Thank you for visiting SNEWPapers!
Sign up free
Editorial
January 14, 1902
Twice A Week Plain Dealer
Cresco, Howard County, Iowa
What is this article about?
Editorial from the Twice-a-Week Plain Dealer refutes the Post Office Department's denial of a ruling restricting second-class mail privileges for newspapers to non-prepaid subscribers. It provides evidence of the December 1901 ruling by Third Assistant Postmaster General Edward C. Madden and highlights protests from publishers, including Kansas papers like the Appeal to Reason, that forced a retraction.
Clipping
OCR Quality
95%
Excellent
Full Text
TWICE-A-WEEK PLAIN DEALER
TUESDAY, JAN. 14, 1902.
W.R. & F.J. MEAD, PUBLISHERS
W.R. MEAD, EDITOR.
Official Paper of County
Who Is the Liar?
Washington, D. C.
January 2, 1902.
Mr. J.O. Adams,
Cresco, Iowa,
My Dear Sir:
In the absence of Senator Allison, he requests me to acknowledge receipt of yours of the 30th, which I will bring to his attention when he returns. A personal call at the Post Office Dept., elicits a statement that no such unwarranted ruling has been made or contemplated, and that the report is untrue and misrepresents the attitude of the Department.
Yours truly,
A. F. DAWSON,
Private Sec.
The above is from Senator Allison's private secretary. When we saw it stated that the Post Office Department had ruled that papers would not be permitted the privilege of the mail unless their subscribers had paid in advance, we felt that such a step would be an unwarranted invasion of our rights as citizens, and contrary to our constitution: that no department of the government would so invade the private rights of a citizen. When we noticed democratic newspapers talking about "Corrupt republican methods and officials," we made up our minds that there was an African in the wood pile, and wrote to the Senator with the above result.-Cresco Times.
The only reply needed to refute the above reply of private secretary of Senator Allison, and the falsehood of the Postoffice Department, that "no such a ruling had been made or contemplated", is the letter of the Third Assistant Postmaster General making the very ruling charged. The letter and ruling is as follows:
WASHINGTON, Dec. 17, 1901.
Sir: In reply to your letter of the 14th inst. you are informed that the Department holds it to be not within a publisher's privilege to mail at the pound rate of postage as to subscribers, copies of his publication to persons whose subscription has expired, and the inclusion within the number presented for mailing as to legitimate subscribers of copies addressed to persons who are not legitimate subscribers, will deprive the publisher of his pound rate upon the whole unless the illegitimate portion is separated therefrom.
Respectfully,
EDWARD C. MADDEN,
Third Assistant Postmaster Gen.
The storm that was raised about that infamous ruling has not only caused the department to retract, but even to deny what it had proclaimed, of the existence of which, there is abundant proof. The department had been deluged with earnest protests from all over the land, even our easy going cotemporary uniting to swell that protest and make it emphatic.
The Appeal to Reason, a Kansas paper was one of the proscribed papers and it furnished proof of having more than 100,000 advance paid subscribers who will be glad to know that "no such ruling had been made or contemplated", although the paper was denied the use of the mails on the unwarranted and unlawful ruling of the department. Three other Kansas papers of weekly and general circulation are named by the Omaha World-Herald as having come under the ban of that department ruling, the existence of which it now denies.
TUESDAY, JAN. 14, 1902.
W.R. & F.J. MEAD, PUBLISHERS
W.R. MEAD, EDITOR.
Official Paper of County
Who Is the Liar?
Washington, D. C.
January 2, 1902.
Mr. J.O. Adams,
Cresco, Iowa,
My Dear Sir:
In the absence of Senator Allison, he requests me to acknowledge receipt of yours of the 30th, which I will bring to his attention when he returns. A personal call at the Post Office Dept., elicits a statement that no such unwarranted ruling has been made or contemplated, and that the report is untrue and misrepresents the attitude of the Department.
Yours truly,
A. F. DAWSON,
Private Sec.
The above is from Senator Allison's private secretary. When we saw it stated that the Post Office Department had ruled that papers would not be permitted the privilege of the mail unless their subscribers had paid in advance, we felt that such a step would be an unwarranted invasion of our rights as citizens, and contrary to our constitution: that no department of the government would so invade the private rights of a citizen. When we noticed democratic newspapers talking about "Corrupt republican methods and officials," we made up our minds that there was an African in the wood pile, and wrote to the Senator with the above result.-Cresco Times.
The only reply needed to refute the above reply of private secretary of Senator Allison, and the falsehood of the Postoffice Department, that "no such a ruling had been made or contemplated", is the letter of the Third Assistant Postmaster General making the very ruling charged. The letter and ruling is as follows:
WASHINGTON, Dec. 17, 1901.
Sir: In reply to your letter of the 14th inst. you are informed that the Department holds it to be not within a publisher's privilege to mail at the pound rate of postage as to subscribers, copies of his publication to persons whose subscription has expired, and the inclusion within the number presented for mailing as to legitimate subscribers of copies addressed to persons who are not legitimate subscribers, will deprive the publisher of his pound rate upon the whole unless the illegitimate portion is separated therefrom.
Respectfully,
EDWARD C. MADDEN,
Third Assistant Postmaster Gen.
The storm that was raised about that infamous ruling has not only caused the department to retract, but even to deny what it had proclaimed, of the existence of which, there is abundant proof. The department had been deluged with earnest protests from all over the land, even our easy going cotemporary uniting to swell that protest and make it emphatic.
The Appeal to Reason, a Kansas paper was one of the proscribed papers and it furnished proof of having more than 100,000 advance paid subscribers who will be glad to know that "no such ruling had been made or contemplated", although the paper was denied the use of the mails on the unwarranted and unlawful ruling of the department. Three other Kansas papers of weekly and general circulation are named by the Omaha World-Herald as having come under the ban of that department ruling, the existence of which it now denies.
What sub-type of article is it?
Press Freedom
Partisan Politics
Legal Reform
What keywords are associated?
Post Office Ruling
Second Class Mail
Newspaper Privileges
Government Denial
Press Protests
Expired Subscriptions
Kansas Papers
What entities or persons were involved?
Post Office Department
Senator Allison
A. F. Dawson
Edward C. Madden
Appeal To Reason
Cresco Times
Omaha World Herald
Editorial Details
Primary Topic
Post Office Department Ruling On Second Class Mail For Newspapers
Stance / Tone
Critical Of Post Office Denial And Republican Officials, Supportive Of Press Rights
Key Figures
Post Office Department
Senator Allison
A. F. Dawson
Edward C. Madden
Appeal To Reason
Cresco Times
Omaha World Herald
Key Arguments
Provides Letter From Third Assistant Postmaster General Confirming The Ruling On Expired Subscriptions
Denial By Senator Allison's Secretary Is False, As Evidenced By Official Letter
Widespread Protests From Publishers Forced The Department To Retract And Deny The Ruling
Ruling Affected Kansas Papers Like Appeal To Reason Despite Their Prepaid Subscribers
Ruling Seen As Unwarranted Invasion Of Citizens' Rights And Unconstitutional