The Argus at KellyGang 22/8/1868 (2)

From KellyGang
Jump to: navigation, search
(full text transcription)

see previous

Last year the steamers were not able to take down all the wheat grown here, and it is only reasonable to suppose that towards the end of the season, in order to save the storage of grain till the Murray again became navigable, and to realise quick profits, the holders of wheat would have it conveyed short distances up stream to Albury, rather than send it down by the long journey to Echuca. One steamer could make three or four trips between Albury and Wahgunyah while she was making one trip between Albury and Echuca. We have heard it argued that whether the produce was sent up the river to Albury or down to Echuca, the Victorian railways would still get the carriage of it, and therefore that Victoria would have no object in running her rails to the river bank at Albury. It will easily be perceived that if this view were correct, it would be equally applicable as an argument against making any railway at all to the Upper Murray. But the idea is based on incorrect data; and to prove it, we have only to mention that since last harvest hundreds of tons of wheat were sent down from those districts to Melbourne by waggon, because the steamers could not take it; and that even now the grain sheds at Howlong and elsewhere are full of the surplus. This traffic can only be brought on to the railway by giving steam-boat owners facilities for loading and unloading, without the necessity of knocking the goods about on drays,

The only real argument against making Albury the terminus is the cost of £33,000 for the additional two miles of line. Against this, credit must be, taken for £18,000, being the cost of the two miles at £9,300, which is the estimated expense per mile of the whole line. Victoria would get the freight and passenger traffic on these two miles, and if the whole line would pay six per cent, (as calculated) these two miles would pay a good deal more, by bringing traffic on to the rails that would not otherwise reach them. Deducting, then, £18,600 from £35,000, it appears that the cost of bridging over the fiats would be only £10,400 in excess of the average cost of the whole line. If arrangements could be made to cause the same track to carry the load traffic as well as the locomotive traffic, there would be a further six or seven thousand pounds to deduct. So that in point of fact, an .extra sum of £9,000 or £10,000 would be all that is required to lay the rails to the Murray.

This seems a small expenditure when it is considered that it ensures connexion with New South Wales, and prevents the possibility of the traffic being in future cut off, as it now is, by every flood that comes down the Murray. The idea of a railway terminus kept alive only by a few half-ton punts made out of old packing cases, and navigated across flooded roads by persons risking their necks in the venture, is simply ridiculous. Why, if the Wodonga people only knew the effect of their own arguments, they must collapse at once.

As they have complained of the cost of two miles of railway to Albury, we must ask them the following question. What population is there along the twenty miles of railway from Chiltern to Wodonga that would justify a line being made to the latter village? These twenty miles will cost, at, £9,300 per mile, £180,000. Can the 150 people at Wodonga or the 100 people at Barnawatha supply a traffic to pay the interest on £180,000?

Obviously, if the Wodonga people are depending on the Riverine traffic to pull them through, they must consent to such arrangements as will secure that traffic. We have already shown that the arrangements they desire will not facilitate that object. The principal merchants in Albury have told Mr Higinbotham the same. The conclusion we have come to is simply this, that if the railway is not to tap from Murray at Albury, there will be a heavy public loss if it goes further than Chiltern.

end

, .1. , .2. ,


 ! The text has been retyped from a microfiche copy of the original.

We have taken care to reproduce this document but areas of the original text may been damaged.

We also apologise for any typographical errors.