In passing, I may say that the professor is recognized by everybody as a most dependable authority—that is, everybody save the railroad and express raiders and their hired men. They have written and talked at great length to “refute” him, which thoughtful and disinterested people take as mighty strong evidence that Professor Parsons presented the truth and the facts, or so nearly the truth and facts that his statements made the “authorized,” rake-off patriots turn loose on him their high-powered, chain-tired public bubblers.
Following are the figures which the Professor published as showing the average ton mile rates the railroads then received for carrying different kinds of shipments:
| Rate per ton mile, cents. | |
| For carrying express generally | 3 to 6 |
| For carrying excess baggage | 5 to 6 |
| For carrying commutation passengers | 6 |
| For carrying dairy freight, as low as | 1 |
| For carrying ordinary freight in 1. c. 1 | 2 |
| For carrying imported goods, N. O. to S. F. | 8 |
| For carrying average of all freight | 78 |
| For carrying the mails (Adams estimate) | 12.5 |
| For carrying the mails (Postoffice Department estimate) | 27 |
THE PARCELS POST.
The Postmaster General in his reports for 1908-9 and 1909-10 recommends a trial or “test” of a parcels post service on several rural routes “to be selected by the Postmaster General.”
The Congress now in session is giving, or will give, this recommendation serious consideration, it is presumed. Especially will it be given such serious consideration when the 1911-12 bill, making appropriations for the postal service, is under fire and is being “savagely attached by its friends.”
It may be depended upon that the express and railroad gentlemen now shearing a rich fleece from your Uncle’s postal fold will not have any fair tests made of a parcels post service so long as they can prevent it, and they appear to have numerous representatives in both houses of Congress who can be influenced to prevent it, if their past talk and votes may be taken as indicating what they are there for.
Of course, the chief clack of the enemy’s hired men is “lack of funds.” Yet they go on appropriating millions to people who do not earn it—to pay for services not rendered.
The same kippered tongue lashed the “rural delivery” service the same way. In the end, the people won. But they won, in the bill as originally passed, a rural delivery of the “test” variety. “Why?” Well, a properly equipped and serviceable rural delivery would be a step towards a serviceable parcels post and the raiders do not want the people to have such a parcels post.