Rambles on Railways

by Sir Cusack P. Roney

On the 19th of December following, a new commission was issued in substitution of the previous one, Mr. Monsell, M.P., being added to the number of Commissioners. The Earl of Donoughmore died shortly after it was issued; and, in consequence of Lord Stanley having become Secretary of State for India, he did not act for more than a short time. The report, dated the 7th of May, 1867, is therefore not signed by His Lordship.

It will not be necessary to follow this report, or to refer to the general recommendations contained in it. Some are very good, and would no doubt be readily agreed to by most railway companies, if they were to take the shape of legislative enactment. Others are impracticable (such as that suggested for ensuring punctuality of trains), and like impracticable notions and ideas at all times, they “fret their little hour on the stage,” and then cease to be heard of afterwards.

The evidence taken is voluminous; some of it is of a very desultory character, several of the witnesses having seized the occasion to vent their own peculiar theories, and, sicut eorum mos est, to inculcate the adoption of their specific or nostrum as the infallible remedy. The appendices, notwithstanding the introduction of much matter that is irrelevant for all large and practical purposes, contain a great deal of useful information.

The great and main recommendation in the report is contained in the 74th clause; it is therefore given in extenso. “On the various grounds we have mentioned, we cannot concur in the expediency of the purchase of the railways by the State, and we are of opinion that it is inexpedient at present to subvert the policy which has hitherto been adopted, of leaving the construction and management of railways to the free enterprise of the people, under such conditions as Parliament may think fit to impose for the general welfare of the public.”

“As regards the purchase of Irish railways,” the Commissioners add, at clause 80, “having come to the determination that it is inexpedient that the railways should be purchased by the State, we consider there is not sufficient reason for excepting Ireland from this general conclusion; but, as it has been the established policy to assist Irish railways and other public works in Ireland, we recommend that when Parliament thinks fit to make advances to Irish railway companies, the money should be lent for a fixed period of considerable length, so as to enable the company to develop its resources before it is called on for repayment.”

The Commissioners add, that these advances or loans should never be made to Irish railway companies on condition that their rates and fares should be reduced, that being a matter, the decision upon which should rest exclusively with the executive of the company.

The two dissentients from the report were Mr. Monsell, M.P., and Sir Rowland Hill. Mr. Monsell being of opinion that the Irish railways should be purchased by the State, and to this extent agreeing with Sir Rowland Hill, whose opinion is that the railways of the whole kingdom should become, by purchase, the property of the nation.

Sir Rowland Hill gives various reasons in recommendation of this suggestion, and summarises in his report, written, as we learn by its first paragraph, “in a growing expectation of dissent,” his reasons with the following language:—

“In short, experience has now shown that railways are essentially monopolies; consequently they are, in my opinion, not suitable objects for ordinary commercial enterprise, in which each party, while striving for its own interests, generally contributes, perhaps in the best possible way, to the interest of all. It seems to follow that they cannot be advantageously left to independent companies, who, of course, manage them with exclusive reference to their own interests, but that they should be in the hands of those who will control the management of them with a view to the interest of the country at large, that is to say, in the hands of the Government.

“Proposing this, however, I do not mean to recommend that any Government Board should take upon itself, in the gross, the duty now performed by railway directors. For the direct management of the lines, I propose to provide by leasing them out, in convenient groups, to companies, partnerships, or individuals, as the case may be. An opinion in favour of leasing the lines will be found in the evidence given by Mr. Bidder before this Commission.