A definite proposal to nationalize the railway systems of the Dominion of Canada was made during the war. Canada has nearly one-sixth of the railway mileage of the United States, although it has less than one-fourteenth of the population. Canada has three trans-continental systems. There is sufficient trade in the Dominion for two good systems. A royal commission appointed to inquire into the subject reported that the net returns of the railways were so low as to prove that more railways had been built than could be justified on commercial grounds. Large subsidies had been granted by the Government. In the case of the Grand Trunk Pacific this public subsidy amounted to nearly two-thirds of the total investment; in the case of the Canadian Northern to nearly three-quarters. The Canadian Pacific was reported as the strongest railway in Canada, economically built and well managed. The other companies, such as the Canadian Northern and the Grand Trunk Pacific, were facing heavy annual deficits. [Illustration: Walker D. Hines He succeeded William McAdoo as Director-General of Railroads after the signing of the armistice. Copyright Underwood & Underwood] The commissioners recommended heroic measures. They did not consider that operation by a Minister directly responsible to Parliament would be in the public interest. It would not secure better service nor lower rates. What the commissioners did recommend was to transfer the three companies to a new body, a board of trustees to be incorporated as the Dominion Railway Company and that the Canadian Northern, the Canadian Pacific and the Grand Trunk Pacific be transferred to this body. The Government-owned Intercolonial and Transcontinental Railways stretching from Halifax to Winnipeg were to be transferred to the Dominion Company. Under the scheme worked out by the commission, the Government would assume responsibility to the Dominion Railway Company for the interest on existing securities of the transferred companies. As to the composition of the board of trustees, the commissioner recommended that they be five; three railway members, one member selected on the ground of business and financial experience and one as especially possessing the confidence of the railway employees. The commissioners laid stress on the importance of the board being non-political, permanent and self-perpetuating, and in this connection pointed to the experience of the Australian state railways. FRENCH RAILWAYS IN WARTIME The great strain on a country's railway system caused by war was illustrated by the French mobilization. Four thousand seven hundred and fifty trains were required. After mobilization was over the Army still had a permanent need of railways for two purposes: for its communications in the rear, and for its movements from place to place. To bring supplies to one Army corps trainloads aggregating 200 tons a day were required. Mr. G. Blanchon in _New Warfare_ explained the situation as follows: