Transcriber’s Note: obvious printers’ errors have been corrected but the spelling, hyphenation etc. in this book is generally inconsistent, as you might expect from a collection of articles by different authors: the editor did not impose a uniform style.

DEBATERS’ HAND BOOK SERIES

PARCELS POST

DEBATERS’
HANDBOOK SERIES

• Enlargement of the United States Navy (3d ed. rev. and enl.)
• Direct Primaries (3d ed. rev. and enl.)
• Capital Punishment
• Commission Plan of Municipal Government (2d ed. rev. and enl.)
• Election of United States Senators
• Income Tax (2d ed. rev. and enl.)
• Initiative and Referendum (2d ed. rev. and enl.)
• Central Bank of the United States
• Woman Suffrage
• Municipal Ownership
• Child Labor
• Open versus Closed Shop
• Employment of Women
• Federal Control of Interstate Corporations
• Parcels Post
• Other titles in preparation

Each volume, one dollar net

Debaters’ Handbook Series

SELECTED ARTICLES
ON THE
PARCELS POST

COMPILED BY
EDITH M. PHELPS

MINNEAPOLIS
THE H. W. WILSON COMPANY
1911

EXPLANATORY NOTE

The plan of this volume is very similar to that of the others of the series to which it belongs. It contains a brief, a bibliography, and reprints of articles containing the various arguments for and against the parcels post; also, information in regard to the present status of the parcels post in this and other countries. For the convenience of the reader, the articles have been arranged in three main divisions: the General, Affirmative, and Negative Discussions. The bibliography is similarly divided. It is believed that debaters and others wishing material on this subject will find this book both convenient and helpful.

September, 1911.

CONTENTS

BRIEF

Resolved, That the Federal Government should establish a Parcels Post.

Introduction

I. It has been claimed that

A. Our postal rates on third and fourth class matter are exorbitant as compared with those in foreign countries.

B. Foreign parcels post systems afford many conveniences which we do not have.

II. An extension of our present parcels post system is demanded.

A. Bills providing for it have been presented to Congress.

B. Postmasters-General Wanamaker, Meyer, and others have tried to secure it.

C. It has been recommended in presidential messages, in conventions, by postal officials and by the people.

III. The plan which has received most favorable attention is that of Postmaster-General Meyer, providing for

A. A general parcels post at the rate of 12c a pound, with a limit in weight of eleven pounds.

B. A rural parcels post at the rate of 5c for the first pound, 2c for each additional pound, limit of weight eleven pounds.

