East Indian Railway: 1906 History of the EIR - Chapter XI
Note: This is a sub-section of the East Indian Railway
The History of the East Indian Railway by George Huddleston. Published 1906 by Tracker, Spins and Co
CHAPTER XI. GROWTH OF THE COAL TRADE IN 1883 - THE QUESTION OF WORKING THE EAST INDIAN RAILWAY BY STATE OR COMPANY MANAGEMENT - AGITATION IN CALCUTTA REGARDING CONSTRUCTION OF THE GRAND CHORD - RETIREMENT OF SIR BRADFORD LESLIE - DEATH OF MR. CRAWFORD.
FOLLOWING the great wheat export trade of 1883, there was a short period of depression. In 1883 everything had been in favour of the exportation of Indian wheat; the stocks held in England and on the Continent were small and there were poor harvests, both in Europe and America. But in 1884 the position was reversed and the average price of wheat in England became lower than it had been since the year 1780. During the first half of 1884 there was, on the East Indian Railway, a decrease in wheat traffic alone of no less than 158,084 tons, and the only considerable set off was an increase of 53,785 tons in the weight of coal carried.
The coal trade which for some years had been slowly developing, was now beginning to attract attention. When the East Indian Railway was constructed, coal was almost unknown in India. Mr. Crawford referring to this in 1885, remarked:—
"If a man fell in with a bit of coal in his walk, he would pick it up as a curiosity, and throw it away because it dirtied his finger. That was all that was known of coal 30 years ago. It was the act of this Company which brought coal to light. From a basis of comparatively nothing 30 years ago, we have now risen to carry one million and a half tons in the course of the year. The native mind is so full of prejudice, that one might have been afraid that the use of an article like coal would have excited some superstitious feeling, but when the native came to know that coal was only fossilized wood, he had no objection to burn it, and with such an enormous population as we have in India, with such large cities and factories rising in all quarters and steam engines and so on, we see the explanation of the great increase in the quantity of coal brought to us for conveyance. So it will go on and very largely increase. I venture to predict that the time will come, which I shall probably not witness, when the article of coal will be our largest source of profit."
Mr. Crawford had great foresight and his prediction has come true, but he seems to have looked more to the internal consumption of coal than to the export trade, which has been where the largest growth has actually come. The natives of India have not yet taken freely to the use of coal as fuel for domestic purposes, when they do so the consumption will be enormous; and it is perfectly certain that sooner or later the time must arrive when they will have to, for wood fuel and charcoal are becoming more and more scarce every year, and there is nothing left to burn, but dried cow-dung or coal. Already we find coal used by natives for brick burning and for manufacturing purposes. Sweetmeat makers use it and it is burnt by blacksmiths even in remote villages, but for cooking purposes, or for heating houses in the cold season, or for other similar domestic use, we very seldom see coal burnt, except perhaps in the vicinity of the colliery district or in Calcutta and the neighbourhood. The retail price is in fact still too high to suit the pockets of the majority.
In the year 1884, in the course of an enquiry before a select Committee of the House of Commons on "East India Railway Communications," Mr. Juland Danvers, the then Government Director of Guaranteed Railway Companies and Secretary in the Public Works Department at the India Office, being asked to state his reasons for an opinion he had given, that he thought that the Agency of both the State and of private enterprise might usefully be employed in working railways in India, though, as a principle, he preferred that of companies, replied:—
"The advantages of making use of private enterprise, even when assisted by guarantees or subsidies, appear to me to be these. It relieves an already overburdened Government of duties which can be equally well performed by others. It prevents an increase to Government establishments and to pension lists. It secures more steady progress, by avoiding interruptions to which State undertakings are liable. It secures also the supply of money as required, and its application to the special purpose which an arrangement between the Government and the company is intended to fulfil, whereas war, famine, and other exigencies of State may interfere with the supply of money when most required for works under Government. It avoids the disadvantages appertaining to State agency, which is liable, more or less, according to circumstances and to the character of those in authority, to be affected by influences from which a company under proper State and legislative supervision is free. It ensures better than any other way the formation of railway systems or administrations of suitable size. It is the best way of securing a healthy competition. Supposing a system of Government agency to be carried out in its entirety, a huge state monopoly would be established which would not be advantageous to the country or conducive to the interests of the various districts traversed. Upon the whole, therefore, I think that, under suitable legislative enactments, and with fair competition, the best results will be secured by employing companies as far as practicable. Might I be allowed to quote a high authority in support of this view, namely, Lord Salisbury. When he was Secretary of State he had to consider the question of purchasing the East Indian Railway and in a despatch to the Government of India relating to that proposition he says:—
