RAILWAY CONSTRUCTION. TO THE EDITOR.

Evening Post, Volume LXX, Issue 37, 12 August 1905, Page 15

RAILWAY CONSTRUCTION. TO THE EDITOR.

Sir, — It is well known that out methods of railway construction, consisting of carrying on a ecore of lines at an average rate of about two miles a year, instead of completing lthsni on© at a itime,. cause * 'toemendous' •(waste of money, Mr. Seddon, however, contends th*t this waste cannot be helped, as it is 4'he first duty of the Government to distribute- the money available for railway construction as fairly as possible. The Premier also says that "ho intends to spread 'the money available over as large an area as possible, in order 4o help the backblocks settlers as much as he can. He' has apparently ignored the fact that 90 per cent, of in© people of this colony are not directly interested in any particular railway, and the best way to •benefit ithtee ipeople is ito construct our railways in a buainess-lik© manner. It is .better for 90 iper cent, of .the people of Canterlrory that a railway should be constructed in, a business-like way in Auckland, than in an unbusiness-like way in •Canterbury. I think most people will agree ithat this is the case, bait the habit of dividing {he -colony into •Watertight oompartmente and trying to do justice to each of them is an old one, end will die hard. -However, concentration is the only kind of distribution tihat is fair <to thfe great majority of "the people of the colony, and' it is not right that this point should be overlooked, merely because the majority -take too little interest in the matter to 'agitate about it. •However, let us admit ithat the interests of 'the great m'ajoritVj of $h© .people should be neglected in order to help the backblocks settlers. This is iMr. _ Seddon's .point of view, and as tho ' very existence of the b_ackblocks sebtleTs depends on the railways, this point of view is not jiectssarily wrong. Which policy is better for the 'backblocKS settler: tile concentration policy, or the fair distribution idea; which last is founded on ithe belief that it is the commencement of Tailways, not their completion, which benefits the settle-re? It will' be obvious .that "under no circumstances oan all the different Macs of 'railway, perhaps forty in number, which it would be well to construct now if we had the money, be taken in hand at once. Thas would ba real fair distribution, and a dose of it wouiu speedily euro the -railway agitators of 'the colony. I would like to recommend this vreatment to Mir. Seddon. However, there must .be a good many backbkeks settlers, clearly entitled to Mr. Seddon'p "fair ehaTe" of public works money, who are not' getting tihis fair share. The more money 'that ie wasted by our piecemeal methods, the longer these settlers must wait for their wante to be satisfied. Here, 'then, wd have a goodly portion of- oar backblocks population whose interests' are the same as those ,of ithe majority of the people of the colony, and are entirely opposed to ourpresent methods of railway construction. 1 now com.c to those %ei tiers wihase wants the Government is attempting to satisfy. I cannot see how it is that more settlers are -being benefit-ed .by constructing little bite of railway^'all ov«r the colony than would be bensfHed by constructing tho same -otal number of miles in one district. Surely the Government would be helping a3 many settlers by completing -the Mai.i Trunk line ■as by constructing, say, five niil-ss of railway in each of twelve different dis tricts. Th^ principal difference is only an electioneering one — nanfely, that the settlers would in the one caso only influence one constituency, in the other case they would" influence twelve. „ Whether this view of the case is • Tight or wjong, there can oe no doubt that in the long run what is best for fcho colony aa a whole is best for every part of it. This principle should be looked upon as. one of the axioms of government. To illustrate it, let us suppose that in ten years' 'timo the waste of money would amount to one million pounds. This is equivalent .to about one hundred and twenty miles of railway, or sufficient 'to 6upply the' needs of a good many backblocks settlers. The waste dn ten years would probably amount to more than one million, as may more Teadily 'be seen when we reflect that -the a mount 'of money sunk in unopened lines on tho 31st March last was £1,300,000. ■ Vut how are the settlers' wants being satisfied? Consider the caso of the railway now under construction to Fkxboume, fifteen miles from Seddon, the present terminus of the line Lake Grasmere, five miles from Seddon, is the immediate objective. One would think that if the Flaxbourne settlers could go the> ten miles to Grasmere they would hardly find it an insuperable difficulty to go the additional five miles 'to Seddon, particularly if they realised that by so doing the railway would get to FlaxbouTne sooner. There are twenty men employed on the railway works, with tho usual prospect of an increase. in the number ; if they a-re increased to forty then we may expect the completion of the Seddon-Lake Grasmete section in fivo years; so thai eyentthjs small benefit •will not' be obtained for five yearts. The Tjawrence-Roxburgb and a dozen other lines are in exactly the 6ame position. It is difficult to put down pieces of transparent folly iiKo those to electioneeringf for surely Mr. Seddon must r^ealise that he would gain far more votes by .pointing out the fact that the best way to further the permanent, interests of any part of the colony ,vas to consider the . interests of tho colony as a whole. The completion of the Flpxbourne or the Lawrence-Roxburgh railway would be hastened* by a .policy : of concentration, .even though this did mean relaying their commencement. — I ■am, etc., . N.Z.R.* Christchufch, 4th August, 1905. j