ing
limitation to 4 ounces of the weight of newspapers which might be
carried by the post for 1d., and the limit was therefore raised from 4
ounces to 6 ounces.
In 1866 the question was raised in the House of Commons whether the Post
Office charge could be reduced, especially in view of the fact that
railway companies were distributing newspapers at a uniform rate of
1/2d. a copy. In 1869 the question was again raised in Parliament. A
resolution was moved in favour of an inland rate of 1/2d. for 2 ounces
on printed matter, and a postage of 1/2d. on newspapers. It was urged
that the concession would be of special value in rural districts: it
would indeed "be hard to say what the effect might be in time on the
social condition of the people." In several continental countries
newspapers were already transmissible by post at very low rates. Against
the possible objection that by introducing a rate lower than the 1d.
rate they were jeopardizing its maintenance for letters, and that the
proposal might therefore lead to a general 1/2d. rate, it was argued
that so far from that being the case, the best way of ensuring the
permanence of the 1d. rate was to grant the concession asked.[301]
The Marquess of Hartington, the Postmaster-General, was unable to accept
the motion because he thought such proposals, before being assented to
by the House, should be thoroughly looked into to discover whether there
was a reasonable probability that the loss of revenue would or would not
be a permanent loss, and the Post Office should be given ample time to
consider whether the additional duties which would be thrown upon it
could be undertaken with due regard to other services, which were of
greater importance than the transmission of circulars or newspapers. The
influx of a largely increased number of circulars and newspapers would
cause serious embarrassment in the practical working of the Post Office,
and might impair the efficiency of the service in respect of letters.
The primary business of the Post Office being the "rapid and punctual
transmission of letters," such a result would give just cause for
dissatisfaction.
The Marquess of Hartington asked that the motion should not be pressed.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer told the House that he had not got
[L]300,000 to give away. Mr. Gladstone also emphasized the seriousness of
the financial aspect of the proposals, and assured the House that the
Government honestly intended to inve
|