it would involve a loss of more than a million francs to
their administration. In some cases, e.g., Italy, the raising of
the limit would have had the effect of rendering the international
service cheaper than the internal service. In the end
the proposal was rejected.</p>

<p>The subject of transit rates, which had not been seriously
considered since the first Congress, was also raised at the
Congress of Washington (1897), two proposals in regard to it,
by Germany and by Austria-Hungary respectively, being
under discussion. In the original project of the Union,
gratuitous transit had been proposed, with the reservation
that remuneration should be paid in cases of special expenses
occasioned to an intermediary by the transit of foreign mails.
The new German proposal was for the abolition of all transit
payments except in those cases where, according to the
statistics of the international service, a payment of more than
50,000 fr. a year was due, and in those cases the actual amount
due to be reduced by 25 per cent., or at least by 50,000 fr.; to
make the amount payable only by those countries whose share
exceeded 10,000 fr.; and the reduction of the maritime transit
rate from 15 fr. to 10 fr. This proposal was avowedly a
step towards completely gratuitous territorial transit. The
Austrian proposal was for gratuitous transit for all correspondence
sent <i>&#224; d&#233;couvert</i>, and a reduction of the transit rates
for closed mails. Gratuitous transit, to which, as already
stated, the German proposal admittedly tended, was advocated
by the delegates of the South American countries, but was
opposed by several other countries, especially by Belgium,
France, and Italy. As at the first Congress, the delegates of<!-- Page 274 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_274" id="Page_274">[Pg 274]</a></span>
the latter countries called attention to the great expense to
which they were put in providing transport for transit mails,
and rejected altogether the idea of gratuitous transit. In face
of this opposition, the proposals could not be carried in their
entirety. The transit rates were, however, considerably
reduced, and simplifications in the method of ascertaining the
amounts payable in respect of transit were introduced. The
land rates were reduced from 2 fr. per kilogramme for letters
and postcards and 25 centimes per kilogramme for other
articles, to 1 fr. 90 and to 23&frac34; centimes for the years 1899
and 1900, to 1 fr. 80 and to 22&frac12; centimes for the years 1901
and 1902, and to 1 fr. 70 and to 21&frac14; centimes for and after
1903. The maritime transit rates were similarly reduced.
Countries whose expenses for the transit of foreign mails
exceeded the receipts, and those whose combined receipts and
expenses for that purpose did not exceed 5,000 fr. per year,
were excused all payment under this head.</p>

<p>At the next Congress, held at Rome in 1906, the question
of reducing the letter rate and transit rates was again discussed.
Proposals to raise the limit of weight for single
letters from 15 grammes to 20 grammes were submitted by
several States. It was pointed out that, although in general
sufficient, the limit of 15 grammes was often exceeded, and
frequently the weight of letters required to be tested, causing
inconvenience both to the public and the postal administrations.
The German delegate expressed the opinion that the
public were anticipating some concession, and that as reduction
of the initial rate of 25 centimes was impossible, an increased
limit of weight would no doubt be appreciated.<a name="FNanchor_593_593" id="FNanchor_593_593"></a><a href="#Footnote_593_593" class="fnanchor">[593]</a> The British
delegates pointed out that the equivalent of 20 grammes
in British weight was ? or &frac34; ounce, a unit which
would be highly inconvenient and could not be adopted.
They would have accepted a limit of 30 grammes; but in
many countries the existing limit of weight for the initial
letter rate in the inland service was 20 grammes, and the
introduction of a higher initial weight in the international
service might lead to difficulties in the case of those administrations
which desired to retain the lower limit in the
inland service. On these grounds they inclined to the<!-- Page 275 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_275" id="Page_275">[Pg 275]</a></span>
maintenance of the <i>status quo</i>. The delegates of the United
States, Italy, and Turkey supported the British view. The
Italian delegates pointed out that the result would in effect
be to compel those countries in which the limit was
15 grammes to introduce modifications into their internal
service&mdash;a position which it was obviously undesirable for
the Congress to take up. Japan advocated the maintenance
of the existing limit, because the effect of raising it would
be to render further reduction of transit rates still more
difficult. In the end the proposal was adopted by thirteen
votes against twelve.<a name="FNanchor_594_594" id="FNanchor_594_594"></a><a href="#Footnote_594_594" class="fnanchor">[594]</a> Countries using the avoirdupois system
were to regard 1 ounce as the initial weight limit.</p>

<p>Gratuitous transit was still unacceptable to the majority,<a name="FNanchor_595_595" id="FNanchor_595_595"></a><a href="#Footnote_595_595" class="fnanchor">[595]</a>
but both land and sea charges were reduced. The land transit
rates were reduced to 1 fr. 50 per kilogramme for letters and
postcards and 20 centimes per kilogramme for other articles,
for distances not exceeding 3,000 kilometres; to 3 fr. per
kilogramme for letters and postcards and 40 centimes per
kilogramme for other articles, for distances between 3,000 and
6,000 kilometres; to 4 fr. 50 per kilogramme for letters and
postcards and 60 centimes per kilogramme for other articles,
for distances between 6,000 kilometres and 9,000 kilometres;
and to 6 fr. per kilogramme for letters and postcards and
80 centimes per kilogramme for other articles, for distances
exceeding 9,000 kilometres.</p>

<p>The sea transit rates were reduced to 1 fr. 50 per kilogramme
for letters and postcards and to 20 centimes for other
articles, for distances not exceeding 300 nautical miles; to
4 fr. per kilogramme for letters and postcards and to
50 centimes for other articles, for distances exceeding 300
nautical miles, between countries of Europe, between parts
of Europe, Africa, and Asia on the Mediterranean and Black
Seas, and between Europe and North America; to 8 fr. per
kilogramme for letters and postcards and to 1 fr. for other
articles, for all routes not falling under the above headings.</p>

<p>At this Congress the question of reducing the international<!-- Page 276 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_276" id="Page_276">[Pg 276]</a></span>
letter rate was raised by Sir J. G. Ward, the Australasian
delegate. In 1901 New Zealand had introduced a universal
penny rate for letters, and the financial results of the change
had been regarded as satisfactory. The loss of revenue was
some &#163;80,000 in the first year, reduced to &#163;50,000 in the
second. There was an increase of 35 per cent. in the
number of foreign letters posted in the first year, as compared
with an increase of 1.76 per cent. for the last year
under the 2&#189;d. rate.<a name="FNanchor_596_596" id="FNanchor_596_596"></a><a href="#Footnote_596_596" class="fnanchor">[596]</a></p>

<p>The proposal met with strong opposition and little
support. The opposition was based entirely on financial
considerations, many of the delegates stating that their
administrations were unable to face the sacrifice of revenue
involved. In this connection the term "sacrifice of revenue"
means sacrifice of gross revenue, and not necessarily that
the carrying of foreign letters at a penny would on the
whole result in actual loss through the cost of service
being greater than a penny, although it is probable that
the cost of a foreign letter weighing as much as an ounce
would be slightly more than a penny.<a name="FNanchor_597_597" id="FNanchor_597_597"></a><a href="#Footnote_597_597" class="fnanchor">[597]</a> The proposal was
defeated by eighteen votes to three.<a name="FNanchor_598_598" id="FNanchor_598_598"></a><a href="#Footnote_598_598" class="fnanchor">[598]</a><!-- Page 277 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_277" id="Page_277">[Pg 277]</a></span></p>


<h3>(II) INTERNATIONAL PARCEL POST</h3>

<p>The Universal Postal Union as at first constituted provided
only for the transmission of what may be regarded in the
broad sense as letter post traffic. It made no provision
for the transmission in the international service of packages
of ordinary merchandise. Such packets could in strictness
only be forwarded at the letter rate, which was almost
prohibitive; although frequently they were forwarded at
the sample rate, in which case the weight of the packet
was strictly limited. The French administration proposed,
in the project of the Congress of Paris of 1878, to extend
in that direction the facilities provided by the Union, by
amplifying the definition of samples to include small parcels
of ordinary goods,<a name="FNanchor_599_599" id="FNanchor_599_599"></a><a href="#Footnote_599_599" class="fnanchor">[599]</a> a proposal which was rejected by a
majority of the administrations. It was, however, submitted
to the Congress under another form. The German administration
proposed, not the extension of the sample privilege,
but the establishment of a new service, which should provide
for the transmission of parcels of general merchandise not
exceeding 3 kilogrammes in weight, the parcels to be charged
a rate of postage sufficient to reimburse the administrations
for the expenses of transmission. Although this proposal
was favourably received, many of the delegates had no power
to enter into any arrangement of that nature. The question
was therefore referred to the International Bureau, with
instructions to call a special Conference for its consideration,
if on investigation that course should be found desirable.<!-- Page 278 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_278" id="Page_278">[Pg 278]</a></span></p>

<p>At this time the circumstances in the different countries
in regard to the transmission of small parcels varied. In
some a service was provided by the Post Office; in others,
the majority, the business was left to the railways or other
forms of commercial transport. In all cases the services
between different countries were regulated by conventions
and agreements on such terms as could be mutually arranged
between the contracting parties. In general the rates of
postage were based on the rates for inland transmission in
each of the countries concerned. They were often extremely
complicated, and several administrations had mutually agreed
to a uniform rate for parcels not exceeding 5 kilogrammes
in weight.</p>

<p>The suggestion for a special Conference was, in general, well
received, and the Conference met in Paris in 1880. All the
countries of Europe (except Greece), Canada, the United
States, Egypt, British India and Persia, were represented.
The fact that in many of the countries the Post Office had
not at that time undertaken the transmission of parcels was
a serious obstacle to the adoption of any sort of general
agreement; and on the question of rates there was divergence
of opinion whether the principle of uniformity should be
accepted, and a fairly high maximum limit of weight conceded
at a low uniform rate of postage, in order that the
service might be of real advantage to the public, or whether
the rates should be graduated according to scales of weight
and distance.</p>

<p>The original suggestion had been for a limit of 3 kilogrammes,
but at the Conference a proposal for a limit of
5 kilogrammes was submitted. Several delegates were unable
to accept the higher maximum, and the limit originally
proposed was retained.<a name="FNanchor_600_600" id="FNanchor_600_600"></a><a href="#Footnote_600_600" class="fnanchor">[600]</a> As regards the rates of postage to
be charged there was also diversity of opinion. Some
delegates held that the rate should be so fixed as to avoid
the possibility of the service involving an administration in<!-- Page 279 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_279" id="Page_279">[Pg 279]</a></span>
loss, while others, in view of the public benefits to be derived
from the establishment of the service, were prepared to
agree to rates which might prove insufficient to cover the
expenses.<a name="FNanchor_601_601" id="FNanchor_601_601"></a><a href="#Footnote_601_601" class="fnanchor">[601]</a> Simple uniform rates were regarded as a cardinal
feature of a postal service for parcels.<a name="FNanchor_602_602" id="FNanchor_602_602"></a><a href="#Footnote_602_602" class="fnanchor">[602]</a></p>

<p>After prolonged discussion agreement was finally arrived
at, and a Convention was signed by all the delegates, with
the exception of those representing Great Britain, British
India, Holland, and Persia, to be brought into operation on
the 1st October 1881.</p>

<p>Financial considerations were the chief obstacle in the
way of the participation of Great Britain.<a name="FNanchor_603_603" id="FNanchor_603_603"></a><a href="#Footnote_603_603" class="fnanchor">[603]</a></p>

<p>The contracting parties undertook to provide a mutual
service for the interchange of parcels not exceeding 3 kilogrammes
in weight. Liberty of transit was guaranteed
throughout the territory of each contracting country, and for
transit services the respective countries were to be remunerated
as follows: The administration of the country of origin
was required to pay to the administration of each other
country concerned in the transmission, and to that of the
country of destination, 50 centimes for each parcel in respect
of land transit. In cases where a sea transit was involved,
the sum of 25 centimes for each parcel was payable on sea
routes not exceeding 500 nautical miles; 50 centimes for
routes between 500 and 1,000 nautical miles; 1 fr. for routes
between 1,000 and 3,000 nautical miles; 2 fr. for routes<!-- Page 280 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_280" id="Page_280">[Pg 280]</a></span>
between 3,000 and 6,000 nautical miles; and 3 fr. for all routes
exceeding 6,000 nautical miles. The rate of postage was
based on the foregoing payments, and amounted to as many
times 50 centimes as there might be administrations concerned
in the transmission, with the addition of all rates for sea
transit, and with the reservation that each country might
charge an additional 25 centimes (raised in certain cases to 50,
to 75 centimes, or to 1 fr.). In addition, the country of
destination might charge a delivery fee of 25 centimes. It
was not anticipated that these rates would in all cases be
sufficient to cover the expenses of carrying on the service,
but the general advantages were regarded as adequate
compensation for any monetary sacrifice which might be
entailed.<a name="FNanchor_604_604" id="FNanchor_604_604"></a><a href="#Footnote_604_604" class="fnanchor">[604]</a> Any administration which did not at that time
conduct a parcel post service was authorized to arrange for
the international service to be undertaken on its behalf by
railway and steamship companies.</p>

<p>At the Lisbon Congress in 1886 the maximum limit of
weight was raised to 5 kilogrammes, at which point it remains,
and special rates were established for parcels which, on
account of their size, shape or fragility, were inconvenient for
transmission.<a name="FNanchor_605_605" id="FNanchor_605_605"></a><a href="#Footnote_605_605" class="fnanchor">[605]</a> Such parcels, which had previously been<!-- Page 281 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_281" id="Page_281">[Pg 281]</a></span>
excluded altogether from the service, were now admitted,
subject to a rate of postage 50 per cent. greater than the rate
on ordinary parcels.</p>

<p>At the Congress of Washington in 1897, power to charge
special rates was given to the administration of British India,
viz. a rate not exceeding 1 fr. for land transit, a surtax not
exceeding 1 fr. 25 on each parcel posted or delivered in
British India, and a scale of rates graduated according to
weight on all parcels posted in British India, provided that
the average receipt of the Indian administration did not
exceed 1 fr. 75 for each parcel.<a name="FNanchor_606_606" id="FNanchor_606_606"></a><a href="#Footnote_606_606" class="fnanchor">[606]</a> The special transit charge
was abandoned at the Rome Congress of 1906.</p>

<p>No changes of importance were made at the Rome Congress
of 1906. Several proposals in regard to the maximum
limit of weight were discussed. The Bulgarian delegates
proposed an increase of the maximum to 50 kilogrammes,
but the proposal found no support.<a name="FNanchor_607_607" id="FNanchor_607_607"></a><a href="#Footnote_607_607" class="fnanchor">[607]</a> The Swiss delegate
proposed an increase to 10 kilogrammes. This met with
some support; but in view of the practical difficulties which
would have been imposed on certain administrations in
dealing with parcels of so great a weight, the proposal was
negatived.</p>

<p>The Indian delegate proposed the insertion of a provision
enabling any country to charge postage on parcels originating
in that country according to a scale of weights of its own
choice, in substitution for the existing single rate.<a name="FNanchor_608_608" id="FNanchor_608_608"></a><a href="#Footnote_608_608" class="fnanchor">[608]</a><!-- Page 282 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_282" id="Page_282">[Pg 282]</a></span></p>

<p>The general proposal was rejected,<a name="FNanchor_609_609" id="FNanchor_609_609"></a><a href="#Footnote_609_609" class="fnanchor">[609]</a> but a clause was added
provisionally according to India the faculty of applying to
parcels posted in India a tariff graduated by weight, provided
the mean of the rates was not in excess of the normal rate
of the Union.</p>

<p>The land transit rate remained unchanged, viz. 50 centimes
for each country participating in the territorial transit.</p>

<p>Russia was given power to collect a transit fee of 1 fr. 25
per parcel in respect of both Russia-in-Europe and Russia-in-Asia,
separately; and Turkey to collect a transit rate of
1 fr. 25 on a parcel sent across Turkey-in-Asia. Owing to
the undeveloped state of the transport services in Persia,
that administration was empowered provisionally to decline
the transport of parcels for and from other countries.</p>

<p>The maritime transit rates were reduced to the following:&mdash;</p>

<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="International maritime transit rates from 1906.">
<tr><td align="left">25</td><td align="left">centimes</td><td align="left">for transits</td><td align="left">not exceeding 500</td><td align="left">nautical</td><td align="left">miles</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">50</td><td align="left">centimes</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">500-2,500</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1</td><td align="left">fr.</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">2,500-5,000</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1&frac12;</td><td align="left">fr.</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">5,000-8,000</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">2</td><td align="left">fr.</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">exceeding 8,000</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>For parcels not exceeding 1 kilogramme the transit rate
should in no case exceed 1 fr.</p>

<hr />
<p><!-- Page 283 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_283" id="Page_283">[Pg 283]</a></span></p>


<h2>VII<br /><br /><br />
AN ANALYSIS OF COST</h2>


<h3>METHOD</h3>

<p>The Post Office<a name="FNanchor_610_610" id="FNanchor_610_610"></a><a href="#Footnote_610_610" class="fnanchor">[610]</a> performs but one service in respect of the
ordinary postage paid on a packet, under whatever rate or
regulations the packet is posted. Whether the packet be
a letter, a postcard, a halfpenny packet, a newspaper packet
or a parcel,<a name="FNanchor_611_611" id="FNanchor_611_611"></a><a href="#Footnote_611_611" class="fnanchor">[611]</a> the service performed in respect of the ordinary
postage is simply to transmit the packet without delay to
the place of its address.<a name="FNanchor_612_612" id="FNanchor_612_612"></a><a href="#Footnote_612_612" class="fnanchor">[612]</a><!-- Page 284 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_284" id="Page_284">[Pg 284]</a></span></p>

<p>There are, of course, several intermediate stages in the
progress of the packet from the place of posting to the
place of delivery. Under the most favourable circumstances,
as in the case of a letter from one small town to another
small town for which there is a direct mail, the packet is
handled two or three times by various officers; and in many
cases, as with the letters from a suburb of one large town
to a suburb of another large town, or to a place in a rural
district or vice vers&#226;, as many as ten or twelve times.</p>

<p>Although the character of the service to be performed, viz.
transmission to the place of its address, is identical in every
case, the character of the packet naturally has considerable
influence on the nature and cost of handling at the various
stages, and the methods adopted in dealing with the packet.
But the operations are in essence the same, and the chief
difference is in the amount of time occupied and the nature
of the office fittings employed.</p>

<p>This variation of cost and method does not correspond
with variation in the rate of postage paid on the packets.
Except in the case of parcels, all distinction on the basis
of rates of postage disappears once the sorting office is
reached.</p>

<p>In regard to the chief indoor operations there is, except at
the smallest offices, complete separation between packets sent
by parcel post and all other packets; but parcels are in some
cases taken out with other packets for delivery at the same
time and by the same officer. Except in rural districts they
are, however, generally taken out separately for the first
morning delivery, and frequently for the last evening delivery.
Speaking broadly, there is as regards delivery, as for other
operations, essential separation between parcels and all other
classes of packets.</p>

<p>In regard to packets other than parcels, the chief, and in
many cases the only, separation in actual handling is as
between those packets which can be passed through the<!-- Page 285 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_285" id="Page_285">[Pg 285]</a></span>
stamping machine and those which cannot; and between
those packets which can conveniently be dealt with at
the ordinary letter-sorting frames, and tied in bundles
for enclosure in the mail-bags, and those which on account
of their irregular size and shape are sorted at pigeon-hole
frames, and cannot be tied in bundles, but are forwarded
loose in the mail-bags. The dividing line is almost identical
in both cases, and is determined by the size and shape
of the packet. In the largest offices more divisions are made,
in some cases as many as five.<a name="FNanchor_613_613" id="FNanchor_613_613"></a><a href="#Footnote_613_613" class="fnanchor">[613]</a></p>

<p>The more usual number is three, "short letters," "long
letters," and other packets.<a name="FNanchor_614_614" id="FNanchor_614_614"></a><a href="#Footnote_614_614" class="fnanchor">[614]</a> The division of the packets
is made in all cases, not with reference to the various
rates of postage under which the packets may have been
posted, but with the view simply of securing that packets
of the same shape and size shall, as far as possible, be
brought together, and their subsequent handling thereby
facilitated.</p>

<p>In cases where there are four or five such divisions of the
packets, the separation is likewise made from considerations
independent of the rates of postage, although it happens that,
as a rule, a large proportion of the packets posted under a
given rate fall into a certain group. Thus all postcards fall
to be handled with the short letters; all newspapers fall to
be handled with the heavier packets sent at the letter rate;
and a large proportion of the halfpenny packets, viz. the
short halfpenny packets, fall to be handled with the short
letters.</p>

<p>There are in general three methods of handling. The<!-- Page 286 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_286" id="Page_286">[Pg 286]</a></span>
sorting is done either at the ordinary open frames, or at the
newspaper frames, or directly into the mail-bags, the two
latter methods being alternative. Short letters are dealt
with at the ordinary sorting frames. Long letters (which
include a large proportion of "circulars") are dealt with
in some cases at the ordinary frames, and in some cases
at the frames provided for the larger packets (the "newspaper"
frames). All other packets are dealt with at the
newspaper frames, or are sorted directly into the mail-bags
in those cases where frames for hanging the bags are
provided. Stamping is performed either by hand or by
machine.</p>

<p>When first brought into the sorting office the packets are
placed on an open table, and the ordinary letters, circular
letters, and postcards are arranged in order with the addresses
in the same direction, or, as it is termed, "faced." Simultaneously,
all other packets are picked out for treatment
separately. The postage labels affixed to the letters and
other packets are then obliterated with a dated stamp. After
stamping, the letters and packers are taken to the respective
sorting tables, where they are separated (in one or more
operations) into groups corresponding to the various towns
to which they will be despatched. Before enclosure in the
mail-bags, all short letters, postcards, and short halfpenny
packets, and some of the long letters, are tied in bundles, other
packets being sent loose.</p>

<p>From the first office of destination many of the packets
are sent forward to another office, since it is naturally not
possible always to enclose a packet in a direct mail-bag for
the town to which it is addressed. These packets are resorted
and despatched. The letters, etc., for immediate
delivery do not require to be faced, as they are received in
bundles, in which they are arranged with the addresses
in the same direction. But, except when received for the
first morning delivery, letters are stamped to show the
date and time of receipt, after which they are sorted in
the order of delivery, and delivered by the postmen.</p>

<p>In the delivery of the packets one division is made, viz.
between the short letters, postcards, and short halfpenny
packets, which are tied in bundles; and the letter packets and<!-- Page 287 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_287" id="Page_287">[Pg 287]</a></span>
halfpenny packets of irregular size and shape, and the newspapers,
which are carried loose in the delivery bag. The
postman takes out of his bag a bundle of letters, etc., from
which he delivers in order. These have been sorted up in the
order of delivery at the sorting office, so that no time is lost in
finding the proper letter for delivery. It is not possible, however,
to arrange the irregular-shaped packets in this manner.
When the postman has such a packet to deliver, he has first
to find it among those in his bag. He then frequently finds
that it is too large to be put through the letter-box, and
further time is lost in gaining the attention of the householder.<a name="FNanchor_615_615" id="FNanchor_615_615"></a><a href="#Footnote_615_615" class="fnanchor">[615]</a></p>

<p>There is, therefore, in the matter of delivery, a heavy
balance against the heavier and more bulky packets, as compared
with the short letters, postcards, and short halfpenny
packets.</p>

<p>As regards the actual transmission from post office to post
office, there is only one real division of the whole of the
packets, viz. that between the parcel post on the one hand,
and the whole of the remaining classes of packets on the
other. In a number of cases separate mails are made up
for newspapers and large packets; but compared with the
total number of mails, the number of such separate mails
is small, and the arrangement may be regarded as exceptional.
In a considerable number of cases, however, packets sent
at the parcel post rate are enclosed in the same mail-bag
with packets sent at other rates. The arrangement is made
somewhat extensively for mails from a post town to subordinate
and other small offices in the immediate neighbourhood,
but only exists in those cases where the number of
parcels to be enclosed is small. As in every case where on
the average as many as eight parcels are available at the
time of despatch a separate mail may be made up, the
arrangement does not exist extensively between any large
centres with any considerable traffic; but it has been extended
in recent years, and the total number of parcels forwarded<!-- Page 288 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_288" id="Page_288">[Pg 288]</a></span>
in this way forms an appreciable proportion of the total
number of parcels sent by post. There is in these cases,
so far as mails conveyed by railway are concerned, complete
separation in regard to one important element of cost, viz.
the cost of conveyance. Separate payment for the conveyance
of parcels is made under the arrangement established by the
Parcel Post Act; while comprehensive payments are made
for the conveyance of all other packets, arranged by negotiation
with the individual railway companies or, failing
agreement, fixed by the Court of Railway and Canal Commission
in the manner prescribed by statute.<a name="FNanchor_616_616" id="FNanchor_616_616"></a><a href="#Footnote_616_616" class="fnanchor">[616]</a></p>

<p>The handling of a postal packet from posting to delivery
therefore comprises the following operations in order:&mdash;</p>

<p>
<span style="margin-left: 3em;">Collection,</span><br />
<span style="margin-left: 3em;">Facing,</span><br />
<span style="margin-left: 3em;">Stamping,</span><br />
<span style="margin-left: 3em;">Sorting,</span><br />
<span style="margin-left: 3em;">Conveyance,</span><br />
<span style="margin-left: 3em;">Stamping,<a name="FNanchor_617_617" id="FNanchor_617_617"></a><a href="#Footnote_617_617" class="fnanchor">[617]</a></span><br />
<span style="margin-left: 3em;">Sorting,</span><br />
<span style="margin-left: 3em;">Delivery;</span><br />
</p>

<p>and in the case of those packets which pass through more
than one office there are, for every such office, the additional
operations of sorting and conveyance.<a name="FNanchor_618_618" id="FNanchor_618_618"></a><a href="#Footnote_618_618" class="fnanchor">[618]</a></p>

<p>The bags are conveyed between the various post offices by<!-- Page 289 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_289" id="Page_289">[Pg 289]</a></span>
mail-van (horse-drawn or motor), by mail-cart, by railway,
or in a few cases by carrier-cycle, tricycle, or motor-cycle.</p>

<p>The vans, carts, or cycles of course convey the bags from
office to office, but when the bags are sent by railway it
is necessary to provide for their conveyance to and from
the railway stations. This is largely done by mail-van, mail-cart,
or carrier-tricycle; but in a great number of cases
throughout the country, where only two or three small bags
are concerned, their conveyance between the station and
the post office is provided for by cycle postman or "runner"
service; that is to say, the bags are fetched or taken by
a postman or porter.</p>


<h3>COST</h3>

<p>In order to ascertain the cost of dealing with postal packets
of the various classes, the relative cost, and the actual cost, of
the various operations must be ascertained, and all general
charges apportioned.</p>

<p>The cost of the "postal" service, shown in <a href="#Table_B">Table B</a>,<a name="FNanchor_619_619" id="FNanchor_619_619"></a><a href="#Footnote_619_619" class="fnanchor">[619]</a> i.e.
the cost of the whole of the services controlled by the Post
Office, less the cost of the telegraphs and telephones, may be
grouped, as shown in <a href="#Table_C">Table C</a>, under the following main
headings:&mdash;</p>

<p>
<span style="margin-left: 1em;">(1) Cost of Staff,</span><br />
<span style="margin-left: 1em;">(2) Cost of Conveyance of Mails,</span><br />
<span style="margin-left: 1em;">(3) Cost of Buildings,</span><br />
<span style="margin-left: 1em;">(4) Cost of Stores, and Miscellaneous Expenditure.</span><br />
</p>


<h4><span class="smcap">Staff</span></h4>

<p>Since parcels are, to a considerable extent, dealt with
separately, it has been possible to estimate the relative cost
of the manipulative services in regard to parcels on the one
hand, and all other postal packets (letters, postcards, halfpenny
packets, and newspapers) on the other. The ratios of
cost are shown in <a href="#Table_D">Table D</a>, and the total cost of the manipulative
services in respect of parcels calculated on this basis is
shown in <a href="#Table_F">Table F</a>.<!-- Page 290 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_290" id="Page_290">[Pg 290]</a></span></p>

<p>No similar ratios of relative cost have been estimated in
regard to the various classes of packets other than parcels,
since they are dealt with together, and it is necessary, therefore,
to ascertain the actual cost for staff under the various
headings of collection, stamping, sorting, and delivery. As
regards collection, it is difficult to discover a basis on which a
computation of the relative cost for the different classes of
packets may be made, because the cost varies greatly, not only
as between each class, but from place to place, in regard to any
particular class of packet. Many of the ordinary letter packets
are posted in large numbers at head post offices, and in respect
of packets so posted there is no cost of collection. Light
letter packets and halfpenny packets (especially halfpenny
packets) are, moreover, handed in at post offices in considerable
numbers for prepayment of postage in cash. In that case
the cost of subsequent handling is slightly reduced, because
under the regulations for such prepayment the packets must
be tied in bundles with the addresses in the same direction,
that is to say, the operation of facing must be performed by
the person who posts the packets. Against this, however,
must be set the very considerable expense incurred both in
towns and rural areas for the collection of ordinary light
letter packets, postcards, halfpenny packets, and newspaper
packets from posting boxes, and the cost of van services, which
are frequently provided for the collection of letters from
business premises. Very little of the cost of these services
can be attributed to the heavier letter packets, which are
to a large extent handed in at the post office counter
to be weighed. This involves considerable expense, which
corresponds to cost of collection, and may be dealt with under
that heading. The best estimate that can be made is that
the cost of collection per packet is approximately the same in
all cases.</p>

<p>Facing and stamping may be regarded as one operation, the
one being really preparatory to the other. Here there is less
difficulty. The relative cost per packet may fairly be taken
as the ratio of the time taken in performing the operation in
the case of each class of packet. In regard to facing and
stamping, and also in regard to sorting, the letter packets
proper, that is to say packets sent at the ordinary letter rate<!-- Page 291 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_291" id="Page_291">[Pg 291]</a></span>
of postage, fall in general into three classes according to the
facility with which they can be handled, viz. (1) "short
letters," (2) "long letters," (3) "letter packets" (that is, the
bulky packets sent at the letter rate).<a name="FNanchor_620_620" id="FNanchor_620_620"></a><a href="#Footnote_620_620" class="fnanchor">[620]</a> In order to complete
the calculation, the number of packets which fall respectively
into these three classes must be estimated.</p>

<p>It has been indicated that the actual division is made
according to the size and shape of the packets. The division
corresponds approximately with variation in weight. Few
packets weighing more than &frac34; ounce would come within the
class of short letters, that is, of letters which can be dealt with
at the ordinary sorting frames; but as there is no analysis of
the number of packets of less than 1 ounce weight, there is no
alternative to the adoption of 1 ounce as the limit of this
class.<a name="FNanchor_621_621" id="FNanchor_621_621"></a><a href="#Footnote_621_621" class="fnanchor">[621]</a> The effect of this is slightly adverse to the short letters
and favourable to the heavier packets. As between long
letters and the heavier packets the limit is less definite. In
many cases packets of the same weight fall into one or other
class according to their size or shape, but the mean weight
of such indeterminate packets is roughly 4 ounces, and that
weight is adopted as giving the mean upper line of division for
long letters.</p>

<p>In <a href="#Table_H">Table H</a> are shown the relative rates of stamping and
sorting for each of the various classes of packets.</p>

<p>The proportionate cost per packet of stamping and of
sorting, based on the rates shown in <a href="#Table_H">Table H</a>, is given in
<a href="#Table_J">Table J</a>.<a name="FNanchor_622_622" id="FNanchor_622_622"></a><a href="#Footnote_622_622" class="fnanchor">[622]</a> The actual cost is shown in <a href="#Table_L">Table L</a>.</p>

<p>As regards the cost of delivery some difficulty presents
itself. Letter packets, postcards, halfpenny packets, and
newspaper packets are, in all cases, taken out for delivery
by the same postman, and it is not possible, therefore, as
with stamping and sorting, to ascertain the rates of work
for the various classes of packets. But the features in the
different packets which lead to differences in the rate of<!-- Page 292 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_292" id="Page_292">[Pg 292]</a></span>
sorting, viz. weight and irregularity of shape and size, lead
also to differences in the time taken for delivery. In practice
the postman makes a division of the packets; and the time
occupied in the delivery of the bulky and irregular packets is
greater proportionately, as compared with the time occupied
in the delivery of ordinary letters, than is the time occupied in
sorting. It is not possible, however, to estimate with any
degree of exactness the relative amount of time actually
occupied in delivering packets of the various classes, and
for the division of the cost of delivery (<a href="#Table_J">Table J</a>) the rates
adopted for the division of the cost of sorting are taken. This
method favours the bulky and irregular-shaped packets.</p>


<h4><span class="smcap">Conveyance</span></h4>

<p>The cost of conveyance of letter mails by railway forms
by far the greater part of the whole cost of conveyance.
The cost of conveyance of letter mails by road and sea,
estimated on such data as are available, is shown in <a href="#Table_M">Table M</a>.
As the total cost of the conveyance of mails is known, the
total cost of the conveyance of parcel mails can be ascertained
(<a href="#Table_M">Table M</a>). The best basis for division of this cost is the
gross weight of the various classes of packets. Payment is
made purely on a weight basis in respect of the conveyance
of a very large proportion of the mails, and, so far, division
on the basis of weight is correct. But payment for the
conveyance of a proportion of the mails is made on the basis
of the cost of providing for the conveyance, and more or less
independently of the weight carried. This applies in the case
of mail-carts, motor-vans, or special trains which do not carry
a full load. The amount paid in such cases is a single sum,
calculated, so far as letter mails are concerned, without reference
to the fact that postal packets of different classes are to be conveyed&mdash;without
indeed, in some cases, much reference to the
fact that any given quantity of mails is to be conveyed. In
the absence of an assigned basis of payment which can be used
to divide such sums, the division between the various classes of
packets is made in proportion to the total weight of each class.
In <a href="#Table_N">Table N</a> is shown the division of the whole cost of conveyance
of letter mails between the various classes on this basis.<!-- Page 293 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_293" id="Page_293">[Pg 293]</a></span></p>


<h4><span class="smcap">General Charges</span></h4>

<p>Separate statistics are obtainable (<a href="#Table_B">Table B</a>) in regard to
(<i>a</i>) buildings and office fittings, and (<i>b</i>) stores, but no exact
estimate can be made of the cost of administration and
accounting.</p>

<p>The cost for buildings and office fittings is divided as
between parcels and other packets on the basis defined in
<a href="#Table_D">Table D</a>; and as between the various classes of packets
other than parcels, on the basis of the gross weight of the
packets (<a href="#Table_O">Table O</a>).</p>

<p>The cost for stores, including the small sum under the
heading "Miscellaneous Expenditure," is similarly divided
as between parcels and other packets. As between the
various classes of packets other than parcels, the cost is
divided on the basis of simple numbers (<a href="#Table_P">Table P</a>).</p>

<p>The cost for administration and accounting, which is
comparatively small,<a name="FNanchor_623_623" id="FNanchor_623_623"></a><a href="#Footnote_623_623" class="fnanchor">[623]</a> cannot be stated exactly. It is contained
in the total cost of staff (<a href="#Table_C">Table C</a>), and is consequently
divided between the various classes in the same proportion
as the cost of the manipulative staff.</p>

<p>Tables A to Q show the complete calculation.</p>

<p><a href="#Table_Q">Table Q</a> shows the final result, which is that the average
total cost of dealing with postal packets is as follows:&mdash;</p>

<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Average total costs for postal packets by type.">
<tr><td align="left">For an ordinary letter&mdash;</td><td align="right">d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; Under 1 ounce</td><td align="right">.382</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; Over 1 ounce, under 4 ounces</td><td align="right">.747</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; Over 4 ounces</td><td align="right">1.404</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">For an average letter packet</td><td align="right">.457</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">For a postcard</td><td align="right">.353</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">For a halfpenny packet</td><td align="right">.432</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">For a newspaper packet</td><td align="right">1.063</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">For a parcel</td><td align="right">7.091</td></tr>
</table></div>

<p>For the letter packets under 1 ounce in weight, for those
between 1 ounce and 4 ounces in weight, for the halfpenny
packets and for the postcards, the estimated average cost will
be approximately the actual cost per packet; but in the case
of letter packets over 4 ounces in weight and newspaper
packets, the variations in weight and convenience of handling
are considerable, and there will be an appreciable variation<!-- Page 294 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_294" id="Page_294">[Pg 294]</a></span>
for individual packets above and below the estimated average
cost. The cost will vary with the weight and size (but not
proportionately), and the deviation will be greatest in the case
of the heavier packets, since with both these classes the
average weight of the great bulk of the packets is less than
the general average. Of all letter packets, postcards, halfpenny
packets and newspapers, the number exceeding 4 ounces
in weight forms less than 10 per cent. With so small a proportion
of heavy packets the result may be taken as almost exact
in the case of the lighter packets. It is not in excess of the
actual cost, because the calculation, taken as a whole, is
biassed in favour of the heavier packets.</p>

<p>The resultant figures are figures of average cost. They
represent the cost of those packets in each class in respect of
which the average amount of service is performed, and not
exceptional cases, as when packets travel over very long
distances, or when a packet is redirected or returned to the
sender, in which latter cases obviously double the normal
service is performed.</p>

<p>The calculation is approximate in that at certain points it
has been necessary to frame estimates on imperfect data.
This is inevitable in dealing with a service conducted over a
large area and under diverse conditions.<a name="FNanchor_624_624" id="FNanchor_624_624"></a><a href="#Footnote_624_624" class="fnanchor">[624]</a> In general the
manner in which the result is affected by the use of imperfect
data has been indicated. These variations have been borne in
mind throughout, and, as their effects are produced in varying
directions, the combined effect is not such as to invalidate the
results arrived at.</p>

<p>The result suggests the following conclusions:&mdash;</p>

<div class="blockquot"><p>(1) That no class of packet sent at the letter rate of postage involves a loss to
revenue;</p>

<p>(2) That there is a large profit on ordinary light letters;</p>

<p>(3) That in the case of packets of the weight of about 4 ounces the profit is
less, but is still appreciable;</p>

<p>(4) That there is a considerable profit on postcards;</p>

<p>(5) That there is a profit on the halfpenny packets;</p>

<p>(6) That there is a heavy loss on the newspaper packets, averaging nearly &#189;d.
per packet;</p>

<p>(7) That as regards packets other than parcels, the principle of uniformity of
rate, irrespective of distance, is well founded. The cost of conveyance (.07d. per<!-- Page 295 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_295" id="Page_295">[Pg 295]</a></span>
packet) is still, in the phrase of Sir Rowland Hill, "not expressible in the
smallest coin";</p>

<p>(8) That as regards the cost of conveyance there is no case for a reduced
rate of postage for local letters;</p>

<p>(9) That as between local letters and other letters there is appreciable
difference in the cost of handling, but this difference would not be sufficient
to justify a discrimination measurable in coin;</p>

<p>(10) That the parcel post is conducted at considerable loss. If the cost be
taken, as shown in <a href="#Table_L">Table L</a>, at 7&#183;091d. per parcel, the loss is on the average
almost 2&#188;d. per parcel, or nearly &#163;1,250,000 on the total number of parcels dealt
with in 1913-14. The matter is, however, complicated by the question whether
a strictly mathematical proportion of the total expenses of the Post Office can
fairly be charged against the parcel post.<a name="FNanchor_625_625" id="FNanchor_625_625"></a><a href="#Footnote_625_625" class="fnanchor">[625]</a></p></div>

<hr />
<p><!-- Page 296 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_296" id="Page_296">[Pg 296]</a></span></p>

<h4><a name="Table_A" id="Table_A"></a>TABLE A<br />
TOTAL NUMBERS DEALT WITH IN THE UNITED KINGDOM, 1913-14.</h4>


<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Total number of items posted in the United Kingdom 1913-1914.">
<tr><td align="left">Letters</td><td align="right">3,488,800,000</td><td align="left"><a name="FNanchor_626_626" id="FNanchor_626_626"></a><a href="#Footnote_626_626" class="fnanchor">[626]</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Postcards</td><td align="right">924,250,000</td><td align="left"><a name="FNanchor_627_627" id="FNanchor_627_627"></a><a href="#Footnote_627_627" class="fnanchor">[627]</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Halfpenny Packets</td><td align="right">1,211,400,000</td><td align="left"><a name="FNanchor_628_628" id="FNanchor_628_628"></a><a href="#Footnote_628_628" class="fnanchor">[628]</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Newspaper Packets</td><td align="right">207,100,000</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Parcels</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">133,663,000</td><td align="left"><a name="FNanchor_629_629" id="FNanchor_629_629"></a><a href="#Footnote_629_629" class="fnanchor">[629]</a></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Total</td><td align="right">5,965,213,000</td></tr>
</table></div>

<hr />
<p><!-- Page 297 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_297" id="Page_297">[Pg 297]</a></span></p>

<h4><a name="Table_B" id="Table_B"></a>TABLE B<br />
STATEMENT OF EXPENDITURE IN THE YEAR 1913-14 IN CONNECTION
WITH THE POSTAL SERVICES, INCLUDING MONEY
ORDER AND POSTAL ORDER BUSINESS, BUT EXCLUDING
POST OFFICE SAVINGS BANK AND GOVERNMENT ANNUITY
BUSINESS.</h4>


<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Postal Service expenditure account, 1913-1914.">
<tr><td align="left" colspan="5"></td><td align="center">&#163;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>a</i>)</td><td align="left" colspan="4">Salaries, Wages and Allowances</td><td align="right">10,538,318</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>b</i>)</td><td align="left" colspan="4">Rent, Rates, Office Fittings, Water, Light and Heating</td><td align="right">268,981</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>c</i>)</td><td align="left" colspan="4">Conveyance of Mails (excluding Payments to Foreign and Colonial Administrations):&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="2"></td><td align="center">&#163;</td><td align="center">&#163;</td><td align="center">&#163;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"></td><td align="left">&emsp;By Rail&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"></td><td align="left">&emsp;&emsp;Ordinary Postal Packets</td><td align="right">1,292,460</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"></td><td align="left">&emsp;&emsp;Parcels</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">1,197,037</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="3"></td><td align="right">2,489,497</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"></td><td align="left" colspan="2">&emsp;By Road</td><td align="right">662,010</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"></td><td align="left" colspan="2">&emsp;By Packet</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">890,530</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="4"></td><td align="right">4,042,037</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"></td><td align="left">&emsp;&emsp;<i>Less</i>&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"></td><td align="left" colspan="3">Contributions received towards the cost of Packet and Mail services</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs"><i>130,335</i></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="5"></td><td align="right">3,911,702</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>d</i>)</td><td align="left" colspan="4">Purchase of Stores and Uniform Clothing</td><td align="right">452,065</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>e</i>)</td><td align="left" colspan="4">Manufacture of Stamps, etc.</td><td align="right">128,000</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>f</i>)</td><td align="left" colspan="4">Travelling, Law Charges, and Incidental Expenses</td><td align="right">180,527</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>g</i>)</td><td align="left" colspan="4">Estimated Rental Value of premises belonging to the Post Office used for Postal purposes</td><td align="right">278,344</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>h</i>)</td><td align="left" colspan="4">Estimated Pension liability for the year</td><td align="right">1,169,406</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"></td><td align="left">Amount expended by other Government Departments in respect of various services rendered, viz.:&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="4"></td><td align="center">&#163;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>i</i>)</td><td align="left" colspan="3">Maintenance and Repair of Buildings</td><td align="right">160,200</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>j</i>)</td><td align="left" colspan="3">Rates on Government Property</td><td align="right">95,676</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>k</i>)</td><td align="left" colspan="3">Issue of Postage Stamps</td><td align="right">22,193</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>l</i>)</td><td align="left" colspan="3">Stationery, Printing, etc.</td><td align="right">112,308</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>m</i>)</td><td align="left" colspan="3">Cost of Audit (Exchequer and Audit Department)</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">3,612</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="5"></td><td align="right">393,989</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>n</i>)</td><td align="left" colspan="4">Net Revenue contribution to the Exchequer for the year</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">6,143,459</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="5"></td><td align="left" class="tdbbd">&#163;23,464,791</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p class="blockquot">&mdash;<i>Annual Report of the Postmaster-General</i>, 1913-14, Appx. N, p. 92.<br />
<!-- Page 298 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_298" id="Page_298">[Pg 298]</a></span></p>


<h4><a name="Table_C" id="Table_C"></a>TABLE C<br />
STATEMENT OF EXPENDITURE, SUMMARIZED AND ADJUSTED.</h4>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Postal Service expenditure, summarized and adjusted.">
<tr><td align="left"></td><td align="center" colspan="5"><span class="smcap">Items in <a href="#Table_B">Table B</a>.</span></td><td></td><td align="center"><span class="smcap">Net Cost.</span></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="6">(<i>a</i>) and (<i>h</i>) <b>Staff</b>, &#163;11,707,724.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"></td><td align="left" colspan="5"><i>Deduct</i>&mdash;</td><td align="center">&#163;</td><td align="center">&#163;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp;&emsp;</td><td align="left">(1)</td><td align="left" colspan="4">Officers in charge of Eastern Mails</td><td align="right">1,000</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp;&emsp;</td><td align="left">(2)</td><td align="left" colspan="4">Post Office Agencies Abroad</td><td align="right">17,000</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp;&emsp;</td><td align="left">(3)</td><td align="left">Cost&nbsp;of</td><td align="left">Services to other Departments</td><td align="left" class="braces-3row" rowspan="3">}</td><td align="left" rowspan="3">excluding Postage</td><td align="right">516,789</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp;&emsp;</td><td align="left">(4)</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">Money Order Service</td><td align="right">156,000</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp;&emsp;</td><td align="left">(5)</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">Postal Order Service</td><td align="right">530,000</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp;&emsp;</td><td align="left">(6)</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left" colspan="3">Registration and Insurance Service</td><td align="right">264,000</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp;&emsp;</td><td align="left">(7)</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left" colspan="3">Express Delivery Service</td><td align="right">52,000</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp;&emsp;</td><td align="left">(8)</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left" colspan="3">Private Boxes and Bags</td><td align="right">41,000</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp;&emsp;</td><td align="left">(9)</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left" colspan="3">Cash on Delivery Service, Reply Coupons, Certificates of Posting, Late Fee Services, etc.</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">50,000</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"></td><td align="left" colspan="5"><i>Proportion allocated to Staff</i></td><td align="right">1,444,264</td><td align="right">10,263,460</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="5">(<i>b</i>), (<i>g</i>), (<i>i</i>), and (<i>j</i>) <b>Buildings</b>, &#163;803,201.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"></td><td align="left" colspan="5"><i>Deduct</i>&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp;&emsp;</td><td align="left" colspan="5">In respect of (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8), and (9) above</td><td align="right">96,587</td><td align="right">706,614</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="5">(<i>c</i>) <b>Conveyance of Mails</b>, &#163;3,911,702.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"></td><td align="left" colspan="5"><i>Deduct</i>&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp;&emsp;</td><td align="left">(1)</td><td align="left" colspan="4">Packet Services outside the United Kingdom</td><td align="right">582,935</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp;&emsp;</td><td align="left">(2)</td><td align="left" colspan="4">Conveyance of Mails across Panama</td><td align="right">2,931</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp;&emsp;</td><td align="left">(3)</td><td align="left" colspan="4">Receipts from Foreign Countries for Land Transit</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">51,000</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="6"></td><td align="right">636,866</td><td align="right">3,274,836</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="5">(<i>d</i>), (<i>e</i>), (<i>k</i>), and (<i>l</i>) <b>Stores</b>, &#163;714,566.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"></td><td align="left" colspan="5"><i>Deduct</i>&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp;&emsp;</td><td align="left" colspan="5">In respect of (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8), and (9) above</td><td align="right">86,938</td><td align="right">627,628</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="7">(<i>f</i>) and (<i>m</i>) <b>Miscellaneous</b></td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">184,139</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="5"></td><td align="right">Total</td><td></td><td align="right" class="tdbbd">&#163;15,056,677</td></tr>
</table></div>

<p><!-- Page 299 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_299" id="Page_299">[Pg 299]</a></span></p>


<h4><a name="Table_D" id="Table_D"></a>TABLE D<br />
COST OF STAFF AND BUILDINGS.</h4>

<p>In the examination of proposals for revisions of staff and accommodation at
post offices, the whole work of the offices is reduced to a common denominator
for each chief division of the work, and is stated in terms of that denominator.</p>

<p>Thus all indoor work is reduced to and expressed in terms of units representing
the work in connection with 1,000 letters posted and delivered, the term
"letter" in this connection covering all packets sent by post other than
parcels.
There are no ratios for the separate classes of "letters."</p>

<p>All outdoor work is reduced to and expressed in terms of a unit of 1,000 letters
(posted and delivered), i.e. the complete service.</p>

<p>For office accommodation the unit is 1,000 letters posted or delivered,
whichever
is the greater number at the office in question.</p>

<p>Certain ratios are taken for the expression in terms of letters of the various
divisions into which the work performed by the post office falls.</p>

<p>As between letters and parcels the ratios are as follow:&mdash;</p>

<p class="center"><span class="smcap">Units Ratios.</span></p>

<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Ratios of different kinds of postal work.">
<tr><th align="left" colspan="2"></th><th align="center" colspan="4"><span class="smcap">Value in Letters.</span></th></tr>
<tr><th align="left" colspan="2"></th><th align="left">Indoor<br /> Work.</th><th align="center">Outdoor<br /> Work.</th><th align="center" colspan="2">Office<br /> Accommodation.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Letter</td><td align="left">posted</td><td align="center">?</td><td align="center">&mdash;</td><td class="braces-2row" rowspan="2" align="right">}{</td><td align="left" rowspan="2">1 (whichever is the<br /> greater traffic)</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">delivered</td><td align="center">?</td><td align="center">1</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">forwarded</td><td align="center">?</td><td align="center">&mdash;</td><td align="center" colspan="2">&frac12;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">collected</td><td align="center">&mdash;</td><td align="center"><i>x</i></td><td align="center" colspan="2">&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Parcel</td><td align="left">posted</td><td align="center">6</td><td align="center">&mdash;</td><td align="center" colspan="2">6</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">delivered</td><td align="center">6</td><td align="center">10</td><td align="center" colspan="2">6</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">forwarded</td><td align="center">4</td><td align="center">&mdash;</td><td align="center" colspan="2">6</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">collected</td><td align="center">&mdash;</td><td align="center">10<i>x</i></td><td align="center" colspan="2">&mdash;</td></tr>
</table></div>

<p class="center">1,000 letters (weekly) = 1 unit of postal work.</p>


<p>For each unit of work so determined there is a corresponding normal cost.</p>

<p>For indoor work the normal cost is approximately &#163;15, for outdoor work
&#163;22 10s., and for office accommodation &#163;2 10s., per annum.</p>

<p>Since the unit to which a certain normal cost is allowed is built upon
calculations
which give a parcel a definite relative value as compared with a letter, the
ratios show the relative cost to the Post Office of a letter and of a parcel.<!-- Page 300 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_300" id="Page_300">[Pg 300]</a></span></p>


<h4><a name="Table_E" id="Table_E"></a>TABLE E<br />
RELATIVE COST OF STAFF FOR LETTERS AND PARCELS.</h4>

<p>It is estimated that on the average more than half the total number of letters
are not sent forward direct to the post office of destination, but are forwarded
from the office at which they are posted to an intermediate office; that is to
say,
more than half the total number of letters travel in two mails, and incur a
handling at an intermediate office. The handling at that office is termed
"forwarding." The letters are termed "forward letters."<a name="FNanchor_630_630" id="FNanchor_630_630"></a><a href="#Footnote_630_630" class="fnanchor">[630]</a> Expressed in
another way, the estimate is that all letters are forwarded, on the average,
in 1.6 mails.</p>

<p>It is estimated that on the average a greater proportion of parcels travel in
this way in two mails. The actual estimate is that a parcel travels in 1.8
mails.</p>

<p>Hence&mdash;</p>

<p class="blockquot">
Total handling of 1 letter = 1 letter posted + 1 letter delivered + 0.6 letter
forwarded.<br />
<br />
Total handling of 1 parcel = 1 parcel posted + 1 parcel delivered + 0.8 parcel
forwarded.<br />
<br />
Now a letter forwarded = ? letter posted and delivered (<a href="#Table_D">Table D</a>).<br />
<br />
And a parcel forwarded = ? parcel posted and delivered (<a href="#Table_D">Table D</a>).<br />
<br />
Hence total handling of 1 letter = 1.2 letter posted and delivered.<br />
<br />
And total handling of 1 parcel = 1.26 parcel posted and delivered.<br />
</p>

<p>The ratio between the total cost of handling (indoor) of 1 letter and the total
cost of handling (indoor) of 1 parcel is therefore&mdash;</p>

<p class="center">
1.2 &#215; 1 : 1.26 &#215; 12 = 1 : 12.6.<br />
</p>

<p>The normal unit cost for indoor work is &#163;15 (approximately).</p>

<p>For outdoor work the ratio is 1: 10, and the normal unit cost &#163;22 10s.</p>

<p>The ratio for all indoor and outdoor services is therefore approximately 1: 11.</p>

<hr />

<p><!-- Page 301 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_301" id="Page_301">[Pg 301]</a></span></p>


<h4><a name="Table_F" id="Table_F"></a>TABLE F<br />
ACTUAL COST OF STAFF FOR LETTERS AND PARCELS.</h4>

<p>The total cost of handling a parcel is 11 times the total cost of handling a
packet other than a parcel (<a href="#Table_E">Table E</a>).</p>

<p>In 1913-14 the total number of parcels dealt with was 133,663,000 (<a href="#Table_A">Table A</a>).</p>

<p>The cost of handling these parcels was equivalent to the cost of handling
133,663,000 &#215; 11 = 1,470,293,000 packets other than parcels.</p>

<p>In 1913-14 the total number of packets other than parcels dealt with was
5,831,550,000 (<a href="#Table_A">Table A</a>).</p>

<p>And the total cost of staff engaged in dealing with all packets, including
parcels, was &#163;10,263,460 (<a href="#Table_C">Table C</a>).</p>

<p>Hence the total cost of handling 133,663,000 parcels was</p>


<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Calculation of cost of handling parcels.">
<tr><td align="right" rowspan="2">&#163;10,263,460 &#215;</td><td align="center" class="tdbbs">1,470,293,000</td><td align="left" rowspan="2">= &#163;2,066,642.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">7,301,843,000</td></tr>
</table></div>

<p>And the total cost of handling 5,831,550,000 packets other than parcels was
&#163;8,196,818.<!-- Page 302 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_302" id="Page_302">[Pg 302]</a></span></p>


<h4><a name="Table_G" id="Table_G"></a>TABLE G<br />
ANALYSIS OF COST OF STAFF.</h4>

<p class="center"><span class="smcap">Letter Mails</span>.</p>

<p class="center"><i>Total Cost</i>, &#163;8,196,818.</p>

<p>The handling of postal packets falls into the following groups of operations:&mdash;</p>

<p>
(<i>a</i>) Collection and delivery,<br />
<br />
(<i>b</i>) Facing, stamping, and sorting,<br />
<br />
(<i>c</i>) Administration and accounting.<br />
</p>

<p>The cost of administration and accounting when reduced to the individual
packet is extremely small. In general also it varies to some extent with the
size
of the packet. Thus the newspaper packets and the halfpenny packets, which
are considerably heavier than the ordinary letters, notoriously involve more
difficulty and expense in administration; and the postcard, the lightest postal
packet, notoriously involves least difficulty and expense in administration.
Parcels undoubtedly involve much more expense for accounting than any other
class of packet; so that if the expense for administration and accounting be
divided in the ratio adopted for sorting, stamping, collection, and delivery,
which also depends largely on the weight of the packet, no appreciable
error is introduced. No attempt is made, therefore, to isolate the expense for
administration and accounting.</p>

<p>The total cost of collection and delivery is estimated to be double the total
cost of facing, stamping, and sorting.</p>

<p>The cost of delivery is estimated to be four times the cost of collection.</p>

<p>The cost of sorting is estimated to be four times the cost of facing and
stamping.</p>

<p>The total cost of handling packets other than parcels (excluding cost of
conveyance) = &#163;8,196,818.</p>

<p>Hence&mdash;</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Total cost of postal operations.">
<tr><th align="center" colspan="3"></th><th align="center">&#163;</th></tr>
<tr><td align="center">Total cost of</td><td align="left">collection</td><td align="right">=</td><td align="right">1,092,909</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center" class="ditto">" &emsp; "</td><td align="left">facing and stamping</td><td align="right">=</td><td align="right">546,455</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center" class="ditto">" &emsp; "</td><td align="left">sorting</td><td align="right">=</td><td align="right">2,185,818</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center" class="ditto">" &emsp; "</td><td align="left">delivery</td><td align="right">=</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">4,371,636</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center"></td><td align="center" colspan="2">Total</td><td align="right" class="tdbbd">&#163;8,196,818</td></tr>
</table></div>
<p><!-- Page 303 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_303" id="Page_303">[Pg 303]</a></span></p>


<h4><a name="Table_H" id="Table_H"></a>TABLE H<br />
RELATIVE RATES OF SORTING AND STAMPING.</h4>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Relative rates of stamping and sorting.">
<tr><th align="left"></th><th align="center">Relative Rate<br /> of Stamping.</th><th align="center">Relative Rate<br /> of Sorting.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Ordinary Letter Packets&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; (<i>a</i>) not exceeding 1 oz.</td><td align="right">1,000</td><td align="right">100</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; (<i>b</i>) over 1 oz., not exceeding 4 oz.</td><td align="right">75</td><td align="right">75</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; (<i>c</i>) over 4 oz.</td><td align="right">75</td><td align="right">60</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Postcards</td><td align="right">1,000</td><td align="right">100</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Halfpenny Packets</td><td align="right">750</td><td align="right">90</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Newspaper Packets</td><td align="right">80</td><td align="right">70</td></tr>
</table></div>


<hr />

<p><span class="smcap">Note I.</span> The rates both as regards stamping and as regards sorting are
not
actual but relative rates. In both cases the handling of an ordinary light
letter
is taken as the standard with which the rate of handling other articles is
compared.
The table is intended to indicate, e.g., that if in a given period of time
100 ordinary light letters would be sorted, only 75 letters weighing between 1
ounce
and 4 ounces, or only 90 halfpenny packets, would be sorted in the same period;
or if in a given period of time 1,000 ordinary light letters would be stamped,
only
75 letters over 1 ounce in weight, or only 80 newspapers, would be stamped in
the
same period. All that is aimed at is the normal relative rate of sorting for
each
class of packet. It is not necessary to ascertain the normal absolute rate.</p>

<hr />

<p><span class="smcap">Note II.</span> <i>Rates of Stamping.</i>&mdash;In determining rates of stamping, a
serious
complication is introduced by the use of machines (both hand and power) at
many offices for stamping certain classes of packets. In London, where
approximately
one-third of the total number of postal packets is posted, power machine-stamps
are employed, except at a few of the sub-district sorting offices, at which
hand machine-stamps are still employed. There are a few of the smaller offices
at which all the stamping is done by hand, but the number of such offices and
the number of packets so stamped is negligible. The power machine stamps
at rates varying from 12 to 16 times as great as that of an officer stamping by
hand; the hand machine stamps at a rate about ten times as great.</p>

<p>Power machine-stamps are in use in the provinces in towns in which approximately
a quarter of the total number of postal packets is posted.</p>

<p>Hand machine-stamps are in use in other towns in the provinces where
approximately one-twelfth of the total number of postal packets is posted.</p>

<p>In the remaining towns there is hand stamping only.</p>

<p>The foregoing estimates give an average rate of stamping throughout the
kingdom for those classes of packets which are of a size and shape to pass
through the machine-stamp, where available, of about ten times as great as
that of an officer stamping by hand.<!-- Page 304 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_304" id="Page_304">[Pg 304]</a></span></p>

<p>This figure must now be applied to the various classes of packets shown in the
table, in conjunction with the rates of hand-stamping for such packets as
cannot be passed through the machine-stamp.</p>

<p>(<i>a</i>) Practically all letters under 1 ounce can be passed through the
machine-stamp
if available. Hence the rate for this class is ten times the rate of
hand-stamping.</p>

<p>(<i>b</i>) None of the second or third classes of packets can be passed through
the
machine. Further, these packets are of irregular shape and are therefore much
less convenient to deal with than ordinary letters. The rate of hand-stamping
is therefore only about three-fourths the rate for ordinary letters.</p>

<p>(<i>c</i>) All postcards can be passed through the machine-stamp if available.
The
rate is therefore ten times the rate of hand-stamping.</p>

<p>(<i>d</i>) A large proportion of halfpenny packets cannot, on account of their
size
and shape, be passed through the machine-stamp, and the figure for the
machine-stamp
must be considerably reduced for these packets. The nearest estimate
that can be formed for these packets is 7.5 times the rate for hand-stamping.</p>

<p>(<i>e</i>) Newspapers cannot be passed through the machine-stamp, but in a
number
of cases the wrappers are taken to the post office before the newspapers are
enclosed in them for cancellation of the postage stamps (in order to secure
a prompt despatch when the newspapers are actually posted). The rate for such
stamping is slightly greater than the rate of hand-stamping for ordinary
letters.
On the other hand, the rate of stamping newspaper packets is not more than
two-thirds the rate of hand-stamping ordinary letters. The nearest estimate
that can be formed for all newspapers is that the rate of stamping is
four-fifths
the rate of hand-stamping ordinary letters.</p>

<hr />

<p><span class="smcap">Note III.</span> <i>Rates of Sorting.</i>&mdash;(<i>a</i>) The average rate of
sorting for ordinary
letters is taken as the unit.</p>

<p>(<i>b</i>) The rate of sorting letters and the rate of sorting postcards may be
taken
as identical.</p>

<p>(<i>c</i>) Owing to the irregular shape of newspaper packets, and letter packets
over
4 ounces in weight, the average normal rate of sorting must be taken as
considerably
less than that for letters.</p>

<p>Both classes are usually sorted at the packet tables and not at the ordinary
letter frames.</p>

<p>(<i>d</i>) The letter packets between 1 ounce and 4 ounces in weight present
some
difficulty, since they include a considerable number of long letters, which are
sorted at the ordinary letter frames at nearly the same rate as short letters,
while the rest are sorted at the packet tables at about the same rate as the
heavier packets. The figure should obviously be between (<i>a</i>) and
(<i>c</i>).</p>

<p>(<i>e</i>) The halfpenny packets also fall into two classes: (1) those sorted as
short
letters, and (2) those sorted at the newspaper frames. A very large proportion
fall into the second class, and the average normal rate of sorting, as in the
case
of the second class of letter packets, is intermediate between (<i>a</i>) and
(<i>c</i>).<!-- Page 305 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_305" id="Page_305">[Pg 305]</a></span></p>


<h4><a name="Table_J" id="Table_J"></a>TABLE J<br />
STAFF.</h4>

<p>This table shows the relative cost per packet, based on the rates of work
(<a href="#Table_H">Table H</a>), the cost of an ordinary letter being taken as the unit.</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Relative cost per packet of postal operations, by type.">
<tr><th align="left">Description of Packet.</th><th align="center">Collection.</th><th align="center">Facing and<br /> Stamping.<a name="FNanchor_631_631" id="FNanchor_631_631"></a><a href="#Footnote_631_631" class="fnanchor">[631]</a></th><th align="center">Storing.</th><th align="center">Delivery.<a name="FNanchor_632_632" id="FNanchor_632_632"></a><a href="#Footnote_632_632" class="fnanchor">[632]</a></th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Ordinary Letter Packets&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp;(<i>a</i>) not exceeding 1 oz.</td><td align="center">1</td><td align="center">1</td><td align="center">1</td><td align="center">1</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp;(<i>b</i>) over 1 oz., not exceeding 4 oz.</td><td align="center">1</td><td align="center">6?</td><td align="center">1?</td><td align="center">1?</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp;(<i>c</i>) over 4 oz</td><td align="center">1</td><td align="center">6?</td><td align="center">1?</td><td align="center">1?</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Postcards</td><td align="center">1</td><td align="center">1</td><td align="center">1</td><td align="center">1</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Halfpenny Packets</td><td align="center">1</td><td align="center">1&frac14;</td><td align="center">1-1/9</td><td align="center">1-1/9</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Newspaper Packets</td><td align="center">1</td><td align="center">6&frac14;</td><td align="center">1-3/7</td><td align="center">1-3/7</td></tr>
</table></div>

<hr />


<h4><a name="Table_K" id="Table_K"></a>TABLE K<br />
STAFF (RELATIVE COST).</h4>

<p>This table shows the ratios in <a href="#Table_J">Table J</a> weighted according to the number of
packets in each class.</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Relative cost of postal operations weighted by nubers of packets, by type.">
<tr><th align="left">Description of Packet.</th><th align="center">Collection.</th><th align="center">Facing and<br /> Stamping.</th><th align="center">Storing.</th><th align="center">Delivery.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Ordinary Letter Packets&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; (<i>a</i>) not exceeding 1 oz.</td><td align="left">1</td><td align="left">1</td><td align="left">1</td><td align="left">1</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; (<i>b</i>) over 1 oz., not exceeding 4 oz.</td><td align="left">0.113</td><td align="left">0.755</td><td align="left">0.151</td><td align="left">0.151</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; (<i>c</i>) over 4 oz.</td><td align="left">0.045</td><td align="left">0.299</td><td align="left">0.075</td><td align="left">0.075</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Postcards</td><td align="left">0.306</td><td align="left">0.306</td><td align="left">0.306</td><td align="left">0.306</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Halfpenny Packets</td><td align="left">0.402</td><td align="left">0.503</td><td align="left">0.447</td><td align="left">0.447</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Newspaper Packets</td><td align="left">0.069</td><td align="left">0.430</td><td align="left">0.098</td><td align="left">0.098</td></tr>
</table></div>

<p><!-- Page 306 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_306" id="Page_306">[Pg 306]</a></span></p>


<h4><a name="Table_L" id="Table_L"></a>TABLE L<br />
STAFF (ACTUAL COST).</h4>

<p>This table shows the ratios given in <a href="#Table_K">Table K</a> applied to the total cost (Tables F
and G).</p>

<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Actual cost of postal operations.">
<tr><th align="left">Description of Packet.</th><th align="center">Collection</th><th align="center">Facing and<br /> Stamping</th><th align="center">Storing.</th><th align="center">Delivery.</th><th align="center">Total.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Ordinary Letter Packets&mdash;</td><td align="center">&#163;</td><td align="center">&#163;</td><td align="center">&#163;</td><td align="center">&#163;</td><td align="center">&#163;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; (<i>a</i>) Not exceeding 1 oz.</td><td align="right">564,811</td><td align="right">165,944</td><td align="right">1,052,392</td><td align="right">2,104,784</td><td align="right">3,887,931</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; (<i>b</i>) Over 1 oz., not exceeding 4 oz.</td><td align="right">63,824</td><td align="right">125,288</td><td align="right">158,911</td><td align="right">317,822</td><td align="right">665,845</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; (<i>c</i>) Over 4 oz.</td><td align="right">25,416</td><td align="right">49,618</td><td align="right">78,930</td><td align="right">157,859</td><td align="right">311,823</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Postcards</td><td align="right">172,832</td><td align="right">50,779</td><td align="right">322,032</td><td align="right">644,064</td><td align="right">1,189,707</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Halfpenny Packets</td><td align="right">227,054</td><td align="right">83,470</td><td align="right">470,419</td><td align="right">940,838</td><td align="right">1,721,781</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Newspaper Packets</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">38,972</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">71,356</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">103,134</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">206,269</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">419,731</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">Total</td><td align="right">1,092,909</td><td align="right">546,455</td><td align="right">2,185,818</td><td align="right">4,371,636</td><td align="right">8,196,818</td></tr>
</table></div>

<p><!-- Page 307 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_307" id="Page_307">[Pg 307]</a></span></p>


<h4><a name="Table_M" id="Table_M"></a>TABLE M<br />
CONVEYANCE.</h4>

<p><i>Total Cost of Conveyance of Mails within the United Kingdom</i>:</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Cost of conveyance by different transport types within the United Kingdom.">
<tr><td align="left" colspan="3"></td><td align="center">&#163;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>a</i>)</td><td align="center">For Conveyance by</td><td align="left">Railway</td><td align="right">2,435,566</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>b</i>)</td><td align="center">" &emsp; " &emsp; "</td><td align="left">Road</td><td align="right">662,010</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">(<i>c</i>)</td><td align="center">" &emsp; " &emsp; "</td><td align="left">Sea</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">177,260</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"></td><td align="center" colspan="2">Total</td><td align="right" class="tdbbd">&#163;3,274,836</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>Of the payment for conveyance by railway, &#163;1,238,529 is the cost of the
conveyance of letter mails, and &#163;1,197,037 the cost of the conveyance of parcel
mails.</p>

<p>The payment for conveyance by road is, on such estimate as can be made,
assignable in equal proportions between letter mails and parcel mails.</p>

<p>Of the payment for conveyance by sea, &#163;150,000 is, on such estimate as can
be made, assignable to the conveyance of letter mails.</p>

<p>The cost of the conveyance of letter mails is therefore&mdash;</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Estimated cost of conveyance of letter mails by different transport types.">
<tr><td align="left" colspan="3"></td><td align="center">&#163;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">By</td><td align="left">Railway</td><td></td><td align="right">1,238,529</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">Road</td><td></td><td align="right">331,005</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">Sea</td><td></td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">150,000</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="2"></td><td align="center">Total</td><td align="right" class="tdbbd">&#163;1,719,534</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>And the cost of the conveyance of parcel mails is&mdash;</p>

<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Cost of conveyance of parcel mails by different transport types.">
<tr><td align="center" colspan="3"></td><td align="center">&#163;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center" colspan="2">By Railway</td><td></td><td align="right">1,197,037</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">Road</td><td></td><td align="right">331,005</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">Sea</td><td></td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">27,260</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center" colspan="2"></td><td align="left">Total</td><td align="right" class="tdbbd">&#163;1,555,302</td></tr>
</table></div>
<p><!-- Page 308 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_308" id="Page_308">[Pg 308]</a></span></p>


<h4><a name="Table_N" id="Table_N"></a>TABLE N<br />
CONVEYANCE: ANALYSIS OF COST.</h4>

<p class="center"><span class="smcap">Letter Mails.</span></p>

<p class="center"><i>Total Cost</i>, &#163;1,719,534.</p>

<p>Cost of conveyance is assigned between the various classes of packets in
proportion to the gross weight.</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Cost of conveyance of packet classes in proportion to gross weight.">
<tr><th align="left">Description of Packet.</th><th align="center">Gross Weight.<a name="FNanchor_633_633" id="FNanchor_633_633"></a><a href="#Footnote_633_633" class="fnanchor">[633]</a></th><th align="center">Cost of<br /> Conveyance.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Ordinary Letter Packets&mdash;</td><td align="center">lb.</td><td align="center">&#163;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; (<i>a</i>) Not exceeding 1 oz.</td><td align="right">67,200,000</td><td align="right">437,734</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; (<i>b</i>) Over 1 oz., not exceeding 4 oz.</td><td align="right">41,700,000</td><td align="right">271,600</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; (<i>c</i>) Over 4 oz.</td><td align="right">54,000,000</td><td align="right">351,700</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Postcards</td><td align="right">8,203,000</td><td align="right">53,450</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Halfpenny Packets</td><td align="right">37,705,000</td><td align="right">245,600</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Newspaper Packets</td><td align="right">55,192,000</td><td align="right">359,450</td></tr>
</table></div>

<hr />


<p><!-- Page 309 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_309" id="Page_309">[Pg 309]</a></span></p>


<h4><a name="Table_O" id="Table_O"></a>TABLE O<br />
BUILDINGS.</h4>

<p class="center"><i>Total Cost</i>, &#163;706,614.</p>

<p>Twelve times as much office accommodation is required in respect of a parcel
as in respect of a packet other than a parcel (<a href="#Table_D">Table D</a>).</p>

<p>Hence&mdash;</p>

<p>The total cost of buildings may be divided as between parcels on the one hand
and all packets other than parcels on the other hand in the ratio&mdash;</p>

<p class="center">
133,663,000 &#215; 12 : 5,831,550,000<br />
<br />
i.e. 1 : 3.6357<br />
</p>

<p>The total cost for buildings chargeable to parcels is therefore &#163;152,428, and
the
total cost for buildings chargeable to other packets is &#163;554,186.</p>

<p>The latter sum is assigned between the respective classes of packets in
proportion
to the gross weight of each class (<a href="#Table_N">Table N</a>) as follows:&mdash;</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Cost of buildings for different classes of packet.">
<tr><th align="left"></th><th align="center">Cost for<br /> Buildings.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Ordinary Letter Packets&mdash;</td><td align="center">&#163;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; (<i>a</i>) Not exceeding 1 oz.</td><td align="right">141,066</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; (<i>b</i>) Over 1 oz., not exceeding 4 oz.</td><td align="right">87,536</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; (<i>c</i>) Over 4 oz.</td><td align="right">113,356</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Postcards</td><td align="right">17,220</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Halfpenny Packets</td><td align="right">79,150</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Newspaper Packets</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">115,858</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">Total</td><td align="right" class="tdbbd">&#163;554,186</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>This division gives an advantage to the light packets as compared with the
heavier packets sent by Letter Post; but, as between parcels and other packets,
an advantage is given to parcels (cf. <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">supra</i>, <a href="#Table_E">Table E</a>).<!-- Page 310 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_310" id="Page_310">[Pg 310]</a></span></p>


<h4><a name="Table_P" id="Table_P"></a>TABLE P<br />
STORES AND MISCELLANEOUS EXPENDITURE.</h4>

<p class="center"><i>Total cost</i>, &#163;811,767.</p>

<p>As between parcels and other packets respectively, this amount is assigned
on the unit basis, reckoning one parcel equivalent to twelve other packets
(<a href="#Table_D">Table D</a>).</p>

<p>As between the various classes of packets other than parcels, the amount
is assigned on the basis of simple numbers.</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Cost of stores and other expenditure for different classes of packet.">
<tr><td align="left">Ordinary Letter Packets&mdash;</td><td align="center">&#163;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; (<i>a</i>) Not exceeding 1 oz</td><td align="right">328,857</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; (<i>b</i>) Over 1 oz., not exceeding 4 oz</td><td align="right">37,251</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; (<i>c</i>) Over 4 oz</td><td align="right">14,779</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Postcards</td><td align="right">100,904</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Halfpenny Packets</td><td align="right">132,254</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Newspaper Packets</td><td align="right">22,610</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Parcels</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">175,112</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">Total</td><td align="right" class="tdbbd">&#163;811,767</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>This method gives an advantage to the heavy packets.<!-- Page 311 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_311" id="Page_311">[Pg 311]</a></span></p>


<h4><a name="Table_Q" id="Table_Q"></a>TABLE Q<br />
TOTAL COST.</h4>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Total costs for all types of packet.">
<tr><th align="center">Description of Packet</th><th align="center">Staff.</th><th align="center">Conveyance.</th><th align="center">Buildings.</th><th align="center">Stores, etc.</th><th align="center">Total.</th><th align="center">Cost per<br /> Packet.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Ordinary Letter Packets&mdash;</td><td align="center">&#163;</td><td align="center">&#163;</td><td align="center">&#163;</td><td align="center">&#163;</td><td align="center">&#163;</td><td align="center">d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; (<i>a</i>) Not exceeding 1 oz</td><td align="right">3,887,931</td><td align="right">437,734</td><td align="right">141,066</td><td align="right">328,857</td><td align="right">4,795,588</td><td align="right">0.382</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; (<i>b</i>) Over 1oz., not exceeding 4 oz.</td><td align="right">665,845</td><td align="right">271,600</td><td align="right">87,536</td><td align="right">37,251</td><td align="right">1,062,232</td><td align="right">0.747</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; (<i>c</i>) Over 4 oz.</td><td align="right">311,823</td><td align="right">351,700</td><td align="right">113,356</td><td align="right">14,779</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">791,658</td><td align="right">1.404</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="5">All Letter Packets</td><td align="right" class="tdbbd">6,649,478</td><td align="right">0.457</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Postcards</td><td align="right">1,189,707</td><td align="right">53,450</td><td align="right">17,220</td><td align="right">100,904</td><td align="right">1,361,281</td><td align="right">0.353</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Halfpenny Packets</td><td align="right">1,721,781</td><td align="right">245,600</td><td align="right">79,150</td><td align="right">132,254</td><td align="right">2,178,785</td><td align="right">0.432</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Newspaper Packets</td><td align="right">419,731</td><td align="right">359,450</td><td align="right">115,858</td><td align="right">22,610</td><td align="right">917,649</td><td align="right">1.063</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Parcels</td><td align="right">2,066,642</td><td align="right">1,555,302</td><td align="right">152,428</td><td align="right">175,112</td><td align="right">3,949,484</td><td align="right">7.091</td></tr>
</table></div>

<hr />

<p><!-- Page 312 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_312" id="Page_312">[Pg 312]</a></span></p>




<h2>VIII<br /><br /><br />
CONCLUSION</h2>


<p>In relation to the rate of postage, the traffic of the Post
Office falls into two main groups: on the one hand light
letters and packets approximating to that type, and on the other
the heavier packets and parcels. This division corresponds
with an important difference in the practical working of
the Post Office service, the task of providing for the transmission
of ordinary letters, hundreds of which can be conveyed
by foot-messenger without difficulty, being one entirely
different from that of providing for the transmission of larger
packets, a few scores of which would render necessary the
use of a vehicle.</p>

<hr />

<p>As to the transmission of letters, Sir Rowland Hill first
perceived the significance of the fact that with objects of
light weight the cost of conveyance, even over great distances,
is small, and in his scheme of reform he consciously applied
this fact to the determination of the rate of letter postage.
This consideration remains; and as regards the ordinary
letters of business or private communication&mdash;the average
weight of which is less than half an ounce&mdash;the principle
of uniformity of rate irrespective of distance, which is now
the characteristic of letter postage, is well founded. Of the
whole expense of conducting the postal services, the expense
of the actual conveyance of a letter from place to place is
not only small as compared with the cost of the terminal
services of collection and delivery, but is actually so small in
amount that no monetary system provides a coin of sufficiently
small value to make its collection a practical possibility. The<!-- Page 313 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_313" id="Page_313">[Pg 313]</a></span>
uniform rate, by making practicable the system of prepayment
of postage by means of adhesive labels, has, moreover, effected
great economy in the working of the service, and its simplicity
is a boon to the public, the more so as it has been possible to
fit the common rate to a popular coin. A low uniform rate
is, however, only made possible from the financial standpoint
by the Post Office monopoly of the carriage of letters, although
that monopoly is justified on other grounds. With a uniform
rate, owing to the varying conditions under which the
service is conducted in different districts, there is inevitably
a variation in the amount of profit. In certain cases,
the rate is actually unprofitable; and were private undertakings
permitted to compete for the more profitable traffic,
such as the local traffic in large centres of population, the
profits of the Post Office would be reduced to vanishing-point.</p>

<p>Improvements in the means of communication have
naturally had considerable effect on the development of the
Post Office. The introduction of the stage-coach in the
eighteenth century, and of railways and steamboats in
the nineteenth, in turn revolutionized the methods of general
transportation. By these improvements the capacity of the
Post Office was largely increased, and regularity, rapidity,
and increased frequency of service made possible. But such
general improvements, while of the utmost importance as
regards the capacity and character of the Post Office service,
can affect the rates of postage only so far as they affect the
cost of transportation of the mails, or, by largely increasing
traffic, enable economies of business on a large scale to be
secured. The stage-coach cheapened the cost of transportation,
but, in England, had no effect on the rates of
postage, because at the time of its introduction the charges
were of a purely fiscal character, and the benefit of cheaper
transportation was not passed on to the users of the Post
Office. The effect of the introduction of the railway has,
at any rate as regards letter postage, not been much greater.
Sir Rowland Hill's reform, which standardized letter postage,
was based on the ascertained cost of conveyance of mails
by stage-coach.<a name="FNanchor_634_634" id="FNanchor_634_634"></a><a href="#Footnote_634_634" class="fnanchor">[634]</a> He found the cost of such conveyance too<!-- Page 314 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_314" id="Page_314">[Pg 314]</a></span>
small to be taken into account; and the introduction of the
railway could not, of course, improve such a situation.<a name="FNanchor_635_635" id="FNanchor_635_635"></a><a href="#Footnote_635_635" class="fnanchor">[635]</a></p>

<p>The ordinary light letter, weighing on the average considerably
less than an ounce, comprises the overwhelming bulk
of Post Office traffic, and the heavier letters occupy a quite
subsidiary place. With the growth of Post Office traffic,
and the consequent economies resulting from business on
a large scale, the profits of the Post Office have gradually
increased, but not to such an extent as to admit of the
reduction of Sir Rowland Hill's penny rate without destroying
the net revenue. Any reduction has been limited to the
heavier letters.</p>

<p>The penny rate for the ordinary letter, though so moderate,
is considerably in excess of the average cost even of long-distance
letters.<a name="FNanchor_636_636" id="FNanchor_636_636"></a><a href="#Footnote_636_636" class="fnanchor">[636]</a> Its maintenance, therefore, depends not
on economic, but on general political and financial considerations.
The question is, what general considerations
shall be allowed to govern the rate? Shall it be fixed on
the simple basis of cost and revenue, or shall it be fixed at
such a level as to yield a surplus revenue? In other words,
is it thought that the general public advantages which would
result from a reduction of postage to the cost basis would
counterbalance the disadvantages which would result from
the loss of public revenue? This question will, of course,
be answered in accordance with the varying circumstances
in the different countries and at different times.<a name="FNanchor_637_637" id="FNanchor_637_637"></a><a href="#Footnote_637_637" class="fnanchor">[637]</a><!-- Page 315 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_315" id="Page_315">[Pg 315]</a></span></p>

<p>An important consideration in relation to any proposal
for reduction or increase of the letter rate, or, indeed, of any
rate of postage, is, of course, the probable effect on the volume
of traffic. Sir Rowland Hill, when he put forward his plan,
laid stress on the increase in the number of letters which
he anticipated would follow the adoption of his proposal.
Since that time it has become almost an axiom that a reduction
of rate will naturally and inevitably be followed by an
increase of the traffic, more or less considerable, according as
the reduction is large or small. Indeed, some writers have
thought that the new postal system was based on a law
of fixed relative proportions between a reduction of rate and
the corresponding result on traffic. In point of fact, Sir
Rowland Hill's estimates were based only partially on the
probable effect of the reduction in stimulating traffic,
and rather on the anticipation that, with a rate reasonably
low, all that vast letter traffic which it was well known
was being unlawfully dealt with outside the Post Office
would be attracted to the lawful service. It is probable
that a point of approximate satiety can be reached in the reduction
of postage rates no less than in the reduction of the
price of other commodities. A reduction would then result
in only slightly increased consumption of the commodity&mdash;that
is, in the case of letters, increase of the number posted.
<i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Per contra</i>, a moderate increase of rate would result in a
comparatively small reduction of the number of letters.<a name="FNanchor_638_638" id="FNanchor_638_638"></a><a href="#Footnote_638_638" class="fnanchor">[638]</a> But
moderate variations of postage on ordinary letters are difficult
to make, since popular charges, such as a penny or halfpenny,
while they offer obvious advantages from many points of
view, are not susceptible of slight modifications.</p>

<p>The variation of rate according to the weight of the packet
is a point which has received insufficient attention. There
can be no doubt that the cost to the Post Office of performing
the service it affords in respect of packets of any kind
entrusted to it increases with the increase of the weight and
size. But it does not increase proportionately. A letter
of 8 ounces does not cost twice as much to collect, transmit,
and deliver as a letter of 4 ounces. The operations of<!-- Page 316 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_316" id="Page_316">[Pg 316]</a></span>
stamping, sorting, and making up for despatch occupy more
time and cause more inconvenience in the case of the larger
packet, but the difference is slight when compared with the
difference in size and weight. Nor does the cost of conveyance
vary directly with the weight. In any system of
rates, therefore, which are accurately adjusted to the cost
of the service, the rate of charge must increase considerably
less rapidly than the increase in weight, that is to say, the
rate would be degressive. Of modern postage rates very
few are constructed on this principle, and to that extent they
are uneconomic. In the case of letters, since the weight
of the packet is normally unimportant, and simplicity
of charge very important, this factor has been for the most
part ignored.<a name="FNanchor_639_639" id="FNanchor_639_639"></a><a href="#Footnote_639_639" class="fnanchor">[639]</a></p>

<hr />

<p>The same consideration which makes the uniform rate
irrespective of distance economically just in the case of
ordinary letters, takes away any ground on the score of
cost of service for a special rate for local letters lower than
the general uniform rate. On the other hand, the considerations
which make for monopoly and unified control in the
case of a general service, do not apply with the same force
in the case of a service limited to a small area. In the latter
case, competition can much more easily be set up; and as
the uniform penny rate is much higher than the cost of
service even in the case of long-distance letters, competing
agencies, which can leave aside unprofitable districts, such as
the rural districts, can secure a profit on a local service while
charging much lower rates. The maintenance of a local
rate for letters side by side with a uniform rate 100 per cent.
greater for all distances outside the local area, as in Canada,
is nevertheless inconsistent from the economic standpoint.</p>

<hr />

<p>The postcard, which may be regarded as a development of
the letter post, is, in effect, an admission that the letter rate
is much higher than the cost of service. The difference in
cost of service in the case respectively of a light letter and<!-- Page 317 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_317" id="Page_317">[Pg 317]</a></span>
a postcard is negligible. Indeed, in some respects light
letters are more easily and more rapidly handled than
postcards. From that standpoint, therefore, there is nothing
to justify the difference of 100 per cent. in the rate of charge,
and the lower rate is an arbitrary concession. The logical
ground for its existence is rather to be looked for in the
familiar and generally accepted principle applied to the
determination of transportation rates by railway, by road,
or by sea, viz. charging "what the traffic will bear," or the
variation of the rates according to the intrinsic value of the
goods transported.<a name="FNanchor_640_640" id="FNanchor_640_640"></a><a href="#Footnote_640_640" class="fnanchor">[640]</a> Many messages are sent on postcards
which otherwise would be sent as closed letters. But, at
the same time, many messages are sent on postcards
which otherwise would not be sent at all. This has been
especially the case since the introduction of the picture
postcard.</p>

<hr />

<p>These remarks apply equally to the lower rate which has
been conceded to circular letters. Both rates represent a
great concession relatively to the letter rate, and under them
a large traffic has grown up.<a name="FNanchor_641_641" id="FNanchor_641_641"></a><a href="#Footnote_641_641" class="fnanchor">[641]</a> They closely approximate
to the actual cost of service, and probably yield a small profit.
They are of great importance in the general scheme of rates,
because they provide a cheap means for the transmission of
a very large proportion of ordinary personal and commercial
messages, and thus indirectly strengthen the position of the
profitable penny rate for ordinary letters.</p>

<p>The picture postcard has strengthened the position of the
letter rate in another way, viz. by raising the cost of
sending a postcard, so that in many cases it is now greater
than that of a letter. A common charge for a picture<!-- Page 318 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_318" id="Page_318">[Pg 318]</a></span>
postcard is a penny; the cost of sending a communication
on such a card by post is then three-halfpence, whereas
the cost of a letter is only a penny plus the very slight cost
of the paper and envelope.</p>

<hr />

<p>The newspaper rate involves some new considerations.
The original aim of the posts was the distribution of a
certain form of intelligence. They had by the seventeenth
century developed into an instrument whose main function
was the distribution of letters. The first postal traffic in
packets which were not letters was that in newspapers.
The early newspapers were, however, in fact as well as in
some cases in name also, merely news "letters," and it
would have been surprising, therefore, had the posts not
been made use of for their distribution. For newspapers,
however, the charges have from the first been of a fundamentally
different character from those for letters, and the
traffic in newspapers, so far from being a source of profit,
has in general resulted in heavy loss. There are certain
general considerations which render the application of the
rates of postage charged on letters inappropriate. The
bulk and weight of a single newspaper is usually much
greater than the bulk of a single letter; and if the newspaper
were charged at the same rate and on the same basis as
the letter, viz. by weight, it must in general be charged
several times the rate for an ordinary letter. Such a charge
would be unjust, because, as already pointed out, the cost
of performing the services of transportation and delivery
does not increase in direct proportion, or anything approaching
direct proportion, to the increase of weight. If a newspaper
is regarded as a very heavy letter, the importance of
the factor of weight is at once perceived. Weight charges
levied on newspapers should at least be on a degressive scale.
But any system of charge by weight proportioned to letter
postage must lead to a higher charge than that for a single
letter. How much higher is of little consequence, because
even the rate for single letters would be almost prohibitive
for ordinary newspapers. The papers would either be excluded
from the mails and despatched by private agencies,
where such agencies exist, or, in countries where the Post<!-- Page 319 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_319" id="Page_319">[Pg 319]</a></span>
Office holds the monopoly of the carriage of newspapers, the
traffic would be greatly restricted.</p>

<p>A lower rate for newspapers is also justified on the
principle of charging "what the traffic will bear." But the
chief reason is that it has usually been considered desirable
to encourage the distribution of newspapers for the benefit
of the public; and in its origin, the special rate for newspapers
seems to rest rather on the two general considerations of
the expediency of providing for the easy distribution of
intelligence, and the impossibility of charging newspapers
with the same rate as letters.</p>

