Postage

irn to the o!d method of charging by ets and not by weight, complaining nt VVi same timo that some persons make up ! )undle of letters, paying postage in a ' " ip, and theroby saving a good deal. - rs ho not know that this grievance, as M considers it, existed in a slill greater ent under the old law, which [ei lably mixed lhe principie of weight and foi gle sheets; for you remember that the ge itage for more than four sheets was lai irged by weight. There was therefore nan in Boston who regularly made up (j nail for the New York pnekets, je for these letters less than the existing as gle posto ge, and making, neverthcless, tl( landsome profit by paying postage . ) rding to weight for the whole bundie bf letters. What does tUe Department ntract and pay for ? For woight, and Ik iight alone it has in turn a right to b arse for? Tho Postmaster General t0 es not seem to be acquainted with the et that all nations, aye, even Austria v id Russia, have abolished the „ me, mean, and pestering principie of p larging by sheets, wilh all its fumbling " ld peeping into letters, and j g and opening at the post office, and its p ijustico of charging for a cover. Yes. il nations have abolished it, and find no t iconvenience. If an half ounce is too b mch for a single letter, fake a third or a " uarler of an ounce, aslhey do in France, t at to recommend to us of all nations, the ecurrence of an obsolete principie ought t j bo stamped by every paper as it r erves - an act of folly. - Charleston Pa.