A CONGRESS AT PARIS, THE PROGRESS OF IRISH LINES, EGYPT AND THE NILE
"Will you undertake to report on the subject of Light Railways for the
International Railway Congress at Paris?" This question was put to me in
the year 1899, and although I was busy enough, without shouldering
additional work, I at once said "Yes," and this was how I came to spend
part of my 1900 annual holiday in the beautiful but crowded capital of
France. Crowded it was almost to suffocation, for 1900 was the Great
Exhibition year, and all the world and his wife were there. The Railway
Congress took place in September. The business part of the proceedings
came first, and I did not stay for the festivities. When my Report was
made and discussed (a reporter was not allowed to read his paper, but was
required to speak from notes), I made, with three railway friends from
Dublin, tracks for Switzerland. It had been a strenuous year and
mountain air and exercise were needed to restore one's physical strength
and jaded faculties.
"_Means of developing light railways. What are the best means of
encouraging the building of light railways_?" This was the text for my
paper, as sent to me by the Congress, and my Report, I was told, should
be confined to the United Kingdom, Mr. W. M. Acworth having undertaken a
report on the subject for other countries.
In my Report I first disposed of Ireland, concerning which and its light
railways I have already written with some fullness in these pages; and my
readers, I am sure, will not be surprised to hear that, as regards that
country I answered the question remitted to me by saying that the only
practical means I could see of further encouraging the construction of
light railways in Ireland was by the wise expenditure of additional
Government Grants, while as regards England, I pointed out that she had
for long preferred to dispense with light railways, that, as forcibly
expressed in _The Times_, she alone of civilised countries had but one
standard for her railways, that is "the best that money could buy"; that
times had changed, and in 1894 and 1895 much discussion and investigation
on the subject had taken place, brought about chiefly, I thought, by
depression in agriculture; that the energy which France, Germany, Sweden,
Belgium and Italy had expended on their light railway systems, especially
in agricultural and rural districts, had helped to further concentrate
public opinion on the question; that a conference had been held at the
Board of Trade and a Committee appointed to investigate the subject; that
this Committee, after various sittings, had reported in favour of
legislation, and that the result had been that the _Light Railway Act_ of
1896 had come into being. My paper also dealt with this Act, explaining
its scope, its limitations and what its effect had been during the
comparatively short time (only four years) it had been in force; and my
conclusion was that in Great Britain no further facilities were at that
time required for encouraging the building of light railways, the best
policy in my judgment being, to give the Act a fair trial, as time only
could show to what extent the railways to be made in virtue of its
provisions would fulfil the objects for which it had been passed.
Mr. Acworth did not tackle the question as affecting other countries. He
reported that he had no special knowledge which would entitle him to say
how light railway enterprise could best be developed in countries other
than his own, and that as my Report "sufficiently set out the present
position of affairs in reference to light railways in the United
Kingdom," he thought the most useful contribution he could offer to the
discussion of the question would be "a short criticism of the working,
both from a legal or administrative and also from a practical point of
view, of our English Act of 1896."
The Act of 1896 was one of considerable importance to British Railways
and, therefore, merits a few words. It established three Commissioners
who were empowered to make Orders authorising the construction of Light
Railways, including powers for the compulsory acquisition of land;
authorised the granting of Government loans and, under special
circumstances, free grants of money. The Board of Trade might require
any project brought forward under the Act to be submitted to Parliament,
if they considered its magnitude, or the effect it might have on any
existing railway, demanded such a course. The Act simplified and
cheapened the process for the acquisition of land, and ordained that in
fixing the price the consequent betterment of other lands held by the
same owner should be taken into account. It imparted considerable power
to dispense with certain expensive conditions and regulations in working
railways constructed under its authority. Though it was intended
primarily to benefit agriculture, it was capable of an interpretation
wide enough to include all kinds of tramways, and it has been extensively
used for that purpose, sometimes, I fear, to the detriment of existing
railways.
