TRAINS AND MOTORS.

Taranaki Daily News, 26 September 1924, Page 5

TRAINS AND MOTORS.

COMPETITION IN DOMINION. VIEW OF RAILWAY MANAGER. (By Wire —Parliamentary Reporter.) Wellington, Last Night. The following statement on the railway tariff and road competition is from the annual report of the general manner of railways : The revision of fire tariff has been in hand during the year, but unfortunately it has been delayed owing to the pressure of work in other directions, which cx>uld not be set aside. The principal feature calling for an adjustment of rates te that of road competition. A careful watch has been kept on road traffic with a view to determining th© extent to which railway traffic has been affected thereby, and while it is found that in some localities opposition to the railway has increased it seems mor* than doubtful whether even those immediately concerned have oftytained any substantial advantage therefrom. The information gained by the department from time to time indicates that road motors are not in reality cheapening the cost of transport. The method by which they are enabled to obtain traffic which would otherwise be sent by rail lies along the line of the increasing charges for carriage to and from railway station© to such a degree as to make the total charge for the transport of goods forwarded by rail higher than that at "which the motorist is willing to convey goods for the whole journey. Thia amounts to nothing less than compulsion exercised by the motorist on the owners of foods, but the latter seem quite, unable to grasp thia aspect of the matter. They are merely content to see that the charge by motor for the whole journey is cheaper than the total charge that would require to be paid when the railway te used, but they quite fail to analyse this latter charge and quite wrongly come to the conclusion that the railway charge is too high, and causes th© use of the railway to be. as they conclude, more expensive than the motor.

In the great majority of cases an analysis of the charges would show bus to be entirely wrong and would disclose that the motorist te not content to receive reasonable remuneration as a feeder to the railway, but by taking ad vantage of his position in respect of that portion of the transport of goods to and from the railway, is enabled to extract from his customers a much higher charge than the latter should really be required to pay. The department cannot and does not object to competition, but it does take exception to the superficial view which impels unthinking person© to hastily conclude that they can obtain transport more cheaply by motor and that the railway is to blame for this position through charging rates that are too high I do not hesitate to suggest that if th© position were gone carefully into it would be found in the real majority of cases that the owners of goods transported by motor are paying a higher rate than they are fairly entitled to pay under compulsion from motorists, who will not transport goods to and from the railway at a reasonable charge.