<hr />

<p>Merchants' and manufacturers' samples are not, of course,
strictly speaking, of the nature of correspondence, and their
conveyance by post represents in some aspects an expansion
of function. The main function of the Post Office is the
distribution of letters, or, as it may be expressed generally,
the distribution of any species of communication between
persons, reduced to material form, whether as manuscript
letters, postcards or circular letters, printed or written, or
even in the form of newspapers. For samples of merchandise
some relationship to ordinary communications may perhaps
be claimed. They are themselves often the necessary complement
of letters of business and are forwarded in order to
convey a precise notion of the commodities with which the
business is concerned, a purpose served much more effectively
by the small sample than by the descriptive letter,
which would be the only alternative. So far, then, as the
Post Office is intended to assist the transmission of information
of whatever sort, the carriage of merchants' samples
is perhaps a legitimate part of its function, especially as the
encouragement of trade is no small part of its main function.
The transmission of small packets not inconvenient to handle
and transport, although essentially different in make-up
from letters, was therefore a natural development when
advantage to commerce would result.</p>

<p>The impracticability of charging the ordinary letter rate,
since such a charge would have been prohibitory, which
has influenced the newspaper rate, is equally applicable to
samples. The case for a lower rate was strengthened by<!-- Page 320 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_320" id="Page_320">[Pg 320]</a></span>
the consideration that commerce would benefit, and the
general considerations of the justice of a lower weight-rate
for moderately heavy packets and for packets of less intrinsic
value, applied to sample packets, no less than to newspapers,
although this point of view was not perhaps consciously
adopted. Based on these considerations, a special rate was
given to samples, fixed more or less arbitrarily, and without
examination into the question of what rate would be the
lowest profitable rate for the business.</p>

<hr />

<p>The basis of the book rate is only to a slight degree
economic, that is to say, related to the cost of providing the
service. The justification for a low rate rests for the most
part on the same considerations as the privileged rate for
newspapers: the desirability of assisting the education of the
people and the utility of books for the purpose, the comparatively
low intrinsic value, and the impossibility of charging
the scale of rates applied to letters&mdash;even less possible
in the case of books than in the case of newspapers.</p>

<hr />

<p>The exceptionally low rate for printed matter for the
blind has been given as a measure of philanthropy. By its
means, although at some loss to postal revenue, the effect
of the disadvantage of bulk and weight in such printed
matter, which results from the affliction, is in a large degree
removed.<a name="FNanchor_642_642" id="FNanchor_642_642"></a><a href="#Footnote_642_642" class="fnanchor">[642]</a></p>

<hr />

<p>The question of the rate to be applied to parcels is one<!-- Page 321 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_321" id="Page_321">[Pg 321]</a></span>
of considerable difficulty. While considerations of public
utility would probably make it undesirable for the State to
derive a profit from the business, they would hardly extend
to the point of conducting a large transportation business at
a loss, and the results in England and Germany show how
important and difficult is the problem of fixing remunerative
rates. The rates for newspapers, samples, ordinary printed
matter, etc., have been accorded not solely with reference to
the cost of the service, but on grounds more or less political
and social as regards the fact of granting a privileged rate,
and more or less empirical as regards the fixing of the actual
amount of the charge. For the most part this method has
answered sufficiently well, the reason being that the cost
per packet is comparatively small, and the privileged traffic
has not generally assumed large proportions relative to the
letter traffic. These empirical methods cannot, however, be
applied in the case of parcels. The expense of the service
performed by the Post Office is not, as with a letter, actually
small, and confined to that of collection at one end and
delivery at the other end of the journey, with a negligible
cost (per packet) for transmission between the points of
origin and destination. Cost of transportation itself becomes
an appreciable item in respect of every parcel. For this
transportation the Post Office is in the main dependent on
the railways, and in the determination of its cost the
principles determining ordinary railway rates must necessarily
apply.</p>

<p>Those principles are complex and to a large degree indeterminate.
On the problem of railway and other transport
rates many volumes have been written, and many more
will yet be written before a solution is arrived at.<a name="FNanchor_643_643" id="FNanchor_643_643"></a><a href="#Footnote_643_643" class="fnanchor">[643]</a> Railways,<!-- Page 322 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_322" id="Page_322">[Pg 322]</a></span>
like the Post Office, are unable to allocate the actual working
costs with any degree of precision between the various kinds
of service they perform. Like the Post Office, they have
one general set of expenses, although they have diverse sources
of revenue.<a name="FNanchor_644_644" id="FNanchor_644_644"></a><a href="#Footnote_644_644" class="fnanchor">[644]</a> Even if the cost of service could in each case
be definitely ascertained, its adoption as the sole basis of
the rates would prove unsatisfactory.<a name="FNanchor_645_645" id="FNanchor_645_645"></a><a href="#Footnote_645_645" class="fnanchor">[645]</a> For the most part
the principles on which the rates are actually fixed resolve
themselves into a consideration of "what the traffic will
bear," that is to say, the test by actual observation and
computation, strengthened, if need be, by actual experiment,
of the rates which will yield the maximum advantage to
the railway company.</p>

<p>The advantage to the railway conducted under private
management may be defined to be the excess of receipts
from the traffic over the out-of-pocket expenses actually
incurred in handling the traffic. To obtain this maximum
it has been found necessary to vary the charge according
to the nature of the goods. Elaborate, detailed classifications
of goods have been arranged with distinct scales
of rates for each class, devised on the basis of charging each<!-- Page 323 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_323" id="Page_323">[Pg 323]</a></span>
kind of goods with the rate likely to yield to the railway
the maximum of advantage as defined above.<a name="FNanchor_646_646" id="FNanchor_646_646"></a><a href="#Footnote_646_646" class="fnanchor">[646]</a> Although
somewhat crude and a little empirical, certainly largely
arbitrary, this method has been almost universally adopted
for the determination of railway charges.<a name="FNanchor_647_647" id="FNanchor_647_647"></a><a href="#Footnote_647_647" class="fnanchor">[647]</a></p>

<p>A characteristic feature of such charges is that account
is invariably taken of the distance over which the goods are
transported. In contrast with this, the principle of uniformity
of rate irrespective of distance has been universally adopted
in regard to all postal packets other than parcels, and to some
extent for parcels. The application of the principle to parcels
rests, however, on other grounds than its application to letters.
Sir Rowland Hill himself never contemplated that the principle
was necessarily applicable to all matter which might be
sent by post.<a name="FNanchor_648_648" id="FNanchor_648_648"></a><a href="#Footnote_648_648" class="fnanchor">[648]</a> The circumstances under which he made his
discovery, and the facts on which he relied, make it plain that,
in the absence of other overpowering considerations, the
grounds advanced in the case of light letters will not justify
uniformity of rate irrespective of distance for packets of<!-- Page 324 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_324" id="Page_324">[Pg 324]</a></span>
considerable weight, which necessarily involve appreciable
cost for transportation. From the financial point of view,
the uniform rate is, moreover, inapplicable to any class of
traffic not secured to the Post Office by monopoly, since
private undertakings will always step in and take away the
profitable sections.</p>

<p>For heavy parcels a uniform rate cannot be justified. There
are, however, certain considerations not purely economic
which may be held to justify a uniform rate for small parcels,
especially if it be held that the State may conduct such a
business for the advantage of the public, and abandon to
some extent ordinary commercial balancing of cost and revenue.</p>

<p>Simplicity, afforded in a high degree by the uniform rate,
facilitates the administration and practical conduct of Post
Office business, and is, therefore, desirable, even if a little
unjust. Complicated rates are an unfailing source of irritation
to the public as well as a source of embarrassment to
the staff, and there is not much doubt that one feature of
the parcel post which commends it to the public favour is
the simplicity of its rates.<a name="FNanchor_649_649" id="FNanchor_649_649"></a><a href="#Footnote_649_649" class="fnanchor">[649]</a> There is, moreover, to be considered
the view that it is no part of the duty of the Post
Office to provide services in towns or districts for which
private industry gives adequate services, but rather to cover
the whole country, so that the public may always have ready
to hand a means of forwarding small packages of goods to
friends or relatives, or traders to customers, in other parts
of the country. Such a service has many features which
distinguish it from business undertakings of the ordinary type.
In this way uniform rates may prove justified; since if in
regard to any local service, or the service between any two
points, the uniform rate, which must necessarily in certain
cases yield considerable profit, is found burdensome, it is in
all such cases open to private industry to provide the remedy.
In the case of light parcels the cost of the services of collection<!-- Page 325 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_325" id="Page_325">[Pg 325]</a></span>
and delivery is much greater than that of conveyance;
and the variation of the total cost with distance of transmission
is small proportionately. The uniform rate can
therefore be fixed near the level of the cost. But even for
such parcels it is economically unsound. It cannot be fixed
at a really low level, because it is to be applicable to a
parcel sent across the whole territory of a postal administration;
and with such a parcel, even if weighing only
1 pound, the cost of transportation is an appreciable item.</p>

<p>The uniform rate for parcels is an expedient for smooth
working rather than a scientific rate, and against the
acceptance of uniformity of rate as a principle must be
placed the fact that railway companies have not adopted it.
The actual results of the uniform rate have not been altogether
satisfactory. The small use of the post for the
transmission of the heavier parcels appears to indicate that
the rate for such parcels is, in general, too high.<a name="FNanchor_650_650" id="FNanchor_650_650"></a><a href="#Footnote_650_650" class="fnanchor">[650]</a> For local
traffic in small towns, where cost of conveyance is negligible,
it is almost prohibitive,<a name="FNanchor_651_651" id="FNanchor_651_651"></a><a href="#Footnote_651_651" class="fnanchor">[651]</a> and is much higher than the
rates charged by competing agencies.</p>

<p>The considerations in favour of a degressive rate apply
with greater force to parcels of moderate weight than to the
comparatively light packets which pass at the letter rate,
and this feature should receive fuller recognition in the
determination of parcel rates than has hitherto been
the case.</p>

<p>To sum up: there are important differences between the
letter and parcel traffic: (1) the letter traffic is a monopoly
in which the more profitable business belongs to the State
as well as the unprofitable, while the parcel business is not
a monopoly, and any traffic which proves profitable may at
once attract private competition; (2) in the letter traffic
the cost of transmission for a given distance is negligible,
and in the parcel traffic it is important; (3) the social arguments<!-- Page 326 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_326" id="Page_326">[Pg 326]</a></span>
which make it desirable for the State to secure as
wide as possible a diffusion of letters containing information,
of newspapers, books, and samples, do not apply in the
same way, or to the same degree, to the traffic in parcels
containing goods.</p>

<hr />

<p>In essentials the case of international rates differs little
from that of inland rates. The work in connection with a
letter falls into three main divisions: (1) at the place of
posting; (2) transmission from place of posting to place of
delivery; and (3) at the place of delivery. In the case
of inland letters, the first and third factors preponderate to
such a degree that their cost alone need be taken into consideration
in fixing the rate. The factor of transmission
can be ignored. In the case of letters from one country to
another, the services at the offices of posting and delivery
are performed under different, instead of under the same,
administrations, but for all practical purposes are otherwise
unaffected. The only factor seriously affected is that of
transportation.</p>

<p>The variation in the cost for transportation<a name="FNanchor_652_652" id="FNanchor_652_652"></a><a href="#Footnote_652_652" class="fnanchor">[652]</a> depends
largely on distance, and in that respect various countries
are affected in varying degrees, not only as regards the
actual distances over which their letters for or from places
abroad are sent, but in the way in which those distances
compare with the distances over which letters in the inland
service are conveyed; and the question therefore wears a
different aspect in the different countries. Thus a very large
proportion of letters in the British service are forwarded
over greater distances than letters in the inland service.
The same thing is probably true of France and Germany.
Distances in the inland services of the United States and
Canada are, however, comparable with the distances in the
international services in Europe, and in many cases with
distances in their own international services. If, therefore,
mere distance of transmission were the only consideration,
there would obviously be little to urge against the application<!-- Page 327 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_327" id="Page_327">[Pg 327]</a></span>
of the ordinary penny letter rate for inland transmission,
at least to the traffic of the whole of Europe, just as it has
been applied to the traffic of the whole of the United States
and Canada.<a name="FNanchor_653_653" id="FNanchor_653_653"></a><a href="#Footnote_653_653" class="fnanchor">[653]</a></p>

<p>But it is doubtful whether inland distances are really
comparable with international distances. The cost of maintaining
lines of communication between distant countries
is often altogether out of proportion to the quantity of mails
conveyed; and the sums paid, although ostensibly payments
for the conveyance of mails, are often really subsidies, paid
sometimes in order to assist the shipping or other industry,
sometimes for political purposes.<a name="FNanchor_654_654" id="FNanchor_654_654"></a><a href="#Footnote_654_654" class="fnanchor">[654]</a> They cannot, therefore,
be used as a basis for calculating the amount of postage which
should be charged on private letters.</p>

<p>This was particularly the case in earlier times.<a name="FNanchor_655_655" id="FNanchor_655_655"></a><a href="#Footnote_655_655" class="fnanchor">[655]</a> With
the expansion of commerce and the establishment for commercial<!-- Page 328 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_328" id="Page_328">[Pg 328]</a></span>
purposes of regular lines of steamers between the
principal countries of the world, the task of the Post Office
has been much simplified, and, notwithstanding the growth
of mails, the cost actually reduced.<a name="FNanchor_656_656" id="FNanchor_656_656"></a><a href="#Footnote_656_656" class="fnanchor">[656]</a> It is, however, still
heavy, and in some cases the payments include an element
of subsidy. The cost of transmission by sea of a foreign
letter in the British service is on the average &#188;d. Foreign
rates are not, however, fixed on a simple cost basis. The
reduction to a penny of the letter rate between Great Britain
and all parts of the British Empire; between Great
Britain, Egypt, and the United States; and between the
United States and Germany and France, has been made
from considerations of general advantage, political or otherwise,
rather than from considerations of immediate profit
or loss on the postal service.</p>

<p>The international parcel post has always been regarded
as primarily commercial,<a name="FNanchor_657_657" id="FNanchor_657_657"></a><a href="#Footnote_657_657" class="fnanchor">[657]</a> and the service has been deliberately
restricted to small parcels on the ground that the conduct
of an ordinary transportation undertaking is not a postal
function, and that the admission of heavy parcels would
render impossible the maintenance of the postal principle
of uniformity of rate. Parcel mails are in the international
service frequently denied the privilege of rapid transmission
accorded to letter mails.<a name="FNanchor_658_658" id="FNanchor_658_658"></a><a href="#Footnote_658_658" class="fnanchor">[658]</a> The developments of the present
war have emphasized the essential distinction to be drawn
between communications on the one hand, and packages
of goods sent by parcel post on the other.</p>

<hr />

<p>The general basis of postal rates is naturally affected in
some degree by the fact that the Post Office is a State undertaking,
and the propriety of Government control deserves<!-- Page 329 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_329" id="Page_329">[Pg 329]</a></span>
consideration. Adam Smith, with his individualistic leaning,
was bound to touch on the question of a State Post Office.
He thought there was no objection to the conduct of the
Post Office by the Government,<a name="FNanchor_659_659" id="FNanchor_659_659"></a><a href="#Footnote_659_659" class="fnanchor">[659]</a> and economists since his
day have generally followed his view.<a name="FNanchor_660_660" id="FNanchor_660_660"></a><a href="#Footnote_660_660" class="fnanchor">[660]</a> This acceptance of
State control as theoretically justifiable has probably been
induced by the logic of facts rather than by the recognition
of any peculiar characteristics tending to that view discoverable
in the postal service as an industrial organization.<a name="FNanchor_661_661" id="FNanchor_661_661"></a><a href="#Footnote_661_661" class="fnanchor">[661]</a></p>

<p>The transmission and delivery of letters for private individuals
may have some affinity to the transmission of official
despatches, but in theory such affinity is slight, especially
in regard to the transmission and delivery of local letters.
Because the Government had found it essential for its own<!-- Page 330 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_330" id="Page_330">[Pg 330]</a></span>
purposes to establish a system of posts, it did not necessarily
follow that the Government must assume also the function of
conveying letters for private individuals. But the Post Office
is one of those organizations in the case of which the normal
influence of economic forces tends to exclude competition.
Its operations are spread over large areas, and duplication of
services over large areas would result in waste of effort and
increase of expenses. Competing postal establishments would
exhibit the same glaring economic waste as competing
arrangements for the supply of gas, water, or electricity.
The service thus almost certainly becomes a monopoly; and
its nature makes the assumption of its management by the
State advantageous. In times of war, State monopoly of
the means of communication (postal, telegraph, telephone, and
wireless) is essential. Even if these services were in private
hands at the outbreak of war, the first action of the Government
would undoubtedly be to assume control.</p>

<p>A further reason justifying the conduct of the postal service
by the Government rather than by private enterprise is that
it is a necessity for the State to provide a means for the
regular transmission of intelligence by letter of script
throughout its territory. If the working of the service were
left to private enterprise, it would be certainly confined to such
routes as were found profitable, and those parts of the country
in which profitable routes could not be established would be
left unserved. The State alone can secure the establishment
of a complete service, in which regard must not be confined to
considerations of mere profit.<a name="FNanchor_662_662" id="FNanchor_662_662"></a><a href="#Footnote_662_662" class="fnanchor">[662]</a> There are also minor features
which render State management peculiarly applicable to the
postal service. The actual operations are simple. As Adam
Smith said: "There is no mystery in the business."<a name="FNanchor_663_663" id="FNanchor_663_663"></a><a href="#Footnote_663_663" class="fnanchor">[663]</a> The<!-- Page 331 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_331" id="Page_331">[Pg 331]</a></span>
work is for the most part of a routine character, and calls for
no special skill or knowledge. That is not to say that in the
performance of the actual duties there is no room for the
acquirement of considerable manipulative skill. It means that
in principle the chief operations are simple, and may be
reduced to routine processes. There is the further important
consideration that the operations of the Post Office are intimately
connected with the daily life of the people, and are
constantly subject to public observation and criticism.</p>

<p>Assuming a State parcel service, there is to be considered
the question whether that service should be attached to the
letter post or whether it would be more economical to set up
a separate service. It might appear at first sight that this
question has been determined by the practice. But as the
financial scheme of the letter post rests on the fact that the
actual transportation of the letters occupies, as regards
expense, a quite subsidiary place,<a name="FNanchor_664_664" id="FNanchor_664_664"></a><a href="#Footnote_664_664" class="fnanchor">[664]</a> it is difficult to discover
any special relation between the letter post and a business
which is really part of the general transport industry. It
may in some instances be advantageous to utilize for parcels
the service provided for the transmission and delivery of
letters. An organization reaching to all parts of the country
is ready to hand, and one which, in rural districts especially,
is often not employed to its full capacity. It may therefore
in some cases manifestly be economical to give additional
work to the service; but, at the same time, the provision of
a service for parcels may in other cases add unduly to the cost
of the general service&mdash;as, for example, when it becomes
necessary to make special arrangements on account of occasional
variations in the numbers of parcels.<a name="FNanchor_665_665" id="FNanchor_665_665"></a><a href="#Footnote_665_665" class="fnanchor">[665]</a></p>

<p>In any case, a postal service should be limited to parcels of
moderate size and weight, because the Post Office, as at present
organized, is for the most part adapted to the handling of
packets which can be delivered by foot-messengers. In rural<!-- Page 332 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_332" id="Page_332">[Pg 332]</a></span>
districts this is almost universally the rule.<a name="FNanchor_666_666" id="FNanchor_666_666"></a><a href="#Footnote_666_666" class="fnanchor">[666]</a> It is frequently
necessary in the towns to separate entirely the parcel post
traffic from the ordinary light letter post traffic (except in
those parts of the service where the parcel post traffic is very
restricted), to provide a separate staff, and to furnish different
equipment.<a name="FNanchor_667_667" id="FNanchor_667_667"></a><a href="#Footnote_667_667" class="fnanchor">[667]</a> In effect, two establishments are maintained.
A separate parcel staff could, of course, collect and deliver
traffic of any dimensions or character. But difficulties would
arise in regard to the transportation from town to town of
heavy parcels,<a name="FNanchor_668_668" id="FNanchor_668_668"></a><a href="#Footnote_668_668" class="fnanchor">[668]</a> and in rural districts their distribution could
not be undertaken without a reorganization of the general
arrangements of the mail service. Any sort of regular house-to-house
delivery would be enormously expensive. To a large
extent&mdash;in the United Kingdom at any rate&mdash;such a service
would be a duplication of services already provided by railway
companies, and consequently economically wasteful.</p>

<p>The transportation of parcels is, indeed, in many aspects
a service more appropriate to the railways than to the Post
Office. The Post Office, for example, is handicapped as compared
with the railways by the fact that, while the larger
part of its traffic in parcels must under present conditions
necessarily be conveyed by railway for some part of the
journey, the actual points of despatch and receipt of the<!-- Page 333 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_333" id="Page_333">[Pg 333]</a></span>
parcels by the Post Office are not in the large majority of
cases adjacent to the railway stations from or at which the
traffic is despatched or received by railway.<a name="FNanchor_669_669" id="FNanchor_669_669"></a><a href="#Footnote_669_669" class="fnanchor">[669]</a> It is, in consequence,
necessary in such cases for the Post Office to provide
a service between the respective railway stations and
post offices.<a name="FNanchor_670_670" id="FNanchor_670_670"></a><a href="#Footnote_670_670" class="fnanchor">[670]</a> If the railway companies provided adequate
collection and delivery services there would be no need for
division of the function with the Post Office. In many
districts, however, the railway companies would find the
provision of any sort of regular and universal service unremunerative,
and this is probably the ultimate reason why the
State has found it necessary to intervene. In the United
States the introduction of a parcel post, and its extension to
heavier parcels, was avowedly in a large degree due to the fact
that in many parts of the country the railways, which are in
private hands, did not provide any service for parcels. Where
a service was provided by the railways, the rates and conditions
were not satisfactory, and the establishment of a parcel
post represents an attempt to prevent the full application of
the principle of charging "what the traffic will bear."</p>

<p>The Post Office, moreover, as a public undertaking, cannot
bargain freely for special facilities or terms with individuals
or firms having large numbers of parcels for delivery within
a limited area. Without such specialization the Post Office
must often be unable to offer the most economical service,
and private carrying agencies secure the business. In those
countries where a parcel post is in operation, the Post Office
does not rank as a transportation agency comparable with
those of the commercial world. The traffic which it secures
is private and personal rather than commercial, to a large
degree exceptional traffic which the machinery of the ordinary
commercial transportation agencies cannot, or at any rate in
general does not, deal with&mdash;traffic for remote and isolated<!-- Page 334 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_334" id="Page_334">[Pg 334]</a></span>
residences, spasmodic in character, and, compared with the
total traffic in parcels, small in amount.<a name="FNanchor_671_671" id="FNanchor_671_671"></a><a href="#Footnote_671_671" class="fnanchor">[671]</a> The uniform rate
favours such traffic, but the expense to the Post Office is
disproportionate to the revenue. From the broader standpoint
this is perhaps not altogether loss to the State, since
by this means local industries are often brought in touch
with markets which could not otherwise be reached, and
the rural population is enabled to obtain from the towns many
amenities not otherwise procurable.</p>

<p>Viewed in the light of these considerations, and especially
of the fact that it is open to competition at all points where
its rates would prove profitable, it will not appear extraordinary
that the parcel post is less successful financially than
the letter post.<a name="FNanchor_672_672" id="FNanchor_672_672"></a><a href="#Footnote_672_672" class="fnanchor">[672]</a> The conditions under which postal business
is conducted render it impossible to earmark the expenses
properly chargeable to the parcel post, since expenses are
for the most part incurred jointly. But the parcel post is to
a large extent a secondary service engrafted on the letter post,
and is perhaps not properly chargeable with a mathematical
proportion of the total cost of the two services based on
the relative cost of handling individual letters and individual
parcels. Theoretical estimates of the cost of the parcel
post must, therefore, be accepted with reserve. But a proved
moderate loss on the parcel post would not be conclusive
against the propriety of its maintenance. Postal rates are
simple, definite, and generally known; and every post office
is a receiving agency. It is convenient to use the post, which
offers the further advantages of quick transmission, and the
greater degree of security attaching to a State institution.
The line on which a postal service for small parcels can best
be justified is that by the utilization of existing machinery
for the disposal of additional traffic, not so large as to overburden
or disorganize the practical arrangements, a useful
public advantage can be secured without inordinate cost.
Nevertheless, the parcel post service is not a true postal
service, but rather a commercial undertaking.<a name="FNanchor_673_673" id="FNanchor_673_673"></a><a href="#Footnote_673_673" class="fnanchor">[673]</a> The question<!-- Page 335 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_335" id="Page_335">[Pg 335]</a></span>
of the legitimacy of State control, which in the case of the
letter post is of academic interest only, is therefore of real
importance in the case of a parcel service, and those who
have a distrust of all State interference in industry may
legitimately argue that it should stand aside from the parcel
business.</p>


<hr />
<p><!-- Page 336 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_336" id="Page_336">[Pg 336]</a></span></p>

<h2>APPENDIXES</h2>


<h3>APPENDIX A</h3>

<h4>I. RATES OF INLAND LETTER POSTAGE CHARGED
IN ENGLAND, 1635-1915</h4>

<h5><span class="smcap">Witherings' Rates</span>, 1635.</h5>

<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Table of Witherings' rates, England, from 1635.">
<tr><th align="left"></th><th align="center">Single Letter.</th><th align="center">Double Letter.</th><th align="center">Per ounce.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Under 80 miles</td><td align="right">2d.</td><td align="right">4d.</td><td align="right">6d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">80 miles and not exceeding 140</td><td align="right">4d.</td><td align="right">8d.</td><td align="right">9d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Above 140</td><td align="right">6d.</td><td align="right">12d.</td><td align="right">12d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">To or from Scotland</td><td align="right">8d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">To or from Ireland</td><td align="right">9d.</td><td align="left" colspan="2">After 2 ounces, 6d. the ounce.</td></tr>
</table></div>

<p class="blockquot">&mdash;Royal Proclamation of 31st July 1635.</p>

<p>This was the introduction of postage in the modern sense. The
object of the exceptional rate for Ireland was to avoid interference
with a Proclamation recently issued there by the Lord Deputy and
Council.</p>

<p>"A single letter is one written on one sheet of paper sealed; a
double letter is one sheet of paper which covers another sheet
sealed up; a treble letter proportionately."&mdash;<i>Calendar of State
Papers</i> (<i>Domestic Series</i>), 1658, p. 368.</p>

<h5><span class="smcap">Ordinance of 1657.</span></h5>

<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Table of letter rates charged in England, from 1657.">
<tr><th align="center">For every Letter&mdash;</th><th align="center" colspan="2">If Single.</th><th align="center" colspan="2">If Double.</th><th align="center" colspan="2">Per ounce.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left"></td><td align="right">s.</td><td align="left">d.</td><td align="right">s.</td><td align="left">d.</td><td align="right">s.</td><td align="left">d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">To or from any place within 80 miles of London</td><td align="right">0</td><td align="left">2</td><td align="right">0</td><td align="left">4</td><td align="right">0</td><td align="left">8</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">At a further distance than 80 miles</td><td align="right">0</td><td align="left">3</td><td align="right">0</td><td align="left">6</td><td align="right">1</td><td align="left">0</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">To or from Scotland</td><td align="right">0</td><td align="left">4</td><td align="right">0</td><td align="left">8</td><td align="right">1</td><td align="left">6</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">To or from Ireland</td><td align="right">0</td><td align="left">6</td><td align="right">1</td><td align="left">0</td><td align="right">2</td><td align="left">0</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">In Ireland&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; To or from any place within 10 miles of Dublin</td><td align="right">0</td><td align="left">2</td><td align="right">0</td><td align="left">4</td><td align="right">0</td><td align="left">8</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; At a further distance than 40 miles</td><td align="right">0</td><td align="left">4</td><td align="right">0</td><td align="left">8</td><td align="right">1</td><td align="left">0</td></tr>
</table></div>

<p class="blockquot">&mdash;H. Scobell, <i>A Collection of Acts and Ordinances</i>, London, 1658, p. 512.</p>

<p><!-- Page 337 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_337" id="Page_337">[Pg 337]</a></span></p>


<h5><span class="smcap">Act of 1660 (12 Car. II, Cap. 35).</span></h5>

<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Table of letter rates charged in England, from 1660.">
<tr><th align="left"></th><th align="right">On Single<br /> Letter.</th><th align="right">On Double<br /> Letter.</th><th align="right">Per ounce.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">From London&mdash;</td><td align="right">d.</td><td align="right">d.</td><td align="right">d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; 80 miles and under</td><td align="right">2</td><td align="right">4</td><td align="right">8</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; Above 80 miles</td><td align="right">3</td><td align="right">6</td><td align="right">12</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">To or from Berwick</td><td align="right">3</td><td align="right">6</td><td align="right">18</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">From Berwick within Scotland&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; 40 miles and under</td><td align="right">2</td><td align="right">4</td><td align="right">8</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; Above 40 miles</td><td align="right">4</td><td align="right">8</td><td align="right">12</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">To or from Dublin</td><td align="right">6</td><td align="right">12</td><td align="right">24</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">From Dublin within Ireland&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; 40 miles and under</td><td align="right">2</td><td align="right">4</td><td align="right">8</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; Above 40 miles</td><td align="right">4</td><td align="right">8</td><td align="right">12</td></tr>
</table></div>

<p>N.B.&mdash;There were no cross posts. Between two towns not on
the same post road, however near, letters could circulate only
through London, and whenever a letter passed through London
an additional rate was imposed, e.g. from Bristol to Exeter (less
than 80 miles) a letter would be sent via London and charged two
rates for over 80 miles.</p>

<h5><span class="smcap">1711 (9 Anne, Cap. 10).</span></h5>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Table of letter rates charged in England from 1711.">
<tr><th align="left"></th><th align="right">Single.</th><th align="right">Double.</th><th align="right">Ounce.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">From London&mdash;</td><td align="right">d.</td><td align="right">d.</td><td align="right">d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; 80 miles and under</td><td align="right">3</td><td align="right">6</td><td align="right">12</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; Above 80 miles</td><td align="right">4</td><td align="right">8</td><td align="right">16</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">To Edinburgh</td><td align="right">6</td><td align="right">12</td><td align="right">24</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">To Dublin</td><td align="right">6</td><td align="right">12</td><td align="right">24</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">From Edinburgh within Scotland&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; 50 miles and under</td><td align="right">2</td><td align="right">4</td><td align="right">8</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; Above 50 miles and not exceeding 80 miles</td><td align="right">3</td><td align="right">6</td><td align="right">12</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; Above 80 miles</td><td align="right">4</td><td align="right">8</td><td align="right">16</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">From Dublin within Ireland&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; 40 miles and under</td><td align="right">2</td><td align="right">4</td><td align="right">8</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; Above 40 miles</td><td align="right">4</td><td align="right">8</td><td align="right">16</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>The initial charge was raised from 2d. to 3d. The area of the
penny post delivery was therefore restricted to the 10-mile circle
from the General Post Office. Previously, towns within about 20
miles had been served by the penny post, but an additional penny
was charged for all packets delivered in the suburbs.<!-- Page 338 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_338" id="Page_338">[Pg 338]</a></span></p>


<h5><span class="smcap">1765 (5 Geo. III, Cap. 25).</span></h5>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Changes to letter rates charged in England from 1765.">
<tr><td align="left">For Great Britain&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; Not exceeding one post stage</td><td align="right">1d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">For England only&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; Over one and not exceeding two stages</td><td align="right">2d.</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>No change was made in other inland rates.</p>


<h5><span class="smcap">1784 (24 Geo. III, Sess. 2, Cap. 25).</span></h5>

<p>The rates of 1765 were increased by 1d. for a single letter for distances under
150 miles, and 2d. for greater distances.</p>


<h5><span class="smcap">1796 (37 Geo. III, Cap. 18).</span></h5>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Single letter rates charged in England from 1796.">
<tr><td align="left">Within England, Wales, and Berwick&mdash;</td><td align="center">For a Single<br /> Letter.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; Not exceeding 15 miles</td><td align="center">3d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; From 15 to 30 miles</td><td align="center">4d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; From 30 to 60 miles</td><td align="center">5d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; From 60 to 100 miles</td><td align="center">6d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; From 100 to 150 miles</td><td align="center">7d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; Over 150 miles</td><td align="center">8d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Within Scotland&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; In addition to existing rates</td><td align="center">1d.</td></tr>
</table></div>



<h5><span class="smcap">1801 (41 Geo. III, Cap. 7).</span></h5>

<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Letter rates charged in England from 1801.">
<tr><td align="left" colspan="4">Within Great Britain&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="4">&emsp; Not exceeding 15 miles</td><td align="right">3d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">15</td><td align="center">to</td><td align="right">30</td><td align="center">miles</td><td align="right">4d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">30</td><td align="center">to</td><td align="right">50</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">5d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">50</td><td align="center">to</td><td align="right">80</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">6d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">80</td><td align="center">to</td><td align="right">120</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">7d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">120</td><td align="center">to</td><td align="right">170</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">8d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">170</td><td align="center">to</td><td align="right">230</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">9d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">230</td><td align="center">to</td><td align="right">300</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">10d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="4">&emsp; For every 100 miles above 300</td><td align="center">1d.</td></tr>
</table></div>

<h5><span class="smcap">1805 (45 Geo. III, Cap. 11).</span></h5>

<p>Within Great Britain, in addition to existing rates&mdash;</p>

<ul>
<li>1d. for a single letter</li>
<li>2d. for a double letter</li>
<li>3d. for a triple letter</li>
<li>4d. for an ounce letter.</li>
</ul>
<p><!-- Page 339 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_339" id="Page_339">[Pg 339]</a></span></p>


<h5><span class="smcap">1812 (52 Geo. III, Cap. 88).</span></h5>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Single letter rates charged in England from 1812.">
<tr><td align="left">Within Great Britain&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center" colspan="5"></td><td align="center">For a Single<br /> Letter.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="5">&emsp; Not exceeding 15 miles</td><td align="right">4d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&emsp; Above</td><td align="right">15</td><td align="left">but not exceeding</td><td align="right">20</td><td align="left">miles</td><td align="right">5d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">20</td><td align="center">" &emsp; "</td><td align="right">30</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">6d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">30</td><td align="center">" &emsp; "</td><td align="right">50</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">7d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">50</td><td align="center">" &emsp; "</td><td align="right">80</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">8d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">80</td><td align="center">" &emsp; "</td><td align="right">120</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">9d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">120</td><td align="center">" &emsp; "</td><td align="right">170</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">10d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">170</td><td align="center">" &emsp; "</td><td align="right">230</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">11d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">230</td><td align="center">" &emsp; "</td><td align="right">300</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">12d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">300</td><td align="center">" &emsp; "</td><td align="right">400</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">13d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">400</td><td align="center">" &emsp; "</td><td align="right">500</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">14d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">500</td><td align="center">" &emsp; "</td><td align="right">600</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">15d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">600</td><td align="center">" &emsp; "</td><td align="right">700</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">16d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">700</td><td align="left" colspan="3">miles</td><td align="right">17d.</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>These rates were re-enacted by I Vict., cap. 34, &#167; 3. The usual
increased charges for double, treble, and ounce letters applied
throughout. Additional rates were charged in respect of conveyance
by packet boat, e.g. for a single letter between Holyhead
and Dublin, 2d.; in respect of Menai Bridge, 1d.; in respect of
Conway Bridge, 1d.; and in respect of any letter conveyed in
Scotland by a mail carriage with more than two wheels, &#189;d. (See
1 Vict., cap. 34, &#167;&#167; 3, 5, 6 and 7).<a name="FNanchor_674_674" id="FNanchor_674_674"></a><a href="#Footnote_674_674" class="fnanchor">[674]</a></p>

<p>By 2 and 3 Vict., cap. 52, the Treasury was empowered to
regulate rates of postage, and subsequent changes have been made
by Treasury Warrant.</p>


<h5>1840.</h5>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Postal charges by weight, England from 1840.">
<tr><td align="left">Not exceeding &frac12; ounce (uniform rate irrespective of distance of transmission).</td><td align="right">1d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Not exceeding 1 ounce (uniform rate irrespective of distance of transmission).</td><td align="right">2d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">For each additional ounce, or fraction of an ounce, 2d.</td></tr>
</table></div>


<h5>1865.</h5>

<p>Rate for letters exceeding 1 ounce in weight reduced to 1d. for each &frac12; ounce,
or fraction of &frac12; ounce, after the first ounce.<!-- Page 340 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_340" id="Page_340">[Pg 340]</a></span></p>


<h5>1871.</h5>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Postal charges by weight, England from 1871.">
<tr><td align="left">Not exceeding 1 ounce</td><td align="right">1d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Not exceeding 2 ounces</td><td align="right">1&#189;d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">For every additional 2 ounces or fraction of 2 ounces up to 12 ounces, &#189;d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">For letters exceeding 12 ounces in weight, 1d. per ounce, including the first ounce.</td></tr>
</table></div>



<h5>1885.</h5>

<p>Rate of &#189;d. per ounce after the second ounce continued without limit.</p>


<h5>1897.</h5>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Postal charges by weight, England from 1897.">
<tr><td align="left">Not exceeding 4 ounces</td><td align="right">1d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">For every 2 ounces, or fraction of 2 ounces, thereafter, &#189;d.</td></tr>
</table></div>



<h5>1915.</h5>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Postal charges by weight, England from 1915.">
<tr><td align="left">Not exceeding 1 ounce</td><td align="right">1d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Not exceeding 2 ounces</td><td align="right">2d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">For every 2 ounces, or fraction of 2 ounces, thereafter, &#189;d.</td></tr>
</table></div>


<h4>II. FOREIGN RATES IN THE BRITISH SERVICE</h4>

<p>One of the earliest regular posts in England was the post to
Dover, established for the transmission of despatches to and from
the Continent.<a name="FNanchor_675_675" id="FNanchor_675_675"></a><a href="#Footnote_675_675" class="fnanchor">[675]</a> This post early assumed considerable importance
relatively to the other posts. The settlement of foreign artisans in
this country, in consequence of the persecutions on the Continent,
naturally led to the growth of a considerable intercourse with places
abroad. There was besides a large cloth trade. Letters were not,
however, sent exclusively by the King's post. Frequently the
merchants made their own arrangements for the conveyance of
their letters; and since one of the functions of the post in those
days was to enable the authorities to keep a close watch on all
correspondence passing within the realm, in order that conspiracies
against the State might be detected, this proceeding of the
merchants was viewed by the Government with much jealousy.
It led to the first assumption by the State of the monopoly of
the carriage of letters. In 1591, before the use of the posts for
the transmission of inland letters for private individuals had been
officially recognized, a royal proclamation forbade the conveyance
of letters to or from places outside the realm except by the
King's post. A further proclamation to the same effect, so far as
it related to foreign letters, was issued in 1609.<a name="FNanchor_676_676" id="FNanchor_676_676"></a><a href="#Footnote_676_676" class="fnanchor">[676]</a></p>

<p>In 1619 the foreign post was separated from the ordinary post,
and a foreigner, Matthew De Quester, who had been appointed by<!-- Page 341 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_341" id="Page_341">[Pg 341]</a></span>
Lord Stanhope, then Master of the Posts, to superintend the foreign
post, was appointed to control the service. In 1626 De Quester
published the following tariff applicable to foreign letters:&mdash;</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Tariff of foreign rates for British Postal Services, 1626">
<tr><td align="left">To or from the Hague, Brussels, Paris, and Vienna</td><td align="left">30s.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">To or from any part of Germany</td><td align="left">6s.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">From Venice for a single letter</td><td align="left">9d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">From Venice for any letter other than a single letter</td><td align="left">2s. 8d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">From Leghorn and Florence for a single letter</td><td align="left">1s.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">From Leghorn and Florence for any letter other than a single letter</td><td align="left">3s. the ounce.<a name="FNanchor_677_677" id="FNanchor_677_677"></a><a href="#Footnote_677_677" class="fnanchor">[677]</a></td></tr>
</table></div>

<p>The tariff was incomplete, but is noteworthy as the first set of
rates of any description issued in England for the conveyance of
letters by post. Stanhope had charged certain fees on letters for
the Continent. On letters to or from Amsterdam or Hamburg, for
example, his fee had been 8d.<a name="FNanchor_678_678" id="FNanchor_678_678"></a><a href="#Footnote_678_678" class="fnanchor">[678]</a> But, until this time, no general
table of rates had been issued.</p>

<p>By the Ordinance of 1657<a name="FNanchor_679_679" id="FNanchor_679_679"></a><a href="#Footnote_679_679" class="fnanchor">[679]</a> the following rates for foreign letters
were established:&mdash;</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="British rates for foreign letters, 1657.">
<tr><th align="left"></th><th align="right">For a Single Letter.</th><th align="right">Double Letter.</th><th align="right">Per ounce.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left"></td><td align="right">d.</td><td align="right">d.</td><td align="right">d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">To Leghorn, Genoa, Florence, Lyons, Marseilles, Aleppo, Constantinople</td><td align="right">12</td><td align="right">24</td><td align="right">45</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">To St. Malo, Morlaix, Nieuhaven</td><td align="right">6</td><td align="right">12</td><td align="right">18</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">To Bordeaux, Rochelle, Nantes, Bayonne Cadiz, Madrid</td><td align="right">9</td><td align="right">18</td><td align="right">24</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">To Hamburg, Frankfort, Cologne</td><td align="right">8</td><td align="right">16</td><td align="right">24</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">To Dantzic, Leipsic, L&#252;beck, Stockholm, Copenhagen, Elsinore, K&#246;nigsberg</td><td align="right">12</td><td align="right">24</td><td align="right">48</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>No rates were fixed for letters passing outside Europe.</p>

<p>These rates were not substantially altered by the Act of 1660,
although in some cases a variation according to the route followed
was introduced. For example, a letter sent to the North of Italy
via Lyons was charged 3d. more than a letter sent direct.</p>

<p>Under James II rates of postage (6d. a single letter, 1s. a double
letter, and 2s. the ounce) were fixed for letters to and from Jamaica,
although no service to and from the island was provided by the
Crown.<!-- Page 342 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_342" id="Page_342">[Pg 342]</a></span></p>

<p>In 1686 regular mail services were established under contract
between Dover and Calais and between Dover and Ostend, and in
1687 a service between England and Holland. It is probable that
packets were sailing between Dover and Calais before that time,<a name="FNanchor_680_680" id="FNanchor_680_680"></a><a href="#Footnote_680_680" class="fnanchor">[680]</a>
but in general the cross-Channel services had previously been
conducted by boats hired casually for the conveyance of particular
mails. For the Calais service a sum of &#163;1,170 a year was paid,
and for the Dutch service a sum of &#163;900 a year.<a name="FNanchor_681_681" id="FNanchor_681_681"></a><a href="#Footnote_681_681" class="fnanchor">[681]</a></p>

<p>Letters from abroad brought by merchant ships (known as "ship
letters") were by the Ordinance of 1657<a name="FNanchor_682_682" id="FNanchor_682_682"></a><a href="#Footnote_682_682" class="fnanchor">[682]</a> and by the Act of 1660
made subject to postage on arrival in this country. Such letters
were required to be given up to the postmaster at the port of arrival,
who forwarded the letters to London, where they were charged with
the proper amount of postage. No payment was made to the shipmaster
in respect of letters handed over to the Post Office in this
way, and no penalty was incurred if the letters were not so handed
over. This part of the Act consequently remained a dead letter.
The farmers of the Post Office saw, however, that it would be
profitable to them to offer a small pecuniary inducement to the
shipmasters, and accordingly offered to pay a penny for every letter
brought by private ship and handed over by the shipmaster to the
postmaster of the port of arrival.<a name="FNanchor_683_683" id="FNanchor_683_683"></a><a href="#Footnote_683_683" class="fnanchor">[683]</a> As the farmers were able to
charge the legal rate of inland postage on all such letters, there was
a sufficient margin to leave a profit after payment of the penny.
The regular ship letter fee, which was afterwards legalized, originated
in this practice.</p>

<p>Most of the ship letters came to the port of London, and the
establishment of the penny post in 1680 had a serious effect on the
proceeds of the ship letter money. If the letters were for delivery in
London, they could be dropped into the penny post for delivery at
a penny each, whereas if handed in to the General Post Office as
ship letters they would be charged at the appropriate foreign rates,
according to their place of origin. Thus, letters from Marseilles
for delivery in London would be charged 1s. each, although the
service actually performed by the Post Office was no greater than
that performed for a penny in the penny post. The foreign rates,
as applied to ship letters, were therefore for the most part a simple
tax, and the use of the penny post was greatly resorted to.<a name="FNanchor_684_684" id="FNanchor_684_684"></a><a href="#Footnote_684_684" class="fnanchor">[684]</a> The
Postmasters-General protested continually against this fraud on the<!-- Page 343 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_343" id="Page_343">[Pg 343]</a></span>
revenue; and in 1696, in order to put a stop to it, two officers were
appointed whose duty it was to receive letters and packets from all
"masters of ships and vessels, mariners, and passengers as shall be
by them hereafter brought in any ships or vessels into the Port of
London."<a name="FNanchor_685_685" id="FNanchor_685_685"></a><a href="#Footnote_685_685" class="fnanchor">[685]</a></p>

<p>The payment of a penny a letter to the shipmasters was without
legal sanction until the Act of 1711.<a name="FNanchor_686_686" id="FNanchor_686_686"></a><a href="#Footnote_686_686" class="fnanchor">[686]</a> This Act revised the foreign
rates, in general in an upward direction, the increase on the rates
of 1660 varying from 1d. to 3d., and first established statutory rates
for letters passing to or from the colonies. From London to or from
the West Indies the rate was 18d. for a single letter, and to or
from New York 12d. The rate to the West Indies was, in 1765,
reduced to 1s. for a single letter, and this rate became in course of
time the standard for all colonial letters.</p>

<p>In 1796, in addition to the ordinary shilling rate, letters from the
colonies were subjected to a charge at the inland rate in respect of
transmission within this country: e.g., a letter from America would
be charged the shilling rate, and the inland rate from Falmouth to
its destination. An addition of 4d. was also made to the rates on
letters to or from places abroad, other than places in the colonies.
In 1805 an additional penny was laid on letters between Great
Britain and the American Colonies.</p>

<p>The Act of 1711 had made illegal the despatch by private ship of
letters which could be sent by the regular packets; but for places to
which no packet service existed, shipmasters were free to accept
and carry letters, and to charge what fees they chose. So far as it
directed that all letters for places abroad should be sent by packet
where a packet service existed, the Act was ineffective. From the
chief coffee-houses in the City of London it was customary to
collect letters to be sent in this way by private ship where no packet
service existed. This practice was extended to those places to
which there was a packet service, and became generally recognized.
Shipmasters usually charged a fee of 2d. per letter,<a name="FNanchor_687_687" id="FNanchor_687_687"></a><a href="#Footnote_687_687" class="fnanchor">[687]</a> and the whole
traffic was conducted independently of the Post Office.</p>

<p>No attempt was made to collect postage on letters conveyed by
private ship, whether received or despatched by such ship, except
in respect of transmission within the kingdom. The penny authorized
by the Act of 1711 went to the master of the ship. About the
year 1790 Frederick Bourne, a clerk in the foreign department of
the Post Office, suggested a scheme which should bring all ship
letters into the post and subject them to postage for foreign transmission.
He proposed that inward ship letters should be charged<!-- Page 344 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_344" id="Page_344">[Pg 344]</a></span>
a uniform rate of 4d., and outward letters should be charged half the
packet rate; for those places to which there was no packet rate,
the rate was to be based on what the packet rate might be presumed
to be if a packet service existed. In view of the long period during
which the provisions of the Act of Anne had not been enforced in
this respect, Pitt was unwilling to attempt to suppress the illegal
practice which had grown up. He considered that in respect of
outward letters the service performed by the Post Office, which
amounted to no more than sealing the bags and handing them to
the shipmaster, was insufficient to justify compulsory payment of
packet postage. The proposal was therefore adopted only as a
permissive measure: merchants were given the option of handing
their letters to the Post Office. The Act authorizing the change
empowered the Post Office to despatch and receive letters by vessels
other than the regular sailing packets. On letters despatched by
private ship the Post Office was authorized to charge half the
packet rates in the case of letters for places to which a packet
service existed; in cases in which no rate of postage was established,
the charge was to be half the rates then paid, as near as
could be ascertained.<a name="FNanchor_688_688" id="FNanchor_688_688"></a><a href="#Footnote_688_688" class="fnanchor">[688]</a> On letters brought in by such vessels, in
addition to the inland postage, a charge of 4d. a single letter, and
so in proportion, was authorized. A fee of 2d. was payable to the
master of the ship in respect of every letter delivered to or received
from him by the Post Office in proper course.</p>

<p>A Ship Letter Office was opened on the 10th September 1799.
No vessel was allowed to make entry or break bulk until letters
brought by it had been handed over to the Post Office. The chief
object in view was not, however, achieved. Letters sent out of the
country by private ship still continued for the most part to be
handed to the shipmaster without the intervention of the Post
Office. Efforts were made to secure the assistance of coffee-house
keepers as agents of the Post Office, but without success; and for
many years the proportion between incoming and outgoing private
ship letters was eighteen to one.<a name="FNanchor_689_689" id="FNanchor_689_689"></a><a href="#Footnote_689_689" class="fnanchor">[689]</a></p>

<p>In 1814 a further Ship Letter Act<a name="FNanchor_690_690" id="FNanchor_690_690"></a><a href="#Footnote_690_690" class="fnanchor">[690]</a> raised the rate on inward
single letters from 4d. to 6d., and made it compulsory to hand all
outward ship letters to the Post Office to be charged. The East
India Company, whose servants had previously been allowed to
send and receive letters free, protested strongly against the new
Act, although the official correspondence of the Company had
been exempted. The Company pointed out that the Post Office<!-- Page 345 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_345" id="Page_345">[Pg 345]</a></span>
maintained no packet communication with the East Indies, and
to charge postage was to levy a charge where no service was
performed, and in effect to lay a tax on letter-writing. They had
a stronger weapon than sound argument: the ships sailing between
England and India were to a large extent controlled by them, and
the Act laid no compulsion on the owners of private ships to carry
letters for the Post Office. When, therefore, the Post Office requested
the Company to carry post letters to India, the Company
replied that they did "not see fit to authorize the commanders or
owners of any of their ships to take charge of any bag of letters
from the Post Office subjected to a rate of postage for sea conveyance."<a name="FNanchor_691_691" id="FNanchor_691_691"></a><a href="#Footnote_691_691" class="fnanchor">[691]</a>
In consequence of this difficulty an Act was passed
in 1815 making it compulsory on all shipmasters to carry such mails
as should be tendered to them by the Post Office. The Post Office
was required to pay the owners a reasonable sum as remuneration
for the carriage of the letters, the ordinary fee of 2d. a letter still
being paid to the commander as a perquisite. The East India
Company was placated by the concession of further exemptions in
its favour. By this Act the rate of postage to India or the Cape
was fixed at 14d. the ounce on letters, and on newspapers at 3d.
the ounce&mdash;the first enactment providing a lower rate for newspapers
than for letters in the foreign service.<a name="FNanchor_692_692" id="FNanchor_692_692"></a><a href="#Footnote_692_692" class="fnanchor">[692]</a></p>

<p>The result of this Act was eminently satisfactory. In the first
eighteen months or so the postage on letters for India and the Cape
of Good Hope amounted to &#163;11,658, while the amount paid for the
conveyance by private ship was only &#163;1,250; although it should be
explained that expense was incurred for less than half the number
of despatches, the remainder being conveyed by his Majesty's ships,
or by ships of the East India Company which were placed at the
disposal of the Post Office free of charge.</p>

<p>Other minor changes were made in subsequent years. In 1836
a postal treaty was arranged with France, under which certain
rates&mdash;in general, rates slightly lower than those previously in
force&mdash;were agreed for all letters passing through France.</p>

<p>The rates for colonial letters were revised when uniform postage
was introduced in the inland service. They were made chargeable
according to weight, and for transmission to any port in the colonies
were fixed generally at 1s. the &frac12; ounce.</p>

<p>In 1850, on political grounds, the Postmaster-General<a name="FNanchor_693_693" id="FNanchor_693_693"></a><a href="#Footnote_693_693" class="fnanchor">[693]</a> proposed
the establishment of a general 1s. rate for all colonial letters. The
proposal was not immediately adopted, but a few years later a rate
of 6d. the &frac12; ounce was established for all parts of the Empire<!-- Page 346 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_346" id="Page_346">[Pg 346]</a></span>
except India, the Cape, Mauritius, and Tasmania. This rate was
extended to all the colonies in 1857, and to the United States
in 1868. In 1869 the rate for letters to the United States,
Canada, and Prince Edward Island was reduced to 3d. In 1875
the Universal Postal Union rate of 2&#189;d. came into operation. The
next great advance was the result mainly of the efforts of Sir
J. Henniker Heaton, who for many years advocated the facilitation
of postal intercourse, especially within the Empire. In
1898 penny postage was established between the United Kingdom
and all the chief colonies except Australia, the Cape, and Natal.
In 1905 these colonies joined, and were followed by Egypt and
the Sudan.</p>

<p>In 1907 a special rate of 1d. a pound was established for
magazines and trade journals posted in the United Kingdom,
for Canada. The rate did not cover the cost of service, and its
justification is to be sought in political considerations. In order
to secure the low rate Canada undertook to defray the whole
cost of ocean transport. Difficulties in regard to the financial
arrangements arose subsequently, and on the 1st January 1915
the rate was altered to the following, viz. 1d. for the first 6 ounces,
1&#189;d. for 1&frac12; pounds, 2&#189;d. for 2&frac12; pounds, and so on.</p>

<p>Under the old system the rates of postage were for the most
part nominal, that is to say, no attempt was made to adjust the
rates to the actual cost of providing the service, although in allocating
between the different States the total amount of postage,
a rough assignment as between land and sea services was made.<a name="FNanchor_694_694" id="FNanchor_694_694"></a><a href="#Footnote_694_694" class="fnanchor">[694]</a>
The usual 6d. rate for single letters to and from the various colonies
illustrates this. The actual cost of service must have varied greatly.
In the case of the colonies other considerations, mainly political,
were allowed to enter. In the case of foreign countries the whole
arrangements for the interchange of correspondence were based
on such agreements as could be arrived at, and the actual rates of<!-- Page 347 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_347" id="Page_347">[Pg 347]</a></span>
postage were determined in that way.<a name="FNanchor_695_695" id="FNanchor_695_695"></a><a href="#Footnote_695_695" class="fnanchor">[695]</a> The chief difficulties in
negotiations occurred in connection with the division between the
contracting parties of the postage collected. The packet service
was often conducted at a loss, and the rates of postage on foreign
and colonial letters were not, in general, fixed with a view to
rendering the service self-supporting, although this was regarded
as a condition to be aimed at.<a name="FNanchor_696_696" id="FNanchor_696_696"></a><a href="#Footnote_696_696" class="fnanchor">[696]</a></p>

<p>By the Consolidating Acts of 1837 (1 Vict., cap. 34 &amp; 36) the
Postmaster-General was empowered to require the masters of
outward-bound vessels to accept mails, and to deliver them without
delay on arrival at the port of destination, under penalty of
&#163;200.</p>

<p>The general character of the foreign packet service was entirely
changed by the introduction of steam propulsion, which greatly
shortened the length of voyages and introduced a degree of
punctuality and regularity hitherto undreamt of. Until this time
the Post Office had, for many long-distance services, relied on
its own packets; i.e. packets sailing under contract expressly for
the conveyance of the mails and under the control of the Post Office.
In 1818, with the introduction of steam vessels, this policy was
changed and that of Crown ownership of the packets adopted.
This method was found extremely costly, and the Commissioners
of Revenue Inquiry reported emphatically against it.<a name="FNanchor_697_697" id="FNanchor_697_697"></a><a href="#Footnote_697_697" class="fnanchor">[697]</a></p>

<p>The policy of providing for the service by contract was then
reverted to. It now appeared, however, that vessels sailing for
commercial purposes could be counted upon to sail and arrive
regularly, and the Government desired therefore to make use of
them for the despatch of mails. It was proposed to forward mails
by the <i>Great Western</i> under the powers conferred on the Postmaster-General
by the Act of 1837 (1 Vict. 34, &#167; 19) for the prescribed
remuneration (&#167; 24). The owners refused to carry mails on these
terms, and the Law Officers advised that the Postmaster-General
had no power, either by Statute or Common Law, to compel the
owners to carry mails.<a name="FNanchor_698_698" id="FNanchor_698_698"></a><a href="#Footnote_698_698" class="fnanchor">[698]</a> It was not found necessary, perhaps it
was not deemed wise, to follow up the question of powers. In
1839 a contract was entered into with Samuel Cunard for the
provision of a steamship service between England and North
America, at a cost to the Post Office of &#163;55,000 a year. This
policy proved successful. It has been followed in the case of
all the great routes, and has continued until the present day.</p>

<p>In considering the question of the rates of postage the sums<!-- Page 348 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_348" id="Page_348">[Pg 348]</a></span>
paid to the shipping companies are a little misleading. The
payments were not then, and are not now, made solely from
regard to the fact that the vessels convey mails. Other considerations,
such as the desirability of encouraging the shipping
industry, its value to the commerce of the nation, and the value
of a strong mercantile marine as a naval reserve, have always
entered largely into the question. It was in accordance with
this view, and largely on account of abuses in the administration
of the services by the Post Office which had come to light, that
the control of the Post Office packet services and of contracts
for the conveyance of mails by sea was in 1837 transferred from
the Post Office to the Admiralty. The control was in 1860
retransferred to the Post Office, but the amount of the subsidies
paid to steamship companies conveying mails has continued to
be influenced by other than purely Post Office considerations.
The chief development in this direction has been a legal decision
obtained in 1889, in a dispute between the Post Office and the
Cunard Steamship Company, which arose from an attempt by the
Post Office to introduce the American system of despatching mails
by the fastest ships available, and paying, not a general subsidy,
but a sum calculated on the basis of the weight of mails carried.
The High Court ruled that the Postmaster-General is entitled to
have all such mails as he may think fit received on board any
of the Company's ships and conveyed and delivered at the ports
of destination without delay.<a name="FNanchor_699_699" id="FNanchor_699_699"></a><a href="#Footnote_699_699" class="fnanchor">[699]</a> Failing agreement as to the payment
to be made in respect of such services, the Post Office can fall back
on its statutory right to the conveyance by merchant ship of all
letter mails at the rate of a halfpenny a letter.</p>

<p>The extension of penny postage to all countries has been prevented
simply by financial considerations.<a name="FNanchor_700_700" id="FNanchor_700_700"></a><a href="#Footnote_700_700" class="fnanchor">[700]</a> In 1910 the question
of establishing penny postage with France received a good deal
of public attention both in this country and in France, but the
Government were not prepared at that time to face the sacrifice
of revenue.</p>

<p><!-- Page 349 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_349" id="Page_349">[Pg 349]</a></span></p>


<h4>III. THE <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">THURN</span> AND <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">TAXIS</span> POSTS IN GERMANY</h4>

<p>The great number of the principalities which made up the
Germany of the early Middle Ages, the mutual jealousy of the
princes, and the indefinite authority of the Emperor, made the introduction
of any sort of general system of communication
extremely difficult. But for a long period before posts of the
ordinary type were established in Germany, there existed throughout
the Empire a system of messengers (<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Boten-Anstalten</i>).</p>

<p>These establishments were maintained by the political administration,
by the scholastic institutions, by political corporations,
by merchant bodies, or by private individuals.<a name="FNanchor_701_701" id="FNanchor_701_701"></a><a href="#Footnote_701_701" class="fnanchor">[701]</a> Their function
was to effect the exchange of the correspondence of their founders.
In addition, the occasional posts (<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Metzger</i>), merchants travelling
to the fairs, judicial and Imperial messengers, and pilgrim monks
were much employed for the carrying of letters.</p>

<p>The system of <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Boten-Anstalten</i> was widely extended, and its
functions were not limited to the conveyance of letters.<a name="FNanchor_702_702" id="FNanchor_702_702"></a><a href="#Footnote_702_702" class="fnanchor">[702]</a> Its
messengers travelled some of the great routes, such as Hamburg-Stettin-Danzig;
Hamburg-Leipzig-Nuremberg; Cologne-Frankfort-Augsburg;
and these services were more or less permanent in
character. Services on other routes were established to meet local
or temporary needs, such as the assembly of the Reichstag, the
meeting of the Electors, Peace Congresses, War Conferences, and
fairs; and these services were discontinued when the occasion
which had required them disappeared.</p>

<p>The organization of this system of messengers resembled in many
ways that of ordinary posts: it was established and managed by
the political authorities; the services were regular; the routes were
fixed and stages were appointed; and the messengers undertook the
conveyance of letters, goods, and persons, by foot, horse, or wagon.<a name="FNanchor_703_703" id="FNanchor_703_703"></a><a href="#Footnote_703_703" class="fnanchor">[703]</a>
At a later date letter-carriers were employed in some instances for
the delivery of letters conveyed by the messenger services. A<!-- Page 350 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_350" id="Page_350">[Pg 350]</a></span>
charge of 3 pf. was raised on letters so delivered, the delivery
charge on letters obtained directly from the <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Botenmeister</i> being 1
pf.<a name="FNanchor_704_704" id="FNanchor_704_704"></a><a href="#Footnote_704_704" class="fnanchor">[704]</a></p>

<p>The intellectual awakening of the early sixteenth century, the
great discoveries of that period and their effect on commerce,
together with the tendency then developing towards amalgamation
of the principalities and creation of larger political entities, all
increased the necessity for an efficient system of intercommunication.
The result is seen in the establishment of an Imperial system
of posts.<a name="FNanchor_705_705" id="FNanchor_705_705"></a><a href="#Footnote_705_705" class="fnanchor">[705]</a></p>

<p>The regular Imperial posts were established towards the end
of the fifteenth century by the Emperor Maximilian I. <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Johann
von Taxis</span> was the first Imperial Postmaster, and the earliest record
of his tenure of the office is in 1489.<a name="FNanchor_706_706" id="FNanchor_706_706"></a><a href="#Footnote_706_706" class="fnanchor">[706]</a> A decree suppressing the
system of <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Boten-Anstalten</i> and the <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Metzgerposten</i> was issued, but
these posts continued, and it was discovered at a later date that
their continuance was not incompatible with the maintenance of
a system of Imperial posts.<a name="FNanchor_707_707" id="FNanchor_707_707"></a><a href="#Footnote_707_707" class="fnanchor">[707]</a></p>

<p>The Imperial posts were to provide more particularly for the
transmission of despatches, and their immediate object was to
provide a means of obtaining information regarding the Turks, and
a means of communication with the princes of neighbouring territories.<a name="FNanchor_708_708" id="FNanchor_708_708"></a><a href="#Footnote_708_708" class="fnanchor">[708]</a>
Their history is inseparable from that of the family of
<span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Thurn</span> and <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Taxis</span>, to whom their management was from the first
entrusted. This family was of Italian origin, and before the
establishment of the Imperial posts, Roger the First of <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Thurn</span> and
<span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Taxis</span> had established a horse-post between Italy and the Tyrol,<!-- Page 351 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_351" id="Page_351">[Pg 351]</a></span>
which proved of so much value to the Empire that as a reward
Roger was made a chevalier. On the routes along which the
Imperial posts were laid, stages were fixed at intervals of about
5 (German) miles, and messengers were stationed at each stage.<a name="FNanchor_709_709" id="FNanchor_709_709"></a><a href="#Footnote_709_709" class="fnanchor">[709]</a>
These messengers from the first enjoyed the privilege of exemption
from all taxes and charges in all the countries through which the
post routes passed. The posts were solely for the service of the
Emperor, and at his charge; and at first, like the earlier messenger
services, were established temporarily for special purposes, such as
the movements of the Imperial Court, or to meet necessities arising
from war; or permanently to provide services between distant and
newly acquired territory.<a name="FNanchor_710_710" id="FNanchor_710_710"></a><a href="#Footnote_710_710" class="fnanchor">[710]</a></p>

<p>In 1500 <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Francis von Taxis</span> was appointed <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">capitaine et ma&#238;tre de
nos postes</i> at Ghent by Philip the Fair, son of the Emperor
Maximilian I, and in 1505 a convention was concluded between
Philip and <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">von Taxis</span> under which the latter undertook to establish
a line of posts between the Court of Maximilian I, the Court of the
French King, and the Spanish Court, for a payment of 12,000 livres
a year. The German and Spanish services were intended to
maintain permanent and regular communications. The French
post was intended to facilitate diplomatic intercourse.<a name="FNanchor_711_711" id="FNanchor_711_711"></a><a href="#Footnote_711_711" class="fnanchor">[711]</a> The time
occupied in the transmission of letters between Innsbruck and
Brussels at this period was 5&frac12; days in summer and 6&frac12; days in
winter; between Paris and Brussels 44 hours; and between
Granada and Brussels 15 days.</p>

<p>Owing to financial difficulties the payments to <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">von Taxis</span> from
the royal exchequer could not be kept up, and in order to maintain
the service another source of revenue had to be discovered.
It was found in the acceptance for transmission by the posts of
private letters, and in allowing the use of the posts by private
persons desirous of travelling. This was made part of the ordinary
business of the posts, with the reservation that the use of the posts
by private persons should not interfere with or impede the official
service.<a name="FNanchor_712_712" id="FNanchor_712_712"></a><a href="#Footnote_712_712" class="fnanchor">[712]</a><!-- Page 352 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_352" id="Page_352">[Pg 352]</a></span></p>

<p>In 1512 the Emperor Maximilian conferred on <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Francis von
Taxis</span>, and on several others of his family, titles of hereditary
nobility in the Empire and in the Austrian and Burgundian
dominions, together with the dignity of Count Palsgrave.<a name="FNanchor_713_713" id="FNanchor_713_713"></a><a href="#Footnote_713_713" class="fnanchor">[713]</a> In 1516
the <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Taxis</span> posts were extended to Verona, Rome, and Naples, and
were improved and accelerated. In 1615 the office of Imperial
Postmaster-General was conferred on <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Lamoral von Taxis</span> and
his descendants as an hereditary fief.</p>

<p>The actual development of the posts was of a twofold character.
At first the <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Taxis</span> family were able to establish their posts in
various parts of the Empire without opposition; the princes were
themselves satisfied with their messenger systems, and were indisposed
to establish posts on account of the heavy cost. But
after a time, when the profitable character of the <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Taxis</span> posts
became apparent,<a name="FNanchor_714_714" id="FNanchor_714_714"></a><a href="#Footnote_714_714" class="fnanchor">[714]</a> the princes questioned the right of the Imperial
Postmaster-General to lay posts within their territories, and claimed
that they alone possessed that right.<a name="FNanchor_715_715" id="FNanchor_715_715"></a><a href="#Footnote_715_715" class="fnanchor">[715]</a> In 1597 the posts were
proclaimed an Imperial reservation,<a name="FNanchor_716_716" id="FNanchor_716_716"></a><a href="#Footnote_716_716" class="fnanchor">[716]</a> but this theory was never
accepted by the princes.<a name="FNanchor_717_717" id="FNanchor_717_717"></a><a href="#Footnote_717_717" class="fnanchor">[717]</a> The <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Taxis</span> posts, therefore, never became
general throughout the Empire. Eights were obtained in certain
States, so that they became an important system reaching many
parts of the Empire; but they did not altogether supplant the
territorial services.<a name="FNanchor_718_718" id="FNanchor_718_718"></a><a href="#Footnote_718_718" class="fnanchor">[718]</a></p>

<p>In the early part of the seventeenth century the struggle against
the monopoly of the Imperial posts developed. The States were
jealous of the growing power of Austria, and political affinities were
weakening. There was, moreover, some feeling against such an
office being held by an alien family.<a name="FNanchor_719_719" id="FNanchor_719_719"></a><a href="#Footnote_719_719" class="fnanchor">[719]</a> The Palatinate, W&#252;rtemberg,
Saxony, Brandenburg, and Mecklenburg established posts within
their respective territories.<a name="FNanchor_720_720" id="FNanchor_720_720"></a><a href="#Footnote_720_720" class="fnanchor">[720]</a> The whole question became involved<!-- Page 353 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_353" id="Page_353">[Pg 353]</a></span>
with the disputes which led up to the Thirty Years' War, and the
princes found their position indirectly strengthened by the Peace
of Westphalia, which contained no settlement of the disputes
regarding the posts, but merely referred the question to the next
Reichstag. Attempts were made to extend the Imperial posts, but
much opposition was encountered. Nevertheless, the system continued
to expand and attained considerable dimensions. The family
held the exclusive right of carrying passengers as well as letters;
and it was estimated that during the eighteenth century the house
of <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Thurn</span> and <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Taxis</span> received a gross sum of 20,000 livres per day,
and a net profit of four millions a year. Some 20,000 men, and a
greater number of horses, were employed in the service.<a name="FNanchor_721_721" id="FNanchor_721_721"></a><a href="#Footnote_721_721" class="fnanchor">[721]</a></p>

<p>The Revolutionary Wars were disastrous to the system. The
<span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Taxis</span> posts were in many instances replaced by territorial posts,<a name="FNanchor_722_722" id="FNanchor_722_722"></a><a href="#Footnote_722_722" class="fnanchor">[722]</a>
and by the Peace of Luneville (1801), which made the Rhine the
boundary between France and Germany, the family lost control
of all their posts to the west of the Rhine. They were, however,
compensated for the loss of the revenues of those posts by a grant
of territory (Reichs-Deputationshauptschluss of 25 February 1803).</p>

<p>In the following years the Prince of <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Taxis</span> strengthened his
position by a series of agreements with the German States, but
with the establishment in 1806 of the Confederation of the Rhine
and the abdication of the Emperor, the Holy Roman Empire and
the Imperial posts fell together. In 1814 Prince Charles Anselm
of <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Thurn</span> and <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Taxis</span> attempted unsuccessfully to regain possession
of the posts in the Low Countries. The territorial posts were not,
however, altogether satisfactory, and the rights of the <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Taxis</span> family
were restored by the Agreement of 1815, establishing the German
Confederation; in pursuance of which the family recovered the
posts in Electoral Hesse in 1816, in Schwarzburg-Rudolstadt,
Oldenburg, and Saxe-Coburg in 1817, Hesse-Darmstadt in 1818, and
W&#252;rtemberg in 1819. The posts in other States were recovered
in subsequent years, and in 1848 the <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Taxis</span> posts comprised an
area of 2,675 square (German) miles, with a yearly income of a
million Marks.<a name="FNanchor_723_723" id="FNanchor_723_723"></a><a href="#Footnote_723_723" class="fnanchor">[723]</a> In most cases a rent was paid to the State for the
privilege of conducting the posts. Thus, W&#252;rtemberg received a<!-- Page 354 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_354" id="Page_354">[Pg 354]</a></span>
yearly payment of 70,000 florins, the Grand Duchy of Hesse of
25,000 florins, and Electoral Hesse of 40,000 thalers.<a name="FNanchor_724_724" id="FNanchor_724_724"></a><a href="#Footnote_724_724" class="fnanchor">[724]</a> In addition,
the Governments of the respective States were given considerable
privileges in regard to free transmission of State correspondence,
etc. The rates of postage charged compared favourably with those
charged in the States in which territorial posts were established.<a name="FNanchor_725_725" id="FNanchor_725_725"></a><a href="#Footnote_725_725" class="fnanchor">[725]</a>
In 1850 the rates were simplified by the introduction of a scale
based on three distance zones: not exceeding 15 miles, 4 kr.
(1 sgr.); from 15 to 30 miles, 7 kr. (2 sgr.); and for distances
exceeding 30 miles, 10 kr. (3 sgr.). In 1861 these rates were
reduced to 3, 6, and 9 kr. respectively for the three zones.<a name="FNanchor_726_726" id="FNanchor_726_726"></a><a href="#Footnote_726_726" class="fnanchor">[726]</a>
In addition there was a local rate of 2 kr. (&frac12; sgr.) for letters delivered
within a distance of 3 miles. In some of the towns a still lower
local rate, 1 kr. (&frac14; sgr.) was in operation.<a name="FNanchor_727_727" id="FNanchor_727_727"></a><a href="#Footnote_727_727" class="fnanchor">[727]</a></p>

<p>The <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Taxis</span> posts were, however, still regarded with a good deal
of jealousy, although it was recognized that in some ways the
system was advantageous in providing a unified postal service for
a large part of Germany at a time when it would have been difficult
to arrange directly between the various States for the maintenance
of a common service.</p>

<p>The situation was materially changed when, after the events of
1864-6, Prussia absorbed the duchies of the Elbe, Hanover,<!-- Page 355 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_355" id="Page_355">[Pg 355]</a></span>
Electoral Hesse, the Grand Duchy of Hesse, Nassau and Frankfort.
Prussia, of course, desired to assume control of the posts in these
territories, which formed a large part of the whole <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Taxis</span> system.
After some discussion of the rights of the <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Taxis</span> family, as a result
of which it appeared that legally the system was well grounded,
and could not be taken, therefore, from the <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Taxis</span> family without
compensation, the Prussian Government decided to buy up the
rights of the family in the new Prussian territory.<a name="FNanchor_728_728" id="FNanchor_728_728"></a><a href="#Footnote_728_728" class="fnanchor">[728]</a> The taking
over of these posts would have left so small a system in the
hands of the <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Taxis</span> family that they preferred to negotiate for the
transfer of the whole system to Prussia. The compensation to be
paid was based mainly on consideration of the net revenue of the
<span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Taxis</span> posts.</p>

<p>During the years 1855-65 this had been as follows:&mdash;</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Net revenue of Taxis posts from 1855 to 1865.">
<tr><th align="left"></th><th align="right">Florins.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1855-6</td><td align="right">405,582</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1856-7</td><td align="right">579,218</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1857-8</td><td align="right">692,884</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1858-9</td><td align="right">500,412</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1859-60</td><td align="right">638,801</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1860-1</td><td align="right">648,519</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1861-2</td><td align="right">464,751</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1862-3</td><td align="right">583,409</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1863-4</td><td align="right">753,917</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1864-5</td><td align="right">724,405</td><td align="left"><a name="FNanchor_729_729" id="FNanchor_729_729"></a><a href="#Footnote_729_729" class="fnanchor">[729]</a></td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>The amount of compensation was agreed at three million Marks.
The sum was voted by the Prussian Parliament without debate, and
on the 1st July 1867 Prussia assumed the control of the entire
<span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Taxis</span> system of posts. The administration was amalgamated with
that of the ordinary Prussian posts.</p>

<h4>IV. PARCEL POST IN CANADA</h4>

<p>Difficulties arising from the circumstances of the country made
the early establishment of a parcel post system impracticable.<a name="FNanchor_730_730" id="FNanchor_730_730"></a><a href="#Footnote_730_730" class="fnanchor">[730]</a></p>

<p>For many years, however, a strong feeling in favour of a parcel
post system existed, especially among the farmers of the West;
and with the establishment of a service in the United States in 1913
it became impossible to withhold a similar service from Canada.
The question was discussed in Parliament in January 1913, and,
as the immediate adoption of a system was obviously desired, the<!-- Page 356 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_356" id="Page_356">[Pg 356]</a></span>
Government undertook to give the matter fullest consideration, with
the view of submitting a scheme at an early date. The matter was
really of some urgency since, under an existing Convention, although
no internal parcel post service was in operation, Canada was called
upon to carry throughout her territory parcels originating in the
United States; and in June 1913, when the success of the service
in the United States was seen to be assured, a Bill was introduced
authorizing the establishment of a parcel post in Canada.</p>

<p>There could be no question of applying a flat rate in a country
of such vast territories and scattered population;<a name="FNanchor_731_731" id="FNanchor_731_731"></a><a href="#Footnote_731_731" class="fnanchor">[731]</a> and the Canadian
system, like the American, is based on zones of distance. The
limits of the zones correspond with the provincial boundaries.
Each province forms a zone, with a flat rate within its borders;
a rate as for an additional zone is charged on parcels crossing
into an adjoining province; and a rate as for a third zone on
parcels crossing an intermediate province to a third province; and
so on. The three maritime provinces are grouped together as one
zone, and a special local zone rate is given for parcels delivered
within 20 miles of the place of posting. This local rate is independent
of the provincial boundaries. It is a concession to
the storekeepers of the smaller towns, given chiefly for their protection
against the competition of the great departmental stores of
Montreal, Toronto, and Winnipeg.</p>

<p>The determination of the actual amount of the rates was left to
the Post Office department, with the proviso that they must be such
as would make the service self-supporting.</p>

<p>The service was introduced in April 1914, with the following rates
of charge:&mdash;</p>

<div class="blockquot"><p>(<i>a</i>) Five cents for the first pound and 1 cent for each additional pound or
fraction thereof, up to four pounds, and 2 cents for each subsequent pound up
to eleven pounds within a radius of 20 miles from the place of mailing, irrespective
of provincial boundaries.</p>

<p>(<i>b</i>) Ten cents for the first pound and 4 cents for each subsequent pound or
fraction thereof, for all points in the province in which a parcel is posted, outside
of the 20-mile radius.</p>

<p>(<i>c</i>) Ten cents for the first pound and 6 cents for each additional pound or
fraction thereof, for all points outside the province in which a parcel is posted,
and beyond the 20-mile radius, with an additional charge of 2 cents a pound<!-- Page 357 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_357" id="Page_357">[Pg 357]</a></span>
for each province that has to be crossed to the destination of the parcel, not
including the province in which it is to be delivered, up to a maximum of 12 cents
a pound.<a name="FNanchor_732_732" id="FNanchor_732_732"></a><a href="#Footnote_732_732" class="fnanchor">[732]</a></p></div>

<p>An additional charge to meet the extra cost of transportation is
made on parcels addressed to or posted at offices in certain outlying
districts when the parcels have to be conveyed on stage routes over
100 miles in length.</p>

<p>Statistics of the number of parcels dealt with are not taken by the
Canada Post Office.</p>

<h4>V. THE SUPPLEMENTAL SERVICES</h4>

<p>In connection with the transmission of postal packets, other services,
which are supplemental, and in some cases complementary, have
been added, e.g. registration and insurance, in order that senders
may protect themselves against loss or damage of packets in the
post.<a name="FNanchor_733_733" id="FNanchor_733_733"></a><a href="#Footnote_733_733" class="fnanchor">[733]</a> Closely allied to the transmission of ordinary letters is the
transmission of money from place to place, and from early times
the Post Office has also undertaken this function for appropriate
fees. This is the money order and postal order business. These
services apply only to a very small proportion of the total number
of packets posted, and may in general be regarded as exceptional.<a name="FNanchor_734_734" id="FNanchor_734_734"></a><a href="#Footnote_734_734" class="fnanchor">[734]</a></p>

<p>In addition to these supplemental functions, the Post Office has
usually been called upon to undertake services which have little or
no relation to the transmission of letters from place to place. Thus,
the British Post Office conducts a Savings Bank, undertakes the
issue of certain local taxation licences (gun and dog licences, etc.)
on behalf of the Inland Revenue Department and local authorities,
pays Old Age Pensions, sells stamps on behalf of the National
Health and Unemployment Insurance Commissioners, exhibits
certain Government notices in the windows of post offices, and, in
general, stands ready to perform any service to which, by reason of
its ramifications reaching to the remotest part of the kingdom, it
may be specially well adapted.<a name="FNanchor_735_735" id="FNanchor_735_735"></a><a href="#Footnote_735_735" class="fnanchor">[735]</a> In many countries the Post Office
has assumed the control of the telegraph or telephone systems, or<!-- Page 358 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_358" id="Page_358">[Pg 358]</a></span>
both&mdash;this, of course, largely in consideration of the close affinity
between the essential character of those services&mdash;transmission
from place to place of information and intelligence&mdash;and the
primary function of the Post Office; and in consideration of the
tendency of those services, like the letter service, to develop on
monopolistic lines.<a name="FNanchor_736_736" id="FNanchor_736_736"></a><a href="#Footnote_736_736" class="fnanchor">[736]</a> In continental countries the Government
control of the telegraphs has been regarded as a military necessity.<a name="FNanchor_737_737" id="FNanchor_737_737"></a><a href="#Footnote_737_737" class="fnanchor">[737]</a>
The assumption of these functions has no necessary relation to the
rates charged for the transmission of packets, but the circumstances
under which the services are conducted, whether at a profit or at
a loss, may indirectly affect the rates.</p>


<h4>VI. POST OFFICE REVENUE</h4>

<p>In England, Germany, and France the Post Office has, almost from
the first, been a source of revenue to the State. What has happened
has been that since the reform the Governments have been glad
to take whatever net revenue a penny rate would yield, but,
in general, they have not been prepared to raise that rate in
order to obtain a greater revenue.<a name="FNanchor_738_738" id="FNanchor_738_738"></a><a href="#Footnote_738_738" class="fnanchor">[738]</a> The only one of the five<!-- Page 359 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_359" id="Page_359">[Pg 359]</a></span>
countries which does not make, and on principle does not wish
to make, a revenue out of the Post Office is the United States
of America.</p>

<p>The penny letter rate is not by any means as low as the cost
of the service. It is, however, not a burdensome charge in any
circumstances, and, although so much greater than the cost, represents
in a large number of instances much less than the full
measure of benefit which the provision of the service confers
on the beneficiary. This is, of course, the ordinary case of the
purchaser of a commodity securing a "consumer's surplus."<a name="FNanchor_739_739" id="FNanchor_739_739"></a><a href="#Footnote_739_739" class="fnanchor">[739]</a>
Rates which yield a profit of 50 per cent. (pp. <a href="#Page_76">76</a> and  <a href="#Page_311">311</a>)
must, however, be admitted to contain some element of taxation.
In France particularly the Post Office occupies a definite place
in the fiscal system.<a name="FNanchor_740_740" id="FNanchor_740_740"></a><a href="#Footnote_740_740" class="fnanchor">[740]</a> There is, however, considerable diversity
of opinion among economists with regard to the theoretical
character of this revenue. Indeed, the general classification of
public revenues is itself not yet agreed upon.<a name="FNanchor_741_741" id="FNanchor_741_741"></a><a href="#Footnote_741_741" class="fnanchor">[741]</a> Under any classification<!-- Page 360 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_360" id="Page_360">[Pg 360]</a></span>
there is difficulty in assigning a place for the Post Office
revenue. With the simplest and most fundamental division it has
been regarded as falling under one or other heading, according to
the notion of the writer, or in accordance with certain changes
of conception based on variations in attendant circumstances.<a name="FNanchor_742_742" id="FNanchor_742_742"></a><a href="#Footnote_742_742" class="fnanchor">[742]</a></p>

<p>The difficulty of classification arises from the fact that of the total
amount of the postage charges actually levied, only a portion can
in any case be regarded as taxation. A person who purchases a
commodity from the State, but in purchasing it is charged something
more than its actual value, is not taxed to the extent of the
whole of the amount which he is charged. There can be no taxation
in that part of the amount for which he receives equivalent value in
the commodity purchased. It is easy to say of the gross postal
revenue that so much is tax (i.e. the net revenue), and so much is
cost of service (i.e. the actual expenses), though it may not be easy
to justify even this distinction;<a name="FNanchor_743_743" id="FNanchor_743_743"></a><a href="#Footnote_743_743" class="fnanchor">[743]</a> but what principle is to be followed
in determining whether a particular postage charge (e.g. the letter
rate or the parcel rate), or any part of it, is taxation?</p>

<p>Taxes are reckoned according to the rate of charge. Thus, the
income tax is 2s. 3d. in the pound on earned incomes; but
approached in this way postage is not a tax. If the charge only
covers the cost of the service, there can be no tax.<a name="FNanchor_744_744" id="FNanchor_744_744"></a><a href="#Footnote_744_744" class="fnanchor">[744]</a> And when there<!-- Page 361 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_361" id="Page_361">[Pg 361]</a></span>
is a surplus (above normal commercial profit) it cannot be argued
that the whole charge becomes a tax. The solution seems to be that
in such a case it is neither tax nor industrial price. It contains
elements of both, and cannot be classed wholly under either.<a name="FNanchor_745_745" id="FNanchor_745_745"></a><a href="#Footnote_745_745" class="fnanchor">[745]</a></p>

<p>The differing analyses of Post Office revenue result largely from
their being based on consideration of the balance-sheet of the Post
Office, as indicating whether postal charges are to be regarded as
taxes.<a name="FNanchor_746_746" id="FNanchor_746_746"></a><a href="#Footnote_746_746" class="fnanchor">[746]</a> The character of postal charges should not, however, be<!-- Page 362 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_362" id="Page_362">[Pg 362]</a></span>
determined by reference solely to the amount of the surplus
revenue. The true classification rests on the conception that the
character of public revenue (including Post Office revenue) varies
with varying circumstances.<a name="FNanchor_747_747" id="FNanchor_747_747"></a><a href="#Footnote_747_747" class="fnanchor">[747]</a></p>

<p>The penny letter rate is a source of very considerable profit, and is
therefore not a pure price. Nor can it be said that this penny rate,
although it is the source of practically all the profit, is a pure tax.
In the case of a large number of letters there is no surplus beyond
the cost of the service, and often the cost is greater than the yield
of the postage on the particular letters dealt with. In such cases
the rate does not contain any element of tax. In other cases the
proportion of surplus over cost which the rate yields is exceedingly
large.<a name="FNanchor_748_748" id="FNanchor_748_748"></a><a href="#Footnote_748_748" class="fnanchor">[748]</a> But in all cases it contains some element of remuneration<!-- Page 363 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_363" id="Page_363">[Pg 363]</a></span>
for service rendered. That part of it which is appropriated to cover
the cost of conducting the service is of the nature of a price for a
service rendered. The remaining part (when found), after allowance
has been made for the element of monopoly, is a tax.<a name="FNanchor_749_749" id="FNanchor_749_749"></a><a href="#Footnote_749_749" class="fnanchor">[749]</a> But it does
not exist in all cases. Three categories of letters are therefore
found; and the letter rate in general may, according to the
circumstances under which the service is rendered, be (1) of
composite character, partly price and partly tax, (2) a pure price,
(3) a mere fee.</p>

<p>The other rates (excepting for the moment the parcel rate)
have all for some specific purpose of State been fixed at a lower
level than the letter rate; but, for the most part, without any nice
adjustment to the cost of service. Consequently these subsidiary
rates are not prices, and do not contain any element of taxation.<a name="FNanchor_750_750" id="FNanchor_750_750"></a><a href="#Footnote_750_750" class="fnanchor">[750]</a>
They are, however, charges made to individuals in respect of certain
services performed by the State, and fall, therefore, under the
heading of fees.</p>

<p>The parcel rates in England and Germany may be put under
the same heading. In both cases the service is conducted at a
loss, and the charges cannot therefore be regarded as prices. In<!-- Page 364 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_364" id="Page_364">[Pg 364]</a></span>
the United States and in Canada the law provides that the rates
for parcels must in all cases be such as to yield a revenue
sufficient to cover the cost of the service, and the presumption
is therefore that in those countries the rates will partake of the
nature of prices.<a name="FNanchor_751_751" id="FNanchor_751_751"></a><a href="#Footnote_751_751" class="fnanchor">[751]</a></p>

<p>Although there has been diversity of opinion regarding the nature
of Post Office revenue, there has been remarkable unanimity as
to the propriety of raising a net revenue for the State on the
service for the transmission of letters. In the days of high rates
and relatively high revenue it was not challenged.<a name="FNanchor_752_752" id="FNanchor_752_752"></a><a href="#Footnote_752_752" class="fnanchor">[752]</a> Sir Rowland<!-- Page 365 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_365" id="Page_365">[Pg 365]</a></span>
Hill's reform took away any sort of feeling that the revenue obtained
from the Post Office lay as a burdensome tax, but the amount of
surplus revenue was still so considerable that it could fairly be
regarded as containing an element of tax.<a name="FNanchor_753_753" id="FNanchor_753_753"></a><a href="#Footnote_753_753" class="fnanchor">[753]</a> It has, moreover,
steadily increased, and its existence been made the justification for
claims for further reductions of rate.<a name="FNanchor_754_754" id="FNanchor_754_754"></a><a href="#Footnote_754_754" class="fnanchor">[754]</a></p>

<p>The use of the Post Office for the purpose of taxation, that is,
the refusal to give away in improvements of service, or by
reduction of rates, the net surplus of revenue, is accepted by
economists as justifiable<a name="FNanchor_755_755" id="FNanchor_755_755"></a><a href="#Footnote_755_755" class="fnanchor">[755]</a> and the public acquiesces. The surplus<!-- Page 366 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_366" id="Page_366">[Pg 366]</a></span>
is obtained with the minimum of sacrifice on the part of
those who pay, and it would be difficult to discover a tax in substitution
which would fall as lightly. Apart from the fact that
rates higher than would be necessary for defraying the actual
cost of the service must of necessity operate to some extent to the
disadvantage of trade and commerce,<a name="FNanchor_756_756" id="FNanchor_756_756"></a><a href="#Footnote_756_756" class="fnanchor">[756]</a> there is little to urge against
the raising of revenue from the Post Office, especially as it is
obtained from such popular charges as a penny and a halfpenny,
which are well within the reach of the poorest. Payment is,
moreover, in a large degree voluntary. The number of letters
which a private individual must write, and cannot avoid writing,
in the course of a year is very small. If he has anything of
importance to write, he does not think a penny an excessive sum
to pay for its transmission. If he has nothing to write, there is no
law to compel him to pay postage. The profits of postage are,
however, large; and the existence of the State monopoly, and the
essentially fiscal character of the rates charged, should not be
overlooked.<a name="FNanchor_757_757" id="FNanchor_757_757"></a><a href="#Footnote_757_757" class="fnanchor">[757]</a><!-- Page 367 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_367" id="Page_367">[Pg 367]</a></span></p>