According to an article in the Jubilee (1914) number of the _Railway
News_, by Mr. Welby Everard, up to the end of the year 1912 (since the
outbreak of the war figures are not obtainable) a total of 645
applications (including 111 applications for amending Orders) were made
to the Commissioners, the total mileage represented being 4,861 miles. Of
these applications 418 were passed, comprising 2,115 miles, of which,
1,415 miles were in class A, _i.e_. light railways to be constructed on
land acquired or "cross-country" lines, that is to say, lines which
legitimately fulfilled the purposes of the Act. But, up to October,
1913, only 45 of these lines, with a total length of 441 miles, had been
constructed and opened for traffic. The number of applications to the
Commissioners seemed to show a considerable demand for greater facilities
for transit in rural districts, but capital apparently was slow to
respond to that demand. Perhaps it will be different now, in these days
of change and reconstruction. The Government is pledged to tackle the
whole question of Transport, and Light Railways will, of course, not be
overlooked, though Motor Traction will run them a close race.
For ten years I had now been manager of the Midland Great Western
Railway, and busy and interesting years they were. In that period Irish
railways, considering that the population of the country was diminishing,
had made remarkable progress, and effected astonishing improvements.
Whilst the population of England during the decade had _increased_ by
9.13 per cent., and Scotland by 4.69, that of Ireland had _decreased_ by
4.29 per cent! Yet, notwithstanding this, the railway traffic in
Ireland, measured by receipts, had increased by 22 per cent., against
England 31 and Scotland 36. In the number of passengers carried the
increase in Ireland was 29 per cent. In the same period the increase in
the number of engines and vehicles in Ireland was 22, in England 30, and
Scotland 33 per cent., whilst the number of train miles run (which is the
real measure of the usefulness of railways to the public) had advanced 27
per cent. in Ireland, compared with 28 in England, and 30 in Scotland.
These figures indicate what Irish railways had accomplished in the decade
ending with December, 1900, and betoken, I venture to affirm, a keen
spirit of enterprise. These ten years had witnessed the introduction of
breakfast and dining cars on the trains, of parlour cars, long bogie
corridor carriages, the lighting of carriages by electricity, the
building of railway hotels in tourist districts, the establishment of
numerous coach and steamboat tours, the quickening of tourist traffic
generally, the adoption of larger locomotives of greatly increased power,
the acceleration of the train service, the laying of heavier and smoother
permanent way, and a widespread extension of cheap fares--tourist,
excursion, week-end, etc. It was a period of great activity and progress
in the Irish railway world, with which I was proud and happy to be
intimately connected. But what a return for all this effort and
enterprise the Irish railway companies received--3 pounds 17s. 10d. per
cent. on the whole capital expended, plus a liberal amount of abuse from
the Press and politicians, neither of whom ever paused to consider what
Ireland owed to her railways, which, perhaps, all things considered, was
the best conducted business in the country. It, however, became the
vogue to decry Irish lines as inefficient and extortionate, and a fashion
once started, however ridiculous, never lacks supporters. The public,
like sheep, are easily led. In England the average return on capital
expended was 4 pounds 0s. 5d., and in Scotland 4 pounds 2s. 2d.
In the spring of 1901, Mr. W. H. Mills, the Engineer of the Great
Northern Railway of Ireland, and I were entrusted by the Board of Works
with an investigation into the circumstances of the Cork, Blackrock and
Passage Railway in regard to a proposed Government loan to enable the
Company to discharge its liabilities and complete an extension of its
railway to Crosshaven. It was an interesting inquiry, comprising a
broken contract, the cost of completing unfinished works, the financial
prospects of the line when such works were completed, and other cognate
matters. A Bill in Parliament promoted by the Railway Company in the
following year became necessary in connection with the loan, which after
our Report the Government granted, and I had to give evidence in regard
to it. In the same session I appeared also before two other
Parliamentary Committees, so again I had a busy time outside the ordinary
domestic duties pertaining to railway management.
