HC Deb 19 March 1878 vol 238 cc1633-56
MR. ANDERSON,

in rising to call the attention of the House to the circumstances under which the Postmaster General has re-established a monopoly in the American Mail Service, at nearly double the rates recently paid by us, or still paid by the American Government, and to move— That, in the opinion of this House, the time for monopoly in the American Mail Service has passed, and that the recent change made by the Government, after a period of freedom, in reestablishing monopoly and subsidizing favoured Companies by paying them nearly double the rates paid by the American Government and lately paid by ourselves, is wrong in principle and prejudicial to the public service; said, he would go back a few years and give a very brief narration of the circumstances attending this matter. Even in 1859 and 1860 a Committee of that House thought this mail service required no subsidy. In 1866, when the late Lord Stanley of Alderley was Postmaster General, he went the length of aiming at a daily service to New York, an amount of progress we had not reached to this day. In 1868 the contracts previously existing with the Cunard Company came to an end, and there was a question about the renewal of these. The Conservative Government was just on the eve of going out, and it made a new arrangement with the Cunard and Inman Lines, the Cunard for two services per week getting £70,000, and the Inman £35,000 for one, the Cunard and Inman Companies having at that time formed a combination, and offered exactly identical terms to the Government. When the Conservative Government went out, they left this new contract not completed, and there arose a question with the new Government whether it should be ratified or not. It had to lie a month on the Table of the House, and there was a debate upon it; and a Committee was moved for by the hon. Member for Lincoln (Mr. Seely), and appointed, and it considered the question. In the end the House ratified the contract—or rather submitted to, than agreed to it, as there was a strong feeling that it was not altogether right, as it was thought that the time had passed away for subsidies to be given. He (Mr. Anderson) himself voted for the contract, because he thought it was hardly fair for a new Government to upset what the previous Government had done, and on that ground alone he voted for the subsidy; for, in fact, he disapproved of subsidies. That contract came to an end in 1876; and so strong was the feeling in the House against subsidies, that the present Government never thought of renewing it; but, on the contrary, in September 1878, addressed a Circular to the Steamship Companies, which he would read— General Post Office, London, 26th September, 1870. Gentlemen—The several contracts now in force for the conveyance of mails from this country to the United States will expire on the 31st December next, and it is not intended to enter into any new contract for the service. The Postmaster General proposes, from the commencement of next year, to forward the American mails on certain fixed days in each week, by the most efficient vessels sailing on those days, and to remunerate the owners by a payment per voyage based upon the amount of the correspondence carried on such voyage. The payment will be at the rate of two shillings and fourpence per pound for the letters, and two-pence per pound for the newspapers, printed papers, and patterns or samples contained in each mail. A similar arrangement for the transmission of mails to this country has been in operation in the United States for the last two years, and the rates which are proposed to be paid by this department for the correspondence conveyed in the opposite direction are the equivalent in British money of the rates now paid by the American Post Office, and of the rates for sea transit fixed by the Post Union Treaty. The Postmaster General desires to make widely known the arrangements that are contemplated, and in carrying them into effect, he hopes to receive the cordial support of all companies and firms running steam vessels from this country to the United States. The Postmaster General in that Circular hoped to receive the cordial support of all the Companies and Firms running steam vessels from this country to the United States. He (Mr. Anderson) called the attention of the House to the fact that the Postmaster General had received the cordial support of most of the Companies; but two of the Companies, and those two he had now favoured with a subsidy, refused to give him the cordial support which he desired to obtain. Those that did support him were the Cunard, the Anchor, the Guion, the Allan, the North German Lloyds, the French Transatlantic and the Hamburg American—all these Companies came forward and contracted with the Government upon what he would call free-trade service, which was the right principle to go upon. The Government then had a perfectly straight course before them. They did what the House had long wanted to be done; and he now censured them for the abandonment of that course which they themselves initiated, and the going back to the old system of monopoly. The two Companies which refused to give cordial support were the Inman and the White Star; but when they had been left out in the cold for a time the Inman came in, and afterwards the White Star also came in, to the extent of agreeing to take the mails on alternate Thursdays with the Inman. The free-trade system was in operation for about a year, and there had been few, if any, complaints of its operation. They paid only £28,000 instead of £105,000 for the year's services. The Postmaster General got lists of the vessels, and selected those he thought best for the service, entering into monthly contracts. The country had had the satisfaction of having the mail service performed as well as before, while paying no more for it than the American Government had been for some years paying for the homeward service. The Cunard Company, however, was not content with the arrangement. They hungered after the good old times when they prospered under a subsidy, and they set about intriguing in order to bring those good old times back again. At last they succeeded. They got the Inman and White Star Lines to enter into a firm combination with them; and when they got that, they went to the Government and put pressure upon the Postmaster General for a new arrangement. In fact, acting as trades unions did, they struck against the work they were previously doing, and endeavoured to make their employers give in. The Government had a clear course to adopt, which was to have told them to go about their business; but they did not follow it, and it was an undignified course for the Government to have yielded to a trades union combination of this sort. Not only had it been undignified, but it had proved the worst course which they could have taken; because, by encouraging and fostering such a trades union, they were simply encouraging and fostering their enemies, and strengthening them