540 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. 



fact Sir Herbert Jekyll, in agreement with the late Sir Courtenay Boyle, 

 attributed the great success which he thought it had achieved, 1,188 

 complaints having in all been made to the Board, of which 769 were 

 settled more or less to the satisfaction of the complainants, and the 

 remainder dismissed as unreasonable ; and in all cases he thought that 

 much friction was removed by mutual explanations. It is somewhat 

 remarkable that, of all these complaints, only twenty related to fruit 

 traffic, and some of these were concerned with the carriage of foreign 

 fruit. It should also be noted that the cases dealt with under this 

 clause are not cases of illegality, but of unreasonableness. With regard 

 to the cases of illegality, they can be dealt with by recourse to the courts. 

 A report is presented to Parliament every year of the proceedings of the 

 Board under this clause, but it appears to be of a rather meagre descrip- 

 tion. Sir Herbert Jekyll also mentioned certain other powers possessed 

 by the Board with regard to rates and facilities— viz., power to deter- 

 mine what are reasonable facilities for the conveyance of perishable mer- 

 chandise under Part V. of the Schedule to the Railway Rates and 

 Charges Acts, 1891-2 ; power to add to the statutory classification of 

 goods, articles not previously classified ; power to assist traders to obtain 

 reductions in the railway general classification of goods by agreement 

 with the railway companies ; power to make application to the Railway 

 and Canal Commission with regard to any contravention of the Railway 

 and Canal Traffic Acts ; and some others. But these powers have been 

 very seldom exercised, and the last mentioned not at all. The Board is 

 convinced of the great utility of its action under the Conciliation Clause, 

 and it does not desire any extension of its present powers. 



59. The Committee have endeavoured to set out as fairly as possible 

 the various points raised in the evidence given on railway grievances, and 

 now proceed to deal with them in order. Looking at the evidence as a 

 whole, they are inclined to believe that, whatever may have occurred in 

 the past, before the fruit industry had grown to its present importance, 

 the railway companies are now in many cases realising the fact that it is 

 in their own interest to give fuller consideration to the requirements of 

 the industry. This is more particularly the case with some of those lines 

 which run in the chief fruit-growing districts and are the largest carriers of 

 fruit. In this connection Mr. Wise, manager of the Toddington fruit farm, 

 said, " I think the railway companies are, thanks to the efforts of the 

 National Fruit Growers' Federation mainly, more inclined to meet 

 growers. I particularly refer to the Great Western and Midland." In 

 the case of railways running in districts where the fruit industry is less 

 developed, and having a comparatively small amount of fruit traffic, the 

 condition of affairs is not so satisfactory. 



GO. In view of the figures put in by Mr. Hennell and Mr. Vincent Hill, 

 and the statements of many witnesses, we cannot hold that the rates in 

 themselves are, in most cases, unduly high. But we think that they are 

 often very variable in their incidence, due, to some extent, to special 

 reductions having been mado to me^t the requirements of particular 

 districts and to the presence or absence of competition. We think that 

 the introduction of a more uniform system throughout the whole country 

 would be a great advantage. 



