1).—2.

dealt with in our printed paper, which you have not thought it expedient or, at any rate, necessary to take any notice of. In conclusion, I beg to refer you to the concluding paragraphs of my letter of the 30th ultimo, and must again respectfully request you to supply the League with a direct answer to the question therein clearly and definitely put to you—viz., whether you are or are not prepared to adopt the recommendation of the Parliamentary Committee of 1886, which reported " That a trial should be given to the system." I much regret that, owing to the Christmas holidays, this letter has been delayed. On behalf of the Eailway Eeform League, I have, &c, William C. Daldy, Chairman, General Committee.

No. 8. The Railway Commissioners to the Railway Reform League, Auckland. Sir,— Wellington, 28th February, 1890. I am directed by the New Zealand Railway Commissioners to send you with this fifty copies of an article on the Zone system of railway-fares (Appendix E), originally abstracted from the American Bailroad Gazette, and which has been reprinted in the Otago Daily Times at the suggestion of the Commissioners. As you mention in your letter of the 31st October that the system adopted by the Hungarian Government is that proposed by your League, the subject of which the article treats will doubtless be of great local interest, and I am desired to say that if you would like to have some more copies for distribution a further supply can be sent. I have, &c., E. G. Pilcher, Secretary.

No. 9. The Railway Reform League, Auckland, to the Railway Commissioners. Gentlemen, — Auckland, 11th March, 1890. I am duly in receipt of your communication of the 28th ultimo, and regret to find that it does not contain any reply to my letters of the 10th January and the 11th February, which still remain unanswered. I am obliged for the printed memorandum accompanying your letter, which gives a description of the Hungarian Zone system. You are in error in stating that in my letter of the 31st October I mention that the system adopted by the Hungarian Government was the system proposed by this League. Reference was only made to this system for the purpose of showing you that the Hungarian Government had abolished the system of mileage, and had adopted a stage system, as was fully explained in my letter of the 10th January last. I am pleased to see by the English Press that the Hungarian Zone system has been a decided financial success. The League has no doubt but that a similar financial success would be the result of a trial of the stage system, as proposed by the League, whilst the concentration of population in the cities, which, as you correctly state, is the avowed object of the Hungarian system, would be avoided. I have, &c, W. C. Daldy, Chairman, General Committee, Railway Reform League.

No. 10. The Bailway Commissioners to the Railway Reform League, Auckland. Sir,— Wellington, loth March, 1890. 1 have the honour, by direction of the Railway Commissioners, to acknowledge your letter of the 11th instant. The Railway Commissioners note from it that your reference in your letter of the 31st October, 1889, to "The Hungarian Government having adopted the system proposed by this League" was erroneous, and that you propose another system, calculated to give diametrically opposite results. The Commissioners await the details of the system of passenger-fares which you propose, and, upon receipt of them from yon, will give the subject their closest consideration. I have, &c, E. G. PILCHBE, Secretary.

No. 11. The Bailway Beform League, Auckland, to the Railway Commissioners. Gentlemen, — Auckland, 24th March, 1890. Your communication of the loth instant is to hand. I again enclose you a list of the original members of the Railway Reform League, and direct your attention to the fact that it comprises many of the leading citizens of this city and province. Seeing that-1 represent these gentlemen, and thatjthey represent a very large section of the inhabitants of this colony, I feel justified in characterizing the communications you have lately thought fit to address to me as trifling. On the 30th November, 1889, and again on the 10th January and 11th February last, I asked for a direct answer to the question whether you are or are not prepared

5