On the first day of November, 1902, my good friend Walter Bailey and I
started on a visit to Egypt. It, like Constantinople and Spain and
Portugal, occupied more than the usual month's vacation, but as these
extra long excursions were taken only every two or three years, and as it
was never my habit to nibble at holidays by indulging in odd days or week-
ends, my conscience was clear, especially as my Chairman and Directors
cordially approved of my seeing a bit of the world, and readily granted
the necessary leave of absence. As for Bailey, he always declared this
Egyptian tour was the holiday of his life. To continue, we arrived in
Cairo, _via_ Trieste and Alexandria, on the 10th. There we were met by
Mr. Harrison, the general manager of Messrs. Thomas Cook and Son, and
their principal dragoman, _Selim_, whom he placed during our stay in
Cairo at our disposal. _Selim_ was a Syrian and the prince of dragomans;
a handsome man, of Oriental dignity and gravity, arrayed in wonderful
robes, which by contrast with our Occidental attire made Bailey and me
feel drab and commonplace. At Cairo we stayed for eight days at
Shepheard's Hotel, and under _Selim's_ guidance made good use of our
time. On the ninth day we began a delightful journey up the Nile. Mr.
Frank Cook had insisted upon our being the guests of his firm on their
tourist steamer _Amasis_.
My relations with Messrs. Thomas Cook and Son go back for many years, and
with the Midland of England, my _Alma Mater_, the firm is, perhaps, more
closely associated than with any other railway. It was on the Midland
system that, in 1841, its business began. In that year the founder of
the firm, Mr. Thomas Cook, arranged with the Midland the first public
excursion train on record. It ran from Leicester to Loughborough and
back at a fare of one shilling, and carried 570 passengers. This was the
first small beginning of that great tourist business which now encircles
the habitable globe. Mr. Thomas Cook was a Derbyshire man and was born
in 1808. My father knew him well, often talked to me about him, and told
me stories of the excursion and tourist trade in its early days. But I
am digressing, and must return to Old Father Nile, who was in great
flood. We saw him at his best. His banks were teeming with happy dusky
figures and the smiling irrigated land was bright with fertility. Our
journey to Assouan occupied eleven days, a leisurely progress averaging
about two and a-half miles an hour. During the night we never steamed,
the _Amasis_ lying up while we enjoyed quiet rest in the quietest of
lands. Of course we visited all the famous temples and tombs, ruins and
monuments, of ancient Egypt; and had many camel and donkey rides on the
desert sands before reaching the first cataract. At Luxor, where we
stayed for five days, we were pleasantly surprised at seeing Mr. Harrison
and Mr. Warren Gillman come on board. The latter was Secretary of
Messrs. Cook and Son's Egyptian business, and has, I believe, since risen
higher in the service of the firm.
The great Dam at Assouan was just completed and we traversed its entire
length on a trolley propelled by natives. Assouan detained us for four
days; then, time being important, we travelled back to Cairo by railway.
Three more interesting days were passed in the Babylonian city, then
homewards we went by the quickest route attainable.
Whilst in Cairo and on our journey up the Nile, Bailey and I wrote,
jointly, a series of seven articles on "Egypt and its Railways." These
appeared in the _Railway News_ in seven successive weeks during December
and January.
Our last hours in the land of the Pharaohs were filled with regret at
having to leave it so soon. Said Bailey: "Cannot you, before we go,
write a verse of Farewell?" So I composed the following:--
Egypt, farewell, and farewell Father Nile,
Impenetrable Sphinx, eternal pile
Of broad-based pyramid, and spacious hypostyle!
Farewell Osiris, Anubis and Set,
Horus and Ra, and gentle Meskenhet,
Ye sacred gods of old, O must we leave you yet?
The mighty works of Ramesis the Great,
Memphis, Karnak and Thebes asseverate
The pomp and glory, Egypt, of your ancient state.
Bright cloudless land! Your skies of heavenly blue
Bend o'er your fellaheen the whole day through;
Night scarce diminishes their sweet celestial hue.
Realm of enchantment, break your mystic spell,
Land of the lotus, smiling land farewell!
For ever it may be, what oracle can tell?