RAILWAYS FINANCES.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 881, 29 July 1910, Page 4

RAILWAYS FINANCES.

It is to be hoped that members of Parliament are including in their preparation for tho debates that are sure to take place on the railways question tho four-weekly figures periodically printed in the GazetteLast night's Gazette contains the figures for the four weeks ended June 25 last and for the fiscal year up to that date (12 weeks). For the twelve weeks tho gross revenue was £816,351 and the gross expenditure £529,445, leaving a net return of £256,905, as compared with a net return of £273,084 last year. This is not much of an. improvement, but the year has not gone far. It is worth noting, however, that the improvement is duo to the Northern lines, which bettered by £17,207, the position of the Southern lines for the twelve weeks being £3385 worse than for the corresponding period last year. For the four weeks ended June 25 the figures were: Net Revenue. Expenditure, revenue. £ £ £ North 121,044 85,378 35,666 South 128,891 85,192 43,699 The Northern return came from 1150 miles of rail, and the Southern from 1574 miles. .The relative earning capacity of the two islands is seen in tho returns per mile: • Miles of Gross , return Not return line. per mile. per mile. £ s. d. £ s. d. North HoO 105 5 1 31 0 3 South 1574 SI 17 0 27 5 3 The continued increase in the superiority of this island as a railway field is manifest. It becomes particularly clear when wo compare the net returns for the four weeks ended June 25 last with the net returns for the corresponding four , weeks last year : Net returns for Inc. or 4-weekly period. dec. 1909. 1910. £ • £ £ North 23,285 35.66G 12,381 inc. South 40,680 43,699 2,987 dec.

While upon this subject, we may note that Mr. Millar stated yesterday, in reply to Mr. Wright, that the gross revenue from the Manawatu line was about £90,000 for the year 1909-10. This enables us to. clinch a controversy 'we had with a Christchurch journal last month. A couple of months ago Mr. Millar stated that the revenue from the Manawatu line was £90,000, but we pointed out at the'time that it was not clear whether he meant "gross" or "net" revenue. Our Christchurch contemporary, took it .as "net" revenue, and proceeded to say thai if the line had not been acquired by the State the return from the State lines in this island in 1909-10 would have been 3.63 per cent. This, it said, was "precisely the same" figure as for the Southern lines if a. million or so were deducted from the capital cost of those lines. It was good enough to add, referring to The Dominion, "No doubt our contemporary has made this little calculation on its own account, and realises the wisdom of keeping its silence." We showed, by way of reply,, on June 6, that making the additions and deductions demanded by our contemporary, the return from the Northern system would have been 3.9 if the figure given by Mr. Millar were "net" revenue, or 4.3 per cent, if it were "gross" revenue. Mr. Millar now says it was "gross" revenue, which is most unfortunate for the Christchurch journal. We refer to. this matter only to show the straits to which the defenders of the present unwiso and unfair allocation of con-' struction expenditure are reduced, and their inability, even then, to make any headway against the case they are endeavouring to meet.