THE Evening Star. PUBLISHED DAILY AT FOUR O'CLOCK P.M. Resurrexi. FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1877.

Thames Star, Volume VII, Issue 2538, 23 February 1877, Page 2

THE Evening Star. PUBLISHED DAILY AT FOUR O'CLOCK P.M. Resurrexi. FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1877.

The three Commissioners—Mr K. G. Wood, Mr J.S. Macfarlane, and Mr W. Swanson—appointed to enquire into the state of the Auckland railroads, have commenced their sitting, Mr F. B. Passmore, Superintendent Engineer for constructed railways, and Mr Macdonald, General Manager of the Auckland and Waikato railway, being present to give information respecting their departments, if required to do so. Any of. the public who had aught to complain of were invited to give evidence, but the only one who presented himself on the first day was the Hod. H. Chamberlin, whose principal cause of complaint was (in his opinion) the excessive charges made, both for passengers and parcels. As an instance that these high charges act prejudicially both to the interests of the railway and the public Mr Chamberlin mentioned that at a recent sheep-fair in Auckland 13,000 or 14,000 sheep were brought in, and only about 1000 of these were brought in by rail, the remainder being driven.in byroad, the cause being, that the tariff charged was too high. Mr Chamberlin also instanced the rates at which, packages were charged as being excessive, and concluded by saying that he thought it would be better to decrease the charges for a year or so, even if the railway was worked at a further loss, so as to get people in the way of using it. One witness was examined on the first day. On the second day when the place of sitting was changed to the Britotnart Railway Station, no les3 than five witnesses volunteered to "give evidence " (i.e., make complaints) exclusive of one of the Commissioners, Mr Swanson, who instanced one case as pertinent as any to the matter before them. The complaints though they varied, in matter of detail were of same kind, viz., the excessive charges which prevented complainants from using, the line as means of transport for themselves, goods, or cattle. Mr Martin complained of the charges for sheep and timber, stating that in the one case he preferred to sell his sheep in the Waikato to paying for their carriage ; in the second, that the carriage of timber he had bought cost him as much as the timber was vorth. He added that if the charges were " reasonable" he would probably pay £100 per annum to the railway for the carriage of sheep alone. Mr J. P. King, the next witness, though he also corroborated the two former ones. as to the excessive price charged for sheep and cattle and timber, yet added this that the fares for passengers, on which subject neither of the two previous witnesses had touched, were too high, and made suggestions such as those regarding Sunday excursions trains, &c, which were not relevant to the point, in that they treated more of what might be done instead of suggesting remedies for what had been done. He considered the fares for passengers too high, but, perhaps, his wisest suggestion was that each passenger should be allowed a certain amount of luggage. The necessity of some such allowance being made was rendered obvious by what was said by Mr Swanson, who stated he had heard of a case in which a tradesman who was travelling wai charged freight for a tin of paint which he was carrying in his hand!. Mr Rawlinson ftave an instance in which prohibitory rates were charged for the carriage of 48 square yards of scoria, viz., £14. Mr Rutherford's grievance was also regarding freight, and he gave some instances in which he had been either surcharged in one case or underchargedin another. He was charged, he says, 5d for a box full of butter sent from Drury, and 2s 6d for the same box returned empty. The same witness bought a colonial safe for 7s fid, and had to pay 10s for its carriage. This evidence concluded the second day's sitting. Of the witnesses examined at Onehonga, four in number, threa made the usual complaint of excessive charges, and one of the inconvenience of the time table, which was notadapted to the requirements of business people. At Ellerslie two were examined. Mr Graham complained of the charges, and stated that the people should be encouraged to come and settle on the line, and Mr Scarrott made simil?r complaints. Thus far, then, has the enquiry proceeded. It has lasted already three days, and twelve witnesses have been examined, who all, with one exception, have complained of excessive charges ; besides these twelve there was a written complaint sent from the Waikato to the effect that the charges made for the conveyance of flour and grain left hardly any profit for the grower. Now these complaints are substantiated by particular instances in which the excessive charge complained of has been made, and-it was not denied by the railway authorities present that the facts were as stated ; they may therefore be taken to be correct. Now, looking at the general question of railways in this colony, how that they were made out of money bor-

rawed on the security of the people, and which the people will have to repay, for the avowed purpose of increasing facilities/of travelling $nd providing proper means for the transport of merchandise, it does 'seem as if reform; in the matter of charges was a thing to be desired. Those who maintain that the charges are as low as can be —and Mr Wood said that the railway was already being worked at a loss—argue that a cer- ■ tain sum was spent on the railway which the railway must repay, it doe's not do so even with the present charges, much less therefore will it do so if these are lower. This is their argument. Granted that it is necessary that the railway should be made to pay, are those in authority going the best way to make it do so ? The mass of the evidence goes to show that if the charges were lowered more traffic would be sent, and the railway reap a larger return by the increased number of passengers and goods, thus benefiting both the 1 public and the railway funds at the same time. It is, in fact, the old story of small profits and much business done, as against large profits with very little doing. Which is best? The question has long been answered in favour of the former. Besides .this, taking the railway as only a part of the internal economy of the country it must also be considered what is the .^best . way : to work, it so as to conduce to the prosperity of New Zealand a whole. Surely this is best done by giving through its means increased facilities for settling and opening up the" country. There are many who would go in much more eagerly for the cultivation of land ; contiguous: to railways were there any inducements held out to them by the prospect of getting their produce conveyed to Auckland at cheap rates, and these things "which are necessaries to them brought out at a moderate charge. As the outlying districts increased in numbers and prosperity: so would the value of the land be enhanced, the traffic, as a matter of consequence, more than doubled, and that line, which i'snow being carried on at a loss, return not only its working expenses, but even an interest on the capital expended. ;