1.—9

42

element of time is an important factor; and the sparse population must be considered. Mr. Vaile's remarks about moving population so many times are somewhat misleading. Victoria and New South Wales have about the same population, the same class of colonists, wages somewhat similar, the passengers' fares are much alike; yet Victoria carries about three times the passengers as in New South Wales. It is not because New South Wales is less liberal in its management. We must look for some other reason. - We have also the experience of other countries to guide us. Many years ago the Caledonian and North British Eailways reduced their third-class fare between Edinburgh and Glasgow to 6d., the distance being forty-seven miles. The result was not a large increase to the passengers, while financially it was ruinous to the companies, although it must be remembered that Glasgow and suburbs contained at that time probably half a million people, and Edinburgh two hundred thousand, with a very large intermediate population. They mutually reverted to the old fare of. 2s. 6d., and that is the third-class fare up to the present time. There are several other cases in England and Scotland of similar ruinous competition : the result has always been the same. A proposal somewhat similar to that of Mr. Vaile—that is to say, somewhat similar to what Mr. Vaile himself states his scheme would work to—namely, " We may ultimately see our way, as regards passengers, at any rate, to make one fare for any distance within the colony " —was before the British public for some years. 492. Mr. Maxwell.} It has been suggested in the evidence taken that, if we get four millions of passengers at an average fare of 6d., it would be as good, so far as revenue is concerned, as if we got one million at an average of 2s.? —My opinion is that the net result would not be so good —that is, if the passengers were carried the same distances. If they were carried longer distances the result would be worse. 493. Hon. Major Atkinson.] How would it be worse ?—lt is more expensive to carry passengers long distances. 494. I understand that on the long-distance traffic there are generally three or four seats for every passenger?— That is not so in every case. 495. But generally ? —As a general rule it would cost more to carry long-distance passengers than short-distance. 496. Do you think you could not double your long-distance passengers without extra cost ? —■ No, I think not. 497. How many more passengers could you carry, on an average, for long distances without extra cost ?—I am not prepared to say, with the present stock. Of course the passenger traffic fluctuates very much for long distances, and we must be prepared to meet extra business. 498. I quite understand that, but I am. talking of averages now. Can you say what percentage of seats are occupied now on long distances ? —lf we take the express trains between Christchurch and Invercargill, we could not anything like double the seats. The expresses in both directions are almost filled —on holiday occasions they are quite filled ; and if the passengers were increased it would certainly cost more. Ido not mean to say, of course, that the trains are run full from end to end : passengers get out and in at stations on the way. 499. Mr. Vaile.} May I ask how many carriages these trains are composed of ?—As a rule, on the train from Dunedin to Christchurch there are four carriages. 500. And do you say that you have not engine-power on that train to carry more than four carriages?—lt would be more expensive if we were to put on more carriages. 501. Hon. Mr. Richardson.] Does that compose the whole train?—No: we have always a guard's van, a mail-carriage, and also a van for carrying small goods—sometimes two, and possibly a horse-box besides. 502. How many vehicles is the train composed of, as a rule?— About eight. 503. Hon. Major Atkinson.] Is that a reasonable load for an engine ? —Yes; the load between Timaru and Christchurch is limited to nine vehicles, between Oamaru and Dunedin it is limited toeight. 504. Mr. Maxwell.] If we took more we could not keep to the same time ?—No ; unless we put on more engine-power. 505. To take an extreme case: If we got four passengers at an average of 6d. for every one we get at 25., should we get the same net revenue ? —I have no doubt that the result in that case would be very much worse. 506. Hon. Major Atkinson.} I wanted to ascertain whether you consider, then, that the trains are as full as they can be ?—Taking these trains to which I have referred, I think they are fairly well filled all the year round. 507. Do we get as many passengers as it is reasonable to expect for the carriages you run ?— I am not prepared to say that—taking every train that carries passengers—we might not, in certain cases, get more. 508. How many more, then, could you carry—supposing you got them—without additional expense or increase of engine-power? —To answer that we should have to consider that more than half of our passengers are suburban passengers —that takes away about 55 per cent.; then, withouthaving the actual figures, I should imagine that at least half of the remainder are the morning-and-evening passengers to the centres, such as Christchurch or Dunedin; these trains are always well filled with country people going to and returning from town : therefore, it does not leave a very large number of the whole passenger-traffic to deal with. Although there may be empty carriagessometimes, I should not like to say exactly what proportion could be carried without additional cost. Hon. Major Atkinson: I understand a good many trains are full now, but I want to know whether we are running seats empty, and to what extent. Mr. Maxwell: I think I can supply you with an approximate statement of that in a short time.