19

E.—S

as it did not include delivery before Tuesday, and did not involve a payment out of the cable rates. The Chairman remarked that the Government could not transmit the messages by telegraph for nothing, and that if the charge did not come out of the cable rate it meant an increased charge to the public. Would it be possible to make a slightly increased charge on all messages to cover the cost of telegraphic transmission in the cases where this might be considered necessary? Sir H. Primrose thought that the Australian and New Zealand Governments would object to any increase in the charge to the public. The Chairman said that the Governments might accept a reduced payment for their service. Australia had offered to accept a quarter of its terminal rate to cover telegraphic delivery without extra charge, and the Post Office might perhaps be able to accept a quarter of its Convention terminal rate of 15 centimes —viz., 375 centimes. Mr. Hibberdine thought that the Eastern Company would be prepared to accept this arrangement. They would, in that case, post all the inward messages and pay the Post Office proportion on the outward messages collected by it. The Post Office would deal with these messages as it chose. He added that the bulk of the outward traffic was handed to the company direct. Mr. Goddard said that the Western Union Company could not make a similar offer. The charges made to the public were the lowest possible, and the company could not pay anything out of them. The present system encouraged senders to hand their messages direct to the company, and was therefore preferred by them. Sir R. Primrose questioned whether, after all, it was necessary to make any alteration. The difficulties to which reference had been made would disappear in time Mr. Hibberdine said that the posting arrangements had given the company much trouble, and they were anxious to get rid of them. Would the Pacific Cable Board be willing to accept a rate of 10d. to Australasia, and pay Australia ljd. out of it for telegraphic delivery, the Post Office at this end receiving 3"75 centimes? Sir H. Primrose, thought it a question whether this would not result in a loss of money to the cables. The proposal would require consideration, but he feared that the abandonment of the posting arrangements would result in Monday delivery, and this, he thought, would involve the Board in loss. Mr. Brown asked whether, if an alteration was not at present practicable in the North American service, uniformity could not be secured in the other services, both as regards the minimum number of words and as regards the simplification of the method of treatment. Mr. Goddard said that he would consider what the Western Union Company could do so as to assist the Pacific Cable Board in adopting some simple and uniform arrangement which would be generally acceptable. It was arranged that Sir Henry Primrose and Mr. Goddard should confer on this point. Mr. Hibberdine expressed the view, with regard to Monday delivery, that the effect would not be so serious as Sir H. Primrose feared. He did not think it would have any great effect on the deferred traffic, and in any case the Eastern Company would not mind that. Sir H. Primrose said that before accepting this view he would like to examine the Board's deferred traffic so as to see what amount would be likely to be diverted to a week-end service with Monday delivery. 111. The Chairman, with reference to the third question on the agenda, asked if the Western Union Company would be willing to assimilate the rules for the text in the American service to the deferred rules — i.e., to exclude figures, commercial marks, and commercial expressions. Mr. Goddard remarked that this would be a withdrawal of a privilege from the public, but said that he would put the question, before the company's executive in New York. General Post Office, London, May, 1913. [The Monday delivery has been conceded from 20th July, 1914. J

No. 14. The AoTiNG-SuPERiNTKNDBNT, Eastern Extension Company, Wakapuaka, to the Secretabt, General Post Office, Wellington. The Eastern Extension Australasia and China Telegraph Company (Limited), Sir, — Wakapuaka, 4th June, 1913. In the case of non-delivery of posted week-end messages, should they be dealt with as unclaimed letters or undelivered telegrams? If the former, the delay in notifying non-delivery from the cable-station, owing to the time that would elapse before the posted copy was returned unclaimed by the Postal Department, would practically render such advice useless. If treated as a telegram, which appears the correct method, is there any general instruction upon the subject? I shall be glad of your views on this question. I have, &c., M. E. F. Airey, The Secretary, General Post Office, Wellington. Acting-Superintendent. [B. * T. 11/16.]