Affirmative

The Affirmative is in favor of the Parcels Post, for

I. The United States government would benefit financially.

A. The receipts from the increased volume of business would more than repay the loss from the reduction in rate.

B. Increased receipts from rural routes would be clear profit.

1. Rural routes are already equipped for this service.

C. If the post with foreign countries pays now, the government ought to make a profit from a similar domestic service.

II. The general public would benefit by this service.

A. Present transportation charges would be reduced.

1. The express companies would have to reduce rates.

B. Greater convenience in sending merchandise would result.

1. The express companies would have to improve service.

C. The cost of living would be reduced.

III. Rural communities would be benefited.

A. The local dealer would profit.

1. He could do a larger business with less expense, and with increased facilities for delivery.

2. He could meet the competition of mail-order houses and city merchants.

B. Country towns and villages would have cheap transportation which is so essential for favorable growth.

C. The parcels post would turn the tide of civilization from the cities back to the land.

D. The farmer would be benefitted.

1. He would save time and expense in driving to market.

2. He could have more of the comforts and conveniences of city life.

3. He would have better market facilities for his products.

IV. A parcels post would not be class legislation.

A. Mail-order houses and city department stores would not benefit unduly.

B. Express companies would not be seriously injured.

1. Their present rates are excessive.

V. The parcels post has been successful in other countries and is practicable.

A. It has paid

1. Financially.

2. In comfort and convenience.

B. In nearly every country the rates are lower than in the United States and the limit in weight is much higher.

Negative

The Negative is opposed to the Parcels Post, for

I. The present postal deficit would be increased rather than diminished.

A. The cost of the increased service would not be covered by the increased traffic.

1. The government cannot compete successfully with the express companies.

2. There would be a continual demand for more and better equipment.

3. Government undertakings are always more costly than those under private management.

B. The inconsistencies between our present foreign and domestic rates are not as great as has been claimed.

II. The general public would not be benefitted by it.

A. It would have little influence on express rates.

B. It would increase the centralization of wealth, population, and manufactures.

C. The demand for it has been artificially created.

III. Rural communities would be injured by it.

A. Retailers and local dealers would suffer.

1. Orders would be sent direct to manufacturing centers.

2. Mail-order houses would obtain most of the trade.

B. Rural towns and villages would be injured.

1. Trade would be drawn to the larger cities and population would follow.

C. The farmer would not be benefitted.

1. He would not use it nearly as much as has been claimed.

2. The market for his products would be largely destroyed by the removal of population to large cities.

3. The rural parcels post alone would be merely an entering wedge.

IV. Legislation for a parcels post would be discriminating and unnecessary.

A. Dealers, wholesalers and jobbers in heavy merchandise could not use it.

B. Mail-order houses and department stores would benefit at the expense of the retailers and consumers.

C. The Interstate Commerce Commission already has the power to correct excessive express rates.

D. The rural post alone would increase the business of the express companies.

V. That the parcels post is in operation in foreign countries at very low rates and high weight-limits is no argument for its extension in the United States.

A. Conditions vary so widely.

1. Distances are greater in the United States.

2. The population is more scattered.

3. The railroads are privately owned, and the government must pay heavy rates for service.

B. It is claimed that the system is run at a loss in England and Germany.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

An asterisk (*) preceding a reference indicates that the entire article or a part of it has been reprinted in this volume.

Bibliographies

Kansas. State University. Extension Division. Bulletin. Vol. XI. No. 10. July, 1910. Kansas High School Debating League, Announcements, 1910-1911. pp. 26-8.

United States. Library of Congress—Division of Bibliography. Select List of References on the Parcels Post. 5p. Typewritten. 15c. Supt. of Doc.

Virginia. Dep’t of Public Instruction, State University, and the Co-Operative Education Ass’n. Bulletin. Ser. I. No. 3. March, 1911. Parcels Post. pp. 18-21.

Wisconsin. State University. Extension Division. Bulletin. Ser. No. 204: Extension Ser. No. 18. March, 1908. Parcels Post. pa. 5c.

General References

Books, Pamphlets and Documents

Bennet, William S. Freight, Passenger and Intelligence Post: The Public Need. 14p. pa. Govt. Ptg. Office.

Address William S. Bennet, Representative, Washington, D. C.

*Bennet, William S. Post-Office, Our Mutual Express Company: Speech in the House of Representatives, May 13, 1909. 8p. pa. Govt. Ptg. Office.

Reprinted from the Congressional Record. 44: 5174-6. Ag. 5, 09. [Address William S. Bennet, Representative, Washington, D. C.]

*Carr, D. M. Up to Members of Congress. 8p. pa. March, 1908.

Address D. M. Carr, Editor “The Winning West,” Omaha, Nebr.

Congressional Record. 32: Appendix. 208-10. F. 21, ’99. United States Parcels Post. James L. Cowles.

Printed in connection with a speech by Senator Butler, in the Senate, F. 20-21, ’99.

Congressional Record. 43: 1866-8. F. 4, ’09. Parcels Post System.

Cowles, James L. General Freight and Passenger Post: Practical Solution of the Railroad Problem. G. P. Putnam’s Sons, New York. 1898.

*Cowles, James L. Our Postal Express. 2p. Postal Progress League.

Address the Postal Progress League, 125 E. 23rd St., New York City.

*Lewis, David J. System of Postal Express to Include Both Country Merchants and Farmers: Speech in the House of Representatives, June 8, 1911. 32p. pa.