<hr />
<p><!-- Page 368 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_368" id="Page_368">[Pg 368]</a></span></p>

<h4>VII. GRAPHS</h4>

<div class="figcenter" style="width: 367px;">
<a href="https://brian.carnell.com/wiki/_media/etext:a:ad-smith-development-of-rates-of-postage-i-368.jpg"><img src="https://brian.carnell.com/wiki/_media/etext:a:ad-smith-development-of-rates-of-postage-i-368_tn.jpg" width="367" height="400"
alt="Graph comparing UK inland postage rates before and after 1st November 1915."
title="Graph comparing UK inland postage rates before and after 1st November 1915; linked to larger image."/></a>
<span class="caption">UNITED KINGDOM INLAND RATES OF POSTAGE 1914, AND NEW RATES INTRODUCED 1ST NOVEMBER 1915.</span>
</div>

<div><hr /></div>
<p><!-- Page 369 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_369" id="Page_369">[Pg 369]</a></span></p>

<div class="figcenter" style="width: 400px;">
<a href="https://brian.carnell.com/wiki/_media/etext:a:ad-smith-development-of-rates-of-postage-i-369.jpg"><img src="https://brian.carnell.com/wiki/_media/etext:a:ad-smith-development-of-rates-of-postage-i-369_tn.jpg" width="400" height="294"
alt="Graph of the variation of United Kingdom postage revenue and expenditure between 1725 and 1851."
title="Graph of the variation of United Kingdom postage revenue and expenditure between 1725 and 1851; linked to larger image." /></a>
<span class="caption">UNITED KINGDOM (1725-1851)</span>
</div>

<div><hr /></div>
<p><!-- Page 370 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_370" id="Page_370">[Pg 370]</a></span></p>

<div class="figcenter" style="width: 384px;">
<a href="https://brian.carnell.com/wiki/_media/etext:a:ad-smith-development-of-rates-of-postage-i-370.jpg"><img src="https://brian.carnell.com/wiki/_media/etext:a:ad-smith-development-of-rates-of-postage-i-370_tn.jpg" width="384" height="400"
alt="Graph of the variation of United Kingdom postage volume, revenue and expenditure between 1820 and 1914."
title="Graph of the variation of United Kingdom postage volume, revenue and expenditure between 1820 and 1914; linked to larger image." /></a>
<span class="caption">UNITED KINGDOM (1820-1914)</span>
</div>

<div><hr /></div>
<p><!-- Page 371 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_371" id="Page_371">[Pg 371]</a></span></p>

<div class="figcenter" style="width: 374px;">
<a href="https://brian.carnell.com/wiki/_media/etext:a:ad-smith-development-of-rates-of-postage-i-371.jpg"><img src="https://brian.carnell.com/wiki/_media/etext:a:ad-smith-development-of-rates-of-postage-i-371_tn.jpg" width="374" height="400"
alt="Graph of the variation of United Kingdom postage Parcel Deliveries between 1883 and 1914."
title="Graph of the variation of United Kingdom postage Parcel Deliveries between 1883 and 1914; linked to larger image." /></a>
<span class="caption">UNITED KINGDOM</span>
</div>

<div><hr /></div>
<p><!-- Page 372 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_372" id="Page_372">[Pg 372]</a></span></p>

<div class="figcenter" style="width: 351px;">
<a href="https://brian.carnell.com/wiki/_media/etext:a:ad-smith-development-of-rates-of-postage-i-372.jpg"><img src="https://brian.carnell.com/wiki/_media/etext:a:ad-smith-development-of-rates-of-postage-i-372_tn.jpg" width="351" height="400"
alt="UNITED KINGDOM MOVEMENT OF STATISTICS OF POSTAL TRAFFIC
1870-1914"
title="UNITED KINGDOM MOVEMENT OF STATISTICS OF POSTAL TRAFFIC 1870-1914; linked to larger image" /></a>
<span class="caption">UNITED KINGDOM MOVEMENT OF STATISTICS OF POSTAL TRAFFIC 1870-1914</span>
</div>

<div><hr /></div>
<p><!-- Page 373 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_373" id="Page_373">[Pg 373]</a></span></p>

<div class="figcenter" style="width: 317px;">
<a href="https://brian.carnell.com/wiki/_media/etext:a:ad-smith-development-of-rates-of-postage-i-373.jpg"><img src="https://brian.carnell.com/wiki/_media/etext:a:ad-smith-development-of-rates-of-postage-i-373_tn.jpg" width="317" height="400"
alt="Graph of the number of letters delivered per head of population in the UK  between 1854 and 1914"
title="Graph of the number of letters delivered per head of population in the UK  between 1854 and 1914; linked to larger image" /></a>
<span class="caption">UNITED KINGDOM NUMBER OF LETTERS DELIVERED PER HEAD OF POPULATION (1854-1914)</span>
</div>

<div><hr /></div>
<p><!-- Page 374 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_374" id="Page_374">[Pg 374]</a></span></p>

<h3>APPENDIX B<br />
DOCUMENTS AND EXTRACTS ILLUSTRATING
ASPECTS OF POSTAL HISTORY</h3>


<h4>(i) <span class="smcap">Ancient Posts.</span></h4>

<h5><i>Persia</i> (<i>circa</i> <span class="smcap">b. c.</span> 500).</h5>

<p>"In Darius's idea of government was included rapidity of communication.
Regarding it as of the utmost importance that
the orders of the Court should be speedily transmitted to the
provincial Governors, and that their reports and those of the
royal secretaries should be received without needless delay, he
established along the lines of route already existing between the
chief cities of the Empire, a number of post-houses, placed at
regular intervals, according to the estimated capacity of a horse
to gallop at his best speed without stopping. At each post-house
were maintained, at the cost of the State, a number of couriers
and several relays of horses. When a despatch was to be
forwarded, it was taken to the first post-house along the route,
where a courier received it, and immediately mounting on horseback,
galloped with it to the next station. Here it was delivered
to a new courier, who, mounted on a fresh horse, took it the next
stage on its journey; and thus it passed from hand to hand till it
reached its destination. According to Xenophon, the messengers
travelled by night as well as by day; and the conveyance was so
rapid that some even compared it to the flight of birds. Excellent
inns or caravanserais were to be found at every station; bridges or
ferries were established upon all the streams; guard-houses occurred
here and there, and the whole route was kept secure from the
brigands who infested the Empire. Ordinary travellers were glad
to pursue so convenient a line of march; it does not appear,
however, that they could obtain the use of post-horses, even when
the Government was in no need of them.</p>

<p>"<i>Note.</i>&mdash;It was not the distance a horse ridden gently could<!-- Page 375 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_375" id="Page_375">[Pg 375]</a></span>
accomplish in the entire day, but the distance he could bear to be
galloped once a day. From the account which Herodotus gives
of the post-route between Sardis and Susa, we may gather that
the Persians fixed this distance at about fourteen miles."&mdash;George
Rawlinson, <i>The Five Great Monarchies of the Ancient Eastern
World</i>, London, 1871, vol. iii. pp. 426-7.</p>


<h5><i>Roman Empire.</i></h5>

<p>"The advantage of receiving the earliest intelligence, and of
conveying their orders with celerity, induced the Emperors to
establish throughout their extensive dominions the regular institution
of posts. Houses were everywhere erected at the distance
only of five or six miles; each of them was constantly provided
with forty horses, and, by the help of these relays, it was easy to
travel an hundred miles in a day along the Roman roads. The
use of the posts was allowed to those who claimed it by an
Imperial mandate; but though originally intended for the public
service, it was sometimes indulged to the business or conveniency
of private citizens (Pliny, though a favourite and a minister, made
an apology for granting post-horses to his wife on the most urgent
business)."&mdash;Edward Gibbon, <i>The History of the Decline and Fall
of the Roman Empire</i>, London, ed. 1896, vol. i. p. 50.</p>


<h5><i>Arabia.</i></h5>

<p>"The first traces of the Arabian postal arrangements date from
about fifty years after the death of Mahomed. Calif Mdowija, who
died in 679, is regarded as the founder of the Arabian posts.
Kodama, a native of Bagdad, who died in 959, gives an account of
the service in his work called <i>The Book of Taxes</i>. There were
930 postal stations on the six great highroads starting from
Bagdad. At some stations there were relays of horses, but in
Syria and Arabia the messengers rode on camels; and in Persia
the letters were conveyed from station to station by messengers
on foot. The postal service under the Califs was an independent
branch of the administration, and in addition to the conveyance
of despatches and travellers was added the supervision of all the
authorities in outlying possessions. Of the two classes of superior
postal officers, the <i>nowaqquium</i> was the postmaster who received
the postal packets and letters and attended to their conveyance,
whereas the <i>farwaneqqyun</i> was a kind of chief postmaster at the
capital of a province, who controlled the work of the postmasters
and made his own report on all the civil and military authorities to<!-- Page 376 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_376" id="Page_376">[Pg 376]</a></span>
the central office in Bagdad. These reports were so valuable that
Calif Abu Djafar Manssur is credited with the statement: 'My
throne rests on four pillars, and my power on four men&mdash;a blameless
kazi (judge), an energetic chief of police, an honest minister of
finance, and a faithful postmaster who gives me reliable information
on everything.' It has been said that the Roman <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">cursus publicus</i>,
the <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">frumentarii</i>, the <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">agentes in rebus</i>, and the <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">curiosi</i>
served a
similar purpose, but the Arabian arrangement was more systematic.
In the Post Office of the Califs the letters and packets posted, as
well as those received from other places, were entered in special
lists, where their number and address had to be stated. This practice
was observed in India till a few years ago, and it will thus
be seen that the letter bill of the modern posts was in use already
among the Egyptians in 270 <span class="smcap">b.c.</span>, and also among the Arabs. From
the information that has been preserved, it is inferred that the
Arabian posts did, to a certain extent, transmit private letters, but
this was not done officially, and the couriers and postmasters
conveyed such correspondence, along with the official despatches,
on their own account."&mdash;I. G. J. Hamilton, <i>Outline of Postal
History</i>, Calcutta, 1910, p. 4.</p>


<h5><i>Mexico</i>.</h5>

<p>"Communication was maintained with the remotest parts of the
country by means of couriers. Post-houses were established on
the great roads, about two leagues distant from each other. The
courier, bearing his despatches in the form of a hieroglyphical
painting, ran with them to the first station, where they were taken
by another messenger and carried forward to the next; and so on
till they reached the capital. These couriers, trained from childhood,
travelled with incredible swiftness&mdash;not four or five leagues
an hour, as an old chronicler would make us believe, but with such
speed that despatches were carried from one to two hundred miles
a day. Fresh fish was frequently served at Montezuma's table in
twenty-four hours from the time it had been taken in the Gulf
of Mexico, two hundred miles from the capital. In this way intelligence
of the movements of the royal armies was rapidly brought
to Court; and the dress of the courier, denoting by its colour the
nature of his tidings, spread joy or consternation in the towns
through which he passed."&mdash;W. H. Prescott, <i>History of the Conquest
of Mexico</i>, London, 1903, pp. 20, 21.</p>

<p>A similar system existed in Peru (W. H. Prescott, <i>History of the
Conquest of Peru</i>, Philadelphia, 1874, vol. i. p. 69).<!-- Page 377 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_377" id="Page_377">[Pg 377]</a></span></p>


<h5><i>China.</i></h5>

<p>"From the city of Kanbulu<a name="FNanchor_758_758" id="FNanchor_758_758"></a><a href="#Footnote_758_758" class="fnanchor">[758]</a> there are many roads leading to the
different provinces, and upon each of these, that is to say, upon
every great highroad, at the distance of twenty-five or thirty miles,
accordingly as the towns happen to be situated, there are stations,
with houses of accommodation for travellers, called <i>yamb</i> or post-houses.
These are large and handsome buildings, having several
well-furnished apartments hung with silk, and provided with everything
suitable to persons of rank. Even kings may be lodged at
these stations in a becoming manner, as every article required may
be obtained from the towns and strong places in the vicinity; and
for some of them the Court makes regular provision. At each station
four hundred good horses are kept in constant readiness, in order
that all messengers going and coming upon the business of the
grand khan, and all ambassadors, may have relays, and, leaving
their jaded horses, be supplied with fresh ones.... When it is
necessary that messengers should proceed with extraordinary
despatch, as in the cases of giving information of disturbance in
any part of the country, the rebellion of a chief or other important
matter, they ride two hundred, or sometimes two hundred and
fifty miles in the course of a day."&mdash;<i>Travels of Marco Polo the
Venetian</i>, London, 1904, pp. 190 et seq.</p>


<h4>(ii) <span class="smcap"><i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Nuncii</i> and <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Cursores</i></span>.</h4>

<p>"The Royal <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Nuncii et Cursores</i> constituted a very important
branch of the Royal Establishment, and the payments to them form
a very large and important item in the Household and Wardrobe
Accounts from the earliest period when those accounts exist.</p>

<p>"These Messengers were employed both in England and in
foreign parts, and as well on affairs of State as what may be considered
as the private and confidential business of the Crown and
Royal Family and the individuals attached to or composing the
Royal Court. These Messengers, so attached to the Court, became
the foundation of the establishment, which about the time of
Henry VIII, or somewhat earlier, assumed the form of the regular
establishment of the Post; and the information connected with
them is important, as showing that the institution was intimately
connected with the person of the sovereign, and that, in the first
instance, it was his convenience that was sought. Those servants
who, by usage, were more particularly employed on State affairs,
probably became those who are now specially termed the 'Queen's<!-- Page 378 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_378" id="Page_378">[Pg 378]</a></span>
Messengers.'"&mdash;<i>Report from Secret Committee on the Post Office</i>
(<i>Commons</i>), 1844, Appx., p. 21.</p>


<h4>(iii) <span class="smcap">Witherings' Scheme for the Reform of the
Posts</span>, 1635.</h4>

<div class="blockquot"><p>A Proposition for setling of Staffets or pacquet posts betwixt
London and all parts of his Maiesties dominions, for the carrying
and recarrying of his subiects lr&#x0303;es. The cleere proffitt
whereof to goe towards the payment of the Postm<sup>rs</sup> of y<sup>e</sup> Roades
of England, for w<sup>ch</sup> his Ma<sup>tie</sup> is now chardged w<sup>th</sup> 3400<i>l.</i> p a&#241;m.</p></div>

<p>In the first place, a certen office or compting house to be by his
Ma<sup>tie</sup> appointed w<sup>th</sup>in the cittie of London, of purpose for carrying
out &amp; receiving in of all Lr&#x0303;es to be conveyed from y<sup>e</sup> cittie of London
into all p<sup>ts</sup> w<sup>th</sup>in his Ma<sup>ts</sup> dominions &amp; answers thereof retorned to
the said Cittie of London, according as occasion shall serve.</p>

<p>Inprimis, for the Northerne and Scotland roade, All lr&#x0303;es to be
put into one Portmantle that shalbe directed to Edenburgh in
Scotland, and for all places of the s<sup>d</sup> roade, or neere the s<sup>d</sup> roade, to
be accordinglie put into y<sup>e</sup> s<sup>d</sup> Portmantle, w<sup>th</sup> p&#x0331;ticuler baggs
directed
to such Postm<sup>rs</sup> as live upon the Road neere unto any Cittie or
Towne Corporate.</p>

<p><i>As for Example</i>&mdash;</p>

<p>One Bagge to be directed to Cambridge w<sup>th</sup> such lr&#x0303;es therein as
shalbe directed to that place or neere thereunto; to take port for
them as is now pd&#x0303; to the Carriers, w<sup>ch</sup> is Two pence a single lr&#x0303;e, and
so accordinglie as they shalbe in bignes. At Cambridge a footpost
to be provided, w<sup>th</sup> a knowne badge of his Ma<sup>ts</sup> Armes, whome upon
the markett daies is to goe to all Townes w<sup>th</sup>in 6: 8: or 10 miles,
there to receive &amp; deliver all such lr&#x0303;es as shalbe directed to those
places. The lr&#x0303;es that the s<sup>d</sup> footpost shall then and there receive,
hee is to bring them to the s<sup>d</sup> Towne of Cambridge before the
retorne of the Portmantle out of Scotland, w<sup>ch</sup> is to retorne at a
certen daie &amp; houre, by w<sup>ch</sup> meanes they maie be upon the verie
instante comeing back of the s<sup>d</sup> Portmantle, as before, put into a
little bagge, w<sup>ch</sup> s<sup>d</sup> bagg is to be put into y<sup>e</sup> s<sup>d</sup> Portmantle as
aforesaid.
It is alwaies to be understood that upon the verie instant cominge
of the Portmantle to Cambridge, the bagg of lr&#x0303;es for that place &amp;
thereaboutes ymmediatly to be tooke out of the s<sup>d</sup> Portmantle; the
said Portmantle being presentlie to goe forwards, night and day,
w<sup>th</sup>out stay, to Huntingdon, w<sup>th</sup> fresh horse &amp; man. At w<sup>ch</sup> place
<!-- Page 379 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_379" id="Page_379">[Pg 379]</a></span>the like rule is to be observed as before at Cambridge, &amp; so the s<sup>d</sup>
Portmantle is to goe from Stage to Stage, night &amp; day, till it shall
come to Edenburgh. The bags of lr&#x0303;es to be left at all Stages as at
Cambridge and Huntingdon, as before.</p>

<p>Only it is to be understood, that the further the lr&#x0303;es shall goe, the
port thereof is to be advanced, as to 3<sup>d</sup>, 4<sup>d</sup>, &amp; 6<sup>d</sup>, &amp; to Scotland more.
By this way of carrying and recarrying of lr&#x0303;es, his Ma<sup>ts</sup> subjects
shall, once in 6 daies, receive answer from Edenburgh in Scotland,
and so consequently from all p<sup>ts</sup> betwixt London &amp; Scotland.</p>

<p>The daie and howre of the comeing and going of the s<sup>d</sup> Portmantle
to and from London to be alwaies certaine. By w<sup>ch</sup> meanes all
Stages upon the Road will knowe at what certen howre the Portmantle
is to come to y<sup>t</sup> place.</p>

<p>It is truth it maie be alledged, that some Citties &amp; Townes of noate
will lye so farre from any of the mayne Roads of England, as Hull
&amp; other Townes of noate upon the Sea coasts, as that it wilbe
impossible for a footman to carry and recarry the s<sup>d</sup> lr&#x0303;es w<sup>th</sup>in such
time as shalbe limitted: for remedie thereof a horse is to be provided
for the s<sup>d</sup> footpost, for the execuc&#x0303;on of the s<sup>d</sup> service w<sup>th</sup> more
expedic&#x0303;on.</p>

<p>The like rule is to be observed to Westchester &amp; so to Ireland.</p>

<p>The like rule is to be observed to Oxford, Bristoll, &amp; so to
Ireland.</p>

<p>The like rule is to be observed to Worcester, Shrewesbury, and so
to y<sup>e</sup> Marches of Wales.</p>

<p>The like rule to be observed to Exceter, &amp; so to Plymouth.</p>

<p>The like rule to be observed to Canterbury, &amp; so to Dovo<sup>r</sup>.</p>

<p>The like rule to be observed to Chelmesford, Colchester, and so to
Harw<sup>ch</sup>.</p>

<p>The like rule to be observed to Newmarket, Bury, Norw<sup>ch</sup>, and so
to Yarmouth.</p>

<p>In the first place, it wilbe a great furtherance to the correspondency
betwixt London &amp; Scotland, &amp; London &amp; Ireland, and
great help to Trades, &amp; true affecc&#x0303;on of his Ma<sup>ts</sup> subiects betwixt
theis kingdomes, which, for want of true correspondency of lr&#x0303;es, is
now destroyed, &amp; a thing above all things observed by all other
nations.</p>

<p><i>As for Example</i>&mdash;</p>

<p>If anie of his M<sup>ats</sup> subiects shall write to Madrill, in Spain, hee
shall receive answer sooner &amp; surer then hee shall out of Scotland
or Ireland. The lr&#x0303;es being now carried by carriers or footposts
16 or 18 miles a day, it is full two monthes before any answer can
be received from Scotland or Ireland to London, w<sup>ch</sup> by this Conveyance
<!-- Page 380 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_380" id="Page_380">[Pg 380]</a></span>all lr&#x0303;es shall goe 120 miles at y<sup>e</sup> least in one day &amp; night.</p>

<p>It will Secondlie be alledged, that it is a wrong to the Carriers
that bring the said letters. To which is answered, a Carrier setts
out from Westchester to London on the Mundaie, w<sup>ch</sup> is 120 miles.
The s<sup>d</sup> Carrier is 8 daies upon the Road, and upon his cominge to
London delivers his letters of advise for his relodinge to Westchester
againe, and his forced to staie in London two daies at
extraordinary charges before he can get his loding redy.</p>

<p>By this Conveyance lr&#x0303;es wilbe fr&#x014d; Westchester to London in one
day &amp; night, so that the s<sup>d</sup> Carriers loading wilbe made ready a
weeke before the s<sup>d</sup> Carriers shall come to London, and they no
sooner come to London but maie be redy to depte againe.</p>

<p>The like will fall out in all other pts.</p>

<p>Besides, if at any time there should be occasion to write from
anie of the coast Townes in England or Scotland to London, by this
Conveyance lr&#x0303;es wilbe brought ymmediatly: &amp; from all such places
there wilbe weekely advise to &amp; from London.</p>


<p><i>As for Example</i>&mdash;</p>

<p>Anie fight at Sea: any distress of his Ma<sup>ts</sup> shipps, (w<sup>ch</sup> Godd forbidd),
anie wrong offered by any other nation to any of y<sup>e</sup> Coaste of
England, or anie of his Ma<sup>ts</sup> forts: the Posts being punctually paid,
the newes will come sooner then thought.</p>

<p>It wilbe, thirdlie, alledged that this service maie be p&#x0311;tended by the
Lo: Stanhope to be in his graunt of Post M<sup>r</sup> of England. To w<sup>ch</sup> is
answered, neither the Lo: Stanhope, nor anie other that ever enjoyed
the Postm<sup>s</sup> place of England, had any benefitt of the carrying and
recarrying of the subiects Lr&#x0303;es: beside, the profitt is to paie y<sup>e</sup> Posts
of the Road, w<sup>ch</sup> next unto his Ma<sup>tie</sup>, belong to y<sup>e</sup> office of the s<sup>d</sup>
Lo:
Stanhope, and upon determinac&#x0303;on of any of the s<sup>d</sup> Posts places, by
death or otherwise, the Lo: Stanhope will make as much of them
as hath heretofore bin made by this said advancement of all theire
places.</p>

<p>The Lord Stanhope now enioying what either hee or any of his
Predecesso<sup>s</sup> hath ever heretofore done to this day.</p>

<p>
(Indorsed by Sec. Coke)<br />
<br />
"Proposition for Missive Letters."<br />
</p>

<p>&mdash;<i>Report from Secret Committee on the Post Office</i> (<i>Commons</i>), 1844,
Appx., pp. 55-6.</p>


<h4>(iv) <span class="smcap">The Monopoly and the General Farm of the Posts.</span></h4>


<h5>No. 1.</h5>

<p>"Whereas heretofore sundry wayes have bene devised to redresse
the disorders among the postes of our realme in generall, and particularly<!-- Page 381 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_381" id="Page_381">[Pg 381]</a></span>
to prevent the inconveniences, both to our owne service and
the lawfull trade of the honest merchants, by prohibiting that no
persons whatsoever should take upon them, publiquely or privately,
to procure, gather up, receive ... any packets or letters to or
from the countreys beyond the seas, except such our ordinarie posts
and messengers for those parties, etc."&mdash;royal Proclamation,
April 26th 1591.</p>


<h5>No. 2.</h5>

<p>"There has long been a constant trade betwixt London and
Norwich in sundry sorts of stuffs and stockings made in Norwich
and Norfolk, which trade has always been maintained by the
merchants of Norwich employing their stocks in buying wares of
the makers and sending them up weekly in carts by common
carriers to London, whence they are dispersed into all parts of
this kingdom, and also exported to foreign parts, in which intercourse
of trade we always had our letters safely and speedily carried by
our common carrier, by a horseman, not in manner of postage by
change of horses, but as is usual by common carriers, and for little
or no charge to us. Of late Mr. Witherings has intercepted our
letters and molested our carriers, forbidding them to carry any of
our letters otherwise than to go along with their carts, and no
faster."&mdash;Petition to Privy Council, 1638; J. W. Hyde, <i>The Post in
Grant and Farm</i>, London, 1894, p. 131.</p>


<h5>No. 3.</h5>

<p>" ... By a Proclamation dated about July 1635 his Majestie did
expresse his pleasure, that <i>Thomas Witherings</i> should have the
carriage of the said letters who would settle it in a better and more
speedy course; thereupon he undertook the said work, and for a
long time, after his said undertaking, it cost him some weeks 20l.
30l. 40l. more than he received, to the great weakening and hazard
of the ruine of his estate. It is verie true, that untill he had his
patent of his Office granted unto him for his life, which was in the
yeare 1637, he did in some places lay horses of his owne, in others
he did make use of the ordinarie Post-horses, and because he
desired quick dispatch, hee paid them for a guide and a horse to
carrie the male 6d. <i>per</i> mile, after not conceiving a guide necessarie
he made only use of one horse, and paid 3d. <i>per</i> mile.... for the
other Posts, they have 3d. <i>per</i> mile which is more than ordinarie
pay. But the objection which seems to carrie the greatest shew,
<!-- Page 382 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_382" id="Page_382">[Pg 382]</a></span>or colour of probabilitie with it is; That the P<sup>mrs</sup> had formerly
4,000<i>l.</i> <i>per annum</i> fee, onely for carrying his Majesties packets, that
Witherings hath reduced this to 2,053l. <i>per annum</i>, and yet puts a
greater burthen upon them by carrying his male; hath displaced
many of them and received 4,000l. for Post places."&mdash;<i>Full and cleare
answer to a false and scandalous Paper entituled: The humble Remonstrance
of the grievances of all his Majesties Posts of England,
together with Carriers, Waggoners, etc.</i>, 1641, pp. 2, 3.</p>


<h5>No. 4.</h5>

<p>Reasons presented to the Committee for Postmasters why the
office should not be farmed:&mdash;</p>

<p>(1) What is of public interest, if farmed, often becomes a great
public grievance.</p>

<p>(2) The postmasters who have served faithfully and others who
run best to Lynn, Yarmouth, etc., must be restrained and will complain
as they did in 1642 to the late Parliament which ordered them
redress.</p>

<p>(3) By farming, the pay of postmasters will be made so inconsiderable
that they will grow careless.</p>

<p>(4) The expectations of the people now at this juncture so highly
raised to hopes of ease and freedom, will be disappointed when they
see new monopolies.</p>

<hr />

<p>Suggestions for reducing the office into one channel, for easing
the people, encouraging the postmasters and raising money for the
public:&mdash;</p>

<p>1. To declare it unsafe for private persons to erect post stages
without licence.</p>

<p>2. To chose faithful persons in all the roads and appoint a supervisor
on each road.</p>

<p>3. To declare that you have appointed them postmasters and
give power to their controller only to sign labels for speedy conveyance
of mails and give them writs of assistance.</p>

<p>Signed by Robert Girdler and seven others.&mdash;<i>Calendar of State
Papers</i> (<i>Domestic Series</i>), 26th November, 1652.</p>


<h5>No. 5.</h5>

<p>Offers of the well-affected postmasters to the Posts' Committee....</p>

<p>The order of the Council in the case of the Inland Post Office
being that it be improved to the greatest advantage either by farm
or account, they conceive the advantages consist not so much in the<!-- Page 383 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_383" id="Page_383">[Pg 383]</a></span>
advance of money, as the service and safety of the State, and beg to
offer,</p>

<p>1. That persons of known integrity may be employed in all parts,
and a sufficient salary allowed, as becomes a trust of that great
concernment.</p>

<p>2. That a fit person be appointed for the control thereof, according
to orders from the State, etc.</p>

<p>3. As righteousness exalteth a nation, it is hoped that after the
expense of so much blood and treasure, the very things adjudged
and condemned in others (viz. monopolies) will not now be practised,
but that next to public safety, you will be tender of the people's just
liberty; for both by the laws of God and man it is lawful for every
man to employ himself in a lawful calling, especially in that to
which he has been bred, and it is also lawful for divers men to
employ themselves in one calling, otherwise there must be as many
callings as men.</p>

<p>4. For avoiding of many inconveniencies that will follow in the
farming of it, viz.</p>

<p>The persons depositing or obliging themselves for so much money
a year, will not lay out themselves and their estates without
expectation of profit, which must arise either out of the people's
letters or postmasters' labour, besides the hazard to the Commonwealth;
for notwithstanding the faithfulness of the postmasters yet
if they will not do their work at their rates (which may prove an
oppression too heavy, like that in Egypt) others shall.&mdash;<i>Calendar of
State Papers</i> (<i>Domestic Series</i>), May 1653.</p>


<h5>No. 6.</h5>

<p>"Petition of John Mann, Mayor, and 22 aldermen &amp; inhabitants
of Norwich:&mdash;</p>

<p>"Having much commerce with London we have always employed
a faithful and careful messenger to carry letters, bills of exchange,
etc., but he has lately been molested by John Manley whose agents
have not only rifled and detained our letters and goods, but charged
more than double price for small parcels of ware, which is a greater
burden to many of us than the monthly assessment....</p>

<p>"Having bought our liberties at vast expense of blood and
treasure, we hope not again to be troubled with distasteful monopolies
but to have liberty to convey our letters freely."&mdash;<i>Calendar of
State Papers</i> (<i>Domestic Series</i>), 1653-4, p. 25.</p>


<h5>No. 7.</h5>

<p>"Also it hinders a man to be as civil as otherwise he would, or
might be, in having, or returning an accompt to, or from his friend,<!-- Page 384 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_384" id="Page_384">[Pg 384]</a></span>
many a man in these times being forced to set a greater value of
6d. or 3d. then of three times as much in former times, when money
was more plentiful; and certainly any man but a Farmer wil
confess it to be a strange imposition, that a man cannot have an
accompt of the condition of his Wife or Family, without paying
thrice as much as he need; &amp; it seems as unreasonable for a man
to be forced to pay 3d. for what may be done for a penny, (in
relation to Letters) as for a man to be compelled to pay thrice as
much for meat or any other commodity, as the price currant."&mdash;J.
Hill, <i>A Penny Post</i>, London, 1659, p. 7.</p>


<h5>No. 8.<br />
1657, <span class="smcap">Cap.</span> 30.</h5>


<p class="center"><i>Postage of England, Scotland, and Ireland settled.</i></p>

<p>"Whereas it hath been found by experience, That the Erection
and Settling of one General Post Office, for the speedy Conveying,
Carrying, and Re-carrying of Letters by Post, to and from all
Places within England, Scotland and Ireland, and into several
parts beyond the Seas, hath been, and is the best means, not only
to maintain a certain and constant Intercourse of Trade and
Commerce betwixt all the said Places, to the great benefit of
the People of these Nations, but also to convey the Publique
Despatches, and to discover and prevent many dangerous, and
wicked Designs, which have been and are daily contrived against
the Peace and Welfare of this Commonwealth, the Intellegence
whereof cannot well be Communicated, but by Letter of Escript,</p>

<p>"Be it Enacted by His Highness the Lord Protector and the
Parliament, And it is Enacted and Ordained by Authority thereof,
That from henceforth there be one General Office, to be called and
known by the name of the Post Office of England, and one Officer
from time to time to be nominated, etc."&mdash;H. Scobell, <i>A Collection
of Acts and Ordinances</i>, London, 1658, p. 511.</p>


<h4>(v) <span class="smcap">Extract from "The Present State of London</span>,"</h4>

<p class="center">By Tho. de Laune, Gent., London, 1681.<br />
<i>Of the Post-office.</i></p>

<p>This Office is now kept in Lumbard-street, formerly in Bishopsgate-street,
the Profits of it are by Act of Parliament settled on his
Royal Highness the Duke of York. But the King by Letters
Patents, under the Great Seal of England, constitutes the Post-Master-General.<!-- Page 385 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_385" id="Page_385">[Pg 385]</a></span></p>

<p>From this General Office, Letters and Packets are dispatched:</p>

<p>
<span style="margin-left: 5em;">On Mondays&mdash;</span><br />
<span style="margin-left: 1em;">To France, Spain, Italy, Germany, Flanders, Sweedland,
Denmark, Kent, and the Downs.</span><br />
<span style="margin-left: 5em;">On Tuesdays&mdash;</span><br />
<span style="margin-left: 1em;">To Holland, Germany, Sweedland, Denmark, Ireland, Scotland,
and all parts of England and Wales.</span><br />
<span style="margin-left: 5em;">On Wednesdays&mdash;</span><br />
<span style="margin-left: 1em;">To all parts of Kent, and the Downs.</span><br />
<span style="margin-left: 5em;">On Thursdays&mdash;</span><br />
<span style="margin-left: 1em;">To France, Spain, Italy, and all parts of England and Scotland.</span><br />
<span style="margin-left: 5em;">On Fridays&mdash;</span><br />
<span style="margin-left: 1em;">To Flanders, Germany, Italy, Sweedland, Denmark, Holland,
Kent, and the Downs.</span><br />
<span style="margin-left: 5em;">On Saturdays&mdash;</span><br />
<span style="margin-left: 1em;">All parts of England, Wales, Scotland, and Ireland. Letters are
returned from all parts of England and Scotland, certainly every
Monday, Wednesday, and Friday; from Wales every Monday and
Friday; and from Kent and the Downs every day: But from other
parts more uncertainly, in regard of the Sea.</span>
</p>

<hr />

<p>A Letter containing a whole sheet of Paper is convey'd 80 Miles
for 2d. two sheets for 4d. and an Ounce of Letters for 8d. and so
proportionably; a Letter containing a sheet is conveyed above
80 miles for 3d. two sheets for 6d. and every Ounce of Letters
for 12d. A sheet is conveyed to Dublin for 6d. two for a shilling,
and an Ounce of Letters for 12d.</p>

<p>This Conveyance by Post is done in so short a time, by night as
well as by day, that every 24 hours, the Post goes 120 Miles, and in
five days, an answer of a Letter may be had from a Place 300 Miles
distant from the Writer.</p>

<p>Moreover, if any Gentlemen desire to ride Post, to any Principal
Town of England, Post Horses are always in readiness, (taking no
Horse without the consent of his owner) which in other Kings
Reigns was not duly observed; and only 3d. is demanded for every
English Mile, and for every Stage to the Post-Boy, 4d. For
conducting.</p>

<p>Besides this Excellent convenience of conveying Letters, and
Men on Horse-back, there is of late such an admirable commodiousness,
both for Men and Women of better rank, to travel
from London, and to almost all the Villages near this great City,
that the like hath not been known in the World, and that is by
Stage-Coaches, wherein one may be transported to any place,
sheltred from foul Weather, and foul ways, free from endamaging<!-- Page 386 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_386" id="Page_386">[Pg 386]</a></span>
ones Health or Body by hard jogging, or over violent motion; and
this not only at a low price, as about a shilling for every five
Miles, but with such velocity and speed, as that the Posts in some
Foreign Countries, make not more Miles in a day; for the Stage-Coaches,
called Flying-Coaches, make forty or fifty Miles in a day,
as from London to Oxford or Cambridge, and that in the space of
twelve hours, not counting the time for Dining, setting forth not too
early, nor coming in too late.</p>

<hr />

<p>The several Rates that now are and have been taken for the
Carriage of Letters, Pacquets, and Parcels, to or from any of His
Majesties Dominions, to or from any other parts or places beyond
the Seas, are as followeth, that is to say,</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Postage rates to and from foreign destinations.">
<tr><td align="left" colspan="2"></td><td align="center">s.</td><td align="center">d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" rowspan="4">Morlaix, St. Maloes, Caen, Newhaven, and places of like distance, Carriage paid to Rouen</td><td rowspan="4" class="braces-4row">{</td><td align="left">Single</td><td align="center">0</td><td align="center">6</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Double</td><td align="center">1</td><td align="center">0</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Treble</td><td align="center">1</td><td align="center">6</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Ounce</td><td align="center">1</td><td align="center">6</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" rowspan="4">Hamburgh, Colen, Frankfort, Carriage paid to Antwerp, is</td><td rowspan="4" class="braces-4row">{</td><td align="left">Single</td><td align="center">0</td><td align="center">8</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Double</td><td align="center">1</td><td align="center">4</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Treble</td><td align="center">2</td><td align="center">0</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Ounce</td><td align="center">2</td><td align="center">0</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" rowspan="4">Venice, Geneva, Legorn, Rome, Naples, Messina, and all other parts of Italy by way of Venice, Franct pro Mantua</td><td rowspan="4" class="braces-4row">{</td><td align="left">Single</td><td align="center">0</td><td align="center">9</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Double</td><td align="center">1</td><td align="center">6</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Treble</td><td align="center">2</td><td align="center">3</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Ounce</td><td align="center">2</td><td align="center">8</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" rowspan="4">Marseilles, Smirna, Constantinople, Aleppo, and all parts of Turky, Carriage paid to Marseilles</td><td rowspan="4" class="braces-4row">{</td><td align="left">Single</td><td align="center">1</td><td align="center">0</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Double</td><td align="center">2</td><td align="center">0</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&frac34;&nbsp;Ounce</td><td align="center">2</td><td align="center">9</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Ounce</td><td align="center">2</td><td align="center">8</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" rowspan="4">And for Letters brought from the same places to England</td><td rowspan="4" class="braces-4row">{</td><td align="left">Single</td><td align="center">0</td><td align="center">8</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Double</td><td align="center">1</td><td align="center">4</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Treble</td><td align="center">2</td><td align="center">0</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Ounce</td><td align="center">2</td><td align="center">0</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" rowspan="4">The Carriage of Letters brought into England, from Calice, Diep, Bulloign, Abbeville, Amiens, St. Omers, Montrel</td><td rowspan="4" class="braces-4row">{</td><td align="left">Single</td><td align="center">0</td><td align="center">4</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Double</td><td align="center">0</td><td align="center">8</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Treble</td><td align="center">1</td><td align="center">0</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Ounce</td><td align="center">1</td><td align="center">0</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" rowspan="4">Rouen</td><td rowspan="4" class="braces-4row">{</td><td align="left">Single</td><td align="center">0</td><td align="center">6</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Double</td><td align="center">1</td><td align="center">0</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Treble</td><td align="center">1</td><td align="center">6</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Ounce</td><td align="center">1</td><td align="center">6</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" rowspan="4">Genoua, Legorn, Rome, and other parts of Italy by way of Lyons, Franct pro Lyons</td><td rowspan="4" class="braces-4row">{</td><td align="left">Single</td><td align="center">1</td><td align="center">0</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Double</td><td align="center">2</td><td align="center">0</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&frac34;&nbsp;Ounce</td><td align="center">2</td><td align="center">9</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Ounce</td><td align="center">3</td><td align="center">9</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">The Carriage of Letters Outwards&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" rowspan="4">To Bourdeaux, Rochel, Nants, Orleans, Bayon, Tours, and places of like distance, Carriage paid to Paris</td><td rowspan="4" class="braces-4row">{</td><td align="left">Single</td><td align="center">0</td><td align="center">9</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Double</td><td align="center">1</td><td align="center">6</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Treble</td><td align="center">2</td><td align="center">3</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Ounce</td><td align="center">2</td><td align="center">0</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"><!-- Page 387 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_387" id="Page_387">[Pg 387]</a></span></td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" rowspan="4">Letters brought from the same places into England</td><td rowspan="4" class="braces-4row">{</td><td align="left">Single</td><td align="center">1</td><td align="center">0</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Double</td><td align="center">2</td><td align="center">0</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&frac34;&nbsp;Ounce</td><td align="center">3</td><td align="center">0</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Ounce</td><td align="center">4</td><td align="center">0</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">The Carriage of Letters Outwards&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" rowspan="4">To Norembourgh, Bremen, Dantzick, Lubeck, Lipswick, and other places of like distance, Carriage paid to Hamburgh</td><td rowspan="4" class="braces-4row">{</td><td align="left">Single</td><td align="center">1</td><td align="center">0</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Double</td><td align="center">2</td><td align="center">0</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">&frac34;&nbsp;Ounce</td><td align="center">3</td><td align="center">0</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Ounce</td><td align="center">4</td><td align="center">0</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" rowspan="4">Paris</td><td rowspan="4" class="braces-4row">{</td><td align="left">Single</td><td align="center">0</td><td align="center">9</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Double</td><td align="center">1</td><td align="center">6</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Treble</td><td align="center">2</td><td align="center">3</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Ounce</td><td align="center">2</td><td align="center">0</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" rowspan="4">Dunkirk, Ostend, Lisle, Ipers, Cambray, Ghent, Bruxels, Bruges, Antwerp, and all other parts of Flanders.<br /> Sluce, Flushing, Middleburgh, Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Delph, Hague, and all other parts of Holland and Zealand.</td><td rowspan="4" class="braces-4row">{</td><td align="left">Single</td><td align="center">0</td><td align="center">8</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Double</td><td align="center">1</td><td align="center">4</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Treble</td><td align="center">2</td><td align="center">0</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Ounce</td><td align="center">2</td><td align="center">0</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>All Merchants Accounts, not exceeding a Sheet, Bills of Exchange,
Invoices, Bills of Lading, shall be allowed without rate in the price
of the Letters, and also the Covers of the Letters not exceeding a
Sheet, to Marseilles, Venice, or Legorn, towards Turkie.</p>

<hr />

<p>The said Office is managed by a Deputy, and other Officers to the
Number of seventy seven persons; who give their actual attendance
respectively, in the dispatch of the business.</p>

<p>Upon this Grand Office, depends one hundred eighty two Deputy-Post-Masters
in England and Scotland; most of which keep Regular
Offices in their Stages, and Sub-Post-Masters in their Branches;
and also in Ireland, another General Office for that Kingdom, which
is kept in Dublin, consisting of Eighteen like Officers, and Forty-five
Deputy-Post-Masters.</p>

<p>The Present Post-Master-General, keeps constantly, for the
transport of the said Letters and Pacquets;</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="List of Pacquet Boat destinations.">
<tr><td align="left" rowspan="4">Between England and</td><td align="right" rowspan="4" class="braces-4row">{</td><td align="left">France, two Pacquet-Boats.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Flanders, two Pacquet-Boats.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Holland, three Pacquet-Boats.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Ireland, three Pacquet-Boats.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center" colspan="3">And at Deal, two Pacquet-Boats for the Downs.</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>All which Officers, Post-Masters, Pacquet-Boats, are maintained
at his own proper Charge.</p>

<p>And as the Master-piece of all those good regulations, established
by the present Post-Master-General, for the better Government of
the said Office, he hath annexed and appropriated the Market-Towns
of England, so well to their Respective Post-Stages, that there is
no considerable Market-Town, but hath an easie and certain Conveyance<!-- Page 388 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_388" id="Page_388">[Pg 388]</a></span>
for the Letters thereof, to and from the said Grand Office,
in the due course of the Males every Post.</p>

<p>Though the Number of Letters Missive in England, were not at
all Considerable in our Ancestors days, yet it is now so prodigiously
great, (since the meanest People have Generally learned to write)
that this Office is Farmed for above 40, rather 50,000<i>l</i>. a Year.</p>


<h4>(vi) <span class="smcap">The Cross Posts.</span><a name="FNanchor_759_759" id="FNanchor_759_759"></a><a href="#Footnote_759_759" class="fnanchor">[759]</a></h4>


<h5>No. 1 (<i>a</i>).</h5>

<p>
To the R<sup>t</sup>. Hon<sup>ble</sup>. Sidney L<sup>d</sup>. Godolphin Lord High Trearer of<br />
England.<br />
<br />
May it please y<sup>r</sup>. Lo<sup>pp</sup>.<br />
</p>

<p>My Lord Grandville and seaverall Gentlemen of Cornwell having
represented to Us that by reason of the Post Road passing along the
South Coast of Cornwell seaverel Inland Towns are under great
disadvantages in their Correspondence paying two pence p<sup>r</sup> Letter
over &amp; above the Common Postage being serv'd only by a By Post;
We did give directions to Our Deputys of Exeter, Plym<sup>o</sup>, and
Lanceston to meet and Consult what Method might be proper to
serve those parts more conveniently, and at as Easie an Expence to
Her Ma<sup>tie</sup>. as might be, and to Report to Us their Opinion of that
Matter with an Estimate of the Charge; which they accordingly did,
and have proposed a Scheme of that Matter how 'tis to be performed
with the Charge of each Stage, which amounts according to their
Computation to about &#163;260 p<sup>r</sup> Ann a Sum more considerable than
We at first apprehended; but We doubt the Charge Her Ma<sup>tie</sup>. will
be put to will Scarce be recompenced by the increase of Letters
upon Settling such a Stage, especially when We consider the great
Number of Letters for that Country which pass Frank: If Y<sup>r</sup> Lo<sup>pp</sup>.
shall think fitting a Post be Settled for the Midland Towns, as well
as for the South Coast, We shall upon y<sup>r</sup> Directions endeavour to
do it with the best Husbandry We can, and as We hope to the
Satisfaction of the Country, and shall lay before Y<sup>r</sup>. Lo<sup>pp</sup>. an
Establishm<sup>t</sup>.
to be approved by Y<sup>r</sup>. Lo<sup>pp</sup>.</p>

<p>We have indeed found by Experience in other Places, That where
We have made the Correspondence more Easie and Cheap, the
Number of Letters has been thereby much increased; and therefore
do believe such a Settlement may be attended with the like effect in
those Parts. All which is humbly Submitted to y<sup>r</sup>. Lo<sup>pp</sup>.</p>

<p>
R.C. T.F.<br />
<br />
<span class="smcap">Gen<sup>l</sup>. Post Office</span>,<br />
22<sup>d</sup>. <i>Novemb<sup>r</sup></i>. 1703.<br />
<!-- Page 389 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_389" id="Page_389">[Pg 389]</a></span></p>


<h5>No. 1 (<i>b</i>).</h5>

<p>After my hearty Comendations, Whereas my very good Lord John
Lord Grandville and seaveral Gentlemen of Cornwall have Represented
to you, That by reason of the Post Road passing along the
South Coast of Cornwall, Seaveral Inland Towns are under great
disadvantages in their Correspondence; Whereupon you have proposed
to Me the Settlement of a New Post for the Midland Towns,
as well as for the South Coast, the better to Serve those parts, the
Charge whereof will Amount to Two hundred and Sixty pounds p.
Ann I approve of what you have proposed, And do hereby Authorize
and Require you to Settle and Establish such a Post accordingly.
But you are at twelve months End to Represent to Me or the Lord
High Treasurer or Commiss<sup>rs</sup>. of the Treasury then being, how far
such a Post doth answer the Expence Her Ma<sup>tie</sup>. is at in Settling the
Same. And for so doing this shall be y<sup>r</sup>. Warrant. Whitehall
Treary Chambers the 7th December 1703.</p>

<p>
<span class="smcap">Godolphin</span>.<br />
<br />
To my very loving Friends<br />
<span style="margin-left: 2em;">S<sup>r</sup>. Rob<sup>t</sup>. Cotton Kn<sup>t</sup>. and</span><br />
<span style="margin-left: 2em;">S<sup>r</sup>. Thom<sup>s</sup>. Frankland Bar<sup>t</sup>.</span><br />
<span style="margin-left: 2em;">Her Ma<sup>ties</sup>. Post-M<sup>r</sup>. Gen<sup>l</sup>.</span><br />
</p>


<h5>No. 2.</h5>

<div class="blockquot"><p>S<sup>r</sup>. Robert Cotton Kn<sup>t</sup>. and Sir Thomas Frankland Baronet Her M<sup>ties</sup>.
Post Master Gen<sup>l</sup>. in the Kingdoms of England Scotland and
Ireland and in all Her M<sup>aties</sup> other Dominions Territorys and
Isles thereunto belonging in Europe Affrica and America.</p></div>

<p>To all People to whom this shall come Greeting know ye, that
whereas the County of Lincoln has not hitherto been Served so well
with the Correspondence by Letters as other parts of the Nation,
several Towns therein not having had the Convenience of a Post at
all, and others having been obleig'd to pay an extraordinary Tax
above the Common Postage, We have thought it proper to appoint
Mr. Richard Bigg of Winslow in the County of Buckingham Gentleman,
and Mr. Richard Dixon of Bourn in the County of Lincoln
Gentleman (having receiv'd good Testimony of the fidelity and
Loyalty of both and each of them to Her Ma<sup>tie</sup>. and reposing great
trust &amp; confidence in the knowledge Care and Ability of them both) to
be our lawfull and Sufficient Deputys with full Power and Authority
to Erect Settle and Establish Posts in such Towns of the said County
for the Carrying and Conveying the Letters as well those called
the London Letters as the By Letters of the said County, as shall be
<!-- Page 390 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_390" id="Page_390">[Pg 390]</a></span>judged most proper for Her Ma<sup>ties</sup>. Service, and the improvem<sup>t</sup>. of
the Correspondence of the said County and to Agree and Contract
with such Persons as the said Richard Bigg and Richard Dixon or
either of them shall think fitt to Agree and Contract with for performing
the Riding part through such Stages as shall be Erected by
them or for keeping Letter Offices in any Towns of the said County,
And do by these presents Depute Constitute Authorise and Appoint
the said Rich<sup>d</sup>. Bigg and Richard Dixon to be our Lawfull and
Sufficient Deputys in manner and form aforesaid from the tenth day
of August next ensuing the date hereof during such time as We or
the Postmaster Gen<sup>l</sup>, for the time being shall think fit under such
Conditions payments and Instructions to be faithfully observ'd perform'd
and done by the said Rich<sup>d</sup>. Bigg and Richard Dixon their
Deputys and Servants as they shall from time to time receive from
the Gen<sup>l</sup>. Post Office in London in writing Subscribed by Us our
Deputy or Deputys in the Post Office, in Witness whereof We the
said S<sup>r</sup>. Robert Cotton and Sir Thomas Frankland have hereunto
sett our hands &amp; Caused the Seal of the said Office in such Cases
used to be affixed this fourth day of August 1705.</p>

<p>
R.C. T.F.<br />
</p>


<h5>No. 3.</h5>

<p>
To y<sup>e</sup> Rt. Honble y<sup>e</sup> Lords Com<sup>rs</sup>. of his Majestys Treary.<br />
<br />
May it please your L.sps&mdash;<br />
</p>

<p>A Proposall having some time since been made to your Lordsps
That a Cross Post might be settled between Bristol &amp; Shrewsbury,
you were pleased to refer y<sup>e</sup> same to Us to Consider of it &amp; Report
Our opinions thereupon w<sup>ch</sup> Wee did accordingly and acquainted yo<sup>r</sup>
Lordsps Wee did hope Wee should find some persons who would at
their Owne Cost and Charges undertake to Settle a Cross Post, upon
such terms as his Majesty would not be a loser and the people
receive the benefit they proposed.</p>

<p>The Establishing such a Cross Roade would undoubtedly be of
great Use to Trade &amp; Convenience to y<sup>e</sup> People and appeares to be
very much desired by the several Countrys thro' w<sup>ch</sup> it wou'd pass;
but as at present it might become loss to y<sup>e</sup> Revenue Wee think it
Our Duety to lay y<sup>e</sup> whole state of the Case before Yo<sup>r</sup> Lorsps to
receive yo<sup>r</sup> further Directions and have hereunto annexed a scheme
both of the Charge &amp; loss that may accrew to the Office thereby.</p>

<p>Wee must observe to yo<sup>r</sup> Lordsps That Lond<sup>o</sup>. (from y<sup>e</sup> establishing
of a post Office) having been esteemed the Center all letters passing
thro' one Road to an other thro' Lond<sup>o</sup>. have been constantly taxed
with a double post first to Lond<sup>o</sup>. y<sup>n</sup> to y<sup>e</sup> places where to they were
directed, but the settling of this Cross Post w<sup>ch</sup> will Cause a direct
<!-- Page 391 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_391" id="Page_391">[Pg 391]</a></span>Intercourse between y<sup>e</sup> West Bristol &amp; Chester Roades, all lres,
passing that way can only be Charged w<sup>th</sup> a single Post according to
y<sup>e</sup> distance of one place from an other; but y<sup>n</sup> it ought to be considered
on the other hand That the passing thro' Lond<sup>o</sup>. is both
tedious and Chargeable, and a more Speedy Conveyance would in
all probability produce of an encrease of y<sup>e</sup> n<sup>o</sup>. of letters besides the
bringing such into y<sup>e</sup> Office as are now Conveyed by Carryers; for
where ever there are any Townes w<sup>ch</sup> have Comerce one w<sup>th</sup> an other
so as to occasion a Cons<sup>t</sup>. Intercourse by Carryer or Tradesmen
Wee do find it a General Practice to Convey at y<sup>e</sup> same time a Considerable
No. of lres as pticularly between Bristol &amp; Worcester &amp;
Worcester &amp; Shrewsbury; where there are two persons that make
it their business to Colect &amp; disperse letters and make a Considerable
advantage by it. That if y<sup>e</sup> settling this Roade should have y<sup>t</sup> good
effect to suppress all these By Posts (as in all probability it will)
notwithstanding at present there will be some Loss the Revenue
in time may be Improved by it; and Wee do find that the Cross
Road set up 3 yeares &amp; &frac12; since Between E<span class="oline">xon</span>&nbsp;<a name="FNanchor_760_760" id="FNanchor_760_760"></a><a href="#Footnote_760_760" class="fnanchor">[760]</a> &amp; Bristol doth now
produce about 255l. p. annum neat proffit, but in regard this is altogether
new Wee can not possibly be so much Masters of it as to
know w<sup>t</sup>. terms to propose to any undertakers that may be equall
between the King and them and therefore if yo<sup>r</sup> Lordsps do agree to
the Proposal Wee are of opinion it may be most proper to be set up
and managed for his Majesty and Carryed on as far as Chester....</p>


<h4>(vii) <span class="smcap">The Early Posts in North America.</span><a name="FNanchor_761_761" id="FNanchor_761_761"></a><a href="#Footnote_761_761" class="fnanchor">[761]</a></h4>


<h5>No. 1 (<i>a</i>).</h5>

<p>
To the Right Honble the Lords Comrs. of his Majesty's Treas'y.<br />
<br />
Thomas Neale Esq<sup>re</sup>. humbly sheweth<br />
</p>

<p>That their sacred Majesty's by their letters pattents bearing date
the 17th day of February 1692 granted to the said Thomas Neale a
power of settling Post Offices in North America to be executed by a
person to be nominated by the said Thomas Neale and Deputed by
the Postmaster Generall of England and thereby directed that
accounts shall be kept of the Charge and produce of the said Post
Offices, and transmitted to the Right Honble the Lord Treasurer or
Lds. Comissioners of the Treasury for the time being.</p>

<p>That in pursuance of this Grant Andrew Hamilton Esq<sup>re</sup>. was
nominated and Deputed to erect Post Offices, who hath at Thomas
Neales great Charge settled 'em 700 miles in Length, upon the
Continent of America and kept true accounts of the Expences and
<!-- Page 392 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_392" id="Page_392">[Pg 392]</a></span>proffits thereof, which acc<sup>ts</sup>. sworne to by the said Deputy Postmaster
before the Governor of New Yorke are now humbly laid
before your Lordshipps and an abstract of it for yor. Lordspps. ease.</p>

<p>That the said Deputy Postmaster is come over to give your Lordshipps
Information of all matters relating to that subject which your
Lordshipps shall think fit to enquire of, and hath proposed the
Method contained in the Memoriall annexed as of absolute necessity
in his opinion to support the Post, which proves a great service to
the Crowne as well as advantage to his Majesty's subjects residing
in those Colliny's and Trading thither.</p>

<p>
All which is humbly submitted to your<br />
<span style="margin-left: 3em;">Lordshipps Judgment &amp; direction.</span><br />
<span style="margin-left: 11em;" class="smcap">Tho: Neale.</span><br />
</p>


<h5>No. 1 (<i>b</i>).</h5>

<div class="blockquot"><p>To the Right Honourable the Lords Com<sup>rs</sup>, of his Majesty's
Treasury.</p>

<p>The Memoriall of Andrew Hamilton Esqr. Deputed by the
Postmr. Generall of England, to mannage the Post Office
in North America, humbly offered.</p></div>

<p>The Post Office in North America produces these good Effects.</p>

<p>It encreases Trade and Correspondence betwixt the Colonys
there.</p>

<p>It affords Merchts. more frequent opertunitys of Corresponding
with Europe.</p>

<p>It contributes much towards putting the Kings subjects in security
in time of Warr by ye. frequent Conveyance of Intelligence when
allarms happen, for want of wch. many familys have been cutt off
before the settling of the Post.</p>

<p>And it readily conveys Court Packets from the Colony, where they
are delivered to those whither they are addressed without any
expence to the Crowne, or said Coliny, besides many other
advantages.</p>

<p>But not withstanding these Publick and private benefits arising
by it and the unspeakable Loss to those Collonys and England
should the Post fall Yet the Undertaker besides a Considerable
sume he hath been out of pocket already (above the Produce in
carrying it on) must still be in disburse for support of it or must let
it fall.</p>

<p>To prevent which it is humbly offered that a postage upon all
letters as well those that come from beyond sea to North America
as what go's from Colony to Colony may be ascertained by an act of
Parliament in England.<!-- Page 393 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_393" id="Page_393">[Pg 393]</a></span></p>

<p>That no Masters of ships or sailers bound to America shall receive
any letters but at the Post Office to be appointed for that purpose.</p>

<p>That in like manner no Masters of shipps shall receive letters in
America that are directed to Europe or from one part of America to
another but from the respective Post Offices in the ports where they
load or from whence they saile which said Post Offices shall put the
letters in a Maile and take a Receipt of the Master that he shall
deliver them in to the first Post Office where he shall arive free of
charge, for which he shall be allowed in America a penny a letter
for his Care excepting such letters as concerne the ship or cargoe
which the freightors or owners if they think fit may commit to the
care or charge of the Master or friend.</p>

<p>Excepting also such letters of Merchants as may Contain Bulky
accounts which no Master is intended to be hindered of carrying as
also excepting such letters which the agents or proprietary governments
may send to the Respective Governors whose agents they
are. It being only hereby intended that the bulke of letters w<sup>ch</sup>
hitherto have gone very loosely, to the great Loss of Merchants
may for the future be conveyed in Mailes to prevent frauds or
inconveniencys which have often hitherto happened.</p>

<p>That the said Master shall under a Penalty be obliged to call at
the respective post offices where he shall load for the Maile and if
none be ready to be sent that he bring with him a Certificate for his
Justification that he called.</p>

<p>The method at present used to get letters transported to America
is this&mdash;</p>

<p>The Masters bound thither put up bags in Coffee houses wherein
the letters are put and for which one penny a letter is usually paid
and 2d. if it exceeds a single letter.</p>

<p>This is Lyable to several abuses.</p>

<p>First any one under pretence that he wants to have his letters up
again may come to those bags and take out other mens letters and
thereby discover the secrets of Merchants and tis in their power
intirely to w<sup>th</sup>draw them.</p>

<p>2<sup>dly.</sup> Severall Masters upon their arrivall often keep up letters till
they have disposed of their Loading and are ready to saile again,
and then Drop them to the great hurt of those that are concerned,
which inconveniencys would be prevented if letters were delivered
from the Post Offices in Mailes and likewise delivered by them in
Mailes into the Post Office where they arrive. Offices may be
erected in London and other sea Port Townes in England that Trade
with America and so they may be in Ireland and the same penny
a letter which is paid into the Coffee houses would support such
offices in England and Ireland to receive such letters.<!-- Page 394 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_394" id="Page_394">[Pg 394]</a></span></p>

<p>Such offices will be a great convenience to lodge such letters as
may concerne his Majestys affairs in America.</p>

<p>If Masters were obliged to receive letters to and from America
from the Post Office only, in Mailes and delivered them so at the
first post office they arrive at; there would be saved to the King
a penny a letter, which now Masters of shipps and passengers
Receive, for every American letter they deliver at the respective
Offices and whereas now many letters are delivered by Masters and
passengers themselves to the persons concerned, all those letters
would then be brought into the Post Office to the encrease of that
Revenue.</p>

<p>That it be provided that the Post and his horse shall go fferry
ffree.</p>

<p>That the rates following may be set upon letters&mdash;</p>

<p>To or from Europe or to the West Indies to North America six
pence p. single letter 12d. p. double 18d. for a packet if a packet
contain nothing but Invoices, accts. Gazetts &amp;ca. to be accounted
but as a single letter.</p>

<p>Upon Inland letters as followes&mdash;</p>


<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Inland letter rates in North America.">
<tr><td align="left"></td><td align="right">d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Where the distance from New Yorke to Boston is within 80 miles the postage</td><td align="right">6</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Where the distance exceeds 80 miles and within 150</td><td align="right">9</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Postage to and from Boston to New Yorke being 300 miles</td><td align="right">12</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">To and from Boston to Jersey 370 miles</td><td align="right">18</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">To and from Boston to Philadelphia 390 miles</td><td align="right">20</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">To and from Boston to Annapolis in Maryland 550 miles</td><td align="right">36</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">To and from Boston to James Towne in Virginia 680 miles</td><td align="right">42</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">To and from New Yorke to Annapolis 250 miles</td><td align="right">24</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">To and from New Yorke to James Towne 380 miles and many broad and dangerous Bays and Rivers to be Ferryed over</td><td align="right">30</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>If it be objected y<sup>t</sup>. there is no reason to grant a postage upon
forrensic letters where the Postmaster is at no charge of Conveyance,</p>

<p>It is answered first that it remidies the evills that letters are subject
to by the present Method of Conveyance.</p>

<p>2<sup>dly</sup>. It encreases the Revenue of the Post Office in England.</p>

<p>3<sup>dly</sup>. That those Colonys having but little Correspondence with an
other if the Reale Expence of Conveying letters from Coliny to
Colony were charged upon Inland letters it would discourage all
Correspondence.</p>

<p>Exa: The Charge of a letter from New Yorke to Boston at present
is after y<sup>e</sup> rate of 12d. a letter and considering the fewness of y<sup>m</sup>.
and the extraordinary charge and trouble of keeping up the Post in
time of Wintor taking it one Post with an other a single letter would
not be Carryed for 5<sup>d</sup>.</p>

<p>The Charges of settling a Post throughout Virginia and Maryland<!-- Page 395 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_395" id="Page_395">[Pg 395]</a></span>
will cost at least 500<sup>d</sup>. p. ann. &amp; 100 letters in a year will not come
from those Collonys to the neighbouring Colonys their Correspondence
being chiefly w<sup>th</sup>. Europe. All which is humbly submitted by</p>

<p>
May it please your Lordshipps<br />
<span style="margin-left: 2em;">Your Lordpps most obedient servant</span><br />
<span style="margin-left: 8em;" class="smcap">And: Hamilton.</span><br />
</p>

<p>I humbly beg leave of your Lordspps to add y<sup>t</sup>. w<sup>n</sup>. his Majesty
shall at any time be inclinable to take this Post Office under his
Immediate direction I humbly make a proffer to make a Surrendor
of y<sup>e</sup>. pattent upon payment of 5000<sup>d</sup> or 1000<sup>d</sup>. p. ann. for life for
the remaining Tearme of y<sup>e</sup>. Pattent.</p>

<p>
<span class="smcap">Tho: Neale</span>.<br />
</p>


<p>A Calculation what Charge will carry ye Post from Newcastle in
Pensilvania to James City in Virginia about 400 Miles.</p>

<p>There being a great many broad &amp; dangerous rivers to be
Crossed makes it difficult to procure men to Ryde ye Stages and
will cost at least to carry ye Post from Newcastle through Maryland
to James City in Virginia 300<i>l.</i> P Ann. I Reckon yt in 2 or 3
yeares &amp; may be less this Charge will be defrayed by what may
Arise by Postage upon letters. The Post from Newcastle to New
England now at last defraying att last its own Charge there will
remain only ye Sallery to be allowed to ye Deputy Postmaster
Generall which by ye Increase of ye Post will in 2 yeares more in
probobility alsoe be defrayed.</p>

<p>As I have laid ye first foundation of ye American Post soe if ye
King think fitt to continue me on this trust I will take upon me ye
managem<sup>t</sup> of ye whole from Piscatway 70 Miles eastward of Boston
to James City in Virginia w<sup>ch</sup> is 800 &amp; odd miles for 300<i>l.</i> p Annum
and will keep exact Accts. of ye produce.</p>

<p>Soe yt 1200<i>l.</i> will in all probability be ye utmost Charge ye King
will be att to bring ye American Post to support it Self vizt. 600<i>l.</i> for
two yeares Carrying it through Maryland &amp; Virginia and 600<i>l.</i> more
for 2 yeares salery to ye Manager or Deputy Postmaster Gen<sup>ll</sup> and
will thereafter bring in A Revenue All which is most humbly
Submitted.</p>

<p>
<span class="smcap">And: Hamilton</span>,<br />
Dep<sup>t</sup> Postm<sup>r</sup> of North America.<br />
<br />
<i>Aprill 26th 99</i><br />
<!-- Page 396 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_396" id="Page_396">[Pg 396]</a></span></p>


<h5>No. 1 (<i>c</i>).</h5>

<p>
<span class="smcap">Cock Pit Treasury Chambers.</span><br />
</p>

<p>The L<sup>ds</sup>. Com<sup>rs</sup>. of his Majties Treary are pleased to refer this
petition and ye account annexed to S<sup>r</sup>. Robt. Cotton Kn<sup>t</sup>. &amp; S<sup>r</sup>. Tho.
Frankland Barr<sup>t</sup>. his Majties Postm<sup>rs</sup>. Generall who are desired to
examine ye particulars and report to their Lopps a true state thereof
together w<sup>th</sup>. their opinion what is fit to be done therein.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">W<sup>m</sup> Lowndes.</span></p>


<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Account annexed to the above petition.">
<tr><td align="left">The account annex'd to y<sup>e</sup> petition makes y<sup>e</sup> charges of Erecting y<sup>e</sup> post in North America from May 1693 to May 97</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">3817</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">6</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">11&frac34;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">The produce of s<sup>d</sup> post</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">1456</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">18</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">3&frac14;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">M<sup>r</sup>. Neale out of pocket at May 97</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">2360</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">8</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">8&frac12;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"></td><td align="right">3817</td><td align="right">6</td><td align="right">11&frac34;</td></tr>
</table></div>



<h5>No. 1 (d).</h5>

<p>To the right Honble the Lords Com<sup>rs</sup>. of his Maj<sup>tys</sup>. Treary.</p>

<p>May it please your Lordspps.</p>

<p>In obedience to yo<sup>r</sup>. Ld.spps. Order of Refference upon y<sup>e</sup>
Memoriall of Thomas Neale and Andrew Hamilton Esq<sup>rs</sup>. Wee
have Considered the same and do find that the said A: Hamilton
hath Established a regular Post to pass weekly from Boston to
New Yorke in New England and from New York to Newcastle in
Pensilvania which must undoubtedly be of great benefit and
advantage to the People and tend to the encreasing of Trade in
those Plantations; Wee have likewise examined the accounts given
in by the said Hamilton of the Proffit and charge arising by this
Post and do find that the Proffits have every yeare encreased, so as
to defray all charges, excepting the sallary paid to the said Andrew
Hamilton for his care in managing and settling the Posts in North
America and it may be hoped that upon the severall Governors
giving all reasonable encouragement to this usefull undertaking, and
a due care in the management thereof, It may in some years bring
in a Considerable proffit.</p>

<p>Wee have Consulted his Majestys Attorney and Solliciter Generall
whether his Majesty can settle the rates and Postage between
England and any of the Ports in America, and for the port of letters
to and from New Yorke to or from any part of the said plantations;
and they are of opinion his Majesty May settle such rates in both
respects as shall be thought reasonable (regard being had to the
proportions and rates settled by the Act), for letters carried beyond<!-- Page 397 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_397" id="Page_397">[Pg 397]</a></span>
sea, so y<sup>t</sup> it doth not seeme necessary there should be any additionall
Act of Parliam<sup>t</sup>. for the settling of rates upon all such letters.</p>

<p>To prevent any Collections of letters that may be made by any
Masters of Ships or Seamen Wee are humbly of opinion it may be
proper to appoint an Officer here whose business it should be to take
Care of all letters directed to any of his Majestys Plantations, and
upon going off of ships to those parts to put them up in severall and
distinct bags, sealed with the Seale of the Office and sent to y<sup>e</sup> Ma<sup>r</sup>.
of such Vessell who shall deliver y<sup>m</sup>. to y<sup>e</sup> Deputy Postm<sup>r</sup>. in the
first Port where he shall arrive such Deputy paying him one penny
for each letter Contained in y<sup>e</sup> said bag as a recompence for his
Care: and y<sup>e</sup> same method may likewise be observed in England for
all such letters as shall come from America: and upon such Officers
being Established it may be fit to give Publick Notice that no other
person presume to make Collection of letters for those parts.</p>

<p>Wee have Considered of the severall rates mentioned in Mr.
Hamiltons Memoriall for the Inland Post of letters between one
place &amp; an other in America and are humbly of opinion some of
them are too high. It having been found by Experience in this
Office That y<sup>e</sup> easy and cheap Corresponding doth encourage people
to write letters and that this Revenue was but little in proportion to
what it now is till the postage was reduced from sixpence to 3d.</p>

<p>Wee have advised with Mr. Hamilton who hath settled and
managed this Post under Mr. Neale and is recomended to Us by
the Governor of Virginia to be well acquainted with that Country
about enlarging the Post through Virginia &amp; Maryland and by his
Competation hereunto annexed do find that it will require 1200<sup>d</sup>.
further Charge than w<sup>t</sup> has already been expended to Establish and
bring the whole to perfection there.</p>

<p>Upon the whole it appears to Us that as the Establishing this
American Post whereby the several Colonys have a regular way of
Corresponding with each other is of great advantage to the Trade
of his Maj<sup>tys</sup>. Subjects in those parts so it may in few years bring
in a cleare proffit over and above what may be required to defray y<sup>e</sup>
necessary Charges but it is to be apprehended that considering the
same is in the hands of a private person the severall Governors will
not give that encouragem<sup>t</sup>. to it they would do if the profit and
advantage arrising thereby were to accrew to his Maj<sup>ty</sup>. All which
is humbly submitted to your Lordsps. Consideration. Gen<sup>l</sup>. Post
Office 27th April 1699.</p>

<p>
<span class="smcap">R: Cotton</span>      <span class="smcap">Tho: Frankland.</span><br />
<!-- Page 398 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_398" id="Page_398">[Pg 398]</a></span></p>


<h5>No. 1 (<i>e</i>).</h5>

<p>
To the Right Honble &amp;c<sup>a</sup>.<br />
<br />
The humble Memoriall of Tho: Neale Esq<sup>r</sup>.<br />
<br />
May it please your Lordsps.<br />
</p>

<p>Though after Strugling with many difficultys in the first settling
the American Post I have now at last at a great Charge made it a
regular Post and brought it to such a pass that where settled it
supports it self and will in a very few yeares bring in a fair Revenue,
Yet since the Postm<sup>r</sup>. Gen<sup>l</sup>. in their Report to your Lordsps Conserning
y<sup>e</sup> Post have declared their opinion that it will not receive so
due encouragement nor so soon attain to perfection in the hands
of a private person for the good of the publick, as it would, were it
in the hands of the King; I humbly offer to lay my Pattent of that
Post office at his Majestys feet rather then an undertaking so
usefull &amp; beneficiall to his Majestys subjects in America and to
those that trade thither should want the least advantage for its
support and to leave my selfe to his Maj<sup>tys</sup> Justice and goodness for
a Recompence of my risque and disbursments by a yearly Pention
or otherwise.</p>

<p>And Whereas in y<sup>e</sup> Memoriall annexed to the Report, the abuses
hitherto practiced in Conveying letters to America and the method
for preventing them for the future are set forth I humbly beseech yo<sup>r</sup>
Lordsps. y<sup>t</sup> the said Method if approved of by your Lordps. or such
other as your Lordsps. shall think more proper may be put in
Execusion for the benefit of the Publick and mine till his Maj<sup>ty</sup>.
shall declare his pleasure conserning the surrender of my Patent.</p>

<p>
All which is most humbly submitted to yo<sup>r</sup>. Lordsps.<br />
<span style="margin-left: 3em;">Great Wisdom &amp;c<sup>a</sup>. by</span><br />
<span style="margin-left: 14.5em;">My Lords</span><br />
<span style="margin-left: 16em;">Your ever obedient</span><br />
<span style="margin-left: 19.5em;" class="smcap">Tho: Neale.</span><br />
</p>


<p><i>April 28, 1699.</i></p>


<h5>No. 1 (<i>f</i>).</h5>

<p>
To the Kings most Excellent Ma<sup>ty</sup>.<br />
<br />
The humble Petition of Andrew Hamilton, and Robert West.<br />
</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Sheweth</span></p>

<p>That your Maj<sup>tie</sup>. and the late Queen of Blessed Memory in the
fourth Year of your Raigne, by Letters Patent granted to Thomas
Neale Esq<sup>r</sup>. full power and Authority to Erect a Post, and Post office
in North America, To hold for one and Twenty yeares without any
Account, And by the same Letters Patent directed the Post Master<!-- Page 399 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_399" id="Page_399">[Pg 399]</a></span>
Generall of England to Issue Deputations from time to time to such
Persons as Mr. Neale or his Assignes should Nominate, to Execute
the same power.</p>

<p>In pursuance of which Grant, the Post Master Generall at Mr.
Neales nomination, Deputed Your Peticoner Hamilton, who hath
Setled a Post from New Yorke Southward as far as Virginia, and
Eastward Seventy Miles beyond Boston in New England, which
proves of great Advantage to the Trade of those Coloneys, and of no
lesse Service to your Maj<sup>tys</sup>. Governm<sup>t</sup>. there.</p>

<p>In the Setling and Supporting w<sup>ch</sup> Post, your Pet<sup>r</sup>. West, above
seven yeares agoe upon the request and Credit of Mr. Neale, advanced
Two hundred pounds, and your Petitioner Hamilton hath since
disbursed Eleven Hundred Pounds more, and brought it to such
Perfection, that it allready defrays Its own Charge, and will in time
be a Considerable Revenue.</p>

<p>That Mr. Neale being unable to pay your Pet<sup>rs</sup>. or to give them
other Satisfaction, in August 1699 Assigned all his Interest in the
said Post to your Petitioner West for secureing all the Monys due
to both your Petitioners and all such other sumes as your Pet<sup>r</sup>.
Hamilton should expend in further enlarging the said Post, with
Common Interest for the whole Moneys.</p>

<p>That Mr. Neale Dying before payment of any part of the said
Debts, and all persons declining to Act either as his Executor, or
Administrator, Your Pet<sup>rs</sup>. will be necessitated to dispose of the
said Post for Satisfaction of their Debts, but being Sensible It is
more for your Maj<sup>ties</sup>. Interest and Service, to have such Post Under
the management and Controll of some Officer to be appointed by
your Ma<sup>tys</sup>. than of any Private Person.</p>

<p>Your Petitioners humbly tender the same to your Maj<sup>tie</sup>. and if
your Maj<sup>tie</sup>. shall not thinke fit to Accept It, They humbly pray that
your Maj<sup>tie</sup>. will Gratiously encourage the Continuance and Enlargement
of the said Post, by granting them a further terme of years
therein, and such additional Priviledges as are necessary for the
Improvement of it.</p>

<p>And your Petitioners shall ever pray &amp;c<sup>a</sup>.</p>

<p>
At the Court.<br />
</p>


<h5>No. 2.</h5>

<p><span class="smcap">London</span> <i>Feb<sup>ry</sup>. 8th 1779.</i></p>

<p>
<span class="smcap">Sir,</span><br />
</p>

<p>My present disagreable Situation as an Officer under the
Crown without Employment, and without a Salary, occasioned by
the Rebellion in America, induces me to give you the Trouble of<!-- Page 400 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_400" id="Page_400">[Pg 400]</a></span>
this Adress, and to request your advice and Assistance in procuring
that Relief which my present Circumstances require.</p>

<p>You are not a Stranger to my Appointment to the Office of
Deputy Postmaster of Philadelphia in the year 1776 by the Deputy
postmasters General of North America, and that I continued to act
in that Office, and as I trust to the entire Satisfaction of all concerned,
until the Confusion and Sedition in that Country rendered
it impossible for me to be of any kind of service.</p>

<p>In the Spring 1775 having good Reason to believe from a variety
of Information that there was a Danger of breaking up the Post
Office at Philadelphia under the Crown, and seizing upon all the
Monies in my Custody, I immediately made up my Accounts, and
remitted the Balance in my Hands to the Comptroller in New York
up to the 5<sup>th</sup> April of the same year.</p>

<p>About this time the disaffected Merchants in Philadelphia set up
by Subscription a post Office in opposition to Government, appointed
William Bradford Postmaster and compelled many of the well
effected Merchants and others to send their Letters to it for Conveyance;
and in May following the Mail was seized in New England
under a public Avowel of the Rebels.</p>

<p>Under these Circumstances finding not only my person was in
danger, but that I could be of no further service to the Crown by
my continuing in Philadelphia, I left it and came into New York
where my Conduct being approved, I procured leave of Absence,
and returned to London in order to represent the true State of the
Offices in America, which on my arrival I did. You will also recollect
that as soon as possible after hearing that the City of Philadelphia
was in possession of the Kings Troops I again embarked
under an Expectation that the War would be settled by the Commissioners,
and to take care of the post Office Affairs in that City.
But on my arrival finding that All Letters by the packets &amp;c<sup>a</sup>. were
taken up by the Commander in Chief, and delivered not only to the
Army and Navy but even to the Merchants, the City being evacuated
soon after, I was obliged to return again to this place for safety.
When in the Execution of my Office my Salary amounted to Two
Hundred and Twenty five pounds Sterl<sup>g</sup>. p. Ann. out of which I paid
Clerks Wages and Office Rent. This I received up to the 5 of April
1775. Since that time I have subsisted on my own means (except
Two Hundred pounds at the Post Office by Warrant from the
Treasury) without receiving any other part of my Salary from
Government.</p>

<p>In these Circumstances it is with reluctance I find myself under
the necessity of applying for the same Allowance from the Crown,<!-- Page 401 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_401" id="Page_401">[Pg 401]</a></span>
which has been made to other persons in Office under it, in the like
Situation.</p>

<p>
I am Sir &amp;<sup>ca</sup>.<br />
<br />
<span class="smcap">Thos. Foxcroft.</span><br />
</p>

<p>Anth. Todd, Esq<sup>r</sup>.</p>

<p>Treasury authorized &#163;100 a year from 5th April, 1775, "until he
may be reinstated in the office or otherwise provided for."</p>


<h5>No. 3.</h5>

<p>
<span class="smcap">General Post Office</span>,<br />
<i>February 15th, 1793.</i><br />
<br />
<span class="smcap">Sir,</span><br />
</p>

<p>In your letter dated the 1st instant which we did not receive
till the 8th, We have the honor to inform you that after much
difficulty We have but lately obtained Mr. Finlay's accounts as
Deputy Post Master General in America the first Statement of which
was for the period between the 5th of April 1786 and the 10th of
October 1790 and exhibited a balance due to the Office up to that
date of &#163;1809.19.4 Sterling but the Account was inadmissible in
point of form for reasons hereafter mentioned.</p>

<p>We are satisfied Sir that you will form no Opinion without having
read the full state of the question on both sides and the proofs and
documents by which Our Conduct towards Mr. Finlay may be
judged and that you will form no hasty conclusion from his statement
of his own case, which you will find to be greatly misrepresented.</p>

<p>In support of this assertion We have ordered Copies of the letters
that We have lately written to Mr. Finlay upon the Subject of his
Debt to be laid before you, And We shall if you will permit us
Order our Deputy Accountant General and desire Mr. Callender to
wait upon you and to explain the particulars of all that have passed.</p>

<p>Mr. Callender is Mr. Finlay's Agent without whose knowledge
and concurrence, We have taken no one step of late in this
business, nor sent out any dispatch to Mr. Finlay that Mr. Callender
has not previously seen and approved.</p>

<p>He will be able to satisfy you Sir, whether our conduct towards
Mr. Finlay has been grounded upon severity or upon forbearance,
more than perhaps our duty strictly speaking, would justify.</p>

<p>In the mean time that we may do away any erroneous impression,
which Mr. Finlay's letters may have made upon your mind, as well
as upon Gov<sup>r</sup>: Clarke's, We shall shortly put together the points
which Our correspondence will prove, and We shall rely upon your
justice to transmit copy of that correspondence to Gov<sup>r</sup>: Clarke, that
He may have full and correct information upon the subject.<!-- Page 402 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_402" id="Page_402">[Pg 402]</a></span></p>

<p>There is and has long been a considerable balance due from
Mr. Finlay, to this Revenue, for the payment of which he has given
no security, which balance We have repeatedly but in Vain called
upon him to pay.</p>

<p>He is in possession from us not as He tells Governor Clarke, of
a Salary of &#163;300 per Annum, but of a Pension of &#163;150 p. Annum,
a Salary of &#163;150 more, and a Commission of &#163;20 per Cent on the
net produce of letters within the province of Canada, which he
assured us in May 1789 produced to Him a nett receipt of &#163;130
p. Annum, but previous to his receiving any net produce, all charges,
dead letters, under Deputies Salaries, and other allowances are by
the Words of his Commission, to be first deducted.</p>

<p>Instead of this he has charged the Office &#163;20 per Cent upon the
Gross, the dead letters only deducted, and not upon the net produce
and claimed to be allowed for sundry of those Articles of Management,
which by His Commission on the Articles which are to be
deducted before the Net Produce is paid to him.</p>

<p>He also charges his Pension for several quarters, which he must
know, was paid to his Agent in this Country during a part of the
time he claims it in Canada.</p>

<p>In an account amounting to several Thousand Pounds and for
several Years, He has sent us home the particulars of no one
Article of expenditure whatever, &amp; one Voucher only which is but
for &#163;27.</p>

<p>His accounts from the length of time and the manner in which
they have at different periods been stated, are in a confused and
contradictory state, and radically wrong, from his having taken considerable
credit for Money received by his Agent here on Account of
his Pension, and the whole of the Articles of his disbursements being
destitute of Vouchers, up to the Period of the 10th of October 1792,
without which they cannot pass this, or the Auditors' Office, together
with his having taken a Credit for his &#163;20 p. Cent on false principles,
and contrary to the words of His Commission, which says it
shall be on the Net and not on the Gross Produce. The Accountant
General therefore thought it more adviseable, and Mr. Finlay's own
Agent strongly recommended the measure, of Mr. Finlay's coming
to England to adjust in person, the whole, and render an Account
capable of being incorporated in the Annual Accounts of this Office,
for the Auditors in which the true balance must be ascertained.</p>

<p>As far as depends upon us We have given him the option to come
or not, just as He pleases, provided We have an intelligible Account
and his Balance paid.</p>

<p>His letter to Governor Clarke of 28th October contains one misrepresentation
which is too strong not to be observed upon; For He<!-- Page 403 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_403" id="Page_403">[Pg 403]</a></span>
says We are about to reduce his Income from &#163;500 a year to &#163;200,
though We have often told him that We would allow him, and our
proposal for doing so is now before the Privy Council, an income of
&#163;400 p. Annum net, besides &#163;50 per Annum for his Clerk. He will
also receive &#163;100 p. Year from the Province as Ma&#238;tre des Postes,
but which in fact is paid ultimately by this Country, being allowed
in the Governor General's Accounts: however independent of that
&#163;100 p. Annum, he will then be in the receipt of &#163;400 p. Annum
from us net Money, free of all deductions for managing an Internal
Revenue in America which will not produce to this Country at the
end of the Year a single shilling after paying the expence of the Post
between Halifax, through the King's Colonies, and Quebec, besides
which this Office pays the expence of four Packet boats which cost
upon the present Peace Establishment about &#163;8000 p. Annum,
though the correspondence between Great Britain and America
does not yield above &#163;3000 per Annum.</p>

<p>The Commissioners of Enquiry recommend that Mr. Finlay's
pension of &#163;150 a Year should cease, which however We have continued
to Him, And that his Salary only of &#163;150 p. Annum should
remain and they do not appear to have known that exclusive of this
Pension and Salary he enjoyed a former Commission from the Year
1774 of &#163;20 per Cent upon the net postage of all Money received in
Canada, for which however in our calculation We had allowed Him
&#163;150 per Annum though He in his own dispatches assured us it
produced him only &#163;130 per Annum.</p>

<p>We have shewn this letter to Mr. Church and Mr. Callender
before it was copied out fair, they have altered and approved of it,
So that We are now Sir communicating to you, not only our own
sentiments, but those of the deputy Accountant General and Mr.
Finlay's own Agent.</p>

<p>
<span style="margin-left: 15.5em;">We are, Sir,</span><br />
<span style="margin-left: 19.5em;" class="smcap">Walsingham,</span><br />
<span style="margin-left: 19.5em;" class="smcap">Chesterfield</span>.<br />
</p>

<p>The Right Hon<sup>le</sup>. Henry Dundass.</p>


<p>(viii) <span class="smcap">The Clerks of the Road and the Transmission
of Newspapers.</span><a name="FNanchor_762_762" id="FNanchor_762_762"></a><a href="#Footnote_762_762" class="fnanchor">[762]</a></p>


<h5>No. 1.</h5>

<p>To the R<sup>t</sup>. Hono<sup>ble</sup>. the Lord Com<sup>rs</sup>. of his Maj<sup>tie</sup>. Treasury.</p>

<p>May it please your Lordshipps</p>

<p>The Postmaster Generall Representation for Increasing the
Clarks Salaries.<!-- Page 404 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_404" id="Page_404">[Pg 404]</a></span></p>

<p>Wee humbly lay before your Lo<sup>r</sup>pps that upon some Information
given the last summer to the then Lords Justices as if his Majesties
Revenue of the Post office was lessened by a practice which had
been long used of the Clarks of the Roads sending great quantitys
of Gazetts and other Prints free of postage. Their Exellancyes
thought fitt to lay the same before his Maj<sup>tie</sup>. who was thereupon
pleased to signifie his pleasure to us by the Lord Keeper (now Lord
Chancellor) in a Comittee of Councell that his Majes<sup>tie</sup>. did not
think it reasonable that Practice should for the future be continued
but we acquainting their Lordshipps that this having been a
perquisite constantly allowed to the six Clarks of the Roades on
consideration of the smalness of their Sallarys it would be reasonable
upon the taking of it away to allow them a compensation for the
same whereupon they told us wee should lay that matter before
your Lordshipps of the Treasury as wee now doe and upon the
strictest enquiry wee can make the Case appears to be as followes.</p>

<p>Upon the first Establishing of the Post office England was
divided into six Roades and a Clark appointed to each Road and
their Sallaryes being but small they were constantly allowed even
by the farmers themselves the privilidge of sending Gazetts and some
other prints free, as the business and Revenue of the office increased
by petting up new posts soe likewise did their perquisites In soe
much that complaint was made thereof to the late King James when
Duke of York who upon a full examination into the matter thought
it more adviseable to continue it as an Incouragement to them than
to compensate them by an addition of Sallary and besides that the
office hath considerably increased since wee came into it the present
Juncture of affairs by the frequent and long sessions of Parliament
and the War wherein the greatest part of this side of the world is
engaged hath occationed peoples being more desirous of News then
formerly soe as wee believe the postage of prints sent by the six
Clarkes may now amount to about ... tho att the same time
the Clarkes does not receive soe great an advantage by them they
paying the first cost for them and susteyne frequent losses by their
Customers failing in their paym<sup>t</sup>. Now upon the takeing this
perquisite from them wee are humbly of opinion it will be reasonable
to give them such an equivolent as is conteyned in the skeme hereonto
annexed for wee must observe to your Lordshipps that not only
the improvement of the Revenue but all the letters being duely
accounted for doth in a great measure depend upon those officers
they being the persons who make the charges upon all the Postmasters
of England and the very nature of the office requires such
despatch that its scarce possible to contrive such Cheque but y<sup>t</sup> these
officers being in combination with the Postmasters may defraud his<!-- Page 405 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_405" id="Page_405">[Pg 405]</a></span>
Majestie and therefore it does not seem adviseable that men should
be under such a temtation for want of a due Incouragement.</p>

<p>The attendance is alsoe soe great and at those unseasonable times
and houres as renders them uncapable of applyeing themselves to
any other business whereby to helpe to support themselves and
familys though the Addition of Sallary which we have proposed doth
not amount to halfe so much as the Postage of Prints now sent by
the severall Clarkes yet we cannot say his Majesty will be a gainer
thereby for it must be considered y<sup>t</sup> many persons who are now
furnished with them from the Clarkes for Two pence a peice will
scarce have them if they must pay a groat or six pence a peice beside
the troubling some friend in Towne to send them and whether they
may not find out some otherways of being furnished with them then
by the Post as by Flyeing Coaches &amp;c<sup>t</sup>. or whether those officers or
persons who have the privelidge of franking their letters may not
hereafter supply those with such Prints as they are now furnished
with from this office.</p>

