The herald., 1895-01-07
STATE OWNERSHIP.

ENGLAND, sensible, far-eeeinR statesmen
and business men are strongly sdvocat-
ing the Absorption Of the railways by
the state. This idea has long since
passed out of the hands Of the extrem.
lists and crauks and is recsiving the best
thought Of those most deeply interested
in internal commerce--the boards OF
trade and commerce and agricultural or
CARNATIONS. In short. the idea OF ma.
tional railways has crystallized and will
probably become an scco mplished fact
this generation. While this phase OF
the question has taken itself to the realm
of constructive legislation and is await
ing bold and able hand to shape it into
mplishsd fact the extremists have
gone good step forward and are advo.
eating not only state ownership OF rail-
ways but free railway travel.
The foundation OF the argument In
favor OF free railway travel is, of course.
the gigantic waste Of the present system.
Elaborate calculations show that every
traveller who buys ticket for seat in
an English railway train really pays for
nine seats. The competition which
seems to compel rival companies to run
hall empty trains between the same
points ct precisely the same time is,
in fact, charge upon the public. So
are the innumerabls boards of useless
and enormously paid directors, so are
the rival stations and their expenses pc
culiar to the present system. 1t lie not
commended that state control or free
travel would absolutely remedy this
waste, but the advocates Of free travel
do undoubtedly bring forward facts
which indicate that the waste Of seats
under free travel would be but trifiing
compared with the existing waste
from ticket travel. In short, it is esti-
mated that all the people who could
possibly want to travel II the railways OF
Gree. Britain were as flee as the high.
ways, could be accommodated under
economical management with the pres
emit rolling stock.
Figures are produced showing that the
throwing open Of bridges, and in some
instances even ferries. in England has
reduced the actual cost to the public to
one'sixteenth. OF course, the additional
number taking advantage OF this free
communication is included, but assum-
ing that railways. like othsr highways,
are for public good and not private
profit. the deduction is not unfair. The
British publici s paying over $3.50 900, 900
annually for railway fares Probably
five or ak timee az many people would
have used the rail had the fares been
within their means. For this sum free
railway travel for the kingdom, it is
claimed, could be maintained.
One Of the advocates of the proposed
reform argues in this way:
1.-THE principle of free travel is not
new, but old. We pay our highway rates
and have good highways for it. Who
would wish to return to the old system
of turnpike gates with toll collector
every few miles? But the ticket box is
o railway turnpike gate to every trav-
eler, and more deterrent than the old
turnpike gates. 1t is much better to
pay our railway fares in rates and taxes.
for in so doing we would get five or six
times as much for our money. The ex-
penss having been paid, the British pub
lie would have gained the inestimable
advantage and right of free railway
travel over every railway in Great Brit
ain and Ireland. Every man, woman
and child would be free to enter any
train and 60 as far as they please and
back again for nothing, until the demand
on the existing rolling stock exceeded
Its accommodation. So long as the ex.
listing rolling stock could supply seats
for all, no additional expense need be
incurred. Rates and taxes equal to the
present fares would be more than sufi-
Gent to pay all expenses, while the fares
iructifying in the peoples pockets in
stead OF in the Golfers of the railway
companies would provide the money to
pay the tax or rate"
1t is next proposed to take up the
more practical question involved in the
causes that must ultimately lead to gov
eminent ownership OF railways. James
Hole, secretary of the associations OF
cham bers of commerce of the United
Kingdom, one of the best informed men
in England from the traders point OF
view, has asserted that with the United
States rate OF agricultural produce the
farmers of England would have saved
this year s12,000,000 $3.50. 1000, 0OO), sure.
ly very large sum. For many years in
/ England an agitation for lower rates
has been kept up only to be met by the
railroads in 1898 by an enormous sd.
vance in rates. This action on the part
of the companies has naturally enraged
the shippers of all classes and war has
begun which in its mildest form means
the construction of cheap or light rail-
ways, and in its most formidable aspec,
the purchase of the entire railway sys.
tenn, and its administration in the inter
eats OF the public by the ststs.
The ground IL taken that ths
profits of 100000 shareholders o
$4,000, 000.0 of capital and the vel.
fare of an equal,numbsr OF employees ar,
only one side of the account. The in.
tersst OF every trader and shipper sne
passenger In Great Britain, q muct
larger confederation, IL involved, Two,
thirds Of the railways of the country ar,