The Press.
London, England, 1855-02-03 00:00:00

122

occupy in the mail-bag the space of one number of

the other.
But this is not the whole case ; nor yet the worst
part of it. The little local journal to which I have
referred does not want the Post-office at ell. If,
living in a town, I wish to send out 1,000 copies of a
circular, I should certainly And it cheaper and more
convenient to hire a messenger to distribute t4iem,
than to pay 81. 3s. 4d. for their circulation by the
local post-office. In this case Government allows
no the option. But if I issue a weekly or fort-
nightly circular, in the shape of a newspaper, I have
no similar freedom of choice. Whether 1 use the

postal arrangements which Government has pro
vided, or dispense with' them, is immaterial to the
State ; but in either case I must pay equally. As a
fact, I believe they are comparatively little used,
copies of newspapers taken in in the town where
they are published passing almost exclusively
through private hands. But to sum up the state
ment of fact; we have here two manifest breaches of
of the rule laid down. In the first place, equal

charges are imposed for unequal service; in the
second, these charges are enforced even where no
corresponding service is performed.
Now, how are these provisions of the law defended?
I have read with care your two pamphlets, and also,
believe, most of the speeches and writings that
have appeared on this subject. Apart from the
question of political results, on which the greatest
stress is laid, the main arguments relied on seem to
bo the following

First, that the power of repeated transmission,
without extra charge, compensates for the overcharge
in some instances ; and that, on the whole, Govern-
ment loses instead of gaining on the transaction.
This plea seems easily to be disposed of. No
doubt, if • every newspaper proprietor were in part-
nership with every other—if the whole fraternity of
journalism had but one common purse—it might be
fair enough for the Chancellor of the Exchequer to
say, " You publish collectively so many copies of
" newspapers—of this total number a certain fixed
" proportion may be assumed as likely to pass
" through the post—l assess you, therefore, at such
" and such a sum ; and you must settle it among
" yourselves in what proportion you shall pay." But
the injustice complained of is not between Govern-
ment and the newspaper press as a body ; it lies
between various conflicting interests in that body,
some of which are unduly fostered by the operation
of the law, others as unduly depressed. Refer once
more to the case of the small local journal I have
mentioned. One-half of its impression, to take the
most moderate estimate, never goes near the post-
office. On the other half, therefore, which does go
by post, its proprietor may be saicrto pay twice over.
Further, on that half, weight for weight, he pays
eight or ten times as mob (I am again understating
the possible case) as the proprietor of the Times.
" Twentyfold my share of the postal charge !" he
exclaims. " What then ?" answers the Government :
"you have your compensation ; you may send every
" copy of your journal, if you like, four, five, six
" times through our post-office, up to the expiration
" of the assigned seven days; it is true that you
" don't want this privilege—that, so far as you are
" concerned, it is a dead letter—that no one reads,
" or is ever likely to read, your publication in any
" place except the town whose local affairs it dis-
" cusses—but that is no business of ours. You
" should deal less in local news; you should get the
" earliest information, the ablest writers, the best
" foreign correspondence; compete with the London
" journals ; and then you would find the advantage
"of our regulations. Why, we actually lose by
" every copy of the large metropolitan journals
which we transmit." "Thank you," replies the
now enlightened complainant; " the comfort you
" give me comes to this—that if I can succeed in
" making my fortune, your system of charges will
" help me to enlarge it; but while I remain poor,
" you will impoverish me yet further."
Secondly, yon rely on the parallel case of the.
Letter-postage, where one uniform rate of charge is
imposed or all distances. In this presumed analogy

;116_
••••0/44.4.••••/"....