45

1.—5

1047. Well, we come to the passenger tariff. As I understood you, you said that in July, 1875, the number of passengers was 45,290 ?—Yes. 1018. And in 1876 there were 53.857 ?—Tes. 1049. In July, 1877, 32,542 ?—Tes, that is right. That is the statement I made; but with regard to the last item I qualified it. 1050. Have you any reason now to believe that those figures are incorrect?—l have. 1051. Will you explain why they are not correct? —I believe the number of return tickets have not, as hitherto, been doubled. The return tickets have been counted as one, instead of two. 1052. What were they counted in 1876 ? —The return tickets were counted as two. 1053. What does that make ? How many would it help to put on to that account ? —I have reason to believe it would amount to about 11,000. In other words, it would make up the number to 41,000, instead of 32,000. 1054. The Chairman.'] It would make a difference of 11,000 ? —I am not in a position to speak positively ; I cannot now give the information. 1055. Mr. Ormond.~\ How did you arrive at this 11,000? —By getting the correct number of return tickets and doubling—adding them to the calculated number of single tickets. 1056. And is it your opinion that this 11,000 is a correct number or not?—l think that would be near it: that would make the number up for 1877 to 44,000 in round figures. 1057. Well, in 1876 tickets were issued at single fares were they not? —Tes. 1058. On Saturdays I mean ?—Tes. 1059. How were they counted ? —As double. 1060. How are they counted in this ? —lt is evident from the memorandum I have received they have treated them as single tickets. 1061. What is the proportion of travelling on Saturdays and Sundays as compared with other clays. Is it larger or smaller ?—Very much larger. 1062. Then there would be something more to add for the percentage of tickets issued on Saturdays and Sundays in July, 1877, when you treated them as singles instead of doubles ? —Tes, that is so. 1063. What number do you estimate that would be ? Can you estimate that ?—No, I cannot estimate that. 1064. The Chairman.] Is that in the 1.1,000? —I am not prepared to say even that. 1065. Were those tickets which were issued on Saturdays and Sundays treated as one single ticket ?—Yes. 1066. But during the month of July, 1877, were they treated as double or single tickets ?—As single. 1067. And the travelling on Saturdays and Sundays is larger proportionately than on other days of the week ? —That is so as to Saturdays. 1068. Is it double or three times, or what is it ? Tou can say that ?—I should be inclined to think it is three times. 1069. Would it make up the difference between the 44,000 and the 54,000 you gave as the double in 1876?— I do not think so. 1070. It would not be 11,000? —Well, I should hardly think so, but I cannot speak positively. It would be a very easy matter to get that information. We should have to get a return from each station of each Saturday's booking. 1071. Who supplied those figures —32,000 —to you? Where did they come from? — The Accountant in Christchurch. 1072. How do you account for this return as to 1876 and 1877 ?—I can only account for it in this way: From the statement I received this morning, it appears the returns are in Wellington. 1073. What does he mean by that?—l infer that he cannot do more than give the totals, as the detailed returns are in Wellington. He says the information is only to be got here, and that his record does not distinguish between single and double journey tickets. Up to the 30th June last it was the practice to double the return tickets. 1074. Did you get double money for them ? —No ; we treated them as two passengers. 1075. Why? —Because they make two journeys. One person might travel a dozen times in a day, and if he took single tickets he would count as so many passengers in our returns. 1076. These things are to show you how your receipts were arrived at.—-Tes. Practically they are two passengers. We carry them twice —there and back again. 1077. And why not the same in 1877 ?—Because the usual provision for dealing with them in this way is not made in the new forms, and that is why they have been overlooked. That is my impression. 1078. Tou got the same printed returns in 1877 as in 1876. Can you tell us anything about the receipts for July, 1876, and July, 1877 ?—ln July, 1876, £4,838; mileage, 255. "In July, 1877, £6,643 ; mileage, 380. 1079. This is for passengers, is it ?—Passengers. 1080. What were the general receipts on the line at the same time —the total traffic ? —The gross receipts ? 1081. For 1876 and 1877 ?—£13,857 for four weeks, July, 1876 ; £16,354 for four weeks in July, 1877; Lyttelton wharfage in both cases excluded. 1082. What are you taking it from ?—From the statement of revenue and expenditure. 1083. The Chairman.] Any wharfage in that ?—No wharfage in that. 1084. Do you make out that the Canterbury railways earned more in 1877 than in 1876, allowing for wharfage ? —Tes ; but you must recollect we have 125 miles more railway. 1085. How much did you say the increase was ?—£2,497. 1086. Before the line was completed through, if a person were travelling from Christchurch, going south, his journey would be broken. In 1876 his journey would be broken. He would go so far as the line was open, and then, crossing the interval, would take the line again ?—Tes; that is true.

Mr. Lawson,

31st Aug., 1877.