sent the future. The experience of all foreign countries has been that the telegraphing public, as soon as they have an elastic tariff, cut down their messages year after year, until a pretty universal average of about fourteen words is attained. It is almost certain that the same gradual falling off in the length of messages will be witnessed in this country; and we cannot but think that the very phrase "sixpenny telegrams," which has so long been used to designate the telegram of the future, will have a contributory share in realising that ideal, every telegram-sender striving to bring his message within the sixpenny limit.
We may note in passing, that in the outcry which has followed the Government proposals, great ignorance has been shown of the systems in force on the Continent; it being frequently implied that in France, for instance, no charge is made for addresses. The truth is, that the Continental countries have always charged for addresses, even when they had, like ourselves, a twenty-word minimum. At the present time, including addresses, the average French telegram contains only fourteen words, the average German only twelve, and the average Swiss only fourteen. The Swiss and the French telegrams do not pay – that is, the expenditure balances or exceeds the revenue; and the German alone show a profit, a profit derived partly from the fact that the tariff (about which we shall speak presently) is higher, and partly from the existence of a system of so-called "urgent telegrams." These telegrams are sent at treble the ordinary price, and are allowed priority over all those sent at the ordinary price. The result of this system often is that a telegram, which in its ordinary turn would be despatched in a few minutes, is again and again sent to the bottom of the heap before the signalling telegraphist, and thus may be delayed an hour or upwards by the incoming of "urgent" telegrams. This system, which of course makes for the rich and against the poor, is one which would not be entertained for a moment in England; for it would simply result in almost every telegram, in a land where "time is money," being paid for at threefold rates – though in Germany, curiously enough, only some half-million out of the 18 millions of telegrams sent annually pay this threefold rate.
We think, however, that the German principle of a tariff which, while elastic enough to allow the shortest messages to be sent at reasonably low prices, yet is high enough to ensure a net revenue and not a deficit, is one to be commended. Indeed we hardly think that if the taxpaying public – which, after all, is larger than the telegraphing public – fully realised that the proposed sixpenny tariff, so far from giving too little, errs by giving too much, and that the consequence sooner or later will be that the Post-office will not only not be able to pay the interest on the immense capital (nearly £11,000,000) which has been sunk in the purchase of the telegraphs, but will show an actual loss on its carriage of telegrams, – we hardly think, we say, that if the tax-paying public realised all this, they would thank the House of Commons for having forced the Government to adopt this measure.
For there can be no doubt that this measure has been forced on the Government. That there should be a reduction in the telegraph tariff was no doubt pretty universally desired. At the same time, it would only be a minority,
