Why Not Reorganize the Railways ?
Page 4
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
A contributor is ofopinion that now is the time to focus public attention On the Shortcommg.s of Britain's innumerable railway systems. Everything to-day is in the melting pot. The railways are already under' State control. Any wholesale improvement in their Ol-ganizeitibn should .bring with it the 111:01"C'extended use by them of commercial motorS.—En.
As we live in such stirring times, and the subject of the alteration of the " personnel" of the Board of Trade has been touched upon by more than one business authority lately, it is my purpose to endeavour to show, to some extent, that it is a vital necessity that an attempt should be made at once to revolutionize the whole of our railway system. It amounts to an axiom to-day that the combination of the Board -of Trade, the Railway Clearing House, and the united Boards of the railway companies of G:eat Britain form a clog, in normal times, on the wheels of commercial Progress. Put the whole of our railways to-day under the guidance of one real live man, with a complete set of able subordinates, convert those railways into one real live railway, and, gradually, there will disappear the almost criminal chaos in transport, general facilities, and 'charges vvhieh, to-day, forms a disgrace to any civilized country -let alone to Great Britain.
Great Britain v. Germany.
It is not necessary here to do more than to touch upon the well-known and often-demonstrated fact that Germany, in her railway methods, beats us hollow in the direction of fostering trade. On the other hand, we are working to-day on the lines of more than 50 years ago, when railway managers admitted that their calculations of charges were, to a large extent, " rule of thumb," with the underlying principle (a pernicious one) of "what the traffic will bear."
Contrast our little country, with its network of railways, each with its separate management, fighting each other for 50 years, then, for the last 15 or 20 years, pursuing a general policy of acquiring and strangling competitive canals, gradually abolishing competition amongst themselves, cutting out facilities here and privileges there, adding charges for services hitherto rendered free, with one general policy of grab for shareholders and highly-paid officials. 'Contrast this with Germany, under State control, affording merchants daily such facilities in order to foster their trade (particularly foreign trade) as would make otu autocratic and conservative railway managers stand aghast and tremble for their safety before their shareholders, if so much as a breath of such a system were named here.
The Fallacy or Our Railway Charges.
The Government, after some years of inquiry, put into force what is known as the Railway Rates and Charges Order Confirmation Acts of 1891-1892."This set out the titles of the main and jointcompanies (nearly 300—just think of it!) whowere to be parties to the Acts, and,alSo set out, for each main company, schedules of maximum rates Which they might charge for the carriage of the different classes of goods on their railways. For the period since then-24 years— these charges have been generally maintained, ignoring any -changing conditions in various trades, and having one object, viz., railway dividends. Merchandie under this schedule is classified into eight classes, A, B, C, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. Class A is the lowest (or cheapest); Class 5 the highest (or dearest). Taking Class 5 for an example, we are told that, for the first 20 miles or any part of such distance the charge is 4.30d. per ton per mile, for the next 30 miles or any part 3.70d. per ton per mile, for next 50 miles or any part 3.25d. per ton per mile, and for the remainder of the distance 2.50d. per ton per mile. Here comes the fallacy, independent of the " steepness" of the charges.
A22 _flaying all the various main and joint lines in our mind, we are told that if for, say, 120 miles of journey the traffic passes over two, three, or more lines of railway owned by companies other than the one the traffic first started upon, We are to go over the same operation two or three more times for each Company ! For example, A to H is 120 miles. Now, A to B is 10 miles, B to C is 15 miles, C to D is 12 miles, then comes another railway company's lines. A to D is charged under the first schedules of three separate charges : this absorbs 37 miles. Then you start again, absorb some more miles, then again, and, say, absorb the remainder, until the 120 miles is completed! Asking why the whole 120 miles cannot be charged as one journey, divided into 20 miles, 30 miles, 50 miles, and the remainder of the journey (20 miles), you will be told that is not the rule, and you can do no more—but pay.
A book might be written on the subject, but the above notes, combined with the general knowledge that all these interchanges mean delays in transit (another indirect charge on the traffic), show that our present system is. not only an absurdity, but an everlasting menace to progressive business.
Briefly, the whole of .the mileage of the railway lines of Great Britain, the present rates and charges, the classification of goods the managers and staffs, need "scrapping," the whole bag and baggage, and from the remains the best to be taken and completely remodelled in the interests of the trading community.
How Shall It Be Done ?
These are big times' with big problems before us, and opportunities in heaps for big men. A dozen schemes might be formulated on paper, and not one be the right one. The main object now is to get a move on, with the following, inter alia, as desiderata.
Appointment of a Ministry of Railways with complete powers of control and the ultimate object, if necessary, of State purchase. Model the railways as one railway, with equal charges for equal distances in any direction. A special eye to the fostering of outward Overseas traffic, and, where necessary, safeguards against Overseas traffic inwards.
A real working committee of experts, half composed of representative business men and half of traffic managers of large business firms (with a subordinate picked clerical -staff), whose decisions, when passed by the Chief of Ministry, shall be final. A sub-committee of accountants, whose work would be to tabulate the changes in charges, compare With previous revenue of railway -companies, and submit basis of settlement to committee above.
While no guarantee could be made of maintenance of present dividends to the railway companies, the shareholders might be given the opportunity of changing their present scrip for a fixed rate of interest, to be arranged by the Government under the advice of the Ministry of Railways. The material is available for the formation of a Ministry of Railways, and the business men of Great
Britain will never have a better opportunity of asserting themselves, puttingthe vital matter of transport in such order as will help every business house to withstand the coming competition of Germany, and for ever abolishing the crying scandal of the strangulation of business by monopolistic. and autocratic railway Boards. The time is now, and I sincerely hope the matter will be taken up by business men and Parliament, and,
this time, pushed through to an actuality. P.K.