ROTORUA-TAUPO RAILWAY.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 20324, 3 August 1929, Page 16

ROTORUA-TAUPO RAILWAY.

Sir, —In connection with the Rotorua to Taupo railway project there is an aspect that may be 'deserving of attention. Train cum car; not train versus car. I have long felt that we want to make such places as Rotorua, Taupo and our magnificent volcanic mountains available to persons of limited means, especially (hose with goodly families. Also, to develop the interior for carrying stock for which there will be soon a great demand, and it should bo within the scope of the ordinary man to carry on with small profit and not leave it only for those who have a goodly capital to carry on, As to the first object: To erect small cottages of one, two or three rooms, furnished with tables, chairs, bedsteads, crockery and mattresses, to be let at, say, 10s per week per room, and let the occupiers do their own housework and in this way enable many to avail themselves of enjoying a quiet time away from the "madding crowd." At present it is only the well-to-do that can venture on a change. Rapid and cheap transit for man or beast- is 'essential, and for such distant places to enable those with a few animals to get their meat into good markets, to send their meat in the form of quarters of beasts or fowl dressed ready for the table, as I found was done in some parts of the United States of America to the advantage of the struggling settler. Now, if cheap fares were in vogue on train and car the thousands enabled to get about would make our railways pay and give cars plenty of work, while at present, with mere hundreds, it is hard to make it pay. In addition to the above one feels that the timber industry in its many branches will very soon bo a big asset, giving employment to many thousands. When the Rotorua to Auckland train was opened one member in the House stated that it would not pay for the grease of the wheels. I think I am right in saying that it is now one of the best-paying lines in New Zealand.

Fred. H. Spencer. Sir, —Mr. Vaile is not living up to the reputation I gave him for dealing with his opponents, and has left me practically nothing to answer. Nine-tenths of his letter have not the remotest bearing on the question at issue, nor on any point I made. The only relevant matter is his suggestionMhat, it my theories are valid, Now Zealand being the "uttermost corner of the earth." should not have been settled, and that my coming to the Dominion was "a remarkable error of judgment." The truth is that the people who settled here were forced by a vicious land policy (which New Zealand copied and whicn Mr. Vaile supports) to leave the Old Country. There ia 110 need for a single Briton to emigrate, nor is there any "surplus" British population. One-third of the cultivable land of England is, even to-day, held out of use, hence unemployment and forced emigration. From tho purely economic point of view there was no need to settle New Zealand. There are, however, other considerations beside' the purely economic, but they are not germane to this discussion. Mr. Vaile says ho is willing to sell all his land to tho Government at its present value, and hopes this will satisfy those who think with me. Where is t lie point ? No Henry George man would allow any Government to buy land; it is only socialists who countenance such folly. Mr. Montgomerio asks how can land bo outside tlie economic margin of cultivation if the railway "can" be niado to nay 1 said "might," and I did not say how long it would be. Your correspondent makes the mistake, common to all "practical" men, that to settle any waste land is necessarily good policy. The cost may be too great. In Australia (which supplies the world's market, bo it noted) there is fertile land in the interior. Would Mr. Montgomerio favour a railway 500 or 1000 miles inland in oi der to settle these "waste spaces" ? I press for a reply for the analogy is close. The T'lupo district is the remotest in this island. Obviously, with a population of less than H millions, the time is not ripe for (farming) settlement there. Farmers in that district would draw their fertilisers, implements, clothing and a lot of their food from Auckland: they would send, nearly all their produco to this port, and thus there would be haulage over 350 to 450 miles past unused (and better) land. From the national siand point, would that bo an "economic" policy? If Mr. Montgomerio had a farm extending back 200 miles from his market and port, would ho employ men milking cows on the furthest areas, while there was unused (and better) dairying land close to the said port? I repeat, a railway from Hotorua '.o Tanpo would take freight, actual or potential, from existing lines. Tho only sound policy is to "settle tho best land first." There will be a double benefit; existing railways will pay better and an enormous and (for the present) unnecessary expenditure on permanent way will bo avoided. Wise legislation would force all (valuable) land into full [use. C.11.N.