THE GLOBE. MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 1880. POLITICAL RAILWAYS.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 2051, 20 September 1880, Page 2

THE GLOBE. MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 1880. POLITICAL RAILWAYS.

The very lamentable accident on the Rimutaka line has given rise to a number of articles in the press of the country which are decidedly remarkable. It has, in many quarters, been seriously asserted that the accident was a description of judgment on the fact that that particular lino was a political job- Amongst other journals the “’Timaru Herald,” which is not generally given to talking “ buncombe,” seriously said in a late issue : “ Events such as that which we have to deplore to-day will open the eyes of the people to the evils of political railways,” and it draws attention to the danger of travelling over the line from Blneskin to Dunedin as another example of the evils of lines not constructed on pure principles of political morality. Now, without in any way denying that these two lines —namely, the Rimutaka and Blueskin lines—were political jobs, yet the line of argument we have alluded to seems decidedly ridiculous. To point the moral of the heinousness of logrolling by any allusion to such an accident as occurred on the Rimutaka line entails entering into such a field of speculation as may end in an alarming bathos. Granted that the two lines are dangerous in the extreme, yet they are not dangerous because they are political lines. The log-rollers, who were the prime movers in their construction, would, no doubt, have been delighted if, consistently with their pet schemes, these lines had run over country as flat as a pancake. It was a pure accident that their lines were compelled to be dangerous ones. It might have happened exactly the contrary. The line built on log-rolling principles might, have been the safe line, and the politically pure line the unsafe one. The country about Mount Cargill and that about Blueskin were both formed some considerable time before the initiation of Sir Julius Yogel’s Public Works scheme, and with no view to the commercial value of the respective routes. That a lino by way of the former would be more safe than that by the Blueskin country is, as it has turned out, decidedly unlucky, but to lay the deaths that occurred on the Rimutaka at the door of the log-rollers is to place a burden on their shoulders which they are not entitled to boar, more particularly as, when their lines were first discussed, the danger of the undertakings was not prominently brought forward as a reason against the schemes. To connect in any way whatever the late accident with the immorality of political railways would lead to serious consequences. Carried to its logical conclusion it would result in every passenger over any line being led to examine the political grounds on which such line had been contracted. Were they found to be at all doubtful ho would either have to

give up Ms journey or to travel with the knowledge that, by using such a nefarious undertaking for his own advantage, he was running a decided risk, and might, indeed, be condoning the principles on which the line was made. Moreover, the passenger who was injured by any accident on such a line would, if the idea started once gained firm possession of the public mind, gain but scant sympathy at the hands of the public, oven if he were altogether oblivious of the early history of the line. “Ho should have known better than to travel on such a sink of iniquity ” would bo the general verdict. The individuals on whom the tower in Siloam fell were considered by the Jews to be egregious sinners because they happened to bo crushed by that faultily constructed erection. The victim of a railway accident on a job line ” might be looked upon in somewhat the same light. If he had not known the early history of the line before he started ho ought to have done so; either ho was culpably ignorant, or he was condoning for private purposes the immorality of the original undertaking, and the accident was a judgment. The propounders of this curious theory are, we doubt, well intentioned. They wish to point a moral, but “ fair play is a jewel,” and their present line of argument will not hold water.

THE TRAMWAY AND THE CABS.

It is remarkable that the City Council should have allowed the present dispute between tho cabmen and the Tramway Company to continue. The puVlio are incovenienced to a great degree, and yot tho City Council, who are the conservators of their privileges, stand by and do nothing. So far as can he gathered, the position is that the Tramway Company has receded from the position taken up by it, and tho proposal of the cabmen does not appear to have been considered at all. As we before pointed out, the proper line of conduct for the City Council is clear. They have a duty to perform to tho citizens —a duty which they ought to do without fear, favour, or affection. Councillor Bishop has made a proposition which appears to ns to got over the whole difficulty. This is, that the cabs should be allowed to stand in to the footpath to tho westward. Of one thing there can be no doubt, and that is, that the Tram way Company are illegally running on that part of tho line which cuts through the cabstand. It is not shown on the official plans, nor is it in the Order in Council. So that they are, without doubt, trespassers. It seems, therefore, rather cool of the Company to arrogate to itself, under these circumstances, the right to dictate to the City Council what shall or shall not be done. Let the Council to-night consider the subject in all its hearings, and decide upon a course which shall have for its object the conserving of tho public convenience. Once decided upon, then tho Council must vigorously, and despite the fear of the chairman of the Tramway Company which appears to paralyze them, insist on their decision being carried out.