The Nelson Evening Mail. WEDNESDAY, MARCH 8, 1876.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XI, Issue 67, 8 March 1876, Page 2

The Nelson Evening Mail. WEDNESDAY, MARCH 8, 1876.

We have read with no little interest an article by Professor Jevons on " The Postoffice telegraphs and their results," which appeared in the Fortnightly Heview of December last. The object of the paper is to show, first, that the transfer of the telegraphs in England to the Grovernnient has proved a failure, and, second, that it is a mistake to argue that, although low rates may and do lead to a far greater number of messages being sent, the financial result must as a consequence prove satisfactory. The writer commences by admitting the immense convenience to the public in having telegraph and money order offices conveniently situated iv every part of the United Kingdom, and shows to what extent they avail themselves of the facilities thus placed at their disposal. " Under the fostering care of a government department," he says, "the traffic has grown enormously, the number of ordinary messages sent in a year being now about 20,000,000 instead of 6,000,000, as it was just before the transfer, while the press messages have been multiplied more than a hundredfold from 2,000,000 to 220,000,000 of words." The number of offices has increased from 2000 to 5600, and the lines from 24,000 t0'49,000 miles. But, on the other hand, it appears that the working expenses have steadily advanced from 57 per cent in 1871 to 91 £ per cent in 1874, thus leaving scarcely anything to pay the interest on the large sum of ten millions sunk in the system or to meet contingent expenses and liabilities. In other words, the more the business has increased the smaller have the profits become, until they have come down to almost nothing. Arguing from this, the writer says, " I have no hesitation in saying that in a fioancial point of view the purchase of the telegraphs by the Government has been a I bluuder." Having shown that all the calculations upon which the lurchase of the Hues was based, j both as regards the original cost, cost of I extension, and working expenses, have proved utterly false and unreliable, the j writer goes oa to deal with the plausible | assertion that the results are exactly comparable to those of the postoffice after the penny postal reform, and that I the low rates must eventually lead to greater profits, and he completely crushes this argument by figures showing the results in each case, the increase iv the one having been steady and considerable, tho decrease in the other enormous and not gradual, but in huge leaps. These figures, which are well worth quoting, are as follows :— - Nett Revenue or Profit. Poßtoffice, Telegraphs. Fir st year after reform £500,7 e>9 £ 03,4.56 ciecond „ „ £561249 £159,834 Third „ „ £600,641 £103,120 Fourth „ „ £640,217 £ 90.033 rilth „ „ £7 9 95* £ 36,725 He then proceeds to show wherein lies the difference between low postal and low telegraph charges : — " The Post Office stands in an entirely unique posit on as regards the great increase in traffic which can be carriel on with a small increase of cost. Sir Rowland HuVs ref inn w;»« snunil and bu cessful, because he lea ly did show that an immensely increased /business ould be done at a v tiform ■of # v peuny. A poßtman. to put the'principle,- bb !pria#y an possible, can carry a hundred letters an w. R »s .one, and a ton ot mail bigs pan be iranßrnif^ed by railway almost as easily as a single bag. #-£ jt is tot 11/ the reverse with the tel graphs,, jn w^ich each iTKPsage u»e to ba individually received fry a I clerk, transmit! ed, retransmitted, wrjjtU-n .out, and Jinally delivered by a anecial messenger

In this case every increase 'of tiftffie imolves an increase of expense in' nearly the same ratio aa regards many items. '* * * In the letter branch of the Post Office the economical condition of the work is entirely different. A large part of th.9 expenses of the department remains near'y unchanged while the truffle increases, and only a small part is actually proportional to thennmber of letters carried. Thus a reduction of charges in the Post Office often leads to such an increase of traffic that tbe net revenue, even at the lessened rate, is ultimately incrrased. But this happy result ein only be achieved in the absence of any serious increase of working expenses. Now in the telegraph branch a growth of traffic, as we have seen and as experience proves, leads to a great increase of working expenses, and it follows almost inevitably that any reduction of the minimum charge for a message will cause a further deficit in the telegraph accounts." On these grounds the writer strongly opposes any reduction in the present tariff of one shilling for twenty words. " I quite agree,". he says, " that, at half the present charge, we should have a vast increase of messages, and I think it likely that the department would have to provide for fifty millions of messages a year instead of twenty. But if we could at all judge of the future progress of the working ex penses by their past progress, the financial result of a sixpenny rate would be to give us a deficiency of a million and a quarter instead of a quarter of a million as at present." "With regard to the lessened expenditure that was promised when the telegraph came into the hands of the Government he draws attention to the great inconsistency between the predictions and the actual results. At the time the transfer was in contemplation it was asserted that the one centralised staff of officers and engineers required by the Government would be less numerous and costly than the aggregate of the separate staffs maintained by the telegraph companies, and further that in the highest grade of clerks the rates of salary under the Government would be lower than in the companies. But in the report of the Select Committee appointed to enquire into the working ol the telegraphs it was stated that the salaries of all the officials of the companies were very largely raised after their entry into the Government service, and that the staff engaged for the supervision of the service in the secretary's and engineer's offices, and account branch was comparatively greatly in excess of that considered necessary under the divided management of the telegraph companies. The article concludes as follows: — " The accounts of the telegraph department unfortunately demonstrate what was before to be feared, namely, that a Government department cannot compete in economy with an ordinary commercial Arm subject to competition. The work done is indeed great, and fairly accomplished on the whole, and some people regard the achievements ot the department as roarvt Hous. They iorget, however, that it has been accomplished by the lavish and almost unlimited expenditure of the national money, and that many wonders might be done in the same way. If the English people like to spend their public revenue upon cheap telegrams, of course they can do so, though there may be two opinions about the wisdom of the expenditure. But in any case it is not wise fbr us to forget the extreme discrepancies between what was promised and what has been achieved by the telegraph department."