4. The 26th section shall be so amended as to read as follows: "26. On all newspapers and periodicals posted in Canada, except in the cases hereinbefore expressly provided for, and on books, pamphlets, occasional publications, printed circulars, prices current, hand-bills, book and newspaper manuscripts, printers' proof-sheets, whether corrected or not; maps, prints, drawings, engravings, lithographs, photographs, when not on glass or in cases containing glass, sheet music, whether printed or written; documents, wholly or partly printed or written, such as deeds, insurance policies, militia and school returns, or other documents of like nature; packages of seeds, cuttings, bulbous roots, scions or grafts, patterns, or samples of goods or merchandize, the rate of postage shall be one cent for each four ounces or fraction of four ounces. "Provided that no letter or other communication intended to serve the purpose of a letter be sent or inclosed in any such newspaper or other package or thing mentioned in this or the next preceding section, and that the same be sent in covers open at the ends or sides, or otherwise so put up as to admit of inspection by the officers of the Post Office to ensure compliance with this provision, and the postage rate shall be prepaid by postage stamp or stamped post bands or wrappers, in all cases when any such articles as are mentioned in this séction are posted in Canada.' 5. The 29th section shall be amended by adding at the end thereof the following pro visions : "And when any letter or other mailable matter is posted in Canada without prepayment, or insufficiently prepaid, in any case in which prepayment is by this Act made obligatory, the Postmaster General may detain the same, and return it, when practicable to the sender.' 6. The 40th section shall be amended by substituting three cents for "five cents, as the additional postage to be charged on dead letters to defray the costs of returning the same. Mr. BOWELL said he regretted that the Postmaster General had not seen his way clear to adopt more of the suggestions thrown out in the course of the debate on the Postal Bill than he had done. However, the hon. gentleman had amended his Bill in one important particular, namely; in allowing letters with insufficient postage stamps to go to its place of destination and then charging the receiver an additional three cents. That was an important improvement upon the original Bill. He regretted that it was determined to insist upon prepayment of letters in all cases, as he was satisfied that the operation of that provision, particularly in the rural districts, would cause a great deal of trouble and annoyance. Taking the Bill as a whole, it seemed to him to have been carefully and studiously prepared in the interest of the Post Office Department rather than in the interest of the people of the country. In other words, the object of the Bill was to save the department from a great deal of trouble and annoyance which they contended arose under the provisions of the existing law. He was quite convinced that the Postmaster General could not have considered the question of newspaper postage as closely as he should have done, or he would not have proposed to place such a serious tax upon publishers throughout the whole Dominion. It was all very well to say that it would not come out of their pock- · ets but out of their subscribers' pockets. Any one who had any experience of the business would know that the very smallness of the tax would preclude the possibility of adding the amount to the subscription price. Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE--They can add more than the amount. Mr. BOWELL thought the Premier, from his experience in doing the hard work of a country newspaper, ought to know better. at once, and newspapers having a large The Act coming into force circulation, the tax must necessarily fall 7. The 44th section shall be amended by upon the publishers. The Postmaster striking out the provision that the expense of General has stated, as would be seen in carrying United States mails over any portion the Hansard, that eight copies of the of Canada, shall be paid by the United States. 3. That it is expedient that the said amend Globe would weigh a pound. This would ments and such other of the amendments pro-give sixty pounds to the ream, and if the posed in the Bill, No. 11, now before this House, as may be adopted by it, be incorporated with the said Act, 31 Vict., cap. 10, so as to consolidate the Statute Law regulating the Postal Service. Hon. D. A. Macdonald, circulation of the Globe was as large as it was said to be, some 10,000 a day, it would impose a tax of $3,912 on the publishers of that newspaper. But the Postmaster eight, nine or ten thousand inhabitants must go the to post office for their letters? If the system was to be adopted it should be extended to all cities towns and villages. In the town in which he resided the post office was a mile distant from some points, and a working man returning from work at six o'clock, could not reach the office before it was closed, and was therefore obliged either to spend time at mid-day to call for a letter or send a messenger for General also