Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1871-07-31
ICOMSICN ICATED.


ton and Ohio Railroad:
I entirely approve the sentiment said to be
expressed by an officer of your company, ID
answer to some criticism in a Washington pa
per, commenting upon your delay IN giving out
contracts on the road from Hamilton westwardly,
which was in substance that you did not intend
to do so until you were ready, and that you IN
tend to do your business IN your oacn NdU--
Pray permit one, who has been staunch adj
yocate for your scheme from its inception. when
it's objective point was but the coal fields OF
Hampshire county, and whose interest has been
largely increased by the grander project OF a
connexion with the Ohio river, through the H.
limit.ble coal fields and deposits of iron ore in
West Virginia. TO make a few remarks.
With this preface, beg leave to call your at
tenton to an article from the New York Tx
press, under the caption, "-NaIron Gauge
RailrouHs-their great economy, which have
read with great interest.
[ have no pretentlons to any knowledge or
skill in eng incering, or the management OF rail-
roads, but the statements in this artlcle-tacts
! I presumc-havc led lac to the consideration
| of applying this new system to the construction
of your road.
| The enormous difference in the construction
of the narrow gauge feet tread, instead Of +
feet inches, is of itself Il great deslderatum:
The saving in the carrying of useless dead
weight equally enormous in favor OF the mar
row gauge, is perhaps even more important,
particularly Of each item, as You will sec set
forth at large in this article.
| have every confidence that your energetic
and indomitable President, Hon. Lewis Nc
Kcnzie and his associates will cndcavOr to make
this oreat royA after the very best manner, and
thcy NAV have had this subject under consldc-
ration. -
You have now in active operation some To
miles of wide gauge to Hamilton.
The reduction Of this to the narrow gauge
would not involve 4 serious loss, including the
necessary alterations Of the rolling stock; 1t
may, perchancc, be said that the great bulk OF
your transportation is expected to be coal and
iron, and much greater amounts may be carried
in cars on the wide gauge. Is this IN reality an
objection to the narrow guasc:
The article referred to, says the present pas
senger car weighs -, 600 pounds empty. The
car for the three feet gauge weighs but 200
lbs \ car that weighs -, 600 lbs will carry on
an average about ~ passengers. The car that
weighs 200 lbs. will carry ~ passengers.
Then three cars wide gauge will carry !2o
passengers, and it would require .tour cars mar
row gauge 100 passengers, or al additional car
for the narrow, or difference Of p per ct. to
the number. presume the same per ccntage
would exist as to burthen or coal cars.
It would, Of course, for large traffic in coal
| or such articles increase the number OF cars
largely, and when trade is slack there may be
large supplies of cars lying idle. But if the cal
culations of this writer are to be relied upon--ls
| supposc they are--the saving Of carriage in
dead weight would surely ovcrbalance largely
this difficulty; to say nothing OF the difference
ia the original construction Of the road itself.
and the great economy in the construction OF
the locomotives, passenger and burthen cars
I have thrown together these ideas in 4 crude
form, hoping to arrest your attention to this
matter, and have no doubt you will consider
them carefully, if you have not already had
them under consideration. | claim to be one
of the warmest and most sangulnc OF the friends
of this great road, and beg you to excuse my
apparent intermeddling with your duties, caused
by my zeal for its completion after the best
fashion AN ORIGINAL STOCKHOLDERS.
ALEXANDRIA, July 81, ISL
NARROW GAUGE RAILROAU--IHElRG GREAT
EcoNoMY-[ From the New York Express. l.
The subject of road gauge appears to be attract
ing much public attention at this time, and peo-
ple seem anxious to know the relative advan-
tage between the two With me it is not q new
subject. | have watched its progress and ex-
amined the investigation made in England some
years ago, between the feet s. inches and the
feet gauge then contrasted. People should
not expect favorable expressions III regard to
the narrow gauge from men largely Interested
in the present wide gauge roads Their entire
interest is against the construction OF narrow
gauge, for the reason that they know that they
will furnish full evidence Of their great advan-
tage, in capacity and economy, over the / feet
81, and wider gauges Of roads. II ! had eX-
pended millions on piece of work tor the pub
lie that could not be withdrawn or diverted or
used for any other purpose than its original i'll
tention, l should not care to ee--although The
public mght-anothcr road or rival line along
the side of the one that | had expended
largely upon to mature, that could do the
business | had expected to Ito at nne-quar-
ter less cost in constructions, and at one
third less operating expenses. This Is the
solution Of indifference in expression, or per-
haps more properly, disparagement Of express
sion in regard to narrow gauge railroads on
the part of interested and prejudced railroad
men. But, notwithstanding the prejudice, this
system will yindicate ITSELF TO deal in gene
ralitics, there will be full one-quartcr, ON Ill
average, saving in the cost Of construction, and
full ope-third difference in the cost Of operat
ing, between > feet and t feet S.! inch gauge.
This shall try to make plain; TO every ton
of paying freight on 4 foot S! inch road, the
road has to carry two tons, on an average, Tor
the one ton paid for, or dead weight equal to
the paying tonnage in other words, and 10
bring it home to every mind, | will state it in
another way. If the Hudson River Road re-
ceiyes So per ton, between New York and Al
bany, for 100 tons of freight they must draw
200 tons, including the cars in which it is load
ed; that brings the price to 81 per ton, in fact,
instead of the s., as would at first appear, OF
the weight hauled On ; foot gauge, to draw
100 tons, they would require only one. half the
dead weight. If they get - per ton the same e.
as on the wide gauge, they draw one and a. half
tons, and get 81 for that ton and a-halt, thus
saving one-quarter. A locomotive capable Of
drawing 100 tons on an so foot grade; feet
gauge will weigh 1850 pounds: 4 locomo-
tive to do the same on a wide or ordinary gauge,
would weigh 35 tons, or onehaf difference.
| ne oouron thor, l. at lna If fr1m one third to