Parliamentary Committee.

This matter was fully argued before the Parliamentary Committee of 1886 (see Parliamentary Paper, I., 9, 1886). The following table summarises the evidence then given, and it also most satisfactorily answers the second question: Will the fares paid by passengers under the new system average 1s. each? It will be seen that it proves, that even if the enormous reductions in long distance fares did not lead to any increase in the average distance travelled, that the average fare would still be 11¾d., instead of the 4½d. Mr. Maxwell said it would be.

It also proves conclusively that two of my low price fares will give a much larger revenue than one of their high price ones; for twice page 5 424,914 is 849,828, whereas their own accountant says I only want 817,454, leaving me a surplus of 32,374 fares from the Auckland line alone.

My calculation is that, under the new system, at the very least four (4) fares would be taken where one is taken now. These at 1s. each, calculated on the basis of last year's travelling, would yield a revenue of £832,485, from passengers alone.

This is an increase of £473,663 on our passenger revenue of last year, and only £350,556 less than the total gross railway revenue for the year 1895-6.

I am quite convinced that by adopting the Stage System we could, within three or four years at the outside, add at least £700,000 to our gross railway revenue. I know that to most people my calculations will appear wild and impossible of attainment; but this is not so, they are the result of very careful study, and I am satisfied that they are moderate and easy of attainment.

It may be as well to mention that the reductions made in passenger fares in Hungary were the same as I am advocating here, namely, to about one-fifth (1-5th) of the present charges. The result has been to increase the average distance travelled by each passenger from seventy-one (71) to one hundred and thirty (130) kilometres.

As all my calculations are based on an increase of from 13 to 15 miles only, the mind becomes bewildered in contemplating the vast financial and social results that would ensue, if our success were only equal to that of the Hungarians; and I again say, it would be greater.

There is practically no limit to the development of railway traffic and revenue, provided they (the railways) are worked on sound principles. The experience of Hungary proves this, where, with a still faulty system, but a great improvement on the present one, not only do their railways pay well, but trade and commerce has been lifted out of the mire, and the whole face, of the country changed.

At any rate I am now in a position to say this. The course of events has proved that I correctly predicted, long before the result was seen, what would be the outcome of certain operations on four different railway systems. Is it therefore in the least likely that I shall be mistaken as to the result of my own work?

I do not say this in any spirit of boasting, nor do I in any way claim to be a prophet, but I do claim that it proves that I have carefully studied my subject and have arrived at sound conclusions as to the principles on which railway finance and working should be based.

page break page 7

I will ask you, Sir, to be good enough to bear in mind that I was not allowed to see this return until the work of the Committee of 1886 had closed. If I had had it one week sooner, it is difficult to see how the Committee could have done other than recommend an unconditional trial.