Grant County herald. [volume] (Lancaster, Wis.) 1850-1968, 1872-07-23

or IL tons in favor of the narrow.
gauge, or 1000 pounds per head fol
leach p passenger.
Assuming the weight of the broad
gauge car to be only 10 tons, or 3d.
1000 pounds, the difference in favor
Iof the narrow gauge car will still be
l8. 600 pounds, or 1884 pounds pei
head for each passenger, as against
1873 pounds per head by the narrow
gauge. OF course the travelling pub
llic pays for the excess of unneeessa'
Try dead weight, amounting to many
millions of dollars per annum.
Here the committee introduce q
table showing the proportions ofpay-
ling and dead weight in freight cars
lof the two gauges when loaded &c
their full capacity, from which it ap.
pears that the broad gauge car
weighs 10000 pounds, with capaci-
|ty of 10000 pounds, giving one
pound of dead weight to every one
pound of freight whereas the mar
row gauge car weighs 5000 pounds,
with capacity of 10000 pounds,
giving two pounds of paying freight
ito one pound of dead weight.
But the table shows that the rail-
ways of Massachusetts and New
Y ork average only about one-sixth
|of their capacity. 1t should be borne
ia mind that the average of our rail
ways will fall short of those of the
states referred to. Ifas shown, Mas
|sachuset!s hauls 1880 pounds of
dead weight to transport 3,l36
pounds paying freight, and New
York 1901 pounds what may We
reasonably expect is the average in
the agricultural districts of the South,
w est and Northwest?
The proportion of dead weight to
paying freight on southern railways
lis even much greater than it is in
the West and Northwest. In a
word, their railways have a capacity
far in excess of the business of that
section, entailing high rates upon
them, and thus retarding develop
ment which cheap narrow gauge
roads with their low rates would
stimulate into great activity. 1t
will be observed that the average OF
freight carried by car by Massachu-
setts roads is less than one>fifth the
of the narrow gauge box
car.
In transporting less quantities
than full car load the narrow gauge
cars have immensely the advantage.
Here table is introduced showing
the comparative wear and tear OF
the two gauges, and the expense OF
keeping them in repair, which is
greatly in favor of the Narrow
Gauge. The saving of dead weight
IinAhe narrow gauge system is un>
'questionably comparative saving
in wear.
5. Can narrow gauge locomotives
be constructed of sufficient power
and speed to answer the general re-
quirements?
Your committee most unhesitating-
ly answer yes and for the follow
ing reasons:
1. Because they are doing it dali
ly, and any one who wishes to in
vestigate the question has only to
visit the roads where they are in use
2. From the fact that the great
standard gauge roads taking their
heaviest freight engines off their
lines as fast as it can be done with
ECONOMY, or as fast as they are worn
out, preferring to run more trains
rather than the extra heavy ones
because the breaking of draftirons
links, bumpers, and the fearfnlly
costly lamination of the rail, &c, &c
'amounts to more than the cost of the
additional men and trains.
B. That by adopting the proper
form of construction, the engines
can have sufficient power to handle
ANY number Of cars that can be pru
IDENTIFY and economically run togeth
er in one train, and that such trair
|: can be handled with as much safety
on the narrow as on the broad gauge
while the proportion of dead weigh
sbeing much less, the same number o
strain-men will handle more tons o
spaying freight on the narrow thar
lon the broad gauge, when WORKED
iup to the same tonnage.
4. All narrow, as well as broad
gauge advocates acknowledge tina
strains can and are run too fast 70
ilhe best interests of the road and tn
zpublic, and that it taxes them far be
syond the bounds of economy to rul
fast trains.
8. That there is no difficulty il
smaking as fast time with the marrow
4gauge locomotive az the great ma
sjority of the broad gauge roads make
(which is all the public demand f; an,
THAT in advocating economy in thi
sparticular we represent the true in
aterests of the public.
q 6. That the locomotives of the Den
Ever and Rio Grande narrow-gauge ra
away, both freight and passenger, ar
sgiving entire satisfaction, both as t
2speed and power. A 17-ton freigh
locomotive on that road has hauled
1train of "a cars with case up a grad
8seven miles long, averaging ten fee
Ito the mile, four miles of the sam
shaving II grade OF rs feet per mile
q But still more remarkable per
aformance was that of one of its pas
asenger locomotives that ran is
zmiles with only 2.3IO pounds of Goa
zhauling the usual train of one bag
agage car and two coaches. Of thi
saaistance, 102 miles were run up a
Beverage grade of 40 feet per mile,an
is miles OF 20 feet per mile.
y The passenger trains on the roa
ahave frequently been driven at th
zspeed of 30 miles per hour with er
tire safety, and with less oscilatin
ssmotion than is observed on broaC
2gauge roads newly constructed.
The construction and practical Of
Iteration of the Denver and r