RAILWAY MANAGEMENT.

Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2610, 18 August 1882, Page 4

RAILWAY MANAGEMENT.

The following correspondence has been handed to us for publication : Sir, —Accompanying this I heg to send yon copies of the two last letters that I have addressed to the Non. the Minister of Public Works on this question, by direction of the committee of the Chamber of Commerce, and I also beg to hand you herewith copies of irespactivo replies to these letters. F These two laconic communications embrace all the encourage meat that the Government ftag yat thought proper to hold out with respect to the redress of the serious grievances brought under its notice, and as it is very necessary that the community should know that their interests in this important ore being persistently ignored,! shall feel obliged if you will be good enough to publish the correspondence. I am, sir. yours, faithfully, W.' Ohbybtall, President, Canterbury Chamber of Commerce. Christchurch 17uh August, 1882,

Canterbury c hambar of Commerce, Christchurch, lOkh July, 3882. Tha Hon. the Minister for Public Works,

Wellington. I Sir, —At the requFst of the-committee of the Chamber I beg to draw yonr attention to the rate t f railway charges incident to the transhipment of gooua at Fort Lyttelton. These charges are as follows •. Goods discharged into trucks and taken direct to another vessel, per ton. Is 6d. Goods discharged into Gladstone Pier shed -Handling in and out of shed, per ton, la ; haulage and handling at ship’s aide, per ton, Is 6d Goods landed into tracks, hauled lo railway station sheds —lnwards, haulage, including handling at ship's side, per ton, la 6d ; outwards, haulage and handling at ship’s side, la Gd. Storage, per ton per week, if goods in store more than three days. &0., 2s. Whan no charge is made for storage a charge is made for handling at shed, per ton. Gd. In addition to those charges, there is to bo added half wharfage rates, as per Harbour Board’s schedule dated 19th. December, 1881. In the case, for example, of goods destined for Timaru, that arrive by ships from London, it very rarely happens that they can just be discharged when there is a vessel in readiness into which to tranship them, and the almost invariable result, therefore, is that goods have to be hauled to the railway sheds, there to await an opportunity for transhipment. This involves, as yon will observe, a charge of 3s per ton for haulage and labor, and 2s per ton per week for storage, in addition to 2a per ton for wharfage, and in the case of heavy or bulky gooda the total charge of 7s per ton (for even a detention Of one week) becomes almost prohibitory. _ A considerable amount of hardship is also experienced in the case of produce destined for London and sent to Lyttelton for transhipment. In consequence of the larger number of vessels that load at Lyttelton for London than at any ether port in the colony, produce is very frequently sent from other ports to Lyttelton to be transhipped, and the heavj charges made there by the railway department are frequently complained of by shippers, and referred to as being heavier than at any other port in the colony. The committee is of opinion that the charges made by the Bailway Department in respect of haulage and storage are very much greater than oan be justified by the work done, and 1 have been desired to request, if you would be good enough to give the matter your consideration, with the view of makisg redactions. In addressing you on this subject, the committee baa further desired me to suggest whether it would not be in the interest of the Bailway Department, as it would be in that of the public, to fix such special rates from Lyttelton (or say from ship’s side there) to Timarn, as wonld secure for the railway all the merchandise that is now transhipped at Lyttelton for that destination. If the rates were made, say 10a to 16s for heavy gooda, such as coal and cement, and 17s 6d to 20a for general merchandise, the railway wonld donbtless be invariably adopted in preference to water carriage, and for the journey of over 100 miles the committee ventures to think that the rates mentioned wonld admit of a good profit being realised by the department. I might also add that if snch a redaction in rates ware made the gooda that are otherwise carried by water from Lyttelton to Timaru would not only be secured to the railway, but many of the sailing vessels that are now sent direct to Timaru with coal would be directed to Lyttelton to have their cargoes discharged there oO4jaSorwarded by rail. The committee therefors trust on these_ questions being considered the Government will see the jnslice and advisability of making the desired concessions. I have the honor to be, sir. Your obedient servant, W. Chbtstalx,, President.