in a continuance of their opposition. By encouraging a free-service system, however, the Government would have been rendering themselves by degrees more independent of particular individuals or of particular Companies, and might ultimately have arrived at a better service for the public. There might, perhaps, have been a little inconvenience for a time, but it would have been only for a short time. When the three Companies which he had mentioned combined together, they asked for double rates, and the Government became frightened. They certainly recognized the fact that three powerful Companies had combined in opposition to them; but, instead of declining all negotiation, they yielded so far as to negotiate, and thereby showed their weakness; and the result of that negotiation had been that, instead of the country being put in a better, it had been placed in a worse position. No doubt, the Government had come out of it with a slightly lower rate for letters, the rates asked forbeing4s. 8d. per lb. and 4d. per lb. for newspapers and other things, while 4s. for letters had been accepted; but they had come out of it with a far worse consequence—the establishment of monopoly. In fact, they had given the Companies a monopoly which they had not at first asked for. All rival Lines had been excluded. The Post- master General had ungratefully thrown over those who had formerly supported him, and favoured and subsidized those who had opposed him. He (Mr. Anderson) did not blame the Cunard, the In-man, or the White Star Company for this. They were mere trading Companies, whose business it was to make their ships pay, and get as much money as they could; but he did blame Her Majesty's Government for yielding to them. He did not charge the Government with jobbery. He believed they were entirely free from any charge of that description in this matter; but he charged them with weakness in acting as they had done in yielding to a trades union. No doubt, as he had indicated, the three Companies referred to were powerful Companies. The White Star and Inman Line steamers were unquestionably the fastest that now crossed the Atlantic. Those of the Cunard Line were for a great many years the fastest; but they had been falling behind, while their neighbours had been pushing ahead, and the Cunard Company now lived pretty much on the prestige of its old glory. It had certainly been a safe line, and by its steamers our mails had been well carried. But, at the same time, no necessity existed for any monopoly, and that was best seen by what the American Government had done under exactly similar circumstances. About eight years ago that Government was paying subsidies to the Inman, Cunard, and North German Lloyds; but when the contracts were about to expire, it said it would no longer continue the subsidies, but would have a weight scale. The three Companies refused to carry the mails on those terms; but the American Government turned them adrift, and, in strong contrast to the invertebrate condition of the English Government, which yielded at once to a trades union, showed that it had backbone enough to put aside the combination. The subsidized Companies found themselves out in the cold, and in a short time were only too glad to come in at the rates which they had previously refused. The contract expired in some three years, and then the Inman Company tendered to the American Government on that Government's own terms, and its tender was accepted. Then the Cunard also sought to do the same; but the American Government refused them, because that Company had declined to support the Government at a time of difficulty; and it was not until the American Government gave up every kind of selection, and adopted an entirely free service, that the Cunard Company were permitted to take American mails. Since then the Inman, the White Star, and the Cunard Companies all had for about three years accepted those terms with perfectly free trade, and they were now actually accepting from the American Government the exact terms which they refused to accept from the British Government. It would have been quite easy for our own Government to have stood out against combination, and there never was a better time for them to have resisted. The transport trade on the Atlantic had never been so depressed as it was now, and all the other Lines which were running across that ocean—and there were plenty of them—would be only too happy to accept the terms which had been paid during the past year, and had so expressed themselves, notwithstanding a letter published that morning. He had just received a telegram from the Guion Company, saying they were perfectly ready to call at Queenstown and perform the same service they had hitherto done upon the same terms. The old rates were, in reality, splendid tonnage rates; and it should be remembered that no sorting room was provided, the letter bags were simply placed. on board, and left to lie there until their arrival; therefore they gave no more trouble than other goods. Yet other goods were taken across the Atlantic at from 7s. 6d. to 30s. or 40s. per ton; and even in good times the rates were only about from 30s. to 60s. a ton. But, at 2d. per lb., the allowance for newspapers, &c, the tonnage was £18 13s.; and at 2s. 4d., the allowance for letters, it was £261 per ton. These were immense rates compared to those on goods. What figures did the new rates produce? Fourpence per lb. paid for newspapers amounted to £37 6s. per ton, and 4s. 6d. for letters to £448 per ton. £448 for a ton of one kind of goods, and 7s. 6d. for a ton of another kind! It was, therefore, quite credible that the other Companies would be delighted to take the Post Office letters at the old rate when the three combining Companies refused to take them except at the higher rate. What was the reason assigned for that higher rate? It might be gathered from what had been stated by Mr. John Burns, the chief partner in the Cunard Company, who had written as if he were doing a great service to the Government in taking their mails at all, and this at a time when numbers of steamers were actually laid up for want of freight. He said this arrangement with other two Companies, for getting double the rates which were obtained for bringing the letters homeward, was "unique for its efficiency and economy." He (Mr. Anderson) had never doubted the efficiency of the service, but he thought its economy might be doubted. The writer of the letter said also— It does not follow that because the rates for homeward mails are insufficient, those for the outward mails should likewise be so. In other words, he asked this Government to pay for the shortcomings of the American Government; and, because he chose to do the work cheaply for the American Government, he laid on an extra price for the English Government, and considered that that made the service unique for its efficiency and economy. Then he talked of specie; but he (Mr. Anderson) was told that it would be easy for anyone to arrange for specie to be carried