diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'old/55570-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/55570-0.txt | 17061 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 17061 deletions
diff --git a/old/55570-0.txt b/old/55570-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 62351c6..0000000 --- a/old/55570-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,17061 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg EBook of Postal Riders and Raiders, by W. H. Gantz - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most -other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of -the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have -to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook. - -Title: Postal Riders and Raiders - -Author: W. H. Gantz - -Release Date: September 17, 2017 [EBook #55570] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK POSTAL RIDERS AND RAIDERS *** - - - - -Produced by MFR, Adrian Mastronardi, The Philatelic Digital -Library Project at http://www.tpdlp.net and the Online -Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This -file was produced from images generously made available -by The Internet Archive/American Libraries.) - - - - - -Transcriber’s Note: Punctuation and typographical errors have been -corrected without note. A list of the more substantial amendments made to -the text appears at the end. - - - - -[Illustration: “The primary step in connection with second-class mail -is taken in the forests of the American continent.”--_Senator J. P. -Dolliver._] - - - - - Postal Riders and Raiders - - _Are we fools? If we are not fools, why then continue to - act foolishly, thus inviting railroad, express company - and postoffice officials to treat - us as if we were fools?_ - - By The Man On The Ladder - - (W. H. GANTZ) - - Issued By The Independent Postal League - - CHICAGO, U. S. A. - 1912 - - COPYRIGHT, 1912, BY THE AUTHOR - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED - - Price $1.50, Prepaid to Any Address. - Independent Postal League, - No. 5037 Indiana Ave., - Chicago - - - - -FOREWORD TO THE READER. - - -The mud-sills of this book are hewn from the presupposition that the -person who reads it has not only the essentially necessary equipment to -do his own thinking, but also a more or less practiced habit of doing it. -It is upon such foundation the superstructure of this volume was built. -It is written in the hope of promoting, or provoking, thought on certain -subjects, along certain lines--not to create or school thinkers. So, if -the reader lacks the necessary cranial furnishing to do his own thinking, -or, if having that, he has a cultivated habit of letting other people do -his hard thinking and an ingrown desire to let them continue doing so, -such reader may as well stop at this period. In fact, he would better -do so. The man who has his thinking done by proxy is possibly as happy -and comfortable on a siding as he would be anywhere--as he is capable -of being. I have no desire to disturb his state or condition of static -felicity. Besides, such a man might “run wild” or otherwise interfere -with the traffic if switched onto the main line. - -Emerson has somewheres said, “Beware when God turns a thinker loose in -the world.” Of course Emerson cautioned about constructive and fighting -thinkers, not thinkers who think they know because somebody told them so, -or who think they have thought till they know all about some unknowable -thing--the ratio of the diameter to the circumference of the circle, how -to construct two hills without a valley between, to build a bunghole -bigger than the barrel, and the like. - -There are thinkers and thinkers. Emerson had the distinction between -them clearly in mind no doubt when he wrote that quoted warning. So, -also, has the thinking reader. It is for him this volume is planned; -to him its arguments and statements of fact are intended to appeal. -Its chapters have been hurriedly written--some of them written under -conditions of physical distress. The attempts at humor may be attempts -only; the irony may be misplaced or misapplied; the spade-is-a-spade -style may be blunt, harsh or even coarse to the point of offensiveness. -Still, if its reading provokes or otherwise induces thought, the purpose -of its writing, at least in some degree, will have been attained. It is -not asked that the reader agree with the conclusions of the text. If he -read the facts stated and thinks--_thinks for himself_--he will reach -right conclusions. The facts are of easy comprehension. It requires no -superior academic knowledge nor experience of years to understand them -and their significance--their lesson. - -Just read and think. Do not let any “official” noise nor breakfast-food -rhetoric so syncopate and segregate your thought as to derail it from -the main line of facts. Lofty, persuasive eloquence is often but the -attractive drapery of planned falsehood, and the beautifully rounded -period is often but a “steer” for an ulterior motive--a “tout” for a -marked-card game. Do not be a “come-on” for any verbal psychic work -or worker. Just stubbornly persist in doing your own thinking, ever -remembering that in this vale of tears, “Plain hoss sense’ll pull you -through when ther’s nothin’ else’ll do.” - -As a thinker, you will now have lots of company, and they are still -coming in droves. Respectable company, too. Mr. Roosevelt suddenly -_arrived_ a few days since at Columbus, Ohio. Then there is Mr. Carnegie -and Judge Gary. The senior Mr. Rockefeller, also, has announced, through -a representative, that he is on the way. These latter, of course, have -been thinkers for many years--thinkers on personal service lines chiefly, -it has been numerously asserted. Now, however, if press accounts are -true, they have begun to think, a little at least, about the general -welfare, about the common good--about the other fellow. - -Whether this change in mental effort and direction, if change it be, has -followed upon a more careful study of conditions which have so long, -so wastefully, or ruthlessly and viciously governed, or results from -the fact that the advancing years have brought these gentlemen so near -Jericho that they see a gleam of the clearer light and occasionally hear -the “rustle of a wing,” I do not know. Nor need one know nor care. That -they come to join the rapidly-growing company of thinkers is sufficient. - -CHICAGO, March 1, 1912. - - - - -Postal Riders and Raiders - - - - -CHAPTER I. - -MAL-ADMINISTRATION RUN RIOT. - - -This is nice winter weather. However, as The Man on the Ladder was born -some distance prior to the week before last, there’s a tang and chill -in the breezes up here about the ladder top which makes the temperature -decidedly less congenial than is the atmosphere in the editorial rooms of -my publisher. - -But, say, the view from this elevation is mighty interesting. The -mobilization of the United States soldiery far to the Southwest; the -breaking up of corrals and herds to the West; the starting of activities -about mining camps in the West and Northwest; the lumber jacks and teams -in the spruce forests of the north are indeed inspiring things to look -upon; and over the eastern horizon, there in the lumber sections of New -England and to the Southeast, in the soft maple, the cottonwood and -basswood districts, the people appear to be industriously and happily -active; away to the South---- - -Say! What’s that excitement over there at Washington, D. C.? - -“Hello, Central! Hello! Yes, this is The Man on the Ladder.” - -“Get me Washington, D. C., on the L.-D. in a hurry--and get Congressman -Blank on that end of the wire. The House is in session, and certainly he -ought to be found in not more than five minutes.” - -It is something unusually gratifying to see that activity about that -sleepy group of capitol buildings--the “House of Dollars,” the house of -the _hoi polloi_, and the White House--a scene that will linger in the -freshness and fragrance of my remembrance until the faculty of memory -fades away. There are messengers and pages flitting about from house to -house as if the prairies were afire behind them. Excited Congressmen are -in heated discourse on the esplanade, on the capitol steps and in the -corridors and cloak rooms. And there are numerous groups of Senators, -each a kingly specimen of what might be a _real man_ if there was not so -much pickled dignity oozing from his stilted countenance and pose. There -now go four of them to the White House, probably to see the President, -our smiling William. I wonder what they are after. I wonder---- - -“Yes, yes! Hello! Is that you, Congressman Jim?” “Yes? What can I do for -you?” - -“Well, this is The Man on the Ladder, Jim, and I want to know in the -name of heaven--any other spot you can think of quickly will do as -well--what’s the occasion and cause for all that external excitement and -activity I see around the capitol building? There must be a superthermic -atmosphere inside both the Senate and House to drive so many of our -statesmen to the open air and jolt them into a quickstep in their -movements. Now go on and tell, and tell me straight.” - -Well, Well! If I did not know my Congressman friend so well, I would -scarcely be persuaded to believe what he has just phoned me. - -It appears that a _conspiracy_--yes, I mean just that--a conspiracy has -been entered into between our Chief Executive, a coterie of Senators, -possibly a Congressman or two and a numerous gang of corporate and vested -interests, cappers and beneficiaries, to penalize various independent -weekly and monthly periodicals. Penalize is what I said. But that word -is by no means strong enough. The intent of the conspirators was--and -_is--to put certain periodicals out of business and to establish a press -censorship in the person of the Postmaster General as will enable him to -put any periodical out of existence which does not print what it is told -to publish_. - -It would seem that when the Postoffice appropriation bill left the House, -where all revenue measures must originate, it was a fairly clean bill, -carrying some $258,000,000 of the people’s money _for the legitimate -service of the people_. Of course it carried many service excesses, -just as it has carried in each of the past thirty or forty years, and -several of those _looting_ excesses so conspicuous in every one of the -immediately past fifteen years. - -But otherwise, it may be stated, the House approval carried this -bill to the Senate in its usual normal cleanliness. It was referred -to the Senate Committee on Postoffices and Postroads, the members of -which, _after conference with the President_, annexed to it an alleged -_revenue-producing_ “rider.” - -This rider I will later on discuss for the information of my readers. -Here I desire only to call the reader’s attention to the fact that under -the Constitution of the United States the United States Senate has no -more right or authority to originate legislation for producing federal -revenues than has the Hamilton Club of Chicago or the Golf Club at Possum -Run, Kentucky. But the conspirators--I still use the milder term, though -I feel like telling the truth, which could be expressed only by some term -that would class their action as that of _assassinating education_ in -this country. These conspirators, I say, did not hesitate to exceed and -violate their constitutional obligations and prerogatives. They added a -revenue-producing “rider” to House resolution 31,539. The rider was to -raise certain kinds of second-class matter from a one-cent per pound rate -to a four-cent per pound rate. Not only that, but they managed to induce -Postmaster General Hitchcock to push into the Senate several _ulterior -motive_ reports and letters to boost the outlawry to successful passage. -But, more of this later. - -My friend Congressman Jim has just informed me that the conspirators were -beginning to fear their ability even to get their “rider” to the post for -a start; that many members and representatives of the Periodical Press -Association of New York City, as well as those of other branches of the -printing industry, hearing of the attempt to put this confiscatory rider -over in the closing hours--the crooked hours--of Congress, hurried to -Washington and sought to inform Senators and members of the House of the -_truth about second-class mail matter_. Congressman Jim also informed me -that a delegation representing the publishing interests of Chicago had -arrived a few hours before and were scarcely on the ground before “things -began to happen.” “People talk about Chicagoans making a noise,” said Jim -in his L.-D. message, “but when it comes to doing things you can count on -them to go to it suddenly, squarely and effectively. That delegation is -one of the causes of the excitement which you notice here. Good-by.” - -Friend Jim, being a Chicago boy, may be pardoned even when a little -profuse or over-confident in speaking of what his townsmen can do, -but Congressman Jim is a live-wire Congressman, and has been able to -do several things himself while on his legislative job, even against -stacked-up opposition. - -While reporting on Congressman Jim’s message from Washington, I phoned -the leading features to the office and have just received peremptory -orders to write up not only this attempt but other attempts to raid the -postal revenues of the country by means of crooked riders and otherwise. -So there is nothing to do but go to it. - -Incidentally, my editor, knowing my tendency to write with a club, -cautions me to adopt the dignified style of composition while writing -upon this subject. I assure my readers that I shall be as dignified as -the heritage of my nature will allow and the subject warrants. If I -occasionally fall from the expected dignified altitude I trust the reader -will be indulgent, will charge the fault, in part at least, to my remote -Alsatian ancestor. He fought with a club. I have therefore an inherited -tendency to write (fight), with a club. So here goes. - -In opening on this important subject, for vastly important it is from -whatever angle one views it, I wish first to speak of the governmental -postoffice department and then of Postmaster Generals. - -First I will say that this government has not had, at least within -the range of my mature recollection, any business management of its -postoffice department above the level of that given to Reuben’s country -store of Reubenville, Arkansas. - -The second fact I desire to put forward is that since the days of -Benjamin Franklin there have been but few, a possible three or four, -Postmaster Generals who had any qualifications whatsoever, business -or other, to direct the management of so large a business as that -comprehended in the federal postal service. Not only are the chiefs, -the Postmaster Generals, largely or wholly lacking in business and -executive ability to manage so large an industrial and public service, -but their chosen assistants (Second, Third and on up to the Fourth or -Fifth “Assistant Postmaster Generals”), have been and _are_ likewise -lacking in most or _all_ of the essential qualifications fundamentally -necessary to the management and direction of large industrial or service -business enterprises. I venture to say that none of them have read, and -few of them even heard of, the splendid book written by Mr. Frederick -W. Taylor explaining, really giving the A, B, C of the “Science of -Business Management,” which for several years has been so beneficial in -the business and industrial methods in this country as almost to have -worked an economic revolution. I equally doubt if they have even read the -series of articles in one of the monthly periodicals, which Postmaster -General Hitchcock and his coterie of conspirators tried to stab in the -back with that Senate “rider” on the postoffice appropriation bill. Yet -Mr. Taylor wrote these articles, and Mr. Taylor must _know_ a great deal -about economic, scientific business management. _He must know_, otherwise -the Steel Corporation, the great packing concerns, several railroads, -the Yale and Towne Manufacturing Company, the Link Belt Company and -a number of other large concerns, as well as the trained editors of -several engineering and industrial journals, would not have so generally, -likewise profitably, adopted and approved his recommendations and -directions. - -Yet while most of these “Assistant Postmaster Generals” and _their_ -subassistants have been glaringly--yes, discouragingly--incompetent -to manage and direct the work of their divisions, some of them have -shown an elegance of aptitude, a finished adroitness in using their -official positions to misappropriate, _likewise to appropriate to their -own coffers_, the funds and revenues of the Postoffice Department. -Reference needs only to be made to the grace and deftness displayed by -August W. Machen, George W. Beavers and their copartners. The one was -Superintendent of Free Delivery, the other Superintendent of Salaries -and Allowances, and the way they, for several years, made the postoffice -funds and revenues “come across” beat any get-rich-quick concern about -forty rods in any mile heat that was reported in the sporting columns of -the daily press. - -General Leonard Wood, Congressman Loud and a few other reputable -officials induced President Roosevelt to institute an investigation. The -investigation was made under the direction of Joseph L. Bristow. Then -things were uncovered; that is, some things were uncovered. In speaking -of the nastiness disclosed William Allen White in 1904 wrote, in part, as -follows: - -“Most of the Congressmen knew there was something wrong in Beaver’s -department; and Beaver knew of their suspicions; so Congressmen generally -got from him what they _went after_, and the crookedness thrived. - -“When it was stopped by President Roosevelt, this crookedness was so -far-reaching that when a citizen went to the postoffice to buy a stamp -the cash register which gave him his change was full of graft, the ink -used in canceling the stamp was full of graft, the pad which furnished -the ink was full of graft, the clock which kept the clerk’s time was -full of graft, the carrier’s satchel tie-straps, his shoulder straps, and -his badge were subject to illegal taxation, the money order blanks were -full of graft, the letter boxes on the street were fraudulently painted, -fraudulently fastened to the posts, fraudulently made, and equipped--many -of them with fraudulent time-indicators. Often the salaries of the clerks -were full of graft. And in the case of hundreds of thousands of swindling -letters and advertisements that were dropped in the box--they were full -of graft.” - -We will now get down to the present Postmaster General, Mr. Frank H. -Hitchcock. I have read, and shall later print in this volume the Senate -“rider” to the postoffice department appropriation bill, which, so far -as The Man on the Ladder has been able to learn, Mr. Hitchcock either -wrote or “steered” in its writing. I have also read his series of letters -to Senator Penrose, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Postoffices and -Postroads; also his 1910 report. At this point I shall make my comment on -Postmaster General Hitchcock brief but, mayhap, somewhat pointed. - -Most Postmaster Generals for the past thirty or more years have been -incompetent. There have been a few notable and worthy exceptions, -but their worthiness was almost completely lost in the department by -reason of previously planted corruption and political interference. -Most Postmaster Generals, as has been stated, have had little or no -qualification for the management and administration of so large a service -industry as that covered by the federal postoffice department. - -Mr. Hitchcock, in his administration of the department, in his reports -and recent letters to the Senate and the House, has shown himself -scarcely up to the _average_ of his incompetent predecessors. - -Mr. Hitchcock’s “rider” to the 1911 postoffice appropriation bill and -his recent letters to Senator Penrose and others will convince any -fair-minded, informed reader that he is either an “influenced” man or -is densely ignorant. I wish to make this point emphatic: The careless, -loose, hurried--yes, even silly--wording of that “rider” and the false -and foolish statements in his letters to Senator Penrose, relating to his -demand for an increase of three cents a pound on certain periodicals now -carried in the mails as second-class matter at one cent a pound, he to be -given authority to pick out and designate the periodicals which should be -subject to the increased rate--his false and foolish statements in that -“rider,” and in his recent letters, I say, must show to any intelligent -mind that Mr. Hitchcock is either an “influenced” man or a six-cylinder, -chain-tired, hill-climber of an ignoramus in matters relating to -periodical publication, and also in many essential matters relating to -his department. - -My previous statements regarding the government’s postoffice department, -about Postmaster Generals in general and about Mr. Hitchcock in -particular, may not be up to the broadcloth of dignity, but they do carry -the dignity of fact and _truth_, as I shall proceed to demonstrate to my -readers. - -Let us consider first the government postoffice department and then Mr. -Hitchcock’s recent actions and utterances. - -Most of the Postmaster Generals, including Mr. Hitchcock, appear to have -been greatly exercised about “deficits,” yet persist in pursuing methods -of business management and direction that must, almost necessarily, make -expenditures of the department exceed its receipts. - -Also I may ask, in this connection, why so much agony, or “front,” -whichever it may be, about a “deficit” in the Postoffice Department? The -postal service of the country is a public service, _a service of all the -people. As such the revenues of the federal postoffice department should -not be permitted to exceed the actual cost of the service rendered under -honest, economical and competent management and direction._ - -The departments of war and the navy produce no revenue save the -comparatively speaking trifling sums received from the sale of junk, -abandoned equipment, accoutrements, etc. These departments render -personal or direct service to but a small fraction of the vast number -of people served by the postoffice department. Almost the entire -appropriation for war and the navy in the past forty-five years might be -called a “deficit” so far as any service they have rendered to the great -body of the Nation’s citizenship is concerned. Yet in the face of all -this, so loosely, carelessly and _crookedly_ have the departments of war -and of the navy been managed that there is scarcely a session of Congress -which is not appealed to for huge sums of money to cover “deficits,” to -meet extravagant, wasteful and, not infrequently, fraudulent expenditures -in excess of the vast sums set aside for them in their annual -appropriation bills. - -_A few years since it was found that the navy department was employing -more clerks than it employed service men._ - -As to these strictures on the Postoffice Department, I will here quote -for the benefit of readers who may not have studied this postal service -question, a few authorities on the subject under consideration. - -A few years ago the methods and abuses of the federal Postoffice -Department were investigated by a joint commission of Congress. One -paragraph of the commission’s report reads as follows and must be -regarded as officially significant: - -“It appears too obvious to require argument that the most efficient -service can never be expected as long as the direction of the business -is, as at present, intrusted to a Postmaster General and certain -assistants selected without special reference to experience and -qualifications and subject to frequent change. Under such a system a -large railroad, commercial or industrial business would inevitably go -into bankruptcy and the postoffice department has averted that fate only -because the United States Treasury has been able to meet deficiencies.” - -Pretty plain, straight talk that, is it not? - -The resolution to appoint a commission of three members and appropriate -$50,000 for the commission’s use was tacked onto the postoffice -appropriation bill after the Senate “rider” was ditched. That resolution -was under discussion in the House March 3rd (1911)--the usual swan-song -day for those who failed to “arrive” at the November election. Mr. -Weeks, chairman of the House Committee on Postoffices and Postroads, -led the discussion. The discussion was participated in by several -Congressmen, among whom was Congressman Moon of Tennessee. Judge Moon is -recognized as one of the best informed men in Congress on postal matters, -and particularly informed as to present methods of transporting and -handling second-class mail. Mr. Moon, though a member of the conference -committee which had just agreed to the bill, Senate resolution and all, -as amended in conference, quite vigorously opposed the appropriation -of $50,000 of the people’s money for a “Commission” to investigate the -cost of transporting and handling second-class mail matter. He based his -opposition largely on the fact that two or three previous commissions had -been appointed to investigate the same question or matter; that these -previous commissions had gone into the subject thoroughly, had collected -every scrap of information that, under the present methods, or lack of -method, in the postoffice department, it was or is possible to collect; -that these commissions had spent hundreds of thousands of the people’s -money; that they had made complete and exhaustive reports covering all -the information obtained or obtainable; that these reports are on file -and easily accessible, and that _the postal committees of neither Senate -nor House had given any attention or consideration to those reports_. - -From the many trenchant things said by Mr. Moon I take the following: - -“If the gentleman will excuse me a minute, I am trying to get to -another reason which I want to present to the House as to why I deem -it inappropriate and unwise to pass this legislation. Now, when the -experts undertake to determine just exactly what ought to be paid for the -carrying of the magazines, how the government ought to be remunerated -for the carrying and handling of these magazines, or other second-class -matter, they are bound to take as the basis of the investigation the -manner in which the second-class matter is now handled and the manner -in which it is paid for. In other words, the basis of weighing and -the computation of paying are the basic facts upon which they must -rely in order to determine the question. I undertake to say to this -House deliberately, that in view of our method of weighing and of the -computation of railway mail pay, that no expert on the face of this earth -can today come within fifteen or twenty millions of dollars of what the -compensation ought to be for the transportation of second-class mail. - -“If every fact has been adduced that would lead to a proper conclusion -as to what the pay ought to be, if we are to go again over the same -field of investigation with no possibility of any more light, tell me -what sense there is in expending the public money for that purpose? And, -then the very minute you undertake to reach the correct result you are -confronted with a proposition that you cannot justly charge the cost -of transportation and handling to a class of matter flatly _that in -itself produces a return to the government in another class of matter, -probably in excess of the charges of transportation and handling of that -matter itself_--the second class. How are you to draw the lines for the -determination of these questions? You are in the dark; it is a chaotic -proposition, considering the method by which it must be determined today.” - -I take it, that however much they may differ from him in his political -and economic views, readers recognize in William Randolph Hearst one -of the most alert and best informed men in this country on the subject -of publishing and distributing periodical literature. He certainly -ranks among the largest, if he is not indeed the largest, publisher and -distributer of newspapers and other periodical prints there is in this -country,--yes, I may say, in the world. - -On February 24, 1911, a letter over Mr. Hearst’s signature appeared -in the Washington Post. In this communication he touches upon the -efficiency--rather the inefficiency--of the Postoffice Department in -handling the postal service of this country. I would like to reproduce -the letter entire, but cannot. I will, however, reprint some of its -cogent statements which bear largely upon the point under consideration. -Mr. Hearst says: - - I know something about the cost of distribution of publications. - I know something about the reasons for the excessive cost of - distribution of the postoffice. And I say that the high cost - of distribution in the postoffice is largely due to loose - and careless and reckless methods, to antiquated systems and - incompetent management. - - It is estimated that 40 per cent of the charged weight of mail - matter is composed of cumbersome mail bags and their heavy iron - locks and fastenings. - - How absurd to imagine that a man who wanted to break into a mail - bag would be deterred by a ponderous lock. - - The postoffice department might as well insist that a - burglar-proof lock be affixed to every letter, under the inane - impression that the only way to tear open a letter would be to - pick a lock. - - I know, too, personally and positively, of an instance where - the great mass of western mail was sent over one railroad and - when the bulk of it was transferred to another railroad, all the - postal clerks previously employed were maintained on the first - railroad for over two years after the mail had been transferred. - - The Evening Journal, without any of the powers of the great - United States government behind it, distributes its product for - seven-tenths of a cent a pound, and included in this average - is the 1-cent-a-pound rate paid to the government for copies - mailed. Obviously, then, the proportion of the product which is - not carried by the postoffice is delivered for much less than - seven-tenths of a cent per pound. - - The New York American distributes by mail and express 303,584 - pounds of daily and Sunday papers every week at a cost of - $1,655.17, or little over one-half a cent per pound. This average - includes 28,028 pounds sent by mail at 1 cent per pound, so, - obviously, the average of matter not distributed by mail is less - than one-half a cent per pound. - - The New York American sends 67,268 pounds of these papers over - the Pennsylvania Railroad at one-fourth of a cent per pound, - or one-fourth the rate paid to the United States postoffice - department. - - That same rate--one-fourth of a cent per pound--is exactly the - rate charged by the Canadian Government for carrying magazines by - mail through its postoffice department and for distributing them - over a thinly populated territory even greater than the United - States. - - How absurd, then, to assert that the government cannot distribute - the magazines profitably at this present rate when it handles the - magazines along with all other mail distributed and without any - particular extra expense because of them. - - Even if, as I said, the government were handling the magazines - at a loss, it would be doing a creditable thing. But it is not - handling the magazines at a loss. It is carrying them at a - profit, and if it taxes the magazines out of existence it will - compel the postal department to be conducted at a greater loss - than the loss at which it is now conducted. - - What inconsistency, too, for the administration to advocate a - government subsidy to restore a United States merchant marine and - at the same time advocate a measure to put out of existence a - much more important American institution. - - If it is a Republican policy to promote business and encourage - industry, and a proper Republican and American policy to take - money out of the United States Treasury to subsidize a private - business in order to create an industry, why is it not a proper - Republican and American policy to continue to provide a cheap - mail rate in order to maintain a great American industry and - perpetuate a mighty educational influence already existent? - -The evidence in support of my impeachment of the Postoffice Department -on account of its almost total lack of business method, its absolute -helplessness to tell, even with approximate accuracy, the loss of any -division of its service, or the revenues resulting from any given source -or class of mail carried, would not be complete without quoting Senator -Penrose and former Senator Carter. - -Senator Penrose of Pennsylvania is Chairman of the Senate Committee on -Postoffices and Postroads, and former Senator Carter was conceded to be -one of the well informed men on postal matters in Congress. - -The excerpt from Senator Penrose is from an address he made on the -floor of the Senate, within the year, when speaking to the subject of -second-class mail rates, and that from Mr. Carter is from his address on -the same subject made in March, 1910. Both follow: - - It is idle to take up such questions as apportioning the cost for - carrying second-class mail matter or the proper compensation - of railroads for transporting the mails until we shall have - established business methods in postoffice affairs by a - reorganization of the whole postal system.--_Senator Penrose._ - - I deeply sympathize with the earnest desire of the department - officials to get rid of the deficiency they are fated to - encounter every year, but I submit that the first real movement - toward that end must begin with the substitution of a modern, - up-to-date business organization for the existing antiquated - system.--_Senator Carter._ - -Comment on the plain, blunt statements of these members of our highest -legislative body, each admittedly well informed on the subject to which -he speaks, is quite unnecessary. - -In closing this division of my subject I desire to quote President -Taft; quote from his message to Congress under date of March 3, 1911. -It is an illuminating message and forcefully pertinent to the point -we are considering. I would like to reprint the entire document, -but fear I cannot do so. Of course, President Taft’s strictures and -adverse criticisms are general--since they apply to all governmental -departments--but every official in Washington knows, and none better -than the President himself, that they have both adhesive and cohesive -qualities when applied to the postoffice department. - -In this message the President asks for an appropriation of $75,000 to -continue the work he has already begun, that of revising departmental -methods of doing business and of instituting a practical, commonsense -system of accounting under which, or from which, it will be possible -for administrative and legislative officials to learn, approximately at -least, just what departments have done--to any date--and just what it -has cost to do it, two items of information as appears from the message -of the Chief Executive which neither his nor any previous administration -has ever been able to learn, and is not _now_ able to learn with any -considerable degree of dependable accuracy. - -As yet I have not learned whether the President obtained the $75,000 -asked for. I hope he did. If Congress will appropriate $750,000 for the -purpose the President names in his message, and sees to it that the money -is judiciously and intelligently disbursed, it is the opinion of The Man -on the Ladder that _not less than $100,000,000 annually would be saved -in government expenditures_, or one hundred millions more of service, -material, equipment, etc., delivered for the money now expended. - -Following is the essential part of the President’s message. The italics -are the writer’s: - - _To the Senate and House of Representatives_: - - I ask that you include in the sundry civil bill an appropriation - for $75,000 and a _reappropriation_ of the unexpended balance - of the existing appropriation to enable me to continue my - investigation _by members of the departments_ and by experts of - the business methods now employed by the government, with a view - to securing greater economy and efficiency in the dispatch of - government business. - - The chief difficulty in securing economy and reform _is the lack - of accurate information as to what the money of the government is - now spent for_. Take the combined statement of the receipts and - disbursements of the government for the fiscal year ended June - 30, 1910--a report required by law, and the _only one_ purporting - to give an analytical separation of the expenditures of the - government. This shows that the expenditures for salaries for - the year 1910 were $132,000,000 out of $950,000,000. As a matter - of fact, the expenditures for personal services during that year - _were more nearly $400,000,000_, as we have just learned by the - inquiry now in progress under the authority given me by the last - congress. - - The only balance sheet provided to the administrator or to the - legislator as a basis for judgment is one which leaves out of - consideration _all assets other than cash, and all liabilities - other than warrants outstanding, a part of the trust liabilities - and the public debt_. In the liabilities no mention is made of - about $70,000,000 special and trust funds so held. No mention is - made of outstanding contracts and orders issued as incumbrances - on appropriations; of invoices which have not been vouchered; - of vouchers which have not been audited. It is, therefore, - _impossible for the administrator to have in mind the maturing - obligations to meet which cash must be provided; there is - no means for determining the relation of current surplus or - deficit_. No operation account is kept, and no statement of - operations is rendered showing the expenses incurred--_the actual - cost of doing business_--on the one side, and the revenues - accrued on the other. There are no records showing the cost - of land, structures, equipment, or the balance of stores on - hand available for future use; there is no information coming - regularly to the administrative head of the government or his - advisers advising them as to _whether sinking-fund requirements - have been met, or of the condition of trust funds or special - funds_. - - It has been urged that such information as is above indicated - could not be obtained, for the reason that the accounts were - on a cash basis; that they _provide for reports of receipts - and disbursements only_. But even the accounts and reports of - receipts and disbursements are on a basis which makes a true - statement of facts _impossible_. For example: All of the trust - receipts and disbursements of the government, other than those - relating to currency trusts, are reported as “_ordinary receipts - and disbursements_.” The daily, as well as the monthly and annual - statements of disbursements, are mainly made up from advances to - disbursing officers--_that is to say, when cash is transferred - from one officer to another it is considered as spent_, and the - disbursement accounts and reports of the government so show - them. The only other accounts of expenditures on the books of - the Treasury are based on audited settlements most of which - _are months in arrears of actual transactions_; as between the - record of cash advanced to disbursing officers and the accounts - showing audited vouchers, there is a current difference of from - _$400,000,000 to $700,000,000, representing vouchers which have - not been audited and settled_. - - Without going into greater detail, the conditions under which - legislators and administrators, _both past and present_, have - been working may be summarized as follows: _There have been no - adequate means provided whereby either the President or his - advisers may act with intelligence on current business before - them; there has been no means for getting prompt, accurate - and correct information as to results obtained; estimates - of departmental needs have not been the subject of thorough - analysis and review before submission; budgets of receipts - and disbursements have been prepared and presented for the - consideration of Congress in an unscientific and unsystematic - manner; appropriation bills have been without uniformity or - common principle governing them; there have been practically - no accounts showing what the government owns, and only a - partial representation of what it owes; appropriations have - been overencumbered without the facts being known; officers - of government have had no regular or systematic method of - having brought to their attention the costs of governmental - administration, operation and maintenance, and therefore could - not judge as to the economy or waste; there has been inadequate - means whereby those who served with fidelity and efficiency - might make a record of accomplishment and be distinguished - from those who were inefficient and wasteful; functions and - establishments have been duplicated, even multiplied, causing - conflict and unnecessary expense; lack of full information has - made intelligent direction impossible and co-operation between - different branches of the service difficult._ - - I am bringing to your attention this statement of the present - lack of facility for obtaining prompt, complete, and accurate - information in order that congress may be advised of the - conditions which the President’s inquiry into economy and - efficiency has found and which the administration is seeking to - remedy. Investigations of administrative departments by congress - have been many, each with the same result. _All the conditions - above set forth have been repeatedly pointed out._ Some benefits - have accrued by centering public attention on defects in - organization, method, and procedure, but generally speaking, - however salutary the influence of legislative inquiries (and they - should at all times be welcome), the installation and execution - of methods and procedure, which _will place a premium on economy - and efficiency and a discount on inefficiency and waste_ must be - carefully worked out and introduced by those responsible for the - details of administration. - -Does that broad accusation of the President approve or disapprove our -previously expressed opinion of governmental department service in -general and of the postoffice department in particular? Notice the -statements I have taken the liberty to _italicize_. Permit me to repeat a -few of them: - -“The chief difficulty in securing economy and reform _is the lack of -accurate information as to what the money of the government is spent -for_.” - -Does not that fully bear out what Judge Moon said in discussing the -Senate resolution to appropriate $50,000 more for a second-class mail -commission--devote fifty thousand more after the government had already -spent several hundred thousands delving into the same subject and -got little or nothing of value, by reason of the loose, careless and -_wasteful_ methods of the federal postal department? - -… “_There is no means for determining the relation of current surplus or -deficit._” - -An _inviting_ business situation that, is it not? Especially “inviting” -is it to officials and subordinates who want something they have not -earned, who want to _find_ something. - -“No operation account is kept, and no statement of operations is rendered -showing the expenses incurred--_the actual cost of doing business_--the -actual cost of doing business on the one side and the revenues accrued on -the other.” - -Now, my dear reader, don’t you know that such a method or system, or -lack of method or system, would put a western corn farm in “financial -distress” the first season and out of business the second? A cattle -ranch, handled on such loose, _ignorant_ methods would be sold out in -a year. What, in reduction, does this _unqualified_ statement of our -President mean? - -It means that the heads of governmental departments _do not know_; that -their subordinates _do not know_, and, therefore, our President, our -Senators and our Congressmen _do not know_. Nor can they, under existing -conditions and methods, _find out_. They cannot find out even the -common--the basic--essentials of business methods and management which -Job Fraser, down in “Egypt,” must know in order to keep his hen range out -of bankruptcy. - -Do you remember a quotation, some pages back, from the joint commission -which investigated the postoffice department? The investigation which -_rummaged_ into the second-class mail schedule particularly? If you do -not remember, turn back and read it again. It fits like the skin of an -Alberta peach to what the President has just said (March 3, 1911), in his -message from which we have quoted. - -While collecting millions of revenue beyond all possible expenditures, -under competent, honest management, our federal postoffice department -would have gone into bankruptcy save for the backing of the government’s -treasury--_for the backing of your money_. - -“The only other accounts of expenditures on the books of the treasury -are based on audited settlements, most of which are _months in arrears -of actual transactions_; as between the record of cash advanced to -disbursing officers and the accounts showing audited vouchers, there is -a _current difference of from $400,000,000 to $700,000,000, representing -vouchers which have not been audited and settled_.” - -Of course, I do not know how that may strike the reader. It strikes the -writer, however, as being about as near the limit as any individual or -corporation could go without falling over the financial edge and nearer -the limit _than any sensible, well and honestly directed government -should go_. - -Again--No, I will requote no more. Turn back and read the quotation from -the President’s message again. Read carefully, and then read it once -more. Any citizen, whose mental tires are not punctured will be not only -a wiser but a bigger and better citizen for having done so. - -It was my intention to close this division of my subject with the -excerpts from President Taft’s message. My attention however was called -to a move made by Postmaster General Hitchcock, and an interview had with -him bearing on said move. It was taken note of and “spaced” by a majority -of the newspapers having general circulation in the United States. What I -shall here quote is taken from a Chicago paper of date April 1, and the -“write-up,” nearly a column, is based, it is probable, on a wire to the -journal either from its Washington correspondent or a news agency. As the -article appeared in so many newspapers I take it that the information -conveyed is entirely dependable. - -From the write-up it appears that Postmaster General Hitchcock has made -“a round dozen” of changes among the postal officials in the railway mail -service. Some of the changes were promotions--on the government’s pay -roll--changes of division superintendents from one division to another, -shifting of division chief clerks and of division inspectors, etc., -etc. Theodore Ingalls, formerly superintendent of “rural mails,” is -now superintendent of the “railway mail service,” succeeding Alexander -Grant, who, the friendly space writer says, “is one of the most widely -known postoffice officials in the service.” Whether favorably or -unfavorably known, the write-up sayeth not. At any rate, Mr. Grant goes -to the St. Paul division of the railway mail service at $1,000 per year -less than he formerly drew from the postoffice department funds. Per -contra, Mr. Ingalls steps from “rurals” to railway mails at an increase -of $1,000. The other “round dozen” changes are of similar character, -though affecting positions subordinate or minor to the ones named. No -dismissals, just shifting the official pegs around, possibly for the -“good of the service,” as Mr. Hitchcock says; possibly for other reasons. -It is to be hoped that Postmaster General Hitchcock stated the entire -truth and that these changes are for the good of the service. The railway -mail service is certainly in dire need of betterment, as the reader will -learn before I finish, if he but has the interest and the patience to -follow me to the end. - -Why Mr. Hitchcock did not make some _twelve hundred_ changes in the -railway mail service instead of a “round dozen,”--and many of them -dismissals--I do not know. Perhaps Mr. Hitchcock does know. Let us hope -he does and be thankful for small favors. Many people, however, who have -watched the Postoffice Department’s maneuverings during the past forty -years have seen too many “Sunday Editions” put to mail to be fooled by -any of this “shake-up” talk. This shifting of the official shoats from -one pen to another, still leaving them with their noses and four feet in -the trough, is a too common and well known practice in the police and -other public safety departments of our larger cities to fool anybody who -has had his eyes open since the first full moon in April, 1868. - -Shake-ups which do not retire incompetent or “faulted” public officials -and servants, just as a “faulted” casting is rejected at “milling,” is -not a “shake-up” that will stand good in any strata of human intelligence -above that found in asylums for broken-down cerebral equipment. It is -_betterments_, not “shake-ups,” that are needed. - -The reader will please understand that there is no personal animus in -what I here--or elsewhere--write. I have not had the pleasure, and -possibly the honor, of personal acquaintance with Mr. Ingalls, Mr. Grant -and others of the “round dozen” involved in the Postmaster General’s -“shake-up.” They are probably all fine gentlemen personally, whom it -would be a privilege to meet and to know. But we are writing to a subject -_infinitely larger than any man or set of men_. - -The people of this country are “up against” a _postal service -proposition_--a proposition so stupendous in import, so far-reaching -in its application, so crucial in its effects upon us and the children -who follow us, and involving service so incompetent, so wasteful, so -_corrupt_ in its management and operation as to have appalled those of us -who have watched and studied its practices, and to have become a joke, -provoking a smile or laugh among postal officials of other nations who -render a service that _serves_. - -For upward of forty years--a few bright spots excepted--our Postoffice -Department has shown itself not only incompetent in the matter of -business management, but disregardful in serving the people who _pay for -the service_. I am aware this is a bald statement, a “mere assertion,” -some postoffice official or sinecure postal “servant” may say, but it -will have to be said more often, more carefully and studiedly and far -more _eloquently_, in order to have it believed outside the family circle -than it ever has heretofore been said to get the people of this country -to stand for it. - -In the “write-up” annexed to Postmaster General Hitchcock’s few -paragraphs of interview, the “space” artist gives us, in epitome, the -biography of the men Mr. Hitchcock promotes and demotes in that “round -dozen” of changes. Some of my readers may have scanned the “booster” -newspaper stuff of which I am writing. If so, much of what I have here -said may be bricks or straw, just as it may happen that they know or do -not know the true “innards” of the service status of this Postoffice -Department of ours. I will not do more here than to point to the epitome -biographical sketches of the promotes and demotes in the friendly -“write-up.” - -In substance it says that Mr. Ingalls “is a highly trained postal -official” and “entirely familiar with the railway mail system, having -begun his postal work in that service.” - -Now, we all sincerely hope that is true. I once ran a sawmill, but, -candidly, I do not believe that any sensible business man would hire me -today to run his saws in any mill turning out mixed cuts. It may be that -Mr. Ingalls has accumulated just the proper, and the proper amount of, -information in superintending “rurals” to enable--to qualify--him to -manage and direct that case-hardened, _looting_ division known as the -Railway Mail Service. Let us hope that he knows how to do it. - -In the past twenty-five or thirty years it has been conclusively shown -that the postoffice department, _en tout_, knows about as much concerning -the _railroad_ end of the railway mail service as a mongrel spitz poodle -knows of astronomy. - -So I might comment on other names mentioned in the write-up of this -“shake-up” of our Postmaster General. They have all _been_ good men. -Possibly they each and all are good men _yet_--for the jobs to which -the Postmaster General has promoted or demoted them. The people may -appreciate and even honor Jim Jones because he “worked his way up” -from mail carrier on a rural route at Rabbit Hash, Mississippi, to -Superintendent of the Cincinnati Division or the St. Paul Division of the -railway mail service, and even more so, if he got stilted to the position -of “Superintendent of the Railway Mail Service.” Still, listen. While we, -the people, at Rabbit Hash, Mississippi, may be entirely satisfied to see -our boy, Jim Jones, move up the ladder to official honor and salary, how -about you other 93,760,000 people? You want prompt, cheap service in the -railway mail and our Jim Jones fails to give it to you,--_fails when you -know the conditions and the facilities are at call and command to give it -to you_. - -What is the answer? Simply that you 93,760,000 other folks may not think -so well of our Jim Jones’ railway mail service ability--or business -ability--as we of Rabbit Hash may think. - -Now I have said enough about Postmaster General Hitchcock’s “shake-up.” -What I have not said the intelligent reader will readily infer--_and -there is a whole lot to be inferred_. - -At the outset I intended to quote Mr. Hitchcock--quote Mr. Hitchcock -himself--in evidence or proof of my previously made and repeated -statement, that the Postoffice Department is incompetently, is -_wastefully_, if not crookedly, managed and directed. - -I am now going to quote Mr. Hitchcock. Of course, he here speaks of only -the railway mail service. It is admittedly one of the worst divisions for -_waste and steal_. But there are others scarcely a neck behind. - -The subjoined dispatch states (March 31, 1911), that “while signing the -orders necessary for the changes Mr. Hitchcock said:” - - The investigation which we conducted so long and so carefully - indicated clearly that the action which I have taken was - absolutely necessary. _The railway mail service has suffered - greatly from poor management and lack of supervision._ - - In certain of the divisions it was found that the chief clerks - had not been inspecting their lines, as was their duty. _Some of - the routes had received no inspection for several years._ … - - The inquiry showed that the business methods of the service in - several offices _were antiquated and that, as a consequence, - there was much duplication of work_. Instructions from the - department directing improvements, as for example the proper - consolidation of mail matter and the conservation of equipment, - received _only perfunctory attention_. - - There had been a lack of co-operation also in carrying into - effect certain reforms which I had indicated, and it was made - evident by the inquiry that _no proper spirit of co-ordination - with the department existed in the railway mail service_. - - - - -CHAPTER II. - -THE UNCONSTITUTIONAL RIDER. - - -We will now give our consideration to Postmaster General Hitchcock and -the “rider.” I may say some plain, blunt things of him. If so, it is -because I believe Mr. Hitchcock’s official action and statements touching -the recent legislative move were a deliberate, calculated attempt to -ruin some of the greatest periodicals the world has ever known, yes, -_the_ greatest periodicals the world has ever known. Not only was it -that, but the method and time of presentation in the session, as well -as the questionable secretiveness of that official in preparing and -advancing the measure, supply reasonably valid grounds for the charge -frequently made that this attempt at “snap” legislation was but a step in -a conspiracy to throttle the periodical press, to place a muzzle on the -most effective means of education which our people have had during the -past two decades. - -Nationally we have far departed from the mudsill principles of the -democratic polity which our founders in their best judgment had framed -for us and bespattered the forest paths of the country with their blood -to _maintain_ for us--the forest paths not alone of the Atlantic states -but also of those vast acquisitions in the West, known in history as the -Northwest Territory and the Louisiana purchases, out of which the fathers -carved so many imperial states. So far indeed have we departed from those -principles, regained from tyranny and maintained for us by the founders -and builders of this governmental polity, that their original _intent_ -has been lost sight of by many of our people. - -As a result of the struggle for subsistence on the one hand and _corrupt -political practice_ on the other, we are traveling rapidly toward the -old, old way. As the kilted Scots put it, quoting Bulwer Lytton, we -are rapidly reaching that view of life which leads men, in the heat of -a justified anger, to say “Happy is the man whose father went to the -devil;” meaning thereby that our sons _can be happy_ if we manage to -steal and loot enough from the government, or from our fellow citizens -through _governmental favor and protection_, to build for those sons -stone fronts on “Easy street” and leave a bank balance and “vested -interests” sufficient to maintain them. - -People happy in the enjoyment of unearned wealth seldom make good, safe -or dependable judges or lawmakers for people who are unhappy. - -There may be, of course, some rare exceptions to that statement. The -history of twenty centuries, however--yes, of forty centuries--has -shown very few of them. This may appear to some as a digression from my -subject. Well, so count it, if you will. I have made it as a “foreword” -for three statements I wish to make--statements cogently asserted in -support of an assertion made some paragraphs back. - -Mr. Hitchcock, in both action and advocacy, has not only been a -conspicuous member, as newspapers and other reports show, but a leading -factor, in the gang of “influenced” mercenaries and aspiring politicians -who sought to “submerge” certain periodicals which for ten or more -years _have been telling the people the truth--the truth about crooked -corporation practices and about crooked public officials_. - -I am here going to make those three statements. I believe them statements -of _fact_. Think them over. _Study_ them. If, after, you think I am wrong -or overstate the facts, then--well, then, that is your affair, not mine. -Remember, I write with a _club_--not a pencil. - -The first of the three statements I wish here to make is: The social and -political polity which patriotic and liberty-loving progenitors gave -us, established for us, has been adroitly led from its prescribed way. -Today our governmental and social organizations are _rich in policemen, -soldiers, prisons, poorhouses, organized charities, charity balls, owners -of unearned wealth and in politicians who helped those owners to acquire -that unearned wealth and who furthermore continue to protect them in its -possession_. - -The second statement I wish my readers to consider is: The periodical -monthlies and weeklies (and a few “yellow” newspapers), which Mr. -Hitchcock and his coterie of conspirators would muzzle or, by laying -an excessive mail rate upon them, suppress or ruin--and incidentally, -make the Postmaster General _an unrestrained censor of the country’s -periodical literature_---- - -Those periodicals, I started to say, have given more _real_ educational -benefit to the adult population of this country during the past ten -years _than has been given by all the “little red school houses,” -colleges, universities, and churches combined_. - -I do not, as you will notice, include the “political stump.” I do not -care to comment on its peculiar didactic value or fascination for fools. -That means both you and me, reader. We each, occasionally, go to hear the -political “stumper” tell us a lot of _“influenced” lies_. - -The third statement I wish to make is: Postmaster General Hitchcock is, -so far as the writer has been able to learn, a politician. Not only -is he a politician, the reports read, but he is a wise, smooth and -“_ambitious_” politician. - -That is bad. “Why?” Well, because an “ambitious” politician is about as -useful to us, to you and to me, as are bugs in our potato patch, or dry -rot in our sheep herd. The “ambitious” politician is a disease, attacking -either our kitchen garden or our mutton supply. - -“What’s the answer?” - -Here is one answer: It is a long way between “three rooms rear and a -palace.” But even they who crawl about the earth, begging for leave to -live, _see_ things, _hear_ things, _feel_ things, and _read_ things. They -are beginning to _understand_ much of what they _see_, _hear_, _feel_ and -_read_. - -Is that, Mr. Hitchcock, a reason, one of the reasons, why you who have so -energetically, likewise offensively, tried to shut us out from our main -source of information, from our mental commissary? - -Arise, please, and answer. - -There are still other remarks which I must make about Mr. Hitchcock’s -peculiar _recent_ action and talk. It may not be at all pleasant to him. -Yet the statements I shall make, I am ready to support by a “cloud of -witnesses.” - -As before stated, this attempt to muzzle the press of the country, for -that appears to be the ultimate, likewise the _ulterior_, purpose of -Mr. Hitchcock and his coterie of senatorial and other abettors in their -recent attempt to outrage the _constitutional_ rights of our people, the -_constitutional_ rights of the Lower House and the rules of both Senate -and House, as Senator Robert L. Owen, in brief but pertinent remarks in -the recent closing days of the late session (February 25, 1911), pointed -out,--remarks rife with the cogency of truth. - -In a previous paragraph I stated, in effect, that Postmaster General -Hitchcock is an “influenced” man or a densely ignorant one. That he -_is_ densely ignorant on matters pertaining to periodical publications -has been amply evidenced by subsequent quotations from his own reports -and letters. That he at least shares the prevailing ignorance as to the -methods, and the _result_ of methods, for handling the vast business of -the federal Postoffice Department, I have already pointed out. - -Possibly I am in error here, but when Senators and Congressmen who have -studied for years the methods of handling business in the Postoffice -Department were--and are--convinced that it is impossible for the most -expert accountants to collect and collate _dependable_ information, -relating either to any of its divisions of service or to the department -in general; when old and tried students of the loose, wasteful methods -of this department, of its utter lack of business system, yes, of its -_crooks_ and _crookedness_--when, I say, such experienced students -frankly and bluntly state their complete inability to gather any -dependable data as to the business done by Mr. Hitchcock’s department, I -am in doubt as to the correctness, or lack of correctness, in my previous -intimation that Mr. Hitchcock is ignorant of his departmental affairs and -practices, as well as of matters pertaining to periodical publication and -distribution. - -Mr. Hitchcock has been at the head of his department something like three -years, I believe. He has talked so much and written so much about postal -“deficits,” about the cause of those deficits and how to remedy them by -holding up periodical publishers, that, maybe, he has learned more about -his department, more about deficits and the cause of them--learned more -about these things in _three years_ than older and more experienced men -have learned in ten years--yes, twenty. - -Maybe he has. If so, then I was in error when I intimated that his -ignorance extended to departmental matters as well as to periodical -publishing. If, however, I was in error as to Mr. Hitchcock’s knowledge -of his departmental matters, I find myself in a multitudinous and -_growing_ company of intelligent and informed people to whom he will have -to talk and write much more, and to talk and write far more eloquently, -persuasively and _wisely_ than he has thus far talked and written, to -convince them that he has accumulated more departmental wisdom in three -years than numerous older students of the subject gathered in ten. - -What training or opportunity Mr. Hitchcock had, previous to his -installation in his present position, to qualify him for the -office--training and opportunity which enabled him to grasp so -comprehensively, as he would have it appear, the duties, functions, -faults in accounting, _frailties_ in the service personnel,--in short, -all the essentials of knowledge and information pertaining to a competent -administration of the department, general, divisional and in detail, I do -not know. - -Of course, Mr. Frank H. Hitchcock was chairman of the Republican National -Committee in 1908, which committee, with the aid of “a very limited -campaign fund,” as one colossally profound “stumper” put it, steered the -votes to Judge Taft and himself to his present exalted position. Now, -this experience of Mr. Hitchcock may or may not have especially qualified -him for ready, quick and comprehensive understanding of all that the -Postoffice Department needs to _make it yield even a half of what the -people of this country are today paying for_. - -It may have done so. Thoughtful people, however, are numerously -entertaining a private opinion, and thousands of them are publicly -expressing it, to the effect that, so far, Mr. Hitchcock’s voluminous -talk about the affairs, methods, needs and “deficits” of his department -displays a knowledge of the subjects he talks about far more -comprehensive than comprehending. That is, he has talked assertively -or persuasively, as his auditor or audience fit into his purpose, upon -numerous departmental phases of administration, regarding which final -analysis in the crucible of “plain hoss sense” shows he knows little. - -And he knew _less_ when he talked than he now knows. The periodical -publishers of the country have been “handing him” some information, -_after they got notice of what he was trying “to put over,” since he went -to President Taft not later than October or mid-November last_. I say -that, because President Taft _covered Mr. Hitchcock’s idea_ (or scheme) -_of removing the postal department deficit in his December message for -1910_. - -Now, did Mr. Hitchcock influence President Taft, or did President Taft -influence Mr. Hitchcock? - -That is the question; whether it is better to be the “influenced” or the -“influencer.” - -The above query may be awkward, or even an uncouth way to state the -question, but in evidence that it is a question with thoughtful -people--_informed people_. I desire here to quote some statements written -by [1]Samuel G. Blythe. With no thought of discriminating praise I can -positively say that Samuel G. Blythe _stands with the best of you boys -who are doing so much for our enlightenment_--FOR OUR EDUCATION--IN -MATTERS RELATING TO OUR NATIONAL GOVERNMENT. - -Is not that right, boys? - -I hear a unanimous “aye.” - -In this connection, however, I wish to remind you boys that many of -you--most of you, probably--have done as much to help the people of the -country in your _local_ fields of interest and activity as you have done -to enlighten us as to Washington’s politics, policies and _tangential -peculiarities_. - -With this explanation for my taking our “Sam” instead of you other -boys for quotation, maybe _mutilation_, just here in the context of -this book, I may add that his article in the Saturday Evening Post of -date, April 15, 1911, is before me. It so _fits_ the point I am now -considering--whether Postmaster General Hitchcock was “influenced” or -“influencing”--that I am going to quote, and, possibly, take all sorts -of liberties with Mr. Blythe’s splendid presentation of Mr. Hitchcock’s -attitude, action and _animus_. - -Mr. Blythe, in his article in the Saturday Evening Post, (published by -the Curtis Publishing Company, Philadelphia, and, by the way, one of the -most educative weekly periodicals the world has ever known), tells us -something of Postmaster General Hitchcock’s procedure since in office. - -I am here going to appropriate some of the information furnished in Mr. -Blythe’s article. Whether I use quotation marks or not, I want the reader -to know that Samuel G. Blythe has “wised me up a heap” regarding our -Postmaster General’s peculiar official gyrations since the latter arrived -on his present job. - -First, it would appear that Mr. Hitchcock arrived with the “deficit” in -his brain. I mean, of course, the Postoffice Department deficit was _on_ -his mind, and being fresh from that state of splendid attainments and -beans--Massachusetts--Mr. Hitchcock came to his job brimful of nerve, -purpose and postal service deficits. He was determined to do things, -especially to that _deficit_. Well, he has been doing things, but -scarcely in a way that one would expect from a man coming from the people -who grow up there. The writer cannot say whether or not Mr. Hitchcock -“growed up there.” If he did, some cog must have slipped or “jammed” in -his raising. Most born Plymouth rock men whom I have met, and I have had -the pleasure of meeting many, start out, _and live_, on life lines which -clearly and _cleanly_ recognize the fact that _the end is on its way_, -and that they are going to meet it--meet it with a brave, honest face and -a moral courage that will answer “Here” at the final round-up. - -I presume, however, there are a few Easterners who grow haughty, -supercilious and dictatorial in proportion to the square of the distance -they are removed (by fortuitous circumstance, political preferment -or other means), from the “down-row” in the fall husking, the spring -plowing, the free lunch and other symptoms of human industry or need. - -This is wholly an “aside.” How it may apply to Mr. Hitchcock must be left -to readers who have a more intimate personal acquaintance with him than -have I. - -At any rate, he came to his present official job, it appears from most -dependable information, with a “deficit”--the postal service deficit, of -course--in his mind, and he immediately began in his vigorous, though -somewhat peculiar, way to work it off. Whether his dominating intent -was to work that deficit off the department books or merely work it off -his mind, has not thus far appeared, save, of course, to the coterie in -the circle of Mr. Hitchcock’s intimates and a somewhat numerous body of -periodical and newspaper reporters on the job in Washington. - -The latter, of course, know everything. And what they don’t know they go -to all extremes to find out. It was, therefore, a hopeless attempt of -Mr. Hitchcock’s (though he yet seems scarcely able to understand how so -much information got to the public), to keep his _scheme_ to remove the -Postoffice Department’s deficit by shunting the _whole of it onto some -twenty or thirty periodicals_--it was, I say, a hopeless task for him to -keep that scheme safely within the periphery of the corral where herded -the “influenced” and the “influencing.” - -But why go on? Mr. Blythe in his article tells some things I want to say -and he says them so much better than I can tell them that I will give -the reader the benefit of that difference and quote him on a number of -points. As showing the studied attempt at snap legislation in the very -closing hours of Congress, Mr. Blythe says: - - The Sixty-first Congress expired by constitutional limitation - at noon on March 4th, last. On Friday afternoon, March 3, the - postoffice appropriation bill was up for consideration in the - Senate. It was being read for committee amendments. At half past - 4 page 21 of the bill was reached, and with it the amendment - proposed by the Senate Committee on Postoffices and Postroads to - increase the rate of second-class postage in certain specified - cases and in certain contingencies. Second-class postage is the - postage paid by newspapers, magazines and periodicals. - - There had been several speeches. Senator Carter spoke for the - amendment, and Senators Bristow, Cummins and Owen against it. - Senator Jones, of Washington, had a few observations in favor of - the amendment also. At 5 o’clock Senator Boies Penrose, Chairman - of the Senate Committee on Postoffices and Postroads and in - charge of the bill, rose in his place, withdrew the amendment - increasing second-class postage, and submitted in its stead an - amendment providing for a commission to investigate the question - of fact concerning the cost to the Postoffice Department for - transportation of second-class mail matter. This amendment was - unanimously adopted and the Senate proceeded to the consideration - of other sections of the bill. - - Postmaster-General Hitchcock sat immediately behind Senator - Penrose when this happened. He had been on the floor of the - Senate most of that afternoon, and a great portion of the time - for several days previous when the discussion of the postoffice - bill seemed imminent. When Senator Penrose withdrew the - amendment, the Postmaster General’s strenuously urged plan to - use the taxing power of the government to make himself a censor, - with almost unlimited power to declare what magazine and what - periodical should be taxed and what magazine and what periodical - should not be taxed; to give himself the sole determining power - to decide what is a newspaper and what is a periodical--his long - conceived plan, perfected quietly, put into preliminary execution - without warning to those concerned, to be jammed through if - possible, failed and failed utterly. - -Mr. Blythe also refers to the fight Postmaster General Hitchcock put up -against _investigation_. Here I desire to quote him at some length: - - The Postmaster General had enlisted the President. He had put - it up to the Republicans on the Senate Postoffice committee as - an _Administration measure_ to be supported by administration - men. He got the President to use the same argument. He contrived - an amendment, after much labor, so drawn as to give _him the - greatest_ powers of discretion in the application of the increase - in second-class postage. He had the regulation of the magazine - and periodical press of this country in his own hands, he - thought; and he was preparing to regulate it according to his - ideas--when he met with a sudden check. It was a good scheme, a - far-reaching scheme, but it didn’t go through. The Postmaster - General, being a small-bore politician, took a small-bore view of - the situation. He underestimated the force of public opinion. - - It is my purpose to tell here the full story of Mr. Hitchcock’s - attempt to put through this legislation. Before starting, - however, there is this to be said: There never has been a minute, - since this contention began, considerably more than a year - ago, when the publishers of the country have not been willing - to submit the disputed question of fact to a proper tribunal, - to determine exactly what _it should cost_ the government to - transport second-class mail. There never has been a minute - when the publishers of the country have not been willing to - pay exactly what, under a businesslike administration of the - department, it should cost to transport their publications. They - do not desire any subsidy from the government, and never have. - The publishers have held that the statement of Hitchcock that it - costs 9 cents a pound to carry second-class matter is absurd; and - they have further held that if the postoffice department were - run on proper business principles, instead of being run as a - political machine, there would be no deficit. - - Notwithstanding, Mr. Hitchcock fought the idea of a commission to - the last gasp. He spent day after day at the capitol, for three - weeks before the session closed, in the corridors, in committee - rooms, on the floor of the Senate, working for his plan to - increase second-class postage, granting concessions here, putting - out explanations there, assuring certain publishers they would - not be taxed, writing letters to Senators and Representatives - showing how their districts or states would not be affected, - utilizing every resource of his department, of his political - connections as former chairman of the Republican National - Committee, to get support. He had the votes in the Senate, too, - if he could have brought the matter to a vote. That was where he - failed. A united opposition was organized, an opposition composed - of men who think and act for themselves and who were prepared to - fight until noon on March 4. - - When Frank H. Hitchcock, after being chairman of the Republican - National Committee in the campaign of 1908, was made Postmaster - General as a reward for his political services, he inherited, - in his department, a deficit, an antiquated, cumbersome and - unbusinesslike organization, and several sets of figures. - _Hitchcock is young and ambitious._ He has been in the government - service, in various capacities, most of his life since leaving - college. He was anxious to make a record. As Postmaster General - _he was political paymaster_ for the administration, to a great - degree, as there are more postmasters than any one other kind - of public officials, and postmasterships are perquisites of the - faithful politicians in the Senate and House of Representatives. - This kept Hitchcock in politics, in a way, for he knew what the - obligations of the administration were, having made most of them - as national chairman, and he paid them off as circumstances - permitted. - - He thought, too, that if he could put the Postoffice Department - on a self-sustaining basis--where it had not been for years, - if ever--he would do a great stroke for himself; and he began - work along those lines. There need be no discussion here of the - methods by which he made apparent reductions in the expenses of - the department. Whether by bookkeeping or otherwise, he did make - some apparent reductions, mostly by not spending appropriated - moneys, by reductions in force, by elimination of substitute - carriers and by other similar means. - -Mr. Hitchcock, it would seem, was a peculiarly active public servant. Mr. -Blythe also speaks of how Mr. Hitchcock got a cue from a predecessor, -Charles Emory Smith. Mr. Smith in the _industrious activities of his -official duties_, signing of reports which subordinates wrote, vouchers -for contracts and other payments, and drawing his salary--Mr. Smith had -laboriously (?) figured it out that the second-class mail rate ought -to be 7 cents a pound. Mr. Hitchcock goes Smith two cents better. This -statement of Mr Smith’s grew on Mr. Hitchcock. “It opened the way to two -things,” as Mr. Blythe ably points out as follows:-- - - First he could increase the revenue of the department if he could - increase the second-class rate; and second, he could get a whip - hand over the magazine press. - - He reported his assumed facts to the President in time for Mr. - Taft’s message to Congress, sent in in December, 1909. In that - message Mr. Taft made the statement that it costs the government - 9 cents a pound to transport second-class mail matter, the total - cost being more than sixty million dollars a year, and asked - that there should be an increase in second-class rates. Mr. Taft - instanced this as a subsidy for the magazine and periodical - press. Mr. Hitchcock’s report as Postmaster General contained - substantially the same statements. - - The House Committee on Postoffices and Postroads, where the - postoffice appropriation bill originates, took cognizance of - these statements by the President and by the Postmaster General, - and ordered a hearing on the matter, which was held early in the - session. The various publishers of the country, representing - not only the Periodical Publishers’ Association but many other - organizations of publishers of various classes of periodicals, - sent representatives to Washington, and there were full hearings - before the committee, extending through several days. The - publishers stated their side of the case and the committee took - the matter under advisement. The House committee reported out the - postoffice bill with no recommendation of any kind in it for an - increase in second-class postage; and no separate bill providing - for the increase was prepared, introduced or reported. - -Then Mr. Blythe, under the subcaption of “Running Down the Nine-Cent -Myth,” says: - - Some years previously the congress authorized what was known as - the Penrose-Overstreet Postal Commission, composed of members - of the postoffice committees of the Senate and House, of which - Senator Penrose was then the Senate chairman and the late Jesse - Overstreet the House chairman. This commission met in various - places, had long hearings and made a report and prepared a bill. - Before making its report or preparing its bill the commission - employed, at a cost of seventy-five thousand dollars, or - thereabouts, chartered accountants and business experts to make a - thorough examination into the business methods of the postoffice - department, its expenditures and its resources. The results of - the work of these examiners was incorporated in the report to - Congress by the Penrose-Overstreet commission. It is notable that - this commission _asked the late Postmaster General, Charles Emory - Smith, of Philadelphia, who was responsible for the statement - that it cost seven cents a pound to transport second-class mail - matter, where he got his figures, and he did not remember, nor - would he testify concerning them_. - - At any rate, when the Penrose-Overstreet bill, providing for - the reorganization of the Postoffice Department and the placing - of that great institution on a business instead of a political - basis, was introduced in the Senate and the House, it contained - no recommendation for the increase in second-class postage, - _because the commission had been unable to find any figures of - cost of second-class transportation on which such an increase - could justifiably be demanded_, even after expert examination of - the books of the department by unprejudiced men. - -Of course, I may be mistaken--_I_ may be. But how, in the name of -Jehosaphat, Pan and all the other ghostly deities of antiquity, does -it happen that men like Samuel G. Blythe and hundreds of others,--men -in position to learn and _know_ the facts, likewise, who have both the -ability and the courage to tell what they know--agree with me? Why, I -ask, if I _am_ mistaken in what I have said and am trying to say, do -so many other men who have studied this question, all of them probably -of greater ability, most of them certainly of far greater opportunity -than have I, why, I inquire again, do they so unanimously concur in the -_judgment I am trying to pass on Mr. Hitchcock and his department_? - -I shall probably take the liberty, later, further to use the data -given in Mr. Blythe’s timely and informative contribution, quoting or -otherwise, for which I confidently feel he will excuse me. Just here, -however, it is fitting that the reader be given a reprint of that _night_ -“rider” to which I have made so frequent reference. - -House bill No. 31,539 brought the postoffice appropriation bill to the -Senate. In the Senate it was read twice and then on February 9, 1911, -it was referred to the Senate Committee on Postoffices and Postroads -from which it was reported back by Senator Penrose, Chairman of the -Committee, “with amendments.” It is only one of those amendments we -shall here care to consider. That one appeared on page 21 of Senate Bill -(Calendar No. 1067), and the “rider” portion begins at line 7. Following -is the “rider:” - - (Page 21.) - 7 “Provided, - 8 That out of the appropriation for inland mail transportation - 9 the Postmaster General is authorized hereafter to - 10 pay rental if necessary in Washington, District of Columbia, - 11 and compensation to tabulators and clerks employed in connection - 12 with the weighings for assistance in completing computations, - 13 in connection with the expenses of taking the - 14 weights of mails on railroad routes, as provided by law: - 15 And provided further, That during the fiscal year ending - 16 June thirtieth, nineteen hundred and twelve, the rate of postage - 17 on textual and general reading matter contained in periodical - 18 publications other than newspapers, as described in the - 19 Act of Congress approved March third, eighteen hundred - 20 and seventy-nine, entitled “An Act making appropriations - 21 for the service of the Postoffice Department for the fiscal - 22 year ending June thirtieth, eighteen hundred and eighty, - 23 and for other purposes,” and in the publications described - 24 in an Act of Congress approved July sixteenth, eighteen - 25 hundred and ninety-four, entitled “An Act making appropriations - (Page 22.) - 1 for the service of the Postoffice Department for - 2 the fiscal year ending June thirtieth, eighteen hundred and - 3 ninety-five,” shall be one cent per pound, or fraction thereof; - 4 and on _sheets_ of any _publication_ of either of said classes - 5 containing, _in whole or part_, any advertisement, whether - 6 display, descriptive, or textual, four cents per pound or - 7 fraction thereof; Provided, That the increased rate shall not - 8 apply to publications mailing less than four thousand pounds - 9 of each issue.” - -As previously stated, and pointed out by Senator Owen, all amendments of -character with the above are clearly in violation of Section 7, Article -1 of the Constitution of the United States. Here is the wording of that -section: - -“All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of -Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments as -on other bills.” - -That is plain enough, is it not, as to the Senate’s lack of right or -power to _originate_ revenue-producing measures either by bill or -amendment? A glance at lines 4 to 9 (page 22), as above quoted, will -convince even a stranger in a strange town or a market garden delegate -that this “rider” amendment, if it had passed, would _originate revenue_. - -Mr. Hitchcock _talked_, so it is alleged, that it would produce -$6,000,000 or more, thus removing that “deficit” he has had in his -brain or on his mind. Some of the best qualified men in this country -have shown, _and they have used Mr. Hitchcock’s own figures in doing -so_, that the increased mail rate as this “rider” provided would not -produce over $2,000,000 additional revenue, probably not over $1,000,000, -after paying for the added clerical and inspection service which such a -_discriminating classification_ would require. - -The reader will note (line 18 of the “rider”), that “newspapers” are -exempted from the increased tax. The reader should likewise note that -under both this “rider” and the present law, newspapers are carried -_free_ to addresses inside the county of publication, save to addressees -resident of towns and cities having carrier delivery. By this is -meant that this tricky rider, as will be readily seen, leaves the -present law--_the one-cent a pound rate_--in force and applying to all -“newspapers.” - -Just here I want to ask the thoughtful reader a question or two, though -they are somewhat tangential to the direct line of thought we are at this -point following: - -If such a breach of constitutional law, of the legislative rules -governing Congress and of plain, common and understood justice as was -covered in this, I believe, studiedly discriminating “rider” on the -postoffice appropriation bill--if such a breach was permitted, I ask, -how long would it be, do you think, before our newspapers would be made -victims of similar restrictions and injustices? - -In short, how long do you think it would take the gang of conspirators -(the “influenced” and the “influencing” factors in the personnel of the -conspiracy) who tried to “put over” that rider, to make any nincompoop of -a politician who chances to be, or who may become, Postmaster General a -_censor of all periodical literature_, newspapers as well as magazines, -_published in this country_? - -In this connection another thought comes which I desire to pass on -to the reader. If such censorship is permitted, such discriminating, -_abrogative_ legislation is tolerated, how long will it be, think you, -before our “banking interests,” our “steel interests,” our “packing -interests,” our “hide and leather interests,” our “rail transportation -interests” go into the periodical business? - -Each of these have the country covered--yes, flooded--with agents. No -trouble whatsoever for them to get the postal department’s required -“bona fide” subscription list and thus be “entered” _at the one-cent -second-class rate_. - -“Will they carry advertising?” Later, yes. - -_When our children are paying the cost of our blunder they will be -advertising each other and--at the one-cent a pound rate._ - -Think it over and--well, wake up. If necessary, get _cogently brisk_ with -that Senator or Congressman of yours. At least, let him know that you are -on the job as well as he and that you _understand the job as well as he_. - -Of course, the “steerers” and “cappers” for this press-muzzling and -official censorship game will tell you that such entrance of the -“interests” into our literary field is “quite impossible;” that “the -postal laws prohibit it;” that “it would be a foolish waste of money on -their part,” and a score or more of other equally silly, equally false -and equally “steered” arguments. - -You can take it from me _flat_ that the man--_any man_--who hands you -that sort of talk is either _hired_ to talk it or he is mentally unsound. - -The “interests” are _already_ in the periodical business. They own, -or control, at this hour, hundreds of newspapers, magazines and other -periodicals. This is a matter of common knowledge to every citizen who -_reads when he is awake_. Not only that, but the interests, banking, -industrial, transportation, etc., have gone into the book publishing -business (the bound book), _and hundreds of thousands of copies of their -capping “literature” have been distributed to the people_, either free or -at a price far below cost of production. - -Not only that, but the “interests” are annually (_now_), distributing -millions, in the aggregate _hundreds_ of millions, of circular letters -and circular matter, under seal and open circular-matter sheets, -pamphlets, etc., first and third class, at a cost of _eight cents a pound -or more_. - -So, I repeat, the man who attempts to controvert my previous statement -as to the intent, _the ulterior motive_, of the conspirators backing -that rider to the 1911 postoffice appropriation bill is either -hired--bought--or is a fool. - -It is one of his easiest “stunts” for any writer to produce a “promotion” -story or article. For instance: The “Packing Interest,” monthly or -weekly, can print three or four “nice” stories. One, say, about “Lucy and -Her Window Garden,” another about “High Light Pink, the Broncho Buster,” -etc., etc. Then can follow a “literary” write-up of how “Jones Rose From -a Wheelbarrow Man to Foreman in a Steel Mill,” or about how “Cruiser -Miller Dropped His Blazing Ax and Became Partner in a Great Lumber -Company,” etc., etc. After this may come a “Home Department,” and then a -few local or “plant” news items. - -In the first, your wife and mine will be told how to make her currants -(not her currency) jell; how to make children “bread winners;” how to -“crochet an art tidy,” or how to “Subsist a Family of Five on Thirty-Nine -Cents a Day.” - -In the “Local” or “Plant” news may appear some explanation of how -Crawloffski, who had lost a leg in service, is “improving in the -hospital” (County), and “is under the competent care of the company’s -physician,” of the promotion of “Mr. James Field, formerly ‘run-way -driver,’ to the position of ‘hammer-man’ in the slaughter pen, with an -increase of $2.80 a week in salary.” - -Of course, it will be understood that I am not giving the entire -scope and plan of an “Interest’s” periodical. The point I am trying -to establish is, that no “Interest” periodical will, for a time at -any rate, advertise _its own interests_, save as _news matter_, and -that each “Interest” can _and will_ advertise the others--_the mutual -interests_--and do it, too, at the _cent-a-pound rate_ and without -violating any postal law now existent. - -I will now return to Mr. Hitchcock’s activity and arguments for this -“rider” to that postoffice appropriation bill. I call it “his,” as, from -the evidence, I am forced to the conclusion that it originated with -him. Most certainly he nursed it and pushed it forward with the urgent -solicitude which a fond father would display in advancing his first-born -or favorite scion. The excerpts which I have taken from Mr. Blythe -clearly evidence that fact. - -Mr. Hitchcock is on record as stating that it costs “9.23 cents a pound -to transport and handle second-class mail matter.” I am quoting from -memory. Maybe he did not include “handling,” and put 9.23 cents per -pound as the cost of transportation only. At all events I remember that -one writer, with keen perception and a robust sense of the humor of -things, as well as the justice involved, pointed out the fact that any -of the competing railroads between New York city and Chicago (easily -proven to be twice the “average mail haul”), would carry Mr. Taft, our -300-pound “good fellow” President, the “run” at less than 9 cents a -pound. Incidentally the writer pointed out these facts: President Taft -would have a sleeping berth or compartment, a porter in attendance, -smoking room accommodations, likewise barber, manicure, buffet, library -and dining-room services and conveniences. The Chief Executive would -of course put himself on board and “discharge” himself at the terminal -station. - -How about 300 pounds of second-class mail matter, say some monthly New -York periodical? This is brought to the mail car, wrapped and directed -to destination, Chicago for instance, to keep the comparison clear and -fair. It is dumped on the floor in a corner of a mail car, with all the -intermediate station deliveries atop of it or stacked about it, and at -Chicago it is tumbled off to the publisher’s agent or salesman. _That -is all the service rendered_ by either the railroads or the Postoffice -Department in handling that 300 pounds of second-class mail matter. - -_Yet the Postmaster General says it costs the government 9.23 cents a -pound to render such service!_ - -Is not that rather jarring to one’s exalted opinion of Mr. Hitchcock’s -all-round, comprehending knowledge of a just and fair mail haulage rate? -If it does not jar the reader he should take his thinking apparatus to -the cobbler and have it half-soled. - -A glance at freight schedules will show any reader that live stock, -cattle, hogs or sheep, are carried from Chicago to New York, Boston or -other eastern destination at only a small fraction of his dead-mail -rate. Again, while double-deck live stock cars are in extensive use -on long hauls, the stock is not corded up on the decks as much of the -second-class mail is piled up. Not only that, but the live stock must be -_watered and fed in transit_. - -The rail rates for the carriage of dead-freight makes Mr. Hitchcock’s -9.23 cents a pound, which he figured as the cost to the government of -carriage and handling second-class mail, read so absurd as to be a joke, -were the purpose and purport of his statement not so grave and serious as -they are. Even the 4-cent rate that he and a coterie of his friends tried -to put over in the Senate rider--$80.00 a ton for carrying dead weights -the average mail haul, and dumping it off at destination--is a ridiculous -charge. - -Why, the express companies are carrying hundreds of tons daily of -dead-freight over such average haul for less than a cent a pound; yes, -they are carrying tons of second-class _mail matter_ and carrying it -_at one-half a cent a pound_. It has been cited by Mr. Hearst and -other publishers that certain railroads carry second-class mail matter -over fast freight runs for about one-quarter of a cent a pound. In -this connection another thought presents itself: Did, or did not, Mr. -Hitchcock, at the time he was pushing his “rider” in the Senate, have -any adequate knowledge of the amount, of second-class mail matter which -publishers were then sending by express and fast freight? If he had such -knowledge, then he must have known of the fact that _thousands of tons_ -of periodicals are now carried by the railroads and express companies at -a rate _lower_ than the government’s mail charge of one-cent a pound. If -Mr. Hitchcock had such knowledge when he was handing his string-talk to -President Taft, having his “heart-to-hearts” with certain senators, I -wonder if he intimated to them what must necessarily happen to the second -class mail division and to that deficit which, apparently at least, has -so continuously, likewise so effusively and diffusively, worried him? - -If the fast freights and express are now taking thousands of tons of -second-class matter from the government in competition with the one-cent -a pound rate, how many thousands of tons more would they take from -the government if the latter advanced its rate to four cents a pound? -And what effect would the withdrawal of so vast a tonnage from the -government’s second-class service have upon the deficit our solicitous -Postmaster General has kept himself so exercised about--that $6,000,000, -or, to be exact, using Mr. Hitchcock’s own figures, $5,881,481.95? That -deficit, if converted into cash, would barely furnish parade money to our -army for a month. If the Atlantic squadron undertook a junket with such -financial backing its progress would probably end by rounding the Statue -of Liberty at the entrance of New York harbor. If Mr. Hitchcock’s attempt -to put up a four-cent rate on periodicals had succeeded, thus forcing the -prominent publishers to find cheaper means of carriage and distribution, -his $6,000,000 would have soared upward to a point making it worth very -serious consideration. - - -DEFICITS AFFECTED BY SECOND-CLASS TONNAGE. - -In this connection I desire to show that deficits in the federal postal -service are largely governed by the tonnage of second-class matter -carried, the greater such tonnage the smaller the deficit. To do this I -shall take the liberty to quote from the “Inland Printer,” probably the -most widely read periodical among the printing crafts, as it certainly -is one of the best informed and most carefully edited journals of any -in matters relating to the publication and distribution of periodical -literature. The article speaks of several points pertinent to our subject -and is so instructively written that I know my readers will appreciate -it in its entirety. If the publishers of the periodical will pardon my -wholesale appropriation of their article, I am confident my readers will -do the same. The article is of date March, 1911, and was written by -Wilmer Atkinson, whose permission I should also ask for reprinting it in -toto: - - In 1860 the postal deficit was $10,652,543; in 1910 it was - $5,848,566. The postage rate was four times greater in 1860 than - now. - - Coming down twelve years to 1872 the total weight of second-class - matter was that year less than 65,000,000 pounds. - - Now it is 817,428,141 pounds, more than twelve times greater. - - Then the postage rate was four times what it is now. - - Then the gross revenue was $21,915,426; now it is $224,128,657, - more than ten times as much. - - Then there was no rural free delivery; now that system costs - $36,923,737. - - Then there were no registered letters; now there are 42,053,574 a - year. - - Then there were issued $48,515,532 of domestic money orders; now - there are issued $547,993,641. - - Then postmasters were paid $5,121,665; now they are paid - $27,514,362, and their clerks are paid $38,035,456.62. - - Then city delivery cost but little; now it costs $31,805,485.28. - - In 1872 there were issued of stamps, stamped envelopes and - wrappers less than $18,000,000 (there were no postal cards); now - are issued, including postal cards, $202,064,887.96, more than - ten times as much. - - Observe that the weight of second-class matter is 752,428,141 - pounds greater than in 1872, costing therefore (according to - some official mathematicians), more than 9 cents a pound for - transportation, or a total of $67,718,532.69. The deficit for - 1910 is almost identical with that of 1872. - - - 1885-1910 - - As late as 1885 the government income from the issue of - stamps, stamped envelopes and wrappers and postal cards was - $35,924,137.70. - - In 1910 it was $202,064,887.96, more than five times as much. - - The number of registered letters issued in 1885 was 11,043,256; - in 1910 it was 40,151,797. - - The amount of money orders issued rose from $117,858,921 in 1885 - to $498,699,637 in 1910. - - The total postal receipts rose from $42,560,844 in 1885 to - $224,128,657 in 1910, an increase of $181,567,813. - - The postage rate on second-class matter in 1885 was double what - it is now. - - During the intervening period the weight of second-class matter - had increased about 600,000,000 pounds. - - Now we will get down a little closer in this business and see - what has happened within the last five years. - - - 1906-1911 - - In 1906 there was a gain in weight of second-class matter of - 41,674,086 pounds; in that year the deficit was $10,516,999. - - In 1907 there was a gain in weight of 52,616,336 - pounds--11,000,000 pounds more than in 1906; the deficit was - reduced to $6,653,283. - - In 1908 there was a _loss_ instead of gain in weight of - second-class matter of 18,079,292 pounds; the deficit went up - to $16,873,223, an increase over the year before of more than - $10,000,000. - - In 1909 there was only a slight gain in weight of 28,367,298 - pounds; the deficit went up to $17,441,719. - - In 1910 there was a gain in weight of 94,865,884 pounds, the - largest ever known; and the deficit dropped to $5,848,566.88. - - From 1906 to 1910 there were 198,863,387 pounds increase in the - weight of second-class matter; the deficit was $4,668,432.12 less - in 1910 than in 1906. - - The impression is prevalent that the amount paid for railway - transportation was cut down the past year, but the truth is that - the railroads were paid $44,654,514.97, the railway mail service - and the postoffice car service cost $24,065,218.88, a total of - $68,719,733.85, which is more by a half million than was paid in - 1909, and over $7,000,000 more than was paid in 1906. - - It is claimed that there is no definite relation between deficits - and second-class matter; very well, the foregoing are the - official figures; let them speak for themselves. - - In the whole history of the Postoffice Department, neither an - increase of second-class matter nor a reduction of the postage - rate has ever increased deficits, no matter what burdens have - been piled upon the service in the way of an extension of - city delivery, the establishment of rural free delivery, the - multiplication in number and increase of pay of officials, - increase of government free matter, increase of railroad and - other transportation charges, nor an increase in the obstructive - energies of postal officials directed against the publishing - business. (See In Memoriam, page 49.) - - It has come to be generally understood and conceded that - second-class matter originates mail of the other classes. The - Postal Commission testifies that “No sane man will deny that - second-class matter is the immediate cause of great quantities - of first-class matter.” Mr. Madden and Mr. Lawshe said the same - thing. Meyer said that “It is known that second-class matter is - instrumental in originating a large amount of other classes of - mail matter.” To what extent this is so can not be determined - with exactitude, but the official figures given throw a flood of - light on the subject. - - There are four classes of (paid) mail matter--first, second, - third and fourth. The first comprises letters and postals, the - second newspapers and periodicals, the third circulars, and the - fourth merchandise. - - How, of themselves, could the first, third and fourth classes - develop faster than the growth of population? Does not their - extension depend upon the business energy and the intellectual - activity of the people, and in turn do not these depend very - largely upon the circulation of the public press? - - Will it, therefore, be deemed unreasonable to conclude that of - the $202,064,887.96 of stamps sold for the first, third and - fourth classes of mail matter last year, $150,000,000 of it - originated immediately, remotely and cumulatively from the second - class? How else than in some such way can we account for the - prodigious development of the postal business, which has outrun - population sixfold or more? - - The late Senator Dolliver, at the American Periodical - Association’s banquet, at the New Willard hotel, at Washington, - a year ago, said: “I look upon every one of your little - advertisements as a traveling salesman for the industries of the - United States.” - - The amazing development of the industries of the country is in - a large measure due to second-class matter; the great increase - of second-class matter is due to the low postage rate; and the - wonderful expansion of the postal establishment is based chiefly - upon the widespread distribution of newspapers and periodicals. - - The foregoing figures are respectfully submitted; they are - official; and their significance can be interpreted by any - intelligent and thoughtful person. In the presence of these - figures, is it too much to claim that the government has never - lost a dollar in transporting second-class mail, that it is by - far the most profitable of any, and that, were it withdrawn - or greatly curtailed by an increase of rate, the postal - establishment would collapse into bankruptcy? - - In view, also, of the foregoing figures it is hoped that the - government will assume a less antagonistic attitude toward the - publishing business, and encourage and promote the circulation - of the public press rather than repress and curtail it. Its - obstructive course has been pursued too long, having no basis in - justice, business foresight, or common sense. - - Let there be a realization and an awakening! - - - IN MEMORIAM. - - During the last fiscal postal year the death list of publications - footed up to 4,229. Of these, 504 died a-bornin, that is, were - denied entry; the others--3,725--were papers that had been - established. - - In the decade from 1901 to 1910, inclusive, 11,563 publications - were strangled at birth (denied entry), and of established papers - that died there were 32,060. - - How many of these were forced to give up the struggle for - existence on account of the hard conditions imposed by the - government, we have no means of knowing. It is not found in the - annual reports. It is beyond question that with sample copies - cut off and necessary credit for subscriptions forbidden, no - publishers without large cash capital to draw from can start and - keep going in competition with old established papers. - - Why at this time, when the people are trying to get rid of - monopoly, the government should thus build one up, is hard to - comprehend. - - We are informed that the rule in regard to expired subscriptions - “has met with strong approval and continues to grow in favor with - publishers and the public generally.” This statement is made by - the newly installed Third Assistant Postmaster General, but it - is a delusion which Mr. Britt has unfortunately inherited from - his predecessor. It may be true as to those benefited by the - monopoly, but not as to those who have been put down and out. - “Dead men tell no tales.” - -I had intended to omit that “In Memoriam.” Then I carefully read it over. -The appalling slaughter of the “innocents” which it exposes was so new to -me, news of such a tragic nature in the domain of periodical publishing, -that I then and there changed my mind. I am of the opinion that the news -conveyed in its five brief paragraphs will be as new and as surprising -to most of my readers as it was to me. Think of 42,623 publications put -out of business in _ten years_? Of 4,229 sent to the commercial--in most -instances, probably, to the _financial_--junk pile in one year--last -year? Then think of the causes this conscientious writer holds chargeable -for a large share of the slaughter! - - -ATTEMPT TO BREACH THE CONSTITUTION. - -We will now revert to the bold attempt made in presenting that rider -amendment to the postoffice appropriation bill to breach the federal -constitution, following which we will take up some of Mr. Hitchcock’s -efforts to show how much or how little he knows about the business of -publishing and distributing magazines and other periodical literature. - -First let us inquire if Mr. Hitchcock and the coterie backing that -Senate “rider” _knew_ that, under the Constitution, all measures for -raising federal revenue must originate in the Lower House of Congress? -One scarcely dares conclude they were so densely ignorant as that. Then, -was theirs a deliberate, calculated attempt to breach the constitutional -prerogatives and rights of the Lower House? Did they figure upon putting -through that vicious rider in the congested closing hours of Congress? -I call them the _crooked_ hours of Congress. Did those backers of that -rider _hope_ that Senators and Congressmen would overlook or fail to read -that rider, hope that so many would be so fully occupied by the swan-song -chorus being sung during those closing hours that they would not notice -that “rider” jumping the constitutional hurdles? - -Now, if either one of the last assigned reasons is valid, a word stronger -than “ignorance” should apply to such tricky, treacherous action, whether -it is practiced by Senators, Congressmen, cabinet chiefs or chiefs higher -up. One greatly dislikes to apply a fitting term to such ulterior motives -as lead high and respected public officials to breach the constitution by -trickery about on a level with that of the sneak thief or with that of -a “con” man who thinks he has done his full duty by the people when he -has sold Reuben the painted brick. But how could Mr. Hitchcock and those -Senators co-operating with him be ignorant of the plain letter of the law -and supported by a long line of precedents in both the Senate and the -House? - -As to the Senate precedents for the House’s right to originate all -measures for the raising of revenues, Mr. Henry H. Gilfry, Chief Clerk -of the Senate, compiled in 1871 a work entitled “Decisions on Points of -Order with Phraseology in the United States Senate.” Mr. Gilfry cites the -attempt of the Senate to repeal the income tax. The House returned the -bill to the Senate with a reminder that the Constitution “vests in the -House of Representatives the sole power to originate such measures.” Mr. -Gilfry cites many other precedents. - -In 1905 the Senate tried to originate revenues by amendment to the -postoffice appropriation bill. That amendment was very similar to the -“rider” of Mr. Hitchcock. I will here reprint it: - -“That hereafter the rate of postage on packages of books or merchandise -mailed at the distributing postoffice of any rural free delivery to a -patron on said route shall be three cents for each pound or any fraction -thereof. This rate shall apply only to packages deposited at the local -postoffice for delivery to patrons on routes emanating from that office, -or collected by rural carriers for delivery to the office from which the -route emanates, and not to mail transmitted from one office to another, -and shall not apply to packages exceeding 5 pounds in weight.” - -The House brought that measure to conference and flatly _refused to -recognize the power of the Senate in the premises_. The Senate receded -and the amendment was killed. - -“Hinds’ Precedents of the House of Representatives” is a recognized -authority. In Chapter XLII, Vol. 2, under the caption, “Prerogatives of -the House as to Revenue Legislation,” Mr. Hinds cites many instances in -which the House had invariably insisted upon the _exclusive exercise of -its rights as defined in Section 7, Article 1, of the Constitution_. - -Mr. Hinds cites in all one hundred and twenty-five precedents, each -of which raises the same point of order as was raised in debating Mr. -Hitchcock’s late “rider” and on each of which the House _maintained its -right to originate all bills for raising revenues_. - -In view of the fact that some of Mr. Hitchcock’s supporters were men -of experience, skilled parliamentarians, in view of the fact that -some of them were trained lawyers, and in view of the further fact -that the works both of Mr. Hinds and of Mr. Gilfry are on file in the -reference libraries of the Senate and House and probably in most of the -departments, how, I ask, in view of the above facts, can either Mr. -Hitchcock or any of his supporters enter a valid plea of _ignorance_ of -the fact that their attempt to put over that rider was contravening the -constitutional rights and prerogatives of the House? - -No, they were not ignorant. In my judgment, as based upon the reports -which have reached me, that “rider” was a deliberate frame-up and its -architects were a few conspirators who sought by means of that rider -either to put certain periodicals out of business or _force them to print -what they were told to publish_. - -Possibly I may be in error as to this, but the careful observation of -the best informed and most experienced correspondents on the Washington -assignment, as well as a number of Senators and Congressmen, have, in -reports made, supplied ample evidence to warrant my statement to the -effect that there was a collusive understanding among a few people to -present that “rider” in the closing hours of the session with the hope -that in the rush of affairs it might escape notice and go through. And -that hope was born of an ulterior purpose to get even with some monthly -and weekly publications--publications of _independent_ thought and -voice and which have for several years been _telling the truth_ about -certain Senators and Congressmen. These independent periodicals have -also been telling a rapidly growing multitude of eager readers the cold, -unvarnished facts about some corporations and corporate interests which, -it is generally believed and openly charged, are represented in federal -legislation and in cabinet and other official circles in Washington _by -several of the very men who were so actively supporting Mr. Hitchcock in -pushing his “rider” over the legislative course_. - -A brief summary of the history of that rider may be presented at -this point. The Penrose-Overstreet bill was before the House in the -early part of 1910. It carried no recommendation of an increased rate -on second-class matter. This Penrose-Overstreet bill was, however, -reintroduced in the House by Congressman Weeks, of Massachusetts, -Chairman of the House Postoffice Committee, and by Senator Carter in -the Senate. The House refused either to approve or take action on Mr. -Hitchcock’s recommendation. After consideration, the Senate approved -the House bill. That bill carried no recommendation for an increase in -second-class postage rates. Not a single member of the Senate during the -debate suggested nor introduced any bill or amendment recommending such -increase. - -In his message of December, 1910, President Taft recommended an increase -in the second-class mail rates. His recommendation was couched in -language very similar to that used in his message of December, 1909. - -Mr. Samuel Blythe, from whom I have previously quoted extendedly, says -some pertinent things in commenting on the situation at this point in our -brief outline of how this “rider” got mounted for a lap or two and then -was blanketed in the home-stretch: - -“The Postmaster General had not been idle in the matter. He had it on -his mind. Moreover, his party had been defeated at the polls in the -previous November and about the only Republicans who were successful -were Progressive Republicans against whom the President had admitted, -in his famous Norton-Iowa letter, he had been discriminating and for -whom Mr. Hitchcock had no sympathy. The policies, and in many cases the -individuals, in the progressive movement had had large support from the -magazines and periodicals; and before that, the reactionaries who had -ultimately been defeated, had been assailed because of their misdeeds.” - -There is a lot of bone and sinew in that. Of course, both the President -and his Postmaster General wanted to make good; wanted, as I have -previously intimated, to get rid of those pestiferous independent -periodicals which had been so conspicuous and powerful in unhorsing some -of their stand-pat friends in the elections of November. - -Mr. Hitchcock is not one of the sort of men who rush in where angels -fear to tread. He is quite a general. He can make the waiting tactics -of General McClellan, it would seem, apply beautifully to a political -maneuver. He can wait and bide his time. At any rate, he waited. He -waited until the President and other friends had worked that announced -method of “discriminating” against the progressives, the so-called -“insurgents,” to the end of appointing a Senate Committee on Postoffices -and Postroads, the personnel of which suited Mr. Hitchcock’s quietly -nursed purpose--in fact suited him as well as if he had selected the -committee himself. Mr. Hitchcock, however, still waited, and while -he waited, the House Committee had been appointed and was engaged in -considering the postoffice appropriation bill. This House Committee -held numerous sessions and gave hearings to many newspapermen and to -publishers of periodicals. It went over the entire field of requirement -in the government postal services and appears to have gone into the -subject of second-class mail rates and the cost of its transportation and -handling most carefully and thoroughly. The result of its deliberations -was to tender to the House a bill carrying, as previously stated, an -appropriation of some $258,000,000 for the year’s salaries, maintenance -and operation of the Postoffice Department, a sum which must certainly -appear liberal to any informed reader. - -In this connection, two points stand out in bold relief. First:--When the -House bill covering the 1911 appropriations for the Postoffice Department -was passed and advanced to the Senate, _it carried no provision or -recommendation for an increase of the second-class postage rates_. - -Second:--As previously stated the House committee held many sessions -while considering and preparing its 1911 Postoffice Department -appropriation bill, and _at no session of that committee did Mr. -Hitchcock urge an increase in the second-class postage rates. He made no -propositions or recommendations to that committee touching on increases -in the second-class mail rate._ - -_In fact he made no proposition of any sort to that committee. Nor did -he submit any statements or figures to that committee, other than those -contained in his 1910 report and in the President’s message._ - -Rather a queer procedure that, is it not? Especially is it queer, -likewise suggestive, in a man who, for two years, had been running with -anti-skidding tires on and the high-speed lever pushed clear down, in a -wild chase to capture an increase in the second-class mail rate. - -That is the way it looks to The Man on the Ladder, anyway. - -Why did Mr. Hitchcock so completely ignore that House committee? Or why, -at most, did his attitude, when present at any of its sessions, manifest -so little interest as almost to indicate an _indifference_ as to what -was done or not done? Why, again, was Mr. Hitchcock so inactive, so void -of suggestions and recommendations when before that branch of federal -legislative authority with which he knew must originate _all_ measures -for the raising of revenues? - -_Why?