Year: 1862

/ tney nave Deen OF uSe to farmers and gar


deners. -., - ssa..-...s-.,-tt


There can be no reason why the very
triting amount of postage provided for il


this bill should not rather be imposed upon


the recipients, than that the charge should


be laid upon the public at large. 4 -


There never could be a more plausible


reason assigned for giving to members oi


Congress the right to frank correspondence
upon their private business, than to give the
same privilege to all other persons. n


The proposition Immediately before the
House is to recommit this bill, for the pur-
pose of inserting a provision tina; public
documents shall pass through the mails free.
| Thst would be to strike out one of the best
features of the bill; and [ am surprised to
fud that the gentleman, from New York,
lMr. Pomeroy,l who otherwise seems to fa-
vor the measure, objected to that feature.
Those who receive books through the mail
for FIVE or ten centa raazfae-~ -A---s
tnsn an equivalent and hence that feature
ought to be retained.


A controlling reason, however, for the
abolition of the. franking privilege, is the
enormous abuses which have grown up IN
der it. The Government is annually de-
frauded out of large part of its revenue by
these abuses. The abuses have grown to
such height that a member of Congress is
esteemed by many persons illiberal and mar
row. minded who refuses to frank the COR
respondence of his friends. What have we
seen in this city The franks of members
of Congress hawked about the streets and
sold by boys and army suffers; and the
Government has thus been deprived of such
a great amount of its postal revenue that
the Postmaster General has felt it to be his
duty to send remonstrance to this House
against the continuance of these abuses. Sir,
there is no reason why we should not cut
off these abuses by cutting up the fraEking
privilege at its roots. -s.er


Now, the gentleman from Pennsylvania
(Mr. Wright) asked if there were any petit
tions from the people on our table for the
abolition of this privilege. II answer, sir,
that year after year bills have been pend
ing in this House for the abolition of that
privilege, and Congress has so adhered to
the privilege that the people have despaired
of the efficacy of petitions. But the argu-
ment might be turned against the gentleman
himself. If the franking privilege is bur-
den upon members, as has been argued.
and the privilege is rather privilege to the
people, why, when bills have been pending
year after year in Congress to abolish it,
have no remoustranees ever been received
from the people This privilege, instead
of being favor to the people, is burden
upon them. I think, therefore, that my
generous and disinterested friend from Illi-
nois mir. Kellogg,) who was willing to en-
dure the heavy burden of this privilege
only on account of the people, may justly
help to remove this burden from our .shonl-
ders, and suffer the weary and heavy laden
to be at rest. ~


trust that this Congress viii distinguish
itself by destroying the franking privilege
altogether. Those who are the recipients
of public matter do not ask aims from us.
They are willing to pay the postage upon
what they receive, instead of imposing
burden upon the people at large. Il I'D