in those vessels at 2s.6d. for £100 sterling. When that was reduced to tonnage, it amounted to £134 a-ton. Therefore, he would be carrying specie—which he said was the very highest thing—at £134 a-ton, while he asked for English letters £448 a-ton. Well, the only reason that really was assigned for making this extra charge was for calling at Queenstown; but that was a perfectly hollow claim, because the vessels called at Queenstown with the homeward mails. But there was a claim made on the ground of delay, and undoubtedly there was a delay in calling at Queenstown—said to be from six to nine hours; but if it were counted from the beginning of the year to the end, it would not be so much as that, and he was certain it could be made a great deal less if the shipowners chose. It arose, in a great measure, from the steamer leaving Liverpool at an unnecessarily early hour, as passengers knew to their annoyance. During the whole of the summer and for half the winter sailings it might easily be avoided; for it would be easy to leave Liverpool by the afternoon tides, and then the delay at Queenstown would be nothing worth speaking of. But this rule as to delay applied equally to the Anchor, State, and Guion Lines, which last Line, as he had said, was quite willing to continue the service at the old rates, calling at Queenstown. He would now proceed to show what service the Government could have had at its disposal if it had had the firmness to throw over the combination and trust to other Lines and free competition. The North German Lloyd's called at Southampton every Tuesday, and its average sailings from that port were from 10 to 11 days—equivalent to 9 to 10 days from Queenstown—and it was, therefore, a quick Line. The Anchor line sailed from Southampton every Thursday. It had been sailing in summer only, but was quite willing to sail in winter if an arrangement could be made; and that was a fast Line. The National Line sailed from Liverpool every Wednesday, and from Queenstown every Thursday; its average sailings were from 10 to 11 days. The State Line sailed from Glasgow, calling at Larne, and its average sailings were from 10 to 11 days. The Guion Line sailed from Liverpool on Saturday, and from Queenstown on Sunday, and its average was from 9 to 10 days—quite as good as the Cunard, but not so good as the Inman or White Star. The Anchor sailed from Glasgow on Saturday, and Moville on Sunday, and its average was also from 9 to 10 days. The French Transatlantic Line sailed from Plymouth, and' also the Hamburg and American, and these could be arranged with; but, as they did not now have mails, they had discontinued calling at Queenstown. The Government might have had from these Companies, irrespective of the Cunard, Inman, and White Star Companies, two sailings a-week from Southampton, two from Queenstown, and two from the North of Ireland. Now, as to speed, the average of the White Star steamers was from 8 to 9 days; of the Inman, from 8 to 10 days; and that of the Cunard, 9 to 10 days; the last being the same as the Anchor, and not quite so good as the Guion Line was at present. This he might be expected to prove. He had the average sailings of the Cunard and Guion lines from the 9th of last December, weekly—-the sailing from Queenstown and the arrival at New York. The sailing of the 9th December was in favour of the Guion by 23¾ hours; December 16, in favour of the Guion by 15¾hours; December 23, in favour of the Guion by 52 hours; December 30, in favour of the Guion by 12½ hours; January 6, in favour of the Cunard by 36J- hours; January 13, in favour of the Guion by 31¾ hours; January 20, in favour of the Cunard by 3¼ hours; January 27, in favour of the Guion by 4½ hours; February 3, in favour of the Guion by 14¼ hours; February 10, in favour of the Cunard by 34¾ hours; February 17, in favour of the Guion by 19 hours; February 24, in favour of the Guion by 16½ hours; March 3, in favour of the Guion by 38 hours. The total average of these 13 voyages was in favour of the Guion by l¾ hours, and the Guion was one of the lines which the Postmaster General had thrown over as a slow Line, and had refused to take any contract at all from it. Taking the sailings of the Anchor Line as against the Cunard from December 15, there was an average of 6½ hours per voyage in favour of the Anchor Line. He admitted that that was a small thing, which a few hours' further delay at Queens-town might account for, and therefore in his statement he had coupled the Anchor Line with the Cunard. But, undoubtedly, the Guion Line was faster than the Cunard Line, and had been going ahead. There was another point, and that was the gross injustice done to Scotland and the North of Ireland by the present arrangement. Scotland had the Anchor line sailing from Glasgow every Saturday, and from Moville every Sunday. Shippers of goods by an Anchor steamer could send their letters by the steamer, and the letters and invoices arrived along with the goods; but now they might go on shipping goods by the steamer, but were obliged to send letters by Queenstown, and the goods would arrive at New York before the invoices. This would not only be the case when there was perfect regularity in the mails; but it was not unusual for the Scotch mails to fail to catch the London mail at Warrington, and, when that was the case, the Glasgow and Scotch letters were actually two or three days later in getting away. Therefore, it was a very uncalled-for proceeding that the Postmaster General had adopted in making such an arrangement; for, by taking the mails from the Anchor Line, the Government had inflicted a great injustice on Scotland, which would not have been inflicted but for the arrangement of a monopoly. He would not himself enter into the Irish grievance, as the hon. Member for Londonderry wished to do that, but it was quite as great; because, while it had been worth the while of the Anchor Line to call at Moville for mails and passengers, it had ceased to be worth their while to call for passengers only, as it would not be worth their while to call for mails only. They had, therefore, discontinued calling at Moville altogether; and thus a great injustice had been done to the North of Ireland. If the Postmaster General had resisted the combination of the three Companies, as he undoubtedly ought to have done, he might have undergone some slight inconvenience for a short time, but for a short time only; and then he would have been independent of any combination that could have been made against him, as the other Companies would have gone on improving their lines. But he had been retrograde in his policy, and had gone back to an exploded system from which the country had been free for a year. He should feel justified in pressing his Motion to a division, unless the Postmaster General could give an assurance to the House that he had it in contemplation to throw over the present arrangement and to revert to the system of free competition. The hon. Gentleman concluded by moving the Resolution.

