MAIL ROUTES

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LIII, Issue 124, 27 May 1919, Page 7

MAIL ROUTES

- -“tip*" WHY ORDINARY MAILS ARE NOT SENT VIA PANAMA. .

During the past few months there has been a good deal of promiscuous criticism a® to why the postal authorities in. London do not take greater advantage of vessels coming out to New Zealand via Panama to carry His Majesty’s mails, and similarly why the postal authorities herb do not make more extended use of the vessels traversing Homeward via the Panama Canal. This matter was touched on by Mr A. P, Dryden (Chief Postmaster), who pointed out, says ithe “Dominion,” that the Vancouver and San Francisco routes were still quicker than the Panama route, providing there was a reasonably good connection at New York. A more cogent reason, however, and one which appears to have been lost sight of, is the one of cost. Both the San Francisco and 1 the Vancouver services (maintained by the j Union S.S. Co.) were heavily subsidised ‘by the Government for the conveyance of our mails. Why, in that case, Should they send the mails via Panama and pay poundage rates (even if the vessels were timed to arrive in England Two or three days ahead of the Vancouver or ‘Frisco runted mails) when they had their owii steamers running regularly? Moreover, such subsidies ensured as far as possible a regular service, and had a bearing (in the public interest) on passenger and freight rates. The English postal authorities had also been blamed for not utilising more generally the transports as mail steamers! The chances were that they were paying subsidies to Atlantic lines for the carriage of the mails, and saw no reason why they should, in addition, incur potmdage rates as well. After all there was a limit to the expense incurred in the conveyance of mails, and it was the duty of the authorities to curtail expense as much as possible without loss of efficiency.