As the conditions in any two cases are never identical, and bare figures without some indication of the differences convey no particular information, the comparison will be attempted in greater detail. In regard to "general expenses and sundries,' "there is no very great difference between the Belgian and the Rohilkund-Kumaon cost per mile. The expenses on the Jodhpore-Bickaneer Railway under this head cannot be compared with the others; there must be particular reasons for the phenomenally small amounts, and we shall not be far wrong in concluding that the survey was carried out under the orders of the State engineer, no part of his salary or of office expenses being debited to the railway, but only the pay of the small native staff actually in the field.

The native states of Jodhpore and Bickaneer built their railways on their own land, so there was no charge under this head. A considerable portion of the Rajputana-Malwa Railway runs through land granted by the native states; and, even in British territory-where, although the procedure of compulsory acquisition is simple, the official valuation is exceedingly liberal—the cost is so small as to make comparison with the cost of European land impossible.

The next head, "labour and material," includes the most expensive items of all. "Formation" and "bridge-work" cost little in the sandy Bickaneer Desert, not more than £83 per mile on the Jodhpore and £120 per mile on the Bickaneer Railway; but they were unavoidably heavy items on the Rajputana-Malwa line, £260 per mile for "formation" and £774 for "bridge-work."

It is in the matter of "permanent-way " that the greatest differences arise. In Belgium, as we have seen, the cost may be nearly £800 on independent formation (with which alone the Indian figures are fairly comparable), nearly £1000 per mile on the side of an existing roadway, and any amount per mile between £1108 and £2266 laid in paving, like a tramway. The Belgian metre-gauge rail, weighing 431 lbs. per yard, compares fairly with the Indian metre-gauge rail weighing 41 lbs.; but, on the Rajputana-Malwa Railway, not only have renewals of the original 36 and 40 lb. iron rails been made, for many years, with 41 lb. steel rails, but the 400 odd miles of main line between Delhi and Ahmedabad are laid with a 50 lb. steel rail, which has been adopted as the standard rail for the line. The fastenings and ballasting are equal to the rail, so the exceptional cost of the permanent-way and ballasting, £1330, as compared with that of the Rohilkund-Kumaon line, £998 per mile, the Jodhpore line, £830 per mile, and the Bickaneer line, £939 per mile, is easily explained. Moreover, in the other cases, serviceable light rails were frequently available at cheap rates from main line renewals. The permanent-way of the Rajputana-Malwa is not that of a light, but of a first-class line.

In regard to the whole question of cost of "labour and material," it must be remembered that unskilled labour is far cheaper, and manufactured (and imported) material is far dearer than in Europe. These compensate one another, perhaps, very roughly, in accordance with the great contractor Brassey's dictum that the cost of work, allround, is the same all the world over. No doubt labour in India is dearer than it used to be, and the Indian rupee, instead of being worth 2s., has been at times worth little more than 1s. in the purchase of European material, but then the price of that material has greatly decreased also. This view is favoured by the approximate equality of cost of "labour and material " on the Belgian (£1352) and Rohilkund-Kumaon (£1316) light lines. The rail on the RajputanaMalwa is too heavy, the standard of the permanent-way is too high, the provision of fencing too complete, and the amount and efficiency of the bridge-work too exceptional, for that line to be classed as a light one. On the other hand, the peculiar advantages of the

Jodhpore and Bickaneer lines in regard to direction, supervision, survey expenses, etc., and their meagre requirements in the way of earthwork and bridging, are too special to enable us to quote them as typical Indian metre-gauge light lines.

stations

Expenditure on "rolling-stock" and (to a less extent) on and buildings" should depend upon the quantity and kind of business done by the railway. If one line costs more than another on these accounts, it should be because the traffic requires it, and in that case the greater first cost per mile is justified. Now the gross earnings per mile of the Rajputana-Malwa Railway are Rx. 1416, of the Rohilkund-Kumaon Rx. 696, of the Jodhpore Rx. 337, and of the Bickaneer Rx. 185, and (although the quantity of traffic is by no means the only important factor) the cost per mile of rolling-stock follows the same order.

Sufficient reasons have been given for rejecting the high figures of the Rajputana-Malwa on the one hand-for it cannot be called a light railway and the low figures of the Jodhpore and Bickaneer lines on the other, since the conditions of the latter are too peculiar to justify a comparison being drawn with other light lines. But the figures of the Rohilkund-Kumaon line and of the Belgian Light Railways are so singularly parallel that it is worth while to repeat them here side by side:

If we eliminate the accidental difference in the purchase of land and the independent difference in the provision of rolling-stock, we have the cost of a typical Indian metre-gauge light line and of Belgian Light Railways approximating to £2700 per mile.

To make the comparison between the average cost of Belgian Light Railways (where the range in conditions is limited) and the average cost of all Indian metre-gauge railways (the larger portion of which is as well built and equipped as the standard 5′ 6′′ gauge railways) would be altogether misleading. And, as we have seen, it would be equally misleading to make the comparison between the Belgian

figures and either the exceptionally high figures of the RajputanaMalwa Railway or the exceptionally low figures of the Jodhpore and Bickaneer railways. Having considered and rejected these examples, a few remarks may be made about the Rohilkund-Kumaon Railway (Company's section).

