post are generally heard from by members of Congress, there is not
much likelihood of definite action being taken, and the probability is
that in any event a general parcels post in this country can only be
secured through the medium of a modest and limited and more or less
experimental beginning in the way of a local or rural parcels post.
_Local Parcels Post_
President Taft in his last annual message recommended a parcels post
limited to rural free-delivery lines. This recommendation was made on
the ground of economy, to meet the opposition aroused by the argument
that a general system would create a great deficit in the postal
revenues, for a time at least. The local system would also have the
virtue that it would furnish an object lesson in a partial and limited
way, which might be valuable in determining the propriety of further
extending the system. There is, furthermore, an argument for rural
parcels post which does not apply in the same degree to a general
parcels post, and that is that while the dwellers in cities and towns
have ready access to stores and opportunities of express service,
the dwellers in rural communities do not have these advantages,
and therefore a rural parcels post which would enable them to have
articles delivered on local routes or to local post offices would be
of great benefit and advantage to them. As we do not have many rural
free-delivery routes in our sparsely settled intermountain country, I
am of the opinion that a rural parcels post, if established, should
also operate over the star routes which supply our country offices and
our people in boxes en route, and therefore the bill which I introduced
provides for such a service.
Such a rural parcels post as is thus proposed would unquestionably be
helpful in building up the trade of the merchants in the small cities
and towns and of very great value and advantage to the people who get
their mail at the country post offices and along country routes. This
being true, I supposed I would avoid much of the storm of opposition
which those who have advocated a general parcels post have heretofore
encountered. Much to my surprise, however, the onslaught against this
very modest proposition, intended to help the local merchant and the
people of the country, has been even more terrific than the outburst
against the general proposition; all of which makes one fact as clear
as the noonday sun, and that is that the opponents of a parcels post
realize that the local parcels post, if it works well and is generally
satisfactory, will be the entering wedge for the general parcels post.
It also illuminates quite as clearly another fact, and that is that the
opponents of parcels post believe that the rural parcels post will work
well and be generally satisfactory. Another important fact emphasized
by this opposition is that the opponents of parcels post believe that
the agitation for a local parcels post is much more dangerous than
the agitation for the general parcels post, because it is more likely
to be successful. The gentlemen who have been spending their money so
liberally in opposition to the local or rural parcels post have thus
made clear three important facts:
First. They believe that there is a strong probability of a local
parcels post being established.
Second. They believe that such a system will work to the satisfaction
of the people.
Third. They believe that, the local system having proven satisfactory,
it would lead to the establishment of a general system.
In this condition of affairs it would seem that it is the duty of
the friends of a parcels-post system to get behind the President’s
suggestion of a local parcels post enlarged so as to include star
routes and country offices.
Some one is spending a lot of money to defeat the rural parcels post.
One way they are doing it is by sending out petitions by the tens of
thousands, which they ask the local merchants to sign and send to their
Congressman. I have received hundreds of these petitions. They have
various sorts of headings printed in various kinds of type, but they
are nearly all alike.
After having in the first paragraph drawn a dreadful picture of the
awful disaster and destruction which the rural parcels post will bring
to the farmers and to the country towns, in whose behalf they weep and
wail--a destruction compared with which the devastation of Sodom and
Gomorrah would be as the passing of a summer zephyr--they tell us how
all these direful calamities are to come, as follows:
In every town catalogue agents of mail-order concerns would
establish themselves. They would need no stores, pay no rent,
employ no clerks, require no credit and give none, and carry no
stock. Their whole time would be devoted to soliciting orders
from catalogues. The merchandise would be shipped to them by
express or freight from the retail mail-order houses in the
large cities. When received it would be deposited in the local
post office and the packages delivered by the rural carriers.
The only trouble with this lovely piece of sophistry is they fail
to explain to us why the very game they describe can not be worked
just as well now as it could after a rural parcels post had been
established. There is nothing in the world to prevent just the sort
of a plan, which is thus held up to our horror and execration, from
being carried out now, except that it would not pay. The mail carriers
on rural and star lines not only have the authority, but they would
be very glad to have the opportunity of delivering packages along
their routes which solicitors for catalogue houses might deliver to
them. And, furthermore, they can now, no doubt would be glad to, take
packages of any size; whereas a rural parcels post only provides
for packages up to 11 pounds. So, when you come to analyze it, this
“local-solicitor-of-the-mail-order-trust” bugaboo is found to be just
another one of the strawmen, the poor miserable scarecrows, that the
express companies are trying to terrify us with.
