much more numerous, and comprise throughout
the day a much more opulent class of persons
than those who use a similar mode of locomotion
in London. This fact may be ascribed, in
a great measure, to a system of so-called
"correspondances," by means of which there is
scarcely a point in Paris which is not connected
with every other. When the point which the
traveller desires to reach lies in the direct line
of the omnibus which he takes, there is, of
course, no difference between the practices of
the two countries. It is when the point lies
apart from the track of the omnibus that the
difference begins. In that case the London
traveller must consider where he must get
out to complete his pilgrimage to the
desired spot. He may perhaps be aware of an
intermediate point, whence another omnibus
will proceed to it directly; or he may be
convinced that a cab or a tedious journey on foot
will be indispensable. At all events, a judicious
choice of the course he ought to pursue
demands an amount of topographical knowledge
which cannot be expected in a casual visitor to
the capital, or even in those confirmed Cockneys
whose London movements have been
confined to a beaten track.

The difficulty here indicated is met by the
French system of " correspondances." Paris is
dotted all over with omnibus stations, which for
some vehicles are starting points, for others
houses of call. To one of these the traveller
proceeds, in the first instance, and tells the
official personage he finds there whither he
desires to go. If the spot does not lie in the route
of the omnibus at this station, he is furnished
not only with a ticket for his place, but another
ticket entitling him to a seat in another omnibus,
which he will enter at an intermediate
station, and, thence proceeding, will complete
his journey. Let us make matters intelligible
to purely British traders, by imagining a similar
arrangement in London. The traveller, being
at the Bank of England, would proceed to
Russell-square— a journey which, according to
the actual system, is altogether impossible. He
would find a station erected (say) by the
Wellington statue, and, armed with a " correspondance,"
would take an Oxford-street omnibus.
The conductor would set him down at the most
convenient intermediate station, which would
be at the corner of the Gray's Inn-road or
Southampton-street, and there he would find another
omnibus, which would take him to Russell-
square, or its immediate vicinity. This journey
costs him no more than it would have done had
the square in question lain on the route of the
first vehicle. The uniform fare from any given
point to any other is thirty centimes, or threepence,
for an inside place; twenty centimes, or
twopence, for a seat on the roof. The first
conductor alone receives money; the second
receives, in its stead, the correspondance
ticket.

As crowding at French theatres is prevented
by a regulation which compels every one to
follow those who have reached the entrance
before him, so that first come is sure to be first
served, however strong the will and the muscles
of second come may be; so also is crowding
into omnibuses prevented, though by a more
elaborate arrangement. In a Parisian omnibus
there are fourteen inside seats and twelve seats
on the roof; and the tickets are inscribed with
numbers corresponding to this capacity, and
must be used in rotation. For instance, the
ticket you obtain at the station is numbered
nine. The omnibus that is about to start may
have two vacant places, and if persons armed
with tickets numbered seven and eight are not
yet accommodated, their claim will be preferred
to yours, and you must await the arrival of
the next omnibus, when you will find yourself
similarly privileged with regard to number
ten. When the vehicle is empty, or comparatively
empty, this ticket system is not regarded.
You may enter it without visiting the station
at all, and the conductor, when you pay him
the fare, will furnish you with correspondance
tickets, if these are required.

If we have made the French plan intelligible
to our readers, they will at once perceive that
in Paris the use of the omnibus is open to
a larger number of persons than in London.
We are compelled, in fairness, to admit that
the city man, whose course is invariably from
a populous suburb to the Bank, will find an
advantage in the London system to which
there is nothing comparable in Paris. Here
we have direct routes only, from which we
have no occasion to deviate, and probably
in Paris there is no omnibus route at once so
long and so direct as that which lies between
Paddington and the Bank of England. In
Paris the travellers who use correspondances
are as much considered as anybody else, and
these must be set down at the most convenient
stations before the vehicle which they have
entered in the first instance completes its journey.
Hence there is much roundabout travelling
unknown in England, the omnibus sometimes
proceeding southward, and then again northward,
as if the place of final destination inscribed on
the vehicle had been forgotten on the route. In
short, the slight convenience of the few is sacrificed
to the great convenience of the many, and
this sacrifice the city gentleman, who belongs
to the few par excellence, will probably not be
disposed to admire.

At the principal omnibus stations in Paris a
little book is sold in which the merits of the
English and French systems are compared in a
very equitable way, on data obtained in the year
1866. Its author is M. C. Lavollée, an
administrator of the Omnibus Company of Paris,
who evidently speaks rather in an official than
in a personal capacity, and its object is partly
to show that the capitalist will find French
omnibus shares a more profitable investment
than the shares of the English company. With
this object we have nothing to do. Those
facts, which as presented by M. C. Lavollée,
concern the general public— the people who
trust their persons to the vehicle, not the per-
sons who trust their money to the enterprise
— alone come under our consideration.