WHY NOT OPERATE THE SAMUEL REPORT ? [To the Editor
of the SPECTATOR.] Sia,—Under the above somewhat misleading title Mr. Roberts continues his attack upon the private ownership of railway wagons in your issue of April 20th. If he is under the impres- sion that the Commission recommended the prohibition of private wagons or their compulsory acquisition by the rail- ways,' he is mistaken. What the Commissioners did say was that " the proposals which we make . . proceed not by way of prohibition but by way of inducement. This appears to be here, as in so many matters, the better course."
In so far as the Commission recommended the voluntary pooling of wagons, this is being carried out on an increasing scale by groups of collieries in the same locality ; and this method, which retains the control of the wagons in the bands of the owners of them, combines the efficient use of the wagons with regular colliery working.
Mr. Roberts quotes comparative figures of railway rates on coal in this country and in Belgium, and then assumes that " many shillings per ton could be saved " on the British rates by the adoption of the' common ownership of railway wagons. He scornfully dismisses the estimate of ld. per ton, presented to the Samuel Commission, as the maximum pos- sible saving from this source, as being absurd " and prepared by " theorists who possess no first hand experience in railway traffic operations."
May I remind him, and your readers, that the estimate was that of Sir Ralph Wedgwood, speaking in his official capacity as General Manager of the L.N.E.R., Chairman of the General Managers' Conference, and on behalf of the rail- way companies generally ? Sir Ralph Wedgwood may surely, claim at least as much first hand experience in railway traffic operation as Mr. Roberts !—I am, Sir, &c., - - Pump Gam.
5 Neat Court, Lincoln's Inn, W.C. 2.
Previous page