_ To that question there appears, to The Man on the Ladder, but one -valid answer. _Mr. Hitchcock was waiting._ - -When the House bill was sent to the Senate and referred to the Senate -Committee on Postoffices and Postroads, it appears from reports of people -whose business it is to watch things done and doing at Washington, D. -C, that Postmaster General Hitchcock livened up a bit, being careful, -however, not to put any noticeable pressure on his high-speed lever -_until those meddlesome publishers had left town and were well away_. - -These publishers, knowing the constitutional prerogatives of the Lower -House, considered matters safe and settled when the House bill making -appropriations for the Postoffice Department was adopted and advanced -to the Senate. They knew it carried no section advancing second-class -postage rates nor any recommendations favoring such advance. With the -publishers that ended it. But they failed to consider Mr. Hitchcock. His -wiles and ways were, it appears, neither understood nor even suspicioned -by those publishers. So, confident and content, they gathered up their -belongings, packed their grips, paid their hotel bills and hied away -to their several homes. Then it was that Mr. Hitchcock got busy with -that discriminatingly selected committee of the Senate--the Committee on -Postoffices and Postroads. - -To see how “discriminating” some one or more persons had been in -selecting that committee, let us look over its membership. At its head, -as Chairman, sat Boies Penrose. He is the reputed Republican boss -of Pennsylvania and an “organization” man. So is President Taft an -organization man. Therefore Senator Penrose is an Administration man to -the last ditch--that is, of course, if the administration is Republican. -Mr. Hitchcock is also an organization man, and if both the President and -his Postmaster General wanted this “rider” turned loose on the senate -tanbark, Mr. Penrose was willing to go along with them. The other members -of the committee were:-- - -Republicans:-- - - Scott, of West Virginia. - Burrows, of Michigan. - Dick, of Ohio. - Crane, of Massachusetts. - Guggenheim, of Colorado. - -Democrats:-- - - Taliaferro, of Florida. - Bankhead, of Alabama. - Taylor, of Tennessee. - Terrell, of Georgia. - -We will scrutinize that list and see how the members fared at the -November election. The first four Republicans and the first Democrat as -named in the list were defeated at the last senatorial selection--in -fact they were repudiated by the states they had been representing or -misrepresenting, as the reader cares to take it. As these defeated -toga-smudgers attributed their overthrow largely to newspaper and other -periodical attacks upon them, Mr. Hitchcock naturally found them in line -for anything he wanted to visit upon those offensive publications. - -Of the other Republicans, Crane, is reputed to be lugging around with him -a large-sized aspiration to be Republican leader in the Senate. If he -cashes that ambition, he must necessarily stand pat with the President -and Hitchcock, in spite of the alleged fact that Senator Crane does not -carry an over-load of esteem for said Hitchcock. The other left-over -Republican member of the committee, Guggenheim, would not be worth -mentioning were it not for the fact that the methods pursued by himself -and his friends in his elevation to senatorial honors have put him in the -class almost removed from criticism. Those methods received much caustic -consideration from newspapers and other periodicals. Simon Guggenheim, -though reputed to be noticeably obtuse in comprehension and decidedly -pachydermatous of integument, is probably neither so dull nor so thick -of skin as not to have felt and to have remembered the exposure the -magazines made of the methods they asserted were used to secure his toga; -methods, it was asserted, which virtually bought his “friends,” both -those in and those out of Colorado’s legislature. Yes, Simon probably -remembers those exposures and the sources from which they emanated. - -Entirely aside from that fact, Simon Guggenheim is a dyed-in-the-wool -Administration man. In fact, if reports be true, and his record in -the Senate appears to justify the reports, Senator Guggenheim could -not be other than an Administration man. First, it is said, there are -“official” motives and reasons for his being such, and, second, that -his intellectual equipment is so out of repair, or so lacking in native -operating power, as virtually to disqualify him for any part or position -save that of a nonentity in legislative procedure and affairs. - -So Senator Simon “Gugg” must necessarily stand with the President and the -Postmaster General on the “rider” amendment as on any other proposition -_they_ wanted to forward. - -As to the hold-over or returned Democratic members of that committee -little needs be said as the Democrats were in the minority anyway. -Senator Bankhead is quite generally recognized as a congenial, obliging -and accommodating politician. In all probability, he would not enter any -strenuous objections to Mr. Hitchcock’s proposed amendment, provided a -hint was given him that the President approved it. That such hint was -handed around quite freely before the committee’s report was submitted to -the Senate is a matter of common knowledge. - -Senator Taylor first voted for the rider amendment. Later, however, when -he neared Jericho, the scales appear to have fallen from his eyes and -he then saw things differently. At any rate he later voted against the -amendment. - -Senator Terrell of Georgia was ill, and therefore not present when action -was had. It will be seen, then, that the Postmaster General _had his -“discriminating” committee_. - -Mr. Hitchcock began his advance on that committee February 1st. He -approached certain of its members on the 1st and 2nd and informed -them, in effect, that he wanted them to urge a second-class amendment -to the postoffice appropriation bill, which the committee had under -consideration. He, it is reported, also assured these senators that -President Taft most earnestly desired that an increase be made in -second-class rates. He got a committee appointed, consisting of Senators -Carter, Crane and others to confer with the President regarding the -matter. Owing, however, to the pending of other legislation in the -Senate (the ship subsidy bill in particular), the matter dragged along -until the 8th of February. During the delay, Hitchcock made sure of -the committee by nailing down Penrose, Crane, Burrows, Carter, Scott, -Bankhead, Taliaferro, Dick and Simon “Gugg.” On the date last named, -Senators Carter and Crane went to the White House “by request” to confer -with the President. The President, it is said on authority, flatly told -the two Senators that they “must” put the amendment into the bill. It -is also reported, and to their credit, that the two Senators argued -strenuously against the expediency of inserting it, pointing out the fact -that such an amendment would go out on a point of order under Senate Rule -XVI. Mr. Hitchcock was present throughout the conference. Incidentally, -it may be likewise noted that Vice-President Sherman dropped in, quite -“by accident” of course, but he showed no hesitancy, it is said, in -participating in the discussion as actively as Postmaster General -Hitchcock had been doing from the beginning of the conference. While the -President and his Postmaster General were arguing with the Senators to -prove to them how important the action was to the Administration; why the -“rider” must go into the bill as an amendment, and probably why it was -“time for all good organization men to come to the aid of the party,” Mr. -Sherman probably dropped a few timely hints to the effect of how easy it -would be, with the gavel in his hands and a quick, true and _favoring_ -eye for floor recognitions, _to get around_ Senate Rule XVI. In the end, -Senators Carter and Crane were won over and a meeting of the Postoffice -and Postroads Committee was called for the afternoon of the same day, -Wednesday, February 8th, 1911. - -When the committee got together it was found that there was not a single -proposition of any sort relating to second-class mail rates before it for -consideration. Neither was there a written suggestion, recommendation or -report bearing upon that subject before them. Mr. Hitchcock, however, was -present at this committee meeting. He formulated his proposition and the -committee went into session, the discussion being led by Senators Carter -and Crane, who had become “convinced” against their best judgment if -not against their will, in the forenoon of the same day, to support the -amendment. The discussion lasted for several hours, with Mr. Hitchcock’s -deficit occasionally buzzing as his wheels went round. Then the committee -adjourned until the next afternoon, February 9th. - -Mr. Hitchcock left the room after the discussion and, it is said, went -immediately and reported to the President. Upon learning that the -attitude of the committee was unfriendly, the President at once began to -turn on more current, not hesitating to use his patronage club in doing -so, reports say. - -The committee met, as agreed at its adjournment. _Mr. Hitchcock was -present with his rider amendment all written up and fully varnished and -frescoed, and in two hours Mr. Hitchcock’s rider amendment was tacked -onto the bill_, in wording substantially as it appears on another page. - -Then the real fight began. Hitchcock stood to his embrazured guns, to his -reprisal rider, throughout the entire engagement. As an evidence that it -was his rider, or his and President Taft’s, I desire here to present to -the reader points in proof: - -That picked “discriminating” Senate committee had a majority of defeated -or otherwise disgruntled politicians. They were defeated or disgruntled -because certain independent periodicals had, figuratively speaking, -peeled the varnish and smooth epidermis off them, thus exposing their -decayed or decaying carcasses to a public not only able to read and -understand, but a public _willing_ to read and understand. - -I will offer a few other established facts. Mr. Hitchcock, during the -closing days of the fight, _devoted nearly his entire time to pushing -and advocating his measure, his carefully prepared scheme_. A canvass -of the Senate was made, which canvass led Mr. Hitchcock to believe he -had the votes to put his rider over the course a sure winner. In that, -however, he was mistaken. A number of the Senators had wised up as to the -real purpose and purport of that rider and, in the canvass, they _handed -back to him a little of his own peculiar brand of jolly, which he had -delivered to them in unbroken packages, freight prepaid_. - -After his canvass, Mr. Hitchcock still kept his oil tank well filled, and -his “deficit” playing rag-time to boost his rider along. He even kept -his deficit buzzer going after nearly everyone about the Capitol _knew_ -that Senators La Follette, Bristow, Owen, Gore, Cummins, Bourne, Clapp, -Beveridge, Borah, Brown and others intended to _talk his rider into the -ditch_ or talk the postoffice appropriation bill into the Sixty-second -Congress. - -Yes, Postmaster General Hitchcock, though neither a very competent -nor scrupulous tactician, nor an able manager for any large business, -industrial or other, is a _good fighter_. That much must be said for him. -When a man fights to the last ditch for a lost or losing cause or purpose -as he fought for his “rider,” that man has courage, nerve, whatever we -may call it, in him. At any rate it is a quality which commands respect -and the man possessing such a quality will receive his just meed of -respect wherever men _are_ men. - -Mr. Hitchcock worked up a vigorous support for what The Man on the -Ladder considers not only an objectionable cause, but a cause viciously -dangerous to our form of government, to the material welfare of our -people, to their educational advancement as well as to their moral and -intellectual betterment. - -That is the reason he opposes the purpose of this rider amendment and -the methods used to enact it into law. In brief, that is why this book -has been written. How Mr. Hitchcock secured a following, even for the -brief period his followers followed, for such a cause and the methods -used to advance it is as difficult for me to work out or solve as -the “Pigs-in-Clover” puzzle or the “How Old Is Ann” problem. He must -certainly have learned some new “holds” or tricks in what Sewell Ford -calls “the confidential tackle,” or he could not have secured so many -“falls” in so short a time for a cause that was bad and for methods even -worse, if such were possible. - -Now we will take up the Postmaster General’s somewhat prolific, if not -always lucid, verbiage, to prove that he knows more about the publication -and distribution of publications than the most experienced and successful -periodical publishers have yet learned, however experienced they are and -however hard they have striven to familiarize themselves with the many -intricacies which the business involves. - - -FOOTNOTES - -[1] Now, see here, Samuel, if you have any knock to make about the -liberties I may take with your Saturday Evening Post informative article, -knock me, not my publisher. I may quote and even disfigure a little, but -I assure you the latter will be far this side of the ambulance. - - - - -CHAPTER III. - -SOME PUBLIC-BUBBLING FIGURES. - - -Postmaster General Hitchcock’s persistent activity in seeking to push the -“rider” through the Senate was a noticeable feature in the closing hours -of that session of Congress, his industry showing in his daily contact on -the floor of the Senate with the members who seemed pliable or willing -to harken to his wishes in the matter pertaining to the legislation he -wished to have made into law. The following communications, adroit and -carefully worded to Chairman Penrose, boldly justified the increase on -second-class matter, and may be regarded as the dying struggle of the -postoffice head to gain his point. - -The italics are the writer’s and set out the controversial -promiscuousness of the Postmaster General. The letters bear date February -14-15, 1911: - - WASHINGTON, D. C., February 14, 1911. - - MY DEAR SENATOR:--In response to your request I _submit the - following statement_ relative to the section of the postal - appropriation bill, H. R. 31539, now pending in the Senate that - provides for an increase in the postage rate on the advertising - portions of periodical publications mailed as second-class matter. - - Under the provision in the bill the postage rate on the - advertising pages of magazines is increased from 1 cent to 4 - cents a pound, _but this increase does not apply to newspapers - of any kind_, nor does it affect periodical publications mailing - less than 4,000 pounds each issue. By the terms of the provision - the privilege of carrying advertisements is for the first - time extended to several classes of periodical publications - enumerated in the act of March 3, 1879, namely, the periodical - _publications of benevolent or fraternal organizations, of - regularly incorporated institutions of learning, of trade union - organizations, and of professional, literary, historical, and - scientific societies, including state boards of health_. - - As the advertising portions of magazines comprise on an average - about a _third_ of their total weight the effect of an increase - from 1 to 4 cents on the advertising pages will be to advance the - postage rate for second-class matter as a whole about 1 cent, - making the second-class rate 2 cents a pound instead of 1 cent, - as at present. In view of the fact that it costs the government - about 9 cents a pound to handle and transport this class of mail - the proposed increase is an exceedingly moderate one. - - In a whole page newspaper advertisement printed on the 12th - instant, signed by 34 of the _principal magazine and periodical - publications_ of the country, it is stated that the increased - rate “will drive a majority of the popular magazines out of - existence, and with them the enormous volume of profitable - first-class mail their advertising creates.” _This charge is made - in the face of the fact that some, if not all, of the signers - of the statement are realizing tremendous profits from the vast - amount of high-priced advertisements._ - - It has been found _on investigation_ that one of the great - periodical publications signing this protest contained in 21 of - its successive issues, from January 1, 1910, to and including May - 21, 1910, exclusive of cover pages, an average of 19,354 agate - lines of advertising matter, which, at the same rate, would make - a total of 1,006,408 lines for the year. - - On October 1, 1910, the publisher of this periodical increased - the rate for ordinary advertising in his publication from $5 - to $6 an agate line. At the higher rate the _gross value_ of - the ordinary advertising space for one year would amount to - $6,038,448. Increased rates charged for the inside and outside - cover pages would bring $650,000, making a total _gross value_ of - $6,688,448. Allowing a discount of 15 per cent, or $1,003,267, - there would remain as a _total net value_ of the advertising - in this publication for a single year the _tremendous sum of - $5,685,181_. The additional income from advertising resulting - from the increased rates would amount in a year _to $957,107, - which would be much more than sufficient to pay the proposed - higher postage rate of 4 cents a pound on the advertising pages - of the publication during the fiscal year ended June 30, 1910_. - In other words, _the advance in advertising rates for this - periodical will not only meet the higher postage charges, but - will leave a surplus of increased revenue to swell the annual - profits of the magazine_. - - In a printed statement recently issued by the president of one - of the leading magazine-publishing companies of New York City, - _the exceedingly profitable nature of the magazine business - was clearly set forth_. According to his statement the profits - of his own magazine for the _month of October, 1910, showed - an increase over the corresponding_ month for 1909 of 100 per - cent on advertisements and 151 per cent on _subscriptions, - making a net annual profit for dividends and surplus, based - on a circulation of 500,000 copies monthly, of $348,980_. - Regarding the periodical-publishing business in general, the - same gentleman says in his statement that “magazine publishers - receive _gross_ incomes as high as $6,000,000 in a single year. - Dividends amounting approximately to $1,000,000 yearly have - been made.” Speaking of the publishers of some of the magazines - joining in the protest against the proposed legislation, he says - that one of them, according to his own statement, realizes a net - profit of $1,000,000 annually; of another, the principal owner - of two great publications, that his gross income is more than - $6,000,000 annually, and that his net profits for the same period - exceed $1,000,000; of another, that his magazine yields more - than 10 per cent on a capital of $10,000,000; of another, that - his net profits are $600,000; of another, that the value of his - advertising space alone is $1,500,000 a year; of another, that - his advertising receipts are $75,000 per month and his profits - are from $600,000 to $800,000 per year; of still another, that - his publishing business represents a profit of 100 per cent a - year to its stockholders. - - MY DEAR SENATOR:--On February 13, 1911, Everybody’s Magazine - published in the local newspapers a full page advertisement - attacking the proposed increase in second-class postage carried - by the postal bill now pending in the Senate. In their statement - the publishers claimed to have a circulation of 650,000 copies - per issue and asserted that “the postal measure now before - Congress increases the cost of handling Everybody’s Magazine - $150,000 a year.” They further stated that in view of the fact - that the magazine makes “each year for its stockholders about - $100,000,” the proposed increase would “actually exclude the - magazine from the mails.” - - The department’s figures for the calendar year 1910 show that - Everybody’s Magazine mailed at the New York City postoffice - 2,898,372 pounds of its issues as second-class matter, on which - the postage at the cent-a-pound rate was $28,983.72. As an - average of one-half of the pages is devoted to advertising, the - proposed increase of 3 cents per pound on such matter would make - the additional postage $43,475.58 per annum instead of $150,000, - as stated by the publishers of the magazine. - - Based on the publishers’ statement of 650,000 circulation, the - gross income of Everybody’s would be about $1,550,000 annually, - divided as follows: - - 200,000 subscriptions, at $1 (net) $200,000 - 450,000 news-stand sales, at $1 (net) 450,000 - 150 pages of advertising per month, at $500 per page 900,000 - ---------- - Grand total $1,550,000 - - Since the publishers state that the magazine makes each year for - its stockholders only about $100,000, the approximate cost of - publication reaches the surprisingly high figure of $1,450,000. - Using their own statement showing a circulation of 650,000, it - appears that Everybody’s issues 7,800,000 single copies annually. - If their total net profits are only $100,000, it is evident that - it must cost the publishers approximately 19 cents to place a - copy of the magazine in the hands of a reader who can secure it - on the news stand for 15 cents. - - Before your committee reported the bill providing for the - increased rate on second-class matter, the publishers of - Everybody’s Magazine announced that on and after March 6, 1911, - their rates for ordinary advertising would be advanced from $500 - to $600 a page. On the extremely conservative estimate that the - magazine carries a monthly average of 150 advertising pages, this - advance will produce an additional income of $150,000 per annum. - As the proposed increase of postage during a like period will - amount to approximately $43,500, it is evident that out of the - increase of revenue alone the magazine will be able to pay the - additional postage and still retain a considerable surplus for - its stockholders. - - Yours, very truly, - - FRANK H. HITCHCOCK, - _Postmaster General_ - - Investigations recently made by the Postoffice Department - show that large numbers of periodical publications already - entered as second-class matter are in reality nothing more than - trade catalogues, which, under the law, ought to be treated - as third-class matter and subjected to a postage charge of 8 - cents a pound, which is the rate for catalogues. By inserting - a few pages of reading matter, these publications succeeded - in being classed as magazines and thus secured admission at - the cent-a-pound rate. Among publications of this kind is one - containing 140 pages, 99 per cent of which are devoted to - advertisements; another containing 562 pages, 97 per cent of - which are devoted to advertisements; another containing 238 - pages, 93 per cent of which are devoted to advertisements; and - another containing 268 pages, 89 per cent of which are devoted - to advertisements. Almost the entire space in these publications - is devoted to the carrying of commercial advertisements, and - this in defiance of the statute specifically excluding from the - second-class privileges “publications designed primarily for - advertising purposes.” - - By the proposed law, magazines, in so far as they provide public - information, are left exactly on a par with newspapers and the - smaller periodicals, for the increase of rate of 3 cents a pound - attaches only to such portions of the magazines as are devoted to - advertising purposes. - - The stock argument of magazine publishers that the profit to the - government on first-class matter induced by the advertisements in - their publications offsets any loss incurred by reason of the low - postage rate on second-class matter is disproved by the fact that - the government’s entire profit on first-class matter is less than - the total loss on second-class mail matter. - - During the fiscal year 1910 over 800,000,000 pounds of - second-class matter were carried through the mails at a loss to - the government of $62,000,000. The profits on all other classes - of mail matter were more than swallowed up by this tremendous - loss, leaving a postal deficit for the year of about $6,000,000. - It is estimated that the annual saving to the government through - the proposed increase in postage will amount to about $6,000,000, - or enough to wipe out what remains of the deficit. - - Magazines have repeatedly increased their advertising rates - as their circulation has grown, but the postal charges for - the handling and transportation of these magazines have - remained stationary for years, so that while this increased - circulation has swollen the profits of the publishers it has - added correspondingly to the loss sustained by the government. - It is clearly inequitable that the public in its general - correspondence, the publishers of books and pamphlets, and the - senders of small merchandise should continue to be taxed to meet - the deficit caused by a subsidy enjoyed by the publishers of the - large magazines. - - Yours, very truly, - - FRANK H. HITCHCOCK, - _Postmaster General_. - - MY DEAR SENATOR:--Observing that the periodical publishers in - their opposition to the pending provision increasing postage on - second-class mail matter frequently refer to the low rate of - one-fourth cent per pound charged by the Dominion of Canada on - newspapers and periodicals, I think it well to point out the - fact that while this exceptionally low rate does prevail in - that country because of the peculiar conditions there, European - countries, so far as our information goes, charge a higher rate - than the United States, notwithstanding their much smaller - areas. The rates charged by Great Britain, Germany, and France - are considerably higher than the rate provided for in the bill - now pending in the Senate. I inclose herewith a memorandum giving - such information as we have regarding the postage rates charged - on newspapers and periodicals by European countries. - - Yours, very truly, - - FRANK H. HITCHCOCK, - _Postmaster General_. - - _Postage rate, in cents per pound, on newspapers and periodicals - in European countries._ - - Cents. - Great Britain (one forty-first of the area of the United - States), 1 cent a copy for local delivery, but for general - distribution by parcels post in quantities, 6 cents for - the first pound and 2 cents for each additional pound up - to 11 pounds. - Germany (one-seventeenth of the area of the United States) 4⅘ - France (one-seventeenth of the area of the United States) 4 - Italy (one thirty-third of the area of the United States): - Daily newspapers 1⅛ - Other publications 2 - Holland (one two-hundred-and-eighty-fourth of the area of - the United States) 1⅘ - Belgium (one three-hundred-and-eighteenth of the area of - the United States) 1⅕ - - Under the provisions of the International Postal Convention, - newspapers and periodicals are mailed by all the signatory - parties at the uniform rate of 1 cent for each 2 ounces or - fraction thereof--practically, 8 cents per pound. - -Postmaster General Hitchcock in his letter, submitted under date of -February 14, 1911, quotes some publisher (name not mentioned), as saying -that “magazine publishers receive _gross_ incomes as high as $6,000,000 -in a single year” … “that one of them, according to his own statement, -realizes a net profit of $1,000,000 annually” … another, “the principal -owner of two great magazines, says that his _gross_ income is more than -$6,000,000 a year;” of another “that his magazine yields more than 10% -profit on a capitalization of $10,000,000,” etc., etc. - -Beyond stating that the foregoing declarations were made by the -“President of one of the leading magazine publishing companies of New -York city,” Mr. Hitchcock sayeth not, save as he quotes (see seventh -paragraph of the Hitchcock letter), this President as saying what Mr. -Hitchcock says he said. The Postmaster General does not name this -“President.” - -Regretting this oversight of our Postmaster General very much, I would -like to know whether or not this “President” is the real, genuine -article of president, or is merely one of these “phoney” presidents who -laboriously support the honors of the corporate title and vote three -shares of stock, usually _given_ by the promoters of an organization for -the “influence” of an honored name in starting the wheels to revolve. - -I mean by this that it would be _information_ to thousands of Mr. -Hitchcock’s readers, as well as to thousands of publishers and printers, -_and numerous millions of American citizens_, had he, Mr. Hitchcock, -told them whether this “President” he quotes so liberally, likewise -confidently and confidingly, is a real, live-wire president, active in -the management of his periodical, and, therefore, fully informed as to -its business, expenditures, profits, etc., etc., or, on the other hand, -whether or not he is merely a corporation stool-bird for the promotion of -a publication enterprise through selling the stock of the concern to the -E. Z.-Mark investing public. - -The quotations which our Postmaster General makes from this publisher -“President” sound to me with quite a familiar _tang_. They read a -good bit like a promotion circular, like an “annual statement” which -corporations and companies as well as individuals print and distribute -to call attention to the prosperous _future_ they have in sight, -incidentally inviting _investment_ from savings banks accounts, stocking -hoardings, etc. - -Nothing wrong about that method of “public bubbling” at all. Even banking -institutions, national and state, sometimes resort to it. Occasionally, -commercial houses have used it. So, also, has the Steel Corporation, -when it wished its employes to chip in a few millions for “a personal -interest.” Our friend, “Bet-You-a-Million-Gates,” used it to advantage in -reorganizing the Louisville and Nashville system, and it is a practice -now and again indulged in among our Napoleons of finance, as well as -great captains in the industrial realm. - -For this reason I cannot--until our Postmaster General further -enlightens us regarding this publisher-president as to his personality, -individuality and general business activity in and knowledge of, his -own publication business,--say anything in adverse criticism of this -“President” Mr Hitchcock quotes so liberally, likewise unctuously. - -However, having been a periodical publisher myself, in a small way, I -shall presume here to present a few figures _approximately_ applicable -to larger periodical enterprises. Mr. Hitchcock has much to say about -_gross_ receipts, _gross_ revenues, and other _gross_. I shall present -my estimate of _net profits_. For this purpose, I shall take a monthly -periodical reputedly issuing 650,000 copies a month, each number weighing -about one pound. - -Now, let it be here distinctly understood by the reader that my figures, -mostly estimates, are those of a man with experience only as a small -periodical publisher, say of 50,000 a month, not 650,000. - -Estimated income of the publisher of a standard monthly periodical -distributing 650,000 copies monthly of average weight of one pound each, -Mr. Hitchcock figures to be (see his letter), about $6,000,000. The gross -annual receipts from subscriptions on a periodical issuing 650,000 copies -per month, and retailing at 15 cents per copy, is less than $750,000. -Such periodicals realize about 12½ cents each for subscribed copies and -8 cents net for copies delivered in bulk to newsdealers and agencies. -The first item of expense the publisher incurs, therefore, is in the -issue cost of production over what he receives for the copies issued. -It is knowledge common to every periodical publisher, newspaper as well -as magazine, that every subscriber as well as news-stand buyer of his -periodical is a _subsidized reader_. Do you catch the import of that -statement? - -Did you ever think of that, Mr. Reader? Frankly I confess that I did not, -until quite recently, when a large producer of trade journals and edition -books, and likewise one of our largest manufacturing printers, pointed -out the facts to me. His varied business interests are such that he must -necessarily buy at the lowest market cost, must know to the fraction of a -cent what those costs are--the cost of composition, of presswork, of ink, -of color work, of covers, of binding, of cartage, of rail haulage, of -distribution, etc., etc. - -Well, this gentleman summoned me off the ladder, and “called” me in a way -which made my landing somewhat abrupt, in order to tell me some things -about periodical publishing which he had shrewdly, likewise correctly, -guessed that I did not know. - -Among the things he told me, not only told me but proved to me, was the -one stated: that readers of periodicals get, _in net mechanical cost, -more than the publishers receive for the publication sold_. - -In proof of this he cited the 8-page dailies issued in cities of the -second and third classes, and the 16 to 32-page dailies published in -our metropolitan cities; also the great “Sunday Editions” issued by the -latter, issues which run more largely to color and _tonnage_ than to news -and literature. The former, (the dailies), my publisher friend pointed -out, realize about _six-tenths of one cent a copy_--a little less, if -they do cartage for any considerable part of their local deliveries or -pay rail haulage charges on outside deliveries. Of course, my tutor -is speaking of news agents and carrier deliveries. On their regular -subscribed issues publishers realize a little more. But the difference, -when cost of wrapping and addressing is figured, is so trifling as not -to be worth considering. It can be safely figured that the net price -received by the publisher of a newspaper is six-tenths of one cent -for the daily and about three and a half cents--probably nearer three -cents--for the leviathan metropolitan Sunday edition. - -Just here is where my publisher friend’s knowledge of _market costs_ came -forth for my enlightenment and, I sincerely hope, for my reader’s as -well. Having studied his business from the “stumpage” up, so to speak, he -began with the cost of pulp wood timber, “of stumpage,” from the spruce -forests of the north and farther north, the scattered linn or basswood -of the east and southeast, and of the soft maple and cottonwood of the -southeast and south. Then he told me of the prices paid the “lumber -jacks” to fell and saw this pulp-wood; of the cost of hauling it by ox, -mule or horsepower to the river “roll-way,” which river would carry it -down to the pulp mill, or hauling it to the railroad loading station for -rail carriage to the same point. - -Nor did he do that only. He told me the price of the “web press roll” -and of “flat-print” papers into which the wood pulp is made, paper stock -on which is printed all our periodicals--both newspapers and monthly -and weekly periodicals. Next he told me of the price of composition, -(typesetting, as we used to call it), by the most modern methods, the -linotype and the monotype machines. Then he talked of ink and presswork -costs, of color work, folding, stitching and covering or binding; of the -cost of wrapping, addressing, cartage, rail haulage and distribution. -The result of the expert’s showing of the _cost_ of raw material and of -skilled and other labor in periodical publication, as the periodicals are -printed and marketed today, was to the effect that the reader gets his -daily, weekly or monthly publication, on an average, _at less than half -what it costs the publisher to produce it_. - -Further, it was conclusively shown to me, that the publisher’s _net_ -receipts for a newspaper, magazine or other periodical is often but a -third, sometimes less than _a fourth_, of the net cost to him of its -production and distribution. - -With this preliminary, we will now go back to our magazine of 650,000 -monthly issue and Postmaster General Hitchcock’s estimate of its profits. - -Postmaster General Hitchcock’s talk of “gross” receipts of $6,000,000 -a year is ill advised. Let us see what must be charged off from that -$6,000,000 before the publisher can count his profits. - -First, we will figure the publisher’s loss on published copies. Taking -only the flat cost of paper, ink and composition; of the cost of fine -color and half-tone pages such as monthly periodicals must print; of -cover designing, presswork, and binding, of wrapping and addressing, say -150,000 copies of the monthly issue to individual addresses, that being, -approximately at least, the number of subscribed readers the publisher -will have on a total issue of 650,000 copies. Next comes the cost of -sacking his subscribed circulation and of bundling and wrapping, then -of cartage to mail trains. The prominent periodical publisher not only -delivers his subscribed list _sacked_ to the mail car, but he _routes_ -the larger portion of it, the railway mail clerks having nothing to do -with it save to dump it off at the designated stations. Then he must -meet the carriage and delivery cost, about 1 cent a pound, or $20.00 -a ton. All these I consider _flat_ costs of producing and delivering -the publication. To this flat cost must be added the expenditures for -contributing writers, for editors, proofreaders and special investigators -(including travel and other expenses), stenographers, postage and -stationery for a large correspondence, clerical, messenger and other -administration service, rents, insurance, etc., etc. And, finally, the -expenditures made in the way of commissions and premiums to work up a -subscribed issue. - -A monthly periodical of the size and character which Postmaster General -Hitchcock has reference to--of the size and character to win its way to -an issue of 650,000 copies a month--must cost its publisher not less, on -an average, than 30 cents per copy, probably more. The subscribing reader -pays 12½ cents per copy for it--pays directly to the publisher. The -news stand buyer pays 15 cents a copy, but the publisher, after paying -newsdealer and agency commissions on the latter sales, realizes but _8 -cents per copy_. Here let us see how this publisher’s circulation-cost -and receipts figure out. Six hundred and fifty thousand monthly issue -figures to an issue of 7,800,000 copies for the year. At 30 cents’ cost -of production, which is rather low than high, those copies cost the -publisher to produce, to get readers for and to distribute, the annual -total of $2,340,000. He realizes in return from subscription and news -stand sales about as follows: - - From news stand and agency sales (500,000 per month, - or 6,600,000 copies a year), he realizes 8 cents per copy or $480,000 - - From subscribers (150,000 per month or 1,800,000 a - year), at 12½ cents each 225,000 - -------- - Total receipts $705,000 - -Thus it is clear that for an expenditure of $2,340,000 a year to produce -and distribute his excellent _low-priced_ periodical to readers, the -publisher gets in return only $705,000, thus standing a net loss of -$1,635,000 on his mechanical output--no, on his _literary and educational -output_. And, mark you, that $705,000 Mr. Hitchcock must, necessarily, -have included in his “gross” receipts. How, then, is the publisher able -to furnish his readers such literary and educational nourishment at so -great a loss on production? - -There is but one answer: The advertising carried by the periodical -must recoup the loss on publication and yield the publisher whatever -profit he may realize. Yet Mr. Hitchcock, in the profound profundity of -his knowledge of periodical publishing, figures that the advertising -receipts are clear profit to the publisher. True, he does, in one of his -urgent letters to Senator Penrose, I believe it is, incidentally admit a -possible maximum cost or expense of “fifteen per cent” in securing and -printing the advertisements. “Fifteen per cent!” - -Omitting all undigestible words, I shall merely say that Mr. Hitchcock’s -fifteen per cent talk--about the cost of soliciting and printing -advertising matter by any of our high-class periodicals, shows a -knowledge of the subject nearly on the level of that of a cold-storage -egg. - -Why, fifteen per cent of the gross receipts for advertising by any of -our high-class periodicals scarcely would meet--I doubt if in any such -case it does _meet_--the expenditures made for skilled “layout” men -and designers. Everyone knows that the advertising pages of any of our -standard weekly and monthly periodicals are _art pages_. People _read_ -the “ads” in these periodicals. They are largely attracted to them by -their artistic arrangement, typographically and in design. It takes -_brains_ to make that arrangement, brains of finer fiber or better -trained than the cold storage variety. The service of such brains _costs -money_. Who pays it? _The publisher._ And the publisher who gets the -services of such brains at less than fifteen per cent of the “gross” -charge for his advertising must, in these days, be a wonder in business -acumen or a “pow’ful ’suadin’ boss,” as Rastus used to say, down on the -Yazoo, years ago, when he took a job at twenty-five cents a day less than -he had asked. - -I say the people _read_ these “ads” and, fearing I shall forget it later, -I desire to interpolate here another thought: They are led to read them -because of the artistic letterpress, the designing, the attractive -phrasing, catchy wording, etc. They read them. _You_ and _I_ read them. -And--well, that is my point--my thought. - -The “ads” in periodicals of the class of which we are speaking cover -almost every field and domain of life--of human life--of _our_ lives. -They tell us of the latest inventions and achievements in the mechanical -and industrial world; of the latest improvements in the cultivation of -the land; of the latest and best in “hen range” management and “run-way” -poultry raising; of the latest achievements of Luther Burbank, or some -other wizard in the domain of pomology; of kitchen and flower gardening; -of how to cut down our gas bills; to make the ton of coal deliver more -“duty”--more thermic B. T. U.’s--of the best new books and of bargain -reprint editions of the best old ones; of where to get a cheap home, -cheap acres around it and how to build and furnish a comfortable home -cheaply; in fact, of an infinity of daily and hourly needs. So what is -the use of my enumerating further? Every reader knows what those “ads” -in our standard periodicals do for us. They enlighten, they inform, they -_educate_ us. And that is why we read them, and that is why we should -continue to do so. - -We will get back now to Mr. Hitchcock and his “wondrous ways” of figuring -a publisher’s profits on the advertising he prints. Postmaster General -Hitchcock appears to have ignored the fact I have already pointed -out--ignored the fact that the publisher’s heaviest loss is on the -printing and distribution end of his periodical, and thus is a charge -against his advertising receipts. - -Mr. Hitchcock, so far as I have been able to read him, furthermore -ignores the important fact that advertisements are secured for a -periodical largely by solicitation. Of course, the “Want,” “To Rent,” -“For Sale” and similar small line “ads” come to newspapers largely -without personal solicitation. But the display advertiser does not -frantically rush to the publisher and say: “Here’s my check for $500.00. -Give me a page display for this line of goods.” Not at all. The publisher -must go after him and, not infrequently, go after him numerous times -before he lands his $500.00 or $5,000.00 contract or order. To secure -such advertisements the publisher employs the most skilled advertising -solicitors within reach of his bank balance. Such men, if carried on his -regular payroll, are among the “high-salaried” human units which make -up the operating, managing and service personnel of his business. If -they are not on regular salary the publisher must pay such men a liberal -commission on the contracts secured, a commission seldom or never as -low as 10 per cent and I have known them to range as high as 40 or 50 -per cent of the gross price received on the first or initial contract, -“just to show the advertiser what we can do for him,” as the publisher -frequently reasons. - - -TESTIMONY UNDER OATH. - -Senate Document No. 820 presents a reply by some publishers to -Mr. Hitchcock’s loose or reckless statements on the point under -consideration. I wish to appropriate for use here some very manifestly -truthful statements made in that Senate Document No. 820. I shall -summarize or quote as best fits my line of presentation. - -In 1909 the publishers of five standard magazines, admittedly carrying -“the largest amount of advertising” among the monthly periodicals, -made _a sworn statement_ covering their receipts, expenditures and net -profits. That sworn statement is on file in the Department of Commerce -and Labor and is easily accessible to the Postmaster General if he -desires to know a little something of what _the publishers know about -their own business_. The publishers of the five periodicals thus making -sworn statements to the government of their incomes, expenditures and -profits, are the publishers of “Everybody’s,” “McClure’s”, “The Review -of Reviews,” “The Cosmopolitan” and “The American.” - -The named periodicals, it will be at once recognized, if not the -strongest, at least are among the strongest monthly periodicals of this -country. Yet these sworn statements show that Mr. Hitchcock’s proposed -increase of 3 cents a pound in their mailing rates would, under present -conditions, _exhaust “81.8 percent of their net profits_.” - -If Mr. Hitchcock’s proposal, prompted, it would appear, by ulterior -motives, as was recently evidenced by his _voluminous_ buttonholing of -interested or “interests” Senators and Congressmen to put his “rider” -over--no, maybe it is not really his, but _it looks like him_--for an -increase on second-class matter would, if made operative, would so -seriously impair the financial strength of five such _strong_ periodicals -as those named, what, it is the part both of duty and of honesty to ask, -will become of the _scores_ of smaller periodicals, especially of those -periodicals which issue more than “two tons” at a mailing and which -serve, inform and _educate_ a reading patronage that needs them? - -If Mr. Hitchcock’s actions in this matter are clean and open--not -“influenced”--he might not only serve himself but a good and worthy -cause as well, if he would give some pointers to these smaller -publishers--those between his “4,000 pounds an issue” exemptions from -his four-cent rate and the stronger periodical publications, five of -which are before him in sworn statement. If he would give, I say, these -middle-class publishers--we may so call them for the comparison in hand, -though their published matter is of the _highest class_ all the time--if -he would give such publishers some method or scheme to keep from the -financial rocks, they, I am quite sure, would greatly appreciate it. -Possibly they would put him on their free lists in perpetuity. - -Mr. Hitchcock appears to be a phenomenon at “figurin’” and for the -devising of methods to obliterate postoffice “deficits;” also at -following the ulterior motive and its “influence,” and still provide, -by exemptions or otherwise, to protect the “fence-building” country -newspapers,--indeed newspapers in general, now that I read him again. -Likewise he protects the farm, the religious, the scientific, the -mechanical and other publications whose influence, it appears, does not -_obstructively_ influence the “influences” which have directed his recent -action. - -I do not know who wrote that Senate Document No. 820. Whoever it was, -he certainly knew “a gob of things,” as our splendid friend, the -washerwoman, would put it, about the United States Postoffice Department, -its management and its methods. I shall probably “crib” or plagiarize -several times from this Senate Document No. 820, but just here I desire -to quote a paragraph from it: - -“Postmaster General Hitchcock’s profound ignorance concerning the -relation of magazine advertising to magazine profits is shown by the -fact that although these magazines received in 1909, $2,463,940.39 -for advertising, the aggregate of their net incomes was only -$230,734.57,--less than one-tenth of their advertising receipts.” - -This Document No. 820 is all good, so good that I believe I will reprint -from it further and at this point: - - Postmaster General Hitchcock proceeds in the first and second - paragraphs on page four to cite a recent increase of advertising - rates of a certain magazine, and to consider, and use in - figuring, as net profits the _total amount of advertising it - carries for the year_. - - (It is of incidental interest, in showing the _partisan attitude_ - of the Postmaster General, that in calculating the total amount - of advertising received by this publication, he takes the number - of lines actually printed in this weekly’s _richest advertising - season_, ignoring the fact that in the summer this periodical - is sometimes published at a loss, and makes an estimate of its - advertising patronage for the whole year on the basis of what it - received in the months when advertising is at its height). - - But the gigantic error of the Postmaster General is in - calculating the additional income from advertising for this - weekly resulting from its increased advertising rate, and - assuming that this increased income is all profit. This error - arises from the Postmaster General’s _total ignorance_ of the - publishing business in general; and in particular, of the fact - proved above, that the magazines save only a small fraction of - their aggregate advertising income as net profits after paying - the expenses of production and administration. - - Then the Postmaster General finds out how much money the - increased rate brought the periodical and observes with an air of - finality that this income was more than sufficient to meet the - higher postal charges. - - The facts are, of course, that to get this higher advertising - rate, the “great periodical” had to publish enough more copies - and additional reading matter in those copies to justify the - increased rate; and that to manufacture and supply these - additional subscriptions it costs magazines more than twice as - much as they get from subscribers. Furthermore, the Postmaster - General takes gross advertising income as net profit, apparently - thinking that advertising flows into periodical offices without - the asking, where, as a matter of fact, it is necessary to spend - enormous sums for high-priced men to solicit advertising, for - other men to lay out plans and make designs for advertisers, and - for a large clerical force to handle the advertising department. - The calm way in which the Postmaster General ignores the cost of - presswork and paper on which the advertising is printed, exhibits - his ignorance of the fact that there is in business an expense - side of the ledger as well as an income side. - - If a magazine has 100,000 circulation and a fair corresponding - rate for advertising and if the circulation is then increased to - 200,000, the publisher has the same right and the same necessity - to charge more for the doubled circulation that a grocer has - to charge more for two pounds of tea than for one pound. But - what possible relation has this to the fact that postage rates - have remained stationary? _The postoffice gives no more service - than it did before magazine circulations and advertising - increased_--in fact it gives less, as it now requires the big - magazines to separate and tag for distribution, and, in many - cases, deliver to the trains, _a vast quantity of magazine mail, - formerly handled entirely by the postoffice_. - -I wonder if Mr. Hitchcock ever read “Job Jobson, Nos. 1, 2 and 3.” If -he has not there is something due him which he ought to take immediate -steps to collect. “Job Jobson” in three little pamphlets tells _more_ -than either Mr. Hitchcock or myself will ever be able to learn about -second-class mail carriage and handling--unless, of course, we read those -three booklets of Job Jobson. - -Why are Job Jobson’s three booklets so important? A very pertinent -question, indeed, at this stage of our consideration. Job Jobson’s three -booklets are toweringly important inasmuch as they were written by Wilmer -Atkinson, publisher of the Farm Journal of Philadelphia, one of the most -successful as well as the most _useful_ farm periodicals the world has -ever produced. - -More than that, Mr. Atkinson has so long and so thoroughly studied this -second-class mail rate question that both Mr. Hitchcock and myself would -have to take our places in the kindergarten class where he is tutor. - -I haven’t those three “Job Jobson’s” by me. I have thumbed two of them -out of existence, but from the one I have I desire to quote a couple of -paragraphs which I hope it will do Mr. Hitchcock as much good to read as -it does me to re-read. Here they are in all their vigor: - - Publishers, one and all, should take their stand upon the - immutable principle that newspaper circulation is not a crime, - and it is not a fault, that neither a law on the statute books, - much less arbitrary power outside the law, should ever be invoked - to curtail the liberty and independence of the press, which are - a sacred inheritance from the fathers; or to cripple newspaper - enterprises or bankrupt those engaged in this noble calling. - - That to send their papers into the very confines of the republic, - into every home, however rich, however humble, to brighten and - to bless, is a great and beneficent work, worthy of all praise - and all honor--worthy of the nurturing care, rather than the - antagonism of government. - -And that was written only a few years ago--written _true to the facts_. I -desire here to quote a couple more paragraphs. They have been published -generally throughout the country and universally indorsed. They are -written by the Hon. Woodrow Wilson, Governor of New Jersey: - - A tax upon the business of the more widely circulated magazines - and periodicals would be a tax upon their means of living and - performing their functions. They obtain their circulation by - their direct appeal to the popular thought. Their circulation - attracts advertisers. Their advertisements enable them to pay - their writers and to enlarge their enterprise and influence. - - This proposed new postal rate would be a direct tax, and a very - serious one, upon the formation and expression of opinion--its - most deliberate formation and expression--just at a time when - opinion is concerning itself most actively and effectively with - the deepest problems of our politics and our social life. To make - such a change, whatever its intentions in the minds of those who - proposed it, would be to attack and embarrass the free processes - of opinion. - - - - -CHAPTER IV. - -BUREAUCRATIC POWERS SOUGHT. - - -I have before me the Postmaster General’s report for 1910. It presents -a large amount of information both in statistical tabulation and in -“straight matter.” A portion of the former, however, leaves the average -lay mind rambling around in circles, wondering what in the name of all -that is lofty it was compiled for, what service value it can possibly -have and what was the ailment from which the fellow who compiled it -suffered; that is, was his a case merely of bad liver or indigestion, or -a serious case of ingrown intellect, struggling to help his fellowmen -know how real dizzy and foolish tabulated figures can be made to appear? - -Mr. Hitchcock in this 1910 report has separated himself from some -striking oddities, about as serviceably valuable as a smoking compartment -would be to a laundry wagon. Of course, it may be that Mr. Hitchcock -did not write the division of this report signed by him. Some talented -secretary, clerk or assistant may have cranked it up. However that may -be, do not let what I here say deter you from looking through this 1910 -report should it come your way. It contains a variety of excellent -things, some valuable information, well collated and intelligibly -presented. The foolishness and fooleries in it are--well, they are of -the kind common to all, or at least most, departmental reports, federal, -state, county and city. Much of the tabulated “statistics” in each can -have no possible service value either in this world or the next--even -assuming that statistics and statisticians will be recognized at all in -that division of the “next” to which we all aspire. - -As to the “straight matter” in these departmental reports, one often -finds in it some most excellent suggestions, as is certainly the case -with Mr. Hitchcock’s 1910 production. One also finds a lot of other -suggestions and space-written stuff that would make a totem laugh--that -is, of course, presuming a totem could laugh and had advanced as far as -the third grammar school grade in reading. - -And the “literary style” of these official reports; so aerial in -elevation, so officially dignified in “tone,” so profusely profound or -profoundly profuse in elaboration and detail, and often so _trivial_ in -significance or import! - -If they were still with us, the “literary” standard of most of these -departmental reports would make Bertha M. Clay hug the rail and E. P. Roe -carry weight. But, of course, one must not look for nor expect literary -exaltedness in a departmental report. It should, however, tell us--_we -people_--a good many things we wish to know, in fact, _ought_ to know. -It should not give us too much talk merely to show us how much--or how -little--some chief or assistant knows. If you get the opportunity, read -the Postmaster General’s 1910 report, and you will find many things in it -that will jar you loose from your expectations, but do not be alarmed at -that. Just keep in mind the fact that you can come as near reciting the -Rubaiyat backwards as can Postmaster General Hitchcock, and that you at -least know Old Mother Hubbard “by heart” as well as he knows it. - -The point I am trying to make--to emphasize--is that Mr. Hitchcock’s -1910 report presents much valuable information for you and me. So -you should not allow its follies to scare you off. For instance, the -Postmaster General’s fifty notations of “Improvements in Organization and -Methods.” Why he should stop at a round fifty I do not know. I believe -he could easily have added twenty or thirty more _of kind_. Some of -these “improvements” are most excellent; some of them are so assumedly -conclusive on matters previously--for years--in doubt and controversy as -to touch off the risibles in any man who has made anything like a careful -study of conditions governing the Postoffice Department. For instance, -his “Improvement” numbered 10 reads: - -“The successful completion of an _inquiry_ into the cost of handling and -transporting mail of the several classes and of conducting the money -order, registry and special delivery services.” - -We can _hope_ that the aforesaid “inquiry” was so carefully and -comprehensively conducted as to entitle it to be classed as “successful” -as Mr. Hitchcock’s statement is assertive. However, just how far we may -prudently indulge such hope is a matter for grave consideration. The -Postmaster General’s Third Assistant, James J. Britt, attempts to tell us -(pp. 328-329, 1910 report), all about it. Mr. Britt will be referred to -later. - -Again: Mr. Hitchcock in his No. 11 “Improvement,” reports “the -successful prosecution of an inquiry into the cost _to the railroad -companies_ of carrying the mails, the result of which will form -a _reliable basis_ for fixing rates of pay for railroad mail -transportation.” - -Now, if Mr. Hitchcock has really and truly so conducted an “inquiry” as -to ascertain a “_reliable basis_” of pay for the mail haulage service -rendered by the railroads--“a reliable basis” that can be built upon, -acted upon and _enforced_--if he has done that, then he deserves a niche -in the Hall of Fame. But here, again, I am doubtful. Did you take Britt’s -word for it, Mr. Hitchcock, or did you steer the “inquiry” yourself? The -only point of interest to us of the commonalty involved in your eleventh -improvement is: Can you, or any other Postmaster General, compel or -persuade the railroads to carry the mail at a reasonable rate? Will such -rate be based upon that “reliable basis” you say you have ascertained? - -Grant us but that and we shall ask no more nor will you have any -“deficits” to worry about. I know you explain quite fully (pp. 18-20), -as to how you went about it, how Congress made appropriation for a force -of “temporary clerks” to tabulate the information, the data which your -“successful” inquiry brought to the surface. Still, knowing something -about the _devious_ peculiarities of the railways in the past--say, back -to the Wolcott investigation (at this moment I forget the year when this -was made and have neither the time nor the opportunity to climb down -and look it up)--unless the railways have had a rush of honesty and -conscience into their reports, accounts and _practices_, I am gravely -_doubtful_ as to the dependability of the data your “inquiry” uncovered. -Of course, if you went after them, backed by a court order calling for a -showdown, Mr. Hitchcock, you may have arrived somewhere in the vicinity -of the facts. Otherwise--well, you got about what other _inquirers_ -got--_got what the railways wanted you to know_. - -I shall make no further specific reference to the fifty improvements the -Postmaster General claims to have covered into operative effectiveness. -It is due, however, that I say, in this connection, that the majority of -those named in the report are sound, sane and _serviceably_ economic. It -is also due from me to say that I personally know that Mr. Hitchcock has -already made a number of them effectively operative in his department -and to the betterment of its service. My contention with the Postmaster -General is chiefly concerning three points, viz.: - -_First_--His manifest intent to throw the burden of his departmental -deficit upon a few _independent_ periodicals which, by reason of their -independence, have indulged the proclivity or practice of _telling the -truth about corporate, vested and other favored interests, and about -corrupt officials--city, county, state, national, executive, legislative -and juridic_. - -_Second_--His colossally unjust and unfair way of figuring his “deficit” -against such periodicals. Maybe it was Britt, Third Assistant Postmaster -General, or some other “pied” subordinate who did the figuring. I do -not know. However, in common with other citizens, I hold Mr. Hitchcock -responsible for those figures, as we are fully warranted in doing by -reason of his official position. - -_Third_--Mr. Hitchcock, it appears, in his reports and letters, gives -us a lot of talk that is _twisted_, “pretzel talk,” someone has aptly -called it. This “night-crawler” talk quite naturally--legitimately, if -not naturally--leaves thoughtful people to wonder what he wants, _what he -is after_, what interest or interests he is trying to subserve and what -“influences” have _influenced_ him to go after certain periodicals in so -_bald and crude a way_. - -Still, that does not altogether fully express my third objection to Mr. -Hitchcock and his methods. His letters and special reports in support of -the absurd claim that the transportation and handling of second-class -mail matter costs 9.23 cents per pound, a figure above or equal to that -which will carry gold or currency bills _by express_ for the average -mail haul, furnish valid grounds for doubt as to the good faith of -his intent, to suspicion an _ulterior motive_ back of his action and -writings. To this I do not hesitate to say that his 1910 report, I mean -his own personally signed section of it, is offensively _bureaucratic_. -Mr. Hitchcock, it appears from his own recommendations, would have his -bureau or department bigger than Congress. He wants powers and authority -centered in it which Congress _should not delegate, which Congress has no -rightful powers nor authority to delegate_. - -Now, do not misapprehend me. Maybe Mr. Hitchcock has not done all this -on his own initiative. He may have acted wholly on a long-distance or -a central direction from the main stem. I shall, however, proceed to -support my accusation that Mr. Hitchcock evidences in his 1910 report a -desire--a tendency, if not a desire,--to make the Postmaster General not -only a censor of periodical literature (as indicated in the wording of -that “rider” amendment printed on a previous page), but to have delegated -to him powers over the mail service which not only contravene the basic -principles of a democratic form of government, but which, also, tend -to establish a bureaucracy that, if carried to its full flower, will, -necessarily _abrogate our form of government itself_. - -Here let us note Mr. Hitchcock’s recommended legislation. In the report -before me he makes thirty-six recommendations. In each of these which -grants added powers or authority touching any matter, the wording of -the suggested legislation gives such added powers and authority to the -_Postmaster General_. In certain minor matters, especially such as relate -only to departmental methods of handling its service accounts, etc., such -grant of power is entirely proper. Among Mr. Hitchcock’s recommendations -are several of such character, and, so far as I have studied them, they -appear sound, and consequently their passage by Congress and their -application to the department would, in my judgment, effect material -savings or betterments in the service. - -In a number of other instances, however, Mr. Hitchcock asks legislation -that will grant him (or any succeeding head of the federal Postoffice -Department), powers and authority which _should be granted to no bureau -or departmental division of our government service_. I mean that -the acquirement of such legislative powers and authority by bureaus -(cabinet service divisions), is inimical to the basic principles of our -government; in fact, it is a _stealthy_ move to establish in this country -the bureaucratic form of government which has proved a curse in every -existing monarchical government, causing their peoples to rebel against -them, or constantly a condition of unrest under the system--a condition -which indicates either _enforced_ submission to governmental wrongs and -impositions or a dwarfed and submerged manhood, “begging for leave to -live” and devoting most of its thought to a few questions, such as: “Why -did I arrive? What am I here for? I work, why does the government take -most of my earnings? Why does the government and its bureau heads live, -live in luxury, while I and my wife and children merely exist,--barely -subsist? _Why are hundreds of millions taken every year from people who -need it to secure the common comforts of life, and given, unearned, to -those who need it not at all?_” - -It would require pages even to print the inquiries which the victims of -bureaucratic governments ask themselves daily, ask themselves daily so -long as they _exist above the level of the clod_, above the level which -Edward Markham so forcefully and eloquently depicts in his “Man with the -Hoe.” - -The point I desire to emphasize is that when the great body of people -in any country--its “citizens”--begin to ask themselves such questions, -_their patriotism begins to dry-rot and die_, and when the patriotism of -a nation’s people begins to die, that nation is on the farther slope of -its existence; it has started on the decline, more or less sharp, _which -ends in rebellion_, dissolution, extinction. This is the uniform lesson -of history. He who reads it not so reads either not carefully or not -comprehendingly. - -To a few of my readers the foregoing may appear to be a digression from -my subject. It is not intended as such. It is intended to call the -reader’s attention to some powers and authority Mr. Hitchcock seeks in -his recommended legislation, _legislation which should not be enacted_. -Let us look at a few of those recommendations. If space permitted, I -would take pleasure in commenting on several more of them. - -On page 10 of his report, Mr. Hitchcock repeats a recommendation of his -1909 report. He repeats it “earnestly.” He also expresses the opinion -that “_as soon as the postal savings system is thoroughly organized_, -the Postoffice Department should be prepared to establish throughout -the country a general parcels post.” As a “preliminary step” to such -establishment of a parcels post Mr. Hitchcock seeks authority from -Congress to initiate a “limited parcels post service on rural routes.” -On page 26 of his report, Mr. Hitchcock suggests the _substantials_ of -the legislation he believes necessary to enable him to establish his -contemplated “limited parcels post service on rural routes,” _as an -experimental test_. - -As evidence that he wants the power and authority to make this -“experiment” on his own lines and judgment and pursuant of his _own -purposes_ I shall here quote the form of his advised legislation. To -anyone who has made study of parcels post service it is needless to -say that among the civilized nations of the earth the United States -is so far in arrears in such service as to be generally recognized as -an international joke. It is quite needless to say to such that Mr. -Hitchcock’s prattle of a “limited” parcels post and of trying it on -certain _selected_ rural routes (with no privileges of service beyond the -geographical limits of such routes), as an “experiment,” is more than a -mere joke. - -Informed people know that any such restricted test of a parcels post -service _is no test at all_. Informed men also know that our Federal -Postoffice Department needs make no “experiments” on the parcels post -service, “limited” or other. Every other civilized nation, and even -provinces such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand and others, have -made the “experiments,” likewise the successful demonstrations. The -experiments of these other nations and provinces, as well as the results -of them, are ours for the asking. Not alone that, but informed men _know, -and know positively_, that our Federal Postoffice Department is in -possession of--_or was in possession of_--all this information gathered -from the experiences and trials and tests of a parcels post service in -these other countries. - -So, I repeat that Mr. Hitchcock’s talk about making an experimental test -of the general value of a parcels post service by putting it in operation -on a few _selected_ rural routes is a joke, _or else it is an evasion -in order to delay the installation of a service which every citizen -wants_, save, of course, the few individuals who now own and control -our railroads, _which individuals also own_, to a controlling extent at -least, _our express companies_. - -But I must quote Mr. Hitchcock’s advised legislation in order to show the -reader that Mr. Hitchcock desires that the resulting powers and authority -center in him, or in his successors: - - In order that the recommendation on page 10 of this report for - the introduction of a limited parcels post service on rural - routes may be promptly carried into effect, it is suggested that - legislation substantially as follows be enacted: - - For one year, beginning April 1, 1911, the _Postmaster General - may, under such regulations as he shall prescribe_, authorize - postmasters and carriers on such rural routes _as he shall - select_ to accept for delivery by carrier on the route on - which mailed or on any other route starting at the postoffice, - branch postoffice or station which is the distributing point - for that route, or for delivery through any postoffice, branch - postoffice, or station on any of the said routes, _at such rates - of postage as he shall determine_, packages not exceeding 11 - pounds in weight containing no mail matter of the first class - and no matter that is declared by law to be unmailable, and he - shall report to Congress at its next session the results of this - experiment (Page 26, 1910 Report.) - -The italics are mine. They make all the comment that is necessary in -proof of my charge that Mr. Hitchcock seeks powers and authority which -should not be delegated to any bureau head. - -As a companion piece to the foregoing Mr. Hitchcock asks the following -legislation--legislation which, if granted or enacted, must look to any -man who has given even a cursory study to the subject of parcels post -service, as merely a “stall,” a bit of dilatory play to delay effective -and efficient action to install a serviceable parcels post _until the -express company interests pull down two or three hundred millions more of -unearned profits_. - -Following is the companion piece of the last preceding quotation. The -italics are mine and make the only comment that is necessary: - - As suggested on page 10 of this report, an investigation should - be authorized as to the conditions under which the transportation - of merchandise by mail may be wisely extended. For this purpose - it is recommended that legislation substantially as follows be - enacted: - - _The Postmaster General is hereby directed to ascertain by such - investigation or experiment as is found necessary_, and to report - to Congress at its next regular session, the lowest rates of - postage at which the Postoffice Department can carry by mail, - without loss, parcels not exceeding 11 pounds in weight; and he - is hereby authorized to place in effect for one year, beginning - April 1, 1911, _at such postoffices as he shall select for - experimental purposes_, such rates of postage on fourth-class - matter _as he deems expedient_; and the sum of $100,000 is hereby - appropriated to cover any expenses incurred hereunder, including - compensation of temporary employees and rental of quarters in - Washington, D. C. (Page 26, 1910 Report.) - -We will here drop the subject of parcels post for the time. In a later -section of this volume I shall discuss the subject--largely aside from -Mr. Hitchcock’s attempts, as has been authoritatively reported to me, to -delay if not to block its successful installation. - -I will make a few more quotations in evidence of Mr. Hitchcock’s desire -to acquire bureaucratic powers: - - To provide for a postal note in accordance with the plan - outlined on pages 10 and 11 it is recommended that legislation - substantially as follows be enacted: - - _The Postmaster General may authorize_ postmasters at such - offices _as he shall designate_, under such regulations as - _he shall prescribe_, to issue and pay money orders of fixed - denominations not exceeding ten dollars, to be known as postal - notes. - - SEC. 2. Postal notes shall be valid for six calendar months from - the last day of the month of their issue, but thereafter may - be paid under such regulations _as the Postmaster General may - prescribe_. - - SEC. 3. Postal notes shall not be negotiable or transferable - through indorsement. - - SEC. 4. If a postal note has been once paid, to whomsoever paid, - the United States shall not be liable for any further claim for - the amount thereof. (Page 29, 1910 Report.) - -Let us next look at a peculiar, “an unusual,” request for legislation -granting authority to the Postmaster General to do a most “unusual” -thing, the granting of salaries higher than $1,200 a year to clerks and -carriers, who are paid under the present law $600 a year, whenever the -postmaster “certifies to the department” that “unusual” conditions in his -community prevent him from securing efficient help. The italics are my -own and make comment unnecessary: - - In last year’s report, attention was directed to the desirability - of authorizing the appointment of clerks and carriers at higher - salaries than $600 at offices where unusual conditions prevail. - Congress added to the appropriation for unusual conditions a - proviso that may have been intended to meet the recommendation - of the department, but subsequent experience has shown that it - fails to do so. The proviso referred to has effected so great - a reduction in the amount available for salaries of employees - at offices where conditions are unusual that the service at a - number of such offices cannot be maintained after the close of - the present calendar year, unless additional funds are provided - by Congress. The same law placed a restriction on the maximum - salary allowable, making it impossible for the department to meet - satisfactorily the unusual conditions existing in certain parts - of the country. In order that the needed relief may be afforded - legislation substantially as follows should be enacted: - - Whenever a postmaster certifies to the department that, owing to - unusual conditions in his community, he is unable to secure the - services of efficient employees at the initial salary provided - for postoffice clerks and letter carriers, _the Postmaster - General may authorize, in his discretion_, the appointment of - clerks and letter carriers for that office at such higher rates - of compensation within the grades prescribed by law as may be - necessary in order to insure a proper conduct of the postal - business, and their salaries shall be paid out of the regular - appropriation for compensation of clerks and letter carriers: - _Provided_, That whenever such action is necessary in order to - maintain adequate service at any postoffice where conditions are - unusual _the Postmaster General may authorize the appointment - of clerks and letter carriers at salaries higher than $1,200_, - their salaries to be paid out of the appropriation for unusual - conditions at postoffices. (Page 30, 1910 Report.) - -I wonder what our Postmaster General is after in asking _re-enactment_ -of legislation of this sort, legislation granting him _censorial powers_ -without so much as _intimating_ that fact. Maybe some of you organized -labor men, or mercantile tradesmen can tell me. I am listening. _So are -others._ - - By the act approved May 27, 1908, making appropriations for the - service of the Postoffice Department, it was provided: - - That Section 3893 of the Revised Statutes of the United States be - amended by adding thereto the following: And the term “indecent” - within the intendment of this section shall include _matter of a - character tending to incite arson, murder, or assassination_. - - The enactment of this statute accomplished beneficial results, - and it does not appear that injustice or undue hardship resulted - therefrom to any person or interest. However, the provision - quoted was not retained in the penal code adopted March 4, 1909, - and became void when the code went into effect on January 1, - 1910. On the assumption that the omission was inadvertent, it - is recommended that the provision be re-enacted. (Page 37, 1910 - Report.) - -Following is one more reach by Mr. Hitchcock for bureaucratic power which -should _not_ be granted: - - By virtue of his office the Postmaster General has the power - to conclude money-order conventions with foreign countries - and to prescribe the fees to be charged for the issue of - international money orders. In like manner he should be empowered - to determine, from time to time, as conditions may warrant, the - fees to be charged for the issue of domestic money orders. It is - recommended, therefore, that Section 2 of the act of January 27, - 1894, be repealed, and that as a substitute therefor legislation - substantially as follows be enacted: - - Section 2 of the act of January 27, 1894, entitled “An act to - improve the method of accounting in the Postoffice Department - and for other purposes,” is hereby repealed. A domestic money - order shall not be issued for more than one hundred dollars, - and the fees to be charged for the issue of such orders _shall - be determined, from time to time, by the Postmaster General: - Provided, however_, that the scale of fees prescribed in said - Section 2 shall remain in force for three months from the last - day of the month in which this act is approved. (Page 38, 1910 - Report.) - -I have probably quoted sufficient to show that Postmaster General -Hitchcock is _reaching_ for power and authority _which should not be -delegated to any bureau or cabinet head_. The last statement is made, of -course, in the confident belief that the reader joins me in the desire -and _confident_ hope that the basic principles of our government will be -neither superseded nor abrogated by legislative grants of bureaucratic -power and authority, which power and authority once granted is _seldom -or never recovered to a people without sanguinary action on their part_, -with all the waste of effort, vitality, money and human life usually a -concomitant of such action. - -There are several more of Postmaster General Hitchcock’s legislative -recommendations I would like to quote, did space permit, but there is one -other which I will quote, because it wears a sort of humoresque drapery -when taken in connection with that “rider” Mr. Hitchcock so industriously -tried to put through the necessary three-ring stunts required in the -senatorial circus; also when taken in connection with a little, not -separately stitched, _brochure_ which Mr. Hitchcock turns loose on pages -7 and 8 of his most excellent, _though ulteriorly tutoring, report_. - -On pages 7 and 8 the Postmaster General tells us, as best he can, under -_influenced and influencing conditions_, the why and wherefore for his -attempt to load his department deficit onto a few periodicals which he, -likewise certain of his “influencers” possibly, does not like. Well, -I want my readers to _read_ this bit of official effort, _in a wrong -cause_. I want them to read it in the _raw_, with no spring papering or -decorating on it. - -As has been my practice in quoting, I shall take occasion to italicize -a little. But that will not cut any four-leaf clovers this early in -the season. I italicize merely to call the reader’s attention to the -elegant _assertiveness_ of Mr. Hitchcock’s “style” and to his _planned_ -determination to “put it over” on those pestiferous periodicals--weekly -and monthly--in spite of _constitutional prohibitions_, Senate rules or -publishers’ opposition. - -Stay! I have another reason for italicizing. I want the reader to read -those italicized phrasings of Mr. Hitchcock’s unstitched _brochure_ a -_second_ time, and to read them more carefully the _second_ time than -he did the first. If the reader will kindly do this we will be better -acquainted, also be mutually better acquainted with Mr. Hitchcock and his -dominating purpose, whether _ulterior_ or other, in attacking a special -class or division of periodical publications in order to recoup a deficit -_created wholly by the rural delivery service and by the free_ (franked -and penalty), _service rendered by his department_. We will first quote -his little second-class _brochure_ and follow it with his humoresque -legislative recommendation: - - In the last annual report of the department special attention was - directed to the _enormous loss the government sustains_ in the - handling and transportation of second-class mail. Owing to the - rapid increase in the volume of such mail _the loss is constantly - growing_. A remedy should be promptly applied _by charging more - postage_. In providing for the higher rates it is believed - that _a distinction should be made_ between advertising matter - and what is termed _legitimate reading matter_. Under present - conditions an increase in the postage on reading matter is not - recommended. Such an increase would place a special burden on a - large number of second-class publications, including _educational - and religious periodicals_, that derive little or no profit from - advertising. It is the circulation of this type of publications, - which _aid so effectively in the educational and moral - advancement of the people, that the government can best afford - to encourage_. For these publications, and also for any other - _legitimate reading matter in periodical form_, the department - favors a continuation of the present low postage rate of 1 cent - a pound, and recommends that the proposed increase in rate be - applied only _to magazine advertising matter_. This plan would - be in full accord with the statute governing second-class mail, - _a law that never justified the inclusion under the second-class - rates of the vast amounts of advertising now transported by the - government at a tremendous loss_. - - _Newspapers are not included in the plan_ for a higher rate - on advertising matter because, _being chiefly of local - distribution_, they do not burden the mails to any such extent as - the widely circulating magazines. - - Under the system proposed it will be possible, without increasing - the expenditure of public funds, to utilize _for the benefit - of the entire people_ that considerable portion of the postal - revenues now expended to _meet the cost of a special privilege_ - enjoyed by certain publishers. - - In view of the vanishing postal deficit it is believed that - if the magazines could be required to pay what it costs the - government to carry their advertising pages, _the department’s - revenues would eventually grow large enough to warrant 1-cent - postage on first class mail_. Experiments made by the department - show that the relative weights of the advertising matter and - the _legitimate reading matter in magazines_ can be readily - determined, making it quite feasible to put into successful - operation the plan outlined. Under that plan each magazine - publisher will be required to certify to the local postmaster, in - accordance with regulations _to be prescribed by the department_, - the facts necessary to determine the proper postage charges. - The method of procedure will be worked out in such manner as - to insure the dispatching of the mails as expeditiously as at - present. (Pages 7 and 8, 1910 Report.) - -That sort of a literary hand-out may be all right for certain of our -citizens transplanted from south European environment, likewise from -malnutrition and inanition, by the ship load to this country, where most -of them expected to find $1.50 or $2.00 per day growing on vines or low -bushes--and found it, in most cases, too. - -But to the home-grown American citizen, “His Majesty,” such departmental -literature is a noise something like a “chuck” steak makes when his -hunger suggests a “porter house” and he is without the price. That is -“His Majesty” who _earns_ what he acquires and _pays_ for what he gets -and who does not take on an over-load of the sort of official talk Mr. -Hitchcock ships him in packages similar to the above. Our home-grown -American citizens like to have their officials say something that _means_ -something. They do not want any literary ham-and’s served to them at four -prices, they knowing where to obtain them at first cost. - -I intended to make further comment on the foregoing--or gone--quotation -from our Postmaster General. I shall, however, deny myself that pleasure, -confidently believing that my italicization of certain of its phrasings -and statements is sufficient comment for the reader who is following me -in this effort to peel the varnish and frescoe from a _planned_ bad cause. - -The reader who has followed me thus far and has not discovered that I am -writing _against_ the men who are, I believe, trying _to set the brakes -on legislation in order to serve some_ “good interest” which pays them -a thousand or more for each of the twelve annual connections with the -cashier or “deposit certificates”--the reader who, I say, has followed me -thus far and failed to discover that fact should quit right here. It will -not cure him to read the rest of what I shall say. It is to be worse than -what I have previously said; in fact, it is going to be some distance -beyond “the limit.” My advice to any “frail” reader, therefore, is to -quit right at this point and give his brain a rest until he is able to -“come back” _and learn something_. - -We will now take a look at the humoresque “throw” of our Postmaster -General for legislative action. To fully appreciate it, the reader -must bear in mind that Mr. Hitchcock’s division of his 1910 report is -of date, December 1st, 1910, and signed by himself. The reader should -furthermore bear in mind that Mr. Hitchcock had previously reported--and -more frequently _asserted_--that the transportation and handling of -second-class mail cost the government 9.23 cents per pound. The reader -should, in this instance, likewise take into his judgmental grinder the -fact that Mr. Hitchcock, in the quotation which follows, is _trying to -put up another hurdle for the magazines and other periodicals to jump_; -that is, for _such of them as he may not like_, to jump. - -This recommendation for _legislative authority_ is intended to cut -out the sample copy privilege of periodicals, a privilege which the -government should _encourage rather than discourage_: - - In order to discontinue the privilege of mailing sample copies at - the cent-a-pound rate, legislation in substantially the following - form is suggested: - - That so much of the act approved March 3, 1885 (23 Stat., 387), - as relates to publications of the second class be amended to read - as follows: - - “That hereafter all publications of the second-class, except as - provided by Section 25 of the act of March 3, 1879 (20 Stat., - 361), when sent to subscribers by the publishers thereof and from - the known offices of publication, or when sent from news agents - to subscribers thereto or to other news agents for the purpose of - sale, shall be entitled to transmission through the mails at one - cent a pound or fraction thereof, such postage to be prepaid as - now provided by law.” - -While I have not the act of 1885 at hand, I am aware that it permits -what the Postmaster General asks for, _a 1-cent per pound rate_ for -periodicals admissible under the acts of 1879 and 1885. Mr. Hitchcock -asks for this legislation, a-cent per pound rate, December 1st, 1910. - -Before that date and since he has repeatedly asserted, both in print -and “_interview_,” that second-class mail _costs the government 9.23 -cents per_ pound to transport and handle. Do you see the _equivocating_ -“ulterior” in this bit of recommended legislation? If you do not, just -go into the back yard and kick yourself until you awaken to the fact -and then come back and read Mr. Britt’s statement, page 328 of the 1910 -report. Britt is Third Assistant Postmaster General and knows--well, he -knows so much that he has to _space-write_ in order to fill in about -sixty pages of this 1910 report. But, as I have to take notice of Mr. -Britt’s _furnished_ data later, I shall give him no more attention at -this point. - -I believe that I have either furnished the evidence to prove the -purpose, _the ulterior purpose_, of Postmaster General Hitchcock, or of -his _influences_, to punish certain periodicals, _to penalize them for -telling the truth_, likewise to acquire bureaucratic powers to give his -department the right of censorship over our periodical literature; not -only that, but to have the successful introduction of a parcels post -_dependent on conditions of his own choosing_. - - - - -CHAPTER V. - -THE PENROSE-OVERSTREET COMMISSION. - - -Next we will again take notice of Postmaster General Hitchcock’s -peculiar figures. I do not know where he learned how to do it, but his -“figerin’” has any expert accountant on the mat taking the count. He -is certainly a “phenom”--or his Third Assistant, Mr. Britt, or other -aid, is the “phenom.” At any rate the figures Mr. Hitchcock and his -third “assist” are wonderfully, likewise _mysteriously_, worked into a -little third-grade problem which makes it look like a proposition in -trigonometry or fluxions. - -It’s too complicated for me. I never had the advantage of hulling beans -in Massachusetts. My cornfield arithmetic was all acquired in Illinois. -So, instead of permitting myself to become enmeshed in Mr. Hitchcock’s -figures, I shall resort to my frequently used tactics. I shall quote. - -I have before me several analyses of Mr. Hitchcock’s peculiar application -of the “double-rule-of-three,” as the schoolmaster used to call it down -in that little school house at the cross roads in District 6, Town. 17, -R. 3 E. The schoolmaster used to divide his time between “’rithmetic” and -lamming. I graduated with honors in the latter. ’Rithmetic never seemed -to take kindly to me--save to push me along in the lamming course. But---- - -Well, that is sufficient explanation to the reader to give broad, -likewise legitimate, grounds for excusing me if I dodge, or try to dodge, -Mr. Hitchcock and his Third Assistant when they get down to “figerin’.” - -Candidly I am at a loss to know why young men of their physical -robustness and their abnormal--yes, phenomenal--super-excellence in the -matter of figuring things out, should be frittering away their time on a -loafing job with the government. They ought to be holding down the chairs -of Mathematics and of Expert Accounting at Onion Run University, or at -some other advanced institution of learning. - -But, as previously intimated, I am going to quote--am going to let -someone else into the maelstrom of official figures. - -I would not, however, have the reader think for a minute that I lacked -the courage to take the plunge myself. Not at all. I know my limitations. -Mr. Hitchcock is not only a graduate of Harvard, but he is a graduate of -_two_ Republican party campaign committees. I’d be perfectly willing to -take chances against Harvard in any game of figuring, but when it comes -to sitting into the game with a graduate in two courses of party campaign -figuring, one as Secretary and the other as Manager of the National -Republican Committee,--well, when it comes to that, I believe the reader -will excuse me if I push some more expert arithmeticians to the front. - -I will first quote from the 1907 Joint Commission which investigated -costs of second-class mail haulage and handling, and then I will quote -the publishers whose figures Senator Owen so pertinently presented in -connection with his remarks when speaking in opposition to the rider, -February 25, 1911. - -Being perfectly familiar with the proceedings of the Senate Committee -on Postoffices and Postroads, he must, necessarily, have learned -something from the publishers who came with the open, frank--yes, -certified--information as to their business. Likewise, he must have got -fairly well acquainted with Mr. Hitchcock and also have learned something -of his _promotive_ methods of figuring. - -I have, as yet, not had the pleasure--the honor--of meeting Senator Owen -or his strong, clean minded, clean acting colleague, Senator Gore, but I -like them. - -Why? - -_Because they stand on the floor of the Senate and fight--fight for what -is right._ - -Now that I have a copy before me, I will proceed to quote from that -report made by the 1907 commission--a commission which dug up more -information regarding the haulage and handling of second-class mail -matter than Mr. Hitchcock could possibly have gathered in two years -as head of the Postoffice Department. The commission was composed of -Senators Penrose, Carter and Clay and Congressmen Overstreet, Moon and -Gardner, men far better informed as to federal postal affairs than is -Postmaster General Hitchcock. - -This commission was authorized by Congress to make inquiry regarding -second-class mail matter. The reader may remember that I made reference -to this report on a previous page. It presents much information and -collated data, which, if Mr. Hitchcock had studiously read would -have enabled him to avoid many of the egregious blunders he has made -at frequent intervals during the past two years when discussing the -subject. It would, at any rate, have prudently curbed or restrained -what appears in Mr. Hitchcock to be a native or acquired tendence to -volume or tonnage in talk when he is speaking of second-class mail -matters or of the publication and distribution of periodical literature. -I do not concur in a number of the conclusions of this commission as -presented in its report, but no fair-minded man can read that report -without being convinced that the commissioners delved into the subjects -of the classification of second-class mail matter and the cost, to -the government, of its haulage and handling most earnestly; also as -thoroughly and as deeply as the _lack of organization in the Postoffice -Department and its antiquated, careless and inaccurate accounting_ left -it possible for anyone to go. - -This commission began its sessions in New York, October 1, 1906. It sent -advance notice to all the organizations of publishers in the country, -to publishers not in organization, to editorial associations, to boards -of trade, mercantile, commercial and trades associations and to other -individuals and organizations that might be interested, directly or -indirectly, in the subject matter to be investigated. It invited them -to present their views, complaints, objections and suggestions in -writing and also to send representatives to present their views and -their grievances, if any, to the commission in person. The notice -and invitation of the commission met with a large response from the -newspapers and other periodical publishers, also from other individuals -and associations interested in the distribution of periodical literature -by reason of the commercial, educational, religious, fraternal, -scientific or other benefits such literature conveyed to the people. - -At the suggestion of this commission, the Postoffice Department prepared -and delivered to it “an elaborate statement with exhibits” to show the -“defects of the existing statute as developed in _actual operation_.” -Also, the then Postmaster General, Mr. George B. Cortelyou, his Second -Assistant, Mr. W. S. Shallenberger, and his Third Assistant, Mr. Edwin C. -Madden, prepared and presented personal statements to the commission. - -Now some readers may wonder why I so particularly present the work -done by this commission for their consideration at this point in my -discussion of the general subject we have under consideration. In view -of my previous statement, to the effect that I do not agree with some of -the conclusions of this “Penrose-Overstreet Commission” some reader may -wonder why I make reference to it at all. Well, there are several reasons -why I do so and do it just at this point in the consideration of our -general subject. Among those reasons are, briefly stated, the following: - -The inquiry and investigation of this commission were broad, -comprehensive and thorough. - -Its report presents many arguments, recommendations and conclusions which -must appeal to any man who is fairly well informed as to our federal -postal service, as sound and sensible, however widely he may differ from -the commission’s conclusions on some other points covered in its report. - -Some readers who have seen and read the Penrose-Overstreet Commission’s -report may possibly have concluded that it presents _all_ the information -collected and collated by the commission. The reader so concluding would, -almost necessarily, think the information it presents insufficient, both -in subject matter and in detail, to be as helpful to the Postmaster -General as, on a previous page, I have asserted the work of this -commission would be to Mr. Hitchcock, or would have been had he taken the -trouble to consult the voluminous but carefully collated data gathered by -the 1906-7 commission and on file in his department. - -I will here quote a few lines from the report of the Penrose-Overstreet -Commission in proof of the fact that its inquiry, investigations and -work provided Postmaster General Hitchcock, had he but taken the time to -consult it, a store of information vastly greater than that presented in -its brief official report of sixty-three pages. - -Read the following and you will readily understand why Representative -Moon, on March 3, 1911, so strenuously objected to the appointment -of another second-class mail commission and to spending $50,000 more -of the people’s money to investigate a matter already thoroughly and -comprehensively investigated and to collect and collate data _which is -already on file in the Postoffice Department_. The quotation is from page -6 of the commission’s report. The italics are the writer’s: - - In accordance with this plan, (outlined in immediately preceding - paragraphs), which operated to economize the time as well of the - commission as of those appearing before it, _a great volume of - evidence was presented upon all aspects of the question_ from the - standpoint _both of the postal service and of the publications - involved_ - - … - - The testimony taken by the commission at these hearings, with - statements submitted in writing by publishers not orally heard, - boards of trade, and the like, and other data collected by the - commission in the course of its investigations, _together with a - complete digest of such testimony, are embodied in the record of - its proceedings submitted with this report_. - -To the end of getting our corner stakes properly located in order to -run our lot-lines correctly, I desire to quote further from the report -of this 1906-7 commission. It says some pertinent things and _says -them hard_. Before quoting, however, I desire to amplify a little on -the character of that commission, on the general character of the men -composing it as indicated in their official and public action. - -The first point of interest for us commoners to note and appreciate is -that the photographs of none of them, so far as I have been able to -learn, have appeared in the rogues’ gallery. We may therefore presume -that they are not only intelligent but “square” men--men worthy of Mr. -Hitchcock’s consideration and respect as well as our own. - -The second point worthy of note in considering the personnel of that -commission is that none of them, so far as public reports show, ever -had the advantages and opportunities of acquiring that peculiar and -specialized knowledge of federal postal affairs, second-class or other, -which may accrue to men from a postgraduate course in national party -management. - -In this connection, however, it may be said that some members of the -commission may have come _near_ to such unusual opportunities as -just mentioned for acquiring expert knowledge of the classification, -transportation and handling of second-class mail. - -It is also fitting for me to say in speaking of the gentlemen composing -that 1906-7 commission that, so far as I have been able to look up their -biographies in the Congressional Directory and elsewhere, I find nothing -to indicate that any of them ever tried