253
regard to the fact that the whole future commercial prosperity
of the two Railways depends on the satisfactory development
of through traffic in the face of keen water competition, the
third method, Joint Working, is the only one which can prove
satisfactory, but this expression of opinion will probably
carry more weight, if I shortly point out the merits and
demerits of each method.
1. Before through through traffic can be carried from
system one independently worked Railway/to another, it is necessary
not only for through rates to be agreed, but arrangements
must also be come to for Rolling Stock of one system to
be received and worked over the adjoining system; for the
apportionment of receipts and the adjustment of the time-table.
This method may work well enough so long as the traffic
exchanged forms a comparatively unimportant part of the
traffic of each system, and consists most ly of minerals and
merchandise, but it is not suitable for through passenger
traffic, where speed and accurate timing is a consideration;
and it involves divided control, which means lack of economy
and unnecessary duplication of plant, engines and stock.
This method also lacks elasticity. It is necessary that the
Agreement should prescribe how all matters affecting the two
systems should be dealt with, and for this reason however
carefully it may be prepared, an Agreement of this sort is
sure to prove faulty and to lead to constant disputes and
friction in practice. Put shortly, this method is only
suitable for unimportant cases.
2. The mutual grant of running powers over each system
to the other would enable one Railway to give the necessary
facilities for development of through traffic, but this
plan is not likely to meet the needs of the present case, and the reason for this is quite simple. The running Company has
(to
-2-