。No.1 in Mr.Bratman's 81.No.1 of Jany. 14th. "01. Postal charges at Chefoo between Mr.Forsyth J.P.
Copy
Venc. English Baptist Mission.
2010 696
10 AUG 01
Chefoo.
November 9th.1900.
To the Chinese Imperial Postmaster
Chefoo.
Dear Sir
I beg to formally protest against the payment of Five dollars and forty cents on six parcels from England. I believe the charge to be oppressive and illegal.
Yours faithfully
(signed)
E.C.Forsyth.
Imperial Post Office
Chefoo. Nov 9th.1900
Replying to your note of today's date containing protest against payment by yourself of five dollars and forty cents charged by this Office on six parcels to your address from England.
I have to say that correspondence as laid down in article 7 of the Convention Principale de l'union Postale Universelle comprehended letters, cards, prints, commercial papers and samples, but not parcels,
In the case of correspondence the postage collected is retained entirely by the office of origin, whereas, in the case of parcels the postage collected is divided between the offices taking part in the transport.
The I.P.O. being outside the Postal Union does not receive a share of the postage collected on parcels to or from abroad and consequently must either refuse to carry parcel at all or charge its own rates.
The charge fixed for the I.P.O. for parcels is 10 cts per lb. The charge of five dollars and forty cents is according to that rate perfectly just and in order.
The public are perfectly free to make most arrangements they think best for the forwarding of their parcels to & from the mail terminus (Shanghai) and they need not use the I.P.O. unless they wish. But if they do send their parcels through the I.P.O. they must abide by its rules.
I have the honor to be,Sir,
your obedient servant
F.C.Forsyth
Actg F/O.