CHAPTER XV.
Moral.
The few rough sketches which we have now concluded, insignificant and trivial as they may appear in detail, form altogether a mass of circumstantial evidence demonstrating the vast difficulty as well as magnitude of the arrangements necessary for the practical working of great railways; and yet we regret to add, in their general management there exist moral and political difficulties more perplexing than those which Science has overcome, or which order has arranged.—We allude to a variety of interests, falsely supposed to be conflicting, which it is our desire to conciliate, and from which we shall endeavour to derive an honest moral.
When the present system of railway travelling was about to be introduced into Europe, it of course became necessary for Parliament and for His Majesty’s Government seriously to consider and eventually to determine whether these great national thoroughfares should be scientifically formed, regulated, and directed by the State, under a Board competently organized for the purpose, or whether the conveyance of the public should be committed to the inexperienced and self-interested management of an infinite number of Joint-stock Companies. Without referring to by-gone arguments in favour of each of these two systems, and, above all, without offering a word against the decision of Parliament on the subject, we have simply to state that the joint-stock system was adopted, and that accordingly capitalists and speculators of all descriptions—men of substance and men of straw—were authorized at their own cost to create and govern the iron thoroughfares of the greatest commercial country in the world. The first result was what might naturally have been expected, for no sooner was it ascertained that a railway connecting, or, as it may be more properly termed, tapping immense masses of population—such, for instance, as are contained in London, Bristol, Birmingham, Liverpool, Manchester, &c.—was productive of profit, than, just as, when one lucky man finds a rich lode, hundreds of ignorant, foolish people immediately embark, or, as it is too truly termed, sink their capital in “mining,” so it was generally believed that any “railway”—whether it connected cities or villages it mattered not a straw—would be equally productive.
The competition thus first irrationally and then insanely created was productive of good and evil. The undertakings were commenced with great vigour. On the other hand, as engineering talent cannot all of a sudden be produced as easily as capital, many important works were constructed under very imperfect superintendence; and as iron, timber, and every article necessary for the construction of a railway simultaneously rose in value, the result was that the expense of these new thoroughfares, which by the exaction of fares proportionate to their outlay must, as we have shown,[A] eventually be paid for by the public, very greatly exceeded what, under a calm, well-regulated system, would have been their cost. Nevertheless, in spite of all difficulties and expenses, foreseen as well as unforeseen, our great arterial railways were very rapidly constructed.
Their managers, however, had scarcely concluded their “song of triumph,” when they found themselves seriously embarrassed by a demand on the part of the public for what has been rather indefinitely termed “cheap travelling;” and as this question involves most serious considerations, we will venture to offer a very few observations respecting it.
There can be no doubt that, inasmuch as it is the duty of Parliament to legislate for the interests of the public, so it is the duty of Her Majesty’s Government to exercise their influence in legitimately obtaining for the community cheap travelling. But although money is valuable to every man, his life is infinitely more precious; and therefore, without stopping to inquire whether by cheap travelling is meant travelling for nothing, for fares unremunerative, or for fares only slightly remunerative to the Company, we submit as a mere point of precedence, that the first object the legislature ought to obtain is, that every possible precaution shall be taken to ensure for the public SAFE travelling.
Now, casting aside all petty or local interests, we calmly ask in what manner and by what means would Her Majesty’s Government ensure for the public safe travelling, supposing our railways were the sole property of the State?
The answer is not only evident, but, we submit, undeniable.