Reprinted from the Hearings before Sub-Committee No. 4, of the Committee on the Post-Office and Post-Roads, June, 1911. pp. 10-38, 48-52. [Address David J. Lewis, Representative, Washington, D. C.]

Monthly Consular and Trade Reports. No. 326. p. 37. N. ’07. Parcels Post from United States. Govt. Ptg. Office.

*Monthly Consular and Trade Reports. No. 329. pp. 104-6. F. ’08. German Parcels Post. Govt. Ptg. Office.

Monthly Consular and Trade Reports. No. 334. p. 192. Jl. ’08. Parcels Post from United States. Govt. Ptg. Office.

Monthly Consular and Trade Reports. No. 335: 179-80. Ag. ’08. Parcels Post.

Monthly Consular and Trade Reports. No. 357. Je. ’10. pp. 109-11. Parcels Post. Germany and Australia. Govt. Ptg. Office.

Postal Progress. 1907-1911. Post Office: The Minister of Peace. 4p. Postal Progress League.

Address the Postal Progress League, 125 E. 23d St., New York City.

*United States. Congress, House of Representatives. Parcels Post: Hearings before the Committee on the Postoffice and Post Roads. April 20-29, 1910, 322p. pa. 25c. Supt. of Doc.

Recommended for purchase.

United States. Congress. House of Representatives. Parcels Post: Hearings before Sub-Committee No. 4 of the Committee on the Postoffice and Post Roads, June, 1911, 390p. pa. Supt. of Doc.

Recommended for purchase.

*United States. Post-Office Dep’t. Data Relative to Proposed Extension of Parcel Post. (60th Cong., 1st Sess., Senate. Doc. 366.) 15p. ’08. Govt. Ptg. Office.

Reprinted from the Congressional Record. 42: 3041-5. Mr. 6, ’08.

World Almanac, 1911. Postal Information, pp. 99-105.

A summary of the present governmental regulations respecting foreign and domestic mails.

Magazine Articles

Arena. 34: 113-9. Ag. ’05. European Parcels-Post. J. Henniker Heaton.

Reprinted in condensed form in the Review of Reviews. 32: 345-6. S. ’05.

Bulletin. Pan American Union. 32: 365-8. F. ’11. Parcels Post Convention between the United States and Haiti.

Contains the text of the convention adopted by Haiti and the United States in 1910.

Catholic World. 81: 353-61. Je. ’05. Parcel-Post System of Germany. J. C. Monaghan.

Chautauquan. 64: 7-8. S. ’11. Parcels Post Next.

Cosmopolitan. 35: 3-10. My. ’03. Governmental Parcel-Post in Great Britain. J. Henniker Heaton.

Cosmopolitan. 36: 217*-19*. Ap. ’04. Postal Parcels Delivery One Cent a Pound. John B. Walker.

Dun’s Review. 14: 12-4. F. 24, ’06. Parcels-Post System of Germany. J. C. Monaghan.

Reprinted in the Hearings before Subcommittee No. 4 of the Committee on the Post-Office and Post-Roads, House of Representatives, June, 1911. pp. 70-3.

Nineteenth Century. 25: 894-901. Je. ’89. Agricultural Parcels Post. Henry P. Dunster.

Nineteenth Century. 54: 981-4. D. ’03. Cash on Delivery, or Shopping by Post. J. Henniker Heaton.

Arguments for and against the extension of the parcels post system in England to admit the cash on delivery feature.

North American. 187: 330-6. Mr. ’08. Parcels Post. George von L. Meyer.

Outlook. 72: 147-8. S. 20, ’02. Cheap Parcels Post from England.

Outlook. 79: 148. Ja. 14, ’05. Comparison of Postal Rates. James L. Cowles.

Postal Progress. Vol. I. No. 6. pp. 1-4. Ag. ’07. Common One-Cent-a-Pound Postal Rate. James L. Cowles.

Clippings from American Industries, June 15, 1907, and Iron Age, July 4, 1907, form a part of the article.

Scientific American. 98: 455. Je. 27, ’08. Reduction of Foreign Parcel Postal Rates.

