SENATE ORDERS REPORT ON SUNDAY OPENING AND BUSINESS OF POST-OFFICES.
By John D. Bradley
Washington, Jan. 13, 1907. THE adverse report, during the last session of Congress, of the Senate Committee on Post-offices and Post-roads on the Crafts' Sunday bill "to prevent Sunday banking in post-offices in the handling of money-orders and registered letters" has not ended for the present Congress the matter of "Sabbath desecration" in the postal department of the government so far as the Senate and Mr. Crafts are concerned. On January 9, Senator Burkett, of Nebraska, submitted the following resolution (Senate Resolution No. 215, 59th Congress, 2d Session) in the Senate, which was immediately considered by unanimous consent and agreed to: "Resolved, That the postmaster-general be directed to inform the Senate by what authority post-offices are required to be kept open on Sunday, together with the regulations of Sunday opening, as to the extent of the business that may be transacted, and also what provisions are made for clerical help, and whether postal clerks or carriers are required to work more than six days per week." The form of this resolution does not leave in doubt the attitude with respect to the Sunday opening and Sunday business of post-offices which inspired it. Not only does it require the Postmaster-General to make the matter of the Sunday opening and Sunday business of post-offices the subject of a special report to the Senate, but it virtually challenges him to defend the practise upon which he is ordered to report. The form of the resolution is such as to imply that post-offices are required to be kept open on Sunday without proper authority. That this resolution of implied censure of the Postmaster-General for the Sunday opening of post-offices, which was presented by a Senator who is not a member of the Committee on Post-offices and Post-roads, is inspired from the same source as the bill "to prevent Sunday banking in post-offices," which for years has been one of the "moral measures" which "Christian lobbyist" Crafts and his Church-and-State lobby at Washington, the "International Reform Bureau," have sought to get through Congress, and which in their literature is termed the "Penrose-Sibley Bill," these gentlemen having been its introducers respectively in the Senate and House for a number of Congresses, may be inferred from the fact that Senator Burkett, if not identified with, is in close and sympathetic relations with the Church-and-State element represented by Mr. Crafts and his lobby. The Senator was a speaker at a "Christmas Chautauqua on Reforms" held by this element at Pittsburg, Pa., from December 16 to 23, and at a "Reform Bureau Institute" presided over by Mr. Crafts and held at the headquarters of the "International Reform Bureau" in Washington from December 10 to 14, and from which those in attendance proceeded directly to the Pittsburg convention. It was given out as a special feature of the Pittsburg meeting that Senator Burkett would attend it and deliver an address. So there can be little doubt as to the source from whence the Senator's resolution was inspired. His bill having been "turned down" by the Senate Committee on Post-offices and Post-roads, Mr. Crafts, with that unabashed and untiring persistence which characterizes him in the pursuit of his Church-and-State aims, now seeks in another way to get at the "Sabbath desecration" in the postal department of the government. In this latest move can be discerned the ultimate and real aim of Mr. Crafts in this matter. The measure which he has sought for years to get thru Congress, but which was disapproved by the Senate committee at the last session, went no further than to prevent "Sunday banking" in post-offices, as the handling of money orders and registered letters was termed in the measure. But it is evident from this resolution of Senator Burkett's that the prevention not only of "Sunday banking," but of SUNDAY OPENING OF POST-OFFICES AT ALL is desired and aimed at. A Washington newspaper remarks with reference to Senator Burkett and his resolution that "legislation will be enacted to close all post-offices in the United States on Sundays if it is within the power of Senator Burkett to accomplish it," and adds that "he holds that carriers and clerks are entitled to rest on that day; that business communications are not acted upon until the day following, and that most of those who hasten to the post-office on Sunday are silly girls looking for letters from sweethearts." There can be no question but that the purpose here ascribed to Senator Burkett is the purpose which is behind not only his resolution, but which all the time has been behind Mr. Crafts' "Sunday banking" bill. But of course Mr. Crafts knew the hopelessness and impolity of demanding at the outset the entire closing of the post-offices on Sunday. He knew that the wise way to reach this end was to commence by demanding the suppression of that feature of the Sunday postal service which is most commercial in its character, and which many people could be