92

Weight of rails

122. Now, as I said before, the permanent way is the item which increases the cost so largely, for while slow speeds are adopted, rails of 42lbs. weight per yard would suffice for the gauge of 3ft. 6in.; 54lbs. per yard would be required for a 4ft. 8½in. gauge; and 60lbs. per yard for the gauge of 5ft. 3in.

In one case there would be an increase of 25 per cent. in the gross weight of the rails necessary, and in the other nearly 50 per cent. as compared with those necessary for the narrow gauge of 3ft. 6in.

Extra cost of broad gauge depends much upon the state of the iron market.

123. So that, as excellent timber exists in numerous places along the route, and superior ballast is procured on the site of the works, the extra cost of these items in the broader gauges is not a very heavy one, and the whole question of the relative cost of the broader gauges over one of 3ft. 6in., would mainly resolve itself into the state of the iron market at the time of constructing the line.

Narrow gauge best suited where curves are sharp.

124. The important advantage of adopting so narrow a gauge as 3ft. 6in., is the facility it gives of safely passing, with moderate speeds, severe curves on the line of rails. This is this chief point of recommendation, and, if slow speeds are to be followed, one of great consideration in a mountainous country like the Province of Nelson.

Advantages of a gauge of 4 feet 8½ inches.

125. The gauge of 4ft. 8½in. certainly presents, in my judgment, the most tempting arguments for its adoption; for, contrary to the narrow gauge of 3ft. 6in.,—

A.—Its working is more certain;

B.—Its speed may safely reach the average of 20 miles an hour, on a line where the curves would be as sharp as a radius of 10 chains, and be very numerous;

C.—Its servants would be less numerous;

D.—It rolling stock of less extent; and

E.—Its cost of working less.

In case of a change of gauge becoming necessary.

126. Supposing, however, that the narrower gauge of 3ft. 6in. was adopted as the best adapted for mineral traffic; and that in the course of time other traffic was so developed as to require higher speeds, then the gauge becomes at once necessary, and the question arises at what cost this change of gauge be accomplished.

Works necessary to make a change of gauge.

127. The reason is obvious, for the curves would have to be increased in severity, the ballasting must be widened, the sleepers be replaced by longer ones, and a heavier rail substituted for that which would suffice for a gauge of 3ft. 6in.

Change of gauge would be costly.

128. Now I have no hesitation in saying that such a change would be very costly indeed if the line was, in the first instance, laid out simply for a gauge of 3ft. 6in., and regardless of possible future increase of width being necessary; and this cost would be standard from the necessity of keeping the traffic on the line open while the alteration of gauge was being made.

Cost increased if traffic to be kept open during the change.

129. I need hardly say that, under such conditions, the cost of the new works would, of necessity, be very much in excess of what they would be if conducted under ordinary circumstances.

130. So that we must come back to the consideration as to how far it is prudent to construct a railway of some 200 miles long, at a moderate cost, but a very narrow gauge, with the hope of being only able to accomplish a very limited speed, against a broader gauge, of say 4ft. 8½in., where higher speeds may be safely attained.

Nature of the curves on the proposed line.

131. The curves on the trunk line that I propose, the need not, I think, exceed a radius of ten chains, but on the branch to Westport curves whose radius is 7 chains, are very frequent.

Speed proposed, when the gauge is 3 feet 6 inches.

132. We must not, I think, on a gauge of 3ft. 6in., calculate upon attaining with perfect safety a speed greater than about 12½ miles per hour on the gauge is 3 feet 6 inches.

average, which would enable the journey from Nelson to Cobden to be accomplished in about 14 hours, and from Nelson to Westport in about 11½ hours.

133. The adoption of the gauge of 3ft. 6in. would, Adoption of a gauge of 3 feet 6 inches might in all probability, exclude Nelson from considerable in any trunk line of communication that must in a short time be established in the Middle Island, provided the main line was proposed to be constructed with a gauge greater than 3ft. 6in.

134. It is true that this question will not immediately arise, but that does not for a moment dispense Necessity of considering this point.

with the necessity of anticipating its occurrence. To provide for it, as far as the province can do so, appears to me to be the common prudence.

135. It may be urged against what I now advance, that if ever the gauge of 4ft. 8½in., which I consider Change of gauge from broad to narrow easily done.

quite sufficient for all the purposes of traffic that are likely to arise on a line of railway from Nelson to the West Coast, may be less than what may be determined as the proper gauge for the whole of the railways of the Colony, or it may be—if more, the change of gauge from a larger to a smaller is very simple—and if increased from 4ft. 8½in. to 5ft. 3in., the cost is not very material, as the same weight of rails would, under the circumstances, perhaps be made to suffice; at least there would be no necessity of an immediate change in the weight of rail, if the weight of the locomotives was not greater than—say 10 tons; so that the only expense necessary would be to increase the length of sleepers about 7in., and the width of the ballasting to the same extent, to secure the alteration from a gauge of 4ft. 8½in. to one of 5ft. 3in. The cuttings would, practically, remain undisturbed.

136. It appears, therefore, that in determining the gauge to be adopted, a variety of present circum- Determination of gauge must be regulated by several considerations.

stances, as well as those which are not only possible but probable to arise, must be duly weighed, and to actions. me it seems that though there are very strong inducements to adopt a gauge as small as 3ft. 6in., its effects must be to raise and limit the good that would arise from such assistance, and to exclude from the Province of Nelson all those great benefits which a through traffic secures to a district.

137. During my examination of the many points which your Honour's Government have to consider respecting the best gauge for the proposed railway. If you are convinced that so long a line should be constructed as for a mineral traffic only, then adopt a gauge of 3ft. 6in.; but, if you think that a larger view of the question should be taken, as to how the gauge would benefit the whole of the Middle Island, that the traffic would be of a mixed character, and that a portion, if not the whole line, might be considered as forming a part of a trunk line to Canterbury and elsewhere, then adopt a gauge of 4ft. 8½in.

138. Do not the examination of the routes I Water ways, endeavoured to ascertain, by the existing water courses, small bridges and the probable average cost per mile of culverts and culverts.

small bridges. So that the line shall be less than 35ft. they will not be separately noted—so that in the estimates which follow the cost of bridging will be in two items, viz.—a rate per mile for all bridges under 35 feet span, and the estimated cost of bridges of larger spans.

139. Before going into the consideration of the estimates, it is necessary for me to observe that, as the works in the valley of the Buller are of quite a different character from those on other parts of the line, I purpose making a separate estimate for each portion, so as to arrive at more accurate results; and for this purpose I attach a sketch of a cross section, which