Scientific American Supplement. 48: 20008. D. 2, ’99. Parcels Post Exchanges with Germany.

Survey. 25: 121-2. O. 22, ’10. Parcels Post Made in Germany.

Affirmative References

Pamphlets and Documents

Congressional Record. 42: 3081-4. Mr. 7, ’08. Post-Office Appropriation Bill: Speech in the House of Representatives, March 3, 1908. James M. Griggs.

Congressional Record. 42: 6567-8. My. 15, ’08. Special Parcels Post. George von L. Meyer.

Congressional Record. 45: 2958-9. Mr. 8, ’10. Amendment for the Parcels Post. Mr. Hardwick.

Congressional Record. 45: 3223-4. Mr. 14, ’10. Extension of Parcels Post: Letter to John M. Stahl. George von L. Meyer.

Congressional Record. 45: 9310-4. Je. 24. ’10. General Deficiency Bill: Speech in the House of Representatives, June 21, 1910. William S. Bennet.

Reprinted in the Congressional Record. 45: Appendix 382-6.

Congressional Record. 46: 1243-5. Ja. 21, ’11. Proposed Parcels Post: Speech in the House of Representatives, January 17, 1911. Ralph W. Moss.

Congressional Record. 46: 1273-6. Ja. 21, ’11. Limited Parcels Post.

Congressional Record. 46: 1443-5. Ja. 25, ’11. Why the People Favor a General Parcels Post: Speech in the House of Representatives, January 17, 1911. William Sulzer.

Congressional Record. 46: 1881. F. 2, ’11. Resolution Adopted by Nebraska Farmer’s Congress in Favor of Parcels Post.

*Congressional Record. 46: 1941-7. F. 3, ’11. Star Routes and Rural Parcels Post: Speech in the House of Representatives, January 19, 1911. F. W. Mondell.

Congressional Record. 46: 2773-4. F. 9, ’11. Parcels Post: Speech in the House of Representatives. Ralph W. Moss.

Consists mostly of quotations from the Price Current and other trade journals.

Meyer, George von L. Address at the Banquet of the New England Postmasters, October 12, 1907. 14p. pa. Govt. Ptg. Office.

*Sulzer, William. Our Postal Express: Speech in the House of Representatives, June 9, 1910. 8p. pa. Govt. Ptg. Office.

Reprinted from the Congressional Record. 45: 8287-97. Je. 15, ’10. [Address William Sulzer, Representative, Washington, D. C.]

*Sulzer, William. People Demand a General Parcels Post: Speech in the House of Representatives, February 6, 1911. 15p. pa. Govt. Ptg. Office.

Reprinted from the Congressional Record. 46: 2094-7. F. 6, ’11. [Apply to William Sulzer, Representative, Washington, D. C.]

United States. Post Office Dep’t. Annual Report of the Postmaster General. 1907. pp. 9-11. Extension of the Parcel Post. 10c. Supt. of Doc.

Magazine Articles

Arena. 23: 103-6. Ja. ’00. Needed Postal Reform. Louis E. Guillow.

Arena. 35: 212-3. F. ’06. England’s Magnificent Postal-Service Record.

Arena. 37: 308-9. Mr. ’07. Postal Service in Japan.

Cosmopolitan. 36: 379*-81*. F. ’04. Aid Which the Post Office Department Might Render to Commerce. John B. Walker.

*Cosmopolitan. 36: 497*-9*. Mr. ’04. Who Will Be Benefited by a Parcels Post? John B. Walker.

*Craftsman. 14: 592-4. S. ’08. More Efficient Postal Service. Gustav Stickley.

*Good Housekeeping. 53: 2-10. Jl. ’11. Housekeeping by Parcels Post. Isabel G. Curtis.

*Hampton’s. 26: 261-4. F. ’11. Let Us Have a Parcels Post.

*Housekeeper. 31: 11-35. Ag. ’08. Parcels Post. George E. Miller.

Independent. 53: 2607-8. O. 31, ’01. Parcels Post.

