but finding that the construction of lines of this class involved a heavier expense than they were prepared to face, the more recent lines were built on a gauge of 3 ft. 6 in. In that state there are 507 miles laid to the 5-ft. 3-in. gauge, and 1,2294 to that of 3-ft. 6-in., which is also the gauge of the 145 miles of railway in the Northern Territory. The line joining Adelaide with the Victorian border, as well as several of the other trunk-lines, has been constructed on the wide gauge, so that the line from Melbourne to Adelaide is uniform. The private line which prolongs the South Australian system into New South Wales as far as Broken Hill is on the 3-ft. 6-in. gauge. All the Queensland lines are built on the gauge of 3 ft. 6 in., so that transhipment is necessary on the boundary between that state and New South Wales. Tasmania, Western Australia, and New Zealand have adopted the 3-ft. 6-in. gauge. The first line laid down in Tasmania was on the 5-ft. 3-in. gauge, but it was soon altered to 3 ft. 6 in. On the west coast of that island an experiment is being made in the construction of a 2-ft. gauge line, at one-fourth the cost of a line laid down to the Tasmanian standard gauge. The advisability of constructing lines of this class is also being considered in Victoria. The total length of line in Australasia laid down to a gauge of 5 ft. 3 in. is 3,809 miles; there are 3,025 miles on the 4-ft. 8-in. gauge, and 8,2284 miles on the 3-ft. 6-in. gauge.

As far back as May, 1889, Mr. Eddy urged the Government of New South Wales to take action with the object of securing a uniform gauge for the states, and frequently since that date the Railway Commissioners have directed attention to the urgency of dealing with this important question before the states incur greater expenditure in railway construction. They have suggested that the settlement of the difficult question of the adoption of a standard gauge should be approached from the standpoint of which of the two gauges, 4 ft. 8 in. and 5 ft. 3 in., can be adopted at the least cost and with the smallest amount of inconvenience to the country; and that the whole of the railways of New South Wales and Victoria, with that part of the South Australian lines laid to the 5-ft. 3-in. gauge, as well as the line to Cockburn, and all the lines in Queensland south of Brisbane leading to New South Wales, shall be altered to the standard, the cost of altering the railways and the rolling stock necessary to work them to be a national charge.

COMPARISON OF RAILWAY FACILITIES.

The population and area of territory per mile of line open vary considerably in the different states and New Zealand. In comparison with population, Western Australia, Queensland, and South Australiathe most extensive states-have the greatest mileage; but in proportion to the area of territory, Victoria, Tasmania, and New Zealand take the lead. The annexed table shows the relation of the railway mileage

to population and to the area of each state and New Zealand for the year 1901-2:

In the following table are given the average population and area of territory per mile of line open in the principal countries of the world. Of course a comparison can only be made fairly between Australasia and other young countries in process of development

:

COST OF CONSTRUCTION

At the close of the year 1901-1902, the cost of construction and equipment of the State railways completed and open to traffic in the Commonwealth was, in round figures, £126,943,000, or 58.8 per cent. of the public debts of the states comprised in the Federation, after deducting sinking funds. The construction and equipment of the railways of Australasia cost £145,114,000, or 54 per cent. of the public debt of Australasia, after deducting sinking funds. To what extent the states have contributed to this expenditure will be apparent from the subjoined table, showing the total cost and the average per mile :

It will be seen that the lines which have been constructed most cheaply are those of Western Australia, where the average cost per mile has only been £5,449, as compared with an average of £9,895 for the Commonwealth and £9,633 for the whole of Australasia. In that state there have been few engineering difficulties to contend with, and the lines laid down have been of a light kind. In New South Wales, the average cost, given as £13,407, has been somewhat reduced lately, in consequence of the construction of light "Pioneer" lines, built at an expenditure of £2,019 per mile. The Minister for Public Works

has constructed 10, and is constructing 7 new lines by day labour, as the Railway Construction Department has had a somewhat unfortunate experience in regard to claims for extras to contracts, and expensive litigation in resisting such claims. In Victoria the average cost has been reduced from £13,153 to £12,298 since 1891. At that date it was decided to apply the "butty-gang" system to the construction of railways in the state, and to build all new country lines as cheaply as possible, and this principle has been strictly adhered to. Fairly substantial permanent-way has been laid down, with reduced ballast; unless absolutely necessary, fencing and gatehouses have been dispensed with; and only a skeleton equipment for stations and water supplies has been provided. As settlement progresses and traffic is developed, it is intended to raise these lines to the requisite standard of efficiency.

It would hardly be fair to institute a comparison between the cost of construction per mile in Australasia and in the densely-populated countries of Europe, for while in Europe the resumption of valuable ground is perhaps the heaviest expense in connection with the building of railways, in the states and New Zealand this item of expenditure is not of leading importance. The cost per mile in certain sparsely-settled countries is as follows:

while for the Commonwealth of Australia it is £9,895, and for New Zealand £8,130.

REVENUE AND WORKING EXPENSES.

The avowed object of State railway construction in Australasia has been to promote settlement, apart from considerations of the profitable working of the lines; but at the same time the principle has been kept in view that in the main the railways should be self-supporting, and some of the states have, with more or less success, handed them over to Commissioners to be worked according to commercial principles, free from political interference. With the exception of South Australia, so` far as the Palmerston-Pine Creek line in the Northern Territory is

concerned, in all the states the revenue derived from the railway traffic exceeds the working expenses. During 1898-9 the states of New South Wales and Western Australia derived a profit from the working of the lines; and for the year ended 30th June, 1900, the states of South Australia proper and Western Australia were similarly favoured. During 1900-1, the lines of New South Wales and Western Australia, and for the year ended 30th June, 1902, those of Western Australia, not only paid working expenses and interest but left a slight margin of profit. Even in New South Wales, where the Commissioners have achieved most commendable results during the term of their administration, and claim to have at last made the lines self-supporting, there is still a deficiency for the year ended 30th June, 1902, when it is borne in mind that the average price received for the loans of the state is but £96.41 per £100 of stock, and the interest payable is calculated accordingly. The net sum available to meet interest charges during the last two working years will be found in the following table, showing the earnings and working expenses:

* Years ended 31st December, 1900 and 1901.

(-) Denotes deficiency in amount available to meet working expenses.

+ Years ended 31st March, 1901 and 1902.