THE TRAMWAY QUESTION.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LV, Issue 230, 17 February 1913, Page 6

THE TRAMWAY QUESTION.

iikply to .mi;, black,

Mr. Waller Rewley writos: —I have mul with interest .Mr. Black's reply to liiy le'.ler of .lanuary :>i). and have pleasure in replying to i|., a . s it i s „ 0 t die>tigured with (lie vulgar abuse and in' simuition-) that are so commonly mistaken for argument. I equally dislike, with Mr. J Slack, a newspaper correspondence, but it has been left to mc to elicit information that should have been placed before the ratepayers. I am not going to discuss the question whether Mr. Black is a prejudiced person with regard to electric traction, as it would not advance the present controversy. ' Jn referring to the matter hefore. I have simply submitted that where one's interest lies, it is only human nature to be biassed in that direction. Like many others. Mr. JJlack ignores that in all my writings I have put the question of road improvement first, and [ have never contemplated or suggested putting motor "buses on the streets in their present condition, consequently a good deal of what he has written does not in any way apply. The streets must be improved and it will be economy as far as the ordinary traffic alone is 'concerned to improve them by the properly carried out use of tar, as being a cheap and yet an efficient method. Mr. Black ran find 110 justification for saying I have unbounded confidence in the motor 'bus, but as a motorist of seven years' standing and a reader of several motor journals for over nine years, I have watched with interest and appreciation the progress that motor traction has made, and is making. T advance that it has made enormous strides, in particular in the last two or three years, and is still advancing, and that the cost of operating the motor 'bus is now very considerably below that of the electric tram when under fair conditions, after allowing a very heavy percentage for depreciation. That, considering the progress being made by the motor 'bus and the stationary condition of the electric tram as to the reduction of cost of operating (it is progressing rapidly as to the cost of installation and renewals. 15 per cent, additional in the last two years), it is in the highest degree inadvisable to inaugurate a tram system at present, more particularly in view of there being a great doubt as to the power available, the inevitable loss that will accrue for an indefinite time, the difficulty of raising the money at present, and lastly, that there is no urgency to justify the large sum contemplated to be spent for a very doubtful benefit.

Mr. Black's reasoning with regard tn the wear of road surfaces sounds excellent theory and somewhat tcrvihle t ; 'l examined. The fact remains, however, that motor services are being ex- , tended all over the world. The matter of road wear if as bad as represented bv Mr. Black would no doubt be serious for the local body if there were a large number of 'buses running, but I hardly think that Mr. Black will advance that an equivalent number of 'buses to the number of tram ears proposed will damage the road annually to the amount of the interest 011 the difference between the cost of the 'buses, say £SOOO. and the tramway expenditure of C;>5.000. which amounts to t'2.">oo. If a private company were running the 'buses and ; seriously damaging the streets, then the ratepayer would have good cause of 1 complaint. Moreover, it has always been the case when anv revolutionary novelty has. been introduced that there! have appeared to be difficulties that have threatened its success, but if the thing has met a popular want, the con- I ditions have found a way of adjusting themselves, with the result that the drawbacks have disappeared. This has,' in fact, been going on with the motor 'bus. as the weight has been reduced by one-half in recent years, with the result that wear both of tvres and road is reduced not to one-half but to one-fourth. With regard to the non use of pneumatic J tyres to which Mr. Black refers. I have > always understood that they have not ,been used owing to the advantages for] slow traffic not being sufficient to com- J pensate for extra expense of manufacture. liability to puncture and bursting when only partially worn, and extra labor of inflation. The solid tyre is free from these disadvantages, but has the drawback of less resiliency, which is not a serious defect for speeds of under l."> miles per hour. On the other band, it is more economical. From latest re- > ports, commercial synthetic rubber is | lnoke-1 upon as likelv to be achieved very I shortly, ami would revolutionise the cost'l of motor traffic. With regard to my figures of loss, 1 have already dealt with the gross loss of £1:559 in my reply to Mr. McLeod. T think few of the ratepayers realised that there was such a loss to be met. as it did not appear 011 the surface of the reports placed before the public. I have now to ,add a further amount to it. as in Mr. Clark's letter I notice that even lie believes that the population of Westown. Vogeltown and Avenue Road, amounting to !>OO II don't know whether he includes Frankley Road), will only be partially served. Now, if we allow that, the whole 90ft will expend /is per head annually, which is I think a very full allowance, for wc must remember that every baby in arms is counted as a traveller. we have 12s per head io deduct front the revenue which has been calculated 011 a total population of ToOO. This will mean adding £>4o to the gross loss making a total of £IOOO. Against this there is the £2OO for advertising. and Mr. Black's estimate of £IOOO additional revenue from increased traffic. T may point, out that £IOOO represents an increase of 240.000 one penny sections. Mr. Black'- remarks about the increase <>f population resulting in n motor 'bus system creating greater wear and tear of fhe roads, calls my attention to fhe fact. Iha I he has neglected to add anything to flic expenses when that £IOOO of increased traffic eventuates, as increase of income from increased traffic must necessarily lie all ended by increased expense, v.'li'rh facf has been overlooked hitherto.

regard fo Mr. Black's last paragraph. referring to the increase of population benefitfing a motor 'bus system, lie merely states what is obvious fo everyone, when he says it will increase fhe wear of the roads, but when he goes on 10 assume the inefficiency of the '■transit system with its accompanying imaginary evil he simply begs the whole uiie-fion and in mv opinion shows most distinct bias in such an utterance. Tn conclusion. T would like to ask Mr. Black two questions:—TTas he made any independent examination of the water power available, and. does he know of nnv town in the world of even double our population that has installed an electric tramway system, and if so. with what result?