EXTRACTS FROM THE EVIDENCE OF WITNESSES.

[Nova.— The evidence of the witnesses fills 346 folio pages. Our selec- tions are necessarily those which are the most important and interest- ing to the public at large.] ROBERT STEPHENSON, ESQ. (son of George Stephenson, the Chief Engineer of the Manchester and Liverpool Railway), Civil Engineer; Engineer of the London and Birmingham and Midland Counties Rail- ways, &c. &c. ; a Manufacturer of Locomotives ; Coal Mine Pro- prietor, and Practical Miner.

ON UNIFORMITY OF GAUGE.

12. The Gauge of 4 feet 84 in. was adopted by the Leeds and Grand Junction Railways, because, after the Liverpool and Manchester had been established, it was quite apparent that all lines in that neighbourhood must work into it, in order to get to the port of Liverpool. In fact, it was con- sidered imperative that the Gauges should be the same.

15, &e. I proposed the same Gauge for the North Midland, because it was a part of the line common to both the Manchester and Leeds and the North Midland ; and the Manchester and Leeds having been fixed with the view of eventually working into the Manchester and Liverpool, of course it became equally a matter of consequence that the North Midland should be of the same Gauge. I also fixed the Gauge of the Derby Junction at 4 feet 81in., it being, in point of fact, a continuation of the North Midland to Birmingham. The Gauge of the London and Birmingham is the same. My principal reason for adopting it was to obtain uniformity of Gauge. I was not responsible for the Gauge of the Great North of England, but it was impe- rative that it should be of the 4 feet 8; in. Gauge, because it was to work into the Stockton and Darlington, which was already in existence at one end, and the York and North Midland at the other. A break of Gauge has always been looked upon as so great an evil that the question of adopt- ing a different Gauge has hardly ever been ventured upon in the North. 59 & 62. The Gauge of the Northern and Eastern Railway, of which rain and was the chief engineer at the time of its construction, was 5 feet, in con- sequence of its being brought into connection with the Eastern Counties, which had, at that time, been laid down with the 5 feet Guage, by Mr, Braithwaite. ',therefore, adopted the 5 feet Gauge, to be in harmony with it ; and with the same view I laid down the 5 feet Gauge upon the Blackwall, because I considered that it might hereafter be extended ; and, being on the same side of London, I thought it would be impolitic tJ run the risk of not having a convenient connection hereafter, if it should be deemed necessary. 63. Those Railways no longer retain the original Gauge of 5 feet ; they have recently been altered under my direction. When the extension of the Northern and Eastern was considered, it became apparent that any line extending to the Northern and Eastern Counties must have lateral commu- nication with existing lines of Railway, on the 4 feet Si in. Gauge in the Midland Counties, and the inconvenience of the change was fully considered. I was strengthened in the opinion that the alteration was necessary, from foreseeing that, wherever there was a cross line of railway having communi- cation with the Midlands, the inconvenience would be multiplied ; that, in fact, nothing could pass from one line to the other without an absolute transference, and that an establishment for that operation would have to be kept at every point where the change would take place. After having decided upon altering the Northern and Eastern, which was the only one leading into counties already occupied by the Narrow Gauge, it became a question whether we should alter the Gauge of the Eastern Counties, which was laid down for fifty miles, to Colchester, into a district of country where the junction of different Gauges would have been of less consequence, because apart almost from any other line in the kingdom, running through quite an agricultural district, having little or no communication with the manufacturing districts. We con- sidered the feasibilty of working that line with a 5 feet Gauge, br laying a third rail down from Stratford to London, a distance of three miles and a half. I found it was impracticable to adopt a third rail, when we came to consider the combination of the two Gauges in the station at Shoreditch. I could not devise any means by which we could work it. There was another reason for altering it. We found that the two lines would require two completely separate carrying establishments. We could never make use of the carriages of one line upon the line of the other ; which we find to be of vital conse- quence, because it materially lessens the cost of carrying establishments. For instance, in the two cases of the Northern and Eastern and Eastern Counties, on market days or race days, or particular seasons, when a flood of traffic takes place upon the Eastern Counties line from Colchester, it does not take place simultaneously on the Northern and Eastern ; there- fore all the carrying establishment on that line may be immediately transferred on that line, in order to meet the exigencies of the Eastern Counties, and vice versa; whereas, if they had two carrying esta- blishments, I consider they would have spent far more money than they have spent in altering the Gauge. The cost of altering it was £52,000.

ALTERATION OF GAUGE.

04. To effect the alteration involved the necessity of working upon a single line of rails. We had to divide the establishment into two parts, one of which we retained as available for the 5- feet Gauge, whilst we altered the other half to be ready to work upon the line which had been converted into the 4-feet 81 inch Gauge ; therefore the alteration from one to the other was to take place in one night—in fact, between two trains, the last at night, the first in the morning. We altered one line in parts first, but the whole in the end. Of course, there were a great number of precautions neces- sary to prevent a collision ; in fact, the principle of the arrangement was working for some time on a single line.

65. The whole distance altered was eighty-eight miles, and the goods train was only stopped for two nights. The whole operation occupied about six weeks. Before we began to alter the machinery, we were obliged to have all the duplicates prepared to put on in the shortest time. For in- stance, if an engine was converted, the wheels were all ready, and a pair of new wheels was prepared to be put on when the old wheels would not do. 'We had duplicate wher Is for the carriages ; almost one quarter were new wheels of 4 feet 81 inches, which were put under carriages that had ben used for the 5-feet Gauge. The whole expense was £52,000; there were no new rails obtained at all. With respect to the York and Scarborough Railway, the traffic to Scarborough is not such as to make the transference of luggsge and passengers a great evil if it had been found desirable to alter the Gauge, but it would have required a separate carrying establishment ; whereas now the carrying establishment of the York and North Midland, by a very slight increase, became capable, in conjunction with that line, of working fifty-two miles more of railway. I do not suppose they have increased the carrying establishment acre by £5,000.

BREAK OF GAUGE, AND PROPOSED REMEDIES.

89 & 90. I am the chief engineer on the Chester and Holyhead Railway.

I propose to use upon that line the 4-feet 81 Gauge ; it is intended to run the carriages from Euston-square to Holyhead direct ; that of all others will be the line upon which the objection to change [of carriage] would be the most severe, because it would interfere with the communication with Ireland.

109. Wherever a meeting of Gauges takes place,it must create a very serious inconvenience ; in fact it is tantamount to asking the Great Western or the London and Birmingham Company to move their passengers at Wolverton. If it takes place in the midst of a great traffic it would, I believe, give canals or any other existing mode of communication a great advantage over

Railways. I stated in my evidence before the Wolverhampton committee that from Rugby, to which point it is proposed that the Wide Gauge should come, the Derbyshire or Leicestershire coalowner would inevitably send their coal by canal in preference to changing the Gauge, because they would have to transfer their coals there. It is proposed, in order to avoid the actual removal of the coals, to move them in boxes, and to have loose bodies to the waggons. Now, that is a system which has been tried over and over again, and which has always failed. It was tried on the Liverpool and Manchester line originally. There was a great coalpit about 200 or 300 yards from the line of railway ; they wanted to send coals to Liver- pool, and small waggons were placed on the back of large waggons and carried to Liverpool ; that was soon abandoned. Loose boxes were tried at Bolton for the purpose of leading the coal into the town by horses with- out changing at the station ; they were eventually abandoned. I tried the same thing at Canterbury, and we were obliged to abandon it, because sometimes we had loose boxes and we had no frames, and sometimes we had under frames when we had no boxes, and we could not fit them in. It is almost impossible to make this intelligible to anybody who has not come directly in contact with the inconvenience of the system. Rather than in- troduce the loose-box system, it would be far better to move the coals by hand from waggon to waggon, because there would be an end of it. When the body of the waggon is made at the same time with the frame, it strengthens that frame, and the body also ; but when they are made to separate, they are both of them wt ak, and they both get ricketty, and are exceedingly costly to maintain in repair. On the Midland Counties the loose-box system was tried where the Erewash joins the Trent. The coal- field there had the accommodation of a canal—the canal comes to the junction of the Railways between Derby and Nottingham—they had cranes put up for the purpose of lifting the boxes out of the boats—it was very well and conveniently done ; but shortly after they were obliged to aban- don it.

111. Does not that rather argue a want of good management than a defect in the system ?—All the coalowners themselves were deeply inte- rested in carrying this out well. The boxes were made of wrought iron, of the best possible workmanship ; the mode of shifting them W9S simple, but not so efficient as it might have been ; but it was not the difficulty of moving them, but the loose-box system itself was objectionable, because the frames arrived without the boxes, or the boxes without frames being ready to receive them, at the end of the journey ; they could not be always kept at a particular point ; and then, when the empty box came, the canal barge was not there to receive it. You could not contrive a system to work so much like clockwork as that system of loose boxes really im- plies; it implies that all parts of the system shall work in perfect harmony.

112. The loose-box system involves the necessity of increasing the number of carriages very materially.

133. Have you seen, at the Great Western Terminus at Paddington, any of the modes exhibited there by which it is proposed to supersede the neces- sity of removing goods or passengers from one carriage to another at the point of junction with a different Gauge ?—Yes, I have. 134. What is your opinion of those expedients respectively ?—I believe the expedient would answer the purpose, as far as machinery could answer it; but the objection that I urge to the change of Gauge is not to the mode of lifting ; that is a small part of the consideration in my mind ; but even there I think that it is not flee from objection : to any one going there to see one or two loaded waggons brought into the place, and transferred by a few men merely moving them backwards and forwards, it does not at all convey the real amount of inconvenience or the real amount of labour which would be required to transfer a train, say of 100 coal waggons ; many of our coal trains consist of about 80 or 100 waggons.

135. Will you go through the process with reference to any particular station, and state the time likely to be occupied, the inconvenience, and the expense ?—We will imagine ourselves to be at Rugby, and the two lines are drawn up parallel and opposite to each other. We commence by moving the leading box on the line on to the waggon of the other line, which must be empty. We will suppose on the other line a series of empty frames, if the tram is 100 waggons long, and each waggon 4 yards, that is 400 yards. This leading waggon, as soon as it has got the transfer made, must be dragged away by horse or some other operation 400 yards along the line. Teen the next frame requires to be brought up to the next full box ; the waggon requires, of course, to be precisely the same dis- tance, minus the length of the waggon at the far end ; and this operation has to go on waggon by waggon. Supposing horse power to be employed, it is quite evident that, supposing the waggons to be taken singly, the horse has to go half a mile, as near as possible. Therefore, supposing that to be done by a horse and man, to transfer a train of waggons would require the horse and man to go over 50 miles ; that is quite clear, and the same will apply to the empty frames from which they have been transhipped, making, in all, 100 miles. The other way of doing it is by engine power ; that, of course, would be the alternative, and would he assumed to be the cheapest. To move 100 waggons by an engine, the train must be moved only one waggon distance at a time ; therefore the engine has to start the train and stop it 200 times. Now, starting a train of waggons of coals, and stopping it again 200 times, would very soon destroy the frame of any waggon that I ever saw in my life ; there is no waggon sufficiently strong to withstand that operation long. Therefore, if you employ engine power for the purpose of saving the apparent impossibility of the horse and man doing it, you then ruin the waggons, destroy their squareness ; and the waggon ought to be as much taken care of as the locomotive engine. Therefore, if you employ the engine, the mere operation of stopping and starting the train would occupy a very great length of time, independently of the time occupied in lifting the goods. The lifting of the goods which is shown at Paddington is a mere mechanical operation. You might even imagine it to be done by magic. Still the evil remains ; and I object to an body's attention being directed to the machine, because the machine has nothing to do with it. The modus operandi would be such as to render it com- mercially impossible.

172. I am decidedly of opinion that the public safety would be endangered by having the bodies of the passenger carriages moveable at the change of the Gauge, because there are a great many slight collisions—not absolute collisions—in which danger takes place, and the momentum cf the bodies would throw them off, and you have to run the risk of the porters, or whoever may have the charge of them, actually seeing that all the fastenings of each carriage are in perfect order, which would, in fact, add to the many operations we have at present to attend to in conducting Railways, whereas we ought to aim at reducing them.

213. I dare say that, even with the best arrangements that could be made, passenger trains could not be changed in less than half an hour— there would be gentlemen's carriages to change.

216. Would any considerable addition to the station at Rugby be re- quired if a change of Gauge took place there ? An entirely new station must be made ; it would require to be as large as the present Rugby station. I have attended to that a good deal, and I believe a mixture of the Gauges in the stations would be impracticable. I do not mean to say that you could not draw a good plan upon paper that might appear reasonable ; but I believe, in working, the most economical plan would be to have two stations.

217. Would there be great inconvenience, not only to the passenger traffic, but to agricultural traffic and to mineral traffic, wherever the change took place ? As to the agricultural traffic, I am quite sure there would be the greatest inconvenience ; for instance, the change of beasts from one carriage to another. I do not believe you could do it at all until the beasts had been to graze again. It is done occasionally, but there is great difficulty in changing beasts from one carriage to another. You almost have to carry them in after they have once got out of the railway waggon ; they will not look near it again until their temper gets settled down by being allowed to graze.

218. Suppose an importation of Irish pigs at Bristol, and they had to be transferred to the Yorkshire lines ?—I am afraid it would be quite neces- sary to have them in loose bodies. I do not think you could manage them otherwise.

219. You must lift them en masse.

VARIETIES OF GAUGE.

38. As an engine-builder, at one time when I was called upon to con- struct engines of greater power than we commenced the line with, I felt some inconvenience in arranging the machinery properly. We were a little confined in space, and at that time an increase of three or four inches would have assisted us materially, and to that extent at one time I thought an addition of Gauge to five feet would have been desirable, but on no other account, looking at it as a mere engine-builder. Since that time the improved arrangements in the mechanism of locomotive engines have rendered even that increase altogether unnecessary.

54. In the line from London to Brighton, you of course had it not in contemplation to form a junction with any of the northern lines, when you fixed the Gauge ?— Certainly not. I felt that 4 feet 81 inches were fully adequate for any purpose to which a Railway could be applied ; and, be- lieving also that the narrower the Gauge the less was the resistance, I con- ceived that it would prove safe and economical.

91. The Foreign Railways with which I have been connected are as follows :—My father and I were consulted as to the details of the line from Antwerp to Brussels, and from Liege. to Ostend. There, of course, a new field was opened to us, and it would have been competent to have intro- duced a wider Gauge, or a narrower one, just as our experience might dic- tate ; but we had no reason whatever to urge upon them an alteration from that Gauge which had already been established in this country, and which seemed to answer every purpose. The other line was the Leghorn and Pisa ; there again it was quite competent to us to alter the Gauge had it been deemed necessary. They were the first two lines in those countries, and there was nothing to induce the adoption of the Narrow Gauge, except that it had been found in this country to answer the purpose. Perhaps, if I had been called upon to do so, it would be difficult to give a good reason for the adoption of an odd measure, 4 feet 8; inches ; but, as an inch or two more or less would have involved a different construction of engines on a new model or pattern, I followed it ; if there had been a good reason for making the Gauge 5 feet I should have done it. The Belgian Railways I was consulted upon in 1835 or 1836 ; and the Leghorn and Pisa was com- menced about two years ago, after 1 bad, of course, seen both the Wide and Narrow Gauges in operation in this country. The Leghorn and Florence line is about sixty-two miles long, twelve of which are now in operation from Leghorn to Pisa.

120. I know America, but I have not been there since the Railway system has extended. I know that the Gauge of American Railways is the same S our own, 4 feet 8i inches. At one time they commenced laying down a line with a Gauge of 6 feet, for which the engines eventually used on the Great Western were intended ; and after they had laid some considerable distance they abandoned it, and went back to the old Gauge of 4 feet 84- inches. There is a line from Basle to Strasburg with a Gauge of 6 feet 3 inches. It was made at the recommendation of some engine-builder in this country ; but I have had recent communication with those parties, and they deeply regret it. They say they have got no advantage from it what- ever ; and they look forward to a transfer at Strasburg at one end, and at Basle at the other. I know officially that they deeply regret that altera- tion. The length of the line is about 60 miles. There is a line laid down from Ghent to Antwerp, by M. Deroider, with a Gauge of, I think, 3 feet 9 inches. He got leave from Government, some time ago, to lay down a third rail for ten or twelve miles upon the line from Brussels, that was then being constructed toward Mons by way of experiment. He made a small engine, and a very beautiful little thing it was, with cylinders out- side. The engine and tender were one thing—it was placed upon six wheels. The after part of the engine was devoted to coke and water, and the front part to machinery. He worked the steam high ; I think eighty pounds to the inch. He worked it very expansively. 1 had the satisfac- tion of making several journeys with that little engine ; and we took a load of forty tons. We ran along that line a great distance, upwards of thirty miles an hour, with that small engine, very smoothly. I believe it was a 3-feet 6-inch Gauge which he tried first ; but I recommended him to increase it a little. I do not know precisely what Gauge was adopted, but I believe 3 feet 9 inches. It is, I believe, in successful operation between Ghent and about 50 or 60 miles, for both passengers and goods. I have not seen that piece ; but the other piece which I have mentioned was laid down under the authority of Government, for the purpose of making that experiment ; and upon that line I went several journeys with M. Deroider. It is laid on transverse sleepers.

131. The rails are light—thirty-five or forty pounds—and altogether it has been constructed very economically.

ECONOMY OF WORKING-ECONOMY OF CONSTUCTION.

98. With your personal knowledge of the Great Western Railway, and your still greater experience of railways on the Narrow Gauge, do you imagine that the Great Western has, by reason of its Gauge, any advantage over the Railways laid down on the Narrow Gauge ?-1 am not aware of any advantage that it has. It has, I think, several disadvantages. The first, of course, is the additional expense of construction. It requires em- bankments and cuttings 4 feet wider, in consequence of the Gauge, in order to give drainage to the Railway, *an the Narrow Gauge ; the one being taken in round numbers to be 5 feet, and the other 7 feet. Their tunnels are, of course, neccessarily increased beyond what is necessary for the Nar- row Gauge. The Narrow Gauge tunnels are 24 feet wide, that is, G feet between the rails and 4 feet between the rail and the wall of the tunnel, that makes 21 feet. Now, of course, to give the same space between the rails, and the same space between the outside rail and the wall, it requires the Wide Gauge tunnel to be 4 feet wider. The distance between the rails on the Great Western is precisely the same, I believe, as on the London and Birmingham,-6 feet.

99. And 4 feet from the rail to the wall of the tunnel on either side ?— I believe it is rather less. The tunnels are, I understand from Mr. Gooch, 30 feet wide on the Great Western ; of course the additional width increases the expense of ballasting, and of the construction of the tunnels ; it is by no means an unimportant item of expense.

100. That applies to bridges and viaducts ?—It applies to viaducts, and of course to bridges under the Railway, and also over, to give the same clearance. The expense of viaducts will be, of course, almost as their width. It would not be so with some bridges, because there the wing-walls would be the same in either case ; but in a high viaduct, like that of Wharncliff and Hanwell, the expense must be in reference to the width. In such a case as the Blackwell, for instance, or the Greenwich, it would be as the width.

101. Are there any other disadvantages of the Broad Gauge which you are aware of, as compared with the Narrow ?—It increases the expense of the carrying department ; the engines are more expensive, so are the ten- ders; the workshops, from their size, are also more expensive ; the stations also require greater room. I think all their sidings are of a larger radius than those upon the Narrow Gauge, in order to allow the engine to go through without grinding the raiis, or sliding upon them ; in fact, every- thing is upon an increased scale.

102. Their turn-tables are more expensive ?—The turn-tables are so cumbrous that they cannot use them, which I think is one great defect of toe Wide Gauge ; they are so large and so expensive, and occupy so much room, that they are obliged to adopt the sliding-frame system, which, I think, has arisen from the adoption of the Wide Gauge. The small turn- table for the 4 feet 81 Gauge comes in conveniently ; the carriages easily moved upon it, and it saves a great deal of space, and the rails in the station are never broken with the turn-table system of stations ; but on the other system of the sliding-frame, of course, the rails are broken, except those that the sliding-frame may be opposite to.

103. Do not you think that economy of working is produced by the larger engines and wider carriages of the Great Western ?—I do not think so. I think the wear and tear of the carriages is as much. I have heard it urged, indeed, by Mr. Gooch, the superintendent of the locomotive power on the Great Western. I heard it given in evidence before the com- mittee on the Wolverhampton lines as compared with two or three other lines, and even there the difference of expense was so trifling that it was less than the difference which exists between a great many of the Narrow Gauge lines, so that it might be accidental. I see no good reason why the expense of working should be less. There are several items which in my opinion tend to make it more. I believe the resistance of the wide car- riages moving along the line of the Broad Gauge to be more than upon the Narrow Gauge.

