The Gisborne Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. MONDAY, JANUARY 31, 1910. MODERN POSTAL METHODS.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVIII, Issue 2723, 31 January 1910, Page 4

The Gisborne Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. MONDAY, JANUARY 31, 1910. MODERN POSTAL METHODS.

In a recent issue we drew attention to ail innovation in the Postal Department that is intended to greatly improve the mail services for country settlers. The new scheme announced at Hastings by Sir Joseph Hard is being adopted on the recommendation of the Secretary of the Department, Mr D. Robertson. This officer, during his visit to the post offices of Europe and America, appears to have used his eyes, ears and understanding to some purpose, for he has made other important recommendations as the result of lies trip. He claims that- their adoption would result in a saving of £IO,OOO annually to the Government. It is obvious that if even half that amount could ho saved the action of the Government in despatching Mr Robertson on his globe-encircling tour will have been amply justified. One department of the mail service in which the Secretary of the Department claims that a great economy of time can be effected is in the practice known as backstamping. At present every letter passing through a New Zealand post office has the time of posting stamped on the face of the envelope and subsequently the time of receipt at the office from which it is delivered is stamped on the back. Thus a letter from Dunedin to Gisborne may have on its face “Dunedin, Jan. 21, 9.30 p.m.” and on the back “Gisborne, Jan. 28, 8.40 a.m.” Mr Robertson claims that to put this stamp on the back oi the letters costs £IOOO a year, and is an unnecessary formality. Moreover, the abolition of hack-stamping would result in a great saving of time at central offices as it would then be possible for inland offices to sort and despatch forward letters in bundles which need not he disturbed by the transit office. It is urged that with regular delivery of mails the time of receipt of a letter at the office where it is posted is sufficient indication ~to the recipient of the time it should have reached him. Mr Robertson found that in the United (States and Canada the date stamping of received letters has ceased at certain offices without any inconvenience to anyone, aild in London letters for the morning delivery are not •back-stamped. The installation of

stamp-selling machines would prove a great time-saver in central offices, but in liis travels Mr Robertson found none to quite equal the invention of the New Zealander, Mr Dickie, which has been adopted by the British post offices. In Germany anu Belgium he saw the Abel machine, a German invention, outside the principal offices, and it did its work satisfactorily whenever he tested it. The substantial growth of the parcels post business caused Mr Robertson to give this branch special attention, and under this head ho says:— In some way there has, during the past, been added to the system in New Zealand so many checks and records that it has now become cumbrous in the extreme. There has been too great a tendency not only in the parcel-post but in other branches to look upon isolated cases of loss as demanding allround checks which eventually have cost large sums of money. At present the position is that a- parcel in New Zealand is treated almost precisely as a registered letter, records being kept and receipts taken on delivery. The British practice and the practice elsewhere prove that many of those are totally unnecessary, and should be abolished' forthwith.

As regards the final adoption of a parcel-post system, however, I came to the conclusion that the German system, where the conditions of State ownership of railways are the same as ours, could with advantage be adopted not only in the office system, but in regard to the facilities afforded to the public in the direction of carrying parcels of considerable weight. Our present maximum weight is lllb., and there appears to be no good reason why this should not be extended lor offices served by railway or steamer to, say, 201 b. or 281 bor more. At the same time, I think it should be possible without risk of loss of revenue to recast the parcel rates with the object of making a substantial reduction on parcels for delivery within five or ten miles of the office of posting. In the ease of our large centres this would attract a class of business which we at present do not handle. A similar arrangement in Germany gives the Post Office a practical monopoly of the city as well as the country parcel business; and if we are to extend our country business materially as suggested, the parcel-post system will no doubt be taken advantage of largely by farmers and others for sending small lots of produce to customers in the cities. This would, in any case, necessitate our providing our own conveyances for the delivery of parcels, instead of the work being carried out by contract as at present. Concerning the details of the office system in use in Germany, the arrangements are excellent, and well worthy of adoption by us. No record of parcels is kept in office books, but every person presenting a parcel presents with it a card bearing the name of the sender and the name of the addressee of the parcel.' This card is immediately numbered with the same number as the parcel, and forwarded by letter-post to the office of delivery, where it is retained until the parcel itself arrives by goods or other train. When the parcel reaches the office of delivery the card is marked with a colored pencil, a different color being used for each day of the week. A slip attached to the card is handed with the parcel to the delivery-cart, and the card itself filed as a record. All book-keeping is thus avoided, while a perfect record of the parcel is kept. No receipts are taken from the addressee, the carter's slip being considered sufficient proof tluit the parcel was duly handed over.

The most important recent innovation is the establishment of a halfpenny city post in Canada, namely, for a letter delivered within the city where posted. While Germany preceded Canada in this reduction of postage the experience of the younger country is more valuable from a New Zealand point of view. When Mr Robertson was in Ottawa the new rate had been in force for a little over a year and it appeared to bo the general impression that the revenue was not likely to suffer. Summing up under this head the Secretary says:— While I am inclined to think, that, in conjunction with the greatly extended city deliveries I have elsewhere recommended, there would be no ultimate loss of revenue in reducing our city rate to Ad., I estimate the loss of revenue, allowing for a reasonable increase in the volume of correspondence, at £45,000 for the first year, £30,000 for the second, and £15,000 for the third year, after which the revenue would recover itself. It should be remembered in this connection that a great proportion of matter which would fall into the letter-post in other countries, such as invoices, etc., has already in New Zealand the advantage of a halfpenny post.

Regarding the distribution of letters Mr Robertson returned with the conviction that there is too much centralisation in New Zealand. At present every letter posted, say, in Auckland must go through the central office in that town, although possibly posted from one business man in Ponsonby to another in the same suburb. In London there is a system of district offices, and letters to and from persons in these districts never go to the head office. So splendidly is this work organised that it is the rule to drop a letter into a pillar-box in expectation of receiving a reply from any other district in two hours, or from any place in the district itself within about an hour. As Mr Robertson points out, any excessive centralisation naturally increases the time of post, and thus restricts the business done.

Another matter to which special attention was given was the abolition of the use of envelopes for telegrams. In Germany envelopes are not used, and Mr Robertson advocates the adoption of the same system. It is claimed that apart from a substantial saving in cost the risk of error in addressing by a second clerk is avoided. Another advantage is additional secrecy, as the messages pass through fewer hands. These are the chief of the recommendations embodied in Mr Robertson’s report, and they are worthy of careful consideration by the Postmaster General and also by the business community.