The Globe. SATURDAY A GUST 24 1878

Globe, Volume XX, Issue 1412, 24 August 1878, Page 2

The Globe. SATURDAY A GUST 24 1878

The noar approach to completion of the main trunk lino of railway from Christchurch to Dunedin suggests tho reflection whether it is not possible to introduce reforms which will prove of infinite benefit to tho travelling public. In speaking of tho alterations which appear to us necessary, wo intend to confine the remarks made to the subject of tho tickets issued to the passengers. Under this head, there are three points which seem to call for careful consideration on the part of tho railway authorities, with a view of seeing if any improvement can be made on the present system. The first of these is the mode of issuing tickets. It has always seemed an anomaly that tickets for a journey by rail must perforce be obtained at the stations only. Why should they not be sold at various places in the city on the same principle as postago stamps ? It would most seriously impede business were the Government to make a regulation that postage stamps should bo procurable only at the Post Office, and that every obstacle should bo jdaced in the way of those desirous of obtaining them by placing the selling clerk in a little box only approachable by one person at a time. Yet this is precisely what the railway authorities do with regard to the issue of tickets. Instead of allowing railway tickets to be bought at any place in town, similarly to postage stamps, they perforce drag a crowd of passengers to the particular spot, where purposely the conveniences for supplying their wants are curtailed as much as possible. Not only so, but no one can be supplied until the last possible moment before the train starts. The whole system appears to us to be framed in the spirit of how "not to do it," so graphically described by Charles Dickens. Continuing our comparison of the Post-office and railway, it may be pointed out that their duties are analagous. The Post-office for a certain fee agrees to carry letters; the railway agrees to carry passengers. Hence practically there is no great difference between the scope of their work. Why, therefore, should there bo any difference in working them ? To be consistent, the little window at the Post-office should be closed till fivo minutes before tho departure of a mail, and then opened for the eager crowd to push and scramble as best they might for tho stamps. This may seem absurd, but it is just what occurs daily in the railway. There is practically no reason why this should be so. If one Department of Government can manage to keep its accounts with its vouchers for payment sold by other hands than its own officers, why should not another P In oilier words, what objection is there to tho Railway Department having, like the Post-office, tickets on sale at various places in the city? Wo say none. Tho now system would bo quite as easily and economically worked as the present one, and would bo of great benefit to tho public generally. In Victoria the railway department, though not going so far as this, have yet taken a step towards it. They have abolished the pigeon-holes for issuing tickets, and instead have substituted a long broad counter at which fifty or sixty people can be served at once. This ie an improvement wo should like to see copied hero, whether tho mode of selling tickets we suggest is adopted or not. Failing the whole scheme, this part of it might be carried into effect hero with advantage. Another point is the absurd restriction which compels passengers to travel on tho clay their ticket is issued. There is no, earthly reason for this except that tho railway department consider they could not arrive at a statement of accounts unless all tho tickets issued during the day were travelled with. It seems to us that tho Government, having entered into a contract with A to convey him from a certain place to another, for which the ticket is a voucher —it is a perfect matter of indifference to them whether A travels on Monday or Thursday. They have io carry him, and one or two days' delay after the issue of tho ticket makes no difference whatever. Beside*, we take it that the passongor, by having paid his fore, has purchased the ticket, and ought, thereforo, to be entitled to proceed on his journey when he pleases. As regards the question of check upon tho issue of tho tickets, the same exists as if the ticket had beou returned by the guard ae tra> e'fled upuo, Tho last number issued for any train is boookod, and the station master can always check from tho number of tickets remaining at the end of tho day, whether the return of the number sold, is correct,

and also how tlio account stands. "When the tickets avo used, they can go into their proper places. Really the tickets are to a great extent, simply vouchers to the traveller that ho has paid his fare, and, therefore, it seems to us that no very great inconvenience would result, to the department if passengers were allowed to use their tickets when they pleased, always provided that this is done within a reasonable time to ho fixed. The same arguments almost apply to the question of making the tickets transferable. It is not a very important matter, but wo may just point out that the Government havo little or no cause to interfere with such a restriction. They, as we before pointed out, contract to carry a person a certain distance. Whether A. or B. travels on the ticket matters not, so long as only one passenger is carried, and, therefore, tho withdrawal of the restriction as to transference would do no harm. However, it is a matter of trifling important as compared with the two others. Tho main points of our suggestions resolve themselves into this: that steps should bo taken to allow of railway tickets being purchased in various parts of the city in the same way as postage stamps; that greater accommodation should be afforded at the station ticket offices, and that tickets should bo obtainable there at any time during train hours; and lastly that tickets should be used when required by the purchaser within reasonable limits as to time. Wo commend the consideration of the questions raised to Mr. Conyers. That gentleman has always shown himself most zoaloiis to promote any improvement which woidd conduce to tho comfort and convenience of tho public, and believing as we do that tho suggested alterations will bo both, wo ask him tothinkwhother ho cannot see his way clear to try them as an experiment.