Twice-a-week plain dealer. (Cresco, Howard County, Iowa) 1895-1913, 1902-01-03

be credited four times what 1t has
hitherto been credited, and the sup
posed deficit on the second-class mat
ter would be reduced to just that ex-
tent. A more exact accounting, as in
dicated by the figures of our own bust
ness. would thus, to large extent, re-
Neve the second-class matter OF tho
charge OF being burden upon the de-
partment.
But, taking up this question from
the figures supplied by the postmaster
increase of seoond-class matter each
year results In corresponding de-
crease IN the deficit. Lat US examine
the figures:
1Ge7-Amount of second-class
matter carried............... $40, 90 600 lbs.
1ss7-Dencit ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS l1 10000
matter carried n .sss 900 900 lbs.
isse-Amount Of; second.class ''
matter carried. .............. .as2 10000 lbs.
isoo-Appro1imate amount Of -
,, sse9nd-class matter carried SO eoo, ooo lbs.
l4OV-DeuClt .............,.......$ 4,oUU,uU
This last deficit $4,000 includes the
extra cost of the rural delivery, and is
therefore not exact.
1t will be seen that these general fig
ures for four years apparently sus-
tain the conclusion derived from
those Of our own Office to the effect
that the business growing out of the
second-class matter, i. e., the postage
paid in first, third and fourth-class
matter directly traceable to that of
the second-class matter, is so much in
creased as in reality to diminish the
deficit. In other words, the second
class matter, in view of all receipts
caused by it, is not the source of the
deficit, but helps out the deficit of the
department. If this is correct the
causes of the deficit must be sought
elsewhere, such as the carrying Of
franked mail matter, the exorbitant
cost of carrying the mails in many in
stances, and other like expenses. But
it is no part of our purpose to criticise
the department OF to account for the
deficit.
Our conclusion is unqualified, viz,
that in view of the wants of the people
and the law congress has made in
their behalf, and in view of the char
acter and interests of the publishers
who use second-class mail ma tier rates,
and in view of the apparent mistake
~ to the cause of the deficit, there is
NO SUFFICIENT ground for cutting off the
privilege Of offering premiums, which
il quite generally used by large
proportion of certain classes of
legitimate publications. If there are
abuses, of course they ought to be
corrected. The law is plain prohibit
ing free circulation and circulation at
nominal rates" No one can complain
Of the proper enforcement of these
provisions; but for the department to
enact law that congress deliberately
refused to enact would certainly not
be sanctioned by the people and is
clearly against public policy.
In consequence of the rulings pub
lished July IT, 1901, there have arisen
two other distinct protests from pub
fishers. One relates to the exclusion
of periodicals "having the Characters
tics of books" The question is asked:
Why should periodicals that have
come into existence by reason of a law
of congress, and have enjoyed the
rights of second-class matter, be sud-
denly deprived of those rights? The
other protest is against ruling that
would exclude bulk subscriptions"
Why may not one man subscribe for a
thousand or even ten thousand copies
of periodical if he sees fit? The rule
published states that such bulk cub.
scriptions must be restricted within
a limited number Of copies" This quo.
| tation is from letter of the postmas-
ter general dated September %, 1901
When the postmaster general was
asked whether he would consent to ar
"agreed case" to be submitted to G
United States court, SO as to obtain an
| impartial and final Interpretation Of
the law on these subjects, including
the rulings as to premiums and sam
pie copies, he replied: "1t is the duty
| OF the department to administer the
law. 1t cannot be party to an agreed
case It's responsibility is it's own
From this it would seem probable thai
! even a decision by United State:
court might not be needed, or that pos
sibly the court would hold that 1t hat
1 no jurisdiction over a coordinate de-
partment Of the government. It once
properly brought before a United
States court, any clause or section Of
the law would doubtless receive an in
depreciation as to Its meaning. Thil
need not imply any right to enjoin thu
post Office department.
This latest letter from the postmas
ter general makes 1t clear from new
source that this whole subject should
be fully discussed before the people. L
Is certain to be SO discussed in the mex
congress, whether brought there byan
other attempt Of the post office depart
ment to have its rulings enacted intt
law or to have the law which has stood
so many years materially changed, Of
whether the subject be brought for
ward by the representatives of tn,
| people with the purpose of preventing
these arbitrary rulings.
c. H. HOWARD.
Chicago. Ill.
|