This line runs from Bhojeepura Junction (12 miles from Bareilly on the main line) to Kathgodam (at the foot of the Himalayas and the terminus for the hill-station of Naini Tal), the total length being 53-92 miles. It was constructed, under a Government 4 per cent. guarantee (with a subsidy of Rx. 4000 or £2400 per annum from the North-West Provincial Government), by an English company, which also works the Lucknow-Bareilly line, and it was opened for public traffic at the end of 1884.

The rails are laid on sal-wood sleepers, which cost little, and the line is unfenced except at stations. The gross earnings were Rx. 45,931 on (adding the 12 miles between Bhojeepura and Bareilly) 66 miles worked, or Rx. 696 (£418) per mile; the expenses Rx. 24,304, or Rx. 368 (£221) per mile; and the net earnings, therefore, Rx. 21,627, or Rx. 328 (£197) per mile. On 58 Belgian light railways open at the end of 1893, with a length worked of 1156 kilometres or 718 miles, the total receipts were 4,684,355f. (£187,374), an average of 4052f. per kilometre, or £261 per mile; the expenses 3,363,490f. (£134,540), an average of 2909f. per kilometre, or £187 per mile; and the net receipts, therefore, 1,320,865f. (£52,834), an average of 1143f. per kilometre, or £74 per mile.

The ratio of expenses to receipts is, on the Belgian lines, about 72 per cent., and, on the Indian line, about 53 per cent. But the differences in the nature of the traffic, in the receipts per mile, in the working of a long and of a short lead traffic, and in the working of a considerable main line mileage (with only one branch of good length) as one system and of a number of small lengths under separate working agencies, make it impossible for us to institute comparisons where the circumstances furnish no common ground for them.

The Company's section of the Rohilkund-Kumaon railway system is only 54 miles long; but the same Company works also the Lucknow-Bareilly section and the Dadhwa branch, State-built lines, which make up the total mileage worked by the Company to 285 miles. The average lead of passengers on this system is about 33 miles; and that of goods 65 in the first, to 87 in the second, half of the year. The amount of business done, too, is much less on the Belgian than on the Indian lines. In regard to the nature of the business, it may be observed that the ratio of passenger to goods receipts is about 75 per cent. in the former case, and 42 per cent. in the latter; indeed, on most Indian railways, the goods bring in far more earnings than the passengers.

All these differences, too, prevent us from making a comparison between the rolling-stock of the Indian and Belgian lines. On the former, 27 locomotives, 166 passenger vehicles, and 674 goods.

The

vehicles suffice for 285 miles of line worked as one system. numerous short Belgian lines require 253 locomotives, 716 passenger and 1631 goods vehicles, 140 luggage vans, and 6 special vehicles. The quotation of such contrasting figures, however, illustrates the necessity of a far larger equipment of rolling-stock to work over a number of separate short sections than on one continuous system.

The

If we may take the figures given for the whole of the RohilkundKumaon Railway system as likely to be fairly accurate for the Company's section also, the average passenger fare per mile in 1894 was 2.6 pies, or say, 0·195d. (well under d.), and the average rate per ton of goods was 56 pies or 0.42d. (less than d. a mile). lowest passenger fares per mile on Indian railways vary, in average, between 2 and 23 pies, but the Madras Railway (to its loss, for the reduced fares merely meant reduced profits) were much lower even than that. The lowest or second-class fare on the Belgian light lines is 5 centimes, and the first-class fare not much higher, 7 centimes.* Professor Hadley, in his Railroad Transportation, observes that the Belgian "passenger rates are lower than anywhere else in the world, except, perhaps, on some East Indian railroads." His cautious qualification is quite unnecessary. We must not infer that Belgian lines would gain by lowering their fares to the Indian standard. It is merely a case of not charging more than the traffic will bear. The Indian wages, both of the fourth-class passenger and of the railway menial, are generally no more than 4d. a day; so that less working expenses compensate, in this and in other ways, for the smaller fares. From an average rate per ton per mile of goods we can learn nothing. In 1894 it was 5'03 pies on the East Indian Railway, 6:50 on the Bengal-Nagpur, 672 on the Indian Midland, 9.11 on the Eastern Bengal, 8:36 on the Great Indian Peninsula, 7.68 on the Bombay, Baroda, and Central India, 8.59 on the Madras, 6.26 on the Bengal and North-Western, 6:33 on the Rajputana-Malwa, and 9.88 pies on the Jodhpore-Bickaneer Railway. Exclusive of terminals, fifth-class goods may pay as much as 1 pie per maund, i.e., 21 annas (or about 2d.) per ton per mile; while first-class goods may pay as little as pie per maund, i.e., 4 pies (or about d.) per ton per mile; and the special class goods minimum rate (as, for example, for coal and coke) is pie per maund, i.e., 2.7 pies (or about d.) per ton per mile. The East Indian Railway carries three-fourths as many tons of coal and coke for the public (and over a long lead) as it does general merchandise, wherefore (among other reasons) its average rate per ton of goods per mile is a very low one; the Eastern Bengal Railway carries only 5ths. as much coal and coke (and that over a very short lead) as general merchandise, wherefore (among other reasons) the average rate per ton per mile is a high one. Precisely the same tariff may be

These are not the fares, according to Mr Cary Elwes' figures for 1894, but in 1896 they were stated (in The Engineer, July 3, 1896) to be usual on these vicinal lines.