Bailway Department, Wellington, N Z , J4lh July, 1882 Sir,—l am directed by the Minister for Public Works to acknowledge the receipt of jour letter of 10th instant, drawing attention to the matter of railway charges incident to the transhipment of goods at Port Lyttelton and to inform yon that the subject will receive consideration. I h ive the honor to be, sir, Your obedient servant, N. W. Webby, Under Secretary for Railways. W. Chrystall. Esq , President Chamber of Commerce, Christchurch.

Canterbury Chamber of Commerce, Christchurch, 22nd July, 1882. The Hon. the Minister for Public Works,

Wellington. Sir,— Referring to my letter of the 10th inat., having since gathered from the report of the General Manager of Bailways that he does not concur in the advisability of adopting differential rates, I would now beg to inquire, at the request of the committee of this Chamber, whether Government would be ffiaposad.ttLmrae the desired concession in ratea;b«*?reah Lyttelton and Timarn and vie? versa, under the head of a j,‘,lqpaj -..rate#~On some other sections of

2 MSpMfflway3 tho Sovemment would appear to have adopted local rates under surrounding conditions that apparently admit of few arguments being reasonably advanced in support of aneb a coarse as compared with the strong reasons that could be adduced for establishing a local rate between Lyttelton and Timaru. For example, I would beg to refer to the local rate for lima and timber between Milborn, in Otago, and Christchurch. This distance is 262 miles, and the rate 19s 3d per ton, or equal to J of one penny per mile for the whole distance. It oonld hardly, I imagine, be reasonably argued in respect of this local rate from Milbnrn that profit to railway and advantage to the general public of the South Island were the first considerations.

But, in desiring to draw yonr attention to the apparent advisability of establishing a local rate between Timarn and Lyttelton, the committee concludes that the argument of profit to the Department is cue that it may urge with the fullest confidence. As I have endeavored tc point ont in my letter before referred to, there would seem to be no donbt that the department could reduce the rate to a point that would have the effect of securing for the railway almost all the goods and produce that are now carried by water between Lyttelton and Timarn, besides a considerable portion of the produce that cow goes by sea from Timaru to Port Chalmers. It would indeed seem to the committee that the community in this district have a most reasonable ground for complaint that the railway system should not be permitted to render all the local service that it can legitimately perfe-m with profit to itself, and the committee would beg most respectfully to bring under the notice of Government the apparent injustice and anomaly of sacrificing the interests of the trading public and the profit that the railway might legitimately earn, in order that effect may be given to considerations that would seem to have no proper bearing on the question. I am also directed by the committee to draw yonr attention again to the railway tariff affecting the carriage of grain and other farm produce cn the Canterbury lines. The small concession made last season still leaves those rates so high as to be a heavy tax upon the ■farming industry. The main argument, however, that the committee would wish to urge in asking Government to make farther reductions, it the relative email cost of hanlage on these .lines as compared with that on the lines of 'steeper grades. The committee understand that the relative Coat of haulage is recognised in England and other countries eb the proper condition for regulating the mileage rate, and there would seem to be no valid reason why the same condition should not determine rates in this colony. The committee therefore trust that Government wiil be induced to make a farther material reduction in the rates for grain on the Canterbury lines, and the committee would also earnestly hope that Government will see the advisability of adopting a local rata between Lyttelton and Timarn, as suggested in this letter.

I have the honor to be, air, Tour obedient servant, W. Chktbtali., President. Bailway Department, Wellington, N.Z., 29th July, 1881. I Sir,-—I am directed by the Minister for Public 'works to acknowledge the receipt of your letter dated 22nd July, in which you recommend a redaction in the rates for carriage of goods between Lyttelton and Timarn. I nave the honor to be, sir.

Tour obedient servant, N. W. Webby, Under Secretary for Hail ways, Ihe Secretory Chamber of Commerce, Christchurch.