THREE BOOKS ON RAILWAY ECONOMICS.*
IT is quite possible, so we are told, that the railway system of this country may ere long be the scene of a great conflict, an Armageddon in which the opposing forces of our present dis- content& will seek to fight out their differences to a finish. For the moment we are glad to think that the danger has been avoided. Still we have to recognize that the views of the various belligerents are not easily reconciled. We read in the Times of September 1st, 1911: " Mr. W. C. Anderson, President of the Independent Labour Party, announced that the party is beginning a campaign in favour of railway nationalization. It is intended that every meeting of the party during the next few months shall deal with some phase 'of the railway question leading up to the purchase of the railway systems of this country by the State." We have met, too, among railway employers, men who declare that they would be delighted to be bought out on equitable terms, for railway management in these days is an anxious and ungrate- ful task. This attitude of renunciation happily is not seriously entertained. National interests are at stake, and the present .directors of the great railways will not selfishly abandon their post. Those who wish to understand the case of the railways and of the opponents of nationalization -cannot do better than read Mr. Pratt's excellent treatise. The zeal of the Labour Party at the present time to promote state ownership of railways must be connected with the recent abortive railway strike. It is assumed that State administra- tors would be more amenable to political and trade-union agitation than are the present boards of directors. This, however, seems by no means certain. Mr. Churchill when at the Home Office was obliged to take the line that the Govern. ment could not permit the railway service of the country to be interrupted. A State bureaucracy, made responsible for maintaining our railway service, would necessarily be an autocratic authority. This the new Syndicalist party (it is con- venient to use the term used to describe the party in France) recognizes. As we understand it, the principal point of the .Syndicalist criticism of their fellow-revolutionaries is that the triumph of nationalization or of Collectivist Socialism would bring into power the so-called " intellectuals " and Parliamentary Socialists, a class of person much more odious to them than the present race of capitalists. Mr. Anderson, of the Labour Party, may have given orders that his following is to agitate for nationalization. Will the following, when it understands the issues at stake, obey P We have seen that, under the influence of the new revolutionary movement of Syndicalism, labour has broken away from the leadership of its Parliamentary guides, and has repudiated the engagements which its reputed representatives have made for it. If they are logical they will repudiate nationalization, a thing which would at once bring them back amder the rule of their discarded leaders. It will he inter- esting to watch the development of this rift in the party counsels.
The second hook on our list is more academic and speculative. It assumes what, indeed, seems to be conceded on all hands,
• (1) Railways and Nationalisation. By Edwin A. Pratt. London: The /Nitre') Gazette. [2s. ed. net.]—(2) The Railways and the Nation : Problems and Possibilities. By W. Boland. London : T. Molter Unwin. 1s. net.] —(5) Los Chemins de For et La Greve. Par Yves Guyot. Paris : Felix Alean. ism fr.j
namely, that the present conditions under which railways have to do their work are not satisfactory, with the result that what the author calls the social advantages of cheap transport have not been put at the disposal of the public. He proposes that the railways should adopt the principle of the Post Office and abolish differential rates. It has paid the Post Office and it would probably pay the railways. His view is sup- ported by much ingenious argument. " The average passenger fare for the United Kingdom is 7d.," be tells us, and "to illustrate the principle it might be possible to charge for passenger traffic minimum fares, irrespective of distance, of 2d., Gd., and 2s. Gd. respectively for (a) local stopping trains ; (b) semi-fast trains ; (c) through express services." Would such a scheme pay P In the long run Mr. Holland thinks it would. The principal motive that influences him, however, seems to be the thought that the "primary function of a railway system is social." In other words, its object is to abolish distance and to bring the town and the country closer together. If railways are to be run in this speculative and benevolent spirit they would require to be in the bands of the State. An enormous economy, so the argument proceeds, would be effected in the expenses of management., and, if the social function of railways were recognized, there would be no reason " why the upkeep of the railways, like the upkeep of the roads, should not be made out of public taxation." All this is an interesting but not very practical speculation. The argument, however, implicitly and very justly condemns the hostile attitude which the Legislature takes up towards the railway interest. Railways have a great social function to perform ; " they are part of the circulating system of the body politic." Yet we subject them to heavy taxes on each passenger that they carry and condemn them to pay enormous sums to the local expenditure of each district through which they pass. Mr. Bolland's millennium, where transport will tend to gratuity, will be approached (it never can be reached) by a recognition by the public that railways are public benefactors and merit generous treatment, by railway companies acting on the maxim that low fares and a convenient service are the most successful way to compete with the counter-attraction of staying at home, and finally, in case of need, by such measures of Government control as will ensure that concessions made to the companies are turned to the advantage of the travelling and transporting public and not solely to that of the share- holders.
With M. Yves Guyot we return to the domain of practical politics. He gives in the first part of his book some personal reminiscences of railway disputes when he was Minister of Works. In a second division he describes the legislation which in his view is necessary to protect society from the in- jury and inconvenience which strikes inflict upon it. His pro- posals are characteristically straightforward and courageous We fear, however, that in the present temper of politicians there is not much chance of the drastic legislation suggested finding favour at present either in this country or in France. The suffering and hardship caused by these violent interruptions of industry have not yet been fully appreciated by the persons responsible. The enormous increase in the rate of infant mortality among the poorer classes in certain large towns during the period of our own recent railway strike must, we are sure, give reason to pause when the facts are fully appreciated by those who are meditating any further action of a similar kind. The country must realize that, as M. Guyot says, it cannot live on anarchy. "The error which politicians make is that they mistake, for real living forces, agitations that are merely for show. They attach much importance to the public utterances of a Pataud (the organizer of the electric-light strike), of a Renault and the other chiefs of the Confederation Gendrale dta Travail or of the Syndicate. They do not see the latent forces, silent and powerful, that come from the great majority who require security to lodge themselves, to clothe them. selves, to find their daily bread, to rear their children, and to provide for the future." Politicians forget this, and their folly allows periods of history to be appropriated by madmen. Much harm is done, but sooner or later the realities of life assert themselves. Anarchy is not in the general interest, but, as M. Guyot wittily puts it, there is danger that Monsieur Tout Is Mends eat foldouts l'llomme oublie. It is melancholy, of course, that this simple elementary lesson should still have to be learnt by civilized societies in this year of grace 1912,
and we must endeavour, amid these sad reflections, to draw such comfort as we can from M. Guyot's ever-cheery optimism.
Previous page
