Union Mills Letters
April 27,1904 and April 11,1905
To: Rural Free Delivery
offices, Washington, DC
From: Louis E. Shriver
Return to the Shriver Letters page
Return to the Union Mills Homestead Foundation main page
(Click to image to enlarge; use the Back button on your browser to return)
Dear sir –
I understand that the P.O. Department is considering the advisability of replacing the four Postal Wagons in Carroll Co., with Rural Carriers. I certainly trust that no such change will be made. If it is it will surely work to the detriment of the service, will lower the high standard to which it has attained and the patrons of the various effected (both wagon and carrier) are bound to suffer in consequence.
I reside on the route of Postal Wagon D, which is about 26 miles long. I can not see how an ordinary carrier, single handed, can serve a route of that length, supply some four or five carriers with the bulk of their mail, and at the same time look after his own horse and vehicle, and perform the work in the prompt, save and generally satisfactory manner in which it is now accomplished. I believe in extending Rural Free Delivery, but do not believe in
making it less effective, even on the score of economy. The appropriations for it are being annually increased.
Well do we all remember the trials and tribulations attending the establishment of the service in our country, and the kicking that was made against it, and now, when things are working smoothly and the people satisfied, it would undoubtedly be bad policy to make a backward step. I was always in favor of the service and used my influence to induce the people to accept it, and also assisted the inspection in laying out several of the routes in this section.
Carroll County is now referred to with pride by all of us, as a model of the Rural Free Delivery System. Therefore, that its high standard be maintained, I emphatically urge that it is highly important that the Postal wagons be continued.
Apologizing for the length of the letter, I am
Judge Harry M. Clabaugh, Washington, D.C., knows me and if you see proper you can inquire of him regarding my standing in the community.
* * *
Dear Sir –
Dr. George E. Baughman, Postmaster of Westminster, Md., advises me that the P.O. Departmetn proposes to substitute a name other than that of Union Mills for the Postal Station to be established at this place, for the reason that there are a couple other Postoffices in the state having the word “Union” in their titles, as for instance, “Uniontown.”
Dr. Baughman has asked me to suggest a new name for the station. That I do not want to do, but instead I urgently and emphatically request you to abandon the idea of using any other name than that of Union Mills. Ours is not a large town. I has age, however, and is well pleased with its present name.
More than one hundred years
ago my grandfather, Andrew Shriver (a prominent and influential man in his day) with his brother David located here and erected a large brick grist mill which is standing today, in te possession of the descendants of Andrew Shriver, and is doing a thriving business. The uniting of the two brothers in the erection of that mill suggested to them a name for the settlement, “Union Mills,” and the place was accordingly so called and has ever since been known by that name. You can readily see and appreciate, therefore, why any one hearing the name of Shriver would deeply regret tht loss of the time honored name our village now bears.
I was Postmaster here and am well aware of the fact that similarity of names sometimes makes trouble. But in the present case, I am convinced that mail matter does not often get off the track and when it does it is not delayed more than a day or two.
On the other hand I believe that if the change in name is made there will be more trouble than ever. We now practically have two addresses for our mail, namely Westminster, Md., and Union Mills, Md. (and our correspondents would doubtless for a long time continue to so address us) and to these would yet be added the new name of the station.
I might also say in this connection that I have always favored the R.F.D. and when the Department had lots of trouble with the people and the routes I helped all I could to make the system a success.
In conclusion I am glad that the station is to be established and trust that it may receive no other name than that of “Union Mills!”
Apologizing for the length of this letter, I am, Yours Very Respectfully,
Louis E. Shriver,
Return to the Shriver Letters page
Return to the Union Mills Homestead main page
prepared and maintained by J. Douglass Klein
© 2001, J. Douglass Klein
Page last changed 09/07/05 .