'The question is shall the Railway, if purchased by the Government, be worked directly by the State, or shall an attempt be made to continue the working through the agency of a company, suitably constituted, to which the Railway shall be leased for a term of years ? I am not disposed to call in question the possibility of carrying out the working of a railway, such as the East Indian, through Government agency in a satisfactory manner. But the difficulties in the way of combining the habitual, and indeed necessary rigidity, with which a system of Government financial and administrative control must work, with the freedom of action required for the successful management of a constantly varying business like that of a railway, made up of a vast mass of details, would be considerable; and to avoid them would require both a happy selection of officers and well-contrived administrative rules and methods, which, though no doubt attainable, could not be confidently or permanently reckoned upon. I view with no small anxiety the ever continued expansion of the vast establishments of your Government, which, as they grow, place an ever increasing weight of business on yourself and your officers, whose strength is already over-taxed, and leave an ever diminishing area for independent action. That such a state of things is, to some extent, an almost necessary consequence of our position in India, may be true; but this in itself is an argument for resisting the tendency, when it may be done without the sacrifice of objects of evident importance. For such reasons I should in the present case, as now advised, gladly hear from Your Excellency's Government that you were of opinion that the working of the East Indian Railway might, without objection, be entrusted to a private company, in the event of the purchase of the line being effected.'
"The result we know. The working arrangement was made, and I think it will be admitted that the best results have ensued."
Mr. Danvers strongly advocated the policy of employing private enterprise and experience, in opposition to State line management, and Mr. Crawford in 1885 wrote a brochure or pamphlet called "The Result we know," the object of which was, by an analysis of statistics for the preceding five years, to verify the truth upon which Mr. Danvers' argument was founded, and to place on record what private experience and private direction had effected, in the case of the East Indian Railway.
It is unnecessary to quote in detail from this brochure, but as a result of the examination of the figures relating to the coaching and goods traffic, the Board of Directors wrote several letters to the Agent in India, impressing upon him the necessity of examining into and cultivating every possible means of increasing the traffic of the line. Particular stress was laid on the desirability of developing the local movement of passengers and goods, by reducing charges and affording facilities between large internal centres, and by encouraging the use of coal for domestic purposes. The letters in fact were a clear indication of the liberal intentions of the Board and a guide to the policy they desired should generally be followed.
During the next few years the competition between Bombay and Calcutta became more acute and considerable reductions were made in the railway rates, by the different administrations interested. At about the same time some correspondence arose as to the construction of the Grand Chord line, attempts being made to influence public opinion towards its being carried out by the Oudh and Rohilkhand Railway, but the claim of the East Indian was beyond dispute and nothing came of the agitation.
One of Mr. Crawford's last acts as Chairman of the East Indian Railway Company was to publish "some observations on the remarks of Sir Alexander Wilson at the Annual General Meeting of the Bengal Chamber of Commerce on the 28th February 1889 and other sayings and doings at Calcutta in connection with the proposed Grand Chord line." The President of the Chamber of Commerce had said at the Annual Meeting held. in Calcutta on the 28th February, 1889, that the East Indian Railway was the sole means of transport between the North-West Provinces and Calcutta; that its resources were inadequate for the trade of the country; that it maintained a high tariff of rates and only granted concessions when competition necessitated its doing so; that trade was gradually being deflected from Calcutta and that an independent alternative route was necessary, in order to break down the monopoly possessed by the East Indian Railway.
On all these points Mr. Crawford had observations to make and in addition reprinted a letter from X. B. E. which had appeared in the Englishman of the 13th March, 1889. This letter afforded a most complete answer to the statements put forward at the meeting of the Chamber of Commerce, and Mr. Crawford had but little to add to it. The writer, who it is not difficult to identify, was even as long ago as 1889, one of the best-known railway men in India. The letter was as follows:—
Sir, I have read with much interest the remarks made by the President at the recent annual meeting of the Bengal Chamber of Commerce, on the subject of the extension and development of the railway system in India, and more particularly the construction of a second line of railway between the North-West Provinces and the port of Calcutta. The President had come to the conclusion and the Hon. Mr. Steel considered Sir A. Wilson's remarks worthy of profound enquiry and deliberation, that a second railway under management independent of the East Indian Railway was really required, on the following grounds:
1. That it has been seen over and over again, when there have been times of pressure, how inadequate the resources of the East Indian Railway have been for the requirements of the State and the trade of the country.
