[ [108] Appendix to Report of Select Committee on Canals, page 214, “These lengths are exclusive of the River Thames, Severn, Wye, Humber, Wear, and Tyne in England; the Rivers Clyde, Forth, Tay, and the Caledonian Ship Canal in Scotland; the Shannon and other navigations in Ireland.” According to Mr. Taunton’s Report, the canals and navigable rivers in England, Wales, and Scotland under control of railways are 1,447 miles as against 2,335, which are independent of railway companies (Appendix 228.)
[ [109] See evidence before the Select Committee on Canals, in 1883.
[ [110] M. de Foville says (1880) “Sur les canaux de l’Etat, la suppression totale des droits de navigation sera peut être bientôt un fait accompli” p 134.
[ [111] There is a large mileage of canals belonging to canal companies, and considering the views expressed by some as to the use which could be made of the canals which belong to the railway companies, it would have been instructive if the proprietors of all the independent canals had shown by the manner in which they had maintained and worked them, that the railway companies’ canals could be more profitably and usefully worked than they now are.
[ [112] “Monopoly” is at present the favourite word of the adversaries of railways; everything is permissible because railway companies have a “monopoly.” This word has at least three senses. Monopoly in the strict legal sense in which the Bank of England is guaranteed by statute, the exclusive right of issuing notes within a certain area; monopoly in the sense of being able to exclude other competitors, because in a commercial point of view there is no room for competition, or because the work could not be done more cheaply or better by others. Messrs. W. H. Smith may be said to possess a monopoly in this sense; monopoly is equivalent to property. No railway company possesses a monopoly in the first sense. No company is guaranteed against competition within any area, as many of them know to their cost. Most attacks against railways are justified by using the word, true in the second or third sense, as if true in the first; and persons in eminent positions occasionally condescend to sanction the use of this fallacy.
[ [113] Some difficulty has been experienced in checking the rates contained in Sir B. Samuelson’s report owing to the distances not being given, and from the name of the district being used instead of the names of the places between which the rates are shewn. For instance, although the South Wales Coalfields extend over a very large area, a rate of 7s. 3d. per ton for coke is referred to as from “South Wales to Darlaston,” on page 24 of the report; and in like manner on pages 27 and 28 the rates for pig iron are given as from “Cleveland and Northamptonshire.”
[ [114] Collection in Banbury, and delivery alongside ship in Liverpool in 10 ton lots.
[ [115] Collection in Banbury, and delivery alongside ship in Liverpool in 10 ton lots.
[ [116] Collection in Banbury, and delivery alongside ship in Liverpool in 10 ton lots.
[ [117] The observation made in the report that the higher rates in Germany are avoided by the intervention of forwarding agents, who collect from small consignees, and make up the minimum load, charging somewhat higher rates than for 5 or 10 ton lots, shows that it was seen that, although the comparison of British rates is made with them, the general public cannot obtain the advantage of the low rates, because of the heavy minimum quantities.