South Canterbury Times, WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 24, 1881.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2629, 24 August 1881, Page 2

South Canterbury Times, WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 24, 1881.

SECOND EDITION

The Railway Construction and Land Bill takes a new departure in Public Works. The main principle of the measure is that it will endow private railway companies with land equal in value to one-third of the cost of the lines constructed. The concession is most certainly of a very solid description. At the outset wc must confess that we do not altogether like the Bill. The granting of large tracts of country in aid of railway construction is of American origin. It is, however, nonothewor.se of that. Still the application of the principle has not proved a blessing to the people of the Great Republic. Powerful monopolies have been created, and these monopolies have managed to work matters to their own advantage. The Pacific Railway Company has had for years a paramount influence in California. It has controlled the State Legislature and bribed the Press. In fact, its Board of Directors are the rulers of the State. The conditions of the grant have been ignored at the Company's pleasure. It does not,however, necessarily follow that a similar Company would wield such immense influence in New Zealand. With' all his “ blow,” a citizen of the United States will submit to more injustice and disregard of his rights than an Englishman, and is undoubtedly a more patient being than the average colonial. The danger of a railway company exercising undue inlluonce in New Zealand lies in the disjointed nature of public opinion in these islands. Wc suppose if the present Bill becomes law, the first three lines constructi'd will he the Otago Central, the Canterbury-West Coast, and the Wellingtou-Manawatu railways. Now, the Company which owned, say, the Otago Central might ignore the conditions of its charter without exciting any indignation in Canterbury and Wellington, and vice rer*a. As for Westland and other places which had no railways constructed under the Act, it is not likely that they would take much interest in the matter. The land had been granted the companies, and there was an end of it. But there is no question but that the three companies would work in common. Indeed, it is quite probable that if the money were raised outside the colony-, the hulk of the shareholders in the three concerns would bo the same persons. There is little likelihood of the capital being subscribed in the colony. That will not he an unmixed evil. Railway companies whose capital was raised in the colony, we have little hesitation in saying, would control both branches of the Legislature.

Mr Macamlrew is of opinion that if the Railway Construction Bill is passed, it will remain a dead-letter , that there will not be a mile of railway constructed under it. He may be right, notwithstanding the tempting nature of the Government subsidy. The Companys’ railways will at the commencement traverse uninhabited or sparsely populated country. Even with the subsidy, to pay the shareholders six per cent, on the outlay, the linos would, after deducting wording expenses, have to pay four per cent, on the total cost of construction. The value of the land, however, is to be - fixed at the price it would fetch if such railway works were not contemplated, and that in all cases the land is to be situated within fifteen miles of the proposed Tines. Looking at it in the above light it is quite possible that the company would be recouped the entire cost of construction by tbe sale of tbc laud. In that case the colony would have the worst of it. The Premier, in introducing tbe Bill, used some most extraordinary arguments. He said that by giving tbe land tbe colony became no poorer. He bad better tell that to tbe English creditor. In floating loans it has always been tbe custom to parade before the eyes of money lenders tbe millions of acres of virgin soil which yet remain the property of the Crown in New Zealand. Those acres have always been looked upon as the most valuable security for the debt. The constructed railways, of course, form another security, but then the return from them only represents f}-] 7 percent on £10,000,000 out of a total debt of about £30,000,000. It is a strange doctrine, indeed, that a state would become no poorer by parting with its assets. In this connection, it must be borne in mind that Mr Hall and the supporters of the Bill contemplate that it will be foreign capitalists who will take advantage of the Railway Construction Bill. For our own part we would much rather sec the railway system of the colony completed by the Government. The English

speculators will of course expect to make money out of their undertakings, and colonists will have -to find the profit. We agree with Mr Macandrew that by granting land to the value of £■2,000,000 the colony will be paying too dear for its whistle. The Public Works policy, so far, has been very successful. The Railway Construction and Land Bill contemplates a step in a dangerous direction.