to rob a smokehouse nor have -any of them ever tried to put over any piece of “frame-up” legislation -of the nature of Mr. Hitchcock’s “rider,” printed on a previous -page--_legislation to hobble, punish or ruin periodicals honest enough -and independent enough to tell the truth to a hundred millions of people_. - -The foregoing are some of the reasons--there are many others--why I -think the membership of that Penrose-Overstreet Commission of 1906-7 was -possessed of an ability, character and qualification to have commanded -Mr. Hitchcock’s careful consideration of the information and data the -commission so carefully collated, after thorough investigation, and -submitted with its official report. - -“Maybe he did make a careful study of that collated data?” - -Yes, maybe he did. But if he did, then much of the “student discipline” -and of the “study habit,” which graduates of Harvard are presumed to have -acquired, must have lapsed in the shuffle of the cards from which recent -years have dealt his hands. I say this respectfully as well as candidly. - -I cannot think of it as possible for a man of Mr. Hitchcock’s known -intellectual gauge to read--_studiously read_--the facts as presented in -the testimony before that 1906-7 commission, or so read even the 63-page -official report signed by five of the commissioners (Representative -Gardner being ill at the time the report was submitted)--I cannot, I say, -think it possible for any man of Mr. Hitchcock’s admitted intelligence to -read that testimony, collated data and report, and then proceed to talk -or write so wide of _known facts_ as does he in parts of his 1909 and -1910 reports and in his letters to Senator Penrose, printed in previous -pages. - -It may be--yes, it is most probable--that the commission did not dig out -_all_ the facts. But admitting that, the further admission must be made -by any fair-minded man that most of the facts it _did dig out_ appear to -be the very facts which Postmaster General Hitchcock _ignored_--ignored -with the self-centered nonchalance of a “short story” cowboy when -“busting” a broncho before an audience. - -I shall now present a few statements from the report of that commission, -first quoting some of the arguments presented by publishers who appeared -at its hearings personally or by representatives, or who presented -their views in writing on the various phases of the questions under -consideration. The quotations made, the reader must understand to be the -commission’s summary of what the publishers testified to, criticised -or recommended, and not the full testimony or reports as made by the -publishers. - -I have taken the liberty to italicize certain phrases and sentences in -these quotations, my purpose being, of course, to bring the points so -italicized more particularly to the reader’s notice: - - The primary purpose and function of the postal service being - the transportation of government and letter mail, second, - third, and fourth class matter are not strictly chargeable with - that proportion of the total cost of the service which would - be equivalent to their proportion of total weight or volume, - but these secondary classes, on the contrary, are chargeable - only with that fraction of total cost which would remain after - deducting all expenses of installation and general management - involved in the maintenance of a complete postal service for - government and letter mail. This method of computation should be - applied not only in respect of the expenses of administration and - handling, but especially in respect of the expense of railway - mail transportation, in which, by reason of the sliding scale of - payment, the additional burden of second-class matter entailed - but _an infinitesimal additional cost_. As an illustration of - this point, attention was drawn to the statement of Dr. Henry C. - Adams, in his report to the commission of 1898 (p. 404), that _if - the volume of mail had been decreased so that the ton-mileage had - been 169,809,000 instead of 272,000,000, the railway mail pay - would have been practically the same_. - - In other words, the argument is that the true cost of - second-class matter is merely that part of total cost which - _would be saved if second-class matter were now eliminated_. - -The foregoing is from page 9 of the commission’s report. On the same page -of the report it gives a summary of another set of reasons presented by -the publishers in their argument in support of their contention that the -mail rate on second-class matter should be low: - - That second-class matter, by reason of the fact that it is - handled largely in bulk in full sacks already routed and - separated and requires little or no handling by the railway mail - service or the force at the office of mailing and of delivery, - is in fact the _least expensive class of matter_. With respect - to the proportion so routed and separated, it was variously - estimated by the publishers as from _70 to 93_ per cent of the - total weight. The assistant postmaster at New York fixed the - percentage for his office at _67 per cent_, and the assistant - postmaster at Chicago estimated it, for the country at large, to - be between 50 and 60 per cent. - - The representative of the _American Newspaper Publishers’ - Association_, speaking for the metropolitan daily press, stated - that less than _6 per cent of their circulation went into the - mail at all_, in many instances the proportion being as low as - two-thirds of 1 per cent; that the radius of circulation was not - more than 150 miles; that their mailings averaged _49 pounds per - sack_, and that 93 per cent of all second-class matter going out - of New York city, for example, _was already sorted and routed_. - It was admitted, however, that while the newspapers _avail - themselves of express and railway transportation_ for matter - sent out in bulk, single copies sent to individual subscribers - invariably went by mail. - -Postmaster General Hitchcock appears to have largely ignored the fact so -clearly pointed out by the publishers in 1906--yes, pointed out as long -ago as 1898--that second-class mail matter is a _large producer of the -revenues_ received by the government from mail matter of the first, third -and fourth classes. Following is a summary of what the publishers pointed -out to the 1906-7 commission: - - There is an immense indirect revenue on second-class matter, due - to the fact that second-class matter is itself the cause of a - great volume of first-class matter, upon which the department - reaps a handsome profit. While the extent to which first-class - matter is thus indebted to second-class matter is necessarily - indeterminate, attempts were made to illustrate it by particular - instances. This was done by computing the amount of first-class - mail arising, first, from the direct correspondence between a - publisher and the readers, and secondly, from correspondence, - between the readers and the advertisers, resulting from the - insertion of the advertisements. In the instances chosen, - the first-class matter thus stimulated appeared to be very - considerable. Upon this basis it was argued that any reduction in - the volume of second-class matter would inevitably be followed by - a corresponding reduction in first-class matter. This would not - only deprive the Postoffice Department of the revenue from the - first-class matter, _but by diminishing the total weight of the - mails would correspondingly increase the rate of mail pay_, so - that the net result of the elimination of the socially valuable - second-class matter would be an actual increase in the total cost - of the service. - -The foregoing is taken from pages 12 and 13 of the commission’s report. -I desire to quote further from page 13--four paragraphs--and I urge -they be read with care. The reader, too, should remember that this is -not _all_ that the publishers said on the points touched upon. It is, -however, no doubt a fair epitome or summary of what they said or wrote to -the commission. The reader should also keep in mind the fact that what -they said and wrote was said and written in 1906, and _all_ they said and -wrote is on file and easily accessible to Postmaster General Hitchcock: - - Within an average radius of 500 miles the express companies - and railways stand willing to transport second-class matter, - in bulk packages weighing not less than 5 to 10 pounds to a - single address or to be called for, at rates actually lower than - the second-class postage rate. Inasmuch as the average haul of - second-class matter was reported by the Wolcott commission (p. - 319), to be but 438 miles, it is impossible that the government - should lose anything upon the transportation of this class of - matter, or if in fact it should be found to be doing so, _the - loss must arise from an overpayment to the railways_. - - Even if it should be found that second-class matter was being - carried at a distinct loss, that loss would be entirely justified - by the _educational value of the periodical press_. From the - beginning of the republic it had been the policy of Congress - to foster and assist the dissemination of information and - intelligence among the people. Next to the great public school - systems maintained by the states, the newspaper and periodical - are the chief agency of social progress and enlightenment. So - far from this being a subsidy to the publisher the advantage of - the low postage rate had been passed on to the subscriber in the - form of a better periodical and a more efficient service. Any - substantial increase in the postal rates, while for the time - being bearing heavily on the publisher, must eventually fall upon - the subscriber, either in the form of an increased price for - his reading matter or of a deterioration in the quality of that - matter. - - The correct method of dealing with the question of cost is to - treat the service as a whole, and if the revenue for the whole - service, _including allowance for government mail_, meets the - cost of the whole service, it is immaterial whether each class of - that service pays its own cost, or even whether the cost of one - class has to be made up by a greater charge upon other classes. - - With respect to rates, with the exception of some of the - representatives of the _stockyards journals_, periodical - publications were a unit against any increase. It was urged - that the periodical publishing business has been built up - on the present second-class rates, and that a change from 1 - cent a pound to 4 cents, as suggested by the Third Assistant - Postmaster General, would cripple, if not destroy, every existing - periodical. While some would, perhaps, be able to adjust their - business to the new rates and survive, the majority would perish, - and the loss would fall heaviest on the smaller and weaker - periodicals. - -We will next note some things which that 1906-7 commission said on its -own account or quotes some one in whose opinion they concurred or did -not, as the case might be. - -Some pages back, I told the reader, in effect, that while this -commission’s official report was a good one, presenting some valuable -suggestions, I did not agree with certain of its recommendations and -conclusions. Now, any adverse criticisms I intend to make concerning -that report are, I think, best made right here, after which I will quote -a few paragraphs from it which I believe highly commendable. There are -many suggestions and recommendations that I believe would be of great -value did the department but act upon them, and the vast amount of data -the commission collected and made a digest of would, had he but looked -into it carefully, most certainly have _persuaded_ Postmaster General -Hitchcock to speak and write less loosely on the subjects of second-class -mail rates and periodical publication and distribution, induced him -to talk in a way that would not leave the impression with studious, -thoughtful auditors and readers that he got his opinions at a bargain -sale during its rush hours. - -I shall comment adversely on but a few points of the commission’s -report. Three of its members (Senators Carter and Clay and Representative -Overstreet) have _passed_--not off the edge of life but to official -retirement, or, maybe, to the political morgue. They, in time, may -be able to “come back.” The Man on the Ladder has heard varied -opinions--some of them decidedly variegated, too--anent the probability -of those three gentlemen coming back. Personally I am not sufficiently -acquainted with their official service careers to justify the expression -of an opinion of them. If, while in office, they directed their efforts -and activities to a service of their constituents and the interests of -the people in general, let us hope they may “come back.” On the other -hand, if while in office they were but working models of the so-called -“practical” politician, then, as a matter both of self-respect and of -duty, we must hope they stay in the morgue. - -“The ‘practical’ politician is the _working_ politician.” - -Well, yes, that may be. But most of those within range of my vision from -the ladder top appear to be devoting their most active and strenuous -industry to “working” the people. - -No, I do not like that type of human animal popularly designated as -a “practical” politician. Especially do I not like him in public -office--executive, legislative or judicial--elective or appointive, and I -have run the lines on a good many of them. Most of them when in positions -of official power and _opportunity_ act as if their consciences had been -handed down in original packages direct from their jungle ancestors. At -any rate most of those in positions of official power and authority seem -to follow one working rule, and follow it, too, both industriously and -consistently. - -_To conceal one theft, steal more._ - -The typical “practical” politician, when holding down a public office, -usually holds-up the people. They pose and talk as courageous patriots -and _large_ thinkers. Under close scrutiny, however, most of them will -show up or show down merely as _discreet private or personal interest -liars_. - -But I have permitted my field glass to ramble from the specific to the -general. Whether the three _passed_ members of the 1906-7 commission -are politically dead or taking only a temporarily enforced rest, the -situation is one which suggests the propriety of that subdued and -respectful tone one is expected to use when standing by as a friend is -lowered to an enforced rest. - -I shall now offer my strictures of a few recommendations made by the -1906-7 commission and of some of the arguments the commission’s report -offers to their support. - -The first objection I find to the report of this Penrose-Overstreet -Commission is that several of its paragraphs indicate that the commission -appears to have been afflicted with Mr. Hitchcock’s current ailment--an -ingrown idea that some action, legislative or other, must be taken -in order to curb the circulation growth and keep down the piece or -copy-weight of periodicals. To The Man on the Ladder such an idea is not -only faulty to the point of foolishness but it violates long established -and successfully applied business practices in the transportation and -handling of goods or commodities, whatever their character. The idea, -it would appear, is based upon an oft-repeated but nevertheless false -statement of fact, to the effect that the government is losing money in -the carriage and handling of second-class mail at the cent-a-pound rate. - -The falsity of that statement I shall conclusively prove to the reader -later, if he will be so indulgent as to follow me. Here I shall say only -this: If the government has ever lost a cent in rail or other haulage -and handling of second-class mail matter, such loss has been _wholly the -result of excessive payments to railroads, Star Route and ocean carriers, -to political rather than business management and to permitted raiding of -the postal revenues in various ways--from overmanning the official and -service force to downright thievery_. - -I have adverted on a previous page to the stealings of the Machen-Beavers -gang, exposed by the investigation of Joseph L. Bristow, and a stench -still exhales from the Star Route lootings exposed some years previous. -In the Star Route case, the waste--a more fitting word is thievery--the -stealing was largely effected through the medium of “joker”-loaded or -unnecessary contracts, the contracts running to the advantage of some -thief who “stood in” with the party in power. - -Nor has all the Star Route grafting and stealing been stopped, though -both Postmaster General Hitchcock and his recent predecessor, Mr. George -B. Cortelyou, deserve great praise for having eliminated much of it, -and Mr. Hitchcock’s active, continued efforts to further clean out that -Augean stable must command the hearty approval of every honest citizen. -But, as just stated, some of the original graft and steal still lingers. - -Last year I personally investigated one Star Route. It was a twenty-mile -drive (round trip). The contractor was receiving $600 or more a year -for the service. What he paid the villager to cover the route with his -patriarchal team I do not know. The villager, however, picked up a little -on the side by hauling over his drive local parcels, some merchandise and -an occasional passenger. I watched his mail deliveries to the village -office for ten days. On no day did the revenue to the government _exceed -sixty cents, and on seven of the ten days it was below twenty cents. One -day it was but ten cents._ - -In this connection it should also be mentioned that the village which -that Star Route was presumed to serve was on a regular rural route and -received fully 95% of its mail by special carrier service connecting with -a trunk line station only six miles away. - -But to return to my objection to the manifest efforts of the Postmaster -General and of recommendations in the Penrose-Overstreet report to -adopt methods or secure legislation to restrain increase in both the -circulation and the copy-weight of periodicals. Of course if the -government really sustains a loss on the carriage and handling of -second-class matter, the loss would be greater on 160 tons than on 80 -tons. I, however, contend, and shall later prove, that--barring waste, -payroll loafing and stealage--the government now transports and handles -second-class matter at a profit. - -Postmaster General Hitchcock, so far as I have found time to read -him, has made no particular effort to restrict or limit the piece or -copy-weight of periodicals. He was, seemingly at least, so occupied -in his efforts to “get” a few periodicals through the means of that -unconstitutional “rider” of his that he had little or no time for -anything else. But the 1906-7 commission boldly advocated a _penalizing_ -of periodical _weight_ for copies mailed to piece, or individual, -addresses. - -A table of graduated increases is given and some very peculiar argument, -to put it mildly, is presented to support the recommended scale, or -system, of weight penalization. Following I quote from pages 28-29 of the -commission’s report. The italics are mine: - - The rate then for copy service would be one-eighth of a cent per - copy not to exceed _2 ounces_, one-quarter cent per copy not - to exceed 4 ounces, and one-half cent for each additional 4 - ounces or fraction thereof to be prepaid in money as second-class - postage is now paid. Tabulated, it would appear thus: - - Not exceeding-- Cents. - 2 ounces ⅛ - 4 ounces ¼ - 8 ounces ¾ - 12 ounces 1¼ - 16 ounces 1¾ - 20 ounces 2¼ - 24 ounces 2¾ - 28 ounces 3¼ - Etc., etc. - - The net result calculated by the pound will be, upon the - periodicals above the average weight of 4 ounces and not - exceeding a pound, a change from 1 to about 1¾ cents per pound. - For heavier periodicals the rate would average 1⅞ _cents per - pound_ for those weighing 2 pounds, and increasing by an - _infinitesimal_ fraction with the proportion of weight above 4 - ounces but never reaching, no matter how heavy the periodical may - grow, the limit of 2 cents per pound. - - While the actual increase of rate upon the _normal_ periodical, - especially in view of the publisher’s right at all times to - send it by bulk at a cent a pound, would be so small as not to - upset his business, there would be two advantages to the postal - revenue, one at each end of the line. - - (1) The making of a definite minimum charge for the handling of - the individual piece. (2) Increase of revenue as the periodical - grows heavier, due to the fact that the initial rate of - one-quarter cent for 4 ounces is _less than the incremental rate_. - - This system of payment by the individual piece with a minimum - limit of weight and an increased rate for each increment of - weight is _common to the postal systems of the entire world_ - with the exceptions of Canada and the United States. The only - difference is that in the present project the incremental rate is - higher than the initial rate. - - Although this graduated scale would appear to be more favorable - to the smaller periodical than to the large one, it must be borne - in mind that the periodical weighing _less than 1 ounce_ and of - necessity paying the initial rate of _one-quarter cent_ would - be paying a rate (2 cents per pound), slightly greater than the - large periodical. This increase upon the periodical weighing less - than 2 ounces finds ample justification in the obvious fact that - the expense of handling second class matter is not to be measured - simply by gross weight. On the contrary, as was pointed out by - the representatives of the publishers in comparing the cost of - handling second-class with that of first-class mail, such expense - is to be measured by the number of pieces handled and frequency - of handling. _A pound of periodicals which is made up of 10 or - 12 or, as is sometimes the case, 30 or 40 separate pieces, each - one of which requires a separate course of handling and delivery, - can not with justice be treated as the equivalent of a pound - of matter which requires but two, or, at most, four courses of - handling and delivery._ - - This increase would be offset, moreover, for the _normal_ - periodical weighing less than 2 ounces, the country weekly, by - the retention of the free county privilege. - -The foregoing is substantially the commission’s _whole_ argument, save -a little more talk about “normal” periodicals, “normal” weeklies, and a -statement to the effect that all countries, other than the United States -and Canada, increase the piece, or copy, postage rate as the weight of -the periodical increases--that is, these other countries do not give a -_flat_ pound, gram or other unit of weight rate. - -Now, I shall briefly state my objections to some points in the above -quotation--those points I have italicized. - -The reader, however, must bear in mind that the scale of increase in -mail rates above reprinted applies _only to single copies_--to copies -mailed to individual addresses. For copies mailed in _bulk_, in packages -weighing not less than ten pounds, to some agent of the publisher or -other individual, to be taken up by the agent or individual at train or -at central postoffice, the commission recommended the cent-a-pound rate. - -In adverse criticism of the commission’s argument for penalizing -_weight_, because all foreign countries do so, I need but say: - -1. There are more high-class newspapers--papers which, necessarily, have -weight--published in this country _than is published in all the rest of -the world_. - -2. There are four times as many of what the 1906-7 commission--also -Postmaster General Hitchcock--would class as “periodicals” published in -this country _as are published in all the rest of the world_. - -Sounds “loud,” does it? Well, look into the matter. Maybe I am mistaken. -If so, it is a mistake made after thirty years of study of the conditions -controlling in my country--in _your_ country--and of the prices paid in -other countries for _efficient, satisfactory service_. - -3. Those “other countries”--the stronger ones, at any rate--either _own_ -or _absolutely control_ the railroads which transport their mails. In -some of them, rail transportation of mails--also of government officials, -the service personnel of the army and the navy, and of other government -“weight”--are _carried free of charge_. - -4. Those “other countries,” of which so much is said and written -ostensibly for our enlightenment, have gone through the mill--their -peoples have been _ground fine_ in mills of sophistry and special -pleadings, to which, _for fifty years_, we have been carrying our grists. - -5. Those “other countries” are making their mail service a source of -_governmental revenue_. - -The people of this country, today, no more expect a revenue from the -government’s postal service than they expect it from the War, the Navy, -the Interior, the Judicial or other service department. - -The people want _service_, not revenues, from any federal service -department. - -And you gentlemen who vote away the people’s money for services _not_ -rendered--which you _know_ will not be rendered when you vote to “burn” -the money--will, before those independent periodicals are through with -the recent sand-bagging attempt to censor or control their _published -thought_--you will learn, I mean to say, that people want _service_ -not revenues; that they want “duty,” as an engineer would name it, not -a _coached_ prattle about B. T. U. or other legislative and official -thermics. - -Now, let us look back at that quotation--at some of the points in it I -have italicized. - -First paragraph quoted: Aside from small country dailies--now carried by -mail to addresses inside the county of publication free--and fraternal -papers, Sunday School sheets and similar publications, there are few -periodicals published in this country which weigh two ounces or less. - -First paragraph following tabulation: “The rate would average 1⅞ cents -per pound” for periodicals weighing two pounds. - -A glance at the table shows that the piece or copy rate on a periodical -weighing 28 ounces is given as 3¼ cents. A periodical weighing two -pounds, or 32 ounces, would be charged a half cent more, or 3¾ cents for -mail carriage and delivery, instead of 2 cents as now. - -Second paragraph following the table, also in last paragraph quoted: -“Normal” periodicals. - -What is a “normal” periodical? Are the 4 or 8 page weeklies published in -the back counties and the small religious, college, Sunday school and -fraternal sheets that weigh two ounces or less “normal” periodicals? Are -the dailies of our large cities, weighing from four to twelve ounces, -“normal” periodicals? Is the Saturday Evening Post, weighing from ten to -twenty ounces a “normal” periodical? - -Are any of the periodicals in the following descriptive list “normal?” - -The newspapers and other periodicals named in the following tabulation -are those I could find within convenient, likewise hurried, reach. I -tried to get them as near concurrent dates as I could. The tabulation -will show the reader the proportion of advertising to body matter, -printed in the different periodicals on the dates named. - -Readers particularly interested in the data presented in the tabulation -should, however, understand that for the newspapers listed, no account -was taken of the “write-up” or “promotion” advertising printed as reading -matter. Some newspapers, at certain times, carry a considerable amount of -such paid matter while the standard monthly and weekly periodicals carry -little or none of it at any time: - - ===================+=======+==========+===========+===========+========== - | | No. of | Reading |Advertising| Gross - NAME OF | Date | Pages or | Matter, | Matter, | Weight - PERIODICAL. | of | Columns. | Pages or | Pages or | of the - | Issue.| [2] |Columns.[3]|Columns.[4]Periodical. - -------------------+-------+----------+-----------+-----------+---------- - NEWSPAPERS. | | | | | - CHICAGO. | | | | | - _The Examiner._ | | | | | - Sunday Edition |6-11-11| 392 Cols.| 171½ Cols.| 220⅔ Cols.| 15 ozs. - Daily Edition |6-8-11 | 126 ” | 77⅔ ” | 48⅓ ” | 4½ ” - _Record Herald._ | | | | | - Sunday Edition |6-11-11| 448 ” | 286½ ” | 161½ ” | 18 ” - Supplement[5] | | 20 pp. | 14 pp. | 6 pp. | - Daily Edition |6-8-11 | 126 Cols.| 77⅔ Cols.| 48½ Cols.| 5 ” - _The Tribune._ | | | | | - Sunday Edition |6-11-11| 490 ” | 212⅓ ” | 277⅔ ” | 20 ” - Supplement | | 30 pp. | 22¼ pp. | 7¾ pp. | - Daily Edition |6-8-11 | 168 Cols.| 86⅓ Cols.| 81⅔ Cols.| 6½ ” - _Inter Ocean._ | | | | | - Sunday Edition |6-11-11| 316 ” | 242⅚ ” | 73⅙ ” | 12 ” - Daily Edition |6-8-11 | 84 ” | 59½ ” | 24½ ” | 4 ” - _The American._ |6-8-11 | 126 ” | 65 ” | 61 ” | 4½ ” - _Daily News._ |6-8-11 | 210 ” | 87 ” | 123 ” | 7½ ” - _Daily Journal._ |6-8-11 | 112 ” | 63⅓ ” | 48⅔ ” | 4½ ” - _The Evening Post._|6-8-11 | 84 ” | 64⅔ ” | 19⅓ ” | 3¾ ” - BOSTON. | | | | | - _The Globe._ | | | | | - Sunday Edition |6-11-11| 720 ” | 399 ” | 321 ” | 25 ” - Supplement | | 28 pp. | 20½ pp. | 7½ pp. | - Daily Edition |6-12-11| 128 Cols.| 102½ Cols.| 25½ Cols.| 4 ” - NEW YORK CITY. | | | | | - _The American._ | | | | | - Sunday Edition |6-11-11| 392 ” | 221⅘ ” | 170⅕ ” | 12½ ” - _The Herald._ | | | | | - Sunday Edition |6-11-11| 728 ” | 373 ” | 355 ” | 23½ ” - Daily Edition |6-12-11| 114 ” | 73⅘ ” | 40⅕ ” | 4 ” - PHILADELPHIA. | | | | | - _The Enquirer._ | | | | | - Sunday Edition |6-11-11| 576 ” | 339⅓ ” | 236⅔ ” | 18½ ” - Daily Edition |6-12-11| 128 ” | 65⅚ ” | 62⅙ ” | 4 ” - PITTSBURG. | | | | | - _The Gazette Times._ | | | | - Sunday Edition |6-11-11| 504 ” | 358¾ ” | 145¼ ” | 15¾ ” - Supplement | | 20 pp. | 15½ pp. | 4½ pp. | - Daily Edition |6-12-11| 84 Cols.| 56 Cols.| 29 Cols.| 3 ” - CLEVELAND. | | | | | - _The Plain Dealer._| | | | | - Sunday Edition |6-11-11| 512 ” | 292 ” | 230 ” | 16½ ” - Daily Edition |6-13-11| 112 ” | 71 ” | 41 ” | 3¾ ” - CINCINNATI. | | | | | - _The Enquirer._ | | | | | - Daily Edition |6-13-11| 112 ” | 66⅘ ” | 45⅕ ” | 4 ” - LOUISVILLE. | | | | | - _The Courier | | | | | - Journal._ | | | | | - Daily Edition |6-10-11| 112 ” | 91⅔ ” | 20⅓ ” | 4 ” - ST. LOUIS. | | | | | - _Post Dispatch._ | | | | | - Sunday Edition |6-11-11| 400 ” | 261⅓ ” | 138⅔ ” | 12 ” - _Globe Democrat._ | | | | | - Daily Edition |6-13-11| 112 ” | 67⅔ ” | 44⅓ ” | 4 ” - KANSAS CITY. | | | | | - _The Star._ | | | | | - Daily Edition |6-15-11| 112 ” | 61⅓ ” | 50⅔ ” | 4 ” - SAN FRANCISCO. | | | | | - _The Chronicle._ | | | | | - Daily Edition |6-10-11| 126 ” | 86⅘ ” | 39⅕ ” | 4½ ” - LOS ANGELES. | | | | | - _The Times._ | | | | | - Sunday Edition |6-4-11 |1170 Cols.| 586½ Cols.| 583½ Cols.| 35½ Ozs. - Supplement | | 30 pp. | 24½ pp. | 5½ pp. | - MONTHLY AND WEEKLY | | | | | - PERIODICALS. | | | | | - _Everybody’s Mag._ |4-1911 | 316 ” | 146 ” | 170 ” | 22 ” - ” ” |7-1911 | 284 ” | 140 ” | 144 ” | 20 ” - _Cosmopolitan_ ” |3-1911 | 266 ” | 144¼ ” | 120¾ ” | 18 ” - ” ” |7-1911 | 288 ” | 146½ ” | 141½ ” | 17 ” - _McClure’s_ ” |6-1911 | 244 ” | 113½ ” | 130½ ” | 12 ” - _American_ ” |6-1911 | 224 ” | 132½ ” | 91½ ” | 15 ” - _Pearson’s_ ” |6-1911 | 206 ” | 143 ” | 63 ” | 16½ ” - _Sat. Evening Post_|5-20-11| 68 ” | 32½ ” | 35½ ” | 9 ” - ” ” ” |6-3-11 | 80 ” | 33¼ ” | 46¾ ” | 10 ” - _Ladies’ Home | | | | | - Jour’l_ |6-19-11| 84 ” | 52½ ” | 31½ ” | 16 ” - _The Literary | | | | | - Digest_ |5-13-11| 72 ” | 37⅙ ” | 34⅚ ” | 8 ” - _Inland Printer_ |3-1911 | 176 ” | 68½ ” | 87½ ” | 24 ” - _Publishers’ | | | | | - Weekly_ |3-18-11| 136 ” | 62⅓ ” | 73⅔ ” | 7½ ” - _Review of Reviews_|6-1911 | 268 ” | 129 ” | 139 ” | 17 ” - _Scribner’s | | | | | - Magazine_ |6-1911 | 250 ” | 134 ” | 116 ” | 16 ” - _Harpers’_ ” |6-1911 | 284 ” | 164 ” | 120 ” | 21 ” - _Popular_ ” |4-10-11| 286 ” | 226 ” | 42 ” | 14 ” - _The Argosy_ |5-19-11| 246 ” | 194 ” | 52 ” | 12 ” - _The All Story_ |4-19-11| 228 ” | 194 ” | 34 ” | 11 ” - _The New Magazine_ |5-19-11| 200 ” | 192 ” | 8 ” | 10 ” - ===================+=======+==========+===========+===========+========== - -Next to last paragraph: Note the statement that “the periodical weighing -less than one ounce” must “of necessity” pay the “initial rate of -one-quarter cent” or “two cents per pound.” - -The initial rate as given in the table is but one-eighth of a cent. -That would make a per copy mail rate of two cents per pound, whereas an -initial rate of one-quarter cent per copy would make four-page sheets and -leaflets “normal” periodicals weighing less than one ounce pay at a rate -of four cents per pound. - -Next, note the _crossed_ argument in the paragraph just referred to. The -commission seems to accept the argument made by the publishers--that it -cost less to handle a pound of mail made up of but one to four pieces -than it costs to handle a pound made up of from ten to fifty pieces. That -is a fact which admits of no controversy, is it not? - -Then why did this commission advise the adoption of a flat rate of -increase of two cents a pound (one-half cent for each four ounces), as -the mail rate on periodicals weighing more than four ounces. - -If the argument of the paragraph just cited is sound--and it certainly -is sound--a just graduation of the mail charge for the carriage and -piece handling of the heavier periodicals should scale downwards and not -continue a flat rate, especially not continue at a flat rate on increase -in weight that is greatly excessive, as two cents a pound certainly is. - -I shall speak further of periodical weights later in connection with -railway mail pay and car rentals. The report of this 1906-7 commission -in various other paragraphs manifests a clear intent to restrict and, -if possible, to curtail the expansion of second-class mail matter, not -only by curbing the enlargement of periodicals in size by increasing -the second-class rate and by penalizing added weight, but by putting -restrictions upon the periodical publisher which must necessarily make it -more difficult for him to increase his circulation. These restrictions, -so far as yet expressed, apply to the publisher’s sample copy privileges -and to the amount of advertising a periodical may carry. - -On page 48 of its report the commission, speaking of methods to curb a -periodical’s growth in both circulation and weight, advises that the -following be covered into the law in lieu of certain phrasings now in the -statutes and which, the commission asserts, have proved quite inadequate -in restraining periodicals from expanding their circulation beyond a -point which they are pleased to call “normal.” They advise that the law -“enforce the requirement that the periodical may be issued and circulated -_only in response to a public demand_.” - -In the draft of a bill which this 1906-7 commission recommends become a -law, the following are the means by which circulation “only in response -to a public demand” will be attained: - - (_a_) By reducing to a _minimum the sample copy, which is one - of the main agencies of inflation_. The legitimate periodical - employing this means only to a slight extent will not be at all - affected. - - (_b_) By abolishing all premiums, whether of printed matter or - merchandise. - - (_c_) By either prohibiting all combination offers, as, for - example, a set of books with a magazine, or requiring that in all - cases a price shall be set upon both elements of the combination - and that the full advertised price of the periodical be paid. - - (_d_) By requiring that the publication shall print - conspicuously, not only its regular subscription price, but any - reduced price at which it is offered in clubbing arrangements and - the like. - - (_e_) By providing that all copies which the postmaster, in the - exercise of due diligence shall be unable to deliver, shall be - returned with a postage-due stamp for an amount equal to double - the third-class rate. In other words, charge the publisher the - third-class rate both for the forwarding and the returning of any - copy sent otherwise than in response to an actual demand. - -To The Man on the Ladder the commission’s talk, advising the enforcement -of “the requirements that the periodical may be issued and circulated -only in _response to a public demand_” (page 40 of report), reads much -like one of two things--either the inconsidered or ill-considered prattle -of persons who want to say _something_, or the argument of _ulterior -motive_--of a covert _purpose_ to restrict, to cripple, to _kill_ the -greatest instrument for the education of its _adult_ citizens which -any nation of earth has to date discovered--an instrument that is -economically within easy reach of its exchequer. - -How much of a “public demand” does the reader think there would have been -for the reaper, for the thrashing machine, for the case-hardened, steel -shared plow, for the sewing machine, for the triple expansion engine, for -the traveling crane, for any brand of breakfast food, of ham, of flour, -books--in short, how much of “public demand” would there have been for -any of the mechanical inventions, for any of the multitude of betterments -in the housing, clothing and subsisting of our people, _had not that -“public demand” been created_? No one wants anything, however excellent -it may be, until his attention is called to it and he believes it will -_aid him or her_, as the case may be, that it will lighten the stress of -labor or increase its product, or in other lines and directions improve -the conditions of their lives, industrially or otherwise. Ninety-nine -per cent of “public opinion,” as to whether or not that public wants or -does not want this, that or the other thing is _influenced_--is promoted -by what it _senses_ in personal contact with the thing or by what it -hears said of it or _reads of it_. - -That statement is as true of the members of the 1906-7 commission and -of Postmaster General Hitchcock as it is of Mr. William Mossback of -Mossville, Connecticut. The “demand” of each of us--our _desire_ to -possess this or that--is prompted--_is created_--by what we see, hear, -feel, taste, smell or _read_ of it. We stand at the head of the nations -of earth for progress in the various fields of mechanical improvement, -from kitchen utensils to laundry equipment, from the plow to the -electric crane. What is true of the progress of our people through the -adoption of labor-saving mechanical devices, implements and machinery -is correspondingly true in various other fields of progress--a progress -largely the result of promoted “demand” for the better things, for the -improvements of which our people have _read_ in our newspapers and in our -monthly and weekly publications--yes, read of in the advertisements and -in descriptive write-ups of such periodicals, if you will have it so. - -So this prattle about issuing a periodical “only to public demand” is not -only prattle--it is not only unsound and unbusinesslike both in theory -and service practice, but it is also a _stealthy attempt to garrote the -facts_, likewise an attempt to subject the great publishing interests of -the country to the _rankest kind of injustice_. - -How is the publisher to secure additional subscribers if he be denied -mailing privilege to sample copies? - -True, the bill recommended by this commission would allow the publisher -to mail sample copies to the extent of ten per cent of his subscribed -issue. Mr. Hitchcock, however, as I shall shortly show, proposes to -exclude _all_ sample copies from the mails. - -The following is quoted from Mr. Hitchcock’s 1910 report and shows that -the Postoffice Department, as at present directed, is determined to curb -the growth and development of periodical literature in this country in -every way possible--ways that scruple not at _biased rulings and grossly -unjust distinctions_. In the following Mr. Hitchcock is after what he is -pleased to designate as an “abuse of the sample-copy privilege.” - -In order to discontinue the privilege of mailing sample copies at the -cent-a-pound rate, legislation in substantially the following form is -suggested: - - That so much of the act approved March 3, 1885 (23 Stat., 387), - as relates to publications of the second class be amended to read - as follows: - - “That hereafter all publications of the second-class, except as - provided by Section 25 of the act of March 3, 1879 (20 Stat., - 361), _when sent to subscribers_ by the publishers thereof and - from the known offices of publication, or when sent from news - agents to subscribers thereto or to other news agents for the - purpose of sale, _shall be entitled to transmission through the - mails at one cent a pound or fraction thereof_, such postage to - be prepaid as now provided by law.” - -In drafting the above recommended legislation Mr. Hitchcock no doubt was -greatly assisted by the luminous suggestions, advice, analyses, etc., -of his Third Assistant, Mr. Britt, to be found on pages 331 and 332 of -the 1910 report--which suggestions, advice, etc., is based largely on -“estimates”--“estimates” which any student or careful observer of the -Postoffice Department methods of figuring and accounting will readily -discern are, in several particulars, somewhat “influenced,” if not, -indeed, “fixed.” - -Up to January 1, 1908, periodical publishers were allowed to mail sample -copies of any issue in number equal to that of their subscribed lists. -Acting on the recommendation of the Penrose-Overstreet Commission, no -doubt approved by Mr. Hitchcock, the mailing privilege on sample copies -was cut down, January 1, 1908, to 10 per cent of the subscribed issue. -Now comes Mr. Hitchcock with a bit of recommended legislation, as quoted -above, which would, if favorably acted upon by Congress, deny the mailing -privilege to _all_ sample copies at the cent-a-pound rate. - -Though not pertinent to the subject immediately under consideration, -I desire here to call the reader’s attention again to a point in Mr. -Hitchcock’s recommended legislation as quoted above--a point which is -conspicuously worthy of a second notice and to which I have called -attention on a previous page. - -Mr. Hitchcock’s report, from which the foregoing piece of recommended -legislation is quoted, bears date of December 1, 1910. Keep that in mind. -In that recommendation he would grant a _continuance_ of the cent-a-pound -postage rate on periodicals “sent to subscribers,” but to such only. -No sample copies are to be carried and handled, mind you, at the -cent-a-pound rate after Mr. Hitchcock’s recommendation becomes law--that -is, if it ever does become law. - -Now, the subscribed mailings of any periodical--newspaper or other--are -piece or single-copy mailings, which are admittedly the most expensive or -costly to the government to transport and handle. - -Yet Mr. Hitchcock recommends that _the cent-a-pound rate shall continue -to be extended to such single copies_--a most just and sensible -recommendation. - -But Mr. Hitchcock when he wrote that bit of recommended legislation was -thinking--and thinking only, if indeed he gave the subject any _personal_ -thought at all--of curbing the circulation growth of periodicals and, as -a means to that end, recommends the exclusion of all sample copies from -the pound-rate privilege. - -Read carelessly or superficially that bit of suggested legislation in -itself does not appear to have anything to do with sample copies. On -second and more careful reading, however, its purpose becomes clear. If -the cent-a-pound rate is to be allowed only to regularly _subscribed_ -copies of a periodical, then _all_ sample copies must be mailed, if -mailed at all, at the third-class rate--_must pay eight cents a pound_. - -When it comes to covering or cloaking ulterior purpose or intent in -legislation, Mr. Hitchcock is an expert, it would appear from the -rider he so strenuously tried to put astride the 1911-12 postoffice -appropriation bill, and from the foregoing as well as some others of -his suggestions to Congress. But the point to which I more especially -desire to call to the reader’s attention when I obtruded that last -preceding quotation at a point where it interrupted a consideration of -the Penrose-Overstreet Commission’s report was this:-- - -As previously stated, Mr. Hitchcock’s 1910 report bears date, December -1, 1910. On that date, as appears from the last quotation, he desired -a law that would bar all sample copies from the mails at the present -second-class rate. It also appears that Mr. Hitchcock at the date -named--December, 1, 1910--desired that all periodicals issued, except -sample copies, _be carried, as now, at the cent-a-pound rate_. - -Somewhere around February 1, 1911--_barely two months after he makes -that cent-a-pound recommendation_--we hear Mr. Hitchcock assertively -declaring, and contentiously arguing, that it costs the government _9.23 -cents per pound_ to transport and handle second-class matter. - -What happened to his mental gear in so short a time to induce so _loud_ a -change in his mind? - -Or was it a change of mind? On page 328 of that 1910 departmental report, -Mr. Britt, Third Assistant Postmaster General, who has charge of the -accounting division of the service, makes the bold statement that it cost -the government $62,438,644.70 more to carry and handle the second-class -mail last year than was received for the service. Being an “expert” -figurer Mr. Britt found no difficulty in arriving at that absurd 9.23 -cents a pound as the _actual cost_ to the government of carrying and -handling second-class mail. On pages 7 and 8 of the report, Mr. Hitchcock -himself gives publicity to a conviction that the cent-a-pound rate -should be increased on certain periodicals--_the magazines_--generously -suggesting that the increased rate be confined to their “advertising -pages” only. In the loosely worded “rider” he carelessly--_or -purposely_--uses the word “sheets” in place of the word “pages” as used -in his report. - -Still, in face of his Third Assistant’s lofty figuring, the conclusions -of which are announced on page 328 of the report, and of his own -statement of the “reasons for an increase of rate” on periodicals of the -_magazine class_, for carrying and handling their “advertising pages”--in -face of these statements, how did his mental gear so slip, or “jam,” -as to induce him to recommend, on page 35 of this _same_ report, the -enactment of a law continuing the cent-a-pound rate on _all_ periodicals -mailed, except sample copies? - -Did he intentionally double cross both himself and his Third Assistant -or, in his anxiety to curb the circulation growth of periodicals, _did he -forget_ what he and Mr. Britt had said? - -What’s the answer? - -I give it up. However it may appear to the reader, to The Man on the -Ladder it appears that Mr. Hitchcock in his 1910 report has written, -figured and “recommended” himself into a situation that is far more -humoresque than it is consistent or informative. - -Returning to the report of the 1906-7 commission, I will mention a few -more of its objectionable recommendations. - -As previously stated, the Penrose-Overstreet Commission recommended the -enactment of a law requiring that newspapers and other periodicals devote -not more than one-half their space to advertising matter (Section 3 of -recommended bill, page 50 of report). Thus, in pressing an ill-conceived -purpose to restrain the growth of circulation and increase of weight of -monthly and weekly periodicals, they would, it appears, cut into that -division of their published matter _which produces the greatest revenue -to the government for carriage and handling_. - -The truth of the last clause preceding has been so frequently and -conclusively shown as to require no argument to convince the veriest -tyro in knowledge of federal postoffice affairs and the sources of its -revenues that the statement made is true. Elsewhere in this volume, -however, the truth of the statement will be found fully established. - -I confine the application of the statement to monthly and weekly -periodicals, to such as are of general circulation. It of course applies, -but in lesser degree, to newspapers. The advertising matter published -in the newspapers is largely of local character, while that published -in our high class monthly magazines and weeklies, in trade journals, -etc., is largely general in character. The advertisements published by -the former are chiefly those of local merchants and manufacturers and of -local, commercial, financial and other interests. On the other hand the -advertisements carried by the class of monthly and weekly periodicals -indicated represent persons, companies and interests widely scattered -throughout the country. Because of this phase in the character of the -advertisements carried, the newspapers advertising space is not nearly so -large a contributor to the government’s revenues from first, third and -fourth class mail carriage and handling as is the advertising space of -our high-class monthly and weekly periodicals. - -It is true that this 1906-7 commission makes a somewhat _strained_ effort -to assign two chief reasons for its recommendation to curtail the space -which publishers of periodicals of all kinds may devote to advertising -matter. - -1. The commissioners appear to have been carrying around with them -a stern purpose to suppress what they designate as the “mail order” -publications, devoted largely to advertising the wares carried in stock -by one or, at most, a few firms that individually or jointly pay for -publishing the “weekly” or “monthly”, as the case may be. - -There can be no question that there is a large number of such alleged -periodicals which have been issued and distributed through the mails -for the _plainly_ manifest purpose of advertising the merchandise of -those who pay for publishing them. I believe, however, that there are -fewer of such fake periodicals enjoying the mail service at second-class -rates today than there were ten or fifteen years ago. The Postoffice -Department, it must be said to its credit, has “disciplined” a large -number of them out of existence or, at any rate, out of the second-class -mail rate privilege. - -But even if there are more of such fraud and fake periodicals today than -formerly, any fair-minded man must agree that it is a very rank injustice -to punish--to penalize by harsh restrictions and increased mailing -rates--the thousands of legitimate and highly serviceable periodicals for -the sins of a comparatively few alleged publications which have abused or -are abusing the second-class mail rate privilege. - -The department, with its large force of inspectors and investigators, -should be able to weed out and exclude such “fixed” periodicals. If -it cannot do so it appears to The Man on the Ladder that it would not -require a very large amount of industrious, strenuous thinking on the -part of six robust, competent legislators to frame a law that would reach -the _guilty_ without punishing or crippling the innocent. - -2. This commission was also, it would appear, a stickler over -_compliance_ with the postal statutes--statutes (those now largely -governing) enacted in 1879 and 1885, therefore so antiquated in their -wording in several particulars as to be a misfit when attempt is made to -apply them to the vast business and varied character of periodicals today. - -The statute of March 3, 1879, in its definition of what the law would -recognize as a periodical says, among other things, that a periodical -must be “_originated and published for the dissemination of information -of a public character, or devoted to literature, the arts, sciences, or -to some industry_.” - -This portion of the statutory definition the Commission seems to have -entertained a special grudge against. At any rate it expatiated at -considerable length in its report, against the inadequacy, lack of -definiteness, etc., of the definition as given. The commission’s chief -objection seems to center around the fact that space in periodicals -should not be devoted to “commercial ends.” - -On page 35 of the report the commission says: - - “What was in the mind of the author (of the 1879 statute), is - clear enough. He wished to prohibit the misuse of the privileges - for _commercial ends_ as distinguished from the devotion to - literature, science, and the rest.” - -It is possible that they knew what was in the mind of the author of -that ’79 statute better than I know it, or than Jim Smith or Reuben -Peachtree knows it. It is also possible that they did _not_ know the mind -of that lawbuilder any better. While the ’79 statute does not, in many -particulars, meet present conditions as they should be met, in defining -a publication that should be recognized as a periodical, it requires a -supercritical or finicky mind to find much fault with it. - -A periodical must be “originated and published for the dissemination of -_information_ of a public character, devoted to _literature_, the _arts_, -sciences or some _special industry_.” - -Now, when one considers the broad application of the word “literature,” -the word “arts,” comprehending as it does not only the mechanical and -liberal or polite arts, but also _business_, commercial, mercantile -and others, including the science of business management, and the term -“special industry” and the broad field covered by it--when one considers -the broad application of those words, it is a fairly legitimate inference -that it was “in the mind” of the writer when drafting that ’79 statute -_to give a broad meaning_ and range of service to the publications he -intended should be classed as periodicals. - -In this connection it is pertinent to ask why periodical publications -should not serve, either in their advertising pages or in their “body -pages,” devoted to fiction and articles on political conditions, -economics, history, the lives and deeds of men, forests and forestry, -mills, mines, factory, farm and a vast array of other features, phases -and conditions--why, I ask, should our periodicals not give aid by giving -space to the great mercantile, manufacturing, financial, agricultural and -other interests in this country--_interests which, collectively, have -built up a commerce more vast today than that of any other nation of -earth_? - -Why should not this vast commerce of ours--a commerce in which every man, -woman and child of our people is directly or indirectly interested--be -aided and served in every legitimate way by our periodicals? Will some -_politically_ living member of that Penrose-Overstreet Commission rise -and answer? Answer, not in hypercritical nothings, but _straightly and -bluntly_? - -Another immediately pertinent thing should be stated and another asked -here. Among the instruments which have contributed to build up the great -commerce of the nation, the American periodical must be recognized--_is -recognized_--as one of the most efficient. - -Why, then, this recent attempt to cripple, to curb, to lessen, its -influence and effort? And why, again, try to curtail its circulation and -usefulness by prattle about a postal “deficit” as reason for restrictive -departmental rulings and laws when, should such restrictive measures be -made effective, a shrinkage of postal revenues and a consequent increase -of deficit would, necessarily, result? - -Will some one whose thought-dome and _pockets_ are not full of ulterior -motives and postal service “deficits” please rise and answer? - -Returning to the 1906-7 commission’s agony over the definition in the -act of 1879 of what should be considered a periodical and, therefore, -entitled to mail entry as second-class matter, it appears that the -commissioners, in an apparent _anxious_ anxiety to prove their charge -against the author of the act for careless, ambiguous wording, quote a -lawyer’s opinion, or part of such opinion, in support of the carefully -framed-up “arguments” which it presents in didactic order, both before -and after the quotation. - -The quotation, it should be noted, is from the brief of the Postmaster -General’s counsel in Houghton vs. Payne, 194 U. S. 88, or so the -commission’s report designates it. - -The point of the commission’s argument appears to be: (1) that owing to -its loose, indefinite wording, the act of ’79 was of easy evasion when -it came to passing upon the kind and character of matter which might -be published in periodical form and mailed at second-class rates, and -(2) that, by reason of such loose and indefinite wording, periodical -publishers _have_ evaded the intent and purpose of the act--have abused -their second-class rate privileges--_have violated the law_. - -That, at any rate, I read as the point and purpose of the commission’s -somewhat labored, if not strained, argument. They quote (pages 37-38) -this counsel in support of that argument. I shall here reprint that -quotation as evidence that the publisher of “the universally recognized, -commonly accepted, and perfectly well understood periodical of everyday -speech” (see fifth paragraph of quotation) _have not violated the law nor -sought to do so_. - -The quoted opinion presents some italicized words, phrases and clauses -as it appears in the report. I have taken the liberty to further -italicize in reprinting it: - - “The next words only strengthen the same idea--originated and - published _for the dissemination of information of a public - character_. Not, it will be observed, that it shall _contain_ - information of a public character, but shall be published _for - the dissemination of_ such public information. Each of these - words is significant, and each gathers significance from its - neighbors. _Dissemination_ is here a word of strong color and - tinges all the rest. It indicates a dynamic process, an agency - at work carrying out a purpose for which it was originated and - set in motion. But strong as the word dissemination is, it is - fortified by the use of the word _information_. An agency for the - dissemination of knowledge for example, might better consist with - the idea of a library of books. But the word is not knowledge, - but _information_. The distinction is obvious. One has the sense - of accumulated stores; the other of _imparting the idea of things - for current needs_. One is, as it were, human experience at rest; - the other, human experience in action. One may be as stale as you - please; the other must be new, fresh, vital. A book, a volume, is - the medium of one; a journal the medium of the other. - - “Information,” says the Century Dictionary, “is timely or - specific knowledge respecting some _matter of interest or - inquiry_.” It is, as it were, vitalized knowledge; knowledge - imbued with life and activity. Nor when we come to the next phase - do we find any change in the idea--or devoted to literature, - the sciences, arts, or some special industry. _Devoted_ to - literature. Mark you, not that the publication shall be - literature or contain literature, but that it shall be devoted - to literature. What is meant by devoted? The Century Dictionary - puts it thus: To direct or apply chiefly or wholly to some - purpose, work, or use; to give or surrender completely, as to - some person or end, as to _devote_ oneself to art, literature, - or philanthropy. There again we have the idea of a permanent - continuing entity, a thing existing for a given purpose, - appearing regularly at such intervals (not greater than three - months), as may most effectually meet its needs, in the interest - of art, of science, or literature. - - Do we say that a book--a novel, a history, a drama--is devoted to - literature? It is not devoted to literature; _it is literature_, - and it would be an absurdity to speak of it as devoted to itself. - Such a locution would be merely a willful perversion of language. - - On the other hand, a review or a magazine may be said to be - devoted to literature with perfect naturalness and propriety. - For we rightly conceive of the review or magazine as one - definite recognizable entity--a continuing whole, originated for - a given purpose, and made up of similar parts having a common - object--literature, for example, or art, or science, or whatever - else it is to which the whole is devoted. - - Taking these words, originated and published for, dissemination, - information, devoted to, they all point to one conclusion. - They are, we repeat, strong and pregnant words. There is but - one concept consistent with them all. We confidently submit - that an attentive reading of the statute will leave no doubt - that what Congress constantly had in mind in the creating of - this privileged class of publications was the _universally - recognized, commonly accepted, and perfectly well understood - periodical of everyday speech_. - - In establishing the rate for newspapers and other periodical - publications Congress was not seeking to discriminate between - good literature and bad literature or to establish a _censorship - of the press with prizes for merit_. The thing it had in mind - was not the goodness or badness of the information disseminated, - but the _instrumentalities by which that dissemination might - be accomplished_. It was not thinking of all the accumulated - stores of sound and pure literature in the vast libraries of the - world, _but it was thinking of how the mind of an inquiring and - progressive people might be kept abreast of the times in all - departments of human thought and activity_. Congress did not - stand hesitating between a good book and a bad newspaper. - -Another position taken by the Penrose-Overstreet Commission, and one -which The Man on the Ladder strongly opposes, is that a periodical may -not or “must not consist wholly or substantially of fiction.” - -The words just quoted are exactly the words used in the sixth paragraph -of Section 2 of the bill the enactment of which this commission -recommended. - -Now, whatever their wit or wisdom, their eloquence or adroitness of -speech, their beauty of shape and apparel, or their loftiness of -position, that “recommendation” should recommend the personnel of that -commission, it seems to me, to some “wronghouse” for a long rest. Their -conclusion, their _lex_ recommendation and their “argument” in support, -taken collectively, are as thrilling, likewise amusing, as the point in -a story “where the woman is turned on and begins to short circuit the -hero,” putting it as near as I can remember in the language of Sewell -Ford, Bowers, or some other “enlivening writer.” - -Lest the reader think my adverse criticism of the commissioners too -harsh, or not in keeping with the dignity of the gentlemen composing that -1906-7 commission, I shall here quote a few of the paragraphs it presents -as basis for its recommendation. The reader will oblige by carefully -noting the italics. They are mine, and, following the quotation, I shall -comment on some of those italicized phrasings and statements: - - “Not only does the element of fiction constitute the (1) - _propulsive force behind the expansion of second-class matter_, - but it serves at the same time (2) _to undermine the main - statutory check upon the commercial exploitation of the second - class_. Being free to make up a periodical which contains nothing - but fiction, publishers find ready at hand the very thing with - which to interlard and _disguise the advertising matter_, for the - sake of which the publication is really issued. This they could - not do if the advertisement carrying text was required to be news - matter or critical matter of a current nature. (3) _Deprive the - mail-order journals of the right to cloak_ their advertising with - fiction and require them to publish something in the nature of - a newspaper or review with expensive news-gathering apparatus - and an editorial staff and (4) the _mail-order advertising - journal will completely disappear_. It lives only by reason of - two things, the cheapness of its fiction, with which it cloaks - its advertising, and the cheapness of the postal rate which that - fiction cloak enables it to obtain. - - “The distinction between the fiction-carrying periodical and the - nonfiction-carrying periodical (5) _is precisely the distinction - between a periodical fulfilling the purposes of the act and the - publication which, although periodical in its form, has no true - periodicity in its essence_. - - “Another consequence of the expansive power of fiction is - found in the confusion of the newspaper and magazine types and - the unhealthy exaggeration of the modern newspaper, as shown - especially in its Sunday editions. - - “The newspaper is rapidly being extended into the magazine field - at the sacrifice both of the postal revenue and the (6) _true - mission of the newspaper. The miscellaneous matter contained - in the Sunday issue of a newspaper must of necessity lack the - quality to make it socially and educationally valuable._” (Page - 37.) - - “No fiction necessarily involves the element of periodicity - or time publication which is involved in the very idea of a - newspaper or periodical. It follows, then, (7) _that the real - purpose of the act of March 3, 1879, namely, the diffusion in the - quickest possible way at the smallest possible cost of timely - information among the people, is perverted when the right to - that quick and inexpensive diffusion is extended to the form - of fiction_. But the periodical form devoted to fiction, or in - which fiction constitutes the predominant feature, is the very - form of periodical which serves to swell the second class. The - popular demand for fiction seems to be practically unlimited. - The temptation offered by the low postal rate to supply that - demand through the periodical form is a temptation impossible to - resist.” (Page 39.) - -I shall make my comment on the foregoing in the order that its italicized -_assertions_ are numbered. - -(1) The “element of fiction” has not and does _not_ constitute “the -propulsive force” stated. Was it “fiction” that propulsed the circulation -of _Everybody’s_? of _Pearson’s_? of _The Cosmopolitan_? of _The -American_? of _McClure’s_? of _The Saturday Evening Post_? of _The Inland -Printer_? of _The Progressive Printer_? or of scores of other monthly -and weekly periodicals whose publishers are independent enough to do -their own thinking and courageous enough to publish what they and their -representatives found to be the truth? - -Was “Frenzied Finance” fiction? - -Was Anna M. Tarbell’s exposures of Standard Oil fiction? - -Was the exposure of the Waters-Pierce Oil Company’s connection with -the great Senatorial “I” of Texas fiction? Was the shake-up of the “Big -Three” life insurance companies fiction? Were the hundreds of other -trenchant write-ups and exposures of wrong practices, of impositions, -of crookedness and _crooks_ in official, corporation and private life, -“fiction?” - -The man who reads and will attempt to answer any of those questions -affirmatively needs to have his brain dusted up--that is, of course, on -the presumption that he is not _paid for vocal gyrations_. - -And yet it was the telling write-ups and exposures of these independents -which greatly increased their circulation and, consequently, increased -second-class tonnage. - -(2) There is no such “main statutory check.” Moreover, the “commercial -exploitation” given in the advertising pages of our standard periodicals -to merchants, manufacturers, etc., is, as previously shown, not only just -and due to the vast commercial interests of the country, but it is safely -within both the letter and the intent of the statute. - -(3) As previously intimated, a sextet of experienced legislators who -could not frame up a law that would put the “mail-order journals” and -other abusers and abuses of the second-class mail-rate privilege out -of business without ruinously restricting and obstructing the vast -legitimate periodical interests of the country, that sextet ought to -do one of two things, either send their thought equipment to a vacuum -cleaner to get the dust blown off and then try again, or they should turn -the task over to some other legislators. There most certainly are scores -of legislators in the Senate and the House fully equipped to prepare such -a piece of legislation. - -(4) In comment under (3) I noted this “mail order advertising journal.” I -did so to indicate that the Penrose-Overstreet Commission, as it appears -to me, worked the “mail order” print stuff overtime for the purpose of -_reaching certain legitimate publications_. - -(5) There is no such distinction between “a fiction-carrying periodical -and the non-fiction carrying periodical” as that named. Fiction in a -periodical is just as permissible under the act as is the series of -war stories, or reminiscences, now (May, 1911), running in one of the -magazines; as in the series of articles on the civil war now running in -one of the Chicago newspapers, or as would be a series of articles on -“the Panama Canal,” on the “Development of the Reaping Machine,” on -“Treason in Our Senate,” on “The Depletion of American Forests,” on “The -Railroads’ Side of the Railway Mail Pay,” or on any other subject of the -historical past or active present. - -In fact, most of the current fiction, whether in serial or short-story, -published in the standard monthly, weekly and other periodicals of large -general circulation presents far more of _truth_ than do the stories, -reminiscences and “historical narratives about the civil war,” written -forty-five years after the events, and, if based on personal experience, -written from fading memory of the facts. - -(6) While one may agree with the thought expressed by the commission -at (6), its wording expresses a desire or tendency to _censor_ the -periodical press of the people by legislative restrictions and -departmental rulings which not only contravene the Federal Constitution, -but which are inimical to the personal rights and liberties guaranteed by -that constitution. - -Force is added to this objection to the commission’s recommendation by -the fact that it specifically delegates to the Postmaster General the -power and authority to decide the kind and character of printed matter -which shall have the right of entry at second-class rates, and which -complies with the requirements the commission would have written into the -law. - -Section 2 of the at present governing statute, the commission advised -(see recommended bill, page 49 of report), should, in its opening -paragraph, read as follows:-- - -“No newspaper or other periodical shall be admitted to the second class -unless it shall be made to appear by evidence, _satisfactory to the -Postmaster General or his lawful deputy in that behalf_, that it complies -with the following conditions.” - -Then follow the “conditions,” several of which I have already shown to be -seriously objectionable. - -(7) I have already presented, under (5), some objections to the -commission’s argument made in this seventh citation. I will, however, -again say that the publication of fiction, other than immoral, in -periodicals, does not, in my judgment at least, in any way infringe the -“purpose of the act” of 1879. I will here go further, and say that the -act of ’79 does _not_ comprehend in its “real purpose,” as the commission -tries to make it appear at (7), that “the diffusion in the quickest -possible way at the smallest possible cost of _timely_ information among -the people”--that is, the act does not so purpose if the word “timely,” -as here used, is intended to mean “news” or “currence of matter,” etc., -as the commission elsewhere in its report argues for. In fact, the -commission’s statement at (7) is further alee of the “real purpose” of -the act of 1879 than is the publication of _any fiction_ in a periodical, -and that too, whether the fiction be a reprint of some old production -or the imaginative visualizations of some current writer who moved from -periodical publication in 1908 or 1909 to print as a “best-seller” in -1910, or from a best seller in 1908-9 to periodical form in 1911. - -In short, the commission’s position regarding the publication of fiction -in periodical form contravenes the “real purpose” of the law. So, also, -does its position on several points it seeks to bolster in its report -contravene the real purpose of that act, as I have previously shown, -quoting in one instance the opinion of a Postmaster General’s counsel, -which opinion the commission itself quoted to support a _false position_. - -I feel constrained to make another point against the stand this -commission took against the admissibility to the second class mail rate -privilege of periodicals largely devoted to fiction. - -It appears to me that these commissioners must have confined their -reading in recent years largely to the older and so-called “classic” -fiction, to professional tomes, to juridic opinions, attorney’s briefs, -and to “booster” stuff for parties and candidates published in our -newspapers. Certainly they could not have read much of the periodical -fiction published by our high-class monthlies and weeklies. If they had -done so, they would not, it seems to me, have written so loosely and -_unwarrantedly_ of the “fiction” in their report. - -Had they read much of the fiction appearing in the leading periodicals -during current and recent years, they would have learned at least two -facts about it: - -1. Much--yes, most--of the fiction printed during recent years in our -standard periodicals (even in those printing only fiction as “body -matter”), has been highly didactic or educational in character. - -2. The periodical fiction published in our leading magazines and weeklies -has taught our people lessons in morals, in politics, in political -economy, in social, domestic and industrial life. It has told its -readers of the habits and habitat of animals, of birds and bees; of -flowers, of fruits and forestry. Nor has there been much of “nature -faking” in it. Some of the most informative matter ever printed bearing -upon natural history, the geography, topography and hydrography of this -earth, has reached us through the periodical fiction of the past ten -or twelve years. Not only that, but such fiction has gone to the farm -and into the laboratory, into the mine, the factory, the mill, and the -lumber camp; into the mercantile establishment, into transportation, -both rail and water; into the counting room, into the “sweat-shop” and -into the tenement districts, the purlieus and the “submerged tenths” in -both the lower and higher “walks” of the world’s various and varying -civilizations, and it has _taught us things_ we did not before know. - -Then _why_ should new laws be enacted, or old laws be twisted, turned -or misconstrued, to exclude “fiction”--_periodical_ fiction--from the -second-class mail rate privilege? - -One other objection I find to this 1906-7 commission’s report. It -recommends the appointment of a “Commission of Postal Appeals.” - -The report states that certain publishers favored such a commission. -That be as it may, I do not believe that such a commission will return -service value at all commensurate with the amount of public money -it would cost to keep its wheels “greased” and operating. Next to a -bureaucracy, government by commissions is the worst. Can the reader think -of a “Commission”--a Government, a State, County or City Commission--that -ever discharged, promptly and satisfactorily, the duties assigned to it? -One is put to no trouble to think of scores of Civil Service Commissions, -Forestry Commissions, Subway Commissions, Canal Commissions, Traction -Commissions, Railroad Commissions, Postal Commissions, Inter-State -Commerce Commissions and a host of others. - -But do you know of one of them that ever did any real serviceable work -_for the people_--did it until an aroused and hostile public opinion -_kicked_ it into doing the work? - -You may know of one. The Man on the Ladder knows of _none_, and he has -been watching the service value of the “commission” for thirty-five -years. As a _governing_ instrument it has largely been a _subversive_ -instrument. It always spends its appropriation. It always puts as many -of its uncles, brothers and nephews on the pay roll and takes as many -junkets as is possible under its appropriation and, if the appropriation -is exceeded, it usually asks for more and--_gets it_. - -We have an Interstate Commerce Commission. It has been on the -job ever since John Sherman put it on duty. Sherman knew what he -intended--_wanted_--it to do. Did it do what he and the rest of us -depended on it to do? Well, not to any noticeable extent. It spent -hundreds of thousands of dollars of our money while it _permitted_ the -railroads and express companies to rebate, “differential” and “short” and -“long” haul us out _of hundreds of millions of easy or stolen dollars_. - -O yes! of course the Interstate Commerce Commission is, of late, getting -down to business--getting down to the work John Sherman _intended it to -do when he drafted the bill which created it_. - -Why has that commission finally arrived at its starting point? Why is it -now trying to do--and trying, even yet, to do it in a _loose, dilatory -way_--what Sherman intended it to do? - -“Why?” Why, simply because the people have finally learned--thanks -largely to the enlightenment given them by the independent periodicals of -the country--that they have been governmentally treated as fools--that -they have been treated as sheep to furnish fleece and mutton for a few -who feast and wear fine raiment, _yet earn it not_. - -O yes, the people have learned some things and they, recently, have been -learning rapidly. It is the people who have _learned_ who have virtually -_kicked_ the Interstate Commerce Commission into dutiful action. - -No, I positively do not like government by commission, and especially -do I not like government of our postal service, or any phase, feature -or division of it, by a “Commission of Postal Appeals” or by any other -commission, however dignified its title may be. Any suggestion or -recommendation of such a commission is, to The Man on the Ladder, but a -suggestion and recommendation to further load an already _overloaded_ -service. - -By that, I mean that the service now rendered by the Federal Postoffice -Department is not nearly commensurate with the number of employes carried -on its payrolls or with its expenditures, and that the creation of a -commission--any postal commission--will only add names to the department -payrolls and thousands of dollars to its already excessive expenditures. - -In closing my consideration of this Penrose-Overstreet Commission’s -report--a report which Mr. Hitchcock appears to have taken some -“hunches” from while it also appears he gave very little or no study or -consideration to the vast amount of informative data it collected and -_filed_--I desire to make a statement or two and then ask a pertinently -impertinent question or two. - -Among the vast amount of informative data on the subject of transporting -and handling second-class mail matter, its cost to the government, etc., -there are pages upon pages of testimony by publishers the commission -invited to appear before it in person or by representative. Some of -that testimony, so newspapers reported during the hearings in both -New York and Washington, is supported or re-enforced by the jurats of -the publishers testifying. Some of those publishers stated in their -testimony that the sample copies they had distributed had, by reason -of the correspondence and mail business resulting, amply compensated -the government for carrying and handling such sample copies. Several -_specific and detailed_ statements were made by the publishers. - -Again: The publishers furnished voluminous testimony--both in their own -statements and in the correspondence of business men who had patronized -the columns of their publications--in proof of the fact that (1) the -advertising pages of their publications were as generally read, if not -more read, than were the body pages, and (2) that the sales of stamps by -the government for the correspondence and business resulting from the -advertisements printed yielded far more postal revenue than did any other -character of second-class matter the mail service handled. - -Now, the questions. - -When this Penrose-Overstreet Commission sent out its invitations most of -them went to publishers and associations of publishers. At any rate so it -would appear from statements in the commission’s report. - -_Did the commission believe the publishers invited were liars?_ - -If so, why did it invite them? - -After hearing their verbal testimony and looking over their written -statements, _did the commission conclude that those publishers were -liars_? - -If so, why did it spend the people’s money to collate, digest and file -the testimony of liars for the information of Mr. Cortelyou, the then -Postmaster General, Mr. Meyer and Mr. Hitchcock, his successor, and other -Postmaster Generals who will follow Mr. Hitchcock? - -Again--If those commissioners of 1906-7 concluded, either before or after -hearing them, that the publishers were or are _liars_, why may not, or -should not, those publishers conclude (after reading their report) that -the commissioners are liars? - - -FOOTNOTES - -[2] Covers are included in the total for pages given. - -[3] One cover page included in count for periodicals carrying cover with -no advertising matter on title page of same. - -[4] Three pages of cover are counted as advertising. - -[5] The weight of supplements to Sunday Editions of newspapers (when -mentioned as supplements in list), is included in the gross weight of the -issue as given. - - - - -CHAPTER VI. - -THE PUBLISHERS SPEAK. - - -I quoted from Senator Owen on a previous page when discussing the -unconstitutionality of Senate revenue-originating amendments. Under his -leave to print Senator Owen embodied in his remarks on February 25, -1911, the arguments presented by some of the publishers in reply to Mr. -Hitchcock’s statements. They point out in particular his peculiar method -of figuring by which he reaches results so at variance with the facts as, -at times, to be far more amusing than informative. I shall here quote -some of them. - -I have previously adverted to the promptitude of Senators Owen, Bristow, -Bourne, Cummings and others in getting onto the firing line. Their -combined resistance soon forced Mr. Hitchcock to unmask his guns. He was -ready, it would seem, to do or concede almost anything _provided_, always -and of course, he could give a few of those pestiferous, independent -magazines a jar that would so agitate their several bank accounts as to -influence them to print what they were _told_ to print. - -But when the General found that he was flanked, and his position being -shot up, he began to display parley and peace signals. “The country -newspapers would not be affected”--they would still be carried and -distributed free--55,000,000 pounds of them or more each and every -calendar year. - -The “poor farmer” needs special government aid, you know. Or, if the -farmer should not be personally in need of government assistance, as now -it frequently and numerously chances, why, well--oh, well, we desire to -show our friendly “leanin’s toward him.” He may remember it at the next -Presidential election--just when we may be needing a few farmer votes. -So, as one evidence of our kindly consideration for the farmer, we will -not trench upon his _special privilege_. He shall still have delivered -him--free--fifty-five to seventy million pounds of “patent insides” and -other partisan dope sheets, printed in his own county and published -and edited by regularly indentured, branded and tagged political -fence-builders--guaranteed “safe” under the pure food laws, etc. - -Then Postmaster General Hitchcock also let it be generally known that -it was remote from his intentions to add a mail-rate penalty to any -religious, educational, fraternal or scientific periodical. Some of -these--not including the Sunday School leaflets, of course--circulate in -vast editions ranging from 500 to 5,000 copies a month. They, too, were -such “powerful educational instruments,” he or some of his assistants -assured doubting Thomases in both the upper and the lower branches of -federal legislation. - -Next, he back-stepped a little to assure trade journals that it was not -his purpose to hand them any advance over the cent-a-pound mail rate, or -so at least, Washington correspondents reported. Finally it is said, a -statement generously borne out by the wording of his jockeyed “rider,” -that newspapers--_all newspapers_--would be fanned through the mail -service at the old cent-a-pound rate. - -It would appear that the anxious interest of our Postmaster General was -willing to let almost any old thing in the shape of a “periodical” switch -through and along at the old rate, if he could only ham-string a few--a -score or less--of monthly and weekly periodicals which persisted in -printing the unlaundered truth about looters, both in and out of office. - -Now, we will present a few figures and statements of the publishers, -presented in answer to Mr. Hitchcock’s voluminous, likewise varied and -variegated, utterances, both verbal and in print, to support his _lurid -guess_ that it costs the government 9.23 cents a pound to transport and -handle second-class mail matter. - -Before quoting the publishers, however, I desire to say two things: - -1. The periodical publishers must necessarily know, I take it, more about -the business of printing and distributing periodicals than Mr. Hitchcock -has been able to learn about that business in the two _politically swift_ -years he has been on his present job. - -2. The publishers in replying--_in presenting the facts_--are entirely -too dignified. Of course, dignity is a fine thing--an elegant decoration -for our advanced and super-polished civilization. But when some human -animal deliberately and industriously tries to shunt on to your siding a -carload or more of “deficits” and other partisan and “vested interest” -junk, and tells you its price is so much and _that you have to pay the -price_--well, at about that point in the progress of our splendid -civilization, I think it both the part of justice and of thrift to lay -_dignity_ on the parlor couch and walk out on your own trackage, making -as you loiter along a few plain and easily understood remarks. That is -just what I believe these publishers should have done when Mr. Hitchcock -covertly tried to deliver to them, charges collect, his several large -consignments of talk about “deficits,” “cost of carriage and handling -second-class matter,” “publisher’s profits” and other subjects about -which he was either equally ill-informed or ill-advised. - -Yes, there are occasions when it is quite proper to hang one’s dignity on -that nail behind the kitchen door and sally forth in shirt sleeves with -top-piece full of rapid-fire conversation. - -With these suggestions, from which it is hoped the publishers may take -a few hints for future guidance when Presidents and Postmaster Generals -undertake to deliver to them a cargo of cold-storage stuff that was -“off color” before it left the farm, I will proceed to do what I have -several times started to do--quote the publisher on Mr. Hitchcock’s -ring-around-a-rosy method of figuring. - -In quoting from the publishers’ “exhibits” it is due to Senator Owen that -we reprint a few paragraphs from his foreword. In speaking to “the merits -of the case,” the Senator said: - - Separate and apart from the fact that this proposed amendment - violates the Constitution of the United States and the rules of - the Senate, I regard such method of legislation as unwise, if not - reprehensible, for the reason that, in effect, it is a denial of - the right to be heard by those who are deeply interested in it. - Over a year ago the periodical publishers affected desired to be - heard in this matter, and were not given a proper hearing on this - vital question. Indeed, they appear to have been left under the - impression that nothing would be done in regard to the matter; - or, at all events, they seem to have been under this impression. - When the matter came before the House of Representatives and the - committee having the matter in charge, no discussion of this - matter took place. No report on it was made. No opportunity to - be heard was afforded. Neither was the matter discussed on the - floor of the House. When the postoffice appropriation bill came - to the Senate, _no hearing was afforded, but at the last minute_, - after the committee had practically concluded every item on the - appropriation bill, this item was presented, not only giving the - periodical publishers no opportunity to be heard, but giving the - members of the committee no opportunity to study this matter and - to digest it. I regard it as grossly unfair, and at the time in - the committee I reserved the right to oppose this amendment on - the floor of the Senate. - - _In the affairs affecting our internal administration I am - strongly opposed to any secrecy._ - - In my judgment, the claim made by the Postoffice Department - _is erroneous on its face_, for the obvious reason that it - is conceded that these magazines are brought by express and - distributed in Washington, D. C., over 250 miles from New York, - at less than 1 cent a pound for cost of transportation and - distribution. The Postoffice Department declares that it costs 9 - cents a pound. _This is a mere juggling of figures._ - - I have no doubt that if a proper weighing of the mails was - observed, and if the railways were to carry the mails at a - reasonable rate, this distribution could be made at a cost - approximately _that which I have named_, as illustrated by the - cost of distribution in Washington City, which is an undisputed - fact. - -After presenting the publishers’ “Exhibit A,” in which they refute Mr. -Hitchcock’s unfounded assertions of colossal profits in the magazine -publishing business--a subject which I treat elsewhere--the Senator -presents their “Exhibit B,” which counters the Postmaster General’s claim -that the proposed increase in rate would yield a large revenue to the -government. “Exhibit B” reads as follows:-- - - It has been shown from the original books of account of the five - most prominent magazines that the proposed measure charging - 4 cents a pound postage on all sheets of magazines on which - advertising is printed would tax these magazines, the most - powerful group, best able to meet such a shock, nearly the whole - of their entire net income. This means that the new postal rate - could not be paid. There is not money enough in the magazine - business to pay it. Magazines would simply be debarred from the - United States mails. - - But assume, for the sake of argument, that this would not be the - case, and that the money could be found to pay the new postage - bills, what, theoretically, would be the increased revenue of - the Postoffice Department, for the sake of which it is proposed - to take more than all the profits of the industry that has been - built up since 1879? - - The Postmaster General, in his statement given to the Associated - Press, and published in the newspapers Tuesday morning, - February 14, claims that the proposed postal increase on - periodical advertising would amount to less than 1 cent flat - on the weight of the whole periodical. This is not the way - the ambiguously worded amendment works out literally; but, - accepting the Postmaster General’s figures and applying them to - the weights, given in his annual report, of the second-class - mail classifications affected by the increase, let us pin the - Postoffice Department down to what it hopes to gain from a - measure that would confiscate the earnings of an industry. - - Mr. Hitchcock in his statement gives 800,000,000 pounds as the - total weight of second-class matter. In his report for 1909 he - gives the percentage of this weight of the classifications that - could possibly be affected by this proposed increase as 20.23 per - cent for magazines, 6.4 per cent for educational publications, - 5.91 per cent for religious periodicals, 4.94 per cent for trade - journals, and 5 per cent for agricultural periodicals, making - 42.97 per cent altogether of the 800,000,000 pounds that might - be affected by the proposed increase, or 343,760,000 pounds. Of - course, this includes the periodicals publishing less than 4,000 - pounds weight per issue, and exempted by the amendment. - - But, making no deduction whatsoever for these exemptions, and - none for the great expense of administering this complex measure, - with its effect of conferring despotic power, certain to be - disputed, the Postmaster General claims that this figures out - only 1 cent increased revenue on 343,760,000 pounds, or a gross - theoretical gain to the Postoffice Department of $3,437,600. - These are the Postmaster General’s figures, not the publishers’. - - But from this figure of 343,760,000 pounds the Postmaster - General would have to subtract the weight of all the periodicals - exempted, and also subtract all the new expense involved for a - large force of clerks. - - There will also be a great increase of work for inspectors, as - the proposed measure puts a premium on dishonesty. There will be - constant temptation for unscrupulous people, who try to take the - place of the present reputable publishers, to publish advertising - in the guise of legitimate reading matter. There will be extra - legal expenses for the disputes that arise between publishers and - the Postoffice Department over matters in which the publishers - may believe the department is using the despotic power given by - this measure to confiscate the property of publishers. In the - hearings before the Weeks committee, it was frankly admitted by - members of the House Committee on Postoffices and Postroads that - the government postoffice service could never be run with the - economy and efficiency of a private concern. - - With all the expense of this new scheme subtracted from such a - small possible gain as is claimed by Mr. Hitchcock, what revenue - would remain to justify the wiping out of an industry built up in - good faith through thirty-two years of an established fundamental - postoffice rate? - - If the department succeeded in saving $2,000,000, after deducting - the exempted publications and all the new expense involved for a - great force of clerks, this would amount to less than 1 per cent - of its revenues for 1910. It would amount to less than one-eighth - of the postoffice deficit in 1909. It would amount to less than - one-fourteenth of the loss on rural free delivery alone in that - year. - - But even this gain would be only theoretical; for, as shown - before (Exhibit A), many of the comparatively small groups of - periodicals left to be published, after the favored ones were - exempted, would find that it required more than all their income - to pay their share of the new rate. - - You can not take away from a person more than 100 per cent of all - that he has--even from a publisher. It is not there. - - These figures of increased revenue to the government are based on - the department’s own statements. They are mathematically accurate. - - They must not be interpreted, however, as measuring the extent - of publishers’ losses. They take no account of the increases, - certain to follow the enactment of this legislation, in the rates - of other lines of distribution from which the government derives - no revenue. They take no account of the loss in circulation - volume, that is certain to follow an attempt to raise the price - of magazines to the public. They take no account of the loss - in advertising revenue that is certain to follow a loss in - circulation. - - Neither are these figures a complete record of the effect on - the government revenue. They take no account of the certain - destruction of publishing properties, and the consequent - destruction of postal revenue on the profitable first-class - matter their advertising once created. - -“_Postscript_: Since this calculation was made and a flood of telegrams -from agricultural publications has come to Congress, the afternoon -newspapers of Tuesday, February 14, reported that at a cabinet meeting on -that day it was decided by the Administration and announced by Postmaster -General Hitchcock that agricultural periodicals will be exempted from -the increased postal rate. The owners and other representatives of -agricultural periodicals gathered in Washington to oppose the amendment -to the postoffice appropriation bill at once left Washington for their -homes. It was reported at the same time that the religious periodicals -had also been assured that a paternal Administration would take care of -them. - -“This leaves the situation in such shape that the Administration has at -last got down to the comparatively small group of popular magazines. - -“These magazines proper, the Postmaster General says, constitute 20.23 -per cent of second-class matter, or only 162,000,000 pounds, out of the -800,000,000 pounds of second-class mail. - -“As the Postmaster General says, as explained above, that the proposed -increase would only mean 1 cent a pound more on the whole periodical, he -could only figure out a theoretical gross gain of $1,620,000. But his -figures are, as usual, all wrong. - -“From this $1,620,000, that his figures come to, he would have to -deduct, of course, the exempted periodicals and also all expenses of -administering the proposed new measure. - -“The pretense of raising second-class rates to do away with the -postoffice deficit therefore disappears. - -“A few popular magazines are to be punished. - -“The absurdly unjust discrimination involved in the proposed increase of -postal rates on certain subclasses of second-class mail, _leaving the -larger subclasses, more costly to the postoffice, untouched_, is shown in -Exhibit C.” - -But how about this new development, in which the Postmaster General -apparently decides from day to day and hour to hour as to whether one -class of periodicals or another shall be allowed to live or made to die? - -Has there ever before been in America, or in Russia, or in China, a -censor with this power? If the institutions of this country are to be so -changed as to give this despotic censorship to one man, _ought that man -to be the official in charge of the political machinery, as patronage -broker, of the Administration_? - -Now, we come to _weights_, and here the publishers begin to talk back a -little. In introducing the publishers’ “Exhibit C” Senator Owen said: - -“It is insisted by the Postoffice Department that it is entirely just -to increase the cost on advertisements in the magazines. I submit their -answer:” - - Why should the Administration have gone to a small 20 per cent - portion of the second-class mail to increase postal rates? The - Postmaster General gives the magazine weight as 20 per cent of - the whole second-class mail, and newspapers as 55.73 per cent. - Why leave out the largest classification entirely and concentrate - all the new tax on a little 20 per cent classification, which in - profit-making and tax-bearing capacity is vastly smaller than - even the figures of 20 per cent and 55.73 per cent indicate? - - The real reason why the Administration concentrated its fire on - the magazines is well known. - - But let us look at the reasons given by the - Administration--_given hurriedly and weakly, and almost absurdly - easy to disprove_. - - Why are newspapers exempt and magazines punished to the point of - confiscation? - - The Administration says (_a_) magazines carry more advertising - than newspapers; (_b_) they cost the Postoffice Department more - than newspapers, because they are hauled farther. - - (_a_) It is not true that magazines carry more advertising than - newspapers. By careful measuring the entire superficial area - and the advertising contents, respectively, of each of 36 daily - newspapers and each of 54 periodicals--the chief advertising - mediums of the country--it is found that magazines averaged - 34.4 per cent advertising, newspapers averaged 38.08 per cent - advertising. - - (_b_) The statement that magazines cost the Postoffice Department - more per pound than newspapers is easily susceptible of final - disproof from the department’s own figures--the most extreme - figures it has been able to bring forward in its attempts to - prove a _case against the magazines_. - - The Postoffice Department states that owing to the different - average lengths of haul, it costs 5 cents to transport a pound of - magazines and 2 cents to transport a pound of newspapers. - - Admit that these figures, _often repeated in the department’s - reports_, are correct. Let us see how the final cost of service - for a pound of magazines looks beside the final cost of service - to a pound of newspapers. - - Besides the cost of transporting mail, figured of course by - weight and length of haul, there are three huge factors of cost, - apportioned according to the number of pieces of mail--rural - free delivery, railway-mail service, and postoffice service - (Postoffice Department pamphlet, “Cost of transporting and - hauling the several classes of mail matter,” 1910). - - - TRANSPORTATION COST OF MAGAZINES AND NEWSPAPERS. - - By weighing carefully the representative magazine, every copy - of a year’s issue of 64 leading magazines, and by weighing 60 - different classes of newspapers, daily and Sunday, the postal - committee of the Periodical Publishers’ Association has found - that the magazine weighs, on the average, _12.3 ounces and the - newspaper 3.92 ounces_. - - The Postmaster General’s report for 1909 furnishes the total - pounds of second class mail--764,801,370--and the proportion of - newspapers and magazines in this weight--55.73 per cent and 20.23 - per cent, respectively. - - This gives 154,719,317 pounds of magazines in the mails and - 426,223,803 pounds of newspapers. - - The cost of transporting these, by the Postoffice Department’s - figures, is 5 cents a pound for transporting magazines and 2 - cents a pound for transporting newspapers, making $7,735,965.85 - for hauling magazines and $8,524,476.06 for hauling newspapers. - - - THE HANDLING COST. - - But the department says specifically, in the pamphlet referred - to above, that the handling cost it apportions according to - the number of pieces, in three classifications of expense--the - railway mail service, rural free delivery, and postoffice - service. The total cost of these items charged against - second-class matter is (Postmaster General’s report, 1909), - $39,818,583.86. - - The total number of pieces of second-class mail handled was - 3,695,594,448 (H. Doc. 910, “Weighing of the Mails.”) - - Newspapers, averaging 3.92 ounces each, and weighing in the mails - altogether 426,223,803 pounds, furnished 1,740,000,000 pieces - to handle (taking round millions, which would not affect the - percentages), or 47.17 per cent of all second-class pieces. - - The 154,719,317 pounds of magazines, weighing 12.3 ounces each, - furnished 201,260,000 pieces to handle, or 5.44 per cent of all - second-class pieces. - - Figuring these piece percentages on $39,818,583.86, the expense - which the department says should be apportioned according to - the number of pieces, _and which it does so apportion_, we - have the handling cost on the 154,719,317 pounds of magazines - $2,166,139.96, or 1.4 cents per pound. - - The newspaper-handling cost would be 55.73 per cent of - $39,818,583.86, or $28,782,425.10, which, divided by the total - of newspaper pounds, gives us the handling cost of a pound of - _newspapers 6.75 cents_. - - - THE NET RESULT. - - So, using the department’s own figures and methods of figuring, - we have the cost of hauling and handling magazines, 5 cents - plus 1.4 cents, or 6.4 cents; the cost of hauling and handling - newspapers, 2 cents plus 6.75 cents, or 8.75 cents. - - _This shows that without going into the miscellaneous - expenditures at all, which would slightly further increase the - cost of newspapers as compared with magazines, the department’s - own figures show that it is losing on the fundamental operations - of hauling and handling 7.75 cents a pound on 426,223,803 pounds - of newspapers, or $33,032,844.73, as against losing 5.4 cents a - pound on 154,719,317 pounds of magazines, or $8,354,843.11._ - - With a loss, according to its own figures, over 400 per cent as - great on newspapers as on magazines, the department goes to the - magazines, of scarcely one-third the weight of newspapers, and - with not one-twentieth the financial ability to pay such a new - tax, to meet the whole burden of its futile and confiscatory - attempt to reduce the deficit. - - Furthermore, the advertising in magazines, which the department - proposes to tax out of existence, is the very national mail-order - advertising that produces the profitable revenue, as against - the local announcements in the newspapers of the class of page - department-store advertisements, etc., which do not call for - answers through the mails under first-class postage (see Exhibit - F). - - And, still further, the modern newspaper of large circulation - is more of a magazine, as distinguished from a paper chiefly - devoted to disseminating news and intelligence and discussion of - public affairs, than the modern magazine. Compare the “magazine - sections” of the large newspapers (and most of the balance of - their Sunday issues), with publications like the Review of - Reviews, World’s Work, Current Literature, Literary Digest, - Collier’s Weekly, or even with Everybody’s, the American, the - Cosmopolitan and McClure’s, to see the obvious truth of this - statement. - -I have marked the fourth from last paragraph of the publishers’ “Exhibit -C” to be set in italics. I did so for fear the hurried reader might -gather a wrong impression from its wording. The publishers do not mean -to say that it costs the government 7.75 cents a pound to carry and -handle newspapers, nor 5.4 cents a pound to carry and handle magazines. -It is a _known fact_ that both the newspapers and the magazines _can be -carried and handled_ by the government at a profit at $20.00 a ton--at -the cent-a-pound rate. Mr. Hitchcock asserted in the official brochure to -which the publishers are here making reply, I take it, that second-class -mail hauling and handling costs 9.23 cents a pound. In this “Exhibit -C,” the publishers are proving that, _even if his absurd claim as to -cost were true_, his method of apportioning that cost between newspapers -and other periodicals is grossly unfair, as well as ridiculously wrong -mathematically. - -Then Mr. Hitchcock, or his department, suggests that the magazines meet -the added charge put upon them for haul and handling by _increasing -their sale price_. That is, let the five, ten or fifteen-cent weeklies -ring up five cents more per copy on subscribed and news stand -prices--_make the readers pay it_. Let the monthlies do likewise. - -That suggestion carries a sort of familiar resonance. “Make the rate -(tariff) what the traffic will stand.” - -Ever hear of it? If you have not, then you must have arrived as a mission -child in the Chinese or Hindoostanese “field of effort,” and have lived -there until the week before last. - -_Ring up the revenues and make the dear people pay it in added purchase -price!_ - -The people have a few dollars stored away in savings accounts or -stockings, and if they want a thing they will broach their hoardings. -They have the money. We _want_ it. - -One of the surest and easiest ways to get it is to _make them pay more -for what they consider essentials_ to their subsistence, to the comforts -and the pleasures of their lives. They have been buying some splendid -monthly periodicals at twelve and a half cents to fifteen cents. If they -want them, why not make ’em pay twenty or twenty-five cents? - -Yes, why not? It’s the people, and--well-- - -“To hell with the people.” - -For four decades or more of our history, that “official” opinion of the -“dear people” has delivered the goods. The Congress, or certain “fixed” -members of it, told us that we needed, in order to be entirely prosperous -and happy, a tariff on “raw” wool, “raw” cotton, “raw” hides, “raw” sugar -and several other “raws,” assuring us that such action would greatly -inure to our benefit. - -They _lied_, of course. But it took us fool people a generation or more -to find out that fact. In that generation, the liars gathered multiplied -millions of unearned wealth and passed it into the hands of “innocent -holders,” most of whom, if our court news columns are correct, have been -spending it to get away from the trousered or the skirted heirs they -married. - -The point, however, I desire to make here is that while this varied -and various “raw” talk was being ladled to us--and most of us ordering -a second serving--our patriotic friends in positions of legislative -authority, and our commercial and business “friends” who steered the -“raw” talk, had “cornered” all the home-grown raw and were _selling us -the manufactured product at two prices_. - -But this is aside. I inject it here merely to illustrate how easily and -_continuously_ we fool people are fooled. - -Postmaster General Hitchcock’s prattle about the publishers recouping -themselves by lifting the price on us is of a kind with all the other -“raw” talk which has looted us for forty or more years. - -We buy a _better_ periodical--say a monthly--for fifteen cents today than -we got for fifty cents thirty years ago. - -Not only that: The fifteen-center tells us of our _wrongs_, of how -we were and are _wronged_ and of how we may right the _wrongs_. The -fifty-center of thirty years ago told us largely of things which -entertained us--things historically, geographically, geologically, -astronomically, psychically or similarly informative and instructive. -They told us little or nothing of how we were misgoverned--of how -_misgovernment_ saps and loots and _degenerates_ a people. That function -of periodical _education_ was left largely to the five, ten and -fifteen-centers of the present day--periodicals _of price within reach of -limited means and of a large, rapidly growing desire to know_. - -See the point? “No”? Well, then don’t go to arguing. - -If you do not see the point, just sit up and shake yourself loose a -little. - -“A little wisdom is a dangerous thing”; “For much wisdom is much grief,” -and similar old saws which truth-perverters glossed into sacred or -classic texts. The people are gathering “wisdom” from these low-priced, -carefully-written, independent periodicals--periodicals which tell -the “raw” truth. It is dangerous. They will hurt themselves. We -vested-interests people and “innocent holders” must set up some hurdles; -must keep the dear, _earning_ people from learning too much--from -learning what we _know_. Their chief source of enlightenment are the -cheap, attractive, instructive, independent periodicals. Our first act -should be to cut down--or cut out--this source of supply. - -Then the dear people will come back and read what we _hire_ written for -them, and then-- - -Well, then the dear earners of dollars for us will not “learn wisdom” -enough to hurt them or--_us_. - -But, getting back to Mr. Hitchcock’s reported suggestion, in effect, to -advance the subscription or selling price of the magazines and others -of the “few” periodicals that would be affected by his proposed “rider” -legislation. I shall call attention to but one basic fact which his -suggestion covers--intendedly or not, I know not. - -To me, it appears better to do this by a few direct statements. - -1. An advance of two or five cents a pound on the people’s subsistence -supplies--meats, vegetables, etc.