stated in his speech, as reported in Hansard, that large numbers of newspapers were now sent by express. That was true, and it was done to save to subscribers the postage which was at present imposed on newspapers. The Postmaster General claimed that this small impost, which would fall on the publishers, would soon put an end to the sending of newspapers by express. He (Mr. BOWELL) predicted that the result would be entirely different. If this Bill were passed, pub-it. But the point to which he wished lishers, not only of city, but also of country newspapers-that is, small towns-would of necessity make arrangements with stage drivers to carry their papers to the different villages. The Postmaster General had overlooked another fact. When he stated that eight copies of the Globe weighed a pound he no doubt weighed them dry. Those acquainted with the business knew that it was necessary to wet paper before printing it, thus increasing its weight at least ten per cent. The lighter the paper the less water it absorbed, the heavier the paper the more was required. With this ten per cent. increase in weight it was sent to the post, and the publisher was obliged to pay for that much water. What he objected to, and he objected to it strenuously, was that this Bill imposed a tax on a certain class of people, which could not be distributed as the Postmaster General supposed it could. There was scarcely a country newspaper in Ontario that would not be taxed to the extent of $150 or $200 a year. The hon. member for Bothwell had contended that the Department had no more right to carry newspapers free than any other common carriers. In the main that might be correct, but he had yet to learn that the Post Office Department had to pay any more for carrying newspapers on which postage was charged than for carrying them free of postage. The contracts for carrying the mails would be the same in either case. If newspapers should not be carried free, on what principle was free delivery to be established? It would cost $45,000 to deliver letters free in certain large cities. Now if it were wrong in principle to carry newspapers free, was it not equally wrong to deliver letters free ? Besides, why should certain large cities have free delivery while residents of cities of seven, Mr. Bowell. especially to call the attention of the House was this, that the Government were about to expend from $40,000 to $50,000 to secure free delivery of letters in certain cities, while at the same time they proposed to impose on the publishers of newspapers a burdensome tax in order that the Post Office Department at Ottawa should not be troubled with the accounts which they received from time to time. There were provisions in the law on which he proposed to offer some remarks when the Bill was under discussion, but as only the resolutions were now before the House he would confine himself to that particular point, and he hoped in the interests of the whole Dominion that the hon. Postmaster General would see his way clear, if not to adopt the policy of abolishing newspaper postage altogether, he would so amend the resolutions as not to impose that heavy tax on publishers throughout the country. He entertained however, very little hope that the hon. Postmaster General would concede that point, from the fact that it had been a pet scheme in the Post Office Department for a number of years; this was not the first time on which the attempt had been made to impose the tax, but the Government, knowing they had a very large following in the House at the present moment, thought this was the most opportune time to carry into effect the scheme. He had failed to find a single newspaper in Canada that had approved of the proposed scheme. No doubt the hon. gentlemen on the Treasury benches would say, "It is not likely journals will approve deliv-say, of a scheme which will impose a tax and burden upon themselves;" but the hon. Postmaster General, having those facts before him, should him, should carefully consider whether it was right that the proposed tax should be imposed. Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said the hon. member for North Hastings had spoken of | Department should carry the enormous the scheme as one imposing a tax on the circulation of newspapers. mass of papers represented by that pay- Mr. BOWELL-No. Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said that a country weekly newspaper, having a circulation of one thousand copies, paid two hundred dollars a year for postage, being at the rate of twenty cents per number, while under the proposed scheme it would pay only $45 per annum, being a reduction to the extent of three-fourths of the present postage upon newspapers. But what the hon. member really meant to object to was payment of postage to subscribers by the publishers. Mr. BOWELL said he had not complained that the Government imposed a tax on the circulation of newspapers; what he did complain of was that the scheme removed the payment of postage from sub-system would be extended just so far as seribers, and placed it on publishers. the necessities of the localities called for The time would Hon. Mr. TUPPER said he fully concurred in both propositions laid