MARKET TICKETS.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume VII, Issue 1915, 10 August 1888, Page 3

MARKET TICKETS.

The " Daily Times " considers that tha case brought by the Railway Department against Mr I R. C. 0. Graham m Ashburton a weak ago, m oonnectlon with the market tickets to Washdyke, chows, presuming the regulations have been rightly Interpreted by the Magistrate, a sad lack of oomraon tense on the part of the Railway Department. The article says : — "Acoordlng to the law aa niw interpreted, a Milton resident who wants to go to Dunedin on a day on which market- excursion tickets are leaned to Mcsgiel (to put aD Imaginary case whloh will strike" home In this provlnoe) will be liable to a fine and commit a breach of the by-laws if he takes advantage of the Mosglel market excursion ticket and provides himself with an ordinary ticket on to Danedin at the railway station at Mosglel while the train Is stopping there. The existing by-laws insists that he shall go to Moßglel and no farther, though there aeems to be considerable doubt left aa to whether he Is not legally as well as morally obliged to vUlt Moseiel market, and cannot be fined for neglecting to put his excursion ticket to the exact pnrpose for which it was Issued; There are two very clear reasons why suoh a regulation should be repealed. The first Is that it Is not c> easily nnderatanded of the people," who cannot be expeoted to enter Into the complicated considerations whloh were present to the deportment m framing such a regulation, and regard It as i 4 unfair " that the Danedin traveller should not be allowed to use a Mosglel ticket as a stepping-stone to hla journey, and feel worried and annoyed by suoh fine upun sohemes. The second Is that it Is impracticable for the railway authorities to place any sufficient oheck upon breaches of suoh a regulation, which furnishes a standing temptation to fraud, and brings the regulations generally Into contempt. We do not enter into the question of whether the regulation is 1 defensive on Its Intrinsic merits or not The two considerations we have mentioned above will be sufficient to condemn it In the eyes of any man of business and the world who has not his Ideas straitened by red tape. From time to time we hear of other petty regulations of the same kind In the management of the railways, such as lower fares being given f or a return ticket from Port Chalmers and Danedin than one from Sawyers' Bay to Dunedin, No doubt there are goo 3 reasons for anon regulations from a departmental point of view ; but the few shillings that are made In that way are not worth the inconvenience and annoyance they oause to the public. We believe that the existing dlssatlsfaotion with the railway management is almost entirely oanaedj by petty annoyanoeß arising from the department taking too narrow and purely official view, and In the appointment of the Railway Baard we trust that the Government will not fall to bear m mind the desirableness of following the example of V'ctorla and South Aurtralla m appointing at least one member of the Board with no pretoDDlona to professional knowledge of railway management, but a man distinguished by strong common sense and keen popular sympathies — one who Is likely to take the outsider's view and keep It constantly before the profecslonal railway manager who will presgntly occupy the Presidency of the Board. We feel .v<ry confident that it ia common sense and a knowledge of men and affairs whloh is laoking m our railway management, and not technical knowledge and capacity {or detail, or even power of organisation.