--or on a yard of textile fabric they -must have to cover or shelter their nakedness, _will_ be met by them as -long as they can dig up, or dig out, the funds to buy. - -2. A corresponding advance in the price of some desired, or even needed, -article which is not _absolutely necessary to subsist, clothe or shelter -them_ will induce them to hesitate before purchasing--will often lead to -an exercise of self-denial which refuses to make the purchase--refuses, -not because they do not _want_ the article, but because they cannot -afford it by reason of pressing _subsistence needs_. - -That these rules of domestic economy apply to the sale and circulation -of periodicals was quite conclusively shown to Mr. Hitchcock by the -publishers. Senator Owens adverts to this point as follows: - -“It has been suggested that the magazines could collect the additional -cost imposed on them by _raising the price_ of their magazines.” - -He then quotes “Exhibit D” of the publishers in reply: - - It has been shown (Exhibit A) from the original books of account - of the chief magazine properties that the measure providing for - a new postal rate of 4 cents a pound on all magazine sheets - on which advertising is printed would wipe out the magazine - industry--would require more money than the publishers make. - - Could not the burden be passed on to advertisers or subscribers, - or to both? - - - WHY ADVERTISERS WOULD NOT TAKE THE BURDEN. - - Magazine advertisers buy space at so much a thousand circulation. - The magazine is required to state its circulation and show that - the rate charged per line is fair. Some advertisers go so far - as to insist on contracts which provide that if the circulation - during the life of the contract falls below the guaranteed - figures they will receive a pro rata rebate from the publisher. - - In view of the small net profits of the industry--it is shown in - Exhibit A that the combined final profits of the five leading - standard magazines of America are less than one-tenth of their - total advertising income--it is clear that the publisher must - be trying always to get as large a rate as possible for the - advertising space he sells, and it is absolutely true that he has - already got this rate up to the very maximum the traffic will - bear. - - Advertisers would not think of paying more than they are now - paying for the same service. Some of them would use circulars - under the third-class postal rate, _which the Postmaster General - says is unprofitable to his department_. Most advertisers - would simply find this market for their wares gone, and the - thousands of people--artists, clerks, traveling men--engaged in - the business of magazine advertising would lose their means of - livelihood. - - There is no possible hope that the advertiser will pay the bill. - - - WOULD THE SUBSCRIBER PAY THE INCREASED POSTAL RATE? - - The 4 cents a pound rate on advertising would require an advance - of approximately _50 per cent_ in subscription prices if the - publisher is to recoup himself by raising the cost of living to - the public in its consumption of magazines. - - _Would the public pay 50 per cent more for the same article?_ - - The question is answered eloquently and finally by the - subscription records of the magazines that were forced to - increase their rates on Canadian subscriptions when Canada - enforced a 4-cent rate on American periodicals. As the - discriminatory rate was later withdrawn in certain cases, we - have a complete cycle of record and proof. First, the Canadian - subscription list before the increase; second, the Canadian - subscription list after the increased postal rate and increased - subscription price to the Canadian public; third, the Canadian - subscription list after the postal rate and the subscription - price to the public had been restored to the original status. - - - HERE IS THE RECORD OF THE REVIEW OF REVIEWS. - - In June, 1907, the Review of Reviews began to pay 4 cents a pound - postage on Canadian subscriptions, instead of 1 cent, and was - forced to raise its Canadian subscription price from $3 to $3.50 - a year. - - Its Canadian yearly subscribers in July, 1907, numbered 2,973. - - At once the subscription list began to fall off, and continued to - do so steadily until in January, 1910, it had come down to 904 - names. - - Early in 1910 the Review of Reviews was readmitted into the - Canadian postoffice at 1 cent a pound, its subscription was - reduced to the old figure of $3, and the Canadian list quickly - “came back,” having reached already in February, 1911, the figure - of 2,690 annual subscribers. - - Below follows the detailed record, eloquent of what would happen - if the prices of popular American magazines were increased 50 - per cent to the public. In this Canadian incident the price of - the Review of Reviews was increased only 16⅔ per cent and the - circulation fell off 69 per cent. - - REVIEW OF REVIEWS--CANADIAN SUBSCRIBERS. - - June, 1907, began to pay extra postage 2,840 - July, 1907 2,973 - August, 1907 2,921 - September, 1907 2,875 - October, 1907 2,761 - November, 1907 2,604 - December, 1907 2,260 - January, 1908 1,536 - February, 1908 1,330 - March, 1908 1,170 - April, 1908 1,350 - May, 1908 1,300 - June, 1908 1,363 - July, 1908 1,360 - August, 1908 1,407 - September, 1908 1,348 - October, 1908 1,357 - November, 1908 1,381 - December, 1908 1,299 - January, 1909 1,095 - February, 1909 1,163 - March, 1909 1,263 - April, 1909 1,321 - May, 1909 1,355 - June, 1909 1,353 - July, 1909 1,369 - August, 1909 1,371 - September, 1909 1,382 - October, 1909 1,237 - November, 1909 1,278 - December, 1909 1,227 - _January, 1910_ _904_ - February, 1910 974 - March, 1910 1,129 - February, 1911 2,690 - -The next exhibit (“Exhibit E”) of the publishers shows quite conclusively -“that it would be ruinous to them to raise the rates in the manner -proposed,” and Senator Owen presents their plea. - -I am going to reprint here their plea as presented in “Exhibit E,” but in -doing so The Man on the Ladder desires to remark that the argument, as -it has been megaphoned into our ears for the past three or four decades, -that an increase of tax rate (whatever the nature of the tax), or a -reduction of the tariff or selling rate would be “ruinous,” does not -cut much kindling in his intellectual woodshed. It has been entirely a -too common yodle either to interest or to instruct any intelligent man -who has been watching the play and listening to the concert for forty -years. This “ruinous” talk has been out of the cut glass, Louis XVI, -Dore, Dolesche and other high-art classes ever since Mrs. Vanderbilt, as -was alleged, discovered that Chauncey M. Depew was merely her husband’s -servant, just as was her coachman. - -If there is a congressional murmur or a legislative growl about cutting -down a rail rate, the rail men immediately set the welkin a-ring with a -howl about “ruin.” If someone rises with vocal noise enough to be heard -in protest against paying 29 cents a pound for Belteschazzar’s “nut-fed,” -“sugar-cured,” “embalmed” hams and insists that they should be on the -market everywhere at not to exceed 23 cents, Bel. and his cohorts will -immediately curdle all the milk in the country with a noise about ruin! -_ruin!_ RUIN! - -If some statesman rises in his place and offers an amendment reducing -the tariff on “K,” or cotton, or sugar; or providing that the government -shall build two instead of four “first-class” battleships, the bugles -are all turned loose tooting “ruin” for the “wool,” the “cotton,” the -“shipbuilding” or other industry affected, as the case may be, and -“_ruin_” will be spread and splattered in printers’ ink all over the -country. No, your Man on the Ladder does not have much respect for this -“ruin” talk, as it is usually “stumped” and “space-written” for us -commoners in the industrial walks of life and in its marts of trade. -But when he hears that warning sounded by men engaged in a business -industry with which he himself is fairly familiar--a business he himself -has several times had to put forth strenuous effort to “lighter” over -financial shoals or “spar-off” monetary reefs--when it comes to talk -of “ruin” among men engaged in the business of publishing periodical -literature in this country, why, then, he gets down off the ladder and -_listens_. - -There are two special and specific reasons why _every_ commoner--every -_earner_--should listen to the publishers’ arguments in proof that Mr. -Hitchcock’s proposal means ruin to many of them--some of _even the -strongest and best_. - -1. An increase of _three hundred per cent_, as the Postmaster General -sought in his “rider” (though somewhat covertly), in the carriage cost -and delivery (rail or other) of its product would _ruin_ almost any -established business there is in this country, if such increase was -forced in the limited time named in that “rider.” A suddenly enforced -increase of even one hundred per cent in the haulage and delivery cost -of product would put hundreds of our most serviceable industries on the -financial rocks. - -2. A business man or a business industry that has been giving us _thirty -cents in manufacturing cost_ for our _fifteen cents in cash_ is certainly -deserving not only of a hearing but of a vigorous, robust, militant -support. - -That the periodical publishers of this country are doing just that -thing--_have been doing it for the past twelve to twenty years_--no -honest periodical reader who is at all familiar with the cost of -production will attempt to deny. - -That is sufficient reason for presenting here the “Exhibit E” of the -publishers: - - We point to the history of deficits in the Postoffice Department - since 1879, when the pound rate of payment was established for - second-class matter. The question at the head of this exhibit is - answered by the successive changes in the size of the deficit, - compared with coincident changes in the volume of second-class - mail. - - It will be seen that the largest percentage of deficit in the - past 40 years occurred _before_ the pound rate of 2 cents - was, in 1879, established for second-class matter; that the - percentage of deficit decreased with great rapidity as soon as - second-class matter, under the stimulus of the new pound rate, - began to increase rapidly; that this decrease in the deficit _was - accelerated after the second-class rate was lowered, in 1885_, - to the _present rate of 1 cent a pound, and after second-class - matter had increased beyond any figure hitherto dreamed of_; that - the decrease in percentage of deficit continued, coincidently - with the increase in volume of second-class mail, until 1902, - when large appropriations began for rural free delivery service. - Then deficits began to grow as the specified loss on rural free - delivery grew. In the last fiscal year, 1910, when the rural - free delivery loss remained nearly stationary, as against 1909, - the deficit decreased by approximately $11,500,000 to the lowest - percentage but one in 27 years, although in this same year - second-class matter made _the largest absolute gain ever known_, - amounting to 98,000,000 pounds more than in 1909. - - We submit that so many coincidences, taken over a whole - generation, and observed in relation to _the enormous production - of profitable first-class postage through magazine advertising, - raise_ the strongest presumption that _the larger the volume of - second-class mail becomes the more fully the postoffice plant is - worked to its capacity in carrying newspapers and periodicals and - the first and third class mail their advertising engenders, and_ - the smaller becomes the deficit, other things being equal. - - The other thing that is not equal is the new expenditures, - unprofitable in the postoffice balance sheets for rural free - delivery. According to the Postmaster General’s report there - is in 1910 a surplus of over $23,000,000 outside the specific - loss on rural free delivery. A chief reason why the Postoffice - Department has this $29,000,000 to lose on rural free delivery - is that periodical advertising, and the enormous postal business - it generates, has long ago extinguished the deficit and given - the huge surplus to spend for a _beneficent_ but financially - unprofitable purpose. - - But one thing is proved beyond any shadow of doubt by this - history of decreasing postoffice deficits and coincident - increases in second-class mail, and that is, _that the deficit - can be reduced with an ever-increasing body of second-class mail, - carried at one cent a pound_. It can be, because the record shows - it was. - - Below is a fuller history of postoffice deficits and second-class - increases: - - - THE FACTS AS TO DEFICITS AND SECOND-CLASS MATTER. - - The annual reports of the Postmaster General are the authority - for the following figures: - - In the year 1870 there was a deficit in the operations of the - United States Postoffice Department of 21.4 per cent of its - turnover. - - In 1879 there was passed the act that put second-class matter - on a pound-payment basis. An immediate increase in second-class - matter began. - - In 1880 there was a deficit in the postoffice operations of only - 9.6 per cent of its business. - - In 1885 was passed the law that made the rate for second-class - matter 1 cent a pound, which still further increased second-class - mail. It trebled in the decade preceding 1890. - - In 1890 the deficit in the operations of the Postoffice - Department was 8.8 per cent. - - The next decade brought a much larger increase in second-class - matter than any previous 10 years--from 174,053,910 pounds in - 1890 to 382,538,999 pounds in 1900. - - The deficit in the postoffice operations in the year 1900 was 5.2 - per cent of its business. - - In the prosperous years following 1900 the increase of - second-class matter was stupendous; from 382,538,999 pounds - in 1900 to 488,246,903 pounds in 1902, only two years. _The - increase of advertising in the magazines was even greater than - the increase in second-class matter._ These years brought the - great forward movement in _the production of low priced but well - edited magazines_, made possible by large advertising incomes, - and also in the increase in circulation by _extensive combination - book offers_, and so-called “clubbing” arrangements, by which the - subscriber could purchase three or more magazines together at a - lower price than the aggregate of their list prices. - - In 1901 there was a deficit in the postoffice operations of only - _3.5 per cent of its business_. - - In 1902 the deficit for the postoffice operations was _2.4 per - cent_, the smallest percentage of deficit in 18 years and the - smallest but two in 40 years. - - - RURAL FREE DELIVERY STEPS IN. - - But in this year is seen for the first time, in important - proportions, a new item of expense, $4,000,000 for rural free - delivery. Our government had _wisely and beneficently_ extended - the service of the postoffice to farmers in isolated communities, - regardless of the expense of so doing. The report of the - Postmaster General for 1902 says: “It will be seen that had it - not been for the large expenditure on account of rural free - delivery, _the receipts would have exceeded the expenditures by - upward of $1,000,000_.” - - It will be clear, from these figures, which are taken from the - reports of the Postmaster General, that beginning with the - advent of the second-class pound-rate system, _the deficit of - the postoffice has steadily declined_, the rate of decrease - being always coincident with the expansion of circulation and - advertising of periodicals, until in 1902 there was a substantial - surplus, which the government _wisely saw fit to use for a - purpose not related to the needs of magazines and periodicals or - to their expansion_. - - - A REAL SURPLUS OF OVER $74,000,000 IN NINE YEARS. - - Since 1902 there has _always been a surplus_ in the operations of - the Postoffice Department, outside of the money the Government - has seen fit to expend for rural free delivery, (wisely, and - otherwise wastefully.) In the present year, 1910, the report of - the Postmaster General shows a _surplus_ of over $23,000,000 - outside the loss on the rural free delivery service of - $29,000,000. The years 1902 to 1910 have each shown a surplus - in the postoffice profit and loss account, the nine years - aggregating over $74,000,000, outside the actual loss on the - rural free delivery system. - - How enormously second-class mail aids the department’s finances - by originating profitable first-class postage can be appreciated - by referring to the specific examples in Exhibit F. - - It should be borne in mind that the turning of large deficits - into actual surpluses, which has come coincidently with the - expansion of second-class mail, of circulation pushing, and - of advertising, has come in _spite of an enormous expansion - in governmental mail, carried free, and Congressional mail, - franked, which has not been credited to the postoffice at all in - calculating the actual surplus shown above_. - -Next the publishers come forward with “Exhibit F.” Their “Exhibit F” is -not merely an “exhibit.” It is an _exhibition_, with a three-ring circus, -a menagerie and moving pictures as a “side.” Candidly, I am of the -opinion that it was this “Exhibit F” of the publishers which induced our -friend, the Postmaster General, to loosen the clutch on his mental gear. - -Of course, it is possible Mr. Hitchcock did not, nor has not, read this -“F” of the publishers. If such a misfortune has cast its shadow across -his promising career, I regret it. - -“Why?” - -Well, to anyone anxiously interested in dissipating, or removing, the -federal postoffice “deficit,” the reading of the publishers’ “F” should -be most entertaining. - -That F of the publishers most certainly presents some facts which any -man, unless he is a fool, as some descriptive artist has appropriately -put it, in an “elaborate, broad, beautiful and comprehensive sense,” must -appreciate. - -Senator Owen introduced “Exhibit F” of the publishers in necessarily, and -of course, dignified form--a form in keeping with the exalted position -he holds and worthily fills. Your uncle on the ladder, however, is not, -as you may possibly have already discovered, restrained by any code _de -luxe_ as to his forms of speech or as to their _edge_. - -The publishers in their Exhibit “F” show and, as I have said, _show -conclusively_, that the advertising pages in periodicals (newspapers -or other), are _the pages which support--which pay the bills_--of the -Postoffice Department of these United States. - -I would ask the reader to keep that last statement in mind, for, in spite -of the Postmaster General’s voluminous, cushion-tired conversation and -automatic comptometer figuring, the publishers furnish ample evidence in -proof that the statement just made is safe and away inside the truth. - -Oh, yes, of course, I remember that Solomon or some other wise man of -ancient times has said “all men are liars.” That was possibly, even -probably, true of the men of his day. It may also be admitted without -prejudice, I trust, to either party to this case, that there is a -numerous body of trousered liars scattered in and along the various walks -of life even at this late date. So, there appears to be no valid reason -nor grounds to question the veracity of Solomon, or whoever the ancient -witness was, when he testified, to the best of his knowledge and belief, -that all men are prevaricators. However, I desire in this connection to -have the reader understand that The Man on the Ladder is of the opinion -there are a few men on earth now, whatever the condition and proclivities -of their remote ancestors may have been, who have an ingrown desire or -predisposition to tell the truth. - -This view of the genus _homo_ is warranted, if indeed not supported, by -the plainly and frequently observed fact that in almost every recorded -instance where the truth serves a purpose better than a lie, the truth -gets into the testimony. - -The Man on the Ladder also believes there are men--bunches of men--in -this our day who will tell us the truth _whether they can afford to do so -or not_. - -I have given this “aside,” if the reader will kindly so consider it, to -the end of calling to his attention two points, namely: - -First, There are probably just as many truth tellers, likewise _liars_, -in the world today as there were in olden times. - -Second, There is probably just as high a moral code--just as high a -standard and practice of veracity--among the periodical publishers of -this country as there is among officials of the Federal Postoffice -Department. - -I am of opinion that few, indeed, among my readers will be found to -question the fairness of that statement. Especially will they not -question it when they take into consideration the fact _that pages of the -publishers’ testimony were under oath, or jurat_. - - - - -CHAPTER VII. - -POSTAL REVENUES FROM ADVERTISING. - - -Now, the Postmaster General’s whole talk--his whole word-splutter--was, -it seems, to create an impression that the government was losing millions -annually _because of the large amount of advertising matter distributed -by magazines and other periodicals_. - -On the other hand, the publishers in their “Exhibit F,” and elsewhere, -try to show, and in the writer’s opinion _do_ show quite conclusively -and dependably, that the excess of expenditure over receipts in the -Postoffice Department would be _two to four times greater than it now -is were it not for the first, third and fourth class revenues resulting -directly from those advertising pages in our periodical literature_. - -Before giving these publishers a chance to tell the truth, as presented -in their “Exhibit F,” I desire to make a few remarks about the point -under consideration--the profits to the _government from periodical -advertising_. - -The publishers present the evidence of their counting-rooms--the _inside_ -testimony. I desire to present some outside testimony. - -I may present it in an awkward, raw way, but I have a conceit that the -“jury” will give it consideration. - -Three months ago, there was a “party at our house.” No, it was not -a bridge party. Mrs. M. On The L. has, in my visual range, I can -here assure you, many commendable virtues--meritorious qualities and -qualifications. Likewise, she has some faults. The latter I cannot, if -the dove of peace is to continue perching on our domicile lodge pole, -mention here. I may, however, say with entire safety, that “bridge” and -alleged similar feminine amusements are not among them. - -The party to which I advert was a “tea.” The guests were six,--Mrs. M. -On The L. serving. The guests not only had “the run” of the house, but -they _took possession of it_. I stuck to my “den” until it was invaded -and then--well, then, my dear trousered reader, I did precisely what you -would have done. I backed off--I surrendered. - -“What was the result?” - -In this particular case, the chief feature of the result was that -these seven women, _in less than ten minutes_, had appropriated every -copy of all the latest, and some a month or more old, of the magazines -and weeklies about my work-shop. They also annexed me. I “just had -to go downstairs and have a cup of tea with them.” Although I am not -entrancingly fond of tea, I did exactly what you would have done. I went. -Necessarily, I had to be good. I was good. I said--as near as I knew -how--the things that were proper to say and as near the proper time as I -could. That is, I said little and listened much. - -It is of what I heard--and afterward learned--I wish here to speak. -I wish to speak of it because it fits like a glove to the point the -publishers make in their “Exhibit F,” which is to follow. - -While the hostess was preparing and spreading luncheon--a necessary -concomitant of all “teas,” other than mentioned in novels--the six guests -scanned the magazines and talked magazines. From their conversation it -appeared that five of the six took, either by subscription or news-stand -purchase, one or two monthly magazines “regularly.” Whether the ladies -_read_ them or not was not made clear to me. One of them did make mention -of two “splendid stories”--“The Ne’er do Well,” by Rex Beach, and, at the -time of the “tea,” appearing, in serial, in one of the monthlies. The -other was a short story entitled “The Quitters,” which, the lady stated, -had appeared in one of the magazines some time previous. - -Now, so far as I can recall, the reference made by this one of the six -ladies was the only mention made of the “literary” features of the -magazines they had read or to such features of those they were examining. -There was considerable talk and attention given to the body illustrations. - -In calling such stories as the lady mentioned “literary” I presume -apologies are due the Penrose-Overstreet Commission. While both the -stories are “brand-new,” are well written, each teaching a lesson--have, -in short, all the essential elements of “currency and periodicity”--yet -that commission, in the anxious interest it displayed to secure “a -general exclusion act” against fiction in periodicals, would, possibly, -see nothing of literary merit in either of the stories the lady mentioned. - -I shall, however, offer no apologies to the commission for classing the -two stories as literature and of exemplary currency. On a previous page I -have given my reasons for differing from the commission on its strictures -on current fiction as run in our standard monthlies and weeklies. The -lady’s expressed opinion of the two stories is another reason for -differing from that expressed by the commission. In my judgment, the lady -who spoke has a broader, juster and far more comprehending knowledge of -literature--of its merits and demerits, whether fiction, historical, -biographical or classic--than has any member of that commission. - -But to return to our tea party. Those six ladies scanned and thumbed -through my magazines. As said, there was comparatively little talk or -comment about the body-matter of the periodicals. But those women--all -married, five of them mothers, two of them (three, counting the hostess), -grandmothers--gave fully _three-fourths of their time to the advertising -pages_. - -But that is not all. Their scanning of the advertising pages of those -periodicals developed some business action. The business talk started -when one lady called attention to the “ad” of a military school in a town -in Wisconsin, “where Thomas attends,” Thomas being her son. It developed -that the lady seated next to her had a son Charles whom it was desired -to start in some preparatory school in the fall. Another matron had a -daughter she desired to have take a course at some school for girls. Both -of the ladies with candidates for preparatory courses, however, were of -the opinion that all the “good schools” appeared to be in the East and -each would prefer to send her son or daughter to some school nearer home. -To this opinion the mother of the boy attending the Wisconsin school -earnestly protested. - -“We have just as good preparatory schools, colleges and universities -in the West as they have in the East,” she declared. “My boy is doing -splendidly at the----, Wisconsin. He has been there two terms now. If -you don’t want to send Charles to a military school, there are a score -or more of excellent schools for either boys or girls in the West and -South--some of them right near us, too. Just look here!”---- - -And then began a scurrying through the school “ad” pages of three or four -of the magazines for the names and locations of preparatory schools. The -advertisements of a number were found. - -“Take the names and addresses and write all of them for their catalogues -or prospectuses or pamphlets, giving the courses of study that pupils -may take, the advantages they offer and other information. That’s what I -did before deciding where to send Thomas. I wrote twenty-two different -military schools in the country and got a prompt reply from each of them. -In fact some of them wrote me _four or five times_, besides sending their -little printed books which gave their courses of study and set forth the -special advantages their students enjoyed.” - -Of course, it was Thomas’ mother who spoke. Her suggestion, however, -gripped the rails at once. The two matrons with children to place in -preparatory schools asked for pencil and paper. I relieved them of the -immediate labor of writing out their lists, by gallantly inviting them -to take home with them such of the magazines as they thought would serve -their purpose, and, as they were near neighbors, they could scan them at -their leisure and address directly from the advertisements. I lost three -of my favorite magazines on my tender. - -“This has no bearing on the point!” Eh? Well, let us see about that. - -Of course, I do not know what the mothers of that son and daughter who -were to be started in preparatory school work did. It is safe to presume -however, that they adopted the plan suggested by Thomas’ mother. We -know what she did. At any rate we have her own statement of the course -she pursued, and there can be advanced no valid reason for doubting her -word. Besides, as she is our “next-door” neighbor, I have made, within -the month, special inquiry of her as to what she did. I found that she -had kept the catalogues of the schools to which she had written and had -carefully “filed” in a _twined package_, as a careful housekeeper usually -files things, every letter she had received from the schools. - -More than that: She wrote nine of the schools a second letter and three -of them, she wrote _four times_. To the Wisconsin school to which she -finally intrusted the training and instruction of her son she wrote _six -times_. - -Now let us see what revenue the federal postal fund _actually_ received -from this one mother in her efforts to place her boy in a good, safe -school. - -First the mother herself wrote forty-five letters. On these the -Postoffice Department collected 90 cents. - -Second, her “twine file” shows that, all told, she had received from -the twenty-two schools written to, a total of 163 letters. On these the -government collected $3.26. - -Third, the catalogues sent her were of various sizes. Their carriage -charge, at third-class rates, I think would range from two to six cents -or more. Putting the average at only three cents, which in my judgment is -low, the government collected for their carriage 66 cents. - -Fourth, thirteen of the schools, either not knowing her boy had been -matriculated or thinking she might have other boys “comin’ on” to -preparatory school age, sent her their catalogues for the following -year--another 39 cents. - -Add those four items and you will readily ascertain that the government -received $5.21 in revenue from the efforts of Thomas’ mother to select -a school for him--a school that would give him military training and -discipline, as well as academic instruction in selected studies. - -_Her course of action was prompted entirely by the school advertisements -she saw in two magazines._ - -How many other mothers and fathers were influenced to similar action by -the three or four school “ad” pages in those two magazines I do not know. -There must, however, have been many, I take it, otherwise the schools and -preparatory colleges would not persist in advertising so extensively, -year after year, during the summer months, in our high-class monthly and -weekly periodicals. - -The two magazines from which Thomas’ mother got her school address -weighed a little under a pound each. If they reached her by mail, the -government got only about two cents for their carriage and delivery, -which was ample pay--$20.00 a ton--for the service. But supposing Mr. -Hitchcock’s wild figures were correct--that it cost the government 18 -cents to deliver those two magazines to that mother--a rate of $180.00 -per ton. Of course, no man could so suppose unless he stood on his head -in one corner of a room and figured results as the square of the distance -at which things appeared to him, or chanced to be one of those “blessed” -mortals prenatally endowed with what may be called mental strabismus. -But for the sake of the argument, let us suppose that it did cost the -government 18 cents to deliver those two magazines to Thomas’ mother; let -us admit that that falsehood is fact, that that foolishness is sense. -Then what? - -A magazine weighing one pound and printed on the grade of paper used by -our high-class periodicals will count 250 or more pages. Four pages of -school “ads,” therefore, would count for about _one-fourth of one ounce_. - -Even at Mr. Hitchcock’s absurd figure of nine cents a pound, the cost -to the government of carrying those four pages of school advertisements -in each of two monthly magazines to the mother of Thomas _was less than -four-fifths of one cent_. - -Do you grasp the point? - -Remember, Mr. Hitchcock has separated himself from much talk to show to -a doubting public that it is _the advertising pages of periodicals which -over-burden the postal service and are responsible, largely, for the -alleged “deficit.”_ - -I say “alleged” deficit. I say so, because it is not, and never was, a -deficit _de facto_. I shall later give my reasons for so saying--shall -show that this much talked of deficit in the Postoffice Department’s -revenues is _quasi_ only--a mere matter of accounting, and bad accounting -at that. - -But here we are considering the cost to the government of carrying and -delivering _advertising pages_ to the reading public of this Nation. -Especially are we considering the transaction between the government and -the mother of Thomas--a transaction induced and promoted by eight pages -of advertising--four pages in each of two magazines. - -As just stated, it cost the government _less than four-fifths of one -cent_, even if we rate the carriage and delivery cost at Postmaster -General Hitchcock’s absurd figure of nine cents a pound, to deliver those -eight pages of school advertisement to Thomas’ mother. Even the delivery -of the _complete_ magazines which printed those advertising pages would, -at Mr. Hitchcock’s own figures, cost the government only about 18 cents. -Let’s admit it all--the worst of it, and the worst possible construction -that the worst will stand. Then how does the government stand in relation -to the resultant transaction--_the transaction induced by those eight -pages of advertising_? - -It cost the government 18 cents, according to Mr. Hitchcock’s method of -hurdle estimating, to deliver those two magazines to Thomas’ mother. -Well, let it go at that. The government is out, then, 16 cents, the -publisher having paid in 2 cents at the present pound rate for mail -carriage and delivery. - -On the other hand, those two magazines each carried four pages of school -“ads.” Those “ads” start Thomas’ mother into a canvass of the schools by -correspondence. The result of that canvass, as previously shown, turned -into the government’s treasury _a gross revenue of_ $5.21 for postage -stamps to cover the first and third-class business resulting. - -The government, then, is $5.05 ahead so far as _gross_ receipts and -_gross_ revenues are concerned, and it is ahead that sum, in the specific -transaction under consideration, _solely and only because of those eight -pages of school advertisements printed in the two magazines_. - -Is that not a fair--a just--statement? - -As Mr. Hitchcock states that there is a large profit to the government -for the stamps sold and as that $5.21 was _all for stamps_, then those -eight pages of advertisements and Thomas’ mother must have turned into -the postal fund a handsome _net_ profit on the service rendered by the -Postoffice Department. - -Now, I desire to return to our “tea.” Two other “business” actions -developed which serve to prove the statement made on a previous page, -namely: _It is the advertising pages of our periodicals which yield the -largest revenue to the government for the postal service it renders._ - -The first of the two postal revenue-producers came up as we sat at -luncheon. Each of the ladies had a magazine or weekly in hand. There was -as much talking as eating in progress, or more. I presume that is the -proper procedure or practice at “tea” luncheons. I am not a competent -authority on “tea” proprieties. - -One of the ladies “had the floor,” so to speak, and expatiated eloquently -and at length on the merits of an electrically heated flat-iron or -sad-iron, an advertisement of which she had found in the magazine -she was scanning--a cloth smoother she had had in use for some three -months. Three of the other matrons were wired--that is, their homes -were electrically lighted. The others were getting their domiciliary -illumination from what is vulgarly designated as the “Chicago Gas Trust,” -at 85 cents per. - -“Results?” Three of the assembled party desired to write for “full -particulars” about that flat-iron at once. - -My boss furnished paper, envelopes, pens and ink. My assigned duty -in this business transaction was both simple and secondary. The boss -_ordered_ me to go over to the drug store, buy the stamps and mail those -three letters. - -I did so. - -The government got six cents postal revenue from _me_ on that sad-iron -“ad.” What further revenue was gleaned from the correspondence between -the three ladies and the flat-iron manufacturer I know not. - -It took me a long time to reach that drug-store--a short block away--buy -the stamps, “lick ’em,” stick them on the envelopes and drop those three -letters into the mail-box just outside the druggist’s door. At any rate, -the ladies so informed me when I got back. They did it politely, kindly, -but very _plainly_. Not wishing to scarify their feelings by admitting -that I had purposely loitered because of an inherent or pre-natal dislike -of teas, I did what I thought was the proper thing to do under the stress -of impinging circumstances--I lied like a gentleman. I told the ladies -that the druggist happened to be out of two-cent stamps and had sent out -for them--sent to another drug store for them. - -“How unfortunate!” exclaimed one of the party. “We want a lot more -stamps. We have each written for a sample of these new biscuits. We have -to enclose ten cents in stamps and the letters will have to be stamped. -That’s eighty-four cents in stamps and we want to get the letters into -the mail tonight.” - -Then I was shown the advertisement of the desired “biscuits.” In the -good old summer time of our earthly residence, “when life and love -were young,” we called such mercantile pastry “crackers.” Mother baked -all the biscuits we then ate, or somebody else’s mother baked them. Of -course, sometimes Mary, Susie, Annie, Jane or another of the dear girls -learned the trick and could “bake as good as mother.” Then she baked the -biscuits. And they _were_ biscuits. Now, every _cracker_ is a biscuit, -and every biscuit one gets smells and tastes of the bakeshop where it was -foundried. - -But that is entirely aside from our subject. The “ad”--a full page--set -forth the super-excellence of some recently invented or devised -cracker--“biscuit,” if you prefer so to call it. It was an attractively -designed and well-written “ad.” The advertiser offered to send a -regular-size package of the “biscuits” to anyone on receipt of ten cents -in stamps--“enough to cover the postage”--and the name of the grocer -with whom the sender of the stamps traded. That, in brief, was the “ad” -offer, and each of the ladies wanted those biscuits--my boss as anxious -to sample them as any of the others. On a corner of the luncheon table in -symmetrical, pyramidal array, was 84 cents in miscellaneous change. - -Before it came my turn to speak, Mrs. M. On The L. gave me a scrutinizing -look--a censorious look--a look that said, “I know where you have been,” -and took the floor. She did not rise in taking it either. - -“Oh, he can get the stamps. Take that change and these letters. You can -go to some other drug store and get the stamps. Put ten cents in stamps -in each envelope and then seal and mail the letters.” - -That’s the speech the boss made. - -I should be ashamed to admit it, but I am not. There are limits to the -endurance of even such a temperate-zone nature as that of the writer. The -boss’ speech reached the limit. My patriotism was set all awry. Even my -earnest desire to reduce the “deficit” in the postal service was, for the -moment, forgotten--was submerged. - -I took the 84 cents those friendly ladies had pooled on “biscuits” and -the seven unsealed letters, assuring them I would certainly find the -stamps. I then went up to my den, unlocked a drawer of my desk, found -the stamps, made the enclosures, stamped and sealed the envelopes, and -then came down and passed out on my assigned errand. I got back just as -the “party” was donning its hat to depart for its several homes, assured -it that its orders had been carried out, and, by direction of the boss, -escorted home one of its members who had some distance to walk. - -Now, I think I did my whole duty to that tea-party, and _more_ than my -duty to reduce the postal “deficit.” - -I trust the “dear reader” will not have concluded or even thought that -I am trying to be funny or humorous, nor even ludicrous. I have been -writing of _actual_ occurrences, and writing the _facts_, too, of those -occurrences, as nearly as I can recall them after an interval of _less -than three months_. I introduce the _de facto_ happenings at our “tea -party” here because they _apply_--because they illustrate, they evidence, -they _prove_ that the advertising pages of our periodicals _are the pages -which produce a large part, if indeed, not the larger part of our postal -service revenues_. - -But we must look after our “biscuits” a little further. - -The seven women at that tea party spent 84 cents for stamps to get -a sample of those crackers. Fourteen cents of these stamps went to -cancellation on the letters they mailed. The other 70 cents went to -cancellation on the cracker packages which the cracker inventor sent -them--cancelled at the fourth-class rate--_cancelled at the postal -carriage rate of sixteen cents a pound_. - -Is that all? No it is not all. It is only the first link in a _postal -revenue_ producing chain. - -The manufacturer of that cracker or biscuit, as you may choose to call -it, wrote each of those seven ladies a neat letter of thanks, and neatly -giving a further boost to the biscuit. I know this because I have seen -the seven letters--all “stock form” letters. - -That contributed 14 cents more in postage stamps for cancellation. - -Three of the ladies heard from that cracker baker _four times_. Their -grocers probably had not put the cracker in stock. My boss got a second -letter from the baker. - -That contributed 20 cents more in postage stamps for cancellation. - -The advertiser sent by mail to each of the seven grocers the ladies had -named a sample package of the “biscuits” and a letter naming the local -grocery jobber or jobbers through whom stock could be had, the jobber’s -price of it, etc. - -That contributed 84 cents more in postage stamps for cancellation. - -Nor is that all. My boss’ grocer got three letters from that cracker -baker and a visit from a salesman of a local jobber before he “stocked.” -If the grocers named by the other six ladies were similarly honored then -the builder of those biscuits must have written the seven grocers whom -the tea party ladies had named fourteen letters in addition to the first -one. - -That contributed 28 cents more in postage stamps for cancellation. - -Now let us figure up--or down--how one tea party of seven (I was the -working or “worked” member, so am not to be counted in), and a one page -“ad” stands in account with the postal revenues. - -The magazine carrying the cracker “ad” weighs about a pound. The single -“ad” page cannot possibly weigh more than _three-fiftieths of one ounce_. -To carry and deliver that one “ad” page the cost to the government, then, -even at Mr. Hitchcock’s extension-ladder rate of 9 cents a pound, would -be about _one-thirtieth of one cent_. - -But as we did in the case of the school advertisements previously -mentioned, let’s give our Postmaster General the whole “hullin’ uv -beans.” Let us credit the government with Mr. Hitchcock’s alleged cost of -carrying that magazine to that tea party--nine cents. - -Per contra, the government must give that “ad” page credit for producing -stamp cancellations to the amount of $2.30. - -Figure it out yourself and see if that is not the _actual_ showing of the -ledger on this account of the Postoffice Department with that one “ad” -page and those seven tea party women. - -That, I believe, is fair and sufficient evidence from the outside--from -the field--in support of the facts which the publishers present in their -“Exhibit F,” and which I shall here reprint: - - The astonishing record contained in (Exhibit E), of the - absolutely unvarying coincidence of decreases in postoffice - deficits with increases in second-class mail is square up against - the Postmaster General’s statements that the department loses - 8.23 cents on every pound of second-class mail and loses over - $60,000,000 a year as a whole, on second-class mail. - - What is the explanation? How can the phenomenon of constantly - decreasing deficits, coincident with increasing second-class - mail, be reconciled? To be sure, the Postmaster General has been - trying for two years to make out a case against the magazines, - and nothing is better understood than that, _under orders_, he is - using all the figures and the infinite opportunities of such a - complex mass of figures as those of the postoffice, to make the - case for the magazines as bad as possible. Of course, it does not - cost the department 9.23 cents a pound for second-class matter; - but also, of course, in all probability, the cost must be more - than one-ninth Postmaster General Hitchcock’s figures. Then why - is it that _the more second-class matter there is mailed the more - money the Postoffice Department has_? - - The answer is that the advertising in the periodicals, the - very advertising the Administration is trying to drive out - of existence, _is far and away the most important creator of - profitable first-class postage that exists_. That, furthermore, - the varied and constant efforts of publishers to extend the - circulation of their periodicals by sending out tens of millions - of circulars, _each making for a 2-cent reply_, and the great and - complex business that has been built up around _the originating - and handling of advertising_ have made this national market - for reputable wares--a market where the purchasing is done by - mail with 2-cent stamps--the stamps that pay the Postoffice - Department’s bills and give it $23,000,000 a year to spend over - and above receipts from rural free delivery, in advancing that - splendid service for the country dweller. - - There were published in 1909 in fifty American magazines - 12,859,138 lines of advertising, for over 5,000 advertisers, who - used over 25,000 different advertisements, and it is obviously - impossible physically to tabulate complete results. But let us - nail down certain specific examples of advertisements inserted - in magazines, _and follow the record right through_, of the work - they did for the postoffice, the expense they put the postoffice - to, and the profit they brought it. - - These score or more of specific instances tell the whole story. - Read, especially, the first instance--the complete bookkeeping - transaction of one magazine advertisement in account with the - United States postoffice: - - A MAGAZINE ADVERTISEMENT IN ACCOUNT WITH THE UNITED STATES POST - OFFICE. - - In the Saturday Evening Post of November 26, 1910, was published - a 224-line advertisement of the Review of Reviews. - - Three thousand seven hundred replies were received, 1,776 of them - inclosing each 10 cents in first-class postage. - - The paper on which this advertisement was printed weighed - 0.132815 ounce. The half of it printed with the advertisement - weighed 0.06640625 ounce. - - One million seventy thousand copies of the Saturday Evening - Post were sent through the United States mails, so that the - postoffice transported 4,440.9 pounds of this advertisement. At - 9.23 cents per pound--the pound cost of transporting and handling - second-class matter given by the Postoffice Department--the total - cost of giving the postoffice services to this advertisement - was $409.90; postage paid at 1 cent a pound, $44.41; loss to - postoffice, $365.49. - - THE POSTOFFICE’S GROSS AND NET GAIN FROM FIRST-CLASS POSTAGE CREATED. - - 3,700 inquiries were received by the Review of Reviews. - - 3,700 2-cent stamps for inquiries $74.00 - 3,700 acknowledgments under 2-cent stamp 74.00 - Six follow-ups to 3,700 inquiries under 2-cent stamps 444.00 - 1,776 inquiries sent 10 cents in stamps 177.60 - 740 sales are made, each involving 12 bills and 12 - remittances, under 2-cent stamp 355.00 - The 3,700 names of inquiries will be circulated at least - three times a year for five years, under 2-cent stamps - (a practical certainty of twice as many circularizations) 1,110.00 - --------- - Total gross direct sales of 2-cent - stamps from advertisement $2,234.60 - Profit of 40 per cent, according to profit percentage - of Postmaster General on first-class postage $893.84 - Direct loss in transporting and handling advertisement, - cost figured at 9.23 cents a pound, income at 1 cent 365.49 - ------- - Ultimate minimum net gain to postoffice - in having carried this advertisement $528.35 - - - MORE SPECIFIC EXAMPLES OF PROFITABLE POSTAGE ORIGINATED BY - MAGAZINE ADVERTISING. - - Names of concerns are withheld here. The original documents on - which these statements rest are in the possession of the postal - committee of the Periodical Publishers’ Association, 156 Fifth - Avenue, New York City. These are only a few samples of hundreds - that have come, and are printed to suggest the details of the - methods by which national magazine advertising far more than - pays its way when sent out through America at 1 cent a pound - second-class postal rate. - - “MR. E. W. HAZEN, _Advertising Director_. - - “DEAR MR. HAZEN: During the year 1910 we paid the Postoffice - Department for carrying our first, third and fourth class mail - matter the sum of $496,749.88. We shipped during the year 1910, - 1,717,514 packages. Of these 809,781 were sent by mail and - 907,733 by express. All of these would have been sent by parcels - post if the postal rates and regulations permitted. We paid the - express companies for the transportation of the packages referred - to above $347,392.30.” - - The above statement covers only mail matter sent out of this - house. The figures given are accurate. Any statement of the - number of pieces of mail matter which we receive would be - approximate, but we can safely state that it was in excess of - 4,500,000 pieces of first-class mail matter. This estimate is - entirely conservative. - - Here is another postal bill of one of the many great “mail order” - magazine advertisers--a company which sells excellent clothing to - women who can not come to the great cities and their department - stores. The president of the company writes: - - “As we are a mail-order concern, our business is derived - entirely, either directly or indirectly, from our magazine - advertising. During the year 1909 we paid the Postoffice - Department for carrying our first, third and fourth class mail - matter the sum of $433,242.” - - What an advertisement in one issue of one magazine did for - another women’s “wearing apparel” house is recorded in their - books as follows: - - The postage required to answer the 15,000 replies from the - one-column insertion in the magazine, also to send the - merchandise required by 2,000 of the inquirers, also to “follow - up” other inquirers, etc., amounted to $5,460. - - The government charge for carrying this advertisement through the - second-class mails was $38.83. - - That $5,460, by the way, did not include the several hundred - dollars spent on postage by the inquirers themselves. - - The president of a concern which publishes encyclopedias, natural - histories, classics, etc., investigated the relations with the - postoffice of a recent page of his advertising inserted in a - single magazine, and the correspondence which resulted. - - The stamps and money orders bought by the inquirers and by the - publishing company, as the result of the 4,000 answers to this - one advertisement, amounted to $884. - - The publishers paid the postoffice to carry that page, at - second-class rate, $12. - - Thus, even if it had not already been disproved that the - second-class rate is insufficient, it would still have been - mightily unfortunate for the department’s business if that page - advertisement had not appeared. A good business man would be - willing to lose several times $12 in order to do $884 worth of - business as profitable to himself as first-class mail is to the - government. - - Scores of apparently small advertisers are found in any issue - of any popular magazine. They are just as good customers to the - postoffice, in proportion, as the big concerns using columns or - pages. - - - ONE INCH--$5,492 STAMPS A YEAR. - - A modest 1-inch magazine advertisement is printed by a company, - which reports that its yearly postage account from that cause is - $5,132. Adding the approximate postage on the 1,500 letters a - month sent to the company, the yearly total of postage created by - this inconspicuous concern through the magazine is found to be - $5,492. - - - ONE-HALF INCH--$590 A MONTH. - - A half-inch magazine space is used each month by a certain - electric manufacturing company in the Middle West, but its - postage records show stamp purchases for a single month - (November, 1909), resulting from that half-inch advertisement of - $590. - - Two quarter-column announcements of a dress fabric, - appealing to women, in a single magazine, brought 7,000 - replies, involving postage stamps worth $230.00 - Pretty good business getters for the department? These - “ads” cost the publishers to mail, at second-class rates 19.40 - Even better, in proportion, was a one-fifth-column appeal - to mothers in one issue of the same magazine. It produced - postage to the amount of 240.00 - To carry the little advertisement at second-class rates - the government charged 7.76 - A single-column magazine “ad” of a Chicago clothing firm, - with a number of retail stores over the country, brought - 4,000 inquiries which, with the following up, etc., - caused postage of 380.00 - That column cost the publisher to mail, at second-class - rates 38.67 - The Woman’s Home Companion sent a letter to the advertisers - in its November issue, asking for a memorandum of the - letter postage on the inquiries from their November - advertising and the answers to these inquiries. - Seventy-five advertisers reported, with definite - figures, an aggregate letter-postage expenditure of $3,385.90 - - The Woman’s Home Companion paid the government just $583 - for carrying that portion of the magazine on which these 75 - advertisements were printed. - - Any advertising man can point to hundreds of “mail-order firms” - like the above. These firms can trace directly to their magazine - advertising, every year, purchases of millions of dollars’ worth - of the stamps that make big profits for the postoffice. - - It is even more surprising to learn the enormous postage - bills caused by an entirely different class of magazine - advertisers--the “general publicity,” or “national” - advertisers--who wish the reader to ask for their fine soaps, or - mattresses, or silks, or stationery at his local store. These - firms do not depend on direct replies, yet they receive so many - that thousands of dollars are spent for stamps per year in scores - of cases--even per month in many. - - - EVEN THE “GENERAL” OR “PUBLICITY” MAGAZINE ADVERTISING CREATES - ENORMOUS STAMP SALES. - - A moderate-priced shoe is sold through a number of retail stores - in different cities. The manufacturers advertise in magazines - for national “publicity,” to bring buyers into these stores. - Incidentally they mention their department to fill orders by - mail. Thus an enormous correspondence has been built up, of which - the average annual increase alone during the last three years - has involved 264,000 first-class letters--a minimum postage of - $5,280. This is simply one yearly addition to the company’s - already first-class business, of which it writes that “all - but a nominal percentage” has been “induced by our magazine - advertisements.” - - More than $15,000 was spent for postage by a mattress - manufacturer last year, “following up” inquiries received from - his magazine advertising, though it is designed to create a - demand for the mattress at local furniture stores. - - This $15,000 is over and above his steady correspondence with - dealers, etc., which was built up in the first place by magazine - advertising. - - One of the many recent “contests” conducted by magazine - advertisers was that of a stationery company. Theirs is also - “publicity,” not mail-order advertising. It is designed to create - a demand for their paper over the stationery store counters. - But their “contest” awhile ago, announced exclusively in the - magazines, brought 59,000 replies, which, with follow-up, etc., - averaged 12 cents first-class postage--a total of $7,080 in one - month. - - Here is still another “publicity” experience. In the course of - familiarizing women with a new trade-mark for silk by means of - magazine advertising, the manufacturers incurred postage bills, - during the first 11 months of 1909, amounting to $7,979.75. About - $2,000 more ought to be added to represent the stamps purchased - by the prospective silk-dress wearers themselves. - - Another “contest,” held by a national advertiser, brought - 12,089 replies from a single insertion in one magazine, to - handle which postage stamps had to be bought for more than $600.00 - The publishers paid to have that page carried through the - mails, at second-class rates 97.66 - A half page in one issue of another magazine brought 4,000 - letters from inquirers, which, with “follow-up,” etc., - meant stamp purchases 200.00 - The carriage of that half page at second-class rates was 25.62 - - Magazine advertisements of a popular cold cream brought 170,000 - letters to the manufacturers last year, though the controlling - purpose of the campaign was to get the public to ask for that - kind of cold cream at the drug stores. - - Not including postal orders, special-delivery stamps, etc., the - stamp revenue to the government from these letters was $8,500. - And, of course, that does not include the profuse correspondence - between the manufacturers, the jobbers, the drug stores all over - the country, and so on. - - For another toilet preparation a single advertisement in a - leading weekly magazine brought more than 13,000 replies. - The stamps involved here add up to $990.00 - The publishers paid the postoffice to carry this - advertisement, at the second-class rate 48.83 - A household remedy, seen in most drug stores, was - mentioned to the extent of one-quarter page in a single - issue of one magazine. The requests for samples numbered - 1,685. The postage involved was 202.20 - - Another “drug store” preparation frequently brings the - manufacturer 2,000 to 6,000 letters each month from their - magazine advertising of it, though that is, of course, for - “publicity,” first of all. A single insertion last fall brought - 12,000 inquiries, which created, first and last, the purchase of - $750 in stamps. - - A system of physical culture for women put quarter pages in - several magazines during the month of November, from which 3,905 - letters were received. In this case, the total postage, including - follow-up and correspondence back and forth, was $1,104.09 for - that month of November alone. - - Narrow limits would be expected in the demand for expensive - silverage. Yet a silversmith’s two advertisements in the November - and December magazines brought 45,000 requests for catalogues. - These had already involved by January 13, with the following up, - etc., a postage bill of $5,510. - - Another big postage bill was also incurred, incidentally, by a - company which uses magazine advertising to bring buyers into drug - stores, etc., asking for certain shaving soaps and the like. - Still their postage bill during 1909, as a result of inquiries - from their advertising, was $3,656.08. This does not include the - stamps bought by the inquirers--probably $1,000 more. - - A similar soap was described in a page advertisement which, - printed in one magazine one time, brought more than 30,000 - letters. First-class postage on them and the answers to - them aggregated more than $900.00 - The charge for carrying that page, at the second-class - rate, was about 120.00 - - - THE LARGE STAMP PURCHASES OF ENTIRE BUSINESSES DEPEND ON MAGAZINE - ADVERTISING. - - All the above examples are of postage sales caused by magazine - advertising directly, in point of time. Just as directly caused - are the sales for correspondence between manufacturer, jobber, - retailer, agent, etc., in the many businesses that have been - built up by magazine advertising. - - A camera company writes: “There is a magnificent revenue to the - government through our correspondence with these dealers, through - their correspondence with their customers, and through their - sending our printed matter, furnished by us, at a postage cost of - $100, and such dealer could not afford to go to this expense were - it not for the fact that this local advertising which he does is - backed up by our general magazine publicity.” - - This one result of magazine work is figured by the company at - tens of thousands of dollars every year in postage. - - The postage-stamp revenue created by magazine advertising keeps - on for months, and years even, between the advertiser and the - consumer, in cases like correspondence schools, for instance. - - One prominent company writes that it not only spends $429 per - month in postage, answering inquiries which themselves account - for about $100 more, but that it enrolls per month more than - 2,200 new scholars--and every scholar, by the time he has - received all his numerous “lessons,” etc., costs the school about - $3.50 more in postage. Thus each month creates about $7,700 more - in postage bills for this school, not counting nearly as much - again which the scholars must spend. - - “Our advertising,” writes a leading investment banker, “by reason - of names being placed on our mailing list for circulation, etc., - costs us several thousand dollars a year for postage, which would - not be the case if we were not doing and had done advertising.” - - In fact, there would be little left of the department’s - profitable postage stamp sales were the big magazine houses - crippled. The publishers are the largest buyers of lists of names - used for circulation. To circularize these lists many millions of - 2-cent stamps are bought every year. - - “Our entire mail order book business,” writes a Western firm, - “has been built up through magazine advertising. Last year our - postal bill amounted to $12,298.57. This was used on circular - matter and letters. If the circulation of the magazines should be - reduced, and it is our opinion that it would be if the postage - rate should be increased, our postage bill would be reduced - proportionately.” - -There is much more to be said in support of my contention that the -advertising pages of our periodicals are their _revenue-producing pages_, -but it cannot now here be said, as I must pass to another division of our -general subject. - -We have devoted most of our previous space to Mr. Hitchcock’s “rider,” -to the influences and _influencers_ that originated it and tried to -push it--by methods adroit and scrupulously unscrupulous--into federal -enactment--into operative law. At this point of our presentation of -the general subject of Postal Riders and Raiders, it was my original -intention to take up generally the _raider_ features or elements as -planned for discussion in this volume. I intended to start just here to -discuss the Postoffice Department “deficit,” of which Mr. Hitchcock has -had so much to say--and of which he made voluminous and eloquent use -during his efforts to bring his “rider” a safe winner under the wire. I -intended, as just said, to begin to write about the postal “deficit” just -here--a deficit _which never had real existence_, since the days of the -“pony post” and “mail coach,” save in quasi form--in methods covering -political lootage and looters. - -Well, I have changed my original plan a little. I’ll run a few lines -through that “deficit”--twaddle-talk, a little further on. Here I will -merely repeat what I have already said, in substance at least. - -There never has been a postal deficit since the period I have indicated, -save deficits created by official crooks and crookedness, by “interests” -which _hired_ the official crooks and bought the crookedness, and by -department accounting methods which would put Standard Oil or a Western -cow ranch on the financial blink inside of thirty-six months, or even in -twelve. - -We will discuss this artistic “deficit” later. Here I now desire to -advert to, and animadvert on, another point which has been brought -forcibly to my attention recently--weeks, some two months, after I -climbed up here to take a look over the general situation, and then -chanced, through the aid of a Congressman friend, to get my distance -glasses focused on this postoffice foolery. - -Foolery, I have written. I was wrong. There was no foolery about it. It -was a _calculated, a studied, a cold-blooded partisan stab at one of the -greatest and most helpful--most up-building--industries in this country_. - -But we will let that point and the “deficit” rest for the present. It -appears that one of Mr. Hitchcock’s much-worked arguments to harvest or -glean votes for his rider amendment was that the amendment would “affect -only a few magazine publishers,” or that “only a few magazine publishers, -at most, would be affected by the amendment and that they had _enriched_ -themselves by the special privilege granted by the second-class mail rate -statute of 1885,” etc., etc. - -Various newspapers quoted Mr. Hitchcock variously on the same point or -to the same end, and two Congressmen acquaintances reported that he had -personally talked to them along the same lines. - -Only a “_few magazine publishers_” would be affected by legislation of -the character recommended in the rider amendment? That is the point I -desire here and now to consider. I hope the reader will go carefully and -thoughtfully through the consideration with me. - -First it may be said, and safely admitted, that no such legislation as -that recommended in the “rider” previously discussed, would be sustained -_by any court in this country_, unless its wording was so modified as -to make its requirements and restrictions apply _to all periodicals_, -or at least to all monthly and weekly periodicals. Even then, it is -doubtful if any court could be found to sustain such a piece of class or -special legislation unless its terms were broadened to cover newspapers, -so numerously and so aggressively are the latter trenching upon what -is generally recognized as the weekly and monthly periodical field of -effort, influence and usefulness. - -I think that any informed, fair-minded reader will agree that that -statement is a fair statement of governing facts, unless we question -the honesty of our courts in the discharge of their judicial duties or -question the juridic honesty of some member or members of the ruling -court. - -That may read like a blunt or offensive way of putting it. But we are not -writing of a Palm Beach twilight party nor of a Newport frolic. We are -writing of and _to_ a serious subject--a subject which vitally touches -and trenches into the vital interests of ninety millions of people--the -ninety millions who are the blood and bone and sinew of this nation of -ours. It is a subject of such grave import as to make it necessary that -we call a spade a spade, a thief a thief, a scoundrel a scoundrel, and -judicial weakness, judicial _treachery_. - -That is why I put, plain and strong, the point that _no court_ could be -found in this country to sustain legislation of the character covered in -Mr. Hitchcock’s “rider” amendment to the 1911 postoffice appropriation -bill, and that every informed, fair-minded man must concur in the -statements that I have made in the three or four preceding paragraphs. - -That “rider” amendment would “affect only a few magazine publishers,” -says Mr. Hitchcock, or as he is reported to have said. - -Now, let us look over the field a little. Let us make an honest, -intelligent effort--an effort not warped by political hopes and -aspirations nor by _personal prejudices and interests_--to see who or -whom would be affected by such special or class legislation. - -First, the reader must get a mental hip-lock or strangle-hold on the -fact that the second-class mail _business_ of this country--the output -of periodical publishers--in marketed values, is somewhere around _one -billion dollars a year_. - -As has previously been stated, and I believe well sustained by the -facts, no business, however well established, can stand an increase of -300 per cent in the haulage and delivery cost of its output without -sustaining great financial loss. The fair-minded reader will, I believe, -agree that the publishers in presenting their case to Mr. Hitchcock, to -the Penrose-Overstreet and other commissions, proved the truth of that -statement quite conclusively. - -Well, if that be true, legislation of the sort proposed in the Hitchcock -“rider” must necessarily, after adjudication, put all the lesser weeklies -and monthlies (those not financially strong) out of business. Likewise -hundreds of the smaller newspapers must discontinue issue. Of course, -Mr. Hitchcock prattled about the newspapers not being affected by his -proposed amendment. But, as previously stated, no court of justice in -this country would sustain such a biased, prejudiced piece of class -legislation as that proposed in the “rider.” - - - - -CHAPTER VIII. - -WHO ARE AFFECTED. - - -Let us see who really would be affected. - -As just cited there necessarily would be thousands of periodical -publishers affected--virtually ruined. But, let us go down to things -elemental in this question--_down to the stumpage_. - -The great educational white way of our periodical literature is builded -upon _wood pulp_. - -In an opening paragraph of this volume I adverted to that fact. The chief -pulp woods are spruce of the North--even of the distant North--and the -Northwest. Then come cottonwood, basswood and soft maple, of the South, -Southeast and New England. Of course, there are several other kinds of -pulpwoods, but they are not used extensively for the manufacture of -white paper, unless chemically treated, and such treatment makes them -expensive. Of the pulpwoods I have named, spruce is far and away the most -extensively used. From spruce is produced the best pulp. In “milling,” it -shows body, fiber, strength--it gives toughness to the milled sheet or -the Web roll. - -But that is enough. I am not an expert in pulp-wood stocks. The point I -am trying to call to the reader’s attention is that _any legislation_ -which cuts down the consumption of wood pulp must necessarily “affect” -some other folks besides “a few magazine publishers.” - -First, a just adjudication of such a piece of legislation as that -proposed in Mr. Hitchcock’s rider amendment would put from thirty to -fifty per cent of our weaker (but excellent) periodicals on the financial -rocks--put them out of business. They consume thousands of tons yearly of -pulp-wood paper. - -It will, I think, be freely admitted that such periodicals would be out -of--_forced out of_--the pulp-wood market--I mean out of the wood-pulp -paper market, which amounts to the same thing. - -But that is not all. The strong weeklies and monthlies are not going -to be put out of business by legislation of that rider character. They -will continue in business. They will meet its unjust exactions by -readjustments. They are printing on sixty to eighty pound stock. Some -parts of their periodicals are printed on even heavier stock. They will -go to the paper mills and demand _lighter_ stock, of special finish--_and -their demands will be met_--and fifty to sixty pound stock will be used. -The special finish will give the reader just as presentable a magazine, -typographically, as he now receives. - -But you observe that the _publisher_ will be saving from twenty to fifty -per cent in _stock weight_. - -You will also observe that the paper mills will be using twenty to fifty -per cent less wood pulp than they are now using. - -You will also observe that the railroads will haul twenty to fifty per -cent less of pulp timber and less wood-pulp paper than they now haul. - -“Only a few magazine publishers will be affected,” eh? - -Let us “recast” as far as we have gone. - -The owners of pulp wood acres or stumpage would be affected, would they -not? There are probably three to five hundred of them in the country, -taken at a low estimate. - -They are not of the “few magazine publishers” are they? - -Pulp mill and other investors in pulp-wood stumpage seldom buy until -they have an estimate by some skilled judge as to the probable “cut” -the acreage will yield. For this purpose the prospective purchasers -usually employ one or more “timber cruisers.” A timber cruiser is a man -so skilled and experienced that he can look at a standing tree and tell -you within a hundred feet or so how much lumber it will saw or how many -cords of pulp or other wood it will cut. He “steps off” an acre, sizes -up the available trees growing on the acre, averaging up the large trees -with the small ones, and then estimates or calculates the _average_ wood -or lumber growth on that acre. He then goes off to some other acre. -The latter may be only a few hundred yards or it may be a mile or two -from the acres last measured, the estimate on which the “cruiser” has -carefully noted in his “field book.” - -The second acre he “works” as he did the first, and so the “cruiser” goes -on with acre after acre through a forest of ten, fifty, a hundred, or it -may be a million or more acres of “stumpage,” always careful to note the -“light” and the “heavy” timbered sections, and marks with a sharp, shrewd -and experienced eye an estimate of the number of acres covered by the -light and the heavy growth of timber. When he has covered the acreage his -employer contemplates buying, he comes back to civilization, turns in his -field book and makes a report to the boss. On that showing the boss buys -or declines. - -Sometimes, of course, the careful, prudent boss may have two, three or -a dozen cruisers, covering different fields of a vast forest section -and, sometimes, virtually _trailing_ each other. In the latter case, the -buyer seeks to use one cruiser’s estimate as a check on the other. In any -event, however, the purchase or investment is usually made on the showing -the cruisers have made. - -Now, this talk about timber, cruisers, etc., may be uninteresting to the -reader. I sincerely hope, though, he will read it and follow me along -the same lines a little further. My object is to show how wide of the -truth--how unjustly or ignorantly wide of the truth--Mr. Hitchcock was -when making the statement, which it has been repeatedly and reputably -asserted he did make, to the effect that the legislation he sought -would “affect only a few magazine publishers.” I have stated, and have -given what I believe to be sound, valid reasons in support of the -statement, that legislation of the nature, covered by his rider amendment -ultimately--_and necessarily_--must be either annulled by the courts or -be so broadened as to remove its special or class features. Of course, -Mr. Hitchcock wanted--_and he still wants_--legislation of the nature -indicated in that rider to become _operative law_. It is my belief he -entertained such hope and desire when he asserted that an enactment of -the character of his rider would “affect only a few magazine publishers.” -At any rate, it was with such belief I introduced this division of our -general subject. - -As previously stated, legislation of the character sought by Mr. -Hitchcock cannot be enacted into operative law _without cutting down the -consumption of wood pulp from thirty to fifty per cent_. - -Such a cut in consumption, I am here trying to show, cannot be made -without affecting the earnings and lives of men--many thousands of men -and families--who cannot even be imagined as of those “few magazine -publishers.” - -When the stumpage owner decides to cut five, ten, fifty, a hundred or -more thousand acres for milling, another gang of men--“road blazers”--is -sent into the forest. If the transportation is to be by water, some -river or smaller stream, these latter men select suitable roll-ways and -boom yardages along the stream. From each of these they “blaze” or mark -the trees and smaller growths to be felled and the obstructions to be -removed in order to provide a haulage roadway--usually providing for both -wagons and snow sleds or sledges. If the transportation is to be by rail, -corresponding work is done, the roadways branching in from the forest to -the rail sidings where the loading is to be done. Not infrequently “spur -tracks” are blazed which sometimes run for miles into the forest away -from the main line of the railway. - -Following these men who mark out the “haulways,” come a far more numerous -body of men with axes, saws, hooks, oxen, mules and other equipment, -including cooks, “grub” and other things necessary to feed and shelter -them. These, also, are factors--elemental or primal factors--in the -production of wood-pulp from which most of our white paper is made. -Numerically they, in the aggregate, number thousands. - -Most certainly they cannot be counted among the “few magazine publishers” -referred to by Mr. Hitchcock. - -With equal certainty it can be said that _each_ of these thousands would -be materially affected in his industrial occupation by any legislation or -other influence which caused a shrinkage in the demand for wood-pulp. - -In the fall and winter of the year (sometimes in other seasons as well), -an army of men--not thousands, but tens of thousands in number--swarm -into the pulp wood forests. They are axemen, “fiddlers” (cross-cut -sawyers,) foremen, gang foremen, ox drivers, mule drivers, horse drivers. -Here also is again found the cook, the “pot cleaner,” the “grub slinger” -and other servers of subsistence to the “timber jackies” of the various -camps. - -Any material reduction in the consumption of wood-pulp would affect them, -would it not? - -None of them publish magazines, do they? - -This brings us down to the pulp mill. Of course each mill has a hundred -or more men employed getting its wood floated down the rivers or streams -during the spring floods, or “freshets,” if their transportation is -by water. They are log “berlers”, “jam” breakers, shore “canters,” -“boomers,” etc. If their working stock comes by rail, there are -“loaders,” “unloaders,” “yarders,” etc. Then come in the thousands of -mill men, engaged on the work of reducing the wood to pulp. If the pulp -mill has not a paper mill in immediate connection, as often happens, -then the railroad is immediately interested in the reduced tonnage haul, -and likewise every man who works for the railroad becomes interested -industrially. - -Even a triple-expansion brained man could not figure these thousands of -industrial workers into the ranks of those “few magazine publishers” whom -Mr. Hitchcock, it is asserted, _repeatedly_ asserted, would alone be -affected by his urgently urged amendment. - -Next, we reach the paper mill. How many thousands of men are employed by -them, I do not know. Of the many other thousands--wives and children who -are dependent upon those workers for clothing, shelter and subsistence--I -cannot make even a worthy guess. The reader can make as dependable an -estimate as I, probably a more dependable one. But readers will unitedly -agree that all these thousands of workmen, wives and children would be -affected by _any_ reduction in the consumption of wood-pulp paper. - -All readers will also agree that no one of these is a magazine publisher. - -Thus far we have seen, in considering the “reach” of Mr. Hitchcock’s -recommended legislation, that it would have affected the earnings and -the lives of many thousands of our people--people who cannot, in even -perfervid imagination, be classed among his “few magazine publishers.” -In this connection, however, should be noted the fact that when the -paper leaves the paper mills, with the thousands dependent upon their -operation and success, the paper proper passes into the custody of the -transportation companies--railroad and water--chiefly the former--and of -the thousands of operatives they employ. Next comes the thousands engaged -in the cartage interests in cities throughout the country, wherever -printing is done. In cities of the first and second classes there is -usually found a division of the cartage interest which confines its -service almost exclusively to the work of carting paper from car, depot, -dock or warehouse to the printing plant which consumes it. - -Here, then, in the last two classes named, must be found several -thousands more workmen who would necessarily be adversely affected by -a shrinkage of thirty to fifty per cent in the pulp wood cut. Those -thousands, mark you, do not include the thousands of women and children -dependent upon the earnings of those workmen. Yet they would necessarily -be affected by any shrinkage in wood-pulp consumption. - -And again it must be admitted by every man--and _will_ be admitted by -any man with as much brains as directs the activities of any lively -angleworm--that none of the thousands here mentioned are magazine -publishers. None of them could possibly be of the “few magazine -publishers” referred to by Mr. Hitchcock. - -So far we have touched upon only the _elements of production_. While the -people employed in the several divisions of the pulp-wood industry may -run, numerically, into many tens of thousands, in the great division of -the printing trades, they run into _the hundreds of thousands_. I refer -to the great printing and publishing trades--the trades which turn the -pulp paper into periodicals and books--_the trades whose work directly -educates us_. - -Before attempting to designate the various divisions of this class, -or to indicate the vast multitude--both men and women--to whom they -give employment, I desire to present a few quotations, showing that -these trades and these hundreds of thousands of employes are, in the -slang language of the street, “onto” not only the controlling--the -_ulterior_--motives of Mr. Hitchcock but also that they know and -understand and _feel_ something of the _far-reaching wreck and ruin to -homes and to lives which legislation of the nature he proposed must bring -to this industrial division of our general citizenship_. - -Under date of May 20, 1911, Mr. M. H. Madden wrote me the following -letter. While Mr. Madden may not be as widely known as is Postmaster -General Hitchcock, he not having had the advantage of a federal cabinet -position to broadcast his fame, there are few men better known among the -personnel of the printing trades than is Mr. Madden, and equally few men -there are who are better informed on the cost of carriage, handling and -distribution of second-class mail. - -In this letter Mr. Madden speaks particularly of the _alleged_ Postoffice -Department “deficit.” While this much-talked of “deficit” is made the -subject of a short subsequent chapter, Mr. Madden’s letter presents -several other points trenchantly pertinent to the subject we are now -considering, to-wit: that the printing trades--all branches and classes -of it, from the pressfeeder and bindery girl to the shop superintendent -and publisher--are alive to the dangers with which legislation of the -“rider” character is fraught: - - CHICAGO, May 20, 1911. - - MY DEAR MR. GANTZ--For a considerable time President Taft has - directed attention to a supposed deficit in the Postoffice - Department revenues, he accepting the figures of his Postmaster - General that the amount of the shortage for 1909 was above - $17,000,000, while that for 1910 was cut down to less than - $6,000,000. - - An authorized statement by Mr. Hitchcock, sent out on May 27, - 1911, declares that for the six months of 1911 there is a surplus - in postal receipts ranging from $1,000,000 to $3,000,000. With - the fact kept in view that there have been increases in expenses - in many directions and the further fact that second-class mail - tonnage, on which great losses occur--according to the Hitchcock - plan of keeping books--has increased, the manifest inconsistency - involved in Mr. Hitchcock’s discovery is too transparent to - permit of discussion. - - Factors which have been left out of the reckoning, among others - might be mentioned the progressive increased amount of business - of the postal department, with but slight advance in the - percentage of cost for transacting the same; a general agitation - for better service on the part of the public which awakened the - authorities to a fuller responsibility of their duty, and the - important circumstance that there has been a new alignment of the - House and Senate Committees on Postoffices and Postroads, has - caused a moving-up process, we might say shaking-up process, in - methods that sadly needed furbishing and of ideas that required - practical demonstration. The effect of improving the system of - transmitting the postal funds promptly to the national treasury - instead of leaving the same to accumulate in the common centers, - where they were earned, is seen by the immediate wiping out of - the need for a balance of $10,000,000 with which to do business. - Such an ancient method of conducting postal business would - probably do in the period when the pyramids were built, but that - system had finally to surrender, it being too archaic for even - the Postoffice Department to adopt. - -In a communication to me under date of August 9th, 1911, Mr. Madden gives -expression to the following very informative statements: - - In connection with the Hughes postal inquiry I would like to - inform you of the _total addition_ to the expense of conducting - the Postoffice Department which became effective July 1, 1911. - You may avail yourself of these facts in your argument, as they - are official, orders having been issued by Postmaster General - Hitchcock for these additional expenditures. - - The sum of $1,200,000 is to be devoted to increases in the - salaries of postoffice clerks during the current year, while - $600,000 of an increase will go to city letter carriers. The - railway mail clerks will get an increase of only $175,000, making - an addition to the salaries of the three groups of $1,975,000. - When the rural route carriers get their increase of $4,000,000 it - will mean _an addition_ to the four groups of the stupendous sum - of $5,975,000 to the annual total. The figures are calculated to - startle the ordinary observer, especially when there has been so - much music about deficits. - -On August 15th, 1911, Mr. M. H. Madden, as Secretary of the Independent -Postal League, wrote the Hon. Daniel A. Campbell, Postmaster of Chicago, -a lengthy and strong letter, in response to the latter’s request for -copies of former issues of the league’s bulletins. I have a copy of -that letter before me and shall take the liberty to quote a few of its -relevant paragraphs. - -After explaining the reasons why it was impossible for him to furnish -Postmaster Campbell a file of the league’s bulletins, Mr. Madden -continues: - - “For myself I have given second-class postage problems some - study, have written articles concerning the subject, and have - addressed many organizations interested, in various portions of - the country. In this connection I appeared before President Taft - as a representative of the printing trades with President George - L. Berry of the International Printing Pressmen’s Union on Feb. - 23 last. We protested against the raise to 4 cents a pound on - advertising pages in the magazines. As a result of our work, - more than 10,000 telegrams of protest were sent to Senators and - members of the House from organized labor men. Two weeks later a - certain ‘rider’ was thrown in the Senate. The Hughes commission - of inquiry into the cost of handling second-class matter was - then created. In one way and another this movement has been kept - somewhat active. - - “Some weeks ago the editors of union labor publications of the - country met in Chicago and formed an association to continue this - work, the Independent Postal League being thereby relieved of the - task of instructing working people concerning the subject, the - League turning over to the editors, the data it had, consisting - of documents, official reports, etc. - - “President Gompers of the American Federation of Labor and - President Woll of the International Photo-Engravers’ Union - were furnished with material to present before the sessions of - the Hughes Commission. The National Typothetæ to convene in - Denver will also use data supplied by the League, as will the - International Typographical Union at San Francisco; also the - American Federation of Labor at its annual meeting at Atlanta, Ga. - - “In this country there are 2,000,000 organized workingmen - affiliated with the American Federation of Labor and 500,000 who - are unaffiliated. These are opposed to a raise in postage and - have so declared. In the printing trades there are more than - 400,000 of the best paid artisans in the world and these are - working in opposition to a raise, and since they produce almost - a billion dollars’ worth of printing each year their protest is - worth listening to. - - “As workingmen we cannot approve of the inconsistency shown by - having a pressman produce a periodical in Canada and sending it - through the mails at ¼ cent a pound, while his brother pressman - in the United States would be forced to pay four cents a pound - for the same service. And the “Canuck” can certainly do it at a - profit. Here is where a little ‘reciprocity’ juice would taste - nectar-like for the Uncle Sam pressman. For several years our - big postoffice officials have been telling the American people - it cost more than 9 cents a pound to haul second-class mail. - In Canada there is a population of 8,000,000 served by 25,000 - miles of railway, while in our country we have 90,000,000 people - and 246,000 miles of railroads. In the United States we print - 500 periodicals to one printed in the Dominion. The merits - of the question are so obvious that there is no chance for a - controversy; in fact there can be no dispute on a matter so - plain.” - -Now, see here, I do not want to burden you--you, the reader--with -quotations. I have not done so save when the quotations covered the -point--our point--better than I could cover it myself. I write up to -a point to the best of my ability, and then, if I have at hand some -authority--some more _conclusive_ and better told statement than I can -make myself, I hand it to you. - -So please do not skip the quotations in this book. The _meat_ of it is in -the _quoted_ matter, not in what I have said or may say. That is why I -desire to quote further just here. - -Under date of May 16, 1911, Mr. Hitchcock wrote over the signature of -his Second Assistant, Joseph Stewart, the following letter, addressed -“To Publishers.” Whether or not it was sent to publishers in general or -only to “certain monthly and semi-monthly periodicals,” I do not know. I -reprint it here as evidence for the reader in proof of the tendency, or -policy, of Mr. Hitchcock to exercise bureaucratic powers in administering -the official service of his office--_powers not given him by law_. - -I reprint also for the purpose of showing, by two or three following -quotations, how closely Mr. Hitchcock’s official acts are being scanned -by the printing trades and how clearly and how _justly_ they estimate the -results and the trade and industrial effects of such action. - -The letter signed by Mr. Stewart follows: - - POSTOFFICE DEPARTMENT, - SECOND ASSISTANT POSTMASTER GENERAL, - WASHINGTON, D. C., May 16, 1911 - - Publisher, Practical Engineer, Chicago, Ill.: - - SIR:--Arrangements are being made by the Postoffice Department - to transport, after June 30, 1911, _certain_ monthly and - semi-monthly periodical second-class mail matter for _certain_ - states by fast freight to a number of central distributing - points, from which points distribution and delivery will be made - by mail as at present. - - This method of transportation necessarily being somewhat slower - than the present method of carriage of mail throughout, it - becomes necessary for publishers to rearrange their mailing - schedules to allow an earlier delivery to the postoffice of mail - for the states to be so transported, in order that delivery to - subscribers may be made at approximately the same time as at - present. - - It is believed that an advance in mailing dates of from _three_ - to _six_ days will provide the necessary margin to offset - the slower movement, and your co-operation to that extent is - solicited. - - Specific information relative to the _states affected_ and the - time of advance mailing will be furnished at an early date. Any - further information desired relative to this matter will be given - and any assistance in completing arrangements gladly supplied. - - The favor of an early reply is requested. - - Very respectfully, - - JOSEPH STEWART, - Second Assistant Postmaster General. - -The foregoing letter brought a flood of protests in reply. Why should -it not? Why does Mr. Hitchcock, as is evidenced by the letter of his -Second Assistant, seek to make such an unjust discrimination among -periodicals--a discrimination directly contravening _the basic principle -of our government_? - -Among the replies Mr. Stewart received was one, a copy of which follows: - - CHICAGO, May 22, 1911. - - Hon. Joseph Stewart, Second Assistant Postmaster General, - Washington, D. C. - - DEAR SIR.--We acknowledge receipt of your favor of the 16th, - and regret that an early reply, as requested, is but partially - possible at present. - - You tell us unequivocally, if we interpret your letter correctly, - that our Postoffice Department in rendering service to - subscribers will discriminate against monthly and semi-monthly - periodicals after June 30th; that certain publications of a - class, issued weekly, will be favored with through mail service, - and that other publications of the same character and class, - issued semi-monthly or monthly, shall be rendered freight - service, and no differential rate provided. - - It is unfortunate that a distinction directly affecting the - majority of the people could not have been arbitrated, and - thereby avoided a period of distress. - - Yours, very truly, - - CHICAGO TRADE PRESS ASS’N, - E. R. SHAW, - President. - -Another reply follows. It is from the Chicago Printing Trades, an -organization which Mr. Madden, previously quoted, represented at -Washington in his conference with President Taft and senators and members -of the House. - - To Postmaster General Hitchcock:-- - - The various branches of labor engaged in the production of - printing in Chicago number more than 50,000 highly skilled - artisans and their annual output is more than $100,000,000. - These well-paid working people declare--they knowing it to - be a statement based on truth--that the contemplated change - in the method of distributing their product will interfere - disadvantageously with their opportunity for employment, and - they respectfully appeal to the postal authorities to pause in - installing a system that is calculated to work great harm to - their industry. Their united, emphatic protest is entered against - what they feel to be an unwise and unnecessary hampering of their - industry and they ask that their appeal be heard on the justice - of their claim. - - In distributing regular publications through the mails the factor - of time is most valuable, and to inaugurate a slower schedule - would greatly reduce the current value of periodicals and curtail - the influence which these publications now wield. We respectfully - direct attention to the injury which the owners of publications - would sustain through curtailment of their earning power, as this - would at once operate adversely to labor. In fact the severest - effect would reach the toiler. - - As well-paid, organized workingmen we respectfully call attention - to the policy of protection which has enabled our country to - flourish almost uninterruptedly for a half-century, and in behalf - of this wise system we ask that no unnecessary interference - with our trade be inaugurated by those to whom we look with - expectation to forward our welfare as industrious citizens. - - In common with other industries, business in the publishing - lines is far from flourishing, and, while our rate of wages is - conceded, we recognize that anything which interferes with the - profits and success of employers will immediately react upon our - opportunity for employment. It is upon this basis that we plead, - and we ask you, as head of the Postoffice Department, that you - forego instituting the system of distributing the semi-monthly - and monthly publications by freight, and continue the present - method of rapid-mail service. - - Labor’s voice is raised in earnest plea for what it considers - itself competent to speak upon, and with the hope that you will - aid in maintaining for us our present conditions, which we esteem - necessary for our welfare and the welfare of those depending upon - us, we leave the question in your hands. - - MICHAEL H. MADDEN, - Secretary Independent Postal League. - -I am presenting just here, only local protests--Chicago protests. Similar -objections were heard from all parts of the country. The Chicago protest, -however, would not be complete unless we presented the resolutions -adopted by Typographical Union No. 16, at a regular meeting held July 30, -1911. It applies both to the proposed increase in second-class postage -rates and to Mr. Hitchcock’s unjust discrimination in distributing -periodicals: - - WHEREAS, It is a fundamental economic truth that anything which - tends to unduly and unjustly raise the cost of distributing the - product of labor reduces the opportunity for employment of those - concerned in the industry thus affected, and indirectly becomes - a menace to all industry, Chicago Typographical Union No. 16, - embracing a membership of more than 4,000 skilled craftsmen, - takes this method of entering its emphatic protest against any - increase in the rate for second-class mail matter; and, - - WHEREAS, The proposed routing of semi-monthly and monthly - publications by fast freight instead of by the regular fast mail - service is manifestly unjust and is a flagrant discrimination - against our product, this organization further condemns those - who contemplate this pernicious innovation, and we submit that - the installation of this system by the Postoffice Department is - not only inimical to our welfare as workingmen but will work - incalculable injury to the publishing interests of the entire - country; and, - - WHEREAS, These propositions of the Postoffice Department deserve - only the strongest condemnation, and as a means of making this - protest effective, we hereby invite the working people of the - United States to unite with us in a movement having for its - purpose the overhauling and readjustment of the postal affairs - of this country, to the end that the service may become one - of greater convenience to our people and be an instrument - of promotion to the industries of our country instead of a - leaden handicap on our industrial progress and the educational - improvement of all the people; therefore, be it, - - _Resolved_, That for the protection of the printing industry we - hereby instruct our delegates to the next annual convention of - the International Typographical Union to propose the following - for the consideration of that body, and they are hereby - instructed to support the indorsement of the same by the said - International Typographical Union convention: - - _Resolved_, That the International Typographical Union - emphatically opposes any advance in the rate of postage on - second-class mail matter, and that it condemns the proposed - method of distributing semi-monthly and monthly periodicals - by fast freight instead of by the regular fast mail, to the - facilities of which they are entitled under the law, because they - pay for the same. - -The foregoing quotations are sufficient to show that the printing trades -of the nation are awake to the industrial significance of legislation of -the Hitchcock “rider” nature, likewise that they are equally wideawake -to the purpose of Mr. Hitchcock--ulterior or other--in his attempt to -_stealth_ such legislation into operative law. - -How many people are employed in the printing trades in this country? I do -not know. - -In Chicago alone there are, at a safe estimate, not less than 40,000. A -representative of the organized pressmen of New York before the Postal -Commission testified that there were 12,000 pressmen in New York City and -that _six thousand of these_ were employed on presses which print monthly -and weekly magazines. - -I have no later statistics by me than a 1905 report touching the number -of men and women employed in the printing trades in this country. From -the figures given for 1905, however, it may be conservatively stated that -the number of persons in this nation who today are earning their shelter, -apparel and subsistence (not counting the office or clerical forces) -in our great printing and publishing industries is somewheres around -400,000. If the counting-room and general office forces are included the -total number--not counting owners or publishers--will reach at least -450,000. - -Now, if we total the people who would be affected by legislation which -must force a shrinkage of from 30 to 50 per cent in the consumption of -wood pulp paper, counting from the timber cruisers to the publication -counting-rooms, we shall find that total to be not less than -700,000--probably 800,000. And, mark you, you fair-minded, conscientious -reader, that total does not include the wives and children dependent upon -the vast army of men employed in our printing industries--dependent for -shelter, clothing and food. If they are counted, the figures I have just -given must be doubled--probably tripled. - -So, there must be not less than two, probably _two and a half_, millions -of people,--men, women, wives and children--who would be affected by -legislation of the Hitchcock “rider” character. - -It is needless, but I must still point out that not _one_ of these -millions of industrial _earners_ nor their dependents who would be -injuriously, if indeed not disastrously affected, by legislation of -the nature Mr. Hitchcock is so persistently, if not _unscrupulously_, -pressing to force into operative law, _is a magazine publisher_. - -Most certain is it that none of this vast multitude of our industrial -citizens and their dependents can be thought of, nor even imagined, as -being counted among those “few magazine publishers” who, Mr. Hitchcock -is reported to have repeatedly asserted, would alone be affected by his -proposed harsh, discriminating and, therefore, unjust legislation. - - - - -CHAPTER IX. - -MR. HITCHCOCK STILL AFTER THE MAGAZINES. - - -I have previously intimated that Mr. Hitchcock is still devoting -himself to forcing his _ulterior_ motive into operation, either as law -or department ruling. In evidence of this I shall here quote from his -address or addresses before the Hughes Commission. This Commission was -created in the closing hours of the last session of Congress--created as -a sort of cushion or pad in order that his _unconstitutional_ “rider” -might take its cropper without breaking any bones or painfully lacerating -the _official_ feelings of Mr. Hitchcock. This Hughes Commission convened -in New York City, August 1, 1911. Following is Mr. Hitchcock’s opening -address before it, as reported by the New York Times, August 2. The -italics are the writers:-- - - Postmaster General Hitchcock opened for the department. He said - his study of the postage rate problem had led him to believe - that certain fundamental principles of administration, almost - new to the Postoffice Department at present, should be closely - adhered to. These included _the operation of the service on a - self-supporting basis_, maintained by imposing such charges as - would yield an income equal to the expenses. They included, also, - he said, such an adjustment of the postage charges _as would - make each class of mail matter pay for its own handling, and no - more_. He would further have the levying of postage rates made on - the basis of _the average cost of handling and carriage for the - country as a whole_, and, finally, postal laws should be enacted - so definite in character as to be easy of interpretation and - susceptible of uniform enforcement. - - Mr. Hitchcock stated in this connection that when the books for - the fiscal year of 1911 are closed _they will show for the first - time in many years a surplus of postal funds_, and he hoped that - this condition would become permanent. Mr. Hitchcock opposed - any new classification of mail matter at this time, saying the - present classification could be made to include all matter - now admissible, and he doubted the expediency of attempting - a revision. He then sought to set forth the large share - second-class matter has in the burdens of the department, and the - _small percentage it pays of the total cost or even of its own - cost_. - - “During 1910,” he said, “there were carried in the mail - 8,310,164,623 pieces of first-class mail, consisting of letters, - other sealed matter, and postal cards. This mail averaged in - weight 0.35 of an ounce a piece, making 45.1 pieces to the - pound. The cost of handling and carriage for this mail was - $86,792,511.35, an _average of 47 cents a pound_, while the - postage charge was $154,796,668.08, leaving a clear profit of - $68,004,156.73. - - “During the same year there were carried 4,336,259,864 pieces - of second-class matter, newspapers and other periodical - publications, averaging 3.33 ounces a piece, or 4.8 pieces to the - pound. The cost of handling and carriage was $80,791,615.03, or a - _little less than 9 cents a pound_, while the postage return was - only $10,607,271.02, leaving a _total loss of_ $70,184,344.01. - - “From a review of the rates provided for the several classes - of mail, it will be observed that in comparison with the - cent-a-pound charge for second-class matter the rate on - third-class matter is 700 per cent. higher; that on fourth-class - matter 1,500 per cent. higher, and that on letter and other - first-class matter 3,100 per cent. higher. While it is true - that _the expense of handling and carrying second-class mail is - less than for any other class_, due to the size and weight of - single pieces, to relief from the cancellation of stamps, and - to the fact that a considerable part of the bagging, sorting, - and labeling in the offices of origin is done by the publishers, - nevertheless a charge of 1 cent a pound covers but a small - fraction of the actual cost.