over the kingdom, regardless of distance, at a
fixed minimum charge. A threepenny stamp
shall take you, third-class, any journey in one
direction you like to go, whether from
Ludgate-hill to Sydenham, or from John o' Groat's
to Land's End. If you prefer second-class,
you will take a sixpenny stamp; if you will
luxuriate in first-class, your postage will amount
to one shilling.

This sounds as mad as the penny postage
innovation sounded at first. But Mr. Brandon
quietly proceeds to argue in his pamphlet*
that it would pay everybody, shareholders, the
public, and the government, besides giving
renewed impetus to industry of all sorts. At
the end of 1865, the total amount of capital
invested in railway undertakings in the United
Kingdom was four hundred and forty-three and
a half millions. The average dividend paid on
the whole outlay was only four and two-fifths
per cent. Hitherto, then, it is clear that
railways have not paid well.

* Railways and the Public. By Raphael Brandon,
F.R.I.B.A. Bell and Daldy, 1868.

Government, he says, must take the railways
as it has done the post-office and the telegraphs;
that is Mr. Brandon's first requirement. The
saving in expenses of management, through
doing away with conflicting interests, and
expensive directorates, will be a large item, to
begin with; and a trifle amounting to a quarter
of a million a year, in outlay for legal and
parliamentary expenses will be abolished. But
these are only flea-bites in a scheme of such
magnitude. The great point is, once provide
cheap and easy locomotion, and passenger
traffic will develop itself to an extent hitherto
unprecedented. Already, through cheapening
the means of travelling, thousands now travel
where scores previously journeyed by coach.
Cheap postage increased letter-carrying many
hundredfold. People don't travel as they
would if railway fares were reduced to an
uniform and nominal postage charge. At
present, labourers out of employ, mass
themselves together in impoverished districts, and
fall back on their parish, because the railway
fare that would transport them to distant
towns where their labour is in demand is to
them a prohibitive rate. Cheap locomotion
by distributing labour, will decrease pauperism.
Every one will travel if only the facility be
given. But this facility can only be obtained
under government management.

The sum proposed to be charged for passenger
postage, looks ridiculously small. In reality it
is not so much less than the average fare at
present paid for the average journeys as might
be supposed. In 1865, in round numbers, three
and a half million passenger trains ran over
seventy-one million miles, carrying two hundred
and fifty-two million passengers. The traffic
produced fourteen million seven hundred and
twenty-four thousand eight hundred and two
pounds. This gives an average of nearly
twenty-one miles and seventy-three passengers
for each train, which is about three and a half
passengers per mile; giving an average for
tare, at present paid, per average journey, of
fourteenpence only.

Now, says Mr. Brandon, give me an universal
threepenny fare everywhere, and I will
promise you six times the traffic, which will give
the united railway interest an excess of four
millions of receipts, with very little, if any,
addition to the expense of carrying an
increased number of passengers. But that is merely
supposing each person, paid but threepence. It
is calculated, however, that of the increased
number of travellers one-seventh would ride
first class at one shilling, and two-sevenths second
class at sixpence. This would raise the annual
return to thirty-two million pounds, for passenger
traffic, instead of fourteen and three-quarter
millions, as at present. That is, supposing that
every person took his single ticket at threepence,
sixpence, or a shilling. Mr. Brandon reckons,
however, on a number of yearly tickets first
and second class at twenty-five and fifteen
pounds, respectively; but it is somewhat doubtful
if a first-class passenger would calculate on
making more than two hundred and fifty railway
journeys per annum; and if not, it would
manifestly answer his purpose better to pay one
shilling per journey. Supposing, if you will, Mr.
Brandon to be too sanguine in his estimate that
traffic would be increased sixfold, still if it be
only conceded as probable that it would
increase threefold, the railway receipts would
thus be two millions in excess of what they
now are, without taking into account the
reduction in expenditure resulting from unity of
management!

But, says a bewildered taxpayer, where on
earth is the four hundred and forty millions of
money to come from, for the government to buy
up the railway interest? Does it mean income
tax, or is it to be a new national debt? No. It
won't cost the government a single sixpence,
nor the public either. And the shareholders
will be better paid than ever they were paid
before, and we shall all live happy ever afterwards,
and go on, and on, and on, travelling
everywhere with the magic carpet that
costs nothing and yet pays everybody. Will
that do? Well; each shareholder is to receive,
in return for his shares, government railway
stock, bearing interest at four and two-fifths
per cent (the average percentage at present paid
by railways). But, objects a shareholder now
receiving a seven per cent dividend, it is not
very likely I should agree to lose two and three-
fifths per cent, per annum to please the public.
No, my good sir nobody wishes it, least of all
Mr. Brandon. If you read his pamphlet you
will see he proposes that just as a shareholder in
a line paying less than four and two-fifths per
cent shall receive so much less in amount of these
government bonds, so you shall receive so much
more as shall be equivalent to the full market
value of your property, to be determined by a
competent tribunal, besides giving you the
additional security of government guarantee.