PORT AND CITY.

Press, Volume LXIV, Issue 19285, 14 April 1928, Page 17

PORT AND CITY.

TO THE EDITOR OF TOT PHESS. Sir, —We read your leading article on railway buses this morning with great interest, and the action of the Railway Department in taking over the Springfield bus service is of' peculiar importance to Canterbury, because the Railway Department have for so many years past exercised a stranglehold monopoly over the transport of goods and passengers between Lytt'elton and Christchurch. The Prime Miniate 1- said on Saturd.V? March 3rd: "We are not- out for a complete monopoly, but,, the railway would have to be wise to all possibilities, and be first on the mark at all times'to handle competition." The ' Department's present, action is an admission these buses pay, yet Mr G. T. Wilson, of the commercial branch of the railways, 011 November Ist last, said: "The Railway Department' could not possibly undertake motor transport and make the charges being made by the'motor firms. Many of tlieni were going into liquidation through making charges which were too low." Why, therefore, worry V Apart from this seeming contradiction which demands explanation, we should like to ask where this snatch-as-snatch-can policy is going to stop. Next, the Department may seek an excuse to buy with our money all private motor-cars, lorries, and buses which run on any roads near a railway. Next, not even a suit case may be permitted to travel by motor where a railway exists—in fact the same conditions 110 more and no less as at present strangle our commerce between the warehouses in Christchurch and "our" wharves in Lyttelton. In effect, robbery under arms, the arms in this case being the tyranny of the officials. As a result of the splendid response of the mercantile community to the questionnaire which we sent out we have exclusive data to _ show that Christchurch alone is losing approximately' £45,000 per annum by .psrnntting the Railway Department, allied to Orders-in-Council, and hosts, of regulations, itself a competitor, but taxfree, to strangle motor traction, its chief opponent, a taxpayer and a producer of wealth. When the indirect savings to be effected bv the construction of our tunnel road, such as delays, elimination of handlings, convenience, etc., are considered, and capitalised, it will he found that th© sum or £45,000 ivould increase by many thousands and represent the actual savings to the community. By our scheme a million and a half of money more-or less would be spent in attaining efficiency and alleviating unemployment, and it would be spread over several years. Each day the cry, "Hands off our wharves," grows more insistent; each day calls us to harness the means of production, distribution, and exchange, and legitimately convert to our own use the wharves which we built, own, and maintain, so that Canterbury may regain her lost supremacy.—Yours, etc.. , THE PORT AND CITY COMMITTEE. Christchurch, April 10th.