CHAPTER VIII

THE STATE TELEGRAPHS SUBSIDIZE THE NEWSPAPER PRESS

Why the newspaper press demanded nationalization. Mr.

Scudamore gives the newspaper press a tariff which he deems

unprofitable. Estimates of the loss involved in transmitting

press messages, made by responsible persons in the period from

1876 to 1900. The State telegraphs subsidize betting on horse

races.

Before proceeding with the further discussion of the intervention of

the House of Commons in the details of the administration of the State

telegraphs, it is necessary to review briefly the tariff on messages

for the newspaper press.

Before the telegraphs had been acquired by the State, the telegraph

companies maintained a press bureau which supplied the newspapers with

reports of the debates in Parliament, foreign news, general news, a

certain amount of London financial and commercial intelligence, and

the more important sporting news. While Parliament was in session,

the messages in question averaged about 6,000 words a day; during the

remainder of the year they averaged about 4,000 words daily. The annual

subscription charges for the aforesaid services ranged from $750 to

$1,250. Before the Select Committee of 1868, the representatives of

the newspapers asserted that those subscription charges yielded the

telegraph companies, on an average, 8 cents per 100 words. They further

asserted that the telegraph companies ascribed 62.5 per cent. of the

cost of the press bureau to the transmission of the news; and 37.5 per

cent. to the collecting and editing of the news.[98] But neither the

representatives of the press, nor the Select Committee itself, called

any representatives of the telegraph companies to testify upon these

latter points.

The subscribers to the companies' press bureau service also were

allowed to send messages at one-half the rate charged to the general

public; and in case the same newspaper message was sent to several

newspapers in the same town, the charge for each address after the

first one was 25 per cent. of the sum charged the first addressee.

By coöperation, therefore, the newspapers in the larger towns were

able to obtain considerable reductions from the initial charge,

which, as already stated, was 50 per cent. of the tariff charged the

general public.[99] Apparently, however, little use was made of these

privileges. In 1868, for instance, the subscriptions to the press

bureau aggregated $150,000, whereas the sums paid for messages to

individual newspapers aggregated only $10,000.[100]

[Sidenote: _The Newspapers' Grievance_]

The newspaper proprietors admitted that the charges for the press

bureau service were entirely reasonable; but they desired to organize

their own press bureaux on the ground that they were the better judges

of what news the public wanted. Since the telegraph companies would not

give up their press bureau, the newspaper proprietors joined in the

agitation for the nationalization of the telegraphs.[101]

As soon as the Government began to negotiate with the telegraph

companies for the purchase of their plants, the newspaper proprietors

organized a committee to protect their interests and to represent them

before the Select Committee to which had been referred the Electric

Telegraphs Bill of 1868. That Bill had said that the tariff was to be

uniform, irrespective of distance, and was not to exceed 24 cents for

20 words, address not to be counted. It had said nothing on the subject

of the tariff to be charged to the newspaper press.

On May 15, 1868, Mr. Scudamore had written the Committee of the

newspaper proprietors: "As a matter of course the Post Office would

not undertake to collect news any more than it would undertake to

write letters for the public, but the news being collected, it could,

and I submit, ought, to transmit it at rates at least as low as those

now charged, and which though they are unquestionably low, are still

believed to yield the companies a considerable profit.... It seems to

me, indeed, that the transmission of news to the press throughout the

United Kingdom should be regarded as a matter of national importance

and that the charge of such transmission should include no greater

margin of profit than would suffice to make the service fairly

self-supporting."[102]

Thereupon the newspaper proprietors demanded: "That the maximum rate

for the transmission of telegraphic messages [for newspapers] should

not exceed that which is now paid by each individual proprietor [as a

subscriber to the companies' press bureau], which is, for transmission,

exclusive of the cost of collection, 4 cents per 100 words."[103] This

demand assumed that the companies' charge of 8 cents per 100 words was

remunerative; that it was made up of two separable parts: a charge for

transmission, and a charge for collecting and editing; and that the

charge ascribed to transmission still would remain remunerative even

after the charge ascribed to collecting and editing had been withdrawn.