[6] - - “The present self-supporting condition of the service is - made possible only by the fact that other classes of mail, - _particularly the first-class, are excessively taxed to make up - the loss caused by the inadequate charge on the second-class_. - This will be better understood when it is noted that although - first-class matter comprised during the fiscal year 1910 only - 13.4 per cent. of all the revenue-producing domestic mail, it - yielded a net profit of $68,004,156.73, while second-class - matter, comprising 65.6 per cent. of all the revenue-producing - domestic mail, yielded but $10,607,271.02, leaving the tremendous - loss of $70,184,344.01. Thus the deficit caused by the heavy loss - on the handling and carriage of second-class matter was greater - than the profit obtained from first-class matter.” - - Mr. Hitchcock here made a plea for equalization of the rate on - second-class matter on the ground that it would at once make - possible the reduction of letter postage from 2 cents to 1 cent - an ounce. This reduction would come about from the fact, he - said, that the present profit in handling first-class matter was - approximately equal to the loss sustained in the transportation - of second-class mail. - - Mr. Hitchcock said, however, that he did not believe that the - rate for second-class mail should be at once advanced to where - _it would cover the cost of handling and carriage, although that - should be the ultimate end in view_. - - “For the present,” said he, “_an increase of only one cent a - pound is recommended_, thus making a flat rate of 2 cents a - pound, which should be regarded as merely tentative, however, - leaving for future determination such _additional increase as may - be found necessary to meet the cost_.” - - The Postmaster General served notice on the commission that if by - any chance it should see fit to recommend the continuance of the - present rate--a “merely nominal postage rate,” he called it--his - department could not consistently do otherwise than renew _its - recommendation for a higher rate of postage on the advertising - portions of magazines_. - -I need make no comment on that address beyond the comment implied in -the phrases and wording I have marked for italics. That Mr. Hitchcock -still purposes to “put over” the injustices covered in his Senate rider -amendment to the postoffice appropriation bill is made baldly clear. That -he still is working that “deficit” as a sort of “come-on” to his purpose -is equally clear. And the ridiculous, if not ludicrous, feature of this -talk before the commission is that it comes _after_ he has demonstrated -and publicly announced that _there is no deficit in the Postoffice -Department for the fiscal year, 1910-11_. - -As Mr. M. H. Madden states in a letter to me, printed on a previous page, -Mr. Hitchcock reports a profit of _one to three million dollars_ for the -fiscal year named. - -Later, if I remember rightly, he discovered a stealage--pardon me, I mean -he discovered an “excess”--of from $9,000,000 to $14,000,000 in railway -mail pay. - -Just in this connection I wish to say that Mr. Hitchcock is deserving of -the praise and commendation of every one of us American citizens for the -aggressive way in which he has cut down expenditures in his department -_without impairing its service_. Also is he deserving of equal praise -and commendation from us for his vigorous and fairly successful methods -of going after that railway mail haulage steal, which has been going -on for a time to which the younger generation of our citizens wots not -of. Although I may adversely criticise a man, as in this volume I have -criticised Mr. Hitchcock, I like the man who puts up a stiff fight for a -cause, even though I believe his cause is wrong. Candidly I can see no -reason why Mr. Hitchcock and his predecessor postmaster generals should -so worry themselves over a “deficit” in the Postoffice Department--_a -department in which a surplus should never be expected and never allowed -to become permanent_. - -But our present Postmaster General has, by his aggressive action and -close scrutiny of the loose, wasteful methods under which the vast -business of his department is carried on, disposed of the “deficit” and -found a _surplus_. - -_In this he has done what his predecessors failed to do._ - -For this he merits our highest praise and commendation. -Personally I yield it to him, untrammeled and in full meed. I -object only to his attempt to saddle upon second-class mail--the -one-cent-a-pound-matter--the burden of recouping the government for -the losses on rural route and star route service and the railway mail -pay stealage. I object because I not only believe, but I _know_ as -comprehendingly and as comprehensively as does he, that the second-class -matter carried in the mails today at one cent a pound _should be carried -and handled at a profit at that rate_. - -I also know that just as second-class mail (periodicals), is cut down in -distribution _in just about the same proportion will the revenue from -first, third and fourth class mail be cut down_. - -It is because of this firm belief, that I oppose Mr. Hitchcock’s, to me, -absurd purpose and attempt to make “each division or class of mail pay -for its carriage and handling.” - -I am also opposing his manifest attempt to “play favorites” in -legislation and to secure bureaucratic powers for his department--in -contravention of my constitutional rights--to _your_ constitutional -rights. - -I take the following from the New York Call of August 26. The Call -captions it as “Hitchcock’s Sum Up.” It evidences the fact that he still -follows his folly--that he is still after those “few magazine publishers” -and after them, too, on his “rider” lines. - -The Call reports as follows: - - “The attorneys for the magazines,” said Postmaster Hitchcock in - summing up the government’s case, “have presented this matter - of advertising in magazines in such a way as to leave the - impression that there is a controversy over it. There is none. - _The department knows that the advertising matter in magazines - produces first-class mail_ and that the postoffice is benefited - in that way. The important question is: What effect will a whole - increase of 1 cent a pound have on the advertising? Will it be - the means of stopping it? - - “We feel that advertising would not be diminished by such an - increase and if such is the case, all this information which - we have heard today, interesting as it may be, is not to the - point. Repeatedly we have heard the general argument against an - increase in rates as though our recommendation is for a general - increase. We don’t want that at all. What we are driving at is a - readjustment. We are not trying to economize or save money. We - have done that to the best of our ability already and want simply - to increase the second-class rate so that the first will pay for - itself, believing that in this way the greater number of people - will be served.” - -If Mr. Hitchcock is correctly reported in the above, it would appear -that something of a change has taken place in his mental landscape since -he put his “rider” on the Senate speedway during the closing hours of -the last session of Congress. “The department knows that the advertising -matter in magazines produces first-class mail,” he now says. - -Did the department know that fact when that “rider” was on the speedway? -It most certainly did, if it then knew anything--that is anything -about the sources of postal revenues. Did Mr. Hitchcock or any of his -assistants, at the time referred to, make any vehement declaration of -that knowledge--that advertising matter in magazines produces first-class -revenue? If he or his assistants did so, no one has reported the fact of -having heard such declaration. - -In March, Mr. Hitchcock battles valiantly to have the advertising pages -of magazines taxed _four_ cents a pound for carriage and distribution. -At that time he “estimated” that such increase in the mail rate on the -advertising “sheets” of magazines would be equivalent to a rate of “about -two cents a pound” on the entire magazine. As about one-half the full -weight of our leading magazines--the magazines which Mr. Hitchcock, as -previously stated, appears to be “after”--is in their advertising pages, -his method of “estimating” must have been somewhat baggy at the knees -last March. Any seventh or eighth grade grammar school pupil could have -told him that a four-cent rate on one-half the weight and a one-cent rate -on the other half is equivalent to a flat rate of two and one-half cents -on the full weight. - -However, we may leave that pass. It is past--has washed into the drift -of time. If the Call correctly reports him, he is now willing, or was -willing on August 25, 1911, to accept a flat rate of two cents a pound on -all second-class matter. That shows some improvement over his “estimate” -of March last. It would seem that Mr. Hitchcock is getting down nearer -the tacks in this second-class mail rate question, and, as he has got -rid of that annoying “deficit,” it can be hoped that he may yet see the -fact--see that a _one-cent-a-pound-rate_ is ample to cover the cost of -carriage and handling of second-class mail matter. - -Still, we must not be over-confident about what Mr. Hitchcock may or -may not do. Regardless of what he said or may have said before the -Hughes Commission at its recent session, it would appear that he is -still gunning for those independent magazines which have been guilty of -_telling the truth_ about both official and private corruptionists and -corruption and also guilty of turning the sandblast of publicity on the -veneer and varnish under which has been hiding much nastiness--political, -financial and other--in this country. I say it appears that Mr. Hitchcock -is still after those magazines. If such is not the fact, then why does -he and the orators and exhorters of his department go junketing about -the country lecturing and hectoring postmasters, instead of staying -at home and attending to department affairs? If he is not on the same -trail he “caught up” last March, why are he and his assistants trying so -hard to work up sentiment favorable to an increase in second-class mail -rates and a decrease of fifty per cent in first-class rates? Has any -considerable number of our people been complaining about the first-class -or letter postage rate? If there has been such complaints The Man on -the Ladder has not heard of them. On the other hand, it is a known fact -that _millions_ of our people have protested and are still protesting -against any raise in the second-class mail rate. Why, then, in face of -these facts, is Mr. Hitchcock working so hard, so industriously and -so adroitly, if not, indeed, _craftily_, to get the vast personnel of -his department,--carriers, rural routers, star routers, railway mail -clerks and postmasters--postmasters, from Hiram Hairpin at Crackerville, -Ga., all the way up--fourth, third, second class postmasters to the -first-class postmasters in our larger cities--why, I ask, is Mr. -Hitchcock working so strenuously to get the vast _political machine_ of -his department lined up against the protest of millions of our people, -unless he is still after those pestiferous, independent magazines? - -Why, again, it may be asked, are he and his assistants coaching the -220,000 clerks of his department and the 60,000 postmasters, assistant -postmasters, etc., on his “staff” to put up a _promotion_ talk for a -one-cent rate on first-class (letter or sealed) matter? It _should be_ -a one-cent rate. Nobody at all informed as to mail service rates and -revenues will question that. But it is equally true that, up to a recent -date, there have been, comparatively speaking (the comparison being with -the millions protesting against an increase in the second-class rate) but -few complaints and complainants against the present rate of two cents for -carrying and handling a letter. - -Why, then, I ask, is Mr. Hitchcock so actively cranking up his -departmental political machine to make neighborhood runs and do some hill -climbing in advocacy of that one-cent rate for first-class matter? Yes, -why? - -Is it a legitimate assumption to say that the present agitation for a -lowered rate on first-class matter found origin in Mr. Hitchcock? If it -is, then what is he after? - -To The Man on the Ladder it looks as if he was still after those -magazines which have exposed--yes, even displayed--a weakness for telling -the truth about men and conditions. Otherwise, why should he be arguing -the postal “deficit” in March as cause and reason for his urgent efforts -to make operative law out of that unconstitutional “rider” and now asking -for a flat rate of two cents on second-class, and advocating a cut of -fifty per cent in first-class, or letter, postage rates? - -In his January-February-March talk, the “deficit” was the _substructure_ -of it all. By attending strictly to what the people understand as a -Postmaster General’s business, Mr. Hitchcock faded the then $6,000,000 -deficit into a few hundred thousand surplus, for the fiscal year recently -ended. For this he deserves our highest commendation. He has mine. Why? - -Because Mr. Hitchcock in converting that deficit into a surplus has done -just what any one of his predecessors could have done in any year during -the past thirty-five, _if they had tried, and not been interfered with by -dirty politics and dirty politicians_. - -Still, from the ladder top, it looks as if Mr. Hitchcock is after some -one or _ones_. If my surmise is correct, who is it he is after, _if not -those publishers of magazines who are educating us as to the wrong and -right of things in this government of ours_? - -That is for you to say, reader. That you may not think that the opinion -just expressed is far fetched or an “individual” to bolster an opinion -of the writer, I shall here quote a few paragraphs from an October issue -of the Farm Journal of Philadelphia. The paragraphs are from an article -written by Mr. Wilmer Atkinson, the Farm Journal editor and publisher. - -I have on a previous page referred to and quoted Mr. Atkinson, and -here I wish to emphasize, if my earlier reference did not do so, that -Mr. Wilmer Atkinson is one of the best, if not _the_ best, informed -men in this country on cost of second-class mail carriage, handling -and distribution. Mr. Atkinson must also be credited with an acumen -in watching and divining--sizing up--the purpose and intent of our -Postoffice Department that is equaled by few, if any, other men in this -country, Postmaster Generals not excepted. I have been studying this -question for years. Mr. Atkinson has studied it for more years, and he -has studied it, too, from a business man’s--a publisher’s--viewpoint, as -he has been compelled to do, being the directing head of one of the most -widely circulated and read farm journals in this country. - -That aside, my purpose here is to reprint a few paragraph excerpts from -a recent (October, 1911) issue of the Farm Journal--an editorial written -by Mr. Atkinson himself and which shows that this astute student of the -present federal postal affairs corroborates the position The Man on the -Ladder has taken--which supports the statement previously made that Mr. -Hitchcock is still gunning for those, to him, objectionable magazines. - -The following is from the October issue of the Farm Journal, under the -heading of “Our Monthly Talk:” - - In response to invitation a number of gentlemen interested in - postal questions came together for informal conference at North - View, the summer residence of the undersigned, on September 20 - and 21. - - Those who met are the official representatives of the following - associations: - - The National Fraternal Press Association. - - The Federation of Trades Press Association. - - The Ohio Buckeye Press Association, and the Weekly Country Press - of other states. - - The National Catholic Editors’ Association. - - The United Typothetæ of America. - - These gentlemen constitute a portion of the Publishers’ - Commission now in process of formation. The representative of the - American Medical Editors’ Association was unable to be present on - account of a pressing engagement, and the member representing The - Associated Advertising Clubs of America was absent in Europe. - - This was the initial effort of the commission to bring the - entire publishing fraternity of the country into such unity of - spirit and purpose that something effective may be accomplished - toward establishing not only just and honorable, but amicable - and pleasant, relations with the Postoffice Department; to bring - publishers of the different classes into harmony, in order - that they may stand and act together for the protection and - furtherance of their common interests, and for the cultivation of - fraternal feelings among themselves. - - There were three meetings held, two on the 20th and another - on the morning of the 21st. After much earnest and harmonious - discussion, it was decided that the great need of publishers at - this time is to have the light turned upon postal affairs, so - that they may know where they are at. To best accomplish this - purpose it was thought that there should be a _Publishers’ bureau - established at Washington_, in charge of a first-class man, who - would be the collector and distributor of information regarding - postoffice doings, rulings, hearings and proposed postal - legislation; this bureau also to publish a paper for circulation - among publishers of all classes throughout the United States, - which would keep them thoroughly informed as to postoffice rules, - regulations, proceedings and acts of every description. - - Much of the information publishers get now is fragmentary, - uncertain, often considerably warped and belated cold-storage - news, void of substantial life-sustaining qualities. _The annual - reports_ of the department in which publishers are most vitally - interested _are less complete than formerly_. Many important - facts do not appear in them. For instance, no statement is - ever made as to the amount of first-class matter originated by - the second-class, none, or very little, account is made of it. - No attempt has ever been made to gather, much less publish, - statistics on the subject. - - Formerly a list was accessible of publications annually thrown - out of the mails at second-class rates, but not in recent years. - - The report of the Third Assistant Postmaster-General in 1897 - comprises 97 pages of compact statements and postal information - in small type; that for 1901, 133 pages; while those for 1909 and - 1910 contain only 60 and 65 pages in larger type, respectively. - I am not censuring Mr. Britt in this matter, but simply stating - facts. - - Then as to the rulings, laws and regulations, there is not a - publisher living who knows what they are, or can definitely - ascertain what they are, from month to month. They are liable - to change without the publishers being informed directly of the - change. What purported to be “The Postal Laws and Regulations - Relating to the Second-class of Mail Matter” was issued in 1910, - but in it the law, rulings and regulations are so jumbled up - together that it is difficult for a publisher to know which is - which; instead of being illuminating and helpful, this compendium - is confusing and involved in obscurity. It is a well recognized - legal maxim, that “where the law is uncertain there is no law.” - - Publishers have not known that an active propaganda in favor of a - higher rate has been in progress ever since Congress adjourned, - but such is the fact. The Postmaster General went before the - Hughes Commission and advocated it. - - The Third Assistant Postmaster General, in the early summer, - made an address before some publishers in Chicago, wherein he - stated that it was the purpose of the Postmaster General “to - adjust postage rates based upon the principle of the payment on - each class of mail matter of a rate of postage equal to the cost - of handling and carriage, and no more, and that one class of - mail matter shall not be taxed to meet deficiencies caused by an - inadequate rate on another class,” meaning by this that the rate - must be raised on second-class matter and lowered on the first - class. - - General DeGraw, Fourth Assistant Postmaster General, in an - address before the West Virginia Association of Postmasters, - stated the purpose of the Postmaster General to be exactly what - Mr. Britt declared it to be; and he had the postmasters pass a - resolution indorsing the Postmaster General, and even as late as - September 22, at Milwaukee, he advocated “_the crystalization of - the proposed increase in second-class mail rates into law_.” - - Jesse L. Suter, representing the Postoffice Department, brought - greetings from the Postmaster General, to a round-up of - postmasters in Michigan in August last, and said that “the great - subsidy extended the publishers in the form of a ridiculously - small rate of postage is unreasonable. Were the publishers - required to pay more in proportion to what it actually costs - the government to transport their products, the people of the - United States would be benefited. _Every man, woman and child - in the United States is taxed seventy-three cents by way of his - letter postage_ over and above the cost of carrying his own - letters in order to meet the deficiency of underpaid second-class - matter.”[7] And then, of course, the postmasters passed a - resolution thanking Mr. Suter for his “timely hints relative to - second-class matter and commending the Postmaster General.” - - On August 22 and 23, there was a postmasters’ convention at - Toledo, Ohio, at which a resolution was proposed complimenting - the Postmaster General “for his efforts to bring about a fair - compensation from those enjoying the benefits of second-class - rates.” - - James B. Cook, Superintendent of the Division of Postoffice - Supplies, Washington, D. C., also addressed a postmasters’ - convention in the West, in which he said: “There is one thing - I am going to ask you to do--it is a simple thing and one that - should be near to your hearts. Certain publishers have attempted - to create public sentiment against an increase of postage on - advertising matter in magazines.… Many of us believe that the - postage rate is class legislation of the rankest kind in favor - of the few at the expense of the masses. Talk to your business - men about it; the Postmaster General _is going to win this fight - because he is in the right_. Tell the business men that the - Postmaster General feels that he is entitled not only to their - moral but their active support.” - - At how many other state conventions the postmasters have - been prompted to pass resolutions and have been addressed by - Washington officials endorsing “the great fight” the Postmaster - General is making for a higher postage rate, deponent sayeth not. - - Thus it is that an energetic campaign has been carried on by the - Postmaster General during the summer, postmasters being urged - to pass resolutions and “talk to business men” in favor of an - increase of postage rate on second-class matter in order, no - doubt, to be ready when Congress meets to put the measure through. - - In confirmation of the above, word comes from Washington to the - effect that “there has been no cessation in the activities of - the department to make preparations to renew vigorously at the - forthcoming Congress the fight for an increased rate. If the - publishers feel that they have won their fight and are resting - easily, they will have an awakening ere the year is over.” - - While it would not be possible or advisable under the - circumstances to circumscribe the activities of our energetic - Postmaster General, certainly it would be a prudent and wise step - for publishers to place themselves in position to know what is - going on injurious to their own interests and that of the people - of the whole country. - - Now, Mr. Hitchcock is a brave and persistent fighter and as such - will respect and honor those who will stand up like men and - defend their cause, and can have only contempt for those who will - meekly sit still while being pummeled to death. - - _If publishers are ever to establish honorable and just and - amicable and pleasant relations with the Postoffice Department - they must show that they are men with red blood in their veins._ - - The essential thing will be to get the right man to represent us - at Washington but this ought not to be difficult. - - Among his duties will be to make inquiry into postal matters - of every description that in any way relate to the publishing - business and to publish them; publish orders of the department; - rulings and proposed rulings; attend hearings and publish the - proceedings; keep abreast of measures introduced in Congress and - proposed by the Postoffice Department bearing upon the publishing - business; keep subscribers fully posted on everything that occurs - at Washington or elsewhere that concerns them; to advocate such - reforms in the postal service as the people ask for and need, and - finally to rally the whole fraternity to resist any threatened - or actual encroachment upon the freedom and independence of the - press. - - Here are some of the qualifications necessary for the person - fit to take charge of the Washington office: Some experience as - editor and publisher; he must be honest and just; patriotic; - discreet; firm; tactful; must have power as a writer; character - as a gentleman; vision, courage, one who cannot be either - frightened or cajoled; and finally, one who recognizes the - fact that _liberty of the press is a principle that lies at - the foundation of republican institutions_, and must not be - encroached upon, or placed in jeopardy. - -I have made the above quotation from Mr. Atkinson to evidence the fact -that he and others support my view of Mr. Hitchcock’s attitude _now_, -in relation to this second-class mail rate question. Mr. Atkinson shows -quite conclusively that our Postmaster General is still, and stealthily, -running the trail which the Penrose-Overstreet Commission _scented_ for -him and urges publishers and the printing trades to be on their guard. - -Some pages back I adverted to the fact that the deficit of $6,000,000 -for the fiscal year 1909-10 was the ground-plan of Mr. Hitchcock for -an increase in second-class postage rates. That deficit he himself has -converted into _a surplus of several thousands of dollars_. - -Why, then, is he still trailing those independent periodicals? - -Why, too, it is relevant to ask, did he so suddenly hear that the people -of this country were crying for a cut of fifty per cent in first-class, -or sealed, postage rates, much as the advertiser declares the children -cry for Castoria? To the Man on the Ladder it appears that what Mr. -Hitchcock heard must have been a “far cry”--very far. So far, indeed, -that no one who did not have his _ear to an ulterior motive_ could hear -it. - -You will observe that he worries a couple of years over a “deficit”--a -little runabout, five H. P. deficit of $6,000,000. Then by doing a few -things which common business sense imperatively dictates should be done, -and which, it is well known among competents, any one of a dozen of Mr. -Hitchcock’s predecessors should have done, or _could_ have done had -not dirty politics blocked them--by doing just a _few_ of the business -things which every student of the question knows could have been done and -should have been done years ago, Mr. Hitchcock lost his “deficit”--his -ground-plan for attack on second-class rates--_and found a surplus -instead_. - -The Man on the Ladder does not desire to appear impertinent nor even -finicky in his type conversation on this point, but in simple justice to -the magnitude of the question he is constrained to ask: Is a “deficit” -so essentially necessary to Mr. Hitchcock in a fight to put certain -independent periodicals on the financial skids that he must, losing one -deficit, _immediately set about creating another_? - -That is just what his move to cut the mail rate on first-class, or -sealed, matter must lead to--lead to temporarily of course. In the end a -one-cent rate per ounce or fraction thereof will win to a paying basis. -That rate will mean a cut of sixteen cents a pound from thirty-two cents -a pound for carriage and handling letters and other sealed matter of -the first-class. Certainly the postoffice can haul and distribute such -matter at a profit at that rate. However, it is equally certain that the -department will not handle such matter at a profit for two, three or more -years--not so handle it until numerous causes of waste, inhering in the -department for years, are sloughed and the department put under _strict -business management_, and not left under partisan political management -as now and as it has been for thirty-five or forty years. - -With the postal and post card facilities now furnished at the one-cent -rate, no considerable number of our people are complaining about the -two-cent rate for letters and other sealed matter. But all will welcome -a flat rate of one cent on such matter at the present weights. If they -get it, either with or without Mr. Hitchcock’s assistance, the people -will be getting only what they are entitled to, deficit or no deficit. -However, if Mr. Hitchcock thinks a “deficit” necessary armament in his -fight to increase second-class mail rates--to increase such rates, as it -would appear, on a certain few periodicals which print and publish _what -the people want to hear and read and not what a few federal officeholders -tell them to print and publish_, then a cut of 50 per cent in the present -first-class postage rates will most certainly create that deficit for him. - -In a few years, of course, after business has adjusted itself to the -lower rate and the fathers, mothers and sweethearts of the country have -learned that they can write a letter to John, Mary, Thomas or Lucy and -have it delivered for one cent, whereas it now costs two cents, then Mr. -Hitchcock’s _created_ deficit will fade away--will again fade into a -surplus. - -In the meantime, however, Mr. Hitchcock and associate coterie who -apparently are gunning for periodicals _which dare tell the truth_, -will have a “deficit” to use as wadding in their verbal, oratorical and -_franked_ ordnance. - -The 1910 report of the Postoffice Department sets up something over -$202,000,000 as receipts from cancellation of stamps, or stamp sales. -Of course, millions of dollars’ worth of those stamps were bought for -and canceled in third and fourth class service, catalogues, books, -etc.--in third-class carriage and handling, and merchandise parcels in -fourth class. One has no data--nor can he obtain such data from the -Postoffice Department records--to show what sum or portion of that -$202,000,000 worth of stamps was canceled in the transmission of letters -and other sealed matter of the first-class. But it may be conservatively -stated that if Mr. Hitchcock succeeds in cutting down or curtailing -the circulation of weekly and monthly periodicals--especially their -advertising pages--he will have no trouble in finding, for two or three -years at least, a shrinkage of from $50,000,000 to $75,000,000 in that -stamp account. - -That, with the falling away in _paid_ second-class matter, will provide -him a “deficit” which should make him jubilant--should furnish wadding -for his embrasured guns for two or three years in his attack on those -recalcitrant periodicals which attend to their _own business_ in a clean, -truthful way and expect nothing of a Postmaster General other than that -he attend strictly and efficiently to his business, to the business of -the Postoffice Department--to the business of collecting, transporting -and distributing the federal mails. - -I have probably discussed Mr. Hitchcock, his faults and his excellencies -sufficiently. I will therefore, pass to another phase of our general -subject. - - -THE HUGHES COMMISSION. - -First, however, I must introduce a few paragraphs here in summary of -the work done by the Hughes Commission at its August session in New -York City. The commission comprised Associate Justice Hughes, President -Lowell of Harvard University, and H. A. Wheeler, President of the Chicago -Association of Commerce. That this triumvirate of gentlemen will act -disinterestedly and fairly, so far as their knowledge and the evidence -relating to postal affairs extends, there is here no question. - -That they have not and will not dig up and uncover facts and data -relating to the haulage and handling of second-class mail matter, beyond -that already known to and on file with government officials, is equally -certain. No finer trinity of men could well have been selected by -President Taft, but the fact is none of the three has had any opportunity -to make a study of the federal mail service, second-class or other. Or -if they have had such opportunity, the press of official and private -business in other lines and directions preventing, in large extent, -their study of postal service costs and affairs. No doubt, these three -gentlemen will do the very best and fairest they can--or know how to -do--with the evidence presented to them. Still, I am of the opinion that -they will discover little which has not already been discovered--which, -as Congressman Moon said on the floor of the House last March (1911), -“has already been discovered and filed for departmental and official -reference.” Each of them is a man of high academic training but neither -of them, so far as The Man on the Ladder has been able to learn, had -made, as previously stated, any qualifying study of federal postal -affairs. So the best we have a right to expect from them is that they -will tell the story, draped in new or different verbiage, told by -predecessor commissions on second-class postal rates, costs of haulage -and handling the same, etc. - -Incidentally it may be said with all due courtesy and respect that -the Hughes Commission will probably succeed in spending the $50,000 -appropriated for its expenses, subsistence, incidentals, etc. The present -commission would not be loyal to precedent if it permitted any of that -$50,000 to return to the general fund as an “unexpended balance.” - -Just here I desire to introduce a few items from the testimony of Mr. -Wilmer Atkinson before the Hughes Commission, which, in August last began -strenuous efforts to spend $50,000 and to discover and report upon facts -anent the cost of hauling and handling second-class mail matter--which -facts have already been collected, collated and filed with labored, -likewise expensive, care somewheres in the government’s archives. I have -quoted from Mr. Atkinson several times in forward pages. I desire to -quote here from his testimony before this Hughes Commission, because the -Hughes Commission is the latest and “best seller” on the second class -mail shelf and because I recognize in Mr. Atkinson one of the first and -most dependable authorities in the country on the cost of carriage, -handling and distribution of mail--whether of the second or any other -class. Especially do I desire to quote part of his testimony before the -Hughes Commission because I am of the opinion that the reader, as well as -the Commission, must necessarily gather forcefully pertinent facts from -it: - - To ascertain what second-class matter costs has been found to be - a puzzling proposition. Many have tried to solve the puzzle and - all have failed. - - The Joint Congressional Commission consisting of Penrose, Carter - and Clay for the Senate, and Overstreet, Moon and Gardner for the - House, with the aid of numerous expert accountants, at a cost - of a quarter of a million dollars (according to the President’s - statement), attempted it and gave it up. All these gentlemen - are on record as declaring that it is a task impossible of - accomplishment. - - Senator Bristow, a former Assistant Postmaster General, who has - given postal questions much careful study, said in a recent - speech that “It does not cost nine cents a pound, nor can the - Department ascertain with even approximate accuracy what is - the cost of handling any special class of mail. It would be - just as easy for the Pennsylvania Railroad to state in dollars - and cents what it costs to haul a ton of coal from Harrisburg - to Pittsburgh, or 100 pounds of silk from Pittsburgh to - Indianapolis, as for the Postoffice Department to state what it - costs the Department to handle newspapers or magazines. Anyone - familiar with transportation knows that such calculations cannot - be made with accuracy, because there are so many unassignable - expenses that must be considered--expenditures that cannot be - subdivided and assigned to the different classes of freight. The - same is true as to the different classes of mail.” - - Postal officials have exhausted conjecture as a basis for a - correct solution of this problem. Nearly every year there has - been a new guess. Mr. Madden, Third Assistant Postmaster-General - for seven years up to 1907, guessed that it cost 4 cents a pound. - His successor, Mr. Lawshe, guessed 2½ cents and then the next - year 4 cents. For the last two years the Department’s guess has - been 9 cents. - - The Penrose-Overstreet Commission declared, while it is - impossible to ascertain with certainty what the cost is, the - members of the Commission gave it as their opinion that “_One - cent a pound is approximately adequate compensation for handling - and transporting second-class matter._” - - I am confident that there is a better way of solving the problem - than has heretofore been tried. This consists in the direct - application of plain, old-fashioned common sense to it. A little - gumption in such a matter as this is far better than fanciful - guessing or astute figuring by experts, who are bent on finding - something that is not there. - - In working out this problem I have adopted a method quite - different and have obtained results quite unlike the foregoing. - I show the relation of second-class mail to stamp mail extending - over a period of 25 years, from 1885 to 1910. This covers the - entire period since the institution of the cent a pound rate. - - I go back still further to 1876 when the postage rate on - newspapers was 4 times greater than now, when the sale of stamps - was less than one-eleventh what it is now, _and while deficits - were larger_. - - The highest point reached in the weight of second-class matter - previous to the institution of the present rate, was 101,057,963 - pounds. - - It has been repeatedly declared officially that second-class - matter originates large quantities of other classes of mail, and - in the official figures we have the proof. - - While population increased from 1885 to 1910 only a little more - than double, the revenue from the sale of stamps, etc., and the - weight of second-class matter, each increased over 5 times. _No - other possible reason can be assigned for the increase in stamp - mail, and the tremendous development of every branch of the - postal business 5 times faster than the growth of population, - than the increased circulation and influence of the newspaper and - periodical press, brought about by the reduced postage rate._ - - SECOND-CLASS MATTER WOULD HAVE LONG AGO WIPED OUT ALL DEFICITS - AND CREATED AN ENORMOUS ANNUAL SURPLUS HAD IT NOT BEEN FOR THE - GREAT BURDENS WHICH WEIGHED THE SERVICE DOWN. - - There would have been a surplus, instead of a deficit, every year - since 1901, had allowance been made for the extraordinary cost - of free rural delivery, and in 1910, the surplus would have been - $31,075,170.12. - - If also allowance had been made for free government matter, other - than the Postoffice Department’s own free matter, being sent - stamped as first-class matter is, the surplus for 1910 would have - been $51,075,470.12 and these figures like all others here given, - are from official reports. - - - A VAST INCREASE OF EXPENDITURES. - - _Not only did stamp mail, under the stimulus of the steady and - enormous increase of second-class matter, enable the Department - to meet the cost of rural delivery while reducing the deficit, - but it also met and overcame the immense increase of the annual - expenditures for railroad transportation which grew from - $33,523,902.18 in 1901 to $44,654,515.97 in 1910: of salaries to - postmasters, assistants and clerks which grew from $32,790,253.39 - in 1901 to $65,582,533.57 in 1910, of the railway mail service - which grew from $9,675,436.52 to $19,385,096.97 in 1910, and of - the city delivery service which grew from $15,752,600 in 1901 - to $36,841,407.40 in 1910. In these four items alone there was - an increase in annual expenditures in the last ten years of - $74,721,361.82, for which second-class matter was only in a very - limited way responsible._ - - Entirely too much stress has been placed upon the cost of - second-class matter, for it makes little difference whether - it costs 2½ cents or 4 cents or 9 cents, or even more, if it - produce results commensurate with its cost, and this it would - do _if the cost were double the highest guess yet made_. The - Government could afford to carry it free rather than not carry - it at all, for without it the bottom would drop out of the - Postal Establishment. As long as the people get the benefit of - the low rate, as they are doing now, for which we have official - testimony, it matters not what the rate is except that it should - be kept at the very bottom notch. - - - WHY THE POSTAGE RATE WAS MADE LOW. - - Even if the cost of second-class matter should be declared to be - more than one cent per pound, it would not be good public policy - for Congress to increase it, because much reading matter would be - placed out of the reach of many who now are receiving the benefit - of it. - - Postmaster-General Meyer said in his report for 1908: “The charge - for carrying second-class mail matter was intentionally fixed - below cost for the purpose of encouraging the dissemination of - information of educational value to the people, _and the benefit - of the cheap rate of postage is passed on to the subscriber in a - lower subscription price than would otherwise be possible_.” - - The Hon. Charles Emory Smith truly declared: “Our free - institutions rest on popular intelligence, and it has from the - beginning been our fixed and enlightened policy to foster and - promote the general diffusion of public information. Congress - has wisely framed the postal laws with this just and liberal - conception. - - “It has uniformly sought to encourage intercommunication and the - exchange of intelligence. As facilities have cheapened, it has - gradually lowered all postage rates. It has never aimed to make - the postal service a source of profit, but simply to make it pay - its own way and to give the people the benefit of all possible - advancement. - - “In harmony with this sound and judicious policy, it has - deliberately established a low rate of postage for genuine - newspapers and periodicals, with the express design of - encouraging and aiding the distribution of the recognized means - and agencies of public information. - - “It is not a matter of favor, but of approved judgment. _It is - not for the publishers, but for the people._” - - The testimony of Senator Bristow is that, “I am glad we have got - a one-cent rate of postage for the legitimate newspapers and - magazines of the country, and I would rather decrease it than - raise it. _The beneficiaries are the poor people themselves_, - who now get daily papers at from $2 to $4 a year, when they used - to pay from $10 to $12. They now get magazines from $1 to $1.50, - when they used to pay $4 to $6 per year for magazines of no - higher grade.” … - - And I would remind the Commission that there are millions of - laboring men and women who cannot afford to add to their living - expenses the cost of any but the very cheapest reading matter, - and many not even that. After buying food and clothing and - providing shelter there is scarcely anything left in the home for - cultivating the intellect and informing the mind. - - When sickness intervenes, then comes the stress of debt, and if - death follow, the future has to be drawn upon to give the dead a - burial such as love would provide. Are these people, _the bone - and sinew of the land, those in the humble walks of life_, not - to be considered when it is proposed to add to the cost of the - family reading? - - It surely should not be made more difficult for the poor to - obtain that which is so essential to their welfare and that of - the Republic of which they form an important part.… - - “But here I cannot forbear to recommend,” said George Washington, - in his message to Congress, on November 6, 1792, “a repeal of - the tax on the transportation of public prints. There is no - resource so firm for the government of the United States as the - affections of the people, guided by an enlightened policy; and - to this primary good, nothing can conduce more than a faithful - representation of public proceedings diffused without restraint - throughout the United States.” - - - NEWSPAPERS AND PERIODICALS.--THE DIFFERENCE. - - An effort was made in the closing hours of the 61st Congress to - increase the postage rate on magazines. It is my opinion that the - postage rate should remain uniform as it is now upon all classes - of publications. There should be no partiality shown, there - should be no discrimination. A proposal to increase the rate on - magazines alone, is not one that should have the endorsement of - this Commission nor the approval of Congress, as I shall endeavor - to show. - - Under Section 432 of the Postal Laws and Regulations, “A - newspaper is held to be a publication regularly issued at stated - intervals of not longer than one week; a periodical is held - to be a publication regularly issued at stated intervals less - frequently than weekly.” - - A magazine is nowhere defined in the Postal Laws and Regulations. - A law that would increase the postage rate on “magazines,” - without an explicit definition of the word, would apply to - just such publications as the Postmaster-General might select - in the administration of the law, and none others. No such - power of discrimination should be vested in any official. The - Postmaster-General is an executive, not a judicial officer, nor a - lawmaker. - - It has been wisely and aptly said that this is a government of - laws and not of men; that there is no arbitrary power located in - any individual or body of individuals; but that all in authority - are guided and limited by those provisions which the people have, - through the organic law, declared shall be the measure and scope - of all control exercised over them. - - There seems to be no good reason why a newspaper, which is - carried in the mails once a day or once a week, should pay a less - rate than a monthly or quarterly. If the Government really loses - money in handling and transporting second-class matter, the loss - would be greater on the former than on the latter, because a - daily goes through the mails 365 times a year, a weekly 52 times, - while a monthly only goes 12 times, and a quarterly 4 times. - - We learn from official records that daily newspapers comprise - 40.50 per cent. of all second-class matter, weeklies 15.23 - per cent., papers devoted to science 1.30, to education .64, - religious 5.91, trade 4.94, agriculture 5, magazines 20.23, and - miscellaneous 6.25. Note that it is stated that 20.23 of the - whole consists of magazines; but what is a magazine? We are - nowhere told, and the percentage quoted has the appearance of - being founded upon conjecture.… - - This Commission may not be aware of the fact that the - Pennsylvania Railroad will take, and does take, packages of - papers for all of the great newspapers that are published - along its lines, and transports them in the baggage cars for - one-quarter of a cent per pound, to any station on the line, - whether it is ten miles from the place of origin, or 1,000 miles - from the place of origin. And yet the Department is paying - the railroads approximately two cents a pound for hauling the - newspapers of the country. - - The papers are delivered by the publishers to the train just - the same as the publisher delivers his newspapers to the train - when they are sent by mail. These packages are delivered to the - depots of the railroads, and the parties to whom they are sent - call at the depots for the packages. If they are sent by mail the - publisher delivers them at the train, and the parties to whom - they are addressed call at the postoffice for the packages. The - postoffice Department does not go to the newspaper office and - get the mail. The publisher delivers the newspapers to the mail - trains, the same as he delivers them to baggage cars for the - railroad company. - - And possibly the Commission has not been informed that the - express companies have a contract with the American Publishers’ - Association whereby they agree to receive newspaper packages of - any size, and deliver them to their destination within a limit of - 500 miles, for one-half cent per pound. The express company does - not call at the newspaper office for the papers. The publisher - delivers them to the express car, the same as he delivers his - papers to the mail car. The express company then takes these - newspapers, consisting of packages of any size, from a single - wrapper to a 100-pound bundle, and delivers them at the other end - of the line to the addresses, if the distance is not greater than - 500 miles, for half a cent a pound, and by its contract with the - railroad the express company pays the railroad only a quarter of - a cent a pound. - - The Department figures show that the average distance which - newspapers are hauled is less than 300 miles. Yet the Department - is paying about two cents a pound to the railroad for that which - the express companies pay but a quarter of a cent a pound. - The express companies only charge the publisher one-half cent - a pound, while the Government charges him one cent a pound. - The express companies pay the railways one-fourth a cent a - pound, while the Government pays about two cents--eight times - as much--for exactly the same service. The express companies - are glad to get the business, and render more service than the - Postoffice Department, because they deliver the packages of any - size at the other end, which the Department does not do. - - Senator Bristow is authority for the above statements concerning - the railroad and express contracts. - - … - - Now I would not have this (class) newspaper and its annexes - deprived of the low postage rate, but as the Postoffice - Department has within the past ten years denied admission to the - mails of 11,563 of other publications, and 32,000 others have - been ruled out or died from the hard conditions imposed, I would - respectfully request this Commission to ascertain and report to - the President for transmission to Congress _why there has never - been a single publication of this class shut out or even molested - in the slightest degree_? - - I do not say it is, but _is_ it, because such papers are - politically powerful, that they have the ear of the public, - that they hold a monopoly of the news, and that they can make - or unmake the reputation of public officials at will, and that - therefore they are immune from interference?… - - I have here a copy of the _Police Gazette_, which I take to be - a superior paper of its class. It is held to be a newspaper, - entitled to transmission through the mails at a cent a pound. It - has never been proposed to raise the postage rate on this paper.… - - _This Commission should endeavor to find out and report to the - President for transmission to Congress, why the postage rate on - one-half of the periodicals devoted to agriculture should be - increased from one cent to three cents, and the postage rate on - the Police Gazette should remain at one cent._ - - -HEARINGS BEFORE THE HUGHES POSTAL COMMISSION. - -I intended to follow the hearings before this commission personally. -Ill health prevented my doing so. Under this stress, I asked my friend, -Mr. M. H. Madden, quoted on a previous page in connection with other -phases of our general subject, to summarize for me the hearings of the -commission in August. Mr. Madden kindly consented to do so. Following is -what he writes me relating to the commission’s proceedings and hearings: - - The first meeting of the commission took place on August 1, and - it continued its hearings in New York City, with occasional - adjournments during the greater part of the month. - - Postmaster General Hitchcock represented his department before - the commission, Second Assistant Stewart and Third Assistant - Britt were also present, each in turn occupying the stand. - Hitchcock outlined his position concerning a demand for an - increase for the first time, although the same idea was - expressed by Third Assistant Britt some months ago, when Britt - made an address before a convention of newspaper circulation - managers in Chicago. Hitchcock and his two assistants held to - the view that each schedule in the postal service should be - made self-sustaining, the credit for this idea being given to - Hitchcock, and in order to justify his position concerning a - raise in second-class rates an arbitrary figure has been placed - on the cost of handling the same, the total “deficit” from this - schedule being placed at about $70,000,000 annually. This amount - was arrived at by what Second Assistant Postmaster General - Stewart states was a complete record of the weighing of all mail - handled by the Postoffice Department of matter originating in - every postoffice and railway postoffice in the country for a - period of six months from July 1 to December 1, 1907, together - with the amount of mail carried in every railway car. The - department in many instances has admitted the unreliability of - the figures used, there having been many estimates employed. - - Publishers of the country were represented by several attorneys - who examined into the testimony given by Hitchcock, Stewart - and Britt, and by a series of questions they showed that the - conclusions of the three as to cost of handling second-class - mail were made on a guesswork plan and not on a scientific or - reasonably accurate basis of fact. Third Assistant Postmaster - General Britt made the startling statement that “if all the - magazines and newspapers were excluded from the second-class - rates because of a circulation gained, _not on the merits_ of - the publication, but _because of some voting contest or offer of - premiums as a bait, not 10 per cent. of the total would remain - undisturbed_.” - - This declaration was looked upon as an argument by the magazine - publishers as favoring their contention that the advertising - portions of their periodicals are justified by legitimate - business reasons, as an increased volume of advertising enables - publishers to issue periodicals of much higher literary - excellence. The postal authorities held with firmness to the - conviction that advertising matter in publications is primarily - for the advantage of the publisher, and therefore should be - charged a higher rate than reading matter. Postmaster General - Hitchcock went on record before the commission as declaring - that he would recommend to Congress an increase on the - advertising portion of magazines and newspapers of a cent a - pound additional. Assuming that the postoffice officials are - prompted by a legitimate purpose in their desire to increase - rates on second-class matter, their arguments before the - commission have been transparently weak, and an unbiased mind - they would fail in convincing, but the feeling is that the - commission will accept the conclusions of the postal authorities - that the government rate of one cent a pound is inadequate for - transporting second-class matter. To justify the position taken - by the government that each schedule should maintain itself, - the Postmaster General intends to press with vigor a reduction - of first-class postage from two-cents to one cent a letter, he - citing the profit on first-class mail and the alleged loss on - second-class matter as his reason for the change of rate. - - Religious and denominational publications were represented - before the commission, the contention being made by these - that the doubling of the rate on second-class matter would - work very serious injury to the religious press, forcing many - publications out of business. This statement was made by E. R. - Graham, representing the Methodist Book Concern publications in - Cincinnati and New York, and seemingly it made an impression on - the members of the commission. The attorneys representing the - publishers were much interested in Mr. Graham’s statement, he - being considered a competent authority on the matter. - - One of the strongest arguments of the hearings, because of the - experience which he has had as a postal official, was made by Mr. - W. S. Shallenberger, who had served several years in Congress - as a member of the Committee on Postoffice and Postroads. - Mr. Shallenberger was for a number of years Second Assistant - Postmaster General, and now represents the Interdenominational - Publishers who issue Sunday school literature throughout the - United States. This witness gave it as his opinion that an - increase in the rate on second-class matter would cause magazines - and newspapers to avail themselves of the facilities now offered - by the express companies which are becoming active competitors - of the government in transporting second-class matter, these - corporations obtaining better rates from the railroads than is - given to the government. Mr. Shallenberger expressed the view - that since every civilized nation was cheapening the cost of - postal service the fact that our country was seeking to increase - the rate seemed to be reactionary. - - Mr. Shallenberger served under six Postmaster Generals and all of - these held that the government was carrying second-class matter - at a loss. But his opinion was that there was a substantial - profit in the present rate, at the same time condemning the idea - that each particular schedule should be made to pay its own way, - the stimulus toward encouraging other schedule receipts not being - given its proper consideration. Mr. Shallenberger gave a hint - concerning hidden influences seeking to have the second-class - rate increased but did not enter deeply into this phase of the - subject. The controversy between Mr. Shallenberger and Second - Assistant Stewart was animated and prolonged, and touched on - features connected with the compensation paid railroads for - hauling the mail, the express companies getting better terms than - the government, this statement being made by a representative of - the Postal Progress League. - - The strongest point the publishing interests made was when the - superintendent of the railway mail service, Chas. H. McBride, - testified that a considerable part of the estimate upon which the - department’s figures are based is guesswork and assumption, he - admitting that if this were so the result would not be greatly - different from what the officials first claimed. On the whole - Superintendent McBride’s testimony was calculated to show that - the Postoffice Department was desirous of making out a case - against the second-class schedule, however necessary it was to - twist figures and conceal facts in order to do so. - - Mr. Wilmer Atkinson, publisher of Farm Journal, Philadelphia, - combated the contention of the postoffice officials, as shown in - their statements and tables, and declared with much emphasis that - second-class matter stimulated first-class postage receipts. The - statement of the cost of carrying second-class matter, placing it - at nine cents a pound, is, according to him, “only a stereotyped - guess that goes into the postoffice department report, each - year,” experts having repeatedly stated that there is no possible - way of fixing the cost of carrying second-class mail. In the - opinion of Mr. Atkinson the government could better afford to - carry it free than not to carry it at all. “Gumption and common - sense,” declared Mr. Atkinson, “should rather be applied than - indulging in worthless guessing.” - - Representatives of scientific publications, college journals, - fashion papers, fraternal societies and trade periodicals - appeared before the members of the commission during the - sessions, and all entered emphatic protests against the increase. - In numerous instances these interests made the statement that - serious reverses would be encountered if the postage rate should - be doubled, and that many publications would be forced to suspend. - - The labor union press, an interest representing about 250 weekly - and monthly publications, with a circulation approximating - 1,250,000 copies was officially represented by President Samuel - Gompers of the American Federation of Labor, and President - Matthew Woll, of the Photo-Engravers’ Union. Mr. Gompers - entered vigorous protests against discriminations against - labor publications and registered a severe censure of the - method by which the Postoffice Department had hampered the - official journals of the labor people. Mr. Gompers stated that - the publications of the American Federation of Labor and its - auxiliaries were all highly educational in their character and, - in the event of an increase in the item of postage to the extent - of 100 per cent additional, many of the best would be driven out - of business with corresponding loss to the men individually and - to the nation as a whole. Mr. Gompers’ declaration was listened - to with much interest. - - President Woll dwelt on the far-reaching effect which the - hampering of the labor press would have on the manifold business - relationships involved in the printing industry, primarily - directing attention to the more than a third of a million of - workers in the printing trades alone. He then advanced to - the foundation of the paper and machinery features of the - proposition, viz., from the ore in the mine, from which the - machinery was made, to the forest tree from which the pulp is - ground. The tonnage of the transportation service of the country - would at once be doubly interfered with, first in a reduced - demand for material with which to make the paper and, secondly, - the corresponding decrease in the weight of the finished product - of the publications. In many features Mr. Woll made prominent - the ideas which the “Postal Riders and Raiders” is promoting, - including the educational features of the immense volume of - printing which comes from the printing press in all sections of - the country. - - The commission adjourned, subject to the call of Justice Hughes. - However, it is understood that it will be called together in time - to prepare its report to President Taft and to Congress when the - session opens in December, 1911. - - -FOOTNOTES - -[6] Mr. Hitchcock, it should be noted, is careful in giving the higher -per cent. of rate which the third and fourth classes show above the -second class rate. Beyond the bare statement that the expense of handling -second class matter “is less” than for other classes, he says nothing -of cost of carriage and handling. His own figures show (see preceding -paragraph), that the cost of carriage and handling first-class matter is -422 per cent. higher than his own absurd cost-figure of 9 cents a pound -(cost) for carriage and handling second-class and _4600 per cent. higher -than the present second class rate_. - -[7] Mr. Suter must certainly have been wind-jamming a little. “Every man, -woman and child” pays at a maximum rate of 2 cents an ounce or fraction -thereof. That is at the rate of 32 cents a pound. Mr. Hitchcock’s figures -assert, that it costs “47 cents a pound” to carry and handle the letters -for “every man, woman and child”--that is, presuming they all write -letters. The letter writers, it appears then, pay only 2 cents for a -service which costs nearly 3 cents. - - - - -CHAPTER X. - -POSTAL DEFICITS. - - -Now, let us look into and over that postoffice “deficit,” to the -origin of which the memory of man scarcely runneth back, and which Mr. -Hitchcock, by some strenuous effort on _right_ lines readily converted -into a surplus--a $6,000,000 deficit into some hundreds of thousands -of dollars surplus. The returns are not all in yet. At any rate the -Postmaster General has not announced them loud enough for The Man on the -Ladder to hear, or he was in his physician’s hands when the announcement -was made. - -However that may be, Mr. Hitchcock has proved quite conclusively that -there is no deficit--or, at least, no valid reason for one under present -conditions. - -And here, again, I desire to say that our present Postmaster General is -deserving the praise or commendation of every American citizen for having -demonstrated, by a few economies here and a few betterments there in the -operation of his department, that the service _can_ be rendered, and -rendered efficiently, with an expenditure safely within the bounds of the -department’s receipts or revenues. - -Especially is Mr. Hitchcock deserving of commendation for this -demonstration, because in making it he has done what so many of his -predecessors _talked of as desirable_, but failed to do. - -But with full acknowledgment of the splendid effort Mr. Hitchcock has -made in converting a postal deficit of $6,000,000 in 1909-10 into a -surplus for the year 1910-11, I desire to discuss, briefly, postal -department deficits of the past--or the future--and the origin and cause -of them. - -In the future pages of this volume little if any reference will be made -to our vigorous Postmaster General’s attempt to put onto the Senate -course a rider that would run down certain periodicals which were to him -and certain of his friends, as it would appear, of obstructive if not -offensive character. It is possible, if, indeed, not probable, that I -may, in this somewhat hurried discussion of our Postoffice Department -deficits and their sources, cause and origin, repeat something, in whole -or in part, that I have said elsewhere in this volume. - -The discussion of the postal deficits leads us into the _Raider_ -factor or feature of our general title--into a consideration of the -political, partisan and business influences and interests which have for -thirty-five or more years been conspicuously--yes, _brazenly_--looting -the revenues of the department. I shall not be able to advert to all -such influences, interests and persons. Especially can I not mention -some of the _persons_. Many of them have gone to “their reward”--or -to their punishment--as the Almighty has seen fit to assign them. As -a matter of venerable custom and of current conventional courtesy we -must leave them to His justice--to our silence. One by one many of the -_dishonestly enriched_ from our postal revenues have dropped into “the -dead past,” which Christ instructed should be left to “bury its dead.” In -our treatment of this subject we shall obey the Master’s instruction--we -shall discuss methods, practices, and _acts_, not men. - -In turning to our subject directly, I desire to make a few positive -statements or declarations. - -1. The Postoffice Department is a public service department--a department -intended to serve _all the people all the time_. - -2. The people are paying, have paid, and are _willing to pay_, for their -postal service. - -3. The people do not care--never have cared--whether the expenditures -exceed the receipts by $6,000,000 or $100,000,000, _if they get the -service for the money expended_. - -In comment on the last, I wish here to ask if anyone has heard -much loud noise from the people about the army and the navy -expenditures--_expenditures larger than that of any other nation on -earth_ for similar purposes? - -Yet, for twenty or more years, the people have paid the appropriations -for--also met the “deficit” bills of--each of those departments without -any noticeable “holler.” - -But, again, it must be pertinently asked, what have the people received -in return for their _billions_ of expenditures for those two departments? - -Yes, what? They have had the doubtful “glory” of having their army -_debauch_ some island possessions, maneuver for local entertainments -and do some society stunts while on “post leave”--which “leave”, for -epauletted military officers, appears to have occupied most of their time. - -And the people have put up, ungrumblingly, $100,000,000 to $150,000,000 -or more (I forget the figures), for a navy--a navy carrying on its -payrolls more “shore leave” men and clerks than it has service men. -(At any rate that was the showing in a recent year). For this vast -expenditure of their money the people got--_got what_? - -Well, for their hundreds of millions expenditure on that navy of ours, -the people, to date, have received in return _newspaper reports_ of -numerous magazine and gun explosions with, of course, a list of the -killed and wounded, and reports of “blow-hole” or otherwise faulted armor -plate, turrets, etc., of raising “The Maine,” of shoaling this, that or -the other battleship, or of “sparring” or “lightering” off, to the music -that is made by a “blow-in” of fifty thousand to two or three hundred -thousand more of their money. - -Reader, if you read--if you have read--the “news”--the periodical -literature--of those past twenty years, you will know that the people -have received little or no returns for the vast expenditure of money--of -_their_ money--that their representatives (?) have made for the Navy -Department. - -Oh, yes, I remember that our army and navy fought to a “victorious” -conclusion the “Spanish American” war. - -No patriotic American citizen alive at the time that war occurred will -ever forget it. He will ever remember Siboney, Camp Thomas, Camp Wycoff, -and the cattle-ship transports for diseased and dying soldiers. He will -also remember the “embalmed beef” and the “decayed tack” and other -contracts and contractors. - -If the patriotic citizen has been an “old soldier,” or is familiar with -the history of wars, he will also know that, if the whole land fighting -of that Spanish American war was corralled into _one_ action that action -would be infinitely less sanguine than was the action at a number of -“skirmishes” in our civil war--that, if the several naval actions of that -war were merged into one, it would not equal, in either gore or naval -glory, Farragut’s capture of Mobile, the action in Hampton Roads, nor -even Perry’s scrimmage on Lake Erie in 1813. - -What has all this to do with the postal department deficit, some one may -ask? It has just this to do with it: - -If a people stand unmurmuringly for the expenditure of _billions_ for -a service that yields them no return, save a protection _they have not -needed_ and of doubtful security if needed, that people is not going to -raise any noisy hubbub over a dinky deficit of a few millions a year for -a service which should serve them _every day of every year_. - -I have expanded a little, not disgressed, in writing to my statement -numbered 3. I will now proceed with my premeditated statements. Some of -them may be a little frigid, but none of them are cold-storage. Some one -may have told it all to you before, but that is his fault, not mine. He -merely beat me to the _facts_. - -4. As stated in a forward page of this volume, the people of this nation -want and demand _service_ of its Postoffice Department. They care not to -the extent of a halloween pea-shooter whether the service is rendered at -a deficit of six million or at a surplus of ten million, _if service is -rendered for the money expended_. - -5. The people of this country will object more strenuously against a -_surplus_ in their postal revenues--their service tax--than they ever -have or will object to a deficit in the revenues of that service, _if -they get the service_. - -6. The Postoffice Department is not understood--is not even thought of -by intelligent citizens--as a _revenue-producing_ department. It _is_ -understood to be a _service_ department, and the citizen--His Majesty, -the American Citizen--is always willing to pay for services rendered. - -7. The Postoffice Department has not in the period named--no, not for -thirty or thirty-five years--_rendered the citizen the service for which -he paid_. - -I mean by that, of course, that the citizen has been compelled to pay far -more for a postal service than he _should have paid for that service_. - -8. Had that service been _honestly, faithfully and efficiently rendered_, -the price the citizen has paid for it _would have left no deficit for any -year within the past thirty_. - -9. _The only deficits in those thirty or thirty-five years have been -the result of manipulated bookkeeping, of political trenching into the -revenues of the department, of loose methods in its management, of -disinterest in the enforcement of even loose methods, and of downright -lootage and stealings._ - -“Rather harsh that, is it not?” asks one. - -“Mere assertion,” says another - -To the first I need only say that this is an age not congenial to -milk-poultice talk. I have previously expressed my opinion on that point. -If you have a thing to say, say it _hard_. The majority of people will -then understand you. Those who do not understand you can continue their -milk poultices--or believe and talk as they are told _or are paid to -believe and talk_. - -The latter--the reader who yodles that my preceding nine statements -appear to be assertions only--can make a courteous and, possibly, a -profitable use of an hour’s leisure in reading a few following pages, -before he _rusts_ into the belief that those nine “assertions” are -groundless assertions. - -In showing that there is no “deficit”--a shortage of receipts in the -Postoffice Department over its legitimate expenditures--I shall not take -my nine statements up seriatim, but present my reasons in a general way -for having made such blunt declarations. I may go about that, too, in an -awkward way, but the reader who follows me will get my reasons for making -those nine declarations. - - -NO CREDIT ALLOWED FOR SERVICES RENDERED OTHER DEPARTMENTS. - -If the department of public works in Chicago does a piece of bricklaying, -concrete or other construction work for the police, fire, health or other -department of the city government, or if it carts or hauls away some -excavated material or razed debris for any of those other departments, -the service rendered is made a _charge_ by the department of public works -_against_ the department for which the service is rendered. - -What is true in this instance in Chicago’s municipal government is true -of every other city or incorporated town in this country that has its -service departmentized. - -If the County Commissioners of McCrackin county build a bridge or culvert -for Ridgepole township in the county the cost of constructing that bridge -or culvert (or a proportional share of it, if on a general highway), is -made a charge against Ridgepole township. - -If the transportation department of the United States Steel Corporation -delivers the services of three steam tugs (services rated at $30.00 per -day) to the corporation’s smelting or rail departments there is a credit -of $90.00 given to the transportation department, and a corresponding -_charge made against the department for which the service is rendered, -for each day’s service rendered_. - -_That states a recognized business rule and practice_ among both private -and public corporations. Its valid and _just_ purpose is to prevent the -loading upon one department (any one department) the expenses created or -incurred by another. - -Is it not a valid, fair and just method of business? - -If it is not, then the largest merchants, the most productive and -profitable manufacturing establishments, transportation companies, -banking and other mercantile, industrial and financial institutions have -not discovered the fact. - -If the owner of an Egyptian hen ranch had a shrinkage in his castor bean -crop, he would not think of charging the cost or loss on those castor -beans up to his hens, would he? Hens do not eat castor beans. That is -useless--well--yes, of course. Well, hens do not eat castor beans, -anyway. So my ill-chosen illustration, though may stand--stand anyway -until someone finds a breed of hens which likes castor beans. - -But, if the hens of that hen-rancher invaded his vegetable garden, -scratched up his set onions and seeded radishes, pecked holes in three -hundred heads of his “early” cabbage and otherwise damaged the fruits -of his labor, care and hopes--likewise disarranged his figures on -prospective profits--if the hens did that, that hen-rancher would most -certainly charge his loss to the hens, would he not? - -That is, he would do so, if the hens had attended to their legitimate -business as industriously as they looked after his vegetable garden and, -by reason of that legitimate effort, showed a “profit balance.” The -preceding is based, of course, on the assumption that the rancher has -acumen enough to distinguish a hen from a rooster and a sunflower from a -cauliflower. If he is so wised up, whether by experience and observation -or by academic training, he will most certainly charge his loss on -vegetables against those hens. - -“What is the application of all this to the Postoffice Department -deficits?” some one is justified in asking. - -Well, my intended application of it is, first, to show a generally -recognized and practical business method--a business method practiced by -both public and private corporations and by individuals and firms, from -the hen-rancher to the department store. My second purpose is to show -that this almost universally recognized business method has been and is -_totally ignored in conducting the vast service affairs_ of the Federal -Postoffice Department. - - -FREE-IN-COUNTY MATTER. - -The 1910 report of the Postoffice Department states that 55,639,177 -pounds of second-class mail was carried and distributed _free_ in the -counties of these United States. - -Of course, this 1910 _gift_ to country publishers is the result of a -moss-grown custom--a custom born of an ingrown desire common to crooked -politicians--a desire to trade the general public service for _private_ -service. All the second, third and fourth class cities in the country, as -well as a majority of our towns and larger incorporated villages, have -their _party_ newspaper or newspapers. - -Comparatively speaking, few of them have any extensive telegraphic -service, if any at all, in the gathering of news. Those which have not, -capture the early morning editions--or the late evening editions of the -day before--of two or more metropolitan papers, “crib” their “news” and -deliberately run it, in many instances, as special wires to their own -sheets. In some cases, which I have personally noticed, that practice was -indulged when their own “newspaper” consisted of but two to four locally -printed pages reinforced by a “patent inside.” Why should such newspapers -(?) be given “free distribution” in the county of publication? - -They contain little if any real news and less matter of any real -informative or educational value. True, the most of them do publish -a “local” column or half column of “news” for each or for several of -the outlying villages in the county of publication. These “local news” -columns inform the reader that “Mr. Benjamin Peewee circulated in -Boneville on Wednesday last;” that “Mrs. Cornstalk and her daughter -Lizzie are spending the week at the old homestead, just south of town,” -that “Mr. Frank Suds shipped a fine load of hogs from Bensonville on -Friday of this week,” etc., etc. - -Most edifying “news” that, is it not? So didactic and brain-building, is -it not? - -Now, why should the Postoffice Department carry those millions of pounds -of Reubenville sheets _free_? - -The department report says it carried about 56,000,000 pounds of such -“periodicals” free last year. The figures for this year (1910-11) will -probably be around 60,000,000 pounds. - -Why should the department give away $600,000 in revenues? - -Besides that, _the department does not know how much of this_ “free -in county” matter it does carry and distribute. Of course, it may be -able to make a more dependable _guess_ at the total tonnage of such -second-class matter than can I. However, any one who has been around the -“county seat” or the “metropolis” of any of the “hill” or “back” counties -during a county, state or national canvass for votes will know that the -postmaster’s scales are often sadly out of balance when he weighs into -circulation the local newspaper. In fact, it frequently happens that he -does not weigh it at all--especially not, if it be an extra or extra -large edition issued “for the good of the party”--and more especially -not, if the edition is issued to serve _his_ party. - -“It goes free anyway, so what is the difference?” the postmaster may -argue, and with fairly valid grounds for such argument. The department, -acting, pursuant of law, says “carry and distribute your local papers -_free_ inside your county.” So what difference does a few hundred or a -few thousand pounds, more or less, make to the department? - -Why, certainly, what difference can it make? It is all done for “the good -of the party,” is it not? - -This condition, governing, as I personally know it does govern, furnishes -my chief reason for saying that the Postoffice Department does _not_ -know--does not know even approximately--the tonnage of the “free in -county” matter it handles. It never has known and does not _now_ know, -within _millions_ of pounds, the weight of such matter it carries and -distributes. - -Again, I ask, why is this vast burden thrown onto the department and the -department getting not a cent of either pay or credit for carrying it? -Is it because of a paternal feeling our federal government has for the -poor, benighted farmers of the country? I can scarcely believe it is. -The farmers of this country are neither poor nor are they benighted. -If they were, free carriage and distribution to them of these local -sheets has not enriched them to any appreciable extent, however much -such free carriage and delivery may have added to the bank accounts of -the publishers of such periodical literature. Besides, ninety-five in -every hundred farmers whose names are on the publishers’ subscription -books _pay their subscriptions_. They usually pay, too, a pretty stiff -rate--$1.50 or $2.00 for a “weekly,” which gives them mostly borrowed -news and much of it decidedly stale at that. If a beneficent government -grants its “free in county” postal regulation with a view to dissipating -the gloom which clogs the garrets of our “benighted farmers,” that -government misses its purpose on two essential points. Our farmers, as -previously intimated, are no more benighted than are the residents of our -villages, towns and cities, and even if their ignorance was as dense as -a “practical” politician’s conscience, the medium which the Government -delivers to them, carriage free, seldom contributes much enlightenment. - -No, it was not for either the enrichment or the enlightenment of the -dear farmer that the present “free in county” postal regulation was made -operative. It was to give some local party henchman a fairly profitable -job as publisher of a county newspaper--a party newspaper--and to have, -in him, a county “heeler” who would divide his time between building the -party fences and telling the dear farmer how to vote. - -It is due to the publishers of country newspapers to say, that hundreds -of them have grown away from rigid party ties--have grown independent. It -is also but just to say that as these publishers have grown independent -of party domination, their newspapers have improved. We have now many -most excellent country papers published in our “down state” cities and -larger towns. - -The points I desire to make, however, are, first, the “free in county” -mail delivery regulation was originally adopted for partisan political -purposes, not to serve the farmer residents of the counties, and, second, -that such regulation is unjustly discriminating and is raiding the -service earnings of the Postoffice Department to the extent of at least -six hundred thousand dollars annually. In my opinion such raiding will -reach seven or eight hundred thousands a year. - - -FRANKED AND PENALTY MATTER. - -Going back now to that generally recognized and practical business method -referred to and which the government persistently refuses or neglects -to adopt in handling and directing the fiscal affairs of its Postoffice -Department, we find another raid on that department’s revenues. - -Third Assistant Postmaster General, James J. Britt, makes a sort of -estimate of the amount of free second-class matter of Government origin -the Postoffice Department transported and distributed during the fiscal -year ended, June 30, 1910. Mr. Britt places the figure at 50,120,884 -pounds. - -Mr. Britt’s estimate is based on a six months’ weighing period in 1907 -(the last half of that year.) It is reported as a “special weighing” and -showed 26,578,047 pounds of “free in county” second-class matter and -23,941,782 pounds of free franked and penalty matter of the second-class. -Mr. Britt then proceeds (page 335 of the department report for 1910), -to arrive at his estimated tonnage of franked and penalty matter by -assuming that the weight ratio of such second-class matter to “free in -county” matter would be about the same for 1910. He says: “If, as it -seems reasonable to believe, the relative proportions of this character -of matter have remained the same,” there would result for the fiscal year -1909-10 the figures he gives for the franked and penalty tonnage, or -50,120,884 pounds. - -Well, to The Man on the Ladder it does _not_ seem “reasonable to believe” -that such method of estimating is sound nor the tonnage result attained -by it dependable. The year 1907 was a decidedly off-year in franked -matter of the second-class. The then President kept most of the Senators -and Congressmen guessing as to just what he intended to do in the matter -of the presidential nomination of his party. In fact, he kept a goodly -number of federal legislators guessing on that point until well along -in 1908. The result of this condition of doubt was greatly to lessen -the franked mailings and also reduced in material degree the mailing of -departmental, or “penalty” matter of the second-class. - -For this and several other reasons, the tonnage of franked and penalty -matter reported as carried in the last half of 1907--even if the “special -weighing” Mr. Britt mentions was accurate and dependable, which it _was_ -not and could not be, either then or now, under the lax methods by which -such weighings were and are made--the reported weight of such franked and -penalty matter carried in the last half of 1907 furnishes no fair or -safe basis upon which to predicate 1910 totals or to base a dependable -estimate of them. - -Another defective factor is used in Mr. Britt’s estimate--the reported -total weight of “free in county” second-class matter as ascertained -by special weighing in the last half of 1907. As previously stated in -discussing the raid of six to eight hundred thousand dollars a year -made upon the postal service revenues by this “free in county” matter, -the department’s reported figures for it are little more than a robust -_guess_ at its tonnage, even now, and the figures given for 1907 are -much less trustworthy than are the department’s estimates and guesses -for the fiscal year ended in 1910. Whatever may be said of its faults -and faulty purposes, it is but simple justice to say the present -departmental administration has shown more judgment and activity and has -put forth more strenuous effort to get to the bottom of things and at -dependable facts in mail weights than has been shown by any of its recent -predecessors. - -Still, I repeat that its reported figures for the total tonnage of “free -in county” for carriage and delivery of second-class mail matter are -not sufficiently reliable to warrant their use as a basis for making a -dependable estimate of the tonnage of another free division of second -class mail. Especially unreliable are the figures reported as total -tonnage of free-in-county-matter as a basis for estimating the tonnage of -a division of the service so far removed from “free in county” as is that -of free franked and penalty matter. - -All that aside, however, the fact is the Postoffice Department should -receive credit for every pound of franked or penalty matter it handles -for the legislative and other departments of the government service. - -Mr. Britt himself appears to recognize the force of that fact. On page -335 of the department report for 1910, he speaks as follows: - - The public mind seems unusually acute on the subject of free - mailing facilities, and there is much criticism in the public - press of the continuance of the franking privilege and the use of - the penalty envelope, the suggestion being often made that the - same should be abolished and that this department should receive - proper credit in accounting for matter now being carried free. - It is therefore suggested that consideration be given to the - desirability of eliminating the transportation of mail matter - under frank or penalty clause, in order that the Postoffice - Department may receive due and proper credit for the tremendous, - and in some part possibly unnecessary, services which it is - performing free, to its apparent financial embarrassment. - - It is probably true that the use of the penalty envelope and the - franking privilege is availed of with undue liberality, even if - not actually abused, as is often alleged; that is to say, the - same care is not taken to confine the mailings of governmental - and congressional matter to only that which is necessary as would - undoubtedly be the case if there were a strict accountability for - their use. - -It will be noted that Mr. Britt in the foregoing covers other than -second-class mail matter. Taking the figures of his estimate of the -volume of free franked and penalty matter of the second-class (51,000,000 -pounds in round numbers, which I believe is so conservative as to be far -below the actual tonnage), then the various other departments of the -government are raiding the revenues of the Postoffice Department to the -extent of $510,000 for the carrying and handling of their second-class -mail alone. That is, they are requiring the Postoffice Department to -render to them without pay or credit over a half-million dollars’ worth -of service a year. That is figured at the 2nd class rate of 1 cent a -pound. If Mr. Britt’s own estimate, on another page of the same report, -that it cost the Postoffice Department 9 cents a pound to transport and -handle second-class mail, is correct, which as previously shown it is -not, then other departments of the government would be raiding the postal -service revenues--revenues which private individuals, firms, corporations -and governments subordinate, now alone pay--to the extent of more than -$4,500,000 a year. - -It must be borne in mind by the reader, however, that Mr. Britt’s -estimate of 51,000,000 pounds (a round figure) of second-class matter -carried and handled free by his department for other departments of the -federal government does not represent the total of service rendered those -other departments for which the Postoffice Department received neither -pay nor credit. Far from it. - -Hundreds of tons--how many hundreds of tons, I do not know, nor have I -been able to find an authority or record to inform myself--of letters -and other sealed matter were carried and distributed by the Postoffice -Department for other departments. For that service not a cent in pay or -credit was received. - -It must be remembered that the service rate for carrying and handling -the class of matter (first-class) we are here speaking of is 2 cents per -ounce or fraction thereof. That is, the rate is not less than 32 cents -a pound, not 1 cent a pound as is the rate on second class on which Mr. -Britt gives his estimate of tonnage carried. - -Why should not the Senate and the House, the Judicial, War, Navy, -Interior and other departments of the government be required to provide -in their annual appropriation bills for paying for the first-class -service furnished them by the Postoffice Department? - -The postal service of the government is also rendered free to the several -departments to handle all their third and fourth class mail matter. What -the annual tonnage of these two classes aggregates I have been unable -to learn. Whether or not the Postoffice Department keeps any records -showing the aggregate mailings by the other departments, I do not know. -I do know, however, that it gets neither pay nor credit for transporting -and handling the third and fourth class matter put to mail by the other -departments of the Federal Government. That the total weight mailed must -run into many hundreds of tons yearly for each of the classes named there -can be little grounds for doubt or question, records or no records. - -The mailing rate on third-class is eight cents a pound. On fourth-class -it is sixteen cents a pound. Those are the rates the people have to pay. -That both rates are outrageously excessive is well known to every one who -has made even a cursory study of the cost of transporting and handling -government mails, and the irony of it all is the stock arguments put up -by postoffice and other federal officials to justify such outrageous -rates. - -“The rates are necessary to make the Postoffice Department -self-supporting--to avoid a deficit,” or statements of similar washed -out force and import. And that in face of the fact that the government -permits its departments, bureaus, divisions, “commissions,” etc., to -raid the postal revenues by loading upon the postal service the cost of -transporting and distributing thousands of tons of mail matter for which -it gets not a cent of pay or credit. - -Nice business methods or practice that, is it not? - -Beautiful “argument,” this prattle about deficits in the postal revenues, -is it not? - -Why, it is humorous enough to make empty headed fools laugh and sensible -men use language which postal regulations bar from the mails. - -Think of the tons upon tons of official reports, of the bound volumes -of the Congressional Record, of copies of the Supreme Courts rulings and -other printed books and pamphlets distributed by the Departments of War, -Navy, Agriculture, Interior and others. - -All these fall into the third-class, or 8-cent-a-pound rate. - -Think of the tons upon tons of seeds--farm, garden and flower--sent by -Congressmen to their constituents--to thousands of constituents who do -not need the seeds, in fact, who can make no possible use of them; of -the tons upon tons of clothing, suitings, household bric-a-brac, etc., -franked by Senators and Congressmen to their homes, to their wives, -children, sweethearts or friends. - -Investigations in the past have shown that hundreds of typewriters, -office desks, even articles of household furniture, were sent home under -frank. - -It was also shown in several instances, if I remember rightly, that -some of the typewriters, etc., were never franked back to government -possession. However that may be, all such mailings are of the fourth -class and fall into the 16-cent a pound rate for carriage and handling. - -Let us here foot up the amount of the raidings on the postal funds, so -far as we have gone. - -First,--There is the free-in-county second-class--$600,000 to $800,000. - -Second,--There is the free second-class franked and penalty matter. Third -Assistant Postmaster General Britt “estimates” it at $510,000, figured -at the present one-cent rate. I have shown the weakness of Mr. Britt’s -_basis_ of estimate. In my judgment the tonnage of franked and penalty -second-class mail is nearer 75,000,000 pounds than his estimate of -51,000,000 pounds. But to take Mr. Britt’s figures, there is another raid -of $510,000 on the service revenues of the Postoffice Department. - -Next, we have the free _first_, _third_ and _fourth_ class matter which -the postal service handles under franking or penalty regulations. - -How much does this raid total? How much has and _does_ this raid -contribute toward the creation of that “deficit” which has so long, -so continuously and so _brazenly_ been used to bubble the people in -politico-postal oratory and writing? - -The reader must keep in mind that we are here asking about the -thirty-two, the eight and the sixteen cents a pound classes of mail. To -what extent have the various departments of the government raided the -postal funds by taxing the postal service with their over-load of the -character indicated? That they have taxed the Postoffice Department’s -revenues by demanding of that department its highest class and highest -rated service in _unlimited_ degree, and that, too, without _one cent -of compensation, pay or credit_, is a fact which no informed man will -attempt to controvert. - -But what did such service (and abuse of service) cost the Postoffice -Department? To what extent did and _does_ this “frank and penalty” -_privilege_ in first, third and fourth class use of the mails loot or -raid the postal revenues? - -Is it to the extent of three, two or one million dollars? Is it lower -than the lowest or higher than the highest figures just named? - -I do not know--do you? Have you, the reader, been able to ascertain -from the records of the Postoffice Department, or elsewhere, any -figures or data that enables you to make even a “frazzled” guess at -the _approximate_ cost to the postal department of this unjust--_this -politically and governmentally crooked_ burden put upon it? - -I have hunted and have found nothing but talk, and a few figures -scattered here and there and gathered from--well, the Lord may know -where. But the Lord has failed to inform me. So I am in ignorance--am -benighted, just like our “poor farmers,” both as to the source of the -figures I have seen and as to their force and value in reaching a fair -conclusion as to the aggregate amount of postal revenues the departmental -raiders have been and _are_ carrying off. If any reader knows or can dig -up the facts, he will confer a great favor by handing the information -to The Man on the Ladder. Not only that, but I am confident that the -people of this country will give such reader a niche, if needed not a -conspicuous position, in _their_ Hall of Fame, if he will give them even -a dependable approximation of the extent to which the postal service -revenues are raided--looted--by federal department abuses--_their -service and their money_, for the departments pay not _one dollar_ for -the thousands of tons of mail matter of the various classes which the -Postoffice Department transports and handles for them. - -So far or so long has this departmental--_bureaucratic_, that is what -it is--practice of raiding the postal revenues by _loading its service_ -continued, that the Postoffice Department has been and is _looting itself -by the same practice_. - -This volume is written during what is known as the “weighing period” in -the postal service, the weighing being done to establish a basis for -_four years_ on which the railroads transporting the federal mails shall -be paid. In other words, as basis for a “railway-mail-pay” rate, which -rate will govern railway contracts for carrying the mails for a period of -four years. - -During the current weighing period I have, at various times, both during -the day and at night, watched the weighing for varying intervals of from -an hour to two hours. Among the revenue raids observed during those hours -of leisure (?), I shall here mention a few. As the present Postmaster -General treats all departmental, or “penalty,” matter as “franked” matter -(See page 11 of the Postoffice Department report of 1910), I shall, -in the brief mention of personally observed facts at several railway -stations in Chicago do likewise. - -(1) Three carloads of Senate speeches, franked to Chicago in bulk, the -bulk then broken and the speeches remailed, under frank, to individual -addresses. - -I do not know the tonnage of those three cars. Local newspaper reports -stated that there were 3,000,000 copies of one of the speeches. I take it -that sixty tons is a low figure for the three carloads. The actual weight -was probably nearer ninety tons. But leave it at sixty, the remailing in -piece at bulk destination makes the weight 120 tons on which the Post -office Department had to pay transportation, on sixty tons of which it -also had to stand the expense of piece handling. - -(2) Another carload of Senatorial vocal effort passed through Chicago to -a destination far west. I do not know, but presume it was in bulk, and -on arrival, bulk was broken and the matter returned to mail for piece -distribution. - -The reader must not overlook the fact that the character of matter -carried in those four carloads was third-class--was _eight-cent-a-pound -matter_. There were eighty tons or more of it in bulk and its remailing -in piece would make it 160 tons. - -If a manufacturer, merchant or other business man put to mail 160 tons of -third-class matter he would contribute to the postal service revenue just -$25,600. - -(3) Three crates of fruit went into a mail car at one time, two cases -of canned goods at another and a crate of tomatoes at another, without -passing over the weighing scale. A drum of coffee, fifty to eighty pounds -in weight, went to mail at another time, and a large sack of sawdust at -another. - -Both of the last mentioned _went over the weighing scale before they went -to the mail car_. - -I am speaking only of what casual or chance notice brought to my -attention in three railway stations in Chicago. If similar or -corresponding abuses were indulged at other stations here, as it is -a legitimate inference they were, it is also a legitimate inference -that similar abuses were, and are, practiced throughout the country, -especially in cities of the first, second and third classes--in cities -and towns on which has been conferred the distinguished honor of having -their mail handled under the watchful eye and supervising care of a -“Presidential Postmaster,” that is, by a postmaster appointed by the -President _for partisan reasons and prospective uses_. - -Again going back to our mutton, I repeat the question, “What is the -extent of this ‘franking’ and ‘penalty’ raid upon the revenues of the -Postoffice Department?” I have cited three local instances merely to -give a “hunch”--to blaze a line along which thoughtful people may safely -think, and think to some fairly satisfying conclusion. I do not know the -extent of the _lootage_ of postal revenues by the uses and abuses of -those “frank” and “penalty” regulations. You do not know, and the present -Postmaster General _admits_ he does not know, nor has he any means or -method of ascertaining. - -On page 11 of the report of the Postoffice Department for the fiscal -year 1909-1910, Mr. Hitchcock very frankly states the fact and gives his -personal opinion of the extent of the franking raid upon the service of -his department. He also suggests a partial remedy which also I shall -quote because it is a good suggestion, on right lines, and for making it -Mr. Hitchcock deserves the thanks of a people over-burdened by the abuses -his suggestion would, I believe, correct in material degree. At any rate, -the suggestion is on right lines. Following is what he says: - - The unrestricted manner in which the franking privilege is now - being used by the several federal services and by Congress has - laid it open to _serious abuses_--a fact clearly established - through investigations recently instituted by the department. - While it has been impossible without a better control of franking - to determine the _exact expense to the government_ of this - practice, _there can be no doubt that it annually reaches into - the millions_. It is believed that many abuses of the franking - system could be prevented, and consequently a marked economy - effected, by supplying through the agencies of the postal - service special official envelopes and stamps for the free mail - of the government, all such envelopes and stamps to be issued - on requisition to the various branches of the federal service - requiring them, and such records to be kept of official stamp - supplies as will enable the Post office Department _to maintain - a proper postage account_ covering the entire volume of free - government mail. - -“_There can be no doubt that it annually reaches into the millions_,” -says Mr. Hitchcock of the cost to his department of transporting and -handling the government free mail matter--frank and penalty matter. It -should also be noted that he says that “the unrestricted manner in which -the franking privilege is now being used by the several federal services -and by Congress, has laid it open to _serious abuses_.” - -Not only are the foregoing statements of our Postmaster General true, but -with equal truth he could have said that the abuses of the postal service -practiced by other federal departments have encouraged--have coached, so -to speak,--the Postoffice Department into _abusing itself_. - -Those crates of fruit and cases of canned goods which I saw loaded into -mail cars were probably for some postmaster who conducted a grocery or -fruit stand, as a “side” to his official duties. Or they may have gone to -some “friend” or “good fellow” along the line, or to some one who stood -for a “split” of the express charges on such a shipment. - -The drum of coffee and sack of sawdust may have had consignees of similar -character. But their shipment as mail matter showed another abuse of -the postal service by the Postoffice Department itself, or by employes -of that department. _They were weighed into rail transportation at a -time when the average weight of mail carried during a period of three or -six months would govern the rate of pay the transporting railroad would -receive for carrying the mails during a period of four years._ - -The same might be said of the four carloads of Senatorial eloquence -referred to on a previous page. Those cars were franked through _during -the weighing period_ in the postal service. There is this difference, -however, between those four cars of franked eloquence and the drum of -coffee and sack of sawdust. The former was an abuse of the postal service -and a raid upon its revenues _by permission, if not by authority, of the -postal statutes_. The latter was an abuse of the postal service and raid -upon its revenues _by employes of the Postoffice Department itself_. - -But the point we are after is the extent of federal departmental raid -upon the postal revenues. How much is it? I have confessed my ignorance -of the sum such raid will total. Our Postmaster General has (see last -preceding quotation), confessed his ignorance of the total. He says there -can be “no doubt that it annually reaches into many millions.” - -I have no other evidence or authority at hand save the testimony of -William A. Glasgow, Jr., before the Penrose-Overstreet Commission in -1906. Mr. Glasgow represented the Periodical Publishers’ Association. -In presenting the case for that association--strong, reputable body, -representing vast business and public service (educational, social, -fraternal and trade interests)--Mr. Glasgow used the following language: - - You may take the revenues of the Postoffice Department and give - _away $19,000,000 per annum in the franking privilege to other - departments of government_ and then give away $28,000,000 per - annum in the beneficent advantages of rural free delivery, and - then lose millions in unequal and exorbitant transportation - charges, certainly $5,000,000, and thus create an apparent - and artificial deficit and use that as a basis for further - taxation upon those who read magazines, but no one will be - deceived by such an excuse and no wise Congress will be moved by - considerations so transparent or necessities so unreal.