MR VAILE ON THE RAILWAYS.

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume XLII, Issue 7381, 6 February 1902, Page 2

MR VAILE ON THE RAILWAYS.

At the meeting of the representatives of the Chambers of Commerce in Wellington, Mr Samuel Vaile put forward a heavy indictment against the railways. His thesis was " that tried by business standards, our railways were a miserable commercial failure ; that their recent boasted successful administration amounted to a fraud, and that they had never paid so badly as they had done during the last few years. For instance, on 31st March last we had , 2212 miles of . working railways. These cost us £17,207,328, and lines unopened £1,022,729, say £18,230,000 in all. Desperate, and in his opinion unprincipled, efforts had been made to prove that this investment had given a return of over 3 per cent., and it was claimed that last year they paid £ 8 9a 8d per cent. He would prove that all they had earned was £1 10s per cent, and be expected that for the current year they -would not earn more than from 18s to £1 per cent." The arguments and figures ha adduced were so lengthy that we are unable to reproduce then:, but generally speaking his case was thai prior to the regime of the Railway Commissioners accounts were fairly kept, and that the railways did give a return of £2 8s Id per oenfc, but that, owing to a system of " manipulation of accounts " instituted by the Commissioners and perpetuated by various Ministers, large amounts expended on additions to lines were charged to capital instead of to revenue, as he contends they should have been. Further, he argued that he cost of earning had steadily in- j creased, notwithstanding tho failure to properly charge the expenditure referred to. He dealt in a similar spirit with various aspects of railway matters, but contended that the ', first step * towards reform would be to " bring the railway accounts under, the control of the Auditor* General, and not leave themprao-

tically without inspection or control." ( He said also that we must have a simple and fixed railway tariff that could be read and understood by everyone. The attitude of the dee gates was that of non-committal, and they declined to discuss the matter. Mr Vaile has been crying out about; railway administration for so loag that many people have ceased to take him altogether seriously, and it really would need a jury of experts to decide between his view and that of tho Department. The one

thing we admire him for is the pertinacity with which he hammers away in the performance of his self-imposed, and we should think disagreeable task. It is part of the price we pay for th 6 great advantage of State ownership that there is virtually little of the keen watchfulness which shareholders would keep oa directors. Shareholders having to find the money would want to know exactly why, and they would know by their dividends or calls whether their property was directly remunerative. In the case of State owned lines loans cover up all deficiencies, and we suppose there i 3 hardly any 'outside the Department, perhaps few in it, who actually know whether the railways do directly pay or not. Certainly Mr Vaile is about the only man outside the .Department who goes deeply into the thing, and we should not be at all surprised if some day it turns out that his figures should have received more attention.