TRAMWAY MATTERS.

Press, Volume LXI, Issue 18404, 10 June 1925, Page 9

TRAMWAY MATTERS.

to this iniToa ot "mi rasas." Sir, —To run a car to Sumnor (eight miles) surely does not cost eight times as much as to run a car ono mile. There are, for tho Simmer passenger, only oho start and one stop (not eight of each), hcuco timo occupied (from Sumner passcngor's point of view) is not eight times as long as for ono mile, so that electric power, wear and tear, and wages aro all less in proportion for tho Sumner trip. All stops, other than terminal stop, aro for tho convenience and benefit of tho more or less shortdistance riders (I* o "Second Section" of your Saturday's issuo), and cannot rightly bo put against tho Sumner rider; indeed, Sumnor riders would gladly eliminate them all to save time, but except on certain non-stop runs, good-naturedly puts up with tho approximately two dozen stops mado on account of "Second Section" and others. ". Second Section" seems anxious that Sumneriteß should have their concession faros further incroasod, and even tho chairman of tho Board hints that long-distance concessions aro much bolow cost; but it appears to me both gentlemen are overlooking the fact that the actual running of tho eight-milo run, taken as an eight-mile run (and this is tho only fair way to consider it as affecting a Sumner resident) must obviously work out at a lower cost per niilo than tho average cost published by the Board, whereaß the one and two section rides must bo above the avorngo cost. Another thing to considor is main ears on which concession cards are used are invariably more than full, and this in itself means good rovonuo as against cost of running. If tho points I raiso are taken into account, perhaps the concession fares may be found to be slightly above actual cost, instead of under cost. Is there not reason in my contention that, in computing actual cost of terminal rider's trip, time and expohao of intermediate stops should be eliminated t —Yours, etc., E.P.G. June 9th, 1925. so ths SOROS or "las rasas." Sir,—May I suggest that as regards Sumnor (Clifton to Head street), Bedcliffs (Cutting to Mpnck'B Bay), New Brighton (Bexley to Pier), and perhaps other long-distance suburbs, the Board should consider issuing a local penny cash faro. If revenue is wanted, I ant sure suburban residents would often take a penny ride in their own locality, but begrudge 2d cash for a shbrt local ride of a few blocks, and consequently walk. Why not encourage local riders by reverting to Id cash rides, especially as there are often plenty of spare seats near the terminala mentioned.—Yours, etc. . NIMBLE PENNY.! TO THS XMTOB Of "THB ?*SSS." Sir, —Mr Wright's reasoning, with respect to possible savings through eliminating some of the tramway stops is fallacious. The chairman of the Board took the expenses directly attributable to the running and stopping of a car, viz,, the wear and tear to which the stopping and starting operation contributes considerably, and the electric current required to start it fyjain and to'keep it running. Some of the expenses would obviously go on even if there wero no stopß. There would still be wear and tear, and there would still be power used, yet to clinch tho argument the 'Tramway Chairman threw these all in, and proved that if'three stops were cut out in every mile at the supposed cost of a penny per stop, the total expense would be reduced, to a vanishing point! Mr Wright, however, would include the total expenses in the By what stretch of imagination could he Bay, for instance, that the, interest would be saved if a few stbpa tfere cut out, or she wages of power engineers, on the* wages of office clerks, etc., etc. "'- * Mr Wright supposes that I am 'a member of the Bo&rd. I am not; but I agree with him that--a'.considerable ■portion of the recent tramyray criticism has been unfair and unjust.--Yours, etc., HEREFORD STREET. June 9th, 10257 TO THS XSRQB 01 "THS PSISS." Sir,—As a counterblast to criticism which Mr A. #. Wrigftt * afl described as unjust and unfair, wo have thjs morning a frank and able letter front Mr Maphjn, who, having »veri close attention last November to tramway ic* ceipts and expenditure, is in a. good position to speak; Ho quotes figures showing that Christcluiroh gives a cheaper milo ride than other centres, and that its much abused administration is lower in cost. His table as to the revenue per head of population » the irioro interesting, because I think it has not been referred to by friend or foe in the recent "dust up." lhe Auckland population contributes £4 103 per head, Christchurch £2 7s 4d, with the others in between. Mr Machinj with a big experience, 6ays that this difference is not due to comfortless trains, because tho reverse is thocase. He says it may be due to 40,000 bicycles in Christchurch, but hero is tho« important point. His investigation convinced him there were two weakf nossos. 'Jfcams do not run frequently enough over, somo of tho sections, and ho advocates a quicker service over tho 3d seotions. I think ho has overlooked tho fact that tho chairman told us that the general manager had brought this up a year .ago, and_ tdtat new cars were already being built to icope with the work. , . ■Air Macbin's other point is that the tramways cover a large amount of unprofitable ground, afid that the Board has been Influenced too much in thG past by pressure from outside districts to lay unprofitable lines. My idea is that Mr Machin has put his finger on tjio spot. It would bo interesting to know exactly how these unpayable lines came into existence. Were they all the result of special rating areas unloading their extension line liabilities on to the unwilling Board? Were some of them built before this? Were any built afterwards P Were they built on the recommendation of the manager, or the reverse? I remember the general manager being in conflict with the promoters of these special rating; lines and his being severely handled in the newspapers because of it. If these things are so, it seems a little rough that he should now be "slangwnnged" for a condition of things which he did his best to avoid, and for which at the time he was subject to pubtio criticism.— Yours, etc., -• ' ST. ALBANS EAST. Christchurch, June 9th, 1923.

TO THB CTTIOS 0» "THB mESfI." Sir^ —I have read a lot of letters in reference to the way the trams should be conducted and it appears quite obvious to me that many improvements could be made to improve the financial aspect. Wo have been told that there is a likelihood of a still further increase in fares." It is my candid opinion that even then the trams will not pay. Why not look at the wholo thing on a broad basis! For instance, I think it right and proper to put a tax on rate(Continued at foot of nest calnsxa.)

payers in the suburban areas whew ttfoperties have increased enormously »• value owing to the trams passu? Unto doors or in the immediato •wewrty. Quito a lot of those people »ww"» the trams at all, and y**.*»«r«!*f* a benefit in the other direction, ratter, the chairman announced that Mara were thirteen inspectors. 0 * *** duce them by 50 per eentt ™**** must take into consideration the IaWJ satariespaid to the high «*««* » is certain the service cannot «*•*_**• We have to "consider tho evening; tens*. Why should the Board charge tan sum price as for day-timef BBw ft t»I •» Sight-time, and you ham to p»y «•» } proportionately: Why not tan trwat— Yours, etc, QB]U^ Juno 9th, 1925.