167. Are you of opinion that locomotives could he manufactured for the Narrow Gauge capable of attaining as high velocities as the engines are now attaining upon the Broad Gauge lines ?—I have no question about it. Every day we are running upwards of 50 miles an hour with our passenger trains, and those engines were not made with a view of attaining a maximum speed, but such a speed as we deemed them advisable to attain. We had never aimed to get our passenger trains upon the Narrow Gauge lines to run more than 30 miles an hour, including stoppages ; therefore we had rarely if ever attempted a wheel larger than five feet six inches diameter. On the North Midland I tried some of six feet in diameter, and they are there constantly running 50 miles an hour. 168. They still exist upon that line ?—Yes ; but those engines are not by any means so powerful as they may be made, nor, consequently, so swift. There is no difficulty whatever in making an engine upon the Narrow Gauge to take 40 tons at 60 miles an hour ; not the least difficulty, or even more than that. I believe that the highest speed that I have heard mentioned was mentioned by Mr. Locke to me, but that was an engine by itself; it ran 68 miles an hour on the Grand Junction. Those engines op_tkeGreat Western were made for the purpose of getting great speeds _Mr. Brunel thought that the Wide Gauge would admit of getting greater speed, and he therefore made all his arrangements with a view of getting greater speed than was attained upon the Narrow Gauge lines ; but he never till recently, perhaps upon the competition arising, attained a greater speed than upon the Narrow Gauge was attained ; because the average speed upon the Great Western was preAsely the same within a shade, I believe a little under, that of the Northern and Eastern ; recently, since they have adopted the plan of express trains, they have exceeded the average on other lines, because they had on the Great Western engines prepared for those speeds. 169. Is it not the fact that the average speed on the Great Western is greater than the average speed on the London and Birmingham ?—It was greater than on the London and Birmingham, not greater for the mail tram; I believe the mail trains were precisely alike, but they were considerably below the average speed of the Northern and Eastern. 173. As a public officer, having the pubic safety in some degree under your care, should you feel that you were taking a heavy responsibility in sanctioning the bodies of the carriages being made separate from the under frame of the carriage ?—I feel it so much that I would never Incur that responsibility. In addition to the objection which I formerly called your attention to, that is the weakening of both, I consider that the under frame, when not attached firmly to the body, is more liable to derangement.

MR. J. E. "M'CONNELL, Superintendent of the Locomotive Department of the Birmingham and Gloucester Railway, previously engaged in Mr. Bury's Steam. engine Manufactory, Liverpool.

COSTLINESS OF TWO GAUGES AT GLOUCESTER.

588. Would any increase or diminution of the staff of porters result from an uniform Gauge at Gloucester ?—A very great decrease—in fact, I may state that the necessity at present existing for keeping up a staff of porters there is entirely owing to the change of Gauge. With about th.rty waggons we require twelve porters to tranship. Now, if the Gauge were uniform, I should imagine that we could do the goods train there with four porters, for it would only be necessary to unload and load the local goods from Gloucester either way—either to Bristol or Birmingham—all goods that require to be put on board vessels will be sent on alongside the vessels, and be unloaded at the dock :—at present those porters are kept there for the mere purpose of lifting goods out of one waggon and repacking them in another, which requires from five to six hours from the time the train arrives to get them sent off again. The superintendence of the porters would not require to be so expensive. The clerks also would be reduced, the general expenses of the establishment altogether would be much decreased, and there would be less liability to delay and damage. We may safely calculate upon having nearly one-half less turn-tables and sidings if uniformity of Gauge were established ; there would be only one set of carriage sheds and of goods sheds, where there now have to be nearly double; there would be a diminution of carrying stock—fcr instance, supposing a heavy train of goods arrived from Bristol, there might not be a heavy train of goods required to go back again ; consequently, at the break of Gauge where those goods were transhipped from the Broad to the Narrow Gauge, the Broad Gauge trucks would have to remain idle till a sufficient number of goods came for them ; in the same way with waggons drawn away from Gloucester to Birmingham with a large train of goods, they will again have to remain for some time until they are employed, or else he required to be sent down to those points where they were required, from Birmingham, till a quantity of goods came again in the other direction to work them back, so that it would be increasing the trouble and delay of the trucks passing when there was a preponderance of traffic in one direction more than in the other.

607. Both lines being now worked by one Company, do you conceive it would promote the interests of the Company to alter the Gauge of the Bris- tol and Gloucester to 4 ft. 8 in. P—I think it is quite essential ; they will never make the concern profitable until it is altered. The success of the two lines depends on their making the Gauge uniform. I believe in all cases the parties are afraid of their goods being mislaid or delayed, and that confidence would be restored if the Gauge was uniform.

BREAK OF GAUGE AT GLOUCESTER, AND REMEDIES.

510. When the decision was come to for making the Bristol and Glou- cester Railway on the Broad Gauge system, the expense and inconvenience of transhipment was not understood. After the line was opened, we found, and have continued to find, very great inconvenience in working the line both before and after the amalgamation with the Birmingham and Gloucester. It has been a subject of serious consideration how the incon- venience of passengers changing carriages could be most easily obviated. It is done now by the passengers leaving the carriage of either Gauge, and walking round the shed to the other side, where the Broad or Narrow Gauge carriages are standing. The luggage is put into little barrows which are conveyed round with them ; in fact, it is almost like taking a fresh train, arid delay is caused by the whole of the passengers and luggage having to be transhipped.

597. It is no greater inconvenience than pa,sengers getting out at Wol- verhampton to eat their luncheon, and getting in again, or the same thing at Swindon ?—There is the inconvenience of the whole of the luggage having to be removed. We have invalids often travelling, and it becomes a mat- ter of delay to the train. Parties going to Clifton or Cheltenham. Then sometimes luggage gets mislaid and mis-sent. With our average passenger trains the delay does not creed half an hour.

602. With respect to goods trains, our plan now is, when the train arrives at Gloucester, to select out those waggons that have not been properly mar- shalled in the train at Birmingham, which sometimes is the case ; the pilot engine selects those which will require to go through to Bristol ; they are put into a line parallel to the main line, and on the other side of the line is a Broad Gauge line, on which the Broad Gauge waggons are standing ; they are run into a shed. The sheets are taken off the Narrow Gauge waggons, and the lighter articles are removed by band. Of course that involves con- siderable time. The lighter articles are all taken from the top, those that are brittle and likely to be damaged ; and as to all the heavy packages at the bot- tom, cranes are required to lift them out and repack them on the Broad Gauge waggon. The greatest care is necessary ; sometimes it occupies considerable time in getting ell those things packed and repacked. The waggonsin the shed, again, on the Broad Gauge are marshalled in proper time and order to go by the Bristol train, and I calculate that that occupies about five hours. That time is neccessary, upon the average, for the transhipment of the goods from one train to the other. There are certain palliatives which may be proposed, and which look very well in theory, but unfortunately, when you come to test them in practice, they are found to be highly objectionable. As an example : —On the Midland Counties Railway they had at one time a project of shifting the bodies of waggons from one to another, which is one plan suggested of overcoming the break of Gauge; but it was found so very inconvenient that it was never carried out. They bad wrought-iron bodies prepared for coal waggons, which were to be lifted by means of a triangle and crane, and put upon railway waggons. I saw not long ago about thirty or forty tons of these bodies, which had never been in use, and which were sent to an iron forge to be broken up for Scrap.

676. In many instances there has been a day occupied in transhipping. I recollect in one case we had between forty and fifty waggons standing loaded with goods at Gloucester a fortnight, waiting for Broad Gauge wag- gons to come up, and that may occur either way.

677. Have you not some mechanical arrangement at Gloucester for transferring the goods from one line to soother? No more than manual labour and cranes. -We did propose, at one time, when the line was first opened, to adopt something of that sort, either by using shifting bodies, or by low trucks, something like ishat gentlemen's carriages are carried OD; but on making further inquiries into the matter, and talking to other parties who had some experience, it was thought advisable not to go to the expense of that plan. 681. You have at present devised no preferable mode of making the tran- shipment ?—No. Although mechanical arrangements may be proposed which may work perhaps sufficiently well in an experimental manner, yet when they ccme into practice I believe they will be found to be totally unfit for the every-day traffic of a line, and must be abandoned. There are various reasons for it, and I think it may be clearly RED. For instance, we may suppose that the transhipment system was adopted, in that case it would be necessary that all the Narrow Gauge bodies were precisely alike, and all the Broad Gauge bodies precisely alike, in such a manner that two Narrow Gauge bodies should fit the Broad Gauge frame. NOR', at present, the carrying stock of all the Narrow Gauge lines is common stock ; on the clearing-house ss stem they go through and become as it were common stock, and where it is required it is supplied ; being sent from other places it may be dispensed with. But in this case the companies which were remote from the break of Gauge would be required to alter their waggons, if they intended to work at all advantageously, as they do at present, to the same construction and size as the others, in order to fit the transhipment system. We may suppose a train of waggons to arrive, the bodies are shifted on the Broad Gauge trucks, and the frames are left. It may happen that there are not sufficient bodies or waggons, or loading again for these waggons to go back ; the frames are put into a siding until the bodies go 'up; perhaps they may not be again loeded to go down, SO that, if there is a preponderance of traffic one way or the other, the same objection would apply in this case as it did in the case of the Birmingham and Gloucester, and Bristol and Gloucester, that there would be actually a loss of capital by these frames or bodies being at rest, or standing useless for want of each other ; consequently the trucks would wait more upon each other than upon work. But, independeetly of that, I believe there would be a risk of acci- dent and damage to the goods. These bodies might be very well fitted at first, but we all know what severe work there is at times—a train stopping and starting on a Railway, the carriages knccking against each other. I do not think they could be made sufficiently strong without incurring a great amount of weight, useless and unremunerative.

683. Do you think that the public safety would be endangered by having the passenger carriages to shift, so that the bodies could be detached from the wheels and frames?—! think so. I think it would not be prudent to adopt such a plan in passenger carriages at all. As far as my knowledge of the construction of a carriage is concerned, I think it requires to be com- pactly and well built, without any shifting or dependence on parts to be Bred and refixed again. I think it is highly objectionable that such a plan should be resorted to.

684. Supposing the system existing at the Great Western terminus at Paddington were to be put into operation at Gloucester, what TIME would be occupied, do you imagine, in transferring a load of goods from one Gauge to the other by that process ?—It would be very difficult to say. There is one thing which is lost sight of in that ME chine at Paddington. In a lorg train, unless by keeping an engine constantly employed to push them forward to the machine to be lifted, and drawing the others away as they were loaded, it would take a considerable time; for, supposing there was a train of twenty or thirty waggons brought up a Narrow Gauge line to be put on the Broad Gauge waggons, they would begin with the first waggon, and they would have to go back a long way to pull up the last one, and so OD. I cannot form an estimate how long it might take, but I dare say that it might be done in an hour or an hour and a half. But, then, I think that is the least of the evil ; it is not SO much the time taken in shifting. I believe the mere machine for lifting the bodies of waggons from one Gauge to another removes a very trifling difficulty compared with the other objec- tions. The thing can be done very well, but it is after this has been done I think the whole of the difficulty would be felt. It is merely a preparatory Step to the mass of difficulty that would be encountered afterwards.

686. Will you calculate what distance a horse would have to travel having to shift 50 waggons P—Taking 20 waggons, allowing 14 feet to a waggon, it would be 51 miles.

SAFETY AND SPEEDS.

982. As far as safety is concerned, we have perhaps the only opportunity of judging of the two Gauges, having part of our line Broad and part Nar- row. We have perhaps the only opportunity in the realm yet, and, for my own part, I should say that, in point of safety, I can conceive no difference between the two Gauges. I think that safety does not depend so much 'upon the width of Gauge as it does upon other circumstances, which we learn and judge of by actual experience, that is, from the accidents we observe on Railways. So far as speed is concerned, I did think that the Broad Gauge engine, from having greater space for the working parts of the engine, might be made more powerful, so as to produce greater speed, but I am inclined now to think that there is no superiority in that respect, inasmuch as I have observed Narrow Gauge engines which have been capable of running equally as fast as the Broad Gauge.

GEORGE HUDSON, Esos, M.P., a Director over 800 to 1,000 miles of Railway.

OPINIONS ON THE GAUGE.

6360. Have you, in the course of your management or direction of the Railways of which you are Director, seen much cause to regret that they are upon the Nan ow Gauge P.—No; without any prejudice in favour of either the Broad or Narrow Gauge, I am perfectly satisfied that everything is accomplished by the Narrow that is accomplished by the Broad ; and there- fore, as economy in the constinction of Railways is an important element, the Narrow Gauge, 1 shculd say, was the better. of the two. 6369. have you any opinicn as to the greater or less convenience of the Narrow or Broad Gauge waggors for cemn ercial purposes ?—I think there cannot be a doubt that either waggon is equally convenient for packing ; the packs, so far as 1 have seen in my experience, are never of such a width as not to admit of being loaded on the Narrow Gauge ; and, if they can be loaded conveniently upon the Narrow Gauge, of course they can be loaded squally conveniently upon the Broad Gauge. I prefer the Narrow Gauge,

on account of the greater economy of construction. Looking at it in the most dispassionate way possible, I much prefer the Narrow Gauge, unless it is shown me that there is any great advantage obtained by the Broad, with which I am not yet conversant. I think, in regard to weight, we can certainly carry as large a quantity by the Narrow Gauge by one train, as can be carried by the Broad Gauge. 6367. Have you at all contemplated the inconveniences that are likely to arise from a break of Gauge ?-1 think the public can scarcely overrate the inconvenience ; with reference to goods it is exceedingly expensive and in- jurious ; for instance, suppose a case were to occur that we had a change of Gauge between Manchester and Hull, and we had to move the packs from truck to truck, if it were to be done by that system (and, if not, any other system would be expensive), I believe that very few packs would come upon the line, for every movement of a ton of goods is a derangement of the packing, and is looked upon by the exporter as an inconvenience. I do not think it is possible to overrate the inconvenience that is experienced from the transhipment of goods from Birmingham to Bristol. It crowds up the station, and the unpacking and repacking of goods is most injurious. As I have already said, if such a change were to take place between Man- chester and Hull, virtually we should carry nothing ; the goods would go by water to a large extent.

6384. What is the length of line from Birmingham to Gloucester ?— Thirty-seven miles.

6385. If, instead of thirty-seven miles, the distance were 100, should you not be disposed to overcome the evil of transhipment, rather than change the Gauge P—If, from our having two Gauges, transhipment is to take place at all, the thing is to consider where the least export takes place. 6388. To show the amount of traffic we are contemplating may come upon the Midland line, we have it under consideration to order 10,000 coal waggons.

6389. Such being the case, do you apprehend any great inconvenience would arise from your having, or a great part of them, made upon the loose, box system ?—The inconvenience would be this, that you would have double framework, which is nearly one-third of the total expense ; that it is a loss of capital, and inconvenience.

6414. Do you think that, upon general principles, it would be better to have a change of Gauge under the control of the same company, rather than have two companies, other things being the same ?—Yes; that they both should be under the same management would be an advantage. 6415. It applies at present to Gloucester ; they are both under one management there ?—Yes ; SO satisfied are we of the inconvenience of it, that we are quite prepared to lay out money to remedy that inconvenience.

6416. You shift it on to Bristol ?—Yes, to a certain extent ; but my principle is this, that there is less transhipment at Bristol than there is at Gloucester. If they could show me that there was a greater amount of transhipment at Bristol than at Gloucester, my argument would not hold good.

SPEED—SAFETY.

6365. I am not aware that we are not competent to attain the speed of the Great Western ; whether it is wise to adopt that speed is very doubt- ful to me. There is a point to which the speed may be carried which becomes dangerous. We are constantly running from Normanton in thirty-seven minutes—forty-nine miles an hour—but we are not limited ; we limit our trains to what we think safe and advantageous ; 1 think we could travel much more quickly.

CONVENIENCE.

6366. And you are of opinion that great rivalry of speed be'ereen two Railways on the Broad and Narrow Gauge may lead to disastrous e

cons- quences ?—Certainly. I think there is also great convenience with the Narrow Gauge in working the traffic, by our carriages moving from point to point, or trucks of goods moving from the different points on the line. I saw an instance of the inconvenience of the wide Gauge when I was at Bristol the other day. Our trucks will hold generally from four to six tons, never exceeding six. One horse will turn and move that truck with perfect ease. I inquired particularly the weight of the trucks on the Great incon-

venient ; they are thirteen tons, and that becomes exceedingly for one horse to move ; it was distressing to me to see them move them, and there would be great difficulty in attaching a second horse to assist. That was a practical illustration, that, unless you could gain some- thing by the Broad Gauge, the present Gauge was wisely chosen.

MR. PETER CLARKE, General Manager of the Brighton Railway Company, preciously Superintendent of the Midland Railway, Traffic Manager of the York and North Midland, and, until it was leased by that Cempany, Traffic Manager of the Leeds and Selby.

BREAK OF GAUGE, AND GOODS TRAFFIC.

5151. Have you at all thought of the inconvenience likely at all to result from a break of Gauge ?—I found great inconvenience while I was in the North Midland Company, in the traffic we had to and from Bristol rip to the opening of the Bristol line, from the detentions, loss, and mis.sending of packages which arose. I attribute a great share of it to the change of Gauge at Gloucester. 5180. I think fully one half of the waggons of a heavy goods train start- ing from Leeds towards the south go through without being opened, Lon- don goods being the great traffic of the manufacturing districts.

CONVEYANCE.

5187. Supposing your waggons were SO large that they carried double the weight of goods, in what way would that affect your loading and un- loading ?—lt would be detrimental to the trade. I think when you get about five or six tons per waggon, it becomes so large that it is only the London trade that can afford a full load. The effect of introducing large waggons upon the line would be inconvenient to the trade of small towns. The waggons which we were making when I left the Midland Railway car- ried six tons each, and were large enough for any purpose. That is, as much as it would be desirable or almost practicable to carry in any waggon with advantage to the trade. 'When you get larger quantities in waggon, the rubbing or chafing becomes much greater ; the pressure upon the lower goods is greater; and upon manufactured packages, which are very tightly pressed, the chafing of them is such that very frequently damage takes place. There is a certain motion in those loads going on ; and any inequality in the package, by having a large pressure upon it, wit the motion, cute through the folds of the wrapper, damaging the contents.

CAPTAIN M. HUIal, General Manager of the Grand Junction and Liverpool and Manchester.

SAFETY—SPEED.

9655. Safety, of course, is but a comparative term, and there must be a point at which comparative safety ends and positive danger begins. I should have no hesitation to-morrow in recommending the Board to diminish the time of the journey between London and Liverpool. We could do it. in my opinion, with safety to the public and with perfect ease to our-

selves ; but, seeing the excitement in the public mind, I do not think it would be by any means politic to encourage at present, until the public is accustomed to it, a higher speed than that at which we are now travelling. At the same time I should be sorry that the Commission should imagine that what we call our express speed is at all that speed at which we think the engine is fully taxed. 4658. As far as regards the permanent way, as to the surface of the line, I should not be afraid to trust myself at all (that is the best test I can give) at GO miles an hour, but there are other elements which necessarily come in as connected with the public safety. The very fact of our having now trains of such different velocities, and the line from London to Liverpool being worked as one line, practically renders it necessary that the slow trains should shunt at particular places to let the express pass ; and of course any dislocation of the system there, where trains are timed to a nicety, must either cause great inconvenience to the public by keeping them a long time at particular stations, or some risk.

BREAK OF GAUGE, AND REMEDIES.

4727. Assuming that the transference of goods at Birmingham is as 920, at Gloucester 685, and at Bristol 51 tons only, where do you think the change of Gauge should take place, that transference relating to the Bir- mingham, Gloucester, and Bristol line?—I think my answer will be the same as with respect to the coals, that, instead of having those 920 tons, you have got rid of all that work which you would have had to do at Birming- ham without a change of Gauge, by the thing doing itself ; that is the obvious conclusion, certainly.

CONVENIENCE AND COMFORT.

4630. Do you find thct the passengers complain of uneasiness in the car- riages, which they do not complain of on the Great Western ?-1 think that our line and the London and Birmingham can convey a passenger as smoothly as it is possible for him to be conveyed upon parallel iron bars.

9631. The public always select the carriages in which there are only two seats abreast, if they have the option, which is the construction of the old mail.

4634. You think that placing four passengers abreast would not produce such an objection on their part as to induce them to take another route where they had carriages three abreast ?—I cannot think that it would weigh to that extent, but that it does weigh to some extent. The Great Western practically admit it, inasmuch as they divide their every compart- ment itself into two by a partition in the centre.

HISTORY OF THE GAUGE, VARIOUS OPINIONS ON.

4629. Do you find any practical inconvenience from the width of the Grand Junction, the line you have been connected with, being limited to 4 feet 81 inches ?—I have never found any practical inconvenience. 4712. I am satisfied that we have, within ourselves, on the Narrow Gauge, the means of accommodating any description or any amount of traffic which may be brought to us, great or small.

