The Dallas weekly herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1885, 1881-06-09


their connection with tho Little River and
Arkansas Narrow. gauge road. Col. IL. D.
Deal Of Mississippi county took the contract
for bridge timber, piliog, cattle guards and
ties. The grading was also let AL the
route is to be completed by the first of Octo'
Der. Eighty more miles Of road will DC
begun in ten days from Maiden in Dunklin
county, or as soon as surveys are completed
The standard Gauge w. the Marrow
Gauge
There are at present many narrow gauge
railway projects In the west, and those who
are advocating this system seem to be meet
ing with success in inducing capitalists to
invest their money in these roads. In the
last number Of the Railway Age, however,
there appears communication dated here
and signed by r. G. II. Minty, in which that
gentleman gives some valuable information
on the subject As this is a subject attract
ing considerable attention in the southwest,
the following facts presented by Mr.. Minty
will no doubt be read with interes:
~ supp $50 all will ADMIT that, If honestly
managed, narrow gauge road can be built
B. equipped for from one-half to two
Ids of the amount it would cost to build
~. equip standard gauge road over the
: ne linz; but unfortunately too many u
the narrow gauge roads are not so managed,
AS the building progresses, money is re-
uuired, u 'syndicate' is formed, 'construc-
ton company (Credit Mobilier) organized,
q chief contractor appointed, the road is
built and few spectators become wealthy,
and for brief period they plume themselv' 8
with the idea that they are railway kinga.'
But when ready to be operated, he road is
found to be loaded down with fictitious CAPT
tai, and the originators who started out with
the idea of building cheap road, and who
worked faithfully and zsalously to that en- d,
are pushed out of the organic ton or retire
from it in disgust.
II know of one narrow-gsuge road which
carries in this way 1924 600 per mile, and
another which is loaded with over S40,OO
SIN making q comparison, will take 1T for
granted that both roads have been honestly
built, and that all the money represented in
their capital has been pat into their con-
struction and equipment.
"The narrow.gauge starts out with the
great advantage OF having smaller capital
investment on which to pay interest; but II 1t
cannot move freight as cheaply as the
standard gauge Can, this advantage OF a
smaller fixed expenditure will soon be lost,
and, as the business increases, will be swal-
lowed up in the daily additional cost OF
operation,
"The problem TO be solved, the question
on which the success or failure OF the
narrow gauge rs a competitor of the standard
gauge hinges, is what will 1T cost per ton per
mile to move freight?
"For the purpose of comparison, the
statistics given 10 the reports OF operation
of MAJ row gauge roads are extremely nesgre.
I have, therefore, made inquiry and secured
information beyond that given in the annual
reports.
"For many years the maximum load OF
freight cars has been for standard gauge ten
tons and for narrow gauge eight tons; OF late,
however, both systems have been moving 10
the right direction, viz. to REFUGE the dead
or non-psying weight. For standard gauge
cars are now being built with a capacity Of
twenty tons and for narrow gauge cars are
being built with capacity OF twelve and In
few Instances of fifteen tons.
"In actual operation find that fifteen cars
with maximum load of eight tons per car
is a large train for mario II gauge road.
"One narrow gauge road reports tor two
consecutive years an average of fiItSsiive and
enc half tons of freight moved by each train,
which is not quite seven cars to the train.
San average train on standard gauge IS twen-
ty-five cars of ten tons each; this Will gives
Marrow gauge Is cars of s tons, 40 tons;
standard gauge, % cars of 10 tons, go tons
or more than double the quantity OF
freight on standard than there is on mar
row gauge train.
Snow ne to expenGes-the narrow gauge
train requires the same number OF men TO
handle it that the standard gauge does; and
engineers, fremen, conductors and brskomen
have to be paid the same amount OF wages on
both roads. The difference in qusntty OF
fuel, oil and waste used is imperceptible. On
examination of performance Of locomotives
| llnd that the narrow gauge fully equals the
standard gauge in total cost per nit; end L
also find that repairs of cars cost more per
mile IN narrow than they do on standard
gauge.
Ca repairs and renewals OF track i i'
difficult TO m Ike fair comparison. AT irst
glance il looks IS IL this m"st be in favor o.
narrow gauge for the reseon that one nil II
forty pound rail will cost 3S l-3 per cent less
than one mile OF sixty pound rail, and Fix
foot tie will cost less than an eight foot tie
and also that Il will tske fewer men TO handle
the light material than il does to handle the
heavy; but the amount of Labor required to
keep up track, and the quan iiy OF mat ria 8
required for renewals, Is 70 "a
large extent governed by the
number of trains which pass
over the road and cause the swear and tear
With an equal volume of freight to move,
the narrow gauge must run double the num-
Der of trains that the standard gauge does,
therefore, IL appears that the ''wear and tear"
and consequently the required renewals must
be double that Of the standard gauge. and
in addition 10 this we have 10 sllow for the
shorter life, or quicker wear Of the light as
compared with the heavy rail
"rhs second glance places cost OF
maintenance and renewals of track
in favor Of standard gauge. Allowing,
however, that this item like that Of
wages OF men is equal, We find
that II costs twice as much 10 move one ton
of freight one mile on the narrow as Il does
on tbs standard gsuge,
The entire revenue ola road is derived
from business. freight, express, mail and
passengers carried on the passenger and
freight trains. and therefore tie entire 'ope.
rating expsnses' sre properly chargesble
thereto. One point on which we al 'sgree
10 disagree Is the division or separation Of
oo.fa 20 soowruntfnO trereoortatiuui Of