On the other hand, objections have been raised to the measures the Department is advocating. Although no sound argument has been advanced in opposition, the contentions which have been made are not without interest. I mention the more important of them, at the same time giving the replies which they have elicited: It has been stated that the Department is not equipped to deliver 11-pound parcels received in the general mails. The present postal regulations provide that where a package is of undue size or weight a formal notice shall be sent the addressee requesting him to call for it. This practice, would continue were the weight limit increased to 11 pounds, in the case of offices having free delivery. Nor would it work a hardship, for under the present limit of 4 pounds the average weight of parcels sent through the mails is but one-third of a pound. Increasing the weight limit would not have nearly as great an effect on the average weight of parcels mailed as seems to be commonly supposed. Where packages were addressed to persons living on rural routes they would, of course, be delivered to the boxes of the patrons by rural carriers, who would not thereby be inconvenienced. The claim that the special local rate recommended for the parcel post on rural routes would eventually be extended to include the entire postal service has been given considerable publicity. The impossibility of this becomes apparent when attention is directed to the cost of railroad transportation, which has no part in the former service. About $45,000,000 were paid last year for mail transportation and $6,000,000 for postal cars. Others have said that large mail-order houses would, under the proposed law, utilize the special parcel post or rural routes through agents to the great disadvantage of the country merchant, first assembling their orders and despatching them by express or freight to suitable distributing points. The Department has recommended provisions which will prevent any such use of the routes. It should be remembered, too, that even in the absence of a specific prohibition of this nature, any systematic attempt upon the part of a mail-order house to thus distribute its wares would necessitate the employment of many thousands of local representatives. The catalogues of these concerns indicate in no uncertain way that they attribute their success, in large measure, to their low selling expense, and that the absence of any sort of agents is the principal feature of their argument in accounting for the supposedly low prices of their goods. The cry of “class legislation” has been raised. There is, of course, no discrimination involved, for all who can be reached by rural carriers will be accommodated. It would be as reasonable to decry the laws which permit the delivery of mail to patrons living on rural routes, while persons differently situated are obliged to make a trip to a near-by post-office to obtain their letters.