198 EAILWAY EATES 



distances, and that it is only by their means that London 

 draws fish from Hull, meat from Aberdeen, vegetables from 

 Penzance, and sweeps a radius of 150 miles for her milk 

 supply. But the inexpediency of charging on the same 

 scale for long distances as for short does not make it fair 

 to charge higher rates for short distances than for long. 

 You cannot argue in the same breath that consumers gain 

 by placing remote markets on the same footing as near, 

 and by placing near markets on a u-orse footing than those 

 which are remote. 



But the case against through rates for foreign perish- 

 able produce is still stronger. Foreign produce may be 

 brought to London partly by sea and partly by land, or 

 wholly by sea. If goods are imperishable, if quick de- 

 livery is not essential to their good condition, if they do 

 not suffer by delay in transit, foreign producers may choose 

 either mode of conveyance. They naturally choose the 

 cheapest. In this case, if low railway rates encourage 

 foreigners to send their goods partly by land, English pro- 

 ducers are little, and possibly not at all, injured. Their 

 grievance would be formulated thus. Railway companies 

 admit that they carry at a profit hops from Flushing to 

 London for 2bs. ; therefore their profit must be enormous 

 on the same weight of hops at 36s. 8d. from Sittingbourne 

 to London, It is only by charging local producers high 

 that they can so cheapen rates for foreigners as to 

 secure their trafiic. The answer would probably be : 

 Kentish hop-growers pay more, because they can only em- 

 ploy land carriage ; foreigners can send by sea, and it is 

 this competition between two modes of conveyance that 

 determines the cheapness of the rates. 



But there is no such competition possible in the case 

 of perishable produce, such as butter, fruit, vegetables, and 