The mail-order houses claim they can sell cheaper than the local
merchants because they do not have any local expense. The moment they
are called upon to pay for the services of a local agent their expenses
are greater than those of the local merchant. I think this disposes
of the “local-agent bogy.” He is the most transparent of all the
scarecrows the express companies have raised.
Congressional Record. 45: 9310-4. June 24, 1910.
General Deficiency Bill.
William S. Bennet.
Mr. Speaker: In view of the great interest in the parcels post
question, I submit herewith the views of the Farmers’ National
Congress:
_A Brief for a Modern Parcels Post for the United States_
[By John M. Stahl, legislative agent Farmers’ National Congress.]
It has been said, and not without justice, that because of greater
density of population parcels can be carried at a less cost in the
domestic mails of Germany or Belgium than in the domestic mails of the
United States, because the average haul would be shorter in Germany or
Belgium. But the disparity between the domestic parcels post of the
United States and of foreign countries is greater than is warranted
by the length of the average haul. No fact is better established in
the science of transportation than that the cost of transporting an
article bears little relation to the distance transported. But if the
density of population should fix the rate of postage and the limit
of weight in a domestic parcels post, then surely we should have a
lower rate of postage and a higher weight limit than those countries
in which the population is not so dense as is ours. For example, the
area of the Commonwealth of Australia is 2,974,581 square miles, and
the present population is 4,300,000. The area of the United States,
excluding Alaska and the islands, is 3,025,600 square miles. Alaska and
Hawaii would add a shade less than 600,000 square miles. The area of
the Philippine Archipelago is 832,968 square miles, and the population,
according to the 1908 census, is 7,835,436. It is certain that,
including all our territory and all our population, we have an average
population of more than 20 per square mile. Australia has a population
of less than 2 per square mile. If the argument of the opponents of
a modern parcels post for the United States, founded on the density
of population of Belgium, Germany, etc., is a good argument, then the
rate charged in our domestic parcels post should be much less and the
weight limit should be much greater than in the domestic parcels post
of Australia. But the postage rate in the domestic parcels post of
Australia is as follows: Intrastate, 1 pound, 6 pence (12 cents); 2
pounds, 9 pence (18 cents); 3 pounds, 1 shilling; and 3 pence (6 cents)
for each additional pound up to and including 11 pounds, the postage
rate for an 11-pound parcel being 3 shillings (72 cents).
The interstate rate in the parcels post among the six states of
Australia is as follows: One pound, 8 pence (16 cents); 2 pounds, 1
shilling 2 pence; 3 pounds, 1 shilling 8 pence; and 6 pence additional
for each additional pound up to and including 11 pounds, making the
charge for an 11-pound parcel 5 shillings 8 pence ($1.36).
New Zealand is 1,200 miles from Australia and extends for 1,100 miles.
It has a population of only 1,000,000. Yet the rate in the parcels
posts between the States of Australia and New Zealand is just the same
as it is among the States of Australia, and the weight limit is the
same.
Now, if the people of Belgium and Germany should have a less postage
rate and a higher weight limit in their domestic parcels post than we
have because the population of Germany and Belgium is denser than our
population, then we should have a much less postage rate and a much
higher weight limit in our domestic parcels post than have the people
of Australia, because our population is more than ten times as dense as
the population of Australia. But, on the contrary, the average postage
rate in not only the intrastate but also in the interstate parcels post
of Australia is less than in our domestic parcels post, and the weight
limit is 11 pounds, as compared with 4 pounds in our domestic parcels
post. The rule laid down by the opponents of a modern parcels post for
the United States must apply to Australia as well as to Belgium and
Germany, and by this rule the rate in our domestic parcels post should
certainly be less than 8 cents a pound and the weight limit should
certainly be far above 11 pounds.
The postage rate in the domestic parcels post of New Zealand is 4
pence (8 cents) for the first pound and 2 pence (4 cents) for each
additional pound. The population of New Zealand is less than one-half
as dense as our population. The weight limit in the domestic parcels
post of New Zealand is 11 pounds. If the argument of the opponents of
a modern parcels post for the United States, founded on the density
of population is correct, then the rate in our domestic parcels post,
instead of being several times that of New Zealand, should be less,
and the weight limit, instead of being only about one-third that of New
Zealand, should be greater.
Our parcels post with foreign countries shows beyond argument that
the postage rate in our domestic parcels post should be not more than
one-third of what it is, at the utmost, and that the weight limit
should be several times what it is. The domestic parcels posts of other
countries and of Australia and New Zealand show also beyond argument
that the postage rate in our domestic parcels post should be only a
fraction of what it is and that the weight limit should be several
times greater.
Whether or not the railways are owned by the government does not
touch the argument founded on the parcel post of other countries.
