RAILWAY RATES AND FARES : HOME AND FOREIGN.
TrrHE new goods rates proposed by the Advisory Committee 1 will mean, in most cases, a 100 por cent. increase on the pre-war charges. The new passenger rates just imposed are mostly equal to a 75 per cent. increase. Before we grumble too much about these extra charges we ought to consider the general alteration in values, the exceptionally short hauls we enjoy in this little country, and the much greater increases, both actually and relatively, suffered by other nations. A 100 per cent. increase here is a smaller burden on trade than is a 50 per cent. increase in Germany, or a 15 per cent. increase in America.
First, let us glance at the foreign figures. In France passenger rates have advanced by 80 per cent. in the case of first class, 75 per cent. second class, and 70 per cent. third class, whilst goods rates have gone up by 140 per cont. In Belgium both
passenger and goods rates have been advanced by 100 per cent. In Italy first-class fares have been increased by 120 per cent., second by 100 per cent., and third by 60 per cent. Luggage rates have been advanced by 120 per cent., and goods rates by from 40 to 100 per cent. Portugal has increased all charges by 57 per cent., though she had little to do with the war. Even Holland has increased passenger rates by 75 per cent., and goods rates by from 70 to 140 per cent. Sweden has increased passenger fares by 200 per cent. for first class, 1.50 per cent. for second class, and 100, per cent. for third class. Goods rates have been increased by 200 per cent. Norway has advanced first-class fares by 180 per cent., second by SO per cent., and third by 60 per cent. Goods rates have been put up by 200 per cent. I have no exact or comprehensive figures for Germany or America, but I know that rates on heavy iron, steel, and engin- eering products in Germany have been advanced by at least 300 per cent. since 1914, and that in the United States steel goods which were carried from Pittsburg to New York twenty years ago for 8s. a ton are now charged 20s., and that another big advance is expected any day.
The chief point in this railway charges problem, and the one
invariably overlooked, is that of haulage distance. It is not the rate per mile but the number of miles that counts. For instance, it has been calculated that the average haul for iron- making materials—ore, coal, coke, and limestone--from mines to furnaces, and for the finished products from works to ports, is less than 30 miles in this country, against 150 miles in Germany and 500 miles in America. Thus, a rate of, say, 2d. per ton per mile is a much less burden on industry in Britain than is a rate of Id. in Germany, or a id. in the United States.
The real wonder is not that our rates are so high, but that they are so low, in consideration of our exceptionally short hauls. The wagon of goods sent the usual very short journey in this country has to be loaded and unloaded and shunted just like the truck sent the usual long trip abroad. We owe a huge debt of gratitude to our railway engineers and managers. For many years before the war our railways stood increased wages, coal costs, local rates and national taxes without any addition to their fares or rates, and they gave a greatly improved service. During the war our railways have borne the abnormal traffic strain, practically without repairs or renewals, better than the systems of any other country engaged in the war.
And just consider these points for a moment. Our railways
are the oldest in the world. As pioneers we had to build with- out special skill, without experience, without efficient appliances, without cheap iron and steel. We had all engineering problems to solve as wo went along. Other countries who built later had the benefits of our experience and of our cheap Bessemer steel. We had costly land; other countries had cheap land. Here railways were opposed; in other countries they were welcomed. In the formation of companies, the promotion of Bills in Parliament, in meeting the paltry objections of local owners and authorities—in legal squabbles and Parliamentary humbug—our railways were fleeced to the tune of £300,000,000, whilst they were charged another £100,000,000 above fair value for land and other property acquired. Interest on that has bad to be got out of traders and travellers. Moreover, our towns being so very close together, we have had to build more stations per 100 miles of track, as we have had to make more multiple track and provide more rolling stock per mile than any other country. Such are but a few of the facts which should be kept in mind when the railway problem is being discussed.
E. T. GOOD.
Previous page