MR. CHARLES LEWIS,

in seconding the Motion, said, that the alteration which had been made ought to rest on strong grounds in order to be justified. The American Government was still continuing the rates of the past three or four years, so that it was carrying on the service for nearly half the prices which were being paid by this country for the outward bound mails. He could understand the conduct of the Government if there had been a combination on the part of all the available lines; but when the lines in combination were only three out of eight or 10, it became necessary for the Government to explain the extraordinary compact which had been entered into. He could not understand what had induced the Government to enter on a policy totally different from that which they adopted in 1876. In that year they conceived the plan of throwing open competition among all the lines, only regulated by speed and efficiency. A year later they conceived the plan of submitting to a combination of three of the leading Companies at nearly double the rates paid by the American Government for similar service, and which Her Majesty's Government themselves paid in 1877. The present arrangement was inconvenient as regarded both Scotland and the North of Ireland, especially in a commercial point of view. The result of the arrangement had been that the weekly inward American mail service of the Anchor Line from America to Ireland had been continued, while the outward service of the same Line from Ireland to America had been discontinued, involving a direct disadvantage to the North of Ireland in the way of commerce, passenger traffic, and prestige of trade. Yet, the average number of American bags carried by the Anchor Line from the North of Ireland was six on every voyage, the average from Glasgow being 10. It was most unfortunate that anything should have been done which would have the effect of checking in the slightest degree the feeble and failing trade of Ireland. He admitted fully the merits of the three Companies to whom the monopoly had been given; but he wished to remind the House that they were only three out of eight or 10 Companies, all of whom might be described as first-class lines, and who, he contended, would have given almost equally good service for a far less sum than that which the contracting Companies had obtained. On the whole, therefore, believing that some explanation of this matter further than that which had been given should be made, he begged to second the Motion of the hon. Member for Glasgow.

Motion made, and Question proposed, That, in the opinion of this House, the time for monopoly in the American Mail Service has passed, and the recent change made by the Government, after a period of freedom, in re-establishing monopoly and subsidizing favoured Companies by paying them nearly double the rates paid by the American Government, and lately paid by ourselves, is wrong in principle and prejudicial to the public service."—(Mr. Anderson.)

