Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Friday, 27 October 1905


Senator HIGGS (QUEENSLAND) asked the Minister representing the Postmaster-General, upon notice -

1.   Has the Postmaster-General observed in the Melbourne daily press of the 24th and 25th October the accountof the trial of a clerk in the employ of Reuter's Telegram Company Limited, Collins-street, Melbourne?

2.   Did the Postmaster-General note that it is alleged this clerk is twenty-three years of age, that he has been ten (10) years in the employ of the company, and that his salary amounted to £86 a year, or about 33s. per week?

3.   What is the salary paid in the Post and Telegraph Department for similar work to that performed by the telegram clerk in question?

4.   Under what clause in the Postal Act was Reuter's Telegram Company authorized to carry on telegraphic business in Melbourne?

5.   Has the Government any objection to any other firm or person carrying on in Melbourne a similar business to that of Reuter's Telegram Company ?

6.   Has the Postmaster-General noted that according to the sworn testimony of H. M. Collins, general manager of Reuter's Telegram Company, the company receives cablegrams at its office in Collins-street, accepts fees, and charges the public for a greater number of words than are sent by cablegram?

7.   Will the Postmaster-General make known by advertisement or otherwise the practice of Reuter's Telegram Company in the matter of charging customers for more words than the company send ?

8.   Does the Pacific Cable Board or the Post and Telegraph Department charge the public for more words than are sent by telegraph or by cable ?







Suggest corrections