NEW ZEALAND RAILWAYS.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 457, 16 March 1909, Page 7

NEW ZEALAND RAILWAYS.

AUSTRALIAN EXPERT'S VIEWS. NON-POLITICAL CONTROL FAVOURED. (BY TELEGRAPH —SPECIAL COIIIILSI'ONDKNT.) Auckland, March 15. Interviewed regarding New Zealand railways, Mr. W. M. Fehon, a veteran Australian railway man, now in Auckland, said: — "I think, considering tho great difficulties that your engineers havo had to contend with in regard to sharp curves and steep gradients, that you have got a really good system. and one that will compare favourably with the larger railway systems of Australia. Iu view of the nature of the country over which your lines travel, Now Zealand has done tho right thing in adopting the narrow gauge of 3ft. 6in., which is tho samo as that in uso in Queensland, _ Tasmania, West Australia, and on a portion of tho South Australian lines, although in Victoria and New South Wales the gaugo is of course broader. You seem to have a good class of engines and carriages, and your trains keep fairly good timo. "Yes, the speed of your trains is also very good when all things aro taken into consideration," said Mr. Fehon in reply to an observation on that point. "Where the road is favourable, your speed is as good as that of the Australian railways. Of course, the fact of having so many curves and so many hills to climb makes it impossible to maintain a good average. Y'our fares and freight rates aro also based 011 n very liberal scale. New Zealand is also ahead of the Australian railways in regard to tho dining-car system. Dining-cars were adopted in Victoria a few months ago, but they havo not yet been introduced in New South Wales. Tho 'sleepers' on the Main Trunk line are very comfortable, although, of course, the compartments are not so 'roomy' as they are on the broader gauge line 3 in Australia." Tho "dust nuisance" on some of the Now Zealand lines has not, of course, escaped the notice of Mr. Fehon. "That," 110 said, "is one of your disadvantages. We have nothing of that kind in Australia, where the ballasting is all done with broken stone. This, however, is a drawback which cannot be overcome in New Zealand unless at an immense outlay of money." In speaking of financial results, Sir. Fehon said that tho two larger systems of ■ Australia were flblo to earn not only working expensos and interest on cost, but wero also able to provide a surplus in addition. In Victoria in 1&07, ho said, tho surplus amounted to over £600,000. The larger population and tho higher rates than in New Zealand had of courso to bo taken ilito account. Generally the Australian policy, where the revenue increased, was to give tho people using the linos tho benefit of decreased rates. As a rule, he said, branch lines connecting with main lines in Australia were run at a loss for a timo, but until their earning power was brought up to that of tho other lines an extra rato was placed on passengers and merchandise. On being questioned regarding systems of management, Mr. Fehon, as might be expected, spoke decisively in_ favour on nonpolitical control as it obtains in Australia. The Railway Commissioners, of course,' he said, liad a much freer hand than the head of the Department in Now Zealand, and, not being subject to interference by the Government, tho.v had a better opportunity of working out 'the best possible results. A political head of a system was too often apt to deal with technical matters of management,. and being without the requisite experience 110 was very likely to got on tho wrong track.