--_Page - 544 Penrose-Overstreet Report (Hearings), 1906-7._ - -If Mr. Glasgow were speaking in 1911, I have no doubt he would have -raised his figure of $19,000,000 to _twenty or more millions_ as a nearer -approximate of the total of federal departmental raids upon the earnings -or revenues of the Postoffice Department. - -Do not misunderstand me. - -All legitimate departmental service _should_ be rendered by the -Postoffice Department, but that department _should receive credit for -such service rendered_. - -The departmental “abuses” of the postal service are _steals_. They -should not be tolerated. If extra-departmental service is rendered (as -is well known it is), _it should be paid for just the same--and at the -same service rates--that Jim Jones, Susie Bowers and Widow Finerty are -compelled to pay for similar service_. - -Now, we have raidings on the postoffice revenues by the government -departments themselves, including free in county, and by the Postoffice -Department’s looseness of methods in handling its own business, of -somewheres around $22,000,000 a year, not counting the _stuffing_ of -weights during the “weighing period”, which goes to swell the railway -mail pay rates for mail carrying railroads for a period of four years. - -As to the last, I wish to say that Mr. Hitchcock, the present Postmaster -General, has done _more_ to correct such weighing frauds than has any -of his predecessors within the range of my study of the question. Yet -it lingers--hangs on to an extent which should put some subordinate -postoffice officials and railway officials in restraint--put them out of -range of opportunity for such looting. - -In the face of an annual raid of $22,000,000, what is the use of all -this prattle--prattle extending over years--about _deficits_ in the -postal service? Will some one kindly rise in the front pews of the postal -department or in the sanctum of its _beneficiaries_ and tell us? - -_There is no deficit in the postoffice service revenues. The people pay -and have paid for more service than is rendered--for more service than -they have received or do receive._ - -“But what difference to the people does it make whether they pay for -carrying the departmental mail out of the postal revenues or have each -department pay for its own mail carriage and handling?” is a common -answering interrogative argument (?) to my immediately preceding charge -that the various government departments _raid_ the postal revenues to the -extent of “many millions,” as Mr. Hitchcock has put it. “The people have -to pay for it anyway, do they not?” - -Just so, and what difference does it make? Well, here are a few points -of difference which might be seen and comprehended without jarring any -fairly normal intellect off its pedestal: - -1. To have the departments pay or give credit to the Postoffice -Department for the service it renders to them is an honest and approved -method in any other business. The present method not only violates sound -business principles but is _dishonest_ as well--dishonest because it -throws the burden of those “many millions” for mail haulage and handling -of franked and penalty matter _upon the postal rate papers_, and not upon -all the people of the country as it should. - -2. If the free congressional and departmental matter now costs, say -$20,000,000 a year for mail haulage and handling, then the government -is practicing a policy which both _originates and distributes revenue -without appropriation_. In other words, the general government in such -practice usurps the function of originating revenue which function, under -the Constitution, is vested in the Lower House of Congress. - -Next, the general government distributes that $20,000,000 (or its -equivalent in service, which amounts to the same thing), to the several -departments, or lets each department raid that service as it pleases. It -does this in flat violation of another section or clause of the Federal -Constitution which provides that the cost of maintenance and operation, -including any contemplated construction and permanent betterments, shall -be provided for in an _annual appropriation bill_. - -3. The recommended method would greatly lessen the “abuses” of the -postal service by government departments and officials of which Mr. -Hitchcock speaks. On the other hand, the method of the present and the -past _invites_ such abuses. Abuses grow but do not improve with age. Each -year the abuses of which Mr. Hitchcock speaks in his 1910 report have -grown until _abuses_ is scarcely a fitting designation for them. These -abuses of the postal service have grown, and grown in such a stealthy, -porch-climbing way, that they amount to a _colossal steal_ every year. - -4. When they hear so much yodling about “deficits” in the Postoffice -Department, millions of our people are led to believe that such deficits -are created by an excess of cost over receipts in carrying the letters, -postal and postcards, the newspapers, magazines and other periodicals, -the books and merchandise, which the people themselves entrust to -the mails for delivery. They hear that the postal service “should -be self-supporting,” that “each division of the service should be -self-sustaining” and then they are called on for higher service rates to -meet “deficits.” - -Why should this great government of ours permit its officials longer to -gold-brick the people with such ping-pong talk? Why not tell the people -the truth, or at least give them an open, honest opportunity to learn the -truth? - -The annual federal appropriation bills informs them at least of the -“estimated” expenditures for the year for other departments. Why not -give them an _honest_ estimate of what it costs the Postoffice Department -to render a service _which should serve them_? - -Other easily comprehended differences between the present method of -loading all governmental mail service upon the Postoffice Department -without pay or credit for the vast service rendered and a method which -would give that department such credit could readily be mentioned. -However, the four points of difference between the two methods above -cited, and the advantages which would accrue both to the service and the -people by adopting an approved, honest business method instead of the -present unfair, foolish and _dishonest_ one, are sufficient, I think, to -convince the reader that there _are_ differences between these right and -wrong ways of handling the nation’s postal service--its governmental mail -matter--that are of vital importance--differences which on the one hand -invite raidings, waste and _lootage_ of the postoffice revenues and on -the other would make for economies in the service and for business care -and _honesty_ in the use and expenditures of those revenues. - - -EXPRESS COMPANIES CONDUCTING A CRIMINAL TRAFFIC. - -But, says another apologist for the loose, wasteful methods of the -Postoffice Department in handling both its service and its revenues, “The -postal service was originally instituted for handling the government mail -only.” - -That be as it may, though I doubt the sweeping assertion of the statement -made, just as I doubt the integrity and truthfulness of purpose of the -person making it. It came to my notice as part of an argument (?) in -defense of the outrageous railway mail pay and mail-car rental charges -which mail carrying railroads have _been permitted_ to collect from the -postal revenues _paid by the people_. But whether or not the postal -service was originally intended to be merely a dispatch service for -transmission of government orders, documents, etc., can stand as no -valid reason now for the Federal Government’s permitting its several -departments to use and abuse the vast system for intercommunication -among the people which it has permitted to be built up, and for the -building of which it has taxed (by way of postal charges) those who made -use of the system--taxed them _excessively_, if indeed not somewhat -unscrupulously--whether or not, not, I say, the government originally -intended the mail service to be an exclusive service for use of the -government only has no present bearing. If such was the original -intention, the foolishness of it must soon have become apparent, for we -find that federal laws were enacted to establish a general postal service -_for all the people_. Not only were laws enacted for the establishment -and regulation of a mail service, but by the law of 1845 it was clearly -intended to make such service a _government_ monopoly. Section 181 of the -federal statutes reads as follows: - - Whoever shall establish any private express for the conveyance - of letters or packets, or in any manner cause or provide for the - conveyance of the same by regular trips or at stated periods over - any post route which is or may be established by law, or from any - city, town or place between which the mail is regularly carried, - or whoever shall aid or assist therein, shall be fined not more - than $500, or imprisoned not more than six months, or both. - -The foregoing makes it quite evident that, as early as 1845 at least, -this government of ours did not intend or design the service on mail -routes then existing, nor on routes to be established, was to confine -itself to the carriage and handling of government matter only. The -establishment of rail post routes and the greater facility and speed with -which such routes would handle the people’s mails--“the letters, packages -and parcels of people residing along such mail routes”--was one of the -stock arguments of the Illinois Central Railroad promoters in 1849-50--an -argument designed to justify before the people a grant of land to the -chartered company so large as to make the grant a _colossal steal_. The -same or similar argument was turned loose and persuasively paraded in -the oratorical procession which preceded the vast federal land grants, -or land steals, in connection with the building of transcontinental or -Pacific rail lines. - -Enough has been said to show quite conclusively that whatever may -or may not have been the “intention” of the government at the first -establishment of a mail service--a service then wholly by water -transportation, by runners and by a “Pony Post” and mail coach--a -decision was very soon reached to make the postal service a public one--a -service for all our people--and to give the government _a monopoly of -that service_. - -No one reading the section of the Revised Statutes of the United States -above quoted will attempt to controvert the statement last made. - -Then, it may be asked again, and justly, too, why does the government -continue to permit its various departments to over-load and to _loot_ -the postal service, the revenues for maintaining which the people--the -mail-using portion of the people--alone contribute? - -It also may be justly asked, why does the government permit -its postoffice and other officials to _scream_ at the people -about “deficits,” when they have already paid far more than the -service--_their_ service--costs the government? - -Other equally pertinent questions might be asked, but I shall forbear. -I have shown, I believe, that the raids upon the postoffice revenues by -free-in-county matter and by government itself would _more than meet_ any -“deficit” yodled about in recent years. - -That is what I started to demonstrate in this chapter. But there are -other raids and raiders upon the revenues of the Postoffice Department to -which I must advert. I purposed in writing to this phase of our general -subject, to make official prattle about postal service “deficits” look -and sound foolish. - -I believe I have already done that, but in justice to the subject and -to the postal ratepayers, at least three other raiders must have their -cloaks slit. - - - - -CHAPTER XI. - -LATEST OFFICIAL STYLES IN POSTAL CONVERSATION. - - -The President’s message of February 22, 1912, reached me a few hours -after the closing chapters of this volume had gone to the printers. With -it arrived a copy of the Postmaster General’s report for the year ending -June 30, 1911; also notice from a Congressman friend that he will have -the Hughes Commission’s report on the way shortly. The Man on the Ladder, -like Lucy, when selecting her spring bonnet, desires the “very latest -creation.” It may not be essentially necessary in a discussion of Federal -postal affairs, but even a hurried reading of the President’s message and -the report of Postmaster General Hitchcock will furnish abundant evidence -that _expressed_ official opinion is somewhat ephemeral and transitory, -like the styles in ladies’ headwear. I have never had the pleasure of -retaining a lady’s unanimous friendship for any appreciable length -of time after giving her my honest opinion of the style of her most -recently acquired bonnet, and readers who have followed me thus far in my -consideration of government postal affairs will have discovered that my -respect for “style” in official oratory and literature needs coaching. - -All that aside, however, the point is that I have persuaded my printers -to “break galley” just here and permit the insertion of a chapter, having -as subject the “very latest” in official postal affairs. - - -THE PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE. - -In his Washington Day effort our smiling President is profusely loyal -to the characteristics of his style in composition--plumage and -displacement. Mr. Taft, however, should set up no claims of originality -of design in Executive messages. Several of his predecessors presented -the people of these United States with numerous displays of verbal -plumage and trimmings. So our President had many working-models as guides -in building the message upon which we shall proceed to comment. - -This message, both in architectural specification and in contour or -_ensemble_, is largely but a re-trim of the “block” furnished by Mr. -Hitchcock in his report, under date of December 1, 1911. In considering -the President’s message and the report of the Postmaster General, we may, -then, shorten our task somewhat by treating the two public documents as -one. They, of course, differ in phrasing and wording, but the language -of the message is only a sort of Executive “Me-too” approval of what -Mr. Hitchcock says in his report, save on one point--the taking over of -the telegraph companies by the government. That point we will discuss -separately, presenting the argument of the president against the -proposition and the _facts_ presented by Postmaster General Hitchcock: - -“It gives me pleasure to call attention to the fact that the revenues for -the fiscal year ending June 30, 1911, amounted to $237,879,823.60 and -that the expenditures amounted to $237,660,705.48, making a surplus of -$219,118.12. For the year ending June 30, 1909, the postal service was in -arrears to the extent of $17,479,770.47.” - -Well, yes, certainly. It gives us all pleasure to see a surplus grow -where only deficits grew before--gives us great pleasure. Still, -Mr. President, you will permit us humbly to say that it has been a -distressful winter and that here, the very last of February, the ground -is still frozen hard. You, of course, will recall that our Postmaster -General, at intervals during the last fiscal year, as opportunity for -“interviews” offered, gave us confident assurances that his department -was harvesting a surplus, ranging in amount from one to three million -dollars. These assurances beyond our expectations--our hopes--led us to -an elevation which makes it a far fall to $219,118.12. Of course, it is -our fault. We should not have permitted our hopes and expectations to -become so altitudinous. But Mr. Hitchcock has a very persuasive delivery -and the public press quoted him so numerously and so prolixly that we -climbed on and on up--away above the one and some of us well on towards -the three million level and--well, as before said, the ground being -frozen, a drop to $220,000 jars us some considerable in alighting. Mr. -Hitchcock probably framed up his mid-year interviews to fit observed -conditions, the best he knew how. Most of us will soon be out of the -hospital and in condition to take an inflation for another flight. Some -of the less venturesome among us may be over-careful not to soar too -high, but our tank capacity remains about the same. So the Postmaster -General may meter nearly the same amount of rhetorical gas to us -without fear. The President might, however, if he thinks it would not -occasion any unseemly discord in rendering the grand symphony entitled -“Administrative Policy,” give us folks some information on the following -points--points raised by a reading of the Washington Day message and of -the 1911 report of the Postmaster General, both of which are before me, -as I write. Of course this is the President’s busy season and he may not -be able to devote as much time to our enlightenment as he would like to -and otherwise would. In that event, he may turn the subject over to Mr. -Hitchcock and request him to separate himself from a few interviews to -clear these matters up for us. - -In each annual report of the Postoffice Department I have at hand (1907 -to 1911 inclusive), there appears an item which reads, “Expenditures on -account of previous years.” For the years indicated, the figures on this -item of expenditures are as follows: - - 1907 $ 303,045.55 - 1908 823,664.64 - 1909 586,404.69 - 1910 6,786,394.11 - 1911 7,132,112.23 - -As figures are always more or less of a serious nature, we will here drop -the personal element in discussing these points on which information -is desired, and much _needed_, if public press notices can be at all -depended upon as informative. Of course “figures do not lie.” Still, -it is generally known that, however truthful they may be in correct -calculations, they sometimes appear very peculiar, if not queer, in -tabulations. Some persons have even gone so far as to assert that -“official figures” have frequently been so arranged and manipulated as -to “conceal the facts.” Now, the figures for that item, “Expenditures on -account of previous years” may conceal no facts which the public has any -right to know. Still, there is something about them which irritates one’s -bump of curiosity; that is, if one’s bump is not abnormally dwarfed or -stunted. At any rate, it appears from press comment that those figures -have sand-papered or otherwise frictioned several bumps of curiosity into -a state of irritation. It is the hope of securing some official light -that will act as a linitive or demulcent to my own and other bumps that -persuaded those figures into evidence here. - -What do those figures mean? Are they of any real informative value or -merely convenient things to have around when building the sub and -superstructures of a department annual reports, like the figures of -the postal deficits? A glance at the sums named in the table shows a -variableness that amounts almost to a waywardness in totaling bills or -accounts payable. The federal fiscal year ends June 30th. The annual -reports of the Postoffice Department bear date December 1st--full -four months after the close of the fiscal year. Surely four months is -sufficient time to gather into account the bills payable or carried-over -obligations of a previous year, is it not? Of course the business of the -department is a large business--over $237,000,000 last year and about -$260,000,000 is asked for this year in the appropriation bill recently -passed by the House. But that is no reason whatever for failure to -account for amounts ranging from $300,000 to $6,200,000 of unpaid bills -of the business year in which the obligations were created; especially -not, when publication of the accounting is made four months after the -close of the year. - -This item of “expenditures on account of previous years” becomes no -more understandable, if indeed it does not become more suggestive of -purposeful manipulation, when one looks over the itemized or segregated -expenditures of the year. The items of expenditure are all of the -conventional character used in business accounting--operation and -maintenance--such as service salaries, transportation of the mails, -rents, light, fuel, supplies, repairs, etc. And these are all set down as -expenditures of and for the fiscal year’s business covered by the report, -there being not even a suggestion that any part or portion of the total -is an expenditure of the previous year--of any previous year. - -So much for the detail of expenditures as published in the reports. From -the summaries of receipts and expenditures one gathers no additional -light. In the reports of the Third Assistant Postmaster General (division -of accounts), one finds only the bald item, “Expenditures on account of -previous years,” down to the report of Third Assistant, James J. Britt, -for the year ended June 30, 1910. For that year Mr. Britt segregates the -item as follows: - - Services for the fiscal year, 1909 $6,721,058.52 - Services for the fiscal year, 1908 53,814.12 - Services for the fiscal year, 1907 108.97 - Claims, fiscal year, 1907 and prior years 11,605.44 - Claims, fiscal year, 1906 and prior years 25.00 - ------------ - Total for prior years $6,786,394.11 - -Anyone taking the trouble to add the five amounts given above, will -discover an error of $217.94 in the total. While that error is only a -trifle, its appearance, however, in the addition of but five items is not -highly commendatory of the ability of Mr. Britt’s expert accountants. -The making of such an error in totaling only five entries has a tendency -to arouse doubt or suspicion as to the reliability or dependability, not -only of the footings given for the longer tabulations published in the -report, but also of the footings which must necessarily have been made -to secure the totals which are entered as items in such tabulations. Be -this as it may, very few persons, aside from clerks paid for doing the -work (and, possibly, an official or two whose duty it is or should be to -see that the work is done accurately), will go to the trouble to verify -even the footings of the published tabulations. So the errors, if any -have been made, are not likely to become subject matter for much adverse -criticism. - -My purpose in presenting the showing of the 1910 report on that item -of “expenditure on account of previous years” is to make the statement -that, so far as I have been able to look up the matter, it is a first -weak attempt to make public in the annual report the accounts and claims -carried over from a previous year or years and published as expenditures -of the year to which they are carried. I desire the reader to note, -also, that of the total of “expenditures on account of previous years” -($6,786,612.05 as above corrected), all but $65,553.53 is set down as -expenditures for the year _immediately prior_--for 1909. - -Now, the business of the Postoffice Department is a cash business--wholly -so in the matter of receipts and nearly so, or should be, in the matter -of expenditures. This being the case, that item entered in the published -annual reports as “expenditures on account of previous years” must -consist largely of payments made on account of the year _immediately -preceding_ the year covered by the report. As just shown by the published -analysis of the item in the 1910 report, the expenditures on account -of prior years other than the one just preceding are so small (only -$65,553.53 in a total of $6,786,612.05), that they may be ignored in -the attempt I am shortly to make, to show that the item we have been -considering--“expenditures on account of previous years”--has such -dominance in the department’s method of accounting, as evidenced in its -annual reports, as to materially affect the deficit or surplus showing. - -First, however, I desire to call attention to another point or two -relating to this item of expenditure. - -A glance at the tabulation made of this item shows a huge jump in its -amount for the year 1910 of $6,200,000, round figures. Next, it appears -that the necessities of business, _or the emergency needs of those -building the report_, forced this item still upward in the showing for -1911 as made December last--upward by $345,718.12, making its total -$7,132,112.23. In the report before me, no analysis of that large -carried-over payment on account of prior years is given. The Third -Assistant Postmaster General may furnish information as to the year or -years of its origin. His report has not reached me yet, so I cannot say. -The bald statement is there, however, that 1911 _paid over seven million -dollars_ on account of 1910 and prior bills. It is also in evidence that -_no information whatever_ is published which enlightens the public as -to the amount of _unpaid 1911 bills that are carried forward to 1912 -account_. - -Whether adverse criticism is justifiable or not, such cloaking of -accounts in giving them publicity most certainly warrants it. It is just -this cloaking that has subjected Mr. Hitchcock’s little vest-pocket -surplus for 1911 to much and merited criticism, doubt and question. -Mr. Urban A. Waters, in testifying before the House Committee on Civil -Service Reform _harpooned_ the Postoffice Department with an accusation -that it had permitted a million dollars to waste, evaporate, be -misapplied or stolen, in connection with a deal for sanitary and safety -appliances to railway mail cars. - -If Mr. Waters’ charges are grounded in fact, then is provoked and -_invited_ the question: Is it designed or intended to carry that million -into the accounting of 1912--or into that of some future year--as an -“Expenditure on account of previous years?” - -Mr. Waters is publisher of the Denver Harpoon. He can say things and is -generally recognized as a man who makes a practice of gathering the facts -to back up what he says before he says it. In his testimony, so far as -I know, Mr. Waters made no statement or suggestion that the evaporated -million he spoke of would be, or could be, very securely _cacheted_ -or “fenced” in this “account of previous years.” It is The Man on the -Ladder who points out--who says--that such loose accounting as carries -to account of a subsequent year the expenditures made or incurred in a -previous year can _very readily_ be made to cloak a steal of one or more -millions of dollars. - -Then, there are those rural carriers who refused to do as Mr. DeGraw, -Fourth Assistant Postmaster General, told them to do. You read the papers -of course, and--you believe them, of course, though most of you say, “Of -course, I don’t believe ’em.” Well, it was broadly published that the -_Rural Free Delivery News_ had the temerity to publish--not merely to -insinuate, mind you--that Mr. Hitchcock’s showing of a little $220,000 -surplus for the year ended June 30, 1911, was made possible only _by the -failure of the Postoffice Department to make a plain, valid charge of -$7,201,149.64 expenditures for that same fiscal year of 1911_! - -Those are _not_ the exact words used in giving publicity to the asserted -fact by the _Rural Free Delivery News_, but that is the meat in the nut -the publication cracked. It appears that the published statement was -closely contiguous to the facts. At any rate, its nestling juxtaposition -to the truth was such that it appears to have neither looked nor listened -well to the department. There is a presidential campaign on the speedway -at this time, with all its usual concomitants of cackle, clack, cluck and -other atmospheric disturbances. Such a published truth--if truth it is, -and it certainly displays a marked resemblance in both form and feature -to that article so extremely rare in campaign clutter--the appearance of -such a truth on the speedway has a tendency to “blanket” some candidate -or jockey him into the fence. With a view no doubt, to guarding against -such possibility, that machine so much used in recent years to smooth -down the rough places in administration roadways was turned onto the -track. A hostile opposition, always somewhat harsh and careless in its -language, calls it “the steam roller.” So the steam roller, with Fourth -Assistant Postmaster General DeGraw at the wheel and manipulating the -levers, rolled out among the rural carriers. - -But it appears that it did not roll over them. There are forty-odd -thousand rural carriers and, of course, it would have to be some “steam -roller” to mutilate or seriously dent the ranks of so numerous a body -of men; especially of men who travel about with the fragrance of the -clover blossom and the corn bloom in their nostrils. They just wouldn’t -be rolled and, it is reported they so informed Mr. DeGraw in very polite -and easily understood language. They would not demand of the publisher -of their association organ that he retract and, to date, the _Rural -Free Delivery News_ has, so far as I have seen, shown no sign of either -intention or inclination to back away from or in any way modify its -charge which, in effect, was that the showing of a surplus--of even a -little “runabout” surplus of $220,000 for the fiscal year of 1911--is a -“faked” showing--a showing made possible only by carrying $7,201,149.64 -of 1911 expenditures over to 1912 account. - -May the _Rural Free Delivery News_ live long in the land and flourish. - -In a letter just received from Mr. W. D. Brown, editor of the _R. F. -D. News_, he says: “When the Postoffice Committee submitted its report -on March 6, it contained the statement that instead of a surplus in -the postal revenues there was, up to that time, a deficit of more than -$600,000.00 and I am satisfied that the amount will be greatly increased -before the end of the current fiscal year.” - -In the _News_ of January 27, the issue to which Mr. DeGraw took -exception, Editor Brown publishes a letter he wrote under date of January -11, 1912, to Mr. Charles A. Kram, Auditor of the Postoffice Department. -He also publishes Mr. Kram’s reply. In comment on the reply, Mr. Brown -says: “Auditor Kram’s reply throws very little light upon the subject, -except to establish the fact that it is impossible to say at any time, -whether the Postoffice Department is being conducted at a profit or a -loss.” - -Next comes Congressman Moon, an admitted authority on postal affairs and -Chairman of the House Committee of Postoffices and Post-Roads. - -I see by a press notice that Mr. Moon, in speaking to the question before -his committee recently, stated that there was a “deficit of $627,845 -for the fiscal year of 1911” in the Postoffice Department, instead of a -surplus of $219,118.12, as published in its report, and over which Mr. -Hitchcock and President Taft display so much luxuriant jubilation. - -We have probably presented sufficient testimony to evidence the fact that -the figures presented by our Postoffice Department are numerously, if not -unanimously, doubted among people who take upon themselves the trouble -and the labor of looking into them. True, the three or four witnesses -we have introduced do not agree as to the amount or magnitude of the -shortages or discrepancies they have found, nor have they said, just -where in the loose, bungled accounting they found the discrepancies. -However, my purpose here is to show only that publicity of such bungled -accounting does not enlighten or inform the public and that the practice -of _charging the expenditures of one year to account of the next_ may -easily be made to cloak and cover up much wasteful if, indeed, not -dishonest expenditure. That being the case, the disagreement of our -witnesses as to the amount of dollars and cents they severally have found -to be mislaid, or not properly accounted for, can make little difference -in the conclusion _forced_ by their testimony on any fair, inquiring mind. - -But, it may be argued by apologists for such misleading practice in -accounting or by persons who would plead extenuating conditions for -Mr. Hitchcock and others charged with administering federal postoffice -affairs, that this loose, fraud-inviting practice is of long standing, -that the present administration has not had time to correct and remedy -the faulty practice and that the published showing of current years is -correct, because it is made on the same basis as was the accounting for -many previous years. - -All very well said, but it does not answer. Hoary-headed age in loose, -falsifying methods of accounting neither commands respect nor can stand -as reason or excuse for continuing such methods. It most certainly has no -warrant as argument in extenuation for the continuance of such methods by -the present administration. - -“Why?” Well, there are several reasons. Mr. Hitchcock, it appears, has -been aware for some two years or more that the practice we are here -discussing was a questionable one, even if he was not fully informed -as to the dangers--the waste, the fraud, the crookedness--which that -practice might easily be made to cloak. Yet he has not only continued the -practice, but, it would appear has further indulged or encouraged its -growth. Let us look at the published evidence on this point. - -A _reduced_ deficit in the showing of the Postoffice Department for the -year 1910 was somewhat _evidently_ desired. To that end, the practice -we are criticising charges 1910 with $6,786,394.11 for expenditures “on -account of previous years,” all of which, save $65,553.53, as previously -shown, were expenditures made on account of the year 1909. - -Now, in a footnote to page 278 of the 1910 report, Third Assistant -Postmaster General Britt presents a somewhat confusing, if not confused -explanation of his showing of the “Revenues and expenditures” for the -year. One statement in the explanation, however, is resonantly loud in -its clearness. - -“On the other hand,” says Mr. Britt, “expenditures made in the first -three months of the fiscal year, 1911 on account of the fiscal year 1910 -and prior years are not included in the reported deficit for the year -1910. _The amounts are approximately equal._” - -I italicize that last statement. Let’s see: 1910 was made to pay (in -accounting only, of course), $6,786,394.11 of 1909 and prior expenditures -and, in an exchange, as simple as swapping Barlows, $7,132,112.23 of 1910 -expenditures are shunted onto the year 1911! - -“The amounts are approximately equal,” says Mr. Britt. - -Well, the difference is only $345,718.12--a mere trifle, of course, in -a shuffle of millions. But if that trifle had been added to the 1910 -expenditures, where it rightly belonged, the 1910 deficit would have -shown up a trifle _over_ instead of a trifle _under_ six million dollars, -as given in the published report--a very important matter along in the -closing days of 1910. - -Then, too, when our President and his Postmaster General so warm up to -a surplus of $220,000, it is possible, if not probable, that a trifle -like $345,000 might have been a convenience as a deficit _reducer_ in -December, 1910. - -On page 19 of Mr. Hitchcock’s report, he presents the following as one -of thirty “Improvements in Organization and Methods” accomplished by the -Postoffice Department during the year ended June 30, 1911: - - A change in the financial system whereby the surplus receipts of - postoffices throughout the country are _promptly_ centralized - at convenient points for the purpose _of meeting other postal - expenditures incurred during the period in which the surplus - receipts accrued_, thus paying the expenses of the service from - current receipts and obviating the necessity of applying to the - Treasury for a grant to meet an apparent deficiency in postal - revenues _when, as has happened in many instances, no actual - deficiency exists_. - -Now, that is certainly an “improvement” worthy of all commendation. If, -as stated, it provides for “Meeting other postal expenditures incurred -during the period in which the surplus receipts accrued” it certainly -should prevent “an apparent deficiency … when … no actual deficiency -exists.” - -But why, then, is it reported that over $7,000,000 of expenditures for -the year ended June 30, 1910, are charged to the fiscal year 1911? The -report bears date December 1st, 1911--_four months after the fiscal year -1911 closed_. If the receipts of postoffices throughout the country are -“promptly centralized” for the purpose of meeting current expenditures, -it would require super, if indeed not supple, expertness in accounting to -figure out a surplus of $220,000 for a year’s business which assumes over -seven millions in unpaid bills of a previous year without, apparently, -knowing what amount of unpaid bills can be shunted onto the next year. - -But, it may be argued, there is nothing inconsistent in Mr. Hitchcock’s -claim as just quoted, of an improvement in the department’s system -or methods of accounting which makes, or _should_ make, unnecessary -the carrying over to 1911 so large a sum for expenditures made in or -an account of the year 1910. While the improved methods have been -introduced, it may be argued that insufficient time has elapsed, even -to December 1st, to admit of their application in making up the fiscal -report for the year 1911. In short, that the improved methods were -introduced so late in the fiscal year 1910 that the resulting betterments -in the system of accounting could not be shown in the report for 1910-11. - -Yes, that possibly might be of some weight in considering this claimed -improvement in the accounting methods of the department. There is, -however, one serious objection to its acceptance as evidence in this -case--evidence in proof that there was not sufficient time to make the -improved methods operative in the showing for the fiscal year 1911: - - (5) The adoption of improved methods of accounting by which the - surplus or deficiency in the postal revenues is approximately - determined _within three weeks from the close of each quarter_, - instead of three months thereafter, on the completion of the - audit of postmasters’ accounts. - - (6) The adoption of an accounting plan that insures _the prompt - deposit in the Treasury_ of postal funds not immediately required - for disbursement at postoffices, _thus making available for use - by the department_ several millions of dollars that, under the - old practice, would be tied up in postoffices. - -In his 1909-10 report, Mr. Hitchcock sets forth _fifty_ “improvements” -in methods of handling and conducting the business of the Postoffice -Department--improvements made _prior_ to June 30, 1910, mind you. -Well, the foregoing quotation presents numbers 5 and 6 of the -enumerated 50 “improvements” that were set up as having already been -instituted--instituted prior to June 30, 1910. Beyond saying that the -department has certainly had ample _time_ to install and make operative -the improvements in methods of handling its business and of accounting, -which its published reports claim to have been made, comment is -unnecessary. If the improvements, as _twice_ claimed in the two annual -reports from which I have quoted have been made, then, it is pertinent -to ask: Why was _over seven millions_ of 1909-10 expenditures carried to -1910-11 account? - -Such a showing excuses another question--excuses it because it _invites_ -the question: - -What amount--how _many millions of dollars_--of 1910-11 unpaid bills -and claims was carried over to become a charge against the fiscal year -1911-12? - -Oh, yes, I am fully aware that this may be all readily explained by -saying that the claimed improvements as set forth have nothing whatever -to do with the practice of carrying forward unpaid bills of one fiscal -year and making them a charge against the receipts of the next or some -subsequent fiscal year. - -Such an explanation is easily understood, _because it does not explain_. -That is, it is an explanation which, to be _believably_ understood, -requires more explaining than do the faults and crooks in the method of -accounting it attempts to explain. - -That the “fumbling” of this carrying-over practice _needs_ -correction--needs _abolishment_--will be seen from a glance at the two -following tabulations. That the practice also makes the departments’ -annual showing of the _results_ of the business of the year--any -year--almost valueless is also made evident--that is, valueless so far -as real, dependable information is concerned as to whether the postal -service is conducted at a loss or at a profit. - -The first tabulation following shows the published figures for the fiscal -year’s expenses as given in the departmental reports. It also shows what -the expenses of the fiscal years indicated really were, when their unpaid -bills (as shown by the next annual report of the department) are charged -against them. - -The whole charge, “On Account of Previous Years” in each report is -treated as a charge against the _immediately preceding year_. It has -been shown that payments on “account of previous years,” as given in the -published reports, include for years other than the first or immediately -preceding, amounts so small that they may be, for purposes of comparison, -ignored.[8] - -At any rate, the figures in the following tabulations of expenditures and -deficits--accepting the department’s published statements of receipts -as correct--are far more enlightening to the general public as to the -results of each year’s business, for the five years here covered, than -are the statements made in the annual reports of the department for the -years named. - -The second table shows the “deficits,” or balances for each of the five -years as compared with the deficits shown in the annual reports of the -department, the corrected figures being subject, of course, to any -trifling reduction which may have resulted from the payment of bills -carried into the account from some other than the immediately preceding -year: - -ANNUAL EXPENDITURES OF THE POSTOFFICE DEPARTMENT. - - Expenditures Expenditures - as published. as corrected. - 1907 $190,238,288.34 $190,758,907.43 - 1908 208,351,886.15 208,114,626.20 - 1909 221,004,102.89 227,204,092.31 - 1910 229,977,224.50 230,322,942.62 - 1911 237,648,926.68 230,516,814.45 - -From the foregoing it will be seen that the corrected figures show a -range of variance from the published figures, of over $6,400,000. That -is, the corrected figures are some $230,000 below for the year 1908 -and more than $6,200,000 above for the year 1910, the showing in the -departments published reports. - -A similar correction for the year 1911 cannot be made until the -department chooses to enlighten the public as to the amount of 1910-11 -unpaid bills it _has carried forward to become a charge against the -receipts of the year 1911-12_. - -As the account for the year stands above, the surplus for the year -1910-11 is $7,363,009.15--not the comparatively trifling amount of -$219,118.12, as published. Of course, if the report shows that 1912 pays -$7,363,009.15 of 1911 expenditures, then the paltry surplus for the -last-named year may stand as given in the report. But if the 1912 report -should show that so much as _one dollar_ more of 1911’s unpaid bills -were shunted onto 1912 than 1911 paid on account of 1910’s shunted bills -($7,132,112.23), then Mr. Hitchcock’s joy-producing “surplus” will vanish -as an _actuality_ in correct accounting. - -Following is the showing of the deficits or balances as published, as -compared with the _actual_ deficits or balances, as corrected according -to previous explanation: - - Deficits Deficits - as published. as corrected. - 1907 $ 6,653,282.77 $ 7,173,901.84 - 1908 16,873,222.74 16,635,962.79 - 1909 17,441,719.82 23,641,709.24 - 1910 5,848,566.88 6,194,285.00 - 1911 219,118.12 (Surplus) 7,363,009.15 - -There, again, is shown a range of more than $6,400,000 between the -published and the _very near_ actual deficits of the several years, not -including 1911, for the showing on which, for reasons stated, I and the -rest of the “dear people,” who are just now being “worked” for votes, -will have to wait until the 1912 report is published. - -Why, nothing but a government treasury--the treasury of our easily -“bubbled” people--could survive that sort of bookkeeping for the time -covered in the above tabulated statement of published and _actual_ yearly -shortages and of _one_ alleged surplus. - - -AN EXECUTIVE OVERSIGHT--POSSIBLY. - -We will now detach ourselves from these wearisome figures and more -wearisome figuring, using figures only as a sort of garnishment to chief -courses served to us by the President and our Postmaster General. - -The receipts of the Postoffice Department, as published in its annual -reports, were $34,317,440.53 greater for the fiscal year 1910-11 than for -the year 1908-9. - -Both the President and Mr. Hitchcock are eloquently ebullient because of -the appearance of a tender shoot or bud of a surplus in a place where -nothing but deficits grew before. But neither of them appears to have -boiled over in either message or report to show the people what splendid -things have been accomplished in two years with that thirty-four millions -of increased revenues. I wonder why? Possibly the failure of ebullition -at the point indicated is the result of oversight. Of course, it may have -resulted from lack of thermic encouragement or inducement. Or, it may be, -that some “induced draft” drew the major part of the thirty-four millions -up the smoke-stack without leaving a B. T. U. equivalent under the kettle. - -“The Postmaster General recommends, _as I have done in previous -messages_, the adoption of a parcels post, and the beginning of this -in the organization of such service on rural routes and _in the city -delivery service first_,” says President Taft. - -If the President really has recommended in “previous messages” the -“beginning” of a parcels post “experiment” in “the City Delivery Service” -such recommendation entirely escaped my notice. A “test” of a parcels -post service on rural routes--yes. That was much talked of a year or more -since. But of an “experimental test” of an improved parcels post in urban -carrier service, little or nothing was said or, if said, it did not make -sufficient noise for The Man on the Ladder to hear. However, I presume -it is as permissible for the conceptions and concepts of a President to -broaden, enlarge and improve as it is for those of a Postmaster General -to broaden, enlarge and improve. For that matter, a proportional, if not -entirely corresponding thought-expansion may be occasionally noticed -in the Department of the Interior as conducted and operated by common, -ordinary mortals. - -As the parcels post is the subject of a later chapter which is already in -type, further consideration here is unnecessary. It may be said, however, -that extending the proposed test--any “test”--of a parcels post service -to city free delivery routes, instead of confining it to a few “selected” -rural routes as Mr. Hitchcock proposed it should be confined in his 1910 -report, is a step in the right direction--a step in advance. Still, such -a step is but dilatory; is but procrastinating. A cheap, efficient, -_general_ parcels post service must come and, now that the people are -aroused--aroused as to the _criminal_ wrongs inflicted upon them by a -Postoffice Department and a Congress that have acted for thirty or more -years as if indifferent to or not cognizant of those wrongs--it must -_come quickly_, unless, of course, it should develop that the people -are, really and truly, as big fools as railroad, express companies and -certain public officials have treated them as being. - -“The commission reports that the evidence submitted for its consideration -is sufficient to warrant a finding of the _approximate_ cost of handling -and transporting the several classes of second-class mail known as -paid-at-the-pound-rate, free-in-county, and transient matter, in so -far as relates to the services of transportation, postoffice cars, -railway distribution, rural delivery, and certain other items of -cost, _but that it is without adequate data to determine the cost of -the general postoffice service and also what portion of the cost of -certain other aggregate services is properly assignable to second-class -mail matter_.… It finds that in the fiscal year 1908 … the cost of -handling and transporting second-class mail matter … was about 6 cents -a pound for paid-at-the-pound-rate matter, and for free-in-county, -and transient matter, each approximately 5 cents a pound, and that -upon this basis, as modified by _subsequent deductions in the cost of -railroad transportation_, the cost of paid-at-the-pound rate matter, -for the services mentioned” (I have not mentioned all the “services” -enumerated by the President, all being covered in the words “handling and -transportation”), “is approximately 5½ cents a pound.” … - -That is from the President’s Washington Day message. Can you beat it? -Well, it will take a smooth road and some going to do it. - -First, it is cheerfully admitted that the Commission (the Hughes -Commission) had no “adequate data to determine the cost of the general -postoffice service and also what portion of the cost of _certain other -aggregate services_ is properly assignable to second-class mail matter,” -and then our President proceeds--with equal cheerfulness and smiling -confidence (_or is it indifference?_) to assure us that the Commission -proceeded to figure 6 cents a pound as the cost of handling and carriage -of _paid_ pound-rate second-class matter and 5 cents a pound as the cost -of corresponding service for _free-in county_ and so-called “transient” -matter! - -Again I ask, can you beat it? If you can, please send me your -picture--full size and two views, front and profile. I would derive -much pleasure from a look at your front and side elevations. Of course, -the President has an official right to a “style” of his own. A “style” -of expression, however, cannot be protected by copyright, otherwise, -as stated at the opening of this interpolated chapter, President Taft -would be guilty of infringement. Other presidents have run into verbose -verbosity in expressing themselves. It is an official _convenience_ at -times to do so, however ludicrously _open of intent_ or “phunny” it may -appear to laymen. - -The President, in the paragraph of his message above quoted, recalls -two of his “arguments” before the Swedish American Republican League, -of Chicago, which arguments I had the honor to hear. In one instance he -was flourishing about our ideal of popular government and said: “What we -are all struggling for, what we all recognize as the highest ideal in -society, is _equality of opportunity_.… Of course perfect equality of -opportunity is _impossible_,” then _why_ it is impossible followed for a -paragraph. - -It was so nicely and redundantly redundant, so resilient in phrasing, so -honestly _earnest_, that one just _had_ to go along with our President, -whether or not one could see how “the highest ideal in society” could -possibly be found in a chase after the “impossible.” - -At another point in his kindly persuasive Come-unto-me discourse, he -pointed out to us how liable a “majority of the people” is to “make -mistakes by hasty action and lack of deliberation.” Then, after a -paragraph of beautiful foliage, the President cited the anti-trust law -of 1890 as an evidence of the advantages and beneficent results of -ample “deliberation” before taking action in matters of “grave import”. -He explained that the decision of the Supreme Court was at first -“misunderstood, or if not misunderstood, was improperly expressed, so -as to _discourage_ those who were interested in the federal power to -restrain and break up these industrial monopolies. _After twenty years’ -litigation_ the meaning of the act has been made clear by a decision of -the Supreme Court, prosecutions have been brought and many of the most -_dangerous_ trusts have been _subjected to dissolution_.” - -It was all so fine, so lulling if not luring! It made one feel as if -he were lost or had gone to sleep looking for himself. But when in a -comfortable seat, in the owl car, where the jostle of the wicked world -was so toned down and gentled as to permit a little analytic thought, -that beautiful illustration of the value of making haste slowly and -of long, careful “deliberation” when acting on matters of vast import -recurred to us--that Anti-trust Act. - -“After twenty years” careful deliberation, the Supreme Court was able to -decide what the act meant! Was able, also, to decide what its _own prior -decisions meant_ and prosecutions were then brought and “many of the most -dangerous trusts have been subjected to dissolution!” - -All of it listened very well, but it don’t stand the wash very well. It -is matter of common knowledge that during the twenty years the Supreme -Court was industriously trying to find out what the Anti-Trust Act -and its own decisions meant, the trust organizers and promoters got -away with _more than eight billions of unearned values_--some set the -figure above fifteen billions. The Supreme Court made haste slowly in -its “deliberation,” while the respectable get-rich-quick Wallingfords -were going after the people’s money and going in high-powered cars with -the speed levers pulled clear down. No making haste slowly or duly -_prolonged_ deliberation with Wallingfords’. - -Then, if one will take the trouble to glance at market quotations -of the stocks of _any_ of “those dangerous trusts” which “have been -subjected to dissolution,” he will find that they have passed through the -trying ordeal of “dissolution” without the turn of a feather. All are -smiling. Why should they not? Stock quotations show that Standard Oil -is over $250,000,000 better off than before its _deliberated_ judicial -dissolution. The Tobacco Wallingfords are also many millions ahead of -the game since “dissolution” set in. And “Sugar”--well since the Sugar -Trust was “busted” and subjected to the “dissolution” process nearly -all its controlled saccharine matter appears to be trickling into its -bank account. Similar “most dangerous trusts” show similar evidences of -“dissolution” since the Supreme Court processed them. - -What has this to do with our immediate subject? Nothing whatever. It is -a mere interpolation--with a purpose. Its purpose is to evidence what -appears to be a practiced habit with our President--a florescence or -foliation similar to that displayed in the quotation I have made from his -Washington Day Message. In the quoted paragraph, the reader will observe -that he first says the Hughes Commission was “without data to determine -the cost” of certain very important factors in the aggregate expense of -handling and transporting the mails, and then he immediately proceeds -to inform us that the Commission finds that the “cost of handling and -carriage of paid-at-the-pound rate matter was about 6 cents a pound,” -etc.--a virtual impeachment of the Commission’s finding before the -finding is stated. - - -THE HUGHES COMMISSION. - -What little space permits me to say of the report of the Hughes -Commission may as well be said here. - -In their report the commissioners very frankly admit the meagerness, or, -on numerous important points, total lack of informative data. But, as the -President states, they proceed to put on record a finding of 6 cents a -pound as the cost of handling and transporting paid second-class matter -and 5 cents a pound as the cost of similar service on free-in-county -matter, for the year 1908. They finally recommend, however, that the -present “transient” rate (for copies of periodicals mailed by other than -publishers) be continued--1 cent for each 4 ounces; also that the present -free-in-county privilege be retained, _but not extended_. - -What does that “not extended” mean? - -I do not know. Do you? Does it mean that the country newspapers now -issued--_now_ entered in Postoffice Department for free haulage and -handling--shall continue free and that no new newspapers established, -founded and distributed in counties, shall be transported and handled -_free_? - -If it does not mean that, what does it mean? If it means -that, then why does this Commission recommend a thing that is -primarily--_elementary_--wrong under the organic law of this government? - -The Constitution of these United States _specifically_ prohibits -“special” legislation. Then why, I ask, should the recommendation of this -Commission be complied with? I have been publishing _The Hustler_, a -_controlled_ Republican or Democrat 4 to 8 pager, as the case may be, for -four years. Paul Jones comes along and flings in his money to publish and -print the _Democratic Booster_ in the same county. Does this Commission -mean to recommend that _The Hustler_ be carried and distributed free in -the county and that _The Booster_ be required to pay the regular pound -rate for the same service? - -A flat rate of 2 cents per pound is recommended for all other periodical -matter, newspapers and magazines alike. - -Well, that recommended rate is of course, better than Mr. Hitchcock’s -“rider” recommendation, discussed in a previous page. The Commission’s -“finding” that the cost of carriage, handling and delivery of -second-class mail “was approximately 6 cents a pound” is also an -appreciable step-down (toward the facts), as compared with Mr. -Hitchcock’s _assured_--milled, screened and sifted--finding that said -cost was 9.23 cents a pound--a finding as late as March 1, 1911. So if -this commendable “merger” of views, opinions and _guesses_ keeps growing, -as industrial, rail and other mergers are wont to grow, the postal _rate -payers_ of the country may hope yet to find that even their great men may -agree. - -I have discussed this second-class mail rate--the cent-a-pound rate for -periodicals--elsewhere. With private companies (the express companies) -carrying and delivering second-class mail matter for the average mail -haul, at _one-half cent a pound_ (and standing for a “split” with the -railroads for one-half of that), the question as to whether or not the -government _can_ carry mail matter without loss at _one cent a pound_, -is not worth debating among men whose brains are not worn in their -sub-cellars. - -I mean the last statement to apply to third and fourth class matter as -well as to second. What it has cost the government, or what it now costs -the government, to transport, handle and distribute the mails is another -and quite different matter from what such service can be and _should_ -be rendered for. Was it not that the people’s money is lavishly wasted -by such foolishness and foolery, a dignified commission of three or six -men sagely deliberating upon, critically “investigating” and laboredly -discussing what it costs the government--what the government in 1908 or -any other year paid--to carry and distribute the mails, might be staged -as the working model of a joke. If a Commission’s time and the people’s -money were spent in making a careful, thorough investigation as to what -it _should_ cost to collect, transport, handle and distribute the mails, -and as to just where and how the millions of dollars, now annually wasted -in an over-unmanned, incompetently managed, raided and raiding service, -could be saved, results fully warranting the expenditures made on account -of these postal-investigating commissions would readily be obtained. - -A summary of the proceedings of the Hughes Commission is presented -elsewhere. Here I shall take space for only two or three observations. -First, as is evidenced by the Commission’s report, the Postoffice -Department was before it in conspicuous volubility and the frequency of -a stock ticker during a raid, with call money at 84. Postmaster General -Hitchcock and his Second and Third Assistants appear to have been the -chief “floor representatives” of the department during the flurry. Of -201 “Exhibits” listed by the Commission, about 100 of them--reports, -documents, memoranda and letters--found origin if not paternity in the -Postoffice Department, and a considerable portion of them was already -on file in government archives. Of the sixteen papers submitted after -close of “Hearings,” fourteen or fifteen are letters and memoranda of the -department, besides which seven memoranda are mentioned as having been -received from “the Postoffice Department and not marked as exhibits.” - -That should make up a pretty fair collection of departmental argument, -views, opinions and “estimates,” should it not? It is very doubtful, -though--debatable, if not doubtful--if the collection is worth $50,000. -Especially does such a valuation appear questionably excessive, when it -is observed that much of the collection is made up of public documents, -the findings of former postal commissions and committees, and of reports -and showings made up by the Postoffice Department at departmental -expenditure of time and money, and not at an expense chargeable to the -Commission’s appropriation. Of course the Hughes Commission may not -have followed the precedent set by most prior postal Commissions, and -by commissions in general. The Hughes Commissioners may not have spent -all of their $50,000 appropriation. Let us hope they did not. However, a -statement of expenditures actually made would be, by some of us at least, -an appreciated “exhibit.” - -Another feature of the Commission’s 108-page report that deserves special -attention is the close adherence of its findings to _the findings of -present postal officials_. Even in cases where the opinions of past -officials are quoted commendingly, the opinions usually support and -bolster the opinions of Mr. Hitchcock and his assistants. The report -presents a number of tabulations, among which are several that are -most excellent and informative. However, the tabulations, and the more -important conclusions of the text as well, are based upon “estimates,” -rather than upon ascertained facts. Then, too, these estimates, as is -somewhat annoyingly evident, are all, or nearly all, the departmental -estimates of the present Administration. Of course, that should in no -way impair their value or dependability and it probably would not, but -for two facts: The present Postmaster General has, for two years or -more, displayed great activity--at times, a fevered if not frenzied -activity--to secure the enactment of laws and issuance of executive -orders to accomplish results which, while they may appear most desirable -to him, were considered by many _thousands_ of our people as being very -objectionable, indeed, inimical to the fundamental right of free speech -in this country and a menace to a free press and to popular education. -The “estimates” which the Hughes Commission has published as basis for -its findings quite uniformly, if not entirely, support the contentions -which the Postmaster General has been making--at times, making with -little or no warrant of fact to support. - -Again, it will be observed by careful readers of the Commission’s report -that the “estimates” upon which several of its more important findings -are based, are conspicuously lacking in elements essentially necessary -in the structure of reliable estimates from which fact or facts may be -deduced. To warrant the drawing of conclusions of fact from it, the -structural material of an estimate must consist largely, if not wholly, -of fact, not of conclusions drawn from other conclusions which, in turn -were deduced from estimates based on other estimates that may or may not -have been accurate and dependable. - -As just stated, the estimates which the Commission appears largely to -have accepted, are nearly all productions of the Postoffice Department. -Few of them are built directly upon ascertained facts. Most of them -are estimates of estimates based on other estimates. It appears that -the Postmaster General’s estimates are Assistant Postmaster Generals’ -estimates of the estimates made by weighing clerks of the several classes -of mail-weights carried by certain railroads during six months in the -year 1908. The nearest approach such a method or procedure makes to a -fact is an estimate of the fact, you see. - - -A POSTAL TELEGRAPH. - -One more quotation from the President’s message and this chapter may -end. This quotation is anent the proposition of having the telegraph -service of the country operated by the government--in connection with the -postal service. Mr. Hitchcock’s recommendation in the matter of a postal -telegraph “is the only one,” says the President, “in which I cannot -concur.” I shall first quote President Taft and then quote Mr. Hitchcock -as he expressed himself in his 1911 report: - - This presents a question of government ownership of public - utilities which are now being conducted by private enterprise - under franchises from the government I believe that the true - principle is that private enterprise should be permitted to carry - on such public utilities under _due regulation as to rates by - proper authority_ rather than that the government should itself - conduct them. This principle I favor because I do not think it in - accordance with the best public policy thus greatly to increase - the body of public servants. _Of course, if it could be shown - that telegraph service could be furnished to the public at a - less price than it is now furnished to the public by telegraph - companies_, and with equal efficiency, the argument might be - a strong one in favor of the adoption of the proposition. But - I am not satisfied from any evidence that if these properties - were taken over by the government they could be managed any more - economically or any more efficiently or that this would enable - the government to furnish service at any smaller rate than the - public are now required to pay by private companies. - - More than this, it seems to me that the consideration of the - question ought to be _postponed until after the postal savings - banks have come into complete and smooth operation and after a - parcels post has been established not only upon the rural routes - and the city deliveries, but also throughout the department. It - will take some time to perfect these additions to the activities - of the Postoffice Department_ and we may well await their - complete and successful adoption before we take on a new burden - in this very extended department. - -As an exhibition of rhetorical aviation, that is both going and soaring -some. How beautifully it “banks” on the curves! How smooth its motor -runs! And its transmission! Words fail me. - -Some paragraphing wit has said, “Foolishness is as plentiful as wisdom -isn’t.” Our President appears to know that we fools can take in a lot of -foolishness without our tanks sloshing over as we stumble along the old, -well-worn way--the way that leadeth the earned dollar into somebody’s -unearned bank account. But I do not intend to comment. The italics I have -taken the liberty to mix into the President’s verbal flight is all the -comment needed. Mr. Taft makes it quite clear that all we fools need to -do is wait--make haste slowly, take time for due deliberation. Of course, -some of us fools think we know, or presume to think we know, that the -telegraph companies are charging us two or three prices for the service -they render--frequently, do not render for twenty-four or more hours -after it ceases to be a service. But think of the good other folks derive -from the pocket change they extract from us! The Western Union is, or -was, a “Gould property.” It paid interest or dividends on eighty or more -millions of _quasi_ and _aqua pura_ in stocks and bonds. But think of -the fun sons George and Howard had! Think of the former maintaining the -beautiful Lakewood place, leasing English hunting preserves, playing polo -and “busting” into, through and around Knickerbocker society circles! -How could Howard have built a replica of Kilkenny Castle on Long Island -Sound, where he and “Wild West Katie,” it is said, spent millions and -had a realistic Kilkenny-Cat time of it? Or how could Frank, the fourth -and last son of Jay Gould, have given to the world such a lurid, if -not illuminating, picture of the “Married Rue” as was exhibited at his -divorce hearings? And there is “Sister Anna”--Well, it is sufficient to -say that Anna Gould could not have blown away ten millions in settling -“Powder-Puff” Boni’s debts and turning him loose in the straight and -broad way which leadeth unto the life that is somewhat too “fast” for -even unearned money. - -Well, none of the before-mentioned “life lessons” could have been set -for the world’s enlightenment--likewise, disgust--had the people of this -country not waited, not made haste slowly, in “due deliberation,” while -the Western Union and other “Gould properties,” were used to separate -them from many millions of dollars which no Gould or Gould property ever -earned. - -But this is digressing. The President advises us to wait, to delay action -a little longer--until the “postal savings banks have come into complete -and smooth operation,” until “after a parcels post has been established -… throughout the department.” Just wait and keep on paying twenty-five -cents for a ten-word wire to your mother or friend ten miles out, even -though the veriest fool knows that a postal telegraph service would carry -a twenty-five word message to any postoffice in the United States for -ten cents. Just keep on waiting--_until the big telegraph interests have -sheared a few millions more fleece_. - -But, says President Taft, “If it could be shown that telegraph service -could be furnished to the public at a less price,” etc., etc. - -Well, maybe there is a sort of visual aphasia which makes a quarter look -like ten cents to some men. If not, I am at a loss to understand how it -yet remains for anyone to be “shown” that telegraph service could be -furnished to “the public at a less price than it is now furnished by the -telegraph companies.” Postmaster General Hitchcock furnished sufficient -information, it seems to me, to show the President, or anyone else for -that matter, that telegraph service “could be furnished the public” at -rates much below those the telegraph companies collect. Mr. Hitchcock -speaks in part, as follows--page 14, 1911 report: - - The telegraph lines in the United States should be made a part - of the postal system and operated in conjunction with the mail - service. Such a consolidation would unquestionably result in - important economies and permit the adoption of lower telegraph - rates. Postoffices are maintained in numerous places not reached - by the telegraph systems and the proposed consolidation would - therefore afford a favorable opportunity for the wide extension - of telegraph facilities. In many small towns where the telegraph - companies have offices, the telegraph and mail business could be - readily handled by the same employees. The separate maintenance - of the two services under present conditions results in a - needless expense. In practically all the European countries, - including Great Britain, Germany, France, Russia, Austria, and - Italy, the telegraph is being operated under government control - as a part of the postal system. As a matter of fact, the first - telegraph in the United States was also operated for several - years, from 1844 to 1847, by the government under authority from - Congress, and there seems to be good ground why the government - control should be resumed. - -While much more could be said in support of Mr. Hitchcock’s position, he -has said sufficient in the above, I think, to “show” even a President. - -As evidence that the “estimates,” upon which the Hughes Commission so -largely base their findings are not entirely dependable, I desire to make -two brief quotations from other pages of Mr. Hitchcock’s 1911 report. -On page 17, as the first of thirty “Improvements in Organization and -Methods,” the Postmasters General sets forth as having been accomplished -in the service during the fiscal year 1911, will be found this: - - The successful completion of an inquiry into the cost to railway - companies of carrying the mails and the submission of a report to - Congress making recommendations for revising the manner of fixing - rates of pay for railway mail transportation. - -On pages 9 and 10 of the report, in discussing a readjustment of railway -mail pay, Mr. Hitchcock uses the following language: - - The statistics obtained during the course of the investigation, - disclosed for the first time _the cost of carrying the mails_ in - comparison with the revenues derived by the railways from this - service.… The new plan (paying railways on the basis of car space - occupied by the mails), if authorized by Congress, will require - the railway companies each year to report what it costs them to - carry the mails and such other information as _will enable the - department to determine the cost of mail transportation_. - -From the above it would seem that Congress was to be asked to adopt at -its present session a “new plan” which “will enable the department to -determine the cost of mail transportation;” to determine an important -service fact which, according to the preceding quotation and also to the -first sentence of the one just made, was determined sometime _prior to -June 30, 1911_. - -Has the Postoffice Department already determined the facts as the report -twice claims, or has it merely collected some data upon which to base an -“estimate?” Which enables it to make a more or less reasonable _guess_ at -the cost of mail transportation? - - -FOOTNOTES - -[8] I find from reports of the department auditor that the fiscal year -of 1909 was made to meet a charge of $128,307.32 which rightly stood -against the year 1907; also that the fiscal year 1911 is charged with an -expenditure of $148,490.01 belonging to 1909 and another expenditure of -$85,195.34, belonging to “1908 and prior years.” - - - - -CHAPTER XII. - -RAILWAY AND EXPRESS RAIDERS. - - -I intended to take up here the railway mail-pay and postal car rental -steal and then the infringement by express companies on the postal -service and its revenues. However, since I have quoted Section 181 -of the federal statutes governing, I think it as well, or better, -here to take notice of the express companies’ raiding into the postal -revenues--raidings into the field of service which the _law specifically -reserved for the operation of the nation’s Postoffice Department_. - -Let me ask the reader to turn back a few pages and read again that -Section 181 of the federal statutes. Let me ask him also to think a -moment about the character of small parcels and packages the express -companies carry. To help our memories a little, let us note a few items. - -The express companies carry and deliver for the general public money -remittance for any sum. For carrying sealed remittance of a hundred -dollars or less--for the carriage and delivery of which the government -has provided in its postal money order regulations--the express companies -are _criminals_ under that Section 181. - -Had the express company “influence” not reached federal legislators, it -is not only highly probable, but almost a certainty, that our postal -service would today be both prepared and permitted to transmit and -deliver sums of money to any amount and at rates _lower_ than now charged -by the express companies. - -If a publisher has ten or a hundred thousand copies of a book to deliver -to mail-order purchasers, some express company steps in and makes him an -offer for delivery, a _trifle lower_ than the 8-cent-a-pound rate charged -by the Postoffice Department for the same service. - -In such instance, the express company making such tender of delivery on -any “post route” is a _criminal_, under the _specific_ wording of that -Section 181. - -In previous pages of this volume the reader will find testimony of people -and of firms that pay large carriage bills for second-class matter. Among -this testimony are found statements (some of them under jurat), that the -express companies carry periodicals in bulk of five to ten pounds and -upward from New York to Chicago, and to other points equally distant from -office of publication, at a rate materially below the cent-a-pound rate -charged by the government for postal carriage. - -In one instance, it is known that one express company has offered to -contract to carry periodicals from New York to Chicago over a certain -connecting railroad at a rate of _one-half cent a pound_. - -What does that mean? - -It means simply this:--The railroad handling such express business hauls -express cars _en train_ with the United States mail, and the railroad -handling such express consignments of periodical mail matter makes -the New York-Chicago haul at somewhere around _one-fourth of a cent a -pound_. That is, it is somewhere around one-fourth cent a pound unless -the carrying road takes _more_ than half the express company’s contract -charge. - -“What more?” - -The express company contracting such business and the railroad handling -it are _criminals_ under that Section 181 of the federal statutes. - -In this connection I wish to say that under a strict--yes, under a -just--construction of that Section 181, I am not sure but that the -publishers party to such contracts are not also parties to the crime. - -From the _letter_ of that section, I confess an inability to see any -other construction of it than that previously stated. The United States -government, or at least its legislative department, in 1845, _intended_ -that all such matter--letters (sealed matter), “packets,” or packages -and parcels, should be turned over to the Postoffice Department for -transportation, handling and delivery. - -Why has not the intent of that law been carried out? - -Why are the express companies permitted, and for years been permitted, so -brazenly to perpetrate criminal violations of that postal statute? Why -and how does it chance that they (the express companies), can violate the -law for years and go unscathed--go unchastized for plain, open, brazen -violation of that Section 181 of the federal statutes? Yes, _why_? - -There is but one answer; there _can_ be but one answer. - -Federal executives, federal legislators and federal judicial officials -_have connived with private individuals and interests to nullify or make -abortive that Section 181_. - -Have you ever read any of Allan A. Benson’s writings? “No?” Then you -have missed something you should never miss again, should opportunity -perambulate around your way. Allan A. Benson says something when he -writes--says it blunt, plain and _hard_--says it in language that -guarantees its own truth--says it in an open, broad way in which no man, -“even though a fool” or a joy-rider, can go astray. In both the February -and the March, 1911, numbers of Pearson’s Magazine, Mr. Benson writes on -the parcels post as a subject. I shall probably quote from him extendedly -when I reach that division of our general subject in this volume. Mr. -Benson _knows_ his subject. And what is didactically of more importance, -_he makes the reader know he knows it_. - -Well, even with a fear that I may here reprint from him some paragraphs -for which I may have a greater need later, I cannot refrain from quoting -him in answer to those several “whys” I have just written, anent the -violations of that Section 181 of the postal statutes. - -Following his quotation of that section of the federal statutes, Mr. -Benson says: - - The purpose of this law was to give the United States government - a monopoly of the mail-carrying privilege. The law was first - enacted in 1845, and, although the statutes have been revised - from time to time, it stands today in precisely the form herein - given. - - On the face of the law the express companies are law-breakers. - But it is not enough to look at the face of a law. Everybody - except the government is prohibited from carrying letters and - packets--but what are “packets?” A letter is a letter; but what - is a packet? - - Foolish question? Yes, it ought to be--but it isn’t. The whole - express business rests upon the answer to this question. When the - law was enacted, _there was no doubt_ about the meaning of the - word packet, because there were no express companies to raise the - question, and everybody knew that packet was a synonym, used more - frequently then than now, for “parcel.” Express companies did not - come along to raise the question until forty years ago. - - Even the express companies, when they began business, had no - doubt about the meaning of the word “packet.” This is proved - by the fact that whenever they handled packets, they required - shippers to affix postage stamps. But recognition of the - government’s mail monopoly had a strong tendency to curtail - express business, and there came a time when the express - companies decided to evade the law, leave off the stamps and - openly compete with the government. - - See how ridiculous the express companies have since made your - government. In 1883, a mail carrier who had stolen tea from a - packet, made the defense at his trial that since a packet of - tea was neither a letter nor a parcel, the law which prohibited - tampering with sealed letters or parcels could not be invoked - against him. United States Judge McCreary, who sat in the case, - was not so minded. He told the jury to disregard the prisoner’s - defense. In other words, a package was not only a parcel, but - presumably a packet. The judge split no hairs about definitions. - The mail carrier had stolen tea. That was enough. He was sent to - prison. - - See how another judge, years later, construed “packet.” Nathan - B. Williams, of Fayetteville, Ark., brought suit in the - United States Circuit Court to prevent express companies from - carrying packets. When the last judge had had his guess about - the conundrum, Mr. Williams was judicially informed that the - government mail monopoly, so far as packets are concerned, - extends only to “packets _of letters_.” In other words, a packet - is a packet of letters; that and nothing more. Here are the - judge’s words: - - “While Congress has full constitutional powers to reserve to - the postal department a monopoly of the business of receiving, - transporting and delivering mails, and, in the exercise of such - rights, may enact such laws, regulations and rules as will - effectively preserve its monopoly, yet this monopoly is intended - (see the Judge read the mind of the Congress of 1845), to extend - only to letters, packets of letters, and the like mailable - matter, and Congress has never attempted to extend this monopoly - to the transportation of merchandise in parcels weighing less - than four pounds, nor to prohibit express companies from making - regular trips over established post routes, or from engaging in - the business of carrying such parcels for hire.” - - That is what the court says--and what the court says goes. - Here is what the present Attorney General of the United States - says--and what the Attorney General says does not go. The - Receivers’ and Shippers’ Association of Cincinnati asked the - Attorney General to join in Mr. Williams’ suit, which the - Attorney General declined to do for this reason: - - “The department has made a very complete study of the proposition - and agrees with Mr. Williams upon the law, except as to the - one point, namely, that there has been an _administrative - construction against the proposition for over forty years_, and - the chances are that a suit will be defeated on that ground.” - - In other words while the Attorney General believes the express - companies have been and are violating the law, the postoffice - department, for forty years, _has let them do it_, and it seems - useless to try to enforce the law. - - Here, then, is the absurd situation with regard to packets - into which the express companies have forced the United States - government: - - If a packet contains tea, and a mail carrier steals some of it, - it is a packet without doubt, and the mail carrier is sent to - prison. - - If an express company carries a packet of tea, the packet is not - a packet, because a packet is only a packet of letters. - - But a mail carrier will find out rather quickly, whether a packet - of tea weighing less than four pounds, is a packet or not, if he - carry the packet for his own profit instead of turning over to - the government the amount of the postage. Let the fact become - known to the government, and he will be arrested as quickly as an - officer can reach him. - - Now: Is or is not this juggling with the law? If it is not - juggling with the law, what, in your opinion, would be juggling - with the law? If the foregoing decisions sound like good law to - you, perhaps you ought to be upon the federal bench. You might - shine as a judge. You don’t shine as a voter. You think, but you - don’t act. You don’t put your thought behind your ballot. You let - somebody else put his thought behind your ballot. - -That is pretty plain talk--talk which should do us readers some good. It -should, at least, enlighten us as to these facts. - -First: The express companies have been _criminally_ trenching upon -and into the service of the Postoffice Department for forty years or -more--have been _raiding_ what were originally intended to be the -legitimate and legally protected revenues of that department. - -Second: Such raidings have been winked at by our federal legislators -and condoned, and the raiders exonerated by juridic opinions which were -so bald, bare, brazen and _cheap_ that they would make a practiced -confidence or get-rich-quick man blush. - -I intended to write further here about this raid of the express companies -on postal revenues, but have concluded to defer much of what I intended -to say in handling this phase of our general subject to the closing -division of this volume--the parcels post. One reason for doing so is -that today it is _not_ the express companies which command and direct the -raidings that _express business_ is making, and for some years has made, -into what rightly and _legally_ should be the field of postal revenue -gathering. Twenty years ago, a trifle more or less, when John Wanamaker -was Postmaster General, he stated to a committee or delegation calling -on him, that there were four insuperable objections to the establishment -of a parcels post at that time. He named the four objections. They were, -if I remember rightly, “The Adams Express Company, the American Express -Company, the Wells-Fargo Express Company and the United States Express -Company.” It may be he named the Southern or some other express company -instead of the United States Express Company. I cannot remember. At any -rate he named _four_ express companies as the “insuperable objections” to -the establishment of a parcels post. - -Well, he was right for the period in which he spoke. But twenty years -is a long time in a swift, governmentally aided get-rich-quick age or -country like ours. There are some dozen or more express companies now--a -dozen or more _on paper_--_quasi_-express companies. - -The railroad companies and railroad officials _control the express -companies and the express business of this country today_. - -A departmental report of the government showed, as stated in the Saturday -Evening Post of May 27, 1911, “that the four principal express companies -have thirty-seven directors, of whom _thirty-two_ are residents of New -York, _two_ are residents of Chicago and _three_ of San Francisco. _These -express directors are also directors in twenty-five of the leading -railroad systems of the United States._” - -So, today, if Mr. Wanamaker were inclined to do so, he would probably -revise his statement of twenty or more years ago. He would probably say -that the _railroads of this country_ stood as the insuperable objection -or obstruction to the establishment and operation of an efficient, cheap -and serviceable parcels post--the failure or neglect to do which is -running one of the greatest raids into postal revenues this or any other -nation has ever known. - -Mr. Albert W. Atwood in writing to this point under the general caption -“The Great Express Companies,” in the American Magazine, February, 1911, -issue, says: - - Perhaps you have thought of all this before, but do you also know - that the six largest express companies are among our greatest - bankers? With them, in one year, the public has deposited - $352,590,814 and their transactions in money orders, travelers’ - checks, letters of credit and bills of exchange rival those - of the most powerful banks. This business, unlike any other - form of banking is under no governmental jurisdiction and goes - untaxed. It is made possible only by using the machinery of - the regular banks, although to these the express companies pay - no revenue. In the money-order line, express companies compete - with the postoffice and do about one-third as much business - as the government. The American Express alone has handled - nearly 17,000,000 money orders in one year. That the public has - confidence in the safety of the express companies as banks admits - of no doubt, and it has been credibly reported that in the panic - of 1907 money was withdrawn from banks, which the people did not - trust, and invested in express money orders. - - Transportation in a multitude of forms and branch banking do not - comprise the sum total of express activities. The surplus funds - of these huge institutions have grown large enough to require - constant investment, and the express companies form a close - second to the savings banks and insurance companies as the most - dependable, regular and important class of investors in railroad - securities. Diversified as the functions of the express companies - have become, success has more than kept pace with their extension - into varied fields, and a keen, wideawake public interest in - the express business is demanded, not alone by the public and - necessary character of the business itself, but still more by - the extraordinary return which the companies receive for service - performed. - - Six companies control more than 90% of the country’s express - business, and of these the Adams is one of the oldest and most - powerful. Organized more than fifty-six years ago, its capital - stock had grown to $10,000,000 by 1866, in which year the members - of the association, as the shareholders are called, received a - stock dividend of $2,000,000. The $10,000,000 of stock itself did - not represent shares issued for cash. According to the company’s - own reports, no shares were ever issued for cash. The 100,000 - shares were given to members of the association to represent each - member’s pro rata ownership in the assets which had accumulated - from earnings. As late as 1890, according to the census figures, - the company had an actual investment in property employed in its - business of but $1,128,195. Yet it had been paying 8% dividends - for many years, or 80% on the actual value of the property in - use. In 1898 it distributed $12,000,000 of its own bonds to - stockholders, these bonds to be secured by the deposit in trust - of the surplus funds not used in the express business. At this - time the company reduced its dividend rate to 4%, but as 4% was - also paid on the bonds, the stockholders did not suffer any loss - of income. By 1904 the dividend rate had mounted to 10%, the - bond interest remaining at 4%. In 1907, $24,000,000 additional - bonds were given to the stockholders, likewise secured by another - fat surplus, and like the first issue, paying 4% in interest. - Dividends on the stock have since been maintained at 12% and - there has grown up another surplus of nearly $25,000,000 which - must soon be disbursed. Meanwhile the property actually employed - for express purposes has grown to but something more than - $6,000,000. - - Moreover, there is another large fund slowly but surely - accumulating in connection with the 1907 bond distribution. This - 1907 gift to the shareholders was in the form of a bond issue - secured by the deposit of stocks and bonds of other corporations - formerly owned by the company itself. The deed of trust provides - that if the income from these stocks and bonds is more than - enough to pay interest of 4% a year on the $24,000,000 of Adams - Express bonds, the surplus shall accrue and be distributed in - 1947 among the holders of the Adams Express bonds. As a matter - of fact there is a computed excess income derived in this way - of $151,517.50 a year and by 1947 this will have mounted up to - more than $6,000,000, not allowing for compound interest. Here is - a 50% extra dividend being nourished along toward maturity. If - there is any better example of being able to eat one’s cake and - have it too, I have yet to hear of it. - - At the outbreak of the civil war the Adams Express Company turned - its routes in the Southern States, in which it had enjoyed a - complete monopoly, over to the Adams-_Southern_ Express Company, - _created by the Georgia courts for the purpose of assuming this - business_. The property of the association was to be represented - by 5,000 shares, of which 558 were then issued. The Adams Express - Company has held to the present day a dominant interest in this - association, which it created to facilitate business _during the - war_. After hostilities ceased, it resumed some of its Southern - routes by agreement with the Adams-_Southern_ Express Company, - whose name had meanwhile been changed to the _Southern Express - Co._ The two companies still work in common and use the same - wagons and offices in many places. - - But close as the Southern Express is to its parent company, it - has a separate enough existence to justify a separate account - of its _money-making capabilities_. Referring to the original - 558 shares of stock, the secretary and treasurer of the Southern - Express says: “_None of the original twenty-four stockholders - are living and there is no existing record to show how much was - realized from the distribution._” This does not help us much, - but in another report to the Interstate Commerce Commission - the company appears to know what these records showed, for it - says “_none of its stock was ever issued for real property_, - equipment, acquisition of securities, or for any other purpose - in the sense in which the issuance of stock is understood in - connection with corporations.” But we do find that in 1866 the - number of shares was increased to 30,000 and distributed to the - owners _as a stock dividend_. Plainly, the civil war did not - impoverish the express carriers. Then in 1886 enough more new - stock was created to give the owners five shares in place of - every three which they already held, so that there are now 50,000 - shares. - - Five hundred and fifty-eight shares of stock, the circumstances - of whose issue are known to no one living, have sprouted into - 50,000 shares by the mere process of _paying stock dividends_. - Dividends of 8%, or $400,000 a year, are now paid upon the 50,000 - shares, although the entire value of the company’s property, real - estate, buildings, equipment, furniture, etc., was only $944,179 - _on June 30, 1909_. Here are dividends of 8% on $5,000,000 stock, - or more than 40% on the value of the property employed in the - business. And this is not all. The Southern Express Company owns - high-grade stocks and bonds valued at almost $4,000,000, which - may some fine day form the basis of another melon. - - If the Adams Express Company and its Southern associate were the - only ones to shower their members with unheard-of profits we - might be inclined to think they had been visited with peculiar - and exceptional good fortune. Such is far from being the case. - Let us proceed alphabetically and see how the members of the - American Express Company have fared. - - The Adams and American are easily the two most important of the - express companies, and control, or have controlled at various - times, all the other important companies with the exception of - the Pacific. Since 1868 the capital of the American has stood - at $18,000,000, this stock having been issued in exchange for - the shares of the original American Express Company and the - Merchants’ Union Express Company, under articles of merger and - association dated November 25, 1868. The company’s books show - that $5,300,000 _was the value_ of the assets taken over at that - time. There was $183,819 in cash; $1,261,023 in securities; - $2,200,300 in real estate, less a mortgage of $505,143; and - $1,260,000 in equipment; making a total of $4,400,000. New stock - was sold which realized $900,000 in cash, making a total of - $5,300,000 in assets for the $18,000,000 of stock. _No new stock - has been issued since 1868 and no further cash has been paid into - the treasury except from earnings._ - - From its own balance sheet we find the company now has less than - $10,000,000 in _real property and equipment_, all of which does - not represent property employed in the service, _because the - item “real property” includes real estate investments_. - - With an original investment in cash and property of but one-third - the par value of its capital stock, the American Express Company - now pays dividends on this stock of 12% a year and for many years - paid 6, 8 and 10%. Moreover, it has accumulated from its earnings - a fund of _more than $20,000,000_ which is invested in readily - negotiable stocks and bonds, the yearly income on which amounted - to $1,178,000 in 1909. Among these securities are such high-grade - railroad stocks as Chicago and Northwestern, Northern Pacific, - New Haven, New York Central and Union Pacific. - - Six years ago (1904-5), the substantial assets of the American - Express Company had grown from $5,300,000, the amount fixed in - the articles of association, to _six times that amount_. These - assets, let me repeat, did not represent new capital put into the - business, for _none whatever_ was put in, but were accumulations - of earnings over and above funds required to carry on the - business and pay dividends of 8% upon $18,000,000 of stock. - Even the association’s own shareholders failed to see the need - of such a treasure and in 1906 a committee representing them - addressed the officers of the company thus: “_It is evident the - management has faith in its ability to conserve the vast fund so - accumulated beyond the needs of the business, without wasting the - same or embarking it in new and dangerous ventures, and while - we personally neither criticise them nor express any want of - confidence in them, still it is our opinion, and that of many - representative holders of long standing, experience and means, - that this immense fund should not be further rapidly increased to - become a source of temptation to the possible weakness or a snare - to the possible inexperience of their successors._” - -I would like to quote further from both Mr. Benson and Mr. Atwood. The -former writes two articles which appeared in Pearson’s Magazine in -February and March, 1911, clearly showing not only why we have no parcels -post, but, to some extent, the raid which the express companies have made -and are making on postal service revenues that rightfully and _legally_ -should accrue to the government. The latter, Mr. Atwood, speaks in three -splendid articles in the American Magazine (February, March and April), -under the caption, “The Great Express Monopoly.” Each of the gentlemen -handles his subject masterfully. Each of them set forth facts which every -American citizen should know and, knowing, should _go after_ every public -official who has ignorantly permitted or knowingly condoned, aided or -cloaked the criminal raiding into the legitimate field of the postal -service and revenues. Every one who can should get hold of and read the -five articles referred to. I shall probably quote further from them in -the closing division of this volume, but to appreciate them fully one -should read them entire and connectedly. - -Sufficient has here been said, however, to show any fair-minded reader -that our express companies, or the railways which use the express -companies merely as pinch-bars to pry into our postal revenues on the one -hand and as cloaks for excessive rates to the general public for handling -light or parcels freight on the other, are illegally taking _millions of -dollars annually_ for a service which should be, and which was originally -intended to be, rendered by the Postoffice Department. - -I say that the express companies, or the railroads over which they -operate and which, today, virtually own and control them, are doing an -_illegal_ business--a business carried on in flat contravention and -defiance of the _plain letter_ of the federal statutes. - -I say further: The contravention of law which makes this vast -lootage--_steal_--possible has no other basis for its past and present -raiding of the field of postal revenues than _corrupted federal -legislators_ and, either corrupted or loose screwed, juridic opinions -which are permitted to stand in place of the plainly worded statute of -1845. - -And there is a colossal irony in the brazen effrontery with which this -raiding of the postal revenues by the express companies has been, and is, -carried on. - -On the one hand, we have public officials cackling about its costing the -government 4 to 9 cents a pound to transport and handle second-class -mail matter--rather, making voluble and voluminous _guesses_ that it -costs from 4 to 9 cents a pound--while on the other hand, the express -companies enter into contracts with publishers to carry and deliver at -line stations that same second-class matter at _one-half cent a pound_. - -When it is remembered that the express companies must “split” with the -transporting railroad to the extent of 40 to 63 per cent of their gross -haulage and delivery charge, the talk of its costing the government 4 -to 9 cents to do what the express companies do for a half-cent--in some -cases possibly, for less even than that--passes, from the domain of irony -and becomes disgusting twaddle. - -The postal rate for carrying merchandise parcels not exceeding four -pounds is 16 cents a pound. That rate is, as previously stated, -outrageously high and the maximum weight of four pounds is almost as -outrageously low. Both the postal weight and rate have been held for -years at the figures named, it has been numerously asserted and is -_generally believed_, by the “influence” of express company and railroad -lobbying in Congress. The result is that by far the larger portion of -light or parcels shipments go by express instead of by mail, as it was -clearly intended in the law of 1845 they should go. - -To get this business, the express companies cut under the government -charge of 16 cents a pound, as they can both easily and profitably do. - -Nor do they hold the shipper to a maximum of four pounds for any single -package or parcel. In fact, they set up practically no maximum parcels -weight, and they deliver at any postoffice or station along their -lines of service. In fact, again, the express companies now have, it -is asserted, a sort of compensating agreement by which the company -collecting the business can have another company make deliveries, each -company taking its prorated share of the profit on the carriage and -handling of the parcel or consignment. - -Such arrangement, it will readily be seen, enables the express company -to accept package consignments for delivery at almost any point in the -country, if on a railroad, or for delivery at some rail point near the -addressed destination of the parcel. - -Then, too, as Mr. Benson points out, the railroads and railroad officials -and owners are also controlling owners of the express companies. Being -so, they do not hesitate virtually to “club” the public into shipping its -parcels freight by express. They do this by fixing a minimum weight in -their freight tariffs. That minimum is 100 pounds. That is, it will cost -the shipper as _much to send a four or ten pound package to destination -by fast freight as it would cost him to send 100 pounds_. - -The foregoing is sufficient to show the reader that the express companies -are _permitted_ to raid the legitimate business of the Postoffice -Department--or what should be and, under the law, was _intended_ to be -the business of the Postoffice Department. - -The express companies, or their railroad control--which amounts to the -same thing--also forage the field of third-class matter which, _by law_, -was made a preserve of the Postoffice Department. - -The postal rate for third-class mail matter is eight cents per pound. -That rate is, of course, away too high. With The Man on the Ladder the -conviction remains, as it has been a conviction for twenty or more years, -that the postal rate of eight cents per pound for third-class matter -is three times what that rate should be--easily double the charge that -should be made to cover the _legitimate_ cost to the government for -handling it, which cost is _all_ that the department should seek or be -_permitted to_ collect. - -Trusting that the reader will find excuse for me, I desire to repeat here -what, in substance, I have written into an earlier page: - -The postal service of the nation should not be made a revenue-producing -service, any more than the War, Navy, Interior, Justice or other -departments of the federal service should be made revenue-producers. - -If the people pay--have paid and are willing to pay--the _actual_ cost of -an efficient, honestly administered and managed postal service, that is -all they should be asked or expected to pay. - -But returning to the express companies’ raidings into the postoffice -revenues, let me here assert what every observant citizen of intelligence -knows: The express companies are today carrying _millions of pounds_ of -books--leather, cloth and paper bound books--at a rate for carriage and -delivery materially below the government’s excessive rate of eight cents -a pound. - -These same express companies are today carrying _thousands of tons_ of -catalogues, pamphlets, business, political and other circulars, color -prints of apparel fabrics, etc., etc., which the Postoffice Department -ought to handle--and, under the law, _should_ handle, and, but for that -extortionate rate of eight cents a pound _would_ handle. - -It has been repeatedly asserted by persons who are familiar with carriage -and handling costs, both in the postal and private service, that the -postal rate of 8 cents a pound for third-class mail matter has been -maintained--and _is_ maintained--by reason of corrupt and corrupting -influences (the coat-pocket “dropped roll,” the “job” bribe, the “deposit -slip,” etc., etc.), which express and railway interests have liberally -exerted upon federal legislators and upon executive and judicial -officeholders--exerted upon “public servants.” - -However, that may be, the facts today are that the postal service rate of -8 cents a pound for third-class matter is so excessive--so conspicuously -above the cost of the service rendered--that the express companies find -no difficulty in under-cutting it--in many cases, _more_ than cutting it -in half--and still reap _millions of profit_ from the handling of such -matter. - -If a publisher has an edition of five, ten or one hundred thousand of -a book to be delivered in piece, or single copies, an express company -representative will see him at once--often see him before the book is -from the press. If the publisher is doing a large and general business -in book publishing or the book trade, the express companies have already -seen him, by representative, and a carriage and handling charge agreed -upon, under which the contracting or agreeing express company will handle -any or all the publisher’s books, both single copies and trade shipments, -at a rate much below the government’s postage rate of eight cents a pound. - -If a publisher brings out a book which weighs, when wrapped or jacketed -for mailing, say one pound on which the mailing charge would be 8 cents, -the express company tenders a rate of 7 cents. If the edition of the book -is a large one the express company will tender a rate of 6 cents or even -a rate as low as 5 cents or 4 cents. - -In performing such service the express company is a violator of _law_--_a -brazen outlaw_. Yet the government not only permits this outlawry, but, -by maintaining that excessive rate of 8 cents a pound, the government -virtually _invites_ it. - -What I have above said applies with equal or even greater force to the -transportation and distribution of mercantile and other catalogues, and -of descriptive pamphlets, etc. However, I think sufficient has been said -to cover the point raised. - -The government _persists_ in charging a third-class rate which virtually -drives _thousands of tons_ of third-class matter to the express -companies. The express companies handle this vast tonnage at a cost -charge to the sender or shipper, ranging from 16⅔ per cent to 50 per cent -_below_ the government’s mail rate. - -The express companies roll up millions--many millions--of profits every -year, while at the higher rate, the government officials (some of them), -slash up the ambient with rapier verbiage about “deficits” and make -extension-ladder guesses at what it “actually costs” the Postoffice -Department to carry and handle a pound of third, or some other, class of -mail matter. - -Another raid upon the postal revenues--and the raid is by the oldest gang -of looters in the game--or graft--is the railroads. - -For lo, these many years, the railroads have carried the mails at a -carriage charge of $21.37 a ton per annum per line mile of haul.[9] That -is $21.37 is allowed on “dense” traffic lines where the daily mail weight -is above 5,000 pounds. On lines where the daily weight is 5,000 lbs., the -rate is $171.00 per annum per line mile of haul. For mail weights less -than 5,000 pounds the rate of pay varies, the ton-mile rate increasing -from 21.37 cents for a weight above 5,000 pounds, to $1.17 per ton-mile -for an average weight of 200 pounds. - -Following are tabulations showing the scale of mail pay and also the -postoffice car rental pay. I get them from the Wolcott Commission -report made in 1901. The tables and accompanying paragraphs form part -of the testimony of Mr. Marshall M. Kirkman, who at the time of the -Wolcott Commission hearings was Second Vice-President of the Chicago -and Northwestern Railway. The rates of pay may have been modified in -some slight degree since 1901. If so, I have not learned of the fact. -I am of the opinion that the figures given by Mr. Kirkman still govern -as rates of mail pay and car rentals, and as Mr. Kirkman was speaking -for the railroads the reader may depend upon it that the case of the -railroads--especially of the Chicago and Northwestern, then a system of -about 5,000 miles of trackage--was presented in as favorable a light as -the governing facts would permit: - - RATES BASED ON THE WEIGHT OF THE MAILS.[10] - - -----------------------------------+--------+---------+--------- - |Present |Present |Present - |pay per |rate per |rate per - Average daily weight of mails |mile per|ton per |hundred - over whole route. |annum. |mile.[11]|pounds - | | |per - | | |mile.[12] - -----------------------------------+--------+---------+--------- - | | | _Cents_ - 200 pounds | $42.75 | $1.170 | 5.85 - 500 pounds | 64.12 | .700 | 3.50 - 1,000 pounds | 85.50 | .468 | 2.34 - 2,000 pounds | 128.25 | .351 | 1.75 - 4,000 pounds | 156.46 | .214 | 1.07 - 5,000 pounds | 171.00 | .187 | .96 - Each 2,000 pounds in excess | | | - of 5,000 pounds | 21.37 | .058 | .29 - -----------------------------------+--------+---------+--------- - - The most striking feature of this table is the rapid decline in - the rates paid with an increase of weight. - - In addition to the above payments based upon weight there is - an additional allowance when full-sized postoffice cars are - provided, the Postoffice Department deciding when these are - necessary. The rates of pay for these cars are as follows: - - RATES ALLOWABLE FOR FULL-SIZED POSTOFFICE CARS.[13] - - ---------------+-----------+---------- - | Rate per | Rate per - | mile of | mile run - Length of car. | track per | by cars. - | annum. | - ---------------+-----------+---------- - | | _Cents._ - 40 feet | $25.00 | 3.424 - 45 feet | 27.50 | 3.786 - 50 feet | 32.50 | 4.471 - 55 to 60 feet | 40.00 | 5.498 - ---------------+-----------+---------- - - The first column, which shows the rate paid per mile of track - per annum, is likely to be misunderstood. The compensation seems - very liberal, and it would be so in fact if it were as large as - it appears to be. To gain $25 per mile per annum a 40-foot car - must make a round trip over each mile of road per day. If it only - makes one trip over the road each day, it will earn but $12.50 - per mile per annum, as it would be but half of what is known as a - line. The statute reads: - - “That … pay may be allowed for every line comprising a daily trip - each way of railway postoffice cars, at a rate not exceeding - twenty-five dollars per mile per annum for cars forty feet in - length.…” - -Let us here take note what the foregoing tabulated figures mean--figures -which Mr. Kirkman argued, if I read his testimony correctly, are -too low[14]. I have read the testimony of numerous other railroad -representatives, testimony before the Loud Commission, 1898, the Wolcott -Commission, 1901, the Penrose-Overstreet Commission, 1907, and before the -Hughes Commission, whose report is not yet compiled for publication. Each -and all of them, so far as I have read their testimony, argue eloquently -that the present rates of railway mail-pay and car rentals are, if unfair -at all, unfair to the railroads--that the rates of pay are too low. - -In this connection a most peculiar, if not indeed a peculiarly -suggestive, _harmony_ of opinion appears to have existed between the -special pleaders for the railroads in this matter of railway mail-pay and -government officials--both executive and legislative--who have had most -to do with fixing railway pay rates. The government has spent millions -of dollars for investigations by commissions, by Senate and House -committees, by inspectors, special agents, etc. Each commission has heard -numerously from the railways. Twenty-seven of them were in hearing before -the Wolcott Commission. The testimony of Mr. Kirkman, from whom I quote -the preceding tabulations, while varying in phase, phrase and verbiage -from the other railroad representatives, has two essential features -common to them all, or, I should say, three features common to them all. - -1. The railroad representatives unanimously oppose any reduction in the -rates for railway mail pay (weights pay), and mail car rentals--“space -charge,” they call it. - -2. They are a unit in declaring that the present rates are too low, but -they as unitedly express a willingness to _continue business at the old -rates_ rather than to contemplate the possibility of a reduction in them, -or even _squarely_ to argue the justice and fairness of such a reduction. - -3. When forced down to “tacks”--down to specific facts--by some -interrogating member of the commission before which they are testifying, -these railroad representatives again have a marked similarity as to -“form.” Each comes eloquently forward with his _own_ set or sets of -figures and proceeds to make his _own_ application of them. But when some -commissioner asks for information and enlightenment as to “net cost,” -“relative cost,” etc., of mail carriage as compared with the cost of -express, freight or passenger handling, the railroad representatives, -almost to a man, at once begin to display a dense denseness that is -marvelously wondrous or wonderously marvelous, as the reader may choose -to word it. - -The peculiar or suggestive harmony between the opinions of these railway -representatives and the _controlling_ executive and legislative officials -of the Federal Government, is especially conspicuous under point 2 as -numbered above. The railway people plead that the ruling rates are too -low, but are willing to stand for them. However, they _do not want the -rates lowered_. - -The peculiar harmony of opinions just adverted to is ample evidence, or -so it appears to The Man on the Ladder, of this one fact: - -The present rates of pay for railway mail _weight_ carriage are the rates -fixed by the act of 1879. Freight, express and passenger rates or tariffs -have been changed--_have been lowered_. The railways did not want the -mail rates lowered and the governmental powers that be, and have been, -were apparently at least, quite willing to take their view of the matter, -even if they did not concur in the numerous half-baked, threadbare -arguments advanced by the railroad people in support. - -_The rates of railway mail pay have remained the same for thirty-three -years--until 1908._ - -Comment is unnecessary. - -As evidence in support of points 1 and 3 as above numbered, points on -which railroad representatives so uniformly agree in support of, or, -with equal uniformity, display concurring lapses of memory or lack of -knowledge relating to, I shall here quote further from Mr. Kirkman’s -testimony before the Wolcott Commission. In electing to quote from -Mr. Kirkman rather than from another to evidence points 1 and 3, I -am influenced only by the fact that I have the report of the Wolcott -Commission before me at the moment, and to the further fact that Mr. -Kirkman’s testimony appears to me cogently illustrative of the points to -which I have called the reader’s attention. - -In closing his prepared or written testimony (page 208 of the report), -Mr. Kirkman says: - - In conclusion, it may be stated that the compensation afforded - this railroad for carrying the mail _is not now in excess of - what it should be_. It is not improper, therefore, for us to - beg, if rates can not be increased, _that no further reductions - may be made_; also, that the practice of fixing the compensation - paid for mail service on the basis of the weight carried at the - commencement of the four-year periods (instead of on the weights - carried in the middle of the periods), may be abandoned in favor - of a more equitable system. - -From the above it will be seen that this witness states with confidence -that the compensation his road (the Chicago and Northwestern) receives -“is not now in excess of what it should be” and _begs_ that, “if the -rates cannot be increased, that _no further reductions be made_.” - -I shall now reprint a few pages from the report of Mr. Kirkman’s oral -testimony as illustrative of point 3: - - By Mr. CATCHINGS: - - Q. What did you state were the gross receipts from your whole - system for carrying the mails?--A. About $800,000. - - Q. Now, can you state to this commission what your net profit was - for carrying that amount over your system?--A. _I do not know._ - - Q. Can you make any estimate?--A. _No, sir._ - - Q. You heard the testimony of Mr. Simpson (representing the Flint - and Pere Marquette Railroad), did you not?--A. Yes, sir. - - Q. He stated that his road carried the mails at a dead loss. What - that loss was _he was unable to give us_. I understand you to say - that you do make a profit out of carrying the mails?--A. I beg - your pardon. I said that, because we got approximately the same - rate per ton per mile for carrying the mails as for express (and - that the express rate had been a matter of careful negotiation - as between our company and the express company); I have reason - to believe that we would not have taken the express business - unless we derived a profit from it, and therefore I think it - is reasonable to suppose that we must derive a profit from the - postoffice business. - - Q. Do you mean to tell me that you have no estimate as to the - cost of carrying this mail matter?--A. _Not to my knowledge. We - have taken what the Government gave us._ As I have shown you, - they have never pretended to remunerate us for many services - rendered. - - Q. If you are unable to say what your profit was for carrying - this mail, how can you complain that you are not being properly - compensated for the service rendered?--A. Because we render so - many services today that we did not formerly when the rate was - fixed. - - Q. I understand; but, so far as we know from your testimony, - you may be amply compensated for it.