MR. BAXTER

said, he had hoped that he had heard a long time ago the last of this vexed question of oceanic postal subsidies. The subject was one to which he had paid much attention many years ago, when it was the fashion to give the Cunard Company a fresh contract four or five years before their old one had expired. He need not allude to the discreditable disclosures relating to the Galwayjob—[Major NOLAN: Oh, oh!]—The hon. and gallant Member did not know, as he was not then a Member of the House, that it was more closely connected with that system than many hon. Members supposed. He (Mr. Baxter) had always protested against that system; but he had never taken up the ground in that House that subsidies might not in certain circumstances be advantageous to the public service. He admitted at once that there might be circumstances, there being no competition and scarcely any sea navigation, where subsidies might be given to stimulate navigation. But the position which he had always taken, and which he took now, was this—that wherever there were many powerful steamers belonging to different Companies plying with the utmost regularity and with great speed on any ocean, and carrying goods and passengers, it was a waste of public money to pay any of those Companies a large sum of money as a subsidy. It was a great advantage to get rapid and regular communication, and, from a personal point of view, he desired that every assistance should be given in order to facilitate its attainment; but, as a Member of that House and a Representative of the ratepayers, it was his duty to see that the service—and he was speaking not of this particular service, but on general grounds—should be performed with the utmost economy consistent with efficiency. He contended that this new arrangement between these Companies and the Post Office was nothing more nor less than a subsidy given for services, and that on the North Atlantic Ocean, where there was more competition than on any ocean in the world. The noble Lord the Postmaster General (Lord John Manners) took the true course last year, and had he only had the courage to continue in it, he would have established this Atlantic mail service on a proper footing, and have done great service to the taxpayers of this country. But, as the hon. Member for Glasgow (Mr. Anderson) had said, he had yielded to nothing more or less than a trades union. He (Mr. Baxter) did not wish to say a word against any of the great Companies who had got that monopoly. The Cunard, White Star, and Inman Companies were splendidly managed, and their combination on this occasion had been eminently successful. It was a combination for their own interests. Almost alone in that House he stood up more than 20 years ago against the Cunard Company getting a monopoly of the mail service. It was supposed at the time that he had an interest in the Inman Company, and it was even mentioned in the House; but when the Inman joined with the Cunard, he opposed the monopoly to two Companies, as strongly as he had before opposed the monopoly to one, and as strongly as he now did the monopoly to three. These three Companies had been successful with their persuasions with the Postmaster General; but they might depend upon it, it would, only be for a time. The people of this country would never go on paying for the carriage of mails across the Atlantic very nearly double what the American Government was paying. He went further, and said he believed the American Government at this moment were paying too much. They had heard a good deal about the Steamship Companies undertaking to start at a certain time, and to perform the voyage at a certain speed; but these representations were sheer nonsense. They would do all these things altogether irrespective of their grants for the mail bags. But he felt perfectly confident, as he had said over and over again, in and out of office, that there was nothing to prevent the American mail service being at this moment conducted for the mere freight of the letter bags. A few years ago one of these Companies had it in contemplation to offer to Her Majesty's Government to do this; and he was confident that the Cunard Company, rather than loose the mails, would carry them for the mere honour of the thing, as was now done between Belfast and Greenock. In fact, the Post Office authorities were now, and had always been, too soft, lax, and squeezable in this matter of contracts. The Companies had too much influence with them, and made representations to the Post Office authorities which business men knew to be quite fallacious. He quite acknowledged that the present Postmaster General wished to do the proper thing, both as regarded the Post Office and the general public, and had dealt as fairly as possible with all parties; but, as the hon. Member for Glasgow had said, and he (Mr. Baxter) concurred with him, if the Postmaster General were manly enough to stand up against any combination, there would be, in the first instance, not only a little, but a good deal, of inconvenience to the public service. But he believed it was the duty of the Postmaster General to do so, and all that was required was a little firmness. As to the Queenstown matter, that was a mere question of detail; and the House might depend on it that it had nothing to do with the placing of the service on a free and proper basis. The fact was, this system of subsidizing had existed 25 years longer on the North Atlantic than it ever ought to have done, and it had demoralized all the parties concerned. This was the last effort to keep it up; and he felt perfectly certain that whatever might be the fate of the Motion of the hon. Member for Glasgow, and whatever the answer they would get from the noble Lord the Postmaster General, sooner or later, and the sooner the better, the Post Office authorities would have to take up a determined stand in the interests of the public, and let these Companies, not only in the North Atlantic but in the other oceans, knew once for all that the days of monopoly and high charges, which he begged the House to keep in mind meant high postage, were at an end.

MR. MAC IVER

said, he did not wish to defend all the details of these contracts, and he agreed with the hon. Member who brought forward the Motion (Mr. Anderson) that the good services of the Anchor Line from Glasgow had not received the consideration they deserved. Pour years or more had elapsed since his connection with the Cunard Company ceased, and he had now no interest either in that, or in any other Company in the trade. Still, he had been for 17 years behind the scenes, and might be permitted to give the result of what had occurred in his time, without in any degree unduly favouring the Company in which he was once interested. The hon. Member for Glasgow had, in his opinion, made a most unwar- rantable attack on the Government. The very troubles of which the hon. Member complained were traceable to mistakes which had arisen at Glasgow, and among the hon. Gentleman's own friends. There had boon no unreasonable combination between the three Companies in question. Those steamers which were really fit to carry mails across the Atlantic in a satisfactory manner were in very few hands. Indeed, he knew the materials did not exist in British steamers that would enable our Post Office to establish a satisfactory mail service which did not include these three Companies. He agreed, however, that the contracts should be extended further, so as to include the Anchor Line, and that the Government should be at liberty to employ any fast vessels as they were built from time to time. The hon. Member for Glasgow, who compared the passages of the Guion steamers with those' of the Cunard steamers, omitted to mention that he was not comparing them with the passages made by the fast steamers of the Cunard Line. Before he had a seat in that House, the American Government were endeavouring to act on the principle which the hon. Member for Glasgow justified. The mails then came principally by the Guion steamers, and goods constantly came by fast steamers some days before the arrival of the letters announcing that they had been despatched. In Liverpool, Manchester, and every great trading centre, the complaints about the delay of the mails were at that period loud and deep. The Government could not employ almost exclusively foreign steamers already subsidized by their own Governments, such as would satisfy the legitimate requirements of the British Postal Service; while with regard to the large question of principle, nobody in the possession of steamers which were fit to carry the mails would conduct any satisfactory postal service unless they were compensated for the work in some way or other. Of course, the owners of more or less inferior vessels would always be glad to carry the mails at a cheaper rate on account of the character which would be given to their ships by being so employed. It was not, however, a question of carrying tons of letters at once, as the hon. Member seemed to suppose. Letters were not carried by the ton. If there was any large quantity conveyed, no doubt the payment might reasonably be reduced. Mail-carrying, whether across the Atlantic or elsewhere, must always be more or less in the nature of a monopoly. The public would rather pay a reasonable sum for an efficient mail service than a low sum for an irregular and unreliable service. Surely, in regard to inland mails, it would not be argued that anybody who happened to possess a wheelbarrow might—if he would only offer to do it cheap—be entrusted with the conveyance of letters? The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Montrose (Mr. Baxter) and the hon. Gentleman who preceded him (Mr. Charles Lewis) had spoken as if this mail-carrying was a hugely profitable business. During the many years he was concerned with it, he found that the profits were more than absorbed in the expenses of the service expected to be performed. He did not think the Companies had at all acted unfairly. Who among hon. Members would undertake to build steamers of a class superior to those required for ordinary traffic, and go to the expense of a detention at Queenstown without due compensation? Nor did he see that the Post Office were to blame except, perhaps, for having negotiated too exclusively with one gentleman. The position of matters, in a word, was this—the Government required something better than a mere trading service, and that something they could only expect to obtain by paying for it. He thought it not unreasonable that there should be some closer association between the mail service and the Royal Navy.

