The Lyttelton Times. SATURDAY, FEB. 1, 1879.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LI, Issue 5597, 1 February 1879, Page 4

The Lyttelton Times. SATURDAY, FEB. 1, 1879.

The railways of New South Wales are showing better results than the railways of New Zealand. Such is the conclusion which a mere comparison of the figures published by the Railway Departments of the two Colonies would inevitably lead to. The crucial test of ordinary commercial speculations is the dividend, and according to that teat the 4 per cent of New South Wales in 1877 must outweigh the 2'65 per cent, of the most profitable section of the New Zealand lines, those of the Middle Island for the year ending June 30, 1878. The test is, however, not a fair one, because the conditions of the comparison are not at pi’esent the same in both countries, and probably they never will be. As, however', it is tolerably certain that time will bring them to a greater similarity it is safe to consider that the more prosperous railway system is an index to the future of its less successful rival. Comparison, therefore, while it marks the difference between the systems of New South Wales and New Zealand, shows that the latter may entertain areasonable hope of attaining to a measure of the success which has already been realised in a neighbouring Colony. The annual report of the Commissioner for the railways of New South Wales, published a few weeks ago, and the Public Works Statement, delivered by Mr •Macandrew in the House of Representatives on the 27 th of August last, enable the comparison to be made with the necessary completeness. The first thing that strikes one is not to the advantage of the New South Wales administration. The New Zealand report is made public eight weeks after the close of the year to which it refers. Revenue, expenditure, and .various'statistics, balance of profit, and everything necessary to a fuU,~account are ready printed; for the Minister in that time. In , New South Wales, on the other hand, the railway accountsare thh dephttinent to publish with 1 his official signa- c tare attached, till a year has been added to the year of which the transactions form the matter of the report. The

advantage of New Zealand is much the greater, inasmuch as the New Zealand railways are of double the length of the New South Wales lines, and the monies have been earned in different parts of a more complicated system. The total receipts of the New South Wales railways for the year 1877, were £815,920, the expenditure was £418,985, and the net profit £396,984. These were the results of an aggregate length of 520 miles of railway line open, which, at an average of £14,855 per mile were constructed at a total cost of £8,833,177. The number of passengers carried was 2,957,144, the tonnage of goods conveyed amounted to 1,430,041, and the interest on the cost of construe* tion was 4.47 per cent. New Zealand received from 1068 miles of railway during the year ending, June 30, 1878, a revenue of £563,634, the expenditure incurred having been £403,382, giving a profit balance of £160,252. The cost of these 1068 miles of line, at an average of £7440 per mile, was £7,947,000. The number of passengers carried was 1,472,875, the tonnage of goods carried was —exclusive of the North Island, for which there are no returns —700,000, and the interest on the cost of construction paid, by the railways, was a shade over 2 per cent. From this it appears that New Zealand bad during the period of comparison completed the construction of double the number of miles of railway that New South Wales possessed for less money than New South Wales had spent in construction by nearly a million sterling. The difference of course represents the difference of guage, and shows practically that the , object being to develop as great an extent of country as possible, as fast as is practicable with a limited credit, the narrow guage system presents very solid attractions. The money devoted to railway construction has gone more than twice as far in this Colony as it has in New South Wales, a fact which will outweigh the advantage of the larger profit which the latter Colonv has to show as the result of a year s work. The New South Wales lines carried nearly double the number of passengers during the year, and something under double the quantity of goods, and they made considerably more than double the profit—the figures being £396,984, against £160,252 —than the New Zealand railways. Moreover, the double is not the real measure of the difference. As New South Wales produced this double result with half the length of railways open, her lines mile for mile hare been four times as profitable as ours. Had we spent as much on our railways in proportion as they did in New South Wales, this profit would have been four and a-half times our profit. The great difference between the lines is accounted for by the great difference in their character. The lines of New Zealand during the period alluded to were split up into thirteen sections, of which the three sections on the east of the Middle Island were the most considerable, the four on the west coast, and the six of the North Island being in comparison short lengths of rail, carrying goods and passengers, it is true, but making no great extent of country accessible to commerce. From such a disjointed system no great profit could have been expected, for it could cai’ry very little in comparison with its aggregate mileage, and its expenses were out of all proportion necessarily heavy. In New South Wales, on the other hand, the railway system is, as far as it has gone, complete. Every pound of goods, and every passenger that gets in at any station, can be carried to Sydney, we believe. It is a central system which developes the country quickly, encourages production and commerce, and while doing more work necessarily can do it with smaller comparative expenditure. The measure is to be seen in the comparison between the ratios which the expenses bear to the gross earnings; that ratio being in New Zealand so high as 71’5, and in New South Wales not more than 51’3. Concentration and completion, as far as connection with a central terminus is concerned, are represented by the smaller ratio: diffusion, isolation of short lengths by the larger. But these dissimilarities are disappearing by degrees. Their existence makes any comparison between the railways of New Zealand and New South Wales quite impossible, for such a comparison is on their account grossly unfair to New Zealand. When the New Zealand trunk lines are completed, the comparison will be fairer; and when branch lines are added in several directions as feeders to the main trunks, it will he fairer still. The capabilities of New Zealand are well known to her people. The New Zealand public, therefore, can feel perfectly certain that by the time railways, as systems of communication, are placed on the same footing as those of New South Wales, a great carrying trade will have sprung up, just as it has done in New South Wales. That the trade here will be as large in proportion may be safely taken for granted. If such were the case, then the expenses, being likewise in proportion, the completion of the railway system in New Zealand will see an annual profit proportionate to the New South Wales profit, at present four’ times as great as ours, as we have shown above. The percentage, therefore, which now stands at two may he expected then to stand at eight. The expenses, it must be borne in mind, can, however, never be as, low on the New Zealand railways as they are in the neighbouring Colonies. The shape of the country forbids any expectation to the contrary. Eight per cent, is, however, a higher rate to look forward to than is at all necessary. The conjecture leaves a large margin for an unavoidably larger proportion of expenses than exists elsewhere. Still the outlook for the New Zealand railways is by no means bad.