CONCENTRATION OF POPULATION. 645 



suffers from this state of things is well known, — one effect 

 of it being that of all loans to be raised, or public moneys to 

 be spent, each centre claims to have a share, not because it 

 is actually wanted, but in order to give work in the district, 

 with the result that not unfrequently useless railways are 

 made and unnecessary public v/orks constructed. This 

 scramble for the public funds has, besides, as may well be 

 imagined, a demoralising eti^ect on both electors and legislators. 



The inconvenience of having more than one centre has to 

 a slight extent been felt in Victoria. In the early days of 

 railway construction Geelong was a sort of rival to Mel- 

 bourne, and claimed to be the pivot upon which the social, 

 political, and commercial interests of the Colony turned, — the 

 result being that when it was proposed to make a railway 

 from Melbourne to Mount Alexander and Bendigo, it was 

 considered only right that Geelong — to which place there 

 was already railway communication with Melbourne — should 

 be the terminus of the hue to Ballarat. Geelong afterwards 

 sank into comparative insignificance ; but, notwithstanding 

 this, for a period of 30 years, persons having to go from 

 Melbourne to Ballarat were obliged to travel a distance of 

 100 miles ind Geelong, whereas the direct distance from 

 Melbourne was only 74 miles. After all this unnecessary 

 travelling and waste of time and money, it was at last found 

 indispensably necessary to construct a direct line of railway 

 from Melbourne to Ballarat ; and, in consequence, the Hne 

 from Geelong to that place is now comparatively little used, 

 and will be probably even less so in future. 



It must be admitted that whilst there are many benefits 

 arising from extensive centralisation, there are also some 

 strong objections to it. The country is more healthy than 

 the town ; and small towns, as a rule, are more healthy than 

 large ones. If there is not so much wealth in the former as 

 in the latter, there is also generally less poverty : there 

 is, moreover, less luxury and extravagance, less vice and 

 immorality, whilst fewer people live in slums. It would no 

 doubt be desirable, especially in newly settled States, that 

 more persons should live in the country, where they are 

 generally producers of wealth, than in either small or large 

 towns, where a much larger proportion of them are merely 

 distributors or dependents; but, since this cannot be the 

 case, the balance of advantage is, I think, as I have already 

 said, in favour of cities being large and few instead of small 

 and numerous. 