<p>Whereas the business of the office is soe much increased that for
the regular and due dispatch of the letters wee have been forced to
appoint a Sortor to each Clarke of the Road for an assistant whereby
their trouble and attendance is very much greater then it was and
being taken from sorting the burden and trouble of the rest is
proportianably increased as there are fuer hands to perform it
nether they or the assistant having any other advantage or
perquisites besides theire bare sallary of forty pounds a yeare which
is soe poor a subsistance that such as have dyed since wee came into
the office have scarce left enough to bury them wee are humbly of
opinion this may deserve your Lordshipps Consideration and soe
upon the whole matter though we must acknowledge it an unseasonable
time to propose an increase of Sallaryes which has
made us defer it thus long we could not omit this oppertunity of
doeing it and humbly hope if your Lordshipps shall think fitt to
give these poor men the Incouragement proposed it will tend very
much to his Majesty Service in this office.</p>


<h5>No. 2.</h5>

<div class="blockquot"><p>The Right Honorable Lord Walsingham, and the Earl of Chesterfield,
His Majesty's Post Master General.</p></div>

<p>The undersigned the Clerks of the Roads gratefully considering
the Report made by your Lordships to Government which recommends
for them a Salary of Three Hundred Pounds p. Annum
with their present privilege of franking Newspapers unimpaired
ask permission to submit to your Lordships Notice the following<!-- Page 406 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_406" id="Page_406">[Pg 406]</a></span>
plan for increasing the circulation of Newspapers and in consequence
the Revenue arising from the Stamp duty probably to the
Amount of Eight thousand pounds p. Annum though attended by
no additional expence to Government but entirely at their own
risque and which they have determined immediately to execute
should your Lordships arrangement take place.</p>

<p>They would first premise that when they were relieved by your
Lordships from the payment they formerly made to the officers
in this Department and from the Office which was filled by
Mr. Tamineau, they reduced their charge from forty Pounds per
Centum to Twenty &amp; Twenty five Pounds per Centum on the
prime cost of the papers which latter sum is the additional charge
now made on the prime cost by all the Stationers Printers &amp; Dealers
who serve the Country with papers, and if in some cases it be less,
it is on account of payment being made in advance.</p>

<p>They now propose upon the Establishment of your Lordships
Arrangement to reduce the general charge on the prime cost from
twenty and twenty five per Centum to ten and fifteen pounds per
Centum, and as all the circulators of Newspapers will now regulate
their charge for Newspapers sold in the Country by that of the
Clerks of the Roads, the charge fixed by the Clerks will be the
general one in the course of Six Months from its commencement.</p>

<p>This reduction will cause a greater demand for Newspapers in
the Country many who now take a Weekly paper will then take a
three day paper &amp; many who now take a three day paper will then
take a six day paper and two Persons who now join the expence
of a Weekly or a three day paper may be induced by the reasonable
charge to take each a paper or increase the number as above, and
as the reduction becomes generally known which by the means of
their Agents the Post Masters and other correspondents throughout
Great Britain &amp; Ireland it can be in fourteen days, the Stationers
Printers and Dealers must likewise lessen their charge or risk the
loss of their Customers.</p>

<p>By abolishing the monopoly once enjoyed by the Clerks in the
Offices of the Secretaries of State, and the Clerks of the Roads in
this Office, permitting the Public to send and receive Newspapers
free, the number increased as this circumstance became known
from&mdash;20,967 to 78,217 weekly and it is by confirming this liberty
to the Public and by a reduction in the charge that the circulation
of Newspapers and consequently the increase of Revenue is intended
to be promoted. The probable increase in the number of Newspapers
circulated in the Country through the above reduced price
may be stated at the lowest computation at one half penny each
upon one hundred Newspapers each Clerk of the Road, one hundred<!-- Page 407 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_407" id="Page_407">[Pg 407]</a></span>
each of the twenty principal Stationers &amp; Dealers and for the more
inconsiderable Dealers which are very numerous fifty of whom are
known Four hundred papers by every poste, which together will
make the additional number circulated every Post three thousand.</p>

<p>By preserving the privelege of franking to the Clerks of the Roads
a competition will be occasioned between them &amp; the other Dealers,
the Public will be supplied on more moderate terms, and an increase
of consumption will be promoted but should this competition be
destroyed by the abolition of the privelege of the Clerks of the Roads,
the principal Dealers purchasing the business carried on by less
extensive circulation might thereby occasion a monopoly and then
fix the price as it might suit their private interest and diminish the
number of Newspapers circulated thereby greatly injuring the Revenue
as formerly by the monopoly of the Clerks of the Secretaries of
State and the Clerks of the Roads for it would be the interest
of the Stationers and other Dealers as it was that of the Clerks
under Government to sell a less number at an advanced price, the
Capital employed would not be so large nor the trouble nor the
risk so great.</p>

<p>The Clerks of the Roads here beg your Lordships attention to a
proposal which there is no doubt will occasion a yet further increase
of circulation of Newspapers, it has been before stated to your Lordships
in the Report upon the Plan proposed by the Commissioners
relative to a Tax on Newspapers that before the duty of one penny
postage was laid on all Newspapers sent by Post to Ireland, the
Weekly number remitted to that Kingdom was upon an Average
8,000, and that the Weekly number now sent upon an average is
only 1,380, should Government consent to repeal this duty it is
evident from the above statement that they would gain a considerable
Sum the Clerks of the Roads will with pleasure make a
considerable reduction in their charge to Ireland, as in the case
of home consumption which will be a means of still further
extending of circulation.</p>


<table>
<tr>
<td align="left" rowspan="6">1764 and 1790 compared.</td>
<td rowspan="6" class="braces-6row">{</td>
<td align="left" colspan="5">Number of Newspapers which passed through the General Post
Office London between the 5th April 1764, and the 5th of April
1765, with the amount at two pence each Stamp duty,</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">&emsp;&emsp;London Newspapers</td>
<td align="right">1,090,289</td>
<td align="right">&#163;9,085.</td>
<td align="right">14.</td>
<td align="right">10</td></tr>

<tr>
<td align="left" colspan="5">Number of Newspapers which passed through the General Post
Office London between the 5th of January 1790 and the 5th of
January 1791, with the amount at two pence each Stamp duty,</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td align="left">&emsp;&emsp;London Newspapers</td>
<td align="right">3,944,093</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td align="left">&emsp;&emsp;Country Newspapers</td>
<td align="right" class="tdbbs">123,200</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td align="right">Total No.</td>
<td align="right">4,067,293</td>
<td align="right">&#163;33,894.</td>
<td align="right">2.</td>
<td align="right">2</td>
</tr>

<tr><td><!-- Page 408 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_408" id="Page_408">[Pg 408]</a></span></td></tr>

<tr><td align="left" rowspan="5">Probable gain by this plan.</td>
<td rowspan="5" class="braces-5row">{</td>
<td align="left" colspan="4">Six Clerks of the Roads at 100 each night</td>
<td align="right">600</td></tr>

<tr><td align="left" colspan="4">Twenty Principal dealers at 100 do.</td>
<td align="right">2,000</td></tr>

<tr><td align="left" colspan="4">Fifty less Dealers at 8 each night</td>
<td align="right" class="tdbbs">400</td></tr>

<tr><td align="right" colspan="5">No. 3,000</td></tr>

<tr><td align="left" colspan="2">3,000 each night at two pence each Stamp duty</td>
<td align="right" colspan="3">&#163;7,800 p. ann.</td></tr>

<tr><td align="left" rowspan="6">1780 and 1790 to Ireland compared.</td>
<td rowspan="6" class="braces-6row">{</td>
<td align="center" colspan="5">To Ireland before the Tax.</td></tr>

<tr><td align="left" colspan="5">Number of Newspapers which passed through the General Post
Office to Ireland between the 5th January 1780 and the 5th
January 1781 at two pence each Stamp duty,</td></tr>

<tr><td></td><td align="right">416,000</td>
<td align="right">&#163;3,466.</td>
<td align="right">13.</td>
<td align="right">4</td></tr>

<tr><td align="center" colspan="5">To Ireland since the Tax.</td></tr>

<tr><td align="left" colspan="5">Number of Newspapers which passed through the General Post
Office to Ireland between the 5th January 1790 and the 5th of
January 1791 at two pence each Stamp duty and one penny each
Postage,</td></tr>
<tr><td></td><td align="right">71,766</td>
<td align="right">&#163;897.</td>
<td align="right">1.</td>
<td align="right">6</td></tr>
</table>

<p>
<span class="smcap">Edmund Barnes</span><br />
<span class="smcap">Isaac Henry Cabanes</span><br />
<span class="smcap">William Ogilvy</span><br />
<span class="smcap">Charles Coltson</span><br />
<span class="smcap">Saml Ardron</span><br />
<span class="smcap">Charles Evans</span>.<br />
</p>

<h5>No. 3.</h5>

<div class="blockquot"><p>To The Right Honorable Lord Walsingham and The Earl of
Chesterfield, His Majesty's Post Master General.</p></div>

<p>The paper from the Post Master General relative to the Tax
proposed by the Commissioners having been communicated to the
Clerks of the Roads and the Inspector of Franks they beg permission
to offer the subsequent observations.</p>

<p>That the proposal by the Commissioners for Government to
receive a Tax of a penny for the postage of each Newspaper passing
through the Post Office, however eligible it might appear at the
time it was first proposed, will not they believe at this period, be
productive of that expected advantage to the public the encrease
of Revenue, as the reasons annexed among others may probably
prove.</p>

<p>Because since the proposal was made to the Commissioners, and
they made their Report an additional Stamp has been imposed of
one halfpenny a paper, and another halfpenny on each has been
added by the Printers, so that the Public now pay one penny more
than they did at that time.</p>

<p>Because the proposed Tax would be a means of compelling the
Stationers, Printers and Dealers to send their papers by Coach the
same day at the customary charge of one farthing each paper<!-- Page 409 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_409" id="Page_409">[Pg 409]</a></span>
instead of sending them by post on Government Account at a
penny the second day. And it cannot be supposed that a number
of persons many of them of considerable property would quietly
submit to have the circulation of their papers confined to post
conveyance at one penny each paper, without those serious efforts
to oppose and prevent it which the prospect of certain and total
ruin to their business and consequently to their Families must
excite.</p>

<p>But allowing it were possible to confine the whole of the papers
sold in the Country to post conveyance and a recompence made
to those Stationers and Printers employed in the distribution at
present would not the encreased price occasioned by this Tax very
much diminish the Number of Newspapers now printed to the
great injury of the Stamp duty? probably to a greater Amount
than would be gained by the plan proposed. For were the Stage
Coaches prohibited conveying Newspapers all the Morning Papers
now conveyed by them to many parts of the Kingdom would be
lost to the Stamp Revenue, and all the Morning Papers read at
the Coffee Houses and other public Houses, would be collected
by the Newsmen at a small sum each paper in the Afternoon
and sent into the Country by the post in the Evening without
the least trouble to themselves, it being their daily business to
go round their London district, early in the Morning, and in the
Afternoon before the dispatch of the Papers by the post.</p>

<p>Before the Penny postage was laid on all papers sent by post to
Ireland the Weekly number remitted to that Kingdom was upon an
Average 8,000: the Number now sent upon an Average is only
1,380 Weekly.</p>

<p>Because when the Tax was recommended by the Commissioners the
first cost of a London Newspaper was threepence only, the first cost
is now fourpence, to which add the Tax for postage it will be fivepence
to any Post Town in England, which is one halfpenny more
than the highest charge now made by any Dealer in the Country for
a London Newspaper. But should this Tax take place the people
who live at a distance from any Post Town must pay an additional
halfpenny a Paper and some twopence on the receipt of each Paper
which will bring the cost to fivepence halfpenny, some sixpence, and
some as high as sevenpence each London Newspaper. This high
price the Clerks of the Roads well know by experience would induce
many people to take only a three day paper who now take a Six day
paper and many who now take a three day paper only a weekly
paper, and as the Salaries of the Clerks of the Roads employed in the
business would be certain and no way answerable for any loss on
the papers would there not be a great many people Customers no<!-- Page 410 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_410" id="Page_410">[Pg 410]</a></span>
way able to pay for their Newspapers many of whom this mode
of business would certainly introduce? consequently Government
would be subject to several deficiencies in payment for Newspapers
sent into the Country whether paid for half yearly, yearly, or each
paper on delivery, the Receiver in the latter case would not feel himself
obliged to give notice for his paper to be discontinued but would
refuse it when offered, the cost of the paper would then be lost
to Government. This latter mode of payment would give an
opportunity to the Deputy Post Masters or their Clerks to Order
more papers than actually required which after being read would
be returned with the Quarterly Dead Letters to be allowed as
refused or gone away.</p>

<p>Because the proposed Tax would cause a decided preference of
Country Newspapers to those of London encrease the sale of the
former and diminish that of the latter for as very few of the
Country Newspapers pass through the Post Office, the Country
Printers would be enabled to undersell the London Printers a
penny a paper. The usual method with a Country Printer is
immediately upon the arrival of his London paper to print his
own with the London News and disperse them to Runners from
ten to fifteen miles around the Town he resides in; these Runners
not only disperse a considerable quantity of Newspapers but carry
also letters which must materially injure the Revenue.</p>

<p>Because notwithstanding the Revenue to be raised by this Tax
is very uncertain the conduct and management of it will be attended
with much expence taken out of the hands of those deeply interested
in its success the greater Burden will fall upon the Deputy
Post Masters in the Country; the Country Newspapers when they
arrive cannot be dispersed without a direction being numerous, the
Deputies will no doubt expect an increase of Salary adequate to the
business imposed on them; this it is conceived will bring a fresh
expence upon Government. In most large Towns two additional
Assistants to the Post Master will be necessary one at &#163;30 and the
other at &#163;20 per Annum, it will also materially delay (in most of
the Post Towns) the delivery of the letters by the time it will
necessarily take in selecting folding and directing the Papers;
allowing the same time to a Post Master and his Assistants as it
takes herewith the same number of hands to dispatch them in the
Post Office, the delay in many large Towns will be from one to
two hours.</p>

<p>The Clerks of the Roads not having received any recompence
whatever for the losses sustained by the Act of 1764 which
abolished their then privelege of franking letters and gave to the
Public liberty to send and receive Newspapers etc. free by a<!-- Page 411 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_411" id="Page_411">[Pg 411]</a></span>
permit from Peers and Members of Parliament to the great diminution
of their Sale of Papers; and by the further extension of this
liberty to the Public to send and receive them free under the
Sanction of a Peer or Member's name without the usual permit;
and by the Separation of the Irish from the English Office, would
certainly consider themselves intitled by Justice to a sufficient
recompence for their Lives were the privelege now remaining to
them taken away.</p>

<p>The rest of the Officers in the Inland department who have
always been told to look up to a Clerkship of the Road as a reward
for their long Services would also consider themselves entitled to
larger salaries were the privelege of Franking Newspapers by the
Six Clerks of the Roads further restricted or abolished.</p>

<p>Number of News Papers which passed through the General Post
Office London between the 5th January 1790 and the 5th January
1791 with the amount at one penny each&mdash;</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Number and costs of newspapers described above.">
<tr><td align="left">London Newspapers</td><td align="right">3,944,093</td><td align="right">&#163;16,433.</td><td align="right">14.</td><td align="right">5.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Country Newspapers</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">123,200</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">&#163;513.</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">6.</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">8.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"></td><td align="right">4,067,293</td><td align="right">&#163;16,947.</td><td align="right">1.</td><td align="right">1.</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>
<span class="smcap">Edmund Barnes</span><br />
<span class="smcap">Isaac Henry Cabanes</span><br />
<span class="smcap">William Ogilvy</span><br />
<span class="smcap">Charles Coltson</span><br />
<span class="smcap">Saml Ardron</span><br />
<span class="smcap">Charles Evans</span>.<br />
</p>

<hr />
<p><!-- Page 412 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_412" id="Page_412">[Pg 412]</a></span></p>

<h3>APPENDIX C<br />
LIST OF AUTHORITIES</h3>


<h4>UNITED KINGDOM</h4>

<p><span class="smcap">Allen, Ralph.</span> A Narrative of Mr. Allen's Transactions with the
Government for the Better Management of the Bye, Way,
and Cross Road Posts. 1761 (pub. London, 1897. <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Vide infra</i>, Ogilvie, A. M. J.).</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Andrews, Alexander.</span> The History of British Journalism. London, 1859.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Baines, F. E.</span> Forty Years at the Post Office. London, 1895.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Beadon, R. J.</span> Uniform Imperial Postage. London, 1891.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Bennett, Edward.</span> The Post Office and its Story. London, 1912.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Bowie, A. G.</span> The Romance of the British Post Office. London, 1897.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Bruce, Sir Robert</span>, C.B. Postal Organisation, with special reference
to the London Postal Service. London, 1912.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Cole, Sir Henry.</span> Fifty Years of Public Work. London, 1884.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Collet, C. D.</span> History of the Taxes on Knowledge. London, 1899.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Corrie, John M.</span> The Dumfries Post Office, 1642-1910. Dumfries, 1912.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">D'Avenant, William.</span> Discourses on the Publick Revenues and
on the Trade of England. London, 1698.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">De-Laune, Tho.</span> The Present State of London. London, 1681.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Harris, Stanley.</span> Old Coaching Days. London, 1882.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Heaton, J. Henniker.</span> Postal and Telegraphic Communications of
the Empire. London, 1888.</p>

<p>Postal Reform. London, 1890.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Hemmeon, J. C.</span>, Ph.D. The History of the British Post Office.
Harvard Economic Studies, vol. vii. Harvard University,
Cambridge, Mass., 1912.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Hendy, J. G.</span> The History of the Early Postmarks of the British
Isles. London, 1905.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Hill, Frederick.</span> An Autobiography of Fifty Years in Times of
Reform. London, 1893.<!-- Page 413 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_413" id="Page_413">[Pg 413]</a></span></p>

<p><span class="smcap">Hill, John.</span> A Penny Post: or a Vindication of the Liberty and
Birthright of every Englishman in Carrying Merchants
and other Men's Letters, against any restraint of Farmers
of such Employments. London, 1659.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Hill, Pearson.</span> The Origin of Postage Stamps. London, 1890.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Hill, Sir Rowland.</span> Post Office Reform: Its Importance and
Practicability. London, 1837.</p>

<p>On the Collection of Postage by Means of Stamps. London, 1839.</p>

<p>The State and Prospects of Penny Postage. London, 1844.</p>

<p>Results of Postal Reform. London, 1864.</p>

<p>Life of Sir Rowland Hill, K.C.B., etc., and History of Penny
Postage, by Sir Rowland Hill and his Nephew, George
Birkbeck Hill, D.C.L. 2 vols. London, 1880.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Horne, L. T.</span> Postal Communications of the Empire. British
Empire Series, vol. v. London, 1902.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Hunt, F. Knight.</span> The Fourth Estate: Contributions towards a
History of Newspapers and of the Liberty of the Press.
London, 1850.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Hurcomb, C. W.</span> The Posts under the Tudors. <i>The Antiquary</i>, 1914.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Hyde, J. W.</span> The Royal Mail: Its Curiosities and Romance.
London, 1889.</p>

<p>The Early History of the Post in Grant and Farm. London, 1894.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Joyce, Herbert</span>, C.B. The History of the Post Office from its
Establishment down to 1836. London, 1893.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Lang, T. B.</span> Historical Summary of the Post Office in Scotland.
Edinburgh, 1856.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Lewins, W.</span> Her Majesty's Mails. London, 1864.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Macpherson, David.</span> Annals of Commerce. London, 1805.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Murch, Jerom.</span> Ralph Allen, John Palmer, and the English Post
Office. London, 1880.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Norway, A. H.</span> The Post Office Packet Service. London, 1895.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Ogilvie, A. M. J.</span> Ralph Allen's Bye, Way, and Cross Road Posts.
London, 1897.</p>

<p>Article on the "Post Office" in Dictionary of Political Economy.
London, 1908.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Peach, R. E. M.</span> The Life and Times of Ralph Allen. London, 1895.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Raikes, H. St. J.</span> Life and Letters of H. C. Raikes. London, 1898.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Smyth, Eleanor C.</span> Sir Rowland Hill: The Story of a Great
Reform. London, 1907.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Stephen, Leslie.</span> Life of Henry Fawcett. London, 1885.<!-- Page 414 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_414" id="Page_414">[Pg 414]</a></span></p>

<p><span class="smcap">Stow, John.</span> A Survey of the Cities of London and Westminster.
London, 1720.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Swift, H. G.</span> A History of Postal Agitation. London, 1900.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Symon, J. D.</span> The Press and its Story. London, 1914.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Tegg, William</span>, F.R.H.S. Posts and Telegraphs. Past and
Present. London, 1878.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Tombs, R. C.</span> The King's Post. Bristol, 1905.</p>

<p>The Bristol Royal Mail. Bristol (undated).</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Webb, Sidney</span> and <span class="smcap">Beatrice.</span> The Story of the King's Highway.
London, 1913.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Williams, J. B.</span> A History of English Journalism. London, 1908.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Wilson, John.</span> History of the Birmingham Post Office. <i>Birmingham
Weekly Mercury</i>, October, 1899.</p>

<p>The Practical Method of the Penny Post. London, 1681.</p>

<p>The Administration of the Post Office from the Introduction of</p>

<p>Mr. Rowland Hill's Plan of Penny Postage up to the Present Time.
London, 1844.</p>

<p>The Post Office of Fifty Years Ago. London, 1890.</p>

<p>Celebration of the Jubilee of Uniform Inland Penny Postage. London, 1891.</p>

<p>Records of the Life of S. A. Blackwood. London, 1896.</p>


<h5><span class="smcap">Periodicals.</span></h5>

<p>Notes and Queries, 1st series, vol. iii; 10th series, No. 141.</p>

<p>Quarterly Review, 1839.</p>

<p>Edinburgh Review, 1840.</p>

<p>Chambers's Journal, vol. vii.</p>

<p>The Postmen's Gazette. London.</p>

<p>The Postal Clerks' Herald. Wolverhampton.</p>

<p>The Telegraph Chronicle. London.</p>

<p>The Postal and Telegraph Record. Manchester.</p>

<p>Telephone Journal. London.</p>

<p>St. Martin's-le-Grand Magazine. London.</p>


<h5><span class="smcap">Parliamentary and Official Papers.</span></h5>

<p>Tenth Report of the Commissioners appointed by Act of Parliament
to inquire into the Fees, Gratuities, Perquisites, and Emoluments,
which are or have been lately received in the several
Public Offices therein mentioned. 1788.</p>

<p>Report of the Committee on Mr. Palmer's Agreement. 1797.</p>

<p>Twentieth and Twenty-first Reports of the Commissioners of<!-- Page 415 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_415" id="Page_415">[Pg 415]</a></span>
Inquiry into the Collection and Management of the Revenue
arising in Ireland and Great Britain. 1830.</p>

<p>The Ten Reports of the Commissioners for Inquiry into the Mode
of Conducting the Business of the Post Office Department. 1834-38.</p>

<p>The Three Reports from the Select Committee on Postage. 1838.
Report from Committee on the Conveyance of Mails by Railway. 1838.</p>

<p>Report from Select Committee on Postage. 1843.</p>

<p>Report from Secret Committee of House of Commons on the Post
Office. 1844.</p>

<p>Report from Secret Committee of House of Lords on the Post Office. 1844.</p>

<p>Report from the Select Committee on Newspaper Stamps. 18th
July, 1851.</p>

<p>Report of the Select Committee on Contract Packets, 1853.</p>

<p>Report of the Royal Commission on Railways, 7th May, 1867.</p>

<p>Report from Select Committee on Railway Amalgamations, etc. 1873.</p>

<p>Report of the Select Committee on Estimates of the Revenue
Departments. 1888.</p>

<p>Post Office Wages. Report of Tweedmouth Committee, 1896.</p>

<p>Post Office Wages. Report of Bradford Committee, 1904.</p>

<p>Report of Select Committee on Post Office Servants (Hobhouse
Committee), 1907.</p>

<p>The Post Office: An Historical Summary. London, 1911.</p>

<p>Report of Select Committee on Post Office Servants (Holt Committee), 1914.</p>

<p>Statement showing the Proposed Increases in Postal, Telegraph, and
Telephone Charges, 1915 (Cd. 8,067).</p>

<p>First Report of the Committee on Retrenchment in the Public
Expenditure, 1915 (Cd. 8,068).</p>

<p>Reports of the Postmaster-General on the Post Office. Annually
(from 1854-5).</p>

<p>Official Records of the British Post Office.</p>


<p><span class="smcap">Cobbett, William.</span> The Parliamentary History of England, from
the Earliest Years to 1803.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Scobell, Henry.</span> A Collection of Acts and Ordinances. London, 1658.</p>


<p>Calendars of State Papers.</p>

<p>Royal Commission on Historical Manuscripts.&mdash;Reports.</p>

<p>Hansard's Parliamentary Debates.<!-- Page 416 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_416" id="Page_416">[Pg 416]</a></span></p>


<h4>CANADA</h4>

<p>Report of the Special Committee of the House of Assembly on the
Post Office Department of the Province of Lower Canada.
February 11, 1832.</p>

<p>Lower Canada. Report of the Special Committee of the House of
Assembly on the Present Condition of the Post Office Department.
March 8, 1836.</p>

<p>Report of the Special Committee of the Legislative Council of Lower
Canada on the Bill intitled "An Act to establish a Post Office
in this Province, etc." March 15, 1836.</p>

<p>Report of a Select Committee of the Legislative Council of the
Province of Upper Canada upon the Post Office. February 17, 1837.</p>

<p>Report on Affairs in British North America, by the Earl of Durham. 1840.</p>

<p>Report of the Commissioners appointed to Inquire into the Affairs
of the Post Office in British North America. December 31, 1841.</p>

<p>Report of a Committee of the Executive Council of Canada on the
Post Office. June 10, 1848.</p>

<p>Correspondence on the Subject of the Establishment of a General
Post Office System in the British Provinces of North America.
Montreal, February 27, 1849. (Appendix B.B.B., 8th volume
of Journals of the Legislative Assembly of Canada.)</p>

<p>Report of the Railway Service Commissioners. Quebec, March 29, 1865.</p>

<p>Canada Official Postal Guide.</p>

<p>Debates and Proceedings in Dominion Parliament, reported in
Ottawa <i>Times</i>.</p>

<p>Hansard. Official Reports of the Debates of the House of Commons
and of the Senate of the Dominion of Canada.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Kingsford, William.</span> The History of Canada. London, 1890.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Hendy, J. G.</span> Early Posts in Canada. <i>Empire Review</i>, London,
1903-4, vols. iv. and vi.</p>


<h4>UNITED STATES</h4>

<p><span class="smcap">Bancroft, George.</span> History of the United States of America.
New York, 1883-5.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Burrows, Charles William.</span> One-Cent Letter Postage, Second-Class
Mail Rates, and Parcels Post. Cleveland, Ohio, 1911.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Franklin, Benjamin.</span> Autobiography. London, 1908.<!-- Page 417 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_417" id="Page_417">[Pg 417]</a></span></p>

<p><span class="smcap">Leavitt, Joshua</span> (Corresponding Secretary, Cheap Postage Association).
Cheap Postage. Boston, Mass., 1848.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Leech, D. D. T.</span>, and <span class="smcap">Nicholson, W. L.</span> The Post Office
Department of the United States of America; its History,
Organization, and Working. Washington, D.C., 1879.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Newcomb, H. T.</span> The Postal Deficit. Washington, D.C., 1900.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Nicholson, W. L.</span> <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Vide</i> Leech, D. D. T.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Norvell, S.</span> Parcel Post. Address at Atlantic City, N.J.,
November 16, 1911.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Phelps, E. M.</span> Selected Articles on the Parcels Post. Minneapolis, 1911.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Seitz, Don C.</span> (Chairman, American Newspaper Publishers' Association).
Statement before Commission on Second-Class Mail Matter. New York, 1911.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Slack, Stanley I.</span> (Curator of the Postal Museum). A Brief
History of the Postal Service. Omaha (undated).</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Williams, Nathan B.</span> The American Post Office. A Discussion
of its History, Development, and Present-Day Relation to
Express Companies. Washington, D.C., 1910.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Woolley, Mary E.</span> The Early History of the Colonial Post Office.
Providence, R.I., 1894.</p>


<p>History of the Railway Mail Service. Columbia Correspondence
College. Washington, D.C., 1903.</p>

<p>International Parcels Post. Some Serious Errors Corrected, 1912.
Document H.E. 6171.I.6, Library of Congress.</p>

<p>Report to Members of the American Weekly Publishers' Association
of Proceedings before the Postal Commission on Second-Class
Mail Matter. New York, 1906.</p>

<p>The Private Profit Railway <i>versus</i> The Public Service Post Office.
Postal Progress League (1908).</p>

<p>An Argument on Second-Class Postal Rates from the Business
Side Alone. Submitted to the Postal Commission on behalf
of the Periodical Publishers' Association of America. New
York, 1911.</p>

<p>An Answer to the Statement of the Post Office Department showing
the estimates by which the cost of transporting and handling
the several classes of Mail was obtained. The Periodical
Publishers' Association of America. New York, 1911.</p>

<p>The Answer of the Magazines and their Demand. New York, 1911.</p>

<p>Progress of the Contest for a Free, Untrammelled, Independent
Public Press in the United States. Address delivered before
the Periodical Publishers' Association of America (April 17,
1912).<!-- Page 418 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_418" id="Page_418">[Pg 418]</a></span></p>

<p>Mail-Carrying Railways Underpaid. A Statement by the Committee
on Railway Mail Pay. New York, 1912.</p>


<h5><span class="smcap">Congressional and Official Papers.</span></h5>

<p>Report of Committee on Rates of Pay for Carrying the Mails on
Railroad Routes (1884).</p>

<p>Orders and Decisions relative to Railroad Mail Matter (1897).</p>

<p>A Brief Comparison of the Postal Facilities of Great Britain and the
United States (1899).</p>

<p>Report of the Postal Committee of the National Board of Trade (1900).</p>

<p>Railway Mail Pay. Report of Joint Commission to Investigate the
Postal Service (1901).</p>

<p>Record of Weight (July 1-December 31, 1906) of Second-Class
Mail Matter (1907).</p>

<p>Report of Postal Commission on Second-Class Mail Matter (1907).</p>

<p>Report of Special Weighings of the Mails of 1907 (1908).</p>

<p>Preliminary Report of Joint Commission on Business Method of
Post Office Department and Postal Service (1908).</p>

<p>Data relative to Proposed Extension of Parcel Post (1908).</p>

<p>Cost of Transporting and Handling the Several Classes of Mail
Matter (1909).</p>

<p>Hearings before the Committee on the Post-Office and Post-Roads
of the House of Representatives on Second-Class Mail (1910).</p>


<h5>1911.</h5>

<p>Instructions to Publishers in the Preparation of Second-Class
Matter for Mailing and Dispatch (May 1).</p>

<p>Information issued by the Second Assistant Postmaster-General
relative to the Transportation of Mails by Railroad.</p>

<p>Letter from Postmaster-General submitting a Report giving Results
of the Inquiry as to the Operation Receipts and Expenditures
of Railroad Companies Transporting the Mails, and recommending
Legislation on the Subject (August 15).</p>

<p>Hearings of the Commission on Second-Class Mail Matter:&mdash;</p>

<p>Statements on behalf of the Post Office Department (August 1).</p>

<p>Supplemental Statement on behalf of the Post Office Department
(September 14).</p>

<p>Supplemental Statement on behalf of the Post Office Department
(October 20 and 21).</p>

<p>Memorandum filed on behalf of the Publishers of Certain Magazines.<!-- Page 419 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_419" id="Page_419">[Pg 419]</a></span></p>

<p>Memorandum on behalf of the Post Office Department in
Reply to "Memorandum filed on behalf of the Publishers
of Certain Magazines" (October 28).</p>

<p>Supplemental Memorandum filed on behalf of the Publishers
of Certain Magazines.</p>

<p>Memorandum on behalf of the Post Office Department in
Reply to "Supplemental Memorandum filed on behalf of
the Publishers of Certain Magazines" (November 27).</p>


<h5>1912.</h5>

<p>Hearings before the Sub-Committee on Parcel Post of the Senate
Committee on Post Offices and Post Roads.</p>

<p>Parcel Post in Foreign Countries (prepared under the direction of
Hon. Jonathan Bourne, Jun., Chairman of the Senate Committee
on Post Offices and Post Roads).</p>

<p>Hearings before the Committee on Expenditure in the Post Office
Department&mdash;Rural Delivery Service.</p>

<p>Parcel Post. Speech of Hon. David J. Lewis, of Maryland, in the
House of Representatives (February 2).</p>

<p>Message of President transmitting Annual Report of the Postmaster-General
and Report of the Commission on Second-Class Mail
Matter (February 22).</p>

<p>Postal Express as a Solution of the Parcel Post and High Cost of
Living Problems, by Hon. David J. Lewis, Member of Congress
(March 5).</p>

<p>The Parcel Post and Postal Express Situation in Congress. Letter
to the People of the United States by Hon. Obadiah Gardner,
United States Senator from the State of Maine (April 4).</p>

<p>Postal Express: Report from the Committee on Interstate and
Foreign Commerce (April 25).</p>

<p>Alphabetical Scheme of New York for use of Publishers in the
Distribution of Second-Class Mail (May).</p>

<p>Hearings before Senate Committee on Post Offices and Post Roads
<i>re</i> Transportation of Periodical Second-Class Mail Matter by
Freight (June 5-11).</p>

<p>Report on Post Office Appropriation Bill from Senate Committee on
Post Offices and Post Roads (July 23).</p>

<p>Parcel Post Bill. Speech by Hon. David J. Lewis in House of
Representatives (August 19).</p>

<p>Post Office Appropriations Act (containing authority for establishment
of Inland Parcel Post).</p>

<p>The Postal Laws and Regulations pertaining to the Second Class
of Mail Matter (October.)<!-- Page 420 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_420" id="Page_420">[Pg 420]</a></span></p>

<p>The Lewis Publishing Company <i>v</i>. The Post Office Department.
Brief for the Post Office Department (November 19).</p>


<h5>1913.</h5>

<p>Parcel Post Regulations.</p>

<p>Interstate Commerce Commission: In the Matter of Express Rates,
Practices, Accounts, and Revenues. Opinion No. 1967.</p>


<p>Reports of the Postmaster-General on the Post Office. Annually.</p>

<p>Abstract of Laws passed between 1792 and 1910, fixing the Rates of
Postage on Newspapers and other Periodical Publications when
sent in the Domestic Mails.</p>

<p>Abstract of Laws passed between 1792 and 1910 fixing Rates of
Postage on Domestic Mail Matter.</p>

<p>Journals of Congress. Philadelphia, 1781-2.</p>

<p>Journals of the Continental Congress. Philadelphia, 1774-89 (pub.
Washington, D.C., 1904).</p>

<p>Gales and Seaton's Register of Debates in Congress. Washington,
D.C., 1825.</p>

<p>The Debates and Proceedings in the Congress of the United States.
Gales and Seaton, Washington, D.C., 1849.</p>

<p>Abridgement of Debates of Congress, from 1789 to 1856. New York, 1861.</p>

<p>Congressional Globe. Washington, D.C.</p>

<p>Congressional Record. Washington, D.C.</p>

<p>The Postal Laws and Regulations of the United States of America.
Washington, D.C., 1912.</p>


<h4>FRANCE</h4>

<p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><span class="smcap">Belloc, A.</span> Les Postes fran&#231;aises. Paris, 1886.</p>

<p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><span class="smcap">Bernede, Charles.</span> Des Postes en g&#233;n&#233;rale, et particuli&#232;rement
en France. Nantes, 1826.</p>

<p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><span class="smcap">Bonnet, Edgar.</span> Importance des Postes et T&#233;l&#233;graphes au point
de vue social et &#233;conomique. Paris, 1891.</p>

<p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><span class="smcap">Cazes, L&#233;on.</span> Le Monopole postale. Paris, 1900.</p>

<p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><span class="smcap">Delmas, Albert.</span> Les Agents des Postes et le Parlement
R&#233;publicain. Paris, 1902.</p>

<p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><span class="smcap">Gallois, E.</span> La Poste et les Moyens de Communication des
Peuples &#224; travers les Si&#232;cles. Paris, 1894.</p>

<p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><span class="smcap">Gouin, M.</span> (Administrateur des Postes). Essai historique sur
l'&#233;tablissement des Postes en France. Paris, 1823.</p>

<p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><span class="smcap">Jaccottey, Paul</span> (Professeur Adjoint &#224; l'Ecole Professionnelle
sup&#233;rieure des Postes et des T&#233;l&#233;graphes). Trait&#233; de
L&#233;gislation et d'Exploitation postales. Paris, 1891.<!-- Page 421 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_421" id="Page_421">[Pg 421]</a></span></p>

<p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><span class="smcap">Maury, Lucien.</span> Les Postes romaines. Paris, 1890.</p>

<p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><span class="smcap">Mercier, Ren&#233;.</span> La Franchise postale. Librairie nouvelle de
Droit et de Jurisprudence. Paris, 1904.</p>

<p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><span class="smcap">Paulhan, L.</span> La Poste aux Lettres.</p>

<p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><span class="smcap">Rothschild, A. de.</span> Histoire de la Poste aux Lettres. Paris, 1879.</p>


<p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Les Services postaux fran&#231;ais. Paris, 1905.</p>

<p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">R&#233;pertoire du Droit administratif. Paris, 1905.</p>


<h5><span class="smcap">Official Papers.</span></h5>

<p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Rapport au Pr&#233;sident de la R&#233;publique sur les Conditions du
Fonctionnement de l'Administration des Postes et des T&#233;l&#233;graphes,
par A. Millerand, le Ministre du Commerce, de
l'Industrie, des Postes, et des T&#233;l&#233;graphes. May 12, 1900.</p>

<p>Proceedings in National Assembly. Reported in <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Moniteur Universel</i>.</p>

<p>Proceedings in Parliament. Reported in <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Journal Officiel</i>.</p>

<p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Chambre des D&#233;put&#233;s. Rapport fait au nom de la Commission du
Budget charg&#233;e d'examiner le projet de loi portant fixation du
Budget g&#233;n&#233;ral, Postes, T&#233;l&#233;graphes, et T&#233;l&#233;phones. (Annually.)</p>

<p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">S&#233;nat. Rapport fait au nom de la Commission du Budget charg&#233;e
d'examiner le projet de loi portant fixation du Budget g&#233;n&#233;ral,
Postes, T&#233;l&#233;graphes, et T&#233;l&#233;phones. (Annually.)</p>


<h4>GERMANY</h4>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><span class="smcap">Crole, B. E.</span> Geschichte der deutschen Post von ihren Anf&#228;ngen
bis zur Gegenwart. Eisenach, 1889.</p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><span class="smcap">Dambach, Otto.</span> Das Gesetz &#252;ber das Postwesen des deutschen
Reiches vom 28. Oktober 1871. Berlin, 1890.</p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><span class="smcap">Dieckmann, Carl.</span> Postgeschichte deutscher Staaten seit einem
halben Jahrtausend. Leipsic, 1896.</p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><span class="smcap">Faulhaber, B.</span> Geschichte des Postwesens in Frankfurt am
Main. Frankfurt a. M., 1883.</p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><span class="smcap">Grosse, Oskar.</span> Die Beseitigung des Thurn und Taxis'schen Postwesens
in Deutschland durch Heinrich Stephan. Minden
in Westf., 1898.</p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><span class="smcap">Grunow, F. W.</span> Zur Reform des Paketportos in Deutschland und
&#214;sterreich-Ungarn. Leipsic, 1898.</p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><span class="smcap">Haass, Friedrich.</span> Die Post und der Charakter ihrer Eink&#252;nfte,
mit einem Anhang &#252;ber die Packetpost. Stuttgart, 1890.</p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><span class="smcap">Holzamer, J.</span> Zur Geschichte der Briefportoreform in den Culturstaaten.
T&#252;bingen, 1879.<!-- Page 422 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_422" id="Page_422">[Pg 422]</a></span></p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><span class="smcap">Hull, C. H.</span> "Die deutsche Reichs-Packetpost." Sammlung
national&#246;konomischer und statistischer Abhandlungen des
staatswissenschaftlichen Seminars zu Halle (Saale) von
Prof. Dr. Conrad. Jena, 1892.</p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><span class="smcap">Jung, J.</span> Entwickelung des deutschen Post- und Telegraphenwesen
in den letzten 25 Jahren. Leipsic, 1893.</p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><span class="smcap">K&#246;hler, B.</span> Die Reichs-Post- und Telegraphentarife in ihren
Rechtlichen Formen. Berlin, 1907.</p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><span class="smcap">Meyer, A.</span> Die deutsche Post im Weltpostverein und im Wechselverkehr.
Berlin, 1902.</p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><span class="smcap">M&#252;ller, C. F.</span> Die F&#252;rstlich Thurn und Taxis'schen Posten und
Posttaxen. Jena, 1845.</p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de">Posten und Posttaxen. Freiburg im Breisgau, 1864.</p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><span class="smcap">Nickau, P. J.</span> Wettbewerb in der Kleingewerbef&#246;rderung innerhalb
des Reichspostgebiets. W&#252;rzburg, 1909.</p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><span class="smcap">Ohmann, F.</span> Die Anf&#228;nge des Postwesens und die Taxis. Leipzig, 1909.</p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><span class="smcap">Perrot, F.</span> Die Anwendung des Penny-Porto-Systems auf den
Eisenbahntarif und das Packet-Porto. Rostock, 1872.</p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><span class="smcap">Portas, K.</span> Deutsche Postzeitungsgeb&#252;hrentarif. K&#246;nigsberg, 1914.</p>

<p><span class="smcap" lang="de" xml:lang="de">R&#252;bsam, Joseph.</span> <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Francis von Taxis</span>, the Founder of the Modern
Post, and <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Johann Baptista von Taxis</span>, his Nephew, 1491-1541.
<i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">L'Union Postale</i>, Berne, 1892.</p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><span class="smcap">Schmid, K. A. H.</span> Zur Geschichte der Briefporto-Reform in
Deutschland. Jena, 1864.</p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><span class="smcap">Schmidt, Artur.</span> Die Tarife der deutschen Reichs-Post-&nbsp;und
Telegraphenverwaltung. <i>Finanz-Archiv</i>, Berlin, 1905-6.</p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><span class="smcap">von Stephan, Heinrich.</span> Geschichte der preussischen Post. Berlin, 1859.</p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><span class="smcap">Ullrich, P.</span> Die Finanzen der Reichs-Post-&nbsp;und Telegraphenverwaltung.
Stettin, 1913.</p>


<p lang="de" xml:lang="de">Die Brieftaxe in Deutschland. Freiburg im Breisgau, 1862.</p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de">Die Uebernahme der Privat-Bef&#246;rderungsbetriebe durch die Reichs-Postverwaltung.
<i>Deutsche Verkehrs-Zeitung</i>, Berlin, March 1901.</p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de">Handw&#246;rterbuch der Staatswissenschaften. Jena, 1901 and 1910.</p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de">Allgemeine Dienstanweisung f&#252;r Post und Telegraphie. Berlin, 1901.</p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de">Archiv f&#252;r Post und Telegraphie. Beihefte zum Amtsblatt des
Reichs-Postamts. Fortnightly. Berlin.</p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de">Bl&#228;tter f&#252;r Post und Telegraphie. Zeitschrift der h&#246;heren Post-&nbsp;und
Telegraphen-Beamten. Berlin.<!-- Page 423 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_423" id="Page_423">[Pg 423]</a></span></p>

<p><span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Stenographische Berichte &#252;ber die Verhandlungen des Reichstags.
Berlin.</span> (Cited <i>Reichstag, Official Reports</i>.)</p>


<h4>GENERAL</h4>

<p><span class="smcap">Acworth, W. M.</span> Elements of Railway Economics. Oxford, 1905.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Adams, H. C.</span> Science of Finance. New York, 1909.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Alexander, E. Porter.</span> Railway Practice. New York, 1887.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Baines, F. E.</span> Posts, Telegraphs, and Telephones, and their Relation
to Trade. London, 1896.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Bastable, C. F.</span> Public Finance. London, 1903.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Bennett, A. R.</span> The Telephone Systems of the Continent of Europe.
London, 1895.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Burritt, Elihu.</span> Ocean Penny Postage. London, 1849.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Cohn, G.</span> The Science of Finance. Translated by T. B. Veblen.
Chicago, 1895.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Colson, C.</span> Railway Rates and Traffic. London, 1914.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Darwin, Leonard.</span> Municipal Trade. London, 1903.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Ely, R. T.</span> Taxation in American States and Cities. New York, 1888.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Farrer, Lord.</span> The State in its Relation to Trade. London, 1902.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Fischer, P. D.</span> Post und Telegraphie im Weltverkehr. Berlin, 1879.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Giffen, Sir R.</span> Essays in Finance. London, 1890.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Grierson, J.</span> Railway Rates, English and Foreign. London, 1886.</p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><span class="smcap">Haass, Dr. Friedrich.</span> Weltpostverein und Einheits-Porto (Welt-Penny
Porto). Heidenheim (Brenz), 1914.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Hadley, A. T.</span> Railroad Transportation. Its History and its Laws.
New York, 1886.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Hamilton, I. G. J.</span> An Outline of Postal History and Practice,
with a History of the Post Office in India. Calcutta, 1910.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Jevons, W. S.</span> A State Parcel Post. <i>Contemporary Review</i>,
January 1879.</p>

<p>Methods of Social Reform. London, 1883.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Jones, R.</span> The Nature and First Principle of Taxation. London, 1914.</p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><span class="smcap">J&#252;rgensohn, Arved.</span> Weltportoreform. Berlin, 1910.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Knoop, D.</span> Outlines of Railway Economics. London, 1913.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Lee, John.</span> Economics of Telegraphs and Telephones. London, 1913.</p>

<p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><span class="smcap">Leroy-Beaulieu, P.</span> Trait&#233; de la Science des Finances. Paris, 1899.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">McCulloch, J. R.</span> Taxation and the Funding System. London, 1863.<!-- Page 424 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_424" id="Page_424">[Pg 424]</a></span></p>

<p><span class="smcap">Merritt, A. N.</span> Scope of Government Functions. Journal of
Political Economy, Chicago, July 1908.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Meyer, H. R.</span> Public Ownership and the Telephone in Great
Britain. New York, 1907.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Northcote, Stafford.</span> Twenty Years of Financial Policy. London, 1862.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Parnell, Sir H.</span> On Financial Reform. London, 1832.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Plehn, C. C.</span> Introduction to Public Finance. New York, 1909.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Ripley, W. Z.</span> Railway Problems. Boston, U.S.A., 1907.</p>

<p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><span class="smcap">Say, L.</span> Dictionnaire des Finances. Paris, 1889.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Seligman, E. R. A.</span> Essays in Taxation. New York, 1913.</p>

<p><span class="smcap">Spencer, Herbert.</span> The Man versus the State. London, 1884.</p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><span class="smcap">Stein, L. von.</span> Lehrbuch der Finanzwissenschaft. Leipsic, 1885.</p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><span class="smcap">Terra, Otto de.</span> Im Zeichen des Verkehrs. Berlin, 1899.</p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><span class="smcap">Wagner, Adolph.</span> Finanzwissenschaft. Leipsic, 1890.</p>

<p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><span class="smcap">Wilhelm, Julius.</span> Frachtporto. Vienna, 1900.</p>


<p>Memoranda, chiefly relating to the Classification and Incidence of
Imperial and Local Taxes. Bluebook C. 9528, 1899.</p>


<p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><span class="smcap">Ruffy, M. E.</span> L'Union postale universelle. Sa fondation et son
d&#233;veloppement. Lausanne, 1900.</p>

<p>Official Documents of the International Postal Congresses. Published
by the International Bureau, Berne.</p>

<p><span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Statistique g&#233;n&#233;rale des postes.</span> (Annually.) Berne.</p>

<p><span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">L'Union postale.</span> (Monthly.) Berne.</p>


<p><span class="smcap">Note.</span>&mdash;<i>The foregoing list includes particulars of the chief works
consulted, but
is not in any sense a complete bibliography.</i></p>

<hr />
<p><!-- Page 425 --><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_425" id="Page_425">[Pg 425]</a></span></p>


<h2>INDEX</h2>


<ul>
<li>Act of Union, <a href="#Page_15">15</a></li>
<li>Acts, Post Office, <i>see</i> Post Office Acts</li>
<li>Advertisement duty, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>, <a href="#Page_128">128</a></li>
<li>Agriculture, encouragement of, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>, <a href="#Page_245">245</a></li>
<li><i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Aktentaxe</i>, <a href="#Page_225">225</a>, <a href="#Page_240">240</a></li>
<li>Allen, Ralph, <a href="#Page_18">18</a></li>
<li>Armour, R., <a href="#Page_138">138</a></li>
<li>Australia, parcel post in, <a href="#Page_197">197</a></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Bastiat, Fr&#233;d&#233;ric, <a href="#Page_86">86</a></li>
<li>Bath Road, <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li>
<li><i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Binnenporto</i>, <a href="#Page_102">102</a></li>
<li>Blackwood, Sir Arthur, <a href="#Page_234">234</a>, <a href="#Page_279">279</a></li>
<li>Blind, rate on printed matter for, <a href="#Page_244">244</a>, <a href="#Page_320">320</a></li>
<li>Bonaparte, Louis Napoleon, <a href="#Page_167">167</a></li>
<li>Book Post, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a>, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>, <a href="#Page_320">320</a></li>
<li>Books, rate for, <i>see</i> Rates of postage</li>
<li><i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Boten-Anstalten</i>, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_209">209</a>, <a href="#Page_349">349</a>, <a href="#Page_350">350</a></li>
<li><i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Botenmeister</i>, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_98">98</a></li>
<li><i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Botenpost</i>, <a href="#Page_98">98</a></li>
<li>Bourne, Jonathan, Senator, <a href="#Page_196">196</a></li>
<li>Buildings, Post Office, cost of, <a href="#Page_293">293</a>, <a href="#Page_309">309</a></li>
<li>Burlamachi, Philip, <a href="#Page_10">10</a></li>
<li>Bye letters, <a href="#Page_17">17</a></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Canadian Magazine Post, <a href="#Page_346">346</a></li>
<li>Cape Breton, posts in, <a href="#Page_51">51</a></li>
<li>Carriers, common, and conveyance of letters, <a href="#Page_1">1</a>, <a href="#Page_250">250</a>, <a href="#Page_380">380</a>, <a href="#Page_381">381</a></li>
<li><i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Cartes de visite</i>, <a href="#Page_224">224</a></li>
<li>Catalogues, <a href="#Page_170">170</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>, <a href="#Page_225">225</a></li>
<li>Chesterfield, Lady, <a href="#Page_112">112</a></li>
<li>Clanricarde, Lord, <a href="#Page_53">53</a>, <a href="#Page_345">345</a></li>
<li>"Class" newspapers, <a href="#Page_124">124</a>, <a href="#Page_125">125</a></li>
<li>Classification of mail matter, <i>see</i> Mail matter;
  <ul class="nest">
  <li>of postal revenue, <i>see</i> Revenue, net</li>
  </ul></li>
<li>Clerks of the Road, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>, <a href="#Page_403">403-11</a></li>
<li>Closed post, <a href="#Page_222">222</a>, <a href="#Page_320">320</a> note</li>
<li><i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Colis encombrants</i>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a></li>
<li>Colonial letters, rates for, <a href="#Page_345">345</a>, <a href="#Page_346">346</a></li>
<li>Commercial papers, rate for, <i>see</i> Rates of postage</li>
<li>Commissioners of Inquiry into Fees and Emoluments,
  <ul class="nest">
  <li>1788, <a href="#Page_115">115</a> note;</li>
  <li>into Revenue Departments, 1829, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a> note;</li>
  <li>of Post Office Inquiry, 1837, <a href="#Page_248">248</a> note;</li>
  <li>1838, <a href="#Page_29">29</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li>Commissioners on Post Office in British North America, Report of, 1840, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a></li>
<li>Committee, Select,
  <ul class="nest">
  <li>on Postage, 1838, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>;</li>
  <li>on Newspaper Stamps, 1851, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>, <a href="#Page_127">127</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li>Commonwealth, The, <a href="#Page_14">14</a></li>
<li>Confederation of British  North American Colonies, 1867, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>, <a href="#Page_254">254</a></li>
<li>Conference, international postal, 1863, <a href="#Page_265">265</a></li>
<li>Congress,
  <ul class="nest">
  <li>Constitutional (United States), <a href="#Page_70">70</a>;</li>
  <li>Continental (United States), <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_149">149</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li>Congress, international postal,
  <ul class="nest">
  <li>1874, <a href="#Page_266">266</a>;</li>
  <li>1876, <a href="#Page_270">270</a>;</li>
  <li>1878, <a href="#Page_277">277</a>;</li>
  <li>1880, <a href="#Page_278">278</a>;</li>
  <li>1886, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>;</li>
  <li>1897, <a href="#Page_272">272</a>, <a href="#Page_281">281</a>;</li>
  <li>1906, <a href="#Page_274">274</a>, <a href="#Page_281">281</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li>Convention, General Postal Union, 1874, <a href="#Page_270">270</a>;</li>
<li>Parcel Post (international), 1880, <a href="#Page_279">279</a></li>
<li>Conveyance of mails, cost of, <a href="#Page_26">26</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Page_254">254</a>, <a href="#Page_292">292</a>, <a href="#Page_307">307</a>, <a href="#Page_308">308</a>, <a href="#Page_321">321</a>, <a href="#Page_326">326</a></li>
<li>Conway Bridge, additional rate for, <a href="#Page_339">339</a></li>
<li>Cost of handling (United Kingdom), <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_311">311</a>;
  <ul class="nest">
  <li>for buildings, <a href="#Page_293">293</a>, <a href="#Page_309">309</a>;</li>
  <li>for conveyance of mails, <a href="#Page_26">26</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Page_254">254</a>, <a href="#Page_292">292</a>, <a href="#Page_307">307</a>, <a href="#Page_308">308</a>, <a href="#Page_321">321</a>, <a href="#Page_326">326</a>;</li>
  <li>for staff, <a href="#Page_289">289</a>, <a href="#Page_301">301</a>, <a href="#Page_306">306</a>;</li>
  <li>for second-class mail (United States), <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>;</li>
  <li>letters (France), <a href="#Page_85">85</a>;</li>
  <li>newspapers (Germany), <a href="#Page_175">175</a>;</li>
  <li>parcels (Germany), <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, (United States) <a href="#Page_198">198</a>;</li>
  <li>postcards, <a href="#Page_243">243</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li>Council of State, <a href="#Page_11">11</a>, <a href="#Page_12">12</a></li>
<li>Country newspapers (protected), <i>see</i> Newspapers (provincial)</li>
<li>Couriers, post, <i>see</i> Post-couriers</li>
<li>Crimean War, <a href="#Page_125">125</a></li>
<li>Cromwell, Thomas, <a href="#Page_3">3</a></li>
<li>Cross-posts, <a href="#Page_14">14</a>, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>, <a href="#Page_388">388</a></li>
<li>Cumbersome parcels,
  <ul class="nest">
  <li>additional charge for, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>, <a href="#Page_215">215</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>;</li>
  <li>definition of, <a href="#Page_206">206</a> note, <a href="#Page_280">280</a> note</li>
  </ul></li>
<li>Cunard, Samuel, <a href="#Page_347">347</a></li>
<li>Cunard Steamship Company, <a href="#Page_348">348</a></li>
<li><i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Cursores</i>, <a href="#Page_1">1</a>, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_377">377</a></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Daily post, establishment of, in England, <a href="#Page_19">19</a></li>
<li>Declaratory Act, 1778, <a href="#Page_44">44</a>, <a href="#Page_45">45</a></li>
<li>Deficit,
  <ul class="nest">
  <li>on newspapers, <a href="#Page_133">133</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_294">294</a>;</li>
  <li>on parcels, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, <a href="#Page_294">294</a>;</li>
  <li>on second-class mail, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li>Delivery fees, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>, <a href="#Page_180">180</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>, <a href="#Page_249">249</a>, <a href="#Page_258">258</a></li>
<li>Deputy Postmasters, <i>see</i> Postmasters</li>
<li>Deputy Postmaster-General (North America), <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_136">136</a>, <a href="#Page_140">140</a>, <a href="#Page_148">148</a></li>
<li>Dockwra, William, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_247">247</a></li>
<li>Double letter, definition of, <a href="#Page_336">336</a></li>
<li><i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Dragonerpost</i>, <a href="#Page_98">98</a></li>
<li>Drop letter, <a href="#Page_254">254</a></li>
<li>Duty
  <ul class="nest">
  <li>(paper), <a href="#Page_117">117</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a> note;</li>
  <li>(advertisement), <a href="#Page_117">117</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>, <a href="#Page_128">128</a>;</li>
  <li>(stamp), <a href="#Page_117">117</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>, <a href="#Page_128">128</a></li>
  </ul></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>East India Company, <a href="#Page_344">344</a></li>
<li>Elgin, Lord, <a href="#Page_53">53</a></li>
<li>Evasion of postage, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_254">254</a></li>
<li>Express companies,
  <ul class="nest">
  <li>competition for second-class mail, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>;</li>
  <li>delivery of parcels, <a href="#Page_193">193</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a></li>
  </ul></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Farm (of the posts), <a href="#Page_13">13</a>, <a href="#Page_14">14</a>, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_380">380</a></li>
<li>Fee letter, <i>see</i> Letters</li>
<li>Finance, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a></li>
<li>Finlay, Hugh, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_401">401</a></li>
<li>First-class mail matter, <i>see</i> Mail matter, classification of</li>
<li>Fittings (for sorting), <a href="#Page_284">284</a>;
  <ul class="nest">
  <li>cost of, <a href="#Page_293">293</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li>Foot-messengers, <a href="#Page_184">184</a>, <a href="#Page_221">221</a>, <a href="#Page_331">331</a>, <a href="#Page_378">378</a></li>
<li>Foreign letter office, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_12">12</a>, <a href="#Page_13">13</a></li>
<li>Foreign posts, <i>see</i> Posts</li>
<li>Fourth-class mail matter, <i>see</i> Mail matter, classification of</li>
<li>Foxcroft, Thomas, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_399">399</a></li>
<li>Frank, definition of, <a href="#Page_27">27</a> note</li>
<li>Franking, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>, <a href="#Page_116">116</a>, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>, <a href="#Page_138">138</a>, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>, <a href="#Page_403">403-11</a></li>
<li>Franklin, Benjamin, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_148">148</a></li>
<li>Freeling, Sir Francis, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_137">137</a>, <a href="#Page_138">138</a></li>
<li>Freight trains, use of for second-class mail, <a href="#Page_163">163</a></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><i>Gazette, London</i>, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a></li>
<li><i>Gazette, Oxford</i>, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a></li>
<li>General post, <a href="#Page_248">248</a></li>
<li>General post delivery (London), <a href="#Page_248">248</a></li>
<li>Germain, Lord George, <a href="#Page_67">67</a></li>
<li>German-Austrian Postal Union, 1850, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, <a href="#Page_226">226</a>, <a href="#Page_236">236</a>, <a href="#Page_264">264</a></li>
<li><i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Gesch&#228;ftspapiere</i>, <a href="#Page_240">240</a></li>
<li>Gladstone, W. E., <a href="#Page_126">126</a>, <a href="#Page_130">130</a></li>
<li>Goddard, William, <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li>
<li>Gratuitous transit (of foreign mails), <a href="#Page_268">268</a>, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>, <a href="#Page_275">275</a></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Halfpenny Packet Post, <a href="#Page_222">222</a></li>
<li>Hamilton, Andrew, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>, <a href="#Page_392">392-9</a></li>
<li>Hamilton, John, <a href="#Page_64">64</a></li>
<li>Hand-stamping machines, <a href="#Page_303">303</a></li>
<li>Handling, cost of, <i>see</i> Cost of handling;
  <ul class="nest">
  <li>method of, <a href="#Page_284">284</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li>Hartington, Marquess of, <a href="#Page_130">130</a></li>
<li>Heaton, Sir J. Henniker, <a href="#Page_346">346</a></li>
<li>Heriot, John, <a href="#Page_40">40</a></li>
<li>Hickes, James, <a href="#Page_113">113</a></li>
<li>Hill, Matthew Davenport, 29</li>
<li>Hill, Sir Rowland, <a href="#Page_23">23-30</a>, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312</a>, <a href="#Page_323">323</a></li>
<li>Horse-posts, <i>see</i> Posts</li>
<li>Howe, John, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>, <a href="#Page_139">139</a></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><i>Illustrated London News</i>, <a href="#Page_129">129</a></li>
<li>Inland letter office, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_12">12</a></li>
<li>International Parcel Post, <i>see</i> Parcel post</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Jaccottey, P., <a href="#Page_171">171</a></li>
<li>Joyce, H., <a href="#Page_17">17</a></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>King's messengers, <a href="#Page_1">1</a>, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, <a href="#Page_377">377</a></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Landbestellgeld</i>, <a href="#Page_110">110</a></li>
<li><i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Landkutschen</i>, <a href="#Page_97">97</a></li>
<li><i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Landporto</i>, <a href="#Page_102">102</a></li>
<li>Laurier, Sir Wilfred, <a href="#Page_147">147</a></li>
<li>L'Estrange, Roger, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>, <a href="#Page_113">113</a></li>
<li>Letter rate, <i>see</i> Rates of postage</li>
<li>Letters,
  <ul class="nest">
  <li>definition of "single," "double," "treble," <a href="#Page_336">336</a>;</li>
  <li>bye, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>;</li>
  <li>cross-post, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>;</li>
  <li>drop, <a href="#Page_254">254</a>;</li>
  <li>fee, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>;</li>
  <li>way, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>;</li>
  <li>average weight of, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_291">291</a>, <a href="#Page_308">308</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li>Licences, issue of, by Post Office, <a href="#Page_357">357</a></li>
<li>Licensing Act, 1662, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>, <a href="#Page_117">117</a></li>
<li>Lichfield, Lord, <a href="#Page_29">29</a></li>
<li>Local newspapers (protected), <i>see</i> Newspapers (provincial)</li>
<li>Local penny posts, <a href="#Page_250">250</a></li>
<li>Local rates, <i>see</i> Rates of postage</li>
<li><i>London Gazette</i>, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a></li>
<li>London Penny Post, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_247">247</a>, <a href="#Page_342">342</a></li>
<li>London Threepenny Post, <a href="#Page_252">252</a></li>
<li>London Twopenny Post, <a href="#Page_252">252</a></li>
<li>Loss on certain branches of Post Office business, <i>see</i> Deficit</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Maberley, Colonel, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a></li>
<li>Magazine Post to Canada, <a href="#Page_346">346</a></li>
<li>Magazines, transmission by post, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>, <a href="#Page_346">346</a></li>
<li>Mail-coach, introduction of, <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li>
<li>Mail matter, classification of, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>, <a href="#Page_244">244</a></li>
<li>Mail order business, <a href="#Page_196">196</a></li>
<li><i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Ma&#238;tres de poste</i>, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_39">39</a></li>
<li>Manley, John, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>, <a href="#Page_383">383</a></li>
<li><i>Maryland Journal</i>, <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li>
<li>Master of the Posts, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_12">12</a></li>
<li>Menai Bridge, additional rate for, <a href="#Page_339">339</a></li>
<li>Merchant Adventurers, <a href="#Page_8">8</a></li>
<li>Merchant Companies, <a href="#Page_8">8</a></li>
<li><i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Mercurius Publicus</i>, <a href="#Page_112">112</a></li>
<li>Military post routes, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_43">43</a></li>
<li>Millerand, A., <a href="#Page_92">92</a>, <a href="#Page_93">93</a></li>
<li>Monopoly, postal, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_255">255</a>, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>, <a href="#Page_325">325</a>, <a href="#Page_330">330</a>, <a href="#Page_340">340</a>, <a href="#Page_358">358</a>, <a href="#Page_380">380-4</a></li>
<li>Monsell, W., 133</li>
<li>Muddiman, Henry, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>, <a href="#Page_113">113</a></li>
<li>Mulock, Sir William, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>, <a href="#Page_146">146</a>, <a href="#Page_147">147</a></li>
<li>Murray, Robert, <a href="#Page_247">247</a></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Neale, Thomas, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>, <a href="#Page_391">391-8</a></li>
<li>Net revenue, <i>see</i> Revenue, net</li>
<li>New England colonies, <a href="#Page_59">59</a></li>
<li>Newsbooks, <a href="#Page_111">111</a>, <a href="#Page_112">112</a></li>
<li>Newsletters, <a href="#Page_111">111</a></li>
<li>Newspaper rate, <i>see</i> Rates of postage</li>
<li>Newspaper Stamps, Select Committee on, 1851, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>, <a href="#Page_127">127</a></li>
<li>Newspaper supplements, <a href="#Page_171">171</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li>
<li>Newspapers,
  <ul class="nest">
  <li>average weight of, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_308">308</a>;</li>
  <li>cost of transmission, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>;</li>
  <li>franking of, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>;</li>
  <li>free transmission of, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>, <a href="#Page_139">139</a>, <a href="#Page_140">140</a>, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>;</li>
  <li>"class," <a href="#Page_124">124</a>, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>;</li>
  <li>political, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>;</li>
  <li>provincial (protected), <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_146">146</a>, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>, <a href="#Page_151">151</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_177">177</a>;</li>
  <li>transient, <a href="#Page_137">137</a>, <a href="#Page_152">152</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li>Nicholas, Sir Edward, <a href="#Page_113">113</a></li>
<li>North German Union, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, <a href="#Page_214">214</a>, <a href="#Page_228">228</a>, <a href="#Page_257">257</a></li>
<li><i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Nuncii</i>, <a href="#Page_1">1</a>, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_377">377</a></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Old Age Pensions, payment of, <a href="#Page_357">357</a></li>
<li>Open post, <a href="#Page_222">222</a>, <a href="#Page_320">320</a> note</li>
<li>Oxenbridge, Clement, <a href="#Page_13">13</a></li>
<li><i>Oxford Gazette</i>, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Pacific mails, <a href="#Page_75">75</a></li>
<li>Packet post, <i>see</i> Post for the packet</li>
<li>Packet postage, <a href="#Page_339">339</a></li>
<li>Page, W. J., <a href="#Page_49">49</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a></li>
<li>Palmer, John, <a href="#Page_20">20</a></li>
<li>Paper duty, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a></li>
<li><i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Papiers d'affaires</i>, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>, <a href="#Page_239">239</a></li>
<li>Parcel Post,
  <ul class="nest">
  <li>international, <a href="#Page_185">185</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>, <a href="#Page_277">277</a>;</li>
  <li>local, <a href="#Page_207">207</a>, <a href="#Page_208">208</a>;</li>
  <li>loss on, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, <a href="#Page_295">295</a>, <a href="#Page_334">334</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li>Parcel Post Act, 1882, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>, <a href="#Page_288">288</a></li>
<li>Parcel rate, <i>see</i> Rates of postage</li>
<li>Parcels,
  <ul class="nest">
  <li>cost of transportation, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>, <a href="#Page_218">218</a>, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, <a href="#Page_311">311</a>, <a href="#Page_321">321</a>, <a href="#Page_325">325</a>, <a href="#Page_331">331</a>;</li>
  <li>average weight of, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>, <a href="#Page_216">216</a>, <a href="#Page_325">325</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li>Paris, University of, <a href="#Page_78">78</a>, <a href="#Page_79">79</a></li>
<li><i>Parliamentary Intelligencer</i>, <a href="#Page_112">112</a></li>
<li>Parnell, Sir Henry, <a href="#Page_24">24</a></li>
<li>Pattern Post, <i>see</i> Rates of postage (samples)</li>
<li>Penalty frank, <a href="#Page_192">192</a></li>
<li>Penny Post (London), <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_247">247</a>, <a href="#Page_342">342</a></li>
<li>Penny posts (local), <a href="#Page_250">250</a></li>
<li>Penny postage, uniform, introduction of, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></li>
<li>Penrose Overstreet Commission, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157</a></li>
<li>Periodicals, transmission by post, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li>
<li>Pitt, William, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_344">344</a></li>
<li>Political newspapers, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li>
<li><i>Poor Man's Guardian</i>, <a href="#Page_120">120</a></li>
<li>Popish Plot, <a href="#Page_14">14</a></li>
<li>Post Office Acts&mdash;
  <ul class="nest">
  <li>1657, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>;</li>
  <li>1660, <a href="#Page_14">14</a>, <a href="#Page_337">337</a>, <a href="#Page_341">341</a>;</li>
  <li>1711, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>, <a href="#Page_229">229</a>, <a href="#Page_248">248</a>, <a href="#Page_337">337</a>, <a href="#Page_343">343</a>;</li>
  <li>1730, <a href="#Page_249">249</a>, <a href="#Page_251">251</a>;</li>
  <li>1763, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>;</li>
  <li>1764, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>;</li>
  <li>1765, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_250">250</a>, <a href="#Page_338">338</a>;</li>
  <li>1784, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_338">338</a>;</li>
  <li>1794, <a href="#Page_251">251</a>;</li>
  <li>1795, <a href="#Page_230">230</a>;</li>
  <li>1796, <a href="#Page_338">338</a>;</li>
  <li>1797, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>;</li>
  <li>1799, <a href="#Page_344">344</a>;</li>
  <li>1801, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_230">230</a>, <a href="#Page_251">251</a>, <a href="#Page_338">338</a>;</li>
  <li>1802, <a href="#Page_116">116</a>;</li>
  <li>1805, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_230">230</a>, <a href="#Page_252">252</a>, <a href="#Page_338">338</a>;</li>
  <li>1812, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_230">230</a>, <a href="#Page_339">339</a>;</li>
  <li>1814, <a href="#Page_344">344</a>;</li>
  <li>1815, <a href="#Page_345">345</a>;</li>
  <li>1836, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>;</li>
  <li>1837, <a href="#Page_339">339</a>, <a href="#Page_347">347</a>;</li>
  <li>1838, <a href="#Page_288">288</a>;</li>
  <li>1839, <a href="#Page_231">231</a>;</li>
  <li>1840, <a href="#Page_231">231</a>;</li>
  <li>1853, <a href="#Page_128">128</a>;</li>
  <li>1855, <a href="#Page_128">128</a>;</li>
  <li>1870, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_221">221</a>;</li>
  <li>1882, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>;</li>
  <li>1893, <a href="#Page_288">288</a>;</li>
  <li>1908, <a href="#Page_131">131</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li>Post Office revenue, <i>see</i> Revenue, net</li>
<li>Postage,
  <ul class="nest">
  <li>origin of term, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>;</li>
  <li>prepayment of, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_238">238</a>, <a href="#Page_251">251</a>;</li>
  <li>rates of, <i>see</i> Rates of postage</li>
  </ul></li>
<li>Postage, uniform, <i>see</i> Uniform postage</li>
<li>Postage stamps, introduction of, <a href="#Page_27">27</a></li>
<li>Postal monopoly, <i>see</i> Monopoly</li>
<li>Postal traffic, growth of, in United Kingdom, <a href="#Page_32">32</a></li>
<li>Postal Union Convention, 1874, <a href="#Page_270">270</a></li>
<li><i>Post-boten</i>, <a href="#Page_97">97</a></li>
<li>Post-boys, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_22">22</a></li>
<li>Postcards, <a href="#Page_241">241</a>;
  <ul class="nest">
  <li>average weight of, <a href="#Page_308">308</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li>Post-couriers, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>, <a href="#Page_81">81</a>, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_374">374</a>, <a href="#Page_376">376</a></li>
<li>Post for the packet, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_378">378</a></li>
<li>Post-horses, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_374">374-7</a>, <a href="#Page_381">381</a>, <a href="#Page_385">385</a></li>
<li>Postmasters, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>, <a href="#Page_254">254</a>, <a href="#Page_342">342</a>, <a href="#Page_387">387</a>, <a href="#Page_390">390</a>, <a href="#Page_397">397</a>, <a href="#Page_404">404</a>, <a href="#Page_406">406</a>, <a href="#Page_410">410</a></li>
<li>Post-riders, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_67">67</a></li>
<li>Post-roads, <a href="#Page_14">14</a>, <a href="#Page_17">17</a></li>
<li>Post-stages, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_374">374-7</a></li>
<li>Posts, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>;
  <ul class="nest">
  <li>cross-posts, <a href="#Page_14">14</a>, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>, <a href="#Page_388">388</a>;</li>
  <li>extraordinary, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>;</li>
  <li>foreign, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_340">340</a>;</li>
  <li>horse, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_350">350</a>;</li>
  <li>military, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>;</li>
  <li>ministerial, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>;</li>
  <li>municipal, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>;</li>
  <li>ordinary, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>;</li>
  <li>parliamentary, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>;</li>
  <li>regular, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>;</li>
  <li>temporary, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>;</li>
  <li>thorough, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>;</li>
  <li><span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Thurn</span> and <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Taxis</span>, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>, <a href="#Page_350">350</a>;</li>
  <li>travelling, <a href="#Page_3">3-6</a>, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>;</li>
  <li>university, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, <a href="#Page_78">78</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li>Povey, Charles, <a href="#Page_250">250</a></li>
<li>Power stamping machines, <a href="#Page_303">303</a></li>
<li>Prepayment of postage, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_238">238</a>, <a href="#Page_251">251</a></li>
<li>Press, restrictions upon, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>, <a href="#Page_126">126</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>, <a href="#Page_180">180</a></li>
<li>Prideaux, Edmund, <a href="#Page_11">11</a></li>
<li>Prince Edward Island, posts in, <a href="#Page_52">52</a></li>
<li>Profit, Post Office, <i>see</i> Revenue, net</li>
<li>Prospectuses, transmission by post, <a href="#Page_170">170</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>, <a href="#Page_225">225</a></li>
<li>Provincial newspapers, <i>see</i> Newspapers</li>
<li>Provost, Sir George, <a href="#Page_42">42</a></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>De Quester, Matthew, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>, <a href="#Page_340">340</a></li>
</ul>

<ul>
<li>Railway Clearing Committee, <a href="#Page_189">189</a></li>
<li>Railway companies, remuneration of, for conveyance of mails, <a href="#Page_186">186</a>, <a href="#Page_288">288</a></li>
<li>Railway rates, basis of, <a href="#Page_321">321</a>, <a href="#Page_322">322</a>, <a href="#Page_323">323</a></li>
<li>Randolph, Thomas, <a href="#Page_3">3</a></li>
<li>Rates of Postage&mdash;</li>

<li class="subheading">England.</li>

<li>
<ul class="nest">
<li><i>Letters</i>,
  <ul class="nest2">
  <li>1635, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>;</li>
  <li>1649, <a href="#Page_11">11</a>;</li>
  <li>1657, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>, <a href="#Page_336">336</a>;</li>
  <li>1660, <a href="#Page_14">14</a>, <a href="#Page_337">337</a>;</li>
  <li>1711, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>, <a href="#Page_337">337</a>;</li>
  <li>1765, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_338">338</a>;</li>
  <li>1784, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_338">338</a>;</li>
  <li>1797, 1801, 1805, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_338">338</a>;</li>
  <li>1812, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_339">339</a>;</li>
  <li>1840, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_339">339</a>;</li>
  <li>1865, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_339">339</a>;</li>
  <li>1871, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_340">340</a>;</li>
  <li>1885, 1897, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_340">340</a>;</li>
  <li>1915, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_340">340</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li><i>Newspapers</i>,
  <ul class="nest2">
  <li>1836, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>;</li>
  <li>1853, 1855, <a href="#Page_128">128</a>;</li>
  <li>1870, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>;</li>
  <li>1915, <a href="#Page_135">135</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li><i>Book Post</i>,
  <ul class="nest2">
  <li>1847, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>;</li>
  <li>1853, 1866, 1870, <a href="#Page_221">221</a>;</li>
  <li>1897, <a href="#Page_222">222</a>;</li>
  <li>1915, <a href="#Page_223">223</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li><i>Parcels</i>,
  <ul class="nest2">
  <li>1883, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>;</li>
  <li>1915, <a href="#Page_190">190</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li><i>Samples</i>,
  <ul class="nest2">
  <li>1753, 1795, 1805, 1812, <a href="#Page_230">230</a>;</li>
  <li>1837, 1863, <a href="#Page_231">231</a>;</li>
  <li>1864, 1870, <a href="#Page_232">232</a>;</li>
  <li>1887, 1897, <a href="#Page_234">234</a>;</li>
  <li>1915, 235</li>
  </ul></li>
<li><i>Commercial Papers</i>,
  <ul class="nest2">
  <li>1660, <a href="#Page_238">238</a>;</li>
  <li>1847, <a href="#Page_239">239</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li><i>Local Rates</i>,
  <ul class="nest2">
  <li>1680, <a href="#Page_247">247</a>;</li>
  <li>1730, <a href="#Page_249">249</a>;</li>
  <li>1794, 1801, <a href="#Page_251">251</a>;</li>
  <li>1805, <a href="#Page_252">252</a></li>
  </ul></li>
</ul>
</li>

<li class="subheading">Canada.</li>

<li>
<ul class="nest">
<li><i>Letters</i> (First-class Mail),
  <ul class="nest2">
  <li>1765, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>;</li>
  <li>1842, <a href="#Page_49">49-52</a>;</li>
  <li>1851, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>;</li>
  <li>1867, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>;</li>
  <li>1889, 1898, <a href="#Page_57">57</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li><i>Newspapers</i> (Second-class Mail),
  <ul class="nest2">
  <li>1840, <a href="#Page_136">136</a>;</li>
  <li>1844, <a href="#Page_140">140</a>;</li>
  <li>1867, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>;</li>
  <li>1882, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>;</li>
  <li>1898, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>;</li>
  <li>1903, <a href="#Page_147">147</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li><i>Book Post</i> (Third-class Mail), <a href="#Page_245">245</a></li>
<li><i>Fourth-class Mail</i>, <a href="#Page_245">245</a></li>
<li><i>Parcels</i>, 1914, <a href="#Page_356">356</a></li>
<li><i>Local Rates</i>,
  <ul class="nest2">
  <li>1867, 1889, <a href="#Page_254">254</a>;</li>
  <li>1898, <a href="#Page_255">255</a></li>
  </ul></li>
</ul>
</li>

<li class="subheading">United States of America.</li>

<li>
<ul class="nest">
<li><i>Letters</i> (First-class Mail),
  <ul class="nest2">
  <li>1693, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>;</li>
  <li>1711, 1765, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>;</li>
  <li>1775, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>;</li>
  <li>1777, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>;</li>
  <li>1780, 1781, 1782, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>;</li>
  <li>1792, 1814, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>;</li>
  <li>1845, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>;</li>
  <li>1851, 1863, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>;</li>
  <li>1883, 1885, <a href="#Page_76">76</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li><i>Newspapers</i> (Second-class Mail),
  <ul class="nest2">
  <li>1792, <a href="#Page_149">149</a>;</li>
  <li>1794, 1825, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>;</li>
  <li>1845, 1847, 1851, <a href="#Page_151">151</a>;</li>
  <li>1863, 1872, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>;</li>
  <li>1879, <a href="#Page_153">153</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li><i>Book Post</i> (Third-class Mail), <a href="#Page_76">76</a>, <a href="#Page_245">245</a></li>

<li><i>Fourth-class Mail</i>, 76, 245</li>

<li><i>Parcels</i>,
  <ul class="nest2">
  <li>1913, <a href="#Page_201">201</a>;</li>
  <li>1914, <a href="#Page_202">202</a></li>
  </ul></li>
</ul>
</li>

<li class="subheading">France.</li>

<li>
<ul class="nest">
<li><i>Letters</i>,
  <ul class="nest2">
  <li>1576, 1627, 1676, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>;</li>
  <li>1703, 1759, <a href="#Page_81">81</a>;</li>
  <li>1791, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>;</li>
  <li>1827, <a href="#Page_83">83</a>;</li>
  <li>1849, <a href="#Page_85">85</a>;</li>
  <li>1850, 1854, 1871, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>;</li>
  <li>1876, 1878, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>;</li>
  <li>1906, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>;</li>
  <li>1910, 1917, <a href="#Page_96">96</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li><i>Newspapers</i>,
  <ul class="nest2">
  <li>1791, 1795, 1799, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>;</li>
  <li>1827, 1850, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>;</li>
  <li>1856, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>;</li>
  <li>1878, 1895, 1908, <a href="#Page_169">169</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li><i>Book Post</i>,
  <ul class="nest2">
  <li>1791, 1856, <a href="#Page_223">223</a>;</li>
  <li>1878, <a href="#Page_224">224</a>;</li>
  <li>1909, <a href="#Page_225">225</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li><i>Parcels</i>,
  <ul class="nest2">
  <li>1881, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>;</li>
  <li>1897, <a href="#Page_206">206</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li><i>Samples</i>,
  <ul class="nest2">
  <li>1791, 1856, <a href="#Page_235">235</a>;</li>
  <li>1871, 1873, 1875, <a href="#Page_236">236</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li><i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Papiers d'Affaires</i>, 1856, 1871, 1875, <a href="#Page_240">240</a></li>
<li><i>Local Rates</i>,
  <ul class="nest2">
  <li>1653, <a href="#Page_255">255</a>;</li>
  <li>1759, 1878, <a href="#Page_256">256</a></li>
  </ul></li>
</ul>
</li>

<li class="subheading">Germany.</li>

<li>
<ul class="nest">
<li><i>Letters</i>,
  <ul class="nest2">
  <li>1712, 1762, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>;</li>
  <li>1766, 1770, 1822, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>;</li>
  <li>1824, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>;</li>
  <li>1844, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>;</li>
  <li>1848, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>;</li>
  <li>1850, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>;</li>
  <li>1860, 1861, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>;</li>
  <li>1868, 1871, 1900, <a href="#Page_109">109</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li><i>Newspapers</i>,
  <ul class="nest2">
  <li>1821, 1848, <a href="#Page_174">174</a>;</li>
  <li>1899, <a href="#Page_178">178</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li><i>Book Post</i>,
  <ul class="nest2">
  <li>1712, 1821, 1824, <a href="#Page_225">225</a>;</li>
  <li>1850, <a href="#Page_226">226</a>;</li>
  <li>1856, <a href="#Page_227">227</a>;</li>
  <li>1871, 1874, <a href="#Page_228">228</a>;</li>
  <li>1890, <a href="#Page_229">229</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li><i>Parcels</i>,
  <ul class="nest2">
  <li>1699, 1713, <a href="#Page_210">210</a>;</li>
  <li>1762, 1766, <a href="#Page_211">211</a>;</li>
  <li>1770, 1805, 1811, 1824, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>;</li>
  <li>1842, 1850, 1857, 1867, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>;</li>
  <li>1874, <a href="#Page_214">214-15</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li><i>Samples</i>,
  <ul class="nest2">
  <li>1825, 1850, <a href="#Page_236">236</a>;</li>
  <li>1860, 1863, 1871, <a href="#Page_237">237</a>;</li>
  <li>1875, 1914, <a href="#Page_238">238</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li><i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Gesch&#228;ftspapiere</i>, 1900, <a href="#Page_241">241</a></li>
<li><i>Local Rates</i>,
  <ul class="nest2">
  <li>1852, <a href="#Page_256">256</a>;</li>
  <li>1860, 1865, 1867, <a href="#Page_257">257</a>;</li>
  <li>1875, <a href="#Page_258">258</a>;</li>
  <li>1900, <a href="#Page_261">261</a></li>
  </ul></li>
</ul>
</li>

<li class="subheading">International.</li>

<li>
<ul class="nest">
<li><i>Letters</i>,
  <ul class="nest2">
  <li>1874, <a href="#Page_270">270</a>;</li>
  <li>1906, <a href="#Page_275">275</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li><i>Parcels</i>,
  <ul class="nest2">
  <li>1880, 1886, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>;</li>
  <li>1897, <a href="#Page_281">281</a>;</li>
  <li>1906, <a href="#Page_282">282</a></li>
  </ul></li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>Rates, international transit, <i>see</i> Transit rates</li>
<li>Redirection (of letters, etc.), <a href="#Page_283">283</a>, note 2</li>
<li>Reform Act, 1832, <a href="#Page_119">119</a></li>
<li>Revenue, net, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_83">83</a>, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_253">253</a>, <a href="#Page_314">314</a>, <a href="#Page_353">353</a>, <a href="#Page_355">355</a>, <a href="#Page_358">358</a>;
  <ul class="nest">
  <li>theoretical character of, <a href="#Page_362">362</a>, <a href="#Page_363">363</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li>Rice, Spring, <a href="#Page_122">122</a></li>
<li>Richelieu, <a href="#Page_80">80</a></li>
<li>Riders in post, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_67">67</a></li>
<li>Rural delivery, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>, <a href="#Page_314">314</a> note, <a href="#Page_331">331</a>, <a href="#Page_332">332</a>;
  <ul class="nest">
  <li>free, <a href="#Page_161">161</a></li>
  </ul></li>
</ul>

<ul>
<li>Sample rate, <i>see</i> Rates of postage</li>
<li>Savings Bank, Post Office, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_357">357</a></li>
<li><i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Schriftentaxe</i>, <a href="#Page_225">225</a>, <a href="#Page_240">240</a></li>
<li>Second-class Mail, <i>see</i> Mail matter, classification of;
  <ul class="nest">
  <li>Congressional Commission on,
    <ul class="nest2">
    <li>1907, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>;</li>
    <li>1912, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>;</li>
    </ul></li>
  <li>deficit, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>;</li>
  <li>use of freight trains for, <a href="#Page_163">163</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li>Select Committee
  <ul class="nest">
  <li>on Postage, Report of, 1838, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>;</li>
  <li>on Newspaper Stamps, 1851, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>, <a href="#Page_127">127</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li>Seven Years' War, <a href="#Page_81">81</a>, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a></li>
<li>Ship Letter Office, <a href="#Page_344">344</a></li>
<li>Ship letters, <a href="#Page_339">339</a>, <a href="#Page_342">342</a></li>
<li>Single letter, definition of, <a href="#Page_336">336</a></li>
<li>Smith, Adam, <a href="#Page_329">329</a>, <a href="#Page_330">330</a></li>
<li>Sorting frames, <a href="#Page_285">285</a></li>
<li><i>Stafetti</i>, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_378">378</a></li>
<li>Staff, <a href="#Page_33">33-5</a>;
  <ul class="nest">
  <li>cost of, <a href="#Page_289">289</a>, <a href="#Page_301">301</a>, <a href="#Page_306">306</a></li>
  </ul></li>
<li>Stage coach, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_250">250</a> note, <a href="#Page_385">385</a></li>
<li>Stamp duty (on newspapers), <a href="#Page_117">117</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>, <a href="#Page_128">128</a></li>
<li>Stamping machines, <a href="#Page_303">303</a></li>
<li>Stamps, postage, introduction of, <a href="#Page_27">27</a></li>
<li>Stanhope, Lord, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>, <a href="#Page_341">341</a>, <a href="#Page_380">380</a></li>
<li>State control of Post Office, <a href="#Page_328">328</a></li>
<li>Stayner, T. A., <a href="#Page_138">138</a></li>
<li>Stephan, H. von, <a href="#Page_241">241</a>, <a href="#Page_266">266</a></li>
<li>Supplemental services, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_357">357</a></li>
<li>Supplements (newspaper), <a href="#Page_132">132</a>, <a href="#Page_171">171</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li>
<li>Surveyors (post office), <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li>
<li>Sutherland, Daniel, <a href="#Page_43">43</a></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Taxes on knowledge, <a href="#Page_126">126</a>, <a href="#Page_142">142</a></li>
<li><span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Taxis, J. von</span>, <a href="#Page_350">350</a></li>
<li>Telegraphs, Post Office, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_358">358</a></li>
<li>Telephones, Post Office, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_358">358</a></li>
<li>Temporary uniform fourpenny rate. <a href="#Page_30">30</a> note</li>
<li>Third-class Mail Matter, <i>see</i> Mail matter, classification of</li>
<li>Thirty Years' War, <a href="#Page_209">209</a>, <a href="#Page_353">353</a></li>
<li>Thorough Post, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_5">5</a></li>
<li>Threepenny Post (London), <a href="#Page_252">252</a></li>
<li><span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Thurn</span> and <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Taxis</span> Posts, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>, <a href="#Page_350">350</a></li>
<li><i>Times</i> newspaper, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>, <a href="#Page_129">129</a></li>
<li>Trade journals, transmission by post, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>, <a href="#Page_159">159</a></li>
<li>Transient newspapers, <a href="#Page_137">137</a>, <a href="#Page_152">152</a></li>
<li>Transit, gratuitous, <a href="#Page_268">268</a>, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>, <a href="#Page_275">275</a></li>
<li>Transit rates, international, <a href="#Page_267">267</a>, <a href="#Page_270">270</a>, <a href="#Page_271">271</a>, <a href="#Page_273">273</a>, <a href="#Page_275">275</a>, <a href="#Page_279">279</a>, <a href="#Page_281">281</a></li>
<li>Travelling Post, <a href="#Page_3">3-6</a>, <a href="#Page_79">79</a></li>
<li>Treble letter, definition of, <a href="#Page_336">336</a></li>
<li>Tuke, Brian, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_3">3</a></li>
<li>Tupper, Sir Charles, <a href="#Page_57">57</a></li>
<li>Twopenny Post (London), <a href="#Page_252">252</a></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Uniform postage, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_26">26</a>, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>, <a href="#Page_85">85</a>, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312</a>, <a href="#Page_323">323</a></li>
<li><i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Union g&#233;n&#233;rale des Postes</i>, <a href="#Page_269">269</a></li>
<li><i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Union postale universelle</i>, <a href="#Page_269">269</a>, note 3</li>
<li>Universal penny postage, <a href="#Page_276">276</a>, <a href="#Page_348">348</a></li>
<li>Universal Postal Union, <a href="#Page_224">224</a>, <a href="#Page_229">229</a></li>
<li>University posts, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, <a href="#Page_78">78</a></li>
<li>Urgent parcels, special fee for, <a href="#Page_215">215</a></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Wages (of postmasters), <a href="#Page_3">3</a>, <a href="#Page_5">5</a></li>
<li>Wages, Post Office, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_297">297</a></li>
<li>Walkley, A. B., <a href="#Page_275">275</a> note</li>
<li>Wanamaker, J., <a href="#Page_77">77</a>, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192</a></li>
<li>Ward, Edmund, <a href="#Page_137">137</a>, <a href="#Page_139">139</a></li>
<li>Ward, Sir J. G., <a href="#Page_276">276</a></li>
<li>Warwick, Earl of, <a href="#Page_11">11</a></li>
<li>Way letter, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>, <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li>
<li>Way Office, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>, <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li>
<li>Weighing of mails (United States), <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157</a></li>
<li>Wells, H. G., <a href="#Page_134">134</a></li>
<li>West, Robert, 398</li>
<li>Williamson, Joseph, <a href="#Page_113">113</a></li>
<li>Witherings, Thomas, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_12">12</a>, <a href="#Page_378">378</a>, <a href="#Page_381">381</a></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Yearly express, <a href="#Page_40">40</a></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Zone rates, <a href="#Page_177">177</a>, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>, <a href="#Page_201">201</a>, <a href="#Page_202">202</a>, <a href="#Page_215">215</a>, <a href="#Page_356">356</a></li>
</ul>

