Act, a trader having premises close to one railway might be faced with the alternatives of paying a higher rate, or of incurring greater costs in carting his goods for a long distance across a town to the station of another railway company having a shorter route and able, therefore, to make a lower charge for conveyance. Whichever of these alternatives the trader adopted, he would be at a disadvantage as compared with one of his own competitors whose premises happened to be situated near the station of the other railway. A trader having private sidings connected with the railway whose route was the longer would be at a still greater disadvantage as compared with a competitor whose sidings were connected with the railway having the shorter route. It will be seen that for these and other reasons, the trader is intimately concerned with the matter of circuitous routes and should be familiar with the provisions of the Act which govern them.

Section 52 (1) of the Act provides that where two places are connected by routes belonging to or operated by two or more railway companies, and the standard rate by one such route is less than the standard rate by another such route, subject to certain provisions as to circuitous routes contained in the section and described hereunder, traffic sent by the longer route may be charged at the standard rate for the shorter route. In effect, where competitive traffic is concerned, the statutory standard rate for the longer route may be disregarded and a special standard rate-the standard rate for the shorter route-may be substituted. It should be noted that this provision affects not only standard rates but, by the operation of s. 36, as described in Chapter III, all exceptional rates as well.

Section 52 defines a circuitous route to which its provisions apply as a route which is longer by 30 per cent. or more than the shortest route between two

places. The expression "route" may be regarded as being the chargeable distance which, as is shown in Chapter III, is the shortest practicable working distance between two places. For the purposes of s. 52 competitive routes longer than the routes with which they are in competition may be divided into three classes

(a) routes less than 30 per cent. longer than the shortest route;

(b) routes between 30 per cent. and 50 per cent. longer than the shortest route;

(c) routes more than 50 per cent. longer than the shortest route.

It will be noticed at once that routes in class (a) do not come within the definition of a circuitous route given above and are not, therefore, subject to the provisions of the section relating to such routes, but only to the general provision of the section as to charging at the rate applicable to the shortest route. The position in regard to these routes is that the rate applicable to the shortest route with which they are in competition may be charged at all times and in all circumstances without regard to the provisions and requirements relating to routes in classes (b) and (c).

It has been briefly shown how certain individual traders may be interested in circuitous routes. It may now be pointed out in referring to the provisions relating to routes in classes (b) and (c) that every trader is of necessity interested in these routes to some extent, because if no limitations were imposed, their employment might tend to uneconomical working and wasteful competition which would react upon the general level of all railway rates and charges.

In order that the interests of traders as a whole might be properly safeguarded it was enacted by s. 52 (3) that any railway company desiring to make use of any

circuitous routes must submit a schedule of such routes to the Minister of Transport for reference to the Tribunal. In accordance with this provision nearly 50,000 routes were scheduled by the four amalgamated companies and certain non-amalgamated companies, and referred to the Tribunal. As from the appointed day only those circuitous routes contained in the schedules as approved by the Tribunal and filed in the offices of the Tribunal may be charged for as provided by s. 52 (1), and all other circuitous routes (see (b) and (c) supra) must be charged for on actual mileage unless or until they are added to the schedules of circuitous routes in the following manner :—

A railway company may itself apply the provisions of s. 52 (1) to a new circuitous route in class (b), but such route must be reported to the Minister of Transport in such manner as he may direct within 14 days. If the Minister approves of the route, it will forthwith be added to the schedules, but if the Minister considers that the proposed route involves unreasonable competition or is not in the public interest, he may refer the matter to the Tribunal, who may, if they think fit, after giving all parties concerned an opportunity of being heard, cancel the route.

No route in class (c) which is not scheduled may be charged for as provided in s. 52 (1) without the consent of the Tribunal.

It appears that if a trader desires a circuitous route to be charged for at the rate applicable to a shorter route the method of procedure is to apply to the railway company concerned to take the necessary steps to have the proposed route scheduled.

The following notes are included for the benefit of traders who may be interested in the matter of circuitous routes.

The general interpretation of s. 52 (1) upon which the

N

railway companies relied in supporting their schedules, and which was afterwards adopted by the Tribunal in approving them, was that routes more than 30 per cent. longer than the corresponding shortest routes should be scheduled only in cases in which the same railway companies were in competition at both terminals. This is the general principle upon which the schedules have been compiled, and no other type of circuitous route which might be embraced by any wider interpretation of s. 52 (1) has been included. Among the routes scheduled there are, however, instances where an intermediate railway offered a route which was a recognized working route with through rates in operation.

All the routes included in the schedules are routes actually in use, and all existing circuitous routes which are within the meaning of the section as interpreted above have been included.

66

It is important to notice that while only those routes where the same railways are in competition at both ends have been included, the railway companies, in supporting the schedules before the Tribunal, stated that it was their desire to give to the traders the full benefit of the provisions of s. 52, and that in cases in which a circuitous route formed a link in a chain" the rates for the circuitous portion of the route would, subject to the provisions of the section, be calculated on the basis of the distance by the shortest route. In such cases the total conveyance rate for traffic viâ the circuitous route would be made up of two parts (a) the standard conveyance rate for the non-circuitous portion, and (b) the standard rate for the corresponding shorter distance for the circuitous portion. An example of the operation of this principle would be traffic from Birmingham to a station on the Southern Railway viâ London by a circuitous route between Birmingham and London. Only the Birmingham to London portion of such a route

will, of course, be found in the schedules of circuitous routes, but that portion will, where necessary, be included in compiling the total conveyance rate.

Further information as to circuitous routes may be obtained from the Reports of the Proceedings of the Tribunal on 9th February, 1926, and 22nd March, 1927, published by H.M. Stationery Office.

THROUGH ROUTES AND RATES; EXCHANGE FACILITIES.

The right of a trader to have merchandise conveyed from one place to another where a continuous route exists between the two places, but does not belong wholly to one railway company, will be maintained as from the appointed day by s. 47 of the Act.

There is little doubt that one of the benefits which the trader will derive from the grouping of the railways under Part I of the Act will be a very considerable reduction in the number of through rates previously in operation. Through rates will still be necessary, however, and interested traders are advised to consider carefully the provisions of s. 75 and of s. 47 relating to exchange facilities and through rates as described hereunder.

Statutory provisions in regard to through routes were first enacted owing to the obstructive policy pursued by railway companies suffering at that time from the effects of excessive competition, and were contained in s. 2 of the Railway and Canal Traffic Act, 1854. This section required every railway company having a continuous line of railway with that of another company to afford reasonable facilities for the receiving, forwarding and delivering of traffic on its own system. Then followed s. 11 of the Regulation of Railways Act, 1873, which entitled any railway company to require another company to forward traffic at through rates.