4718. Of course, if you had to Use larger waggons, like Broad Gauge waggons, there would be greater loss from tare ?—Froin wear and tear, and tare weight. I feel perfectly satisfied that the development of the Narrow Gauge is not by any means arrived at, and that we have a capacity within ourselves which would almost surprise the public if we attempted to go to the extreme point which we might do with safety and practical utility. 4719. We were about to inquire whether you were prepared to give a de- cided superiority to one Gauge over the other, or whether you thought there was so near an equality that there was no reason for the more costly construction of the Broad Gauge ?—I was asked the same question last session in committee, when, under peculiar circumstances,* if I bad any tendency, it would have been towards the Broad Gauge, and I recol- lect my answer was, that, if I had to choose between the two, I was afraid I should give it in favour of the Narrow Gauge. Having stated that last session, I have seen nothing whatever to alter my opinion at present.

BENJAMIN WORTHY HORNE, Esq. (of the firm of Chaplin and Horne, Carriers upon almost all the principal lines of Railway in the country).

THE BREAK OF GAUGE, AND GOODS TRAFFIC.

4746. There seems to be a great probability of the Great Western system interlacing considerably with the Narrow Gauge system ; and the Com- missioners are desirous of knowing whether you, as one of the greatest carriers in Europe, would find inconvenience from a frequent change of Gauge ?—Yes. With a view to avoid reloading, even at present, I will give an instance of what we do. According to the present arrangements with the Railway Companies, the Manchester and Birmingham Company, the York and North Midland, the Midland Counties, and all those lines, limit us to so much weight in a truck : supposing that truck has not the full weight in it, we would rather pay the difference than have the goods in that truck subjected to being turned over. There are so many things we suffer from : there are three places where we are liable to robberies, and where we lose more money than we get for the carriage : that is, at Bir- mingham, at Derby, and at Leicester : those are three places where we encounter losses and delays.

4750. Supposing at Normanton there should be a change of Gauge, and that all the carriages arriving there from the north were to be run upon the Broad Gauge, what would be the effect of that ?—It would ruin our trades we should have cloth from Huddersfield, Bradford, and Halifax there. Now, the friction alone sometimes will amount to three or four pounds in a truck- load from bad loading, although we may have a reasonable time before starting, which could not be ensured at reloading. 4752. But suppose the companies undertake the shifting of the goods bodily, by putting the entire load upon another set of trucks ?—There will still be the chances of any deleys arising from the late arrival of the train, and many uncertainties. But, as far as relates to the unloading and re- loading, we pay is. 6d. a tcn at Derby, at Leicester, and at Birmingham. There is another point that is material: supposing you shift the goods from one Gauge to another, and the trucks are of different dimensions, you will not have enough to fill the truck, or too much for one, except both are nearly alike. A certain quantity of goods is required to fill a truck w ith safety to save friction which is a very common thing in a Manchester pack; and, if this same quantity of goods are put into a truck which has more room than the lesser one has, the result will be, we should have to encounter damage, because from the oscillation of the traia everything rubs. We have that as it is, more or less, but we have it more when we do not have a full load. The fuller the load the safer the goods travel.

4757. So that you think that the system of breaking bulk is one that would tend very much to injure your trade in every way ?—There cannot be a question about it.

4772. Sometimes we pay as much money as the carriage amounts to between Chester and London. That is to say, suppose our cheese ac-

* The Grand Junction had not then amalgamated, but was hostile to the London and Birmingham, and was supporting the Great Western Company.

count with a man is £60, the cost of a truck will be 50s. or 45s. a ton from Chester to London : when we unload that truck-load we should find that the amount of carriage of one truck-load of cheese is gone by the damages, and that those damages arise when we have not a sufficient quart. tity to make a truck by reloading them at Birmingham. Supposing it is a small load of cheese, say one ton for London, and 2 tons 10 cwt. for Bir- mingham : when we get to Birmingham we take out that which is for Bir- mingham, and send on that which is for London ; and the cheese we send on is likely to meet with some misfortune. For instance: three cheeses might travel upon one another pretty well, but if you have four layers of cheese you will find that the friction and shifting will cause them to be very much injured. Now, at the last sale, we had 80 tons from Chester alone—. 40 for Manchester, and 40 for Birmingham; and we shall have that every sale up to next May, and we should not liketmhave those cheeses shifted.

4776. Then, taking the whole question, hit your decided opinion that any transhipmentresulting from a break of Gauge would be a most serious evil ?—We should not be able to conduct a large business with it with any satisfaction to the public or ourselves. We never know when a goods train is going to bring the heaviest quantity. If we bring our goods in time for the first train, of course they go by the first train ; if not, they go by the second train.

4806. Do you find the Great Western [carriages] the steadier ?—Certainly not. I think I have found also a difference in the motion of the carriage from leaning against it. I think the closer and compacter the conveyance itself is, the less motion you find in the carriage. I said so before any question of the Gauge occurred, that the larger the vehicle, the more motion there is in the body of the coach itself, from the velocity. You will find it precisely the same in an omnibus. If there is the least rickettiness in the carriage itself, you will find motion in the whole framework of the car- riage; and I attribute it much to the height and size. There is more motion than in a compacter carriage ; therefore, with a great speed, you will find more motion from the carriage itself, in proportion to its size : you will hear more cracking, just as you will hear in an omnibus compared with a stage-coach.

JOHN BRAITHWAITE, Esq., Civil Engineer, Chief Engineer of the Eastern Counties.

CHANGE FROM ONE GAUGE TO ANOTHER.

1836. Was the change of Gauge on the Eastern Counties, from 5 feet to 4 feet 81 inches, effected without any great inconvenience ?—Yes ; one would scarcely have known any change was taking place ; it was done remarkably well, under the management of Mr. Berkley. It surprised all parties that it was done so well as it was, considering that it never inter- fered with the running of the trains.

1837. Could you change back again to that same Gauge, or to a broader Gauge, without more inconvenience ?—Perfectly so. I should say there would be about the same expense in the one instance as in the other ; it might be done with very great facility. 1838. Did it cost £1,000 per mile altogether, or more than that ?—I think that was as near the amount as possible.

1839. Have you any tunnel on your line which will interfere with the in- crease of Gauge )—None whatever that I consider would interfere with the increase of Gauge. The whole might be widened without increasing the tunnels.

1840. Would that apply to your bridges also ?—Certainly. Our horse- boxes determine the width. The space between our rails being six feet, if we were to leave the two horse-boxes the common width in their position as running upon the rails, and widen out the lft. 81 in. rails to the Broad Gauge, it would not affect the tunnels, or bridges, or viaduct.

1857. Would it cramp your operations a little ?—No doubt they would not be so readily used. My notion is, that trucks should be sufficiently large for the traffic ; but the more handy the waggons are, the fewer are the hands employed, and the better able are the porters to sort those waggons,—confessing, at the same time, that I think there is more sorting than is necessary.

WHY HE ADOPTED THE FIVE• FEET GAUGE.

1767. Will you favour the Commissioners with your motives for adopting the 5-feet Gauge ?—At the commencement of the undertaking, several of the Directors were under an impression that it would be much better to lay down the then contemplated 7-feet Gauge of the Great Western Railway. I considered that it was very unnecessary, involving a very extravagant outlay, and I began to think seriously as to whether that Gauge should be adopted by us, or the 4ft. 81 in. ' • and I then wrote a report upon it. It was very fully discussed at the Board, and it was eventually carried that the 7-feet Gauge should not be laid down. Shortly after it became a question as to what the Gauge should be, presuming it was not to be 7 feet. Having dropped some observations about a variation in the Gauge, the question was put to me, it it was left to myself, whether I would make any alteration in the Gauge. Considering that we were an eastern district, and that our departure was from London, and not believing that we were all to concentrate in London, to take our departure from each other's Rail- ways, and that the eastern portion would be devoted to us, just as we thought the Great Western portion would be devoted to its particular Company, and knowing the difficulties we had to encounter in 4 feet 81 inches ; and not looking to ultimately taking a northern mad, presuming that the Birmingham line had occupied that portion ; and I submitted to the Directors that a 5-feet Gauge would be a better Gauge. I arrived at that 5.feet Gauge in this way : I found that the locomotive engine was defective in several particulars,—one, as to its generative power, the space we had for boiler room ' • next, as to the number of wearing parts : I thought that each of them ought to have, if we could afford it, a little more room, allowing a little more wearing surface, but more particularly with regard to the boiler. The tubular system then being very much adopted, it struck me that if we had a little more space between the tubes we should have a more quiet action of the water in the boiler, and consequently less ebulli- tion; and, therefore, with my diagram and my section of my engine, I added to all its different bearings, and 1 added what I considered sufficient additional space to the tubes, the sum of which gave me 4 feet 11:1 inches, and upon that I assumed that 5 feet would be about the thing. Since then the Gauge has been altered from 5 feet to 4 feet 81 inches. As to the policy of to doing, I have very little doubt that it was perfectly right it should be so done, notwithstanding that it involved very great expense. If the inten- tion had been originally to run to the north, we should not have added that 3/ inches, but we should, in common with others, have taken the chance of the very great improvements that have been made in locomotive matters, to which I have my self paid very great attention ,and I am very happy to say that, although I think that still greater improvements may be made, the locomo- tive of this day is not the locomotive of 1836, and that, for all purposes for which Railways can be wanted, there is additional space to crowd in as much power and more than can ever be commercially beneficial. The trade gene- rally throughout all the Narrow Gauge lines, from what I see, and from what I have read and heard, is, in all instancar, conducted with every port- sible regularity-that is, so far as the present experience of railway manage- ment will permit-but I consider that we are, in respect particularly to the management of our trains, in almost comparative ignorance. I think we are now aust breaking into something ; there are new ideas daily suggesting themselves. The mind having been hitherto devoted to the construction of railways, people are now turning their attention seriously to the transmission of goods and passengers ; and for the convenience either of carrying goods, or for the transit of passengers in particular, I should say that, barring those little notions we had about tt• addition of 31 inches, which the improvement of the locowotive has, a drink, superseded, I think that, for the purposes of passengers in particular, the Narrow Gauge is infinitely superior to any other. If the thing were to be made de novo, I think then that it might be made 5 feet, because it does give a little more room : but we have found that, although at that time we could not make the engines of that power and dimension to suit:a Gauge of 4 feet 81 inches, yet that some of the bodies of those engines upon our line have been 80 altered, that those that were running on 5 feet now are running on 4 feet 8; inches, which shows the great attention that has been paid, and the improvements which have been made.

1841. Have you any other observations to add on the general question ?- Having adopted a wider Gauge than others, an impression has been created that I am a Broad Gauge man ; but 1 state most distinctly I am not a Broad Gauge man, and I see no necessity for the Broad Gauge.

1851. If I were to adopt any, I should adhere to the 4 feet 81 inches Gauge.-As being sufficient for all the purposes of commerce ?-As being sufficient for all the purposes we can require, and necessarily attended with much less expense in broken countries, with respect to the way itself, in the construction of the line.

1853. In the original construction is the Narrow Gauge in all cases less costly than the Broad Gauge ?-Yes, particularly in difficult countries. I may state with reference to the very question that Captain Laws answered, as to curves in rocky districts, it is quite bad enough to curve them down to 4 feet 81 in., as may be seen by the Taff Railway ; for it is the most frightful specimen we have of curves through a difficult country, and engines running at considerable speed, and very far beyond the notion of engineers generally that they are capable of.

1854. Are you aware that Mr. Brunel was the engineer of that line ?- I am.

CONVENIENCE AND COMFORT.

1793. Do you think in the 4 feet 8; inch Gauge you have sufficient space for cleaning, oiling, and repairing the various parts of the engine ?-On the present construction of engines the space is ample, and the complica- tion is much reduced. A variety of parts that required a complication of cranks, eccentrics, and other things, are done away with ; and a boy may now with facility clean an engine in an hour, which formerly would take a man a day.

1808. The sleepers are more easily repaired, and all Narrow Gauge lines are in better condition, as far as regards running, than the Broad Gauge. It is not six weeks since I travelled on the Great Western line, not in an express train ; and on certain portions of the line they travelled at the rate of 40 and 45 miles an hour ; the oscillation was insupportable ; and a por- tion of the line had been relaid, and possibly it may have been more out of order at that time than it usually is. But I can state positively that all my experience has shown there is more oscillation on the Great Western than on the Narrow Gauge lines.

1809. Might not that have arisen from the particular carriage in which you were riding ?-We changed our carriage, and experienced the same oscillation.

ECONOMY OF WORKING-ECONOMY OF CONSTRUCTION.

1802. Ton per ton, do you think you work as economically as the Great Western ?-1 have no doubt of it, taking our gradients into consideration. If the capital is to be taken into consideration with full employment for the trains, I have no doubt the Eastern Counties or the Northern and Eastern work equally economical.

GREAT SPEED ON THE NORTHERN AND EASTERN.

1805. Do you happen to know the maximum speed of the express trains on the Northern and Eastern line ?-I have travelled 62 miles an hour between Broxbourn and Waltham.

1806. With what load ?-I should think there must have bern at that time about 60 tons. The carriages on the Northern and Eastern are heavier carriages. We run with four wheels, and they run with six wheels.

APPARATUS AT PADDINGTON.

1844. Have you seen the apparatus put up by Mr. Brunel, at Paddington, for transferring from the Broad to the Narrow Gauge ?-Yes.

1845. Does not that seem very ingenious and simple ?-Perfectly simple. 1846. By an increased number of such contrivances, might there be a change effected of the whole train without great loss of time ?-By multi- plying those accommodations you might do it in any time required.

MR. WILLIAM BASS, District Agent to Messrs. Pickford-connected with the Gloucester, Bristol, Bath, Bridgwater, Taunton, and Exeter Stations.

THE BREAK OF GAUGE, AND REMEDIES.

5681. The goods upon the Narrow Gauge truck, if they are light packages, furniture or bulky packages, are always put on the top of the truck, and are necessarily taken off to get at the heavy loading, to put the heavier loading at the bottom of the Broad Gauge truck. 5686. What is the average detention at the Gloucester station with the trains, in consequence of the transhipment ?-I should say at least from four to six hours.

5687. In the event of the Gauge being continuous, there would be no detention at all ?-None at all.

5694. I would prefer any system to breaking bulk. 5725. I think the lighter the weight you have to transfer the better ; I consider Gloucester an exceeding bad place for break of Gauge. 5726. Do you not think that where the break of Gauge takes place there should be the least traffic ?-To be sure I do.

5735. Before the opening of the Bristol and Gloucester line, I was con- sulted by the Chairman of the Bristol and Gloucester and by some of the Directors as regards the different establishments ; it was at that time deter- mined that the Broad Gauge should be put down, very much to the an- noyance of the Chairman of the Bristol and Gloucester, who is also a Director of the Great Western Railway, for he said it was the worst thing that could have happened for the port of Bristol, and for the Bristol and Gloucester line.

5736. Who was that ?-Mr. Jones, the Chairman of the Bristol and Gloucester Railway : he agreed with me in opinion that it was a pity that a continuous line had not been put down.

5747. As regards through traffic, a break of Gauge would be most conve- nient where there is least through traffic ?-Decidedly. 5751. I should say that of our loading there is nothing like a tenth goes on to the Bristol and Exeter line compared with what stops at Bristol.

5843. You have stated that you have four men at Gloucester employed in transferring the goods from the one Gauge to the other ; will you explain how it is done ?-One man is placed in the Narrow Gauge truck, after it is uncovered ; two men are upon the platform to work the train ; one man is in the Broad Gauge truck to load ; the clerk stands by to mark the goods off; and you will see the necessity for this from the circumstance that to prevent robberies, and this establishment is rendered necessary by the interruption of the Gauge ; from no other cause ; we are frequently obliged to have extra men when we have an extra quantity of loading.

5848. There is hardly a day passes but goods get wrong.

5851. Supposing there was a continuous Gauge through Gloucester, how long would your goods be in travelling from Birmingham to Bristol ?-I suppose between five and six hours.

5852. And with the break of Gauge how long are they ?-Sometimes two days, or more. We have no dependence upon them, because, if we have not time to make the transfer before the train leaves, the train from Glou- cester to Bristol leaves at a certain time without waiting for our making the transfer, and frequently delays them till next day ; "there is no regularity at all.

UNIFORMITY OF GAUGE, AND MEANS OF OBTAINING IT.

5729. If the Narrow Gauge were placed upon the Broad Gauge line, between Gloucester and Bristol, would not that remedy, in a great degree, the evils you now complain off-It would not matter to the carriers or the public connected with the goods what number of Gauges they had, suppose they had a continuous Narrow Gauge.

5742. You think that any regulation that would admit of an increase of break of Gauge, in various parts of the country, would be a great public evil ?-Most clearly, as regards the carrying, and it is not very convenient as regards passengers. I have seen inconvenience myself frequently in coming from Bristol and going to Birmingham ; I do not like it at all. I would much rather put myself into a carriage at one point, and go in that carriage throughout where I am going. 5751 and 5752. I am quite eatisfied that Bristol, as a port, cannot rise without a continuous Gauge. I am borne out in that remark by the disin- terested portion of the trade at Bristol.

CONVENIENCE AND COMFORT.

5737. The goods are mingled in the large trucks owing to the size of the trucks ?-Yes; and the Broad Gauge trucks are exceedingly inconvenient ; we find it so, because we do our own work at the stations, and the moving about a Broad Gauge truck takes so much labour. I had a practical know- ledge of it the other day at Bristol. We were endeavouring to move a truck there ; I was exceedingly anxious to get at some of the goods that were wanted in great haste for shipment ; the truck was in the yard of the station at Bristol; I applied for assistance to the Railway Company, which was given to me ; I got some of my own men, and I myself had to assist in order to move a great cumbersome Broad Gauge truck, requiring, upon that occasion, eight of us to move it. A Narrow Gauge truck a couple of men would have moved with great ease. The Broad Gauge trucks are most inconvenient for the carriers' purposes generally. I speak completely dis- interestedly ; I have no share in either the Broad Gauge or the Narrow in any way. I have nothing to do with them ; and, as carriers, it matters not to us whether we carry by the Broad Gauge or the Narrow Gauge, but it is for the public ; if the carriers or the Railway Company are put to extra expenses by working an inconvenient Gauge or truck, it must fall eventually upon the public. A carrier, in doing his business, must calculate his expenses, and the moving of these heavy trucks comprises a part of the expenses ; so that eventually the public does and must pay for it.

5738. The trucks in question are six-wheeled trucks ?-There are a few six-wheeled trucks ; a far greater number of four-wheels-nearly the whole.

5739. What do you suppose is the gross load in these trucks ?-They vary from four tons up to six tons. I have seen them 5.18, the truck itself ; then, putting the maximum weight of goods of six tons, it would be ten or twelve tons.

5740. In the other case it would be five to six tons ?-Yes. Then many parties have observed that the Broad Gauge trucks will take more loading ; it is true they will, but it depends entirely upon the description of loading; as regards the article of cheese, for instance, a case came before me the other day ; a quantity of cheese was loaded in a Broad Gauge truck ; there was too much loaded together, and when we got to Gloucester it was very much injured. Now, in putting it into a Narrow Gauge truck, we could not have put the same quantity, so as to cause the pressure. 5741. It was caused by the superincumbent weight ?-Yee. Then as regards pipes of wine and spirits, and all that description of loading, I never liked the system of what we call "saddling," that is putting five or six pipes of wine at the bottom, and then putting one between each ; I have seen injury arise from it. I have had thirty years' experience in the carrying trade. I have been connected with the house of Pick ford now nearly thirty- one years. 5743. Is it the fact that for road-station traffic it is generally more con- venient that the trucks should be small rather than large ?-Certainly.

5741. Is it desirable that you should pick up a single truck, or any number of trucks, at each station, rather than load a truck partially ?- Yes ; our first station from Gloucester is at Cheltenham ; we are allowed a minimum weight of 20 cwt ; nothing could be better than that arrange- ment.

5753. You often travel by railway on both Gauges ?-I do. 5754. Speaking as a traveller, what do you think of the convenience of the carriages, and the steadiness of the motion, upon each Gauge ?-The con- venience of the carriages upon the Great Western is exceedingly good ; but, as respects the motion, there is much more motion upon the Broad Gauge than upon the Narrow. I experienced it on Tuesday evening. I came up by the Broad Gauge to Gloucester, by the express train to Birmingham ; the motion upon the Narrow Gauge was much less than upon the Broad Gauge ; and the best travelling I have ever had was upon the express train of the London and Birmingham. The new carriages are exceedingly corn; fortable and roomy. 5757. With regard to the number of persons who are upon one seat, do you prefer four on a seat or three ?-Three; but I prefer the two. I came up by the mail from Birmingham yesterday, and I prefer the small mail carriages decidedly ; there was ample room ; there were four in the carriage that I came up in, and I did not observe they were at all close ; they were exceedingly comfortable In the coupe they have only two, and I prefer that.

Me.. JOSEPH HAYWARD, connected with the Firm of Pickford's.

GOODS TRAFFIC.-BREAK AT GLOUCESTER.