Upon none of these several points were the officers of the telegraph

companies asked to testify, the statements of the newspaper proprietors

being allowed to stand unsupported.

[Sidenote: _Mr. Scudamore yields to the newspapers_]

In order to insure the payment of an average sum of 4 cents or 5 cents

per 100 words, the newspaper proprietors proposed that messages be

transmitted for the newspapers "at rates not exceeding 24 cents for

every 100 words transmitted at night, and at rates not exceeding 24

cents for every 75 words transmitted by day, to a single address, with

an additional charge of 4 cents for every 100 words, or for every 75

words, as the case may be, of the same telegram so transmitted to every

additional address." By way of compromise, Mr. Scudamore proposed a

charge of 24 cents for 75 words or 100 words for each separate town

to which each message might be sent, and the limitation of the 4 cent

copy rate to copies delivered by hand in the same town. Mr. Scudamore,

however, withdrew that proposal, and accepted the proposition of the

newspaper proprietors, which became the law. It is needless to add that

the opposition of the newspaper press to the Bill of 1868 would have

delayed the passage of that Bill even more than any opposition on the

part of the telegraph companies and railway companies could have done.

Indeed, it is probable, that the newspaper press could have defeated

the Bill.

In 1875 the Treasury appointed a "_Committee to investigate the Causes

of the Increased Cost of the Telegraphic Service since the Acquisition

of the Telegraphs by the State_." That committee consisted of three

prominent officers taken from the Post Office Department and other

departments of State. Upon the newspaper tariff fixed by the Act of

1868, the Committee reported: "The consequences of such a system must

be obvious to every one. Even at ordinary times the wires are always

largely occupied with press work, and at extraordinary times they

are absolutely flooded with this most unremunerative traffic, which

not only fills the wires unduly to the exclusion of better paying

matter, but necessitates a much larger staff than would be necessary

with a more reasonable system [of charges].[104] After very careful

consideration of these points, Mr. Weaver [one of the members of the

committee, and the former Secretary of the Electric and International

Telegraph Company], has no hesitation in expressing his opinion that

the principle of the stipulations of the tariff authorized by the

Telegraph Act, 1868, both as regards messages transmitted for the

public, and those forwarded for the press, is essentially unsound,

and has been the main cause of the large percentage of expenditure as

compared with the gross revenue. In order to provide for the prompt

and efficient transmission of the vast amount of matter produced

by such a system, a considerable extension of plant was necessary,

involving a large original cost, besides a regular yearly outlay for

maintenance and renewal, and not only so, but a large and constantly

increasing staff had to be provided to work lines, which, if taken

separately, would not be found to produce anything approaching to the

cost entailed for erecting, working, and maintaining them. It will be

obvious, therefore, that, unless a retrograde step be taken in order to

amend the principles upon which the stipulations of the tariff are made

up, it would be unreasonable to expect that the revenue derived for

telegraph messages under the present system can ever be made to cover

the expenses of working, the interest upon capital, and the ultimate

extinction of the debt."[105]

In May, 1876, Mr. C. H. B. Patey, Principal Clerk in the Post Office

Department, testified that the Post Office was losing $100,000 a

year by transmitting 220,000,000 words for the newspaper press at an

average price of 8 cents per 100 words. Mr. Patey said 180,000,000

words were being carried at the rate of 4 cents per 100 words, or

for $74,180 in the aggregate; and 40,000,000 were being transmitted

at the rate of 24 cents per 100 words, or, for $109,795 in the

aggregate.[106] Mr. Patey submitted no calculations in support of his

statement that there had been a loss of $100,000 on newspaper messages

yielding $183,975. But he cited two illustrations from Hull and the

Nottingham-Sheffield-Leeds-Bradford group of towns. He stated that

the Post Office received $1,600 a year for messages transmitted to

six newspapers in Hull, and spent $5,275 on the transmission of those

messages. He added that the service supplied to nineteen towns included

in the Nottingham-Sheffield-Leeds-Bradford group of towns yielded

$21,760, and cost the Post Office $38,270.[107]

