CHAPTER XXVI.

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?