Sacramento daily record-union., 1883-10-30

ana Interstate commerce by congress, Dut
Congress cannot, under that grant OF
power own the plant of commercial
business. To this we reply that the postal
service is related to commerce and by
parity of reasoning is commerce itself.
The argument of the doctor proves too much.
The Supreme Court by the very decision
he cites admits the power to exist in Con-
gress to which he excepts. That Court
has held that telegraphic message is a
communication, as much so as letter, and
therefore it is logical to conclude that the
government may engage to carry the one
as readily as the other. If the Government
may own telegraph lines, it may buy rail.
roads and elevators and bake shops and
operate them, says the objector. So far as
that is concerned we are considering only
the power of the Government as to its pos.
tai system; the other supposed powers do
not logically follow, and are not related to
it. But we may say that it is not now
may not construct a railroad to facilitate
the carriage of its mails, and should that
be shown to be the most econom-
ical method, we do not doubt that
it would be done. Beyond that,
it is not demanded that the present debate
can be carried, because the comparisons of
DR.. Green do not have any relation to the
subject of mail-carriage, which we hold is
expressly conferred upon Congress as a
right. Now the adoption of postal tele-
graph system is only question of policy.
Should it be shown that it cannot be
economically engaged in, it will not be
set up, and the objection of the doctor,
that the Government would be beaten by
private lines, is therefore without point.
To avoid this, however, he says the Gov
ernment must take charge OF the existing
lines. This he would have done under and
according to an Act passed in 1866. By
its terms the lines it might take must be
offered for within five years. That limit
has expired, and there is no legal obliga.
tion any longer involved. But he presents
it as having moral force and effect. It is
possible that the Government may buy ex.
isting lines, but if it does it will be
purely matter of economic policy,
and not by reason of any obligation
TO do so. Bat the present service here, he
affirms, is better than in Europe, and rates
are lower here than there. This is not
matter at issue. We are willing, for argu.
ments sake, to admit all he may wish to
claim on this head, but we do not see how
it relates to the question in hand, which is
simply one of policy as to the transmission of
communications at postal rate, by means
of an agency which is more advanced than
that now employed. The Government
telegraph would enlarge the patronage of
the Administration and increase the dan
gers of partisanship, says Mr.. Green. And
these are the most weighty of any of the
arguments advanced. In these objections
are found the most serious section of the
problem. If we cannot control the service by
civil service reform principles and practice
it will not be well to engage in the enter
prise. But we believe that it can be done,
and that there need be no augmentation of
the political evils that now affiict us, in
that respect. In fact the whole tendency
of the day is to limitation of the danger
GUS powers of political patronage, and we
are firmly convinced that the civil service
will be speedily regenerated in this regard
in every department. We must not 90
backward in this respect We have made
decided progress, and the country cannot
retrograde in the light of the decided ben.
etiss civil service reform is bestowing. II
is claimed that the telegraphic postal SER
vice OF England is not success. The tes-
timOny is not uniform, 1t is true, that it is
successful, but the preponderance of evil
dence is largely in favor Of the system.
The conditions here and there are dissim-
liar. While it is true that complaints are
frequent against the service in England, it
is because it is public service that we
hear of them. OF whatever complaints are
here made against the private corporations
we seldom have notice. It is not at all
probable that they are any less in number
or gravity than those against the Govern
ment operatives in England. The plea that
the engagement by the Government in the
postal telegraph business will be unjust to
the citizens who are operating private
lines, may be responded to by the answer
that private lines should be operated as
oheaply as Government lines and should
command their share Of business. The ad.
mitted large gains of DR.. Green's company
will certainly justify it in competing. The
general good and ndconvenienceist to be consid-
cred. That the Government carries letters
by mail unquestionably limits the letter
carrying of the express companies, which
is done at disadvantage by being handi-
capped by postage but with equal propri-
ETY. the express companies might claim the
pity OF the Government and ask to be per.
mitted to carry letters free from official
tax. The questions raised by the article
of DR.. Green are by no means exhausted in
such review as this, which but indicates
the points for thought, that are
capable of much elaboration. Nor are all
the matters cognate to the subject en-
braoed in the debate. There are considera.
tions more far.reachipg still, that will come
to the surface as the discussion continues.
1t may be said, however, in brief, that the
plea for postal telegraph does not call for
any enlargement of Governmental powers,
nor does it in our opinidn enter the domain
of dangerous or excessive legislation, or
advance doctrines of interference with pri.
vate concerns or personal liberty.
GROWING CONVICTION.
Mr. Curtis, in Harper's Weckly, after
reviewing the candidacy of Mayor Low,