In 1876, the Postmaster General, through Mr. S. A. Blackwood, Financial

Secretary to the Post Office,[108] asked the Select Committee on the

Post Office (Telegraph Department) to recommend to Parliament that the

tariff on newspaper press messages be made "24 cents for 75 words or

100 words for each separate town to which each message may be sent, and

that the 4 cent copy rate be limited to copies delivered by hand in

the same town." That, it will be remembered, was the proposal made and

withdrawn in 1868 by Mr. Scudamore. The Select Committee recommended

that the amount of the loss on the newspaper press messages be clearly

ascertained, and that the copy rates be raised sufficiently to cover

that loss. But Parliament failed to act on the recommendation.

Mr. Patey had supported Mr. Blackwood's request with the statement,

based upon inquiry of postmasters throughout the United Kingdom, that

"in a very large number of towns only a small part of the telegraphic

news transmitted was inserted in the newspapers. In many cases, on

inquiry of the proprietors, it was stated that it was not inserted

inasmuch as it was not of interest to the readers. In other cases,

because the amount of local news was more than would admit of the

special telegraphic news being inserted." Mr. Patey also had quoted

from a recent issue of the _Glasgow Herald_ the statement, that "there

was not a leading provincial paper in the Kingdom, the sub-editorial

room of which was not littered in the small hours of the morning ankle

deep with rejected telegraph flimsy;" and from a recent issue of the

_Freeman's Journal_: "The fact is, that the Post Office, and the

better class of papers as well, are both over-pressed with these cheap

duplicate telegrams. We suppose we pay for about ten times as many as

we print. Though we get them, and pay for them, so as to insure having

the best news from every quarter, we regard them rather as a nuisance,

and would be glad to have them reduced in quantity." And finally, Mr.

Patey had argued that the newspaper press was able to pay much more

than it did pay, "inasmuch as there had been a tendency on the part of

the papers generally, not confined only to the large papers," to get

their news by special messages prepared by their own agents and not

sent in duplicate to any extent.[109]

Before the _Select Committee on the Revenue Departments Estimates_,

1888, Mr. C. H. B. Patey, Third Secretary to the Post Office, stated:

"We believe that the tariff under which the press messages are sent in

this country causes a loss amounting to nearly $1,000,000 a year."[110]

In August, 1888, in the House of Commons, Mr. Cochrane-Baillie asked

the Postmaster General "whether in view of the _Report of the Committee

on the Revenue Departments Estimates_, he could state that the

Government would bring in further legislation to relieve the country

from the loss incurred by the present arrangement in connection with

press telegrams?" The Postmaster General replied that "he was quite in

accord with the Committee on Revenue Departments but he feared it would

be difficult to effect any change, since the newspaper press tariff was

fixed by the Act of 1868, and had been in force for upward of eighteen

years."[111]

[Sidenote: _Annual loss on Newspaper Messages estimated at $1,500,000_]

In November, 1893, Mr. Arnold Morley, Postmaster General, stated in

the House of Commons that "the best estimate that can be formed by the

officials at the Post Office points to the loss on the newspaper press

telegrams being at least $1,500,000 a year; and it probably is still

more."[112] In April, 1895, Mr. Arnold Morley, Postmaster General,

repeated the foregoing statement, and "maintained it in spite of

various statements to the contrary in the newspapers." He added: "and I

should be quite willing to arrange for an impartial investigation such

as is suggested by the Right Honorable Gentleman, if I were to receive

satisfactory assurances that the press would abide by the result of an

inquiry, and would undertake not to oppose the passage of the necessary

legislation for a corresponding revision in the charges, if it should

be shown that they are insufficient to provide for the cost of the

service."[113] The assurances were not forthcoming; and the newspaper

press tariff remained unchanged.