If government ownership of railways lessens the cost of the postal
service, it may be an argument that our Post-Office Department pays
our railways too high a rate for transporting mail matter, but it has
nothing to do with the character of the mail service our government
should give our people.
As a matter of fact, government ownership of railways has no apparent
effect on the parcel post of foreign countries. Both those in which the
railways are in large part owned by the government and those in which
the government does not own any railway mileage have a parcel post much
superior to ours.
Possibly our government should not conduct a parcel post at any
considerable loss, although it should be borne in mind that the object
of our Post-Office Department is to serve the people and not to make
money. It might be successfully argued that fundamentally there is no
greater reason why the Post-Office Department should be a source of
revenue than that the War Department should be a source of revenue. The
mails have become so very important in the transaction of business,
in the communication of intelligence, and affect so many of the
operations of our daily life, that each year it becomes apparent that
the test of our Post-Office Department should be the excellence of
the service it gives our people; and the relation of expenditures, so
long as they are judiciously and economically made, to receipts is of
less and less importance. But we would not advocate any parcel post
that, when fully established and on a normal basis, would add much,
if any, to the net cost of our Post-Office Department. However, it is
apparent from a study of the profits of our express companies that our
Post-Office Department could carry parcels in our domestic post at a
much less rate than 16 cents a pound without increasing the net cost
of the Post-Office Department. Further, a study of the profits of our
express companies show clearly that we are being charged altogether
too much by these express companies for the service they give us, and
that their charges should be subjected to that most effective of all
control--the competition of a modern parcel post. This study shows
with equal plainness that the present weight limit on parcels in our
domestic post, which compels us to send by express all parcels weighing
more than 4 pounds, should be raised to a much higher figure, probably
25 or even 100 pounds. Recent investigations and revelations have shown
that our express companies are really subjecting us to extortion.
The competition of a modern parcels post may not prove sufficient of
itself to make the charges of the express companies what they should
be, but it would certainly be most effective in accomplishing this
result. We are subjected to overcharges by express companies as are the
people of no other country on the face of the earth. In fact, the most
important countries of Europe, as well as Australia, New Zealand, etc.,
are not subjected to any overcharges at all by express companies for
the reason that in those countries and colonies there are no express
companies of the nature of those existing in this country. On account
of the overcharges of our express companies we have a very good reason,
indeed, for a modern parcels post in this country; and this very good
reason is in addition to those that so many other countries have found
amply sufficient to warrant a modern parcels post.
And it should not be forgotten that the enormous profits of our express
companies on the capital they actually have invested in the express
business show conclusively that our government could give us a modern
parcel post without increasing the net cost of the postal service after
that parcel post had been established and its business had reached
normal proportions.
In an honest endeavor to arrive at a correct conclusion as to the
features of our domestic parcel post we can not do better than to study
the parcel post of Australia and New Zealand, for the dominant elements
in the population of Australia and New Zealand are the same as in ours,
the people of Australia and New Zealand have obtained their ideas of
government and the functions of government from the same source that
we have, their institutions and conditions approach ours nearer than
those of other countries, and they have the same problem of adapting
the government service to a wide expanse of territory in the settlement
and development of a new country. This problem, though much greater
than ours at this time--the area of Australia is nearly the same as
that of our states, while the population is only about one-twentieth as
much--is the same in its nature.
Another reason is that the postal service of Australia and New Zealand
is so satisfactory in every way. On page 25 of “L’Union Postale” for
1909 it is stated in regard to the New Zealand postal service: “The
financial results of the administration were very satisfactory. The
receipts increased by 9.04 per cent and the expenditure by 7.22 per
cent over the preceding year.”
It will be seen that the postal business of New Zealand conforms to the
rule of good business management that as a business increases in volume
the receipts should increase faster than the expense.
In the last published report of the postmaster-general of New Zealand
it is pointed out that notwithstanding several important reductions
in the postage rate the revenue of the postal service had during the
preceding sixteen years increased by a considerably larger amount
than the expense. “From December 16, 1907, the postage on inland
post cards was reduced to one-half penny. From January 1, 1908, the
rates for inland letters were made 1 penny for the first 4 ounces and
one-half penny for each additional 2 ounces. From January 1, 1908, the
commission chargeable on money orders within New Zealand is 3 pence
for each 5 pounds sterling or fraction of 5 pounds. Owing to the
reduction in postal rates made the year before, the number of parcels
increased 81.57 per cent.” “The rate of postage for inland parcels
was reduced from 6 pence for the first pound and 3 pence for each
additional pound to 4 pence for the first pound and 2 pence for each
additional pound. The public, moreover, has by the change been induced
to send by parcels post articles which were previously forwarded as
packets.” “The reduction in postal rates may be practically referred
to as having resulted in a great increase in parcels-post business.”