5819. Will you explain the way in which trucks are loaded, and in which they are taken up and distributed for the roadside traffic as well as for the

• -

through traffic ?•—Our great object is to send a truck to each point we carry to; we send one to Wolverton ; another for Northampton, to the station called Roade; the next station we conic to is Rugby, where we divide ; we have one for Rugby, one or two for Leicester, one for Derby, one for Notting- ham, one for Chesterfield, one also for Sheffield and Leeds : then we go on to the Hull and York line; we have trucks to Hull, to York, to Darling- ton, and to Newcastle ; at every point we endeavour, as much as pos- sible, to make a distinct load, so that it may not be interfered with, because every interference with a load causes more or less damage to the load, and great cost attaches to goods when they are shifted in any way ; if we cannot make a load to these points we centre at Derby, because goods from the west come up to Derby, and we can there mix them with the goods from the south, and make a distinct load to those points north of Derby. 5823. From this statement of your practice it appears that you would experience great difficulty if the trucks were much larger than they are at present ?—Certainly, because they would take so much that we could not send direct; every place must either have a transhipment, or be left a day to make up that weight ; but by this system we are enabled to accom- modate the public with a daily conveyance to those places, and many more which I have not named.

5836. The less anything is moved when it is once started the better it is for it.

5841 and 5842. Our trucks are unloaded as little as possible on all the lines on which we have traffic, except at Gloucester. Mr. Bass can speak much more to Gloucester than I can. I can speak to its inconvenience, for I have stood there nights together to see it going an. We are obliged to have horses and immense power to move those immense trucks out of our way. 5845. Do you receive complaints from different parts of goods lost or goods injured ?—Yes. 5854. A man in transhipping a load of coals begins at the top, and puts the coals that were at the top into the bottom ; but with us we must put all the light goods upon the platform, and put the heavy goods in again at the bottom and the light at the top; so that it is double the labour in tran- shipping general goods that it is in transhipping such articles as iron, corn, or coals.

5824. In your opinion would the public prefer a frequent conveyance to every place not remarkably quick, or a very quick conveyance to every place, but not so regular ?—Very quick conveyance is not wanted ; what is wanted is a regular conveyance once a day ; and it is much more important, both to the public and to the carrier, to have it regular than to have it very quick.

CONVENIENCE AND COMFORT.

5825. Suppose you had a large trade from London to a distant point, such as Newcastle, and very little roadside traffic, would you prefer large wag- gons for that purpose or small ones ?—Small ones ; for this simp!e reason --our goods come up from the City for different parts at different times ; we get a small waggon, we load it with the weight, and it is consequently off our hands, and there is room for another, and room for other goods ; if we were to have large waggons we could not move them ; we should want a much larger space such a large space as cannot be had in the neighbour- hood of London, and there our goods must lie in all directions to our in- convenience; all put down, and requiring more labour to put them up again.

5826. There are some goods packed in very large parcels, such as hops and wool ?—Yes ; as regards hops, we can carry upon those small waggons from 35 to 40 pockets, and they cannot carry many more upon the large waggons, because their size will not admit of two pockets : a pocket of hops is 6 to 7 feet long : the Narrow Gauge waggons are 7 feet to 7 feet 6 wide, so that a pocket of hops just fits it in laying it across. A Broad Gauge waggon is 9 feet wide, consequently there is 2 feet of waste room in loading hops which cannot be made use of; it is all lost.

$827. Could you not lay them lengthwise ?—In loading them lengthwise you lose ground again; a Broad Gauge truck is 18 feet long ; a pocket of hops being about 7 feet, you lose 4 feet of length ; the Narrow Gauge wag- gons on the South Eastern, which are made purposely for hops, and on the London and Birmingham, their new waggons run from 13 to 14 feet long, so that we can just squeeze in two pockets lengthwise ; so that there is room lost in an article like hops, and there is also room lost in an article like wool.

$834. We have never had anything yet but what could be carried ; we have carried 11 or 12 feet turn-tables whole : our own turn-tables in our own warehouse are 11 feet, and they were all brought up whole on the London and Birmingham.

STATE AND PROSPECTS OF THE RAILWAY SYSTEM.

5838. There has been a very great division of traffic since the railways opened, from the North of England to the West of England, which used to pass through London previous to the Railways being opened. The traffic will be divided very much now, according as the lines of traffic open through the country ; there will be a great deal withdrawn that used to pass through London. We always followed the same plan in our boat system when it was at its height, before the Railways came into operation, of always loading direct to towns where it was possible, the cost of transhipping and the loss by damage was so very great.

UNIFORMITY OP GAUGE.

5860. Suppose that by the extension of the Broad Gauge into different parts of the country there were intermingled the two systems, the one of Broad Gauge Railways and the other of Narrow Gauge Railways, inter- secting each other at various points, do you conceive that your traffic, when it is started upon the Narrow Gauge railway, would be confined to the Narrow Gauge, and that which started upon the Broad Gauge would be confined to the Broad Gauge?—Certainly ; I do not see how it would be possible to work it otherwise. Now, with the intermixing of Railways at various points, it is very difficult to keep it straight, and I do not know what it would be with the two Gauges together.

• WYNDHAM HA.RDING, Esq., now connected with the London and Birmingham Railway, late Manager of the Bristol and Gloucester (a Broad Gauge line), on which the only Break of Gauge which has yet oc- curred, namely, that at Gloucester, is found ; previously General Super- intendent and Secretary to the Glasgow and Greenock (a Narrow Gauge Railway) ; educated as a Civil Engineer.

4431. From your experience of the Gloucester Station, are you of opinion that the want of an uniformity of Gauge is an evil of a serious descrip- tion?—Yes, I think, when regarded in connexion with the advantages which Railways ought to afford, it is of the most serious possible descrip- tion. I have formed my opinion on what was daily brought under my ob- servation with regard to all descriptions of traffic, and I should say that the want of uniformity strikes at the very root of the advantages which Railways are calculated to afford ; because among the peculiar advantages of Railways is punctuality as well as despatch, whereas when you have a Break of Gauge it is quite impossible ever to ensure punctuality, especially with goods, and for reasons which 1 can state to the Commissioners, and which I think will place it beyond a doubt ; it certainly has been so at Gloucester. 4432. We shall be glad to have all your reasons in the fullest detail, as we understand you have turned your attention very closely to the subject. —Perhaps you will allow me to enumerate the different descriptions of traffic, and how they are affected. In the first place, as to the passenger traffic, it is clear that there must be great inconvenience in taking a pas- senger out of one carriage and moving him with all his articles of luggage sad all that accompanies him into another carriage ; that is evidently an annoyance to a certain extent, and gives rise to delay as far as passengers are concerned (supposing you have nothing but passengers in a train) of between a quarter and half an hour on the average ; but then horses and carriages always accompany passenger trains, and the delay is thus in- creased. With horses there is a risk of injury ; and I have known two or three hours even occupied in getting a restive horse into a truck. Very often the owner is with the horse, and he is unwilling to let the train go unless the horse is in it. With regard to a carriage, the same thing occurs ; the men are apt to injure it in getting it on and off, and the owner is dis- contented and complains it the train goes without it, and that gives rise to further delay than takes place where you have only passengers to change. But with regard to merchandise, the evil assumes a totally different cha- racter: you stop your train ; you have to take it to pieces and to disar- range it, to unpack the goods and repack them, and put them in other trucks of a different capacity, and consequently take an inventory of the whole as you pass them over ; it is a work of great time, and requires the greatest possible care. Then you have to pack them up again and send them off; this costs a great deal of money, and occupies a great deal of time. The goods are continually injured, and wrongly invoiced and misdirected, and it must always be so when the work is to be done in a hurry. But It is especially hurtful, looking to the irregularity of the traffic to which it gives rise; and I will give this statement with the permission of the Com- missioners, showing how irregularity must exist in consequence of the fluctuating character of the goods trains on all lines ; there is no sort of average of goods trains, it varies day by day. I will read out the goods:in the trains which arrived at Gloucester last week, taken by accident :- Tons. Cwt.

. 124 4 October 20th . . 34 17 • • 59 21st •

19 Pt • • • 64 1

On one day, therefore, the train, which was 124 tons, is suddenly, without any apparent reason, reduced to 5 tons. Tons. Cwt.

October 22nd .

• . 6 147 15 14

23rd

. 20 12

. 48 5 „ 24th

. 28 3

. 127 5

25th

• 5 1.)

i•

• • • • •

42 14 Now, in this week the fluctuations appear to be unusually great ; but they are always of this character, though not always to the same extent. It is quite clear that with work fluctuating as this does it is impossible to fix any average force, with a view to economy, which shall be equal to the greatest amount of work ; one day you will have half your porters stand- ing still, and the next day you will have more work than they will possibly be able to do.

4438. Do you happen to know the gross load on each train shall be able to give you that. Now, the expense of work conducted under these circumstances is very great ; great is a vague term ; it approaches to Is. per ton, the mere expense of porterage and shifting ; but that does not by any means represent the real expense connected with it ; for instance, if your goods are three hours longer than they ought to be in going to Bristol, the carts are waiting there and doing nothing, expecting goods that do not come ; and, above all, you thereby lose a great quantity of the traffic, be. cause people will not use that conveyance which is so irregular if thereon get any other, and this is equivalent to expense. 4439. By carts you mean road carts ?—Yes, waiting to take goods to the warehouses and mills ; so that the loss to the company is very great by the irregularity of the traffic. The inconvenience to the public is to some extent represented by the loss which the company suffer ; to that extent the Railway conveyance is not so effective as it might be. A break of the Gauge is precisely analogous to what takes place at a custom-house, sup- posing that custom-house to be well conducted and in a friendly spirit ; goods are unpacked and enumerated, taxed, and allowed to pass on. With regard to every ton of goods that passes either way, the change of Gauge, measuring distances by time's compasses, as the phrase goes, places towns frequently 50 further miles apart than they otherwise would be. There is one other branch of traffic which I have to touch upon, that is, mineral traffic. If you have to shift minerals, coals, or lime, it is clear that you do them such an injury that it is not likely you would have the traffic ; under those circumstances you would, therefore, in order to avoid the shifting of the minerals, contrive a scheme for lifting the vehicle which they were in from one body to another. You must endeavour to do that by mechanical arrangements, because otherwise most likely, except under very extraordinary circumstances, it would preclude the traffic passing ; and all these contrivances are liable to great objection, especially applied to cheap and bulky traffic, such as time traffic in minerals. Of course, in this description which I am endeavouring to give, I have assumed that everything is changed by hand, and that there are no mechanical arrange- ments adopted which will save the labour of transhipping. I will state the objections to them afterwards, if the Commissioners wish it. 4(41. Do you imagine that it will be possible, with such a traffic, to give to each passenger his carriage to go to every one of the points diverging from Rugby P—Unless I knew all the points, of course, I could not answer the question directly ; but it is clear that there is already a considerable divergence at Rugby, and the number of carriages that are sent through

may be regarded as an indication of the convenience which the clearing- house system affords to the public. I would remark that the difference between a break of Gauge occurring at Rugby, and no break of Gauge, and still the same convergence taking place, is this, that if there were no break, as soon as ever the traffic coming through or into One channel became of any importance, immediately the remedy would be applied of sending the carriages through ; whereas, if there were a break of Gauge, the greater the traffic the more the inconvenience of 'gifting would be—in the former case the shifting which would take place would only be where the traffic was inconsiderable ; whereas, in the other cue, it would be more felt as the traffic increased.

4442. Still there is reason to believe that all the great lines will have various branches, and that there will be more trunk lines communicating

with them ; and it does not, therefore, seem fair to assume that it will never be possible for the London and Birmingham, or any company, to supply carriages throughout ; consequently, you must be subject, in all probability, to a change of carriage at Rugby. At the present moment, the Great Western Company change carriages upon their own line at Swindon and Didcot, and we are informed that no inconvenience is com. plained of, if it be felt. Are you aware that those changes do take place ?- The difficulty of transhipment which must exist where you have exceedingly large carriages, such as you have upon the Broad Gauge, is generally remedied as soon as possible, as far as first-class passeegens are concerned ; the inconvenience remains to the second class, aud their complaints ate not regarded so much as those of the first class ; that gives a sort of reason why complaints are not heard so much in some cases as in others ; but it is quite clear that, though it may be impossible to tend carriages in all direc- tions, it is infinitely more difficult to do it where you have a large vehicle holding twice as many people, and occupying twice as much space, as where you have a smaller vehicle.

4443. Then you are disposed to think that, with the description of Rail- ways we shall have for the future, the smaller the carriages the greater the convenience will be to the public at large ?—For the branch traffic un- doubtedly. 4444. Because you afford greater facility to the passengers that are to be carried through ?—Yes; you accommodate your Railway to the passengers that you have to early; there is an advantage in that, in regard to economy and convenience.

4445. You speak of the inconvenience of the change of truck in the case of private carriages, where a break of Gauge occurs ; would not that be remedied by allowing the passenger trucks of the Narrow Gauge to be carried upon the trucks of the Broad Gauge, it merely adds to the dead weight, and there is no great loss of time ?—Possibly, with reference to private carriages, such an arrangement may be admissible ; but it is not admissible with reference to goods trucks, in my opinion. As it is, we have considerable fear very often from the light lashings which attaches a gentle- man's carriage to the truck ; an accident very rarely happens, but ti1l it would hardly be safe; if the train were suddenly brought up by anything like a collision, there is no knowing where a private carriage would be found afterwards ; and that danger would be increased it the Narrow Gauge railway truck-and gentleman's carriage were perched on a broader railway - truck.

4448. With regard to the inconvenience of removing goods from one Gauge to the other, does not that resolve itself into a question of the cost of removal 2-1 do not think it does ; I think both to the company and the public it affects the whole advantages which the Railway ought to afford them. It affects the revenue of the company and the traffic of the district.

4449. I do not think that any such mechanical arrangements can accom- plish the object for which they are designed, and my reasons are principally these : I do not mean to say that it is a matterof difficulty to shirt the boay of a carriage from one carriage to the other ; 1 co riot think it is. I think I have myself designed a machine, and other people have no doubt done the same, which overcomes the difficulty to a great extent, perhaps alto- gether ; you cannot be sure of this, though, till you have worked it for a few months or a year ; but, as far as the model goes, it appears to have overcome the difficulty ; but the reason why I think such arrangements on principle never can generally apply is this, that they involve two sorts of stock—one the ordinary or permanent stock, if we may so call it ; and the other the shifting stock, capable of undergoing this process of transhipment. It also requires the concurrence of a great many Companies, not merely to consent to such stock being built, but to their continually, even daily, and all their servants, taking care that it is used as it is intended to be used for that purpose only, otherwise the arrangements will fail altogether, and rather increase the evil than mitigate it. Now, supposing all the Railways were under one menagement, even assuming that to be the case, I do not think it would then be practicable to bring into use two sorts of stock. We find already that there is a great difficulty in carrying on a goods ti sac, in getting hold of any stock at all, from the fluctuating nature of the traffic, especially the extraordinary rapidity with which everything goes on ; in the goods shed you get hold of the first goods truck you can, and continually those out of repair are sent, although contrary to order ; and the necessity of thus using the first truck that comes to hand without the distinction is shown by the clearing-house system, which many Companies were originally averse to, but which they were subsequently obliged to adopt. 1 he Great Western were against it at first at Bristol, but in three weeks they were obliged to give way. They found it impossible when stock was there not to seise and use it in spite of all regulations to the contrary, and I feel satisfied that you cannot keep in use all over the country, or even at the principal stations of the country, two sorts of stock, each of which shall be applied to a particular traffic of the district of the opposite Gauge. For that reason I think that mechanical ingenuity is almost thrown away upon the subject, because when you have overcome the apparent difficulty the real difficulty remains. But, at the same time, I do not mean to say that the arrangement should not be tried with regard to particular branches of traffic. it is the only thing left for you to do ; if both Gauges continue in use it must be tried, and you must get it into use as w ell as you can ; but I do not think it is applicable to miscellaneous traffic.

4454. I will put the question in another shape : supposing it were a pro- fitable trade for the Midland Company to carry coals with new stock, do TOR not imagine that they would construct it ?-1 think they would hesitate to do so, because the coalownera have so often tried those shifting bodies, and I do not know a case in which they have succeeded.

4456. Nobody says that the arrangement is mechanically impossible, but it is commercially an inconvenience and expense.

4464. We have been told by a celebrated engineer, that he could contrive such machinery at Rugby, and that he could, in half a minute, shift any quantity of goods, the larger the better, at a penny a ton ; that is no great cost ?—No; I think that it is possible to shift an individual ton of goods or a great many tons of goods for much less than a penny, merely speaking of the mechanical expense of lifting the truck and letting it down. I should say less than a farthing ; but that does not involve the whole expense of the transhipment : the arrangement of the train, to begin with, is an expense .—the moving it backwards and forwards.

THE JUNCTION OF THE BROAD AND NARROW GAUGES.

At each point of meeting of the Gauges it would be necessary that the passengers alight, produce their luggage (w hich would probably have to be weighed, in order to satisfy the regulations of the new company into whose keeping it was about to be transferred), and see that it is replaced in the proper vehicle on the other Gauge. The passengers themselves, with all the accompaniments of travellers, must move into another carriage; if a private carriage or horses have to be shifted, the risk of injury in shifting mind be undergone ; goods in various but sometimes enormous quantities must be unsheeted, unpacked, overhauled package by package (in order that the precise condition of each article turned over from the Narrow

Gauge Company's keeping to the Broad Gauge Company, or vice versd, may be noted by the responsible officers of each company) ; an inventory must be taken of the whole, and they must then be reloaded into another vehicle. This proceeding will often have to take place at night, and in a hurry, and mistakes and injury to the goods are sure to occur continually.

The goods will arrive in varying quantities, five or even ten times more on one day than on another ; the number of clerks, and porters, and the premises would be only adapted to the shifting of a certain average quan- tity of goods in a given time ; when, therefore, as would continually happen in practice, such a sudden influx of business took place, the goods would have to wait at the station for an indefinite time until they could be shifted.

This would give rise to constant irregularity in the time of conveyance of merchandise to its destination, which is now the case at Gloucester, so that the carrier is unable to tell the sender of goods how long his goods will be in reaching any place beyond the point of the meeting of the Gauges ; whereas he is able to give this information accurately in all other cases when the goods go over railways of one Gauge. It is a matter of the greatest practical importance in the operations of commerce ; for punc- tuality in the arrival of goods at the expected time is even more desirable than speed of conveyance. It was the want of this punctuality which was so seriously felt in canal conveyance ; and it is this which constitutes the great superiority of Railway conveyance for the carriage of merchandise.

THE CLEARING-HOUSE.

It is a well-known fact to all who are conversant with the working of the Narrow Gauge Railways that the carrying stock of all Narrow Gauge lines is used very much in common by the different companies ; that carriages and waggons the property of one company are sent over other companies' lines according to the destination of the passengers or goods with which they are laden ; thus you may continually find Darlington and Hull wag- gons at Gloucester, and the reverse. To facilitate this interchange, there is a central office, called the Railway Clearing-house, established in London, to which daily ratites from the stations in the Narrow Gauge districts are made, and each company is there charged for the use it has made of the carrying stock of the neighbouring lines. The system is evidently the cor- rect one; and it wes stated before the Committee of the House of Commons on the contending schemes for the country immediately north of Oxford, that to the facilities which it affords the vast increase in the goods traffic upon Railways which has taken place within the last three or four years is mainly attributable.

COMPARISON OF GAUGES.