In April, 1900, Mr. R. W. Hanbury, Financial Secretary to the

Treasury, and representative in the House of Commons of the Postmaster

General, a member of the House of Lords, said: "The penny postage

realizes an enormous revenue and brings in a profit, but every other

part of the Post Office work is carried on at a loss. The whole profit

is on the penny letter."[114]

* * * * *

[Sidenote: _Betting on Horse Races subsidized_]

The Telegraph Act of 1868 provided that newspaper rates should be given

to "the proprietor or occupier of any news room, club, or exchange

room."[115] The clubs or exchange rooms in question are largely what

we should term "pool-rooms," places maintained for the purpose of

affording the public facilities for betting on horse races.[116] In

1876 Mr. Saunders, proprietor of the Central News Press Association,

testified that his association would send in the course of a day to the

same list of addressees the results of a number of races.

The words in the several messages might not aggregate 75 words, and

thus his association would be charged for the transmission of one

message only. In that way a number of messages would be transmitted

"gratuitously." Mr. Saunders added that, in 1875, the Post Office

had transmitted gratuitously for his association 446,000 sporting

messages. Mr. Patey, Third Clerk in the Post Office, added that while

the Post Office received 4 cents for transmitting from 8 to 10 sporting

messages, it had to make 8 to 10 separate deliveries, by messenger boy,

on account of those messages which were counted as one; and that each

such delivery cost the Post Office on an average two cents. Thus, on a

recent date, the Post Office had delivered the results of the Lichfield

races to 205 addressees by means of 1,640 separate deliveries, and had

received for the service, on an average, one-half a cent per separate

message.[117]

In January, 1876, the Post Office discontinued the "continuous

counting" of sporting messages.[118] It took the Department six years

to summon the courage to make this change whereby was effected some

diminution of the burden cast upon the general body of taxpayers for

the benefit of the sporting element among the voters of the United

Kingdom.

It would seem, however, that the practice of "continuous counting"

had been resumed at some subsequent date. For, in March, 1906, in

reply to a question from Mr. Sloan, M. P., the Postmaster General, Mr.

Sydney Buxton, said: "Clubs are, under section 16 of the Telegraph

Act of 1868, entitled to the benefit of the very low telegraph rates

accorded to press messages; and I have no power to discriminate against

a legitimate club because it is used for betting purposes. I propose

to consider whether the section ought not to be amended in certain

respects."[119]

On December 31, 1875, the Post Office discontinued entirely the

practice--voluntarily assumed--of transmitting sporting messages to

so-called hotels, in reality saloons. The waste of the public funds

that the Post Office had incurred in response to pressure from the

publicans, is illustrated in Mr. Patey's statement that the Post Office

had received from a certain Liverpool hotel $0.82 a week for messages

which had entailed a weekly expenditure of $2.50 for messenger service

alone.

FOOTNOTES:

[98] _Report from the Select Committee on the Post Office_ (_Telegraph

Department_), 1876, J. E. Taylor, Proprietor of the _Manchester

Guardian_; q. 3,835 to 3,849, and 1,246; and C. H. B. Patey, Principal

Clerk in the Post Office Department; q. 3,452 and following, 3,845,

3,377, and 3,383; and _Report by Mr. Scudamore on the Re-organization

of the Telegraph System of the United Kingdom_, 1871, pp. 31 and 32.

[99] _Special Report from the Select Committee on the Electric

Telegraphs Bill_, 1868; Dr. Cameron, Editor and Manager of the _North

British Daily Mail_; q. 1,430 and following.

[100] _Report from the Select Committee on the Post Office_ (_Telegraph

Department_), 1876, C. H. B. Patey, Principal Clerk in the Post Office

Department; q. 4,900 and 4,901.

[101] _Special Report from the Select Committee on the Electric

Telegraphs Bill_, 1868; J. E. Taylor, Proprietor of the _Manchester

Guardian_; Wm. Saunders, Proprietor of the _Western Morning News_;

Dr. Cameron, Proprietor of the _North British Daily Mail_; and F. D.

Finlay, Proprietor of the _Northern Whig_.

