The Victorian Railway System.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 6244, 17 June 1890, Page 2

The Victorian Railway System.

According,to the Melbourne Age the old system of political interference in railway management is as rife to-day as it was before the Railway Management Act was passed. The Commissioners are constantly being interviewed by members of Parliament, with or without deputations at their heels, craving favours for themselves or their constituents. Such a state of affairs was never meditated by Parliament when the new system was inaugurated. The first year Mr Speight was here (remarks the Age) he showed that he understood the spirit of the Act under which he held office, by refusing to recognise a member of Parliament in his official capacity. It would have been better for the country if that position had been

maintained. During the time it was maintained there was a marked improvement in the conduct of the railway business. The officers were civil and diligent, and the whole system showed the presence of a directing hand. Mr Speight at that time won golden opinions from the community, but since he has become a part of the political machine there are few railway travellers to do him honour, and all the old evils from which wa tried to escape have reappeared in an aggravated form. The present Government is to blame in this matter, because it struck a fatal blow at the non-political system by making the Commissioners, contrary to the wise intention of the Act, partially dependent on the goodwill of - hon. members for their remuneration. The first step in the path of reform is to abandon the course of placing an additional sum for the payment of the Commissioners on the Estimates, and making the increase of salary, if it is to be made at all, by Act of Parliament. The

secona is to put a stop to me practice oi me Commissioners receiving deputations. It is a practice which has grown up, as all evil practices do, beoause it has not been challenged, until now we find a highly paid expert, imported for the performance of certain professional duties, practically withdrawn from those duties, and figuring in the capacity of a political Minister, receiving and placating deputations in the old political way. The position in which the Commissioners stand is a false one, and they ought to be relieved from it at once. The Minister of Railways should receive the deputations, and Mr Sneicht should be left at liberty to attend

to the management of the railways, which is his real business, and the work for which the country pays him. It is to be regretted that when a vacancy occurred on the Commission our advice was not taken, and an expert accustomed to the American railway system obtained. Such a Commissioner would have made short work of the stupid old regulations adopted when officialism was rampant, and the art bow not to do it was tempered by a malicious delight in tormenting the publio. He would have had as little hesitation as difficulty in sweeping away the pigeon-hole system, and affording opportunities for the public to buy railway tickets'as freely as postage stamps, and to ueo them when they pleashd. It is a disgrace to the colony that the railway authorise the prosecution as a criminal of a person who utilise a return ticket taken out one day for a return journey on the next. It is the person who framed that regulation who ought to be prosecuted, for evidently he

had in bis mind the fraudulent intent of extorting a second payment for one service from a laggard who missed his train at night. It makes not the slightest difference to the railway department whether a man who has paid for his haulage takes half of it one day or another. The average number of travellers will always be the same, and no extra cost is imposed upon the railway service. There are numberless small improvements which could be introduced into our railway system at once if the vis inertim of the civil servants could be overcome, and the heads of the railway administration freed from the thrall of the politicians who ignore the second constitutional maxim that the service should be subject to the control of Parliament in its corporate capacity, but not be made the tool of individual members.