8 



companies for the carriage of coal with those charged for 

 the carriage of fish : and certainly the contrast is a very 

 striking one. To put it in a rhetorical manner, I believe 

 that the railways carry coal from Yorkshire to London 

 for about as many pence as they charge shillings for 

 carrying fish from Grimsby to London. But of course 

 coal is not fish. Fish being a perishable article, must 

 be carried at a speed and inconvenience to the com- 

 panies which is not necessary in the case of coal, and it 

 is only fair and reasonable that they should charge 

 some extra sum on this account. I therefore purposely 

 abstain from contrasting two rates which are really dis- 

 similar in themselves ; but I should like to compare 

 the rates which the railway companies are charging for 

 the carriage of fish with the rates which they charge 

 for the carriage of a commodity which is also- a perish- 

 able commodity. I was looking a day or two ago at 

 one of the railway manuals, and some figures struck me 

 as being very surprising. I find the railway companies 

 carry one ton of American meat from Glasgow to London 

 for 6^s., that they carry one ton of Scotch meat from 

 Glasgow to London for ^5, and that they carry a ton of 

 fish from Glasgow to London for a sum which is some- 

 where between £6 los. and £y. But this contrast, surprising 

 as it is, does not represent the whole truth. The railways, 

 in the case of meat, undertake to collect the meat in 

 Glasgow free of charge, and to deliver it free of charge in 

 the markets in London : but in the case of fish the rate 

 only includes the actual charge from station to station, and 

 does not include the cost of collection or the cost of 

 delivery at Billingsgate. I own I think it is rather difficult 

 to justify a policy of this description, which I am sure 

 must be fatal to the public interests, and cannot be 



