QUOT HOMINES TOT SENTENTIAE. In practically all important discussions diversity of opinion exists, even in those which are not strictly contentious. Railway subjects are no exception. There are many sides to railway questions; there have been many reformers, and also many theorists, whose ideas have led practically nowhere. Professor Smith of Birmingham University said recently, inter alia., that "most of the valuable literature on Railway Transport came from the U.S.A. and that, with few exceptions, British thinkers had not made any remarkable contribution to the theoretical side, though, on the practical side, we had never been in the second place" When it comes to the practical issues of railway management and operation, British writers on railways speak, generally, from practical knowledge, and can give helpful suggestions but, on the theoretical side, about which there has been much controversy, few works of a really valuable nature have yet been produced. Not only so, but all reformers and thinkers deal with their problems in the light of the present day organisation and management methods, evidently overlooking the fact that it is useless to try to rebuild from the top of the structure, and that the proper foundation must first of all be laid, before real progress can be attained. There is an urgent need for a careful and thorough examination of these important que: tions, more particularly, perhaps, in the field of allocation of traffic costs. The possibility of allocating costs has been disputed by all decent writers on Railway Economics. In the latter parts of this thesis, it is contended that traffic costs can, and ought to be, obtained, though this [??al] can only be achieved by the re:organisation of the railway management. [??tes] Tribunals and Tribunals for deciding the Standard revenue, and similar Bodies, will never solve the problems that are at present facing the Railway Companies and the public, unless they can obtain the appropriate facts and figures to work on.