Independent. 56: 306-9. F. 11, ’04. Post Office, Our Mutual Transportation Company. James L. Cowles.

Independent. 63: 1185-7. N. 14, ’07. Parcels Post.

Independent. 67: 986-7. O. 28, ’09. It Must Come.

*Independent. 70: 105-7. Ja. 12, ’11. Parcels Post Once More.

Nation. 90: 345. Ap. 7, ’10. For a Parcels-Post. Reuben G. Thwaites.

Nineteenth Century. 53: 253-63. F. ’03. Agricultural Parcel Post. J. Henniker Heaton.

Outlook. 90: 801-2. D. 12, ’08. Postal Deficit and a Rural Parcel Post.

Outlook. 96: 567. N. 12, ’10. Express Monopoly versus a Parcels Post.

Postal Progress. Vol. I. No. 4. pp. 1-2. Ap. 1, ’07. Foreign Parcels Post Necessary.

Scientific American. 102: 274. Ap. 2, ’10. Need of an Improved Parcels Post.

World’s Work. 21: 13978-86. F. ’11. Post-Office: An Obstructive Monopoly. Don G. Seitz.

*World’s Work. 21: 14248-51. Ap. ’11. Parcels Post and the Retailer. Fremont Rider.

Negative References

Pamphlets and Documents

*Bogardus, W. P. Why Parcels Post Is Not a Good Thing for This Country. 8p. pa. Iowa Retail Hardware Ass’n.

Address A. R. Sale, Iowa Retail Hardware Association, Mason City, Iowa.

*Burrows, Charles W. Further Thoughts on Parcels Post: With an Examination of Postmaster-General Meyer’s Recommendations. 19p. pa.

Address Charles W. Burrows, 633 Euclid Av., Cleveland, Ohio.

*Burrows, Charles W. One Cent Letter Postage, Second Class Mail Rates, and Parcels Post: Address Delivered before the National Hardware Ass’n, March 30, 1911. pp. 11-25.

Address Charles W. Burrows, 633 Euclid Av., Cleveland, Ohio.

Congressional Record. 40: 3476-82. Mr. 7, ’06. Parcels Post: Speech in the House of Representatives. Gilbert N. Haugen.

*French, F. E. Parcels Post: Address before the Southern Merchant’s Ass’n, Nashville, Tenn., February 28-March 3, 1911. Leaflet No. 8. 15p. pa. American League of Associations.

Address the American League of Associations, Room 343, Rand-McNally Bldg., Chicago, Ill.

*Haugen, Gilbert N. Parcels Post and Postal Savings Banks: Speech in the House of Representatives, March 13, 1908. 8p. pa. Govt. Ptg. Office.

Reprinted from the Congressional Record. 42: 3548-51. Mr. 17, ’08. [Address Gilbert N. Haugen, Representative, Washington, D. C.]

Hutsinpillar, C. A. Parcels Post: Address Delivered before the Annual Convention of the Ohio Hardware Ass’n, February 23, 1904, 3p. pa. gratis.

Address C. A. Hutsinpillar, Ironton, Ohio.

*Maxwell, George H. Perils of Parcels Post Extension. Leaflet No. 7. 35p. pa. American League of Associations.

Reprinted in the Hearings before the Committee on the Post-Office and Post-Roads, April 20-29, 1910. [Address American League of Associations, Room 343, Rand-McNally Bldg., Chicago, Ill.]

Menace of a Parcels Post. 40p. pa.

Address S. R. Miles, Mason City, Iowa.

Miles, S. R. Extracts from an Address Delivered before the Federated Commercial Clubs of Minnesota, January 17, 1908. 14p. pa.

Address S. R. Miles, President, National Retail Hardware Dealers Ass’n, Mason City, Iowa.

*Ordway, John A. Parcels Post: Address before the New England Drygoods Ass’n, March, 1911. Leaflet No. 9. 15p. pa. American League of Associations.

Address the American League of Associations, Room 343, Rand-McNally Bldg., Chicago, Ill.

