THE RAILWAYS COMMITTEE'S REPORT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXI, Issue 9582, 6 August 1894, Page 3

THE RAILWAYS COMMITTEE'S REPORT.

• TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —la this day received from the RaiL ways Committee the following •' Abstract of I Report of the Railways Committee of the House of Representatives, on the Petition of ■, Samuel Vaileof Auckland":— /,'.■' "That in the opinion of this committee,V the time is inopportune to give a trial to the system proposed by Mr. Vaile. That the committee strongly recommends the system have a trial in regard to certain perishable products being carried at rates somewhat - similar to the stage rates advocated by Mr. v Vaile. This proposal should be satisfactory; to Mr. Vaile, seeing that, if only to a limited extent, what he has so long and earnestly advocated, is to be brought to a practical test; That the position of the colony, and f. the workinar of the railways, has not sc materially altered since Mr. Vaile was last examined before a Select Committee of the House of Representatives, as would warrant the committee in incurring the expense of asking Mr. Vaile to personally attend the ; committee, to give evidence." :.-. w This is a most astounding deliverance, and it is abundantly evidently that a majority ol this committee cannot have even a rudimentary knowledge of the system of railway administration that I propose to introduce. I am exceedingly sorry to say anything that may even seem to be disrespectful of a Parliamentary committee, and especially of one composed as this is, of the Premier and Minister of Public Works, an ex-Premier, an ex-Minister of Public Works, and nine other members of Parliament, but if they present a report that is so absurd as to compel me to expose their want of knowledge of the important subject they have attempted to deal with, the fault is not mine. Had the committee taken my evidence, or had the majority of them read and sfudied the evidence taken by the committee of 1886, or the pamphlet of which I posted two copies to each of them, they could not have fallen into this error. During my twelve years' contest, there are three things that more than any others I have insisted upon :—lst. The total , abolition of differential and mileage rating. 2nd. Equal treatment for all. 3rd. A great ;. simplification of the fares, rates, and charges, so that everybody may be able to understand them. My main attack has been directed on these three points. There is no man in: the. world, either living or dead, who has - written and spoken so much and so Btrongly against _ differential rating as I have done. There is no form of this unutterably vile system so liable to abuse as special rating. , What a majority of this committee < now proposes to do isTo impose more : differ- , ential rates; to favour one class t>f producers at the expense of other producers, and the taxpayer generally: to greatly increase the present complicated muddle, and render the| tariff still more difficult to . understand. They also propose te introduce some hotchpotch muddle of "rates somewhat similar to the stage rates advocated by Mr. Vailed The committee may know what they mean by this last proposal, I do not, for I have never " advocated" any rates for goods. I have only advocated the system on which those, rates should be levied, and their reduction to the lowest possible point. ' This, then, is so far the outcome of all my work and expenditure. A : Parliamentary Committee recommends that all the things I have worked hardest against should be done, and they say that this is a trial of my system, and that " This proposal should be : satisfactory to Mr. Vaile." If I did not know that a majority of this committee do not in the least degree understand my proposals, 1 should imagine they were speaking ironically; but the position is serious. In view of such treatment how can men be expected to take up and study questions of great public importance when their work is handed over to such incompetent, people to deal with? So far from the committee's report being satisfactory to me, it is eminently i unsatisfactory, and I enter my most emphatic protest against it being given effect to, or my name in any way being connected with it. I say that all it can lead to is more loss of revenue, more taxation, more heart-burning, and more discontent ■

Fortunately it remains for Parliament to say what is to be done, and I trust that it will render me greater justice than its committee has. :.; Q.x *- J i.-.■'.-:■--. ,>:! .;■..; "•;■;' ;/■;.;•. &&i~& '& The committee says the time is " inopportune" for trying the new system. Perhaps so, but 1 may mention that the net railway revenue for the first 12 weeks of the current: financial year was £21,443 less than for the corresponding period of 1893, it was £24,296 less than iu 1692, and £23,911 less than, it was five years ago. : -4Cfi I would ask if we have not had about enough of the old "no-system." If the public will only move, it is not too late now to do something iu this matter this session.— I am, etc., " ' Samuel Vaile.