A NEW WAY OF CRIPPLING TRADE. T HE Government have an
unfortunate trick of telling the nation that it is its duty to do a particular thing, and then putting impediments in the way. The Government say the trade of the country must be increased, particularly the export trade. The manu- facturers reply : "Excellent. That's just what we want —that's what we exist for. If you won't interfere with us, we will increase trade all round." All seems to be going well—and then the Government begin to strew obstacles in the path We do not for a moment attribute to the Government any malice aforethought, or cynicism, or any real wish to thwart trade for some hidden reason. No doubt they want more trade as genuinely as the rest of us. The grim comedy is repeatedly played because the Government apparently do not know that they are creating obstacles. They are only seeking a solution of some immediate difficulty, and in arriving at it they incidentally upset the apple-cart, and nobody seems to be more pained and astonished than they are when the apples are running all over the road. The latest instance of this curious process of doing and undoing is the increased postal charges. The reason for the increase is, of course, that the Post Office finds itself with a deficit of £3,500,000. How shall the deficit be wiped out ? Why, of course, by increasing the postage. It is all quite simple—as viewed from the chair of the Postmaster-General. Accordingly Mr. Kellaway, without so much as saying "By your leave" to the House of Commons—why. does the House of Commons sit still under these repeated provocations and humiliations ?- announced that from June 13th postcards will be charged lid. instead of id., the printed paper rate will be id. for 2 ozs. instead of id. the foreign letter rate will be 3d. for the first ounce instead of 24d., and "printed matter" going abroad will be charged 1d. instead of id. for 2 ozs. There are to be no deliveries or collections on Sundays. Mr. Kellaway's reason for this last step, is very revealing. He says that the Sunday service is " very unremunerative. ' The phrase suggests a misconception of the whole principle upon which the postal service has been conducted since the days of Rowland Hill.
Before Rowland Hill's magnificent reforms the postal service was conducted on the plan that each letter must pay its way, and, logically enough, the charge was regulated in accordance with the distance. Rowland Hill proved beyond doubt what the nation, and especially the Govern- ment of the day, found at first almost inoredible, that the element of distance was of no importance whatever. Money was consumed prodigally by the Post Office in the circuitous labour of prodigally " the letters—that is, in ascertaining and marking the postage on each—and in collecting payment for the letters on arrival, for pre- payment in the absence of stamps was almost unknown. Finally, there was the enormous waste of time, and there- fore waste of money, due to the various and complicated rates. Rowland Hill noticed that the revenue of the Post Office did not increase in spite of the expansion of trade and of the population, and he noticed simultaneously the wonderfully illuminating fact that the revenue of the French Post Office was increasing steadily because, as he rightly believed, a lower rate was charged in France. The secret of success was a low charge and simplicity of rates. It was true that the person who paid a low rate on a long-distance letter would get an enormously greater benefit than had ever been conceived possible i • but Rowland Hill foresaw, and he was right again, that the tremendous expansion of postal work would• make losses on particular undertakings a mere incident in a wide and general success. Trade would increase by leaps and bounds owing to the new freedom of communication.
In short, microscopic arguments about this or that district, or this or that distance, being " unremunerative " were irrelevant. Even if a low tate did not mean a higher revenue for the State, as he was convinced it would mean, the service to trade would he a new and mighty indirect asset to the nation.
If Mr. Kellaway forgets Rowland Hill and presses his own principle to its logical conclusion, he will cease sending mails to the Outer Hebrides on the plea, which is in the' narrow sense true, that the service is unremunerative. One might have thought that the Government would have learned their lesson from the high taxes on cigars and sparkling -wines. They nearly killed both trades, and there was a crash in the revenue from those sources.
The right motto in dealing with the Post Office is : "Don't kill business." The loss on the Post Office, apart from the increase in the .cost of labour from which all concerns are suffering, is due to the trade slump. The only way to make the Post Office pay again, apart from economy and proper administration—which, of course, we can never be sure of getting from the State—is to make trade recover. A more expensive, that is to say a worse, postal service delays that recovery. Trade wants a tonic just now, not the lowering medicine which Mr. Kellaway prescribes. It may be supposed that we of the Spectator are prejudiced—and perhaps we are—when we object to the increase in the postage of newspapers to foreign places. Mr. Kellaway did not seem to be aware that "printed matter" going abroad includes newspapers, except in the case of Canada and Newfoundland. Newspapers going abroad carry their advertisements with them, and they also convey infor- mation about British affairs which it is highly desirable to disseminate. The trade due to the sale abroad of technical papers is also very great. But as what we say on that subject may be discounted on the ground that we are an interested party, let us leave it and point out rather what a fearful handicap the British trader will suffer under when the cost of sending out his circulars, announcements, price lists, and catalogues, not merely abroad but at home, is increased by 100 per cent. It will be a terrible blow to trade at a time when blows cannot be borne. Yet the Government propose to deliver this blow, and the House of Commons is told that its opinion will not even be asked.
Previous page