persuaded was an unnecessary feature of that service, and then when this was suppressed by an act of Congress and the precedent of legislation against the Sunday postal service was established, the way would be prepared for going on to further restrictions and the ultimate end and aim of the entire suppression of the postal service on Sunday. The adverse report (Senate Report No. 1426, 59th Congress, 1st Session) of the Committee on post-offices and post-roads of the Senate on the bill (S. 1653) to prevent Sunday banking in post-offices, was presented in the Senate by the chairman of the committee, Senator Penrose, on February 21, last, and was headed "Handling Money Orders and Registered Letters on Sundays." At the time, it was reported in a Washington newspaper that "the committee was almost unanimous in saying that THERE COULD BE NO GOOD REASON FOR CLOSING THE POST-OFFICE DIVISIONS AFFECTED BY THE BILL while permitting other divisions, such as mail deliveries and the sale of stamps, to15remain open," and that "THERE HAS BEEN NO DEMAND for the closing of these public conveniences," but the committee report itself merely stated that the committee, having considered the bill, "report thereon with a recommendation that it do not pass." But appended to, and made a part of, the report were "the views of the Post-office Department," as the committee termed it, in the form of a letter from the Postmaster-General to the chairman of the committee. This letter of the Postmaster-General expressing the views of the Post-office Department in the matter of the Sunday postal service, which, so far as the writer is aware, has never been published except in the committee report, is particularly pertinent in view of the adoption by the Senate of the Burkett resolution. The letter was written from the office of the Postmaster-General under date of Feb. 7, 1906, and reads as follows: "My dear Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of December 30, 1905, with which you enclosed a copy of Senate Bill 1653, entitled, 'A bill to prevent Sunday banking in post-offices in the handling of money-orders and registered letters.' You ask my opinion upon its merits." "In reply I beg to state that the present regulations do not require postmasters to accept mail matter for registration, or to deliver registered matter, or to issue or pay money-orders on Sundays. They are left to exercise their discretion according to the needs and best interests of their respective local communities." "When consideration is given to the fact that the operations of the postal service are almost as extensive on Sundays as on other days; that letters are written, postage stamps sold, mail matter received and delivered, collections made from street letter-boxes, and other use made of the facilities of the service, it would seem that such an absolute prohibition as that proposed in this bill might in many instances occasion hardship to the public." "Such service as now rendered in the matter of receiving and delivering registered mail and in the issuance and payment of money-orders, in the discretion of postmasters is performed without the employment of any additional clerks beyond those required to be present in the post-office for the regular delivery of Sunday mail. The department does not encourage the extension of Sunday service in those branches." "Very respectfully,
"GEO. B. CORTELYOU,
"Postmaster-General." It will be observed from this letter that the views of the Post-office Department do not coincide with that of the Sabbatarian theocrats who are seeking to restrict and suppress the Sunday postal service. It will be observed also that in this letter, written about a year ago, and of which Senator Burkett and those behind his resolution are no doubt perfectly cognizant, he and they already have from the Postmaster-General substantially the information which they have succeeded in getting the Senate to order him to furnish, and likewise, that in this letter which was embodied in the report of its committee last February, the Senate already has from the Postmaster-General substantially the information which it has now ordered him to furnish it with. It will be interesting to see what response the Postmaster-General makes to the resolution. The fact that the Sunday-law men continue to push their fight against the Sunday postal service of the government notwithstanding the attitude of the Post-office Department, and the defeat suffered in the action of the Senate Committee on Post-offices and Post-roads last February, shows how persistent and determined they are and will probably continue to be in the matter. And now that the Senate has in a measure lent itself to this fight by the adoption of the Burkett resolution, it has a standing, dignity, and importance which it has not hitherto had, and which will no doubt greatly encourage and accentuate the zeal and persistence of the misguided men behind it. It should have the effect also of accentuating the zeal and activity of those who are opposed to theocratical legislation.
JOHN D. BRADLEY.