Parcels Post: from the Standpoint of an Iowa Editor. Parcels Post Circular No. 3, Series 1911. 4p. pa. Iowa Retail Hardware Association.

Address A. R. Sale, Iowa Retail Hardware Ass’n, Mason City, Iowa.

*Parcels Post Problem: From the Standpoint of the Towns and Small Cities. 30p. pa. National Hardware Bulletin.

Address M. L. Corey, Secretary, National Retail Hardware Association, Argos, Ind.

Shall the Country Towns Be Destroyed by a Local Rural Parcels Post. Pamphlet No. 5. Home Advancement Series. 30p. pa. American League of Associations.

Most of this pamphlet is a reprint of pp. 274-96 of the Report of the Hearings before the Committee on the Post-Office and Post-Roads, April, 1910. [Apply to M. L. Corey, Argos, Ind.]

*Smith, S. C. Parcels Post: Speech in the House of Representatives, March 3, 1908. 15p. pa. ’08. Govt. Ptg. Office.

Reprinted from the Congressional Record. 42: 2928-31. Mr. 3, ’08. [Address S. C. Smith, Representative, Washington, D. C.]

Spofford, C. W. A. B. C. of Parcels Post; A. Catechism, 11p. pa.

Trans-Mississippi Commercial Congress, Proceedings, 1907. pp. 232-40. Parcels Post.

Magazine References

*Independent. 70: 72-3. Ja. 12, ’11. Objections to the Parcels Post. Allan W. Clark.

Independent. 70: 185. Ja. 26, ’11. Parcels Post Again. Sylvester C. Smith.

*Journal of Political Economy. 16: 417-35. Jl. ’08. Shall the Scope of Governmental Functions Be Enlarged so as to Include the Express Business? Albert N. Merritt.

North American Review. 174: 807-19. Je. ’02. Defects and Abuses in Our Postal System. Henry A. Castle.

Parcels Post. pp. 812-4.

North American Review. 178: 222-34. F. ’04. Postal Service. E. F. Loud.

Parcels Post. pp. 224-6.

Outlook. 96: 794. D. 3, ’10. Parcels Post. George P. Engelhard.

SELECTED ARTICLES ON THE PARCELS POST

INTRODUCTION

The parcels post is not a new question. It has been the subject of popular discussion for years, and several of our postmasters-general have recommended an extension of our present system, sufficient, at least, to put it on an equal basis with our foreign service. Those who are familiar with the parcels post systems of other countries, and those who believe that the express companies should not be permitted to monopolize so large a part of the parcels-carrying trade, are in favor of these recommendations. On the other hand, those who believe that the government should not enter into any commercial undertaking, and those who fear that the change will be detrimental to the country communities and will result in the centralization of our population in the large cities, are strongly opposed to any increase in our present rates, or in the size of the package to be accepted.

There are several organizations who are actively engaged at the present time in supporting or opposing all attempts to enact parcels post legislation. The Postal Progress League, with headquarters at 125 East 23d St., New York City, has for its aim the improvement of our postal service, and is at present actively promoting the cause of the parcels post. This organization is made up of manufacturers, wholesalers, publishers and importers, and is supported by many of the state Granges. The Postal Express Federation is a new organization, formed for the express purpose of urging a reform of our parcels post service, and is supported by many of the same organizations which are back of the Postal Progress League. The American League of Associations (headquarters at Room 343, Rand-McNally Building, Chicago, Ill.), is composed of wholesalers in all lines of merchandise. Its object is to promote the welfare of the small towns and country communities, and to oppose the centralization of population in cities. It is at present actively engaged in fighting the parcels post.

These organizations as well as several others, named in the bibliography given elsewhere in this volume, publish and distribute literature for and against the parcels post, and the student of this subject will find it profitable to get into communication with them.