I have turned my attention to all the advantages or disadvantages of one Gauge over another, in a commercial point of view. I could scarcely avoid making the comparison, being stationed at a place where the two Gauges join. With regard to passenger traffic, the difference between the passenger traffic in the one Gauge is, that in the one case the traffic is conducted in much larger vehicles ; they bold double the number of people, and are one- third wider. That is found not to be adapted to the ordinary passenger traffic. We find that the middle seats are dark and inconvenient, and not liked by passengers ; they generally do not sit in them if they can help it. ibis remark applies to the width of the stock. As regards the general size of the stock, we find the carriages too large. We cannot fill them ; and if the passengers rather exceed a certain number, and we have to add one more, we must add an unwieldy vehicle, which holds far more than wewant. Indeed for some lines the carriages are found to be altogether too large. I find on the Bristol and Gloucester we had only five first-class and nine se- cond-class passengers for two months, on the average of two of our trains, and we cannot carry less than a carriage capable of holding 32 first class and 72 second class, for those five and nine passengers, which was overshooting the mark as far as those trains were concerned, that is as regards passenger traffic. Then we come to horses. We find that the Broad Gauge vehicle will hold four horses, but we never have four to send, except at time of fairs ; therefore we take a vehicle weighing five tons for the con- veyance of one or two horses, which is the usual number, whereas upon the Narrow Gauge a vehicle weighing three tons will convey the same number, which is all we want. The same with respect to the truck. On the Broad Gauge they have a truck which weighs tour tons two cwt. for a gentleman's carriage. On the Narrow Gauge we have a truck of three tons which conveys one gentleman's carriage just as well. That is as regards passenger traffic. Then we come to goods traffic. We find that we have a waggon capable of holding in the Broad Gauge a loading of greater weight and of somewhat greater arc. The widths are in propor- tion of 7 feet 3 inches, and 8 feet 6 inches, or thereabouts; the lengths are unlimited ; you may make them as long as you like ; but we find that those waggons on the Broad Gauge are unnecessarily heavy. For instance, on the Bristol and Gloucester, they have two sorts of waggons, one called the tilted and the other the open waggon. The tilted waggon weighs 5 tons 13 cwt., the open waggon 4 tons 19 cwt. The limit of the load is 6 tons. On the Narrow Gauge, taking the average, you cannot make a precise comparison there again, because the waggons are constructed in a different way ; but taking the average of six ordinary goods weggons, of different

lines, you find that they weigh 2 tons 12 lb., and their limit, as to weight, is 41 tons, that is, the weight of the goods ; but it is necessary to remark that those weights do not indicate at all what the trucks have actually got to carry in practice ; the loading of a truck is regulated more frequently by the destination and quality of the goods, than by the absolute weight of the goods ; we find that the result of large trucks of these peculiar dimensions is, that we have a most enormous quantity of tare, or unprofitable weight, compared to the profitable, as between the one Gauge and the other. I have with me an account of the trains for last week, which I took acci- dentally ; the traffic at the Gloucester station may be divided into two sorts, terminal traffic, and roadside traffic ; of course with regard to the latter the proportion of dead weight is much greater, and the proportion of net weight much smaller than with terminal traffic. Between Bristol and Birmingham last week we took 219 tons of goods, which were transferred at Gloucester from the Wide into the Narrow Gauge waggons ; they occupied in the Narrow Gauge 65 waggons, which weighed 169 tons tare ; the same 219 tons of goods occupied upon the Broad Gauge 48 waggons, which weighed 228 tons ; there- fore the proportion of useful weight, as compared to the useless or dead weight, is 35 per cent, in favour of the Narrow Gauge. That is an experiment made under the most unfavourable circumstances for the Narrow Gauge, for I have put the weight of the Narrow Gauge carriages at more than they really weigh, because accidentally some very light and bad carriages got in among them, and I threw them out, and called them of the usual weight. Also between Bristol and Gloucester, from certain circumstances connected with the traffic, the carriers throw their goods together much more than between Gloucester and Birmingham, and therefore there is a greater weight per truck than it would otherwise be ; even making those allow- ances, it is 35 per cent, in favour of the Narrow Gauge, and 1 think that it the fair result. JOHN HAWKSHAW, Esq., Engineer of the Manchester and Leeds, Manchester and Bolton, and the Ashton, Stalybridge, and Liverpool Railways.

5609. Supposing the question of the Gauge were now entirely open throughout the country, I have no hesitation in saying I should be disposed to adopt a Narrow Gauge ; of course, when I say a Narrow Gauge I do not mean 4 feet 81 precisely, because its being 4 feet 81 is an accidental cir- cumstance.

SPEEDS.

5611. 1 must confess that running express trains is not nearly so im- portant a thing to the traffic and commerce of this kingdom as the running of the trains which carry on the every-day business ; it is only one man in fifty that cares about being hurried along at that speed ; the mass of the people do not care at all about it.

5658. There is no doubt at all that, if you put the same engine upon the Liverpool and Manchester line, it will run as fast as upon the Great Western. The breadth of Gauge cannot increase the velocity ; as an abstract question, there would be greater velocity with no Gauge at all.

PROSPECTS OF THE RAILWAY SYSTEM.

5608. 1 think the absolute necessity of extending railways, now that every road is to have a Railway, rather goes to show that it is not wise to make those Railways of very large dimensions. he question is not so much what is best for one large Trunk Railway running through the kingdom, as what is best as a system to be applied to the whole kingdom ; and any ar- rangement which neglected the extension by branches to every town and every village of importance would, I think, be detrimental to the country. For the reasons which I have stated, and also others quite obvious to myself, I am quite sure that the working of Railways will become a very different matter, in course of time, from what it is at present ; that, instead of col- lecting traffic, and carrying it in very large heavy trains, the perfection of the system will be to have much lighter and more mime/ ens trains. I may state that, in my own practice on the Manchester and Bolton Railway, I have greatly increased the trains each way ; and I do not, and shall not, feel satisfied until, on lines like that in the manufacturing districts, a time-hill will be unnecessary, and you will be able to go to the station as you look out in London for an omnibus, and be sure that you will get a train within ten minutes of wanting it ; and my impression is, that that will ultimately be the practice of working Railways. I believe it will be for the advantage of the companies themselves very much, and certainly to the advantage of the public.

5613. I am persuaded that expense of working a line upon the principle I have just stated would very little exceed the present expense, and give increased accommodation to the public ; but if the universal Gauge were a large one, while you might prove it to be desirable to run very frequent, and therefore light, trains, if you were compelled at the same time to run very large engines, there would be a very great difficulty in the way of work- ing the lines in that manner.

THE BREAK OF GAUGE.

5628. There can be no doubt about the break of Gauge being a great evil. The fact is, that the interchange of traffic at a station where there are many lines, as at the Normanton station, is a difficult matter : the sorting of the trains there alone occupies a very considerable time; and if you have not only the sorting to do, but the changing to do, I think it will be attended with considerable inconvenience. I know last session we ob- tained a bill in Parliament for the Wakefield, Pontefract, and Goole Railway, which avoided the Normanton station, starting from Wakefield ; and the reason alleged for that arrangement, and which had very great weight with the committee, and, I think, induced them in a great measure to pass that bill, was the obstruction which would arise to the traffic from having to pass through the Normanton station, simply be- cause at the Normanton station several lines meet, and the sorting of waggons alone occupies a great deal of time. Every traveller finds that. In the first place, it would require that you should have a set of men con- stantly waiting to carry on this operation, and do nothing else ; because otherwise it would be found that the men were engaged in some- thing else just as necessary, and, if they were to leave that and come and look alter those waggons, they would be obstructing some other pro- cess which was going on at the station ; EC/ that you would have to keep men constantly in attendance to do this changing of the trucks, and even with that it would be quite impossible to do it in the time. It is not simply the lifting of the body from one waggon to the other ; it is getting the waggon to its place. I have known stations blocked up for hours together ; it frequently happens that the sidings are blocked up with a dozen waggons together. You cannot get one waggon where you want it to be, because there are large trains in the way, which you cannot move.

5642. I think no mechanical contrivance would give the facility that would be necessary for the purpose of transhipment, without causing great inconvenience to the commerce of the country ; nothing is easier than to lift a waggon and put it anywhere you please ; it is the simplest thing possible; we have been lifting stage waggons these four or five years, but still it is the room it would take, and the delay it would occasion, which, of course, with a very large train, is very serious. And then again, in a manufacturing district like Lancashire and Yorkshire, there are a great number of branches and a great number of stations ; you can afford to keep a man at each station to keep the switches clear and so on, but if you Carry on this changing you must have a large establishment at each place, which no Railway Company can afford.

MR. J. P. BUDD, Manager of Copper Works and Coal Mines, Deputy- Chairman of the Welsh Midland.

6069. With reference to the break of Gauge, will you state the places at which any junction of different Gauges would cause inconveniences to you ; and will you state how the question of the difference of Gauge enters into the consideration of the convenience of your proposed Railway ?—I think that, supposing there was a break of Gauge between us and Birmingham, or :between us and Birkenhead or Liverpool, or a break of Gauge disconnecting us with the north or east of England, that, looking at the nature of the traffic we anticipate in metal and heavy goods, the benefits of the Railway would be greatly diminished indeed. I cannot fancy how 500 or 600 or 700 tons of iron (which, there being no break of Gauge, certainly would reach its destina- tion by the next morning) could be transferred and shifted in the course of the night. My great wish is that we should have no break of Gauge at all. As to what Gauge we shall have, we, of course, are in the hands of Parlia- ment.

6071. Where are the places in which you fear a break of Gauge as pos- sible ?—I fear a break of Gauge as disconnecting us from Gloucester, Worcester, Wolverhampton, Birmingham, Birkenhead, Holyhead, Man- chester, and Liverpool ; in fact the whole system.

THE BREAK OF GAUGE.

6076. I would merely say, in addition, that having now the sending of goods to Gloucester, where they have lobe transferred into other modes of conveyance, I have found the greatest difficulty and loss ; frequently a parcel of goods is sent to the wrong party. Perhaps, after I have been months in endeavouring to get ironworks to try this particular quality of iron, I send up a lot for them, and that lot gets sent to another party.

Resulting from the break of Gauge ?—Merely from the transference ; the transference being into the basin at Gloucester.

G. P. BIDDER, Civil Engineer, in partnership with Mr. R. Stephenson. CONVENIENCE AND COMFORT OF PASSENGERS.

4133. As regards convenience of passengers, that is a matter of taste. I myself would rather ride certainly three abreast, or even two abreast, than four abreast. In winter I have found the double compartment a great inconvenience when I have been in the compartment furthest from the platform side; I have had to disturb those whom I have had to cross when they have been making themselves very comfortable. On the other hand, I have been disturbed by others under the same circumstances ; and cer- tainly on the Birmingham and Grand Junction lines the old-fashioned mail carriages, two abreast, are most sought after, and most generally filled. 4133. From your long experience and the consideration which I am aware you have given to the subject, are you disposed to give a preference now in a new country to the Broad or the Narrow Gauge, or some inter- mediate Gauge ?—It seems to me that in the question of Gauge there are four material points which ought to decide the question. The first is as to safety ; the next is as to the power of the engine ; the next would be that class of carriage which would be most convenient to the public ; and the last the waggon which would be most economical and found most gene- rally useful. Now, as regards safety, I must confess that I cannot see that between the two systems there is really any difference at all. I admit that on the one hand you would have somewhat more difficulty in cap- sizing a broad-wheeled carriage ; then, on the other hand, I think you must admit that a broad-wheeled carriage has a greater tendency to run off the line—it must have the Effect as regards curves of diminishing the propos-. tion. I do not mean to say that I would lay any stress on that objection. Mr. Gooch has quoted an experiment, an observation at Bristol of a car- riage that went at 40 miles an hour round a curve of 600 feet radius. I have calculated the centrifugal force, and that is rather less than one- sixth of gravity. Now, supposing the centre of gravity to be 5 feet, which perhaps it may be on a Narrow Gauge carriage, that carriage would travel round a curve without capsizing, supposing the curve was half a mile radius, at about 130 miles an hour before it would capsize. A Broad Gauge carriage would travel on the same curve probably at between 150 and 160; that is what theory would give. Both those speeds appear to me not likely to be attainable in practice, and not likely to be required. There- fore I think, in point of safety, as regards the question of Gauge, it really ought to be put on one side, and, though a narrow-wheeled carriage has not the same tendency to run off the rail, I think there is so little tendency In either, that, as regards safety, there really can be no material question be- tween them. Then the next point is the power of the engine. 4135. As to speed—after you have attained a speed of 40 or 45 miles an hour—a saving of time by the increase of speed does not go on pro rata, it is very much diminished. You save a great deal of time from 20 miles an hour to 40 miles an hour, but an increase from 40 to 50 miles an hour is not of that importance think the only danger from increase of speed arises, not from the actual travelling, but from the interference of other lines. For instance, if you take the line of the Great Western, and the London and Bit mingham, they would be connected by branches at various points ; you cannot have high rates of speed between the termini without the necessity of very few stoppages, and therefore you must go through a great number of stations at a very high rate ; there is where there would be the danger, not in the travelling. 1 do not believe there is any danger in travelling at any speeds that we are ever likely to attain. With the present state of the permanent way, where the rails are 70 to 751bs. weight, I believe upon that system of rails you might travel certainly 70 or 80 miles an hour. 4139. I do not see any danger, except where the curves are sharp, but there would be a practical limit to speed from the difficulty of getting the engine- drivers to diminish their speed at certain points. I do not think the express trains can be introduced to any extent, with any safety, without the electric telegraph to forewarn their progress, and to forewarn them of any impediments in their way.

JOSEPH LOCKE, Esq., C.E., completed the Grand Junction, South

Western, &c.

279. Do you apprehend that any mercantile evil will result to the traffic of the country by the difference of Gauge between the Great Western and the South Western Companies ?—Most unquestionably.

399. If you were engaged as engineer for a company, independent of the Birmingham or Great Western, to unite Oxford with Rugby, what Gauge do you suppose you would select for that particular line ?—I should most unquestionably select the Narrow Gauge, and I would do it upon this prin- ciple, that, as there are far more Narrow Gauge Railways made than Broad, I think you ought to limit the inconvenience which must necessarily be felt from the change within the smallest possible compass ; for that reason I would say that the Narrow Gauge being brought up from the end of Scot- land to Oxford, by which you will ensures uniform system of Gauge up to that point, if you take the Broad Gauge to Rugby you limit the conve- nience, and you throw an obstacle in the way between the North of Scotland and Oxford.

BREAK OF GAUGE.

If the result of this contest and this trial shall be that you must have two Gauges in order to get rid of the annoyance of changing, it is far better for the public and for the companies that it shall be done as between Oxford and London than as between Rugby and London. It is for that reason I would not even allow a chance of the double line being put upon a greater space than is now rendered necessary by the Broad Gauge lines that are constructed ; and I would apply that opinion not only to the line from Oxford to Rugby, but from Oxford to Worcester and Wolverhampton, —to the whole of the lateral lines ; in fact, every line that has passed Par- liament during the present session. 400. In fact, you think that a diversity of Gauge is an evil, and that it should be kept within the narrowest limits ?-1 do ; and believing, as I do, that, wherever the change of Gauge is, it will necessitate hereafter either an entirely new line to get rid of the evil, or the making a Narrow Gauge line upon the broad ; believing that that will be the event, it is, I think, better that you should now continue the Narrow Gauge, and have the Double Gauge upon the shortest possible length.

401. Suppose you introduce upon the Broad Gauge lines Narrow Gauge rails, you only get rid of one•half of the evil, that is transferring the Narrow Gauge traffic upon the Broad Gauge line, but the converse of that you do not obtain without a change of Gauge, because trains coming up to Oxford and having to pass to the north must change at Oxford to the Narrow Gauge carriages P—Unless it was a Narrow Gauge carriage that had come all the way from London, which might not be the case certainly, there is an inconvenience in that ; but the Broad Gauge carriages belonging to the Great Western need not go beyond Oxford ; it is only the trams

that are going off from the line that would carry that traffic, and they would be the Narrow Gauge carriages. I do not think it is necessary that the Broad Gauge carriages should go upon the Narrow Gauge lines-that would be so if we had a lesser number of miles of Railway upon the Narrow than the Broad Gauge, but what you have to do is to limit upon the smallest number of miles possible the amount of that inconvenience.

405. Which will be attended with greater expense to the Great Western Company, the altering of their Gauge from 7 feet to 4 feet 81 inches, or the introduction of Narrow Gauge rails within their broad rails, taking into consideration the change of stock and engines P-The first expense would be the least, and I think if the Great Western Gauge were changed to 4 feet 81 inches-in fact, if every one of the Broad Gauge Railways that is now laid down were changed to 4 feet 81 inches-the evil which you are sitting here to consider would be in the best and in the cheapest way got rid of.

I think the best way is to allow the Great Western line the fullest extent of the lines at present made ; but the extension of the Great Western to Rugby on the one hand, and towards Salisbury and Plymouth on the other, should be made upon the Narrow Gauge, and, if there be little inconvenience in the change of Gauge, at all events that would be limited to the Great Western main line, of which that company would have the perfect control. And my opinion is, that they would find hereafter that the inconvenience of that transfer was so great, that it was worth their while to lay down the Narrow Gauge from Oxford to London, in order to get rid of the change, and in that case they might do it without great expense and without any very serious loss.

407. Suppose the whole of the Railways in this district of England belonged to the Government, and it was intended to make extensions on the system spoken of, should you be disposed to recommend, as a Govern- ment officer, the Great Western Gauge to be changed at once to the Nar- row Gauge, as being likely, eventually, to lead to the greatest economy and the greatest commercial advantage ?-I am not prepared to say that I would recommend that change in the first instance ; for this reason, the Great Western Company, through its officers, have declared that the inconvenience arising from the change of Gauge is very little. Then I would say, you shall have an opportunity of testing that. All the Railways that are now projected, but are not made, we will not involve in the extra xpense. All the Railways that are now projected from Corsham, called the Wilts and Somerset, shall be made upon the Narrow Gauge, and the transfer shall take place upon the Great Western line, proper ; and if found hereafter, which I believe will be found, that there is more incon- venience and more annoyance with that change of Gauge than they anti- cipate. they then will come to advocate that which you now suggest to me. But, in the one case, to compel the Great Western Company to change their Gauge would be a hardship, without compensation ; in the other case it would be no hardship at all ; if they do not choose to make the Railways, for which they obtained Acts of Parliament last year, upon the Narrow Gauge, other parties will ; the inconvenience would then be limited, with- out any further expense, and it would give the Great Western Company an opportunity of proving what they themselves assert, that there is no inconvenience in making the change. 417. Supposing it should be found desirable to change the Gauge of the South Western to the Broad Gauge, what interruption would that be likely to cause to the traffic upon that line during the change ?-There would be great inconvenience in it ; the better plan, I think, would be to take a certain length, and use a single line. In any substantial repair, such as entirely taking up the rails or sleepers, or putting in blocks instead of sleepers, I have always thought that the simplest mode would be for a mile, or a mile and a half, to take up the rails, and use a single line, keeping a policeman at each end. 418. But you would have to alter the tunnels ?-Yes, our tunnels would not be large enough for the Wide Gauge.

419. Nor your bridges and viaducts ?-Some would not, and some part might be altered. It is not an impossibility, but it would be attended with considerable expense, and great inconvenience, if it were to be done during the time the passenger traffic was carried on ; but if you had to change the tunnels, you could not carry on the traffic. My other answer was with reference only to the alteration of the permanent way.

INCONVENIENCES OF A BREAK.

295. Have you at all considered the -nature of the inconvenience that would result from the two Gauges coming into contact for the through traffic ?-Yes, I have considered the inconvenience of it ; it must certainly involve the inconvenience of a change of carriages on the part of the pas- sengers, and probably on the part of the luggage too and the merchandise. A change whether in mass or in detail I am not prepared to say ; but it would involve a change both of one and the other, and that cannot be looked upon but as a serious inconvenience.

296. Do not you imagine that it would be possible to lay down other Narrow Gauge rails on a Broad Gauge Railroad, so as to carry the Narrow Gauge traffic continuously ?-Yes, quite possible ; but then that is a very great expense, and it would be attended also, particularly with reference to the stations, with some inconvenience.

297. Taking the Salisbury station, for instance, would it require that station to be very much enlarged if the two Ganges met there ?-There is a doubt about it. Wherever the two Gauges meet, the station would want to be not only larger, but of a different construction from what it would necessarily be if it were made for either one Gauge or the other. 298. Do you imagine that the mixture of the Gauges would tend to diminish the public safety ?-There is no doubt about it. 299. By a mixture of the Gauges, you mean the two Gauges upon the same line ?-Yes.

300. But that you would scarcely recommend ?-I would not recommend it. If it were a matter of necessity I might adopt it ; we adopt many things which we should not recommend, from mere matter of necessity ; and if it were imperative upon us to take for a short distance Narrow Gauge lines upon a Wide Gauge Railway, we should find some means, either by going more slowly, or taking precautions in passing over it without absolute danger ; but still I would not recommend working the line in that way.

369. Do you think the public safety would be at all endangered by having the passenger bodice removed from the under frames ?-I certainly do think

; I think in many cases of collision the body being attached to the frame gives greater security to the passengers. I may say this because the strength of the carriages affords great security to passengers in all those collisions.

446. Do you foresee any increased difficulty in the ordinary working as regards the maintenance of way, packing the rails, &c., if you were to have combined together the Narrow and Broad Gauge ?-Certainly ; it could not be done well if you laid down two rails.

HISTORY OF THE GAUGE-VARIOUS OPINIONS ON THE.

303. From your present experience of the Broad and Narrow Gauge, suppose you had a fresh district of country in which to project a series or

system of Railways, should you be disposed to take the one or the other ?- I am not quite sure that I should adopt either the one or the other. I think, if we had to begin afresh, I might adopt another Gauge rather wider than the Narrow Gauge ; but certainly I would not take a Gauge so wide as the Wide Gauge.

306. We have now wheels on the Narrow Gauge 6 feet 6 inches in dia- meter, and we have some engines on the South Western where the boilers certainly are not higher than the boilers of some of the engines which we have been running with wheels of 5 feet 6 inches ; and the reason why they are kept so low is, that we have done away with the cranked axle upon those engines. We have placed the cylinder outside the boiler, and we have brought the boiler very nearly on to the axle, and we have thus saved as much by avoiding the crank as we have lost by increasing the size of the wheel, keeping the centre of gravity very nearly where it was. 311. I am Chief Engineer of the Paris and Rouen, and Rouen and Havre Railways. At Paris we form a junction with the St. Germains Railway, which is on the 4 feet 81 inches Gauge.

