NEW ZEALAND RAILWAYS.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2548, 21 May 1881, Page 2

NEW ZEALAND RAILWAYS.

The following letter from Sir Francis Dillon Bell appeared in the “Economist” on March 5, last; — TO THE EDITOR OF THE ECONOMIST. Sir,— l ask your permission to say a few words on the point which I think should bo remembered in any comparison of railway expenditure as between Australia and New Zealand. In New South Wales, Victoria, and South Australia, the settlement of the country gradually extended from the original centres of colonisation, which have now grown into the cities of Sydney, Melbourne, and Adelaide. The Governments of each of these colonies were able from the first to choose in whatever railway system they might adopt, and how far they would take their lines from the centres into the interior. They knew that wherever they went the metropolis of each colony would always be the point on which the lines must converge; and this condition of their geographical position will always remain because Sydney, Melbourne, and Adelaide must always be the shipping ports for the produce of the three colonies. The Governments could begin, as, in fact, they did, with some line starting from the metropolis and could choose their own time tor extending their railway systems in any direction they pleased. It was not so with us. The colonisation of New Zealand went on, as it was sure to do in islands having a long coast line and so many fine harbors, from several points at once. We founded a series of detached settlements, so separate from one another that at one time letters were not longer in coming from England than they were in passing be ween Auckland and Otago. There never was a centre of colonisation. To this day there is no metropolis; Wellington is the seat of Government, but is a smaller town than Christchurch or Dunedin. When, therefore, we first begin to think whether there should be railways in New Zealand we were forced, by a condition of our geographical position, quite opposite to the one that existed in Australia, either to have a railway system meeting the wants of our detached settlements, or to give up having any at all. Our insular position, in fact, exacted a great deal more of line-building than would have served an equM population in any Australian continent. Our 1200 miles of line should be attributed, then, less to extravagance than to conditions from which we were not free. We always said that from every tract of our land whose produce we enabled to be brought cheaply to our many harbors, ws could raise more than the Australians could raise from an equal extent of theirs. If you say that we have been “ going much too fast” in the friendly rivalry that is developing the wealth of the whole Australian group, please not to forget what a temptation to go fast Na'ure has given to a people, which possesses so genial a climate and so fertile a soil. —I am &c., Francis Dillon Bell.