down by the hon First Minister. First, that postage could scarcely be regarded as a tax because it was a charge for services rendered by the Government; and second, that it could not be regarded as the imposition of a tax, if it were held to be a tax, because it was a reduction instead of an increase. But the Government having gone so far in the direction of reduced rates of postage, they should have gone a step further and removed postage from newspapers altogether. He hoped the hon. Postmaster General would reconsider the subject with a view to removing the newspaper postage from which, under the new law, a very small revenue would be received by the department. The great objection to the proposed change in the postal regulations was, that the large reduction it made would be most beneficial to those who were best able to do without it. The change of altering the charge for the carriage of newspapers to a certain amount per lb. had this effectit favored those who published daily and had a large circulation through the country. Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said the hon. its extension with a fair prospect of remember had, however, spoken of the Gov-ceiving some remuneration therefor. ernment proposal as one which imposed an additional tax on newspapers, whereas it was really one which reduced the cost of postage by three-fourths. It was necessary in order to effect the reduction that the publishers of papers should be called upon to prepay the postage, for it would be very difficult to collect five cents per annum from each subscriber to a weekly journal. The amount would be five cents, supposing ten copies weighed one pound, but twelve, thirteen and even fifteen copies of some papers were required to weigh a pound, so that the tax was very trifling. În regard to the assertion that the scheme would entail a loss on country newspapers of from $150 to $200 a year, he did not believe there were three journals outside of the cities which had a circulation of 4,000 copies. If it was impossible for publishers to obtain a higher price for their journals from subscribers, it must be simply because the publishers had resolved at all hazards to send their papers at a fixed price, for they could fix the charge at what they pleased, and when a reduction was made in the charge for postage, which under the new law would be prepaid by the publisher, subscribers would never object to paying a small increased price for their papers. The cost of mailing the Daily and Weekly Globe was estimated to cost the publishers $10,000 a year, and yet the hon member for Hastings proposed that the Post Office Hon. Mr. Mackenzie. Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said that publishers of daily newspapers sent by express. Hon. Mr. TUPPER contended that notwithstanding this, the benefit would be largely in favor of extensive publishers. It was, of course, important, that those larger organs should circulate as widely as possible; but he thought there should be some benefit, as far as possible, extended to smaller organs which had a more limited circulation; were almost exclusively sent singly, and would, therefore, be subjected to a much higher rate of charge. Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE-They were all sent for the same charge. Hon. Mr. TUPPER said it was not so much the amount charged as its vexatious character that he complained of. He was satisfied that the small amount the Government proposed to obtain from this surce would be wisely surrendered, in consideration of the immense convenience and satisfaction it would give the people of the country. There was another point in this connection to which he desired to call the attention of the Postmaster General. That was the charge on periodicals. There was no country in the world were it was more desirable that the periodical press should be fostered than in Canada. The difficulty in the way of sustaining that class of literature was very great. It had not the same general or party objects in view as the newspaper press, and publishers of periodicals were obliged, therefore, to depend upon the kind of effort they made, or publish at a loss. He thought if the hon. gentleman would take these things into consideration he would feel that he might relatively reduce the charge proposed upon periodicals, which he thought, in the interests of the country, should be encouraged. There was another feature of the measure-excellent, on the whole, as that measure was-to which he thought great objection would be taken in the country, and, he was afraid, would be productive of great loss and misery in many cases. He saw no pressing necessity for it, and he hoped it would be abandoned. What he referred to was the prepayment of letters. Hon. D. A. MACDONALD-I had anticipated my hon. friend's wishes in that respect. Hon. Mr. TUPPER said he was very glad, indeed, to hear it. All that he had intended to ask was that a letter should go forward, whether pre-paid or otherwise, and seeing that measures had been taken to secure that end, he had not another word to say. Hon. Mr. Tupper. As Mr. YOUNG said he had intended to defer any remarks upon this Bill until the House went into Committee of