There was a handsome net balance to the credit of the postal business.
“The net balance on the year’s transactions would be much higher if the
value of official correspondence dealt with were taken into account.”
“The expansion of the business has necessitated large additions to the
staff. The increase of the staff was, however, below the percentage
of increase of the receipts. An amendment to the post-office act
contributed to improve the financial condition of the postal service.”
The experience of New Zealand and the Commonwealth of Australia in
postal service is well stated by the colonial treasurer, Hon. Sir
J. G. Ward, in one of his recent financial statements, as follows:
“Experience has shown that every concession in postal rates creates
a new class of business which is ultimately to the profit of the
post-office.”
Of course, in the official publications of the Commonwealth of
Australia and of New Zealand one hears nothing to the effect that the
government should not engage in any competitive business--one hears
that only in the United States. If that were put into effect, our
national government would be compelled to stop building war ships
in the navy-yards, to close up altogether the government printing
establishment, to stop at once all its irrigation projects, to close
up all the land-grant colleges, to stop at once casting cannon and
making small firearms and ammunition, etc. As a matter of fact, when
our Constitution was framed there was no question among those that
framed it that it should give to the national government the power to
do certain things, in competition with private enterprise, that would
be for “the public welfare;” and there was never any intimation that
the national government should not engage in any competitive business.
On the other hand, those that helped to frame the national Constitution
and to secure its adoption participated in and sanctioned legislation
by Congress that put the national government into several lines of
competitive business.
The publications of the labor officials of Australia and New Zealand
are decidedly numerous, and show plainly that the working people of
these colonies, as well as the other elements of their population,
are heartily in favor of a modern parcel post. It may truly be said
that the parcel post of Australia and New Zealand has the hearty and
universal approval of the people of those colonies. The officials
and the rank and file of the labor organizations of these colonies
are among the heartiest supporters of their parcel post. And it is
certain that the very large majority of the rank and file of our labor
organizations and the very large majority of our city people, as well
as of farmers, heartily favor a modern parcel post.
As for the relation of a modern parcels post to the so-called
catalogue houses: In his official reports the postmaster-general of
both Australia and New Zealand frequently emphasizes that for years a
thoroughly modern colonial, intercolonial, and foreign parcels post has
been enjoyed by the people of those colonies, even in “the most remote
districts to which the mail service penetrates.” Notwithstanding this,
in all of the many publications on Australia and New Zealand, or by the
officials of those colonies, there could not be found a sentence to
the effect that the local merchants of those colonies have been in the
least injured in their business by catalogue houses.
This fact certainly merits being emphasized. In all the countries in
which there is a modern parcels post the catalogue house is unknown.
In our country, which is the only enlightened country that has not a
modern parcels post, the catalogue house exists and, to some limited
extent, flourishes. Hence the fact is plain that instead of a modern
parcels post aiding catalogue houses the very opposite is true. If
the universal experience of humanity counts for anything, then the
antiquated parcels post, such as we have, aids the catalogue house and
the modern parcels post puts it out of business and keeps it out of
business.
The rural delivery service has grown to more than 20,000 routes.
Official reports show that the average weight of mail delivered by
each team or single-horse wagon in the rural delivery service is only
25 pounds. On nearly all the trips the carrier could practically as
well take 500 pounds in his wagon. The more than 40,000 rural carriers
make more than 12,480,000 round trips each year. If a parcels post on
the rural routes earned $2 for each round trip the gain would be, in
round numbers $25,000,000 a year, and this, with some little reforms
that all agree should be and easily could be made, would wipe out the
postal deficit. Now, if the rate on the pound packages in a rural route
parcels post was 5 cents a pound the carrier to earn the $2 per round
trip would be compelled to carry not the 500 pounds that he could, but
only 20 pounds additional going and coming or a total load of only 45
pounds.
This is a fair calculation as to profit to the government, for the
expense for the rural carrier service would not be any greater
whatever, and the small expense for handling the additional 20 pounds
at the terminal post-office would be more than covered by the increased
first-class mail (handling which is very profitable) resulting from the
parcels post.
As, on the average, about 100 families are served by each rural route,
if, on the average, each family had delivered or sent each trip only
one-half pound of parcel, taking into account that a good many parcels
would weigh less than 1 pound and that every parcels-post bill proposes
for them a higher rate than for heavier packages, the rate could be
made much less than is proposed and yet the postal deficit would be
wiped out altogether!