351. So that in point of fact you did not think it necessary to increase the Gauge from 4 feet 81 inches to 5 feet and upwards on the Paris and Rouen line ?-I did not.

308. The Manchester and Sheffield line is 4 feet 8i Gauge also ?-It is.

386. For the same reason, I presume, as the others ?-No doubt. I may state that I, for myself, have never found, except in the first instance, when our engines were complex, any want of space for the proper working of the engines in the present Gauge. Having got rid of that difficulty, I have never seen any necessity for increasing the Gauge.

CONVENIENCE AND COMFORT.

303. The Wide Gauge is not necessary for the machinery, in my opinion ; and as to the public covenience in the construction of large carriages, which seems to me to have run away with the public in some measure, larger carriages, if they are necessary, can be had upon the Narrow Gauge as well as upon the Wide, particularly in reference to height. It appears to me that it does not add to the convenience of the public to have four or five sitting abreast. If you give as much room to each passenger as they give upon the Wide Gauge, which I think we do, the Narrow Gauge carriage, carry- ing three on a side, are quite as comfortable as the Broad Gauge, carrying four.

304. And you see no difficulty in giving the same height to the carriages ? -Not the slightest. 305. There is the same height now in some of the carriages, is there not ? -I believe 6 or 8 inches have been added to the height of most of the car- riages upon the Narrow Gauge lines in the last two years.

390. As regards the shape of the carriage, its width, with reference to its length, do you apprehend that that makes any difference as to the ease in riding, with regard either to the horse-boxes, or carriages for passengers ? Is there less yawing motion in the one than the other ?-That depends upon other circumstances. I do not see that it would affect the carriage. I certainly have, upon particular carriages in the Great Western, been more seriously rocked than I was upon a Narrow Gauge line. It was in the last carriage ; where we know that there is more motion than in a carriage that is braced up, and confined in the middle of the train ; but I do not think that the relative width of the carriage would necessarily affect the rocking motion.

440. They have small waggons [for coal] on the North Midland ?-Yes; and in most of the new Railways they have made waggons that will containfive tons ; but in the North of England, where they carry 50 times the amount that they do in the South, they still adhere to the small waggons; there is an advantage in it ; the axletrees need not be so strong, and a horse may move it easily about ; there is a facility of motion which there is not with the heavy carriages.

465. You have spoken of the accommodation of the first-class passengers on the Great Western carriages, where there is space for eight. You do not think they afford more accommodation than the six inside carriages ; do you think the accommodation for the second and third class passengers is equally good on the Great Western as on other lines ?-I do not; because I think when people are sitting on a long bench across a wide carriage, not being near the window so as to see anything, they are not comfortable; they cannot put their heads out to look at the country ; and I think that increasing the number of people on one bench is sometimes an annoyance, and is not pleasant to the passengers themselves. My notion is, that if every person could have a corner seat he would prefer it. Then the Great Western Company, in order to make corner seats in their wide carriages, have put a partition in the middle. A man in the middle cannot see out, and he sits there all day, and cannot see the country at all. If! were going by a train, I should get a corner seat, where I could look out of the window.

466. For the same reason you would not get in the middle ?-I would not. You will find that all persons get in the corners near the window; those are the four first places taken. It shows what the public wish to have.

SAFETY (CURVES)-SPEEDS.

306. I think we have obtained (looking to the construction of the road) a speed high enough, and if it were left to myself I would neither increase my Gauge, nor my wheel, nor my speed, till I had more experience, not only in the construction but also of the strength of the materials. You can never get over the inequalities of road arising from the change of tem- perature and weather. You may have the most perfect road that has been standing for months and been run upon daily, and you shall have a shower of rain or a continuation of wet weather during the time the trains are running, and in two days the road may become positively dangerous, and no ordinary precautions can meet that; and for that reason I say that, till we can ensure our roads being in better order than we can now ensure their being, we ought not to go even at the speeds we are travelling at. 315. In point of fact, can you now attain as high a velocity for the express trains on the Grand Junction as is obtained upon the Great West- ern ?-In answering that question I may say that I do not exactly know what velocity could be attained upon the Great Western, not having ex- perience as to that line ; but I have no doubt that we could, if it were safe, run our express trains upon either line at 50 miles an hour ; they now travel 40. Our time to Southampton is two hours, and it is 78 miles, very nearly 40 miles an hour, including stoppages; and I am quite sure that, if it were a matter of necessity, we could travel at 50 miles an hour. 316. Do you think the state of the road would admit of your travelling at that speed with safety?-! do not ; I am very much opposed to it ; I do not think it is safe. 317. Either on your line or any other P-Any other that I have ever been on.

318. Have you considered the practicability of working round curves, such as are used upon the Narrow Gauge lines, with a Broad Gauge line ?- Yes ; I think that the introduction of the Broad Gauge would be much more difficult, in countries where curves are necessary, than the Narrow Gauge lines.

319. Will you favour us with any reason for your opinion ?-Because

with the Wide Gauge Railway there is a greater difference between the length of the outer rail and of the inner rail than there is upon the Narrow Gauge ; supposing the wheels are upon the same axle, they have more to make up than they would have upon the Narrow Gauge line. And It would appear, if you were to increase it very greatly, that you would be scarcely able to have curves such as are now commonly used. On the Narrow Gauge lines you diminish the difference between the two rails, and by that means you enable the wheels to pass round the curve with greater facility.

320. So that, in point of fact, the facility of turning curves is almost in the inverse ratio of the width of the Gauge ?—No doubt.

416. With regard to the question of speed, you have already stated that you think as high a velocity can he obtained upon the Narrow Gauge lines with your engines as is compatible with safety ?—Yes, and a far higher speed.

427. Is it a mutter of frequent occurrence getting off the line ?—No, it is not ; till very recently it has been of very rare occurrence.

423. To what do you attribute its being more frequent lately, with our increased experience ?—I do not mean that it has been only lately that we have had any accidents, but the accidents that have arisen of that kind, in the last few weeks, I attribute in a great measure to the increased speed they were travelling at. I will not say that you may not, with a very per- fect road indeed, travel at the speeds you do now, and even at higher speeds; but! attribute such accidents to the change in the state of the road, pro- duced by weather and sometimes by neglect. I know a case on the South "Western Railway, when they first opened it throughout. The road being new, it was perhaps not in the most perfect state (it never is when it is new); the engine got off the line, travelling, I am afraid, somewhat faster than it ought to have done, though the engine-man was exceedingly careful. The engine-man and the fireman were killed, the engine was broken in a great many places, but the w heels and the axles were found to be all right. No. body could tell what vi as the cause of the accident. I went back to the Spot where it had got off. I traced the flange running on the rail ; there was nothing wrong in the Gauge ; there was nothing wrong in any part, except that it was a little undulating, and evidently not in good repair, but it was not apparent to the eye ; and it was only by pressing a weight upon it, and seeing whether the sleepers yielded, that you could discover that the rail had subsided. That engine was placed upon the Railway and taken to Southampton, without any alteration in the wheels or the axle ; therefore it could not be accounted for, except that the engine must have got off by jumping, owing to the elasticity of the road. 429. Was that a four or six wheeled engine ?--Six. It is the only in- stance that I know of a six-wheeled engine leaving the rails. Several acci- dents occurred before and since, which I did not see; but this was one that I saw, and I never could account for it except it were from the elasticity of the road.

321. Are you of opinion that the Broad Gauge gives you greater power for the conveyance of heavy trains of luggage ?—Certainly ; it gives you greater facility by giving you a larger space to put your power in, but I have not come to the conclusion that you cannot get as much power as you want upon the Narrow Gauge. On the contrary, I am of opinion that you may get more than you want. I am not favourable to the system of throwing a large fence upon one engine. I have, on my own lines of trains, of 60, 70, and the other day 77 waggons in one train.

322. The gross weight being what ?—They might be part empty and part full, but there were three engines attached to it. I would positively pro- hibit having such a train, for this reason : it strains the waggons ; if you push them the frames are thrown out of square ; if you draw them you break the chains, and it always creates delay and inconvenience on the road. I think 40 waggons is enough for any one engine to draw.

323. Then you would rather subdivide the train into two or three than run a very large train ?—I would take that with a limitation. I say 40 wag- gons weighing 5 tons or 6 tons each, being 220 tons, is quite enough ; and I say one engine would do that with the greatest ease ; and if it were possible to have a greater power, a power sufficient to drag 60 waggons, I would not have it even if I could get it. I am quite sure that the engines on the North Midland with the large boilers would drag anything ; they would drag a hundred waggons ; those boilers are very long, and the fire-boxes are very large, and the cylinders large ; and, so far as I understand, they can generate far more steam than they consume.

Mn. JAMES BROWNE, connected with the Mineral Trade of South Wales.

HISTORY OF THE GAL/GR.-VARIOUS OPINIONS ON.

5213. Have you at all turned your attention to the conveniences or in- conveniences that would result to your district from having the Broad or Narrow Gauge introduced ?--Yes, I have a strong feeling upon that matter. I think the Narrow Gauge far preferable. I think tke Broad Gauge will be found very inconvenient.

5234. According to Mr. Cubitt's account, it would be merely an increase of id. per ton either to the producer or to the consumer ?—I should very much question that sum in my own mind. I do not think that would be the whole of it. I think there would be found a great deal of detention and loss of time. A large staff of men would be necessary to work those several machines, if they are to be done all at once; if you are to do the work cheaply you must do it with great regularity.

N. WOOD, Engineer of Newcastle and Carlisle Railway.

6089. Will you be so good as to favour us with any observations which may occur to you upon the whole subject under consideration, in such order as may seem fit to yourself ?—I will take the order of the queries issued by the Commissioners and go through them seriatim. The first is the delay which the transhipment, arising from the change of Gauge, would occasion to the express trains. The observations which I should make upon that would perhaps apply to both express trains and passenger trains generally. They are placed in the queries under two heads. I con- sider that, as regards express trains, there would be very great inconvenience, which is very appreciable in changing passengers from one carriage to another. So far as regards passengers, they would have to be taken out of one carriage and put into another, and the whole of their luggage would have to be replaced. Most people have had that to do upon different

and it is so annoying that I think it ought to be avoided if possible. With regard to private carriages, I think it would be a very serious inconvenience. It would be impossible to have bodies containing private carriages that could be transferred from one Gauge to the other; therefore private carriages would have to be taken off one Gauge and put upon the other, and the railway carriages having to be sent through different turn-rails at the sta- tion, it would occupy considerable time. With regard to horses, gentlemen require them to be conveyed in the same train as themselves ; they do not like their horses to be separated and put in other trains and it would be a very great inconvenience and delay in passenger trains, taking the horses out of one box and putting them into another. It is extremely difficult, when horses are removed out of the box, to induce them to go into another; it is necessary to keep them quiet for some time to cool them, and it would therefore be productive of great delay. Then, again, as it is difficult to say what number of carriages will come in a train, you will have to provide at the stations a sufficient establishmenttoaccommodate the maximum number. The establishment, also, must be such as that you might do it in the least possible time. That I think would entail a permanent additional expense in the transfer of passengers and luggage and carriages and other things from one train to another. I think these are some of the principal ob- jections which apply to this point, and that there ought to be very strong reasons for adopting a change from one Gauge to another. We see the very great expense that Railway Companies go to in connecting the different lines in towns, in order to prevent a change of carriages and a change of luggage ; certainly the transfer from one Gauge to another would not be to so great an extent as having to be put into omnibuses, or walk from one station to another, still, to a certain extent, the inconvenience is the same. 6092. With respect to merchandise, have you any observations to make ? —With respect to merchandise, I shall first consider, as having to be trans- ferred from one carriage to another, not that loose bodies are to be used, that will be subject of other observations, which I will presently make. The goods trains consist of thirty or forty trucks. I think the transfer of goods from one truck to another would occupy very considerable time. I should say that the ordinary establishment could not transfer a load of goods in less than five or six hours. Then there is an objection to having goods turned over and tossed about and mixed, besides the expense. The expense is very considerable ; and with regard to goods that are now carried at a very low rate, something like a penny a ton per mile, it would be the means of preventing these goods from being carried by railway. 6102. It is said that cattle are very unmanageable when they are once taken off the Railway ; have you witnessed that ?—Yes, frequently. lain a director of the Newcastle and Darlington Railway. We convey a very large quantity of cattle, in some instances 1,200 head of cattle a week ; they are extremely wild when they are turned out ; they require a considerable time to get cooled down. I should say, generally, that with regard to pas- sengers, carriages, horses, cattle, minerals, and timber, they would all have to be transferred from one carriage to another ; you cannot have a system of transhipment composed of loose boxes ; all those articles would necessarily have to be transferred from one carriage or truck to another. It is practicable to have a system of loose boxes for merchandise generally, with the exception of those that I have named ; but with regard to that system I should state that we have in the North of England tried the system of loose boxes with reference to coals, and have not found it to answer.

6142. I feel quite convinced from my experience that the interposition of one Gauge with another would be very objectionable. It think it would be attended with inextricable confusion.

6155. Upon the Newcastle and Carlisle, from the number of curves on that line, we found it desirable to try whether we could have one loose wheel and a fast one, with a view of lessening the wear and tear ; that system was tried not precisely in the way idr. Brunel has proposed it, but in effect practically the same. 6161. The risk or liability to run off was so fearful to contemplate, that we abandoned it at once.

6167. I have tried different plans of loose wheels, in order to counteract the friction underground where the curves are so small, but we cannot get them to remain on the rails; and we prefer to submit to the additional friction of the wheels upon the rail sliding round the curves, to having them loose and liable to get off.

SAFETY.

6178- As regards the question of safety generally on the different Gauges, are there any other matters which occur to you ?—I think, as regards safety, the oscillating motion being that which has the greatest tendency to throw the carriages off the line, and as that oscillating motion is, as I stated, irrespective of the width of the Gauge, I think the one Gauge is just as safe as the other. Those experiments show that there is no rocking motion of any consequence ; if there had been any rocking motion, of course the Broad Gauge, presenting a wider base, would have been safer in that respect ; but as there is, practically, no rocking motion, I think it is scarcely an item in the consideration. The danger evidently arises from the carriage getting into an oscillating motion ; and as the one Gauge is just as liable to produce this motion of the carriages as the other, indeed, as the wide Gauge is more liable than the other to throw the car- riages from side to side, by reason of the wheels being further distant from. the centre of motion, I think the carriages on the wider Gauge rather more of the two liable to jump off the rail by such oscillation. I do not think it is a correct mode of estimating the comparative smoothness of two lines to take an accidental journey in the carriages on the two Gauges, because both cases ought to be precisely the same ; they ought both to be on longi- tudinal sleepers, or both upon transverse sleepers. 6203. You mentioned that you considered the two Gauges equal for a speed of 45 miles an hour ; do you consider them equal for a speed of 60 miles an hour ?—I think the safety is just the same. I should not appre- hend more danger at 60 miles upon the Narrow Gauge than upon the Broad Gauge. 6204. But you think that this speed upon either is not desirable ?—I do not think that it is expedient, or that the public feel very comfortable at those high rates of speed. 6205. It is not that you consider that, when you go up to a speed of 60 miles an hour, one Gauge has any particular advantage over the other ?— No.

6206. I think it would not be consistent with prudence to found a system upon an imaginary rate of speed. I think that 60 miles an hour is the utmost limit that we ought to speculate upon. Above that rate of speed is beyond the limit of judicious travelling.

CAPTAIN J. M. LAWS, General Manager of the Manchester and Leeds Railway, Director of the London and York, Wakefield and Goole, and the Leeds and West Riding.

1712. Does not the greater width of the Great Western waggon admit of the centre of gravity of the load being kept much lower than in the Narrow Gauge waggon ?—Certainly it would ; but I should think there is no advan- tage, where you have a thing that is perfectly safe, in spending money to make it safer. We have never bad an instance of a waggon upsetting. Now, the coal waggons are made sloping, from about 7 feet at the upper edge to about 3 feet 6 inches at the bottom. The centre of gravity would still belle the centre, but still a considerably preponderating part of the load would be projecting beyond the centre of the road. The safety would be increased from its coming between the wheels, where the bottom of the ordinary load would be a foot higher than the coal waggons. 1713. Then you think you have a surplus of safety with the Narrow Gauge as far as regards the upsetting of the waggon ?—That is my impres- sion ; as regards safety from the position of the centre of gravity, we have a vast margin to go on with the highest load I have ever heard of yet, that

is with the horse-box, as I before described. I have seen many first-class London and Birmingham carriages with a ton weight upon the top of them, and very little weight comparatively under. You see an enormous quan- tity of luggage packed on the top of those carriages, so that they have the fairest possible chance of upsetting. But I apprehend that the safety of the road is not limited exactly to the Gauge, because the journals of the axles project considerably beyond the rails, and the points of support of the car- riage is on the extreme point of the axle. 1664. Are not higher speeds attained upon the Great Western than upon any of the Narrow Gauge lines ?—I cannot understand why they should be ; it is a general prevailing opinion that that is the case ; if it be so, it must arise from the fact only of their having more powerful engines. I have no doubt they have very powerful engines, and they have a very easy gradient line ; but, on the other hand, I do not understand why they should attain a higher speed with the same weight in proportion ; to prove which we are now running our trains at 45 miles an hour. We are obliged to do it to keep our time, on gradients varying from 1 in 44 to a level, with hardly any portion of a straight line ; but we are running 45 miles an hour, and for the last two months our express trains have been working at that speed, without being five minutes after time. 1666. We have a descending line of 1 in 192 for eight miles, passing round two curves of ten chains each.

1667. What is the length of those curves respectively ? —About a mile. Where the tunnel was abandoned, there is an S curve ; they join each other, and are under half a mile each.

1668. Do you imagine that engines with the Broad Gauge would take those curves ?—Certainly not so safely. Besides, we could not get them into 1 in 10 with the Broad Gauge : they must be sharper with the Broad Gauge considerably. There was a tunnel that we intended to have made : the whole side of the mountain came down ; it was just at the foot of the mountain where the tunnel was to have gone through : we found the ma- terial composed of the abria of this mountain : the moment we touched it, the mountain began to slip, and we cracked a farm. house and some build- ings almost two-thirds of a mile from where we touched this hill, and we were obliged to abandon it. It crushed the tunnel in, and 18-inch balks, as you would this pen. The canal is just below the turnpike-road ; just below that we were obliged to divert the turnpike-road, and we had great difficulty to get room enough to divert to do so, for the mountain began to squeeze up the bottom of the canal. We were obliged to adopt these S curves, which are about 10 chains on a gradient of 1 in 182; but we got the curve part on a level. If the Gauge had been wider, of course the curves must have been sharper.

1669. And that, you think, it would have been impracticable to work at high velocities ?—It would have certainly diminished the safety, and con- sequently the speed. I very much question whether, in the position of the Manchester and Leeds line, where in the 50 miles between Normanton and Manchester there are not four miles of straight line, a Broad Gauge could ran with safety at the speed we are now running, for that distance ; we are obliged to be constantly on a curve.

THE BREAK OF GAUGE, AND REMEDIES.

1715. Have you at all contemplated what would be the inconvenience to the Manchester and Leeds Company, if the North Midland were to change their Gauge 1—The result of it would be, we should try very hard, if there was any considerable traffic between us, to get another line upon the Narrow Gauge. We should immediately attempt that, because we could not alter our Gauge with the tunnels and viaducts that we have; it would be almost as cheap to make a new line as to alter the Gauge. I can con- template no practical means of moving goods in loose boxes. One part of our waggon would be in one part of the world, and another part in another ; and there would be such confusion and mixture, unless the Railways were all one property,—and, even then, you would find boxes at one end of the line when you wanted them at a another ; you would find one end of the Railway with a great many more wheels than they wanted, and another with all the boxes.

1725. Must not that arise from some want of system ?—I cannot under- stand how we are to move the load. As to the mere mechanical process of moving an engine or a waggon from one point to another, no doubt a mechanical arrangement could be made to move an engine 30 feet high in a few minutes ; but to say that to divide the waggon, and that one part of the waggon is to be left here and another to be left there, I do not think any arrangement could be made that would not prove a vast incon- venience.

