The Globe. TUESDAY, JULY 24, 1877.

Globe, Volume VIII, Issue 960, 24 July 1877, Page 2

The Globe. TUESDAY, JULY 24, 1877.

The result of the appeal of the deputation to the Government regarding the Railway Tariff lias, to some extent, been successful. We say to some extent, because the Grovernmcnt hold out no hope at present of a reduction ou what we look upon as the vital part of the tariff—that is the passenger rates. Why the Government should desire to keep on rates which it is proved conclusively are productive of had results, we cannot say. If the present rates are continued for a few months, what will be the experience gained ? Why, a more extended and wide-spread feeling on the part of the public against using the railways unless positively obliged. The persistauce in what is all hut a prohibitive charge can do no good. It will not enable the Government to reconcile the public to it, and, therefore, the delay asked for is totally unnecessary. It may he perfectly true that the rates now charged are lower than the Australian rates. We are not going to dispute that for one moment. But let us turn to the receipts of the Canterbury railways, as published month after month, and what do we find ? W by, that the revenue arising from passenger traffic —not at the present high rates, hut at the old ones —has been rapidly increasing, and with the other component parts of railway revenue, is sufficient to pay interest and sinking fund on the construction. What reason, therefore —granting that the rates are lower than in Australia —is there for increase ? Much as we desire to see the tariff altered on goods, it appears to us that the question of passenger fares is also of one of vital importance to the interests of our lines. It means either one thing or the other—equitable fares and a hearty co-operation on the part of the people, or high fares and determined opposition. The Government, beyond the fact that the rates are lower than in Australia, advance not one single reason for the continuance of rates which have had the effect of materially reducing the number of passengers on our lines, and will yet do more. On this part, therefore, of the Government reply we are bound to express dissatisfaction, and we believe this will be the feeling of a majority of the public. Turning to the other points brought under the notice of the Government it is satisfactory to find that they are disposed to consider favourably the recommendation of the Chamber for a reduction of rates on distances over fifty miles. This being adopted, would, as we pointed out in a former article, tend greatly to increase the business done by the railway, and encourage the settlement of land at a distance from the centres of population but contiguous to a railway line. That reductions are to be made in the present prohibitive rates for the carriage of stock will be satisfactory to the large body representing the pastoral interest, and also to the public at large. Our prosperity, as a whole, is so bound up with that of the pastoral and agricultural portion of the community, that anything that conduces to their interests must re-act for good on the community at large. It is to be hoped that the reductions promised will be of a substantial character, and

that they will be such as to encourage to the fullest extent the use of the lines for the transport of stock. Taken altogether the reply may he considered fairly satisfactory, but we hope that those who have taken the matter in hand will not rest until the present high and uncalled-for passenger rates are reduced to a more equitable level.

Apologue on the part of the Lyttelton Times appear to be the order of the clay. On Saturday last our contemporary performed the ceremony in rather an ungracious manner, and again on Tuesday lie had to confess lie had made some strong comments regarding Mr Moorliouse, founded on an “ unfortunate error.” In to-day’s publication we are informed that “ circulars have been issued by the Colonial Bank, intimating that on and after duly 81st the rate of interest allowed on deposits will be G per cent.” We are authorised by the manager of the Colonial Bank here to say that there is no truth whatever in the above statement. As such an unfounded assertion is likely to have a prejudicial effect upon those concerned, no doubt our contemporary will feel himself called on once more to eat the “ leek ” in a most abject manner.