HC Deb 30 March 1896 vol 39 c376

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether his attention has been called to the Return recently issued showing the time respectively occupied in the carriage of the mails between New York and Queenstown, and between New York and Southampton, during the year 1895; and whether, in view of the marked superiority of the Queenstown route, the Postmaster General will represent to the postal authorities of the United States the advisability of forwarding the mails for Great Britain and Ireland viâ Queenstown?


The Postmaster General has, of course, had before him the Return prepared in his Department for the information of the House showing the time respectively occupied in the carriage of the mails between Queenstown and New York and between Southampton and New York during the year 1895. The United States Post Office is thoroughly aware, from weekly returns furnished to it by the Postmaster General, how the service works by both routes, and, speaking generally, sends by the Queenstown route all letters, etc., for Ireland, as well, of course, as all letters, etc., for other parts of the United Kingdom, which are specially superscribed for the Queenstown route. Moreover, the Saturday mails from New York, containing letters, etc., for all parts of the United Kingdom, are regularly carried by the Cunard Company's steamers touching at Queenstown. On Wednesdays, when a subsidised American packet for Southampton and a British steamer for Liverpool via Queenstown are both starting from New York, and the disparity between the transit times is small, the United States Post Office give the preference to their own subsidised packet, and the Postmaster General can scarcely find fault with them for so doing.