[102] _Report from the Select Committee on the Post Office_ (_Telegraph

Department_), 1876; J. E. Taylor, Proprietor of the _Manchester

Guardian_; q. 3,854 to 3,862.

[103] _Report from the Select Committee on the Post Office_ (_Telegraph

Department_), 1876; G. Harper, Editor _Huddersfield Chronicle_, and

representative of the Provincial Newspaper Society, which embraced

about 300 newspapers.

[104] Compare: _Report by Mr. Scudamore on the Re-organization of the

Telegraph System of the United Kingdom_, 1871, pp. 31 and 32.

Daily number of words transmitted for the newspapers:

Parliament Parliament

in session not in session

1868 6,000 4,000

1870 20,000 15,000

[105] _Report from the Select Committee on the Post Office_ (_Telegraph

Department_), 1876; J. E. Taylor, Proprietor of the _Manchester

Guardian_; q. 3,854 and 3,900; and G. Harper, Editor _Huddersfield

Daily Chronicle_, and Representative of the Provincial Newspaper

Society; q. 4,157 to 4,162.

[106] _Report from the Select Committee on the Post Office_ (_Telegraph

Department_), 1876; q. 5,057 to 5,074, 3,360, 3,377, 3,383, and 4,934

to 4,942; and Jno. Lovell, Manager of The Press Association; q. 3,979

to 3,986.

[107] _Report from the Select Committee on the Post Office_ (_Telegraph

Department_), 1876; q. 5,122 to 5,129.

[108] _Report from the Select Committee on the Post Office_ (_Telegraph

Department_), 1876; q. 5,278.

[109] _Report from the Select Committee on the Post Office_ (_Telegraph

Department_), 1876; q. 3,385 and following, 4,926, 4,927, 3,371, and

3,372.

Receipts from messages sent to individual newspapers, and not

duplicated to any extent:

$

1870 29,000

1871 41,000

1872 60,000

1873 78,000

1874 85,000

1875 91,000

[110] Questions 2,007 and 2,167.

[111] _Hansard's Parliamentary Debates_, August 30, 1888, p. 305.

[112] _Hansard's Parliamentary Debates_, November 27, 1893, p. 1,789.

Compare also June 19, 1893, p. 1,316.

[113] _Hansard's Parliamentary Debates_, April 4, 1895, p. 919.

[114] _Hansard's Parliamentary Debates_, April 27, 1900, p. 136.

[115] _Report from the Select Committee on the Post Office_ (_Telegraph

Department_), 1876; q. 3,360 to 3,370, 3,423, 4,917 to 4,923, and 5,147

to 5,149.

[116] _Report by Mr. Scudamore on the Re-organization of the Telegraph

System of the United Kingdom_, 1871, pp. 31 and 32; and _Report from

the Select Committee on Revenue Departments Estimates_, 1888; Mr. C. H.

B. Patey, Third Secretary to the Post Office, in Appendix No. 14.

=======+=======+========+============+===========+=============

| | News- | Newsrooms | Messages | Words

| Towns | papers | and Clubs | Delivered | Delivered

| | |(pool-rooms)| |

-------+-------+--------+------------+-----------+-------------

1869 | 144 | 173 | 133 | ? | ?

1871 | 365 | 467 | 639 | ? | 21,702,000

1881 | 326 | 525 | 278 | 2,735,042 | 327,707,400

1885 | 371 | 578 | 397 | 3,616,653 | 421,362,579

1887 | 286 | 499 | 289 | 4,289,986 | 481,796,400

=======+=======+========+============+===========+=============

[117] _Report from the Select Committee on the Post Office_ (_Telegraph

Department_), 1876; q. 4,047 to 4,051, 4,889, 4,890 and 3,343.

[118] _Parliamentary Paper_, No. 196, Session of 1877; Copy _of

the Regulations Relating to Press Telegraph Messages issued by the

Postmaster General_ in 1876.

[119] _Hansard's Parliamentary Debates_, March 12, 1906, p. 867.

The British State Telegraphs A Study of the Problem of a Large Body of Civil Servants in a Democracy · 第 8 / 19 章