CHRISTCHURCH TRAMWAYS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLV, Issue 13778, 17 June 1908, Page 8

CHRISTCHURCH TRAMWAYS.

: ♦— w COMPARED WITH OTHKR CENTRES. [BY telegkAinr. —OWN" CORKBrOSTJ?ENT.] !,,. : .- CmiisTCirnncH, Tuesday. , Is- his annual statement the chairman of 'the Tramway Board, commenting on the '■financial'' report, which showed' a credit balance of £288 on the year's working, said it enabled the financial position of the tramways during a normal year of traffic to he' disclosed for the first time. Referring to-the difficulties of the Christchurch system, he pointed out that the district served bylthe: Christchurcli trams was 30 miles in circumference. Ten different lineW radiate from the . common centre to different points "of 'the compass, leaving large areas "country between the lines not much benefited by\the services, but still able to be rated if a rate became necessary. The policy of the Board must be to seek to provide a 'Service only just a, little in excess of the actual traffic requirements. For many years there would be a comparatively small proportion of the\ revenue derived from what might be called city traffic. In Wellington and Dunedin three passengers will occupy successively the same seat on one trip. This was not evident in Christchurch. The 1 long gaps on some of the lines were severe handicaps.

The speaker quoted some statistics showing how Christchurch was served by its trams compared with other cities and how the community patronised the service: — Population per mile of single track: Christchurch, 1407; Wellington, 2593; Dimedin, '2905; Auckland, 2274. Passengers carried per car mile run: Christchurch, 6.9; Wellington, 9.9; Dunedin, 9.7. Revenue, per Lead of population: Christchurch, £1 6s 6d; Wellington, £1 17s Id; Dunedin, £1 9s 7d: Auckland, £1 15s 3d. Capital expenditure per head of population: Christchurch, £6 2s 8d: Wellington, £7 6s 2d; Dunedin, £7 12s 6d; Auckland. £8 12s 9d. To accommodate a widely-spread district the Board had laid down more miles of track per head of population than elsewhere, yet the expenditure per head of population was the lowest. To keep expenditure anything like under control the number of car miles ran had to be limited, because on a considerable proportion of the trips" comparatively few passengers were carried. The revenue per head of population was less than in other cities in the Dominion because there was a, large- proportion of the population which was nob reached by the trams. The proportion of the population using the trams being smaller in Christchurch, the revenue contributions per head of those within the uveas reached by tin- trains was higher than in Wellington or Dunedin. as during the. past month the chairman said he had heard, of very many families spending from £20 to £30 a year on tram fares.