than two days, arising from the rivalry of the companies owning the railways between the two places. But one of the most monstrous features in the Irish railway traffic is the exorbitancy of the fares. They are higher than those charged in either England or Scotland, where the people are far better able to pay them, and greatly higher than those charged in Belgium, Germany, and France. The third-class passenger in Ireland actually pays more than the first-class express passenger does in Belgium. Thus, between Dublin and Athlone, 80 miles, the third-class fare is 6s. 6d., whereas between Brussels and Verviers, 86 miles, the first-class express fare is only 5s. In Prussia, the workingclass fare for a distance such as that between Dublin and Athlone, at three-eighths of a penny a mile, would be only 2s. 6d. What is the consequence as regards Irish passenger traffic? That it makes comparatively little progress; and the thirdclass, which in all other countries increases the most rapidly, is almost stationary. In Scotland, where the fares are lower, 76 per cent. of the whole number of passengers carried are third-class; but in Ireland only 60 per cent. In short, the fares are beyond the poor Irishman's means; and, in many cases, he prefers to walk. And wherever a working man decides to make his journey on foot rather than by rail, because of the cheapness of the former method of travelling, it may safely be concluded that there the railway is not performing its proper function. It is the same with rates for merchandise, which are in a great measure prohibitive of any further development of the traffic of Ireland. Coal, which in England, Belgium, Prussia, and France, is carried at a halfpenny per ton per mile, and under, is on some of the Irish lines charged three times that rate. The charges for the conveyance of live stock are so high that by far the greater number of the cattle, sheep, and horses that travel, continue to go by road, only about one-seventh part of the whole being conveyed by rail. The charges for carriage of agricultural produce and of manure are almost prohibitory. And as regards goods, the tendency of the present arrangements is towards the gradual extinction of Irish commerce. Mr. Bagot, a Dublin merchant, describing the evils arising from inequality of charges, and the discrepancies between the through rates from England to the Irish inland towns via Dublin, and the rates from Dublin, used these strong words: Our direct import or foreign trade is thus being sapped and undermined.' Nothing is done to develop the traffic in dead meat, though Mr. Cawkwell is of opinion that, under proper arrangements, it might become a great branch of trade, as in England; and though the west coast of Ireland is swarming with fish, no facilities are afforded for the conveyance conveyance of the article, so that the fish remain uncaught, and the coast population unemployed. In short, were it the object of the directors and managers of the Irish railways to repress the industry of Ireland, they could not adopt more effectual means for that purpose than those they are now pursuing. But the proprietors of the railways are not without their defence. They represent that the Irish lines, like the English, have been constructed at the cost of private individuals, under powers granted by the State; that they are, in fact, speculations authorised by Parliament, and that it is the business of directors to render them as profitable as possible to those who have invested their capital in them. Like some of the English companies, they are of opinion that this is only to be done by maintaining a high rate of fares; and so long as these do not exceed the maximum fixed by Parliament, the public have no alternative but to grin and pay. At the same time, it is clear that the present system of working the Irish railways, while it is extremely onerous to the public, does not enrich their proprietors; for the expense of working them on the high-fare system amounts to not less than 57 per cent, on the gross receipts, while the average dividend paid on the open stock of the companies does not amount to more than 2 per cent. is also worthy of notice that, while the increase in the receipts from passenger traffic on the English railways in 1866, compared with 1865, was 664,9857., and on the Scotch railways 75,1347., the decrease on the Irish railways during the same period was 41,1567. It And yet the mileage of Irish railways, compared with the population and the area of country served, is less in proportion than either in England or Scotland, while the Irish lines have been constructed more cheaply than those of most European countries, as will appear from the following table : COUNTRIES. Miles open. Miles of Railway Miles of Railway to every 100 Square Miles of Territory. Miles. : Average Cost of Railways per Mile. £. 2244 7 As it is clear that the present management of the Irish railways is materially obstructing the prosperity of that part of the United Kingdom, the question of how the obstruction is most effectually to be removed has come to be one of great public importance, and numerous expedients have been proposed for solution of the difficulty. All the English railway managers who gave evidence on the subject before the recent Commission were agreed as to one point, namely, the necessity for greater consolidation in the management of the Irish lines. Mr. Cawkwell recommended that they should be amalgamated into four sections; Mr. Allport, that they should be amalgamated into three; while Mr. Bidder held that one uniform management would be the best. One consolidated company would not by any means be too large for effective management. Indeed, all the Irish lines combined amount to little more in length than several of the larger English railways, while their combined annual income is very much less. The gross receipts of the London and North-Western Company are four times greater; those of the North-Eastern and Great Western more than double; while the Midland, the Lancashire and Yorkshire, and the Great Northern, each earn considerably more money than all the Irish companies. It is, indeed, a remarkable fact that the whole traffic receipts of Ireland are less than those of the Great Eastern Railway, which runs through an almost purely agricultural district. As the testimony is uniform as to the advantages derived by the public from consolidation of railway interests in England, it seems clear that similar results would follow the consolidation of the Irish