<hr />

<p><i>Printed in Great Britain by</i></p>

<p>UNWIN BROTHERS, LIMITED, THE GRESHAM PRESS, WOKING AND LONDON</p>

<hr />

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_1_1" id="Footnote_1_1"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_1"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> <i>Report from Secret Committee on the Post Office</i>
(<i>Commons</i>), 1844, Appx., p. 21.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_2_2" id="Footnote_2_2"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_2"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> Ibid., p. 4. <i>Annual Report of the Postmaster-General</i>, 1854,
p. 8.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_3_3" id="Footnote_3_3"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_3"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> <i>Encyclop&#230;dia of the Laws of England</i>, London, 1908, vol. xi.
p. 344. J. W.
Hyde, <i>The Post in Grant and Farm</i>, London, 1894, p. 131.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_4_4" id="Footnote_4_4"></a><a href="#FNanchor_4_4"><span class="label">[4]</span></a> <i>Report from Secret Committee on the Past Office</i>
(<i>Commons</i>),1844, Appx., p. 95.
In 1324 a writ or letter was issued to the Constable of Dover and Warden of the
Cinque Ports, to the Mayor and Sheriffs of London, the Bailiffs of Bristol,
Southampton, and Portsmouth, and the Sheriffs of Hants, Somerset, Dorset,
Devon, and Cornwall, reciting that previous orders <i>de scrutinio faciendo</i>
had not
been observed, in consequence of which many letters prejudicial to the Crown
were brought into the kingdom; and commanding them to "make diligent
scrutiny of all persons passing from parts beyond the seas to England, and to
stop all letters concerning which sinister suspicions might arise, and their
bearers, and to keep the bearers in custody until further directions, and to
transmit the letters so intercepted to the King with the utmost speed."</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_5_5" id="Footnote_5_5"></a><a href="#FNanchor_5_5"><span class="label">[5]</span></a> Richard III in 1484 "followed the practice which had been recently
introduced
by King Edward in the time of the last war with Scotland (1482) of
appointing a single horseman for every 20 miles, by means of whom travelling
with the utmost speed, and not passing their respective limits, news was always
able to be carried by letter from hand to hand 200 miles within two
days."&mdash;<i>Third
Continuation of the Chronicle of Croyland</i>, Oxford, 1684, p. 571. The
system was identical with that of the posts of antiquity (<i lang="la" xml:lang="la">vide</i> Appendix
B,
pp. <a href="#Page_374">374-7</a>, <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">infra</i>).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_6_6" id="Footnote_6_6"></a><a href="#FNanchor_6_6"><span class="label">[6]</span></a> Derived from <i>posta</i>, a contraction for <i>posita</i>, from
<i>ponere</i>, to place. The
general use of the word is to signify relays placed at intervals on the routes
followed by messengers.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_7_7" id="Footnote_7_7"></a><a href="#FNanchor_7_7"><span class="label">[7]</span></a> "Ne men can kepe horses in redynes without som way to bere the
charges"&mdash;Tuke
to Cromwell, 17 August 1533 (<i>Report from Secret Committee on the Post
Office</i> (<i>Commons</i>), 1844, Appx., p. 32).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_8_8" id="Footnote_8_8"></a><a href="#FNanchor_8_8"><span class="label">[8]</span></a> "The King's pleasure is that postes be better appointed, and laide
in al
places most expedient; with commaundement to al townshippes in al places
on payn of lyfe, to be in such redynes, and to make such provision of horses
at al tymes, as no tract or losse of tyme be had in that behalf "&mdash;Ibid., Appx.,
p. 32.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_9_9" id="Footnote_9_9"></a><a href="#FNanchor_9_9"><span class="label">[9]</span></a> "<span class="smcap">a.d.</span> 1572. The Office of the Maister of the Postes. The
Accompte of
Thomas Randolphe esquier, Maister of the Postes.... As also of the yssuyng
and defrayment owte of the same, as well for the wages of the ordinarie postes
laide betwene London and Barwicke and elles where within hir Ma<sup>ts</sup> Realme of
Englande, As also for the wages of divers extra ordenarie postes laid in divers
places of the Realme in the tyme of hir Ma<sup>ts</sup> severall progresses, and also to
divers postes for cariage of packets of l'res from Sittingbourne, Dartforde
Rochester, Canterbury and Dover for hir Ma<sup>ts</sup> service and affayres, as occasion
from tyme to tyme did requier."&mdash;Ibid., Appx., p. 34.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_10_10" id="Footnote_10_10"></a><a href="#FNanchor_10_10"><span class="label">[10]</span></a> In the United Kingdom this system exists to a considerable extent,
chiefly
in the south and west of Ireland, and in many parts of Scotland, more
especially among the Western Isles. In remote parts the means of communication
are in general provided for the double purpose, and economy to the
Post Office naturally results from the fact that the contractors for the mail
service have a source of income in addition to the Post Office payment. Indeed,
it is probable that since the days of the post-boys by far the greater portion
of the mails has always been conveyed by means not exclusively provided for
that purpose. The mail coaches carried passengers and goods, and it was from
that traffic that the income of the proprietor was mainly derived. The payment
in respect of the mails was very small, the real consideration inducing
the proprietors to carry the mail being the fact that the mail coaches were
exempt from tolls. The railway displaced the mail coach, and increased the
dependence of the mail service on means of communication provided primarily
for other purposes. The number of trains run solely for the conveyance of mails
has always been extremely small. The weight of mails to be conveyed is
usually insufficient to warrant the provision of a special train, and the Post
Office is therefore compelled, as far as possible, to make use of such trains
as may be run for other traffic, endeavouring to obtain such modification in
the times and working as will make them of the greatest advantage to the mail
service without destroying their utility for general traffic. The existence of
extensive means of communication for general purposes therefore results
advantageously to the Post Office.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_11_11" id="Footnote_11_11"></a><a href="#FNanchor_11_11"><span class="label">[11]</span></a> 2 and 3 Edward VI, cap. 3.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_12_12" id="Footnote_12_12"></a><a href="#FNanchor_12_12"><span class="label">[12]</span></a> "The Lords of the Privie Counsell, endevouring heretofore the like
furtherance of the service of the State, as well in horsing such as ride on
their
Prince's affaires, as the speedy despatch of packets in all places where Posts
were
erected and ordeined, considering that for the service of the one, a daily fee
is
allowed, and for the other, no certaine wages at all, but the hire of the horses
let out, and that often ill paide, whereby they stand not so bound to the one,
as
to attend to the other; And that the townes and countreys besides became many
wayes vexed and perplexed, by the over great libertie of riders in poste,
specially
by such as pretend publike service by speciall commission, contrary to the
King's
meaning or their lordships' orders."&mdash;Orders for Thorough Posts and Couriers,
riding Post on the King's Affairs, 1603 <i>(Report from Secret Committee on the
Post Office (Commons</i>), 1844, Appx., p. 38).
</p><p>
The "Thorough Post" was the term applied to the travelling facilities
provided by the posts, i.e. when the messenger travelled "through," in
contradistinction
to the "Post for the Pacquet" (or "Packet"), i.e. the post for
the transmission of the mail, or "pacquet."</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_13_13" id="Footnote_13_13"></a><a href="#FNanchor_13_13"><span class="label">[13]</span></a> "1. First it is ordered, That in all places where Posts are layde
for the
packet, they also, as persons most fit, shall have the benefit and preheminence
of
letting, furnishing, and appointing of horses to all riding in poste (that is to
say)
with horse and guide by commission or otherwise.
</p><p>
"2. And, like as in the orders for the carrying of the packets, the furtherance
of our service and the State is only aymed at; so in this it is intended that
none
be holden to ride on publique affairs but with speciall commission, and the
same signed either by one of our Principall Secretaries of State, ... and of
all such so riding in publike affaires, it shall be lawfull for the Posts, or
the
owners of the horses, to demand, for the hire of ich horse, after the rate of
twopence halfe-peny the mile (besides the guides groats). But of all others
riding poste with horse and guide, about their private businesses the hire and
prices are left to the parties discretions, to agree and compound within
themselves."&mdash;Ibid.,
Appx., p. 39.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_14_14" id="Footnote_14_14"></a><a href="#FNanchor_14_14"><span class="label">[14]</span></a> Contemporary papers show that this was largely a measure of
police, intended
to enable the Government to keep a watch on all persons travelling about the
kingdom.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_15_15" id="Footnote_15_15"></a><a href="#FNanchor_15_15"><span class="label">[15]</span></a> As late as 1620 there were only four, and they touched only a
small portion
of the kingdom. They were (1) The Courte to Barwicke, (2) The Courte to
Beaumaris, (3) The Courte to Dover, and (4) The Courte to Plymouthe.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_16_16" id="Footnote_16_16"></a><a href="#FNanchor_16_16"><span class="label">[16]</span></a> See <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">supra</i>, p. <a href="#Page_3">3</a>.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_17_17" id="Footnote_17_17"></a><a href="#FNanchor_17_17"><span class="label">[17]</span></a> "The constables many times be fayn to take horses oute of plowes
and
cartes."&mdash;Brian Tuke, 1533 (<i>Report from Secret Committee on the Post
Office</i>
(<i>Commons</i>), 1844, Appx., p. 33).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_18_18" id="Footnote_18_18"></a><a href="#FNanchor_18_18"><span class="label">[18]</span></a> The post from London serving the "Westerne part" of the kingdom
was
discontinued in 1610 as unnecessary except in time of war.&mdash;Ibid., Appx., p.
43.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_19_19" id="Footnote_19_19"></a><a href="#FNanchor_19_19"><span class="label">[19]</span></a> "Universities and great towns had their own particular posts; and
the
same horse or foot post went through the journey, and returned with other
letters, without having different stages as at present. It was thus practised
later in Scotland as having less commerce than in England."&mdash;D. Macpherson,
<i>Annals of Commerce</i>, London, 1805, vol. ii. p. 400.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_20_20" id="Footnote_20_20"></a><a href="#FNanchor_20_20"><span class="label">[20]</span></a> The Committee of Secrecy of the House of Commons were of opinion
that
the practice of carrying private letters probably began at an early period and
became a perquisite of the postmasters (<i>Report from Secret Committee on the
Post Office</i> (<i>Commons</i>), 1844, p. 4).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_21_21" id="Footnote_21_21"></a><a href="#FNanchor_21_21"><span class="label">[21]</span></a> Ibid., Appx., p. 56.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_22_22" id="Footnote_22_22"></a><a href="#FNanchor_22_22"><span class="label">[22]</span></a> Ibid., Appx., p. 36; see p. <a href="#Page_380">380</a>, <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">infra.</i></p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_23_23" id="Footnote_23_23"></a><a href="#FNanchor_23_23"><span class="label">[23]</span></a> Ibid., Appx., p. 41.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_24_24" id="Footnote_24_24"></a><a href="#FNanchor_24_24"><span class="label">[24]</span></a> The business of carrying foreign letters had been conducted by the
holder
of the general patent for carrying letters, although that patent covered only
inland posts and foreign posts within the King's dominions. In 1620 a patent
was issued to Matthew de Quester and his son, conferring on them the
office of Postmaster of England for Foreign Parts. The holder of the patent
for the Inland Posts, who had hitherto been conducting this service,
attempted to resist this new grant, but without success; and for some time
there was a sort of triple division of the posts, viz. the Inland Posts, the
posts in parts beyond the seas within the King's dominions, and the posts
for foreign parts out of the King's dominions. There was, nevertheless, no
regular provision for the conveying of letters for places out of England. The
foreign mails were conveyed by men who were engaged in other business,
who bought their places in the posts, and were accused of delaying the mails
through "more minding their own peddling traffic than the service of the State
or merchants, omitting many passages, sometimes staying for the vending of
their own commodities, many times through neglect by lying in
tippling-houses."&mdash;See
J. W. Hyde, <i>The Post in Grant and Farm</i>, London, 1894, p. 12.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_25_25" id="Footnote_25_25"></a><a href="#FNanchor_25_25"><span class="label">[25]</span></a> "Nether can anie place in Christendom bee named wher merchants are
allowed to send their letters by other body or posts, then by those only which
are authorized by the State.... Your Lordship best knoweth what accompt
wee shal bee hable to give in our places of that w<sup>ch</sup> passeth by letters in or
out of the land, if everie man may convey lrs, under the covers of merchants,
to whome and what place hee pleaseth."&mdash;30th February 1627. John Coke to
Lord Conway (<i>Report from Secret Committee on the Post Office (Commons)</i>,
1844,
Appx., p. 51).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_26_26" id="Footnote_26_26"></a><a href="#FNanchor_26_26"><span class="label">[26]</span></a> A copy is given in Appendix B, <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">infra</i>, pp. <a href="#Page_378">378-380</a>.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_27_27" id="Footnote_27_27"></a><a href="#FNanchor_27_27"><span class="label">[27]</span></a> "Now his Majesty ... taking into his princely consideration how
much
it imports this State and this whole realm, that the secrets be not disclosed to
foreign nations; which cannot be prevented if promiscuous use of transmitting
or taking up of foreign letters by these private posts and carriers aforesaid
should be suffered, which will be also no small prejudice to his merchants in
their trading.... And his Majesty, taking further into his consideration that
the mutual commerce and correspondency of his subjects within his Majesty's
dominions will be as advantageous and beneficial as the trade with foreign
nations, and that nothing will more increase and advance the same than the
safe and speedy conveying, carrying, and re-carrying of letters from one place
to another ... he doth hereby straightly charge and command, that no post
or carrier whatsoever within his Majesty's dominions, other than such as shall
be nominated and appointed by the said Thomas Witherings, shall presume
to take up, carry, receive, and deliver any letter or letters, pacquet or
pacquets
whatsoever, to any such place or places where the said Thomas Witherings
shall have settled posts, according to the said grant, except a particular
messenger
sent on purpose with letters by any man for his own occasions, or letters by
a friend, or by common known carriers."&mdash;Proclamation of 11th February 1637-8
(<i>Report from Secret Committee on the Post Office (Commons)</i>,1844, Appx.,
p. 58).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_28_28" id="Footnote_28_28"></a><a href="#FNanchor_28_28"><span class="label">[28]</span></a> "1650. June 29th. Council of State to (Serjeant Dendy and his
assistants?):&mdash;
</p><p>
"You are to repair to some post stage 20 miles from London on the road
towards York; seize the letter mail going outward, and all other letters upon
the rider, and present them by one of yourselves; the other shall then
ride to the next stage, and seize the mail coming inwards, and bring the letters
to Council, searching all persons that ride with the mail, or any other that
ride
post without warrant, and bring them before Council, or the Commissioners
for Examinations. All officers civil and military to be assistants. With note
of like orders for Chester Road and the western roads."&mdash;<i>Calendar of State
Papers
(Domestic Series</i>), 1650, p. 223.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_29_29" id="Footnote_29_29"></a><a href="#FNanchor_29_29"><span class="label">[29]</span></a> <i>Commons Journal</i>, 7th September 1644, p. 621.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_30_30" id="Footnote_30_30"></a><a href="#FNanchor_30_30"><span class="label">[30]</span></a> Ibid., 21st March 1650, p. 385.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_31_31" id="Footnote_31_31"></a><a href="#FNanchor_31_31"><span class="label">[31]</span></a> Ibid.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_32_32" id="Footnote_32_32"></a><a href="#FNanchor_32_32"><span class="label">[32]</span></a> H. Joyce, <i>History of the Post Office</i>, London, 1893, p. 25.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_33_33" id="Footnote_33_33"></a><a href="#FNanchor_33_33"><span class="label">[33]</span></a> <i>Commons Journal</i>, 19th October, 1652, p. 192.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_34_34" id="Footnote_34_34"></a><a href="#FNanchor_34_34"><span class="label">[34]</span></a> <i>Register of Council of State</i>, 7th May 1653, vol. xvi. pp.
34-6.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_35_35" id="Footnote_35_35"></a><a href="#FNanchor_35_35"><span class="label">[35]</span></a> <i>Calendar of State Papers (Domestic Series)</i>, 1652-3, p.
455.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_36_36" id="Footnote_36_36"></a><a href="#FNanchor_36_36"><span class="label">[36]</span></a> "The case of the first undertakers for reducing letters to half
the former
rates, viz. Clem. Oxenbridge, Rich. Blackwell, Fra. Thompson, and Wm.
Malyn. We observed that the postage of inland letters was long continued
at 6d. a letter, and that the whole benefit went into one hand, to the
grievance of many. Being encouraged by the votes of the last Parliament (made
in the time of their primitive, free, and public actings, viz. 16 August 1642)
that
the taking of letters from and the restraints and imprisonments of Gower,
Chapman, Cotton, and Mackedral were against the law and the liberty of the
subject ... and that the said secretaries and Witherings were delinquents,
being also encouraged by the opinion of the judges given in the House of
Lords, that the clause in Witherings' patent for restraint of carrying letters
was void and against law&mdash;we attempted to put the same in practice, but
through the interest of Mr. Prideaux, who for many years had enjoyed excessive
gains by the former high rates, we met with all the obstruction he could make
against us, by stopping our mails, abusing our servants, etc., though he always
held forth that it was free for any to carry or send letters as they
pleased."&mdash;<i>Calendar
of State Papers (Domestic Series)</i>, 1653/1654, p. 22. Cf. John Hill,
<i>A Penny Post</i>, London, 1659.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_37_37" id="Footnote_37_37"></a><a href="#FNanchor_37_37"><span class="label">[37]</span></a> "Cross posts did not exist. Between two towns not being on the
same
post road, however near the towns might be, letters could circulate only
through London; and the moment London was reached an additional rate was
imposed. Hence the apparent charges, the charges as deduced from the
table of rates, might be very different from the actual charges. Bristol and
Exeter, for instance, are less than 80 miles apart; but in 1660, and for
nearly forty years afterwards, letters from one to the other passed through
London, and would be charged, if single, not 2d. but 6d., and if double, not 4d.
but 1s. That is to say, the postage or portage, as it was then called, would
consist
of two rates, and each of these rates would be for a distance in excess of 80
miles."&mdash;H.
Joyce, <i>History of the Post Office</i>, p. 29. Cf. <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">infra</i>, Appendix B,
pp. <a href="#Page_390">390-1</a>.
</p><p>
This practice of charging according to the route traversed and not according
to direct distance was also followed in other countries. It is perhaps
comparable
to the practice of computing railway charges on the basis of the
distance by railway, and not as the crow flies.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_38_38" id="Footnote_38_38"></a><a href="#FNanchor_38_38"><span class="label">[38]</span></a> H. Scobell, <i>Collection of Acts and Ordinances</i>, London,
1658, p. 511.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_39_39" id="Footnote_39_39"></a><a href="#FNanchor_39_39"><span class="label">[39]</span></a> 12 Car. II, cap. 35.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_40_40" id="Footnote_40_40"></a><a href="#FNanchor_40_40"><span class="label">[40]</span></a> See, e.g., Royal Proclamations, 16th January 1660-1 and 16th July
1667.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_41_41" id="Footnote_41_41"></a><a href="#FNanchor_41_41"><span class="label">[41]</span></a> See Appendix, pp. 388-391.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_42_42" id="Footnote_42_42"></a><a href="#FNanchor_42_42"><span class="label">[42]</span></a> "As early as William's reign they (the Postmasters-General) had
been
asked to estimate how much an additional penny of postage would produce;
... the necessities of the Civil List had prompted the inquiry."&mdash;H.
Joyce, <i>History of the Post Office</i>, p. 119.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_43_43" id="Footnote_43_43"></a><a href="#FNanchor_43_43"><span class="label">[43]</span></a> 9 Anne, cap. 10.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_44_44" id="Footnote_44_44"></a><a href="#FNanchor_44_44"><span class="label">[44]</span></a> 9 Anne, cap. 10, &#167; 35.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_45_45" id="Footnote_45_45"></a><a href="#FNanchor_45_45"><span class="label">[45]</span></a> "The additional tax has never answered in proportion to the
produce of the
revenue at the time it took place, the people having found private conveyances
for their letters, which they are daily endeavouring to increase,
notwithstanding
all the endeavours that can be used to prevent them."&mdash;Statement by the
Postmasters-General, 20th May 1718 (<i>British Official Records</i>).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_46_46" id="Footnote_46_46"></a><a href="#FNanchor_46_46"><span class="label">[46]</span></a> H. Joyce, <i>History of the Post Office</i>, p. 145.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_47_47" id="Footnote_47_47"></a><a href="#FNanchor_47_47"><span class="label">[47]</span></a> 9 Anne, cap. 10, &#167; 39.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_48_48" id="Footnote_48_48"></a><a href="#FNanchor_48_48"><span class="label">[48]</span></a> 3 Geo. III, cap. 75, &#167; 1.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_49_49" id="Footnote_49_49"></a><a href="#FNanchor_49_49"><span class="label">[49]</span></a> "An important legal decision, with which the Post Office had only
the
remotest concern, an improved system of expresses following as a natural
consequence from circumstances over which the Post Office had no control, a
simple contrivance to facilitate the posting of letters (i.e. the aperture), and
an acceleration of the mail between London and Edinburgh&mdash;this as the record
of forty or fifty years' progress is assuredly meagre enough; and yet we are not
aware of any omission."&mdash;H. Joyce, ibid., p. 184.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_50_50" id="Footnote_50_50"></a><a href="#FNanchor_50_50"><span class="label">[50]</span></a> "A letter between Bath and London would be a London letter, and a
letter
from one part of the country to another which in course of transit passed
through London would be a country letter. A bye or way letter would be a
letter passing between any two towns on the Bath Road and stopping short of
London&mdash;as, for instance, between Bath and Hungerford, between Hungerford
and Newbury, between Newbury and Reading, and so on; while a cross post
letter would be a letter crossing from the Bath road to some other&mdash;as, for
instance, a letter between Bath and Oxford."&mdash;Ibid., p. 147.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_51_51" id="Footnote_51_51"></a><a href="#FNanchor_51_51"><span class="label">[51]</span></a> 9 Anne, cap. 10, &#167; 18.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_52_52" id="Footnote_52_52"></a><a href="#FNanchor_52_52"><span class="label">[52]</span></a> "To give a slight idea of the nature of this conveyance: <i>The
Bye and
Way Letters</i> were thrown promiscuously together into one large Bag, which
was to be opened at every Stage by the Deputy, or any inferior Servant of
the House, to pick out of the whole heap what might belong to his own delivery,
and the rest put back again into this large Bag, with such Bye Letters as he
should have to send to distant places from his own Stage. But what was
still worse than all this, it was then the constant practice to demand and
receive the postage on all such Letters before they were put into any of the
Country Post Offices. Hence (from the general temptation of destroying these
Letters for the sake of the Postage) the joynt mischief of embezling the Revenue
and interrupting and obstructing the commerce, fell naturally in, to support and
inflame one another. Indeed, they were then risen to such a height, and
consequently
the discredit and disrepute of this conveyance grown so notorious, that
many Traders and others in divers parts of the Kingdom had recourse to various
contrivances of private and clandestine conveyance for their speedier and safer
correspondence; whereby it became unavoidable but that other branches of the
Post Office revenue should be greatly impair'd, as well as this ...
</p><p>
"Now whilst the <i>Bye and Way Letters</i> continued to be conveyed in so
precarious
and unsafe a way, as is shewn above, it was thought hard to punish
such as undertook to convey them in a speedier and safer manner. But from
a Time that this Branch of the Revenue was put under a just regulation, in
consequence of the contract with Mr. Allen, all such Persons who were any
way concerned in this illegal collection and conveyance of Letters, were by
proper Officers employed by him, strictly enquired after, and when detected,
the most notorious of them punished as a terror to the rest."&mdash;Ralph Allen's
Narrative, 2nd December 1761 (Ralph Allen's <i>Bye, Way and Cross Road
Posts</i>,
London, 1897, pp. 6 and 18).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_53_53" id="Footnote_53_53"></a><a href="#FNanchor_53_53"><span class="label">[53]</span></a> "Upon the next renewal of his Contract, which was in the Year
1741, the
Postmasters-General, after largely expressing, as usual, their sense of the
integrity of his conduct, and the services he had done to the Public, told
him they judged it but reasonable to expect some addition to his rent of
&#163;6,000 a Year for the <i>Bye, Way and Cross Road Letters</i>, altho' he should
still continue to support and increase the produce of the Country Letters for
the Benefit of the King. To which, Mr. Allen answered, that their expectations
of additional rent appeared very reasonable to him, and which he should
have made in his own way (a way he was going to open to them) had they
not themselves proposed it. That there are two ways of giving this additional
Rent: the one was by paying a further some of money yearly, such
as he could afford to his Majesty's use without any advance to public commerce,
the other was by paying his Majesty, and immediately too, a much larger sum
than he could in the first way pretend to advance, in causing a considerable
increase of the produce of the <i>London and Country Letters</i> by means of
extending
and quickening the correspondence of London and several of the most considerable
Trading Towns and Cities thro'out the Kingdom; a project that would be
of infinite advantage to commerce. Which of these two ways the
Postmasters-General
would think fit to prefer, he left to themselves to consider; who on duly
weighing all circumstances, did not in the least hesitate to prefer the latter
method.
</p><p>
"Upon which Mr. Allen agreed to erect, at his own Expence, one every day
cost from London to Bath, Bristol, and Glocester towards the <i>West</i>; and
from London to Cambridge, Lynn, Norwich, and Yarmouth towards the <i>East</i>;
and to all intermediate places in both quarters: and&mdash;that all the increase of
the postage of Letters thus conveyed between London and the several places,
East, and West of it above-mentioned, should, without any charge or deduction,
be paid in directly for his Majesty's use, as well as all the increase of
the <i>Country Letters</i> within that District, that is, such Letters as pass
between
one Country Town and another thro' London.
</p><p>
"All this was accordingly done and executed conformable to the terms of
the contract."&mdash;Ibid., pp. 25-6.
</p><p>
Similar extensions were made at the renewals of the lease in 1748 and 1755.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_54_54" id="Footnote_54_54"></a><a href="#FNanchor_54_54"><span class="label">[54]</span></a> 5 Geo. III, cap. 25, &#167; 5.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_55_55" id="Footnote_55_55"></a><a href="#FNanchor_55_55"><span class="label">[55]</span></a> "It is certain that the alteration of the rates of Postage in the
year 1765
has not been attended with every good consequence then expected from it
and has been some loss to the Revenue."&mdash;Mr. Draper, District Surveyor,
<i>British Official Records</i>, 1783.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_56_56" id="Footnote_56_56"></a><a href="#FNanchor_56_56"><span class="label">[56]</span></a> "At a time when the mail leaving London on Monday night did not
arrive
at Bath until Wednesday afternoon, he (Palmer) had been in the habit of
accomplishing
the distance between the two cities in a single day. He had made
journeys equally long and equally rapid in other directions; and, as the result
of observation, he had come to the conclusion that of the horses kept at the
post houses it was always the worst that were set aside to carry the mail, and
that the post was the slowest mode of conveyance in the kingdom. He had
also observed that, where security or despatch was required, his neighbours at
Bath who might desire to correspond with London would make a letter up into
a parcel and send it by stage-coach, although the cost by stage-coach was,
porterage included, 2s. and by post 4d."&mdash;H. Joyce, <i>History of the Post
Office</i>,
pp. 208-9. Cf. D. Macpherson, op. cit., vol. iv. p. 54.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_57_57" id="Footnote_57_57"></a><a href="#FNanchor_57_57"><span class="label">[57]</span></a> "If the present hours fixed at all the offices of the Kingdom with
the greatest
care and attention to that regular plan of correspondence which has been
established after long experience were to be altered it would throw into the
greatest confusion for the present and would be many years before it could be
restored to the degree of perfection it now has."&mdash;Observations on Mr. Palmer's
Plan by Mr. Draper, District Surveyor (<i>British Official Records</i>, 1783).
</p><p>
"Indeed, it is a pity that the Author of the Plan should not first have been
informed of the nature of the Business in question, to make him understand
how very differently the Posts and Post Offices are conducted to what he
apprehends,
and that the constant Eye that has been long kept towards their
improvement in all Situations and under all Circumstances has made them
now almost as perfect as can be without exhausting the Revenue arising
therefrom."&mdash;Observations on Mr. Palmer's Plan by Mr. Hodgson, District
Surveyor. Ibid.
</p><p>
"Upon the whole it appears impracticable upon a general System to convey
the Mails by Machine."&mdash;Observations on Mr. Palmer's Plan by Mr. Allen,
District Surveyor. Ibid.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_58_58" id="Footnote_58_58"></a><a href="#FNanchor_58_58"><span class="label">[58]</span></a> "In 1797 there were forty-two mail-coach routes established,
connecting
sixty of the most important towns in the kingdom, as well as intermediate
places. These coaches cost the Government &#163;12,416 a year, only half the sum
paid for post-horses and riders under the old system. The coaches made daily
journeys over nearly two-thirds of the total distance traversed and tri-weekly
journeys over something less than one-third the total distance. The remainder
travelled one, two, four, and six times a week."&mdash;J. C. Hemmeon, <i>History of
the
British Post Office</i>, Cambridge, Mass., 1912, p. 40.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_59_59" id="Footnote_59_59"></a><a href="#FNanchor_59_59"><span class="label">[59]</span></a> 24 Geo. III, sess. 2, cap. 37.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_60_60" id="Footnote_60_60"></a><a href="#FNanchor_60_60"><span class="label">[60]</span></a> H. Joyce, <i>History of the Post Office</i>, p. 215.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_61_61" id="Footnote_61_61"></a><a href="#FNanchor_61_61"><span class="label">[61]</span></a> H. Joyce, <i>History of the Post Office</i>, pp. 317-18.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_62_62" id="Footnote_62_62"></a><a href="#FNanchor_62_62"><span class="label">[62]</span></a> 41 Geo. III, cap. 7.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_63_63" id="Footnote_63_63"></a><a href="#FNanchor_63_63"><span class="label">[63]</span></a> 45 Geo. III, cap. 11.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_64_64" id="Footnote_64_64"></a><a href="#FNanchor_64_64"><span class="label">[64]</span></a> 52 Geo. III, cap. 88. For details of the changes in the rates
during this period
see Appendix, pp. 338-9.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_65_65" id="Footnote_65_65"></a><a href="#FNanchor_65_65"><span class="label">[65]</span></a>
<span lang="de" xml:lang="de">"Von epochemachender Bedeutung war die ber&#252;hmte von</span> <i>Rowland
Hill</i>
<span lang="de" xml:lang="de">angeregte Portoreform bei Briefen (sogenanntes Pennyporto) in</span>
<span class="smcap" lang="de" xml:lang="de">Grossbritannien</span>
1839."&mdash;A. Wagner, <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Finanzwissenschaft</i>, Leipzig, 1890, vol. ii. p. 152.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_66_66" id="Footnote_66_66"></a><a href="#FNanchor_66_66"><span class="label">[66]</span></a> Sir Rowland Hill and G. Birkbeck Hill, <i>Life of Sir Rowland Hill
and
History of Penny Postage</i>, London, 1880.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_67_67" id="Footnote_67_67"></a><a href="#FNanchor_67_67"><span class="label">[67]</span></a> "They were all full of high aims&mdash;all bent on 'the accomplishment
of
things permanently great and good.' There was no room in their minds for
the petty thoughts of jealous spirits. Each had that breadth of view which
enables a man to rise above all selfish considerations. Each had been brought
up to consider the good of his family rather than his own peculiar good, and to
look upon the good of mankind as still higher than the good of his family.
Each was deeply convinced of the great truth which Priestly had discovered,
and Bentham had advocated&mdash;that the object of all government, and of all
social institutions, should be the greatest happiness of the greatest number
for the greatest length of time. In their youth their aims were often visionary;
but they were always high and noble."&mdash;Ibid., vol. i. p. 193.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_68_68" id="Footnote_68_68"></a><a href="#FNanchor_68_68"><span class="label">[68]</span></a> "Early in the 'thirties there had been some reduction in certain
departments
of taxation. It occurred to me that probably some ease might be given
to the people by lowering the postal rate.... Although occupied with other
affairs, the reduction in the postal rate was not dismissed from my thoughts.
The interest it had excited induced me to read Reports, etc., on postal
administration."&mdash;Ibid.,
vol. i. p. 242.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_69_69" id="Footnote_69_69"></a><a href="#FNanchor_69_69"><span class="label">[69]</span></a> "The best test to apply to the several existing taxes for the
discovery of
the one which may be reduced most extensively, with the least proportionate
loss to the revenue, is probably this: excluding from the examination those
taxes, the produce of which is greatly affected by changes in the habits of
the people, as the taxes on spirits, tobacco, hair-powder, let each be examined
as to whether its productiveness has kept pace with the increasing numbers
and prosperity of the nation. And that tax which proves most defective under
this test is, in all probability, the one we are in quest of."&mdash;Rowland Hill,
<i>Post
Office Reform: Its Importance and Practicability</i>, London, 1837, p. 2.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_70_70" id="Footnote_70_70"></a><a href="#FNanchor_70_70"><span class="label">[70]</span></a> "The revenue of the Post Office has been stationary at about
&#163;1,400,000
a year since 1818. This can be accounted for only by the great duty charged
on letters; for with a lower duty the correspondence of the country through
the Post Office would have increased in proportion to the increase of population
and national wealth."&mdash;Sir Henry Parnell, <i>On Financial Reform</i>, London,
1832, p. 41.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_71_71" id="Footnote_71_71"></a><a href="#FNanchor_71_71"><span class="label">[71]</span></a> "While thus confirmed in my belief that, even from a financial
point of
view, the postal rates were injuriously high, I also became more and more
convinced, the more I considered the question, that the fiscal loss was not
the most serious injury thus inflicted on the public; that yet more serious
evil resulted from the obstruction thus raised to the moral and intellectual
progress of the people; and that the Post Office, if put on a sound footing,
would assume the new and important character of a powerful engine of
civilization; that though now rendered feeble and inefficient by erroneous
financial arrangements, it was capable of performing a distinguished part in
the great work of national education."&mdash;Sir Rowland Hill in <i>Life of Sir
Rowland
Hill and History of Penny Postage</i>, London, 1880, vol. i. p. 245.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_72_72" id="Footnote_72_72"></a><a href="#FNanchor_72_72"><span class="label">[72]</span></a> <i>Post Office Reform: Its Importance and Practicability</i>, by
Rowland Hill,
London, 1837.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_73_73" id="Footnote_73_73"></a><a href="#FNanchor_73_73"><span class="label">[73]</span></a> "In order to ascertain, with as much accuracy as the circumstances
of the
case admit, the extent to which the rates of postage may be reduced, under the
condition of a given reduction in the revenue, the best course appears to be,
first to determine as nearly as possible the natural cost of conveying a letter
under the varying circumstances of distance, etc., that is to say, the cost
which
would be incurred if the Post Office were conducted on the ordinary commercial
principles, and postage relieved entirely from taxation; and then to add to the
natural cost such amount of duty as may be necessary for producing the
required revenue."&mdash;Ibid. p. 10.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_74_74" id="Footnote_74_74"></a><a href="#FNanchor_74_74"><span class="label">[74]</span></a> "I found, first, that the cost of conveying a letter between post
town and
post town was exceedingly small; secondly, that it had but little relation to
distance; and thirdly, that it depended much upon the number of letters
conveyed by the particular mail; and as the cost per letter would diminish with
every increase in such number, and as such increase would certainly follow
reduction of postage, it followed that, if a great reduction could be effected,
the
cost of conveyance per letter, already so small, might be deemed absolutely
insignificant.
</p><p>
"Hence, then, I came to the important conclusion that the existing
practice of regulating the amount of postage by the distance over which an
inland letter was conveyed, however plausible in appearance, had no foundation
in
principle, and that consequently the rates of postage should be irrespective of
distance."&mdash;Sir Rowland Hill, <i>Life of Sir Rowland Hill and History of Penny
Postage</i>, London, 1880, vol. i. p. 250.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_75_75" id="Footnote_75_75"></a><a href="#FNanchor_75_75"><span class="label">[75]</span></a> "It appears, then, that the cost of mere transit incurred upon a
letter sent
from London to Edinburgh, a distance of 400 miles, is not more than <i>one
thirty-sixth
part of a penny</i>. If therefore the proper charge (exclusive of tax) upon a
letter received and delivered in London itself were twopence, then the proper
charge (exclusive of tax) upon a letter received in London, but delivered in
Edinburgh, would be twopence <i>plus</i> one-thirty-sixth part of a penny. Now,
as
the letters taken from London to Edinburgh are undoubtedly carried much more
than an average distance, it follows, that when the charge for the receipt
and delivery of the letter is determined, an additional charge of
one-thirty-sixth
part of a penny would amply repay the expense of transit. <i>If, therefore, the
charge for postage be made proportionate to the whole expense incurred in
the receipt, transit, and delivery of the letter, and in the collection of its
postage, it must be made uniformly the same from every post town to every
other post town in the United Kingdom</i>, unless it can be shown how we
are to collect so small a sum as the thirty-sixth part of a penny."&mdash;Rowland
Hill, <i>Post Office Reform: Its Importance and Practicability</i>, London,
1837,
pp. 18-19.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_76_76" id="Footnote_76_76"></a><a href="#FNanchor_76_76"><span class="label">[76]</span></a> Ibid., p. 45.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_77_77" id="Footnote_77_77"></a><a href="#FNanchor_77_77"><span class="label">[77]</span></a> A "frank" was a letter or packet bearing on the outside the
signature of a
person entitled to send letters free of postage.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_78_78" id="Footnote_78_78"></a><a href="#FNanchor_78_78"><span class="label">[78]</span></a> These proposals are not, however, necessarily related to the
principle of
uniformity, and, although interesting and important at the time, are now only
of historical interest. They relate more particularly to the practicability of
applying low and uniform rates to the postal service in the United Kingdom,
having regard to the circumstances then obtaining and to the necessity for
maintaining a large net revenue. Given that uniformity of rate was
scientifically
sound, it did not follow that it should be immediately adopted, and the
financial effect was, to say the least, speculative. But since it was unlikely
that the plan would be adopted if any large decrease in revenue were likely to
result, Sir Rowland Hill was at great pains to explain methods by which his
plan could be adopted without serious reduction of net revenue, and it was in
this connection that the question of the increase in traffic which might be
anticipated assumed such importance.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_79_79" id="Footnote_79_79"></a><a href="#FNanchor_79_79"><span class="label">[79]</span></a>
See, e.g., H. von Stephan, <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Geschichte der preussischen
Post</i>, Berlin, 1859, p. 615.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_80_80" id="Footnote_80_80"></a><a href="#FNanchor_80_80"><span class="label">[80]</span></a> <i>Ninth Report of Commissioners for Inquiring into the Mode of
Conducting
the Business of the Post Office Department</i>, 1837, Appendix, pp. 26-40.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_81_81" id="Footnote_81_81"></a><a href="#FNanchor_81_81"><span class="label">[81]</span></a> "Of all the wild and visionary schemes he had ever heard or read
of, it was
the most extraordinary."&mdash;Lord Lichfleld, Postmaster-General, 15 June 1837,
<i>Parl. Debates</i> (<i>Lords</i>), vol. xxxviii, col. 1464.
</p><p>
"He considers the whole scheme of Mr. Hill as utterly fallacious; he thought
so from the first moment he read the pamphlet of Mr. Hill; and his opinion of
the plan was formed long before the evidence was given before the Committee.
The plan appears to him a most preposterous one, utterly unsupported by facts,
and resting entirely on assumption. Every experiment in the way of reduction
which has been made by the Post Office has shown its fallacy; for every
reduction whatever leads to a loss of revenue, in the first instance: if the
reduction be small, the revenue recovers itself; but if the rates were to be
reduced to a penny, revenue would not recover itself for forty or fifty
years."&mdash;Abstract
of Evidence of Colonel Maberly, Secretary to the Post Office, <i>Third
Report from the Select Committee on Postage</i>, 1838, p. 18.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_82_82" id="Footnote_82_82"></a><a href="#FNanchor_82_82"><span class="label">[82]</span></a> <i>Post Office Reform: Its Importance and Practicability</i>, by
Rowland Hill,
second edition, London, 1837.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_83_83" id="Footnote_83_83"></a><a href="#FNanchor_83_83"><span class="label">[83]</span></a> See <i>Life of Sir Rowland Hill and History of Penny Postage</i>,
London, 1880;
Sir Henry Cole, <i>Fifty Years of Public Work</i>, London, 1884.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_84_84" id="Footnote_84_84"></a><a href="#FNanchor_84_84"><span class="label">[84]</span></a> <i>Third Report of the Select Committee On Postage</i>, 13th
August 1838, &#167; 10.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_85_85" id="Footnote_85_85"></a><a href="#FNanchor_85_85"><span class="label">[85]</span></a> In 1837-8 the deficiency was &#163;1,428,000; in 1838-9, &#163;430,000; in
1839-40,
&#163;1,457,000; in 1840-1, &#163;1,851,000; and for 1841-2 it was estimated at
&#163;2,421,000.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_86_86" id="Footnote_86_86"></a><a href="#FNanchor_86_86"><span class="label">[86]</span></a> "Was the Committee ignorant&mdash;we think not&mdash;that the radicals in
politics
and the sectarians in religion, have been the warmest advocates&mdash;and indeed
(except the mercantile body we have alluded to) the only very zealous advocates
for this penny post?"&mdash;<i>Quarterly Review</i>, October 1839, p. 531. Cf.
<i>Edinburgh
Review</i>, January 1840; J. Morley, <i>Life of Cobden</i>, London, 1881, p.
411.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_87_87" id="Footnote_87_87"></a><a href="#FNanchor_87_87"><span class="label">[87]</span></a> "On the 9th April 1839, Lord Melbourne's Government brought in
what is
generally known as the Jamaica Bill&mdash;a Bill for suspending for five years the
constitution of that colony. This measure was strongly opposed by the
Conservative party (led by Sir Robert Peel), and by many of the Radicals.
On the second reading of the Bill, the Government only escaped defeat by the
narrow majority of five votes. The Ministry thereupon resigned; Sir Robert Peel
was sent for by her Majesty, but owing to the 'Bedchamber Difficulty' failed to
form a Government. Lord Melbourne was recalled, and in the negotiations with
the Radical members for future support to his Government, the bargain was
struck that that support should be given, provided Penny Postage was conceded.
</p><p>
"Thus one of the greatest social reforms ever introduced was, to speak plainly,
given as a bribe by a tottering Government to secure political support."&mdash;<i>The
Post Office of Fifty Years Ago</i>, London, 1890, p. 24. Cf. <i>Parl.
Debates</i>, 26th
March 1855, vol. cxxxvii, col. 1136; Sir Stafford H. Northcote, <i>Twenty Years
of
Financial Policy</i>, London, 1862, pp. 8-9.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_88_88" id="Footnote_88_88"></a><a href="#FNanchor_88_88"><span class="label">[88]</span></a> As a temporary measure, with the view of minimizing the practical
difficulties
of the Post Office, a uniform rate of 4d. a letter (1d. a letter for London
local
letters) was introduced on the 5th December 1839.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_89_89" id="Footnote_89_89"></a><a href="#FNanchor_89_89"><span class="label">[89]</span></a> Estimate of number of chargeable letters delivered in the United
Kingdom
(in round numbers):&mdash;
</p>

<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Estimated number of chargeable letters delivered in the UK between 1839 and 1914.">
<tr><td align="left">1839</td><td align="center">Letters</td><td align="right">76.0</td><td align="center">millions</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"></td><td align="center">Franks</td><td align="right">6.6</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1840</td><td align="center">Letters</td><td align="right">169.0</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1841</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">197.0</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1842</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">208.0</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1843</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">220.0</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1844</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">242.0</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1845</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">271.0</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1846</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">300.0</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1847</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">322.0</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1848</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">329.0</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1849</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">337.0</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1860</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">564.0</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1900-1</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">2,323.6</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1913-14</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">3,477.8</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
</table></div>

<p>
The total number of packets of all descriptions delivered in the United
Kingdom in the year 1913-14 was about 6,000 millions.&mdash;<i>Annual Reports of the
Postmaster-General.</i></p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_90_90" id="Footnote_90_90"></a><a href="#FNanchor_90_90"><span class="label">[90]</span></a> See J. R. McCulloch, <i>Taxation and the Funding System</i>,
Edinburgh, 1863,
p. 331.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_91_91" id="Footnote_91_91"></a><a href="#FNanchor_91_91"><span class="label">[91]</span></a> The number of letters per head of population shows a continuous
increase, as
follows:&mdash;
</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Increase in the number of letters per head of UK population between 1880 and 1914.">
<tr><th align="center">Year.</th><th align="center">England.</th><th align="center">Scotland.</th><th align="center">Ireland.</th><th align="center">United Kingdom.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1880-1</td><td align="center">38</td><td align="center">29</td><td align="center">15</td><td align="center">34</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1890-1</td><td align="center">50</td><td align="center">36</td><td align="center">21</td><td align="center">45</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1900-1</td><td align="center">61</td><td align="center">47</td><td align="center">32</td><td align="center">57</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1905-6</td><td align="center">68</td><td align="center">51</td><td align="center">36</td><td align="center">62</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1910-11</td><td align="center">73</td><td align="center">56</td><td align="center">40</td><td align="center">68</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1913-14</td><td align="center">81</td><td align="center">63</td><td align="center">45</td><td align="center">75</td></tr>
</table></div>

</div>


<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_92_92" id="Footnote_92_92"></a><a href="#FNanchor_92_92"><span class="label">[92]</span></a> As in other countries. It is contrary to the general principles
upon
which the post is conducted in the leading countries of Europe to throw a
quantity of heavy matter upon the letter post, which exists primarily for the
carriage of light letters, and would be seriously hampered by the transmission
of
large numbers of heavy packages."</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_93_93" id="Footnote_93_93"></a><a href="#FNanchor_93_93"><span class="label">[93]</span></a> Of these, 123,640 were established and 125,813 unestablished
officers.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_94_94" id="Footnote_94_94"></a><a href="#FNanchor_94_94"><span class="label">[94]</span></a> The following table shows the date and annual cost of the various
revisions:&mdash;
</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Date and cost of revisions between 1881 and 1914.">
<tr><td align="left">1881-2.</td><td align="left">Fawcett Revision</td><td align="right">&#163;320,000</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1888-91.</td><td align="left">Raikes Revision</td><td align="right">406,600</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1897-8.</td><td align="left">Tweedmouth Revision (including Norfolk-Hanbury concessions)</td><td align="right">388,000</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1905.</td><td align="left">Stanley Revision</td><td align="right">372,300</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1908.</td><td align="left">Hobhouse Committee Revision</td><td align="right">707,900</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1914.</td><td align="left">Holt Committee Revision</td><td align="right">1,335,750</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1894-1912.</td><td align="left">Other improvements</td><td align="right" class="tdbbs">144,400</td></tr>
<tr><td></td><td align="right">Total</td><td align="left">&#163;3,674,950</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>
In addition, the annual cost of the War Bonus granted in 1915 is estimated
at &#163;1,080,000.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_95_95" id="Footnote_95_95"></a><a href="#FNanchor_95_95"><span class="label">[95]</span></a>
</p>




<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0"
summary="The increase in proportion of the total revenue paid in wages and salaries between 1880 and 1914.">
<tr><th align="center">Year.</th><th align="center">Percentage of Salaries,<br /> Wages, etc., to Total<br /> Revenue.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1880-1</td><td align="center">28.39</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1890-1</td><td align="center">35.78</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1900-1</td><td align="center">45.30</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1905-6</td><td align="center">45.34</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1909-10</td><td align="center">49.09</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1910-11</td><td align="center">47.61</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1911-12</td><td align="center">49.20</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1912-13</td><td align="center">47.88</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1913-14</td><td align="center">47.04</td></tr>
</table></div>





</div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_96_96" id="Footnote_96_96"></a><a href="#FNanchor_96_96"><span class="label">[96]</span></a> The increase is partly accounted for by the fact that parcels are
included in
the later figures. Deducting the estimated cost of the parcel post (see
<i lang="la" xml:lang="la">infra</i>,
Chapter VII), the cost for staff for packets other than parcels was, in 1913-14,
some .340d. per packet.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_97_97" id="Footnote_97_97"></a><a href="#FNanchor_97_97"><span class="label">[97]</span></a> Omitting the cost of conveyance of mails by sea, and omitting the
cost of
conveyance of parcels by railway, which is fixed by the Parcel Post Act
of 1882. The following table shows the movement of the general cost of
conveyance of mails:&mdash;
</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0"
summary="Table of the movement in the cost of conveyance of mails and the change in the proportion of the total conveyed by road and rail.">
<tr><th align="center">Year.</th><th align="center">Cost of Conveyance.</th><th align="center">Percentage of Cost of Conveyance<br />
of Mails by Road and Rail to Total<br />
Revenue (excluding Cost of<br />
Conveyance of Parcels by Railway).</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1880-1</td><td align="right">&#163;921,093</td><td align="right">16.17</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1890-1</td><td align="right">1,273,894</td><td align="right">12.62</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1900-1</td><td align="right">1,519,219</td><td align="right">11.26</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1905-6</td><td align="right">1,710,891</td><td align="right">10.68</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1910-11</td><td align="right">1,812,505</td><td align="right">9.18</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1913-14</td><td align="right">1,940,735</td><td align="right">8.85</td></tr>
</table></div>



</div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_98_98" id="Footnote_98_98"></a><a href="#FNanchor_98_98"><span class="label">[98]</span></a> Assuming there is no loss on the Parcel Post. If there is such
loss, the cost
per packet other than a parcel would be reduced (see <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">infra</i>, Chapter
VII).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_99_99" id="Footnote_99_99"></a><a href="#FNanchor_99_99"><span class="label">[99]</span></a> The general increase of wages partly accounts for this (see p. 34,
opposite).
The cost of working is, however, higher in the larger offices (where the bulk of
postal work is done) than in the smaller offices, and tends to be highest in the
largest offices. The matter is complicated by the fact that higher scales of pay
are in force in the larger towns.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_100_100" id="Footnote_100_100"></a><a href="#FNanchor_100_100"><span class="label">[100]</span></a>
</p>

<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0"
summary="Table of the variation in the ratio of expenditure and revenue between 1839 and 1914.">
<tr><th align="center" rowspan="2">Year.</th>  <th align="center" colspan="2">Percentage of Total Expenditure to Total Revenue.</th></tr>
<tr><th align="center">Postal Services.</th>  <th align="center">All Services.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left"> 1839-40 [A] [B]</td><td align="center">31.66</td><td align="center">&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"> 1840-41 [B]</td><td align="center">63.16</td><td align="center">&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"> 1880-1</td><td align="center">61.84</td><td align="center">68.97</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"> 1890-1</td><td align="center">65.79</td><td align="center">74.33</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"> 1900-1</td><td align="center">71.75</td><td align="center">80.99</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"> 1905-6</td><td align="center">69.44</td><td align="center">80.19</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"> 1909-10</td><td align="center">73.75</td><td align="center">84.00</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"> 1910-11</td><td align="center">72.28</td><td align="center">82.94</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"> 1911-12</td><td align="center">72.36</td><td align="center">82.89</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"> 1912-13</td><td align="center">71.25</td><td align="center">82.05</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"> 1913-14 [C]</td><td align="center">69.71</td><td align="center">80.02</td></tr>
</table></div>

<ul>
<li>A: Penny Postage introduced, 10th January 1840.</li>
<li>B: Revenue does not include proceeds of Impressed Stamp on Newspapers.</li>
<li>C: Estimated.</li>
</ul>
<p>
<span style="margin-left: 6em;">&mdash;<i>Report of Postmaster-General</i>, 1913-14, pp. 122-3.</span><br />
</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_101_101" id="Footnote_101_101"></a><a href="#FNanchor_101_101"><span class="label">[101]</span></a> "The inhabitants live so scattered and remote from each other in
that vast
country, that posts cannot be supported among them."&mdash;Benjamin Franklin,
evidence before House of Commons, 28th January, 1766 (<i>Parl. History</i>, vol.
xvi.
col. 138).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_102_102" id="Footnote_102_102"></a><a href="#FNanchor_102_102"><span class="label">[102]</span></a> The usual rate of remuneration for deputy postmasters in North
America.
Cf. <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">infra</i>, pp. <a href="#Page_49">49</a> and <a href="#Page_66">66</a>.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_103_103" id="Footnote_103_103"></a><a href="#FNanchor_103_103"><span class="label">[103]</span></a> "On account of the scarcity of money, people will forbear to
correspond until
they find occasions by friends, travellers, and the like, to send their letters,
which
makes it to be wished that the Legislature might enact that the rate of postage
for the greatest distances on the Continent of America may not exceed 1s. 6d.
for
a single letter and so in proportion."&mdash;<i>British Official Records</i>, 1764.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_104_104" id="Footnote_104_104"></a><a href="#FNanchor_104_104"><span class="label">[104]</span></a> Preamble of 5 Geo. III, cap. 25.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_105_105" id="Footnote_105_105"></a><a href="#FNanchor_105_105"><span class="label">[105]</span></a> "The present rates may in some parts be reduced, and the Revenue
nevertheless
may hereafter be improved, by means of a more extensive circulation."&mdash;5
Geo. III, cap. 25, &#167; 1.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_106_106" id="Footnote_106_106"></a><a href="#FNanchor_106_106"><span class="label">[106]</span></a> <i>British Official Records</i>, 8th February 1774.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_107_107" id="Footnote_107_107"></a><a href="#FNanchor_107_107"><span class="label">[107]</span></a> <i>British Official Records</i>, 23rd September 1790.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_108_108" id="Footnote_108_108"></a><a href="#FNanchor_108_108"><span class="label">[108]</span></a> J. G. Hendy, <i>Empire Review</i>, London, 1902, vol. iv., p.
180.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_109_109" id="Footnote_109_109"></a><a href="#FNanchor_109_109"><span class="label">[109]</span></a> "There is no doubt that the revenues of the provinces showed a
nominal
surplus, but it is not so clear that this surplus, which amounted to &#163;884 in
1801,
and to &#163;2,514 in 1811, was a surplus on the provincial services. Many years
later, when the administration of the Post Office in the colonies and the
question
of the disposal of the surplus revenue had become part of a political matter
of the first magnitude, the provincial Legislatures alleged that the surplus
amounted to a very considerable sum each year, and that the circumstances
constituted a taxation of the colonies by the Mother Country; but the Deputy
Postmaster-General asserted that this surplus was in fact composed of revenues
to which the colonies had no claim, viz. the charges for British packet postage,
that is, for transmission of letters across the ocean, and payments in respect
of military postage, and that in point of fact the local service had never
yielded
a surplus&mdash;that, indeed, there was probably a deficit.
</p><p>
"This I feel myself bound to state as my firm conviction, that neither for the
last ten years, nor for any previous period, has the postage of Lower Canada
afforded one farthing of Net Revenue."&mdash;Mr. T. A. Stayner, Deputy
Postmaster-General
(<i>Report of Special Committee of the House of Assembly on the Post Office
Department in the Province of Lower Canada</i>, 11th February 1832, p. 12).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_110_110" id="Footnote_110_110"></a><a href="#FNanchor_110_110"><span class="label">[110]</span></a> See, e.g., <i>Report of Special Committee, House of Assembly,
Lower Canada</i>,
8th March 1836.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_111_111" id="Footnote_111_111"></a><a href="#FNanchor_111_111"><span class="label">[111]</span></a> In 1790 Governor Carleton of New Brunswick manned the posts at
St. John, Cumberland, Preguile, and Fredericton with a troop of soldiers, by
which means "the route was kept in good order"; and in 1794 the Duke
of Kent, then Commander-in-Chief of the forces in Nova Scotia, constructed
a military post road from Halifax to Annapolis, and also other roads in the
vicinity of Halifax.&mdash;<i>British America</i> (British Empire Series, vol. iii.,
London,
1900), p. 121.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_112_112" id="Footnote_112_112"></a><a href="#FNanchor_112_112"><span class="label">[112]</span></a> <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Vide</i> p. <a href="#Page_41">41</a>, note, <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">supra.</i></p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_113_113" id="Footnote_113_113"></a><a href="#FNanchor_113_113"><span class="label">[113]</span></a> 31 Geo. III, cap. 31.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_114_114" id="Footnote_114_114"></a><a href="#FNanchor_114_114"><span class="label">[114]</span></a> 18 Geo. III, cap. 12.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_115_115" id="Footnote_115_115"></a><a href="#FNanchor_115_115"><span class="label">[115]</span></a> Will. IV, cap. 7.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_116_116" id="Footnote_116_116"></a><a href="#FNanchor_116_116"><span class="label">[116]</span></a> <i>Report of Special Committee, House of Assembly, Lower
Canada</i>, 8th March
1836.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_117_117" id="Footnote_117_117"></a><a href="#FNanchor_117_117"><span class="label">[117]</span></a> Ibid., <i>Legislative Council, Lower Canada</i>, 15th March 1836.
Cf. <i>Report of
Select Committee, Legislative Council, Upper Canada</i>, 17th February 1837.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_118_118" id="Footnote_118_118"></a><a href="#FNanchor_118_118"><span class="label">[118]</span></a> "We have failed to discover reasonable grounds for hoping that
the several
Colonial Legislatures will soon (if indeed they ever will) arrive at such
uniformity in their enactments for the management of the Post Office within
their respective localities as would ensure the establishment of a practicable
system, more especially since it is admitted that the Bill of one Legislature,
in
order to become effective, must correspond in all its material provisions with
the Bills of all the other Legislatures, and that after these Bills have been
found
to correspond with one another, and had in consequence thereof become Laws,
no alterations in them, however expedient it might be deemed by one
Legislature for the improvement of the system, could be carried into effect,
until agreed to by each separate Legislature."&mdash;<i>Joint Address, Legislature of
Upper Canada</i>, March 1837, p. 11.
</p><p>
An example of the difficulties likely to be encountered, and some justification
for the reluctance of the Imperial authorities to yield control of the service,
is
afforded by a dispute which occurred at about this time between Canada and
Nova Scotia concerning the arrangements for the transmission of the British
mails between Quebec and Halifax. Nova Scotia refused for the first time to
make good the deficiency in the Post Office revenue. The authorities in
London thereupon ordered the Deputy in the province to discontinue all
unremunerative services, a course of action which proved effective.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_119_119" id="Footnote_119_119"></a><a href="#FNanchor_119_119"><span class="label">[119]</span></a> <i>Report of the Commissioners appointed to enquire into the
affairs of the Post
Office in British North America</i>, 31st December 1841.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_120_120" id="Footnote_120_120"></a><a href="#FNanchor_120_120"><span class="label">[120]</span></a> <i>British Official Records</i>, 1842-3.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_121_121" id="Footnote_121_121"></a><a href="#FNanchor_121_121"><span class="label">[121]</span></a> W. J. Page, Report of 1st October 1842 (<i>British Official
Records</i>).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_122_122" id="Footnote_122_122"></a><a href="#FNanchor_122_122"><span class="label">[122]</span></a> Despatch of 28th August 1847.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_123_123" id="Footnote_123_123"></a><a href="#FNanchor_123_123"><span class="label">[123]</span></a> <i>Report of a Committee of the Executive Council of Canada on
the Post Office</i>,
10th June 1848.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_124_124" id="Footnote_124_124"></a><a href="#FNanchor_124_124"><span class="label">[124]</span></a> 12 &amp; 13 Vict., cap. 66.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_125_125" id="Footnote_125_125"></a><a href="#FNanchor_125_125"><span class="label">[125]</span></a> <i>Correspondence on the Subject of the Establishment of a
General Post Office
System in British North America</i>, Montreal, 27th February 1849.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_126_126" id="Footnote_126_126"></a><a href="#FNanchor_126_126"><span class="label">[126]</span></a> In 1851, $362,065; in 1852, $230,629; in 1855, $368,166.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_127_127" id="Footnote_127_127"></a><a href="#FNanchor_127_127"><span class="label">[127]</span></a> "He would, were it necessary for the revenue, prefer to retain
the existing
letter rate than to extend through the Dominion this newspaper impost,
unknown in the Maritime Provinces before."&mdash;Hon. Dr. Tupper, <i>Parl.
Debates</i>
(<i>Canada</i>), <i>House of Commons</i>, 20th December 1867.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_128_128" id="Footnote_128_128"></a><a href="#FNanchor_128_128"><span class="label">[128]</span></a> Hon. Mr. Campbell, Ibid., <i>Senate</i>, 3rd December 1867.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_129_129" id="Footnote_129_129"></a><a href="#FNanchor_129_129"><span class="label">[129]</span></a> "The Postal service should be expected to yield a revenue; but
the service
should be performed as low as possible, and if it paid its way that was all
that need be desired."&mdash;Hon. Mr. Campbell, Ibid.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_130_130" id="Footnote_130_130"></a><a href="#FNanchor_130_130"><span class="label">[130]</span></a> The revenue in 1868 was $1,024,702, and in 1871, $1,079,768. In
1889 the
rate was made 3 cents per ounce.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_131_131" id="Footnote_131_131"></a><a href="#FNanchor_131_131"><span class="label">[131]</span></a> See <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">infra</i>, p. <a href="#Page_143">143</a>.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_132_132" id="Footnote_132_132"></a><a href="#FNanchor_132_132"><span class="label">[132]</span></a> Sir W. Mulock, <i>Parl. Debates</i> (<i>Canada</i>), <i>House of
Commons</i>, 1st April 1898
(<i>Official Reports</i>, vol. xlvi.).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_133_133" id="Footnote_133_133"></a><a href="#FNanchor_133_133"><span class="label">[133]</span></a> Sir Charles Tupper, Ibid., 13th May 1898.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_134_134" id="Footnote_134_134"></a><a href="#FNanchor_134_134"><span class="label">[134]</span></a> In 1898, $3,527,810: in 1902, $3,888,126.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_135_135" id="Footnote_135_135"></a><a href="#FNanchor_135_135"><span class="label">[135]</span></a> "It is ordered that notice be given that Richard Fairbanks his
house in
Boston is the place appointed for all letters which are brought from beyond the
seas or are to be sent thither to be left with him, and he is to take care that
they are to be delivered or sent according to the directions; and he is allowed
for every letter a penny, and must answer all miscarriages through his own
negligence in this kind."</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_136_136" id="Footnote_136_136"></a><a href="#FNanchor_136_136"><span class="label">[136]</span></a> Stanley I. Slack, <i>A Brief History of the Postal Service</i>,
Omaha.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_137_137" id="Footnote_137_137"></a><a href="#FNanchor_137_137"><span class="label">[137]</span></a> M. E. Woolley, <i>Early History of the Colonial Post Office</i>,
Providence, R.I.,
1894, p. 6.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_138_138" id="Footnote_138_138"></a><a href="#FNanchor_138_138"><span class="label">[138]</span></a> New York, in 1692, enacted that any persons or body politic or
corporate
other than the Postmaster-General presuming to "carry, re-carry, or deliver
letters for hire, or to set up or imploy any foot-post, horse-post, or
pacquet-boat
whatsoever" for the carrying of letters or packets should forfeit &#163;100; and the
Act of New Hampshire, passed in 1693, provided that no person or persons
whatsoever should carry letters for hire, "except letters sent by private friend
or by any messenger for or concerning the private affaires of any person."</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_139_139" id="Footnote_139_139"></a><a href="#FNanchor_139_139"><span class="label">[139]</span></a> Preamble of Act (1st April 1693).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_140_140" id="Footnote_140_140"></a><a href="#FNanchor_140_140"><span class="label">[140]</span></a> "The mail carriers rode through the wilderness in this year of
the
beginning."&mdash;Stanley I. Slack, <i>A Brief History of the Postal Service</i>,
Omaha,
p. 11.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_141_141" id="Footnote_141_141"></a><a href="#FNanchor_141_141"><span class="label">[141]</span></a> See <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">infra</i>, Appendix B, pp. <a href="#Page_391">391</a> ff.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_142_142" id="Footnote_142_142"></a><a href="#FNanchor_142_142"><span class="label">[142]</span></a> "An Act for establishing a General Post Office for all her
Majesty's
Dominions" (9 Anne, cap. 10).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_143_143" id="Footnote_143_143"></a><a href="#FNanchor_143_143"><span class="label">[143]</span></a> 5 Geo. III, cap. 25. See <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">supra</i>, pp. <a href="#Page_38">38-9</a>.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_144_144" id="Footnote_144_144"></a><a href="#FNanchor_144_144"><span class="label">[144]</span></a> Cf. <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">supra</i>, p. <a href="#Page_38">38</a>.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_145_145" id="Footnote_145_145"></a><a href="#FNanchor_145_145"><span class="label">[145]</span></a> Evidence of Benjamin Franklin before House of Commons Committee,
28th
January 1766. The Committee were, of course, most anxious on points having
relation to the taxation of the colonies by the English Parliament, and
Dr. Franklin was asked questions directed to discovering whether the colonists
regarded postage, which was fixed by Act of the British Parliament, and had
been newly fixed by such Act in the previous year (5 Geo. III, cap. 25), as a
tax. On this point Dr. Franklin emphatically held that the postage paid on
a letter was not of the nature of a tax, but that it was simply payment for
service performed; and, moreover, the payment of postage was not compulsory,
since a man might still, as before the passing of the Act, send his letter by a
servant, a special messenger, or a friend, if he thought it cheaper or safer.
Dr. Franklin said that every Assembly encouraged the Post Office in its infancy
by grants of money; that they would not have done this if they had thought
the postage charge a tax, and as a matter of fact the system was always
regarded as supplying a great convenience (W. Cobbett, <i>Parliamentary History
of England</i>, vol. xvi. cols. 137-160).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_146_146" id="Footnote_146_146"></a><a href="#FNanchor_146_146"><span class="label">[146]</span></a> <i>Manifesto to the American People</i>, issued by Goddard, 2nd
July 1774. Earlier
in the manifesto it was remarked that "newspapers, those necessary and
important alarms in time of public danger, may be rendered of little consequence
for want of circulation."</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_147_147" id="Footnote_147_147"></a><a href="#FNanchor_147_147"><span class="label">[147]</span></a> "It is not to be doubted but that the institution will be
properly regulated
by the Continental Congress."&mdash;<i>Manifesto to the American People</i>, 8th May
1774.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_148_148" id="Footnote_148_148"></a><a href="#FNanchor_148_148"><span class="label">[148]</span></a> <i>Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774-1789</i>, pub.
Washington, 1904,
vol. ii. p. 208.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_149_149" id="Footnote_149_149"></a><a href="#FNanchor_149_149"><span class="label">[149]</span></a> Resolution of 30th September 1775. Ibid., vol. iii. p. 267.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_150_150" id="Footnote_150_150"></a><a href="#FNanchor_150_150"><span class="label">[150]</span></a> <i>British Official Records</i>, 6th December 1780.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_151_151" id="Footnote_151_151"></a><a href="#FNanchor_151_151"><span class="label">[151]</span></a> "The officers of the American Army beg leave to inform their
friends and
correspondents that the postage of all letters to and from the Army is doubled:
but as their pay is fully adequate to every expense, they therefore request them
to send all letters by the public post, and not <i>through any &#x0153;conomical
view</i> by a
private conveyance.
</p><p>
'Tis a pity that the Honourable Congress did not treble the postage for
Officers' letters, as a large annual sum by this means would be put into the
public Treasury.
</p><p>
The several printers of newspapers on the Continent are requested to insert
the above."&mdash;<i>Pennsylvania Packet</i>, 22nd June 1779.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_152_152" id="Footnote_152_152"></a><a href="#FNanchor_152_152"><span class="label">[152]</span></a> In all, no less a sum than $111,967 was advanced to the Post
Office during
the year 1779.&mdash;<i>Journals of the Continental Congress</i>, 1774-1789, pub.
Washington,
1904, vol. xv. pp. 1412 and 1436.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_153_153" id="Footnote_153_153"></a><a href="#FNanchor_153_153"><span class="label">[153]</span></a> Ibid., vol. xviii. p. 1142.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_154_154" id="Footnote_154_154"></a><a href="#FNanchor_154_154"><span class="label">[154]</span></a> The rates were given in pennyweights and grains of silver, each
pennyweight
being estimated as equivalent to five-ninetieths of a dollar.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_155_155" id="Footnote_155_155"></a><a href="#FNanchor_155_155"><span class="label">[155]</span></a> <i>Journals of Congress</i>, Philadelphia, 1781-2, vol. vii. p.
509.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_156_156" id="Footnote_156_156"></a><a href="#FNanchor_156_156"><span class="label">[156]</span></a> See pp. <a href="#Page_12">12-14</a>, <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">supra.</i></p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_157_157" id="Footnote_157_157"></a><a href="#FNanchor_157_157"><span class="label">[157]</span></a> Ibid., vol. xii. p. 11.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_158_158" id="Footnote_158_158"></a><a href="#FNanchor_158_158"><span class="label">[158]</span></a> Message to Congress, 25th October 1791.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_159_159" id="Footnote_159_159"></a><a href="#FNanchor_159_159"><span class="label">[159]</span></a> See <i>Debates and Proceedings in Congress</i>, 20th December
1791. (Washington,
1849.)</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_160_160" id="Footnote_160_160"></a><a href="#FNanchor_160_160"><span class="label">[160]</span></a> Ibid., 6th December 1791.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_161_161" id="Footnote_161_161"></a><a href="#FNanchor_161_161"><span class="label">[161]</span></a> See <i>Congressional Record</i> (<i>House of
Representatives</i>), 21st February 1863.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_162_162" id="Footnote_162_162"></a><a href="#FNanchor_162_162"><span class="label">[162]</span></a> Questions of the establishment and maintenance of the post roads
were dealt
with by Congress separately from questions of mail service.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_163_163" id="Footnote_163_163"></a><a href="#FNanchor_163_163"><span class="label">[163]</span></a> <i>Reports of Senate Committee</i>, 27th January 1835, p. 115.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_164_164" id="Footnote_164_164"></a><a href="#FNanchor_164_164"><span class="label">[164]</span></a> Letter to Hon. Mr. Kennedy, <i>Life of Sir Rowland Hill and
History of
Penny Postage</i>, pp. 336-7.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_165_165" id="Footnote_165_165"></a><a href="#FNanchor_165_165"><span class="label">[165]</span></a> See D. D. T. Leech, <i>The Post Office Department of the United
States of
America; its History, Organization, and Working</i>, Washington, D.C., 1879.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_166_166" id="Footnote_166_166"></a><a href="#FNanchor_166_166"><span class="label">[166]</span></a> Message to Congress, 3rd December 1844.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_167_167" id="Footnote_167_167"></a><a href="#FNanchor_167_167"><span class="label">[167]</span></a> Some notion of the spirit in which the question was approached
may be
gathered from the following extracts:&mdash;
</p><p>
"To content the man dwelling more remote from town with his homely lot,
by giving him regular and frequent means of intercommunication: to assure to
the emigrant, who plants his new home on the skirts of the distant wilderness or
prairie, that he is not forever severed from the kindred and society that still
share
his interest and love: to prevent those whom the swelling tide of population is
constantly pressing to the outer verge of civilization from being surrendered to
surrounding influences and sinking into the hunter or savage state: to render
the citizen, how far soever from the seat of his Government, worthy, by proper
knowledge and intelligence, of his important privileges as a sovereign
constituent
of the Government: to diffuse, throughout all parts of the land, enlightenment,
social improvement, and national affinities, elevating our people in the scale
of
civilization, and binding them together in patriotic affection."&mdash;<i>Report of
House
Committee</i>, 15th May 1844.
</p><p>
"It [the Post Office] was a most important element in the hand of civilization,
especially of a republican people. There would be room to dilate in reference
to the utility of the diffusion of sciences, the promotion of morals, and all
these
great benefits resulting from the intercourse of mind and mind.... Because it
was so well understood by those who framed the Constitution, we find in that
sacred instrument that the power of this department of the public service is
exclusively vested in Congress.... Every nook and corner of this country
should be visited by its operations, that it should shed light and information
to the remote frontier settler as well as to the inhabitant of the populous city
or densely populated districts."&mdash;Mr. Merrick in the Senate when introducing
the Bill, 27th January 1845 (<i>Congressional Globe</i>).
</p><p>
"And what element but universal enlightenment of the people forms the chief
corner-stone in the temple of our political hopes? and what instrument so
calculated to awaken the ambition of the people to become educated as the
cultivation of the taste for epistolatory correspondence, calling into action
those
energies o&#163; the mind so necessary to the intelligent discharge of the high and
responsible duties of freemen, in a country where every man is equal, and the
builder and maker of his Government."&mdash;Mr. Paterson in the House of
Representatives, 1st March 1845 (<i>Congressional Globe</i>).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_168_168" id="Footnote_168_168"></a><a href="#FNanchor_168_168"><span class="label">[168]</span></a> "The extension of the mail service and the additional facilities
which will be
demanded by the rapid extension and increase of population on our western
frontier will not admit of such curtailment as will materially reduce the
present
expenditure."&mdash;Message to Congress, 2nd December 1845.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_169_169" id="Footnote_169_169"></a><a href="#FNanchor_169_169"><span class="label">[169]</span></a> "The honour and interest of the nation required that as soon as
the title to
the country was settled, our citizens who were resident there, and those who
shall go to settle there, should enjoy the benefits of the mail. And as it was
the
nation's business to establish the mail, it was equally the nation's business
to pay the expense. No man can show how it is just and reasonable that
the letters passing between Boston and New York should be taxed 150 per cent.
to pay the expenses of a mail to Oregon on the pretext that the Post Office must
support itself."&mdash;J. Leavitt, <i>Cheap Postage</i>, Boston, Mass., 1848, p. 27.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_170_170" id="Footnote_170_170"></a><a href="#FNanchor_170_170"><span class="label">[170]</span></a> Mr. Root (<i>Congressional Globe, House of Representatives</i>,
18th December 1850).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_171_171" id="Footnote_171_171"></a><a href="#FNanchor_171_171"><span class="label">[171]</span></a> "Sir, I am acquainted with the privations and hardships incident
to the
settlement of a new country: and I do not intend that my friends who are now
combating the trials and hardships of California and Oregon shall be visited by
their Government with such injustice. The men who are settling those countries
are sacrificing their lives for a coming generation. I will not add to their
hardships
by taxing them four times as much as a citizen of the old States of the
Union for a letter which shall give them intelligence of their friends left
behind
them, and shall chill that gush of feeling which will swell their bosoms, as
they
take possession of a letter that comes from their far-distant native land."&mdash;Mr.
Sweetser (Ibid., 4th January 1851).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_172_172" id="Footnote_172_172"></a><a href="#FNanchor_172_172"><span class="label">[172]</span></a> <i>Congressional Record, Senate</i>, 17th January 1883.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_173_173" id="Footnote_173_173"></a><a href="#FNanchor_173_173"><span class="label">[173]</span></a> The cost of the provision and maintenance (lighting, heating,
etc.) of Post
Office buildings is charged directly on the Federal Treasury, and does not in
any
way figure in the Post Office deficit.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_174_174" id="Footnote_174_174"></a><a href="#FNanchor_174_174"><span class="label">[174]</span></a> "If the postal revenue arising from letter postage could be set
aside for its
proper uses, the millions of letter-writers of this country might quickly be
permitted
to enjoy a reduced taxation on letter-writing. In point of fact, there is a
dear gain of nearly $30,000,000 from letter postages."&mdash;<i>Annual Report of the
Postmaster-General</i>, 1890, p. 53.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_175_175" id="Footnote_175_175"></a><a href="#FNanchor_175_175"><span class="label">[175]</span></a> Ibid., 1891, p. 102.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_176_176" id="Footnote_176_176"></a><a href="#FNanchor_176_176"><span class="label">[176]</span></a> "There is now, and has been for many years, an insistent demand
for the
reduction of letter postage. The advocates of that reduction argue that the
volume of business naturally resulting therefrom would offset the temporary loss
in revenue. They insist that the charge for first-class matter is out of all
proportion to the cost of its handling and transportation."&mdash;<i>Annual Report of
the
Postmaster-General</i>, 1906, p. xlvi.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_177_177" id="Footnote_177_177"></a><a href="#FNanchor_177_177"><span class="label">[177]</span></a> "As the profit on first-class matter is almost equal to the loss
on second-class
matter, it will readily be seen that an equalization of rates on the basis of
the cost
of service would permit a reduction in letter postage from 2 cents to 1 cent an
ounce."&mdash;Mr. Hitchcock, Postmaster-General, evidence before Commission
of 1911.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_178_178" id="Footnote_178_178"></a><a href="#FNanchor_178_178"><span class="label">[178]</span></a>
P. Jaccottey, <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Trait&#233; de L&#233;gislation et d'Exploitation
Postales</i>, Paris, 1891,
p. 5. E. Gallois, <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">La Poste</i>, etc., Paris, 1894, pp. 41 and 44.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_179_179" id="Footnote_179_179"></a><a href="#FNanchor_179_179"><span class="label">[179]</span></a>
A. de Rothschild, <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Histoire de la Poste aux Lettres</i>, Paris,
1879, p. 60.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_180_180" id="Footnote_180_180"></a><a href="#FNanchor_180_180"><span class="label">[180]</span></a>
P. Jaccottey, op. cit., p. 6.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_181_181" id="Footnote_181_181"></a><a href="#FNanchor_181_181"><span class="label">[181]</span></a> Edict of 19th June 1464.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_182_182" id="Footnote_182_182"></a><a href="#FNanchor_182_182"><span class="label">[182]</span></a>
Edict of 8th May 1597: <span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">"&#201;dit du Roy pour l'&#233;tablissement des
relais de
chevaux de louage, de traite en traite, sur les grands chemins, traverses et le
long
des rivi&#232;res, pour servir &#224; vo&#239;ager, porter malles et toutes sortes de
bagages."</span></p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_183_183" id="Footnote_183_183"></a><a href="#FNanchor_183_183"><span class="label">[183]</span></a>
<span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">"Louis XI ne se pr&#233;occupait nullement de la correspondance des
particuliers,
ni du d&#233;veloppement des relations commerciales et sociales: il poursuivait un
but exclusivement politique.</span>
</p><p>
<span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">"Engag&#233; dans sa grande lutte contre la f&#233;odalit&#233;, il cherchait le moyen de
transmettre avec c&#233;l&#233;rit&#233; ses ordres dans les provinces et d'&#234;tre rapidement
inform&#233; des man&#x0153;uvres de ses ennemis.... L'institution cr&#233;&#233;e par Louis XI
pour son usage exclusif &#233;tait donc identique dans son but, sinon dans ses
moyens,
&#224; la course publique des Romains."</span>&mdash;P. Jaccottey, op. cit., p. 7. See also
D. Macpherson, op. cit., vol. i. p. 695.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_184_184" id="Footnote_184_184"></a><a href="#FNanchor_184_184"><span class="label">[184]</span></a>
A. Belloc, <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Les Postes fran&#231;aises</i>, Paris, 1886, pp. 43 and
46.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_185_185" id="Footnote_185_185"></a><a href="#FNanchor_185_185"><span class="label">[185]</span></a> Regulation of 26th October 1627.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_186_186" id="Footnote_186_186"></a><a href="#FNanchor_186_186"><span class="label">[186]</span></a>
See Charles Bernede, <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Des Postes en G&#233;n&#233;ral, et
particuli&#232;rement en France</i>,
Nantes, 1826.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_187_187" id="Footnote_187_187"></a><a href="#FNanchor_187_187"><span class="label">[187]</span></a>
L&#233;on Cazes, <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Le Monopole Postale</i>, Paris, 1900.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_188_188" id="Footnote_188_188"></a><a href="#FNanchor_188_188"><span class="label">[188]</span></a> Edict of 8th December 1703.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_189_189" id="Footnote_189_189"></a><a href="#FNanchor_189_189"><span class="label">[189]</span></a> Decrees of 26th-29th August 1790.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_190_190" id="Footnote_190_190"></a><a href="#FNanchor_190_190"><span class="label">[190]</span></a>
P. Jaccottey, op. cit., p. 287. Cf. <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Le Moniteur Universel</i>,
18 ao&#251;t 1791, p. 954.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_191_191" id="Footnote_191_191"></a><a href="#FNanchor_191_191"><span class="label">[191]</span></a> Law of 27th December 1795.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_192_192" id="Footnote_192_192"></a><a href="#FNanchor_192_192"><span class="label">[192]</span></a>
P. Leroy-Beaulieu, <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Trait&#233; de la Science des Finances</i>,
Paris, 1899, vol. i. p. 612.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_193_193" id="Footnote_193_193"></a><a href="#FNanchor_193_193"><span class="label">[193]</span></a> Law of 15th March 1827.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_194_194" id="Footnote_194_194"></a><a href="#FNanchor_194_194"><span class="label">[194]</span></a> Law of 3rd June 1829.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_195_195" id="Footnote_195_195"></a><a href="#FNanchor_195_195"><span class="label">[195]</span></a> "Citoyens repr&#233;sentants, puisque l'honorable d&#233;fenseur de
l'inter&#234;t du tr&#233;sor
a port&#233; &#224; cette tribune un mot, je ne le nie pas; il est vrai qu'au comit&#233; des
finances j'ai dit que cette loi &#233;tait une loi d'amour; je le r&#233;p&#232;te, et
j'adresse de
sinc&#232;re remerciements &#224; la monarchie, pour avoir laiss&#233; &#224; la R&#233;publique le soin
de donner cette loi au pays."&mdash;Le Citoyen Goudchaux, Ministre des Finances,
Assembl&#233;e Nationale, 24 ao&#251;t 1848 (<i>Le Moniteur Universel, Journal Officiel
de la R&#233;publique Fran&#231;aise</i>).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_196_196" id="Footnote_196_196"></a><a href="#FNanchor_196_196"><span class="label">[196]</span></a> "La question que j'appelerai sociale est la premi&#232;re qui se
presente &#224; mon
esprit ... Je dis done, que, au point de vue sociale, la diminution de la taxe
des
lettres, loin d'&#234;tre favorable uniquement aux n&#233;gociants, aux gros banquiers,
comme on l'a suppos&#233; toute &#224; l'heure, sera favorable aussi au plus grand nombre
des citoyens ...
</p><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">
"Quant &#224; l'avantage moral qui r&#233;sulterait de l'accroissement de ces
correspondances,
je crois inutile de m'appesantir sur ce c&#244;t&#233; de la question. Est-il
douteux, en effet, que les enfants auront toujours &#224; profiter des conseils d'un
p&#232;re, d'une m&#232;re? Est-il douteux que les liens de famille so resserreront
davantage,
lorsque les r&#233;lations seront plus fr&#233;quentes?"&mdash;Le Citoyen Goudchaux,
Assembl&#233;e Nationale, 24 ao&#251;t 1848 (ibid.).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_197_197" id="Footnote_197_197"></a><a href="#FNanchor_197_197"><span class="label">[197]</span></a> The total is made up thus:&mdash;
</p>

<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0"
summary="Breakdown of numbers of letters in France prior to reform of 1849.">
<tr><td align="left">Local letters in towns of the departments</td><td align="left">14&frac12;</td><td align="center">millions</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Local letters in Paris</td><td align="left">10</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Foreign letters</td><td align="left">&nbsp;7&frac12;</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Letters passing between different towns</td><td align="left" class="tdbbs">23</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left"></td><td align="left">55</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
</table></div>



