83

1.—9

port Section, and the first occasion in the history of railway management in New Zealand in which other than a proportion of a mileage-rate has been allowed or claimed for " way-leave," or a differential rate has been levied on one affreighter as against another. When, in 1878 or 1879, the Westport Coal Company completed their private line at a cost of about £8,000, and junccioned on to the Koranui Company's line at the Wellington Mine, Waimangaroa, the rate levied on their coal for haulage over the Koranui Company's line, a distance of 1 mile and 3 chains, was fixed at 3d. per ton, of which 2d. went to the Government for haulage, and Id. to the Koranui Company for " way-leave." The Westport Company subsequently purchased the Koranui Company's line for £14,000, and the through-rate from Conn's Creek to the Government railway-line at Waimangaroa, a distance of 1 mile 56 chains, is now reduced to Id. per ton for the entire distance, the Government contenting themselves with -J-d. for haulage, the other Jd. going to the Westport Coal Company for " wayleave," and it is open to any person or Company to send coal along that line at that rate. If 3d. per ton was considered a sufficient charge fifteen years ago for both haulage and " wayleave " over the Koranui Company's line, 1 mile 3 chains in length, and costing £14,000, and Id. per ton is considered a sufficient charge at the present time for both haulage and "way-leave " over the entire length of the Waimangaroa branch lines, a distance of 1 mile 56 chains, and costing £18,000, it is obvious that Id. per ton should be deemed sufficient to charge for both haulage and " wayleave " from our bins and over 1 mile 22 chains of the Mokihinui Company's line, even although their own value of £16,500 for the said section should be adopted. It may be objected, that the Westport Coal Company are putting out more coal than we are likely to do for some time; but in 1879, when their rate was fixed at 3d. per ton over the Koranui branch-line, their chen output was less than 200 tons per day. However, be that as it may, quantity cannot affect the question to be decided, which is not one of haulage only, but of " way-leave " also, and in the latter case the smaller our output the less will be the wear and tear on the Mokihinui Company's line. That the haulage-rate now sought to be levied on our coal is excessive and unreasonable is further, emphasized by an Order in Council published in the New Zealand Government Gazette, dated the 12th April, 1888, fixing the charges to be made by the Mokihinui Company for carriage of goods, minerals, and passengers over their line while it was a quite independent line and unconnected with the Government or any other railway. The said Order in Council authorises the Mokihinui Company to charge Is. per ton for the haulage of coal for a similar distance to that now proposed to be used by us, together with terminal charges for loading and unloading. But there is a proviso attached to the order which stipulates that when the Ngakaw.au extension is completed to Mokihinui (which has been done) " then these charges shall be reduced as regards all through-traffic to rates not exceeding 20 per cent, over the ordinary rates, fares, and charges for haulage of all classes of goods and passengers, &c, prevailing on New Zealand Government railways of similar character. When neither loading nor unloading is done by the Company then no terminal charge to be made by the Company." Under this Order the Mokihinui Company were entitled to charge Is. per ton for haulage of coal over about the same distance of line to be used by us, that Company providing rolling-stock, labour, maintenance, &c.; whereas the Commissioners propose to pay the Company Is. Id. per ton for "way-leave " only, charging 3d. per ton additional for haulage, the Commissioners finding all rolling-stock, &c, as before stated. Now, we submit that this proviso makes it quite clear that your Government intended that a considerable reduction of the haulage rates then authorised should be made on "through traffic" when the through line was completed, and that such reduction was to be based upon the ordinary rates, &c, prevailing on New Zealand Government Bail ways, and not the rates prevailing on any private line ; whereas under the proposed tariff, instead of a reduction, an increase of about 4d. per ton, or 33-J- per centum advance, is made on those rates for haulage of coal. It is also quite clear that the haulage rates authorised under the Order, and the proposed reductions under the proviso, were intended to cover the provision of rolling-stock and the working of the line by the Mokihinui Company, and not by the Commissioners. If, therefore, the Mokihinui Company were working their own line, and finding rolling-stock under the said Order, it is clear that they would have to submit to a reduction on their previous haulage rate of Is. per ton, and, further, that such reduction must bring the rates down to those prevailing on the New Zealand Government Eailways in respect of through traffic —namely, ton per mile, with 20 per cent, added. ■ As, however, the Mokihinui Company are not working the line, or finding rolling-stock, it becomes a question between the Commissioners, that Company, and ourselves, not of haulage, but of "way-leave" only, for which the Commissioners demand payment from us of Is. Id. per ton. If the aforesaid condition and proviso for reduction had been given effect to by the Commissioners in fixing the charges now appealed against, the rate for haulage and " way-leave " on coal from our bins along and over the Mokihinui Company's line to the Government railway at Mokihinui would have been reduced to 2d. per ton for the entire distance, whereas the Commissioners have increased it from Is. to Is. 4d. per ton. To put it in another form, the tariff now sought to be imposed on us by the Commissioners is Is. 2d. per ton worse for us than that provided for by the said Order in Council. If it is contended that, inasmuch as our traffic originates on our own line, that, therefore, the Order in Council does not provide for or apply to the case, and the tariff must be fixed without reference thereto, then we say, How can the Commissioners charge us Is. 4d. per ton for haulage and "way-leave" on the Mokihinui Company's line (allocating Is. Id. per ton to that company in