companies. Rivalry, jealousy, and competition, would be put an end to, and an immense saving be at once effected in working expenses. A large number of useless boards of directors would be abolished, with their separate auditors, secretaries, engineers, and general managers. There are 333 Irish railway directors, 70 auditors, 35 secretaries, and 13 general managers, all of whose functions would be much more satisfactorily performed by an efficient executive sitting in Dublin. But as the authority of Parliament would be required to enable a general consolidation of the Irish companies to be carried out, a further important question has been raised in the course of this discussion, namely, whether the railways of Ireland should not cease to be the property of private individuals, and become the property of the State, and be worked, as they have been with so much success in Belgium and Germany, for the sole benefit of the public. Had the proposal made to Parliament by Lord George Bentinck Bentinck in 1847-that Government should undertake the construction of Irish railways in conjunction with private capitalists -been carried into effect, it would probably have proved one of the greatest boons ever conferred upon Ireland; but it has been the misfortune of that country to be made the battle-ground of party, and the proposal was defeated. More fortunately for India, party combinations did not stand in the way of a policy similar to that recommended by Lord George Bentinck for Ireland being adopted in that dependency; and the native Hindoo is now, with the help of British capital guaranteed by the British Government, enabled to travel a hundred miles for 2s., while the poor Irishman must pay four times the price for the like service. It is not, however, too late to remedy the evils occasioned by the present chaotic and unnational Irish system. The railway companies are in too distressed circumstances to stand out for high terms. Two of them are bankrupt; two are at a standstill; six have paid no dividend on their preference stocks for three years; ten have paid no dividend on their ordinary shares ; two pay less than one per cent.; five pay less than the funds; six only have paid more than the funds, but less than the ordinary rate of commercial interest; while, with one exception, that of a line near Dublin, six miles in length, all the shares are below par. Mr. Dargan, a competent judge, estimated the present value of Irish railway property at 22,000,000l., or less than one year's expenditure on our Army and Navy. For this amount the whole of the Irish lines might be purchased, by the creation of a Government Stock at 3 per cent., the interest on which would be less, by 157,000l., than the net receipts of 1865. Mr. Stewart expressed an opinion before the Commission that the whole working expenses of railways in the United Kingdom might easily be reduced 10 per cent. without diminishing the convenience or service of the public. If this be the case with the United Kingdom, the reduction for Ireland would probably not amount to less than 15 per cent. But allowing for a reduction of only 10 per cent., the balance at the disposal of the Government would be about 330,000l. per annum, which might be applied, first to the reduction of rates and fares, and next to the extension of railways into districts not yet provided with them. The lines might either be worked directly by a Government staff, as in Belgium, or the working might be leased to a company, with conditions for affording every possible facility to the public, and subject to low rates for passengers, cattle, merchandise, coal, and minerals. But the working of the lines is a mere matter of detail, and could be arranged without difficulty were the the important principle once definitively affirmed, that it is to the interest of the public that the State should become the owner of the national highways in lieu of the private companies. Even though this principle might not be accepted as regards England, ́ it may be held, as it has been held, that Ireland, like India, forms an exceptional case; that we have, indeed, already made Ireland an exception to our usual policy by supporting Irish railways with Government money, though we have gone to work in the wrong way; and that the time has at length arrived for correcting past errors, and assuming the proprietorship of the Irish railways, on the grounds of enlightened public policy. No such recommendation has, however, been made by the Royal Commission of 1865. Their report, though containing much interesting information as to the history of railway enterprise, and full of details as to the working of railways, is on the whole very disappointing as to the measures recommended for the improvement of the railway system. The strongest thing in the Report is the large Egyptian type in which sundry recommendations are printed-in imitation of the style of Mr. Reade the novelist, when he makes his characters speak loud-though, for anything of force which they contain, they might as well have been set in the smallest nonpareil. The two supplemental reports of Mr. Monsell and Sir Rowland Hill are much more valuable, and are especially worthy of consideration. The former, in support of the policy of Government assuming the proprietorship of the Irish railways, has not yet been answered, and indeed is unanswerable. That of Sir Rowland Hill is a Report for the future, worthy of the author of the Cheap Postage System.' In brief, he sets forth that experience has shown that railways are essentially monopolies; consequently, that they are not suitable objects for ordinary commercial enterprise; that they cannot be left advantageously to independent companies, who, of course, manage them with exclusive reference to their own interests; but that they should be in the hands of those who will control their management with a view to the interests of the country at large, that is to say, in the hands of the Government. Into this large and important question we cannot now enter; but we shall be surprised if the views which Sir Rowland Hill sets forth with so much point and vigour do not meet with increased and increasing acceptance by the public. The readiness with which Parliament recently empowered the purchase of the telegraphic lines by the State-a measure which would not have been deemed practicable five years ago-shows how rapidly public opinion ripens under admitted practical grievances. And though it might be deemed impracticable at the present time to carry |