The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1871-07-06
Narrow.Gauge Railroads.

Many OF our readcrS dOuDtieSS TeIneulDel tiie
great contest waged in England twenty years
or more ago over what were then called respec;-
| lively the broad and narrow gauges for rail-
roads. The broad gauge roads were built with
their rails six and seven feet apart, while the
narrow-gauge roads, following the ordinary
width of wagons in use when railroads were
first introduced, had them but four feet eight
and half inches apart. Inasmuch as cars and
locomotives adopted to the one gauge could not
be used on the other, there could be no transfer
of trains from one to the other; and conse-
quently it was important, in order to avoid un-
loading and loading again at connecting points,
that as far as possible one Of the two gauges
should give way to the other. The result was
that the narrower gauge was victorious, not
withstanding the strenuous opposition of great
engineers, such as the late 1amcnted Brunei ;
and now, with slight variations, it prevails al
most universally wherever railroads are known;
Lattcrly, however, new rival to this oid !!i
narrow gauge has arisen In the form OF stlll
narrower ore The experiment has been tried
in Europe of constructing railroads with their
] rails as close together as one foot eleven and
one-half inches, and from that up to three 1eet,
and the results have been so encouraging as to
secure for this principle of extreme narrowness
many advocates among both engineers and cap
italists. Besides those in use in Europe, read
with gauge of two and one-half feet has been
for some time in operation near Cleveland,
Ohio; and one eight hundred and soSenty-tye
miles long, from Denver, in Colorado Territory,
to and along the Rio Grande river, to El Paso,
on the Mexican boundary, is now building with
a gauge of three feet. The English Govern
ment in India, after spending millions in build,
ing railroads of the old gauge, have adopted
three feet three inches as the standard gauge
for the whole Indian railway system: Indeed,
it is confidently predicted that the new gauge
will eventually drive the old one out of use for
all but passenger traffic.
The advantage claimed for the new gauge is
the important one of vastly greater cheapness.
In mountainous regions, especially, it has been
shown that road of two feet gauge can be
built for one-eighth of the cost of road four
feet eight and onc-half inches gauge. This is
owing both to the diminished width required
for cuttings, cmbankments and bridges, and to
the fact that much shorter curves are practica-
Bile, permitting the road to follow more nearly
the natural conformation of the country. On
level plains, even, the cost IS only one-half; SO
that the same expenditure of money will build
there two miles of the new gauge for ono OF the
old The same difference extends, of course, to
the locomotives and cars.
| Furthermore, this saving does not stop with
the construction and equipment OF the road,
but is found in its operation. It rs well known
| to persons connected with railroad affairs, that
one of the most serious causes OF expense In
transporting both freight and passengers on
railroads, is the excessive weight OF the cars as
compared with the loads they carry In freight
train7s for every ton of paying weight two tons
of non-paying or dead weight have to be.moved,
in the form of the iron and timber Of which
the cars are composed; while in passenger
trains the proportion of paying weight to dead
weight is as twenty-nine TO one. On the new
narrow gauge roads ali this is reversed Only
one ton of dead weight has to be moved for
three tons of paying weight, and the running
expenses arc reduced accordingly. To put the
comparison in a more striking light, the Lon
of four feet eight and onc-half inches, moves
one hundred and sixty million tons annually,
of which but seventeen millions pay; while
the Festiniog railway, in Wales, with gauge
of one foot eleven and one-half inches, moves
two hundred and fifty thousand tons annually,
of which one hundred and seventy-fvc thou
sand pay. That is, in the former case the
gross weight carried is to the paying weight as
niue to one, while in the latter it is as ten to
seven.
Should these results be verified by the work
ings of the Denver and Rio Grande road, it
would seem that new era in railroad building
is opening upon us. If by reducing the gauge
railroads can be built which will answer every
practical purpose for 81 1000 per mile instead OF
$4,000, and after they are built can be run for
onc-third the cost of the present usual gauge,
we may look for ramiication of tracks over
the entire country compared with which those
now in existence will be as nothing.