Hearings on the subject of a parcels post have been held before the House Committee on the Post-Office and Post Roads, at two different times, in April, 1910, and in June, 1911. At these hearings, have appeared representatives of the associations named in the preceding paragraph and of others who approve or oppose the recommendations for an enlarged parcels post. Among those who have appeared in favor of the parcels post are the various state Granges and farmer’s organizations, the American Dyers and Cleaners Association, the Manufacturing Perfumers Association, the Associated Retailers of St. Louis, the Pennsylvania State Federation of Labor, the Society of American Florists and Ornamental Horticulturists, and the National American Woman’s Suffrage Association. Other societies opposing the parcels post are the National Retail Hardware Association, the United Commercial Travelers, the National Association of Implement and Vehicle Dealers’ Associations, the National Associations of Retail Druggists and Grocers, and various Oil, Paint, and Varnish Clubs and Associations.

Postmaster-General George von L. Meyer recommended that our present parcels post system, which is now limited to parcels weighing four pounds or less, be extended to include all parcels of eleven pounds or less, and that the rate be reduced from sixteen to twelve cents a pound. He also recommended that a similar post be established on the rural routes for all parcels of eleven pounds or less, with a rate of five cents for the first pound and two cents for each additional pound. Various bills have been introduced into Congress embodying part or all of these suggestions. Other measures that have been presented provide that the government be given a complete monopoly of the parcels-carrying trade. One bill of this kind introduced by Representative David Lewis of Maryland, provides that the government shall take over the business of the express companies and have complete control of the carrying business in parcels under a given weight. This bill also provides that the zone-system of rates, now in operation in Germany, be adopted.

The General Discussion, following this Introduction, contains data in regard to our present parcels post systems both foreign and domestic, also similar data concerning the systems of other countries. It also contains information regarding many of the recommendations that have been made for an enlarged parcels post and the measures that have been presented to Congress. The student is advised to familiarize himself with the facts given in this discussion before proceeding to take up the arguments for and against the parcels post.

GENERAL DISCUSSION

Up to Members of Congress.

D. M. Carr.

Bills have been introduced in the present Congress, by Senators Burnham and Kean, with a view of further improving the postal service. These measures are for the purpose of enabling the postal department to extend its parcel delivery service, commonly designated as the “parcels post.”

There is a large percentage of citizens who strongly advocate an enlargement of the parcels carrying service performed by the government. A number of foreign countries have for years maintained parcels post systems on broad gauge plans; in fact, in Great Britain, in Germany and a few other countries, the parcels post is conducted in a manner so as to almost monopolize the express business. But in these countries conditions, both geographically and commercially, are vastly different from conditions that obtain within the United States. In the old countries, there is greater density of population, and distances which mail matter traverses are about one-thirteenth the distance that the average piece of mail matter is carried in the continental United States.

In considering any postal innovation, it is essential that not alone the operation and the revenue of the postal department be taken into consideration, but also what the effect of the innovation will be upon the industries located in various districts of the United States. Some of the bills introduced in Congress, chief among them, that introduced by Congressman Hearst during a former session, and the one by Congressman Henry of Connecticut, during the present session, have elements that mark them as undesirable and thoroughly impractical under prevailing conditions, or any possible conditions that may arise in the United States during the next quarter century.

The postal department is not conducted for the purpose of profit; rather it is conducted to perform a special service, which governmental function can best perform for the people. But the department should be self-sustaining. The revenue derived for the services rendered the people should be sufficient to cover all expense of operation economically performed. Any legislation involving the performance of this service for less than cost to the government does not appeal to the economist as wise or desirable. Yet the postal department does perform certain services at a loss, although there are compensating circumstances which more than overbalance the expenditure. In the carrying of newspapers and periodicals, under the present system, there is probably a loss, but at the same time the people receive a general benefit far outweighing the cost to the government by having cheap and good literature and such information as the press of the country conveys and this at the minimum of expense. The second class rate, a subsidy granted the press, has been instrumental to a degree impossible of estimation in improving the intelligence of the people and raising the standard of citizenship.