2. That the East Indian Railway being a monopolist company, a high tariff of rates has been maintained, from which concessions have been so grudgingly extracted that Calcutta merchants have seen their trade gradually but steadily deflecting to the other side of India, and under existing circumstances have been powerless to stop this deflection.
3. That the competition resulting from the construction of an alternative route would ensure proper accommodation for goods and traffic and bring down rates sufficiently, to attract again to Calcutta, a considerable amount of the traffic which is now attracted by cheaper land carriage to the Western Coast.
4. That competition alone will secure that control of rates so essential to the development of the resources of the country and that all control over the East Indian Railway rates has been abandoned by Government.
If you will permit me to remark, under each of these four heads, I shall be much obliged.
The line stated to be necessary is that affording an alternative route between Moghalsarai and Calcutta.
1. The statement that the East Indian Railway has repeatedly failed in times of pressure seems rather sweeping. It is extremely questionable whether it can be stated that the capacity of this Railway to transport traffic over its lines between stations has ever been approached. There is a double line throughout between Moghalsarai and Howrah, and the only means of ascertaining whether more lines of rails are required seems to be to determine what daily tonnage can be hauled over the present lines, and what tonnage could be given by Calcutta merchants, with favourable rates to Calcutta, as compared with the charges to Western Ports, taken advantage of by Calcutta. If it be found that the double line of the East Indian Railway Company is prepared to deal with a considerable progressive development of traffic, why should money be sunk in 400 or more miles of new line, if the alternative railway is intended to enter Calcutta at a separate terminus from that of the East Indian Railway, as would appear to be the intention of the President of the Chamber of Commerce? The difficulties referred to by the President have, even in the merchants' view, been practically confined to terminal accommodation. The only serious difficulty was in 1883, when export trade developed suddenly beyond all expectations. Merchants had neither cargo, boats nor carts to clear arrivals to their full extent; no steamers, nor warehouses in which to stow consignments when cleared, the result being that the thee, existing accommodation at Howrah became "congested" and eventually rolling stock, instead of transporting grain and seeds, became locked up in warehousing them at Howrah. Since 1883 the railway accommodation has been largely increased, and only three years later, in 1886, Howrah dealt with the same weight of traffic in the busy months as in 1883, without difficulties either to merchants or the railway. Since 1886 the shed room at Howrah has been further increased, and there is now also the option to merchants to deliver on the Calcutta side.
2. If the East Indian Railway is a monopolist company, it must be admitted that it uses its powers with great consideration towards its constituents. The Administration Report recently issued by the Director-General of Railways chews that the charges levied by certain railways for the carriage of goods vary as below:—
Average sum in pies received for carrying a ton of goods one mile:—
- East Indian - 5.96
- North Western - 6.43
- Great Indian Peninsula - 8.21
- Baroda 9.19
- Rajputana 8.08
The charges by the East Indian Railway are, therefore much lower than those of the lines serving Bombay and Kurrachee. In other words Calcutta has an immense advantage over Bombay in the matter of railway charges.
