RAILWAY REFORM.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 957, 4 July 1890, Page 2 (Supplement)

RAILWAY REFORM.

TO THE EDITOR OF IHE HEW ZEALAND MAIL. Sir, —My attention has been directed to your article of the 13th inst., which I have carefully read, and a 3 it deals with a matter of great public importance you will afford me space for reply. While admitting the new system would have many advantages, you say that its introduction would cost the Colony “ some £200,000 a year extra taxation to begin with.” Seeing the importance of this question I think the public had a right to expect the data to be given on which this extraordinary calculation is based, but this is not done, and I venture to say that it is impossible to show how such a loss could be made except by the most wilful and premeditated waste. Against the statements of your writer we have the statements of Messrs W. Conyers, J. Stoddart, W. It. Moody, and T. D. Edmonds, all railway men, also Messrs W. C. Daldy and A. Hell, of this city. These six gentlemen have carefully examined my calculations and the data on which they are based, and they have all signed documents which in effect 3ay that the adoption of the proposed system would add at least from one hundred and fifty to two hundred thousand pounds (£150,000 to £200,000) per annum to the net railway revenue. The Auckland Chamber of Commerce appointed a Railway and Postal Committee of seven. These gentlemen also investigated my proposal, and reported to the chamber that they were unanimously of opinion that no loss could be incurred by tryiDg the new Bystem, so far as regards passengers, on the Auckland lines. Let us consider the question fairly. In 1886 the Auckland lines carried 424,914 passengers, who paid collectively L 39.910. The Accountant of the Railway Department has proved conclusively that my average fare cannot sink below one shilling. This being the case, the present average being 1 Is it is manifest that if we did not secure an extra fare the cost of running the new system for a whole year on the Auckland lines could not exceed L 20,000, and if we secured a fare and a half for one we get now, the los3 would be only LIO,OOO, while two fares for one would give a profit. How is it possible there can be any risk ? "With regard to the Hungarian—not Austrian—experiment, at latest dates the new system had been at work for eight months, and so far from the traffic falling off, the increase i 3 so great that they have had to order 800 new passenger carriages. It must be borne in mind, too, that so far they have only had the winter months to work in. The statement of the Hungarian Minister is clear and distinct that there has been no increase in the working expenses, and that he has not had to buy an extra carriage or employ an extra man. How then can our expenses be so much increased by filling up our empty carriages ? The Railway Hews—not a friendly newspaper —states that the increase of passenger traffic in Hungary is 160 per cent, and that, notwithstanding there has been no alteration in the goods charges, the effect has been to increase that branch of traffic by 62 per cent. Notwithstanding Sir Edward Watkins’ great reputation, I venture to say that he is mistaken, and that the Hungarian traffic will not fall off for some years ; but as I have already pointed out, unless they re-adjust their stages, owing to its centralising tendency it must ultimately fail, and perhaps sooner than we expect. Under the New Zealand system settlement in the country and the creation of new centres of trade and commerce must continually go on. The Hungarian system was avowedly arranged for the purpose of “ getting revenue ” and concentrating population in BudaPesth. My system was designed to settle the country and distribute population and wealth, and 1 say that by doing this we must increase railway revenue. I again assert that there can be no loss, unless that loss is purposely made.—l am &c., Samuel Yaile. P.S.—I post herewith a set of pamphlets, in which the difference between the Hungarian, the Austrian and my system is pointed out. S.V. Auckland, 16th June. ,