</div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_198_198" id="Footnote_198_198"></a><a href="#FNanchor_198_198"><span class="label">[198]</span></a>
See <span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><i>Le Moniteur Universel, Journal Officiel de la R&#233;publique
Fran&#231;aise</i>, ao&#251;t
1848.</span></p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_199_199" id="Footnote_199_199"></a><a href="#FNanchor_199_199"><span class="label">[199]</span></a> "Je concevrais quo le Gouvernement &#233;tabl&#238;t un imp&#244;t sur tout
autre chose
pour favoriser celle-l&#224;, mais qu'il &#233;tablisse un imp&#244;t, sur celle-l&#224;, cela me
parait contradictoire. Tous les jours nous votons des taxes pour faciliter la
locomotion des hommes et des choses, nous construisons des routes, des canaux,
des chemins de fer dont nous livrons gratuitement l'usage au public, et ensuite
nous entravons par des taxes la transmission des id&#233;es! Je dis quo le
Gouvernement
ne doit pas faire des profits sur ce service. C'est l&#224; un principe qui s'est
&#233;tendu sur presque toute l'Europe. En Angleterre on est compl&#232;tement entr&#233;
dans cette voie. Aux Etats-Unis le Gouvernement fait des frais et des frais
&#233;normes pour en &#233;pargner &#224; ceux qui veulent correspondre."&mdash;Le Citoyen
Fr&#233;d&#233;ric Bastiat, Assembl&#233;e Nationale, 24 ao&#251;t 1848, ibid.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_200_200" id="Footnote_200_200"></a><a href="#FNanchor_200_200"><span class="label">[200]</span></a> "Les frais de la poste sont &#224; peu pr&#232;s de 30 millions. Qu'est-ce
que la
poste nous porte? Qu'est-ce qu'elle distribue? Elle distribue trois natures
d'objets; d'abord une multitude de journaux, et remarquez-le bien, ces journaux
sont soumis &#224; la m&#234;me l&#233;gislation que je propose aujourd'hui pour
les lettres; car, telle est la puissance de l'habitude, ce qui vous a paru fort
extraordinaire se pratique sous nos yeux, tous les jours pour les journaux;
et cependant aujourd'hui vous trouvez singulier qu'on le propose pour les
lettres.
La poste transporte done des journaux dont le poids, si je ne me trompe, est
de 900 kilogrammes.
</p><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">
"Elle transporte ensuite toutes les d&#233;p&#234;ches administratives dont le poids
d&#233;passe 1,000 &#224; 1,100 kilogrammes.
</p><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">
"Enfin elle transporte les lettres dont le poids n'est pas &#233;gal ni &#224; celui des
journaux, ni &#224; celui des d&#233;p&#234;ches administratives.
</p><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">
"En cons&#233;quence, si vous r&#233;partissez les 30 millions ou 35 millions, si vous
voulez, sur les trois services, vous verrez qu'il ne faut pas mettre au compte
des
lettres plus d'une douzaine de millions de francs.
</p><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">
"Eh bien, si toutes les lettres &#233;taient tax&#233;es &#224; 5 centimes, il n'y a pas de
doute que les 12 ou 15 millions de frais seraient parfaitement couverts."&mdash;Le
Citoyen Fr&#233;d&#233;ric Bastiat, ibid.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_201_201" id="Footnote_201_201"></a><a href="#FNanchor_201_201"><span class="label">[201]</span></a>
Edgar Bonnet, <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Importance, des Postes et T&#233;l&#233;graphes au point
de vue social et
&#233;conomique</i>, Paris, 1891.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_202_202" id="Footnote_202_202"></a><a href="#FNanchor_202_202"><span class="label">[202]</span></a>
M. Caillaux, Assembl&#233;e Nationale, 23 ao&#251;t 1871 (<i>Journal
Officiel de la
R&#233;publique Fran&#231;aise</i>).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_203_203" id="Footnote_203_203"></a><a href="#FNanchor_203_203"><span class="label">[203]</span></a> P. Jaccottey, op. cit., p. 298.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_204_204" id="Footnote_204_204"></a><a href="#FNanchor_204_204"><span class="label">[204]</span></a>
See <span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><i>Rapport sur l'Administration des Postes</i>, pr&#233;sent&#233; au
Ministre des
Finances par M. L&#233;on Riant, Directeur-G&#233;n&#233;ral, octobre 1877.</span></p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_205_205" id="Footnote_205_205"></a><a href="#FNanchor_205_205"><span class="label">[205]</span></a> "Toute commune doit &#234;tre desservie une fois par jour, au moins
(<i>loi du 21
avril, 1832, art. 47</i>) sauf exception temporaire en cas de force majeure, et
dont il
est rendu compte au directeur du d&#233;partement."&mdash;<i>Instruction g&#233;n&#233;rale sur le
service des Postes et des T&#233;l&#233;graphes</i>, Paris, 1905, vol. iv. p. 453, Instr.
5316.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_206_206" id="Footnote_206_206"></a><a href="#FNanchor_206_206"><span class="label">[206]</span></a> It must further be borne in mind that France was less developed
industrially.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_207_207" id="Footnote_207_207"></a><a href="#FNanchor_207_207"><span class="label">[207]</span></a> "Nous avons jug&#233; cette r&#233;forme insuffisante; elle ne serait pas
de nature &#224;
donner une satisfaction r&#233;elle &#224; notre industrie et &#224; acc&#233;l&#233;rer suffisamment le
mouvement de la correspondance. On pouvait discuter peut-&#234;tre l'opportunit&#233;
de la mesure; mais d&#232;s que cette mesure est reconnue n&#233;cessaire, elle doit &#234;tre
compl&#232;te, de mani&#232;re &#224; produire tous ses effets....
</p><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">
"La r&#233;forme &#224; 20 centimes entra&#238;nerait done un d&#233;ficit total de 12 millions;
et celle &#224; 15 centimes, de 27 millions; le rapprochement de ces deux chiffres
suffit &#224; d&#233;montrer que le sacrifice n'est pas assez consid&#233;rable pour h&#233;siter &#224;
faire une r&#233;forme compl&#232;te en r&#233;duisant imm&#233;diatement la taxe &#224; 15
centimes."&mdash;<i>Rapport
portant fixation du Budget g&#233;n&#233;rale</i>, d&#233;pos&#233; le 31 juillet 1877.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_208_208" id="Footnote_208_208"></a><a href="#FNanchor_208_208"><span class="label">[208]</span></a>
<span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><i>Rapport portant fixation du Budget g&#233;n&#233;rale</i>, Chambre des
D&#233;put&#233;s,</span> 1898,
No. 498.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_209_209" id="Footnote_209_209"></a><a href="#FNanchor_209_209"><span class="label">[209]</span></a> Their remarks are characteristic of the attitude adopted towards
the reform.
They said:&mdash;
</p><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">
"L'adoption de cette proposition de M. Chassaing aurait pour effet de cr&#233;er
dans le Budget de 1898 un d&#233;ficit qu'il ne parait gu&#232;re possible d'&#233;valuer &#224;
moins
de 38 millions. Quel qu'il puisse &#234;tre, dans la situation actuelle, il serait
indispensable
de le combler et l'on ne pourrait pour cela recourir qu'&#224; des ressources
nouvelles. L'auteur de la proposition n'en indique pas. II se borne &#224; demander
l'abandon d'une recette sans dire par quoi cet abandon serait compens&#233;. Sera-ce
&#224; l'imp&#244;t qu'il faudra s'adresser? Mais ce n'est pas seulement d'une diminution
de recette qu'il s'agira. On a vu qu'une augmentation de d&#233;pense &#233;tait le
corollaire
imm&#233;diat de la proposition, car plus prompt et plus sensible sera l'effet de la
r&#233;duction de tarif, plus pressante sera la n&#233;cessit&#233; d'ouvrir de nouveaux
bureaux,
de cr&#233;er de nouveaux courriers, de renforcer le personnel charg&#233; de la
manipulation
et de la distribution, plus t&#244;t s'imposera l'obligation de r&#233;organiser le
service
de Paris.
</p><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">
"C'est l&#224; une &#x0153;uvre ou l'initiative et l'intervention du Gouvemement sont
n&#233;cessaires.
</p><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">
"Mais, en tout cas, et pour ce qui concerne la Commission du Budget de 1898,
un abandon de recettes de 21 millions ayant lui-m&#234;me pour consequence une
augmentation de d&#233;pense de 17 millions ne lui ont pas paru
admissibles."&mdash;<i>Rapport
portant fixation du Budget g&#233;n&#233;rale</i>, Chambre des D&#233;put&#233;s, 1897, No. 2701, p.
49.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_210_210" id="Footnote_210_210"></a><a href="#FNanchor_210_210"><span class="label">[210]</span></a>
<span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><i>Rapport sur les conditions du Fonctionnement de
l'Administration des Postes
et des T&#233;l&#233;graphes</i>, par A. Millerand, le Ministre du Commerce, de
l'Industrie, des
Postes, et des T&#233;l&#233;graphes,</span> 12 May 1900.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_211_211" id="Footnote_211_211"></a><a href="#FNanchor_211_211"><span class="label">[211]</span></a> "En tout cas les r&#233;sultats de l'exp&#233;rience faite &#224; l'&#233;tranger
prouvent que l'on
peut abaisser la taxe des cartes postales jusqu'&#224; la moiti&#233; de celle des lettres
simple sans craindre que les cartes fassent concurrence aux lettres et que la
g&#233;n&#233;ralisation de ce mode de correspondance &#224; prix r&#233;duit am&#232;ne une diminution
des revenus de la poste."&mdash;M. Millerand, op. cit.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_212_212" id="Footnote_212_212"></a><a href="#FNanchor_212_212"><span class="label">[212]</span></a> Ibid.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_213_213" id="Footnote_213_213"></a><a href="#FNanchor_213_213"><span class="label">[213]</span></a> On such packets the rate was 1 centime for each 5 grammes. M.
Millerand
was of opinion that any rate less than 5 centimes involved a loss to the net
revenue. In 1877 it had been estimated that the average cost of dealing with
a postal packet (taking all classes into consideration) was 8 centimes: in 1889
it
had been estimated at 5.5 centimes. The Budget Commission of 1901 estimated
the cost at 4 centimes.&mdash;See <span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><i>Rapport portant fixation du Budget g&#233;n&#233;rale</i>,
Chambre
des D&#233;put&#233;s,</span> 1901, No. 1866.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_214_214" id="Footnote_214_214"></a><a href="#FNanchor_214_214"><span class="label">[214]</span></a> "C'est tomber dans la banalit&#233; de dire que la France n'occupe pas
dans le
monde, au point de vue du trafic postal, un rang correspondant &#224; l'importance
de sa population, de son commerce, de son Industrie, et de sa haute
civilisation."&mdash;Ibid.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_215_215" id="Footnote_215_215"></a><a href="#FNanchor_215_215"><span class="label">[215]</span></a> "Depuis de longues ann&#233;es, les chambres de commerce et la Presse
toute
enti&#232;re r&#233;claimaient une r&#233;forme depuis quelque temps r&#233;alis&#233;e dans la plupart
des pays &#233;trangers. Mais le souci de l'&#233;quilibre budg&#233;taire avait toujours fait
ajourner la r&#233;duction &#224; 10 centimes de la taxe des lettres."&mdash;Ibid., S&#233;nat,
1906,
No. 477.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_216_216" id="Footnote_216_216"></a><a href="#FNanchor_216_216"><span class="label">[216]</span></a> On the proposal at the Universal Postal Congress of 1907 to
increase the
weight unit for international letters, the Budget Report (<span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Chambre des D&#233;put&#233;s</span>,
Session 1909, No. 2767) contained the following:&mdash;
</p><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">
"Alors que tous nos voisins ou presque tous s'&#233;taient conform&#233;s &#224; partir du
1<sup>er</sup> octobre 1907, aux indications du Congr&#232;s de l'Union postale universelle, il
&#233;tait humiliant pour la France de montrer que des pr&#233;occupations purement
fiscales l'emp&#234;chaient d'adopter, avec le m&#234;me empressement que l'Allemagne,
la Belgique, l'Angleterre ou la Suisse, la r&#233;forme."</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_217_217" id="Footnote_217_217"></a><a href="#FNanchor_217_217"><span class="label">[217]</span></a>
<i>Rapport portant fixation du Budget g&#233;n&#233;rale</i>, S&#233;nat, 1908,
No. 340. Ibid.,
Chambre des D&#233;put&#233;s, 1908, No. 2032.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_218_218" id="Footnote_218_218"></a><a href="#FNanchor_218_218"><span class="label">[218]</span></a> "Il n'en coute pas plus pour timbrer, trier, transporter et
distribuer un objet
pesant qu'un objet l&#233;ger. Tout au plus doit ou tenir compte de l'encombrement
produit par les objets volumineux et du surcro&#238;t de travail qu'occasionne le
contr&#244;le obligatoire du poids des objets pesantes, en graduant les tarifs
suivant
une progression nettement d&#233;croissante par rapport au poids."&mdash;Ibid.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_219_219" id="Footnote_219_219"></a><a href="#FNanchor_219_219"><span class="label">[219]</span></a>
See table of financial effect, <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Rapport portant fixation du
Budget g&#233;n&#233;rale</i>,
S&#233;nat, 1910, No. 115.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_220_220" id="Footnote_220_220"></a><a href="#FNanchor_220_220"><span class="label">[220]</span></a> Prior to the date of the establishment of the Imperial German
Post Office,
the text deals more particularly with the rate in Prussia. For a sketch of the
<span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Thurn</span> and <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Taxis</span> posts in Germany see <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">infra</i>, Appendix A, pp. <a href="#Page_349">349</a> ff.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_221_221" id="Footnote_221_221"></a><a href="#FNanchor_221_221"><span class="label">[221]</span></a>
H. von Stephan, <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Geschichte der preussischen Post</i>, Berlin,
1859, p. 12.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_222_222" id="Footnote_222_222"></a><a href="#FNanchor_222_222"><span class="label">[222]</span></a>
F. Haass, <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Die Post und der Charakter ihrer Eink&#252;nfte</i>,
Stuttgart, 1890, p. 92.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_223_223" id="Footnote_223_223"></a><a href="#FNanchor_223_223"><span class="label">[223]</span></a> F. Haass, op. cit., p. 94.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_224_224" id="Footnote_224_224"></a><a href="#FNanchor_224_224"><span class="label">[224]</span></a> H. von Stephan, op. cit., p. 15.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_225_225" id="Footnote_225_225"></a><a href="#FNanchor_225_225"><span class="label">[225]</span></a> Ibid., p. 17.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_226_226" id="Footnote_226_226"></a><a href="#FNanchor_226_226"><span class="label">[226]</span></a> 1 German mile=7.5 kilometres. Distances are given throughout in
German miles.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_227_227" id="Footnote_227_227"></a><a href="#FNanchor_227_227"><span class="label">[227]</span></a> H. von Stephan, op. cit., p. 62.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_228_228" id="Footnote_228_228"></a><a href="#FNanchor_228_228"><span class="label">[228]</span></a> Ibid., p. 18.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><a name="Footnote_229_229" id="Footnote_229_229"></a><a href="#FNanchor_229_229"><span class="label">[229]</span></a> "Dass unter solchen Umst&#228;nden bei Ankunft der Posten namentlich
an
bedeutenderen Orten ein grosser Zusammenlauf von Menschen stattfand, ist
begreiflich. Auch finden wir mehrere Rescripte wider das tumultuarische
Treiben des Publicums vor den Posth&#228;usern."&mdash;Ibid., p. 61.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_230_230" id="Footnote_230_230"></a><a href="#FNanchor_230_230"><span class="label">[230]</span></a> In 1662 the posts yielded 7,000 thalers surplus (revenue 17,000
thalers,
expenditure 10,000 thalers); in 1672, 10,433 thalers (revenue 24,539 thalers,
expenditure
14,106 thalers); in 1682, 29,058 thalers (revenue 51,959 thalers,
expenditure 22,901 thalers); and in 1688, 39,213 thalers (revenue 79,971 thalers,
expenditure 40,758 thalers). The net revenue of the posts was generally devoted
to the payment of State officials, to the improvement of means of communication
(building of canals, etc.), and to beneficence. For example, the Elector,
during the severe illness of his first wife, made a vow to found an almshouse
and ordered 6,000 thalers yearly to be assigned for its support. Of this sum
2,000 thalers were laid on the post revenues.&mdash;Ibid., p. 60.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_231_231" id="Footnote_231_231"></a><a href="#FNanchor_231_231"><span class="label">[231]</span></a> A groschen was roughly the equivalent of a penny. The value of
money was
then about four times its present value.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_232_232" id="Footnote_232_232"></a><a href="#FNanchor_232_232"><span class="label">[232]</span></a> The price of a bushel of rye in Berlin, which from 1740 to 1756
had varied
from 23 groschen to a thaler, rose to 4 thalers.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_233_233" id="Footnote_233_233"></a><a href="#FNanchor_233_233"><span class="label">[233]</span></a> The edict of the 27th January proclaiming the higher rates
remarked that
the raising of the letter rate would be detrimental to the public and
prejudicial
to the credit of the service, and that "in spite of the high price of corn and
the
depreciation of money, raising of the letter rate could not be thought of, and
that in the neighbouring States this measure, however soon it might be set
aside,
had worked to their disadvantage."&mdash;H. von Stephan, op. cit., p. 292.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_234_234" id="Footnote_234_234"></a><a href="#FNanchor_234_234"><span class="label">[234]</span></a> "The encouragement of a particular business or manufacture in a
particular
place; the better opposing of the competition of a neighbouring route;
tenderness
for existing difference in newly acquired districts; the difference in the
price of corn in a province, and at an earlier date even of money, weight,
length
of the miles, as also, in the case of travelling post charges, the season of the
year; all these circumstances were often brought into consideration in the
fixing of postage rates."&mdash;Ibid., p. 296.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_235_235" id="Footnote_235_235"></a><a href="#FNanchor_235_235"><span class="label">[235]</span></a> The ascertainment of the direct distances was commenced in 1823.
It was
completed in a year and a half (including two revisions), and a map of distances
prepared. There were 1,386,506 distances to measure, and the measuring was
done by land surveyors. The distances so measured were tabulated for practical
use by postal officials.&mdash;H. von Stephan, op. cit., p. 746, n. 3; Moch,
<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Archiv f&#252;r
Post und Telegraphie</i>, 1893, p. 2.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_236_236" id="Footnote_236_236"></a><a href="#FNanchor_236_236"><span class="label">[236]</span></a> The rates were to be rounded up. One or 2 pfennigs were to be
counted as
3 pfennigs, 4 or 5 pfennigs as 6 pfennigs, 7 or 8 pfennigs as 9 pfennigs, and
10 or 11 pfennigs as 1 silver groschen.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_237_237" id="Footnote_237_237"></a><a href="#FNanchor_237_237"><span class="label">[237]</span></a> H. von Stephan, op. cit., pp. 760 and 761.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_238_238" id="Footnote_238_238"></a><a href="#FNanchor_238_238"><span class="label">[238]</span></a> This does not take into account the normal yearly increase, which
was
120,000 thalers under the old rates. If that be taken into account there was
still
a loss in 1847. Thus:&mdash;
</p>




<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Loss (in thalers) of postage revenue, adjusted for expected annual increase, Prussia 1844 to 1847.">
<tr><th align="center"> Year.</th><th align="center">Probable Gross Postage<br /> Receipts under Old<br /> Rates.</th><th align="center">Actual Yield.</th><th align="center">Loss.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="center"> 1844</td><td align="center">4,765,000</td><td align="center">4,628,133</td><td align="center">136,867</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center"> 1845</td><td align="center">4,885,000</td><td align="center">4,325,570</td><td align="center">559,430</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center"> 1846</td><td align="center">5,005,000</td><td align="center">4,514,338</td><td align="center">490,662</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center"> 1847</td><td align="center">5,125,000</td><td align="center">4,771,392</td><td align="center">353,608</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right" colspan="4">&mdash;Ibid., p. 762.</td></tr>
</table></div>




</div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_239_239" id="Footnote_239_239"></a><a href="#FNanchor_239_239"><span class="label">[239]</span></a> Ibid., p. 763.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><a name="Footnote_240_240" id="Footnote_240_240"></a><a href="#FNanchor_240_240"><span class="label">[240]</span></a> "Die preussische Postverwaltung war bei Einf&#252;hrung der
weitgreifenden
Taxerm&#228;ssigungen mit grosser Vorsicht und mit weiser Berechnung aller in
Betracht kommenden Vorst&#228;nde schrittweise zu Werke gegangen und hatte
die Erleichterungen ohne bedeutende Opfer aus der Postkasse erkauft."&mdash;Moch,
<i>Archiv f&#252;r Post und Telegraphie</i>, 1893, p. 40.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_241_241" id="Footnote_241_241"></a><a href="#FNanchor_241_241"><span class="label">[241]</span></a> Regulation of 21st December 1800.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_242_242" id="Footnote_242_242"></a><a href="#FNanchor_242_242"><span class="label">[242]</span></a> Law of 21st March 1861.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_243_243" id="Footnote_243_243"></a><a href="#FNanchor_243_243"><span class="label">[243]</span></a>
Moch, <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Archiv f&#252;r Post und Telegraphie</i>, 1893, p. 42.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_244_244" id="Footnote_244_244"></a><a href="#FNanchor_244_244"><span class="label">[244]</span></a> Ibid.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_245_245" id="Footnote_245_245"></a><a href="#FNanchor_245_245"><span class="label">[245]</span></a> Law of 16th September 1862.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_246_246" id="Footnote_246_246"></a><a href="#FNanchor_246_246"><span class="label">[246]</span></a> Law of 16th February 1867. See <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">infra</i>, Appendix, p. <a href="#Page_355">355</a>.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_247_247" id="Footnote_247_247"></a><a href="#FNanchor_247_247"><span class="label">[247]</span></a> Prussia, Hanover, the two Mecklenburgs, Oldenburg, Brunswick,
Saxony,
Hamburg, Bremen, Lubeck, and the <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Thurn</span> and <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Taxis</span> posts.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_248_248" id="Footnote_248_248"></a><a href="#FNanchor_248_248"><span class="label">[248]</span></a>
Moch, <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Archiv f&#252;r Post und Telegraphie</i>, 1893, p. 44.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_249_249" id="Footnote_249_249"></a><a href="#FNanchor_249_249"><span class="label">[249]</span></a> Law of 28th October 1871.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_250_250" id="Footnote_250_250"></a><a href="#FNanchor_250_250"><span class="label">[250]</span></a>
For 1906 it has been estimated at 41,693,017 M. P. <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Ullrich</span>,
<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Die Finanzen
der Reichs-Post- und Telegraphen-Verwaltung</i>, Stettin, 1913, p. 54, n. 5.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_251_251" id="Footnote_251_251"></a><a href="#FNanchor_251_251"><span class="label">[251]</span></a>
J. <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Jung</span>, <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Entwickelung des deutschen Post- und Telegraphenwesen
in den
letzten 25 Jahren</i>, Leipzig, 1893, p. 45.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_252_252" id="Footnote_252_252"></a><a href="#FNanchor_252_252"><span class="label">[252]</span></a> The following table (J. Jung, loc. cit.) shows the increase in
the number of
rural deliverers:&mdash;
</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Increase in the number of rural deliverers in Germany between 1868 and 1891.">
<tr><td align="center">1868</td><td align="center">1870</td><td align="center">1875</td><td align="center">1880</td><td align="center">1885</td><td align="center">1891</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">8,021</td><td align="center">8,334</td><td align="center">11,405</td><td align="center">11,480</td><td align="center">20,386</td><td align="center">25,649</td></tr>
</table></div>


</div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_253_253" id="Footnote_253_253"></a><a href="#FNanchor_253_253"><span class="label">[253]</span></a> In a number of cases the deliverer was provided with a vehicle
for the sake of
speed, and worked out from the railway. In 1898 there were 2,365 such
services.&mdash;<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Handw&#246;rterbuch der Staatswissenschaft</i>, Jena, 1901, p. 137.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_254_254" id="Footnote_254_254"></a><a href="#FNanchor_254_254"><span class="label">[254]</span></a> "There was a profession of 'news writers,' or correspondents, who
collected
such scraps of information as they could from various sources, and for a
subscription
of three or four pounds per annum sent them every post-day to their
employers in the country."&mdash;A. Andrews, <i>The History of British
Journalism</i>,
London, 1859, vol. i. p. 14.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_255_255" id="Footnote_255_255"></a><a href="#FNanchor_255_255"><span class="label">[255]</span></a> E.g., "To Mr. Neale, Deale, 27 Nov. 1674.
</p><p>
" ... You should give me a Constant Accompt (as m<sup>r</sup> Lodge was wont to doe)
of all Newes that happens in your Parts. It is Expected from me at Whitehall,
and much wondered at, y<sup>t</sup> my officers doe not give me y<sup>e</sup> first, and best
Accompt
of all that Passes, all Newes, Comeing (Probably) first to theire hands. I Pray
be
Carefull, and punctuall herein hereafter. I shall be ready, in all things (as I
have
bin) to shew myself
</p>
<p><br />
Y<sup>rs</sup>, &amp;c."<br />
</p>
<p>
&mdash;Documents from Peover Hall, <i>British Official Records</i>.
</p><p>
"The Post Office Packets in those days were carriers of news as well as of the
mails. The officers had instructions to record most carefully in their journals
full details of any events of public importance occurring in the countries which
they visited. These journals, which frequently contained news later and more
authentic than any which had yet reached London, were sent up from Falmouth
immediately after the arrival of the Packets, and lay at the Post Office open to
the inspection of the merchants."&mdash;A. H. Norway, <i>History of the Post Office
Packet Service</i>, London, 1895, p. 37.
</p><p>
"An old instruction was renewed in 1812, that all postmasters should transmit
to me (the Secretary), for the information of his Majesty's Postmaster-General,
an
immediate account of all remarkable occurrences within their districts, that the
same may be communicated, if necessary, to his Majesty's principal Secretaries
of
State. This has not been invariably attended to, and I am commanded by his
Lordship
to say, that henceforward it will be expected of every Deputy."&mdash;Cited (without
giving source) by J. W. Hyde, <i>A Hundred Years by Post</i>, London, 1891, p.
91.
</p><p>
"The mail-coach it was that distributed over the face of the land, like the
opening of apocalyptic vials, the heartshaking news of Trafalgar, of Salamanca,
of Vittoria, of Waterloo."&mdash;De Quincey, <i>The English Mail-Coach</i>.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_256_256" id="Footnote_256_256"></a><a href="#FNanchor_256_256"><span class="label">[256]</span></a> "As it seems clear that the 'Remonstrance' (<i>The Remonstrance
and Address
of the Army</i>) was framed by Clarges, Henry Muddiman must have settled its
wording and final form, as he did that of many other documents.... For this
reason, after the Restoration, he became sole privileged journalist of the
kingdom,
and was granted the privilege of free postage for his letters like the officers
of
State."&mdash;J. B. Williams, <i>A History of English Journalism</i>, London, 1908,
p. 176.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_257_257" id="Footnote_257_257"></a><a href="#FNanchor_257_257"><span class="label">[257]</span></a> <i>Calendar of State Papers, Charles II</i>, vol. 139, No. 61.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_258_258" id="Footnote_258_258"></a><a href="#FNanchor_258_258"><span class="label">[258]</span></a> J. B. Williams, <i>A History of English Journalism</i>, p. 190.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_259_259" id="Footnote_259_259"></a><a href="#FNanchor_259_259"><span class="label">[259]</span></a> <i>Calendar of State Papers</i> (<i>Domestic Series</i>), 1665-6,
p. viii.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_260_260" id="Footnote_260_260"></a><a href="#FNanchor_260_260"><span class="label">[260]</span></a> "I find that the South Wales maile is much retarded in your
Stage; particularly
that yo<sup>r</sup> riding servant calles at severall places by y<sup>e</sup> way; and that you
allow him noe other wages, but what hee getts (by a <i>Gazette</i> News-letter,
w<sup>ch</sup> you
give him y<sup>e</sup> benefitt of) from severall Gentlemen near y<sup>e</sup> Roade, and this
hinders
y<sup>e</sup> due course of the post, not only to y<sup>e</sup> Damage and discreditt of y<sup>e</sup> office,
but
to y<sup>e</sup> prejudice of publique businesse; it is much complained of and I canot
longer
dispence with it; wherefore I Give you this freindly admonicon and remaine
</p>
<p><br />
Yo<sup>r</sup>, etc.<br />
</p>
<p>
Mr. Davyes, Feb. 8th, 1672."&mdash;Documents from Peover Hall, <i>British Official
Records</i>.
</p><p>
"I am clearly of your opinion, that Hereford and the Hay is y<sup>e</sup> best roade for
the Pembroke Maile, the onely difficulty will be to bring you and Mr. Phillpotts
to reason....
</p><p>
"I pray consider these 2 Points, that y<sup>e</sup> Hay being in your Branch will
much Encrease your share, and it is easier to send thither than to
Abergaveny&mdash;if
you will joyne Issue in this Proposall I will give y<sup>e</sup> Contrey y<sup>e</sup> Satisfaction
to turne the Roade that Way; and by y<sup>e</sup> tyme I have your answer I shall
be ready, to give directions for the Change; you must provide a fitt person, to
keepe the office at Hay and for his Encouragem<sup>t</sup> I will send him a
<i>Gazette</i> by every
Post, few of y<sup>e</sup> By offices expect more, and some make great Suite and would
pay money for the Imployment. I pray close w<sup>th</sup> me herein, being desirous to
Continue&mdash;I pray give me your opinion of sending y<sup>e</sup> Maile into Wales 3 tymes
a weeke, as I doe to all other places.
</p>
<p><br />
I am, Y<sup>rs</sup>, etc.<br />
</p>
<p>
"Mr. Awbrey, Brecon, 1st April, 1675."&mdash;Documents from Peover Hall,
<i>British Official Records</i>.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_261_261" id="Footnote_261_261"></a><a href="#FNanchor_261_261"><span class="label">[261]</span></a> H. Joyce, <i>History of the Post Office</i>, p. 50.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_262_262" id="Footnote_262_262"></a><a href="#FNanchor_262_262"><span class="label">[262]</span></a> <i>Tenth Report of the Commissioners on Fees and Emoluments</i>,
1788, p. 28.
</p><p>
"For Post Office purposes the kingdom was divided into six roads&mdash;the
North Road, the Chester or Holyhead Road, the Western Road, the Kent Road,
and the Roads to Bristol and to Yarmouth; and these roads were presided over
by a corresponding number of clerks in London, whose duty it was to sort
the letters and to tax them with the proper amount of postage."&mdash;H. Joyce,
ibid., p. 47; cf. <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">infra</i>, Appendix B, p. <a href="#Page_404">404</a>.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_263_263" id="Footnote_263_263"></a><a href="#FNanchor_263_263"><span class="label">[263]</span></a> <i>Eighteenth Report of Commissioners of Revenue Inquiry</i>,
1829, Appx., p. 486.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_264_264" id="Footnote_264_264"></a><a href="#FNanchor_264_264"><span class="label">[264]</span></a> "That the six Clerks of the Road are also allowed to frank
newspapers from
the London office.
</p><p>
"That the newspapers franked by them are not included in any of the
accounts of Deductions in respect of Franks. That the profits arising from their
franking newspapers may amount to &#163;3,000 or &#163;4,000 p. ann., and that a
considerable allowance is made thereout to the Comptroller, Deputy-Comptroller,
By Night Clerk and six assistants; all of whom as well as the six Clerks of the
Roads would without such advantage be very insufficiently provided
for."&mdash;Evidence
of Anthony Todd, Secretary to the Post Office. <i>Report of Committee
appointed to enquire into the several frauds and abuses in relation to the
sending or receiving of letters and parcels free from the Duty of Postage</i>
(<i>Commons
Journal</i>, March 28, 1764).
</p><p>
"The Profits derived by the Clerks of the Road from the privilege of sending
Newspapers into the Country free of Postage, were so considerable that they
were not only able to make a good Provision for their Families but also to pay
thereout an Annual Sum of &#163;1,300 to Officers and Clerks in this Dept. in Aid
of their Salaries, which on that Account were proportionately small from the
Public; and this Situation of Clerk of the Roads was looked up to as the Reward
of their long and arduous Labour in the subordinate Stations of the Office.
Twenty years before, of the sum of &#163;8,660 paid to the 39 Officers of the Inland
Dept., &#163;2,060 was paid by the Public and &#163;6,600 from the profits on the
circulation
of newspapers."&mdash;<i>Tenth Report of the Commissioners on Fees and
Emoluments</i>,
1788, p. 28.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_265_265" id="Footnote_265_265"></a><a href="#FNanchor_265_265"><span class="label">[265]</span></a> 4 Geo. III, cap. 24.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_266_266" id="Footnote_266_266"></a><a href="#FNanchor_266_266"><span class="label">[266]</span></a> "The Produce of this Privilege has long been decreasing, and is
now reduced
to one-third the above sum from the operation of an Act of 1764 by which
members of both Houses were empowered to have Newspapers, Votes, and all
other printed Parliamentary Papers, sent by post in their Names, free from
Postage, upon a written Notice of the Direction of such Papers being sent to
the Postmaster-General by the respective Members, whose names were to be
used instead of the former Mode of franking Newspapers the same as Letters.
The Printers, News Sellers, and others, availing themselves of this Privilege,
have obtained numerous Orders, readily granted, under the Persuasion of
increasing
the Stamp Revenue. The present Number of Orders in the Office is
6,751, and the Number of Newspapers sent weekly by the Post in Consequence
thereof is 47,017; these Dealers are enabled to supply their Customers in the
Country at a cheaper Rate than the Clerks in the Office can, who are loaded with
Out Payments from their Profits, and are obliged to purchase their Papers at an
advanced Price from an Officer appointed by the Postmaster-General to supply
them."&mdash;<i>Tenth Report of the Commissioners on Fees and Emoluments</i>, 1788,
p. 29.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_267_267" id="Footnote_267_267"></a><a href="#FNanchor_267_267"><span class="label">[267]</span></a> A. Andrews, <i>The History of British Journalism</i>, London,
1859, vol. i.
pp. 210-11.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_268_268" id="Footnote_268_268"></a><a href="#FNanchor_268_268"><span class="label">[268]</span></a> "The Postmaster-General, sensible of this Diminution, lately
directed the
Payments thereout to the other Officers and Clerks in the Office to be
discontinued,
and reimbursed some of them out of the Revenue; but this is not the
only Expence to which the Public is subjected by the Increase of these Orders.
The Number of Newspapers to be forwarded every Night is now so great, that
... a separate Office is allotted ... and 18 Extra Persons are employed, at an
Annual Expence of &#163;400, to perform the Duty of sorting and packing up the
Newspapers; besides it is in Proof that Letters and written Papers are
frequently
enclosed in them, by which the Revenue is defrauded, without a
Possibility of Prevention, while the present Mode continues; as the number is
by far too great to admit of a general Search for Enclosures."&mdash;<i>Tenth Report
of the Commissioners on Fees and Emoluments</i>, 1788, p. 29.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_269_269" id="Footnote_269_269"></a><a href="#FNanchor_269_269"><span class="label">[269]</span></a> 6 Geo. IV, cap. 68, &#167; 10.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_270_270" id="Footnote_270_270"></a><a href="#FNanchor_270_270"><span class="label">[270]</span></a> "Was there no way by which, without the necessity of constant
contention,
private men might be prevented from using the Press to make their opinions
public? The pamphleteers were not rich, but they were often persons of
education,
and not penniless. When only a few copies of their writings were wanted
they could pay for them, but now that reading was become more common, and
that great numbers of copies were printed, the cost had, to a great extent, to
be
paid by the readers. If these sheets could be taxed their distribution might
become difficult, and when any one attempted to evade the tax he could be
punished, not as a libeller, but as a smuggler."&mdash;Collet Dobson Collet,
<i>History
of the Taxes on Knowledge</i>, London, 1899, vol. i. p. 7.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_271_271" id="Footnote_271_271"></a><a href="#FNanchor_271_271"><span class="label">[271]</span></a> <i>Chambers's Encyclop&#230;dia</i>, London, 1908, vol. vii. p. 473.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_272_272" id="Footnote_272_272"></a><a href="#FNanchor_272_272"><span class="label">[272]</span></a> "There was no doubt but that, in the first instance, the stamp
duty upon
newspapers had been imposed for political purposes."&mdash;Attorney-General,
26th March 1855, <i>Parl. Debates</i> (<i>Commons</i>), vol. cxxxvii. col.
1129.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_273_273" id="Footnote_273_273"></a><a href="#FNanchor_273_273"><span class="label">[273]</span></a> "Whereas many papers containing observations upon Public Acts
tending to
excite the hatred of the public to the constitution of this realm, and also
vilifying our holy religion, have lately been published in great numbers, and
at a very small price, and it is expedient that the same should be
restrained."&mdash;Preamble
of the "Six Acts," 1819.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_274_274" id="Footnote_274_274"></a><a href="#FNanchor_274_274"><span class="label">[274]</span></a> "Sir Francis Freeling states that he succeeds to the enjoyment of
the
privilege of franking which had previously appertained to the situation of
the Comptroller of the Inland Office, when he held the situation of Principal
and Resident Surveyor, and that it was deemed a measure of economy to
provide for the remuneration of this officer by these means in lieu of
salary."&mdash;<i>Eighteenth
Report of the Commissioners of Revenue Inquiry, Post Office</i>,
1829, p. 26.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_275_275" id="Footnote_275_275"></a><a href="#FNanchor_275_275"><span class="label">[275]</span></a> About 12 millions a year. Ibid., p. 464.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_276_276" id="Footnote_276_276"></a><a href="#FNanchor_276_276"><span class="label">[276]</span></a> H. Joyce, <i>History of the Post Office</i>, p. 419.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_277_277" id="Footnote_277_277"></a><a href="#FNanchor_277_277"><span class="label">[277]</span></a> "These laws (the Six Acts) were specially directed&mdash;not against
the morning
Newspapers, which had been cajoled or frightened into comparative silence, or
shared in the then general feeling in favour of a 'strong Government'&mdash;but
against the Radical writers and speakers, 'Cobbett, Wooler, Watson, Hunt,' as
Byron reminds us, all of whom had contributed, by cheap political publications
and strong political harangues, to raise a demand for reform, loud enough and
daring enough to be most troublesome to the authorities."&mdash;F. K. Hunt, <i>The
Fourth Estate</i>, London, 1850, vol. ii. p. 49.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_278_278" id="Footnote_278_278"></a><a href="#FNanchor_278_278"><span class="label">[278]</span></a> "Newspapers are so cheap in the United States, that the
generality even of
the lowest order can afford to purchase them. They therefore depend for support
on the most ignorant class of the people. Everything they contain must be
accommodated to the taste and apprehension of men who labour daily for their
bread, and are of course indifferent to refinement either of language or
reasoning."&mdash;Quoted by Lord Sandon, 20th June 1836; <i>Parl. Debates</i>
(<i>Commons</i>), vol. xxxiv. col. 649.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_279_279" id="Footnote_279_279"></a><a href="#FNanchor_279_279"><span class="label">[279]</span></a> The duties on newspapers at that time were (1) the duty on paper,
3d. per
pound weight (&#188;d. a sheet), (2) a duty of 4d. a copy, (3) a duty of 3s. 6d. on
every
advertisement.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_280_280" id="Footnote_280_280"></a><a href="#FNanchor_280_280"><span class="label">[280]</span></a> "The change which had taken place in the political condition of
the country
made it essential to communicate to the people sound political knowledge and
information. He would say that the security of that House, living, as it did, in
the affections of the people&mdash;of the Government, possessing, as it did, the
confidence
of the people&mdash;and of the Monarchy, reigning, as it did, and as he trusted
it ever would, in the hearts of the people, depended upon the diffusion of sound
political knowledge."&mdash;Chancellor of Exchequer, 20th June 1836; <i>Parl.
Debates</i>
(<i>Commons</i>), vol. xxxiv. col. 634.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_281_281" id="Footnote_281_281"></a><a href="#FNanchor_281_281"><span class="label">[281]</span></a> "Many of these publications circulated to the amount of several
thousand
copies weekly; their sale, in several instances, was larger than the sale of
some
among the most popular legitimate papers; their influence over large bodies of
the working classes was much greater."&mdash;E. Lytton Bulwer, 14th June 1832;
Ibid., vol. xiii. col. 623.
</p><p>
"You have laws imposing severe penalties upon those who are guilty of
breaches of these laws; but it has been found impossible to stop the sale of
those
cheap and obnoxious publications by fiscal laws; and the success with which
they are broken, the sympathy excited in favour of the offenders, and the
assistance
which they receive, only give encouragement to pursue the same course.
I have been informed that, within the last fortnight or three weeks, between
forty
and fifty persons have been taken before the police magistrates, and convicted
for selling these publications."&mdash;Mr. O'Connell, 14th June 1832; Ibid., vol.
xiii.
col. 637.
</p><p>
"As long as the Tories were in power Lord Liverpool, or even Canning, could
consistently advocate the restriction of political discussion. But the fact that
the
Whigs had now held office since 1830, and that the tax remained undiminished,
was only to be explained by their rooted disbelief in every principle which they
professed to hold.
</p><p>
"Year after year Place had brought the question forward. Every year the
Chancellor of the Exchequer declared himself in favour of repeal in principle,
and every year the Government, for reasons which they dared not avow, continued
the tax. Meanwhile the Commissioners of Stamps so used their power of
prosecution as to set up a peculiarly odious form of censorship. The <i>Penny
Magazine</i>, for instance, was allowed to circulate unstamped, while the
<i>Poor Man's
Guardian</i> was prosecuted."&mdash;Graham Wallas, <i>The Life of Francis Place</i>,
London, 1898, p. 336.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_282_282" id="Footnote_282_282"></a><a href="#FNanchor_282_282"><span class="label">[282]</span></a> "The market for a Newspaper at twopence appeared to be
insatiable, and
this ready demand produced an ample supply. In vain the police apprehended
hawker after hawker; in vain the Stamp Office gave the informers and detectives
additional premiums for vigilance, the trade went on with an exciting degree of
activity. As the London gaols became crowded with 'victims,' the public
sympathies were touched, and a fund was raised by subscription to support the
families of the men and women (for women were seized and imprisoned) whilst
under sentence."&mdash;F. K. Hunt, <i>The Fourth Estate</i>, London, 1850, vol. ii.
p. 75.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_283_283" id="Footnote_283_283"></a><a href="#FNanchor_283_283"><span class="label">[283]</span></a> "This tax was a charter to the existing newspapers&mdash;it was not
they who
suffered from it&mdash;it was the public&mdash;it was the Government&mdash;it was order&mdash;it
was society that suffered."&mdash;E. Lytton Bulwer, 22nd May 1834; <i>Parl.
Debates</i>
(<i>Commons</i>), vol. xxiii. col. 1195. See also <i>G.J.</i> Holyoake,
<i>Sixty Years of an
Agitator's Life</i>, London, 1893, vol. i. p. 288.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_284_284" id="Footnote_284_284"></a><a href="#FNanchor_284_284"><span class="label">[284]</span></a> <i>Parl. Debates</i> (<i>Commons</i>), vol. xxxiv. col. 625.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_285_285" id="Footnote_285_285"></a><a href="#FNanchor_285_285"><span class="label">[285]</span></a> "2755. <i>Chairman</i>: That penny which was left when the stamp
was reduced,
was called by some noble Lord the worst penny of all; and was not it always
foreseen by those who looked deeply into the subject, that the retention of
that penny just made the difference between not being able to circulate a
cheap paper and being able to circulate it?&mdash;It makes all the difference, I
think."&mdash;Evidence of Mr. H. Cole, <i>Report from Select Committee on Newspaper
Stamps</i>, 18th July 1851.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_286_286" id="Footnote_286_286"></a><a href="#FNanchor_286_286"><span class="label">[286]</span></a> "The penny was avowedly retained in 1836 not for the purposes of
revenue
but as a compensation to the State for services performed in the transmission of
newspapers by post."&mdash;Viscount Canning, 24th May 1855; <i>Parl. Debates</i>
(<i>Lords</i>),
vol. cxxxviii. col. 954.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_287_287" id="Footnote_287_287"></a><a href="#FNanchor_287_287"><span class="label">[287]</span></a> McCulloch has some remarks which indicate the line on which was
justified
the practice of charging the stamp duty on every copy of a newspaper, in order
that a portion of them might be transmitted by post without further charge:&mdash;
</p><p>
"<i>Impolicy of Imposing a Postage on Newspapers.</i>&mdash;The duties now
substantially
repealed produced, in 1853, &#163;412,220 nett, no inconsiderable sum
in a period of war. In point of fact, however, they could hardly be called
duties, and ought rather to have been regarded as a payment for the trouble
and expense attending the conveyance and distribution of newspapers by
post. But supposing such to be the case, it was argued that the duty should
be so limited, that is, that it should only be imposed on papers carried by
the post. Matters of this sort are not, however, to be decided by mere
logical considerations. The effect of the new plan is to confine, in a greater
or less degree, according to circumstances, the circulation of newspapers to
the districts within which they are published; and this certainly is not
a desirable object.... Under the new plan the charge for conveyance, or
it may be postage, being added to the price of the metropolitan journals,
they will be dearer than the local papers, and people in many, or rather
perhaps in the majority of instances, will be disposed to prefer the low-priced
though inferior journal published at their door, to the superior but higher
priced journal of the capital.... On the whole, therefore, we anticipate
little or no advantage from the new plan. But we are, at the same time,
ready to admit that no system of this sort can be safely judged <i>a priori</i>;
and
that the results of experience may differ very widely from those of theory."&mdash;J.
R. McCulloch, <i>Commercial Dictionary</i>, London, 1856, p. 893.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_288_288" id="Footnote_288_288"></a><a href="#FNanchor_288_288"><span class="label">[288]</span></a> "We are living under a disguised censorship of the Press. I use
the word
advisedly; and I find that generally where there is an avowed censorship
of the Press there are no taxes on knowledge; no stamp duty and generally
no paper duty. From the time when the stamp duty was first imposed in
the reign of Queen Anne, the number of newspapers has been very much
diminished by the stamp. For instance, Steele's <i>Spectator</i> was nearly if
not
quite ruined by it; and from that time to this the amount of revenue has
never been so large as to be a serious subject of consideration."&mdash;Evidence of
Collet Dobson Collet, <i>Report from the Select Committee on Newspaper
Stamps</i>,
18th July 1851, p. 113.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_289_289" id="Footnote_289_289"></a><a href="#FNanchor_289_289"><span class="label">[289]</span></a> Mr. Roebuck, 20th June 1836; <i>Parl. Debates</i>
(<i>Commons</i>), vol. xxxiv. col. 653.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_290_290" id="Footnote_290_290"></a><a href="#FNanchor_290_290"><span class="label">[290]</span></a> Treasury Minute, No. 21,355, 28th November 1838: "It appears that
these
papers, though stamped as newspapers, are not according to Law Newspapers,
and consequently need not have been stamped, but that the proprietors have
caused them to be stamped for the purpose probably of obtaining the facility of
passing them free of postage.
</p><p>
"My Lords consider that all publications which are in the construction of the
law newspapers and are compelled to be stamped are in equity entitled to the
privilege of passing free of postage, but with respect to publications, which
like
these now under consideration are not properly newspapers, or necessarily
stamped, they are of opinion that they are not in equity entitled to the
privilege,
and that my Lords must take into consideration the convenience of the public
service and the other circumstances of the case. My Lords are desirous of
affording
every fair facility which may not be inconsistent with the proper despatch of
the mails, and in this view they consider that a limit of weight may be properly
applied, and adverting to the average weight of a large newspaper, they are of
opinion that the limit may be properly fixed at 2 ounces.
</p><p>
"They are pleased therefore to direct that for the future in all cases where
applications
are made for the transmission of any stamped publication through the post
free of postage, if it shall appear that such publication is legally a newspaper
and
compelled to be stamped such paper shall pass postage free whatever may be
its weight, and that when such publication may not appear to be strictly a
newspaper,
still it should be permitted the indulgence in case the weight shall not
exceed 2 ounces."</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_291_291" id="Footnote_291_291"></a><a href="#FNanchor_291_291"><span class="label">[291]</span></a> <i>Parl. Debates</i> (<i>Commons</i>), vol. cxxxvii. col. 1130.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_292_292" id="Footnote_292_292"></a><a href="#FNanchor_292_292"><span class="label">[292]</span></a> "If a tradesman at the present time carries his circular to the
Board of Inland
Revenue, he obtains the postal privilege on the condition of his declaring his
circular to be a newspaper, although, if the Board of Inland Revenue were
afterwards
to prosecute him for not stamping his entire impression, he would be
entitled to go into a Court of Justice and there to contend that that was not a
newspaper which he himself had declared to be a newspaper in order to obtain
the postal privilege for part of his impression."&mdash;Mr. Gladstone, 19th March
1855; ibid., vol. cxxxvii. col. 791.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_293_293" id="Footnote_293_293"></a><a href="#FNanchor_293_293"><span class="label">[293]</span></a> 'The Solicitor of the Board of Inland Revenue, being examined
before a
Committee upon the subject of class publications, was asked why class
publications
were not subjected to the compulsory stamp. Inadvertently, instead of
saying that they were exempted because they were addressed to a particular
class of the community, he said that it was because they related only to one
subject. In giving that reason, he made a slight error of statement. That error
has now been taken up in different parts of the country, and a number of
periodicals have appeared, such as the <i>War Telegraph</i> and the <i>War
Times</i>, containing
intelligence relating exclusively to the war, which they say is 'one
subject,' and so saying, set the Board of Inland Revenue at
defiance."&mdash;Chancellor
of the Exchequer, 19th March 1855; ibid., vol. cxxxvii. col. 804.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_294_294" id="Footnote_294_294"></a><a href="#FNanchor_294_294"><span class="label">[294]</span></a> "I am quite satisfied, from years of attention to this subject,
that there
never was so large a measure involved in a small measure, so to speak, as is the
case with regard to this proposition for making the Press free. I am willing to
rest on the verdict of the future, and I am quite confident that five or six
years
will show that all the votes of Parliament for educational purposes have been as
mere trifles compared with the vast results which will flow from this measure,
because, while the existing papers will retain all their powers of usefulness,
it
will call to their aid numbers of others not less useful, and while we continue
to
enjoy the advantage of having laid before us each morning a map of the events
of the world, the same advantage will be extended to classes of society at
present shut out from it."&mdash;John Bright, 19th March 1855; ibid., vol. cxxxvii.
cols. 810-11.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_295_295" id="Footnote_295_295"></a><a href="#FNanchor_295_295"><span class="label">[295]</span></a> "Another objection, and that of a more serious character, has
been brought
under my notice by various persons, who have described the proposition to
repeal the compulsory newspaper stamp as one which would be most dangerous
to society. It has been described as a measure which will open the floodgates of
sedition and blasphemy, and which will inundate the country with licentious
and immoral productions, which will undermine the very foundations of society,
and scatter the seeds of revolution broadcast over the land. These expressions
are not exaggerated representations of the opinions which have been communicated
to me from many quarters since this measure has been under my
consideration."&mdash;Chancellor
of the Exchequer in House of Commons, 19th March
1855; ibid., vol. cxxxvii. col. 782.
</p><p>
"The Right Hon. Gentleman who has just resumed his seat (Mr. Disraeli) has
spoken of the 'liberty of the Press.' That has been long spoken of. It has been
said that it must be 'free as the air we breathe; take it away, we die.' But,
Sir,
what is the 'liberty of the Press'? It is the liberty of a certain number of
persons to slander anonymously whomever they please, against whom you have
no redress. It is freedom to the anonymous libeller."&mdash;Mr. Drummond in the
House of Commons, 23rd April 1855; ibid., vol. cxxxvii. col. 1680.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_296_296" id="Footnote_296_296"></a><a href="#FNanchor_296_296"><span class="label">[296]</span></a> "This is not merely a fiscal matter, because, as I have already
stated to the
Committee, the existing law respecting the stamp duty upon newspapers has
been brought into a most inconsistent state by a succession of indulgences
which were made for the benefit of a certain class of newspaper publications.
The consequence of these indulgences is, that the greatest difficulty exists in
the
administration of the present law."&mdash;Chancellor of the Exchequer in House of
Commons, 19th March 1855; ibid., vol. cxxxvii. col. 802.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_297_297" id="Footnote_297_297"></a><a href="#FNanchor_297_297"><span class="label">[297]</span></a> "Q. 1852. <i>Mr. Cobden</i>: Would the carrying of newspapers be
profitable to
the Post Office at the present rates, provided you were left to adopt your own
regulations as to the transmission of newspapers without the intervention of the
Board of Inland Revenue?&mdash;In one sense it would be profitable and in another it
would not. If we were to charge against the newspapers a share of the fixed
expenses of the establishment, then it is very questionable whether it would be
profitable; but if you consider, as we probably should, that the expenses of the
establishment are incurred in respect of the letters, and only calculate the
additional
expense which would be thrown upon us for the transmission of newspapers,
then I think we should find them profitable.
</p><p>
"Q. 1853: Having an immense organization at the Post Office with a certain
amount of fixed charges, with a large amount of postmen necessarily travelling
over the whole of the kingdom, you would find it profitable to carry newspapers
for a penny, in addition to the letter carrying, would you?&mdash;Yes.
</p><p>
"Q. 1854: Therefore, if the newspaper stamp were abolished, and you were
left to regulate the postage at the Post Office, you would deem it profitable to
carry newspapers at a penny each?&mdash;Yes, certainly we should: what I mean is,
that the carrying of newspapers would not increase our expenses to the extent of
a penny each.
</p><p>
"Ans. 1912: I was in hopes that we might distribute them at a halfpenny,
if we could have completed a plan in the simple form in which it presented
itself
to my mind at first.
</p><p>
"Q. 1913: The plan is so far under consideration, and, perhaps, these
difficulties may be got over?&mdash;I cannot hold out any expectation of that; I
think
I have considered it sufficiently to see that those difficulties are all but
insuperable."&mdash;Evidence
of Sir Rowland Hill, <i>Report from Select Committee on Newspaper
Stamps</i>, 18th July 1851.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_298_298" id="Footnote_298_298"></a><a href="#FNanchor_298_298"><span class="label">[298]</span></a> "He believed it would be admitted that there was no wish to make
revenue
out of this carriage of newspapers; but, on the other hand, the newspaper
interest had no right to ask that their productions should be carried at less
than
cost price. It should be as near as possible an equal bargain between the
parties,
by which neither the revenue on the one hand, nor the newspapers on the other,
should gain.... He believed it was the opinion of the Post Office that a
halfpenny
would not be sufficient to cover the expenses of transmission."&mdash;Lord
Stanley, 23rd April 1855; <i>Parl. Debates</i> (<i>Commons</i>), vol. cxxxvii.
col. 1664.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_299_299" id="Footnote_299_299"></a><a href="#FNanchor_299_299"><span class="label">[299]</span></a> The duty was reduced to 1d. upon a sheet containing a superficies
not
exceeding 2,295 inches.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_300_300" id="Footnote_300_300"></a><a href="#FNanchor_300_300"><span class="label">[300]</span></a> See <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">infra</i>, p. <a href="#Page_221">221</a>.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_301_301" id="Footnote_301_301"></a><a href="#FNanchor_301_301"><span class="label">[301]</span></a> "Another objection might be urged that, by once touching the
permanency
of the 1d. rate they were endangering its stability, and that if the edge of the
wedge were once inserted it might lead to the uniform rate of &#189;d. He shared
no such apprehension, and believed that the wisest way to maintain the
permanency
of the 1d. rate was to remove the cause of the agitation."&mdash;Mr. Graves,
6th April 1869; <i>Parl. Debates</i> (<i>Commons</i>), vol. cxcv. col. 241.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_302_302" id="Footnote_302_302"></a><a href="#FNanchor_302_302"><span class="label">[302]</span></a> "A newspaper with an impressed stamp circulates free for fifteen
days. It
is the last relic of the old taxes on knowledge. The law is complicated and
leads to fraud by the abuse of free transmission. An unstamped newspaper now
goes at the rate of 1d. for every 4 ounces, and every fraction of 4 ounces.
About 35,000,000 newspapers pass through the Post Office annually with an
impressed
stamp, and about the same number without. What we propose to do is
to abolish the impressed stamp altogether, at a loss to the Revenue of
&#163;120,000.... Then
we propose to carry all newspapers which weigh less than 6 ounces
for a &#189;d. That will be limited to <span lang="la" xml:lang="la">bona fide</span> newspapers; but we propose,
instead
of 1d. for every 4 ounces and fraction on of 4 ounces, to charge &#189;d. for every
2 ounces
of other printed matter. There will in this way be a loss to the Post Office,
over
and above that incurred by the abolition of the impressed stamp, of &#163;250,000 a
year. There may be besides some additional expense in connection with building
and the increase in the number of persons to be employed; but this has not
been estimated for, and the amount cannot be very large."&mdash;Chancellor of the
Exchequer, 11th April 1870; <i>Parl. Debates</i> (<i>Commons</i>), vol. ce. col.
1636. The
limitation to 6 ounces was withdrawn. Ibid., vol. cciii, col. 1383.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_303_303" id="Footnote_303_303"></a><a href="#FNanchor_303_303"><span class="label">[303]</span></a> <i>Parl. Debates</i> (<i>Commons</i>), 7th May 1855, vol.
cxxxviii. col. 197.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_304_304" id="Footnote_304_304"></a><a href="#FNanchor_304_304"><span class="label">[304]</span></a> In 1899 the number of registered newspapers which normally
exceeded
8 ounces in weight was 29.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_305_305" id="Footnote_305_305"></a><a href="#FNanchor_305_305"><span class="label">[305]</span></a> See <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">infra</i>, p. <a href="#Page_293">293</a>. The size and weight of many of the
largo trade papers has
decreased in consequence of the war.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_306_306" id="Footnote_306_306"></a><a href="#FNanchor_306_306"><span class="label">[306]</span></a> "Newspapers and books are carried at a low rate for the sake of
the education
and general information of the people."&mdash;Mr. W. Monsell (Postmaster-General),
14th March 1871; <i>Parl. Debates</i> (<i>Commons</i>), vol. cciv. col. 2014.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_307_307" id="Footnote_307_307"></a><a href="#FNanchor_307_307"><span class="label">[307]</span></a> In 1854 the average weight of the mails which left London daily
was
279 cwt. of which 219 cwt. consisted of newspapers.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_308_308" id="Footnote_308_308"></a><a href="#FNanchor_308_308"><span class="label">[308]</span></a> Only some 150 copies of the <i>Daily Mail</i> are delivered in
London by the
post each day.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_309_309" id="Footnote_309_309"></a><a href="#FNanchor_309_309"><span class="label">[309]</span></a> "There is no reason whatever why the Post Office should charge a
man
threepence or fourpence for a book and a halfpenny for these vast trade
circulars, and it would be the simplest, as well as the wisest and most
beneficial
of reforms, to bring the book post down to the newspaper level."&mdash;H. G.
Wells, <i>Mankind in the Making</i>. London, 1914, chap. ix.
</p><p>
The following further suggestions by Mr. Wells are reprinted here for the
consideration of postal reformers. Their adoption involves merely an extension
of the principle of State benefit.
</p><p>
"Now, in the first place, the post office as one finds it in Great Britain
might very well be converted into a much more efficient distributing agency
by a few simple modifications in its method. At present, in a large number
of country places in Great Britain, a penny paper costs three-halfpence
including the necessary halfpenny for postage, and the poorer people can
afford no paper at all, because the excellent system in practice abroad of
subscribing to any registered periodical at the post office and having it
delivered
with the letters has not been adopted. Government publications and
Government maps, which ought also to be obtainable at a day's notice, through
the Post Office and post free, have to be purchased at present in the most
devious way through a remote agent in London. There is no public reason
whatever why a more intimate connection should not be established between
the Stationery Office and the Post Office."&mdash;Ibid.
</p><p>
"It would be the simplest thing in the world to have a complete, business-like
catalogue of Government publications, kept standing in type and reissued and
reprinted quarterly, distributed to every post office, and by its means one
ought to
be able to order whatever one wanted at once, pay for it on the spot, and get it
delivered to any address in Great Britain in the next twenty-four
hours."&mdash;Ibid.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_310_310" id="Footnote_310_310"></a><a href="#FNanchor_310_310"><span class="label">[310]</span></a> <i>Report of Special Committee, House of Assembly, Lower
Canada</i>, 11th February
1832, p. 10.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_311_311" id="Footnote_311_311"></a><a href="#FNanchor_311_311"><span class="label">[311]</span></a> Sir Francis Freeling replied to the petition. He said the
practice of his
Deputy in North America was not illegal, but was based on an Act of Parliament
authorizing certain of his officers to circulate newspapers by post; that as it
had
been in existence since the first establishment of the Post Office in the
colony,
the petitioners must have entered into the business with a full knowledge of the
charge to which their publications would be subject if sent by post; there was
no stamp duty in the colonies to give the publishers a right to free
transmission;
and, moreover, the amount of the charge was less than the similar charge in the
United States.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_312_312" id="Footnote_312_312"></a><a href="#FNanchor_312_312"><span class="label">[312]</span></a> "Mr. Howe was very loose, and rarely took any steps to obtain or
enforce the
payments of the amounts due to him for the transmission of Journals through
the Post....
</p><p>
"I cannot look upon it as the mere collection of a private source of emolument
to the officer, but I conceive that the Department is interested in the question
not only inasmuch as the amount received from this source goes in aid of a
larger salary to the officer, but that whenever the time comes that the
substitution
of a postage rate on newspapers supersedes the present mode of sending
them, a due enforcement of such rate will be most unfavourably received, if a
free transmission has been previously permitted from the negligence of the party
to whom the collection of the charge was deputed and whose perquisite it
was."&mdash;Report
of Mr. Page, 1842 (<i>British Official Records</i>).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_313_313" id="Footnote_313_313"></a><a href="#FNanchor_313_313"><span class="label">[313]</span></a> "It may fairly be viewed in the same light as the amounts
annually granted
by the Legislature for roads and bridges, and for the support of common schools.
The mail carriage to all parts of the province secures us the travelling public
conveyance which would not otherwise exist, and the very large amount of
newspapers,
etc., which pass through the Post Office affords strong evidence that the
Department may be considered a branch of our educational
system."&mdash;Postmaster-General
of New Brunswick, 1857.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_314_314" id="Footnote_314_314"></a><a href="#FNanchor_314_314"><span class="label">[314]</span></a> "Already they found a tax proposed on every poor man who took a
newspaper
for the information of his family; a stamp tax, an impost unknown in the
Maritime Provinces, and one which had cost England half this continent."&mdash;Mr.
Macdonald in Canadian House of Commons, 12th December 1867 (<i>Ottawa
Times</i>).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_315_315" id="Footnote_315_315"></a><a href="#FNanchor_315_315"><span class="label">[315]</span></a> Sir John A. MacDonald in Canadian House of Commons, 20th December
1867, ibid.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_316_316" id="Footnote_316_316"></a><a href="#FNanchor_316_316"><span class="label">[316]</span></a> "If ever there was a time when it was necessary for the interests
of the whole
Dominion that just the sort of information which newspapers conveyed should
be disseminated through all the Provinces, it was now."&mdash;Hon. Dr. Tupper in
Canadian House of Commons, 20th December 1867 (<i>Ottawa Times</i>).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_317_317" id="Footnote_317_317"></a><a href="#FNanchor_317_317"><span class="label">[317]</span></a> Mr. Savary in Canadian House of Commons, 20th December 1867
(ibid.).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_318_318" id="Footnote_318_318"></a><a href="#FNanchor_318_318"><span class="label">[318]</span></a> Hon. Mr. Mackenzie in Canadian House of Commons, <i>Parl.
Debates, Canada</i>
(<i>Commons</i>), 22nd February 1875.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_319_319" id="Footnote_319_319"></a><a href="#FNanchor_319_319"><span class="label">[319]</span></a> "There was good reason for the enactment of the old law that made
the rate
for the carriage of newspapers a cent a pound, and there never was even a
semblance
of sense or reason or any request for the repeal of that law. The truth is
that its repeal was a mere whim of a gentleman of the Senate, who, anxious to
pose in the niche of personal popularity, jollied through Parliament a measure
that has cost this country in postal rates millions of dollars, creating a big
deficit
in the spending department, which has stood in the way of reform every time a
reform was proposed."&mdash;Mr. Ross Robertson, <i>Parl. Debates, Canada</i>
(<i>Commons</i>),
13th May 1898.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_320_320" id="Footnote_320_320"></a><a href="#FNanchor_320_320"><span class="label">[320]</span></a> See <i>Parl. Debates, Canada</i> (<i>Commons</i>), 11th July
1900.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_321_321" id="Footnote_321_321"></a><a href="#FNanchor_321_321"><span class="label">[321]</span></a> The following remarks by Sir Charles Tupper in the Dominion House
of
Commons, though made at a somewhat later date, will illustrate this. He said:
"There is abundant evidence that manhood suffrage in the Dominion is a far
higher franchise than manhood suffrage in Great Britain, for the reason that
there are tens of thousands of electors in the United Kingdom who go to the
polls
without having the remotest idea not only of public questions before the
country,
but, if their lives depended on it, they could not state who is the Prime
Minister
of Great Britain to-day. I give that as an indication of the great advance the
people of Canada have made in intelligence; and the thorough knowledge which
the mass of the people here have in respect of the political issues, and all
other
questions of that kind, as well as general information, rests largely on the
fact
that newspapers have so largely increased in circulation until they now reach
almost every individual in the country."&mdash;Sir Charles Tupper, <i>Parl. Debates,
Canada</i> (<i>Commons</i>), 13th May 1898.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_322_322" id="Footnote_322_322"></a><a href="#FNanchor_322_322"><span class="label">[322]</span></a> In Great Britain the figures are in very different proportion.
While the
letters are 3,500,000,000, the newspapers are only some 200,000,000. The
circumstances of the two countries are in such contrast that the figures afford
no basis for argument as regards the relative postage rates: but they illustrate
very effectively a fundamental difference in the general character of the two
postal services. In Great Britain the number of separate newspaper mails is
extremely small proportionately to the number of letter mails. In Canada the
proportions are almost reversed. The postmen on delivery in Great Britain carry
their letters and packets in a light canvas bag, and the number of newspapers
taken out by any one postman is quite small (the proportion is about one
newspaper to twenty-five packets of other description). In Canada the
letter-carriers
are weighted with newspapers, carried either strapped in a bundle or
stuck in a satchel which is full to overflowing. In effect, the general
practical
arrangements in Canada must be made largely with a view to the handling of
vast quantities of newspapers, while in Great Britain the arrangements are in
general based on letter traffic, and, except at the largest offices, the
arrangements
for newspapers are incidental. Letters, however, receive first consideration in
Canada, and the discrimination in their favour against the newspaper matter,
in point of promptness of handling, is carried to much greater lengths than
in Great Britain.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_323_323" id="Footnote_323_323"></a><a href="#FNanchor_323_323"><span class="label">[323]</span></a> Cf. <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">supra</i>, p. <a href="#Page_57">57</a>.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_324_324" id="Footnote_324_324"></a><a href="#FNanchor_324_324"><span class="label">[324]</span></a> "I trust that after the reimposition of postage on newspapers has
been
fairly in working order, we shall then have the Post Office a self-sustaining
department."&mdash;Sir William Mulock, Postmaster-General, <i>Parl. Debates,
Canada</i>
(<i>Commons</i>), 1st April 1898.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_325_325" id="Footnote_325_325"></a><a href="#FNanchor_325_325"><span class="label">[325]</span></a> Sir William Mulock, <i>Parl. Debates, Canada</i>
(<i>Commons</i>), 1st April 1898,
col. 2915.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_326_326" id="Footnote_326_326"></a><a href="#FNanchor_326_326"><span class="label">[326]</span></a> "Hon. gentlemen are entirely in error in assuming that the length
of the
journey does not make extra cost. It lays the foundation for extra claims by
railways, and there is in the department at present, on the part of practically
all the railways in Canada, application for increased payment. It is quite
impossible
to treat newspaper postage in the same way as letter postage."&mdash;Sir
William Mulock, ibid., 11th July 1900.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_327_327" id="Footnote_327_327"></a><a href="#FNanchor_327_327"><span class="label">[327]</span></a> "This new Bill is little else than a special tax and handicap on
certain
Montreal newspapers, which are the only ones which have the bulk of their
circulation outside of their own province. We have always favoured newspaper
postage, but we are not favourable to its being collected off a few papers, and
thus making them pay for the carriage of their own mails."&mdash;Mr. Foster, <i>Parl.
Debates, Canada</i> (<i>Commons</i>), 10th July 1900.
</p><p>
Sir Wilfrid Laurier made some interesting observations. He said: "A newspaper
is merchandise, a letter is not. A letter simply conveys to somebody the
views and thoughts of another. But newspapers are merchandise, and the
publisher of a newspaper a manufacturer of merchandise which he sells. Now,
I do not see any reason why this class of merchandise should not pay freight
for its transportation as well as any other class of merchandise."&mdash;In Canadian
House of Commons, 10th July 1900.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_328_328" id="Footnote_328_328"></a><a href="#FNanchor_328_328"><span class="label">[328]</span></a> Sir William Mulock, ibid., 11th July 1900.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_329_329" id="Footnote_329_329"></a><a href="#FNanchor_329_329"><span class="label">[329]</span></a> Ibid., 3rd July 1903.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_330_330" id="Footnote_330_330"></a><a href="#FNanchor_330_330"><span class="label">[330]</span></a> Ibid., 25th January 1905.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_331_331" id="Footnote_331_331"></a><a href="#FNanchor_331_331"><span class="label">[331]</span></a> "The growth of the Post Office from this humble beginning
solidified the
American Colonies and made independence possible."&mdash;<i>The American Post
Office</i>, by Nathan B. Williams. Reprinted as Senate Document No. 542 of the
61st Congress, 2nd Sess., p. 5.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_332_332" id="Footnote_332_332"></a><a href="#FNanchor_332_332"><span class="label">[332]</span></a> E.g., "Mr. Franklin has in particular the great Advantage of
circulating
his Papers free, and receiving intelligence, which he may make the best or
worst Use of in the present Situation of Affairs."&mdash;Minutes of Pennsylvania
Council, 21st March 1757.
</p><p>
The Council recommended that the Postmaster be commanded to be extremely
cautious "to prevent the publication of improper intelligence," and that the
Governor should be authorized to exercise a censorship on the publication
of news.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_333_333" id="Footnote_333_333"></a><a href="#FNanchor_333_333"><span class="label">[333]</span></a> It was in point of fact due to his action in submitting to the
Assembly of
Pennsylvania English official letters addressed from the Governor of the colony
which had come into his hands.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_334_334" id="Footnote_334_334"></a><a href="#FNanchor_334_334"><span class="label">[334]</span></a> See <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">supra</i>, pp. <a href="#Page_64">64-5</a>.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_335_335" id="Footnote_335_335"></a><a href="#FNanchor_335_335"><span class="label">[335]</span></a> "To take it (the franking privilege) away would be levelling a
deadly stroke
at the liberty of the Press; the information conveyed by franks may be
considered
as the vital juices, and the channels of the Post Office as the veins; and
if these are stopped, the body must be destroyed; it is treading on dangerous
ground to take any measures that may stop the channels of public information....
It is the duty of the members to dispense the newspapers among those
people who cannot, perhaps, otherwise obtain them, under the protection of
franks.... The establishment of the Post Office is agreed to be for no other
purpose than the conveyance of information into every part of the
Union."&mdash;<i>Debates
and Proceedings in the Congress of the United States</i>, 16th December
1791 (pub. Washington, 1849).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_336_336" id="Footnote_336_336"></a><a href="#FNanchor_336_336"><span class="label">[336]</span></a> "The poisonous sentiments of the cities, concentrated in their
papers, with
all the aggravation of such a moral and political cesspool, will invade the
simple, pure, conservative atmosphere of the country, and meeting with no
antidote in a rural Press, will contaminate and ultimately destroy that purity
of sentiment and of purpose which is the only true conservatism. Fourierism,
agrarianism, socialism, and every other ism, political, moral, and religious,
grow
in that rank and festering soil.... Relieve them (the country papers) from
the burden of postage and they can successfully compete with the city
publishers.
Reduce the rate of postage on newspapers and pamphlets, and you diffuse light
and knowledge through the land."&mdash;Mr. Venables in House of Representatives,
18th December 1850 (<i>Congressional Globe</i>).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_337_337" id="Footnote_337_337"></a><a href="#FNanchor_337_337"><span class="label">[337]</span></a> I.e. odd packets posted by members of the public, as against the
regular
bulk postings of publishers.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_338_338" id="Footnote_338_338"></a><a href="#FNanchor_338_338"><span class="label">[338]</span></a> <i>Report of Postmaster-General</i>, 1892, p. 68.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_339_339" id="Footnote_339_339"></a><a href="#FNanchor_339_339"><span class="label">[339]</span></a> "The law cannot be so construed as to permit such an abuse&mdash;an
abuse that,
while operating to load down the mails with immense masses of stuff of
insufficient
value to command cash-paying subscribers to any extent, would be a wrong
to every business institution which issues its advertising circulars and other
matter in an undisguised manner and therefore pays the lawful rate of postage
on them."&mdash;Ibid., p. 72.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_340_340" id="Footnote_340_340"></a><a href="#FNanchor_340_340"><span class="label">[340]</span></a> "The most urgent need of the postal service is the rectification
of the
enormous wrongs which have grown up in the perversion and abuse of the
privilege accorded by law to second-class matter. This reform is paramount to
all others.... For this costly abuse, which drags on the Department and weighs
down the service, trammels its power and means of effective advancement in every
direction."&mdash;Ibid., 1899, pp. 4 and 5.
</p><p>
In 1900 it was stated that the whole cost of the extension of the rural free
delivery service could be met from the saving which would result from the
elimination of the second-class mail abuses.&mdash;Ibid., 1900, p. 13.
</p><p>
In 1901 it was described as "the one great overshadowing evil of the service,
because it underlies and overtops all other reform and advance."&mdash;Ibid., 1901,
p. 4.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_341_341" id="Footnote_341_341"></a><a href="#FNanchor_341_341"><span class="label">[341]</span></a> There had been, under an Act of 26th June 1906, a weighing of
second-class
matter from 1st July to 31st December 1906.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_342_342" id="Footnote_342_342"></a><a href="#FNanchor_342_342"><span class="label">[342]</span></a> <i>Report of Postal Commission on Second-class Mail Matter</i>,
1907. Known as
the Penrose-Overstreet Commission, from the names of two of its members.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_343_343" id="Footnote_343_343"></a><a href="#FNanchor_343_343"><span class="label">[343]</span></a> The actual statistics to be obtained were defined thus:&mdash;
</p><p>
"The Postmaster-General shall cause a record to be kept from July first to
December thirty-first, nineteen hundred and seven, inclusive, of the weight in
pounds, respectively, of first-class, second-class, free,
paid-at-the-pound-rate, and
transient, third-class, and fourth-class matter and all franked and penalty
matter and the equipment carried in connection therewith.
</p><p>
"For thirty days during such period he shall require a record to be kept of the
weight of each of the classes above specified despatched from such post-offices
as
he shall determine to be representative for the purpose and have computed
thereon, in the most practicable way, the average haul of the mail of the
different
classes and sub-classes as hereinbefore set out. For seven days during such
period he shall cause a record to be kept of the revenue received from each of
the
classes and sub-classes of mail matter hereinbefore specified and a count of the
number of pieces of each class and sub-class, showing also for the first class
the number of letters, postal cards, and other matter separately, and for thirty
consecutive days during such period he shall cause a record to be kept for the
purpose of ascertaining the average load of railway post-office cars other than
storage cars, the average load of storage cars, and the average load in
compartment
cars.
</p><p>
"Such record shall be reported to Congress by May first, nineteen hundred
and eight, and the sum of three hundred thousand dollars, or so much thereof
as may be necessary, is hereby appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury
not otherwise appropriated, to cover the expense of such weighing and counting
and the recording and compilation of the information so acquired, and the rent
of necessary rooms in the city of Washington, and the same shall be immediately
available."&mdash;Statute of 2nd March 1907.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_344_344" id="Footnote_344_344"></a><a href="#FNanchor_344_344"><span class="label">[344]</span></a> <i>Special Weighing of the Mails</i>, 1907. Document 910, 60th
Congress.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_345_345" id="Footnote_345_345"></a><a href="#FNanchor_345_345"><span class="label">[345]</span></a> <i>Hearings before Committee on Post Office and Post Roads</i>
(<i>House of Representatives</i>),
January-February 1910.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_346_346" id="Footnote_346_346"></a><a href="#FNanchor_346_346"><span class="label">[346]</span></a> <i>Report of Commission on Second-class Mail Matter.</i> Appendix
to Message of
President of 22nd February 1912, pp. 137-8.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_347_347" id="Footnote_347_347"></a><a href="#FNanchor_347_347"><span class="label">[347]</span></a> Ibid., p. 129.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_348_348" id="Footnote_348_348"></a><a href="#FNanchor_348_348"><span class="label">[348]</span></a> "The historic policy of encouraging by low postal rates the
dissemination
of current intelligence, and the extent to which it has proved successful,
should
not be overlooked."&mdash;Ibid., p. 143.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_349_349" id="Footnote_349_349"></a><a href="#FNanchor_349_349"><span class="label">[349]</span></a> "If the Republic of our patriotic love is to live and our people
preserve their
liberties, the sheet-anchor of their salvation is a free, independent,
untrammelled
and fearless Press, and we believe that to maintain this happy condition
publishers
must not be subjected to any arbitrary authority that claims and exercises
the power to destroy by closing the mails against them without the right to
appeal to the courts, a right that is held sacred by every citizen, however
humble, whenever and wherever his opportunity to earn a livelihood in an
honourable business is called in question or denied him."&mdash;Evidence of Mr.
Wilmer Atkinson of Philadelphia, Pa., <i>Report of Commission on Second-class
Mail Matter</i>, 1906, p. 412.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_350_350" id="Footnote_350_350"></a><a href="#FNanchor_350_350"><span class="label">[350]</span></a> "Publishers are now sometimes kept on the anxious seat for months
awaiting decisions which may wreck their businesses."&mdash;Evidence of Mr. Madden,
Third Assistant Postmaster-General.&mdash;Ibid., p. 89.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_351_351" id="Footnote_351_351"></a><a href="#FNanchor_351_351"><span class="label">[351]</span></a> "There is no 'subsidy' at all, as claimed by the foolish, but
simply that the
lawmakers of the greatest Government on earth have been wise enough to see to
it that the people shall have periodical literature within easy reach, and with
as
little expense as possible."&mdash;Evidence of Wilmer Atkinson, ibid., p. 441.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_352_352" id="Footnote_352_352"></a><a href="#FNanchor_352_352"><span class="label">[352]</span></a> "Who knows but that the onerous restrictions of the department
have some
connection with the efforts of the express companies to have second-class mail
rates increased, and by both means drive the publishers of the country to
employing
the express companies to carry their publications? Such would not be
beyond the craftiness of these skilled farmers in the field of
legislation."&mdash;Nathan
B. Williams, <i>The American Post Office</i>, 1910; Document 542, 61st Congress,
2nd Session, p. 40.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_353_353" id="Footnote_353_353"></a><a href="#FNanchor_353_353"><span class="label">[353]</span></a> "Yet we publish more periodicals than Germany, France, Russia,
Great
Britain, Switzerland, Belgium, and Holland aggregated, and you may then add
all the other countries of Europe, then Canada and Mexico. Then add all the
Central American States, and the South American States, and the African
Colonies&mdash;North, South, East, and West. You must still add Australia, and
Hindoostan, and all other Asiatic countries, including Japan and China, and
even then you haven't reached the end or the story. You then have only 40 per
cent. of the total against our 60."&mdash;C. W. Burrows, <i>One Cent Postage</i>,
etc., Cleveland,
Ohio, 1911, p. 11.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_354_354" id="Footnote_354_354"></a><a href="#FNanchor_354_354"><span class="label">[354]</span></a> "The great decrease in all the more serious departments of
literature, as
well as in some of the lighter ones, is a curious and unexplainable condition of
our book production. Scientific and philosophical writings are as conspicuous
through their absence as are the simply amusing books."&mdash;<i>Publishers'
Weekly</i>
(New York), 30th January 1904.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_355_355" id="Footnote_355_355"></a><a href="#FNanchor_355_355"><span class="label">[355]</span></a> Message to Congress, 22nd February 1912.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_356_356" id="Footnote_356_356"></a><a href="#FNanchor_356_356"><span class="label">[356]</span></a> "No lobby ever sent to Washington in furtherance of the most
corrupt legislation
has ever been more persistent or dealt less fairly with both legislators and
public than the lobby that has worked for the retention of the second-class mail
graft."&mdash;C. W. Burrows, <i>One Cent Postage</i>, etc., Cleveland, Ohio, 1911, p.
4.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_357_357" id="Footnote_357_357"></a><a href="#FNanchor_357_357"><span class="label">[357]</span></a> "Je vois que le prix du port des journaux fera d'un
vingt-quatri&#232;me du prix
des lettres. Le prix n'est sans doute pas suffisant pour les frais de la poste,
et je
ne crois pas que l'envoi des journaux doive &#234;tre &#224; la charge de la nation."&mdash;M.
Biozat, Assembl&#233;e Nationale, 17 ao&#251;t 1791 (<i>Le Moniteur Universel</i>).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_358_358" id="Footnote_358_358"></a><a href="#FNanchor_358_358"><span class="label">[358]</span></a> "Si vous examinez set objet sous un point de vue fiscal, je vous
dirai qu'en
augmentant le tarif, vous diminuez le produit, en rendant la circulation de
plusieurs feuilles impossible. Le plus l&#233;ger surhaussement de taxe priverait de
tout b&#233;n&#233;fice les autres des productions p&#233;riodiques les plus utiles, telles que
les
journaux d'agriculture, de physique, d'histoire naturelle, de m&#233;decine, etc.,
qui,
par leur nature, ne sont pas susceptibles d'avoir un grand nombre de
souscripteurs.
Et les journaux que l'on aurait peut-&#234;tre en vue d'&#233;carter sous le poids
d'un imp&#244;t on&#233;reux seraient pr&#233;cis&#233;ment ceux que l'avide curiosit&#233; du public
ferait r&#233;sister &#224; la surtaxe. Personne d'ailleurs ne r&#233;voquera ne doute que, de
tous les commerces, celui des id&#233;es soit le plus pr&#233;cieux, et je crois que vous
devez le favoriser de toutes les mani&#232;res."&mdash;M. Larochefoucault, Assembl&#233;e
Nationale, 17 ao&#251;t 1791 (ibid.).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_359_359" id="Footnote_359_359"></a><a href="#FNanchor_359_359"><span class="label">[359]</span></a> The increase during the Revolutionary period was nevertheless
considerable.
Before the Revolution the cost of distributing 60,000 prospectuses by post was
200 livres. Under the rates then in operation it would be 3,000 livres, and
under
the new rates then (1796) proposed, 7,500 livres. Before the Revolution a volume
could be sent from one end of France to the other for 12 sous.&mdash;A. Belloc,
<i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Les Postes fran&#231;aises</i>, Paris, 1886, p. 353.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_360_360" id="Footnote_360_360"></a><a href="#FNanchor_360_360"><span class="label">[360]</span></a> "Le conseil des Cinq-Cents, consid&#233;rant qu'il importe de
faciliter la circulation
des ouvrages p&#233;riodiques, brochures, catalogues, et prospectus tant pour
encourager la libre communication des pens&#233;es entre les citoyens de la
R&#233;publique
que pour augmenter le total du revenu public...."&mdash;<i>Proclamation</i>, 1796.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_361_361" id="Footnote_361_361"></a><a href="#FNanchor_361_361"><span class="label">[361]</span></a> Law of 15th March 1827.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_362_362" id="Footnote_362_362"></a><a href="#FNanchor_362_362"><span class="label">[362]</span></a> Law of 16th July 1850.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_363_363" id="Footnote_363_363"></a><a href="#FNanchor_363_363"><span class="label">[363]</span></a> There was also at this time a tax on books.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_364_364" id="Footnote_364_364"></a><a href="#FNanchor_364_364"><span class="label">[364]</span></a> M. Rouher, Assembl&#233;e Nationale, 21 mars 1850 (<i>Le Moniteur
Universel</i>).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_365_365" id="Footnote_365_365"></a><a href="#FNanchor_365_365"><span class="label">[365]</span></a> Decree of 17th February 1852.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_366_366" id="Footnote_366_366"></a><a href="#FNanchor_366_366"><span class="label">[366]</span></a> The political Press was somewhat strictly controlled. The law of
1814 on
the liberty of the Press, which was continued by the Press law of the 27th June
1849, imposed on every printer the obligation to deposit with the Procurator
Imperial every article treating of political matters or social economy
twenty-four
hours before publication, under penalty of a fine of 100 to 500 fr. A decree of
1852 subjected political publications to a stamp duty.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_367_367" id="Footnote_367_367"></a><a href="#FNanchor_367_367"><span class="label">[367]</span></a> "Les journaux n'&#233;tant plus dangereux et ne pouvant plus faire que
du bien,
l'honorable membre e&#251;t d&#233;sir&#233; qu'une l&#233;g&#232;re r&#233;duction des droits de poste leur
perm&#238;t d'acqu&#233;rir une existence plus s&#251;r, plus ind&#233;pendante, afin qu'on p&#251;t les
retrouver fid&#232;les et d&#233;vou&#233;s, si la France avait encore des jours difficiles &#224;
traverser. Nul n'a oubli&#233;, en effet, l'admirable attitude de la Presse
d&#233;partmentale
au milieu des &#233;v&#233;nements de 1848, son empressement &#224; se rallier &#224; la
cause du Pr&#233;sident de la R&#233;publique, le courage que ses r&#233;dacteurs ont montr&#233;
pour la d&#233;fense de l'ordre, courage que quelques-un on pay&#233; de leur vie.
</p><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">
"Telles sont les consid&#233;rations d'&#233;quit&#233; et de politique qui avaient fait
r&#233;clamer en faveur de la Presse d&#233;partmentale une r&#233;duction de taxe. Tout ce
que la commission a pu obtenir, c'est qu'il n'y aura pas d'aggravation de taxe
lorsque le num&#233;ros circuleront dans les d&#233;partments limitrophes. Rien ou &#224;
peu pr&#232;s rien ne sera done chang&#233; aux charges que les journaux de province
ont support&#233;es jusqu'&#224; ce jour."&mdash;M. Paul Dupont, Chambra des D&#233;put&#233;s,
31 mai 1856 (<i>Le Moniteur Universal</i>).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_368_368" id="Footnote_368_368"></a><a href="#FNanchor_368_368"><span class="label">[368]</span></a>
<span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Motif du loi</span>, cited A. Belloc, op. cit., p. 542.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_369_369" id="Footnote_369_369"></a><a href="#FNanchor_369_369"><span class="label">[369]</span></a> Ibid., p. 545.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_370_370" id="Footnote_370_370"></a><a href="#FNanchor_370_370"><span class="label">[370]</span></a> Law of 29th April.</p></div>

<div class="footnote" lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><p><a name="Footnote_371_371" id="Footnote_371_371"></a><a href="#FNanchor_371_371"><span class="label">[371]</span></a> "La poste perd sur le transport des journaux et des imprim&#233;s.
</p><p>
"Pour l'ann&#233;e 1889, M. Jaccottey (<i>Trait&#233; de l&#233;gislation et d'exploitation
postales</i>, p. 329) calculait que le co&#251;t, c'est-&#224;-dire la d&#233;pense
moyennement, fait
pour un objet quelconque de correspondance, n'avait pas &#233;t&#233; sup&#233;rieur &#224; 0 fr.
055.
Il fixait de m&#234;me le produit moyen des imprim&#233;s, par unit&#233;, &#224; O fr. 023, et il
&#233;valuait la perte du Tr&#233;sor &#224; 25 millions....
</p><p>
"Le nombre des Imprim&#233;s de toute cat&#233;gorie &#233;tait &#224; cette &#233;poque de 800
millions....
</p><p>
"Or, il y a eu, en 1895, dans la circulation int&#233;rieure:&mdash;
</p><p>
"514,957,761 journaux ayant rapport&#233; 8,378,873 fr. soit, par unit&#233;,
1 centime 62, 472,202,885 imprim&#233;s de toute nature, dont 82,597,172 sou
enveloppes, avec un produit total de 13,791,025 ou par unit&#233; 2 centimes 92.
Pour ces 987,160,646 journaux, p&#233;riodiques, imprim&#233;s de toute cat&#233;gorie,
circulent
&#224; prix r&#233;duit, la recette total a &#233;t&#233; de 22,169,975 fr. et le produit moyen
de 2 centimes 245.
</p><p>
"La perte a done &#233;t&#233; de pr&#232;s de 36 millions."&mdash;<i>Rapport portant fixation du
Budget</i>, Chambre des D&#233;put&#233;s, 1907; No. 2701, p. 37.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_372_372" id="Footnote_372_372"></a><a href="#FNanchor_372_372"><span class="label">[372]</span></a> 29th April 1908.</p></div>

