telegrams at 4d. and 5d. Let them, then, keep to the idea of a fixed minimum, but give us only eight words, instead of twelve, for 6d., coupled with a liberal method of counting the addresses. It is true that such a sixpenny "social" telegram, which would, generally speaking, allow only of three words of message being sent in addition to the five of address, is not at all what the public expected. But then, apparently, neither is the twelve-word message, with seven or eight words used up in the address, which is the sixpenny telegram proposed by the Government, at all what was expected. We consider, however, that the public might well be content; for it is remarkable what a number of short messages of the kind particularly contemplated by many who have advocated sixpenny telegrams can be framed in three or four words. "Shan't be home;" "No dinner to-night;" "Shall return late;" "Don't come home;" "Send latch-key;" "Don't sit up," – are examples which will readily occur to every one.
We fear it is too late now to hope that any change will be made in the direction we have suggested. All the pressure seems the other way. More concessions even than the Government has given are asked for; and we have shown that the Government has already conceded too much. It is right that the telegraphing public should have cheap telegrams. Granted. But it is not right that they should have them, even if they clamour for them, at the expense of the country. And we would ask those who have it in their hands to decide this question, whether it would not be far better to give a smaller reduction of telegraph tariff than land us in a telegraph deficit? Surely £11,000,000 sterling is enough to have paid for the boon of the telegraphs, without a further annual sum sunk in the same abyss!
