But let us state, in the first instance, what are the opinions of the Royal Commissioners on the relations between the Post Office and the Railways. They are contained in the following extract from their report:—
“134. In connection with the passenger traffic we have to consider the question of postal communication.
“On the continental railways, as we have observed, the Government has conceded the lines to the companies on the condition that the mails are to be carried free. On the railways of this country, Parliament has reserved to the Post Office the right of requiring the railway companies to carry the mails as the Postmaster-General may direct, but has reserved to the railway companies the right to be paid for such service at a rate to be fixed by arbitration. The Postmaster-General is also at liberty to send a Post Office guard with a weight of mails equal to the luggage of an ordinary passenger, at the fares charged for such ordinary passenger, any extra weight being paid for according to the ordinary rates of the company.
“The Post Office authorities complain that the price they have to pay, under many of the arbitrations, for services rendered, is in excess of what individuals pay for such services, and that if guards are sent in charge of the mails as baggage, the railway companies insist that the guard can only carry the baggage from one end of his journey to the other, without intermediate receipt and delivery, and that, therefore, when they desire to use the trains by sending a guard with mail bags, without putting the trains under the statutory notice, the demands of the railway companies are exorbitant. They also state that they cannot require a company to run a train exclusively for their use, and that the law is defective as to the speed they are entitled to require, and as to the provision of apparatus for exchanging mail bags without stopping.
“The railway companies, on the other hand, complain that whilst by law the award should bind both parties for three years, the Post Office practically possesses the power of at once putting an end to it, if they consider it too high, by requiring some alteration of service, which may be a mere nominal alteration, and thus the Post Office may go on asking for fresh arbitrations until they get an award to their liking. The Post Office authorities deny that there has been any abuse of this power. The railway companies further complain that, by means of the book and parcel post, the Post Office has entered into competition with the railway companies for an important branch of their traffic.