<div class="footnote" lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><p><a name="Footnote_373_373" id="Footnote_373_373"></a><a href="#FNanchor_373_373"><span class="label">[373]</span></a> "Il serait &#224; d&#233;sirer qu'on p&#251;t rem&#233;dier &#224; une cons&#233;quence
regrettable de la
disposition particuli&#232;re qui r&#233;serve aux seuls journaux paraissant au moins une
fois par mois le tarif sp&#233;cial accord&#233; &#224; la Presse.
</p><p>
"En fermant la porte aux feuilles d'annonces trimestrielles on l'aussi ferm&#233;e
aux bulletins et annales de m&#234;me p&#233;riodicit&#233; publies par un grand nombre
d'associations et de soci&#233;t&#233;s (soci&#233;t&#233;s litt&#233;raries, arch&#233;ologiques,
scientifiques,
agricoles, syndicats professionels et agricoles, associations professionelles
amicales d'instituteurs, soci&#233;t&#233;s de secours mutuels, etc.), qui doivent &#234;tre
encourag&#233;es par tous les moyens au lieu d'&#234;tre g&#234;n&#233;es dans leur essor."&mdash;Ibid.,
S&#233;nat, 1908, No. 340, p. 84.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_374_374" id="Footnote_374_374"></a><a href="#FNanchor_374_374"><span class="label">[374]</span></a>
Defined thus in the law of 1878: <span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">"Pour moiti&#233; au moins de leur
superficie
&#224; la reproduction des d&#233;bats des Chambres, des expos&#233;s des motifs des projets
de lois, des rapports de commissions, des actes et documents officiels, et des
cours, officiels ou non, des halles, bourses, et march&#233;s."</span></p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_375_375" id="Footnote_375_375"></a><a href="#FNanchor_375_375"><span class="label">[375]</span></a> P. Jaccottey, op. cit., p. 322.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_376_376" id="Footnote_376_376"></a><a href="#FNanchor_376_376"><span class="label">[376]</span></a> Certain questions arose on this point, and the Council of State
decided
that there was no need to inquire whether the printed sheet added to the
newspaper
constituted an accidental and unforeseen addition, whether it was the
production of the paper, whether it really appertained to the paper, nor
whether it was printed at the same time. All that was necessary, in order
that it might be regarded as a supplement, was that it should bear the title
and date of the number which it accompanied.&mdash;Ibid., p. 325.
</p><p>
The Keeper of the Seals concurred in this opinion, and held that it was
unnecessary to inquire into the circumstance in which the supplement was
joined to the paper, whether it was special or whether it was printed at the
same
time; but that the supplement ought to fulfil the conditions imposed on all
newspapers, to mention the title of the paper, together with the date or serial
number, and to preserve, at least materially, the appearance of an annexe to the
principal journal.&mdash;Ad. Frault, <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Manuel postal, th&#233;orique et pratique</i>,
Paris, 1893,
pp. 385-6.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_377_377" id="Footnote_377_377"></a><a href="#FNanchor_377_377"><span class="label">[377]</span></a>
The second oldest newspaper in Germany, the <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Postavisen</i>,
which appeared in
Frankfurt in 1617, was published by the <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Taxis</span> Postmaster, Johann von den
Birghden. Cf. B. Faulhaber, <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Geschichte des Postwesens in
Frankfurt am Main</i>,
Frankfurt, 1883, p. 62.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_378_378" id="Footnote_378_378"></a><a href="#FNanchor_378_378"><span class="label">[378]</span></a>
Dr. Artur Schmidt, <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Finanz-Archiv</i>, 1906, vol. 23, part 1.
p. 64; <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Archiv f&#252;r
Post und Telegraphie</i>, 1884, p. 290.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_379_379" id="Footnote_379_379"></a><a href="#FNanchor_379_379"><span class="label">[379]</span></a>
<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Archiv f&#252;r Post und Telegraphie</i>, 1884, p. 291.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_380_380" id="Footnote_380_380"></a><a href="#FNanchor_380_380"><span class="label">[380]</span></a>
<span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Regulativ &#252;ber die k&#252;nftige Verwaltung des Zeitungswesens</span>, 15th
December
1821.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_381_381" id="Footnote_381_381"></a><a href="#FNanchor_381_381"><span class="label">[381]</span></a> Decree of 26th June 1848.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_382_382" id="Footnote_382_382"></a><a href="#FNanchor_382_382"><span class="label">[382]</span></a> Statute of 4th November 1867, fixing rates of postage for the
North German
Union:&mdash;
</p><p lang="de" xml:lang="de">
"Diese Bestimmung entsprang aus der Erkenntniss, dass die weniger h&#228;ufig
erscheinenden Zeitschriften durch die volle Besorgungsgeb&#252;hr von 25 pct. des
Verlagspreises um so h&#228;rter getroffen w&#252;rden, als letzterer der Natur der Sache
nach in vielen F&#228;llen verh&#228;ltnissm&#228;ssig hoch sei."&mdash;<i>Archiv f&#252;r Post und
Telegraphie</i>, 1884, p. 296.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_383_383" id="Footnote_383_383"></a><a href="#FNanchor_383_383"><span class="label">[383]</span></a> Statute of 28th November.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><a name="Footnote_384_384" id="Footnote_384_384"></a><a href="#FNanchor_384_384"><span class="label">[384]</span></a> "Wir haben heute in Deutschland Bl&#228;tter, deren Jahresabonnement
j&#228;hrlich
2 Mark betr&#228;gt, und solche, deren Jahresabonnement bis 40 Mark betr&#228;gt. Die
Post erhebt nun an Geb&#252;hr 25 Prozent von dem Abonnementspreise, womit sie
die Bef&#246;rderungskosten decken muss. Die Post erh&#228;lt f&#252;r dieselbe Leistung
von einem t&#228;glichen Blatte, welches 40 Mark Abonnementspreis erhebt, 10 Mark
pro Jahr und von dem andern t&#228;glichen Blatt, welches bloss 2 Mark erhebt,
50 Pfennig pro Jahr. Das ist ein ganz unhaltbarer Zustand. Wenn Sie beide
Bl&#228;tter nun auf ihren Inhalt pr&#252;fen, was erblicken Sie da? Auf der einen Seite
Inseratenblatt, das den Text als Nebensache behandelt, das mit sehr niedrigen
Redaktionskosten hergestellt wird. Auf der anderen Seite haben Sie ein
Blatt, zu dessen Herstellung hervorragende Kr&#228;fte, mit einem Worte Intelligenz
erforderlich ist, und dass die Intelligenz nicht billig ist, wissen wir alle
miteinander; diese muss bezahlt werden. F&#252;r die Post bildet die Hauptsignatur
der Zeitungen: viele Anzeigen&mdash;schweres Gewicht; niedriger
Abonnementspreis&mdash;niedrige
Postprovision (weil die Herstellungskosten durch die
Inserate gedeckt werden). Die Post macht in Folge dessen ein schlechtes
Gesch&#228;ft damit. Ein Blatt mit wenigen Anzeigen bedeutet auch gleichzeitig
ein geringeres Gewicht und einen h&#246;heren Abonnementspreis, und das setzt
eine hohe Postprovision voraus.
</p><p>
"Das sind Erscheinungen, &#252;ber die seit Jahren geklagt wird, und die durch
die neue Vorlage in ein gerechteres Verh&#228;ltniss zu Leistung und Gegenleistung
gebracht werden sollen."&mdash;Abgeordneter Dietz, <i>Reichstag, Official
Reports</i>,
15th November 1899, vol. iv. p. 2799.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_385_385" id="Footnote_385_385"></a><a href="#FNanchor_385_385"><span class="label">[385]</span></a>
Dr. Artur Schmidt, <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Finanz-Archiv</i>, vol. 23, part i. p. 69.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_386_386" id="Footnote_386_386"></a><a href="#FNanchor_386_386"><span class="label">[386]</span></a> In 1871 the number of newspapers passing by post was 203
millions, and the
average postage 87/100 pf. per copy.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_387_387" id="Footnote_387_387"></a><a href="#FNanchor_387_387"><span class="label">[387]</span></a>
<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Reichstag, Official Reports</i>, vol. iv. pp. 2923-4:
<span lang="de" xml:lang="de">"Seit 20
Jahren ist im
Reichstag sowohl als auch in der Budgetkommission erneut die Forderung
aufgestellt worden, es soll ein anderer Tarif aufgestellt werden. In der
Budgetkommission
ist namentlich in den letzten zehn Jahren von den verschiedensten
Parteien anerkannt worden, dass die Post bei der Bef&#246;rderung der Zeitungen
thats&#228;chlich mit Verlust arbeitet, und dass demzufolge seitens der Zeitungen
eine h&#246;here Geb&#252;hr entrichtet werden m&#252;sste. Ich kann den Herren nur das
Beispiel, welches in der Budgetkommission des &#246;fteren erl&#228;utert worden ist,
wieder vorf&#252;hren. Wir bef&#246;rdern rund 400 Millionen Drucksachen; f&#252;r diese,
400 Millionen Drucksachen nehmen wir 15 Millionen ein. Demgegen&#252;ber
stehen eine Milliarde Zeitungsexemplare und eine Einnahme von noch nicht
5 Millionen."&mdash;Von Podbielski</span> (Postmaster-General), 21st November 1899.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_388_388" id="Footnote_388_388"></a><a href="#FNanchor_388_388"><span class="label">[388]</span></a>
<span lang="de" xml:lang="de">"Es musste ein Tarif gefunden werden, der auf dem Grundsatz der
Abw&#228;gung der <i>Leistung und Gegenleistung</i> beruht, der der Postverwaltung
eine
m&#228;ssige Mehreinnahme wenigstens f&#252;r die Zukunft, wenn auch nicht f&#252;r die
unmittelbare Gegenwart sichert."&mdash;Dr. Oertel</span>, 15th November 1899; <i>Reichstag,
Official Reports</i>, vol. iv. p. 2801.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_389_389" id="Footnote_389_389"></a><a href="#FNanchor_389_389"><span class="label">[389]</span></a> Von Podbielski, 21st November 1899; <i>Reichstag, Official
Reports</i>, vol. iv.
p. 2924.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_390_390" id="Footnote_390_390"></a><a href="#FNanchor_390_390"><span class="label">[390]</span></a>
<span lang="de" xml:lang="de">"Die Inseratenpresse macht eine sehr starke Konkurrenz auch der
Provinzialpresse,
der kleinen Presse. Die erstere hat langsam den Abonnementspreis
so weit herabgedr&#252;ckt, dass schliesslich die Provinzpresse, wenn sie nicht
zu Grunde gehen wollte, gleichfalls mit einer Erm&#228;ssigung des Abonnementspreises
hat vorgehen m&#252;ssen, mit einer Erm&#228;ssigung, die sich wirthschaftlich
nicht aufrecht erhalten l&#228;sst. Die Abonnementspreise sind hier und da so
niedrig geworden, dass manche Verleger wohl Ursache gehabt haben, zu schreien,
man m&#246;ge ihnen seitens der Post durch einen gerechten Tarif entgegenkommen,
um die furchtbare Konkurrenz in etwas zu mildern."&mdash;Abgeordneter Dietz</span>,
15th November 1899; <i>Reichstag, Official Reports</i>, vol. iv. p. 2799.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_391_391" id="Footnote_391_391"></a><a href="#FNanchor_391_391"><span class="label">[391]</span></a>
<span lang="de" xml:lang="de">"Der Zonentarif ist meiner Ansicht nach vollkommen gerechtfertigt
auch
vom Gesichtspunkte der Leistung und der Gegenleistung aus. Die kleine
Provinzpresse bleibt auf einen kleinen Verbreitungsbezirk beschr&#228;nkt, und dort
ist sie in vielen Exemplaren an einem und demselben Orte verbreitet. Die grosse
Presse dagegen geht in einzelnen Exemplaren durch das ganze Reich, sie
verursacht demgem&#228;ss der Post bedeutend mehr Kosten und Lasten, mehr
Arbeit als die kleine Presse. Der Herr Staatssekret&#228;r des Reichspostamts hat
das in der Kommission selbst zugeben m&#252;ssen. Er wies z. B. darauf hin, dass
schon jetzt durch die grosse Anzahl von Bl&#228;ttern, welche von Berlin aus in die
Provinz hineingehen, die Post gezwungen w&#228;re, tagt&#228;glich einen Extrapostwagen
zu stellen, welcher lediglich Zeitungen von hier nach K&#246;ln mit der Eisenbahn
bef&#246;rdert; die Bef&#246;rderung dieses einen Wagens koste der Post 120,000 Mark.
Bei dieser Bef&#246;rderung kommt aber im grossen und ganzen nur die grosse oder
die farblose Presse, welche zu einem billigeren Preise gegeben wird, in
Betracht.
Die kleine Provinzpresse macht der Post nicht derartige Ausgaben, wie ich
bereits vorhin betont habe. Daher erscheint es angebracht, dass wir zwei
Zonen schaffen, dass die Zeitungen in der ersten Zone zu einem billigeren
Satze versendet werden als diejenigen in der zweiten Zone."</span>&mdash;Dr. Marcour,
15th November 1899; <i>Reichstag, Official Reports</i>, vol. iv. p. 2796.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_392_392" id="Footnote_392_392"></a><a href="#FNanchor_392_392"><span class="label">[392]</span></a> Von Podbielski, 15th November 1899; ibid., vol. iv. p. 2797.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_393_393" id="Footnote_393_393"></a><a href="#FNanchor_393_393"><span class="label">[393]</span></a> Statute of 20th December 1899:&mdash;
</p><p lang="de" xml:lang="de">
"(<i>a</i>) 2 Pf. f&#252;r jeden Monat der Bezugszeit.
</p><p lang="de" xml:lang="de">
"(<i>b</i>) 15 Pf. j&#228;hrlich f&#252;r das w&#246;chentlich einmalige oder seltenere
Erscheinen,
sowie 15 Pf. j&#228;hrlich mehr f&#252;r jede weitere Ausgabe in der Woche.
</p><p><span lang="de" xml:lang="de">
"(<i>c</i>) 10 Pf. j&#228;hrlich f&#252;r jedes Kilogramm des Jahresgewichts unter
Gew&#228;hrung
eines Freigewichts von je 1 Kg. j&#228;hrlich f&#252;r soviele Ausgaben, wie der Geb&#252;hr zu
(<i>b</i>) unterliegen."</span>&mdash;Article 1 (sec. iii), Law of 20th December 1899.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_394_394" id="Footnote_394_394"></a><a href="#FNanchor_394_394"><span class="label">[394]</span></a>
Dr. Artur Schmidt, <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Finanz-Archiv</i>, 1906, vol. 23, part i.
p. 74.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_395_395" id="Footnote_395_395"></a><a href="#FNanchor_395_395"><span class="label">[395]</span></a> Dr. Artur Schmidt, ibid., p. 69.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_396_396" id="Footnote_396_396"></a><a href="#FNanchor_396_396"><span class="label">[396]</span></a>
Cf. Dr. Artur Schmidt, <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Finanz-Archiv</i>, vol. 23, part i. p.
79.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_397_397" id="Footnote_397_397"></a><a href="#FNanchor_397_397"><span class="label">[397]</span></a>
<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Allgemeine Dienstanweisung f&#252;r Post und Telegraphie</i>,
Berlin, 1901, <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Abschnitt</span>
V, i. pp. 69-70.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_398_398" id="Footnote_398_398"></a><a href="#FNanchor_398_398"><span class="label">[398]</span></a>
<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Archiv f&#252;r Post und Telegraphie</i>, 1880, p. 278. The present
regulations are
as follow:&mdash;
</p><p lang="de" xml:lang="de">
"Als aussergew&#246;hnliche Zeitungsbeilagen werden solche ... die nach Form,
Papier, Druck oder sonstiger Beschaffenheit nicht als Bestandtheile derjenigen
Zeitung oder Zeitschrift erachtet werden k&#246;nnen, mit welcher die Versendung
erfolgen soll.
</p><p lang="de" xml:lang="de">
"Jede Versendung aussergew&#246;hnlicher Zeitungsbeilagen muss von dem Verleger
bei der Verlags-Postanstalt unter Entrichtung der Geb&#252;hr f&#252;r so viele Exemplare,
als der Zeitung u. beigelegt werden sollen, vorher angemeldet werden.
Das Einlegen in die einzelnen Zeitungs u. Exemplare ist Sache des Verlegers.
</p><p lang="de" xml:lang="de">
"Aussergew&#246;hnliche Zeitungsbeilagen d&#252;rfen nicht &#252;ber zwei Bogen stark,
auch nicht geheftet, geklebt oder gebunden sein; die einzelnen Bogen m&#252;ssen in
der Bogenform zusammenh&#228;ngen. Die Postanstalten sind zur Zur&#252;ckweisung
solcher Beilagen befugt, die nach Gr&#246;sse und St&#228;rke des Papiers oder nach
ihrer sonstigen Beschaffenheit zur Bef&#246;rderung in den Zeitungspacketen nicht
geeignet erscheinen.
</p><p lang="de" xml:lang="de">
"Die Geb&#252;hr f&#252;r aussergew&#246;hnliche Zeitungsbeilagen betr&#228;gt &frac14; Pf. f&#252;r je
25 Gramm jedes einzelnen Beilage-Exemplars. Ein bei Berechnung des
Gesammtbetrags sich ergebender Bruchtheil einer Mark wird n&#246;thigen Fallen
auf eine durch 5 theilbare Pfennigsumme aufw&#228;rts abgerundet."&mdash;<i>Allgemeine
Dienstanweisung f&#252;r Post und Telegraphie</i>, Berlin, 1901, Abschnitt V, i. p.
17.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_399_399" id="Footnote_399_399"></a><a href="#FNanchor_399_399"><span class="label">[399]</span></a>
<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Archiv f&#252;r Post und Telegraphie</i>, 1880, p. 279.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_400_400" id="Footnote_400_400"></a><a href="#FNanchor_400_400"><span class="label">[400]</span></a> 22nd August 1874.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_401_401" id="Footnote_401_401"></a><a href="#FNanchor_401_401"><span class="label">[401]</span></a> When in 1700 Dockwra was dismissed from the comptrollership, one
of the
charges against him was that he forbade the acceptance of band-boxes or other
parcels over 1 pound in weight&mdash;to the great inconvenience of traders and the
peril of many sick folk who might have received "phisick" by the Penny Post.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_402_402" id="Footnote_402_402"></a><a href="#FNanchor_402_402"><span class="label">[402]</span></a> 5 Geo. III, cap. 25.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_403_403" id="Footnote_403_403"></a><a href="#FNanchor_403_403"><span class="label">[403]</span></a> "In 1839 Sir John Burgoyne wrote to complain that, for a packet
of papers
sent to him at Dublin, which had been forwarded from some other part of Ireland
by mail-coach, as a <i>letter</i>, instead of a <i>parcel</i> (i.e. a
coach-parcel), he had been
charged a postage of &#163;11; that is to say, for a packet which he could easily
have
carried in his pocket, he was charged a sum for which he could have engaged the
whole mail-coach, i.e. places for four inside and three outside passengers, with
their portmanteaus, carpet bags, etc."&mdash;<i>The Post Office of Fifty Years
Ago</i>,
London, 1890, p. 7.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_404_404" id="Footnote_404_404"></a><a href="#FNanchor_404_404"><span class="label">[404]</span></a> "It has been suggested that if the proportional charge on Letters
by Weight
was more gradual, many Things which now pass as Parcels by the Mails and
augment the Profit of the Proprietors would be sent by the Post on Account of
the superior Safety.
</p><p>
"It is certain that great Numbers of small Parcels are sent by the Mail
Coaches at an inferior Rate of Carriage, which, considering this Establishment
as a Species of exclusive Carrying Trade, must subtract considerably from its
Revenue." <i>Seventh Report</i>, July, 1797 (<i>Commons Reports</i>, vol. xii.
p. 189).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_405_405" id="Footnote_405_405"></a><a href="#FNanchor_405_405"><span class="label">[405]</span></a> E.g., in 1829 the Secretary reported: "With respect to the
conveyance of
Pamphlets and Periodical Publications by the Post, Treasury has expressed
itself to me as decidedly hostile to any such infraction of the carrying Trade
of the Country. It is moreover physically impossible. We have the greatest
difficulty in conveying Letters, Newspapers, and official packets; many of the
official forms, etc., remain some days until we can take them by the Mail
Coaches." And in 1847, when Sir Rowland Hill put forward his proposal for
a Book Post, Colonel Maberley, then Secretary, said: "The Post ought to be
confined to small packets as much as possible and to convey large packets only
when the necessity is urgent." He was especially afraid of the inconvenience
which would be caused to foot-messengers.&mdash;<i>British Official Records.</i> Cf.
10 &amp;
11 Vict., cap. 85, &#167; 2.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_406_406" id="Footnote_406_406"></a><a href="#FNanchor_406_406"><span class="label">[406]</span></a> See <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">supra</i>, p. <a href="#Page_32">32</a>.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_407_407" id="Footnote_407_407"></a><a href="#FNanchor_407_407"><span class="label">[407]</span></a> As they had always done. "The Post Office has recently absolutely
entered
into competition with the Railway Companies. As carriers, the Companies
derived considerable profit from parcels. The Post Office, finding that railways
afford the means of carrying any quantity of bulk, has seen fit to undertake the
conveyance of books and other parcels at very reduced postal rates. If the
Post Office should extend its operations a little further, it must be brought
into
absolute antagonism with the Companies. Books are heavier articles than
laces or muslins, or many other fabrics, the conveyance of which enters largely
into railway receipts. The Post Office having made book parcels profitable, may
try to turn to account the conveyance of other, whether lighter or heavier,
articles of trade. It might be thought advisable to carry a small valuable
parcel to Aberdeen for 2d., a rate at which Railway Companies, having to pay
interest on capital, certainly cannot hope to compete with a department which
insists on the right of travelling on their roads at the mere actual cost. You
will not, therefore, fail to see that the Post Office arrangements may be
carried
to a point at which great injustice would be done to Railway Companies."&mdash;Robert
Stephenson before the Institution of Civil Engineers, January 1856
(S. Smiles, <i>Life of George Stephenson</i>, London, 1857, p. 525).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_408_408" id="Footnote_408_408"></a><a href="#FNanchor_408_408"><span class="label">[408]</span></a> See Leslie Stephen, <i>Life of Henry Fawcett</i>, London, 1885,
pp. 417-18.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_409_409" id="Footnote_409_409"></a><a href="#FNanchor_409_409"><span class="label">[409]</span></a> 45 &amp; 46 Vict., cap. 74.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_410_410" id="Footnote_410_410"></a><a href="#FNanchor_410_410"><span class="label">[410]</span></a> Jevons had foreseen that the rich would benefit; but he
anticipated a large
general traffic in household supplies. See W. S. Jevons, "A State Parcel Post,"
<i>Contemporary Review</i>, London, 1879, p. 209.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_411_411" id="Footnote_411_411"></a><a href="#FNanchor_411_411"><span class="label">[411]</span></a> See graphs at pp. <a href="#Page_371">371</a> and <a href="#Page_372">372</a>, <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">infra.</i></p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_412_412" id="Footnote_412_412"></a><a href="#FNanchor_412_412"><span class="label">[412]</span></a> The estimates on which this statement is based are given below at
p. <a href="#Page_311">311</a>,
Cf. Leslie Stephen, loc. cit. p. 420.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_413_413" id="Footnote_413_413"></a><a href="#FNanchor_413_413"><span class="label">[413]</span></a> See p. <a href="#Page_75">75</a>, <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">supra.</i></p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_414_414" id="Footnote_414_414"></a><a href="#FNanchor_414_414"><span class="label">[414]</span></a> <i>Annual Reports of the Postmaster-General</i>, Washington, 1890
and 1891.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_415_415" id="Footnote_415_415"></a><a href="#FNanchor_415_415"><span class="label">[415]</span></a> I.e. under the Government frank, for the fraudulent use of which
a penalty
of $300 is imposed.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_416_416" id="Footnote_416_416"></a><a href="#FNanchor_416_416"><span class="label">[416]</span></a> "In point of fact there are but four strong objections to the
parcels post, and
they are the four great express companies, who would be just as well off with an
8- or 11-pound parcel post if the heavy freight of the Executive Departments
and the immense packages of bogus serial books that are now thrown upon the
mails were shut out and turned over to the express companies, where they
belong."&mdash;<i>Report of the Postmaster-General</i>, Washington, 1891, p. 114.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_417_417" id="Footnote_417_417"></a><a href="#FNanchor_417_417"><span class="label">[417]</span></a> Ibid., 1904, p. 2.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_418_418" id="Footnote_418_418"></a><a href="#FNanchor_418_418"><span class="label">[418]</span></a> Cf. <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">supra</i>, p. <a href="#Page_127">127</a>, note 2.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_419_419" id="Footnote_419_419"></a><a href="#FNanchor_419_419"><span class="label">[419]</span></a> "When the British Government can secure better mail facilities in
the
United States for the English people than Uncle Sam can secure in this country
for our own people, it is time that somebody be heard from."&mdash;Mr. Hartranft,
Secretary of the Postal Progress League of California.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_420_420" id="Footnote_420_420"></a><a href="#FNanchor_420_420"><span class="label">[420]</span></a> "The difficulty now lies in the absence of a connected
transportation conduit,
which will receive the small shipment at the farm and convey it, like a letter,
direct to the consumer."&mdash;Hon. David J. Lewis, <i>Postal Express</i>, 1912, 62nd
Congress, 2nd Sess., Doc. No. 379, p. 5.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_421_421" id="Footnote_421_421"></a><a href="#FNanchor_421_421"><span class="label">[421]</span></a> Ibid.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_422_422" id="Footnote_422_422"></a><a href="#FNanchor_422_422"><span class="label">[422]</span></a> Mr. S. Norvell: "I found the conditions in Europe very much worse
than I
had anticipated. I found the way the people lived was entirely different from
what I had anticipated, and no man who has simply lived in this country and
has read in a general way about the conditions in Europe can appreciate how the
people live in Europe without going among them and studying the subject.
The business of Europe, while in the aggregate, of course, it is very large, as
a
matter of fact is a peanut business."&mdash;<i>Hearings before the Sub-Committee on
Parcel Post</i>, Washington, 1912, vol. ii. p. 496. Cf. <i>Address at Atlantic
City, N.J.</i>,
16th November 1911.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_423_423" id="Footnote_423_423"></a><a href="#FNanchor_423_423"><span class="label">[423]</span></a> "The department believed and still believes that the parcel post,
in time,
will become an important factor in improving and cheapening the food supply of
the great cities. Hence, on March 25, 1914, twelve of the large post offices
were
designated for special test of a farm-to-city service. Farmers were invited to
register their names and designate the commodities they desired to sell. Lists
of farmers and of the articles each offered were then printed and distributed by
the carrier force. The results exceeded expectations; shipments of country
products at the twelve offices named so materially increased that now eighteen
additional offices have been named for similar exploitation of the farm-to-city
service. The department's preliminary experience warrants the conclusion that
direct shipment of food products that are consumed substantially in the same
form in which they are produced offers practical possibilities of reducing the
cost
of living."&mdash;<i>Report of Postmaster-General</i>, Washington, 1913-14, p. 12.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_424_424" id="Footnote_424_424"></a><a href="#FNanchor_424_424"><span class="label">[424]</span></a> Law of 9 vend&#233;miaire, an VI.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_425_425" id="Footnote_425_425"></a><a href="#FNanchor_425_425"><span class="label">[425]</span></a> <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Vide infra</i>, p. <a href="#Page_279">279</a>.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_426_426" id="Footnote_426_426"></a><a href="#FNanchor_426_426"><span class="label">[426]</span></a> Art. 5 &#167; 2, Convention of 1880.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_427_427" id="Footnote_427_427"></a><a href="#FNanchor_427_427"><span class="label">[427]</span></a> "En obtenant ainsi le concours des compagnies pour le transport
des colis
internationaux, M. le Ministre devait &#233;videmment &#234;tre frapp&#233; des conditions
dans lesquelles allait se trouver la circulation des colis &#224; l'int&#233;rieur. Tandis
que
les premiers circuleraient en France avec la plus grande facilit&#233; &#224; un prix
forte
r&#233;duit, notre commerce int&#233;rieur non seulement continuerait &#224; payer des taxes
de transport relativement &#233;lev&#233;es, mais encore resterait assujetti &#224; tous les
inconv&#233;nients qui r&#233;sultent de la multiplicit&#233; des taxes et du manque d'entente
entre les compagnies."&mdash;<i>Journal Officiel de la R&#233;publique fran&#231;aise</i>, 27
janvier,
1881, p. 474.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_428_428" id="Footnote_428_428"></a><a href="#FNanchor_428_428"><span class="label">[428]</span></a> (1) La taxe sur la grande vitesse; (2) l'imp&#244;t du timbre; (3) la
taxe de
plombage; (4) le droit de statistique.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_429_429" id="Footnote_429_429"></a><a href="#FNanchor_429_429"><span class="label">[429]</span></a>
<i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Tarif pour le Transport des Colis Postaux</i>, Paris, 1913, p.
38.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_430_430" id="Footnote_430_430"></a><a href="#FNanchor_430_430"><span class="label">[430]</span></a> "Sont consid&#233;r&#233;s comme encombrants: les colis d&#233;passant 1 m. 50
dans un
sens quelconque; les colis qui, par leur forme, leur volume ou lour fragilit&#233;,
ne
se pr&#234;tent pas facilement au chargement avec d'autres colis, ou qui demandent
des pr&#233;cautions sp&#233;ciales."&mdash;Ibid., p. 6.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_431_431" id="Footnote_431_431"></a><a href="#FNanchor_431_431"><span class="label">[431]</span></a> Ibid., p. 17.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_432_432" id="Footnote_432_432"></a><a href="#FNanchor_432_432"><span class="label">[432]</span></a>
<i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Rapport portant fixation du Budget g&#233;n&#233;rale</i>, S&#233;nat, 1911,
No. 189.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_433_433" id="Footnote_433_433"></a><a href="#FNanchor_433_433"><span class="label">[433]</span></a> "Il faut que le bureau soit situ&#233; sur le parcours d'un courrier
en voiture, et
que les Compagnies de chemins de fer veuillent bien consentir &#224; accepter les
colis &#224; acheminer sur le bureau de poste.... Bref, tout compte fait, il n'y a
pas
une commune sur six en France o&#249; l'on puisse re&#231;evoir &#224; domicile un colis
postal."&mdash;Ibid., Chambre des D&#233;put&#233;s, Session 1907, No. 1247.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_434_434" id="Footnote_434_434"></a><a href="#FNanchor_434_434"><span class="label">[434]</span></a> "Il faudrait apporter au service des colis postaux dea
perfectionnements que
<i>les compagnies se refuseront &#224; effectuer et qui semblent plut&#244;t du ressort de
l'Administration</i>. La reception et la distribution des colis postaux dans les
communes rurales est une de ces am&#233;liorations d&#233;sirables.
</p><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">
"Il est inutile d'insister sur l'importance &#233;conomique de cette question. Les
colis postaux fournissent ou devraient fournir un moyen facile et rapide de
transport &#224; bon march&#233;; ils devraient favoriser aussi bien les int&#233;r&#234;ts du
commerce que ceux de l'agriculture. II s'en faut de beaucoup qu'ils rendent
tous les services que l'on est en droit d'en attendre."&mdash;Ibid., S&#233;nat, 1911,
No. 189.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_435_435" id="Footnote_435_435"></a><a href="#FNanchor_435_435"><span class="label">[435]</span></a>
F. Haass, <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Die Post und der Charakter ihrer Eink&#252;nfte,
Stuttgart</i>, 1890, p. 95.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_436_436" id="Footnote_436_436"></a><a href="#FNanchor_436_436"><span class="label">[436]</span></a>
Ordinance issued at Breslau; C. H. Hull, <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Die deutsche
Reichs-Packetpost</i>,
Jena, 1892, p. 1.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_437_437" id="Footnote_437_437"></a><a href="#FNanchor_437_437"><span class="label">[437]</span></a> C. H. Hull, ibid. p. 2.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_438_438" id="Footnote_438_438"></a><a href="#FNanchor_438_438"><span class="label">[438]</span></a>
E.g., <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">"Wann die Botten innerhalb Landes verschickt werden, soll
Ihnen
von Jeder Meill Ein Groschen und sechs Pfennig des tages und dan zween
Groschen, so des nachtes, und im b&#246;senschnee und regenwetter lauffen,
sowohl auch des tages zween Groschen warttgeld, endtrichtet und gegeben
werden."&mdash;Post und Botenordnung, 20 Juni 1614, Brandenburg;</span> cited F.
Haass,
ibid.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_439_439" id="Footnote_439_439"></a><a href="#FNanchor_439_439"><span class="label">[439]</span></a> The new parcel rates were, e.g.:&mdash;
</p>


<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Parcel rate for Brunswick and L&#252;neburg, 1741.">
<tr><th align="center">Weight.</th><th align="center">Up to 2 Miles.</th><th align="center" colspan="2">15-16 Miles.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="center">Pounds.</td><td align="center">Pf.</td><td align="right">Gr.</td><td align="right">pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">1</td><td align="center">8</td><td align="right">1</td><td align="right">8</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">2-10</td><td align="center">5</td><td align="right">1</td><td align="right">10</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">10-30</td><td align="center">3</td><td align="right">&mdash;</td><td align="right">&mdash;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">30-60</td><td align="center">1</td><td></td><td align="right">6</td></tr>
</table></div>



</div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_440_440" id="Footnote_440_440"></a><a href="#FNanchor_440_440"><span class="label">[440]</span></a> The rates of 1766 compared with those of 1712 as follows: For the
transmission
of a pound parcel from Berlin&mdash;
</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Comparison of parcel post rates of 1712 and 1766, from Berlin to other German towns.">
<tr><th align="right"></th><th align="center">1766.</th><th align="center">1712.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">To Hamburg</td><td align="center">1&frac12; gr.</td><td align="center">1 gr.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">To Magdeburg</td><td align="center">10 pf.</td><td align="center">7 pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">To K&#246;nigsberg</td><td align="center">3&frac12; gr.</td><td align="center">2&frac12; gr.</td></tr>
</table></div>
<p class="blockquot">
&mdash;F. Haass, op. cit. p. 98.</p>
</div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_441_441" id="Footnote_441_441"></a><a href="#FNanchor_441_441"><span class="label">[441]</span></a>
Dr. Artur Schmidt, <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Finanz-Archiv</i>, 1906, vol. i. p. 80.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_442_442" id="Footnote_442_442"></a><a href="#FNanchor_442_442"><span class="label">[442]</span></a> H. von Stephan, op. cit. p. 746.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_443_443" id="Footnote_443_443"></a><a href="#FNanchor_443_443"><span class="label">[443]</span></a>
Moch, <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Archiv f&#252;r Post und Telegraphie</i>, 1893, p. 6. If the
average price of oats
in the most important districts in Prussia should exceed a thaler a bushel, the
rate
might be increased from 3 pf. to 4 pf.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_444_444" id="Footnote_444_444"></a><a href="#FNanchor_444_444"><span class="label">[444]</span></a>
Cabinet Order of 5th March 1847.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_445_445" id="Footnote_445_445"></a><a href="#FNanchor_445_445"><span class="label">[445]</span></a> Law of 2nd June 1852.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_446_446" id="Footnote_446_446"></a><a href="#FNanchor_446_446"><span class="label">[446]</span></a> A similar system had been introduced in the German Postal Union
in 1858.
The sides of the squares were, however, 4 miles long, and were too large for the
smaller distances of the North German Union.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_447_447" id="Footnote_447_447"></a><a href="#FNanchor_447_447"><span class="label">[447]</span></a>
<span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Motiv zur Posttaxnovelle vom 4 November 1867</span>; cited F. Haass, op.
cit.
p. 100.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_448_448" id="Footnote_448_448"></a><a href="#FNanchor_448_448"><span class="label">[448]</span></a> Law of 17th May 1873.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><a name="Footnote_449_449" id="Footnote_449_449"></a><a href="#FNanchor_449_449"><span class="label">[449]</span></a>
Motiv zur Posttaxnovelle vom 17 Mai 1873.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_450_450" id="Footnote_450_450"></a><a href="#FNanchor_450_450"><span class="label">[450]</span></a> Railway postal law of 20th December 1875.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_451_451" id="Footnote_451_451"></a><a href="#FNanchor_451_451"><span class="label">[451]</span></a> The parcel rate for 20 kilogrammes sent as one parcel or as four
parcels
each of 5 kilogrammes in each zone would be as follows:&mdash;
</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Comparison of rates for sending combined or separate parcels, Germany, from 1873.">
<tr><th align="center" colspan="3" valign="middle">Zone.</th><th align="center" valign="middle">As one Parcel.</th><th align="center" valign="middle">As 4 Parcels,<br /> each of 5 kg.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="right" colspan="3"></td><td align="center">Pf.</td><td align="center">Pf.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">I</td><td align="left">(up to 10</td><td align="right">miles)</td><td align="center">100</td><td align="center">100</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">II</td><td align="left">(10-20</td><td align="right">"&emsp;)</td><td align="center">200</td><td align="center">200</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">III</td><td align="left">(20-50</td><td align="right">"&emsp;)</td><td align="center">350</td><td align="center">200</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">IV</td><td align="left">(50-100</td><td align="right">"&emsp;)</td><td align="center">500</td><td align="center">200</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">V</td><td align="left">(100-150</td><td align="right">"&emsp;)</td><td align="center">650</td><td align="center">200</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">VI</td><td align="left">(Over 150</td><td align="right">"&emsp;)</td><td align="center">800</td><td align="center">200</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p class="blockquot">
&mdash;C. H. Hull, op. cit. p. 21.</p>
</div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_452_452" id="Footnote_452_452"></a><a href="#FNanchor_452_452"><span class="label">[452]</span></a> Parcels in Imperial German Postal Service (Inland):&mdash;
</p>


<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Changes in distribution of parcel weights in Imperial German Postal Service, from 1875 to 1900.">
<tr><th align="center">Year</th><th align="center">Parcels not<br /> exceeding 1 kg.</th><th align="center">From 1<br /> to 5 kg.</th><th align="center">From 5<br /> to 10 kg.</th><th align="center">Over<br /> 10 kg.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="center"></td><td align="center">Per cent.</td><td align="center">Per cent.</td><td align="center">Per cent.</td><td align="center">Per cent.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">1875</td><td align="center">25</td><td align="center">50</td><td align="center">18</td><td align="center">7</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">1880</td><td align="center">20</td><td align="center">61</td><td align="center">17</td><td align="center">4</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">1890</td><td align="center">15</td><td align="center">65</td><td align="center">18</td><td align="center">3</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">1900</td><td align="center">12</td><td align="center">69</td><td align="center">17</td><td align="center">2</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p class="blockquot">
&mdash;<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Finanz-Archiv</i>,1906, vol. i. p. 89; C. H. Hull, op. cit. p. 28.</p>
</div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_453_453" id="Footnote_453_453"></a><a href="#FNanchor_453_453"><span class="label">[453]</span></a> Average postage per parcel (pf.):&mdash;
</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Postage per parcel compared 1875 with 1890, Imperial German Postal Service.">
<tr><th align="right">Zone.</th><th align="right">&nbsp; &nbsp;</th><th align="center">1875.</th><th align="center">1890.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="right" colspan="2">Ortssendungen</td><td align="right">26&#183;2</td><td align="center">26&#183;8</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">I</td><td align="right">&nbsp; &nbsp;</td><td align="center">32&#183;3</td><td align="center">29&#183;7</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">II</td><td align="right">&nbsp; &nbsp;</td><td align="center">62&#183;1</td><td align="center">57&#183;4</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">III</td><td align="right">&nbsp; &nbsp;</td><td align="center">66&#183;5</td><td align="center">57&#183;4</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">IV</td><td align="right">&nbsp; &nbsp;</td><td align="center">69&#183;3</td><td align="center">57&#183;4</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">V</td><td align="right">&nbsp; &nbsp;</td><td align="center">74&#183;3</td><td align="center">58&#183;5</td></tr>
<tr><td align="right">VI</td><td align="right">&nbsp; &nbsp;</td><td align="center">86&#183;6</td><td align="center">73&#183;8</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p class="blockquot">
&mdash;Ibid., p. 24</p>
</div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_454_454" id="Footnote_454_454"></a><a href="#FNanchor_454_454"><span class="label">[454]</span></a> Average weight of parcels in Imperial German Postal Service
(Inland):&mdash;
</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Average weight of parcels in Imperial German Postal Service, 1875 to 1890.">
<tr><th align="center">Year.</th><th align="center">All parcels.<br /> Kg.</th><th align="center">Parcels not <br />exceeding 10 kg.</th><th align="center">Parcels over<br /> 10 kg.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="center">1875</td><td align="center">4&#183;3</td><td align="center">3&#183;6</td><td align="center">16&#183;2</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">1880</td><td align="center">4&#183;2</td><td align="center">3&#183;8</td><td align="center">15&#183;4</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">1885</td><td align="center">4&#183;1</td><td align="center">3&#183;8</td><td align="center">15&#183;0</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">1890</td><td align="center">4&#183;0</td><td align="center">3&#183;9</td><td align="center">14&#183;5</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p class="blockquot">
&mdash;Ibid., p. 26.</p>
</div>


<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_455_455" id="Footnote_455_455"></a><a href="#FNanchor_455_455"><span class="label">[455]</span></a>
<span lang="de" xml:lang="de">"Angenommen es h&#228;tte im Jahre 1890 unter 10 Packeten das Gewicht
eines in Zone III 12.4 Kg.; eines in Zone IV 8.7 Kg.; eines in Zone V 7.5 Kg.,
oder eines in Zone VI 6.9 Kg., das der anderen neun je 5 Kg. betragen, so
st&#228;nde der Durchschnittsportobetrag schon auf seiner thats&#228;chlichen H&#246;he."</span>&mdash;C.
H. Hull, loc. cit. p. 25.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_456_456" id="Footnote_456_456"></a><a href="#FNanchor_456_456"><span class="label">[456]</span></a>
<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Statistik der Deutschen Reichs-Post-&nbsp;und
Telegraphen-Verwaltung</i>, 1910,
Berlin, 1911, p. 20.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_457_457" id="Footnote_457_457"></a><a href="#FNanchor_457_457"><span class="label">[457]</span></a> An analysis of the traffic of the Imperial Post Office gives the
following
result:&mdash;
</p>
<p>
Numbers&mdash;
</p>

<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Proportions of parcels in weight categories, Germany, 1887 and 1900 compared.">
<tr><th align="center" colspan="4"></th><th align="center">1887.</th><th align="center">1900.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="center" colspan="4"></td><td align="center">Per cent.</td><td align="center">Per cent.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">Parcels</td><td align="center">not exceeding</td><td align="right">1 kg.</td><td align="center">in weight</td><td align="right">17.158</td><td align="right">12.163</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">1-5 kg.</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">62.086</td><td align="right">68.874</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">5-6 kg.</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">7.095</td><td align="right">7.783</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">6-7 kg.</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">3.984</td><td align="right">4.081</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">7-8 kg.</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">2.629</td><td align="right">2.364</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">8-9 kg.</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">1.809</td><td align="right">1.466</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">9-10 kg.</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="right">1.353</td><td align="right">.986</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="left" colspan="3">over 10 kg. in weight</td><td align="right">3.886</td><td align="right">2.193</td></tr>
</table></div>

<p>
Revenue and distance of transmission&mdash;
</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Analysis of parcel post revenue, Germany.">
<tr><th align="center" colspan="3"></th><th align="right">Per cent.</th><th align="right">Postage, M.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="3">Local parcels</td><td align="right">0.216</td><td align="right">42,826</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Zone</td><td align="right">I</td><td align="right">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">42.535</td><td align="right">9,639,750</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center"> "</td><td align="right">II</td><td align="right">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">15.865</td><td align="right">6,849,005</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center"> "</td><td align="right">III</td><td align="right">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">25.258</td><td align="right">10,906,357</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center"> "</td><td align="right">IV</td><td align="right">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">14.610</td><td align="right">6,321,769</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center"> "</td><td align="right">V</td><td align="right">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">1.452</td><td align="right">604,909</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center"> "</td><td align="right">VI</td><td align="right">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">0.064</td><td align="right">29,200</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>
&mdash;F. Haass, ibid. p. 77; <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Finanz-Archiv</i>, 1906; vol. i. p. 89; cf.
<span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Statistik</span>, 1900,
p. 31.</p>
</div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_458_458" id="Footnote_458_458"></a><a href="#FNanchor_458_458"><span class="label">[458]</span></a> Total number in 1870, 37 millions; in 1880, 60 millions; in 1890,
97
millions; in 1913, 280 millions.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><a name="Footnote_459_459" id="Footnote_459_459"></a><a href="#FNanchor_459_459"><span class="label">[459]</span></a> "Infolge seiner Billigkeit hat sich f&#252;r viele Handels-&nbsp;und
Erwerbszweige ein
unmittelbarer Verkehr zwischen Produzenten und Konsumenten entwickelt
(Butter-, Fleisch-, Fischsendungen, u.s.w.), der fr&#252;her durch Zwischenhandel
verteuert
und erschwert wurde. Ganz neue Erwerbszweige haben sich gebildet,
indem Erzeugnisse, die fr&#252;her am Produktionsorte fast gar nicht verwertbar
waren, in Massen billig nach weit entfernten Gegenden versandt werden k&#246;nnen,
um dort Verwertung zu finden. Auch die Hausindustrie ist durch direkten
Bezug von Rohstoffen f&#252;r Spinnerei, Weberei, u.s.w., neu belebt worden."&mdash;Dr.
Artur Schmidt, <i>Finanz-Archiv</i>,1906, vol. i. p. 84.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><a name="Footnote_460_460" id="Footnote_460_460"></a><a href="#FNanchor_460_460"><span class="label">[460]</span></a> "'Der Eisenbahn den Gross-&nbsp;und Massenverkehr, der Post den
Kleinverkehr,'
empfiehlt auch <i>de Terra</i>. In der Tat erscheint dieser Vorschlag
verlockend.
Denn die Post kann den ungeheueren Paketverkehr schon jetzt nur mit M&#252;he
bew&#228;ltigen und ist zu dem Zwecke oft zur Einstellung kostspieliger
Transportmittel
(Eisenbahnbeiwagen) gen&#246;tigt."&mdash;Ibid., p. 90.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_461_461" id="Footnote_461_461"></a><a href="#FNanchor_461_461"><span class="label">[461]</span></a> Ibid., p. 91.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><a name="Footnote_462_462" id="Footnote_462_462"></a><a href="#FNanchor_462_462"><span class="label">[462]</span></a> "Abgesehen aber von diesem rein politischen Einwand w&#252;rde die
Aufstellung
eines komplizierten Zonentarifs bei dem heutigen Umfang des Packetverkehrs
den Dienst unertr&#228;glich erschweren und verz&#246;gern. Es l&#228;sst sich wohl fragen
ob, wenn jedes Packet auf seine Bef&#246;rderungsentfernung zu pr&#252;fen w&#228;re, der
Dienst sich technisch durchf&#252;hren liesse, wenigstens zu Geb&#252;hren, welche den
Verkehr nicht allzusehr einschr&#228;nken w&#252;rden."&mdash;C. H. Hull, op. cit. p. 31;
<i lang="la" xml:lang="la">vide</i> also Dr. Artur Schmidt, <i>Finanz-Archiv</i>,1906, vol. i. p. 87.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><a name="Footnote_463_463" id="Footnote_463_463"></a><a href="#FNanchor_463_463"><span class="label">[463]</span></a> E.g. "Es ist sogar wahrscheinlich, dass, wenn zu den Kosten der
Eisenbahnleistungen
f&#252;r Packetpostzwecke ein Betrag f&#252;r Verzinzung des Eisenbahn-Anlagekapitals
noch hinzugerechnet wird, die Packetpost dann mit einem Defizit
arbeitet."&mdash;C. H. Hull, op. cit. p. 152; ibid., p. 139. Cf. G. Cohn,
<i>Finanzwissenschaft</i>,
Berlin, 1889, p. 383, F. W. Grunow, <i>Zur Reform des Paketportos in
Deutschland und &#214;sterreich-Ungarn</i>, Leipzig, 1898, p. 131; contra,
<i>Handw&#246;rterbuch
der Staatswissenschaft</i>, Jena, 1910, vol. vi. p. 1092.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_464_464" id="Footnote_464_464"></a><a href="#FNanchor_464_464"><span class="label">[464]</span></a> <i>British Official Records</i>, 1847.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_465_465" id="Footnote_465_465"></a><a href="#FNanchor_465_465"><span class="label">[465]</span></a> <i>British Official Records</i>, 1847.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_466_466" id="Footnote_466_466"></a><a href="#FNanchor_466_466"><span class="label">[466]</span></a> The new rates were&mdash;
</p>


<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="United Kingdom book postage rates from 1855.">
<tr><td align="left">Not</td><td align="left">exceeding</td><td align="left">4</td><td align="left">ounces</td><td align="left">1d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">8</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">2d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">"</td><td align="center">"</td><td align="left">1</td><td align="left">pound</td><td align="left">4d.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left" colspan="5">2d. for every additional half-pound.</td></tr>
</table></div>

</div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_467_467" id="Footnote_467_467"></a><a href="#FNanchor_467_467"><span class="label">[467]</span></a> See <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">supra</i>, pp. <a href="#Page_129">129-131</a>.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_468_468" id="Footnote_468_468"></a><a href="#FNanchor_468_468"><span class="label">[468]</span></a> 6th April, 1869; <i>Parl. Debates</i> (<i>Commons</i>), vol.
cxcv. col. 258.
</p><p>
"The Post Office revenue is derived mainly from the circulation of letters
which pay 1d. for half an ounce, and if they exceed half an ounce, another 1d.
The writers of those letters are not necessarily rich people, or persons to whom
the postage is a matter of indifference; they are, in a certain sense, the
helots
who bear the burden of the expense of the Department. Is it, then, not a
question worth considering, whether&mdash;supposing we accede to this request and
carry 2 ounces of printed matter for a &#189;d., for the benefit of a particular
class of
the community&mdashmdash;that might not interfere with the possibility of maintaining the
1d. postage on letters?"&mdash;Chancellor of Exchequer in House of Commons,
6th April 1869; <i>Parl. Debates</i> (<i>Commons</i>), vol. cxcv. col. 254.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_469_469" id="Footnote_469_469"></a><a href="#FNanchor_469_469"><span class="label">[469]</span></a> The growth of the traffic is shown by the following table:&mdash;
</p>


<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Growth in traffic of books packets in the United Kingdom from 1872 to 1914.">
<tr><th align="center">Year.</th><th align="center">Average Annual<br /> Number of<br /> Book Packets</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1872-76</td><td align="right">143,000,000</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1882-86</td><td align="right">323,000,000</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1892-96</td><td align="right">570,000,000</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1900-05</td><td align="right">811,000,000</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1909-10</td><td align="right">974,000,000</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1912-13</td><td align="right">1,079,000,000</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">1913-14</td><td align="right">1,172,000,000</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>
&mdash;<i>The Post Office: An Historical Summary</i>, London, 1911, p. 14; and
<i>Annual
Reports of Postmaster-General</i>.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_470_470" id="Footnote_470_470"></a><a href="#FNanchor_470_470"><span class="label">[470]</span></a> See <i>First Report of the Committee on Retrenchment in the
Public Expenditure</i>,
1915 (Parliamentary Papers, Cd. 8067 and Cd. 8068); <i>Times</i> newspaper,
28th September 1915.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_471_471" id="Footnote_471_471"></a><a href="#FNanchor_471_471"><span class="label">[471]</span></a>
A. Belloc, <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Les Postes fran&#231;aises, Recherches historiques</i>,
Paris, 1886, p. 353.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_472_472" id="Footnote_472_472"></a><a href="#FNanchor_472_472"><span class="label">[472]</span></a> Law of 4 thermidor, an IV (22nd July 1796).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_473_473" id="Footnote_473_473"></a><a href="#FNanchor_473_473"><span class="label">[473]</span></a> P. Jaccottey, op. cit. p. 327.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><a name="Footnote_474_474" id="Footnote_474_474"></a><a href="#FNanchor_474_474"><span class="label">[474]</span></a> "Gedruckte B&#252;cher und Aemter-Rechnungen, Akzise-, Zoll-, und
Messzettel,
sowie f&#252;r Stempelpapier."&mdash;<i>Archiv f&#252;r Post und Telegraphie</i>, 1880, p.
268.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_475_475" id="Footnote_475_475"></a><a href="#FNanchor_475_475"><span class="label">[475]</span></a> This rate was, e.g., 2 groschen per pound from Berlin to Xanten
or Duisburg,
1 groschen to Hamburg, and 2 pf. to Spandau.&mdash;Ibid., p. 269.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_476_476" id="Footnote_476_476"></a><a href="#FNanchor_476_476"><span class="label">[476]</span></a> Ibid.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_477_477" id="Footnote_477_477"></a><a href="#FNanchor_477_477"><span class="label">[477]</span></a> Law of 21st December 1849.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_478_478" id="Footnote_478_478"></a><a href="#FNanchor_478_478"><span class="label">[478]</span></a> The first penalty applied also to sample packets.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><a name="Footnote_479_479" id="Footnote_479_479"></a><a href="#FNanchor_479_479"><span class="label">[479]</span></a> "Zeitungen, Journale, Preis-Courante, gedruckte Cirkularien,
Empfehlungsschreiben,
Correkturbogen ohne beigef&#252;gtes Manuskript und gedruckte
Lotterie-Gewinnlisten."</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_480_480" id="Footnote_480_480"></a><a href="#FNanchor_480_480"><span class="label">[480]</span></a>
To include <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">"Druckschriften, Ank&#252;ndigungen und sonstige
Anzeigen."</span></p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_481_481" id="Footnote_481_481"></a><a href="#FNanchor_481_481"><span class="label">[481]</span></a>
<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Archiv f&#252;r Post und Telegraphie</i>, 1880, p. 273.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_482_482" id="Footnote_482_482"></a><a href="#FNanchor_482_482"><span class="label">[482]</span></a> Order of 11th April 1856.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_483_483" id="Footnote_483_483"></a><a href="#FNanchor_483_483"><span class="label">[483]</span></a>
<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Archiv f&#252;r Post und Telegraphie</i>, 1880, p. 274.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_484_484" id="Footnote_484_484"></a><a href="#FNanchor_484_484"><span class="label">[484]</span></a> Ibid., p. 275.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_485_485" id="Footnote_485_485"></a><a href="#FNanchor_485_485"><span class="label">[485]</span></a>
<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Archiv f&#252;r Post und Telegraphie</i>, 1880, p. 276.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_486_486" id="Footnote_486_486"></a><a href="#FNanchor_486_486"><span class="label">[486]</span></a> Ibid., p. 278.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_487_487" id="Footnote_487_487"></a><a href="#FNanchor_487_487"><span class="label">[487]</span></a> Order of 3rd March 1873.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_488_488" id="Footnote_488_488"></a><a href="#FNanchor_488_488"><span class="label">[488]</span></a> Order of 18th December 1874.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><a name="Footnote_489_489" id="Footnote_489_489"></a><a href="#FNanchor_489_489"><span class="label">[489]</span></a> "Alle durch Buchdruck, Kupferstich, Stahlstich, Holzschnitt,
Lithographie,
Metallographie, und Photographie vervielf&#228;ltigten Gegenst&#228;nde" (Sofern sie nach
ihrer Form und sonstigen Beschaffenheit zur Versendung mit der Briefpost
geeignet erscheinen).&mdash;<i>Archiv f&#252;r Post und Telegraphie</i>, 1880, p. 281.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><a name="Footnote_490_490" id="Footnote_490_490"></a><a href="#FNanchor_490_490"><span class="label">[490]</span></a> "Auch der Erh&#246;hung des Meistgewichts l&#228;sst sich das Wort nicht
reden.
Mit dieser Massnahme w&#228;chst sofort die Unhandlichkeit der Sendungen und
damit die Vermehrung und Kostspieligkeit der Betriebsmittel. Bereits jetzt
m&#252;ssen zur Bew&#228;ltigung der Massen v.a. in den Bahnposten, besonders infolge
der vielfach vertretnen Rollenform, ausserordentliche Austrengungen gemacht
werden. Zudem bietet das billige Paketporto hinreichend g&#252;nstige Gelegenheit
zur Versendung schwerer Drucksachen. Zu einer Aenderung des Drucksachentarifs
liegt demnach ein Bed&#252;rfniss nicht vor."&mdash;<i>Finanz-Archiv</i>, 1905, vol. ii.
p. 178.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_491_491" id="Footnote_491_491"></a><a href="#FNanchor_491_491"><span class="label">[491]</span></a>
<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Statistik der Deutschen Reichs-Post-&nbsp;und
Telegraphen-Verwaltung</i>, 1910, p. 15.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_492_492" id="Footnote_492_492"></a><a href="#FNanchor_492_492"><span class="label">[492]</span></a> H. Joyce, <i>History of the Post Office</i>, p. 177.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_493_493" id="Footnote_493_493"></a><a href="#FNanchor_493_493"><span class="label">[493]</span></a> "For the Port of every Single Letter, or Piece of Paper, to or
from any Place
not exceeding Eighty <i>English</i> Miles distant from the said General Post
Office in
<i>London</i>, and within that Part of <i>Great Britain</i> called
<i>England</i>, and not coming
from or directed on Shipboard, Three-pence; and for the like Port of every
Double
Letter, Sixpence; etc."&mdash;9 Anne, cap. 10, &#167; 6.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_494_494" id="Footnote_494_494"></a><a href="#FNanchor_494_494"><span class="label">[494]</span></a> "For every Single Letter or Cover containing One or more Paper or
Papers
with Patterns, or containing One or more Pattern or Patterns of Cloth, Silk,
Stuff, or One or more Sample or Samples of any other Sort of Goods, or One or
more Piece or Pieces of any Sort of Thing enclosed therein, or affixed thereto,
though not Paper, if the same together do not weigh an Ounce Weight, the
Rates payable for a Double Letter shall be paid, and no more."&mdash;26 Geo. II,
cap. 13, &#167; 8.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_495_495" id="Footnote_495_495"></a><a href="#FNanchor_495_495"><span class="label">[495]</span></a> 35 Geo. III, cap. 53, &#167; 9.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_496_496" id="Footnote_496_496"></a><a href="#FNanchor_496_496"><span class="label">[496]</span></a> 41 Geo. III, cap. 7, &#167; 11.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_497_497" id="Footnote_497_497"></a><a href="#FNanchor_497_497"><span class="label">[497]</span></a> 45 Geo. III, cap. 1, &#167; 1.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_498_498" id="Footnote_498_498"></a><a href="#FNanchor_498_498"><span class="label">[498]</span></a> 52 Geo. III, cap. 88, &#167; 2.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_499_499" id="Footnote_499_499"></a><a href="#FNanchor_499_499"><span class="label">[499]</span></a> 7 Will. IV &amp; 1 Vict., cap. 34, &#167; 28.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_500_500" id="Footnote_500_500"></a><a href="#FNanchor_500_500"><span class="label">[500]</span></a> 2 &amp; 3 Vict., cap. 52, &#167; 1.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_501_501" id="Footnote_501_501"></a><a href="#FNanchor_501_501"><span class="label">[501]</span></a> 3 &amp; 4 Vict., cap. 96, &#167; 4.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_502_502" id="Footnote_502_502"></a><a href="#FNanchor_502_502"><span class="label">[502]</span></a> <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Vide</i> <i>Annual Reports of the Postmaster-General</i> 1859
et seq.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_503_503" id="Footnote_503_503"></a><a href="#FNanchor_503_503"><span class="label">[503]</span></a> <i>British Official Records</i>, 1863.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_504_504" id="Footnote_504_504"></a><a href="#FNanchor_504_504"><span class="label">[504]</span></a> See <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">supra</i>, p. <a href="#Page_31">31</a>.
</p><p>
"The public felt aggrieved at the restriction, and, as the difficulty of
defining
samples in all cases could not be overcome, it was decided to reduce the inland
letter postage to such an extent as would enable the public to send through the
post in closed covers not only patterns and samples, but also any light articles
for a moderate charge; thus abolishing altogether the distinction between
letters
and samples, and providing a cheap and convenient post for small
parcels."&mdash;<i>Seventeenth
Report of the Postmaster-General</i>, London, 1871, p. 4.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_505_505" id="Footnote_505_505"></a><a href="#FNanchor_505_505"><span class="label">[505]</span></a> <i>Report of Select Committee on Estimates of Revenue
Departments</i>, 1888, p. 24.
</p><p>
It may be noted, in justification of the view sometimes advanced that
additional traffic can without loss be undertaken by the Post Office at rates
lower than those for the main services, that in this case the Post Office
anticipated that no direct additional expense would be incurred in the
provinces in dealing with the increase of traffic, and that in London the
additional expense would only amount to some &#163;500 a year.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_506_506" id="Footnote_506_506"></a><a href="#FNanchor_506_506"><span class="label">[506]</span></a> See <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">supra</i>, p. <a href="#Page_223">223</a>.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_507_507" id="Footnote_507_507"></a><a href="#FNanchor_507_507"><span class="label">[507]</span></a> Arr&#234;te of 4th March 1858. In 1881 these limits were raised
slightly&mdash;to 350
grammes and to 30 centimetres respectively.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_508_508" id="Footnote_508_508"></a><a href="#FNanchor_508_508"><span class="label">[508]</span></a> In 1871 the Compagnie des Chemins de Fer de l'Est filed a
petition in which
they contested the right of the Post Office to send samples of merchandise
by railway without specially remunerating the railway company. They
claimed that under the law they were obliged to carry free only "letters" and
"despatches." The case was, however, decided against the company.&mdash;P. Jaccottey,
op. cit., p. 334.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_509_509" id="Footnote_509_509"></a><a href="#FNanchor_509_509"><span class="label">[509]</span></a> Ibid., p. 333.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_510_510" id="Footnote_510_510"></a><a href="#FNanchor_510_510"><span class="label">[510]</span></a>
<i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Statistique g&#233;n&#233;rale du service postal</i>, Berne, 1914, p.
7.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_511_511" id="Footnote_511_511"></a><a href="#FNanchor_511_511"><span class="label">[511]</span></a>
<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Archiv f&#252;r Post und Telegraphie</i>, 1880, p. 270.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_512_512" id="Footnote_512_512"></a><a href="#FNanchor_512_512"><span class="label">[512]</span></a>
<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Archiv f&#252;r Post und Telegraphie</i>, 1880, p. 273.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_513_513" id="Footnote_513_513"></a><a href="#FNanchor_513_513"><span class="label">[513]</span></a>
Dr. Artur Schmidt, <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Finanz-Archiv</i>, 1905, vol. ii., p. 180.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_514_514" id="Footnote_514_514"></a><a href="#FNanchor_514_514"><span class="label">[514]</span></a> 9 Anne, cap. 10, &#167; 13.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_515_515" id="Footnote_515_515"></a><a href="#FNanchor_515_515"><span class="label">[515]</span></a> H. Joyce, <i>History of the Post Office</i>, p. 332.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_516_516" id="Footnote_516_516"></a><a href="#FNanchor_516_516"><span class="label">[516]</span></a> 6 Geo. I, cap. 21.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_517_517" id="Footnote_517_517"></a><a href="#FNanchor_517_517"><span class="label">[517]</span></a> 41 Geo. III, cap. 7, &#167; 4.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_518_518" id="Footnote_518_518"></a><a href="#FNanchor_518_518"><span class="label">[518]</span></a> "We find that in France, and generally on the Continent, the
circulation of
Prices Current, at a low charge, is encouraged by the Government, and we are of
opinion that any facility which can be given for the transmission of mercantile
information must tend to promote the commercial interests of the country; we
therefore beg to recommend to your Lordships, in the first place, that English
Prices Current, and Publications of a similar nature published in this country,
be
permitted to pass through the medium of the Post Office without the imposition
of a charge so high as to impede their general circulation.... We hope ...
your Lordships may find it practicable to permit the free transmission of Prices
Current by post, if printed on paper bearing a halfpenny stamp."&mdash;<i>Fifth
Report
of Commissioners</i> (11th April 1836), pp. 3, 4.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_519_519" id="Footnote_519_519"></a><a href="#FNanchor_519_519"><span class="label">[519]</span></a>
<span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">"Cette assimilation les soumettait &#224; des taxes exorbitantes; elle
provoquait
la fraude, et multipliait les contraventions au monopole de la poste."</span>&mdash;P.
Jaccottey, op. cit., p. 319.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_520_520" id="Footnote_520_520"></a><a href="#FNanchor_520_520"><span class="label">[520]</span></a> See <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">supra</i>, p. <a href="#Page_225">225</a>.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><a name="Footnote_521_521" id="Footnote_521_521"></a><a href="#FNanchor_521_521"><span class="label">[521]</span></a> "Als Gesch&#228;ftspapiere sind zugelassen: alle Schriftst&#252;cke und
Urkunden,
ganz oder teilweise mit der Hand geschrieben oder gezeichnet, welche nicht die
Eigenschaft einer eigentlichen und pers&#246;nlichen Korrespondenz haben, wie
Prozessakten,
von &#246;ffentlichen Beamten aufgenommene Urkunden jeder Art, Frachtbriefe
oder Ladescheine, Rechnungen, Quittungen auf gestempelten oder ungestempelten
Papier, die verschiedenen Dienstpapiers der Versicherungsgesellschaften,
Abschriften oder Ausz&#252;ge aussergerichtlicher Vertr&#228;ge, gleichviel ob
auf gestempelten oder ungestempelten Papier geschrieben, handschriftliche
Partituren
oder Notenbl&#228;tter, die abgesondert versandten Manuskripte von Werken
oder Zeitungen, korrigierte Sch&#252;lerarbeiten mit Ausschluss jeglichen Urteils
&#252;ber die Arbeit, Militarp&#228;sse, Lohn-, Dienst- oder Arbeitsb&#252;cher, u.s.w. (&#167; 9,
Postordnung)."&mdash;<i>Finanz-Archiv</i>, 1905, vol. ii., p. 180.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_522_522" id="Footnote_522_522"></a><a href="#FNanchor_522_522"><span class="label">[522]</span></a>
<i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">L'Union postale</i>, Berne, 1st July 1876.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_523_523" id="Footnote_523_523"></a><a href="#FNanchor_523_523"><span class="label">[523]</span></a> A proposal to introduce postcards in France was made by M.
Wolowski in
the National Assembly on the 23rd August 1871, in the debate on the Bill for
raising the rates of postage. The proposal was rejected on account of the
probable effect on the revenue. The cards would no doubt substitute letters to
some extent, and at the time, of course, the chief object in view was an
increase
of revenue. M. Wolowski repeated his proposal in 1873 as an amendment to the
Budget. He was able to point to the effect in England of the introduction of
postcards&mdash;an increase of 6 per cent. in the number of letters, as compared with
an increase of 6 per cent. in the year preceding their introduction. The
proposal
was opposed by the Budget Commission and by the Government, but the
amendment was voted by the Assembly and was incorporated in the law of the
20th December 1872. The rate of postage was fixed at 10 centimes for cards
circulating within the area served by the same office and 15 centimes for
others.
(The minimum letter rate was at this time 15 centimes for letters circulating in
the area served by the same office and 25 centimes for others.) In 1878 the rate
was made uniform at 10 centimes for all cards. This rate still continues in
respect of cards bearing written messages in the nature of personal
communications,
but it has been reduced to 5 centimes in respect of picture postcards or
commercial advertisement cards which do not boar a written communication of
more than five words. The circulation of postcards is naturally much restricted,
and the reduction of the general rate to 5 centimes is much desired.
There has been a good deal of discussion of the matter by the parliamentary
Budget Commissions, but financial considerations have so far prevented the
concession of this boon.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_524_524" id="Footnote_524_524"></a><a href="#FNanchor_524_524"><span class="label">[524]</span></a> See <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">infra</i>, pp. <a href="#Page_303">303-4</a>; cf. C. H. Hull, op. cit., p. 146.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_525_525" id="Footnote_525_525"></a><a href="#FNanchor_525_525"><span class="label">[525]</span></a> <i>Annual Report of Postmaster-General</i>, 1913-14, p. 1.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_526_526" id="Footnote_526_526"></a><a href="#FNanchor_526_526"><span class="label">[526]</span></a> E.g., "As to books for the blind, there can be only one opinion.
The
afflicted must be looked after before anybody else."&mdash;Sir Adolphe Caron,
<i>Parliamentary
Debates, Canada</i> (<i>Commons</i>), 13th May 1898.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_527_527" id="Footnote_527_527"></a><a href="#FNanchor_527_527"><span class="label">[527]</span></a> Cf. <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">supra</i>, Chapter II.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_528_528" id="Footnote_528_528"></a><a href="#FNanchor_528_528"><span class="label">[528]</span></a> "Inland post comprehends all matter deposited in a post office in
Canada
for delivery either from the same or from any other post office in Canada.
</p><p>
"Such matter is divided into four classes:&mdash;
</p><p>
"(1) Letters, postcards, and all matter either wholly or partly in writing or
typewriting, except the manuscript of books or newspapers and certain documents
of the Dominion and Provincial Governments and of Municipal
Authorities, which belong to Class 3.
</p><p>
"(2) Newspapers and periodicals.
</p><p>
"(3) Printed matter not included in Class 2, samples, and certain miscellaneous
matter.
</p><p>
"(4) Merchandise."&mdash;<i>Canada Official Postal Guide</i>, 1912, p. 4.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_529_529" id="Footnote_529_529"></a><a href="#FNanchor_529_529"><span class="label">[529]</span></a> See <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">supra</i>, p. <a href="#Page_158">158</a>.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_530_530" id="Footnote_530_530"></a><a href="#FNanchor_530_530"><span class="label">[530]</span></a> See <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">infra</i>, pp. <a href="#Page_336">336-7</a>.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_531_531" id="Footnote_531_531"></a><a href="#FNanchor_531_531"><span class="label">[531]</span></a> See <i>The Practical Method of the Penny Post</i>, London, 1681.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_532_532" id="Footnote_532_532"></a><a href="#FNanchor_532_532"><span class="label">[532]</span></a> The "General Post" was the term applied to the service throughout
the
country as distinguished from local services.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_533_533" id="Footnote_533_533"></a><a href="#FNanchor_533_533"><span class="label">[533]</span></a> The General Post Office only provided for the delivery of letters
within a
restricted area. See <i>Ninth Report of Commissioners of Post Office
Inquiry</i>, 1837,
p. 5.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_534_534" id="Footnote_534_534"></a><a href="#FNanchor_534_534"><span class="label">[534]</span></a> 12 Car. II, cap. 35, &#167; 2.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_535_535" id="Footnote_535_535"></a><a href="#FNanchor_535_535"><span class="label">[535]</span></a> 9 Anne, cap. 10, &#167; 6.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_536_536" id="Footnote_536_536"></a><a href="#FNanchor_536_536"><span class="label">[536]</span></a> 4 Geo. II, cap. 33. See D. Macpherson, op. cit., vol. iii., p.
169.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_537_537" id="Footnote_537_537"></a><a href="#FNanchor_537_537"><span class="label">[537]</span></a> <i>Ninth Report of the Commissioners of Post Office Inquiry</i>,
1837, pp. 1 and 2.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_538_538" id="Footnote_538_538"></a><a href="#FNanchor_538_538"><span class="label">[538]</span></a> "We have said that to us who live at the end of the nineteenth
century it may
appear incredible that up to April 1680 the General Post Office in Lombard
Street
was the only receptacle for letters in the whole of London. But it is by no
means
certain that our descendants may not think it more incredible still that London,
with all its boasted progress, has only now recovered a post which, in point of
convenience and cheapness, at all approaches that which an enterprising citizen
established more than two hundred years ago."&mdash;H. Joyce, <i>History of the Post
Office</i>, pp. 41, 42.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_539_539" id="Footnote_539_539"></a><a href="#FNanchor_539_539"><span class="label">[539]</span></a> "No stage-coach entered London without the driver's pockets being
stuffed
with letters and packets, and he was moderate indeed if he had not a bagful
besides. The waggoner outstripped his waggon and the carrier his pack-horse:
and each brought his contribution. The higgler's wares were the merest pretext.
It was to the letters and packets that he looked for profit."&mdash;H. Joyce, ibid.,
p. 55.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_540_540" id="Footnote_540_540"></a><a href="#FNanchor_540_540"><span class="label">[540]</span></a> When threatened by the Postmasters-General with prosecution
"according
to the utmost rigour of the law," he replied, according to their account, that
"he
should not be so unjust to himself as to lay down his undertaking at our demand,
that his case was not as Mr. Dockwra's was, neither did we live under such a
constitution as he did when the penny post was first set up (that is, an
arbitrary
government and bribed judges)."&mdash;<i>Ninth Report of the Commissioners of Post
Office Inquiry</i>, 1837, p. 71.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_541_541" id="Footnote_541_541"></a><a href="#FNanchor_541_541"><span class="label">[541]</span></a> 5 Geo. III, cap. 25, &#167; 11.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_542_542" id="Footnote_542_542"></a><a href="#FNanchor_542_542"><span class="label">[542]</span></a> <i>Ninth Report of the Commissioners of Post Office Inquiry</i>,
1837, p. 66.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_543_543" id="Footnote_543_543"></a><a href="#FNanchor_543_543"><span class="label">[543]</span></a> 5 Geo. III, cap. 25, &#167; 14.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_544_544" id="Footnote_544_544"></a><a href="#FNanchor_544_544"><span class="label">[544]</span></a> 34 Geo. III, cap. 17.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_545_545" id="Footnote_545_545"></a><a href="#FNanchor_545_545"><span class="label">[545]</span></a> 41 Geo. III, cap. 7.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_546_546" id="Footnote_546_546"></a><a href="#FNanchor_546_546"><span class="label">[546]</span></a> <i>Ninth Report of the Commissioners of Post Office Inquiry</i>,
1837, p. 6.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_547_547" id="Footnote_547_547"></a><a href="#FNanchor_547_547"><span class="label">[547]</span></a> 45 Geo. III, cap. 11.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_548_548" id="Footnote_548_548"></a><a href="#FNanchor_548_548"><span class="label">[548]</span></a> Clause 1.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_549_549" id="Footnote_549_549"></a><a href="#FNanchor_549_549"><span class="label">[549]</span></a> These changes followed the recommendations of the Commissioners
of
Revenue Inquiry, who, in their Twenty-first Report (1830), remarked strongly
on the intricacy and confusion of the boundaries of the posts in London, viz.
the General Post, the Foreign Post, the twopenny post (town delivery), and
the twopenny post (country delivery). All these had different delivery areas,
and in addition there was the "threepenny post town delivery," comprising the
area lying between the limits of the General Post delivery and those of the town
delivery of the twopenny post.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_550_550" id="Footnote_550_550"></a><a href="#FNanchor_550_550"><span class="label">[550]</span></a> The following statement shows the rates charged in the twopenny
post:&mdash;
</p><p>
</p><p><br />
"For every letter transmitted by such Post within the limits of<br />
delivery for the time being of the General Post                       2d.<br />
</p><p><br />
For every letter transmitted by such Post between a place within<br />
the said limits and any place beyond the same, or between places,<br />
both of which are beyond the said limits                              3d.<br />
</p><p><br />
And for every letter originally sent by the General Post directed<br />
to places beyond the said limits, and for every letter originally sent<br />
by the Twopenny Post, and afterwards passing through the General Post,<br />
in addition to all other rates chargeable thereon                     2d.<br />
</p><p><br />
Newspapers sent by the Twopenny Post, and not passing or intended<br />
to pass by the General Post, are charged each                         1d.<br />
</p>
<p>
But newspapers by the General Post and delivered by the Twopenny Post,
received by the Twopenny Post and afterwards passing by the General Post,
have, since August 1836, been exempted from postage."&mdash;<i>Ninth Report of the
Commissioners of Post Office Inquiry</i>, 1837, p. 4.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_551_551" id="Footnote_551_551"></a><a href="#FNanchor_551_551"><span class="label">[551]</span></a> "It is on this principle that it has been found that where a
letter has been
dropped into the post office in a city, and delivered by a letter-carrier, it
does
not pay to deliver it for 1 cent, which is just half the rate charged in any
other
country in the world; and this provision is to assimilate the rate to that
prevailing
in other countries."&mdash;Mr. Haggart, <i>Parliamentary Debates, Canada</i>
(<i>Commons</i>), 9th April 1889.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_552_552" id="Footnote_552_552"></a><a href="#FNanchor_552_552"><span class="label">[552]</span></a> "We have been influenced to make this change from the fact that
in large
cities and towns the departmental stores, the manufacturing establishments,
and other concerns which do a large postal business, use the messenger service
to deliver their letters as they found it cheaper, and in this way a large
amount
of revenue was lost to the Post Office.... Several firms will amalgamate their
messenger service, employing say five or ten boys, to whom they will pay 1 cent
or &frac12; cent for each letter, and in that way they will make a profit. Of course,
this action on their part is illegal, but it is one of those illegalities that
we can
hardly prosecute, and we thought it was better to adopt the uniform 1-cent rate
which we had formerly."&mdash;Hon. R. Lemieux (Postmaster-General), <i>Parliamentary
Debates, Canada</i> (<i>Commons</i>), 16th June 1908.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_553_553" id="Footnote_553_553"></a><a href="#FNanchor_553_553"><span class="label">[553]</span></a>
A. de Rothschild, <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Histoire de la Poste aux Lettres</i>, Paris,
1879, p. 98.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_554_554" id="Footnote_554_554"></a><a href="#FNanchor_554_554"><span class="label">[554]</span></a> "16 ao&#251;t 1653.&mdash;On fait &#224; s&#231;avoir &#224; tous ceux qui voudront &#233;crire
d'un
quartier de Paris en un autre, que leurs lettres, billets ou m&#233;moires seront
fid&#232;lement port&#233;s et diligemment rendus &#224; leur addresse, et qu'ils en auront
promptement responce, pourvu que lorsqu'ils escriront, ils mettent avec leurs
lettres un billet qui portera: <i>port-pay&#233;</i>, parce que l'on ne prendra point
d'argent;
lequel billet sera attach&#233; &#224; la dite lettre, ou mis autour de la lettre ou pass&#233;
dans
ou en telle autre mani&#232;re qu'ils trouveront &#224; propos, de telle sorte n&#233;anmoins
que le commis le puisse voir et oter ais&#233;ment. La date sera remplis du jour ou
du mois qu'il sera envoy&#233;. Le commis g&#233;n&#233;ral qui sera au Palais rendra de ces
billets de <i>port-pay&#233;</i> &#224; ceux qui en voudront avoir, pour le prix <i>d'un
sol marqu&#233;</i>;
et chacun est adverti d'en acheter pour sa n&#233;cessit&#233; le nombre qu'il lui plaira,
afin que lorsqu'on voudra escrire, l'on ne manque pas pour si peu de chose &#224;
faire
ses affaires."&mdash;Advertisement issued by M. Velayer, cited A. de Rothschild,
<i>Histoire de la Poste aux Lettres</i>, Paris, 1879, p. 101.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_555_555" id="Footnote_555_555"></a><a href="#FNanchor_555_555"><span class="label">[555]</span></a> A. de Rothschild, ibid., p. 145.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_556_556" id="Footnote_556_556"></a><a href="#FNanchor_556_556"><span class="label">[556]</span></a>
A. Belloc, <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Les Postes fran&#231;aises</i>, Paris, 1886, p. 200.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_557_557" id="Footnote_557_557"></a><a href="#FNanchor_557_557"><span class="label">[557]</span></a>
Moch, <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Archiv f&#252;r Post und Telegraphie</i>, 1893, p. 38.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_558_558" id="Footnote_558_558"></a><a href="#FNanchor_558_558"><span class="label">[558]</span></a> 30th May 1865.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_559_559" id="Footnote_559_559"></a><a href="#FNanchor_559_559"><span class="label">[559]</span></a> Order of 22nd October 1869.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_560_560" id="Footnote_560_560"></a><a href="#FNanchor_560_560"><span class="label">[560]</span></a> Moch, ibid.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_561_561" id="Footnote_561_561"></a><a href="#FNanchor_561_561"><span class="label">[561]</span></a> Moch, ibid.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_562_562" id="Footnote_562_562"></a><a href="#FNanchor_562_562"><span class="label">[562]</span></a> Administrative order of 18th December 1874.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_563_563" id="Footnote_563_563"></a><a href="#FNanchor_563_563"><span class="label">[563]</span></a>
Moch, <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Archiv f&#252;r Post und Telegraphie</i>, 1900, p. 735.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><a name="Footnote_564_564" id="Footnote_564_564"></a><a href="#FNanchor_564_564"><span class="label">[564]</span></a> "Als Nachbarorte im Sinne des Gesetzes sollen solche Orte der
engen unmittelbaren
Nachbarschaft gelten, deren bebaute Ortsgrenzen nicht zu weit von
einander entfernt bleiben und die wegen ihrer Lage und ihres wirtschaftlichen
Zusammenhanges als ein einheitlicher Verkehrsbezirk (Taxgruppe) angesehen
werden k&#246;nnen, ferner aber solche Orte, die zwischen zwei hiernach eine
Taxgruppe bildenden anderen Orten an der diese verbindenden Strasse oder
Eisenbahn liegen, auch wenn ein wirtschaftlicher Zusammenhang hier nicht
vorhanden ist."&mdash;Moch, ibid.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_565_565" id="Footnote_565_565"></a><a href="#FNanchor_565_565"><span class="label">[565]</span></a> Ibid., p. 736; Articles 2 and 3 of law of 20th December 1899.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_566_566" id="Footnote_566_566"></a><a href="#FNanchor_566_566"><span class="label">[566]</span></a> <i>Reichstag, Official Reports</i>, vol. ii., p. 1006.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_567_567" id="Footnote_567_567"></a><a href="#FNanchor_567_567"><span class="label">[567]</span></a>
<span lang="de" xml:lang="de">"Um ein klar wirkendes Bild von dem Umfange der Verkehrszunahme
zu
geben, sei nur erw&#228;hnt, dass die Ober-Postdirektion in Berlin im Kalenderjahre
1900 eine um 106 Beamte und 1,606 Unterbeamte h&#246;here. Personal verst&#228;rkung
f&#252;r ihren Bezirk hat eintreten lassen mussen als im Jahre vorher; am 1 April
1900 sind allein&mdash;ohne die zahlreichen Aush&#252;lfskr&#228;fte&mdash;860 Unterbeamte neu
eingestellt worden."&mdash;<i>Deutsche Verkehrs-Zeitung</i>,</span> Berlin, 8th March 1901,
p. 131.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_568_568" id="Footnote_568_568"></a><a href="#FNanchor_568_568"><span class="label">[568]</span></a> Ibid.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_569_569" id="Footnote_569_569"></a><a href="#FNanchor_569_569"><span class="label">[569]</span></a> Ibid., p. 132.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_570_570" id="Footnote_570_570"></a><a href="#FNanchor_570_570"><span class="label">[570]</span></a>
Order of 20th March 1900. See Moch, <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Archiv f&#252;r Post und
Telegraphie</i>,
Berlin, 1900, p. 737.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_571_571" id="Footnote_571_571"></a><a href="#FNanchor_571_571"><span class="label">[571]</span></a> Order of 29th March. W. Hess, ibid., 1910, p. 448.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_572_572" id="Footnote_572_572"></a><a href="#FNanchor_572_572"><span class="label">[572]</span></a> <i>Reichstag, Official Reports</i>, 17th May 1906.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_573_573" id="Footnote_573_573"></a><a href="#FNanchor_573_573"><span class="label">[573]</span></a>
<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Finanz-Archiv</i>, 1906, vol. ii., p. 253.</p></div>

<div class="footnote" lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><p><a name="Footnote_574_574" id="Footnote_574_574"></a><a href="#FNanchor_574_574"><span class="label">[574]</span></a> "Une partie des pays qui out pris part au Congr&#232;s de Berne avait
fix&#233; le
maximum du poids des lettres &#224; 250 grammes; l'autre partie n'avait fix&#233; aucune
limite de poids. Dans certains pays, l'&#233;paisseur des lettres &#233;tait limit&#233;e. Au
Danemark, par exemple, elle ne pouvait pas d&#233;passer 2? centimetres. La
Grande-Bretagne avait fix&#233; le maximum de dimension des lettres pour l'&#233;tranger
&#224; 2 pieds (60 centim&#232;tres) en longueur et &#224; 1 pied (30 centim&#232;tres) en largeur
ou
&#233;paisseur.
</p><p>
"Le port des lettres se calculait tant&#244;t pas 7&frac12; grammes, tant&#244;t par 10
grammes et tant&#244;t par 15 grammes; parfois aussi l'&#233;chelle de progression ne
comportait que deux poids (lettres de 15 grammes et lettres de plus de 15
grammes).
</p><p>
"Les taxes des lettres d'un pays diff&#233;raient presque pour chaque pays
correspondant;
en outre, la taxe d'une lettre pour un seul et m&#234;me pays variait
fr&#233;quemment suivant la voie d'exp&#233;dition. L'Allemagne n'avait pas moins de
7 taxes pour les lettres affranchis &#224; destination des autres pays d'Europe
(abstraction
faite des taxes r&#233;duites pour les rayons limitrophes); la France n'en avait
pas moins de 6, et la Grande-Bretagne pas moins de 9; les Etats-Unis
d'Am&#233;rique en avaient 5 pour leurs rapports avec 10 pays europ&#233;ens. La moins
&#233;lev&#233;e de ces taxes &#233;tait, pour l'Allemagne, de 10 pfennig jusqu'&#224; 15 grammes
(20 pfennig de 15 &#224; 250 grammes); pour la France, de 25 centimes par 10
grammes; pour la Grande-Bretagne, de 3 pence par &frac12; once; pour les Etats-Unis
d'Am&#233;rique, de 6 cents par &frac12; once. La plus &#233;lev&#233;e &#233;tait, pour l'Allemagne,
de 30 pfennig par 10 grammes; pour la France, de 70 centimes par 10 grammes;
pour la Grande-Bretagne, de 6 pence par &frac14; once; pour les Etats-Unis d'Am&#233;rique
de 10 cents par &frac12; once.
</p><p>
"Les taxes des lettres &#224; destination des pays d'outre-mer variaient davantage
encore; elles &#233;taient, en outre, toujours extr&#234;mement &#233;lev&#233;es. Une lettre
affranchie de l'Allemagne pour le P&#233;rou, &#224; exp&#233;dier par la voie de Hambourg,
payait 100 pfennig par 15 grammes; si elle &#233;tait exp&#233;di&#233;e par la voie
d'Angleterre
ou de France, elle payait 120 pfennig par 15 grammes. Pour une lettre
d'une &frac12; once de la Grande-Bretagne pour la Bolivie, l'exp&#233;diteur devait payer
1 shilling 6 pence et une taxe additionnelle &#233;tait, en outre, r&#233;clam&#233;e du
destinataire.
Une lettre simple de la Russie pour la Cochinchine (voie des paquebots
fran&#231;ais) payait 75 kopecks; de l'Autriche pour la R&#233;publique de Honduras
(voie de Panama), 84 kreuzer; de l'Italie pour la R&#233;publique Argentine ou
l'Uruguay (voie de Belgique), 2 lire 40 centesimi.
</p><p>
"Pour ses relations avec le Japon, la Russie no disposait pas de moins de
9 voies d'&#233;xp&#233;dition, pour lesquelles il existait 8 taxes diff&#233;rentes rien pour
les
lettres affranchies."&mdash;M. E. Ruffy, <i>L'Union postale universelle</i>; <i>sa
fondation
et son d&#233;veloppement</i>, Lausanne, 1900, pp. 20, 21.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_575_575" id="Footnote_575_575"></a><a href="#FNanchor_575_575"><span class="label">[575]</span></a> Austria, Belgium, Costa-Rica, Denmark, Ecuador, Spain, France,
Great
Britain, Italy, Holland, Portugal, Prussia, the Sandwich Islands, Switzerland,
and the Hanse Towns.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_576_576" id="Footnote_576_576"></a><a href="#FNanchor_576_576"><span class="label">[576]</span></a>
M. E. Ruffy, <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">L'Union postale universelle; sa fondation et son
d&#233;veloppement</i>,
Lausanne, 1900, p. 13.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_577_577" id="Footnote_577_577"></a><a href="#FNanchor_577_577"><span class="label">[577]</span></a>
Or, as they were called, <span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">"principes g&#233;n&#233;raux de nature &#224;
faciliter les relations
de peuple &#224; peuple par la voie de la poste et pouvant servir de base aux
conventions
internationales destin&#233;es &#224; r&#233;gler ces relations."</span>&mdash;Ibid.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_578_578" id="Footnote_578_578"></a><a href="#FNanchor_578_578"><span class="label">[578]</span></a>
<i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Documents du Congr&#232;s postal international</i>, Berne, 1874,
pp. 3-7. See
M. E. Ruffy, ibid., pp. 39, 40 and 41.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_579_579" id="Footnote_579_579"></a><a href="#FNanchor_579_579"><span class="label">[579]</span></a>
<i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Documents du Congr&#232;s postal international</i>, Berne, 1874, p.
23.</p></div>

<div class="footnote" lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><p><a name="Footnote_580_580" id="Footnote_580_580"></a><a href="#FNanchor_580_580"><span class="label">[580]</span></a> "Toutefois, comme mesure de transition, il est r&#233;serv&#233; &#224; chaque
pays, pour
tenir compte des convenances mon&#233;taires ou autres, la facult&#233; de percevoir une
taxe sup&#233;rieure ou inf&#233;rieure &#224; ce chiffre, moyennant quelle ne d&#233;passe pas
32 centimes et ne descende pas au dessous de 20 centimes....
</p><p>
"Pour tout transport maritime de plus de 300 milles marins dans le ressort de
l'Union, il pourra &#234;tre ajout&#233; au port ordinaire une surtaxe qui ne pourra pas
d&#233;passer la moiti&#233; de la taxe g&#233;n&#233;rale de l'Union fix&#233;e pour la lettre
affranchie."&mdash;Article
3 of Convention, ibid., p. 140.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_581_581" id="Footnote_581_581"></a><a href="#FNanchor_581_581"><span class="label">[581]</span></a>
<i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Documents du Congr&#232;s postal international</i>, Berne, 1874,
pp. 41-2.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_582_582" id="Footnote_582_582"></a><a href="#FNanchor_582_582"><span class="label">[582]</span></a> R&#232;glement de D&#233;tail, secs. xi, xii and xiii, ibid., p. 158.</p></div>