3. As explained under head (1) it is very much open to question, indeed, whether Calcutta, including Howrah, has not ample accommodation for the present, and even for a largely increased trade. On the other hand, there seems to have been no attempt to show that a new line, running, as must the alternative route, through a country already served by the East Indian Railway and branches, can attract any considerable new traffic. If the two railways were under separate managements, and proceeded to competition, the undoubtedly low rates already charged by the East Indian would be liable to further reduction, and there would be every probability of the new railway becoming a burden to its owners. There is only one railway in India charging lower rates than the East Indian, and that railway, although open for a number of years, returns only 3 per cent. per annum on the capital outlay. As regards the alleged cheaper land carriage to Bombay, the President was clearly in error in his statement on this point. The distance from Calcutta to Bombay, via Jubbulpore, is 1,400 miles, Jubbulpore being distant 616 miles from Bombay and 784 miles from Calcutta. Even at Jubbulpore and at the important station of Sihora, near to Jubbulpore, charges are greatly in favour of Calcutta, notwithstanding the shortest lead to Bombay, while from Kirwee 673 miles from Bombay and 727 miles from Calcutta, the charges for grain and seeds are, per hundred maunds-
- To Bombay ... Rs.69 As.6 P.0
- To Calcutta ... Rs.50 As.0 P.0
4. The question whether the control of rates has been abandoned by Government appears to be one requiring the confirmation of Government or of the East Indian Railway. It is to the mutual interests of Calcutta merchants and of the East Indian Railway to keep trade to Calcutta and prevent diversion to Western Ports, and all will agree that the East Indian Railway must be reasonable in its charges, when the fact is known that last year Bombay got the lion's share of the trade from an important station, distant 540 miles from Calcutta and 880 miles from Bombay, rates Rs. 43 per hundred mann& in favour of Calcutta. In other words the charge to Bombay was almost twice as much as to Calcutta.
All circumstances considered, it is submitted that further enquiry on the part of the Chamber is desirable regarding the facilities they already receive from the existing line of communication.
X. B. E.
To this letter no convincing reply was forthcoming, but after many years the Government, as will be seen in another chapter, sanctioned the construction of the Grand Chord line as part of the undertaking of the East Indian Railway.
It need hardly be pointed out that the interests of the State and of the East Indian Railway Company are, and always have been, identical, and both would have been seriously affected by a diminution of the traffic of the Main Line, had the construction of the Grand Chord Line been entrusted to a rival company. And it is difficult to see that the public would in any way have benefited.
The development of the Bengal and North Western Railway led to the opening of the Digha Ghat branch, where it was intended that the bulk of the traffic between that system and the East Indian Railway should be interchanged by means of a steam ferry, for the conveyance of wagons across the river Ganges.
The Tarkessur Railway, constructed by private enterprise, was handed over to the East Indian Railway to work on the 1st January, 1885, and in the same year the Indian Midland Railway was formed under the auspices of the Great Indian Peninsular, with the object of connecting that system with the East Indian Railway at Cawnpore and Agra. The Hooghly Bridge was completed and formally opened to traffic by His Excellency the Viceroy on the 21st February, 1887, receiving from him the appropriate name of the "Jubilee Bridge," while Sir Bradford Leslie, its constructor, was appointed a Knight Commander of the Indian Empire. The bridge over the Ganges at Benares was also completed in 1887, and in the same year the distinction of Knight Commander of the Indian Empire was conferred on Sir Alexander M. Rendel, who had then been for upwards of thirty years the Consulting Engineer of the Company.
Sir Bradford Leslie, K.C.I.E., retired in 1887, and was succeeded as Agent by Mr. David Wilkinson Campbell, C.I.E., who was at the time the Locomotive Superintendent of the Company. Shortly after his retirement Sir Bradford Leslie put forward a scheme for the construction of a new line of railway, between Moghalsarai and the town of Hooghly, to compete with the East Indian Railway. The Board lost no time in entering with the Secretary of State their protest against this scheme, on the ground "that the construction by this Company of a Grand Chord line between Sitarampur and Moghalsarai, the main line originally proposed and surveyed by this Company in 1850, would be the natural complement to a line following the course of the Ganges, whenever the circumstances of the country, commercial, political or otherwise, should require it and justify the large expenditure which it would involve."
In 1888 the first portion of the Company's hill school at Mussoorie was opened. This school which has since proved a great benefit to the Company's employees, is not intended for the education of the children of servants of the superior grade but for the children of those who, by reason of their position in the service, lack the means of sending them to be educated in England. A more detailed account of the Hill School will be found elsewhere.
In 1888 Sir Macdonald Stephenson resigned his position as Deputy Chairman of the Board, though he continued on the directorate until 1892, and in 1889 Mr. Crawford, who for thirty-five years had been Chairman of the Company, died. These two had been associated in the formation of the Company, Mr. Crawford had been a Director as early as 1847 and had been Chairman of the Board since 1854. His services both in the interests of Government and in those of the shareholders had been of a specially valuable nature.
Mr. Crawford, to quote from Herepath, "had a great eye for figures"; like all masters of the arithmetical and statistical craft, he put life and force into his statistics; giving them that margin which never fails to carry home the particular point to be inculcated.
See Also
Sources of Information