THE POST OFFICE.
IN dealing with the Post Office the introduction of figures balks, rather than assists, conclusions. The Post Office is pre-eminently a Department about which one feels. It needs no economist nor statistician to convince the average man who uses the telephone or the pillar- box that the whole organization is not worth much more than the cost of an insulated wire or a postman's bag. The service has convinced us where the figures might confuse us. Thus, although the average man may forget for the moment whether the deficit on the telephones is made up by the profit on the letters, or whether 'the loss on the letters is recompensed by the gain on the telegrams—letters, telephones, or telegrams are high in cost and unsatisfactory in their working. The loss of time, the mental anxiety, the constant exacerbations and annoyances, to which users of these services are compulsorily subjected, are a toll the Postmaster-General levies from the country which does not figure in his budget.
We should be tempted to consider the responsibility of Mr. Kellaway in this matter seriously, were it not for the fact that his own Department is so little ac- quainted with him that a letter recently addressed to him by name at a Government Department was returned to the sender by the Post Office officials marked " Not Known." Under his regime innovations so surprisingly unbusinesslike have been introduced that we might be tempted to consider him as an original Minister were it not for the fact that he sheltered himself from protest against the recent increases behind the appointment of a Business Committee. Mr. Kellaway poses as a humorist, for he related recently in the House of Commons the story of a distinguished Member of Parliament who was aroused from his midnight slumbers by the ringing of his telephone bell. On placing the apparatus to his ear, he was greeted by a message in these terms : " Adrian, I am ready to come home. I am Zaza." We should be tempted to take the Postmaster-General at his own valuation were it not that such misconnexions have passed from the realm of humour into the consecrated experience of users of the telephone. As it is, the sole innovation for which Mr. Kellaway is entitled to take credit in his Department is in the introduction -of classes -in which his assistants are to be taught politeness. The new curriculum is evidently bearing fruit, for a gentleman who recently handed a telegram across the counter was greeted with the courteous question : " And would you • like this telegram to be sent ? " In the world of literature these instances of our Post Office administration might be classified under the head- of banter." They- would more accurately be included in the more serious pages of contemporary history. The whole conduct of this Department is an insult to the public who are compelled to use it, and a taunt to common sense. Certain facts stand out in relief. We know, for instance, that the telephone tariff was recently augmented. The use of the telephone was almost restricted to those with cast-iron nerves and gilt-edged pockets. By some abstruse method of ratiocina- tion, it was estimated that by these means the telephone would be popularized and that the profit would therefore be greater, or—rather—the loss be less. The increase in price has, of course, not resulted in a better service, but it has resulted in a diminution of subscribers. It might have been thought that if the intention of the Post Office was seriously to make a greater gain, prospective subscribers would, on application, be promptly supplied with instruments. It is harder to get a tele- phone installed than to discover a needle in a hayrick. But we trespass on time and space by pointing out such obvious things.
We know, too, that the following postal increases were recently made : Postcards from ld. to lid., printed papers from id. to ld., registered letters from 2d. to 3d., and foreign letters to 3d. Why was this done ? If one looked at the matter a priori, one could only come to the con- clusion that these increases were instituted with the object of discouraging the use of the Post Office or com- pensating the officials for their recent increase in salaiy by giving tnem less to do. One would imagine that the conclusion had but solemnly reached that it was not the quantity but the quality- of the letters sent through the post that counted. Nothing of the sort. Mr. Kella- way solemnly announces to the House of Commons that he hopes to wipe off a deficit of £3,400,000 made on the telephones by these means.
Now, +the loss on the telephones and telegraphs together amounts to no less a sum than £4,300,000. It might have been thought that the way to remedy that loss was to provide a cheaper and a better service. That was not the reasoning of the Post Office. It adopted precisely the reverse process. The postal service, on the other hand, was estimated to yield a profit of £900,000 during the current year. It might have been thought that the Postmaster-General would either be content with that profit or would endeavour to increase it by popularizing the service. Not at all. He proceeds to put the postal service in the same position as the telephone service, and estimates that by so doing he will increase at one swoop the profit by no less a sum than £3,370,000.
One thing is quite clear. These two methods of " reasoning proceed from antithetic premises. They cannot, therefore, in the nature of things, produce the same conclusions. You cannot wipe off a loss which has been caused in the telephone service by inefficient ad- ministration and high cost to the consumer by making that cost higher and that administration worse. If you can, there should surely be no need to increase the cost and make worse the administration of the Post Office in order to recover a loss on the telephone service, which by your own showing should not be there, and which can quite easily be removed by increasing the cost of the telephone service ad infinitum. This may seem somewhat confused, but it is a direct result of endeavouring to find logical explanations for the Post Office's way of thinking.
The whole question is really very serious. We are confronted by the spectacle of Europe, Asia, and Africa crying out for food, clothing, and all the necessaries of life.
We are confronted, on the other hand, by the spectacle in this country of a complete technical equipment admir- ably fitted to supply those things, and on that equipment millions of unemployed men are gazing in wonder. They cannot understand why they -should remain in idleness when, by using _that equipment, they could supply what the whole world needs. The whole of our modern civiliza- tion depends on communications. It depends on good communications. Europe to-day is not unlike one of Mr. Kellaway's telephone exchanges. The calls cannot be " got through." A hungry man in Vienna is trying —figuratively—to telephone to a manufacturer in Birming- ham, or a merchant in Liverpool, who is anxious to supply him with his needs, but he cannot " get through." The same phenomenon is observable within the boundaries of our own country. Communications are vital. They are disorganized. One letter delayed in post, a restric- tion on the use of a telephone, may mean the loss of an order. Every hindrance and delay placed in our way now impedes our recovery. The picture is not exaggerated. It would be impossible to exaggerate it. We are trying to recover, but we are tied like goats to the post of State interference and State ineptitude. Industry has been drained to the dregs by the thirst of the national Ex- chequer. If a new thing is to be done an old extravagance is not cleaned away, but a new tax is imposed. If the Government cannot make a monopoly—a vital monopoly —like the postal, telephonic, and telegraphic communun- tions of the country pay, then they make them more expensive. More taxes ! more costs ! These are the only remedy which the official brain can conceive for the solution of a problem which is caused primarily by high taxes and high costs. When the pressure and rigour of circumstances are compelling every trader and merchant in the country to reduce his prices—this is the moment that the Govein- ment have chosen to put up their costs. It would be almost ridiculous, in view of what has happened, to remind Mr. Kellaway of Sir Rowland Hill. When Sir Rowland Hill advocated the use of the penny postage, he did so at a time when -letters were very ex- pensive. He advocated, in fact, a reduction precisely on those grounds on which Mr. Kellaway has now instituted an increase. Sir Rowland Hill was, of course, justified in the result just as Mr. Kellaway will be condemned. The benefits which came to the Exchequer from the penny postage were not benefits to the Exchequer only. They were benefits to civilization. It would be no exaggeration to say they transformed the whole country. They abolished distance and made for community. Our trade increased beyond all measure. Our influence spread far and wide. Members of families separated from one another by great distances were drawn together. And what the penny postage did for the family it did also for the Empire. The bonds which unite the members of the British Commonwealth to-day were tied firmer and ' rendered more secure by a cheap postage. Thus Mr. Kellaway has flown in the face not only of business experience, but of a great English tradition. This country has never regarded the benefits of cheap 'communications merely as a profit and loss account. The foundations of that system which was introduced 'over half-a century ago are more sacred than Mr. Kellaway :apparently realizes. A " Penny Postage " was for years a cry of the pepole. It was an intensely human cry, to which the ears of officialdom have grown deaf.
Previous page
