T. BONAYNE.I

89

I.—lo.

equipping a station would be about £610. There is no Board of Trade here to compel the company to provide signals, but two of these xvould cost £40 each. If the country became settled xve should be asked to fence the track on both sides xvhich, xvith crossings, gates,' &c, would'cost £150 a mile; and if cattle-stops xvere put in each cattle-stop xvould cost £30. With regard to the sleepers, the number per mile should be 3,500 for a 301b. rail, but our 30-lb.-rail track is all up-rails noxv, and xve relaid our 50 lb. track xvith 53 lb. second-hand, taken from the main lines. The sleepers should be spaced about 18 in. apart. The company's sleepers, I believe, are spaced 19 in. apart. The number of men required to keep the track in order, in accordance xvith the experience of the Department, is one man per mile and a quarter for a 30 lb. track, and one man for every two miles on a 55 lb. track; so that a ganger and six men xvould have to be employed on a3O lb. track as against four men on a55 lb. track. That is what xve have found to be necessary in actual experience. If the line were completed to Taupo it xvould take nine hours on the journey from Auckland and twenty-txvo hours from Wellington. The locomotives used by the company are geared locomotives, xvhich are doing successful xvork throughout the country, but the speed has to be limited to from eight to ten miles an hour, otherxvise the xvear-and-tear is very excessive. It takes eight hours to do fifty miles. The heavy grades are taken sloxvly, and no doubt they slacken doxvn xvhen going round the sharp curves. The formation of the track is good, and the ballast is pumice. The Railway Department uses gravel pumice on the Rotorua line, and the ballast is of the same general description.. Pumice is not a very satisfactory ballast. It is subject to being blown axvay, and. has to be renexved frequently. The Department is replacing it as fast as possible xvith broken-metal ballast. The maximum axle-load xvhich could be allowed to run on a 301b. track would be 5 tons 16 cxvt., which is our standard. 6. Mr. Buchanan.] Are you of opinion that the rolling-stock should have been made heavy enough to admit of its running on the Government lines?—ln the interests of the company I think it should. It might have cost 25 per cent, more, but it would have saved the cost of transferring the timber at Putaruru, xvhich probably costs 6d. per 100 ft. 7. You have shoxvn that there is a xvide difference between the freight charged by the company, for account purposes, for the carriage of timber on the company's line and xvhat xvould have been received by the Government if it had xvorked the line, say, in conjunction with the general lines? —That is so. 8. Could you give us a general percentage —that is, hoxv much less per cent, would the Government get for carriage if it took over the line? —It xvould require xxwking out. I have quoted the figures. 9. The Committee have had an offer of a guarantee of £11,600 for fifteen years in freight: hoxv would that item stand if the line were taken over by the Government?—l do not knoxv that it would stand. If it were a cash guarantee it would stand. We have had guarantees before. 10. Mr. Dalziell.] Not of this kind?—No, not of this kind. The £11,600 would be very much more. According to my figures, on the basis of last year's working, the Government would get £3,900. Now, according to the company's proposal, instead of getting £3,900 xve should get £11,600; that is the position. But the Government would not be dealing with the company for their business alone; the settlers along the line xx-ould have to be given the benefit of the ordinary Government tariff rates. You could not charge a settler on the £11,600 basis, because on the company's basis thev are debiting themselves for freight xvith a very much larger amount than thev xvould be debited if the Government xvere working the line. 11. You gave us a sketch of the number of men required in given mileage for maintenance: do you not think the cost would be less on pumice country, xvhich does not grow grass, than on, say| the New Plymouth line, where you have difficulty in keeping doxx-n the grass?—lt is a dry climate, but the maintenance of that line xvould require less than two miles to the man. The heavier the rail the easier the maintenance. 12. Can vou give us anv opinion as to the advisability of inaugurating light lines in different parts of Nexv Zealand? —In Mr. Hall-Jones's time—he xvas an advocate of light lir>es and also of a broken gauge —a light line xvas constructed from Stratford to Toko, which will ultimately become the main line between Nexv Plymouth and Auckland. He xvanted a broken gauge and 401b. second-hand rails. He had the bridges built of timber, xvlvch was obtained on the spot— rimu and so on —and the banks and cuttings were made exceptionally narrow. Later on the Railway Department had to relay that line with 531b. steel rails and renew all the bridges. That xvas a bad sample of light railway. When the idea xvas broached of breaking the gauge, I offered on behalf of the Railxvay Department to build that line for the Public Works Department with the standard gauge for the same amount of monev which thev pronosed to allocate for it on the broken gauge—l think, 2 ft. 6 in. The resuH was that there was no break of gauge. There are parts of New Zealand xvhere light railxvavs could no doubt be made with advantage to the countrv at a fair and reasonable cost, the same as xvas done in Canterbury years ago; but vou rrmst have suitable rolling-stock and light engines. The Dermrtmet-t worked the traffic with 301b rails successfully in Canterbury, and had about two hundred miles at one time. It is not a light railway as interpreted in England, xvhere thev put a heavv rail down, but it is_ what I call a light railwav. In fact, the New 7ealand railways as built to-day are light railways according to the interpretation an English railwayman would put on them. 13 Can vou give us a general ir>ea of the difference in cost b»txveeu xvhat vou would coll the most useful light railwav for New Zealand and the nresent standard line? —Tt is very difficult to arrive at that. Tt all denends on the country you run through. I could not give you an estimate without going into the matter carefully. ~,.,., , H With your experience of some of the in New Zealand xvhicV, have been losing for years co"1d you have saved that monev if light railways had been adonted instead of standard railways?—Of course, if vou could reduce the canit.M cost very largelv it would alter the situation. Tf vou had £50 000 to find interest on instead of £100.000 it might be a reasonable proposition.

12—1. 10.