ROAD VERSUS RAILWAY.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVIII, 4 October 1924, Page 7

ROAD VERSUS RAILWAY.

QUESTION OF FREIGHT RATES DEPARTMEN/S POINT OF VIEW. Th© question of competition between rail and road traffic and the adjustment of railway rates so as to compete with rival means of transport is discussed by the General Manager of Railtvays (Mr. R. W. M’Villy) in h'is annual report. “While it is found that in some localities the opposition to the railway has increased,’' the report states, ‘.‘it seems more than doubtful whether eyen those immediately concerned have obtained any substantial, advantage there, from. The information gained by the Department from time to time indicates that the road motors are not in reality cheapening the cost of transport. The method by which they are enabled to obtain the traffic which, would otherwise be sent by fail lies along the line of increasing the charges for carriage to and from the railway stations to such a degree as to make the total charge for the transport of the -goods forwarded by rail higher than that at which the motorist is willing to convey the goods for the whole jurney. This amounts to nothing less than compulsion exercised by the motorist on the owners of the goods, but the latter seem quite unable to grasp * this aspect of the matter. They are merely content to see that the charge by the motor I for the whole journey is cheaper than the total charge that would require to be paid when the railway is used, but they quite fail, to .analyse this latter charge, and quite wrongly come .tip the conclusion that the railway charge is too high, and causes, the use of the railways to be, as they conclude, more expensive than the motor. In the great majority of cases an analysis of the charges would show this to be entirely wrong, and would disclose that the motorist is not content to receive a reasonable remuneration as a feeder to the railway, hut by taking advantage of his position in respect of that portion of the transport of the goods to and from his customers a much higher charge than the latter should be really required to pa#. “The Railway Department cannot, and does not, object to competition, but it does take exception to the superficial view which impels unthinking persons to hastily conclude that they can obtain transport move cheaply by motor, and that the railway is to blame for this position through charging rates that are too high. I do. not hesitate to suggest that if the position were gone carefully into, it would he found in the great majority of cases that the owners of goods transported by motor are paying a higher fate than they are faily entitled to pay, under compulsion from the motorists who will not transport the goods to and from the railway at a reasonable charge. “It' may he possible —and the Department is now taking steps in that direction —to make .suitable arrangements for transport of goods to ami from the railway at a reasonable charge, (So far as the position may be met by the lowering of the railway charges, definite proposals in this direction will be made in connection with the revision of the tariff, and this prompts some comment on a state of affairs that is becoming increasingly common I refer to the practice of certain sections of the community who take advantage of free services afforded by tin railway, such as the carriage of linn for agricultural purposes, but who dc not hesitate to send their more re munerative traffic by other forms ol transport. The purpose for which free carriage of lime was granted was tc increase the productivity of the land and it was assumed in justification o' the concession that the resulting in creased product would be carried rail. The rate of interest on the cap itnl invested in them, and in view o this circumstance free services, suci as the carriage of lime, have to be pale for. bv the higher-rated classes o traffic! If, therefore, the Departmen does not get this higher-rated traffic it is deprived of the means of affordim the free services, and the ultimate re suit of the diversion of the paynp traffic to. the-road must- inevitably b the withdrawal of the unrenrunerativ services. . . . '. People are too prone t rail until the railway charges are re duced. quite failing to grasp the tac that the only way in which the De partment ca.n he placed in a position to reduce its charges is by receivini ait adequate nroportion of remuneraitt traffic.”