The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1853-07-14

Inc autnOrlty OF Mr. MORTON, so large
ly quoted by Col. Garnett, proves, after all,
the very position which we assumed in the
beginning of this controversy, In opposi-
ton to the statement, that the 4, 81 gauge
had been almost universally condemned BY
the Judgment of practical men, 1t shows
so far from this being the case, that the
question remains as far from decision as
ever. The A, 81 gauge would give us ac-
cess to four hundred miles of Kentucky
railroad without change of cars. In all
cases this would be vast advantage. 1t
would be so great, that Brunei himself
would not think of disturbing it. In case
of invasion, it would be incalculable. In
Gillespie's 'sRoads and Railroads. - o. 2S5,
where he is speaking of the difficulties
arising from break of gauge, he says 'sthe
speedy conveyance of troops is also an i'm
portant consideration; for railroads are one
of the most powerful means of national
defence, enabling an army to be concentra-
ted rapidly at any point attacked; but
their value for this purpose would be great
ly lessened if it were necessary, on some
break of gauge on the route, to stop and
lose the time necessary for transferring the
troops, with their artillery, stores, &c. from
one set of cars to another" With the 4,
s. we might command the whole force of
Kentucky from Big Sandy to Louisville,
and from Lexington to the Ohio river. At
the same time, by means of the foot
gauge, the Lynchburg and Tennessee road
would command Tennessee, and the States
south of her. If that were not sufficient,
then by means of the Lynchburg and Cum
berland five foot road, uniting at Lexington
with the Memphis and Lexington five feet,
she could bring the necessary addition In
military point of view, no arrangement
vantages Col. Garnett would throw away
for mere abstraction, for he has not proved
that his three inches and half could have
any other effect than to break the gauge.
True he complains of us for saying that he
expected to protect Virginia against Balti-
more by means of the 'sbug-bear of tram
shipment, whereas he said twas to be done
through the medium of his 8 inches and a
half. But save the unsupported assertions
of his Mentor, Morton, he brings forward
nothing to corroborate his position. AS he
seems to be at a loss, we shall make so
bold as to furnish him with certain data,
which we can hardly suppose he had in
possession when he wrote the communica-
ton to which we are replying.
The Erie railroad, it is well known, has
a gauge of six feet. The claims of this
gauge, as tested by practice on the road,
are fully examined in the American Rail-
road Journal of June 25th. All these
claims are stated as drawn from the report
of Edwin F. johnson, made in 1912, with
the addition of such as have been made
over and above by Mr.. Morton, the engi-
neer on whom Col. G. relies with so much
confidence. The article in question is too
long for insertion, but we shall attempt an
analysis of it..
lst. 1t is said by Johnson that the 4, s.
gauge was adopted originally in this coun-
try solely because it was common in Eng
land, whence we got our engines, and
therefore cheaper; but that in 1912 our
own builders had become acquainted with
what was necessary for the broad gauge
The reply to this is, that even now the
Erie road has engines of every variety of
construction, so that the best engine has
not yet been ascertained by experiment.
I'd. 1t was said that the bearing of the
weight upon the wheels was more equal,
as the depression of either side of the
track, being distributed over a broader
base, would reduce the angle of transverse
inclination, and consequently the unequal
adjustment of the weight upon one OF the
other wheel of the car. To this the writer
in the Journal replies: ''As the extra
weight, however, Of the Erie rolling stock
brings the maximum weight on each wheel
on LeueI track-the usual weight exceed
ipcr tha m, m am, on 4ha roo,t ~
even narrow track-the broad gauge de-
serves what small advantage can be attach
ed to this point.'
Sd. 1t was claimed that the axle friction
would be reduced by the admission of large
car wheels. The diameter of the freight
car wheels has heretofore been 80 inches
passenger cars Sc inches. They have been
reduced to 33 inches for both, while many
narrow gauge roads are increasing the size
of theirs.
4th. 1t was said that the freight cars
would be wider and better for storage of
freight, and that the trains being shorter
for the same freight, would meet with less
atmospheric resistance, sc. The Erie
freight cars are not any wider than those
on the narrow gauge.
5th. The greater smoothness of running
is claimed for the wide gauge. This may
be obtained on any gauge by increasing
the dead weight in proportion to the weight
of passengers, as the Erie cars have done.
The Erie cars were intended to accommo-
date three passengers in seat, and it was
contended that thereby the proportion be-
tween live and dead weight would be di-
minished. But the seats are wider than Is
necessary for two, and not wide enough for
three. The narrow gauge cars can most
comfortably accommodate two. The re-
port of the Erie road for 1852 made the
average number of passengers per train ~,
within fraction, and the average weight
of passenger trains, without passengers or
baggage, 96 tons; that is, Il tons dead
weight per passenger. BY the report of
the Hudson river railroad company for the
same year, it appears that the number of
passengers per train was s5, and the ave-
rage weight of trains, exclusive of passen-
gers and baggage, 7ss tons, being about
1l-I2ths of ton of dead weight to each
passenger. The following corresponding
facts upon four of the roads leading from
Albany to Buffalo are made up from the
Ay of passen- Av. weight Of