MR. T. DICKSON

thought the arguments of the hon. Member for Glasgow (Mr. Anderson) still remained unanswered. It seemed to him most unbusinesslike that the service performed by one Company every week from Londonderry at a cost of 2s. 4d. per lb. should have been handed over to another Company at 4s. per lb., especially when no fault was found with the steamers of the first. The noble Lord the Postmaster General seemed to have ignored the commercial interests of the North of Ireland altogether, and to have studied only the interests of the Companies. Such conduct had created great surprise, and had given rise to inconvenience to the merchants of the North of Ireland. He asked the House, by its vote on the Motion, to show that the North of Ireland was worthy of a mail service, and that its commercial interests should not be sacrificed to that of shipowners.

MAJOR NOLAN

contended that the endeavour of the borough and county of Galway, as well as of the Representatives of Irish constituencies generally, to secure for that part of Ireland the advantage to which it was entitled by its position of being made a point of communication between Great Britain and America, was by no means deserving of being called "the Galway job," as it had been by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Montrose (Mr. Baxter). It was the opinion of the Irish Members that there should be one post in Ireland in direct mail communication with America; but by subsidizing English Companies all Irish ports were shut out.

MR. PULESTON

pointed out that when the late arrangement for the conveyance of the mails between this country and America was abolished, it had been reduced to a state of perfect chaos. It was consequently found that some different arrangement was demanded by the great commercial interests of the country, and it had to be made with some Company. The facts, were, indeed overwhelming in support of the view that the service under that system was so bad that it could not possibly, consistently with duo regard to the commercial relations between the two countries, be suffered to remain unchanged. He had known letters to have been, not once or twice, but frequently, delayed 15 or 16 days before the new arrangement was entered into, and it was quite clear, from experience, that if we wanted to have a thing well done, we must pay for the advantage. He thought that we should scarcely have had the great fleets of grand steamships in this country had it not been for the fostering care of the Government in their early history; and the new contract which had been entered into would be very bad indeed if it did not prove a great improvement upon the former hap-hazard arrangement. He was opposed to the system extolled by the hon. Member for Glasgow (Mr. Anderson).

MR. MACDONALD

argued that to give a subsidy as in the present instance was to confer a monopoly, which, he contended, the Government should avoid doing, either directly or indirectly. He had, he added, himself crossed the Atlantic five times, and on throe occasions the Anchor Line steamer, in which he had taken his passage, had got into port before the Cunard, although the former did not carry the mails, and had no such inducement to arrive at her destination quickly as the latter. On one of the occasions, the Scottish Rifle Team in going out took the Cunard steamer. The Anchor Line steamer was in port 48 hours before. The weather was alike for both. He felt some stern light when they were so unpatriotic as to go out of the country to travel by another line. Again, the accommodation afforded to the West of Scotland was a great injury to the trading community, and he begged of the House to mark their disapprobation of the transaction. He looked upon the present system as one of the worst forms of trade combinations—a combination backed by power and money; and he trusted the House, by a vote on the Motion, would crush out the monopoly and subsidies to any Line of steamships whatever. There ought to be a fair field and no favour. If a body of working men made a combination to crush out any fellow-labourer, the result would, no doubt, be three months with hard labour.

SIR ANDREW LUSK

said, that unlike the hon. Member for Stafford (Mr. Macdonald), he had never crossed the Atlantic, and could not, in consequence, speak from experience; but he was aware that many of the Companies had carried the mails punctually and quickly, and that the old system had, on the whole, worked well. He thought that the noble Lord the Postmaster General had' treated the Anchor Line rather shabbily. There could be no doubt that the Anchor steamers were very fine vessels, and had done their work remarkably well; and he (Sir Andrew Lusk) did not think it was right to get rid of an old servant in the way which had been done. There was great prestige in carrying the mails, and honour was a thing which was valued in commercial as well as in other departments of life. What did gentlemen want to get into Parliament for? They exposed themselves to much abuse, and. sacrificed a great deal of time; and honour was one of the things for which they wished to enter that House. He did not think that a Line which did their work so admirably as the Anchor Line should have been jostled aside in that way.

