Twice-a-week plain dealer. (Cresco, Howard County, Iowa) 1895-1913, 1902-01-03
PUBLIsHERsPROTEsT'
Important Controversy with the
Post Office Department.
Two Points Wherein 1t Is Felt That
the Rights of the Former Have
Been Violated by Arbitrary
Rulings of the Latter.

FeTSleS DeIOre tue puUuC az lle PIeSeul
time is one involving the interests of
the publishers of the country, and the
rights of the post Office department in
issuing rulings restricting the use of
the mails to certain classes of matter.
In the December issue of The Arena,
published in New York city, Gen. c. ii.
Howard, president of the National
Publishers Bureau, discusses the cues
tion under the caption: Publishers
and the Postal Department"
[Republished by Permission of the Alliance
Publishing Col
On two points the publishers of
newspapers and periodicals have diff
ference with the post Office depart
ment at Washington which they deem
of sufficient Importance to discuss be-
fore the great free parliament of the
American people. One relates to the
use of executive power. 1t has been
source of irritat ton for many years.
AS one newspaper put 1t as long ago
as 1892: "Any third or fourth-class
postmaster or employe of his Office
may decide what is Objectionable mat
ter in a newspaper and withhold the
entire edition until an appeal to the.
department at Washington has been
heard and answered. This requires
time, and though the decision may be
in the publishers favor, he has, mean
while, suffered great loss by the deten-
ton of his newspaper editions in the
home post Office, and there is no re-
course for damages"
This sort of "hold-up'' process is of
frequent occurrence. 1t is the method
just now resorted to in order to en-
force the recent new and arbitrary
rulings Of the department which it is
the purpose of this article to discuss.
The publishers would like to submit to
the public and at the proper time to
the congress of the United States
whether this method and habit of the
post Office department is not an unnec-
essary infringement of personal rights
and an unwarrantable assumption of
executive power. It often works posi-
ruling is reversed. But the representa-
lions of the subordinate postmaster,
or even clerk, are usually sustained,
and the publisher is arbitrarily sub
jected to fine without any proper jul
dicial process and to an irreparaible
loss in his business.
The second point Of controversy re-
lates to recent rulings concerning "sec-
ond-class mail matter" The law es-
tablishing the pound rate of postage
and defining plainly enough what
should constitute second-class matter
has been in operation over twenty
years.
The present third assistant post
master-general, Hon. Edwin C. Mad
den, sent out a circular letter to four
hundred publishers, dated April 10.
1901, in which he asked the opinion of
those addressed whether a ruling
against the use of any bonus or premi-
ums would be injurious to legitimate
periodicals, and plainly intimated that
If the publishers addressed should fa-
yor his new policy it would be carried
out without waiting for any further
legislation. From other communica-
tions from his Office it appeared, also,
that he was disposed to interfere with
the sending out of sample copies, which
is distinctly provided for in the act OF
congress which established the pound
rates for second-class matter.
The publishers of the periodicals at
fected, throughout the country, tookis-
sue with the expressed intent of the
third assistant postmaster general and
drew up protests without waiting for
the proposed ruling. At meeting in
New York, April 20, 1901, the following
action was taken:
Resolved, That the publishers represent
I'd at this meeting are unanimously OF the
opinion that the post office ruling proposed
by the third assistant postmaster general In
his circular letter of April 49, affecting the
use of premiums for subscriptions, If issued
would be contrary to the traditions and
practices of our postal system, an assump-
fion Of legislative power not vested In thu
post ONCE department and detrimental K
The interest and circulation of periodical!
now legitimately included in mail matte,
OF the second class.
we, the undersigned. heartily adopt tn.
above resolution and respectfully ant
earnestly demonstrate against the pro
posed Interpretation or modification Of the
existing status which would abridge the
rights and privileges of second-class mai
matter which It has enjoyed uninterrupted
" since the passage of the law in 1879, and
we beg that no such steps may be taken
(Signed by)
THE CENTURY COMPANY.
HARPER & BROTHERS.
CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS.
DOUBLEDAY, PAGE & CO.
ROBERT BONNER'S SONS.
AMERICAN TRACT SOCIETY.
STREET & SMITH.
DoDD, MEAD g. CO.
g. s. MCCLURE CO.
METHODIST BOOK CONCERN.
MCCLURE, PHILLIPS & co.
THE OUTLOOK COMPANY.
THE JUDGE COMPANY.
LIFE PUBLISHING COMPANY.
THE TRUTH COMPANY.
G. P. PUTNAMs SONS.
ART INTERCHANGE
MCRAW-MARDEN COMPANY.
REVIEW OF REVIEWS.
THE CHURCHMAN COMPANY.
MUM & COMPANY.
OUTING PUBLISHING COMPANY.
CONGREGATIONAL WORK.
EVANGELIST PUBLISHING co.
CHRISTIAN WORK.
NEW YORK OBSERVER.
e. L. KELLOGG COMPANY.
FUNK d wAGNALLS COMPANY.
THE EXAMINER.
NEW YORK WEEKLY WITNESS.
ORANGE JUDD COMPANY.
PHELPS PUBLISHING COMPANY.
PUBLIC OPINION.
GOLFERS WEEKLY.
In Chicago joint meeting of repre-
sentatives Of about sixty publication
was held IN May and resulted in tn
formation Of an organization, after
msgd Joined by publishers Of St. Louil