1726. Supposing the Railway Company furnished the under carriage, and the proprietor of the goods furnished the box to contain those goods, he would then bring his goods to your under carriage, and you would accom- modate him ?—A farmer, for example, brings his two loads of corn in from his farm at Wakefield or Pontefract ; I would much rather take his waggon, if he could afford to send it, than have any bother about loading it on to another Railway. That man could not undertake to find a railway-box. The same with greengrocers. At this very time we are sending trains from Manchester, containing greengroceries, to the extent of 150 tons a day, going from Manchester along the valley of the Calder. Those gardeners would never find boxes. These waggons go on with the greengroceries, and bring back corn ; so that, if we were to make a change of Gauge on that journey, every article would have to be changed into another carriage by hand. The best way to change it would be by hand, much better than attempting to change the bodies of the waggons; and I am satisfied that very great risk would necessarily be involved by changing any of those waggons in the night. For instance, nearly all our goods trains meet at Normanton in the night. We often have as many as 300 waggons of goods at Normanton for different parts of the district,—some coming to Manchester, others going to Leeds, others to Hull ; they are all put into the Normanton station at night. It is with the greatest difficulty, with the aid of torches, that it is done. The wonder is, how they get on without danger now ; and if you had to tranship all those goods from one waggon to another, or from one bottom of a waggon to another, it is palpable that it could not be done without an immense amount of delay, expense, and danger. If those things were done in the night, you could not depend upon the man having placed the boxes securely on the bottom of the truck. The first thing I should expect to hear would be, that some of them had bolted off the bottom of the framing, and upset the train. 1728. Do not you think that, by having your empty goods waggons pro- perly marshalled on one line, and bringing up a train full of goods abreast of them, tbe goods might be shifted, carriage by carriage, in an hour by machinery, and dropped into the under carriages ?—I will just take a win- ter night in our northern climate as we have it,—a dark, snowy, or rainy night. We are often three hours now in sorting our waggons, with three or four locomotive engines to assist. If we have to move our waggons by hand at Normanton, where there are four diverging lines, it would take us nine or ten hours in a dark winter's night. I cannot contemplate getting over such a difficulty. To do it by moving one waggon from one body to another would be attended with vast expense, inconvenience, and danger. You must have a station three times as large as it now is ; and goods that

are now shipped down at Hull in the morning will, in all probability, be there in the middle of the next day. 1735. Do you think the system of running the Narrow Gauge carriages upon Broad Gauge trucks would answer 1—No, I do not. 1736. Why not ?—I think the plan of dividing a truck into two parts would be attended with such great practical inconvenience as to make it wholly inapplicable ; and I would much rather move the goods at once from one waggon into another, than attempt to enter into such a system; and if the system were to be set afloat immediately, and they were now to have to provide their trucks and to move their goods, I have no doubt, from the practical working of Railways now in existence, it would dwindle down in twelve months to having none of those, and that they would say we had better move the goods at once by hand.

1737. The loose-box system would involve a considerable increase of expense to your company ?—Yea, if we had to bear our proportion ; but we should not do it.

1738. Have you at all thought of what cost it would involve to cancel all your goods waggons, and to adopt others upon the loose-box system ?—The value of our goods waggons now is about £48,000. Then, if we were to adopt this loose-box system after all, the Broad Gauge must be entirely limited to the accommodation of the Narrow; they could have no wider box than we could carry.

1746. Did you examine the eystem of working of the joint station at Gloucester with regard to the change of Gauge ?—Yes ; there is not a large goods traffic, but there is great inconvenience. In fact, the inconvenience that is now experienced at Bristol, from the wretched arrangements of the station, is almost as bad as at Birmingham, except for certain trains, as regards passengers. The folly of the two stations being arranged as they are at Birmingham, of course, may be easily remedied, and will be when they can get some other Railways that will work them a little close ; they will have to give up the existing arrangements. The London and Bir- mingham arrangements at Birmingham involve as much delay and incon- venience as the Gloucester system does. I went on Thursday last from Gloucester to Manchester. Of course, we had no change till we got to Birmingham. When we arrived in the London and Birmingham station, and were going to Manchester, the London and Birmingham servants had not the slightest interest in us. We arrived by the Gloucester Railway, and were going by the Grand Junction. We saw an express-train engine just coming in to the station to take them as we got in. We were very anxious to get on by that train. "No, you are too late for that train," was the reply. Then we wanted to get our luggage over. "It will go over by-and-by in a truck." There was all the inconvenience of getting the luggage moved across in a truck, and the risk of leaving something behind. We did get it over, but not with less inconvenience than if we had to change the Gauge. But that is an evil that clearly ought to be remedied, and can and must be remedied, by the two Companies before long. It was a great absur- dity the two stations being formed like termini stations, instead of making Birmingham like a roadside station, so that both Companies could have run through without this moving of carriages. That arose out of the squabbling and misunderstanding of those two Companies. If they make the London and York Railway, there will be nothing of the sort. You will have no change of carriage till you get to Newcastle or Edinburgh. But the station at Derby is just as bad. In the station at Bristol they have adopted the same course as at Birmingham, and nothing can be more inconvenient, or cause more delay. 1747. They have the same sort of inconvenience that you contemplate in a change of Gauge ?—The same inconvenience must be involved in every change of Gauge, but at present that has not been sufficiently appreciated, because the Narrow Gauge lines at this moment, from bad arrangements, are submitting to a very great proportion of the same inconvenience as re- gards passengers. I was very much struck at the difference between those stations and the Victoria station at Manchester. In that station we have nearly eighty trains a day in and out at the two ends, and I will be bound to say that we have not above one-third of the porters that there are at Bristol, or that there are at Birmingham, although we have double the number of passengers in and out that station that there are either at Bristol or Bir- mingham—I believe equal to the two put together—and there is not one quarter the inconvenience. The train goes right through, and if you have a change of carriage they just cross the turn-plate, and two men can do it in two minutes.; and the cost of that station is one-third what either of the others was in construction or working. 1751. You are aware that an act has been passed in the late session for a line of Railway between Rugby and Oxford; and that the question is un- decided what Gauge shall be used on that line ?—Yes ; I was not aware how that question stood, but I am sure that if Oxfordshire is to be supplied with coals at a cheap rate, and that cheap rate and that supply of coals are to be made available as soon as the line is made, the Narrow Gauge will be the best means of securing it. A supply will be opened close to Rugby, and & district that is now very badly supplied, judging from the price, will then become as well supplied almost as any part of England, and the produce of that agricultural district would be taken back to the manufacturing districts with great despatch and cheapness, in proportion to what it is now. We have, at this moment, flour and maltground and made in the neighbourhood of Newport Pagnell, not far from that district ; and the process of getting it to Manchester is this :—It drops down the Lesser Ouse all the way to Lynn ; from Lynn it is put into ships and brought to Hull ; and from Hull it is brought on our Railway to Manchester. In sending by canal it is often a fortnight or more getting from there to Manchester. If a Narrow Gauge Railway were made there, they would send minerals down direct, and return corn and fruit ; they get a great deal of fruit in that district, and other garden stuff, particularly cucumbers. I have seen as many as four railway waggons coming from the neighbourhood of Rugby, full of cucum- bers, to Manchester ; about twelve or fourteen tons of cucumbers. If there was a change of Gauge there, this would be attended with expense and in- convenience. We should say, "Oh! we cannot allow our waggons to go about without tops and bottoms." Whatever you do, whatever you may fix, upon the subject of Gauge, the Gauge must ultimately become uniform, if we intend to communicete readily with each other. Whether the 4 feet 81 inch is the best Gauge or not I do not pretend to say. It is a very good one, and we have found no practical inconvenience in it of any kind. I know of no difficulty that has been demonstrated in it, but I have no doubt that anything between 5 feet and 5 feet 6 inches would be a very good Gauge. But the wider you get, the more limited you are in the use of that Gauge in a broken country, as is demonstrated by the collieries, most of them having a very much narrower Gauge than 4 feet 81 inches ; and they have adopted it because it was cheaper, and better adapted to get round the sharp curves. A small outlay in winning determines very much the price of coals ; and where it is a question whether it is worth while to open a colliery or not, a wider Gauge than 4 feet 81 inches would be entirely use- less for any practical purpose.

1753. It seems to be quite clear that the Narrow Gauge of 4 feet 81 inches was adopted for sharp curves in the collieries ; but, as such sharp curves are not used on Railways, is not the necessity for that Gauge of 4 feet 81 inches diminished, if not altogether obviated ?-1 do not apprehend of necessity

BO, because the great wealth of this natio°, the great internal resource of this country, depend on its minerals : a bag of coals would not be so cora- fortable a thing for the Lord Chancellor to sit on as the woolsack is, but much more emblematical of the wealth of England. It is the coal and not the wool that has made England what it is, and that is yet in its infancy ; and the superiority of this country, either in war or peace, will depend upon its coal and iron.

1754. You think the resources of this country are not fully developed of either one or the other 1—Certainly not, as compared with what they will be ; the mineral wealth of this country is just touched on the fringe, some. thing like the cultivation of New South Wales, as compared with what it may be. 1755. And you imagine that the great increase of Railway communication will tend to develop those resources ?—More than anything else I can conceive.

1693. Have you any reason to believe that the Narrow Gauge has any advantage over the Broad for goods traffic ?—I think that the Narrow Gauge has decided advantages over the Broad for goods traffic, inasmuch as you must have very large and unwieldly carriages on the Bread Gauge, or they must be carriages that would be subject to a very unequal motion on the Broad Gauge as compared with the Narrow one ; for instance, if there is not a very large carriage, it must be nearly a square one on the Broad Gauge. If I attempted to draw a square box by the centre it must partake of any inequality of the road, and have a very much more violent motion than if I was drawing a body of a more oblong shape. Some of the carriages on the Broad Gauge are quite as long in proportion to their breadth as the Narrow Gauge; of course that observation would not apply to a carriage under those circumssances. What I mean to say is this— the ordinary length of a Narrow Gauge waggon is about 14 feet (nearly all the Companies have adopted a large-sized waggon, about 14 feet long, and about 7 feet wide). If you were to take the proportions, say that the length of the waggon is nearly three times the breadth of the points of sup- port, you have a great deal to steady you, and it would not partake so readily of the lateral motion as if the carriage was drawn by the same point of traction, andswas only half the length. The effect of any little inequality would be to give much more motion to a short waggon than a long one ; and that would apply to carriages unless they were equally long in propor- tion to their breadth; and I believe commonly the Great Western carriages, and those upon other lines in connexion with them, are quite as long, if not longer. I observed some of them upon the Bristol and Gloucester last week : they are immensely long carriages, longer in proportion than most of the Narrow Gauge carriages, and I did not observe that there was any very great difference between the motion on the line between Bristol and Gloucester and upon that between Gloucester and Birmingham ; but, with respect to the coal waggons I saw on the line, I observed particularly the coal waggons they were using from Coal-pit Heath Colliery, about six miles out of Bristol: they were not longer than our coal waggons, nor would they carry very much more; but it is a country that is not very much broken ; it is a tolerably level country ; you gradually rise out of Bristol ; they have no very sharp curves to go round ; but if you took the Broad Gauge into another country, where the coal-wagggons have to go into curves of 100 feet radius, yen could not get those coal-waggons round at all.

1694. You are of opinion that a Broad Gauge carriage is unsuited to a country of great undulation or tortuous lines ?—I think more especially in coal traffic. Whenever you get into a coal country, you get into a country that is a good deal broken, and you must have sharper curves to go round to get the waggons to the coalpits than could be adopted upon the Broad Gauge. The proof is, that the collieries often make their own Gauge three feet, for the purpose of getting the waggons round the curves which a Wide Gauge could not encounter. And in Scotland you find some of the colliery lines 4 feet Gauge.

1696. If we had a Wide Gauge we must have warehouses and a station of nearly double the cost that we are now building. It is a line of building on arches. The trains come in at the top of the warehouse ; we bring a train with 100 tons of flour in at a time; and if we had had the Wide Gauge we could not have got round the curves which we pass those waggons round now ; we must have had almost double the space. It is constructed on a viaduct ; and we avail ourselves of that circumstance, which is generally considered objectionable, and have made it of very greet advantage, inasmuch as the load is always descending. The floor comes to the top of an inclined plane, and with little or no labour it is slid into the warehouse and cart that takes it away into the manufacturing districts. That would apply to every town on the line ; because, notwithstanding the vast quantity of goods manufactured in Lancashire and Yorkshire, there is a vast deal more flour eaten than there is piece-goods sent away, and the preponderating load is always inwards. There is all the food sent inwards ; with all the raw material for manufacturing purposes inwards, a vast portion of which is entirely extinguished in the process of manufacture ; and the export is merely a maimfactured article, a fraction of the weight that is brought in. With a Broad Gauge line in those positions, the enormous additional cost of accommodation would have been something that I think has not been well considered by the advocates of the Broad Gauge, who are, luckily for themselves, situated in a district where is a very large passenger traffic, and not much merchandise.

1702. Has the Narrow Gauge any superiority over the Broad Gauge for passenger traffic, in your opinion ?—I do not think it has. We are now making carriages to give accommodation to private parties where you can select your party ; but that could be equally done with the Broad Gauge. I do not think the Narrow Gauge has any advantage over the Broad Gauge for passengers, with the exception of their being less costly and better adapted for general purposes in going into a difficult country ; but when you leave that country, and the point of connexion is of no great importance— for example, if I am going from here to Bristol, I think the Broad Gauge is as good as any other, if it were not for the inconvenience of not being so well adapted for general purposes.

1756. And you think that any want of uniformity in the Gauge of rail- ways will tend to diminish that development ?—Clearly. I look upon the question of transmitting passengers at sixty miles or at forty miles an hour as nothing in comparison with these hidden resources; forty miles is quick enough for anything. Fifty miles we can go as safely upon the Narrow Gauge as upon the Wide Gauge; but I look upon it as an important thing for this country, to the best practical means of commercial communication, and that commercial communication depends upon the mines, and not in conveying passengers sixty miles per hour. 1757. Are you of opinion that mineral traffic is sufficient to justify the construction of a Railway in any dist ict where that mineral traffic would be large, irrespective of passengers altogether ?—Yes ; I look at the question not so much with regard to passengers as I do with reference to the enormous wealth which is now in fact the basis of this country's manu- facturing districts. What should we be without our manufacturing dis- tricts ? We could not eat our corn or support ourselves. The wealth of the country depends upon its coal and its iron ; and wherever you can give facilities for opening the collieries and the mineral districts of the kingdom, you do a vast deal more than by making a Railway to travel sixty miles an hour for passengers. We owe all our Railways to the collieries in the North ; and the difficulties which their industry overcame taught us to make Railways, and to make locomotives to work them.

1719. Do you think it would be utterly impossible to widen your Gauge upon the Manchester and Leeds ?—Utterly impossible. If we altered tbe Gauge, the tunnels must be altered.

1760. Does it happen that you send any goods by your Railway that eventually reach Oxfordshire ?—I have no doubt we do, though we donot declare our goods to other places than London and Birmingham and places along the Midland Line. The Oxford people would get their manufactured goods out of Lancashire and Yorkshire to Leicester ; but still the quantity of goods actually consumed in any district is a mere bagatelle, unless you have an export trade ; it would never he worth making a truck to move for. I do not suppose the whole county of Oxford would consume six railway waggon loads of textile goods in a week. But look at the coals, look at the iron, look at the stone. When you talk about the comparatively small amount of goods trade on a Railway, that is whit Railways are doing now ; but what Railways are designed to do is to carry every necessary for the construction of houses, or the keeping in repair of farms, or the produce of farms, which they have not yet touched. 1761. How do you account for the railways not being used for those pur- poses already ?—Because Railway Companies are in their infancy, none of them know their business yet ; we are only just learning our business. But take timber —Oxfordshire has a great deal of timber in it, and that timber will find a market at the seaports, at the manufacturing districts ; and the timber is now rotting in the wood there, because it is not worth moving. How are you to move the timber from those trucks to others ? It will cost you more than a penny a ton to move timber. We have a very large trade in timber ; we send timber from Liverpool and from Hull, all down this dis- trict ; we shall send to a much greater degree than it is now sent. We have balks of timber, 60 and 80 feet long, going along the Railway, that could not be carried for a penny per ton.

CAPTAIN W. O'BRIEN, late Secretary to the South Eastern Railway Company.

BREAK OF GAUGE—ITS INCONVENIENCE.

1866. Have you turned your attention to the inconvenience that would result if a Broad Gauge line were to come down on the Great North of England in any way, so as to require a transfer of the minerals or goods from the Narrow to the Broad Gauge ?—The subject has occurred to me.

1867. Do you think it would be attended with great inconvenience ?- With the very greatest.

CATTLE.

1872. Where does the cattle traffic meet the 's;rreat North of England line ?—It now principally comes on from the Newcastle district, but there is a very large district of country about Darlington. The great fair of Brough is not far off, and an enormous quantity on those occasions comes upon the line.

1873. Are they driven into the pens on the Great North of England line, or do they come penned ?—Those from Newcastle come in the waggons, and the others come and are driven into the pens on the Great North of England Railway. 1874. Da you find it a matter of difficulty to get them into the pens ?— No difficulty, but it takes a little time. 1875. If they came by the Broad Gauge carriages to the Great North of England line, and had to be transferred from the carriages of the Broad Gauge to those of the Narrow Gauge, would that be a matter of difficulty ? —If it is to involve the driving them out of the Broad Gauge carriages, and reloading them in the Narrow Gauge carriages, it would cause very great delay ; and that would be further increased, because cattle sometime' get frightened, and one obstinate animal will detain a whole train longer than would be required to load a couple of hundred. 1881. If you were to be met by the Broad Gauge at Redhill, would that involve much increase of trouble and expense to the company by having to transfer ?—The transfer of that produce would be a very great expense and a great deal of trouble. At one particular time of the year, in the hop season, it would become, I do not say impracticable, but an exceedingly great inconvenience. At that time the increase of traffic is so enormous for four or five weeks that it takes all the waggons that can be collected to work it through, and they are very inadequate for the purpose. It is a great object that it should be loaded with rapidity, brought to London, and either warehoused there immediately or removed, and the waggons used again. 1898. I should wish to state that a line is projected to be connected with the South Eastern, the Great Western, and various other lines of Railway. It would come in at Reigate, and of course would come in at some con- venient point of the Great Western. We feel very strongly that it is essential that the great Continental communication through the various ports along the South Eastern coast should be connected, without any break in the Gauge, with the great manufacturing districts of England. I am now making arrangements for the transmission of goods direct from Ostend, to be landed at Dover or Folkestone, and taken direct to Sheffield, and Manchester, and Liverpool, and so on. We should feel great incon- venience from the delay and expense if any transhipment interposed between our line at Reigate and the Narrow Gauge line.

1899. Your object would be to get to the London and Birmingham as speedily as possible ?—Yes.

1900. Therefore you would be desirous of passing under or over the Great Western ? —Just so.

R. CREED, Esst., Secretary of the London and Birmingham. SPEED.

5035. Is the speed of your express train equal to that of the Great Western express train ?—For our express train the return of the speed is 38 miles an hour. 5036. Upon the average throughout the line ?—Yes. What the Great Western is I do not know. Our time is given from the point of starting; we fix the time of starting at four, and the train arrives at seven ; and, in a number of returns we have had now of trains which have been working, it has very rarely exceeded that time by a few minutes ; it generally arrives a few minutes before time.

5037. Have you the means of giving us the speed of the express train between stations; for instance, on passing stations at which the train does not stop, have you a register of the time of passing stations at which the train does not stop ?—We keep no such register.

5038. So that you are not able to give us the running speed ; you can only give us the speed including the time lost in pulling up and starting again, and the time lost in stopping at the stations ?—The net speed is 38 miles, viz., the speed realized from the time of departure, always assuming that we start punctually at the moment : we shut the doors at four o'clock, and start as soon after as we can ; of course there must be a few minutes lost. 5039. To what circumstances do you attribute the fact that you cannot run at the same speed as the Great Western express train ?—We have never been required to run at a higher rate of speed.

5040. Should you find any difficulty in running at a higher rate ?—I think the difficulty to us, or to any other line circumstanced as ours is, would be the interference with trains of a different rate of speed, not the inability to master the speed. On every great Railway that would be every important consideration.

W. J. CHAPLIN, Esa., Chairman of the South Western. NUMBERS OF TRAINS—CONVENIENCE OF NARROW GAUGE.

5441. We used to think it was a bad thing to increase the number of our trains ; I think now every one must feel that, to make more frequent departures, and go quickly, and avoid double and treble engines, is a very much better way ; therefore I think the Narrow Gauge comes better into play, because you can do that with less expense. 5412. The Broad Gauge advocates state that they are enabled to carry less expensively by working larger engines, and that they thereby supersede the necessity for the greater number of trains which must be drawn upon other lines ?—Yes; but I think that will not be the proper course ; every one must feel that the more frequent the communication the more trade it creates. If you wish to avoid those very lengthy trains, the Narrow Gauge works more economically ; at least that would be my view of it. I believe it gives more general accommodation. 5145. You therefore think it more economical to work trains with small carriages than trains with large carriages ?—Yea; I think frequent depar- tures are a desirable measure for the public accommodation ; and if you do not require immense trains, by having frequent departures, the Narrow Gauge is more advantageous to work. 5446. Have you turned your attention at all to the carrying system upon the present lines of Railway ?—Yes. 5447. Are you inclined to think that the larger waggons used by the Great Western give them advantages as compared with the Narrow Gauge in pick- ing up traffic on the road, and carrying on traffic from terminus to ter- minus ?—I think it might have some advantages for the through traffic with regard to cumbrous goods, such as wools and a variety of goods which a Railway carries, when they are going throughout. I think they must have a better conveyance ; but where you are subject to change on the road, and to leaving part of the goods at provincial towns, I should say so much packing was bad, because the unloading and loading is calculated to damage such parts of the goods as are altered from their original loading, where there has been great care used ; and I should fancy that damage would ensue by taking some away, and leaving the rest worse packed. I think if there were some goods going to provincial towns, a couple of tons we will say, it would be better managed by a waggon being loaded and left for that destination, than by taking two tons out of a waggon that had four or five in it.