SIR EARDLEY WILMOT

said, that strong representations having been made to him from the North of Ireland relative to the injury and injustice done to the trade and commerce of those districts through the act of the Government in concentrating the mails for North America at Queenstown, he had listened with attention for some arguments in favour of the course pursued by the noble Lord the Postmaster General'; and he should anxiously await the explanation about to be given by his noble Friend (Lord John Manners). The arguments already adduced in support of the new system appeared to him (Sir Eardley Wilmot) to condemn it, especially those brought forward by the hon. Member for Birkenhead (Mr. Mae Iver), whose speech had been directed to the several heads of speed, efficiency, and economy. He would take those three heads separately—and, as regarded speed, it had been disposed of by the hon. Member for. Stafford (Mr. Macdonald), who had crossed the Atlantic to America from Glasgow in one of the steamers of the Anchor Line, and had actually arrived at New York 24 hours before one of the favoured Cunard steamers had put in an appearance. Other testimony to the same effect had been given. Then, as regarded efficiency, he had in his hand the copy of a letter from the Postmaster General of the United States, written from Washington, in which he had testified to the thorough efficiency of the Anchor steamers, and to the great regularity with which they had performed their voyages from Glasgow to New York. As regarded the third head of economy, the hon. Member for Glasgow (Mr. Anderson) had fully shown that, whereas the cost of letters before the late change was 2s. 4d. per lb., and 4d. per lb. for newspapers, it was now 4s. per lb. for letters, and 8d. per lb. for newspapers—quite double the cost for the latter, and very nearly double for the former; and if efficiency and cheapness went together, he considered they ought to lean always to the side of economy. Now, in the case so ably presented to them by the hon. Member for Glasgow, there were three principal features. First, the question of monopoly, as exemplified in the three Companies favoured by the Post Office; secondly, the case of Glasgow; and, thirdly, that of Londonderry and the North of Ireland. As regarded the first, it had been so fully disposed of by the right hon. Member for Montrose (Mr. Baxter), that he thought he need not trouble the House with any further remarks on that. The axiom was as old as our first copy-books, where was to be found the text, "Monopolies are odious;" and he quite concurred with the right hon. Member for Montrose, that nothing was so prejudicial to the interests of trade and commerce as monopoly, and nothing so favourable to their advancement and healthy state as free and fair competition. As regarded Glasgow, it did seem hard that a community so flourishing, and scarcely second to any in the Kingdom as regarded its trade and manufactures, should suddenly be deprived of an advantage only lately conferred upon it, and of which it had shown itself worthy in every way. It had been left out in the cold, while other cities had been taken into special favour. And what were the facts of the case? That at 7.15 P.M. every Saturday evening the box used to be closed at the Glasgow Post Office for making up the American mail; whereas now, under the new regime, it was closed at 5.15 P.M.—two hours earlier than before—whicli was a disadvantage to the houses of business in Glasgow. Then the Anchor Line of steamers left Glasgow that night with the mails, and on Sunday morning entered Lough Foyle, calling at Moville for the Londonderry and North Irish letters and passengers, and proceeding thence straight away to New York, where they arrived almost always before the Liverpool steamers, which had called at Queenstown. The last point in the argument was Londonderry, and the inhabitants of that city and district complained that they had been unduly deprived of the advantage of the Glasgow steamers calling at Moville, inasmuch as the mail service having been taken from the Anchor Line, the steamers of that Company now sailed direct to New York without touching at Londonderry. Thus the passengers from the North of Ireland, who wished to cross the Atlantic, were now obliged to go by rail to Dub- lin and Queenstown, and there embark, which entailed upon them considerable inconvenience and expense. He had in his hand the copy of a Memorial addressed to the Postmaster General by the Harbour Commissioners of Londonderry, complaining of the great check to the trade and commerce of that part of Ireland, which had begun rapidly to develop themselves under the advantages of the Anchor Line, making Moville a point of departure for America, but which the removal of the mails to Queenstown had injuriously affected. The memorialists represented that, in view of the Glasgow steamers calling in Lough Foyle, they had made a large outlay in improvements in the harbour of Londonderry, by the erection of lighthouses and the formation of docks and quays. All these improvements had been made with a view to the mails from the North of Ireland continuing to be shipped from Londonderry. Under these circumstances, however much he should regret not being able to support the Government, he considered the case presented by the hon. Member for Glasgow and the hon. Member for Londonderry (Mr. Charles Lewis) so overwhelmingly strong that, unless it could be successfully met by his noble Friend the Postmaster General, he should feel constrained, however reluctantly, to give his vote in favour of the Resolution.