The proposals set forth in the Henry bill, involving the establishment of a parcels post system with a maximum weight of 11-pounds and the maximum charge for maximum weight 25 cents from one postoffice in the United States to any other postoffice or where mail is delivered, are objectionable from an economic view. In the first place, such service would entail heavy losses annually to the department; these losses possibly reaching $150,000,000 or $200,000,000 annually. Then again this system of parcels post would be a wonderful factor in increasing the unequal distribution of business throughout the nation. Geographical and other conditions greatly vary throughout the states of the United States. In the thickly populated districts, where manufacturing is carried on, the cost of labor and the cost of production of articles of manufacture, ranges from 20 to 50 per cent less than in other sections, principally in the agricultural regions. A parcels post that allows the transportation of merchandise at as low a rate as that provided for in the Henry bill, would enable consumers residing in agricultural districts, where wages are high, to purchase their goods in the lowest priced markets in the United States, and the results of this system would be to concentrate industries in the large cities and densely populated districts to the detriment of agricultural and other sections now undergoing commercial and manufacturing development. This would retard the growth of towns and the upbuilding of manufacturing industries in those sections. Thus it can be seen that there would be no compensating effects to justify the installation of a parcels post of this character.

The exorbitant charges made by the express companies and other carriers have caused the people of the United States to demand that the package carrying machinery of the United States postal department be enlarged. Recognizing this demand, Postmaster-General Meyer in his annual report made the recommendation that the parcels carrying service of the government be broadened and that the parcels post be extended so as to make the maximum weight of a package carried 11 pounds with a graduated rate up to one pound and a pound rate of 12 cents, making the maximum rate for the maximum weight $1.32. He also recommended that a parcels post be established over rural delivery routes, starting from the post-office where the route emanates and ending upon a rural route. For this service he recommended that the limit of weight be 11 pounds and the charge 5 cents for the first pound and 2 cents for each additional pound, making the maximum charge for an 11 pound package 25 cents, and that this service be limited to bonafide merchants and others residing along the line of a rural route.

In making his recommendation as to parcels post enlargement, it is evident that the postmaster-general well considered not alone the welfare of the department as to revenues sufficient for proper maintenance and the installation of a more efficient service, but as well carefully weighed the economic aspects as they relate to geographical and commercial conditions throughout the Union.

A careful study into Mr. Meyer’s plan will show that it does not contemplate any revolution in commercial methods. Notwithstanding the charges made to the contrary, by those opposed to his views, it does not appear that should his system be adopted by Congress that the large houses doing an exclusive mail order business would have any advantage over the merchants of the smaller cities and towns. The rural parcels post would certainly be not alone advantageous to the twelve or fifteen millions of people residing in agricultural districts, who are now served by more than 38,000 rural carriers, but would be of great value to the live merchants in the smaller towns who at a minimum of expense could utilize the rural service for the delivery of goods to their patrons in the country.

The bills introduced, respectively by Senators Burnham and Kean, are in perfect harmony with the recommendations of the postmaster-general.

With the diversion of small packages from the express companies to the mails, the revenues to the postoffice department would be proportionately greater than the increased cost occasioned by the greater tonnage of matter carried.

During the past fiscal year, the expense of maintaining the rural delivery routes was in excess of $26,000,000. The installation of a parcels delivery over the rural routes would most likely during the first year place the rural delivery on a self-sustaining basis. There are 38,253 rural routes. Should each carrier over a route on his daily trip carry only 88 pounds of merchandise from the local stores to the patrons on his route, it would give the government a revenue of approximately $24,000,000 annually, and this service can be performed without other carrying equipment than rural carriers now have.

When every phase of the recommendations of Postmaster-General Meyer be carefully weighed, it becomes apparent that his plans are based upon soundest business judgment.

Opposition to Mr. Meyer’s recommendations comes from three sources, namely:

Large manufacturers, jobbers and other classes of business men who annually spend enormous amounts for letter postage.

Country merchants who are unduly alarmed over the growth of the catalogue houses, and who fear that a parcels post extension will increase the mail order business to their detriment.

Express companies, whose revenues would be decreased by operation of the system.

Data Relative to Proposed Extension of Parcel Post. pp. 1-6.