<div class="footnote" lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><p><a name="Footnote_583_583" id="Footnote_583_583"></a><a href="#FNanchor_583_583"><span class="label">[583]</span></a> "La Belgique occupe une position pour ainsi dire unique dans le
monde.
Plac&#233;e au centre de la partie la plus riche, la plus active et la plus peupl&#233;e
de
l'Europe, elle forme, en quelque sorte, le carrefour des grandes voies postales
de
notre continent. Il s'en suit que la Belgique rend de tr&#232;s grands services
&#224; tous les Etats de l'Europe, tandis qu'elle-m&#234;me n'a &#224; r&#233;clamer que fort peu de
services de ses voisins."
</p><p>
Belgium received 946,235 fr. net annually in respect of transit traffic, and
the ratio between the transit services rendered by Belgium to other countries
and by other countries to Belgium was 20 to 1.&mdash;<i>Documents du Congr&#232;s postal
international</i>, Berne, 1874, pp. 37-8.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_584_584" id="Footnote_584_584"></a><a href="#FNanchor_584_584"><span class="label">[584]</span></a> Ibid., p. 23.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_585_585" id="Footnote_585_585"></a><a href="#FNanchor_585_585"><span class="label">[585]</span></a>
Changed in 1878 to <span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">"L'Union postale universelle."</span></p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_586_586" id="Footnote_586_586"></a><a href="#FNanchor_586_586"><span class="label">[586]</span></a> Those countries which were unable to adopt the metric system of
weights
were given liberty to substitute the ounce avoirdupois (28.3465 grammes), a
half-ounce
being reckoned the equivalent of 15 grammes, and 2 ounces the equivalent
of 50 grammes.&mdash;<i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Documents du Congr&#232;s postal international</i>, Berne, 1874,
p. 66.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_587_587" id="Footnote_587_587"></a><a href="#FNanchor_587_587"><span class="label">[587]</span></a> "En acc&#233;dant, disent-ils, &#224; l'Union postale, la France s'est
impos&#233; des
sacrifices consid&#233;rables dont elle a d'avance calcul&#233; la port&#233;e. Elle est pr&#234;te
&#224; en
faire de nouveaux aujourd'hui en vue de compl&#233;ter la grande &#x0153;uvre de Berne;
et, &#224; ce propos, M. Ansault a cru devoir d&#233;clarer que les subsides accord&#233;s &#224;
des
lignes de paquebots ne peuvent pas &#234;tre consid&#233;r&#233;s comme ayant un caract&#232;re
postal, c'est-&#224;-dire, que l'on ne doit pas chercher dans le produit de la taxe
des
lettres une r&#233;mun&#233;ration de ces services, lesquels sont &#233;tablis principalement
pour les besoins du commerce et de l'industrie, aussi bien que dans un int&#233;r&#234;t
politique. En proposant une taxe maritime de fr. 6.50 par kilogramme de
lettres et de 50 ct. par kilogramme de journaux, le Gouvernement fran&#231;ais a eu
en outre pour but de faire cesser une anomalie injustifiable aux yeux du public,
&#224; savoir qu'une missive pour les Colonies fran&#231;aises paie une taxe plus &#233;lev&#233;e
qu'une lettre pour la partie la plus recul&#233;e des Etats-Unis
d'Am&#233;rique."&mdash;<i>Actes
de la Conf&#233;rence postale de Berne</i>, 1876, p. 29.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_588_588" id="Footnote_588_588"></a><a href="#FNanchor_588_588"><span class="label">[588]</span></a> Ibid., p. 30.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_589_589" id="Footnote_589_589"></a><a href="#FNanchor_589_589"><span class="label">[589]</span></a> Ibid., pp. 13, 14.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_590_590" id="Footnote_590_590"></a><a href="#FNanchor_590_590"><span class="label">[590]</span></a>
<i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Actes de la Conf&#233;rence postale de Berne</i>, 1876, p. 34.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_591_591" id="Footnote_591_591"></a><a href="#FNanchor_591_591"><span class="label">[591]</span></a> Thus in 1913-14 the number of foreign reply-paid postcards in the
case of
the United States was 130,596. The total number of foreign postcards posted in
the United States in the same year was 42,252,570.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_592_592" id="Footnote_592_592"></a><a href="#FNanchor_592_592"><span class="label">[592]</span></a> "M. Buxton Forman, d&#233;l&#233;gu&#233; de la Grande-Bretagne, ne voit pas
l'utilit&#233;
de la mesure propos&#233;e, qui, on son pays du moins, n'est pas demand&#233;e par le
public. Il serait d'ailleurs presque impossible &#224; l'Administration britannique
d'y
adh&#233;rer...." The French view was stated by M. Ansault: "La modification
demand&#233;e ne r&#233;pond &#224; aucun besoin. Les statistiques tenues en France t&#233;moignent
que le poids moyen de la lettre n'atteint pas 10 grammes; il reste donc
une marge de 5 grammes avec le poids actuel. C'est largement suffisant; en
augmentant cette marge, on risquerait de provoquer le groupement des lettres
au d&#233;triment de la recette postale."&mdash;<i>Documents du Congr&#232;s postal de
Washington</i>, 1897, p. 421.
</p><p>
In the same year the limit of weight for the single letter in the British inland
service was raised from 1 to 4 ounces.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_593_593" id="Footnote_593_593"></a><a href="#FNanchor_593_593"><span class="label">[593]</span></a>
<i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Documents du Congr&#232;s postal de Rome</i>, 1906, vol. ii., p.
163.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_594_594" id="Footnote_594_594"></a><a href="#FNanchor_594_594"><span class="label">[594]</span></a> Ibid., vol. ii., p. 165.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_595_595" id="Footnote_595_595"></a><a href="#FNanchor_595_595"><span class="label">[595]</span></a>
<span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">"Pour nous, le service gratuit est un r&#234;ve, un beau r&#234;ve, si vous
voulez, mais
que nous ferions bien, en gens pratique, de laisser aux r&#234;veurs."</span>&mdash;A. B.
Walkley,
British Delegate, ibid., vol. ii., p. 106.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_596_596" id="Footnote_596_596"></a><a href="#FNanchor_596_596"><span class="label">[596]</span></a>
<i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Documents du Congr&#232;s postal de Rome</i>, 1906, vol. ii., p.
168.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_597_597" id="Footnote_597_597"></a><a href="#FNanchor_597_597"><span class="label">[597]</span></a> "The British Post Office itself is unable to agree with the New
Zealand
Government that the sacrifice of net postal revenue involved would be
'temporary in duration and inconsiderable in amount.'
</p><p>
"The experience of the British Post Office in connection with the Imperial
Penny Postage Scheme shows that if the increased cost of dealing with
increased quantities of postal matter be taken into account, as it should be,
the department has not recovered, and cannot recover, the loss of net postal
revenue involved by the reduction of the Imperial letter rate, which was
estimated in 1898 at &#163;108,000 for the first year.
</p><p>
"Recent calculations show that, in the case of a letter for a foreign country,
the expense to the Exchequer can be taken at about one penny per
half-ounce rate, and in the case of a letter for a Colony, where a long sea
transit is generally involved, at about a penny farthing, excluding the heavy
cost of subsidized packet service."&mdash;<i>Papers laid before the Colonial
Conference,
1907: Memorandum by General Post Office</i> (Cd. 3524), p. 499. It was estimated
that the introduction of universal penny postage, together with the ounce unit
(<i lang="la" xml:lang="la">vide supra</i>), would involve an initial loss of &#163;610,000 a year. Ibid., p.
500.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_598_598" id="Footnote_598_598"></a><a href="#FNanchor_598_598"><span class="label">[598]</span></a> The United States, Australasia, and Egypt voted in favour of the
universal
penny rate. Canada, Great Britain, British India, and Japan abstained from
voting. The remainder voted against the proposal.&mdash;<i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Documents du Congr&#232;s
postal de Rome</i>, 1906, vol. ii., p. 181.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_599_599" id="Footnote_599_599"></a><a href="#FNanchor_599_599"><span class="label">[599]</span></a> "Chaque jour de nouvelles difficult&#233;s surgissent, soit dans les
rapports du
public avec les Administrations, soit dans les rapports entre les
Administrations,
sur la definition de l'&#233;chantillon. Tel objet est admis dans un pays et refus&#233;
dans un autre. Ici, on repousse un article sans valeur, uniquement parce
qu'il est entier et on en exige la d&#233;t&#233;rioration ou lac&#233;ration; l&#224;, au
contraire,
ce m&#234;me article passe sans observation, par la raison qu'il n'est suj'et &#224; aucun
droit de douane. Cette derni&#232;re doctrine paraissant la plus logique et la plus
conforms &#224; l'esprit lib&#233;ral de l'Union, qui ne saurait refuser au commerce des
facilit&#233;s compatibles avec les exigences du service, on a pens&#233; que, sous la
double
r&#233;serve d'une limite de poids de 300 grammes et de la prohibition des articles
sujets aux droits de douane, il y aurait un simplification, profitable &#224; tout
le monde, &#224; &#233;tendre la qualification d'&#233;chantillons aux menus objets, m&#234;me
entiers et non d&#233;t&#233;rior&#233;s."&mdash;See M. E. Ruffy, <i>L'Union postale universelle: sa
fondation et son d&#233;veloppement</i>, Lausanne, 1900, p. 67.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_600_600" id="Footnote_600_600"></a><a href="#FNanchor_600_600"><span class="label">[600]</span></a> "La proposition d'&#233;lever le poids des paquets de 3 &#224; 5
kilogrammes modifie
notablement l'&#233;conomie du projet; c'est la substitution d'un vrai service de
messagerie au transport de simples colis postaux. Le Gouvernement anglais
estime que le transport de paquets d'un tel poids est de domaine de l'industrie
priv&#233;e."&mdash;S. A. Blackwood, <i>Documents de la Conf&#233;rence postale de Paris</i>,
1880,
p. 60.</p></div>

<div class="footnote" lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><p><a name="Footnote_601_601" id="Footnote_601_601"></a><a href="#FNanchor_601_601"><span class="label">[601]</span></a> "Si on transporte &#224; perte, plus le trafic sera grand, plus les
d&#233;penses augmenteront.
II serait en d&#233;saccord avec les vrais principes d'&#233;conomie politique,
d'entreprendre un service postal dont les frais p&#232;seraient sur une autre branche
de l'exploitation ou seraient &#224; la charge du Tr&#233;sor. Un &#233;conomiste aussi
distingu&#233;
que M. Fawcett ne pourrait admettre cette th&#233;orie."&mdash;S. A. Blackwood,
<i>Documents de la Conf&#233;rence postale de Paris</i>, 1880, p. 60.
</p><p>
"M. G&#252;nther fait remarquer &#224; M. le d&#233;l&#233;gu&#233; de la Su&#233;de que le nombre des
colis &#233;chang&#233;s entre la Su&#232;de et l'&#233;tranger n'&#233;tant pas tr&#232;s important, son
Administration aurait &#224; faire peu de sacrifices."&mdash;Ibid., p. 55.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_602_602" id="Footnote_602_602"></a><a href="#FNanchor_602_602"><span class="label">[602]</span></a> "Il para&#238;t de toute n&#233;cessit&#233; d'adopter un droit uniforme, car
autrement,
avec un tarif variable suivant le poids ou le lieu de destination, on aurait un
service des messageries, avec de nombreuses taxes, gradu&#233;es, et non plus un
service tr&#232;s simple de colis postaux."&mdash;M. le Pr&#233;sident; ibid., p. 55.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_603_603" id="Footnote_603_603"></a><a href="#FNanchor_603_603"><span class="label">[603]</span></a>
<span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">"Quant &#224; la taxe internationale de 50 centimes, sans addition
possible,
elle ne peut &#234;tre accept&#233; par l'Administration britannique qu'elle constituerait
en
perte. La taxe devant &#234;tre partag&#233;e entre l'&#201;tat et les Compagnies, une somme
de 50 centimes ne couvrirait les frais."</span>&mdash;S. A. Blackwood, ibid.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_604_604" id="Footnote_604_604"></a><a href="#FNanchor_604_604"><span class="label">[604]</span></a> "Le commerce surtout vous saura le meilleur gr&#233; d'avoir &#233;lev&#233;
jusqu'&#224;
3 kilogrammes le poids des petits colis transport&#233;s par la poste, et d'avoir
abaiss&#233;
la taxe &#224; un chiffre minime. Dans bien des cas m&#234;me, ce prix ne sera pas
l'&#233;quivalent des frais; et les Gouvernements qui consentent &#224; ce sacrifice
m&#233;ritent une gratitude toute particuli&#232;re; je vous l'exprime ici bien volontiers
et bien hautement au nom de la France, au nom de l'Europe et au nom de
l'humanit&#233;, qui profiteront si largement du progr&#233;s nouveau que vous venez de
r&#233;aliser."&mdash;M. Barth&#233;l&#233;my Saint-Hilaire, Foreign Minister of France, to the
Conference; <i>Documents de la Conf&#233;rence postale de Paris</i>, 1880, p. 180.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_605_605" id="Footnote_605_605"></a><a href="#FNanchor_605_605"><span class="label">[605]</span></a>
The convention of Washington, 1897, defined cumbersome parcels
(<i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">colis
encombrants</i>) as follows:&mdash;
</p><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">
"(<i>a</i>) Les colis d&#233;passant 1 m&#232;tre 50 centim&#232;tres dans un sens quelconque;
</p><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">
"(<i>b</i>) Les colis qui, par leur forme, leur volume ou leur fragilit&#233;, ne se
pr&#234;tent
pas facilement au chargement avec d'autres colis ou qui demandent des
pr&#233;cautions sp&#233;ciales, tels que plantes et arbustes en paniers, cages vides ou
renfermant des animaux vivants, bo&#238;tes &#224; cigares vides ou autres bo&#238;tes en
fardeaux, meubles, vannerie, jardini&#232;res, voitures d'enfants, rouets,
v&#233;locipedes,
etc.
</p><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">
"Les Administrations qui n'admettent pas les colis encombrants ont la
facult&#233; de limiter &#224; 60 centim&#232;tres le maximum de dimension de ces objets.
Les Administrations qui assurent des transports par mer ont aussi la facult&#233; de
limiter &#224; 60 centim&#232;tres le maximum de dimension et &#224; 25 d&#233;cim&#232;tres cubes le
volume des colis postaux destin&#233;s &#224; &#234;tre transmis par leurs services maritimes
et de ne les accepter au del&#224; de ces limites qu'&#224; titre de colis
encombrants."&mdash;<i>Documents
du Congr&#232;s postal de Washington</i>, 1897, p. 887.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_606_606" id="Footnote_606_606"></a><a href="#FNanchor_606_606"><span class="label">[606]</span></a> Ibid. pp. 881-2.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_607_607" id="Footnote_607_607"></a><a href="#FNanchor_607_607"><span class="label">[607]</span></a> "M. Herman, d&#233;l&#233;gu&#233; de la France, d&#233;clare qu'il est impossible
d'entrer
dans les vues de l'Administration bulgare, laquelle semble ne plus tenir
compte de l'id&#233;e premi&#232;re qui a conduit &#224; la cr&#233;ation des colis postaux pour
l'&#233;change d'objets de petit poids, &#224; des prix tr&#232;s mod&#233;r&#233;s. En cr&#233;ant les
colis postaux, les Administrations participant n'ont pas eu l'intention de
faire concurrence aux compagnies de transport. Si les tarifs des articles de
messagerie sont trop &#233;lev&#233;s, ce n'est pas &#233;videmment &#224; l'Union postale de les
diminuer."&mdash;<i>Documents du Congr&#232;s postal de Rome</i>, 1906, Berne, 1906, vol.
ii.,
p. 381.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_608_608" id="Footnote_608_608"></a><a href="#FNanchor_608_608"><span class="label">[608]</span></a> "Il n'y a aucun besoin ou avantage &#224; son avis, d'avoir une taxe
uniforme
pour les colis de m&#234;me cat&#233;gorie de poids exp&#233;di&#233;s de diff&#233;rents pays. Pour
les lettres, cette uniformit&#233; a l'avantage, pour l'exp&#233;diteur, de conna&#238;tre,
dans
n'importe quel pays, le prix du port des lettres. Mais, pour un colis postal,
l'exp&#233;diteur doit toujours aller au bureau de poste pour y d&#233;poser la
d&#233;claration
en douane et, aussi, pour conna&#238;tre le tarif qui varie selon le nombre des pays
et services interm&#233;diares."&mdash;M. Kisch, Delegate for India, <i>Documents du
Congr&#232;s postal de Rome</i>, 1906, Berne, 1906, vol. ii., p. 391.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_609_609" id="Footnote_609_609"></a><a href="#FNanchor_609_609"><span class="label">[609]</span></a> "N'est-ce pas pr&#233;cis&#233;ment l'unit&#233; de tarif qui caract&#233;rise le
colis postal?
Elle est tr&#232;s appreci&#233;e du commerce dont elle facilite les op&#233;rations. Si l'on
entre dans la voie de la taxation au poids, comme pour les articles de
messagerie, ce sera un recul."&mdash;M. Mazoyer, <i>Documents du Congr&#232;s postal de
Rome</i>, 1906, Berne, 1906, vol. ii., p. 393.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_610_610" id="Footnote_610_610"></a><a href="#FNanchor_610_610"><span class="label">[610]</span></a> The analysis relates to the British inland service in 1913-14.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_611_611" id="Footnote_611_611"></a><a href="#FNanchor_611_611"><span class="label">[611]</span></a> The number of packets sent at the blind post rate is very small
comparatively
(some 300,000 a year), and those packets are therefore not considered
separately.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_612_612" id="Footnote_612_612"></a><a href="#FNanchor_612_612"><span class="label">[612]</span></a> In general, for any supplemental service an additional fee is
charged, the
only exceptions being that, in the case of a packet sent at the letter rate of
postage, if the person to whom it is addressed cannot be traced, the packet
is returned to the sender without charge; and that under certain conditions
the address written on any packet (but not the name of the person to whom
it is addressed) may be amended, and the packet sent forward, without payment
of additional postage. Parcels are forwarded to a second address in this way
free of charge only when the first address and the substituted address are
within
the delivery of the same post office, or are within the same "town delivery
area."
In certain circumstances the Post Office itself undertakes to amend the address
and forward packets in this way free of charge&mdash;that is to say, to "redirect."
These are, however, minor services, and apply only to a small fraction of the
total number of packets posted. For example, the actual proportion redirected
is as follows:&mdash;
</p>


<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Proportion of postal items which are redirected, by type.">
<tr><th align="left"></th><th align="center">Per cent. of<br /> Total Number posted.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Letters</td><td align="center">2.2</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Postcards</td><td align="center">4.0</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Halfpenny packets</td><td align="center">2.0</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Newspapers</td><td align="center">1.7</td></tr>
</table></div>

<p>
The service of free redirection applies to all classes of packets; but for the
return to the sender in case of non-delivery of postcards, halfpenny packet,
or newspapers, an additional rate of postage is charged, and the packets are
only so returned when they bear on the outside a written or printed request
for return in case of non-delivery. This inquiry relates only to the cost of the
simple transmission and delivery of the packet, and consideration of all other
services, such as registration or express delivery, is excluded.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_613_613" id="Footnote_613_613"></a><a href="#FNanchor_613_613"><span class="label">[613]</span></a> In London there are the following divisions:&mdash;
</p><p>
(1) "Short Letters" (including postcards and a large proportion of the halfpenny
packets). Halfpenny packets which are of such size as to admit of
handling with the short letters are referred to as "short halfpenny packets."
</p><p>
(2) "Long Letters" (for the most part letters of foolscap size).
</p><p>
(3) "Circulars" (that is, packets sent at the letter rate or by the halfpenny
packet post, posted in large numbers at one time and generally of uniform size
but which cannot conveniently be dealt with at the ordinary letter-sorting
frames).
</p><p>
(4) "Packets" (that is, packets which are bulky or of irregular shape and
cannot therefore be sorted at the ordinary sorting frames).
</p><p>
(5) "Newspapers."</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_614_614" id="Footnote_614_614"></a><a href="#FNanchor_614_614"><span class="label">[614]</span></a> Divisions 2 and 3, and divisions 4 and 5, described in the
preceding footnote,
being combined.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_615_615" id="Footnote_615_615"></a><a href="#FNanchor_615_615"><span class="label">[615]</span></a> The postman does not rely on his memory to discover at which
houses
he has packets to deliver. Usually he reverses in the bundle of letters that
letter for delivery next preceding a packet. A complication is thus introduced
in the preparation of the short letters for delivery.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_616_616" id="Footnote_616_616"></a><a href="#FNanchor_616_616"><span class="label">[616]</span></a> 2 &amp; 3 Vict., cap. 98 and 56 &amp; 57 Vict., cap. 38.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_617_617" id="Footnote_617_617"></a><a href="#FNanchor_617_617"><span class="label">[617]</span></a> In recent years the stamping at the office of receipt has been to
a large
extent dispensed with.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_618_618" id="Footnote_618_618"></a><a href="#FNanchor_618_618"><span class="label">[618]</span></a> In addition to these principal operations there are certain minor
operations.
The packets are in general sorted on frames, from which they are collected
at intervals and taken to the despatching table for enclosure in the mail-bags.
Here the short letters, etc., are tied in bundles (as explained above), and in
many cases a label is affixed, on which the name of the office of destination
is written by the despatching officer. Next a letter bill is prepared. On this
are entered particulars of the mail and of registered letters. The bundles
of letters, etc., the loose packets, the registered letters and the letter bill
(to
which are tied all packets which are insufficiently prepaid and are to be
charged on delivery), are enclosed in a mail-bag on which is stencilled the
name of the office of destination, and in some cases particulars of the
route to be followed. The bag is then tied, sealed, and sent forward. The
despatch of each bag is recorded, as is the receipt of each bag from another
office.
</p><p>
The opening of bags at the office of receipt also comprises a distinct series
of operations. First the letter bill is obtained and examined. The receipt
of the registered letters and charged packets is verified, and the letters and
packets are withdrawn for special treatment. The bag is then emptied on
the "opening table," reversed, in order to ensure that no packets are
overlooked,
and the contents distributed for sorting.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_619_619" id="Footnote_619_619"></a><a href="#FNanchor_619_619"><span class="label">[619]</span></a> See <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">infra</i>, p. <a href="#Page_297">297</a> (from <i>Postmaster-General's
Report</i>, 1913-14, Appx. N).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_620_620" id="Footnote_620_620"></a><a href="#FNanchor_620_620"><span class="label">[620]</span></a> Cf. <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">supra</i>, p. <a href="#Page_285">285</a>.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_621_621" id="Footnote_621_621"></a><a href="#FNanchor_621_621"><span class="label">[621]</span></a> See <i>The Post Office, an Historical Summary</i>, London, 1911,
p. 11.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_622_622" id="Footnote_622_622"></a><a href="#FNanchor_622_622"><span class="label">[622]</span></a> There is practically no short-distance newspaper traffic, and it
is probable
that, on the average, newspaper packets undergo one more intermediate handling
than packets sent at the letter rate. In the absence of precise information, no
adjustment of the relative cost for sorting has been made on this account. The
result will, therefore, be slightly to the advantage of the newspaper packets.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_623_623" id="Footnote_623_623"></a><a href="#FNanchor_623_623"><span class="label">[623]</span></a> It has been estimated at .075d. per letter.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_624_624" id="Footnote_624_624"></a><a href="#FNanchor_624_624"><span class="label">[624]</span></a> Cf. <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">supra</i>, p. <a href="#Page_158">158</a>.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_625_625" id="Footnote_625_625"></a><a href="#FNanchor_625_625"><span class="label">[625]</span></a> See <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">supra</i>, p. <a href="#Page_127">127</a>, n. 2, and <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">infra</i>, p. <a href="#Page_334">334</a>.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_626_626" id="Footnote_626_626"></a><a href="#FNanchor_626_626"><span class="label">[626]</span></a> In this number 35.5 million undelivered packets and 124.5 million
redirected
packets are included twice. The service performed in respect of both these
classes of packet is, however, at least twice as great as that performed in
respect
of an ordinary packet; and as it is desired to estimate the cost of the normal
service, no adjustment of the numbers is made on this account.
</p><p>
The total number actually delivered was 3,477,800,000, but of these, 162.3
millions were foreign and colonial letters. As the number of foreign and
colonial
letters despatched (184.3 millions) exceeds the number received, and a foreign
or
colonial letter received plus a foreign or colonial letter delivered may be
taken
as equivalent to an inland letter fully dealt with, the number delivered in the
United Kingdom has been adjusted by adding half the difference between the
number of foreign and colonial letters despatched and received respectively.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_627_627" id="Footnote_627_627"></a><a href="#FNanchor_627_627"><span class="label">[627]</span></a> Number of postcards delivered, 926.5 millions.
</p><p>
Number of foreign and colonial postcards delivered in the United Kingdom,
23.3 millions; number despatched, 18.8 millions.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_628_628" id="Footnote_628_628"></a><a href="#FNanchor_628_628"><span class="label">[628]</span></a> Number of packets actually delivered, 1,172.3 millions.
</p><p>
Number of foreign and colonial packets of printed matter, commercial papers,
and samples received, 44.7 millions; number despatched, 122.9 millions.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_629_629" id="Footnote_629_629"></a><a href="#FNanchor_629_629"><span class="label">[629]</span></a> Number of parcels delivered, 132,700,000. Number of foreign and
colonial
parcels received, 1,991,975; number despatched, 3,917,860.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_630_630" id="Footnote_630_630"></a><a href="#FNanchor_630_630"><span class="label">[630]</span></a> This definition indicates the strict nature of "forward" packets.
In
practice it is, however, impracticable to divide postal packets precisely on
these lines, and the actual statistics of "forward" packets are not exactly
accurate. The practical division approximates, however, to the line of the exact
division.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_631_631" id="Footnote_631_631"></a><a href="#FNanchor_631_631"><span class="label">[631]</span></a> Adjusted to allow for the fact that two men are needed to work
the machine-stamp.
The cost of the machine-stamp itself is a negligible item.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_632_632" id="Footnote_632_632"></a><a href="#FNanchor_632_632"><span class="label">[632]</span></a> For the relative cost of delivery the same rates are taken as for
the cost of
sorting. There are no data on which any actual comparison can be based, but it
is obvious that the same features, viz. irregularity of shape and size, which
lead
to differences in the cost of sorting lead to similar differences in much the
same
degree in the cost of delivery.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_633_633" id="Footnote_633_633"></a><a href="#FNanchor_633_633"><span class="label">[633]</span></a> The average weight of letter packets not exceeding 1 ounce is
0.357 ounce.
The average weight of all letter packets is 0.747 ounce. In the case of packets
between 1 ounce and 2 ounces the average weight is assumed to be 1.4 ounces;
and 2.6 ounces in the case of those between 2 ounces and 4 ounces.
</p><p>
Of ordinary letter packets, 86.34 per cent. do not exceed 1 ounce in weight,
5.25 per cent. are between 1 ounce and 2 ounces, and 4.53 per cent. are between
2 ounces and 4 ounces in weight.
</p><p>
The average weight of a postcard is 0.142 ounce, of a halfpenny packet
0.498 ounce, and of a newspaper packet 4.264 ounces (97.57 per cent. containing
only one newspaper, average weight 4.159 ounces; 2.43 per cent. containing two
or more newspapers, average weight 8.461 ounces).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_634_634" id="Footnote_634_634"></a><a href="#FNanchor_634_634"><span class="label">[634]</span></a> <i>Life of Sir Rowland Hill and History of Penny Postage</i>,
vol. i., p. 249.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_635_635" id="Footnote_635_635"></a><a href="#FNanchor_635_635"><span class="label">[635]</span></a> Sir Rowland Hill was strongly of opinion that the use of the
railway
increased the cost of conveyance of mails (<i>Life of Sir Rowland Hill and
History
of Penny Postage</i>, vol. i., pp. 329 and 412). The cost of conveyance by
stage-coach
from London to Edinburgh was, according to Sir Rowland Hill, about 1/36th of
a penny per letter, and less for the whole country (ibid., vol. i., p. 249;
<i>Post Office
Reform: Its Importance and Practicability</i>, pp. 18-19). The cost of
conveyance
by railway at present averages for the whole kingdom about .05d. per letter.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_636_636" id="Footnote_636_636"></a><a href="#FNanchor_636_636"><span class="label">[636]</span></a> An important fact in this connection is that the service is
adjusted to the
circumstances of the respective countries. Thus, in England and France,
provision
is made for the delivery of letters at every house in the country, while in
the United States and Canada there is in general no house-to-house delivery in
rural districts. Until recently there was no rural delivery service of any kind
in the latter countries. Letters could be obtained only at the rural post
offices.
And the system now being introduced provides only for delivery into roadside
boxes at the points on the rural deliverer's route nearest to the house of the
addressee. Such adjustments, of course, materially affect the cost and profit of
the service.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_637_637" id="Footnote_637_637"></a><a href="#FNanchor_637_637"><span class="label">[637]</span></a> E.g. the war increases in the United Kingdom and in other
countries. The
point is further considered in the Appendix "Post Office Revenue," <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">infra</i>,
p. <a href="#Page_358">358</a> ff.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_638_638" id="Footnote_638_638"></a><a href="#FNanchor_638_638"><span class="label">[638]</span></a> Graphically, the variation of the number of letters with changes
in the rate
of postage would be represented by an asymptotic curve.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_639_639" id="Footnote_639_639"></a><a href="#FNanchor_639_639"><span class="label">[639]</span></a> It appeared in the English letter rate of 1885, but disappeared
with the
changes of 1897. It has been reintroduced into the letter rate with the war
changes of November 1915, and the result is an awkward scale.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_640_640" id="Footnote_640_640"></a><a href="#FNanchor_640_640"><span class="label">[640]</span></a> This point is dealt with more fully in connection with the parcel
rate.
</p><p>
The whole question of subsidiary rates is dismissed by Bastable with the
following:&mdash;
</p><p>
"One of the principal distinctions now turns on the character of the articles
transmitted. Circulars and postcards would not bear the same charge as
ordinary letters. The transmission of newspapers gives a yet smaller fund of
utility on which to levy a tax, and is affected by the competition of carrying
agencies. The result is seen in the lower halfpenny rate."&mdash;C. F. Bastable,
<i>Public Finance</i>, London, 1903, p. 208.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_641_641" id="Footnote_641_641"></a><a href="#FNanchor_641_641"><span class="label">[641]</span></a> In England two-fifths of the total number of postal packets pass
at a
halfpenny.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_642_642" id="Footnote_642_642"></a><a href="#FNanchor_642_642"><span class="label">[642]</span></a> The concession of specially low rates for these classes of
packets has given
rise to a noteworthy general line of division between postal packets. All
packets
passing at privileged rates must obviously be subject to examination and check
by the Post Office in order to ensure that the privilege is not abused, a
necessity
which leads immediately to the principle of the "open" post, as contrasted
with the "closed" post, the ordinary sealed letter packet. The difference in
charge is not, however, based on the consideration that the packets are open
to inspection. The effect is in the reverse direction. The view of practical
officers is that, other things being equal, the treatment of a packet sent by
the
Open Post is more expensive to the Post Office than its treatment if sent by
Letter Post.
</p><p>
The requirement is imposed in order that compliance with other conditions
may be ensured. In none of the five countries are ordinary letters allowed to
pass at postcard rate if merely enclosed in open covers. But a printed circular
letter, if sent in a sealed cover, would lose its claim to the privileged rate.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_643_643" id="Footnote_643_643"></a><a href="#FNanchor_643_643"><span class="label">[643]</span></a> "Fixing a railway rate is, in one word, an art&mdash;not a science,
and it is
an art which, in Bagehot's phrase, must be exercised 'in a sort of twilight,
... in an atmosphere of probabilities and of doubt, where nothing is very
clear, where there are some chances for many events, where there is much
to be said for several courses, where, nevertheless, one course must be
determinedly
chosen and fixedly adhered to.'"&mdash;W. M. Acworth, <i>Elements of
Railway Economics</i>, Oxford, 1905, p. 73.
</p><p>
"The problem of railway rates has not, like that of postal charges, passed
beyond the domain of current discussion. This is in part due to the fact that
railways are universally regarded as a source of profit, to companies when
privately owned, to the State when public property; but it is in larger measure
due to the fact that the social significance of railways is not yet clearly
understood.
The problem of railway rates is a problem by itself, and stands as one
of the most important of the unsettled problems of the day."&mdash;H. C. Adams,
<i>Science of Finance</i>, New York, 1909, p. 280.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_644_644" id="Footnote_644_644"></a><a href="#FNanchor_644_644"><span class="label">[644]</span></a> "The cost of the service of transport for any given commodity
cannot, under
the varying conditions of railway operation, be even approximately calculated.
The first insuperable difficulty is the division of the expenditure for any
given
work. Though railway economists have endeavoured, by means various and
ingenious, to allocate the different items of railway expenditure, they have
been unable to determine such a relatively simple matter as the division between
passenger and goods traffic, and though estimates have been formulated, many
of the charges have been allocated to one head or another by arbitrary decision,
and not as a result of positive knowledge."&mdash;<i>Railway News</i>, London, 6th
September 1913, p. 396.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_645_645" id="Footnote_645_645"></a><a href="#FNanchor_645_645"><span class="label">[645]</span></a> "Though all the rates must be so fixed as to pay all the expenses
both of
construction and working, separate rates cannot be fixed according to cost
of individual service or even according to the average cost of services to
traffic
in the same group. For in the first place the cost of the service cannot be
ascertained. And secondly, if it could be ascertained, it would be of no use
as a standard. To charge the average cost would be to drive away a large
portion of the traffic and so increase almost proportionately the average cost
of the remainder. This increase would then drive away a fresh portion, and
so once more increase proportionately the cost to that still remaining. And so
on."&mdash;W. M. Acworth, "The Theory of Railway Rates," <i>Economic Journal</i>,
London, 1897, p. 324.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_646_646" id="Footnote_646_646"></a><a href="#FNanchor_646_646"><span class="label">[646]</span></a> "The process is in practice worked out as follows. First comes
classification.
The whole of the commodities known to commerce are entered on
a list divided into classes, eight in number here, six in France, and about ten
in
number in the United States. To each class belongs a normal scale of rates,
ranging, let us say, from &#190;d. per mile in the lowest to 4d. per mile in the
highest. The classification undoubtedly takes account of greater or less cost
of carriage to the companies, arising out of the differences of packing,
liability
to theft or damage, proportion of space occupied to weight, etc. But it is
safe to say that its main principle is, the more valuable the commodity, the
higher the rate it can afford to pay."&mdash;Ibid., p. 325.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_647_647" id="Footnote_647_647"></a><a href="#FNanchor_647_647"><span class="label">[647]</span></a> "Historically this theory has been recognized and approved by
English
legislation from the time when Adam Smith applauded the equity of statutory
turnpike tolls at the rate of one shilling for a light carriage and eightpence
for a heavy dray, through the whole long series of Canal Acts and Railway Acts,
down to the elaborately careful revision of the railway companies' charging
powers in the series of Provisional Order Confirmation Acts dated 1891 and 1892.
The opinion of modern economists all over the world as to the justice of the
underlying principle may be conveniently summarized in a sentence borrowed
from the first annual report of the American Interstate Commerce Commission:
'With this method of arranging tariffs little fault is found, and perhaps none
at all by persons who consider the subject from the standpoint of public
interest.'"&mdash;Ibid., p. 317.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_648_648" id="Footnote_648_648"></a><a href="#FNanchor_648_648"><span class="label">[648]</span></a> "One great element of the reform introduced by you in the postage
was, that
there should be one uniform rate throughout?&mdash;Yes, it was proposed with a
view to simplification, but the principle has been carried to an extent that
I did not contemplate, and did not recommend."&mdash;Evidence of Sir Rowland
Hill, <i>Report of Select Committee on Newspaper Stamps</i>, 1851, Question No.
1945.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_649_649" id="Footnote_649_649"></a><a href="#FNanchor_649_649"><span class="label">[649]</span></a> In the same way that the soap-makers of Port Sunlight secured a
large
sale by the simple expedient of refraining from varying the price of their
tablets of soap with the variations in the cost of raw materials, making the
adjustment in the weight of the tablets instead of in the price; and for the
same reason that many people prefer restaurants widely known and with
numerous branches, not always because the charges are less, but because it is
well known what the charges and what the service obtained will be.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_650_650" id="Footnote_650_650"></a><a href="#FNanchor_650_650"><span class="label">[650]</span></a> In the United Kingdom less than 50 per cent. exceed 2 pounds in
weight,
and not more than 1 per cent. exceed 10 pounds. The proportion for
short-distance
parcels is much less, and the proportion for foreign parcels is very
much greater, over 15 per cent. being above 10 pounds in weight.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_651_651" id="Footnote_651_651"></a><a href="#FNanchor_651_651"><span class="label">[651]</span></a> Even in the London postal area, which is of considerable extent,
the local
traffic is quite small, amounting to some four or five million parcels only per
annum in a total traffic of some 130 millions.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_652_652" id="Footnote_652_652"></a><a href="#FNanchor_652_652"><span class="label">[652]</span></a> I.e. the actual cost incurred by a Government in providing packet
services,
not the amounts paid to intermediate countries as "transit rates" under the
International Convention.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_653_653" id="Footnote_653_653"></a><a href="#FNanchor_653_653"><span class="label">[653]</span></a>
</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Total land areas of Europe, the U. S. A. and Canada.">
<tr><td align="center">Total area</td><td align="left">of Europe</td><td align="right">3,800,000</td><td align="center">square miles.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">" &emsp; "</td><td align="left">United States (with Alaska)</td><td align="right">3,600,000</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">" &emsp; "</td><td align="left">Canada</td><td align="right">3,700,000</td><td align="center">"</td></tr>
</table></div>


<p>
Of the total area of Europe, Russia accounts for some 2,100,000 square miles.</p>
</div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_654_654" id="Footnote_654_654"></a><a href="#FNanchor_654_654"><span class="label">[654]</span></a> E.g. the transportation of Indian mails through France and Italy.
For
this service a special train in each direction between Calais and Brindisi is
provided
by the French and Italian Governments, and the payment made by the
British Government in respect of the service is much in excess of the ordinary
transit rates fixed by the Postal Union Convention.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_655_655" id="Footnote_655_655"></a><a href="#FNanchor_655_655"><span class="label">[655]</span></a> The following particulars relate to the British Packet Service in
1860:&mdash;
</p>




<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Costs of British Packet Services in 1860.">
<tr><th align="center">Packets.</th><th></th><th align="center">Contract Payments.</th><th align="center">Other Payments.</th><th align="center">Sea Postage.</th><th align="center" colspan="2">Profit<br /> or Loss.</th></tr>
<tr><td align="left"></td><td></td><td align="center">&#163;</td><td align="center">&#163;</td><td align="center">&#163;</td><td align="center" colspan="2">&#163;</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Dover and Calais</td><td align="center" rowspan="2" class="braces-2row">}</td><td align="right" rowspan="2">18,600</td><td align="right" rowspan="2">4,100</td><td align="right" rowspan="2">79,000</td><td align="right" rowspan="2">+</td><td align="right" rowspan="2">56,300</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Dover and Ostend</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Peninsular</td><td></td><td align="right">5,000</td><td align="right">800</td><td align="right">4,000</td><td align="right">-</td><td align="right">1,800</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">North American</td><td></td><td align="right">189,500</td><td align="right">400</td><td align="right">112,000</td><td align="right">-</td><td align="right">77,900</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">West Indian</td><td align="center" rowspan="3" class="braces-3row">}</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Pacific</td><td align="right">293,500</td><td align="right">8,900</td><td align="right">103,600</td><td align="right">-</td><td align="right">198,800</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Brazilian</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">West Coast of Africa</td><td></td><td align="right">30,000</td><td align="right">&mdash;</td><td align="right">4,500</td><td align="right">-</td><td align="right">25,500</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Cape of Good Hope</td><td></td><td align="right">38,000</td><td align="right">&mdash;</td><td align="right">9,300</td><td align="right">-</td><td align="right">28,700</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">Australian</td><td></td><td align="right">90,200</td><td align="right">4,300</td><td align="right">30,300</td><td align="right">-</td><td align="right">64,200</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">East Indian</td><td></td><td align="right">163,000</td><td align="right">17,300</td><td align="right">111,000</td><td align="right">-</td><td align="right">69,300</td></tr>
<tr><td align="left">On the whole service the figures were</td><td></td><td align="right">827,800</td><td align="right">35,800</td><td align="right">453,700</td><td align="right">-</td><td align="right">409,900</td></tr>
</table></div>



<p class="blockquot">
&mdash;<i>Annual Report of the Postmaster-General</i>, 1860, Appx. H, pp. 34-7.</p>
</div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_656_656" id="Footnote_656_656"></a><a href="#FNanchor_656_656"><span class="label">[656]</span></a> In 1860, when the total number of foreign letters was very much
less than
at present, the cost of the British foreign packet service was some &#163;860,000,
and
in 1913 the cost had fallen to some &#163;700,000.&mdash;<i>Annual Reports of the
Postmaster-General</i>,
1860, pp. 34-7; 1913-14, p. 51.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_657_657" id="Footnote_657_657"></a><a href="#FNanchor_657_657"><span class="label">[657]</span></a> <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Vide supra</i>, Chapter VI.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_658_658" id="Footnote_658_658"></a><a href="#FNanchor_658_658"><span class="label">[658]</span></a> E.g., parcel mails are not forwarded by the train between Calais
and Brindisi
run specially for the Indian mails. Parcels are, it is true, forwarded to
America
by the Cunard packets which carry the letter mails, but this arrangement is due
to special circumstances. The Cunard line, being heavily subsidized (with other
than Post Office ends in view), is required to carry all mails tendered.
Otherwise
it might be found economical to send parcels by slower cargo boats.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_659_659" id="Footnote_659_659"></a><a href="#FNanchor_659_659"><span class="label">[659]</span></a> <i>Wealth of Nations</i>, ed. 1904, vol. ii., p. 303.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_660_660" id="Footnote_660_660"></a><a href="#FNanchor_660_660"><span class="label">[660]</span></a> "The business being one which both can and ought to be conducted
on fixed
rules, is one of the few businesses which it is not unsuitable to a Government
to conduct."&mdash;J. S. Mill, <i>Principles of Political Economy</i>, London, 1871,
vol. ii.
bk. v. chap. v. &#167; 2.
</p><p>
"It is clear that the restriction put upon the liberty of trade by forbidding
private letter-carrying establishments is a breach of State duty. It is also
clear
that were that restriction abolished, a natural postal system would eventually
grow up, could it surpass in efficiency our existing one. And it is further
clear
that if it could not surpass it, the existing system might rightly continue; for
the fulfilment of postal functions by the State is not <i>intrinsically</i> at
variance
with the fulfilment of its essential function."&mdash;Herbert Spencer, <i>Social
Statics</i>,
London, 1910, p. 120.
</p><p>
Professor Cannan sums the matter up from the point of view of modern
opportunism:&mdash;
</p><p>
"Much too great importance is commonly attributed to this part of State
action: the sale of commodities. We may be sure that if the State had not
happened to undertake the business of carrying letters, some private
organization
would have been established for the purpose. Whether it would have done
the work better or worse than the present State Post Office does it, is a
question
which we have no means of answering. So, too, on the other hand, if the State
in this country had undertaken the provision of railways, we should have had a
railway system of some sort; it might have been a better or it might have been
a worse system; whether it would have been better or worse would have
depended on the wisdom of those who had the largest share in devising and
extending it, and who these persons would have been, and what their wisdom
would have been, we have no means of telling."&mdash;Edwin Cannan, <i>Elementary
Political Economy</i>, London, 1903, p. 132.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_661_661" id="Footnote_661_661"></a><a href="#FNanchor_661_661"><span class="label">[661]</span></a> "Before the rise of the economic schools that opposed industrial
action on
the part of the State, the method of public postal service was firmly
established,
and was seen to give, on the whole, sufficiently satisfactory results. It,
therefore,
escaped the hostile criticism that economists freely bestowed on the less
efficient
public departments."&mdash;C. F. Bastable, <i>Public Finance</i>, London, 1903, p.
208.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_662_662" id="Footnote_662_662"></a><a href="#FNanchor_662_662"><span class="label">[662]</span></a> "He was always eager to improve the mail service to remote towns;
and
would observe that one good result of State management was the consideration
of out-of-the-way places. A private management, he said, might probably have
introduced a halfpenny post in London, and have left the country worse served
than at present."&mdash;Leslie Stephen, <i>Life of Henry Fawcett</i>, London, 1885,
p. 438.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_663_663" id="Footnote_663_663"></a><a href="#FNanchor_663_663"><span class="label">[663]</span></a> "The Post Office is properly a mercantile project. The Government
advances the expense of establishing the different offices and buying or hiring
the necessary horses or carriages, and is repaid with a large profit by the
duties
upon what is carried. It is perhaps the only mercantile project which has been
successfully managed by, I believe, every sort of Government. The capital to be
advanced is not very considerable. There is no mystery in the business. The
returns are not only certain but immediate."&mdash;<i>Wealth of Nations</i>, ed.
1904,
vol. ii., p. 303.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_664_664" id="Footnote_664_664"></a><a href="#FNanchor_664_664"><span class="label">[664]</span></a> <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Vide supra</i>, p. <a href="#Page_26">26</a>.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_665_665" id="Footnote_665_665"></a><a href="#FNanchor_665_665"><span class="label">[665]</span></a> In the United Kingdom the expense incurred in providing specially
for the
disposal of parcels in this way often exceeds the total amount of the postage
paid on the parcels.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_666_666" id="Footnote_666_666"></a><a href="#FNanchor_666_666"><span class="label">[666]</span></a> In the United Kingdom, horse-posts or cycle-posts are in general
provided
in view of the length of the route to be traversed, rather than in view of the
weight of traffic to be carried.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_667_667" id="Footnote_667_667"></a><a href="#FNanchor_667_667"><span class="label">[667]</span></a> The need for such a separation between ordinary letters and
packets of
appreciable weight is felt even in regard to the letter post itself. In England,
the extension of the weight limit for penny letters, and the reduction of the
rates for the heavier letters, has led to serious practical difficulties and has
impeded smooth and rapid working. In the larger offices the letter post traffic
is dealt with in two divisions: (1) the lighter, homogeneous traffic, the light
letters and postcards; and (2) the heavier packets, and packets of irregular
shape (p. <a href="#Page_285">285</a>). In France, the extension of the maximum limit of weight gave
rise to similar difficulties; so much so that the question of establishing a
separate
slower post for such packets has been seriously considered. In Paris, at the
present time, there is a completely separate indoor and outdoor staff for the
newspapers and packets.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_668_668" id="Footnote_668_668"></a><a href="#FNanchor_668_668"><span class="label">[668]</span></a> It is only necessary to glance into a van containing railway
parcels in order
to realize how impossible it would be to apply to such packages the usual postal
method of enclosure in sacks; and conveyance <i>&#224; d&#233;couvert</i> by railway
companies
on behalf of the Post Office would give rise to obvious practical difficulties.
In
Germany and Switzerland postal parcels are so despatched, but the railways are
State-owned in those countries, and the service is in many respects a railway
service.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_669_669" id="Footnote_669_669"></a><a href="#FNanchor_669_669"><span class="label">[669]</span></a> The railways frequently establish receiving offices in various
parts of a town.
The services necessary for the conveyance of parcels from these offices to the
railway stations are not, however, comparable with the services for closed
parcel
mails between the post offices and the stations, but rather with the services
between branch post offices and the chief post office. The service from the
chief
post office to the railway station is a further service.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_670_670" id="Footnote_670_670"></a><a href="#FNanchor_670_670"><span class="label">[670]</span></a> In France heavy parcels are not accepted at post offices, but
must be taken
to a railway station. <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Vide supra</i>, p. <a href="#Page_206">206</a>.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_671_671" id="Footnote_671_671"></a><a href="#FNanchor_671_671"><span class="label">[671]</span></a> The general proportion of parcels to letters for the United
Kingdom as a
whole is 1 in 40; but on some of the remoter rural routes the proportion of
parcels frequently rises to 1 in 20, and sometimes to more than 1 in 10.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_672_672" id="Footnote_672_672"></a><a href="#FNanchor_672_672"><span class="label">[672]</span></a> <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Vide supra</i>, pp. <a href="#Page_190">190</a> and 219.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_673_673" id="Footnote_673_673"></a><a href="#FNanchor_673_673"><span class="label">[673]</span></a> The naval operations during the present war in regard to neutral
mails
have brought out clearly the essential distinction between letters and parcels.
The arguments as to the customary inviolability of mails have been based on
the idea of free communication. But parcels containing goods, possibly
contraband,
e.g. rubber, obviously cannot claim the privileges of communications,
and the right of sea-power to interfere with parcel mails has been admitted.
"The Government of the United States is inclined to regard parcels post
articles as subject to the same treatment as articles sent by express or freight
in respect of belligerent search, seizure, and condemnation."&mdash;United States
Note to Great Britain, 10th January 1916.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_674_674" id="Footnote_674_674"></a><a href="#FNanchor_674_674"><span class="label">[674]</span></a> For particulars of other Acts relating to packet postage, and of
Acts
relating to Ship Letters, and to rates of postage within Ireland, see Schedule A
of 1 Vict., cap. 32. Rates for transmission within Ireland were also fixed by
1 Vict., cap. 34 (&#167; 4).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_675_675" id="Footnote_675_675"></a><a href="#FNanchor_675_675"><span class="label">[675]</span></a> <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Vide supra</i>, p. <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, n. 1.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_676_676" id="Footnote_676_676"></a><a href="#FNanchor_676_676"><span class="label">[676]</span></a> Ibid., p. 7.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_677_677" id="Footnote_677_677"></a><a href="#FNanchor_677_677"><span class="label">[677]</span></a> <i>Calendar of State Papers</i> (<i>Domestic Series</i>), 1625-6,
p. 523.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_678_678" id="Footnote_678_678"></a><a href="#FNanchor_678_678"><span class="label">[678]</span></a> H. Joyce, <i>History of the Post Office</i>, p. 12.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_679_679" id="Footnote_679_679"></a><a href="#FNanchor_679_679"><span class="label">[679]</span></a> H. Scobell, <i>A Collection of Acts and Ordinances</i>, London,
1658, p. 513.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_680_680" id="Footnote_680_680"></a><a href="#FNanchor_680_680"><span class="label">[680]</span></a> H. Joyce, ibid., p. 72.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_681_681" id="Footnote_681_681"></a><a href="#FNanchor_681_681"><span class="label">[681]</span></a> Ibid., p. 73.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_682_682" id="Footnote_682_682"></a><a href="#FNanchor_682_682"><span class="label">[682]</span></a> H. Scobell, ibid.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_683_683" id="Footnote_683_683"></a><a href="#FNanchor_683_683"><span class="label">[683]</span></a> <i>Historical Summary of Post Office Services</i>, London, 1911,
p. 47.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_684_684" id="Footnote_684_684"></a><a href="#FNanchor_684_684"><span class="label">[684]</span></a> The number of letters still handed in to the General Post Office
was, however,
quite considerable. Thus, in 1686, 60,447 ship letters were
received.&mdash;<i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Vide</i>
H. Joyce, ibid., p. 74.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_685_685" id="Footnote_685_685"></a><a href="#FNanchor_685_685"><span class="label">[685]</span></a> <i>London Gazette</i>, No. 3247, 21st-24th December 1696; cited
H. Joyce,
ibid., n. 2.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_686_686" id="Footnote_686_686"></a><a href="#FNanchor_686_686"><span class="label">[686]</span></a> 9 Anne, cap. 10, &#167; 16.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_687_687" id="Footnote_687_687"></a><a href="#FNanchor_687_687"><span class="label">[687]</span></a> H. Joyce, ibid., p. 329.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_688_688" id="Footnote_688_688"></a><a href="#FNanchor_688_688"><span class="label">[688]</span></a> Act of 39 Geo. III., cap. 76, &#167;&#167; 1 and 2; H. Joyce, ibid.; J. C.
Hemmeon,
<i>History of the British Post Office</i>, p. 124.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_689_689" id="Footnote_689_689"></a><a href="#FNanchor_689_689"><span class="label">[689]</span></a> H. Joyce, ibid., p. 330.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_690_690" id="Footnote_690_690"></a><a href="#FNanchor_690_690"><span class="label">[690]</span></a> 54 Geo. III, cap. 169.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_691_691" id="Footnote_691_691"></a><a href="#FNanchor_691_691"><span class="label">[691]</span></a> H. Joyce, ibid., p. 362.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_692_692" id="Footnote_692_692"></a><a href="#FNanchor_692_692"><span class="label">[692]</span></a> Ibid., p. 363; 55 Geo. III, cap. 153.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_693_693" id="Footnote_693_693"></a><a href="#FNanchor_693_693"><span class="label">[693]</span></a> The Marquis of Clanricarde.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_694_694" id="Footnote_694_694"></a><a href="#FNanchor_694_694"><span class="label">[694]</span></a> "The principle upon which the postal communication between
England
and the Australian colonies has latterly been conducted is, that a postage of
6d.
for a single letter has been charged, of which 4d. was understood to represent
the sea rate, 1d. for collecting or delivering a single letter in any part of
the
United Kingdom, and the same in any part of the colonies; so that the whole
cost of sending a letter from any part of the United Kingdom to any part of the
Australian colonies, or <i>vice vers&#226;</i>, should not exceed 6d.
</p><p>
"As the whole cost of the packet service has hitherto been borne by the
Imperial Government, the portion of the postage which represented the sea
service has been accounted for to the Home Post Office, so that of the 6d.
charged, 5d. has been appropriated to England, and 1d. to the colony receiving
or
despatching the letter, as the case might be."&mdash;<i>Second Report of the
Postmaster-General</i>,
London, 1856, p. 66.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_695_695" id="Footnote_695_695"></a><a href="#FNanchor_695_695"><span class="label">[695]</span></a> Cf. H. Joyce, ibid., pp. 138-9.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_696_696" id="Footnote_696_696"></a><a href="#FNanchor_696_696"><span class="label">[696]</span></a> Cf. note 1, opposite.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_697_697" id="Footnote_697_697"></a><a href="#FNanchor_697_697"><span class="label">[697]</span></a> 18th Report, 1829, and 22nd Report, 1830.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_698_698" id="Footnote_698_698"></a><a href="#FNanchor_698_698"><span class="label">[698]</span></a> <i>Historical Summary of Post Office Services</i>, p. 52.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_699_699" id="Footnote_699_699"></a><a href="#FNanchor_699_699"><span class="label">[699]</span></a> <i>Historical Summary of Post Office Services</i>, p. 55.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_700_700" id="Footnote_700_700"></a><a href="#FNanchor_700_700"><span class="label">[700]</span></a> "The advantage of Imperial unity, which was held in 1898 to
justify the
sacrifice of revenue incidental to a measure calculated to bind together the
United Kingdom and her possessions beyond the seas, cannot, of course, be
urged as a plea in favour of universal penny postage; but apart from all
other arguments for and against the proposal, the decisive consideration is
that the British Government are not at present in a position to bear the
very heavy loss that would be involved in the reduction of foreign postage
from 2&#189;d. to 1d."&mdash;<i>Papers laid before the Colonial Conference</i>, 1907;
<i>Memorandum
by General Post Office</i> (Cd. 3524), p. 500.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_701_701" id="Footnote_701_701"></a><a href="#FNanchor_701_701"><span class="label">[701]</span></a>
H. von Stephan, <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Geschichte der preussischen Post</i>, Berlin,
1859, p. 3.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><a name="Footnote_702_702" id="Footnote_702_702"></a><a href="#FNanchor_702_702"><span class="label">[702]</span></a> "Kommt es doch vor, dass ein Bote eines deutschen Reichsf&#252;rsten
ausser
dem Botenlohn noch eine besondere Verg&#252;tung beansprucht, weil er auf dem
Botengange gleichzeitig einige Schweine f&#252;r die Herrschaft nach dem
Bestimmungsort
hat treiben m&#252;ssen. Da diese Begleitung auf kein besonders lebhaftes
Gangtempo schliessen l&#228;sst, so d&#252;rfen wir es dem Garzonus nicht verdenken,
wenn er die deutschen Boten zum Wetteifer mit ihren Collegen im alten Persien
ermahnt, deren Geschwindigkeit Xenophon in der Kyrop&#228;die mit dem Fluge der
Kraniche vergleicht."&mdash;Ibid., p. 15.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_703_703" id="Footnote_703_703"></a><a href="#FNanchor_703_703"><span class="label">[703]</span></a> Ibid., p. 4.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_704_704" id="Footnote_704_704"></a><a href="#FNanchor_704_704"><span class="label">[704]</span></a>
B. E. Crole, <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Geschichte der deutschen Post</i>, Eisenach,
1889, p. 214.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><a name="Footnote_705_705" id="Footnote_705_705"></a><a href="#FNanchor_705_705"><span class="label">[705]</span></a> "Die Vereinigung Oesterreichs mit den Burgundischen Niederlanden
ruft
die erste Reichspost, die Vereinigung von Brandenburg, Preussen, Cleve und
Hinterpommern unter einem Scepter die erste Brandenburgische Staatspost
hervor."&mdash;H. von Stephan, op. cit., p. 5.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_706_706" id="Footnote_706_706"></a><a href="#FNanchor_706_706"><span class="label">[706]</span></a>
F. Ohmann, <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Die Anf&#228;nge des Postwesens</i>, Leipzig, 1909, pp.
49, 86, and 92.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_707_707" id="Footnote_707_707"></a><a href="#FNanchor_707_707"><span class="label">[707]</span></a>
<span lang="de" xml:lang="de">"(1) Die Unterhaltung solcher Boten lange Jahre vor Errichtung
der Posten
&#252;blich gewesen; (2) dem Taxis w&#228;re nur das Post-, nicht das Botenwesen zu
Lehen gegeben; (3) es w&#252;rden ihnen (den Boten n&#228;mlich) viele Waren und
Kostbarkeiten anvertraut, welche sie &#252;berliefern und daf&#252;r stehen, welches
wieder der Postillone Werk nicht sei; (4) die Posten dienten wohl zu Briefen,
nicht aber zu Bestellung anderer Sachen, also k&#246;nnten Posten und Boten wohl
nebeneinander bestehen."</span>&mdash;Imperial Rescript of 1686, given by Beust, Teil 1,
s. 149 ff; cited F. Haass, <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Die Post und der Charakter ihrer Eink&#252;nfte</i>,
Stuttgart,
1890, p. 93.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_708_708" id="Footnote_708_708"></a><a href="#FNanchor_708_708"><span class="label">[708]</span></a> "For very good and potent reasons, especially on account of the
troublesome
war, as also for the purpose of obtaining good and reliable information about
the Turks, the hereditary enemies of the whole of Christendom, and other
potentates, adjacent to the Empire, in order that the Emperor, the King, and
other potentates may exchange their correspondence."&mdash;Dr. Joseph R&#252;bsam,
<i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">L'Union postale</i>, 1892, p. 126.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_709_709" id="Footnote_709_709"></a><a href="#FNanchor_709_709"><span class="label">[709]</span></a>
<span lang="de" xml:lang="de">"Es lag allweg 5 Meil wegs ein Post von den andern, einer war zu
Kempten,
einer zu Bless, einer an der Bruck zu Elchingen und also fortan imerdar 5 Meil
wegs von einander und must allweg ein Pot des andern warten, und so bald der
ander zu ihm ritt, so bliess er ein h&#246;rnlin, das h&#246;rt ein bott der in der
Herberg
lag und must gleich auf sein. Einer musste all Stand ein Meil, das ist 2 Stund
(wohl f&#252;r den Fussg&#228;nger berechnet) weit reiten, oder es ist ihm am Lohn
abzogen, und musten sie reiten Tag und Nacht."</span>&mdash;"Memminger Chronicle,"
cited F. Ohmann, <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Die Anf&#228;nge des Postwesens</i>, Leipzig, 1909, p. 102.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_710_710" id="Footnote_710_710"></a><a href="#FNanchor_710_710"><span class="label">[710]</span></a> Dr. Joseph R&#252;bsam, ibid., p. 157.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_711_711" id="Footnote_711_711"></a><a href="#FNanchor_711_711"><span class="label">[711]</span></a> Ibid., p. 127.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_712_712" id="Footnote_712_712"></a><a href="#FNanchor_712_712"><span class="label">[712]</span></a> "Contrary to what was usually the case with the postal
arrangements in
antiquity and the Middle Ages, the institution founded by <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Francis von Taxis</span>,
though chiefly intended to serve the purposes of the State, assumed from its
very beginning a character of public utility and political economy, for it was
at the disposal of anybody wanting a rapid, cheap, and safe means of conveyance
for his letters."&mdash;Dr. Joseph R&#252;bsam, ibid., p. 128.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_713_713" id="Footnote_713_713"></a><a href="#FNanchor_713_713"><span class="label">[713]</span></a> Ibid., p. 130.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_714_714" id="Footnote_714_714"></a><a href="#FNanchor_714_714"><span class="label">[714]</span></a> Von Beust, cited H. von Stephan, op. cit., p. 6.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_715_715" id="Footnote_715_715"></a><a href="#FNanchor_715_715"><span class="label">[715]</span></a>
B. E. Crole, <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Geschichte der deutschen Post</i>, Eisenach,
1889, p. 201; H. von
Stephan, <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Geschichte der preussischen Post</i>, Berlin, 1859, pp. 6-10.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_716_716" id="Footnote_716_716"></a><a href="#FNanchor_716_716"><span class="label">[716]</span></a> Proclamation of 6th November 1597; B. E. Crole, op. cit., p.
205.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_717_717" id="Footnote_717_717"></a><a href="#FNanchor_717_717"><span class="label">[717]</span></a> An account of the struggles between the <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Taxis</span> family and the
princes is
given in Crole's <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Geschichte der deutschen Post</i> (Part III, chaps. iv. and
v.).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="de" xml:lang="de"><a name="Footnote_718_718" id="Footnote_718_718"></a><a href="#FNanchor_718_718"><span class="label">[718]</span></a> "Trotz der Ausdehnung der Taxis'schen Posten im 'Reich' h&#246;rte das
Botenwesen in den einzelnen L&#228;ndern und in den Reichsst&#228;dten keineswegs auf
sondern entwickelte sich fort und fort und hatte seine Botenmeister, auch
Postmeister und andere Bedienstete."&mdash;B. E. Crole, op. cit., p. 213.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_719_719" id="Footnote_719_719"></a><a href="#FNanchor_719_719"><span class="label">[719]</span></a> Ibid., p. 231.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><a name="Footnote_720_720" id="Footnote_720_720"></a><a href="#FNanchor_720_720"><span class="label">[720]</span></a> E. Gallois, <i>La Poste et les Moyens de Communication des
Peuples &#224; travers
les Si&#232;cles</i>, Paris, 1894, p. 94.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_721_721" id="Footnote_721_721"></a><a href="#FNanchor_721_721"><span class="label">[721]</span></a> B. E. Crole, op. cit., p. 247.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_722_722" id="Footnote_722_722"></a><a href="#FNanchor_722_722"><span class="label">[722]</span></a> The territory of the <span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Taxis</span> posts shrank between the years 1790
and 1811
from 3,922 square (German) miles to 745 square (German) miles, and a number
of territorial posts took the place of the Imperial posts. In 1810 there were no
less than 43 of these territorial posts.&mdash;<i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Die Brieftaxe in Deutschland</i>,
Freiburg
im Breisgau, 1862, p. 4; C. F. M&#252;ller, <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Die F&#252;rstlich Thurn und Taxis'schen
Poster und Posttaxen</i>, Jena, 1845, p. 7.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_723_723" id="Footnote_723_723"></a><a href="#FNanchor_723_723"><span class="label">[723]</span></a>
Oskar Grosse, <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Die Beseitigung des Thurn und Taxis'schen
Postwesens in
Deutschland</i>, Minden in Westf., 1898, p. 33.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_724_724" id="Footnote_724_724"></a><a href="#FNanchor_724_724"><span class="label">[724]</span></a> C. F. M&#252;ller, op. cit., p. 13.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_725_725" id="Footnote_725_725"></a><a href="#FNanchor_725_725"><span class="label">[725]</span></a> The rates for a letter weighing 1 loth (&frac12; ounce) were:&mdash;
</p>



<div class="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Comparison of the rates of Taxis Posts and Prussian State Post, for comparable weight and distances.">
<tr><th align="center">Distance<br /> (German Miles).</th><th align="center" colspan="3">In W&#252;rtemberg<br /> (<span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Taxis</span> Posts).</th><th align="center" colspan="4">In Prussia<br /> (State Post).</th></tr>
<tr><td align="center"> 1-3</td><td align="right">2 kr. =</td><td align="left">&emsp;</td><td align="right">6-6/7 pf.</td><td align="right">2&frac14; sgr.</td><td align="left">D</td><td align="right">1&frac12; sgr.</td><td align="left">E</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center"> 3-6</td><td align="right">3 kr. =</td><td align="left">&emsp;</td><td align="right">10-2/7 pf.</td><td align="right">3&nbsp; sgr.</td><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">2&frac14; sgr.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">&nbsp;6-12</td><td align="right">4 kr. =</td><td align="left">1 sgr.</td><td align="right">1-5/7 pf.</td><td align="right">4&frac12; sgr.</td><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">3&nbsp; sgr.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">12-18</td><td align="right">6 kr. =</td><td align="left">1 sgr.</td><td align="right">8-4/7 pf.</td><td align="right">6&nbsp; sgr.</td><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">3&frac34; sgr.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">18-24</td><td align="right">8 kr. =</td><td align="left">2 sgr.</td><td align="right">3-3/7 pf.</td><td align="right">7&frac12; sgr.</td><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">4&frac12; sgr.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">24-30</td><td align="right">10 kr. =</td><td align="left">2 sgr.</td><td align="right">10-2/7 pf.</td><td align="right">7&frac12; sgr.</td><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">4&frac12; sgr.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">30-36</td><td align="right">12 kr. =</td><td align="left">3 sgr.</td><td align="right">5-1/7 pf.</td><td align="right">9&nbsp; sgr.</td><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">6&nbsp; sgr.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">36-42</td><td align="right">14 kr. =</td><td align="left">4 sgr.</td><td align="center">&mdash;</td><td align="right">10&frac12; sgr.</td><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">6&nbsp; sgr.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">42-48</td><td align="right">16 kr. =</td><td align="left">4 sgr.</td><td align="right">6-6/7 pf.</td><td align="right">10&frac12; sgr.</td><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">6&nbsp; sgr.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">48-54</td><td align="right">18 kr. =</td><td align="left">5 sgr.</td><td align="right">1-5/7 pf.</td><td align="right">12&nbsp; sgr.</td><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">7&frac12; sgr.</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">54-60</td><td align="right">20 kr. =</td><td align="left">5 sgr.</td><td align="right">8-4/7 pf.</td><td align="right">12&nbsp; sgr.</td><td align="left">&nbsp;</td><td align="right">7&frac12; sgr.</td></tr>
</table></div>

<p>
D: Rates established 18th December 1824.<br />
E: Rates established 1st October 1844.&mdash;Ibid., pp. 9 and 39.
</p>
</div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_726_726" id="Footnote_726_726"></a><a href="#FNanchor_726_726"><span class="label">[726]</span></a>
K. A. H. Schmid, <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Zur Geschichte der Briefporto-Reform in
Deutschland</i>,
Jena, 1864, p. 36.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_727_727" id="Footnote_727_727"></a><a href="#FNanchor_727_727"><span class="label">[727]</span></a>
Oskar Grosse, <i lang="de" xml:lang="de">Die Beseitigung des Thurn und Taxis'schen
Postwesens in
Deutschland</i>, pp. 98-9.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_728_728" id="Footnote_728_728"></a><a href="#FNanchor_728_728"><span class="label">[728]</span></a> Ibid., p. 47.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_729_729" id="Footnote_729_729"></a><a href="#FNanchor_729_729"><span class="label">[729]</span></a> Ibid., p. 66.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_730_730" id="Footnote_730_730"></a><a href="#FNanchor_730_730"><span class="label">[730]</span></a> The conditions were in many respects similar to those obtaining
in the
United States. <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Vide supra</i>, p. <a href="#Page_191">191</a>.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_731_731" id="Footnote_731_731"></a><a href="#FNanchor_731_731"><span class="label">[731]</span></a> "In England you have thickly congested rural districts, large
towns every
few miles, and tremendous cities: in Canada you have a population of less than
8,000,000 spread over a vast area, with few cities or large towns, and with vast
spaces that must be traversed where no population exists.... We are giving,
as compared with England, a flat rate in an area twice as great as Britain gives
parcel post, and where all the conditions are much less favourable."&mdash;Hon. L.
Pelletier, <i>Parl. Debates, Canada</i> (<i>Commons</i>), 4th June 1913.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_732_732" id="Footnote_732_732"></a><a href="#FNanchor_732_732"><span class="label">[732]</span></a> <i>Canada Official Postal Guide</i>, 1917, pp. 27-8.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_733_733" id="Footnote_733_733"></a><a href="#FNanchor_733_733"><span class="label">[733]</span></a> Such improvements as the introduction of letter-cards, reply-paid
postcards,
etc., afford conveniences to the public, but they have little bearing on general
questions of rates of charge. The number of such articles passing by post is
insignificant in comparison with the total postal traffic.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_734_734" id="Footnote_734_734"></a><a href="#FNanchor_734_734"><span class="label">[734]</span></a> Thus, in the United Kingdom, the number of letters registered in
1913-14
was .68 per cent. of the total number posted. The total cost of the supplemental
services, including registration, insurance, and express delivery, was in
1913-14 only about a million, out of a total cost for all postal services of
over &#163;17,000,000 (<i>Annual Report of the Postmaster-General</i>, 1913-14, p.
92).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_735_735" id="Footnote_735_735"></a><a href="#FNanchor_735_735"><span class="label">[735]</span></a> "In the present century the Post Office has assumed three new
functions&mdash;the
transmission of money, and telegrams, and the custody of savings. These
are alike only in requiring a widespread system of branch offices."&mdash;A. M.
Ogilvie's article on "The Post Office" in R. H. Inglis Palgrave's <i>Dict.
Political
Economy</i>, London, 1899, vol. iii. p. 175.
</p><p>
"The so-called 'Post Office' is in fact a collection of different, though
connected,
industries."&mdash;C. F. Bastable, <i>Public Finance</i>, London, 1903, p. 206.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_736_736" id="Footnote_736_736"></a><a href="#FNanchor_736_736"><span class="label">[736]</span></a> See H. R. Meyer, <i>Public Ownership and the Telephone in Great
Britain</i>,
New York, 1907.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_737_737" id="Footnote_737_737"></a><a href="#FNanchor_737_737"><span class="label">[737]</span></a> "To-day, State ownership is the general rule over Europe, and
only in America
is there private ownership on a large scale. It is significant that the first
seizure of this monopoly of the State was in France, on the simple ground that
it was not safe to allow so important a device to be in other than the hands of
the State. In 1837 a law was passed making every kind of telegraph a State
monopoly. This was due to Napoleonic influence. It was not until 1870 that
the British Government claimed the monopoly."&mdash;John Lee, <i>Economics of
Telegraphs and Telephones</i>, London, 1913, p. 2.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_738_738" id="Footnote_738_738"></a><a href="#FNanchor_738_738"><span class="label">[738]</span></a> "No man can feel a more intimate conviction than I do that,
whatever our
financial difficulties may be, we must not take measures to meet them which
should bear upon the comforts of the labouring classes.... Well, then, I must,
with my sense of public duty, abandon the idea of raising a revenue from the
Post Office."&mdash;Sir R. Peel, 11th March 1842, <i>Parl. Debates</i>
(<i>Commons</i>), vol. lxi.
col. 434.
</p><p>
"If, therefore, it should also happen that it (the penny) is the best rate
adapted ultimately to produce the largest amount of money profit, such a
coincidence would be the result of <i>accident, not of design</i>."&mdash;<i>Report
from Select
Committee on Postage</i>, 1843; evidence of Sir Rowland Hill, Answer 74.
</p><p>
"The Post Office, and, since the fall in silver, the Mint, both produce in
England a net revenue, but the yield of revenue ought to be considered as purely
incidental if not accidental."&mdash;J. Shield Nicholson, <i>Principles of Political
Economy</i>, London, 1901, vol. iii. p. 372.
</p><p>
As a war measure the United Kingdom has now increased the rate on letters
over one ounce in weight. Such letters are, however, only a small proportion
of the total number of letters posted (<i lang="la" xml:lang="la">vide supra</i>, p. <a href="#Page_33">33</a>). Canada has
imposed a
war tax of one cent on all letters, and on postcards (<i lang="la" xml:lang="la">supra</i>, p. <a href="#Page_57">57</a>).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_739_739" id="Footnote_739_739"></a><a href="#FNanchor_739_739"><span class="label">[739]</span></a> <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Vide</i> Alfred Marshall, <i>Principles of Economics</i>,
London, 1907, vol. i. p. 124.
</p><p>
"If I put a letter in the pillar-box rather than walk half a mile to deliver it
by hand, it is clear that I value the service at one penny at least, and if its
true
value is to be taken at less than a penny, it must be assumed that some one
would have carried the letter for less than a penny if the Post Office monopoly
had been absent. But to deal thoroughly with this question it would be
necessary to enter on a discussion of the Austrian theory of value and
Marshall's
conception of 'consumer's rent.'"&mdash;E. Cannan (<i>Memoranda on Classification
and Incidence</i>, p. 163).</p></div>

<div class="footnote" lang="fr" xml:lang="fr"><p><a name="Footnote_740_740" id="Footnote_740_740"></a><a href="#FNanchor_740_740"><span class="label">[740]</span></a> "Notre syst&#232;me fiscal demande aux imp&#244;ts indirects la plus grande
partie
de nos recettes budg&#233;taires. Les allumettes sont lourdement tax&#233;es. &#201;crire une
lettre est, malgr&#233; tout, moins indispensable &#224; l'homme qu'allumer du feu.
Tant que les objets de premi&#232;re necessit&#233; sont frapp&#233;s, il n'y a pas raison
d&#233;cisive pour refuser de laisser pr&#233;lever sur les correspondances de toutes
sortes
un imp&#244;t indirect, qui appara&#238;t, dans les &#233;critures budg&#233;taires, comme un
exc&#233;dent de recettes des Postes, T&#233;l&#233;graphes, et T&#233;l&#233;phones sur leurs d&#233;penses.
</p><p>
"Si l&#233;gitimes que soient en principe les b&#233;n&#233;fices de l'&#201;tat-postier, tenons
pour
certain que le public, &#224; moins de quelque catastrophe impr&#233;vue, ne permettra
pas de les accro&#238;tre beaucoup, et que les Ministres de Finances de demain auront
beaucoup de peine &#224; conserver le peu qui leur en reste."&mdash;<i>Rapport portant
fixation du Budget g&#233;n&#233;ral</i>, Chambre des D&#233;put&#233;s, Session 1909, No. 2767.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_741_741" id="Footnote_741_741"></a><a href="#FNanchor_741_741"><span class="label">[741]</span></a> "The widest division of public revenue is into (1) that obtained
by the State
in its various functions as a great corporation or 'juristic person,' operating
under the ordinary conditions that govern individuals or private companies, and
(2) that taken from the revenues of the society by the power of the
sovereign."&mdash;C.
F. Bastable, <i>Public Finance</i>, London, 1903, p. 158. Of. C. C. Plehn,
<i>Introduction
to Public Finance</i>, New York, 1909, p. 79; E. B. A. Seligman, <i>Essays in
Taxation</i>, New York, 1913, p. 400, et seq.; see also Bastable, op. cit., p.
156.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_742_742" id="Footnote_742_742"></a><a href="#FNanchor_742_742"><span class="label">[742]</span></a> E.g. "The common mode of levying a tax on the conveyance of
letters is
by making the Government the sole authorized carrier of them, and demanding
a monopoly price. When this price is so moderate as it is in this country under
the uniform penny postage, scarcely if at all exceeding what would be charged
under the freest competition by any private company, it can hardly be considered
as taxation, but rather as the profits of a business; whatever excess there
is above the ordinary profits of stock being a fair result of the saving of
expense,
caused by having only one establishment and one set of arrangements for the
whole country, instead of many competing ones."&mdash;J. S. Mill, <i>Principles of
Political Economy</i>, London, 1871, vol. ii. p. 461.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_743_743" id="Footnote_743_743"></a><a href="#FNanchor_743_743"><span class="label">[743]</span></a> <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Vide</i> note 2, opposite.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_744_744" id="Footnote_744_744"></a><a href="#FNanchor_744_744"><span class="label">[744]</span></a> "Wherever the benefit to the individual can be even approximately
estimated there is a strong presumption in favour of levying the cost incurred
from him and converting the tax into a 'fee.'"&mdash;C. F. Bastable, op. cit.,
p. 267.
</p><p>
"To be properly remunerative to the State, as to a private individual, the price
at which a commodity is sold must be sufficient to pay interest on the capital
invested in the business, that is to say, to pay for the use of the property
which
must be used in producing the commodity, as well as to pay the more immediate
cost of its production in wages and materials. There is no ground at all for the
theory sometimes put forward that the State should deliberately abstain from
making a profit from the working of an institution like the Post Office.
Taxpayers
are indeed nearly all users of the Post Office, and users of the Post Office
are nearly all taxpayers, but there is nothing to show that people are taxed in
the
same proportion as they use the Post Office&mdash;the largest taxpayers are not
necessarily
the largest users of the Post Office. Consequently it is not a matter of
complete indifference whether the State, which in this case means the taxpayers,
makes a profit on the business or not. The only question difficult to decide is
how much interest on the capital invested the State ought to obtain, in order to
make the business remunerative but not a source of taxation. When the State
has no monopoly, or only a monopoly secured by driving out all competitors in
fair commercial rivalry (if such a case has ever occurred), it may charge what
it
can get for the commodity sold without making the business a source of taxation.
But when the State has conferred on itself a monopoly of a business, it is
evident
that to charge the price which would bring in the largest profit would often be
simply equivalent to laying a tax on the commodity. In this case, the price
charged should only be such as would produce a rate of interest which would
satisfy private individuals or joint-stock companies, supposing there were no
monopoly. The rate of interest should be reckoned in relation to the actual
market value of the property used, not in relation to what it may have
originally
cost the State. When the State makes a bad investment the loss should be
written off once for all as soon as it is discovered. If, for instance, a State
has
bought telegraph apparatus for far more than it is worth, there can be no reason
why the senders of telegrams, and not the whole body of taxpayers, should pay
for the mistake."&mdash;Edwin Cannan, <i>Elementary Political Economy</i>, London,
1903,
pp. 130-1.
</p><p>
The cost which ought in strictness to be taken is the cost of the most
economical private commercial undertaking which would provide an equal
service if the monopoly of the Post Office were withdrawn:&mdash;
</p><p>
"I do not regard the greater part of the Post Office revenue as a tax at
all. If all of it were earned by doing for the public on a large scale work
that no private company could do as cheaply, because it would have to do it
on a small scale, then I should say that none of the Post Office revenue
was a tax. That part, however, of its revenue which it gets by prohibiting
others from performing services for the public is a tax."&mdash;Alfred Marshall,
<i>The Times</i>, 6th April 1891.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_745_745" id="Footnote_745_745"></a><a href="#FNanchor_745_745"><span class="label">[745]</span></a> The terms "Mixed Taxes" and "Quasi-Taxes" have been applied to
charges of this character. "Mixed Taxes, or Quasi-Taxes, naturally arise
when a governing body makes demands for payments, and gives something
in return, but without any pretence of equivalence between individual payments
and individual returns."&mdash;R. Jones, <i>The Nature and First Principle of
Taxation</i>, London, 1914, p. 7.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_746_746" id="Footnote_746_746"></a><a href="#FNanchor_746_746"><span class="label">[746]</span></a> E.g. "Many definitions of the word 'tax' have been proposed, but
I
know of none which would include just so much of the Post Office revenue
as happens to be in excess of the amount expended in the year and no more.
</p><p>
"I believe that the desire to reckon this amount and no more as a tax,
arises from a somewhat dim impression that it is the sum which the State
exacts in excess of what a private company, without any legal or natural
monopoly, would have to be satisfied with for performing the same services.
But it is not. In the first place, such a private company would expect and
receive about 3 per cent. on its capital in addition to the mere working
expenses.
We do not know what the capital of the Post Office is, but it must be very
great, seeing that all the more important offices are owned in fee simple.
Secondly, a company would raise new capital for new buildings and the
purchase of more land, instead of defraying the expense as if it were current
working expenditure. Thirdly, a company would not 'encourage thrift'
by giving away upwards of &#163;700,000 a year to the depositors in the savings
bank, by paying 2&frac12; per cent. Fourthly, in all sorts of ways the Post Office
is not conducted as a commercial enterprise would be. For example, it
spends more than a company would do in the less profitable districts.
</p><p>
"The only argument I know of in favour of treating the so-called 'net
revenue' alone as a tax, thus breaks down. If any part of the gross revenue
is a tax, the whole must be."&mdash;E. Cannan (<i>Memoranda on Classification and
Incidence</i>, p. 163).</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_747_747" id="Footnote_747_747"></a><a href="#FNanchor_747_747"><span class="label">[747]</span></a> "The payment for the same service may be a price in one State, a
fee
in a second, or a tax in a third.... The controlling consideration in the
classification of public revenues is not so much the conditions attending the
action of government or the kinds of businesses conducted by the government,
as the economic relations existing between the individual and the
government."&mdash;E.
R. A. Seligman, <i>Essays in Taxation</i>, p. 423.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_748_748" id="Footnote_748_748"></a><a href="#FNanchor_748_748"><span class="label">[748]</span></a> This has been held a justification for regarding the letter rate
as a whole as
a pure tax:&mdash;
</p><p>
"A special service is no doubt rendered to each contributor of the tax, as well
as a general service to the whole community, by means of the facilities of
communication always available; but the charge is what is technically known
as a tax, and the fact that a particular, as well as a general, service is
rendered,
does not alter the tax nature of the charge. Apart from the theory it has also
to be considered that the productive portion of the Post Office revenue is
derived
from charges where the cost is very little&mdash;from letters, for instance, in the
metropolitan district, or in and between great centres of population, where the
cost of conveyance and delivery does not exceed, probably, one-tenth of a penny
per letter, and the surplus of nine-tenths is spent on other services of the
Post
Office on which there is a deficit."&mdash;Sir Robert Giffen, K.C.B. (<i>Memoranda on
Classification and Incidence</i>, p. 94).
</p><p>
The argument is that in large towns the cost of the service is infinitesimal,
and the charge is therefore tax. Obviously this has no application to country
services.
</p><p>
Plehn does not take this view:&mdash;
</p><p>
"<i>Postal surplus not the result of taxation.</i>"
</p><p>
"There are some writers who regard any surplus acquired in this way as
practically the result of taxation, and class any charge for the public service,
above the cost thereof, as a special tax. This classification presupposes that
the
service is, by nature, of a public character, an assumption contrary to the
fact,
for no function except that of governing itself, in the narrowest possible
sense,
is <i>by nature</i> of a public character, nor, on the other hand, <i>by
nature</i> of a private
character. On this consideration, therefore, it is better to class these gains,
not
as taxes, but as the earnings of a public industry."&mdash;C. C. Plehn,
<i>Introduction to
Public Finance</i>, p. 358.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_749_749" id="Footnote_749_749"></a><a href="#FNanchor_749_749"><span class="label">[749]</span></a> "On the purely financial side the gain from the service must
generally be a
small one; the return for capital employed is little, and the only remaining
element would be the economy that results from the application of monopoly, and
the consequent unity of the service. Any further charge is really a form of
taxation."&mdash;C. F. Bastable, <i>Public Finance</i>, London, 1903, p. 209.
</p><p>
"When we come to look more closely into the essential character of this
'public utility' in respect of its economic and financial value, it will appear
that in this case an important administrative function has attached to it, as it
were involuntarily, an effective contrivance for the levying of a tax, such as
to
require that the Post Office be taken up in connection with the theory of
taxation."&mdash;G. Cohn, <i>Science of Finance</i>, translated by T. B. Veblen,
Chicago,
1895, p. 126.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_750_750" id="Footnote_750_750"></a><a href="#FNanchor_750_750"><span class="label">[750]</span></a> The rates for postcards, printed matter, and samples roughly
correspond
with the cost of service and are perhaps to some extent prices.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_751_751" id="Footnote_751_751"></a><a href="#FNanchor_751_751"><span class="label">[751]</span></a> The suggested classification, if satisfactory from the
speculative point of
view, does, however, give rise to practical difficulties. In public financial
statements it is, of course, impossible to show the actual nature of the revenue
on such a basis. The only practicable course is to classify as a whole the gross
revenue and the net revenue for the entire service. There is difference of
opinion even as to this apparently simple problem. The common-sense solution
would seem to be that recommended by Sir Edward Hamilton, viz. to reckon
the net revenue as a tax and the balance of gross revenue as payment for
services rendered; although in view of the complications resulting from the
existence of unremunerative services, and the failure to make proper allowance
in respect of the capital employed in the service, such a course is unscientific
and misleading.
</p><p>
"The whole of the receipts from the various sources administered by the
Post Office has always been treated in our Public Accounts as 'Non-Tax
Revenue.' It is all carried to the Exchequer; and the whole cost is annually
provided by Parliament. Therefore, to omit altogether this public receipt from
a classification of taxes would seem to be the natural course to take. But the
charge which is made for the carriage of letters, telegrams, and parcels, so far
as
the Post Office services are a State monopoly, is unquestionably 'an obligatory
contribution by persons in respect of or incidental to something which they do.'
Accordingly, to take no account of this charge, which nobody can avoid, would
be to omit something which falls within our definition of a tax. At the same
time it is obvious that to treat the whole of the Post Office revenue as a tax
would for present purposes be misleading, inasmuch as the amount actually
expended by the State represents direct and immediate service rendered to those
who write letters or send telegrams. Regard being had to these considerations,
when balanced one with another, it appears to me that the least incorrect course
to adopt is to treat as a tax the amount by which the revenue derived from
Post Office services exceeds the cost of administering those services."&mdash;Sir E.
W.
Hamilton, K.C.B. (<i>Memoranda on Classification and Incidence</i>, p. 36).
</p><p>
See also p. <a href="#Page_361">361</a>, n. 2, <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">supra.</i></p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_752_752" id="Footnote_752_752"></a><a href="#FNanchor_752_752"><span class="label">[752]</span></a> "There cannot be devised a more eligible method than this of
raising money
upon the subject; for therein both the Government and the people find a
mutual benefit. The Government acquires a large revenue, and the people do
their business with greater ease, expedition, and cheapness than they would
be able to do if no such tax (and of course no such office) existed."&mdash;Sir
William Blackstone, <i>Commentaries on the Laws of England</i>, London, 1783,
vol. i.
p. 324.
</p><p>
"Nor, while the rates of postage are confined within due limits, or not carried
so high as to form any serious obstacle to correspondence, is there, perhaps,
a more unobjectionable tax."&mdash;J. R. McCulloch, <i>Taxation and Funding</i>, p.
320.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_753_753" id="Footnote_753_753"></a><a href="#FNanchor_753_753"><span class="label">[753]</span></a> "The Post Office in reality is neither a commercial nor a
philanthropic
establishment, but simply one of the revenue departments of the Government.
It very rightly insists that no country post office shall be established unless
the
correspondence passing through it shall warrant the increased expense, and it
maintains a tariff which has no accordance whatever with the cost of conveyance.
Books, newspapers, and even unsealed manuscripts, can be sent up to
the weight of 4 ounces for a penny; whereas if a sealed letter in the least
exceeds &frac12; ounce it is charged 2d. It is obvious that the charges of the Post
Office are for the most part a purely arbitrary system of taxes, designed to
maintain the large net revenue of the Post Office, now (1867) amounting to a
million and a half sterling.
</p><p>
"It will thus be apparent that Sir Rowland Hill's scheme of postal tariff
consisted in substituting one arbitrary system of charges for a system more
arbitrary and onerous."&mdash;W. S. Jevons, <i>Methods of Social Reform</i>, London,
1883,
p. 280.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_754_754" id="Footnote_754_754"></a><a href="#FNanchor_754_754"><span class="label">[754]</span></a> "Will it pay?
</p><p>
"I will here lay down what may seem to financiers in this House a somewhat
startling position. I hold that the State has no right to make a profit out of
the
Post Office. (Cheers.) ... Probably half the letters sent are business letters;
and another very large share is sent by persons of small means who have many
stern inducements to take care of their pence. In other words, one half of your
postal revenue is derived from a tax on the machinery of trade, and another
large share from the poorest class of citizens.
</p><p>
"This is practically a tax on commerce."&mdash;Sir J. Henniker Heaton, <i>Parl.
Debates</i> (<i>Commons</i>), 30th March 1886.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_755_755" id="Footnote_755_755"></a><a href="#FNanchor_755_755"><span class="label">[755]</span></a> "Regarded as a tax diffused over the whole community, it is on
the whole
defensible, though the tendency to insist that the postal profits shall be
devoted
to improving the service is already becoming more pronounced."&mdash;C. F. Bastable,
op. cit., p. 575.
</p><p>
"The Post Office, therefore, is at present one of the best sources from which
this country derives its revenue. But a postage much exceeding what would
be paid for the same service in a system of freedom is not a desirable tax. Its
chief weight falls on letters of business, and increases the expense of
mercantile
relations between distant places. It is like an attempt to raise a large revenue
by heavy tolls: it obstructs all operations by which goods are conveyed from
place to place, and discourages the production of commodities in one place for
consumption in another; which is not only in itself one of the greatest sources
of economy of labour, but is a necessary condition of almost all improvements
in production and one of the strongest stimulants to industry and promoters of
civilization."&mdash;J. S. Mill, <i>Principles of Political Economy</i>, London,
1871, vol. ii.
p. 462.
</p><p>
"It may happen (quite acceptably) that a surplus comes in from an undertaking
which is primarily carried on for administrative purposes alone. A
striking instance of this is afforded by the letter post. If the administrative
purpose in question admitted of no aim beyond the covering of its own expenses,
such a surplus would have no meaning, or at any rate no other meaning than
that of a surplus in the hands of a consumers' club, which is returned to the
members, on the closing of the accounts for the year, in the proportion in which
they have contributed to it. The fact that the postal service not only retains
any such surplus but even (with due regard to its primarily administrative
function) consciously seeks it, is to be explained on the ground that, without
hindrance to the administrative function, the different abilities of the
citizens
to contribute to public purposes may be drawn on by this means, with desirable
results which are not attainable in any other way."&mdash;G. Cohn, op. cit., p. 94.
Cf. <i>The Development of the Post Office</i>, Fabian Research Department,
London,
1916, pp. 43-7.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_756_756" id="Footnote_756_756"></a><a href="#FNanchor_756_756"><span class="label">[756]</span></a> The extent to which any such disadvantage may be experienced is,
of
course, largely minimized by the existence of a low rate containing no element
of tax, (see <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">supra</i> Chapter IV) for most of the formal documents of
commerce.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_757_757" id="Footnote_757_757"></a><a href="#FNanchor_757_757"><span class="label">[757]</span></a> "It is wholly misleading to point to the fact that the business
of the Post
Office now yields a very considerable profit, and to suggest that increased
remuneration can easily be provided from that source. That profit is not in a
bag to be drawn upon at will. It goes into the National Exchequer, and forms
part of the revenue of the country, and if two or three millions is taken from
it,
the deficit in the Exchequer must be made good in other ways. And it has
never been admitted, nor can it now be admitted, that the profits of the Post
Office belong in equity to the staff rather than to the taxpayer. The Post
Office
is not like a private business. Parliament has established a monopoly, and has
fixed certain rates of postage. If Parliament chose to relax that monopoly, or
to reduce those rates of postage, the profit would straightway disappear. It
does not do so, because it desires to retain for the Exchequer the sums so
brought.
</p><p>
"Parliament has also established the sixpenny telegram, extended the telegraph
service into remote rural districts, and has given very cheap rates to the
Press. This has resulted in the telegraphs being worked at a loss of over a
million a year. No one would suggest that it would be just, because of this
loss, to reduce the wages of the men and women employed in the telegraph
service, and it is equally beside the mark to quote the profits on the postal
side
as though the pay of the staff should be determined by their amount."&mdash;The
Right Hon. Herbert Samuel, British Postmaster General, to a deputation from
the staff, 19th November 1913.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_758_758" id="Footnote_758_758"></a><a href="#FNanchor_758_758"><span class="label">[758]</span></a> Pekin.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_759_759" id="Footnote_759_759"></a><a href="#FNanchor_759_759"><span class="label">[759]</span></a> From the <i>British Official Records</i>.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_760_760" id="Footnote_760_760"></a><a href="#FNanchor_760_760"><span class="label">[760]</span></a> Exeter.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_761_761" id="Footnote_761_761"></a><a href="#FNanchor_761_761"><span class="label">[761]</span></a> From the <i>British Official Records</i>.</p></div>

<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_762_762" id="Footnote_762_762"></a><a href="#FNanchor_762_762"><span class="label">[762]</span></a> From the <i>British Official Records</i> (undated).</p></div>

</html>