F.—6

71

No. 237. The Hon. the Postmaster-General to Mr. Geo. Goodsir. London. Sir, — General Post Office, Wellington, 12th September, 1911. In reference to your letter of the 29th June last, and to my acknowledgment of the same date, 'on the subject of the irregular arrival in London of mails from New Zealand, I have the honour to enclose a time-table showing the actual dates of arrival in London of the mails mentioned, which in all but two cases are earlier than the dates given by you. The irregular arrivals were due to the fact that the time of transit of mails despatched via San Francisco is less than that of mails despatched via Suez. It does not appear, however, that the mails are consistently late in arriving in London. Since the despatch from Christchurch on the 23rd February last the mails have arrived thrice on due date, five times before the time-table date, and. six times late. Once out of the six times the lateness has been caused by the vessel despatched from New Zealand with the mail via Suez missing the connection at Sydney ; and I do not think, from assurances I have had from the contracting steamship companies, that these delays need be apprehended in the future. I very fully appreciate the seriousness of these late arrivals, and you may depend that any proposal to prevent them will have my best attention. But over so long a sea distance it seems to be out of the question to expect absolute regularity, and the best remedy to suggest seems to be the posting of documents as long before shipments are made as circumstances permit of. 1 have, &c, J. G. Ward. Geo. Goodsir, Esq., Director, Messrs. W. Weddel and Co. (Limited), 16 St. Helen's Place, London E.C.

Enclosure in No. 237.

No. 238. The Secretary. General Post Office, Wellington, to Mr. Alex. Myers, London. Sir, — General Post Office, Wellington, 22nd September, 1911. In reference to your letter of the 25th July last, drawing attention to the irregular arrival of New Zealand mails in London, I am directed to inform you that since the Ist January last the mails despatched to London via Suez have arrived on thirteen occasions earlier than the "due dates, on ten occasions on the due date, on seven occasions one day late, and twice three days late. It does not appear, therefore, that the mails are consistently late in arriving in London. Mails despatched every four weeks via San Francisco reach London about six days before the mails despatched on the same date via Suez, and consequently very little correspondence is sent via Suez by that despatch. I have, &c, D. Robertson, Secretary. Alex. Myers, Esq., care of Messrs. E. A. De Pass and Co., 75 Fenchurch Street, London E.C. [P.O. 11/3475(2).]

Date r *,. nu ■ i u u Mail arrived London Lett Christchurch. ' * a j v m as stated by Mr. Goodsir. Actual Date Mail arrived London. Route. Remarks. 1911. 1911. 23 February . . 1 April 2 March ' . . 10 April 9 March . . 12 April 16 March . . 24 April 23 March .. 29 April 30 March . . 8 May 6 April . . 8 May 10 April . . 16 May 12 April . . 22 May 19, 20 April . . 27 May 27 April* . . 6 June 3 May . . 6 June 10, 11'May .. 19 June 18 May .. 29 June 1911. 31 March 9 April 11 April 23 April 28 April 7 May 8 May I 15 May 21 May 26 May 4 June 6 June 18 June 28 June Suez San Francisco. . Suez San Francisco. . Vancouver Suez Due date. One day late. One day lateOne day late. Due date. One day late. Due date. One day early. One day early. Two days early. One day early. One day late. One day early. Three days late. (" Aorangi " missed connection at Sydney. Mails forwarded by German line.) San Francisco. . Suez I * This letter was evidently post" ed too late, and wenl forward via San Fi •ancisoo a week later.