Postal Riders and Raiders. W. H. Gantz
here care to consider. That one appeared on page 21 of Senate Bill (Calendar No. 1067), and the “rider” portion begins at line 7. Following is the “rider:”
| (Page 21.) | |
| 7 | “Provided, |
| 8 | That out of the appropriation for inland mail transportation |
| 9 | the Postmaster General is authorized hereafter to |
| 10 | pay rental if necessary in Washington, District of Columbia, |
| 11 | and compensation to tabulators and clerks employed in connection |
| 12 | with the weighings for assistance in completing computations, |
| 13 | in connection with the expenses of taking the |
| 14 | weights of mails on railroad routes, as provided by law: |
| 15 | And provided further, That during the fiscal year ending |
| 16 | June thirtieth, nineteen hundred and twelve, the rate of postage |
| 17 | on textual and general reading matter contained in periodical |
| 18 | publications other than newspapers, as described in the |
| 19 | Act of Congress approved March third, eighteen hundred |
| 20 | and seventy-nine, entitled “An Act making appropriations |
| 21 | for the service of the Postoffice Department for the fiscal |
| 22 | year ending June thirtieth, eighteen hundred and eighty, |
| 23 | and for other purposes,” and in the publications described |
| 24 | in an Act of Congress approved July sixteenth, eighteen |
| 25 | hundred and ninety-four, entitled “An Act making appropriations |
| (Page 22.) | |
| 1 | for the service of the Postoffice Department for |
| 2 | the fiscal year ending June thirtieth, eighteen hundred and |
| 3 | ninety-five,” shall be one cent per pound, or fraction thereof; |
| 4 | and on sheets of any publication of either of said classes |
| 5 | containing, in whole or part, any advertisement, whether |
| 6 | display, descriptive, or textual, four cents per pound or |
| 7 | fraction thereof; Provided, That the increased rate shall not |
| 8 | apply to publications mailing less than four thousand pounds |
| 9 | of each issue.” |
As previously stated, and pointed out by Senator Owen, all amendments of character with the above are clearly in violation of Section 7, Article 1 of the Constitution of the United States. Here is the wording of that section:
“All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments as on other bills.”
That is plain enough, is it not, as to the Senate’s lack of right or power to originate revenue-producing measures either by bill or amendment? A glance at lines 4 to 9 (page 22), as above quoted, will convince even a stranger in a strange town or a market garden delegate that this “rider” amendment, if it had passed, would originate revenue.
Mr. Hitchcock talked, so it is alleged, that it would produce $6,000,000 or more, thus removing that “deficit” he has had in his brain or on his mind. Some of the best qualified men in this country have shown, and they have used Mr. Hitchcock’s own figures in doing so, that the increased mail rate as this “rider” provided would not produce over $2,000,000 additional revenue, probably not over $1,000,000, after paying for the added clerical and inspection service which such a discriminating classification would require.
The reader will note (line 18 of the “rider”), that “newspapers” are exempted from the increased tax. The reader should likewise note that under both this “rider” and the present law, newspapers are carried free to addresses inside the county of publication, save to addressees resident of towns and cities having carrier delivery. By this is meant that this tricky rider, as will be readily seen, leaves the present law—the one-cent a pound rate—in force and applying to all “newspapers.”
Just here I want to ask the thoughtful reader a question or two, though they are somewhat tangential to the direct line of thought we are at this point following:
If such a breach of constitutional law, of the legislative rules governing Congress and of plain, common and understood justice as was covered in this, I believe, studiedly discriminating “rider” on the postoffice appropriation bill—if such a breach was permitted, I ask, how long would it be, do you think, before our newspapers would be made victims of similar restrictions and injustices?
In short, how long do you think it would take the gang of conspirators (the “influenced” and the “influencing” factors in the personnel of the conspiracy) who tried to “put over” that rider, to make any nincompoop of a politician who chances to be, or who may become, Postmaster General a censor of all periodical literature, newspapers as well as magazines, published in this country?
In this connection another thought comes which I desire to pass on to the reader. If such censorship is permitted, such discriminating, abrogative legislation is tolerated, how long will it be, think you, before our “banking interests,” our “steel interests,” our “packing interests,” our “hide and leather interests,” our “rail transportation interests” go into the periodical business?
Each of these have the country covered—yes, flooded—with agents. No trouble whatsoever for them to get the postal department’s required “bona fide” subscription list and thus be “entered” at the one-cent second-class rate.
“Will they carry advertising?” Later, yes.
When our children are paying the cost of our blunder they will be advertising each other and—at the one-cent a pound rate.
Think it over and—well, wake up. If necessary, get cogently brisk with that Senator or Congressman of yours. At least, let him know that you are on the job as well as he and that you understand the job as well as he.
Of course, the “steerers” and “cappers” for this