OO f 

 OOrt 



THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY.— SUPPLEMENT. 



traffic. We see some main lines already dou- 

 bling their tracks expressly to give accommoda- 

 tion to the slow trains. The ordinary mercantile 

 rule would be to charge the capital in proportion 

 to the work done, or to the occupation of the 

 railway by each class of traffic. If this mode of 

 apportionment of capital were adopted, it would 

 debit the mineral traffic with interest on more 

 than half the total capital invested in our rail- 

 ways. But, even if revenue be taken as the basis 

 of account, 22.5 per cent, of the total capital 

 outlay must look to the mineral traffic to provide 

 the interest on its expenditure. This proportion 

 gives a total of £141,750,000 expended in pro- 

 viding for the conveyance of the mineral traffic 

 on railways. To pay 4£ per cent, on this sum 

 requires a net profit of £6,024,375 per annum ; 

 and any profit short of that amount derived 

 from the mineral traffic is pro tanto a depre- 

 ciation of the general dividend actually paid. 

 That is to say, that on the most moderate dis- 

 tribution of capital outlay, or rather on that 

 distribution which is most unjustly favorable to 

 the mineral traffic, a profit of 45 per cent, of 

 the net earnings is requisite in order to avoid a 

 deterioration of the general dividend as the re- 

 sult of this branch of business. For the share- 

 holders not to be actually out of pocket by 

 the mineral traffic, this branch of the trade 

 must earn a net profit of £6,000,000 per annum. 

 The gross revenue, however, from this source is 

 only £13,400,000. To earn this, according to 

 the statistics above given, the general expenses 

 of the company have been increased by between 

 £6,000,000 and £7,000,000 per annum. If we com- 

 pare the charge per ton for conveyance with the 

 cost of conveyance, we find that it is only in very 

 favorable cases that there is any margin what- 

 ever for profit in mineral transport. Certain 

 rates, lately adopted in order to compete with 

 sea-carriage, involve palpable loss. 



It seems very difficult to escape from the con- 

 clusion that the efforts made by the railway com- 

 panies to deprive the canals of their proper 

 traffic have in the first place been the main cause 

 of the heavy and annually increasing list of 

 killed and wounded on railways, especially 

 among the servants of the companies ; and, in 

 the second place, have effected a reduction of 

 the average dividends paid on the railways of the 

 United Kingdom by something like a fourth part 

 of their amount. So that it is not extravagant 

 to suggest that the maintenance of this traffic by 

 the railway companies costs the country at least 

 five thousand casualities every year — of which 



nearly #ne-fourth are fatal — and costs the rail- 

 way companies at least £5,000,000 per annum. 

 The figures are startling ; but they are not imag- 

 inary. 



It is only just to the reader to add that the 

 above statements are the unbiased outcome of 

 statistical investigation. They are prompted by 

 no interest except that of the public welfare 

 They are not the sequence of any preconceived 

 idea, or the result of any personal hobby. A 

 certain want of precision, as has always been al- 

 lowed, characterizes every attempt at the direct 

 analysis of the profits of the English railways. 

 That want of precision is due to the concealment 

 by the English companies of a class of facts 

 which are published by American, by French, and 

 by Indian railway managers. The results ob- 

 tained from these more complete returns are 

 such as to show that ignorance of the facts con- 

 cealed is contrary to public welfare, and is likely 

 to be extremely dangerous to the proprietors of 

 railway capital. The more incertitude there is 

 on this part of the subject, the louder and more 

 imperative is the demand for full information. 

 On the other hand, the comparative analysis, now 

 for the first time attempted, has results as to the 

 bearing of which there can be no question. It 

 is not a matter of opinion that the working cost 

 of railways of mixed traffic increases with the 

 proportion of mineral traffic. For the sake of 

 conciseness, only two or three lines have been 

 analyzed in the foregoing pages, but the same 

 analysis has actually been applied to the returns 

 of all the principal trunk-lines. On each of these 

 some special features may be pointed out, but on 

 all the general rule is clearly exemplified. The 

 fact that minerals can be conveyed on lines laid 

 out and well adapted for the service of a miner- 

 al district, at remunerative prices, has probably 

 been the basis on which the whole doctrine of 

 the value of mineral traffic on mixed lines, which 

 is quite another question, is founded. It might 

 have been sufficient to point out the difference 

 between a case of this kind and one in which 

 there is a competition with a sea-borne traffic, to 

 show that the profit earned by such a line as the 

 Taff Vale can have but little to do with the profit 

 at which minerals can be conveyed by the Lon- 

 don & Northwestern, or any other great trunk- 

 line fully occupied by light and rapid traffic. As 

 to this, the comparison of the proportion of min- 

 eral earnings and of locomotive charges gives a 

 positive indication which it will be madness on 

 the part of the shareholders to neglect. All hu- 

 man investigations are liable to error, and there 



