Untitled

New Zealand Mail, Issue 761, 1 October 1886, Page 23

Recently we reviewed a proposal for the establishment of an Anglo-Aus-tralian line of exceedingly swift steamers, which should perform alternately the function of mail carriers in time of peace, and of fighting cruisers or convoy-ships in time of war. That .a mail service of 25 days between London and Adelaide is perfectly possible with such vessels as now cross the Atlantic, there is no doubt at all, but, as we pointed out, the question is—-Could it be made to pay ? And we came to the conclusion that the answer must be in the negative. But there is another direction beside speed in which mail conveyance is open to improvement and that is cheapness. If we cannot as yet venture upon so fast a service as modern steamers could readily give us, can we not make the present comparatively slow service more acceptable by reducing the postal charges? Take our own case —that of New Zealand—-for instance:—lf we were prepared to pay for it we could have a service of 30 or 32 days by the Direct steamers, or of 28 days' via San Francisco. We cannot afford that luxury, but the question is often asked Could we not cheapen the rates by the present service ? This question as applied to all the Australian colonies has been actively discussed at Home during the present year. A “ universal international penny post” is the great end and aim of those who are agitating the matter, but failing this somewhat Utopian idea, it is argued that if Her Majesty’s Empire should be found willing to make the necessary sacrifice to establish such a postal service within its own Dominions as a step toward the best form of Federation, the question would become worthy the best efforts of all. The Times has published letters from Mr Henniker Heaton and Mr Arnold Eorster, dealing nominally with the penny postage as° an “ international ” question, though their arguments are more particularly directed toward the Colonies ; and in a leading article, the views thus put forth are discussed at some length. It is remarked upon as a strange anomaly that European countries should be able to post to Australia letters and papers at lower rates than those at which they can be transmitted thither from Great Britain. But it is shown that most of the colonies, even at present speeds and rates, make a heavy annual loss on their mail services over and above postages, the New Zealand San Francisco service beino- among the rare exceptions. The loss on mail contracts to the Imperial Government is no less than £365,000 per annum, but £224,000 of this loss results from the Indian service and not afarthingfrom the Australasian service, because these colonies bear the whole brunt of their own mail losses. It is pointed out by the British Australasian that if the "public would tolerate any longer a monthly service between Great Britain and Australasia, or a slowfserviee, a profit instead. of a loss could be made upon the mails. The Post Office already has the power to compel any vessels to convey letters for a penny each, but with no guarantee as to safety or time of delivery. But far from merchants and the public generally being content with even the present rapid voyages, they are demanding a still more accelerated mail service—one that shall convey a letter from !London to Adelaide in a month ; and speed means money. The P. and O. and Orient Companies have asked more money for more speed, and are about to build new and faster steamers. Now, it is proposed that a penny postage shall be established, and the argument used is that there are . ships already which would convey the letters at a penny, if speed were no object. But speed is of vital importance, and if a quick weekly mail is a sine qua non, and the Australians have to find the contract money, it will hardly do, as matters stand, to take away from them the only means by which the

burden can be lessened. It is remarked that the Australasian colonies have not been able to maaage a penny postage among themselves yet, and even as it is, the postal services of all these colonies involve them in loss. A penny postage, therefore, means a radical internal as well as external change, and it is held that Australasia as not yet in a position to meet the additional charge. Even in Victoria, where population is densest, distances short,and the railway system most complete, the loss on the inland postal service in 1884 was £22,122, beside £BOOO on the interAustralian mails. The other colonies lost more heavily than this. This was the reason why the Australasian colonies refused to join the Postal Union, though urged by the Home Government to do so, when a or 5d rate would have been established, the reason being that they could not afford it. The conclusion arrived at by most of the Home papers seems to be that a penny postage is as yet too much lor the Australasians. They do not feel warranted even in joining the Postal Union. This would mean a heavy additional outlay for them, and it would give the poorer part of the community the benefit of the cheaper postcard system. But the distances to Australasia are so much more considerable than to Canada, or the West Indies, or the Cape, or even India, and the subsidies required so much heavier that they would need very substantial aid from Home to bring the penny rate within sufficient range for practical discussion. It is likely that we mav in time get a 2|d rate between England and Australasia, but the Colonies certainly would not be willing to sacrifice speed for the sake of this saving. The plain truth is that in this matter, as well as in respect of railway management, the great question which has to be authoritatively settled is : “ Who’s to pay ? ” Is the cost of each service to be defrayed by those who use it or by the general body of the public ? Hitherto our rulers have declined to adopt either alternative decisively, and have fallen back on half measures. They levy a certain sum in postal charges and in railway fares and freights, and these are of course paid by the users of the services, but the proceeds are not enough to meet all the cost. The balance has to come out of general taxation. So, as we showed in discussing Mr Yaile’s Railway Reform Scheme, it is in any case the public pocket out of which all that money must needs come,. and the point at issue is whether it is to be paid entirely by that section of the public which derives the most direct benefit from the service, or to be spread over the whol? public, or to be divided between the two as at present, and, if the last, in what proportion. It is certain that we have not yet arrived at any finality with regard to either oar rail way or our mail services. But the fact must be distinctly borne in mind that every reduction in our postal or railway charges means a relative increase in the general taxation. On those terms we could have a penny postal service with England to-mor-row, but on those terms only.