5448. You are aware that the Great Western Company obtained a Bill in the last Session of Parliament for a line of Railway between Rugby and Oxford, and that the question of the Gauge of that line is as yet undeter- mined. Looking at the question generally, and also locally, are you of opinion that the break of Gauge will be an inconvenience to the traveller, merchant, and carrier ?—I am quite sure it will ; in that particular instance it might have been the Narrow Gauge throughout, from the North to South- ampton; but the Wide Gauge intervening from Rugby to Reading, there must be a change at Reading or Basingstoke ; and in that particular case, therefore, it must be prejudicial, there can be no doubt about it.

SPEED.

5505. Do you think the speed that is now attained by the Railway Com- panies generally is as fast as ought to be adopted ?—Without some improve- ment being made somewhere, I think the vibration is too great ; on going down the declines, I think the carriage shakes very much ; and I am sure on the Great Western it does also : lain quite clear that it is not the Gauge which prevents it or causes it. My friends have taken particular notice of their travelling by the express train, and ours shakes. The summit of our line would be between Basingstoke and Andover Road ; and when you have passed the summit and go down the incline, it shakes a great deal; I always have felt that, and I must confess I do not think it answers.

5506. As Chairman of the South Western Company, should you be dis- posed to recommend your brother Directors to increase very much the speed of the express train ; do you think it would be consistent with public safety ?—I should not, indeed ; I think, with the express trains, the advan- tages of meeting with very few stoppages, and avoiding all delay possible, getting the speed in that way, would be better than acceleration under the present state of things. I do not know whether there would be any altera- tion in the hanging of the carriages, and also in the other parts of the affair ; but, under the present circumstances, I really think I should regret myself seeing the speed much increased. I have been struck with the cir- cumstance in several reports which I have had from friends coming by the Great Western ; I have inquired whether they came by the express train, and they have almost universally said that it shook them a good deal, and I know that ours has done so also.

JOHN URPETH RASTRICK, Chief Engineer of the London and Brighton Railway.

THE BREAK OF GAUGE, AND REMEDIES,

896. What would be the inconvenience at Rugby on the Midland Counties in that case ?—I do not ECC how the business could be carried on with any sort of expedition if you changed from one Gauge to another either at Rugby or at any other place. There must be delay and great inconvenience attending the change of goods from one carriage to the other.

897. Have you any knowledge of the system adopted in the North at one time, of the loose box for coal to be transferred from carriage to carriage ? —Yes. When we first began to work the Brighton Railway, I had some of them taken down there on purpose to try the experiment ; we had loose boxes ; two boxes were put on each carriage, and the coals were put into them. It was then thought that, if the loose carriages were lifted off the waggon and then put on a pair of wheels, they might be taken to the town ; but the contrivance was never used to any extent, being found very inconvenient. They were square boxes ; there were small wheels under- neath, and there were a couple of flange rails laid for each carriage ; they were pushed on sideways, and the other carriage was backed up to it. We never prosecuted it to any extent, because it was found extremely incon- venient. I think we had four carriages of that description made.

UNIFORMITY OF GAUGE, AND MEANS OF OBTAINING IT.

889. Then you are of opinion, I presume, that the change of Gauge is an inconvenience ?—lt would be extremely inconvenient.

890. Both to passengers and goods P—I mean that the change of Gauge on these lines could not be made, because it would involve the change of Gauge on all the other lines with which they are connected ; but, if you refer to the proposition of making the Railroads for which I have lately obtained the acts of a different Gauge, I should say it would be very in- convenient. All these lines are of course, in some measure, branches into other Railways ; and it could not be endured for a moment that the trains should be stopped at all those different places where the connection is made, for the purpose of changing from one Gauge to the other.

891. Should you consider it a great evil to the general traffic of the country if the Grand Junction Railway Company were to change their Gauge to the Broad Gauge ?—I think so. It would involve a change of all the Railroads in the North of England.

892. It would put the public to inconvenience ?—Undoubtedly.

Ma. W. FERNIHOUGH, Superintendent of the Locomotive Depart- ment on the Eastern Counties Railway.

POWER AND CONSTRUCTION OF ENGINES AND CARRIAGES.

4238. Take the heaviest load that you work upon the Northern and Eastern Railway ; do you imagine that the heaviest loads that the country requires upon that line can be worked by engines of the 4 feet 81 inches Gauge to the utmost advantage ?—I think they can, under certain circum- stances, that is, when advantage is taken of all those points which may be adjusted to the Gauge in a powerful engine upon the Narrow Gauge. I mean to say that a more powerful engine may be made upon the Narrow Gauge than has hitherto been made, and that the narrowness of the Gauge need be no obstacle to increased power beyond what they have now.

4239. Do you imagine that, for the traffic of your district, a 7-feet Gauge would be preferable ?—No, 1 do not think so. It would be extremely incon- venient in the sharp curves ; for on sharp curves there is more friction and grinding on the Wide Gauge than on the Narrow, because, of course, the outer rail being so much longer than the inner one, there is more slipping. 4296. The Great Western people naturally aim at a much higher velocity than they have already attained, and they assert that the narrower carriages cannot run with safety at the same speed or carry the same loads, inasmuch as they cannot construct engines of the same power without being dan- gerous ?—I completely dissent from that.

4297. I have some engines under my care at this moment that, at any speed you can put them to without a train, are as steady as at 10 miles an hour. Those engines have, for the satisfaction of General Pasley, to whom I wished to show the fact, been run at a speed of above 60 miles an hour ; and at that speed that they were steadier, and apparently safer, than at 10 miles an hour, owing to the application of buffers between the engine and tender, which have a very great effect in producing steadiness.

4357. Do you consider that an increase of the Gauge would afford you greater facilities for augmenting the power of your engines than you have at present ?—The power of the engine is limited by the strength of the rail ; and, if you still retain the six wheels, you cannot, with the present plan of engine, get beyond a certain power ; the rails would not bear it. 4373. Do you think that increased power might be better attained by a wider Gauge, or by the adaptation of the engines to the Narrow Gauge ? —I would rather adapt the engine to the Narrow Gauge.

SAFETY (CURVES).—SPEED.

4308. Our speed isnot great now ; we only run an express train upon the Cambridge line ; the speed is probably about 40 miles an hour ; but when the line was opened only to Bishop's Stortford, 30 miles, the express train then maintained a very high rate of speed ; it was often done at 55 miles an hour the whole distance. After the accident on the Cambridge line, when the engine ran off the rails at Littlebury, the speed was reduced upon the new part of the line ; and, as the new part of the line constituted the greater part, it would have availed nothing to have run at excessive speed upon the old portion. We have several severe gradients upon our line. 4355. It is assumed by the Great Western, that they have greater steadi- ness and greater safety by carrying the whole of their load within the framing. There is less rocking motion naturally ?—Aa I said before, when the arrangements are good, and the proportions good, and the carriages properly screwed up together, then I do not think that rocking motion has any danger attached to it ; it is the sinuous motion that,' think, is the most dangerous, and that is greater on the Wide than on the Narrow Gauge. 4378. Then you think you can attain by a proper engine the same speed as can be attained by the Great Western, supposing they carry out their principle to its highest point ?—if they were to run a battle between the two, there being introduced first one improvement, and then another im- provement, no one could say who would get to the highest point first ; but I think this, that I can back an engine on the Narrow Gauge to run quite as fast as anybody would like to go with a train, as fast as would be safe, on account of gates, crossings, &c., which would probably be found to be about 70 miles an hour. I think 70 miles an hour I can make an engine capable of attaining with a train, and working regularly with a train of moderate weight ; but I do not think there is any engine in existence that would do it now.

HISTORY OF THE GAUGE—VARIOUS OPINIONS ON.

4300. Whatever advantage may be in the case of the Great Western line, you do not think that a system of general application ?—Taking the whole affair together, I do not think the increased expense of making and working are compensated for by any advantages that they possess over the Narrow Gauge. I think the full efficiency of the Narrow Gauge has not yet been brought out. 4360. If it were now a question to determine the Gauge for the whole country, what width should you, as a practical man, be disposed to give, so as to attain the greatest number of advantages with regard to safety, speed, and profit, looking at the thing both as a matter of safety and as a commer- cial matter ?—In proposing a new Gauge, I should not fix on an odd num- ber of inches, because I could not give any reason for a half inch one way or another. Very probably I should think 5 feet the right Gauge in that case, deriving it from the practice of common road vehicles.

JOHN ELLIS, Esq., Deputy Chairman of the Midland Railway, a Director of the London and Birmingham, and of the Leicester and Swaniaington.

BREAK OF GAUGE, AND REMEDIES.

5768. I have not seen the expedients proposed by Mr. Brunel for shifting loads from one Gauge to the other, for I have not thought it worth while to go to look at them. but I have no doubt that Mr. Brunel will provide something as ingenious as any man can provide ; I have had a good deal to do with the coal trade, and I am satisfied that the change of Gauge would be nearly a prohibition, for it would occasion such an expense that we should not be able to compete with the Staffordshire coalfield, as we ought to do, for the benefit of the public and ourselves too. 5772. Now, take such a time as this, when we are exceedingly busy in the Leicestershire coal trade. Suppose we have sent a train to Rugby with a lot of these boxes, and that we have removed them on to Mr. Brimel's platform, and they come back to our colliery, and we want to load them for an entirely different district ; they are of no use to us for that purpose.

If we happen to have no trucks but those, the coal must be stacked till we have some from somewhere else. I can see nothing but interminable trouble and cost, and inconvenience and confusion of all sorts. Then if you are to carry the Broad Gauge to the collieries, the confusion and cost are beyond all calculation. We have all the small roads to the collieries made upon the Narrow Gauge, and we have all our turn-tables upon the Narrow Gauge. We have miles of rails laid down upon some of the collieries. I sold the Clay Cross Colliery, a mile and a half of rails, the other day, from the Leicester and Swannington, to put down in addition to the present rails, merely for the by-rails to the colliery ; old 35 lb. rails that we have taken out as too light. If the whole thing is to be changed, all those must be swept away ; all our roads must be pulled up; in fact, you cannot imagine the cost and difficulty that would arise from it.

5775. I have been for many years connected with railways ; the Midland leased the Gloucester Railway to prevent the Broad Gauge coining to Bir- mingham; we had had so much trouble with it the summer before. I am in some measure connected with the worsted trade. I live at Leicester ; our wool went to Manchester, and all over the country, and we could not get it. The wool merchants found that the inconvenience and delay were beyond description in consequence of the change of Gauge at Gloucester. That was before we purchased the railway.

5793. There would be no breaking of coal, I imagine, in shifting from the Narrow to the Broad Gauge by the loose-box system. The Midland Counties tried the loose-box system before I was on the Broad. The Mid- land Counties Railway is a railway from Rugby to Derby and Nottingham. It was first projected by the Derbyshire coalowners to fight the Leicester and Swannington Railway, which had destroyed their trade to Leicester ; their way of competing with the Leicester and Swannington coal was to bring the coal down the Erewash Canal in loose boxes to thej unction of the Trent, and to lift them by a crane out of the bottom of the boat on to a flat truck, which carried two of them ; that went on for a year or two, during which time they had an advantage; in fact, the Railway Company charged the coalovraers with none of the expenses, of the moving, which were con- siderable. But, when the Derbyshire coalowners were put on a fair footing by the railway, that trade entirely disappeared, and we have either con- verted those loose boxes into fixed waggons, or we have sold them for old iron ; we sold a great part of them for old iron the other day ; and the whole work stands there as a monument of folly to be looked at. The basins are of no use, and the warehouses are of no use ; the whole thing is gone to the dogs; it is not worth sixpence a year to the Railway Company. As soon as this experiment was put into competition with other modes of conveyance, it failed entirely ; and in the course of twelve months after that, I think it ceased. There may be 300 tons a year come there now-certainly not more.

5796 An eminent engineer has told us that the whole cost of shifting at Rugby the entire coal trade of that part of the country would be about Id. a ton ?-But the question is what it would cost the coalowners to have a new plant for the whole of the trade. 5797. They say, upon that point, that you must have a fresh plant for the Oxfordshire trade; if you have got too much plant now, you must convert that ; but if you have only plant enough for your present trade, you will require a new plant for the new trade; and then you must make those loose boxes ?-But just look at a case that will arise every day ; what are we to do with those trucks coming back from Rugby, when we are so pressed for trucks that we do know what to do ? We cannot use them to go any where else. They are useless for the Leicester trade, and they must stand by till we want to send them to Rugby again. 5798. Do youimagine that loose boxes would not work upon anyother than that upon that line ?-We found so much difficulty in keeping those boxes fast that the trucks wore out ; they broke the sides of the truck in two ; the trucks got out of shape. We tried next making the boxes fast together, and then they were so cumbersome that we could not laft them with the cranes, and the whole thing failed.

UNIFORMITY OF GAUGE, AND MEANS OF OBTAINING IT.

5770. What we want for the coal is a continuous Gauge to Oxford and to Banbury. Our object is to get the coal to the market, and any obstruc- tion afforded to it must fall upon the public.

5781. In short I am of opinion that if the Great Western had not made the Gauge that they have, the traffic of the country would be much more conveniently managed ; and,:if it is allowed to'extend any more, I can imagine the turmoil that must take place in the country.

5802. The most extensive traffic in coals that we have now are those of the Claycross Coal Company, and theirs go now 150 miles or inure. The Midland Company being amalgamated, they are taken up to Kilburn, near London, by passing over two railways. Some Stavely trucks come to Gloucester. It is 53 miles from Gloucester to Birmingham, and !42 to Derby,-that is 95; and then Stavely will be about 30 miles from Derby, that is 125 miles; and now, since the amalgamation of the Companies, that traffic will be over one railway.

5806. But occasionally the coal-waggons pass over several distinct lines ? Joseph Pease, of Darlington, sends his coke to Gloucester ; it comes on to the Stockton and Darlington ; then the Great North of England and the York and North Midland ; SO that it comes over four lines. But it is a very great point to have one cmtinuous line, and with continuous manage- ment. We have a contract with Joseph Pease.

5807. Is that system likely to be so extended that any interlacing of the Broad Gauge would be very pernicious ?-I have a perfect horror of it, as a , railway director. 5808. If the Broad Gauge gets thoroughly interlaced in the south and south-western district, and should there be approved as a cheaper mode of traction, it will work its way farther north by new lines ?-Yes ; as smatter of business, if they could show it was cheaper, it would extend itself; but you cannot alter the tunnels, you cannot put down another Kdsby tunnel, to bring the Broad Gauge through. I mentioned our little tunnel on the Leicester and Swannington ; you could not put on the Broad Gauge there ; it is but 12 feet wide, but it answers its present purpose very well.

HISTORY OF THE GAUGE-VARIOUS OPINIONS ON.

5776. I do not think anything can be done upon the Broad that cannot be done upon the Narrow Gauge. I am disposed to think that if we were beginning de noes, and a council were held to consider the best Gauge, we should have it a little wider than the Narrow Gauge, but that we should not go to the Broad Gauge I am satisfied.

MR. EDWARD BURY, Manufacturer of Locomotive Engines for the last 17 years. SAFETY SPEED. I think the speed at which we have arrived is quite sufficient, connected with safety. I do not know what we are to do in the winter, during foggy

weather. It is very well to run at high velocities in fair weather, when a man can see before him ; but what we are to do in the depth of winter, during foggy weather, at high velocities, I do not know. I think the pub- lic must be prepared for serious accidents.

1101. You are speaking of express trains ?-Yes.

1102. Do you imagine that the state of the road is such as to justify a higher rate of speed than you have hitherto attained ?-No ; I think the securities for the rail are not sufficient.

1109. I think the injury to the permanent way will be in proportion to the speed. That which would do at twenty miles an hour will not do at forty, for as you increase the velocity you must increase the security. 1112. Do you imagine that greater speed is to be attained on the Broad Gauge than on the Narrow ?-Yes, for this reason : the speed depends on the ratio of the stroke to the wheel ; they may get a longer stroke, and a a larger wheel on the Broad Gauge than we can, but I think the Narrow Gauge will give a great deal faster speed than can be useful.

1217. Have you yourself travelled by the express trains on the London and Birmingham ?-Frequently.

1218. Do you find much oscillation ?-Very little indeed. We tried with one of the new engines in what time we could do it, and we took the train in two hours and thirty-five minutes from Euston-square station to the station at Birmingham. I went down with the train from Wolverton upon the engine. I think the express train is almost steadier than any other train, because it is better screwed up.

1219. Everything is in high order ?-Yes.

BREAK OF GAUGE.

1128. Have you at all contemplated the effect of having to convey coals and goods in loose boxes, if your line becomes connected with a Broad Gauge ?-I do not think it could be done. It is one of those notions which is just a fancy for the time, but it never could be done in practice. On the Liverpool and Manchester, I have seen loose boxes on the railway

carriages for the purpose of transhipment to the carts. There was a delivery of coals at Crown-street, and, to save the expense of reloading, the boxes were laid loose upon the waggons or trucks ; it was attended with great confusion, and a great deal of expense, and it was given up. The boxes were made to hold about 30 cwt. ; they were fixed on rollers ; the frame of the waggon had a little railway upon it, upon which these boxes could be rolled, and they were drawn off the truck on to the cart-wheels, where there was a little corresponding railway. It was always attended with a great deal of trouble and inconvenience.

1129. And was abandoned ?-Yes.

1130. Do you know how long it was tried ?-It was tried a great length of time, for they wished to accomplish it if they could, but it was given up. 1131. Do you know the reason that it was given up ?-The trouble of keeping the things in order, and it was found less expensive and incon- venient to reload or unload the ordinary railway coal-waggons into a com- mon cart.

1132. Do you apprehend that would be the case at Rugby, with coals going to Oxford on the Broad Gauge from the Narrow ?-I think it would entirely prevent the coal traffic from being carried on. I do not see how it is possible to avoid it, because the expense of shifting coals from one waggon to another would be very considerable, and the detention of the waggons would be very great.

1133. Do you think that a loose box being lifted off its carriage, and put upon the Broad Gauge, would not answer practically ? -I think it would not.

1134. Do you think a carriage could not be made strong enough to bear the transfer P-In giving these opinions I speak relatively to the cost. You may accomplish anything, if the expense is not to be considered, or if it is not to be known what is the expense ; but, if it is to be a question of economy, I should say that such an arrangement could never be carried out.

1135. Of course the coalowners will carry their coal at the cheapest rate ?-No doubt.

1136. If a great expense is involved in the transfer of one carriage to another, do you think they would have recourse to canals in preference to railways ?-I think so.

1137. Da you think it practicable to baild carriages to ensure safety to passengers if the body were removable from the under frame ? -It might be done ; but I should say it was a very injudicious way of doing it. We cannot tell to what extent or how far the ingenuity of man may be carried, but it does not appear to me to be the right course.

1138. Da you think it would endanger the public safety P-I think so ; it would be attended with a great deal of inconvenience, and a great deal of . On the Paris and Rouen Railway, it has been stated that a trans- fer is effected by the body of the diligences being lifted from the under carriages and placed upon railway carriages, and that at the end of the jour- ney they are retransferred to road carriages ? -When first the London and Birmingham Railway opened to Denbigh.hall we did the Post-office work to that place. The mails were loaded at the Swan with two Necks ; we put them on a truck at Easton-square station, they were carried down to Denbigh-hall, they were then drawn off the trucks and put on the road, and they went to Birmingham. It was not worth while putting them on at Rugby ; but it was attended with a great deal of inconvenience. I think we had eight or nine mails in that way every night.

1140. In the case referred to they leave the carriage behind, and merely shift the body, and the body is then placed on the railway carriage, per- forms its journey, and at the end of the journey it is again put on the road carriage ?-I should say that such an arrangement was perfectly and entirely impossible where the traffic is to any extent : we could not do it on the London and Birmingham Railway. I sin quite certain it could not be done with a heavy traffic. 1111. Supposing that one half of the Midland Counties trains were to be transferred in that way at Rugby, do you think it would be attended with great delay ?-No doubt it would.

1112. Do you think that at the high velocities now used it would be attended with risk ?-Very great risk. You would lose the advantage of the hign velocity, because the delay would be a great deal more than travel- ling in the ordinary course at a moderate velocity.

1158. In the event of the loose-box system being adopted throughout the country, our present waggons would become entirely useless.

1224. Are you aware that it has been proposed to use carriages with shifting wheels to run on the Broad Gauge or the Narrow Gauge ?-I have understood that some such notion has been broached.

1225. Are you able to give an opinion at all upon its practicability should give a very decided opinion against it.

1226. Upon what ground P-The difficulty of keeping the securities always right.

[To be continued next week.]