SIR FREDERICK PERKINS

protested strongly against the injustice done to the North German Lloyd's Company, whose ships sailed from a port in which he was interested, by the withdrawal, without any sufficient reason, of the confidence which the Government had reposed in them. The vessels of that Company were as numerous, as well manned and officered, and their power and speed were as good, as those of the three Companies on whom the favour of the Post Office authorities was now concentrated. They had carried the mails many years, doing their work regularly and well; and they had, moreover, been the means of breaking down a system of monopoly. It was, therefore, most unfair, and he might say unjust, on the part of that, or any other, Government, suddenly to take away this service from them, and give it to others, without any legitimate reason; while, at the same time, by that arbitrary proceeding, additional expense was thrown upon the country. He hoped the noble Lord the Postmaster General would be able to give some legitimate reason for the proceeding, and that it had not been withdrawn from mere whim or fancy.

MR. J. P. CORRY

thought it right, as the Representative of the largest constituency in the North of Ireland, to say that the people of Belfast did not complain of what the Government had done. It would, however, cause great inconvenience to the people of Ireland if the mail steamers going to and from America did not call at Queenstown. He believed that the present arrangement was as good as any that could possibly be made by the Post Office.

LORD JOHN MANNERS

said, the question before the House was, no doubt, a very important one, and he had no complaint to make of the tone or the form in which the hon. Member for Glasgow (Mr. Anderson) had proposed his Resolution; although he supposed he must regard it as tantamount to a Vote of Censure. The hon. Gentleman had traced the history of the question from the beginning; but he had given the kernel of the matter in a sentence that he had read from the Circular which the Post Office had issued on the termination of the old contract. The purport of that sentence was, that the Postmaster General appealed to all the great steam shipping Companies, entertaining a hope and a belief that he would receive from them a cordial support in the introduction of the proposed new system. That was really the gist of the whole business. If he had received, and continued to receive, the cordial support which he had asked for, that system would have gone on, and there would have been no reason for departing from it, or for the Motion before the House. But it was precisely because he did not obtain that amount of assistance from some of the Companies—without which it could hardly be expected to possess anything like permanency—that after a certain number of months' trial the new system really collapsed. He most heartily reciprocated everything which had been said in favour of those Companies which had come forward at the first and which had continued up to the last to render him a cordial support; and he had therefore heard with regret from the hon. Baronet the Member for Finsbury (Sir Andrew Lusk) that he had cast a slur on any one of those Companies. He appreciated most fully the services which the North German Lloyd's Line, the Guion Line, and the Anchor Line had rendered. They had all rendered most efficient services. If he had had to consider his own feelings, or the feelings of the Government, he should have continued to avail himself of the services of those Companies and let everything take its chance; but he had to consider not what was the conduct of this or that Company, or what might have been agreeable to the Government or to the Postmaster General for the time being, but what was for the general convenience and the utility of the public of the three Kingdoms. He had to consider what was for the convenience of the great commercial and manufacturing classes of the three Kingdoms, when the three principal supports of the system then in practice gave way under it. Therefore, while agreeing, so far as the principle went, and with the remarks made upon it by the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Baxter), and the hon. Member for Glasgow, he had to consider whether the correspondence of those classes with America should run the risk of being disarranged for the sake of maintaining a theory. Consequently, when the Companies, to which so much reference had been made, gave notice in October that after November they would no longer continue to carry mails on the terms which had been agreed upon—namely, from month to month—he had to re-consider the whole question simply for the convenience of the public, and he came, reluctantly, to the conclusion that it was necessary to abandon that system, and enter into relations with three of the most powerful and most capable of existing Companies for the conveyance of the mails from this country to the United States for the limited period of 12 months. When the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Montrose called the arrangement a subsidy or a contract he (Lord John Manners) demurred, as it was neither the one nor the other, but simply a payment for services rendered for the carriage of the mails for that period, and the Government could give six months to terminate the arrangement, and this debate would, no doubt, be taken into consideration by the Government when the proper time for giving notice arrived. By the admission of the hon. Member for Glasgow one of the three Companies with which the existing arrangement had been made was the fastest and another was the safest Line in the Kingdom. That was a very material admission.

MR. ANDERSON

I did not say that. I said two of them—the White Star and Inman—were the fastest, and the Cunard might be called the safest

LORD JOHN MANNERS

said, if the hon. Gentleman admitted that two were the fastest, and the other the safest in the whole Kingdom, he thought that was a very satisfactory admission to make, and it showed that the existing arrangement could not have been made from any favouritism or backstair influence at the Post Office as had been suggested. The Government were anxious to carry into effect the new system. He must decline to give any pledge to the hon. Gentleman as to what course the Government might be disposed to adopt at the end of the limited period of 12 months. He thought the House would be of opinion that a question of such great practical importance ought not to be hampered beforehand by some theoretical principle, but ought to be dealt with on the broad grounds of speed, punctuality, and certainty. When the time arrived for the expiration of this temporary arrangement, he could assure the hon. Gentleman and the House that the Government and the Department over which he had the honour to preside would be most anxious to take the whole of this subject into their consideration; and if they should see a fair chance of re-establishing the system which had been tried as a mere experiment, they would be most happy to take every possible step in that direction: but it was not wise to enter upon an experiment of that sort without a very good chance of its having a lasting success. He must maintain he had not abandoned the previous system—it had abandoned him.

Question put.

The House divided:—Ayes 92; Noes 117: Majority 25.—(Div. List, No. 59.)