the Whole, and had reached the resolution referring to this matter. However, the hon., the First Minister had stated that he did not see how any one could object to the reduction made, and he (Mr. YOUNG) was prepared to show where and how the objection was taken. The press did not object to the reduction. He (Mr. YOUNG) stated distinctly that he gave credit to the Government for the reduction they had made up to a certain point, but the very fact that they had thrown off the postal charge, except a small amount, was, in his opinion, a very good reason why it should be abolished altogether. he had stated, the press did not object to the reduction ; what they did object to was, the arrangement in this Bill which made pre-payment absolutely necessary—an arragement by which the postage was virtually placed upon the heads of the publishers. There could not be the slightest doubt that the country country publishers would have to pay this postal charge out of their own pockets. Undoubtedly the press of the country were themselves best able to understand whether it would be to their interest or not to have this clause of the measure carried through or otherwise, and it was remarkable that not a single country newspaper, or, at any rate, scarcely a country newspaper, but had taken ground against the pre-payment of postage being made compulsory. He had one or two telegrams in his possession on this subject; one of them from the President of the Press Association, stating that a petition was on its way to Ottawa, asking that the Government should forego this portion of their measure. aware that this charge could not be regarded in the light of a tax, but that was not really the question before the House. The Government had decided to throw off a large proportion of the amount received from postage on newspapers, and the question before the House was not really whether a newspaper ought to pay postage or not, but whether the Government, having abolished the existing postage, except to the small amount of about $10,000, it was a proper thing to make pre-payment compulsory, thereby saddling the publishers with this amount of expense. He held that having gone so far He was the Government should have gone further, and he did not think it just that the whole of an amount like this should fall upon any particular class of the community. It was claimed that a very large amount of additional matter would be carried through the mails, provided that postage were reduced as proposed. He was not very sure that that would be the case. He was not very sure either if the present scheme were put into force that the newspapers, which send their publications by express at present, would use the mail to any greater extent, for the reason that the postal rate would probably be as high as the express rate (for he did not think that the express rate was more than 12 cents per 100 lbs.), whereas if sent by post they would have to wait for half an hour or an hour at every post office along the line of railway before they could be delivered, and on the other hand, the express companies would deliver them at once. The total revenue which would be derived from this source would be a mere trifle. He did not think it would exceed $15,000 or $20,000. He took the ground that the proposed regulations would be injurious to the country press, and to some extent beneficial to the city publishers, who sent most of their daily issues by express. It was well known that at present they paid a considerable amount by way of commission to news-dealers, which would be saved by sending their papers through the mail at the reduced postage. The compulsory pre-payment of newspaper postage would compel newspaper publishers in the country to pay from $40, to $60, $80 and $100, and in a few cases $200 a year, which amount would come out of their own pockets, as any one acquainted with the business knew it was impracticable to increase the subscription price of the newspapers so as to cover that amount. The result would be that while city publishers and the public generally were to derive benefit from the reduced postage, this remaining charge left upon newspapers would fall exclusively upon one class, instead of upon the readers of the newspapers. If it was right that the publishers should pay the newspaper postage why was it reduced at all? Evidently the Government felt that in removing this charge from the readers of newspapers to the publishers, they could only do so by reducing the amount, thereby indirectly Mr. Young. recognizing the injustice of imposing the Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE asked who would benefit by the reduction of newspaper postage from 20 cents to 5 cents. Mr. YOUNG said that no doubt the readers of newspapers, who were the parties who should pay the postage, if there was to be any, would be benefitted in the first place by the reduction; but whatever they paid at the Post Office, would have to be paid to keep up the Post Office Department, so that there was no real saving to them, whilst the publishers would be injured, because the charge, though reduced, would fall exclusively upon them. The proposal before them would tend to depreciate the Press, whereas |