--A. We receive, as I said - before, a certain rate from the express company for analogous - service, and do not render them anything like the equivalent that - we render the Postoffice Department, so that we must derive a - great deal more profit from the express business than we do from - the postoffice. - - Q. Still, it would not follow that you were not deriving proper - compensation for carrying the mail, would it?--A. It would not - follow that we do not derive some compensation from it. - - Q. _Unless you are prepared to tell us what your profit is, or - your loss, as the case may be, of course you can not expect us - to know it, and, unless we know it, you can not expect us to - sympathize with the complaint._--A. _We are not making complaint - about the compensation we receive, but the threat held over our - heads that our compensation would be cut down._ When they cut us - down on the land-grant roads they did not make it a matter of - negotiation at all; they just simply took off 20 per cent. - - Q. Do you not think that the best way to prove this complaint - would be to show that you are not receiving due compensation?--A. - If I was keeping a boarding house and you came to me and I - agreed to give you two meals a day, and you afterwards exacted - four, because you are mightier than I in forcing it, would it be - necessary for me to prove that I was giving you something that - you were not entitled to under your contract? - - Q. You ought to show us what your net profits are.--A. _It is - impossible._ - - By the CHAIRMAN: - - Q. General Catchings calls your attention to this: In your - direct examination I asked you if you had any suggestions to - make to this commission in the matter of changes of law. You - said you thought the law should be so changed as to increase - your compensation to an adequate sum. Now, in answer to General - Catchings, you say that it is remunerative; he asks you how - much you make, and you can not tell; then he asks you why you - recommend a change in the law if you will not tell the commission - what you are now making by it, and if you can tell what your - profits in carrying the mail are. That is what General Catchings - is anxious to have you tell. - - By Mr. CATCHINGS: - - Q. I would like very much to know if we are under-paying these - roads; we would like to pay them.--A. You ask a question that - there is nobody but Omniscience could answer, because there is no - possible method by which you can determine accurately what the - cost is of carrying traffic. The Government did pretend at one - time to divide the expense of operating as between passenger and - freight, but finally abandoned it. Now, if you can not determine - the cost between passenger and freight, how can you determine it - between mail and other kinds? - - Q. There is one thing certain; if the roads can not determine it, - the Government can not.--A. Is it not true that, in matters of - this kind, no one would expect anything definite in the absence - of definite information? - - Q. I do not see why you can not figure as well the cost of - carrying these mails as you can the cost of carrying the express - packages. I do not see why it ought to be more difficult for - you to determine that.--A. There is not any single thing that - a railroad carries, from a first class passenger to a cord of - stone, that it can tell accurately what the cost is. _Tariffs are - a matter of evolution._ - - Q. At least, your road is better off than the Flint and Pere - Marquette, for they carry at a loss and you carry at a profit--A. - I did not say we carry at a profit; but I say that is my - judgment, sir. - - Q. I believe something has been said about the extraordinary - cost at which these railroads handle these postal cars. I would - like to have you help me reach a conclusion from that. How many - railway postal cars have you on your system?--A. I do not know - how many we do have. - - By the CHAIRMAN: - - Q. Does your statement show?--A. No, sir; it does not. - - By Mr. CATCHINGS: - - Q. How much do you receive from the government for the railway - postal cars?--A. We receive certain compensation for cars over a - given length. - - Q. You stated, I believe, the gross revenue to you for these - cars?--A. We have a great many that we do not receive any revenue - from the government for their use. - - Q. I want to know what your revenue is from the postal cars?--A. - I can not tell you. - - Q. You can furnish that amount?--A. Yes, sir. - - Q. I wish you would furnish this commission a statement showing - the gross revenue to your system of road derived from these - postal cars; and then I wish you would furnish a statement - showing what the cost to you is of maintaining those cars, - keeping them in repair, what the estimated cost to you is of - hauling them, and the number of cars?--A. I will give you all - that you desire so far as I can. - - By Mr. LOUD: - - Q. You stated, Mr Kirkman, that you were Vice-President of the - Chicago and Northwestern?--A. Yes, sir. - - Q. Are you General Manager?--A. No, sir. - - Q. What is your particular business in connection with the - railroad?--A. I have charge of the local finances and accounts of - the company. - - Q. You are not prepared to answer technically, then, questions - that might be propounded to you, as has been developed in the - examination by Mr. Catchings, about the cost of the operation of - a car and the cost of the transportation of a ton of freight, - passengers, etc?--A. _I am as well prepared to answer the - question as anyone. There is no one, as I said before, who knows - what the cost is or can tell you definitely, simply for the - reason that it is utterly impossible to fix the cost as between - passengers and freight, for instance._ - - Q. What is the use of our investigation, then?--A. I am here - before this commission; my time here, perhaps, represents ten - dollars or ten cents. _What am I going to charge it to?_ In this - case perhaps to mail. In many expenses of railroads there are - questions impossible to determine as to what expenditures should - be charged to. You may make, as the General has, a comparison - between the Flint and Pere Marquette, what he thinks is an - approximate statement of cost; it may be more, and it may not. - For instance, the Government of the United States requires that - the mail shall be carried on fast trains-- - - Q You are going into quite an argument. You ought to be able to - tell what it cost to haul the mail.--A. _No, sir; I can not._ - - Q. You can not tell?--A. No, sir; nobody can tell. - - Q. Could not your General Manager give us some information on - that subject? - - Mr. CHANDLER. He can tell how much their gross receipts are - and what the gross expenditures are, and he can tell whether - their whole business is done at a profit or not; but I do not - understand that the railroads can subdivide their receipts and - expenditures so as to tell whether any particular branch of it - actually pays a profit or not. The previous witness undertook - to do it, and I noticed, as he went on, _that it was mere - guesswork_. Mr. Kirkman says he never has done it. - - The WITNESS. I want to say, Mr. Loud, that this question of - division of cost has been up before railroads and experts - for forty years, and here is what the chief engineer of the - Pennsylvania says in regard to it. _He estimates that the cost, - for instance, of maintenance of track and machinery increases - with the square of the velocity._ - - By the CHAIRMAN: - - Q. How much do you charge this maintenance of way?--A. What is - the wear and tear of machinery and track from the passage of a - particular train? _No one can tell nor guess approximately._ - In an examination of this question I gave it, probably, the - most exhaustive study that I have given any subject in my life, - because so much depended on it--I searched all the records of - Scotland and England and of the United States to determine, but - unavailingly-- - - By Mr. LOUD: - - Q. Could you not put a train of five cars on and run it from - Chicago to Council Bluffs and give approximately what that train - would cost to operate and the approximate cost of wear and tear - to your rails?--A. I can determine all those things that are - apparent; that is, the cost-- - - Q. That is all we expect; what is reasonable.--A. _But then there - is the question of interest and the wear and tear of machinery - and track._ - - Q. Let us discard the interest. You ought to be able to get at - the cost of operation.--A. That train so run has to receive the - _constant attention of station men, of track men, the whole - length_. If you will give it a moment’s reflection you will see - how _utterly impossible it is_ to determine it accurately enough - to state here to this commission. - - Q. Approximately, it ought to be a perfectly easy matter. It - seems to be to other railroad men.--A. I do not think there is - any railroad man who has given it any more attention than I have - and no railroad man understanding the subject _will do more than - guess at it_. - - Q. I will ask you a few questions. If you can answer them I wish - you would. How many miles of land-grant railroad have you?--A. My - impression is that we have about 600. - - Q. Out of your total of 5,000 miles?--A. Yes, sir. - - Q. What is the average charge on your road for freight per ton - mile?--A. Last year ninety-nine one-hundredths of a cent per ton - mile. - - Q. You do not know how much it costs? That is correct, is it not? - You do not know how much it costs?--A. _That is correct._ - - Q. You do not know how much it costs to operate a 40 or 60 foot - mail car?--A. _No, sir; only approximately._ - - Q. Can you say, approximately, how much?--A. _No, sir. It will - afford me great pleasure to give you all this information that - can be determined if you desire, but it is valueless in itself._ - - Q. Can you say approximately?--A. _I can not._ I would be very - glad to furnish you all the figures, but such questions, _like - the cost of the velocity_ with which we send trains across the - country, _are unknown_. - - Q. Does it cost a dollar a mile as the outside?--A. I could - not---- - - Q. Would it not?--A. _I would not want to pay you the disrespect - of saying a thing that I know nothing about._ - -The foregoing testimony appears on pages 213-216 of the Wolcott report. -The italics are mine. When so well informed a railroad man as Mr. Kirkman -answers questions--questions covering that which appears, to a layman -at least, to be essential in successful railway management--as he is -reported in the foregoing, what is to be thought of such testimony? With -all due respect to Mr. Kirkman, it may be said that his apparently frank -confession of ignorance as to several points made subject of inquiry -by the commissioners in the part of his testimony quoted, many readers -of it are left with more or less valid grounds for doubt--grounds for -asking more or less offensive questions: “Was the witness telling the -truth or equivocating--stalling for time?” If he told the truth--if his -acknowledged ignorance was genuine--as to several essential factors in -the successful management and financing of a railroad--then of what value -are his--or any other railroad man’s--statistics and tabulations of cost, -profits, losses, rates, tariffs, “cost of velocity,” etc., etc.? - -Mr. Kirkman’s reputation for truth and veracity, I believe, is as high -as that of any other railroad man’s in the country, yet on several basic -factors in the problem which the Wolcott Commission was, presumably at -least, trying to solve, he confessed an ignorance as profound as its -members and the officials of the Postoffice Department acknowledge. If, -as Mr. Kirkman virtually testifies, the information sought is beyond the -ken of man, then why persist in spending thousands--_yes millions_--of -money trying to run it down? - -If these railroad men do _not_ know the things which it is _necessary to -know_ to arrive at a solution of this railway mail carrying problem--to -arrive at a just, equitable rate of pay for the service rendered--why -waste more time on them? - -That question brings us back to the _rails_ again. - -Why do not our postal officials and commissions reach out to Cornville -and summon a few eighth-grade nubbins? Then turn over to them the -_wastefully_ collected and collated statistics, data and _talk_ which the -Postoffice Department has in cold storage and tell them to “go to it” at, -say, $25 per week? - -Yes, why not? - -Skilled lawyers, reputed “experts,” men of “experience” and “students,” -it would seem, have told all they know about this railway mail cost -problem--told the truth or equivocated or _lied_ about it, to the best -of their ability and in full accord and harmony with their several -“standards” of veracity. Still they have failed to uncover or to -_divulge_ the essential and governing factors in the problem--failed for -_thirty or forty years_. Is it not about time, then, for sensible people, -I would ask, to enter the plea of the Master and say, “Suffer little -children to come unto me?” - -Any _average_ “shock” of eighth-grade nubbins from Cornville, or from -other hamlets where the “little red school house” has been in fairly -active operation, will “figger” the cost--_the cost to the railroads_--of -mail haulage and handling, in not to exceed _four weeks_. - -That is, such a bunch of eighth graders will arrive at a dependable -solution of this forty-year-old problem in four weeks, if they are given -the _plain, bald facts upon which a correct solution depends_, and -not turned loose on a lot of befuddling, alleged data and _accepted_ -“testimony.” - -As I must necessarily touch upon the _raid_ of the railroads into postal -revenues when I reach the closing division of this volume, I shall not -comment further here on the testimony and special pleadings presented -by railroad representatives to the several postal commissions that have -sat and sat and then “reported.” The commissions probably--_possibly_, -if not probably--reported the best they could on the evidence presented -to them. Certain it is, their reports present much valuable--much -informative--data of which neither Congress nor the Postoffice Department -appears to have made any constructive or corrective use. - -Before quitting this railway pay raid, however, it may be well to do -a little figuring--basing our figures on Mr. Kirkman’s tabulations of -rates, printed some pages back. The tables of rates are correct. They -ought to be. If rate-tables could vote the youngest of the two was -entitled to the suffrage many years since.[15] But let us look into and -over them in a little-red-school-house way. - -The first mail rail-haul weight is 200 pounds. That weight of mail is -carried on some cornfield railroad--“a feeder.” It is all bundled or -sacked, if “free in country” or other second-class matter, sacked or -pouched if first or third-class, and, also, if valuable fourth-class. -Some of the fourth-class, if large in dimension of package, may, of -course, be loose. But whatever their class, character, pouching, sacking, -casing, or jacketing, that _estimated_ weight (_estimated once every -four years_), is received by the railroad and dumped into a corner of a -“general utility” car. By that I mean a car used for carrying baggage and -express matter, between stations--jars, buckets, boxes, bags, etc., of -local “favors” or shipments; such as jam, fruits, eggs, butter, and even -“line loafers” who are going to mother, uncle, or friend for a few days -feed, or--sometimes--going to the local metropolis for a “good time.” - -But let us, for the moment, stick to that _quadrenially estimated_ 200 -pounds of mail. At the several stations along the cornfield or “feeder” -railroad the packages, sacks and pouches of mail are tossed off to the -station agent. Coops of chickens, cases of eggs, tubs or jars of butter -and crates of fruit or vegetables are taken on. - -Have you, the reader, ever traveled on a “cornfield line?” Have you -ever “got off to stretch your limbs” at some station between start or -“change” to destination? Have you, while stretching those limbs of yours, -ever noticed or taken note of the miscellaneous and promiscuous sort of -goods--merchandise and human adipose tissue--that get into companionship, -into carriage or _housed_ connection, with that “estimated” 200 pounds of -United States mail? - -Well, if you have, no argument is necessary to convince you that the -“railway mail pay” rate on that cornfield line is from _two to five -times_ the rate paid for any other weight (tonnage) carried. - -Turn back and look at the table of railway mail-pay (weight). Look at the -rate per 100 pound per mile haul--5.85 cents, or _eleven and seven-tenths -cents_ for carrying 200 pounds _one_ mile. - -Do you weigh 200 pounds? If not, our President and several other -gentlemen in this country do, and you, the President, or the other -gentlemen, will be carried--_and for thirty or more years have been -carried on any railroad east of the “Rockies”_--_for three_ cents a mile. - -Now, you, the President, or other gentlemen, pay only _two_ cents a mile -for rail _haulage_ on most all of the cornfield or “feeder” lines (and on -“trunk” lines as well), east of the Rocky Mountains. - -You see the joke of it? The postal revenue _raid_ in it? - -Two hundred pounds of United States mail is railroaded in a general--a -catch-all or pick-up--car at a government charge of 11.7 cents per -mile, while you, the President, or other gentlemen, pay but 3 _cents_! -You, and the other fellows as well, have an upholstered seat, have -watering and toilet facilities and accommodations, have smoking, -“pitch,” “high-five,” “cinch,” “euchre” and, maybe, even “poker” as -divertisements--with palatable “wets” on the side! - -You, the President, and the other gentlemen, have all this _sumptuous -haulage_ for _three_ (or two) _cents_ a mile, while the 200 pounds -(_averaged every four years_) of United States mail, handled as junk or -dunnage, pays 11.7 cents a mile. - -Does it not look--look to you--somewhat _off_ at the corners somewhere? -Does it not look as if that railway “system” feeder line was getting -robustly _large pay_ for the service rendered? - -Well, if it does not so appear to you, it appears to me that you should, -at your earliest convenience, consult some qualified and competent -alienist, or drop into a “rest resort” for six months or more. - -As to the other weights given in that tabulation--500, 1,000 and up to -5,000--nothing here needs be said. They are all below the “postoffice -car” weights. At the weights, 5,000 pounds per day of mail-haul, the -student of this rail-mail pay _raid_ should sit up and begin to observe -his nurse and the attending physician. - -Before I further inflict the reader with personal comments, it might -be of mutual advantage to quote a recognized authority on the weights -actually carried in postal mail cars--weights of _actual_ mail. - -I take the following from the official report of the Penrose-Overstreet -Commission, pages 30-31. - -“It is stated in the report of Dr. Henry C. Adams to the former -Commission (Vol. II, 233), that-- - - “The average loading of the postoffice car, according to the - testimony before the Commission is 2 tons. It must be admitted, - in view of the great weight of these cars, that such loading - _pays little regard to the requirements of economy_. It is - doubtful if, on the basis of such loading, the railways could - afford to carry mail at a rate much cheaper than it is now - carried. On the other hand, if cars were loaded with 3½ tons, - which Mr. Davis says is an easy load, or should the average - load go as high as 6 tons, which, according to testimony, is - accomplished on the Pennsylvania Railroad by a special train, I - am confident that _railways operate upon a margin of profit in - carrying mail that warrants a reduction in pay_. - - “For the purpose of emphasizing the importance of loading as - essential to the determination of railway mail compensation, as - well as to suggest the line of desired improvement in the present - railway mail service, it may be added that were it possible to - load 5 tons in a car, the expense would be reduced to $1,766 per - mile of line; that is to say, a sum less than one-half the amount - actually paid.” - -Dr. Adams in the foregoing was presenting a judgmental summary, -or digest, of the testimony before the Wolcott Commission on this -“railway-mail-pay” question. His opinion, or conclusion, as to the -dominant factors involved, has been recognized as authority--_if not -final authority_--on the points to which he spoke. - -Now, let us figure a little more. I’m not much at “ciferin.” Maybe the -reader can help me along. Let’s get properly started. - -Those rail “postoffice cars,” of which Dr. Adams spoke, are from 40 to 55 -feet or more in length. They must weigh, empty, or “stripped,” figuring -running trucks, body, etc., _forty to one-hundred or more thousand -pounds_. So, according to Dr. Adams, this twenty to fifty ton vehicle is -sent hurtling over a hundred or a five-hundred mile run on a steel track -with finest and most modern engine or motive power, baggage and express -cars ahead, and sleepers, buffet, diner and observation cars trailing, -_to carry two tons of United States mail_ in each mail car in the train. - -Oh yes, I know that Dr. Adams spoke some years ago (1901, I believe), and -spoke of the “average load” of mail carried by mail cars then. I also -know that our present Postmaster General has “gone after” this railway -mail car raiding--has made them carry more load. All praise to him for -doing so. It was an action which _any_ of his predecessors had the power -to have taken, and which should save millions of postal revenues. - -The department report for 1910 (P157), states, there were 1,114 full -and 3,208 apartment postal cars in service--_rented_ cars--while there -were 206 of the former and 559 of the latter (a total of 765), kept -in “reserve.” That makes a total of 5,087 postal cars for which the -government pays rent. - -There is, however, another strong presumption--with some very robust -facts which investigation has uncovered--that a considerable number -of the so-called “reserve” cars are in the hospitals about railroad -shops, where such patients receive little but “open air treatment.” In -“emergencies” it is legitimate, of course, to presume that the division -traffic manager may order out or put on the rails any of these hospital -cars, “full” or “apartment,” as first aids to the injured. And it is -right that he does so. - -But why, in the name of George Washington, should all these hospital cars -be charged up to the Postoffice Department? Yes, why? - -Oh, yes, I know that they are all in “service” or “reserve”--_all subject -to department orders_. But when one looks down from the ladder top -into these shop-hospital yards for car patients, he not unfrequently -sees, unless he is freakishly nearsighted or a victim of a new brand of -strabismus, an old “flat-wheeler” which bears a marked resemblance to one -that he used to, in days agone (long agone), pause, while husking the -“down-row,” and gaze at in admiration as well as wonderment. Of course, -it did not wear “flat wheels” then. It also carries some mars and scars -of time, just as The Man on the Ladder carries marks which did not stand -out so conspicuously then as now. But there, on its sides, appears, -somewhat dimmed by age, that patriotic, stirring designation: _U. S. Mail -Car_. - -This is not intended as a criticism. It is merely a suggestion as to -where the present or some future Second Assistant Postmaster General may -find additional _raiding_ into the postal revenues. - -A few years since, Professor Parsons asserted, (so the public press -declared--I have not the document by me and am writing hurriedly--the -Professor will, therefore, excuse me if I mis-spell or misquote. -Corrections will be made in later editions) that the railway mail pay and -car rental raid amounted to something like $24,000,000 a year. - -Speaking again from press reports, Mr. Hitchcock seems to have been going -after those raiders. At any rate he appears to have stopped that graft -sluiceway to the extent--reports vary--of from _nine to fourteen millions -of dollars a year_. - -Again, Mr. Hitchcock, we say, may your tribe increase--_on this line of -action_. - -Now let us return and do a little “red-school-house” figuring on this -railroad pay raid. Some pages back, we reprinted Mr. Kirkman’s tables of -weight and car rental pay to the railways. You can glance back and verify -the figures when you deem necessary. Here “orders” force me to hurry. But -in spite of orders a few generalizations in “cipherin,” have to be made. - -Many pages back, the Postoffice Department’s _own_ distribution of mail -weights for 1907 (the last preceding “weighing period”), was printed. For -ready reference, we will here reprint it. - - Per Cent. - First-class matter 7.29 - Second-class matter 36.38 - Third-class matter 8.32 - Fourth-class matter 2.73 - Franked matter .21 - Penalty matter 1.99 - Equipment carried in connection therewith 38.12 - Empty equipment dispatched 4.96 - ------ - Total 100.00 - -A few pages back we figured out how a 200-pound mail weight haul stacks -against, around and up-to a 200-pound _human avoirdupois_ haul, assuming, -of course, that the aforesaid avoirdupois is not casketed with the mail, -express or baggage in front. Well, with that understanding, the reader -may take my previous statements anent those 200 pounds of U. S. mail -matter and human avoirdupois--whether citizen or imported--as made. He -should also understand that what was then said fits, of course with a -varying application, to the wheatfield, cornfield, oilfield, cottonfield, -timber, tobacco and other “feeder” fields, which carry our mails at -varying rates of pay for varying weights up to 5,000 pounds. - -Now, at the weight of 5,000 pounds (2½ tons), is about where the -“postoffice car” enters, and it is to the mail-carriage-pay the railways -get for this postoffice car service we wish here to “cipher” on a little. -As a start, however, the “example” must be “set.” To do that a little -preliminary figuring must be done. - -The quadrennial weighing of the mails is now in progress. The last -preceding weighing was in 1907. In the interim, however, Mr. Hitchcock, -has made some special or test weighing--a good and commendable business -movement--of second-class mail. - -From these weighings the department, I take it, has arrived at estimated -results more or less satisfactory--to itself at least. The 1910 report -presents a tabulated tonnage of second-class matter on page 329. A -prolix discussion of the cost of handling second-class mail appears on -immediately associated pages. The discussion is a masterly, a forensic, -production, and, outside of Indiana, the habitat of experts, it may stand -out in fair form as a literary production. Our Third Assistant Postmaster -General must, though, have got the wires crossed or the gear jammed on -his comptometer to have reached those two “answers.” - -_Sixty-two and a fraction per cent of the total mail is second class._ - -_To haul and handle a pound of second-class mail costs the government -nine and a fraction cents._ - - -SOME LITTLE RED SCHOOL HOUSE FIGURING. - -Now, let us sit down on the veranda, bring out the little red school -house slates and do some figuring on this railway pay problem, question, -proposition, or whatever the “experts” may choose to call it. - -First, there, on page 329 of the 1910 report, it states, “estimated” on -the basis of those 1907 “special weighings,” that there were 873,412,077 -pounds of second-class mail carried and handled. - -Let’s see! Yes, of course, how simple it is. There’s that 1907 table of -percentages, a page or so back. - -As it was “figured out” in 1907 _by the people who did the weighing_, or -who bossed it, we may consider it as dependable as the Third Assistant -Postmaster General’s figures on page 329 of the department’s 1910 report. - -The reader will please understand me. I do not mean to say that either -the 1907 or 1910 reports are dependable. - -I wish the reader to understand that I understand, or believe, them both -to be merely _guesses_--guesses more or less mis-stitched in the knitting -and more or less frazzled and threadbare by reason of long service. - -But they are what we have to “figger” from. - -Page 329 of the 1910 report says: - -Total mailings (second-class), 873,412,077 pounds. - -The 1907 tabulation of distributed mail weights (see table a few pages -back) says that second-class mail, in carriage, is 36.39 _per cent_ of -the _total mail weight_. - -Here’s where we put our slates into service. - -We’ll first divide (look back at that 1907 table), 873,412,077 pounds by -.3638--that being the percentage of _second-class_ to the _total_ of mail -carried, as reported in the “special weighing” of 1907. - -Well, .3638 into 873,412,077 gives us 2,400,802,850 _pounds_ as the -_gross mail weight_ carriage in 1910. - -That does not look near so large, nor so _questionably_ peculiar, as does -some other “answers” we are figuring out on our little red school-house -slates. - -Looking back to that 1907 tabulated estimate, we find that, of the total -weight carried--_and paid for as mail_--.4308 of that total for which we -patriotic, likewise confiding, kitchen-garden citizens pay is not mail at -all. - -A glance at that 1907 tabulation will show us that 43.08 per cent. of the -_total mail weight_ for which the government pays is for “equipment” and -“empty equipment dispatched.” - -Now let’s take our slates again and multiply that total weight -2,400,802,850 pounds by .4308. “Well, what’s your answer?” - -One billion, thirty-four million, two hundred forty-five thousand, eight -hundred and sixty-eight pounds! - -Well, that’s some tonnage, is it not? Of course, as the reader will -readily grab hold of, that tonnage is not, in itself, staged as a -“feature” in this “ciphering.” This is a big country and its tonnages -are big, whether of wheat, corn, pigs, fools, or mail. It is a “curtain” -comparison we desire to have noticed and studied. Look at it, study it -prayerfully, then put your thinker to work for about thirty seconds. - -According to the Postoffice Department’s own figures and estimates, it -appears that a total tonnage of 2,400,000,000 pounds (omitting the tail -figures), were handled, and the cost of all _paid for_ by this grand old -government of ours. - -Next, let us notice that 1,034,000,000 pounds (tail figures again -omitted), was not mail at all--sacks, fixtures, etc., etc. - -Now, look at it--the result. - -Railroads were _paid_ for carrying 2,400,000,000 pounds of mail. - -_Of that total weight_ 1,034,000,000 (_nearly half_) was _“equipment” and -“empty” equipment “dispatched.”_ - -Beyond the showing of these figures, comment is scarcely necessary for -anyone at all familiar with railway traffic methods and costs--whether -the haulage is by slow or fast freight or by express--anyone will see the -_raid_ in it. - -Look at that haulage of “equipment,” which the postoffice revenues pay -for! Pay for as mail. Look it over, and over again and then sit up and do -a little _hard thinking_. - -Waters Pearse, of Pearseville, Texas, ships, say ten or twenty coops -of chickens to Chicago. He may ship by express or by fast freight--the -latter of course, if “Wat” and his friends have been able to make up -a carload. “Wat” consigns his chickens to some Commission house in -Kansas City, St. Louis, Chicago or elsewhere. Wherever our friend “Wat” -of Pearceville, Texas, ships, or whether he ships by express or by fast -freight, his empty coops will be returned to him _without charge_. - -If Steve Gingham, in Southern Illinois--“Egypt”--has a hen range and his -hens have been busy, Steve will have several cases of eggs to ship every -week or ten days. Well, all Steve has to do is to take his cases of eggs -over to the railroad station. Some express company will pick them up and -take them to Chicago, to St. Louis, to Cincinnati, or other market. In a -few days, about the time Steve gets the check for his eggs, he’ll find -the cases on the station platform returned to him, _without charge_. - -What we’ve said about our friends, Wat down in Texas, and Steve in -“Egypt,” is equally true of any shipment of any sort of specially crated -fruit or vegetables, of boxed, bucketed or canned fish, milk, etc., etc. -The shipping cases, buckets, boxes or cans are returned to the shipper -_without charge_. Yet here is this great government of ours paying the -railways for nearly one ton of fixtures and equipment for every ton of -mail (all classes), carried. Fixtures, equipment, etc., aggregated, in -the weighing of 1907 (see tabulation a page or two back), 43.08 per cent -of the total weight for which the government has paid mail-weight rates -for four years--paid for hauling those racks, frames, sacks, etc., etc., -back and forth over the rail-line haul _every day of the four years_. - -Railroad people and their representatives have written voluminously, -likewise _fetchingly_, to prove to an easily “bubbled” public that -the government has been paying too _little_ rather than too much for -the rail carriage of its mails. I have read numerous such vestibuled -productions. They were all good; top-branch verbiage and rhetoric, so -smooth, noiseless and jarless in coupling that the uncritical reader’s -sympathies are often aroused, and his conviction or belief enlisted by -the sheer massive grandeur of the terminology used. Try almost any of -these _promotion_ railway mail-pay talkers and throw the belt on your -own thought-mill while you read. Four times in five the ulterior-motive -writer or speaker will have you rolling into the roundhouse or repair -shop before you know you have even been coupled onto the train. When you -emerge, if your thinker is still off its belt, you will find yourself -about ready to “argue” that the railroads are very much underpaid, if, -indeed, not grossly wronged by the government. I would like to quote -some of the picture arguments from several of these railway studios but -cannot. As illustrative of the general _ensemble_ of these forensic art -productions, I will, however, reproduce here a gem from one of them--a -bit of verbal canvas so generic and homelike as to class as a bit of real -_genre_. - -The reader will find it in Pearson’s Magazine for June, 1911. Who -personally perpetrated it, I know not, and the magazine sayeth not. The -editor of Pearson’s, however, assures us that the article from which the -following excerpt is made, was “prepared” by the authority and under the -direction of the Committee on Railway Mail Pay, and as prominent members -of said committee the editor gives the names of _Julius Kruttschnitt_, -Director of Maintenance and Operation, Union and Southern Pacific -Systems; _Ralph Peters_, President and General Manager, Long Island -Railroad; _Charles A. Wickersham_, President and General Manager, Western -Railway of Alabama; _W. W. Baldwin_, Vice-President, C. B. & Q. Railroad; -_Frank Barr_, Third Vice-President and General Manager of the Boston and -Maine Railroad. - -That is certainly a representative quintette of railway artists and -generally recognized as qualified to produce--verbally--almost anything -in railway art, from a freehand tariff to a “car shortage” done in -oil while the crops ought to be moving. Am sorry I cannot quote more -extendedly. The following, however, will give the reader a sample of the -“style” and also of the “argument” common to most of the _protective and -promotive railway word pictures_: - - If, as has been reported, a certain railroad president ever - did utter the famous phrase attributed to him, “the public - be damned,” the public has more than gotten even. It does - the damning itself nowadays instead, and so effective is its - verdict that we are even confronted with the spectacle of the - government itself bowing to the popular prejudice irrespective - of the facts in the case. Undoubtedly we have become a nation - of stone-throwers. To a certain extent this has worked for - the public benefit. Every deserved stone has worked for the - correction of admitted evils. But so rapidly has the public - taken to the lately discovered pastime of stone-throwing that it - not infrequently uses its strength like a giant, and that, we - have been told, is tyrannous. Let a corporation raise its head - nowadays and it is greeted by a shower of stones of which perhaps - not ten per cent. are intelligently cast. The only thing to do in - such a case is to “duck;” argument becomes futile in the heat of - battle.… - -That is sufficient to show the “style.” The article then proceeds to -give some mail-service history and to cite a few points wherein by -“arbitrary” rulings the government is grievously wronging the railroads -in under-paying them for the carrying of the mails. The following is one -of the _strong_ points or arguments presented: - - Furthermore, the railroads hold that an additional injustice was - done in this connection in the adoption of the present methods of - determining the weights. In addition to the several reductions - from the act of 1873 above mentioned, and in spite of the fact - that various government committees admitted their injustice, a - singular order amounting practically to a _juggling of weights - in favor of the government_ was issued under the date of June 7, - 1907. - - Under the date of March 2, 1907, the following order was issued: - - “When the weight of mail is taken on the railway routes, the - whole number of days the mails are weighed shall be used as a - divisor for obtaining the weight per day.” - -But under date of June 7, 1907, a surprising order was issued reading as -follows: - - “When the weight of mail is taken on railway routes, the whole - number of days _included_ in the weighing period should be used - as a divisor for obtaining the average weight per day.” - -Certainly this is a startling change of methods on the part of a -government which has been attempting to establish a high standard of -integrity in the conduct of all business. Slight as the difference in -the wording of the two orders may seem upon a casual reading, the actual -effect is drastic. Under the order of March 2, 1907, the total amount -of mail weighed to obtain the average daily weight was to be divided by -the total number of days on which it was handled. _Surely there could -be no other fairer basis of determining the average weight._ But under -date of June 7, 1907, the system of weighing was changed, so that to -determine the daily average weight of mail the total weight should be -divided, not by the number of days on which it was weighed, but by the -whole number of days included in the weighing period irrespective of -whether mails were handled daily during the whole period or not. _As a -matter of fact in many cases they were not_, and this arbitrary “change -of divisor,” as it is called, further reduced the pay of the railroads -for the transportation of mails by about 12 per cent in addition to -the reductions above mentioned which _congressional committees_ had -previously characterized as unfair. - -There, now. Is not that profoundly and beautifully conclusive? The -strictures, hard and unjust regulations and arbitrary impositions of -the government in the matter of railway mail weights is working great -wrong to the roads; is, in fact, so cutting into their earnings as to -jeopardize their solvency or to force them to raise freight and passenger -rates in order to continue business. - -Very sad, very sad, indeed! And how unjust it is for the Postmaster -General so to cut down railway mail pay as possibly to cut down the -dividends the railroads have been paying the “widows and orphans” who -own stock in the roads--stocks and bonds aggregating two or three times -their tangible value. Especially wrong was it for the Postmaster General -to issue and enforce such drastic orders after “congressional committees” -had declared any reduction of the weight-pay rate “unfair.” - -I shall not impose on the reader any extended discussion or consideration -of the quoted bubble talk. A few comments I will make--comments which it -is hoped will peel off sufficient of the rhetorical coloring to let the -reader see at least enough of the real subject (the points involved), as -will enable him to make a robust and correct guess at the “ground-plan” -of both the sub and the superstructure the railway talkers and speakers -are trying to erect. - -First: Every right-minded citizen should--and when he rightly understands -the matter, I believe, will--give the Postmaster General unstinted praise -and commendation for the issuance and enforcement of the two orders which -the railway men quote and complain about. - -Second: The rail people say the last order (see quotation), “reduced the -pay of the railroads by about 12 per cent.” - -Without questioning the veracity of the gentlemen under whose “authority” -that statement is made, The Man on the Ladder, as a judgmental -precaution, shall line up with the folks “from Missouri” until that 12 -per cent is set forth in fuller relief--until he is shown. The reader -will observe that the railroad authorities quoted merely say that the -“arbitrary change of divisor further reduced the pay of the railroads.” -Whether or not the pay received by the roads _before_ that order was -issued was too low, low enough or too high is not directly stated by -the writer or writers. That it is designed to have the reader draw the -conclusion that the rate was low enough or too low before that second -order was issued is made evident by the reference to the expressed -opinions of “congressional committees”--opinions to the effect that the -“reductions” forced by the first order were “unfair.” - -Third: The names of many men of both ability and of integrity have -appeared upon the rosters of the Committees on Postoffices and Postroads -of both the Senate and the House during the past forty years. In face of -that fact stands forth in bold relief a fact so bare and bald--and so -_suggestive_ of wrongs done and doing by the rail people--as to remove -it from the field of serious debate. That fact is: For forty or more -years the railroad men and allied interests have by lobbies, or other -_persuasive_ means, got the Congressional Committees (Senate, House and -joint), to do about what they wanted done in the matter of rail carriage -and pay for handling the mails, or to prevent the committees from doing -things they did not want done. - -Fourth: That “change of divisor,” covered in the order of June 27, 1907, -and which these railroad men accuse of causing a shrinkage of 12 per cent -in the mail-weight pay the roads were receiving under the order of March -2, 1907, and prior, possibly was based on some valid reasons or grounds, -or upon grounds the then Postmaster General believed to be valid. I have -not before me, at the moment, any written data or information as to the -reasons assigned by the postal authorities for that “change of divisor”, -or whether they assigned any reasons for the order making the change. I -know, however, of one very good reason there was for making such a change -on several railroads or divisions of roads. - -The weighing of the mails was formerly made during a period of 90 to -105 days, or fifteen weeks, once every four years. The law now permits -the Postoffice Department to make special weighings, I believe. On the -average daily mail weight for those 105 days the postal department based -its contract with the roads for carrying the mails for four years. - -Now notice this: The terms of such contracts not only implied but -specifically required a _daily_ carriage of the mail weight for the -number of days designated, allowing, of course, for wrecks, washouts and -other unavoidable interruptions in the movements of trains. - -Keeping that in mind, suppose the Postmaster General discovered that on a -good many mail runs--“lines” or “half-lines”--suppose that the chief of -the department discovered a condition on many mail runs similar to that I -personally know to have existed on a few, in years 1907 and prior. That -was, briefly stated, this: - -The contract called for a _daily_ carriage of so much mail weight and the -government _paid_ for that per diem carriage, the days of unavoidable -interferences and interruptions included. Suppose that the postoffice -authorities discovered that, by reason of the diversion of the mails to -other lines, the _daily_ mail service was not rendered; or discovered, -as in at least one instance I discovered, that the contracting road (or -roads) gave little consideration to the _daily_ service clause save -during the _weighing period_, dropping the mail from train--skipping a -day’s service--whenever it was to their interests to do so, and often -assigning the most flimsy reasons for so doing or assigning no reasons at -all? - -That order of June 7, 1907, would have a tendency to stop that sort of -disrespect and abuse of contract stipulations, would it not? - -Fifth: The writer of the article from which we have quoted appears to -have got himself somewhat twisted in his consideration of that order -of March 2, 1907. It seems that (see first paragraph of quotation) he -would have the reader class it among those several forced reductions -which “various government committees” had called unjust. But, further -along, it is stated that “surely there could be no other fairer basis -of determining the average weight” than that furnished in that order of -March 2. - -I wonder why the railroad lobby so strenuously opposed that order of -March, 1907--connived and schemed for its rescinding, until the order -of June 7, 1907, gave the gang of corruptionists something still more -objectionable to the interests they served? Yes, I wonder why they so -hotly opposed that order of March 2? If there could be “no other fairer -basis of determining the average weight” in June, 1911 (the publication -date of the article from which we have quoted), why was it not fair in -March, 1907? And why was it not a fair and just basis for arriving at the -average daily mail weights for many weighing periods prior to 1907? Did -anyone ever hear any railway man advocating the “fair basis” provided in -that order of March? Most certainly The Man on the Ladder never heard of -such advocacy. The railway people did not advocate such a “fair” method -of ascertaining the average daily mail weight their roads carried during -a period of fifteen weeks--or during any other period--_because they were -beneficiaries of some very unfair methods and practices which gave them -pay for mail weights their roads did not carry_. - -As I refer later to some of the practices indulged in the weighing -periods, I will here mention only a method used for years prior to the -issuance of that order in March, 1907--a method of arriving at the -“average daily weight” for the carriage of which the railroad was to be -paid for a period of four years. That method was, though I have been -unable to learn that it was ever officially authorized by the Postoffice -Department, to find the daily average for each week covered in the -weighing period and then arrive at the average for the whole period by -dividing the sum of the weekly averages by the number of weeks in which -the mail was weighed. - -Nothing wrong with that is there? Should work out fair and square, should -it not? Well, it did not. The method was all right in theory and in -letter, but a crooked practice was worked into its application--worked -into it by collusion between crooked railway and public officials. And -the crookedness of the practice was very plain and bold and bald. It was -what in street parlance would be called “raw.” Here it is in figures: - -Take a “heavy” mail line. Say the total mail weight for a week was, using -a round figure, 840,000 pounds or 420 tons. Now dividing that total by -7, the number of days in a week and the number of days also on which the -mail was weighed, would give a daily _average_ of 120,000 pounds, or 60 -tons. That is all clear and straight, is it not? Most certainly it is. - -But the crooked application of the method divided the week’s total by 6 -instead of by 7--divided the total of seven days’ weights by six. The -railway people, you see, were great respecters of the Sabbath. They -would run trains on Sunday to accommodate the public and to meet the -necessities of their business, which was, and is, perfectly proper. They -would also carry the mails for your Uncle Sam, which was also right and -proper. But their lofty respect for the Holy Sabbath, or the high esteem -in which they held our much loved and much abused Uncle, was such as -induced them to hold up said Uncle as a respecter of the Sabbath, or -seventh day, while they “held him up” in averaging his mail weights. - -In the illustrative example we have put on the slate, the “hold up” would -amount to--let’s see: 840,000 pounds, or 420 tons, divided by 6 gives us -70 tons as the daily average for the week, instead of 60 tons, as the -actual average was. That is a “hold up” for pay for ten tons a day--for -10 tons not carried. - -“What did the hold-up amount to in cash?” - -Yes, it might be well to follow our hypothetical or illustrative example -to its _cash_ terminal. Well, that is easily and quickly done. - -The rate of pay per ton mile per year on daily weights above 2½ tons is -$21.37.[16] That ten tons added to the daily average would give to the -railroads, then, just $213.70 in _unearned_ cash each day. - -If the contract stood for full four years on such false average, the -railroad would pull down just 1,460 times $213.70 of unearned money or a -total of $312,002 in the four years. - -I would, of course, not have the reader understand that our hypothetical -example would fit all railroads. Many, in fact most, of the mail-carrying -roads average in mail weight much below sixty tons per day--even below -ten tons per day. Some roads were and are paid for an average above -sixty tons. Nor would I have the reader understand that the crooked -practice just mentioned was common to all mail-carrying roads. There -were possibly--yes, probably, some exceptions--some roads that carried -so little mail as not to make a steal of a sixth of its weight-pay worth -while. - -I would, however, have the reader understand that I mean to assert that -_most_ of the mail-carrying roads were parties to the crooked method -here described and that the hypothetical figures here given applied, -proportionally, to any average per diem weight of mail covered in the -carriage contract, whether it was one ton or a hundred tons. - -I would also have the reader understand me to assert that, so far as -information has reached me, no railroad man, or man representing the rail -mail-carrying interests, ever questioned the “fairness” of the crooked -practice just described--a practice which looted the government of -millions of dollars. - -As a _raider_ into postal revenues, this thieving practice, it must be -admitted, deserves conspicuous mention--more extended notice than I have -given it. - - -FOOTNOTES - -[9] 5,000 to 48,000 pounds, $20.30 per ton. Above 48,000 pounds, $19.24 -per ton. - -[10] Land grant roads receive but 80 per cent of these rates. - -[11] This is the rate received for carrying each ton handled 1 mile, and -is obtained by dividing the yearly compensation by 365 and then dividing -the daily compensation thus obtained by the number of tons carried 1 mile -each day. - -[12] This rate was obtained in the same manner as the ton-mile rate. - -[13] By full-sized cars is meant cars 40 feet or more in length and -wholly devoted to mail. - -[14] Car and mile-run rates corrected for 1908 and since. - -[15] Tables corrected for 1908. - -[16] The rate 1907 and prior. Now the rate is $20.30 for tonnages between -2½ and 24 tons and $19.24 for each ton above 24 tons. - - - - -CHAPTER XIII. - -RAIDERS MASKED BY CIVIL SERVICE. - - -One other raid into the postal revenues I must notice before passing to -a consideration of the parcels post question, in which consideration of -other raids and raiders will be mentioned. - -Here I desire to refer to that band of raiders--thousands in number--who -are carried on the payrolls of the Postoffice Department--carried at -salaries ranging into the thousands in many cases--and who do little or -nothing of service value for the money paid them. - -The Postoffice Department is a large institution and does a big -business--a huge business which has much detail and extends over a vast -territory. To handle such a business properly, necessarily requires -the service of a large force of operatives. Most of the work of the -department is of that sort which human brain and muscle alone can do. The -machine can touch but a few of the minor details of the vast amount of -work our Postoffice Department handles. It may cancel stamps, perforate -documents, etc., but it cannot collect, sort, distribute, carry and -deliver mail. It requires human muscle and brains to do such work. Much -of it requires skill--the trained eye and hand as well as academic -knowledge. - -Well, the Postoffice Department employs a large force--a vast army of -men, and some women, I believe. Counting the employes in its legal, -purchasing and inspection divisions with the postmasters, assistant -postmasters, railway and office clerks, city and rural carriers, -messengers, etc., there must be somewhere around 330,000 people employed -in our federal postal service. - -Whether that is too large or too small a force for the _proper_ handling -of our postal service is beyond my purpose here to discuss. That the -business now handled by the department could be far better handled by -330,000 employes than it now is, and that such a service force could, if -properly directed and disciplined, handle a business much larger than -that now transacted by the department, I do not hesitate to assert. I -base that assertion chiefly on the following observed conditions: - -First: There are frills and innovations in handling the business which -take up the time of employes and which have little or no service value. - -Second: There is, not too much “politics,” as Mr. Hitchcock and -his immediate predecessors have modestly but wrongfully called it, -but too much political partisanship--_dirty, grafting, thieving, -partisanship_--not only in the appointment of people to the service, -but also in making partisan, often grafting, crooked use of them after -appointment. - -Third: There are too many non-producers--non-service producers--among -that army of 330,000. - -It is the last, or third, condition named that I shall here briefly -consider, or such observed phases of it as, in my judgment, so trench -into the postal revenues as not only amounts to a raid in itself, but -which also encourages others to graft and loot. - -First, I desire to say that there are many thousands in that postal -service, many who are honest, faithful and _competent_ workers. There -are about seventy thousand (69,712 according to the department’s report -for 1910) carriers, city and rural, most of whom work industriously and -efficiently and who are underpaid for the service they render. - -There are about 50,000 clerks employed. Of these, the 1909-10 report -says, 16,795 are railway clerks. Quoting the same report, there were -33,047 postoffice clerks in the service. All or nearly all of these are -employed in the “Presidential” postoffice--offices of the first, second -and third classes. Of the total number of clerks, 31,825, are employed -in offices of the first and second classes. There were 424 offices of -the first class and 1,828 of the second. That placed the service of -31,825 clerks in 2,252 offices. The report (1909-10), from which these -figures are taken states 5,373 as the number of third-class offices. The -remainder of the reported number of clerks (1,222) are, it is presumed, -distributed among those 5,373 third-class offices. At any rate, in the -statement of expenditures for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1910, the -Second Assistant Postmaster General, Mr. Stewart, presents the following -showing of expenditures as compensation to clerks: - - Clerks in first and second-class postoffices (31,825) $31,583,587.37 - Clerks in third-class postoffices, lower grade 540,891.31 - Clerks in third-class postoffices, upper grade 663,632.20 - -The lower grade of third-class postoffices comprise those which yield -the postmasters an annual income ranging from $1,000 to $1,500 and the -higher grades are those with a compensation of $1,600 to $1,900 to the -postmasters. In this connection, it should be noted that for the fiscal -year there was paid, in addition to the amounts above named, the sum of -$325,953.44 for what are called “temporary” and “substitute” clerks. - -Adding these various sums gives a total of $33,114,064.32 paid for -clerk hire for clerks in first, second and third-class offices--in the -“Presidential postoffice,” or offices to which the President has, by -law or otherwise, been granted or permitted the right to appoint the -postmasters. - -As previously stated, there is a total of 7,625 Presidential postoffices -on the payrolls of which are carried the names of 33,047 clerks. In -addition to these are 16,795 railway postal clerks. Beyond saying that -the appointment and advancement of these last-mentioned clerks have been -in the past--_and yet are_--largely influenced by assistant postmaster -generals, superintendents and other chiefs of division in the Washington -or department office and by Senators, Congressmen and _postmasters_ -in offices of the first and second-classes, I shall not consider them -further here, nor do I include them in the adverse criticisms I shall -make of the clerical force and service of the department. - -It should, however, be noted in this connection that in addition to -the 31,825 clerks employed in the 2,252 offices of the first and -second classes, there are 2,237 assistant postmasters. These were paid -$2,536,997.24 for the year ended June 30th, 1910. There were in offices -of the first and second-classes 2,252 postmasters. To these was paid the -sum of $5,814,300. That makes the service personnel of the first and -second class offices, not counting carriers, messengers, etc., 36,314, -and gives a total of annual expenditures for this service amounting to -$40,465,361.56. - -The reader will please keep in mind the fact that the foregoing figures -apply only to postoffices of the first and second-classes. There may be a -few clerks and also assistant postmasters in offices of the third-class. -If so, there are so few of them that the department did not deem it -worth while to account for them in that position in any of its fiscal -statements, so far as I have been able to find. I would ask the reader -also to bear in mind that while the following strictures are intended to -apply to all three classes of Presidential postoffices, their application -is less general and less forceful in offices of the second than in -offices of the first class, and less in offices of the third-class than -in either of the two higher class offices. - -There has been much talk by Postmaster Generals in recent years about -efforts made and making to get the employes of the Postoffice Department -into the classified service--getting them under civil service protection. -Not only has this been made subject of urgent advocacy in almost every -annual department report of recent years, but Postmaster Generals have -made prolix and voluble reference to and favorable comment upon the -progress that has been made in “taking the department out of politics.” -Mr. Hitchcock in the 1909-10 report commends highly the progress made in -that direction. See pages 13, 14, 24, 85, 86 and others of the report. -The party stump and banquet oratory of the past twelve or more years -has sparkled--fairly scintillated it might be said--with rhetorical -coruscations about what “the administration has done” to remove the -federal service from the “baleful clutch and influence of politics.” - -Now do not misunderstand me. I am not saying this because the Republicans -have been in control of things. Had Democrats been at the helm of the -national craft, they would have done the same. The Democratic politicians -might have done more or less than the Republicans have done to get -the civil service of the government away from corrupt and corrupting -partisan influences. The Republicans have done only what they have been -compelled to do--compelled by general public demand. So the Democrats -would have done, had they been in power. Politicians do not want a civil -service free from party control. The “jobs” have been and _are_ a source -both of spoils and of continued power to the so-called “practical” -politician of either party--of any political party. That is why the -party leaders--“bosses”--fight so persistently and craftily to retain -control of the civil jobs. That is why almost every civil service law or -“executive order” for placing civil employes under a merit or efficiency -classification carries a “joker” somewhere about its clothes. That is -true of most all such laws and orders so far enacted or issued, whatever -be their field of application--city, county, state or nation. - -So I desire the reader to understand that there is no political or party -animus in what I may say in adverse criticism of the jokes and jokers -which so conspicuously decorate the Republican display of effort to place -federal postal employes under classified civil service and which, it is -said, “has taken them out of politics and will keep them out.” The Man on -the Ladder believes in civil service, but he does not believe in either -legislative or executive “jokers” which, under the guise and pretense -of establishing a _protected_ merit classification of public servants, -makes stealthy crooks and turns to keep their own partisans on the jobs, -regardless of either their ability, merit or fitness. - -Now let us return to our subject--to the points which make much if not -most of the alleged “progress” in the postal department toward the -institution of a _merit_ classification of its office employes but -little more than a move on lines to keep administration partisans on -postal service jobs, and which makes this much-talked of progress toward -efficiency conserve party more than service interests. - -But some readers may urge that this is mere assertion. Well, let me -present a few facts and conditions which support the assertions, or -which, to me, seem to make the statements assertions of fact. - -Mr. Hitchcock rightly asserts (page 13 of 1909-10 report) “that the -highest degree of effectiveness in the conduct of this tremendous -business establishment cannot be attained while the thousands of -postmasters, on whose faithfulness so much depends, continue to be -political appointees. The entire postal service should be taken out of -politics.” - -Well and good. Following the foregoing, he mentions the fact that all -assistant postmasters have been placed in the classified service by order -of the President. Mr. Hitchcock, “as a still more important reform,” -recommends that “Presidential postmasters of all grades, from the first -class to the third, should be placed in the classified service.” He also -speaks of efforts made and making to place the fourth-class postmasters -under its laws and regulations. He points out some valid difficulties -to be surmounted if such desired result is attained without impairment -rather than betterment of the service. The First Assistant Postmaster -General, C. P. Granfield, states in his report, that, under an executive -order dated November 30, 1908, all fourth-class postmasters in _fourteen -states_ have been put into the classified service. He also explains -briefly the method of procedure in filling vacancies--_when they occur_. - -That is probably sufficient preliminary. Now for a few of the observed -and observable conditions which govern in civil service as thus far -applied in the Postoffice Department. Taking the fourth-class postmasters -first, it may be said the method of appointing such postmasters by civil -service examination scarcely rises to a dignity entitling it to serious -consideration. While the method itself _reads_ well, its application, in -many instances, is but a joke--a tame joke at that. Postmaster General -Hitchcock substantially admits, as previously stated, that conditions -are met with which make its application extremely difficult if not quite -impossible. - -Certain it is that, so far as applied, the results have given a vast -majority, if not all, of the certifications to persons of administration -party affiliation. - -Then, too, it might be asked by a person addicted to the habit of doing -his own thinking--a habit very obnoxious to party “leaders” and to -politicians of the so-called “practical” breed--it might be asked by any -capable, independent thinker, if it was mere chance that selected twelve -administration and two “doubtful”--chronically doubtful--states in which -first to make application of a civil service method to the selection and -appointment of fourth-class postmasters? - -While there are, according to the last published department report, -about 52,000 fourth-class postmasters in the country, a great majority -of them are persons of little or no local political influence. Beyond -their own votes, then, they are of little service to the administration -party, save as distributing or disbursing agents of the party in power -for its campaign literature and other promotion matter. They are used -also to keep the county and state “bosses” of the party advised of local -political conditions as they view them--flurries in the party atmosphere, -as indicated by hitching-post and whittling discussions of party -legislation and proposed legislation or of party policies, as set forth -by the published utterances of state and national “leaders.” - -In such and other minor ways, then, the fourth-class postmaster may be a -helpful instrument in the retention of power by the political party in -power--the party from which he has received appointment. So it is good -“practical” politics to keep such a party agent on the job. To that end, -then, the party in power--the administration--places the fourth-class -postmaster in the classified civil service, thus making his removal more -difficult, if not impossible, in case an opposing party should win out at -the polls and take charge of the government. - -The foregoing is said, of course, on the presupposition that every reader -knows that a vast majority of the postmasters and other personnel of -the postal service today is of the political party in power. In saying -that the party from which these postmasters and other postal service -employes received their appointments has been and is using a civil -service classification largely, if not wholly, for partisan ends. I -say only--in fact have already said--that the Democratic party or any -other party would, if in national control, make similar use of the -civil classification. And such partisan manipulation of a merit service -classification will continue _so long as we fool people will stand for or -permit it_. - -The chief “jokers” woven into most all civil service laws and executive -orders are these: - -First: The law or “order” directing the application of a classification -of a service into certain grades, places those holding positions at the -time of the enforcement of such law or order, into the various grades -_without any examination as to their merit or efficiency_. - -Second: Such laws and orders almost universally provide a promotion or -advancement credit for “experience,” and the only factor or element -recognized in the make-up of experience is _time_. The number of years an -employe has been on his job or in the service is his “experience.” - -Third: Such civil service laws or orders always provide for -examinations--usually an “entrance” and “promotional”--and for -“examiners.” Seldom is anything said as to the qualifications of the -persons selected as examiners. Their selection is invariably left to a -“Civil Service Commission,” and the membership of such commission is as -invariably left to _partisan appointment_. There is usually a pretense -of making such commissions “non-partisan,” that is, one of three or two -of five of the appointed commissioners are to be of the minority party. -Nevertheless, they are _all_ appointed by the majority party--the party -in power. - -All three of these “jokers” are in the government civil service laws -and the extension of those laws to the various divisions of the federal -civil service is left largely or wholly subject to the orders of the -President. I object to a classified merit service under such statutory -“jokers.” They provide a service more partisan than efficient. They -permit a payroll raid upon the revenues from which employes are paid. -They retain incompetent, inefficient persons in graded positions for -partisan purposes--often “grafting” purposes--rather than for service -reasons. They leave the promotion or advancement of honest, industrious -and competent employes largely, if not wholly, subject to the will, -wish and whim of a partisan appointed or elected superior or to a -partisan civil service commission. They provide for advancement on an -“experience”--a time service--which may not, and which in many cases does -not, constitute an experience of any value whatsoever to the service. - -I have said that the office personnel of the government’s postal service -embraces a large number--_thousands_--of raiders on the postal revenues. -I repeat that assertion here. - -Most of these raiders occupy the higher salaried positions--postmasters -of the “Presidential” classes, assistant postmasters, chief clerks and -others who secured their positions through partisan “pull” or “drag.” -These do little work of service value for the salaries paid them. Many of -them are so occupied with affairs of their party that they have little -time for service work even if they were inclined to do it. Most of them -are not so inclined. Many of these raiders know of--some of them have -been parties to--railway mail-weight, contract and other raids upon the -department they are supposed to serve. - -But this is only generalization, some one may say. In answer I say kick -off your blanket of apathy. Go do a little investigating and then do a -little--just a little--hard thinking. See what you shall see in even -such a modest effort to put two and two together. Visit a “Presidential” -postoffice in your county, preferably the one at the county seat or the -one at the capital or at the metropolis of your state. These cities -are the storm centers of partisan activity, likewise of partisan -manipulations, bubble and crookedness. If you know the postmaster, -so much the better. If you are of the same party affiliation as the -postmaster, still better. If you are not, do not let that deter you. You -visit him to see things for yourself, and an investigator is not only -warranted but fully justified in appearing to be what he is not. Fix -upon some subject of inquiry before you reach the “presence” on that -particular “Presidential” P. O. throne. Then, with ears spread and eyes -shrewdly as well as interestedly open, go to it. - -The postmaster will be glad to see you if he knows you. If he does not -know you, he will be assumedly glad to see you anyway, after he learns -where you are from and that you have an ingrown habit of voting the -ticket of his party. He may even warm up to the extent of tendering a -box of his favorite brand with an invitation to smoke up. Then he will -probably want to know “how things look up your way.” It does not make -much difference how or what you answer, so long as it is favorable -to “the party.” He is handing you a case-hardened jolly. You must be -gentleman enough to return the courtesy. “I know you are a very busy man, -Mr. Jones, and I must not take up your time. I want a little information -and decided I would come to the right place to get it,” etc., or -something along such lines will do. - -Then ask your question or questions. Preferably let them be about some -detail or details in the handling of “the large business” of his office. -Now you will begin to see things. - -The postmaster will press a buzzer button. In response a well groomed -gentleman appears whom, by introduction, you learn is his assistant. -“Fred,” says the postmaster, “Mr. Smith here desires some information. He -is from Brainville and--well, he is a friend of ours. Now, Mr. Smith,” -with a real “glad-hand” shake, “you go with Fred. He’ll dig up any -information you want, and, now, don’t forget to call on me the next time -you are in town.” - -Then you go off with Fred. He sluices a lot of kiln-dried small talk at -you and rounds out with “How are things up at Brainville, Mr. Smith?” -Of course you assure him that things “look good” to you, or that, in -your opinion “there will be nothing to it but counting our majority.” -By this time Fred has steered you to the chief clerk. To the latter he -says, “Here, Baker, shake hands with Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith lives up at -Brainville and is one of our friends. He wants some information. You see -that he gets it will you?” - -Fred, then, with another ingratiating hand shake, leaves you in -Mr. Baker’s care. To him you state the points on which you wish -enlightenment. “Oh, I see,” says Mr. Baker. “You just come with me and -I’ll have you fixed out.” Then, if it be a postoffice of fairly large -business, he will take you over to some chief or foreman of division, -tells him what you desire to know and instructs him to inform you. The -division boss next takes you in tow and with much pleased and pleasing -talk steers you down the line to some $900 or $1,200 a year clerk to whom -he turns you over. This shirt-sleeved clerk knows the answer or answers -and gives you the desired information in about three minutes. - -Incidentally in your round of the postoffice, you have asked some -conventional questions and have learned, among other things, that the -assistant postmaster, chief clerk, division chief and other top-notchers -in the service are all men of “experience”--have each been in the service -five to ten years and “know the business from garret to basement.” - -Once outside or on your way home, some questions will begin swimming a -marathon in your think-tank. Such as these for instance: - -“Did those top-notchers really know the business of their office?” - -“If they did know, why did they troll you around for an hour to get -information which a shirt-sleeved _worker_ gave you in three minutes?” - -“If they did not know, then what have they been doing during their five -or ten years of service?” - -“If they know so much, how many years would it take “Boob” Sikes of -Boobtown to learn as little as they appeared to know?” - -By the time the questions begin to take on this sort of “How old is Ann” -character, you will have reached the conclusion that you have discovered -something and have seen things to prove it. - -Just here it may be pertinently asked, why those top-notchers in that -postoffice should be blanketed by the stipulations of a civil service law -which gives them merit credits and grades for the years they have been -in the service? If you and I have been loafing on a job for five, ten or -more years--been foozling with the duties of that job while heeling and -fanning for a political party--why should the law credit those years to -us as service “experience?” - -In placing any service or a division of any service under a merit -classification, the law should require that every position in such -service be filled by examination, and such examination should be open -alike to the shirt-sleeved employe already holding a position in such -service and to outsiders. Such a requirement would show what of service -value there really was as a result of the years an employe had been in -the service. - -Do you ever go to Washington, D. C.? If so, the next time you go, take -in one or more of the main divisions of the Postoffice Department. Some -guide or clerk will probably be detailed to steer you through. Your pilot -will talk considerable and his talk will listen well. You need not, -however, hear all nor even much of what he says. As advised in your visit -to the Presidential postoffice, keep both your ears and your eyes open to -hear and see what the service employes say and do. - -You will observe that a considerable number of the clerical force are -doing something--are really trying to work. You will also discover before -going far that a number of employes are industriously engaged in talking. -The smiles and quiet laughter which embellish their conversation may lead -you to believe that they are talking about some of the humorous incidents -and features of the postal service. Do not, however, be hasty in arriving -at such conclusion. If you get near enough to hear an occasional word, -you may discover that their conversation is evidently about something -which a humoresque writer has described as “the recently distant -elsewhere,” and not about the department service at all. It may be about -some feature or phase of Washington’s social flux or about some social -function which is to stake a temporary claim in the circle in which the -talkers circulate. In short, you will discover that the conversation is -but commercially pasteurized small-talk and not business. - -Moving on, you will observe other little groups in animated conversation. -A glance at the anæmic appearance of some of the talkers will lead you -to the immediate and sound conclusion that the subject of conversation -cannot be weighty. Politics, even party politics, either practical or -progressive, you will readily see would be some sizes too large for them. -Getting within hearing range, you will learn that these industrious -servants of the people are discussing the telling points in some prize -fight “pulled off” the night before or of the ball game which some one or -more of the coterie had seen the day before. Maybe some one of the group -is turning loose his stem-winding, automatic bloviate ejector in telling -his interested auditors about what a “ripping time” he had with Rose at -some dance or other party last night. What you hear will be sufficient to -convince you that these “classified civil service employes” must put in -considerable time in mental and physical exertion to work out of their -systems the lessons they were taught at mother’s knee, and much more of -their time trying to keep several laps behind their jobs. You will also -see that some of the service men are workers--real _workers_--who earn -more than the salaries paid them. So, too, are there many of them whose -industry should make a more or less conspicuous service trench into four -or five dollars a day. But when you get outside or get home, you will -remember having seen numerous supervising and directing heads and many -clerks who appeared to be actually tiring themselves out in exertions to -keep away from work. - -Yes, I repeat, the Postoffice Department carries upon its payrolls too -many non-producers of service values--too many mere payroll-raiders on -the postal revenues. Putting all these into graded classified service and -under the protection of a “joker”-ridden law will not improve the actual -service--will not stop the raid of which I have been writing. - -The civil service of the government and subordinate division of it--city, -county and state--should be controlled by law, not by political -partisanship. Mr. Hitchcock is forcefully right in what he says on this -very important subject. But laws providing rules and regulations for -the betterment of a public service should not provide blind alleys and -trenches through which dominating party officials and “bosses” may so -easily obstruct or balk accomplishment of the purpose, or the alleged -purpose, of the law. I have mentioned three objectionable features common -to nearly all civil service laws--to all that I have read. There are -other objectionable provisions in some of the laws. I am not, however, -intending to discuss here the desirability or the objections to civil -service, either as it is or as it should be, save in so far as the -present federal law has applied, is applied and may be applied, to the -postal service. - -I have tried to show how three of its joker provisions--only _three_ of -them, mind you--have worked, have been and may be “worked,” to keep party -henchmen on the jobs rather than to secure to the people industrious, -capable and efficient servants. Of the three wire-tapping provisions -of the law mentioned, I have suggested how two of them might, in my -opinion at least, be remedied. The third is that of leaving it an easy -possibility to victimize employes through the agencies of partisan -commissions selected to enforce or administer the law and of incompetent, -biased and prejudiced persons such commissions may select to conduct -examinations for entrance or promotions in the service. How remedy that? - -Having civil service commissioners _elected_, instead of being selected -by a temporary official over-lord would, in my judgment, go far toward -correcting the abuses which now flourish so luxuriously under that third -“joker” provision of the law. - -Any service embracing a considerable number of persons in its execution, -must be closely supervised if anything approaching efficiency is attained -and maintained. An old German saying reads thus: “The eye of a master -will do more work than both his hands.” If value is secured either in -public or in private service, the people paid for delivering it must be -kept under close supervision--must be kept under “the eye of the master.” -A consciousness of having earned his pay should enable any service man, -whatever his position, to shake hands with himself without blushing at -the close of his day’s work. But if his superiors set him an example in -loafing, of hitting the nail slack while on duty, most men will soon -learn not only how to loaf but how to accept any amount of pay for -services not rendered, and accept it, too, without a flicker of blush or -jar of conscientious scruple. - -So in closing our consideration of this phase of our subject, permit me -to say that efficient civil service will never be attained--can never be -attained--if department, division and other supervising and directing -heads sit at their desks most of the time, approving documents and -requisitions, reading reports and talking politics. If they expect men -under them to work, they must get out on the job where they expect the -work to be done, and that, too, whether the job be in the office or in -the field. - - - - -CHAPTER XIV. - -PARCELS POST RAIDERS. - - -Anyone who attempts to give our parcels post service anything like -careful, studious consideration will, at the very outset of such -consideration, find himself confronted by a number of bald facts which, -when fully rounded out and understood, should make unnecessary any -discussion of our claim that we need, should have and are entitled to -better and cheaper service than that we now have. Without attempting any -immediate discussion of these facts, I desire to present them, or some -of them, to the reader’s consideration just here at the opening of our -discussion of the subject. The desire to do this is prompted by a hope -that their presentation here will induce the reader to think of their -significance and their bearing upon the parcels post question in any fair -discussion of it. - -Now for these facts: - -1. There are about 250,000 miles of railroad in this country--more than -the aggregate mileage of all the other nations of earth. - -2. The capitalization of the railroads of these United States is now, -according to Poor’s Manual of Railroads, the universally recognized -authority, about $18,800,000,000--_Eighteen billion eight hundred million -dollars_! - -3. That capitalization is admittedly _twice_ the value of all the -tangible values--trackage, rolling stock, terminals, shops and -other--owned by the roads. In many instances the capitalization of a road -is easily three times the value of its tangible property. - -4. Most of these railroads were built with borrowed money, covered by -bond issues, and the payment of the bonds met from the _earnings of the -roads_, or by new issues of bonds, payment of which has been, or it is -intended will be, met from earnings. In view of this method of financing -construction and equipment, it is well known in informed circles that -the present capitalization of these railroads is _ten or twelve_ times -the actual cash ever invested in them--that is, cash other than that -collected from the people for freight, passenger, and other service -rendered--rendered at rates _unscrupulously_ excessive. Some of the best -informed people have gone so far as to say that _all_ of the stock and -a considerable part of the bond capitalization of the nation’s railroads -_is water_. - -5. There are a number of express companies in this country. The express -business of the country, however, is controlled by six companies--the -“Big Six.” - -6. The express transportation (land) is wholly by railroads. The railroad -companies, and men owning large or controlling interest in railroads, own -a large majority of the “Big Six” stock capitalization. - -7. For most of the express company stock owned by railroads, no cash -consideration whatsoever was given. For the stock, a railroad company -gave to some express company a monopoly of the express business on its -line or system of lines of road. - -8. The express companies, in addition to any stock bonus they may -have given for the monopoly of the express business on a rail line or -system of lines, pay to the railroads on which they operate _forty to -fifty-eight per cent of the gross receipts_ from the express business -handled. - -9. The railroads furnish cars free to the express companies. They also -furnish depot accommodations and facilities for storing and handling -express shipments. In some instances, as much as 90 per cent of the -handling of express shipping is done by railroad employes. - -10. There are thirty-seven directors in the controlling express -companies. Of these, thirty-two are also directors in some one or more -railroad companies or are large owners of railroad stocks and bonds. - -11. Practically no cash investment whatsoever was ever made in -establishing or organizing an express company, nor in equipment to -conduct its business. Every dollar of value there is in equipment and -other tangible assets of the express companies today--and _hundreds of -millions besides_--has come from the people--has been _taken_ from the -people for handling their express business at rates ranging from _two to -five times the actual cost of handling_. - -12. The controlling express companies--“associations” some of them -are called--pay 8 to 12 per cent dividends yearly on their stock -capitalization, which stock has but a fraction of substantial values -back of it, and _all_ those real values have come from earnings. 13. In -addition to the regular annual dividends paid, these express companies, -every few years, “cut a melon”--pay stockholders a substantial “extra” -dividend. One company (Wells, Fargo & Co.), with a stock capital of -$5,000,000 in 1872--and no one knowing what tangible assets that five -millions represented--increased it to $8,000,000 in 1893. That added -$3,000,000 was issued to the Union Pacific Railroad for a contract which -gave the express company a monopoly of the express business on the Union -Pacific rail system. On that eight millions the express company paid -annual dividends ranging from 6 to 9 per cent from 1893 to 1901. From -1902 to 1907 it paid 9 per cent annually, since which date its annual -dividend rate has been 10 per cent. - -In addition to these substantial yearly dividends on $8,000,000 of stock, -_which cost its holders little or nothing_, this company cut a huge -“melon” in 1910. This melon was an extra dividend to its stockholders -of 100 per cent in cash ($8,000,000) and a stock dividend of 200 per -cent--_a total of 300 per cent as an extra dividend_--thus raising its -stock capitalization from $8,000,000 to $24,000,000. - -On this twenty-four millions of stock the company has continued to pay 10 -per cent annually. - -_The net earnings of the company for 1910 and 1911 were about 20 per cent -on its $24,000,000 of stock._ - -14. There are no express companies in European countries. The heavier -express shipments here are there handled--and satisfactorily handled--by -the railroads direct. All the lighter express shipments are there handled -by the parcels post. - -15. The parcels post service of European countries is entirely -satisfactory to the people, is cheaper than the pretense of a parcels -post service which has victimized the people of this country for a -half-century and _far_ cheaper than the rates we have been forced to pay -for express service. - -16. As it was originally designed, and _so provided by law_, that our -government should have a monopoly in the carriage and delivery of -packages and parcels, the express companies in this country--_all of -them_--have been and are engaged in an _outlawed traffic. They are -criminals._ - -17. Our government, in all its branches--legislative, executive and -judicial--has been party to this outlawry. It not only has protected -these express and railway raiders while they robbed us, but _it has -permitted itself to be robbed by them_. - -The seventeen statements of fact should be sufficient for a starter--a -starter for arriving at a safe, sound conclusion as to how and why a -comparatively few folks get fabulously rich so quickly and so easily -while so many _millions_ of other folks, though lavish in industry and -self-denying in expenditure, rise only to modest means or remain poor. - -We shall now take up a discussion of the parcels post--as it has served -us, and as it has served other peoples and should be made to serve us. - -The first thing that is noticed in taking a ladder-top view of this -Parcels post question is the _immense_ amount of public bubbling talk and -writing and _money_ that is being expended upon, about and around it. - -Is it the people? No. That is easily to be seen. The people are being -written and talked to. The people are saying little, write less and are -not _putting up the money to bubble themselves_ in the _anti_-parcels -post campaign. - -Is the general government putting up the oil and fuel to run this -anti-parcels post bunk-shooting game? - -Well, the government for years has made little noticeable effort to give -the people better and cheaper parcels accommodation in its mail service. -That is, the _executive_ arm of the national government has done so. The -legislative arm of the national government has _uniformly_, though never -unanimously, _opposed_ any and every measure intended to increase the -_service_ value of parcel mail-carriage to the people. - -“Why have U. S. congressmen and senators opposed?” - -_They have opposed, because the party caucuses of the House and the -Senate have been and are dominated and controlled by men who were and are -opposed to such legislation._ - -Still, the government, executive or legislative, has probably spent no -money and has certainly made little noise to defeat the establishment of -a better and cheaper parcels post service. - -Now, if it is not the people themselves nor the people’s government who -are making all the parcels post noise, _buying_ newspaper space and -putting up money to _steer country merchants and others into organizing -and petitioning against increased parcel facilities in the mails_--if it -is not the people trying to bubble themselves nor the government trying -to bubble the people, I wonder who it is? Who is putting up for the _fuel -and oil_ to run this anti-parcels post _opinion-molding_ sulky-rake, -which has been so vigorously, so industriously and so _designedly_ -dragged over the mental hay-fields of the American _hoi polloi_ during -recent years? What’s the answer? - -Unless, of course, one has taken on an over-load of this anti-parcels -post tonnage, thereby giving his _feelings_ a chance to hip-lock or -strangle-hold his intelligence, he’ll not need to browse around long for -an answer. - -You have a boy working at Blue Island or Elgin, Illinois. Mother in -Chicago wants to send him a Christmas present. If it weighs no more than -four pounds she can send it by mail, paying _one cent an ounce_. If she -wants to feel sure that her boy gets it, she can “register” the parcel, -_paying ten cents more_. - -If the parcel weighs _the fraction of an ounce more_ than four pounds, -mother _cannot send it to her boy through the mail service at all_. -If the parcel weighs exactly four pounds, then our Uncle Samuel will -deliver it at Blue Island or at Elgin when mother puts up _sixty-four -cents_--seventy-four, if mother wants to feel sure that her boy gets it -and for that reason has the parcel “registered.” - -That is one case--one _statement of fact_. - -Andrew Carnegie at Skibo Castle, Scotland, desires to send a four-pound -Christmas present to some son of Norval or “blow-hole” friend in Los -Angeles, California, or Mrs. John Bull, at Manchester, England, has a -yearning--and the price--to send a present of corresponding weight to -her daughter Margaret, who is happily, likewise _richly_, married and -who lives in a beautiful suburb of San Francisco. Well, “Andy” and Mrs. -John Bull can send their four-pound presents--to be more exact, _they_ -can send even if the parcels weight up to _eleven_ pounds each--can have -those four-pound parcels carried by rail to some steamship port, carried -across the Atlantic ocean, put into _our_ mail cars, carried with _our -own_ mail across the entire country and _delivered by American carriers_ -to the _remotest_ suburb of Los Angeles or San Francisco for _forty-eight -cents--three-fourths_ the price mother has to pay to get _her four-pound_ -present to her boy at Blue Island or Elgin! - -That is another case--_another statement of fact_. - -For _many years_ the United States government has _carried_ parcels of -newspapers, magazines and other periodicals, weighing up to 220 _pounds_, -to any point in the country reached by its mail service, broke the -package and delivered each separate piece to individual addresses in -postoffice boxes or by carrier for _one cent a pound_. - -Yet it persists in charging mother _sixteen cents_ a pound to send her -present to her boy at Elgin or Blue Island and _compels_ her to keep its -weight down to _four pounds_. - -That is another case--_another statement of fact_. - -For many years, the government has carried by mail, not hundreds, but -_thousands_ of tons of parcels _free_. Every United States Senator, every -Congressman, every department head, every division head, every first, -second, third or fourth “assistant” department or division head, every -political “fence” builder, whatever his position in the government’s -official service, _uses his franking privilege_. - -Not only that. _Most of them abuse it._ - -Not only that. Most of those who abuse it do not confine the abuse to -franking public documents to “friends at home” and speeches--most of -which were never made or were made or written by somebody else--to “my -constituents.” Oh, no! That government “frank,” so it has been credibly -asserted, has been used to carry easy chairs, side boards, couches -and other household goods which have been “bought cheap”--_some of -it too cheap to carry a price tag_--and which “can be used at home.” -Typewriters, filing cases, office desks, frequently acquired by a process -of _benevolent appropriation_, have reached home _without carriage -charge_. - -That is another case--_another statement of fact_. - -But why continue? I could go on for a page or two with _statements of -fact_, all evidencing this other _FACT_. - -_Mother--your mother, my mother--the great tax-paying body of our -people--is wronged, is victimized, by our postal service and regulations._ - -That is my opinion. That opinion is based upon a “broad, general and -_comprehensive_ view”--a ladder-top view--“of the whole question in its -various and varying details,” as one _anti_-parcels post spouter has -spouted. - -I have presented but _four_ statements of fact. A score of others will -readily appear to any reader who does his own thinking. But take any one -of the four above given and study its significance for just _one minute_. - -Have you done so? “Yes?” Well, then you see the joke--or the “joker”--in -the _anti_-parcels post talk and literature, do you not? You will also -be able to make a close guess as to _who are financially backing_ the -public-bubbling _opposition_ to any legislation for the improvement of -our parcels post service. If you cannot, I advise you to go to some -jokesmith and have the gaskets and packings on your think-tank tightened -up. - -John Wanamaker was a great merchant. He was a brainy business man and, -to a large extent, did his _own thinking_. He was, for a term of years, -Postmaster General of the United States. Mr. Wanamaker was likewise a man -of broad, comprehensive and _comprehending_ humor. He could crack or take -a joke. In either event, the kernel was separated from the shell quickly. -Here is one of Mr. Wanamaker’s jokes: - -Years ago, when Mr. Wanamaker was Postmaster General, John Brisbane -Walker asked him why the American people stood for the existing parcels -post outrage. Mr. Walker believed the American people were quick, -_judgmental_ thinkers and _swift_ in remedial action when thought reached -the conclusion that the _thinker was being victimized_. - -Mr. Walker was right--_is_ right. American people do think. The trouble -is that too many of us are _coupled into train with the wrong kind of -thinkers_. We are switched or shunted onto any side-track or yarding -the engineer, the conductor or the _traffic manager_ desires. We simply -_think_ we think, while really we are merely following a _steer_. But I -digress. - -To Mr. Walker’s question, Mr. Wanamaker made this reply: - - “It is true that parcels could be carried at about _one-twelfth_ - their present cost by the Postoffice Department, but you do not - seem to be aware that there are four _insuperable obstacles_ to - carrying parcels by the United States Postoffice Department. The - first of these is the _Adams Express Company_; the second is the - _American Express Company_; the third is the _Wells-Fargo Express - Company_; and the fourth, the _Southern Express Company_.” - -Of course there are several more “insuperable obstacles” to an -improvement in our parcels post service. There is the previously -mentioned “big six” obstacles with the railroads, now as when Mr. -Wanamaker spoke, _owning or controlling them all_. - -The reader may _know_--no need of _guessing_--that those insuperable -obstacles are _stoking_ the engines which are “yarding” public -opinion--and much honest, but superficial or careless, _private -opinion_--where it will yield _unearned_ revenues to the stokers. Any -man who argues _against_ cheapening our parcels post rates is merely a -_hired_ angler for suckers or a sharer in the spoils which railroad and -express raiders are looting from the people. - -I recently heard one of those patriotic hired “cappers” talk to his job. -Among his forceful points were the following: - -“The big express companies employ nearly 100,000 men. - -“Their payroll (officials included), is nearly $50,000,000 a year. - -“Roosevelt added 99,000 names to the federal pay roll during his seven -years in office. - -“There are about 70,000 postoffices in the United States and an improved -parcels post service would require an additional clerk in each. Therefore -70,000 more tax-eaters would be added to the federal payrolls. - -“There was a _deficit_ of $6,000,000 piled up in the Postoffice -Department last year. To what _appalling_ figures would that deficit -mount if a parcels post were established?” - -Now, I want to ask a few questions. - -First, those 100,000 men employed by the big express companies and -who are paid the colossal sum of $50,000,000 in salaries. The express -companies neither employ so many men nor pay so much money. But if they -did, that is an _average_ of but $500 a year to each employe. Do you -think those 100,000 express men would lose any _killing_ amount in annual -salary if the government took the whole bunch of them bodily over and put -them into a parcels post service? - -So much for those alleged 100,000 express company _employes_, concerning -whose interests and welfare the _anti_-parcel post bunk-shooter _appears_ -to have had a pain in his lap or bunions on his mind. - -Now, how about the 90,000,000 or more people who make up the rest of us -folks in these United States? How would we come out in the ledger account -if a good, efficient and _cheap_ parcels post service was put into -operation and the “big express companies” put out of business? - -It is quite impossible to figure it out to the cent. The _public_ reports -of those big express companies, likewise their system of double cross -bookkeeping, prevent us getting nearer than about eight blocks of their -“inside information.” But some of the _governing facts_ we know and -others must _necessarily_ follow in _any_ process or method of reasoning -recognized outside the harmless ward of a crazy house. - -The stock of express companies is _owned_ largely by a comparatively -few people--a thousand, possibly five hundred, persons own 90 per cent -of this stock. No one at all familiar with express company tangibles, -unless he is exercising a loose-screwed veracity, will estimate their -_aggregate_ tangible values _above_ twenty or twenty-five millions. More -than that. The present tangible values in these companies _are_, as -previously stated, almost wholly _investments from earnings_. So largely, -in fact, is that true that _six million dollars_ is a _liberal_ estimate -for the _actual cash capital_ at any time invested in actual operation. - -These companies paid their owners two to three and a half, or more, -millions a year _in dividends_. - -Since 1907, the Adams company has paid $480,000 a year on $12,000,000 -of bonds. Those twelve million of 4 per cent bonds were _given to the -stockholders. Not one cent of actual cash was given in consideration._ - -What has that to do with the parcels post question? Simply this: - -When the government installs a parcels post service that accepts, carries -and _delivers_ packages weighing from twelve to twenty or more pounds -these _looting express and railroad raiders will go out of business_. - - -SUBSIDY RAIDERS. - -Everybody who has studied the question at all knows that all alleged -deficits in the postal service are the malformed progeny of an illegal -union between crooked public officials and criminal violators of the law -enacted to establish and govern the carriage and delivery of mail matter -in these United States. So noticeable has been the closed eyes and “rear -view” of government officials while the railroad and express raiders -raided and walked off with their loot that petty thieves began to shin -up the posts of the Postoffice Department directly or sneak in by way of -Congressional legislation. - -“What were they after?” Why, they wanted a “subsidy” for carrying foreign -or ocean mails, or they wanted a “pork” contract--one of those contracts -which renders little service for much money. - -Did you ever hear of Tahiti? No. It is _not_ a breakfast food nor a sure -cure for cancers. It is an island. “Where?” Ask the Almighty. I don’t -know, and I am doubtful whether the Almighty knows or _cares_. I know it -is an island somewhere, because a few years ago the postal department -entered into a contract with some “tramp” steamer flying a _rag_, which -_close_ inspection might discover had _once_ been the American flag. - -The Postoffice Department paid that tramp $45,000 for carrying our mails -to Tahiti--_a service that another vessel in the Tahiti trade offered to -render for $3,500_. - -Can there be any _legitimate_ surprise or wonder at a “deficit” resulting -from such business methods? - -But that, of course, was “a few years ago.” Yet, stay! On page 264 of the -1910 report of the Postoffice Department, I find that the Oceanic Line--a -line of United States register--carried to and from Tahiti and the -Marquesas Islands 7,622 pounds of letters and 159,483 pounds of prints. -This was carried under a “contract” and the Oceanic people were paid -$46,398 for the service--_for carrying about 88 tons of mail matter_. - -Looks like a good “deficit” producer, does it not? - -But there is another queer thing about this Tahiti mail contract. Note -(1) on page 263, to which the report refers readers, says steamers of -United States register _not under contract_ are paid 80 cents a pound for -carrying letters and 8 cents a pound for carrying prints. Figuring up the -Oceanic’s service at those rates gives as result only $18,856.24. - -So it can readily be seen there is something in a “contract”--some -contracts, anyway. - -On the same page (264), I find that another ship, one of the Union Line -and under foreign register, touches at Tahiti in making New Zealand. It -carried 2,713,850 grams (about 5,970 pounds) of letters and 58,926,887 -grams (about 129,639 pounds) of prints--within 16 tons the weight the -Oceanic people carried--and received only $7,781.54 for the service. -These vessels of foreign register are paid about 35 cents a pound for -letter weights and 4½ cents for print weight. - -Figuring up the weights hurriedly at the named rates, I find that the -Union folks were entitled to $7,923.40, or some $142 _more_ than was paid -them. The Oceanic folks, you will remember, were paid $46,398 when at -_open_ carriage rates of pay to vessels of United States register they -earned only $18,856.24. - -Looks a little off color, does it not? But we must remember that Tahiti -is an island. Must be an island of vast importance. It requires the -shipment of 88 tons of mail matter in a year--a whole year--and our -government pays $46,398 haulage on it. Something over 79 of those 88 tons -of mail was printed weight, too. - -What great printers and publishers those Tahitians and Marquesans must -be! Or was that print stuff of United States origin? Catalogues and -franked and penalty matter, I wonder? - -At any rate there is the “contract” in 1910 as an evidence that some -one here is doing, or has done, a little turn toward “burning” postal -revenues and helping, in a small way, to keep a postal “deficit” in -evidence. A deficit, you know, shows that the revenues of the department -are too low, too small, to permit the establishment of an efficient, -cheap parcels post, or so the railroad and express raiders would have us -think. - -The important point, however, is: Are we fools enough to think it? If so, -how long shall we continue to be fools enough to think it? If not, is it -not about time that we created a disturbance--that we raise some dust--in -efforts to let these raiders and their cappers know we are not fools? Why -should we continue to act foolish if we are not fools? Please rise, Mr. -Sensible Citizen, and answer. - -As before said, no one expects nor desires the government to _make -money_ out of _their_ mail service. People have, however, _a right_ to -expect--_and to demand_--that their regularly chosen representatives and -other government officials _prevent_ a lot of raiders, or any one else -for that matter, from making more than a _fair, legitimate profit_ on -what they do for or contribute to that service. - -There has been much talk the last three or four years about the economies -effected by the Postoffice Department in the execution of the work it -was established to do. How much of this talk is grounded on fact and -how much of it is mere political gargle and party and administration -“fan”-talk I shall not here attempt to say. Time has not permitted me -to look into these averred economies carefully and thoroughly enough to -warrant positive statements from me anent them here. I am inclined to -believe, however, that the present Postmaster General, Mr. Hitchcock, -and his immediate predecessors, Mr. Meyer and Mr. Cortelyou, have really -accomplished a little in the right direction--a little, where the Lord -knows we _should_ know there was much to accomplish. But, as stated, my -favorable opinion is not based on what I have dug up myself about these -economies alleged to have been effected in the recently passed years. If -they have been effected, their accomplishment only goes to prove that -advocates of a cheap parcels post in this country have been _right_ in -their facts and arguments, and also that their exposures and severe -condemnation of the waste, extravagance, grafting and _stealing_ in the -postal service were timely and well deserved. - -Something, however, has, I think, been done. The exposure of criminal -crookedness, grafting, waste and thievery which existed in the -department--with administrative employes, officers, Congressmen and -Senators, either directly or collusively connected with it--was bound -to wipe some leaking joints in the service. The exposures uncovered so -much porch-climbing and so much nastiness that most decent citizens -were holding their noses and thinking of buying a gun. Something _had_ -to be done. The noise and injured-innocence “holler,” which railroad -and express company raiders are vocalizing and printing, is pretty good -evidence not only that some little has been done to them, but also that -they fear more is going to be done to jam the gear or otherwise interfere -with the smooth running of some one or more of their high-speed, -noiseless-action cream separators. And more will be done if the people -keep on the mat and keep swinging for the jaw and plexus. But it is not -all done yet. The raiders may be squealing and squirming a little. They -always do when a little hurt. But they are still busy--still actively -after the cream. They may spar a little for time, but they will use the -time actively in figuring out a new entrance into the people’s milk house. - -And these raiders will find a way to get in, too, if the people pull up -the blankets and let themselves be talked and foozled to sleep. - - -TOUTING FOR “FAST MAIL.” - -There appears to be much talk about “fast mail” service. Of course if -the railways are already running at a destructive loss on mail weight -and space-rental pay--which they are not--why they will want more pay if -they furnish a fast mail service. The postal authorities (official) seem -to think that a “fast mail” is a thing altogether lovely and much to be -desired. The railroad carriers are of like mind, but--well, such service -costs more money. They want more money. A fast mail is just the thing the -people want and need! It will push the corn crop ahead and keep the frost -off the peaches! - -For these and other equally _easy_ reasons it is sought to steer the -people into making a scream for a “fast mail” service. They want and need -their mail in a hurry. The quicker the better. In fact, from the way -some people are already talking, it would appear they want their mail -delivered about twenty-four hours before it starts in their direction. - -If the cream-skimming raiders and their “public servant” assistants can -only get the people to talking for a “fast mail” service, why a fast mail -we will have, and we will _pay the raiders for furnishing it_. - -How will we pay them? - -Oh, that is easy. Bonuses and subsidies are popular fashions in federal -legislative society. Likewise they appear to be popular in postoffice -circles. They are seasonable the year around and are cut to fit any -figure. They don’t stand the wash very well, but--well, don’t wash them. -The raiders and their official valets always keep them brushed up and -vacuum cleaned. Just pay for them is all the people have to do. - -I recall a serviceable subsidized fast mail gown which was handed to -a railroad between Kansas City, Mo., and Newton, Kan., some years -since. It was neatly boxed and delivered by the handlers of postoffice -appropriations. It was worth $25,000 a year to the road that got it. - -“Of what use was it to the people?” - -None whatever. The fast train it was made to drape was put on the line -named for the sole service and benefit of two Kansas City newspapers. -It swished those papers (their midnight editions), into Western Kansas, -Oklahoma and Northern Texas ahead of the appearance of local morning -issues. - -I recall another “fast mail” bonus. It was $190,000 and went to the -Southern Railway for a fast train out of New York for New Orleans. It -left New York about 4 a. m. and _carried little or no mail for delivery -north of Charlotte, N. C._ - -It arrived in New Orleans, if I remember rightly, along about 2 a. m. the -next day--_too late for delivery of any mail before the opening of the -day’s business_--9 or 10 o’clock in the morning. - -But the regular mail train, as was shown in the debate in the Senate, -left New York at about 2. a. m. and arrived in New Orleans about 4:30 -a. m.