206
Į
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
885/26
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH—NOT TO BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-
20
(IV.)
LIGHT RAILWAYS AND MECHANICAL ROAD TRANSPORT.
REPORT OF SUB-COMMITTEE TO COLONIAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE.
The Sub-Committee, consisting of Sir Herbert Read, Sir John Eaglesome, Sir William Mercer, with Mr. Ezechiel as Secretary and Mr. E. Owen as Assistant Secretary, were requested "to enquire into the comparative results and cost of light railways and mechanical road "transport in the West African Colonies and Protectorates, taking into account the various "forms of both kinds of transport and particularly the use of alcohol and other fuels for "internal combustion as well as petrol; to consider how far any principles that can be laid "down for West Africa are applicable to other Colonies and Protectorates, to take such "evidence as may be necessary and to report to the Committee upon the matter."
We have held seven meetings and examined the following witnesses:—
Brig. General F. C. Guggisberg, CM.G., D.S.O., R.E., Governor, Gold Coast. Mr. E. H. D. Nicolls, O.B.E., A.M.I.C.E., Director of Public Works, Gold Coast.
Mr. C. W. Pettit, Secretary of Works, Gold Coast.
Mr. H. F. Peet, Director of Public Works, Nigeria.
Lt. Col. F. H. Greenhough, D.S.O., Chief Engineer, Nigerian Railway.
Mr. T. O. B. Otway-Ruthven, Chief Mechanical Engineer, Nigerian Railway.
Major R. B. Hill, Deputy Director Uganda Transport.
Mr. E. G. Wilson, Traffic Manager, Uganda Railway.
Mr. W. McGregor Ross, Director of Public Works, Kenya.
Mr. George Anderson, Chairman of the Barsi Light Railway Co. (India).
Major T. G. Tulloch (late R.A.), M.I.A.E. Representing the interests of Smith's Lt. Col. D. J. Smith, O.B.E., M.J.A.E.
Portable Producer Gas Plant.
Mr. H. W. Bamber, Consulting Engineer to Producer Gas Plants, Ltd.
Brig. General R. S. Stronach, representing the interests of Dutton Road-Rail System
of Transport.
Mr. D. N. Stafford, representing the Uganda Planters' Association.
It has been of great value to us to have the views and experience of these gentlemen, to whom we take the opportunity of expressing our thanks.
We should have been glad to hear the views of representatives of the London Chamber of Commerce also, but unfortunately they were unable to attend either of the two meetings to which they were invited. The Chamber has, however, submitted to us a memorandum to which we refer later, prepared by General W. H. Grey, whose views on the subject under consideration are endorsed by the West African Section of the Chamber.
Alternatives to be Compared.
In the development of long-distance communications in a Colony the choice would usually lie (apart from water transport where that is available) among the following alternatives: —
(a) Standard gauge railways-the standard being 3 ft. 6 in. in West Africa, and 1 metre
(39 37 in.) in East Africa.
(b) Railways of narrower gauge, say, 2 ft. or 2 ft. 6 in. A modification of the narrow- gauge railway is the " loco-tractor" or road-rail system referred to below, in which the waggons and the guiding wheels of the locomotive run on narrow-gauge rails, but the driving wheels of the locomotive, bearing most of its weight, run on a pair of narrow macadam tracks laid beside the rails.
(a) The construction of roads for mechanical transport, driven by either steam or internal combustion engines. The fuel for the latter may be petrol, or a liquid substitute for petrol, such as alcohol, or producer gas generated from various fuels, of which charcoal promises to be one of the most important.
At an early stage in our consideration of the subject, it became clear that the condition in different Colonies the physical conformation of the country, the density of population, the nature and quantity of traffic to be carried, the availability of skilled native labour, the accessibility of good road materials, and other circumstances are so diverse that the solution of the transport problem in each Colony and even in different parts of the same Colony can only be arrived at after full and careful study of the special conditions in each case; and that in a general discussion of the subject little more can be done than to lay down a few broad principles, and to direct attention to some of the considerations which should be borne in mind and to certain recent developments in mechanical invention which may be useful in solving the problems presented under given conditions.
A Formula for Comparison
The broad characteristic of railway as compared with road transport is that the initial cost of construction is high, while the running and maintenance expenses are low, so that if there is a sufficient volume of traffic over which the capital charges (for interest and ainking
• Not printed.
21
fund) can be distributed, the resulting cost per ton-mile is low, and the railway is the most economical form of transport. The following may be taken as a general formula applicable to both railways and roads ;-
Cost of construction x
rate of annual charge for annual maintenance and interest and sinking fund +
running expenses.
Cost per ton-mile
X
Number of ton-miles per annum.
or, dividing both numerator and denominator by the length in miles of the railway or road,
Cost of construc- rate of annual charge for maintenance and running ex- tion per mile interest and sinking fund penses per mile per annum.
Average density of traffic (in tous per annum).
Cost per ton-mile .
+
The term "cost of construction" here includes, of course, the cost of rolling stock and other equipment. The term "sinking fund" refers to the fund accumulated for the purpose of repaying the money borrowed for construction; it is open to question whether the contri- butions to this fund should strictly be included in the calculation of the ton-mile cost, but on the whole, since they have to be paid, whether out of freight rates or out of other public revenue, it seems preferable to include them, provided that the period for the accumulation of the fund is reasonably long. Contributions to renewal funds, for the purpose of renewing locomotives, rails, &c., when they have to be scrapped, may he regarded as included in the main- tenance expenses.
Since the commencement of the war both the cost of construction and the rate of interest have been roughly doubled, so that the product of these two factors has been multiplied about four times. On the other hand, operating costs in the Colonies have probably been not more than doubled. Thus the conditions for the construction of new railways in preference to roads are much less favourable at the present time than they were before the war.
In applying the formula to a railway, allowance must be made for the share of both capital charges and maintenance and running expenses which should be borne by the passenger traffic, and these may be considerable in Africa, where the native is believed to take readily to travelling.
In applying it to road transport a similar allowance should be made, but would usually be less important, at least as regards maintenance, since under normal Colonial conditious goods traffic would wear a road out much faster than passenger traffic.
A more important point in regard to roads is that the Government gets no immediate return from private traffic, which bears no direct share of the cost of constructing or maintaining the roads. It may be possible to compensate for this to some extent by a tax so designed as
to fall principally on the inhabitants of the district or the users of the road.
As indicated above, the main criterion in determining the choice in a given case between a railway of standard or narrow gauge and a motor road is the volume of traffic which will be available immediately or can be developed within a reasonable period. If a graph be drawn representing horizontally the average density of traffic and vertically the cost per ton-mile, the curve for a standard railway would commence ou a high level for a small traffic, but would
Cost per ton mile
A(Standard railway)
B'Narrow guage riy
B(Narrow quage railway)
-C(Road)
M Average density of traffic
descend steeply with increase of traffic (as at A in the diagram). For a road the curve would begin lower, but would descend less steeply (as at C in the diagram) and ultimately pass above
26790
B 3
:
14