Changing conditions of transport and trade are at present having a marked effect on the railway industry. World trade, although now on the mend, is still in a generally depressed state, spelling lessened freight revenues; road transport is taking valuable business from the rails on both the passenger and freight sides; and such developments as the wholesale distribution of electric power from big central generating stations and the pipe line conveyance of petroleum call for serious attention from railways everywhere. The fact is that business conditions throughout the world are at present in a state of transition; and at the heart of this transition lies transportation progress.

As Sir Arthur Stanley remarked, some time ago (in his Presidential Address to the London Institute of Transport) railways, in consequence of improvements in road and air conveyance, have lost the virtual monopoly they once enjoyed, but there were many means by which they could regain their prosperity. The Home railways have wisely entered the field of road transport on the passenger side, while on the freight side they have improved their services by a general speeding-up and by the introduction of containers, introducing also a comprehensive system of road collection and delivery services.

Organisation and Salesmanship.

It was Sir Arthur Stanley's view—and with this we are in entire agreement—that railways can do much to secure prosperity through efficient organisation and effective salesmanship. In my last letter I dwelt upon the value of an attractive passenger station as a business-bringer, likening this to the “shop window” of the railway organisation. By ways such as this, and by the whole-hearted support of every employee in the direction of traffic solicitation, the future of the railway can be assured, and with it, of course, the future of every individual worker. Another point brought out in the Institute of Transport Presidential Address was the inelasticity of railway carriage charges. Railways certainly do attach far too much importance to the value of the commodity carried, and too little importance to actual cost of service. The old axiom of “charging what the traffic will bear” was doubtless sound enough in the “good old days,” but now it should not be forgotten that to the road page 20 carrier the value of the commodity handled matters little. His charge is always based on the truck load, irrespective of its contents, and railways would be well advised to work more on these lines in the future.

Economy in Unification.

By more than one leader in the field of transportation has the view been ex

A TYPICAL LONDON PASSENGER STATION.
St. Pancras Terminal, L.M.S. Railway, the former London Terminus of the Midland Railway.

pressed of late that, eventually, the four big consolidated railways of Britain will be united to form one comprehensive transportation undertaking serving the whole of the country with its rail, road, steamship and aeroplane services. The time may be somewhat distant before this move is actually tackled, but there would seem every reason for the belief that unification would produce substantial economies in operation, staff, and other directions. Waste and redundancy of effort would be nullified; and provided political interference was not permitted and the railways were operated on strictly commercial lines, it should be possible to build up a sound and profitable undertaking covering the whole of Britain with its co-ordinated rail, road, water and air services.

At present there is contemplated the setting up of a single transportation undertaking in the London area, to take the place of the existing individual rail and road carriers; and there is really no logical argument against the fusion of the whole of the four group railways of Britain to form one big consolidation. The existing group railways of the Homeland each possess a mileage on a par with the New Zealand Government Railways, and while on combination the resulting system would be a large one, it would not be too unwieldy bearing in mind the experience in lands like Germany and the United States. Everyone connected with the Home railways would, in many ways, be sorry to see the passing of the existing group systems, just as there was general regret at the disappearance of the smaller individual lines swallowed up by the introduction of consolidation ten years ago. All things considered, however, it would certainly seem that unification of the four Home group railways is inevitable sooner or later.