--two hours after the so-called “fast mail”--in ample time for -deliveries when the business of the city opened. - -Fine business that, is it not? Well, yes, for the _Southern Railway_. - -The reader, however, should be able to recognize it as a regular 60 H. -P., six-cylinder, rubber-tired “_deficit_” producer. Especially will he -so recognize it if he thinks of it in connection with this other fact: - -That same year, the Southern Railway was paid, in addition to the -$190,000 “fast mail” subsidy mentioned, _over one million dollars at the -regular weight rates for hauling the mails_! - -There are numerous others of equal beauty and effectiveness in design. -As previously stated, however, subsidies and bonuses are all carefully -designed and cut to fit any figure. All we wise, “easy” people need do is -to make a little noise for a “fast mail” service and Congress will hand -it out. - -The railroad raiders can easily justify their demands for subsidies for a -fast mail service with people who have given little or no study to this -mail-carrying question. Our Postoffice Department furnishes the raiders -about all the argument that is needed. One of the raiders has been quoted -as saying: “We could carry the mails at one-half cent per ton mile, if -the Postoffice Department would allow us to handle it in our own way.” - -There you are. The department will not let these raiders help the people -_save their own money_. Very generous. Much like a burglar calling on you -the day before in order to tell you how to prevent him from cracking your -safe. - -But the beauty of that railroader’s statement lies in the fact that it -states a fact; not one of these glittering, rhetorical facts, but a real -_de facto fact_. - -The rules and regulations of the Postoffice Department for the carriage -of mails in postoffice cars are such as furnish ample grounds and warrant -for the railway official’s statement. - -Postoffice cars are from 40 to 50 or more feet in length and weigh, -empty, from 50,000 to 110,000 pounds. The department then has fixtures -and handling equipment put in. This equipment occupies about two-thirds -of the floor space of the car, and, with the four to twelve railway mail -clerks also put into it, weighs from 10 to 15 or more tons. The railroad -is paid for carrying all this bulky, space-occupying equipment at the -regular mail-weight pay rates. - -And how much real mail does the department get into these postoffice cars? - -Well, some years since Professor Adams, after a most careful and extended -investigation, placed the average weight of mail actually carried at two -tons. He pointed out, however, that the mail load could easily go to -three and a half tons and referred to the Pennsylvania road which, in -its special mail trains, loaded as high as six tons. He also stated that -if the load were increased to five tons, the cost of carriage would be -_reduced more than one-half_, and he made it very clear that his figures -were easily inside the service possibilities. - -In view of such evidence and testimony from Professor Adams, and of other -men to much the same effect, the department may possibly have increased -the mail load since 1907 to three or maybe to three and a half tons. - -Even so, it is still evident that the railroad must haul from 70,000 to -140,000 pounds of car and equipment to carry 6,000 to 7,000 pounds of -mail; thirty-five to seventy tons of dead load to carry three to three -and a half tons of live--of service--load. Do not forget that, so far -as the railroads pay is concerned, the equipment is live weight--_paid -weight_. So, the railroads get paid for a load of fifteen to eighteen -and a half tons, while they carry only three to three and a half tons of -mail--for carrying, according to Professor Adams’s figures in 1907, only -two tons of mail. - -As a deficit-producer that should rank high. As an evidence that our -Postoffice Department is run on economic lines, that mail car tonnage -load is nearly conclusive enough to convince the residents of almost any -harmless ward. - -Speaking seriously, the department’s methods of mail-loading the -postoffice car--methods which put from two to three and a half tons into -cars that should carry six to ten tons--furnishes the carriage-raiders -an excellent basis for their talks to the people to the effect that the -roads are not getting sufficient pay for carrying the mails now, and if -they (the people) want better or faster service the roads must be paid -more money, either as bonuses or subsidies. In fact, the railroad people -have been holding up this nonsensical--or collusive--practice of the -department for years as basis for their demands for more pay for hauling -the government mails. As proof of this statement, take the testimony of -Mr. Julius Kruttschnitt before the Wolcott Commission, I think it was. -Mr. Kruttschnitt was then (1901) Fourth Vice-President of the Southern -Pacific. In reply to the Commission’s inquiry as to whether or not the -mails could be profitably carried over the New Orleans-San Francisco -routes at a half cent a pound ($10.00 per ton or for $100 to $200 per car -if reasonably loaded), Mr. Kruttschnitt is reported to have answered in -part that “at half a cent a pound the mileage rate for 442 miles is 2.3 -cents. Statement G,” he continued, “shows that to carry one ton of mail -we carry nineteen tons of _dead weight_, so that for hauling twenty tons -we get 2 cents or a little over one-tenth of a cent a gross ton mile.” - -All very forceful and conclusive, if it were true, which it is not. It -is true, however, that Mr. Kruttschnitt was making good argumentative -use of the ridiculously low loading of cars under the regulations of the -department. That is all. If the postoffice car used on Mr. Kruttschnitt’s -road was a 50-foot car and weighed, say, 100,000 pounds, that and the -railway mail clerks constituted the only “dead” weight hauled. - -His road got paid for hauling the tons of ridiculously heavy -mail-handling equipment and fixtures in that car--got paid for hauling -them _both ways_, at the regular mail-weight rates. His road also -received over $8,000 a year rental, or “space pay,” whichever the -rail-raiders desire to call it, for the use of that car for mail haulage. - -So, it is really not so bad as Mr. Kruttschnitt apparently would have it -appear. In fact, one does not have to look into the matter very closely -to see that the Southern Pacific had what might be called a “good thing” -in its mail carrying contract. - -But what are the railroads really paid for hauling mail tonnage as -compared with the rates they receive for hauling other tonnage? - -In writing to this phase of the question at the time of the pendency of -the Fitzgerald and another bill,--the former requiring that periodical -publishers pay $160 and the latter that they pay $80 per ton for mail -carriage of their publication--Mr. Atkinson said: - - Let it not be forgotten, that publishers pay the government - $20 per ton for their papers; doesn’t it seem enough, when the - government is so generous toward the railroads that it pays for - transporting 1,000 pounds of leather, locks, etc., for every 100 - pounds of letters? - - … - - It is no unusual thing for the railroads to haul live hogs - from Chicago to Philadelphia, a very inconvenient as well as - unpleasant kind of freight. The hogs have to be fed and watered - on the way, they cannot be stacked one upon another, so require - much space. What do the railroads charge for this service? Is it - $160 per ton? No. Is it $80 per ton? No. Is it $20 per ton? No. - They do it for $6 per ton, and are glad of the job. - -Professor Parsons wrote a volume a few years ago entitled “The Railways, -The Trusts and The People.” Professor Parsons looked into this ton-mile -rate of pay for rail haulage most carefully and gave the results of -his investigations in his book, from which I take the tabulated rates -following. - -In passing, I may say that the professor is recognized by everybody as -a most dependable authority--that is, everybody save the railroad and -express raiders and their hired men. They have written and talked at -great length to “refute” him, which thoughtful and disinterested people -take as mighty strong evidence that Professor Parsons presented the truth -and the facts, or so nearly the truth and facts that his statements made -the “authorized,” rake-off patriots turn loose on him their high-powered, -chain-tired public bubblers. - -Following are the figures which the Professor published as showing -the average _ton mile_ rates the railroads then received for carrying -different kinds of shipments: - - Rate per ton - mile, cents. - For carrying express generally 3 to 6 - For carrying excess baggage 5 to 6 - For carrying commutation passengers 6 - For carrying dairy freight, as low as 1 - For carrying ordinary freight in 1. c. 1 2 - For carrying imported goods, N. O. to S. F. 8 - For carrying average of all freight 78 - For carrying the mails (Adams estimate) 12.5 - For carrying the mails (Postoffice Department estimate) 27 - - -THE PARCELS POST. - -The Postmaster General in his reports for 1908-9 and 1909-10 recommends a -trial or “test” of a parcels post service on several rural routes “to be -selected by the Postmaster General.” - -The Congress now in session is giving, or will give, this recommendation -serious consideration, it is presumed. Especially will it be given such -serious consideration when the 1911-12 bill, making appropriations for -the postal service, is under fire and is being “savagely attached by its -friends.” - -It may be depended upon that the express and railroad gentlemen now -shearing a rich fleece from your Uncle’s postal fold will not have any -_fair_ tests made of a parcels post service so long as they can prevent -it, and they appear to have numerous representatives in both houses of -Congress who can be influenced to prevent it, if their past talk and -_votes_ may be taken as indicating _what they are there for_. - -Of course, the chief clack of the enemy’s hired men is “lack of funds.” -Yet they go on appropriating _millions to people who do not earn it_--to -pay for services _not rendered_. - -The same kippered tongue lashed the “rural delivery” service the _same_ -way. In the end, the people won. But they won, in the bill as originally -passed, a rural delivery of the “test” variety. “Why?” Well, a properly -equipped and serviceable rural delivery would be a step towards a -serviceable parcels post and the raiders do not want the people to have -such a parcels post. - -As samples of the _sort_ of “friendly feeling” manifest in Congress -toward a parcels post and of the _profound_ wisdom carried by some of its -alleged friends, I desire to make a quotation or two. - -When the measure was first up (1908), Representative Lever of South -Carolina introduced the four counties “experimental test” amendment in -the House. Following is his opening: - - Every _farmer here present_ knows of his _own experience_ how - much time is taken in _extra_ trips to town and city. - -Now, that is _real_ fetching. Especially before so vast a gathering _of -farmers_ as heard it! - -But a Missouri “farmer” present wanted to be shown. So he fired a -question at Mr. Lever. The farmer from Missouri wears the name of -Caulfield. He likewise wears an abiding _distrust_ of the parcels post. -Following is his question: - - Is it not a _fact_ that the _great mail order houses_ of the - country are the ones who are _really_ in favor of the parcels - post? - -There is real intellectual magneto and lamp equipment for you. Note, too, -the _shrewdness_ of this Missouri “farmer” in wording his question--the -mail order houses may not be the _only_ ones who favor the parcels post, -but they are about the only ones who “_really favor_” it! - -Well, there are over 40,000,000 residents of the country--villages and -towns in this country--among them, too, are twenty millions of _real_ -farmers. These are pretty firmly of opinion that _they_ “are really in -favor of the parcels post.” There are, also, not _less_ than 30,000,000 -_more_ residents of incorporated cities, small and large, who at least -_think_ they favor a parcels post service which will permit “mother” to -send a pair of pants to her boy ten miles away as _cheaply_ as the laird -of Skibo Castle, Scotland, can send two pairs of kilts to a son of his -friend’s Aunt Billy who lives in Los Angeles, California. - -Of course, the people may only _think_ they think and are sitting up -nights with the windows open and their ears spread to hear _their_ -representatives tell ’em they are wrong. If so, Mr. Caulfield and -Mr. Lever will probably hear from them. It takes the people some -time to recognize or properly to appreciate how wise some of their -representatives are--what a _vast_ amount of charges-prepaid wisdom they -have. But the people finally catch on and then--well, then there will not -be so many “farmers” of the Mr. Lever variety in Congress. - -But I want to give Mr. Lever another show. He’s entitled to it “under -the rules.” He should have several of them--not to show his profound -knowledge of the value and _dangers_ of an efficient, _cheap_ parcels -post, but to show that a man need not spend a cent in Congress to -advertise the fact that he is a “practical politician.” All he needs do -is make a few _hired_ or _ignorant_ remarks on some subject _about which -the people of the country have been thinking_. - -Here is Mr. Lever’s answer to Mr. Caulfield’s question, as previously -quoted: - - The wisdom of _discriminating in favor of the local merchant_ - must be apparent to _any one_ who regards, for a moment, the - _danger_ involved in a system (parcels post) which would - _inevitably centralize_ the _commerce of the country_. - -Now, candidly, how _could_ a “friend” of a parcels post service show -his friendship more _nicely_ than that? Especially if he is a “farmer?” -Or even if he is not, and merely _desires_ the farmers to _think_ he is -their friend? - -Why, Mr. Lever has Mr. Caulfield shoved clear over the ropes in that -answer. Mr. Caulfield, of Missouri, may have full magneto and lamp -equipment, but Mr. Lever, when it comes to a _friendly_, high-speed -spurt for a parcels post service, shows _all_ the latest improvements. -No, sirs, Mr. Lever is not merely a last year’s model. He’s _bang_ -up-to-date--axles, drawn steel; forged crank shaft with eight cams -integral; continuous bearings and bearings all ground; two water-cooled, -four-cylinder motors with _sliding_ gear; “built-in” steel frame, and -running on a “wheel-base” of 106 inches. Mr. Lever shows all the other -“latest,” _necessarily_ belonging to the “best seller” class among late -models. - -However, I have probably mentioned enough to make it clear to my readers, -if _not to his constituents_, that Mr. Lever is fully equipped to _act_ -the part of the farmer’s “friend,” a friend of the parcels post, or of -any other old thing. Some may think he carries a little too much weight -for a good hill-climber. It should be remembered, however, that some -sorts of “friends” do not climb hills. They skip around the hills and -get what _they_ are after while we are climbing. When farmers and others -of our producing classes wise-up to the brand of vocal friendship I am -“insinuatin’ about,” such representatives as Mr. Lever will _last_ about -as long as it would take a one-armed, wooden-legged man to fall off the -top of the Flat Iron Building flag pole. - - -PARCELS POST “TESTS.” - -It may as well be said here as elsewhere that such “tests” of the -feasibility and desirability of a good parcels post service as Mr. -Hitchcock proposes to make are but procrastinating foolery. Great Britain -and every continental country of Europe has an efficient parcels post -service in operation. - -Postmaster Generals and railroad and express company raiders know that. -The countries indicated have made all the “tests” we need have of -people-serving parcels post, and every one of them derive more or less -revenue from that service, there being no deficits. - -Postmaster Generals and our railroad and express company raiders know all -that. So, also, do our Senators and Congressmen know that. Even alleged -“farmer” Congressmen know it. - -Our public servants know even more than that. They know that under the -International Postal Union agreements our government has entered into, -our postal service today handles these foreign countries’ parcels, of -either United States or of foreign origin, weighing up to eleven pounds. -They also know our own postal service now won’t permit our own people -to send by mail, packages weighing more than four pounds. They also -know that for carrying a four-pound parcel by his own mail service the -American must pay 64 cents if the parcel is for delivery in any of the -foreign countries covered by Postal Union agreement,[17] but if sent by -some one in any of those countries for delivery in this, the sender may -make up a parcel weighing as much as eleven pounds and for its delivery -will have to pay only 48 cents. - -I say that our mail carriers and public officials know these things. The -facts as stated must be known of the Postal Union agreements. On request, -the Postoffice Department does not hesitate to give this information -to anyone. The following is a paragraph taken from a department -communication. It was sent in response to a request made by Mr. Alfred L. -Sewell, who wrote a most informative communication that appeared in the -Chicago Daily News of date November 6, 1911. I take the quotation from -Mr. Sewell’s article. - - Mailable merchandise may be sent by parcels post to Bahamas, - Barbadoes, Brazil, Bermuda, Bolivia, Danish West Indies (St. - Croix, St. John, St. Thomas), Colombia, Ecuador, British Guiana, - Costa Rica, Guatemala, British Honduras, Republic of Honduras, - Haiti, Jamaica (including Turk islands and Caracas), Leeward - Islands, Windward Islands, Mexico, Newfoundland, Nicaragua, Peru, - Salvador, Trinidad, Tobago, Uruguay, Venezuela, in the western - hemisphere, and to Australia, Japan and Hongkong in the east, and - to Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Great Britain, - Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden in Europe. - The postage rate is uniform at 12 cents a pound, or fraction of - a pound. A parcel must not weigh more than eleven pounds, nor - measure more than three feet and six inches in length, or six - feet in length and girth combined. - -Then why prattle about a “test” as to the desirability and practicability -of a good, cheap parcels post service in this country; one that will -serve our own people? - -Especially why prattle about such a parcels post service on a few -selected rural routes? It is not only foolishly silly, but it looks -suggestively wrong--as if there was some ulterior motive back of any -suggestion of such a test. “Why?” - -Well, if such test is made under regulations suggested by the Postmaster -General, the only parcels that service, or “test” service, is designed -to carry, are such as originate on a selected rural route and are for -delivery on the same route or on a route immediately connected with it. -That is, as I understand Mr. Hitchcock’s recommended regulations, any -farmer or villager along the selected “test” rural route may send a -package (weight and rate of carriage yet to be decided upon) to any other -farmer or villager on the same route or connected route, or to a resident -of the town or city at which such route originates or starts. - -If such a farce can be seriously thought of as a “test” of what use -and economic value a nation-wide parcels post service would be to our -people, even to the people residing on the test routes, it will take some -graduate of a foolery school or foreman in a joke foundry to so think of -it. - -Let’s see. A farmer may send a jar of butter, box of eggs, crate of -fruit or vegetables, etc., to the village storekeeper and get his pay -for the consignment, “in trade” usually. By writing the storekeeper an -order, postal card or letter, the farmer may get on the next round of the -carrier what he desires. That is, he will get what he has asked for if -the storekeeper has it in stock. The farmer, or the farmer’s wife, may -do the same thing in the event that the consignment of their products, -presuming that the “regulations” will permit the carrier to handle -perishable goods, goes no farther away than the county seat or other -town or city from which the rural route starts. They can also send such -parcels to any railroad station on the route for shipment to any more -distant point. In such case, however, the farmer must pay an express -carriage charge from the local railroad station to the destination of his -shipment. - -But enough of this local application of the proposed “test” regulations. -It will readily be seen that if the farmer or villager on a selected test -route desires to send a parcel, not above the regulation weight--whatever -that may be--to any point not on the same route, he will have an express -charge to pay--whatever that charge may be. And if he orders something, -inside the regulation weight, from some factory or city not on his -carrier’s route, he must also pay an express charge for its carriage to -his local railroad station. If he wants the article or goods delivered -at his home by the rural carrier, he must pay an additional charge--the -postal carriage charge, whatever that may be. - -As a “test” of the service value of a parcels post, could anything be -more absurd? If so, it would be difficult to frame it up. Such a “test,” -however, will still leave the raiding express companies in position -to hold up the selected “home circle,” rural-route residents on all -shipments, which go to or come from any city or point outside the home -circle--and that is about what, if not just what, the proposed “test” is -designed or intended to do, or so it appears from the ladder top. - -In this connection it should be noted that the rural-route delivery -enactment, or the department regulations under which it was to be -applied, carried an express protecting “joker.” If not, why was the rural -route carrier required to furnish a cart or other carrying vehicle of -only twenty-five pounds capacity? Was it valid for ulterior reasons which -named so small a weight? Would it have cost the government any more money -for rural carrier service if a maximum weight of 500, or even of 1,000 -pounds, had been named for the carrying vehicle? - -The reader may answer. To The Man on the Ladder, though, that 25-pound -requirement looks to be of doubtful mail-service value, if, indeed, not -suspiciously queer. - -It was carefully figured in 1900 that our rural, or non-railroad, -communities alone lost $90,000,000 a year in excessive express charges -and delays in delivery by reason of the _criminal_ apathy of their -government in the matter of furnishing even a _reasonably_ adequate -domestic parcels post service, such, for instance, as that furnished by -the German government. The German government carries an 11-pound package -anywhere in the German empire or in Austria-Hungary _for 12 cents_. - -To aid the reader, I give, following, a table covering the data essential -to a fair understanding both of the excessive pay for a service which our -government should render for a _tenth_ of the money and, also, of _why_ -our express service is inconvenient--is _wasteful and expensive_--by -reason of the _distance_ the express offices are from the people -ordering. This last is clearly shown by comparing their _number_ with the -larger number of postoffices in the several states named. - - -THE WORM UNCOVERED. - - =============+========+========+=======+========+=======+=======+======= - | No. | No. |Average| Amount | | | - | of | of |express|saved by|English|German |Mexican - STATE. |express | post- |charge.| parcel | merchants’ advantage - |offices.|offices.| |post at |at 48c.|at 58c.|at 66c. - | | | | 12c. | | | - -------------+--------+--------+-------+--------+-------+-------+------- - Alabama | 334 | 2,445 | $1.33 | $1.21 | $0.85 | $0.75 | $0.67 - Arizona | 41 | 202 | 3.89 | 3.77 | 3.41 | 3.31 | 3.23 - Arkansas | 262 | 1,880 | 1.66 | 1.54 | 1.18 | 1.08 | 1.00 - California | 586 | 1,659 | 3.16 | 3.04 | 2.68 | 2.58 | 2.50 - Connecticut | 108 | 511 | .61 | .49 | .13 | .03 | - Georgia | 451 | 2,657 | 1.33 | 1.21 | .85 | .75 | .67 - Illinois | 1,495 | 2,622 | 1.09 | .97 | .61 | .51 | .43 - Kentucky | 471 | 2,892 | 1.22 | 1.10 | .74 | .64 | .56 - Maine | 248 | 1,254 | .61 | .49 | .13 | .03 | - Michigan | 737 | 2,161 | 1.22 | 1.10 | .74 | .64 | .56 - New York | 1,309 | 3,735 | .61 | .49 | .13 | .03 | - Ohio | 1,362 | 3,398 | 1.09 | .97 | .61 | .51 | .43 - Oklahoma | 30 | 576 | 2.10 | 2.07 | 1.62 | 1.52 | 1.53 - Pennsylvania | 919 | 5,206 | .61 | .49 | .13 | .03 | - Rhode Island | 90 | 153 | .61 | .49 | .13 | .03 | - South Dakota | 229 | 639 | 2.67 | 2.55 | 2.19 | 2.09 | 2.01 - Texas | 662 | 2,968 | 2.19 | 2.07 | 1.61 | 1.61 | 1.53 - Virginia | 263 | 3,468 | 1.22 | 1.10 | .74 | .64 | .56 - +--------+--------+ | | | | - Whole country| 20,155 | 60,000 | | | | | - -------------+--------+--------+-------+--------+-------+-------+------- - -Had I the space at command I would print the figures for the whole United -States. However, it will be seen that the states I have taken are fairly -representative of the whole country--the populous with the sparsely -settled. - -The figures as to number of express and postoffices are from the United -States census for 1900.[18] The estimates are made on the parcel weight -of 11 pounds. Eleven pounds is the English _domestic_ parcels weight -that is carried anywhere in the United Kingdom for 24 cents or, by -international postal agreement, to any point in this country for 48 -cents. In passing, it might be noted that for the year 1900 the British -postoffice turned into its national treasury over $18,000,000 _profit_. -It might also be well to notice that English merchants _imported_ nearly -five and a half million dollars value by parcels post and _exported -nearly twenty and a half million dollars of value by means of the same -service_. - -But to get back to our 11-pound parcel. - -Germany carries it anywhere in her empire or in Austria-Hungary for 12 -cents. - -Switzerland carries it for _eight cents_, and several other countries -_are now trying to reach the German weight-rate for domestic delivery_. - -So we will take as our package of _eleven pounds_ and figure its delivery -at any postoffice in the United States for _twelve cents_. - -One more point about this table. - -The reader must keep in mind that we now deliver packages up to eleven -pounds from any person--merchant, manufacturer or other--living in -England, Germany or Mexico. It is delivered for the English shipper (_by -our mails_) to any United States postoffice for 48 _cents_; for the -German shipper for 58 cents or for the Mexican shipper for 66 cents. - -The _three right-hand_ columns of the table show how much _cheaper_ the -English, German or Mexican merchant, or other shipper, can have his -eleven pounds of merchandise carried to Rabbit Hash, Ky., Springtown, -Mo., Gold Button, Cal.--_to any postoffice in the United States_--than -the New York merchant can send his 11-pound parcel to the _express -office_ “nearest” the customer ordering. - -The express charges given are the _carefully figured averages_ for the -states named for carriage from New York City. The third column gives -the _average_ express charge (at rates ruling in 1900) from New York -City to the states named. The fourth column gives the _savings_ to -the purchaser--the merchant or the consumer--if the 11-pound parcel -were carried, as it should be carried, in the mails for 12 cents. The -first two columns give the number of express offices and postoffices in -the several states named and are intended as _conclusive_ proof that -_millions_ of our people are much nearer to a postoffice than to an -express office. - -With this preliminary, let us now comment on the table. Don’t side-step -it because it’s figures--unless, of course, you’re some _hired man_ of -the express or railroad companies. - -The total of express companies in the footing is that given in the -census report for 1900. There are probably several hundred more now. -The corresponding total given for the number of postoffices is correct -for July 1, 1910. There are fewer postoffices now than in 1900, the -establishment of rural route delivery having reduced the number greatly. -The reader must keep in mind that the figures named in headings of the -three right-hand columns cover a “delivery” charge in addition to the -home-rate mailing rate for the countries named. This delivery charge was -covered in the international agreements. - -If the reader will study that table a little he will learn several things. - -If we have one hundred millions of people in this country, there is -an express office for about each 5,000 of them, while there is a -_postoffice_ for about each 1,666 of them. - -There is an _express_ office to about every 175 _square miles of our -territory_, while there is a _postoffice_ for about each 60 square miles -of our territory. - -The reader will have no trouble to see by the table that, if he ordered -an 11-pound lot of hose and shirts or phonograph records, photograph -films or other goods from New York City for delivery in Chicago, he would -get the goods by a properly served parcels post for just 97 cents _less -carriage charge_ than he now pays the express companies. If he live in -Los Angeles, Cal., he would get the goods from New York for $3.04 less. -Even if he lived in Buffalo, N. Y., he would get those eleven pounds of -goods from the metropolis of his state for _48 cents less than he now -pays the express companies_. - -Be sure, however, to notice those three right-hand columns. - -You will observe that the Right Honorable John Bovine, an exporting -merchant of London--or a _manufacturer_, if you please, of Manchester or -Leeds, England--can send that 11-pound package to you in Chicago, Hot -Springs, Fargo or elsewhere in the United States--_send it by mail_, -which no American merchant or manufacturer can do--at from 90 cents to -$3.00 _less carriage cost_ than the New York merchant can send it to you -by express--_the only means our present laws and methods permit him to -use_. - -Baron Von Stopper, an exporter of Berlin, likewise has a large advantage -over the New York merchant in supplying your _parcel_ demands. Even -Senor Greaser of the City of Mexico, can ship--_by mail_--eleven pounds -of kippered tamales or sombreros to any point in the country, save ten -states within short-haul range of New York City, and have an _edge_ of -30 cents to $3.23 over his New York City competitor in supplying your -_parcel order wants_. - -Great, is it not? Fine system, is it not, to “protect _home industries_?” -To build up “foreign trade?” - -But, it is not quite so bad as it looks for the very reason that our -“postal agreements” recognize the “tariff wall” that is built around -_certain_ “infants” in this country. Your goods from England, Germany -or Mexico must be of our “_free_ list” kind, otherwise they must pay a -rake-off to the government. As that is pretty stiff, _you_ don’t order -many parcels from abroad. You buy home products--_thus paying the tariff -rake-off to the protected “infant” instead of the Government_. - -Does it not appear that we American citizens are an easily “worked” bunch? - -In connection with the tabulation just presented, should be noted -the fact that _millions_ of our people live in non-railroad -communities--live, often, _many miles from any express office_, while -a postoffice may be near. If these people have pressing need for any -article of merchandise weighing over four pounds it cannot reach them, -under existing law, by mail. _They must order it sent by express and make -the long drive to the nearest express office to get it._ - -The article may be one needed for the health of the family or it may be -a rod, a gear wheel or other part of some machine that has broken in a -critical hour of need--_any one of a hundred needs_, delay in supplying -which _costs money_. - -It was carefully figured in 1900 that our rural, non-railroad communities -alone lost $90,000,000 _a year_ in excessive express charges and delays -in delivery by reason of the peculiar if not studied apathy of their -government in the matter of furnishing even a _reasonably_ adequate -domestic parcels post service. - -The hypothetical rate (1 cent a pound or $20.00 per ton), for parcels -carriage and delivery by post is low--maybe a little too low. If so, it -is only a very little, _if it is figured to have the rate cover only -the actual cost of the service_. A nation-wide parcels post service, if -properly organized and directed, would, it must be remembered, handle -all the short as well as the long haul business. It would not, as -now, permit a collusive raiding arrangement between the railroads and -the express companies by which the latter get most of the short-haul -shipments and leave most of the long-haul parcels to be handled by the -mail service. - -I see by a local press item, that the Senate Committee on Postoffices and -Postroads is going to propose in the bill it is drafting that parcels of -eleven pounds in weight be carried by the mail service for 50 cents--10 -cents for the first pound and 4 cents for each additional pound or -fraction thereof, up to the maximum of 11 pounds. Of course, a rate of 50 -cents for the carriage of 11-pound parcels would be a great betterment -over the present rate and weight regulations. But a rate of 50 cents for -an 11-pound package is away too high, figuring on short and long haul -parcels, unless it is intended to make the service a revenue producer, -which it should not be. The committee, I gather from the news item, has -recognized the fact that a 50-cent rate is too high on short-haul matter -and are considering the recommendation of a lower rate for it--a distance -scale or schedule of rates. It is to be hoped that, if the proposed bill -becomes law, it will carry such a provision. - -It is said the committee decided upon the weight and rate limits after -an “exhaustive investigation of all the parcels post systems of the -world,” and it was pointed out that this investigation disclosed the -fact that only “five powers” reported deficits in their postal services -in 1909--Luxemburg, Chili, Greece, Mexico and Austria--the deficits -ranging from $7,437 in Luxemburg to $1,693,157 in Austria. Of these, it -will be noted, all save Austria are small or only partially developed -countries. None of them have rail or other transportation facilities -at all comparable to those of this country. Yet our government, with -its excessive parcels rate and ridiculously low maximum weight limit on -parcels reported a deficit of $17,441,719.82 in its postal revenues for -1908-9, and $6,000,000 in 1910. - -Whatever the action that may be taken by the present or a future Congress -looking to the betterment and to a cheapening of the nation’s parcels -post service, one thing must be done if such action be made effective--if -it yield the results it is alleged are expected of it. Such action must -carry provisions that will effectively break up the present collusive -understandings and arrangements between the railroads and the express -company interests, which arrangement has for years been raiding the -postal revenues on the one hand and, by greatly excessive rail and -express rates for carrying parcel freight, has been looting the people on -the other. - -This can be--and should be--done. There are two actions which may be -taken by the government, either of which I believe would accomplish that -most desirable and necessary result. - -On previous pages (pages 227 and 228), will be found quoted a section -of the law of 1845--a law for the establishing and regulation of the -government mail service. On the pages 256-257 will be found a most -instructive discussion of the law by Mr. Allan L. Benson. Turn back and -read those pages. Mr. Benson is always worth a second reading. - -That it was the intention of the legislators of that time to make the -carriage, handling and delivery of letters and “packets” (small parcels -or packages of any sort of mailable matter), a government monopoly, there -can be no valid reason to doubt. That the express companies have operated -and are operating in violation of Section 181 of that law, there can be -no valid reason to doubt. That Section 181 of the enactment of 1845 is -good, sound law today, there can be no valid reason to doubt. That the -express companies have operated, and continue to operate, in violation -of that law--in open defiance of it--and are therefore engaged in a -_criminal_ traffic, there can be no valid reason to doubt. - -True, they have a very peculiar court decision to protect them in their -violation of that law. I call it a “peculiar” decision. A more fitting -term might be used in describing that court decision, and the use of such -a term would be fully justified. - -One of the two actions which Congress might take would be to amend -Section 181 of its Revised Statutes so that even a yokel, as well as -a Federal Judge, may clearly see that the carriage of _packages and -parcels_, as well as of “packets,” which do not exceed the maximum -regulation weight and are of mailable class and kind, is “intended” to be -the _exclusive privilege of the government_. - -Such an amendment to the law would force the express companies out of -business. - -The other action which could be effectively taken would be to make the -parcels post rate so low and the maximum weight of parcels so liberally -high that the railroads and express raiders would quit of their own -accord, which they would do as soon as their present tonnage of loot is -seriously cut down. Nothing would cut into that lootage deeper or quicker -than would a service rated and weighted parcels post. - -I have been severe in my strictures and condemnation of the express and -railway raiders. In evidence that my condemnation is deserved I desire to -quote two or three people--people who have made a careful, painstaking -study of the game these raiders have played, and yet play, and of the -practices and tricks which make it a “sure thing” for the high-finance -gentlemen who play it. - -Mr. Albert W. Atwood wrote a series of three most informative articles -for the American Magazine under the caption, “The Great Express -Monopoly.” They appeared in the American in its issues for February, -March and April, 1911. I trust the publishers will not take unkindly my -quoting Mr. Atwood. He presents some facts which so conclusively evidence -several points that I cannot resist the appeal they make for quotation. - -In evidencing the fact that the railroads own and control the express -companies and also showing how that ownership and control was obtained -and is maintained, Mr. Atwood writes as follows: - - It has frequently been asserted by merchants and shippers that - the stock issues of the express companies are merely a device - to make possible the exaction of unreasonable charges. Perhaps - the most direct case in point is that of the Pacific Express - Company, organized in 1879 to do business on the Union Pacific - and Gould Railroads. Before the Indiana Railroad Commission John - A. Brewster, auditor of the company, recently testified that - there were twelve stockholders and $6,000,000 of stock. On pages - 784-785 of the record there appears this colloquy: - - Q. What did you do with that stock, Mr. Witness? - - A. The capital stock was given to the Wabash, Union Pacific, and - Missouri Pacific for the rights, franchises. - - Q. For what rights? - - A. Franchises and rights to do business. - - Q. We begin to understand it; it wasn’t understood before that; - nothing was received by the Pacific Express Company for the issue - of this $6,000,000 of stock? Do these railroad companies own the - stock? - - A. Yes, sir. - - Q. These twelve stockholders are the railroads. The railroads get - these 6 per cent dividends on the stock? - - A. Yes, sir. - - Before another State Railroad Commission an officer of the - company stated that so far as he knew and so far as the records - show no cash was received for the $6,000,000 stock. The Illinois - Railroad and Warehouse Commission has decided this stock was - issued in fact and in law without consideration. Ostensibly the - stock was issued by the express company in exchange for the right - to do business over the lines of the railroads, but all the - express companies pay a fixed percentage of their gross receipts, - ranging from 40 to 57½ per cent, to the railroads over which they - operate. - -On the question as to whether express companies operate at a profit or -not, Mr. Atwood writes as follows of this same Pacific organization: - - Whatever legal view we may take of this curious stock issue, - there is no room for doubting that it has served as a device for - the extortion of money from the shipping public, for express - charges are made high enough to more than pay dividends on the - stock. Starting in business with no capital except such as may - have been temporarily loaned to it by the railroads in control, - the Pacific Express Company has paid dividends of $8,334,000 in - twenty years and in addition has been paying to the railroads, - which owned all its stock, about 50 per cent of its gross - receipts of more than $7,000,000 a year. A large block of the - stock recently changed hands at $200 a share, and yet we have - seen how it was issued without consideration in cash or property. - Indeed it is said the company operated for eight years before the - stock was issued at all. - -In speaking to the same point as applied to the United States Express -Company, Mr. Atwood calls attention to the fact that 55 per cent of its -“stockholders” have entered suit to wind up the company’s affairs on -charges of mismanagement by its dominating officers. Mr. Atwood further -writes: - - Although the gravest of charges of mismanagement and waste of - assets have repeatedly been made against the directors of the - United States Express Company, a profit of almost 15 per cent - was earned by the company on the capital invested in the express - business in the year 1909. This profit would have been still - greater had general trade been normal, and had there not been a - hiatus between the loss of one large contract and the securing of - another. That the stockholders have not received all the profits - proves nothing. Millions have gone into unnecessary real estate - investment and large salaries have been paid, but earnings on the - capital actually invested have clearly shown that even under a - management whose good faith and ability is being challenged in - the courts there is an ample return. - - As long ago as 1875 a writer in Harper’s Magazine said the - express business had already created fifty millionaires, a - statement which does not tax the credulity of anyone who casts - a glance at the dividend record of these companies. To use the - calmly judicial words of the Census Bureau: “In no other business - is it probable that so little money, comparatively, is invested - where the gross receipts are so large.” We have seen that new - capital is not a necessity of the express business. Unlike the - railroads, new security issues to raise capital are never sold to - the investing public. - -The cappers for railroad and express interests, keep the atmosphere -agitated with talk about the “uncertainty and irregularity” of the -quantity of express matter to be carried, “the excessive taxes paid,” -etc. In answer to such bubble, Mr. Atwood has this to say: - - While this may be theoretically true, the experience of years - has shown that the patronage of these companies has been fairly - regular, remunerative and growing. Not only will a study of the - gross receipts prove this contention, but further confirmation - will be found in the remarkable series of excessive dividends. - “We do not feel that any extravagant return should be permitted - upon the business of these companies,” said the Interstate - Commerce Commission in Kinde _v._ Adams _et al._, “for it - involves none of the elements which entitle an investment to a - high return.” - - When the Adams Express Company enriched its shareholders with a - 200 per cent extra dividend in 1907, stress was laid upon the - increase in taxation throughout the country. How ridiculous - this is can be seen from the fact that the Adams Company paid - only $145,184 in taxes in the entire fiscal year of 1909, and - $202,234 in 1910, although its extra dividend alone amounted to - $24,000,000. Profits on stock and bond speculation amounted to - $418,979 in the year 1909, and $1,943,889 in 1910. The American - Express Company, with its huge resources, paid but $283,951 - in taxes in 1909. In the same year the volume of its banking - business alone amounted to more than $250,000,000. In at least - one important state, the express companies paid no taxes until a - few years ago and in Indiana the companies had the audacity to - tell the Tax Commissioner that they had little or no tangible - property in that state. When Congress voted to put a tax of two - cents on every express transaction to raise revenue for the - Spanish War the companies made the shipper pay, and when the - shippers objected fought the case to the highest courts. - - At this point the question naturally arises as to how the express - companies have been able to carry on for so many years such - a perfect system of extracting money from the public without - being seriously molested. The answer involves a knowledge of - the relations existing between the railroads and the express - companies, and a knowledge of the complete monopoly which exists - in the express business--a monopoly made possible only because of - these very relations. - -In Pearson’s Magazine appeared two forcefully written articles by Mr. -Allen L. Benson on the parcels post. The articles appeared in Pearson’s -in February and March, 1911. In his February opening and closing Mr. -Benson says some things to us and says them with a kindly bluntness which -we should appreciate: - - Is it a pleasure to you to be treated as if you were a fool? Do - you never tire of acting like an organ-grinder’s begging monkey? - - These questions are put to you in good faith. I have no desire - to insult you. I know you are not a fool. I know you don’t like - to beg. Yet here you are again, with your little red cap on and - your little tin cup out, begging for a parcels post. Begging from - those whom you should order. And the gentlemen from whom you beg - treat you as if you were a fool. - - Perhaps you believe these statements are not so. I shall soon - show you that they are so. But before we go down this interesting - parcels-post road, let us hang a lantern to the wagon-tongue. You - will understand the scenery better if you see it by the light of - this particular lantern. Here it is: - - Bad government is largely made possible by the mistaken opinions - held toward each other by the governing classes and the governed. - By “governing classes” I don’t mean Presidents and Congresses. - I mean the great capitalist interests that make Presidents and - Congresses. The governing classes underestimate the intelligence - of the people. That is why the governing classes are always in - process of yielding something to the people. Depending upon the - stupidity of the people, gross wrongs are inflicted that are - righted only under force, inch by inch. - - The people, on the other hand, have too exalted an opinion of - both the intelligence and the patriotism of those who control the - government. They have no good opinion of the patriotic impulses - of the great capitalists, but they fail to note that the great - capitalists are the National government. Mr. Morgan in Wall - street they recognize. But Mr. Morgan in Washington, disguised as - Uncle Sam, they do not recognize. Therefore they behold him with - a certain veneration. They have been taught, since childhood, - to look up to Uncle Sam as to a father. He is the government in - breeches. The people do not always agree with the men who govern - them, but they always agree with the government. The grand old - government of the United States looks good to them. It looks good - to them because it seems to embody the power, the will and the - virtue of the people. - - All of which is not true. No government is much better than - the men who control it. If the men who control it are bad, the - government is bad. If a few control it, the rest do not control - it. If a few use it to get more than belongs to them, the rest - cannot use it to get what belongs to them. If a few control the - government to rob the rest of the people, the government is not - the friend, but the enemy, of the rest of the people. - - The United States government is and long has been controlled by a - few rich men. These men have used and are using the government to - enrich themselves at the expense of the rest of the people. I do - not mean so say that the government never performs an act that is - of service to all of the people, but I do mean to say that when - there is a conflict between the interests of the few who control - the government and the interests of the rest of the people, the - government is almost certain to take the side of the few as - against the many.… - - The little guiding group of rich who tell you that a high tariff - helps you is the same little guiding group that tells you a - parcels post would hurt you. - - … - - Is it a pleasure to you always to be treated as if you were a - fool? Do you never tire of paying 16 cents a pound on mail - packages limited to four pounds, when there is hardly a little - South American republic or fourth-class European state that will - not carry at least eleven-pound packages for a cent a pound or - less? - - Think of it--we have entered into agreements with forty-three - nations that have the parcels post to receive and deliver their - parcels when directed to any person in this country; we are - permitting the Philippine Government to establish a parcels post; - we have agreed to receive in this country big packages at low - rates for delivery abroad; but we ourselves have no such rights - among ourselves. We must not only pay tribute to the express - companies, but we must believe that it is good for us to do so. - - _If the American people only knew their power; if they only knew - their power! If they would tear off their party labels and vote - as they talk at home among their neighbors, they could push this - country half a century ahead at the next election. Everybody - knows something is wrong, but almost everybody votes the thoughts - of those who make the wrong._ - - _Shall we never vote for ourselves?_ - -The italics in the last paragraph quoted are mine. So, too, are the -sentiments of that paragraph--both the expressed and the implied. That is -I believe in them--I believe in them hard and stubbornly. If my readers -will think hard about them for a few minutes, I feel confident they -will conclude that it is about time for them, for all of us, to act on -Mr. Benson’s advice--tear off our party labels and begin “to vote for -ourselves.” - -In support of his charges of bad faith on the part of the government in -giving the people a serviceable parcels post, Mr. Benson’s remarks are -most illuminating. He makes reference to a public or semi-public document -of the government, written by one Mr. Turner and proceeds as follows: - - “‘This will open a great business for American retail merchants,’ - wrote Mr. Turner. ‘Brazil can be flooded with catalogues. This - information, in advance, will enable those desiring to go after - business to prepare for it.’ - - “Mind you, these are only occasional sentences from his - enthusiastic article. He dwelt at length upon the eagerness - of the Brazilians to buy such articles as we make. He even - became specific and enumerated some of the articles that - could be advantageously sent by parcels post. ‘This opens up - great possibilities for the retail shoe houses,’ he said, for - instance, ‘as elegant shoes are worn.’ Also, there was a great - market for gloves, embroideries, ribbons, silks, stockings, and - underclothing. - - “Here, then, we have the spectacle of the United States - Government making statements to business men through a - publication that the common people never read, that are directly - opposed to the statements that are made to the people of the - United States in congressional debates and other publications. - - “Now, ask yourself these questions: - - “Would the establishment of a parcels post by Brazil, which we - have permitted to extend to this country, open any markets for - Americans in Brazil if parcels-post rates did not permit American - merchants to deliver their goods in Brazil at reduced cost? - - “Again: If a parcels-post in Brazil will enable American - merchants to lay down their goods in Brazil at reduced cost, why - wouldn’t a parcels post in the United States enable American - merchants to lay down their goods in the United States at reduced - cost? - - “Furthermore: If reduced carrying charges would enable American - merchants to capture Brazilian trade by reducing selling prices, - why wouldn’t reduced carrying charges tend toward lower selling - prices in the United States? - - “Finally: Is there any reason on earth why the United States - Government, which is opposed to a parcels post in this country, - through an official publication, welcomes a parcels post in - Brazil--is there any reason except the one fact that there are no - American express companies in Brazil? - - “Figure it out for yourself. I have figured it out for myself. As - I figure it out, the United States Government is treating us as - if we were a little weak in the head; as if we are just foolish - enough so that it was safe to print, in a semi-public official - publication, an acknowledgment that all of its excuses for not - giving us a parcels post are really impudent lies.… - - “‘Should the mail trade have a government subsidy?’ asked one - gentleman who represented an association of jobbing firms. Let us - see how much honesty there is in this question. A subsidy implies - the payment of money, either for nothing, or for something that - is not immediately received in return. That is what these same - rich gentlemen mean by subsidy when they ask you to subsidize - American ships. What element of subsidy would there be in a - parcels post that enabled the government to derive a great profit - from the mail-order business? We have all the machinery for - handling ‘packets’--costly postoffice buildings, cars, letter - carriers, rural mail carriers. Why not use them? Why not let the - rural mail carrier, whose average load is now 25 pounds, carry - 500 pounds at a cent a pound? The postoffice department would - earn $40,000,000 more a year if the rural wagons were loaded to - the 500-pound limit. - - “‘The fact is,’ said the same jobber gentleman, ‘that the - United States Government cannot carry merchandise by parcels - post without having to meet an enormous annual deficit for - conducting the service.’ The fact is that the fact isn’t. What - brazen effrontery to declare that the government would lose - money carrying packages at a cent a pound, when the German - government makes money by carrying packages at a little more - than half a cent a pound! It is true that German rates are based - upon distance, but it is also true that Germany, without any - mail monopoly, competes with all comers and beats them out with - low tariffs. The German government can compete with the German - express companies because the German parcels post will accept - packages up to a weight limit of 110³⁄₁₀ pounds, while our - Government turns over to the express companies everything that - weighs more than four pounds. - - “Furthermore, if the carrying of packages is such a hazardous - business that our Government should not dare to attempt it, - how comes it that the express companies have become rich at - it? The combined capital of the express companies is a little - in excess of $48,000,000. For years, the big stockholders in - express companies have been apoplectic with wealth. All of this - money came from somewhere. All of this money came from those - who consumed products sent by express. Only a few weeks ago the - Interstate Commerce Commission brought out the fact that the - Adams Express Company’s business in New England yielded a profit, - in 1909, of 45 per cent, upon the investment. Yet, there was - nothing brought out in the proceedings to show, that the Adams - Express Company was gouging New England any harder than it was - the rest of the country, or that the other express companies were - not doing to the rest of the country approximately what the Adams - was doing to New England. If you had the Government’s equipment - for handling express matter, would you feel particularly - frightened at a proposition to give you a monopoly of the - ‘packet’ business at an average rate almost twice that of the - German Government’s average rate?” - -Knowing that my readers have not wearied of Mr. Benson, I shall presume -to take further liberties with his articles on our subject. His handling -of the point I have raised--railroad control of the express companies--is -so informative and so able that I would do neither my readers nor my -subject justice were I not to quote him and do it right here: - - The railroads have become the express companies, not in legal - fiction, but in transportational fact. The railroads largely own - the express companies, entirely control the express companies, - and, to all intents and purposes, are the express companies. We, - the highly intelligent American people, simply don’t know these - facts. Never has it seemed to occur to us that, since Benjamin - Harrison was President and John Wanamaker was in his cabinet, the - express grafters may have devised improved ways of working the - express graft. Therefore, in this parcels post matter, we don’t - know who is pushing the knife that we feel between our ribs. We - accuse the express companies. A man who was being murdered might - as well accuse the shadow of his murderer. - - Perhaps the facts that follow will show you who are behind the - shadows of the express companies. I quote from Senate Document - No. 278, Sixtieth Congress: - - Stock held by railways in express companies $20,668,000 - Railway securities owned by express companies 34,542,950 - Holdings of express companies in the stock of other - express companies 11,618,125 - - Since this article was written (Mr. Benson adds in a footnote) - the Interstate Commerce Commission has issued a report in which - railroad holdings in express stock are given at $14,124,000. The - same report says the “total book value of property and equipment - of 13 express companies is $22,313,575.53.” The figures furnished - by the express companies are evidently somewhat bewildering - to the commission, which, having found the total value of the - express companies’ assets to be $186,221,380.54, remarks: “It - is evident that the capital stock of these companies bears no - relation to the amount invested in the express business.” On - the face of the Interstate Commerce Commission’s report, the - railroads have disposed of more than $6,000,000 worth of express - stock since the United States Senate investigated the matter - during the life of the Sixtieth Congress. Yet there is no mention - of such a transaction, and it seems exceedingly unlikely that - the railroads have suddenly reversed their policies and become - sellers instead of buyers of express stock. What seems more - likely is that both the railroads and the express companies are - continuing the policy to use figures to conceal facts. Gentlemen - who can give $186,000,000 worth of assets a “book value” of - $22,000,000 might have no difficulty in compelling figures to - turn flip-flaps upon almost any occasion. - - Please notice that railroad companies--not railroad men, - railroad companies--own more than $20,000,000 of stock in - express companies. The express companies are capitalized at only - $48,000,000. Railroad companies therefore own almost half of the - stock of the express companies. Railroad men like Mr. Gould, the - Vanderbilts and Mr. Morgan also own stock in express companies. - Railroad men presumably do not vote their private holdings of - express stock in opposition to the manner in which they vote the - express stock owned by the railways they control. But, even if - railway men owned no express stock, the ownership by railways of - a solid block of more than $20,000,000 of express stock would - enable the railways to control the express companies. Mr. Morgan - controls many corporations in which he holds only a minority - interest. It is the way of big men to control more than they own. - - … - - Let us assume that you attach no significance to the ownership - by the railways of almost half of the stock of the express - companies. You don’t believe the railroads would take the trouble - to get control of $3,500,000 more stock and thus control the - companies. You want to be shown. - - All right. You don’t mind using your common sense? Good. - - Wouldn’t railroad companies be incorporated fools if they didn’t - control the express companies? Couldn’t the railroad companies, - if they cared to, control the express companies, even though - the railroad companies owned not a share of stock in any of the - express companies? What is an express company? - - An express company is a corporation that is engaged in - transportation. Not a single express company owns a foot of - railway track, a locomotive, a roundhouse or a water tank. Not a - single express company employs an engineer, a fireman, a train - dispatcher, or a section hand. Not a single express company could - carry a bar of soap from New York to Albany without using all - of the mentioned instruments of transportation, besides many - others. In other words, an express company is an institution - engaged in transportation without owning any of the means of - transportation. It exists only by sufferance. So long as railroad - companies are willing to haul the cars of an express company, - the express company may do business--but no longer. An express - company, if ill-treated, has no other place to go. It cannot hire - a department store company to haul its cars, nor a dry-goods - firm, nor a manufacturer of hats. An express company must go to - railroads for its transportation facilities, accept the best - terms it can get, or go out of business. - - Is it not so? How comes it, then, that you never hear of rows - between express companies and railroad companies? How comes it - that the same railroads that are always trying to squeeze you - on freight rates apparently never try to squeeze the express - companies on rates for hauling cars? The express companies are - exceedingly fat birds. They are absolutely in the power of the - railroad companies. If you owned the only vacant house in the - world and a wanderer must rent from you or die in the street, - you would not have him more completely in your power than the - railroad companies have the express companies. - - Yet the railroad companies are frying the express companies to a - frazzle. The New York Central Railroad Company takes 40 per cent - of the gross receipts of the express company that operates over - its lines. But the frying is entirely friendly, and therefore - the express companies do not cry out against it. A station agent - does not complain because the railroad company for which he works - takes from him the money for the tickets he has sold. He expects - to give up the money. The officers of express companies expect - to give up the money they take in. That is what they are there - for. If they were otherwise disposed they would not be there. The - $20,000,000 block of express stock held by railroads would keep - them out. Can you imagine an express company giving 40 per cent - of its gross receipts to a railway company if the directors of - the express company were not controlled by the railway company? - - Please get the full meaning of that New York Central arrangement. - It is not a mere matter of 40 per cent. It is a matter of 40 - per cent of the gross receipts and then perhaps 50 per cent of - what is left. In other words, the railroad company first takes, - as a carrier, four-tenths of the express company’s receipts. As - a stockholder in the express company, the railroad next takes - almost half of the net profits. - - … - - In both surveying the Canadian express situation and giving the - order to reduce rates, Judge Mabee, chairman of the commission, - said: - - “Cut short of all the trimmings, the situation is that the - shipper by express makes a contract with the railway company - through the express company. The whole business could go just as - it now does without the existence of any express company at all - by simply substituting railway employees and letting the railways - take the whole of the toll in the first instance.” - -As showing how freight tariffs are manipulated by the railroads to force -the people to make light shipments by express and pay the looting rates -the express companies charge, the following by Mr. Benson should be read: - - In what essential particular does the conduct of the American - express business differ from the conduct of the Canadian express - business? The Canadian express companies collect money from the - public and hand it over to the railroads. What do our express - companies do? - - At this point, some gentlemen may be moved to ask. Why is an - express company? At first glance, it does seem rather strange - that the railroads should bother to do business through express - companies if the railroads not only haul the express cars, but - get the money the public pays. Yet there is nothing strange about - it, as we shall see when we consider what the express business is. - - Part of the express business is an effort to commit a crime for - pay. The rest of the express business is an effort to perform a - service at an exorbitant rate of compensation. In other words, - part of the express business is the carrying of “packets” that - should be sent only by mail, and the carrying of which by a - private person or corporation is a crime, and the rest of the - business is the carrying of light freight that should go by fast - freight at a rate much below the express rate. - - The express business, like every other business that has thriven, - was based upon a public need. The public need was for a fast - freight service for light freight. The railroad managers of forty - years ago were not disposed to give the service, but they were - willing to haul cars for an express company that wanted to carry - fast freight at a high rate. - - In this small, timid way the express business began. The crime - of carrying mail in competition with the government had never - been considered. When shippers offered mailable packages for - transmission, they were accepted, but postage stamps were affixed - to comply with the law. Even the volume of light freight was - relatively small. The railroads themselves kept all of the light - freight traffic they could. It was not until the railroads - invested heavily in and obtained control of the express companies - that deliberate efforts were made to compel the public to send - light freight by express. - - Let me explain precisely what I mean by this. The minimum freight - rate from Chicago to North Platte, Neb., is $1.10. Whether a - package weighs five pounds or 100 pounds, the charge is the same. - - Suppose you want to send a ten-pound package. A dollar and ten - cents seems an exorbitant charge, especially when the fact is - considered that a ten-pound package, sent by freight, probably - would not reach its destination in less than ten days. You look - up express rates and find that you can send the package for 55 - cents, with a certainty of delivery within forty-eight hours. Of - course you send the package by express. - - What has happened? Apparently, the express company has saved you - 55 cents. Actually, the railroad company has clubbed you into - the clutches of the express company. The railroad company never - expected you to pay $1.10 for the transmission of a ten-pound - package. In the good old days when the express companies were - not owned by the railroad companies, and the railroad companies - were not controlled by a little group of men in Wall Street, the - freight rates for ten-pound and hundred-pound packages were not - the same. The railroads wanted to carry small packages and made - rates that brought them in. But the express companies showed - the possibility of collecting a higher rate for quick delivery. - For this reason, a certain amount of business naturally came to - the express companies. But after the railroads obtained control - of the express companies, resort was had to artificial means - to drive business over to the high-priced express companies. - The freight rate for 100 pounds was established _as the minimum - rate_ for all lighter packages. No one is expected to pay this - exorbitant rate, but it is there for everyone to look at. - - Slow freight delivery is also apparently employed by the - railroads to compel the public to ship by express. If one have - a full hundred pounds to send a short distance, he will find - the minimum freight rate lower than the express rate. But he - will also have reason to believe that freight trains are drawn - by snails. The Pennsylvania Railroad and the New York Central - recently struggled ten days to bring a hundred-pound package - forty miles to me. An express company would have performed - the same service over-night. If the railroads had wanted the - business, they would have required no more than two days. - -Now, I have quoted extendedly from both Mr. Atwood and Mr. Benson. I have -done so, because they wrote not only what I have quoted but much more -that I would like to quote, and each of them has handled his subjects -pointedly and forcefully conclusive. The call for “copy” by my publisher, -will, I trust, argue my excuse with the publishers of Pearson’s and The -American magazines for having drawn so largely upon their columns without -first asking and securing their permission to do so. - -But it seems to me I can hear some barker for the interests barking -“Yellow writers! Yellow magazines!” - -A few years since, the fling of that appellation “yellow” may have had -some influence--probably did have some influence among the thoughtless. -But millions of the then indifferent and thoughtless people have become -serious and thoughtful recently. To such there is no opprobrium in the -word “yellow” as the barkers fling it at newspapers and magazines which -attack and tell the truth about the interests for which the barkers bark. -In fact, the word has become an appellation of honor rather than of -discredit--of repute rather than of disrepute. - -Here is another quotation--two of them. They are from an article in -Pearson’s Magazine, February, 1912, issue. Get the magazine and read the -whole article. The article is captioned “The Railroad Game.” It will -richly compensate you: - - I chanced to meet a man who is now president of one of the great - Western railroad systems. He chided me good-naturedly about my - antagonism to the railroads. Finally he said: … “You are too big - a man to be fighting the railroads. Come get into the game with - us. It isn’t how much money we make, but how much we can conceal - that counts in the railroad business.” - - … - - These figures do not take into consideration at all the - operations of the numerous express companies which impose upon - the people a burden approximating $125,000,000 a year while their - actual investment for all purposes does not exceed $6,000,000 - a year. These companies all earn prodigiously. All pay big - dividends. All have big surplus funds, and frequently have big - melon cuttings. In one of these a few years ago $24,000,000 were - distributed among the stockholders of a single company. And after - all, these companies amount in actual service to the people to - no more than a parcels post which the government should have - established long ago. With government control of the railroads - this pernicious form of extortion would end. In European - countries express companies do not exist. There the parcels post - is supreme, satisfactory to the people and remunerative to the - governments. - -Of course, the writer of the above when he mentions $6,000,000 as the -“actual investment for all purposes” means all the actual investment for -all express service purposes. In that statement he is entirely correct. - -But who is the writer? Well, the man who made the statements just quoted -is Mr. O. C. Barber, the American “Match King.” Certainly no one--not -even the most courageous and venturesome hired liar of the raiding -combinations--will call Mr. Barber “yellow.” - -“Why?” Well, Mr. Barber has a lot of real long-headed and hard-headed -sense. He also has _money_. He has a _whole lot_ of money. That makes -Mr. Barber a “strong” man, as Mr. Benson puts it, in the calculating -eyes and minds of public bubblers. Not only has Mr. Barber money, but, -as Pearson’s editor points out, “he is a man of affairs.” He has been a -man of affairs for fifty years. He is an officer or director in companies -which have a capital of fifty million dollars. Their combined freight -shipments are from 150,000 to 200,000 cars per year, and go to all parts -of the world. - -No, there is nothing of the yapped “yellow” about Mr. Barber. When -the barkers bark of him, the trajectory of their language will carry -it scarcely beyond the walls or to the banqueters. In most cases the -barker’s voice, when adversely criticising Mr. Barber, will take that -humble, pendant expression so universally characteristic of the tail of a -scared dog. - -Mr. Barber is “strong.” If you don’t know it get the February, 1912, -Pearson’s and read his article on “The Railroad Game.” You will know it -then. - -The clackers who clack for those who profit by the outrageous parcels -post service in this country now, will tell you, of course, that Germany, -France and some other countries can “afford” to give their citizens lower -postal carriage rates, “because the governments own the railroads and -have their mails carried free.” - -It is sufficient to say in answer to such clack that if we can have a -cheap, efficient parcels post service _only by owning the railroads_, -then let us own them. - -Why not? A good, cheap parcels post service is worth it--worth it to you, -to me, to every man, woman and child of the country, both to those living -and to the generations yet unborn. - -Yes, sirs, such a parcels post service is worth _more to our people than -our railroads cost to build_, or would cost to rebuild or to buy. Why do -I say that? I say it _because_ it is a _fact_--a fact that needs but a -line or two to evidence. - -1. Such a parcels post service would save our people _more_ than -$300,000,000 every year. - -2. At 2 per cent (a rate at which the government can borrow all the -money it wants), three hundred million dollars would pay the interest on -$15,000,000,000. - -3. Fifteen billions of dollars is _more_ than either the “book” or the -“market” value of _all_ the railroads in this country--“water” included. -It is more than _twice_ their tangible, or construction, value. - -So, if we can have cheap, reliable parcels post service only when the -“government own the railroads,” then let’s get busy. - -One of the much _worn_ objections to a cheap parcels post service is that -it cannot be established and _profitably_ operated, as it has been in -those countries which _own_ the mail-carrying roads and pay much _lower -salaries_ to the operators of the service. - -In reply, I will say that in neither Great Britain, nor in _any country -of continental Europe_ are _all_ the rail-mail roads _owned_ by the -government. But those countries do _control_ all their railroads--and -that is exactly what this government must soon do _or the railroads will -control it_. - -To tell _how_ these governments got control _and keep control_ of their -railroads is another story. In fact, it is a story for each of the -countries. Suffice it to say here that they _do_ control them. One -element of that control _compels_ the railroads to carry a _large portion -of the mails free of charge_. - -In Great Britain, all regular trains carry at least one mail car free, -or at a mere nominal charge, and the trunk line roads are required to -turn out extra mail trains of ten cars each on demand of the postoffice -authorities. For such a train the road can charge _no more_ for the run -than the _average cost of an average passenger train_. - -France guarantees and, I believe, _pays_ the interest on a 70,000,000 -franc railway bond issues. That is equivalent to $14,000,000. At 3 -per cent the interest amounts to $420,000 a year. For that sum the -railroads carry all the _regular_ mails free--carry them _under -government direction and stipulation_. Last year we paid our railroads -$49,330,638.24 for carrying our mails. The French roads also carry the -officials, the soldiery, and all military supplies _free_. - -That, in brief, is about what the French government _compels_ the -railroads of France to do. - -_And those roads are all paying fair returns on the money invested in -them!_ - -It was only a few brief years since the railroads of the German Empire -were _all_ in the hands of private owners--of “frenzied financiers” who -robbed both the government and the people in outrageous mail, freight and -passenger rates. Germans will not stand for such conditions long. The -people shouted aloud their grievances and demanded redress--demanded a -remedy. - -_The German government heard and heeded the demands of its people._ It -usually does. When it started to give its people relief it was met on -every hand with just the same sort of talk as has been heard in this -country for a quarter of a century. - -“You can’t cut down the rates, for the roads are now earning barely -enough to pay fair interest on the investment.” - -“You can’t trespass upon the ‘sacred rights’ of property.” - -“You can’t think of taking such action! Why, it would create a financial -upheaval--a panic--causing widespread disaster and bankrupting the -railway companies.” - -“You cannot possibly be so inconsiderate as to endanger the savings of -the hundreds of thousands of widows and orphans who have invested in our -stocks and bonds”--and a lot more of like junk. - -But the Chancellor of the Exchequer was a clear-headed, _clean_-minded -old German, with the _rugged honesty_ for which his race is justly noted. -Well, this Chancellor listened with courteous dignity to all their “you -can’t do this,” “You can’t do that,” etc., until it was made quite clear -to his mind that frenzied financiers and railroad grafters in his country -were _dictating as to the powers and policies of his government_. - -What happened then? Why, as Creelman put in writing of the incident, -when this grand old Von heard enough of those “you can’ts” to make their -object and purpose clear to him, he jumped to his feet and turned loose a -few yards of forceful German language which, translated, summarized and -anglicized, would sound something like this: - -“_I can’t! Well, you just watch me!_” - -“Did he give ’em anything worth looking at?” Oh, but didn’t he? The -honest old Von sat quietly into their _own_ game, played with their own -_marked cards_ and “beat ’em to a frazzle,” as our strenuous ex-President -would put it. Did he buy up the roads, paying for all the _aqua pura_ -they had tanked up? - -Well, hardly! It was _control_ Von wanted, and _ownership_ was neither -immediately nor particularly sought, _beyond the point necessary to that -control_. - -As I remember the story, he quietly put some agents on the floor of -the Berlin stock bourse and before the gentlemen who had handed him -that miscellaneous assortment of “can’ts” knew what had happened, _Von -had control of one or two of the German trunk lines_. Then the way he -made those friends of the “poor widows and orphans” _see_ things was -profoundly and, for a few weeks, almost _exclusively_ awful. He did not -buy the road for his government. He merely bought _control_. - -His government having control, he next slashed all the silk and frills -_out of rail rates on the road or roads controlled_. - -“What was the result?” Why, the “can’t” venders were on their knees to -him in six months. In a year the German government _controlled_ its -railroads and there was not a railway patriot in the Empire who was not -busy telling the Chancellor how many _more things_ he could do, if he -wanted to and, in fact, _urging_ him to do some of them. - -And the “widows and orphans,” or other _legitimate_ investors in the -securities of the German roads, _lost not one cent of earned income_ in -the passing of _control_ from private to government hands. As a result, -the German government is making money from its _owned_ railroads. -The net revenues of the German Government from its railroads is now -annually about $250,000,000. From 1887 to 1906, the roads paid into the -government’s exchequer about $1,400,000,000. It has saved money from -its _controlled_ roads and is furnishing its people _a cheap and most -serviceable_ parcels post. So much for the cheap foreign mail-carriage -and _the way the “cheap foreigners” got it_. - -Now, as to salaries paid. Mail carriers and clerks in this country -are paid something under $1,000 a year. Railway mail clerks are paid -an average of $1,165--_and the latter work only one-half the time for -full pay_. I have no information at hand as to the pay of mail carriers -and clerks in foreign countries, but I have the figures for the pay of -railway mail clerks in Great Britain, Germany and France. So, we will -make comparison of the pay in that class of service. They stand as -follows: - - Per Year. - In the United States $1,165 - In Great Britain 780 - In Germany 515 - In France 610 - -There, now, you see the shocking disparity in the very _worst_ and _all_ -of its enormity--the way it is usually presented by “farmers” in Congress -who are _cultivating_ express company crops. But let us look into those -figures a little further. - -Information carefully collected and collated, both by official and -private agents, among the former being the Department of Commerce and -Labor of our own government, has _conclusively_ shown that _living_ in -England and in the countries of Continental Europe is _from thirty to -forty per cent cheaper than in this country_. - -Let us take 30 per cent--the lowest reported estimate of the difference -in the cost of living--subsistence, clothing, housing, schooling, -amusements, etc.--and see how the figures look in comparison as to pay of -railway mail clerks: - - Per Year. - In the United States $1,165.00 - In Great Britain 1,114.30 - In Germany 734.30 - In France 871.43 - -The _enormity_ of the difference, you will observe, is not so shockingly -enormous as it appears in _heeler’s_ figures first shown. But even the -last set of figures does not afford a just comparison. Here is why: - -The English railway clerk is allowed $160 a year as “travel pay.” The -German rail man is provided _free_ a house that is worth an annual rental -of $135 _in Germany_. Here, it would rent for from $240 to $360. In -addition to his “salary” the French railway mail clerk is allowed $180 -“travel pay” and is also provided _free_ with a house of a rental value -of $80 per year--a house that would rent here at from $160 to $300 per -year. Making these little additions to the actual service _pay_ of those -“cheap foreigners,” let’s see how they compare with our “high salaried” -railway mail clerks. We will figure the “travel pay” allowances at its -purchasing power _in buying a living_ and for the rent allowances we will -add the lowest equivalent given above of corresponding housing in this -country. - -On that basis the stack-up is as follows: - - Per Year. - In the United States $1,165.00 - In Great Britain 1,344.30 - In Germany 974.30 - In France 1,288.57 - -Those “cheap foreigners,” _who are efficiently operating a cheap parcels -post_, you see, come out of the wash in pretty fair shape after all, when -compared with our “high salaried” postal service men. - -But even the last table does not present the whole truth as to the _lie_ -so often yapped about by the _tools_ of the private interests in this -country that are opposing the betterment and _cheapening_ of our parcels -post service. - -The railway mail clerks of England, Germany and France not only get full -pay while laid up from temporary injury, the same as do our rail postal -men, but their governments pay those “cheap foreigners” _a pension_ when -they get old or are permanently injured--_pay it for the remaining years -those “cheap” mail handlers live_! - -Among the most _brazen_, yet most frequently used, objections to a cheap -and serviceable parcels post is that it would “benefit but very few -people in the country’s vast population,” or other vocalized breath of -similar purport and _purpose_. - -Objectors who use this argument belong to one of two classes: They are -either fools or think _you_ are, or they are men whose sense of the right -and wrong of things, commonly designated as conscience, got lost in their -transit from diapers to dress suits. - -The “argument” is not worth a line of consideration were it not so -frequently used by objectors of the two classes just indicated. A man--_a -full-sized man_--who can give it more than a smile ought to hire a -janitor and a couple of scrub women to clean up his garret and dust off -its furnishings. - -But, seriously speaking, let’s think a moment about “the few” people who -would be benefited by a cheap parcels post service. - -There are 95,000,000 or more folks in this country. - -There are about 36,000,000 of that number engaged in farming, farm labor, -stock-raising and other agricultural occupations, counting the dependent -families. - -Counting the dependent families. Those “few” would be benefited, would -they not? - -Counting wives and babies, there are somewhere around 22,000,000 of our -folks engaged in the mechanical trades and manufacturing. - -Those “few” would be benefited, would they not? - -Among our folks are, counting families as before, not less than -16,000,000 domestic servants, saloon, hotel and restaurant people, -policemen, firemen, soldiers, sailors and laborers “not elsewhere -specified.” - -Those “few” would be benefited, would they not? - -Next, we have around 12,000,000 of bookkeepers, clerks, agents, -operators, teamsters, etc., “engaged in trade and transportation,” -again counting “the little ones at home” but _not_ counting the “retail -merchants” nor the _railway manipulators_. - -Those “few” would be benefited, would they not? - -Next, we may enumerate among our people, doctors, lawyers, teachers and -other _professional folks_, counting their folks at home the same as -before, some 7,000,000. - -Those “few” would be benefited, would they not. - -Next we have-- - -But we have already found about _ninety-one millions_ of the “few people” -among our folks who _would be benefited_ by a cheap, serviceable parcels -post. That leaves somewheres around four millions to be accounted for. - -Again, including dependent families not less than 3,000,000 of that -number can be classed as retail merchants. Half of that 3,000,000 are -merchants, dealers, manufacturers, etc., in the “larger cities,” whom -even the opponents of the parcels post have agreed would be _benefited_ -by its service. At any rate it has been _demonstrated_ by organizations -of merchants in the large cities that parcel deliveries within a radius -of thirty or forty miles of their stores, which had cost from _eight to -fifty cents_, can be made at an average cost _not exceeding four cents_. - -That leaves the country merchants, the jobbers, the railroad and express -company raiders and their hired opinion molders to account for. Of these, -the country merchant is by far the most numerous, likewise the most -deserving of consideration. - -On a previous page I made it fairly clear, I think, that a good, cheap -parcels post service would be of great service to him. He has the respect -and the confidence of his customers. He knows the worth of goods. He can -sell the goods--any line or make--at the advertised or catalogued price -and _still make a good profit_, as I have previously shown. - -The parcels carriage charge, either by mail or express, is now so high -he is compelled to order in quantities to keep “laid-down-prices” low -enough to meet competition. A cheap parcels post service would put him in -position to meet the competition of the larger merchants of _the cities. -A line of samples_, showing the latest patterns, makes and grades, could -take the place of fully _half the shelf stock he now carries_, aside from -the staples. He could take the order of his customer and have the goods -delivered by parcels post either to his store or, if in a rural delivery -district, to the home of his customer for a few cents--_have it delivered -as cheaply as the big city merchant, manufacturer or mail order house can -have it delivered_. - -Do not overlook that last point, Mr. Country Merchant, when _hired_ -yappers are coaching you to oppose a good parcels post service. The -government will not pay “rebates” nor allow “differentials” in its -parcels carriage. You can put your packages through the mails at as _low -a charge_ as that paid by a merchant _with millions of capital invested -in stocks of goods_. - -Of all the objections now urged against a _domestic parcels_ post in -this country, the dangers lurking in the _mail order house_ is the -most industriously worked. “It would be a fine thing for the eastern -merchant to have a parcels post system whereby he could supply the people -throughout the country,” said a Mr. Louis M. Boswell, a few years since -when speaking to the National Association of Merchants and Travelers, -convened in Chicago. - -And who, pray you, is or was Mr. Boswell? Why, Mr. Boswell was one of -the main cogs at that time, in the _Western freight traffic wheels_. Mr. -Boswell _talked for his personal interests_, and for those interests -only. To make his anti-parcels post talk _catch_ his auditors--the -Western merchants--he even told the _truth_ about the express companies. - - Freight should be transported as such by _railroads in freight - cars_, and not by the government in mail cars.… I have long - regarded the express companies as _unnecessary middlemen_.… - _Millions of dollars would be saved annually_ to the public if - the express companies were done away with, and I do not believe - the _revenues of the railroads would be decreased_. - - “And what are you on earth for,” wrote a self-serving trade - journal editor in 1900, “if not to look after _your own - interests_? A parcels post … will _knock your business silly_. - You are the one entitled to the trade in your town and - neighborhood.” - -I present the above quotations as _fair samples_ of the “argument”--its -method and its _source_--against a domestic parcels post. Let it be -noticed that these two quoted statements--as is the case with most of the -other promotion talk against a parcels post--is talked or addressed to -_country, village, town and one-night-stand city merchants_. - -The _mail order houses_ “will knock your business silly!” - -Now, of course, it must be admitted that, in this day of super-heated -service of _self_, a man’s _personal_ interests must receive his _first_ -consideration. But I cannot for the life of me see why these “Western -merchants and travelers” take the talk handed them by “traffic” cappers, -express company agents and _space muddlers_--take it in such large -_slugs_--and apparently overlook the fact that these talking and writing -bubblers _are serving special interests_. Can you understand it, Mr. -“Storekeeper” of Rubenville? Or you, Mr. “Merchant” of Swelltown? Or you -Mr. “Shipper” of Cornshock or Feedersville? - -Mr. Benson in his March article in Pearson’s, says something anent the -great hue and cry which the raiders, aided in this particular case by -merchandise jobbers and some of the larger department store retailers, -are trying to raise among country merchants and rural residents about -what a great “menace and danger” the mail order houses would be if a -cheap, serviceable parcels post was put into operation. I hope my readers -will carefully peruse what he has said. Here it is in part only: - - The railroads, in fighting the parcels post through the country - merchants, are playing the old game. The old game is to work - upon the fears of a minority, create what appears to be a - difference of opinion among the people, and thus give Congress - an opportunity to say that as sentiment seems to be divided, - it would perhaps be better to do nothing until the public can - thrash the matter out and discover what it wants. In the present - instance we see great firms like Marshall Field & Company - combined in an organization to spread among country merchants - fear of a parcels post. Such an association was recently formed - in Chicago with a membership of 300.… - - There is only one country merchant, perhaps, to every 500 country - customers, and the country customers are all in favor of a - parcels post. All other things being equal, Congress always moves - in the direction of the greatest number of votes. But in this - matter, as in many others, things are not equal. Great financial - interests and a few country merchants are regarded by Congress as - a majority.… - -“At any rate, I cannot forget that while Marshall Field & Company cry out -against a parcels post, because it would build up the mail order houses, -that they themselves do a large mail order business. - -“This action on their part may seem like patriotism of the highest -sort--but it isn’t. The mail order houses don’t care a rap about a -parcels post. They are not against it, but they are not for it. My -authority for this statement is Mr. Julius Rosenwald, President of -Sears, Roebuck & Company of Chicago, the largest mail order house in the -world. I approached him upon the subject, believing that he would grow -enthusiastic, but he didn’t. He said he had never signed a petition for -a parcels post, or otherwise interested himself in the matter, and never -should do so. He didn’t tell me why, but I found out why and will tell -you. - -“The minimum freight rates of the railroads literally drive country -customers into the mail order houses. A farmer’s wife, we will say, has -a present need for two or three articles that she can buy from a mail -order house for less than her local merchant can afford to sell them to -her. But the articles weigh only fifteen pounds, the express charge would -annihilate her saving, and the minimum freight rate, for which she might -as well have 100 pounds shipped to her, is just as high as the express -rate. But she still wants the two or three articles and she wants to -buy them from the mail order house. So what does this thrifty woman do? -First, she increases her order by putting down a few articles that she -will need perhaps three months later. Then she canvasses her neighbors -for orders until she gets enough to make 100 pounds, and divides the -freight charges pro rata. The result is that the mail order house gets an -order for 100 pounds of goods instead of an order for the fifteen pounds -that would have been bought if a parcels post like the English or the -German had enabled the farmer’s wife to order only what she first meant -to buy. Incidentally, the country merchant in her vicinity is not helped -thereby. - -“If you have any doubt about the truth of this statement, send a petition -for a parcels post to Mr. Julius Rosenwald, President of Sears, Roebuck -& Company, Chicago, and see how quickly he will not sign it. You will -not be able to get him to lift a finger to help you. He is sending out -fifty-eight loaded freight cars each day, comparatively little express -matter, doing a business of $63,000,000 a year, and is quite satisfied -with such transportation facilities as exist. - -“But don’t blame the mail order men because they don’t help you. Help -yourself. First, help yourself by getting it clearly in your mind who in -this matter is the chief offender. Your government is the chief offender. -So far as postal matters are concerned, your government is protecting the -interests that are robbing you. Your government goes even to the extent -of submitting to robbery at the hands of the interests that rob you. I -refer to the continuing scandal of exorbitant mail contracts.”… - -Now, I desire to talk somewhat directly to the rural and village -storekeeper and of storekeeping. - -The manufacturer, wholesaler or jobber always sells the retail -merchant--_the quantity buyer_--_cheaper_ than they will sell in broken -lots to the consumer. They will always sell to _you_ cheaper than they -will sell to your customer, will they not? - -You have an “edge” of 20 to 40 per cent., have you not? But to hold -that “edge” now, you must order in quantities which _anticipate_ the -demands of your custom, must you not? You must “stock up,” must you -not? If you miss your guess, and _underbuy_ the demands of your trade, -you must, later, “sort up,” must you not? If you sort-up, you do it at -“broken-lot” rates and pay _excessive carriage charges_ for delivery to -your place of business, do you not? If, on the other hand, you _overbuy_ -the demands of your trade, your shelves are soon full of “shelf-worns,” -are they not? These shelf-worns you must unload, must you not? To do -that, you offer “bargains,” do you not? Unloading “bargains” _loses your -“edge”_--your _profits_--does it not? - -But still another point in your present _and compelled_ method of -business. Your customer is _never_ so well pleased with your _sacrifice_ -“bargains” as he or she is with the _fresh, up-to-date article_, which -you sell at a _profit_. Is that not so? - -Now, let us see how a _cheap_ parcels post would “knock your business -silly.” Let’s put the rate, say at 5 cents for parcels up to one pound, 8 -cents to two pounds, 10 cents to three pounds, 12 cents to four pounds, -and so shading up in weight to twenty-five pounds, _at one cent a pound_. -I present this scale of weights and prices merely to illustrate. I have -given them no particular thought or consideration--that is, I do not -present them as a _recommended_ basis for a parcels carriage system. I -believe, however, that the government can carry and _deliver_ parcels at -about the rates named _and not create any larger “deficits”_ than the -postal service now shows. - -That aside, let us see how you, Mr. _Retail_ Country Merchant, would come -out in the deal: - -_First_: You would not have to “stock up” beyond the _known_ demands of -your customers. Your “shelf-capital,” then, would need not, necessarily, -be more than _half_ what is now is. - -_Second_: You could serve your customers fresh goods of latest pattern -and at _less_ cost, and still serve them _at a profit_, instead of -working off shelf-worn “bargains” on them at a _loss_. - -_Third_: Mrs. Lucy Smith sees a Sereno Payne _imported_ glove, advertised -by an “eastern merchant” or some distant “mail order house.” It is the -“very latest” and guaranteed to be the very best “kid” ever built--from -a _premature_ calf. Or Uncle Joe wants a mop rag-holder for Martha. It, -too, is advertised by some distant manufacturer, merchant or mail-order -bogey man. Say the advertised price of each is $1.00. Each, of course, -weighs _less than one pound_. - -Now, if Mrs. Smith or Uncle Joe orders _direct_, the article costs them, -postage added at our hypothetical rate, $1.05. Of course, they will have -inquired of you before they ordered--to see if you have it in stock--will -they not? Well, you haven’t it in stock--and you can’t work off on them -“something just as good.” Mrs. Smith just _must_ have those particular -gloves, and no other mop-holder will satisfy Uncle Joe. Now what do you -do? - -Do you tear off a yard or two of tirade about mail order houses that are -“knocking your business silly” and about manufacturers who are “flooding -the country with fake goods?” If you do, you ought to quit business and -go put your head in pickle or take the “cure.” But you won’t tirade. No -sir, nary tirade from you! You will be onto your job in a minute. And why? - -Well, first, you know that you can get those gloves or that mop-holder -for 20 _to_ 40 _per cent less_ than the rate advertised for Mrs. Smith -and Uncle Joe. You can have either sent by mail and deliver it to Mrs. -Smith or Uncle Joe at the _advertised_ rate, pay the parcels charge -yourself and still make 10 to 20 cents on the deal. If the gloves or the -mop-holder strikes you as a probable “seller,” you can order a half dozen -or a dozen pairs of the gloves, or three or four mop-holders, and _still -keep your parcel inside the one or two pound rate_. - -One other point in closing: - -Well, it may be of no use--of _no_ service value to the reader who asks -the question. He may be a man who has reached his limit of endurance--who -has given up all hope of improving or correcting _legalized_ injustices -which _rob him to enrich others_. If so, he has my sympathy. Or he may -be a man who has “set into the game” and lost, or one who is _hired_ as -a capper, steerer or “look out” for its operators. I cannot say. If the -former, he still has my sympathy; if the latter, my contempt. - -I am fully convinced that the outrages permitted by the municipal, state -and national governments of this country in rendering public service to -its people have _discouraged thousands_ of its _best citizens_--best in -_manhood_ I mean, of course. The beneficiaries of the outrages I speak -of are, usually, rated as “best” at the bank, in the society columns and -_in court proceedings_. Even our divorce court records give the latter -_conspicuous precedence_. - - “Ill fares the land, to hastening ills a prey, - Where wealth accumulates and men decay.” - -No truer thought as to the politics and policy of _government_ was ever -written than that. When wealth accumulates by _legalizing_ the spoliation -and exploitation of the great body of a nation’s people for the benefit -of a few, _the decay of its manhood is all the more rapid_. When any -considerable body of a nation’s citizens begins to ask, “What is the -use?”--that nation has reached the danger line--has started down the -decline. - -Now, I undertake to say that no observing man of average intelligence -can be found in this country today who will not give it as his _honest -opinion_--unless, of course, he is _hired_ to say otherwise--that -not only thousands but _millions_ of our people--of its industrial, -productive manhood and womanhood--are asking, “What is the use” of -arguing and struggling against the oppressive conditions which the _laws -and our administrative and judicial officers force upon us_? What is the -use of “knocking” the men who get the “graft,” the rake-off or the loot? - -“Their big bunch of money,” says one writer, “makes so much _noise_, no -one hears our knocks.” “Everybody is out for the stuff,” says another. -“It is _their_ representatives not ours who make the laws and it is -_their_ judges not ours who adjudicate them.” “Industry, thrift, brains -and even _honesty_ have ceased to count anywhere, save on _their_ -payrolls. _Money alone counts._” - -“Stop knocking, my son,” has become _common_ in paternal counsel. “Sit -into the game and _get money_. Of course, ‘get it honestly if you _can_, -but _get it_.’” - -“And if I fail,” asks the boy. - -“Well, my son, unless you are careful to salt away in some place secure -from assessors and raiders as well as from thieves, the chips _I have -raked in_, your best course is to _get on the payroll of the gamesters_.” - -A recent reading says, in effect, that there are dropped into the life -of every man moments in which “he has the chance to act the hypocrite -or to act the scoundrel.” But when _aided and abetted_ by the law, such -“chances” are not merely for the _moment_. They extend through days and -years, and those so aided and abetted usually take _both_ chances--_act -both the hypocrite and the scoundrel, and to the time limit of their -protected opportunity_. - -But that is neither all nor the _worst_ of it. - -This _legalized_ hypocrisy and scoundrelism is now _widely_ known to the -honest, productive citizenship of the country, _and it is daily becoming -better known_. What is the result? Simply this: - -The law and government administrators are, in permitting such injustices, -not only _creating class distinction_ by the enrichment of a few of our -citizens and holding the millions to the subsistence level--_hundreds of -thousands of them to the “bread-line”_--not only that, but legalized and -_protected_ injustice is _dignifying hypocrisy and scoundrelism_. It is -sapping the _moral foundations_ of a worthy manhood as well as _robbing_ -it of its material wealth and earnings. - -But what has this sermonizing to do with the parcels post question, some -one asks? It has this to do with it! - -_Of the numerous array of law enriched hypocrites and scoundrels in this -country, nowhere can be found more of them to the lineal or square rod -than can be counted in the ranks of the favored beneficiaries of existing -postal laws and regulations--in the ranks of the opponents to cheapening -and bettering the parcels carriage service._ - - -FOOTNOTES - -[17] By latest Postal Union agreements, 12 cents a pound, instead of 16 -cents a pound (maximum limit 4 pounds) for United States delivery. - -[18] Postoffices, 1910. - - - - -Transcriber’s Note - - -List of changes made to the original text: - -Page 9, “poloi” changed to “polloi” (the _hoi polloi_) (we’ll ignore the -wrongness of using “the” as well as “hoi”; our author is an expert on -postage, not Greek) - -Page 51, “controvening” changed to “contravening” (contravening the -constitutional rights) - -Page 57, “be” changed to “he” (but he showed no hesitancy) - -Page 73, “neswpapers” changed to “newspapers” (indeed newspapers in -general) - -Page 85, “Posmaster” changed to “Postmaster” (what our Postmaster General -is after) - -Page 89, “italization” changed to “italicization” (my italicization of -certain of its phrasings) - -Page 91, “Massacheusetts” changed to “Massachusetts” (hulling beans in -Massachusetts) - -Page 123, “naratives” changed to “narratives” (historical narratives -about the civil war) - -Page 123, “evidenee” changed to “evidence” (shall be made to appear by -evidence) - -Page 125, “bureauocracy” changed to “bureaucracy” (Next to a bureaucracy) - -Page 150, “perparatory” changed to “preparatory” (the names and locations -of preparatory schools) - -Page 183, “wastful” changed to “wasteful” (the loose, wasteful methods) - -Page 199, “bagagge” changed to “baggage” (transports them in the baggage -cars) - -Page 208, “hubub” changed to “hubbub” (not going to raise any noisy -hubbub) - -Page 213, “dominition” changed to “domination” (independent of party -domination) - -Page 213, “presistently” changed to “persistently” (which the government -persistently refuses) - -Page 214, “tonnaged” changed to “tonnage” (his estimated tonnage of -franked and penalty matter) - -Page 225, “unsurps” changed to “usurps” (in such practice usurps the -function) - -Page 232, “accunt” changed to “account” (Expenditures on account of -previous years) - -Page 236, unnecessarily duplicated word “has” deleted (has, so far as I -have seen, [has] shown) - -Page 250, “uniformely” changed to “uniformly” (uniformly, if not -entirely, support) - -Page 251, “franchiess” changed to “franchises” (private enterprise under -franchises from the government) - -Page 259, “reveneus” changed to “revenues” (this raid of the express -companies on postal revenues) - -Page 261, “accure” changed to “accrue” (the surplus shall accrue) - -Page 264, “remembeerd” changed to “remembered” (When it is remembered) - -Page 269, “testimnoy” changed to “testimony” (the testimony of numerous -other railroad representatives) - -Page 277, “befudling” changed to “befuddling” (a lot of befuddling, -alleged data) - -Page 280, “dominent” changed to “dominant” (the dominant factors involved) - -Page 287, “abitrary” changed to “arbitrary” (unjust regulations and -arbitrary impositions) - -Page 296, “corruscations” changed to “coruscations” (with rhetorical -coruscations) - -Page 307, “doue” changed to “done” (shipping is done by railroad -employes.) - -Page 312, “throught” changed to “thought” (when thought reached the -conclusion) - -Page 345, “af” changed to “of” (the possibility of collecting a higher -rate) - -Page 345, “approbrium” changed to “opprobrium” (there is no opprobrium in -the word) - -Page 354, “mecrhants” changed to “merchants” (one-night-stand city -merchants) - -Page 359, “spoilation” changed to “spoliation” (the spoliation and -exploitation) - - - - - -End of Project Gutenberg's Postal Riders and Raiders, by W. H. Gantz - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK POSTAL RIDERS AND RAIDERS *** - -***** This file should be named 55570-0.txt or 55570-0.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/5/5/5/7/55570/ - -Produced by MFR, Adrian Mastronardi, The Philatelic Digital -Library Project at http://www.tpdlp.net and the Online -Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This -file was produced from images generously made available -by The Internet Archive/American Libraries.) - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive -specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this -eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook -for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, -performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given -away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks -not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the -trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country outside the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you - are located before using this ebook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The -Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - - - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the -mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its -volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous -locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt -Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to -date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and -official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -For additional contact information: - - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. - |