NOTES.

Evening Star, Issue 7183, 11 April 1887, Page 2

NOTES.

It is said that when the Minister of Public Works addresses his constituents,

The he will enter fully into the quesbXS? * io " of ™ lwa y management. It is time this was done, ihe Kailway Department has the unenviable fame of being the worst-managed department in the public serviae, and it will require a deal of explanation to remove the prevailing impression. Complaints from all sorts and conditions of men reach us daily. If Mr Richardson cares to take the responsibility of this state of affairs on his shoulders—as indeed he must do, being the Minister—he cannot escape the charge of incapacity. By this time, however, it is beginning to be understood that he is merely the mechanical registrar of the decrees of his subordinate. But on his head be it! A most convincing commentary on the present mismanagement of our public railways comes to hand in the form of the report and balance-sheet of the Wellington-Manawatu Railway Company. This was a line, be it remembered, which the Government abandoned as offering no prospect of being payable. Then a private company took it up, and have carried it to completion. The report before us presents the traffic account from March, 1886, to February, 1887, showing a fair Erofit even when the line was incomplete; ut for the purposes of comparison we will take the period of twelve weeks and six days from the completion of the line on December 1, 1886, to February 28, 1887. The total receipts during this period were LE1,39.3, and the working expenses L 2,745, leaving a profit of L 10,648, or a net interest of more than 5 per cent, on the total cost of the line, or 7.69 per cent, on the debentures sold in London at 5 per cent. How do the public railways stand in comparison? We will take the nearest approximate period on the Wanganui line, of which the Manawatu line is a continuation. The circumstances and conditions are therefore as nearly equal as possible. During the twelve weeks ending on the sth February, 1887, the receipts on the Wanganui line were L 18.074, and the expenditure L 14,062, leaving a trivial balance of L 4,000 towards payment of interest. In the case of the Government portion of the line the working expenses amount to nearly 80 per cent; in the case of the Company’s portion of the same line the working expenses are less than 11 per cent. By no evasion of the fact, nor by any verbal quibbling, can this monstrous discrepancy be explained away. Its causes are selfevident : in the one case business incompetency ; in the other business capacity is displayed. No other explanation is possible. The reports say, truthfully enough, “ experience of all such undertakings teaches that they improve and give better results as time progresses.” flow then is it that the Government railways do not improve, but give worse results as time progresses ?

Victorians are beginning to understand that it is possible to have too Protection much of a good thing. At a Run Mad. recent meeting of the Victorian

Chamber of Manufacturers a resolution proposing that the “ bounty ” system should be applied to exports of “ productions, being the natural growth or manufacture of Victoria,” was discussed. This is significant. The imposition of duties on imports having resulted in a glut, it is now suggested that bounties should be given on exports to relieve the congested local market. The public revenue in such case would be mulcted twice over, to “ encourage local industries.” One of the speakers at the meeting unwittingly put the whole question of Protection in a nutshell, when, referring to the French sugar bounties, he said :—“ The taxpayer found that he had to pay for the production of an article which was sold cheaper in another country than in his own, whilst the producer derived no benefit.” Another inember of the Chamber declared that “the' bounty system was Protection run mad ” ; and a third urged the danger of reprisals from other colonies if such a system were adopted in Victoria. Ultimately the discussion was adjourned. But it is worthy gf note thatjthe only articles specified at the meeting as requiring the fostering aid of State bounties were beetroot sugar, coal, and reaping and binding machines. I'Jow, sugar is already protected by an import duty i coal in payable quantities has not yet been found in Victoria ; and reaping machines are successfully manufactured in New Zealand without any protective duty whatever, whilst in Victoria an import duty of 20 per cent, is levied on them. The lesson to he learned from all this is so easy to read that comment is quite unnecessary.

The Canterbury Industrial Association intend to attack the Factories Act Boy Labor so far as it relates to the cmployWantcd. ment of boy labor. According to the men who constitute the Committee of that organisation, the Act (which was the magnum opus of the late Mr J. B. Bradshaw’s legislative career, and to the passage and improvement of which the late sir John Richardson, Sir Robert Stout, Mr Rolleston, and Sir George Grey gave their best energies) is a failure, and has done more harm than good. These representatives of the industrial classes in the City of the Plains assert that the Act has driven boys intended for the workshops, not back into the schools, but on to the streets and into places of questionable resort—in fact, has assisted largely to develop larrikinism of a pronounced type. Whilst willing to accord philanthropic motives to the sponsors of the Act, they say that the results of its operation have been the reverse of satisfactory ; that it has indicted hardship on the employers of labor; and that it has retarded the industrial progress of the Colony. Such a heavy indictment is enough to cause Mr Bradshaw’s spirit to return to this mundane sphere in order to keep watchful vigil over the legislation of next session, lest his prized measure should be tampered with or impious hands be raised to wreck it. But we decline to accept the ipue dixit of these interested individuals that the Act has in any way proved oppressive or failed to realise the aims of those who introduced it. We want proof, not mere assertions, that the Act operates unjustly towards the employers. The Association, instead of seeking to rob the youth of the Colony of the privileges the Act confers, might help any movement for providing them with the means of self-improvement or innocent recreation, Free libraries, technical classes, art galleries, popular lectures and concerts, are some of the methods that will effectually wean our boys and girls from the streets and direct their talents m ways that must eventually benefit themselves and the community at large. It may be answered that none of these things are within the province of an Industrial Association. Possibly not; but the members, as individuals, can do a great deal privately to assist any movement of the kind. We are thankful to the Association for so plainly showing their hand. The Industrial Association profess Protectionist proclivities, but are-averse to the protection of the interests of our youth. Such is the unselfishness of the Protectionist! The truth, we fancy, is that the employers who speck through the Committee of the Industrial Association w.apt to get rid of the Bradshaw Act, because it rightly prevents the employment of cheap, juvenile labor, The crowding of boys or girls—many of them quite unfitted physically and educationally—into the factories and workshops will do more to retard the industrial development of the Colony than anything else. We regret, as must all who have observed the boys and girls who arc employed in the cities, that better use is not made of their hours of relaxation, but hope that those whose interests are likely to be affected will take steps to acquaint the Legislature with their views on the matter* The Premier has always taken a prominent part in ameliorating the condition of the laboring classes, and he will,' we are sure, cheerfully respond to a call to undertake the work so long and ably performed by Mr Bradshaw.