HENRY V. POOR, Editor.





ae vw


Seconp Quarto Series, Vou. VIL, No, 9}


[Wuote No. 776, Vou. XXIV.

ASSISTANT EDITORS, J. T. Hover, For Mining and Metallurgy.

Pon ve wo T. James, For Manufactures and the


Defects of Railroads and their Remedy....... Cost of Repairs of Locomotives.............. ERVOPAUIIC WHEE 06s cwne.daccieaee dee inges aos 132 Project for the englargement of the Erie Canal.132

PURMNPIVORIR CORD coo. esion ses aheewocecdec 134 Leggett’s Gap Railroad .... 0.22 cece cece coces 134 Statistics of New York Railroads............ 135 Stock and Money Market............ e200. 136 Ohio and Mississippi Railroad............... 137 CEE SP renitsae saananen dete: «nd hed 138 Lexington and Maysville Railroad........... 138 Harlem Railroad Extension...............-. 138 South Carolina Railroad............ 0.22.0. 138 Albany and Northern Railroad............... 138 Cleveland and Columbus Railroad...........138 East Tennessee and Georgia Railroad........ 138 Ohio Central Railroad .... 0... 002 cece cceeee 138 Mohawk Valley Railroad.... ..... ss. sess 139 Ohio and Indiana Railroad.................- 139 Michigan Southern Railroad................ 139 Central Railroad—Illinois...................139 Dimensions of the Engine, ‘“ Champlain.” ....139 EE heck wep cava aitenivediinns vba 139 WOOK UMEROS 5.5 dace ceveies .140

American Railroad Journal.

Pusuisuep By J..H. Scuutrz & Co., 136 Nassau sr.

Saturday, March 1, 1851.

Remarks upon the Defects of Railway Tracks and their Remedy.



Although the railway structure, in its simple el- ements, is not an invention of modern times, (the Egyptians are supposed to have used it,) and al- though in its more matured form, it is now up- wards of twenty years old, yet it is still in a pro- gressive state, and is admitted on all hands not to have attained perfection, but to be marked by some serious defects. The best evidence of this, is the great variety of opinions which still prevail in re-

ard to the details of its form and combinations.—

here is but little agreement among professional men, even in the leading principles of the struc- ture—that is, in regard to the section of the rail, the mode of supporting it, the manner of connect- ing it at the joints, &c. The undersigned has been an attentive observer of the constant agitation to which these questions have been subjected, and has, as he believes, carefully and impartially

weighed the arguments for and against the vari- ous ways proposed for the accomplishment of the object which all have had in view, viz., a firm yet elastic strueture—well connected at the joints of the bars and other egy of contact of the different pieces composing the track, and yet readily taken apart in the process of repair. His conclusion has been, that there were radical defects in all the ex- isting systems of form and combination of parts, defects to be remedied only by a fundamental change in some of the principles of the structure, and, in his view, the cure is as the cause of these imperfections.

A railway track has always heretofore consisted of a series of iron bars, of greater or less length, and of various sectional forms, laid together at the ends, and supported throughout their lengths in va- rious ways. Care has usually been taken to give these bars a sufficiency of strength in themselves, and their supports, to make them form a solid and smcoth surface for the rolling of the wheels upon them throughout their length—and if the bars could be incorporated together by welding at their ends, or in other words, if there were no joints in the track, there would be little to desire in any of the well built railways of the present day ; for, al- though the resistance of the soil on which the track rests not being uniform, undulations will occur in the surface of the rails—yet there would be no ab- rupt depressions or eleyations—and the carriages would oscillate with an easy swinging movement, attended by no concussion. The rails, however, not being continuous, but terminating at every distanee of 15 or 20 teet, the wheel has to pass from one to the other, over a very narrow gap it is true, but one quite wide enough almost to annihilate the resistance of the bar at that point as a beam, and to make it depend for its power to hold up the

.|wheel, principally upon the resistance of the sab-

stance supporting it at that spot, whether that sub- stance be a longitudinal bearer or cross sleeper of timber, or a stone block—according as one or other of these three systems of support are used. Now to give the bearer, or sleeper, or block, the resis- tance necessary to compensate fully the loss of strength as a beam, which the bars sustain at their ends, has been in practice found impracticable—al- though an approximation thereto may be had by increasing the compactness of the road bed and the extent of surface bearing thereon at the joints.— The approximation, however, is always an un- certain, and, at best, an imperfect one, and even in the case of the continuous timber bearer under the rail, which would appear to give the best support to the joints of the bars, the result is unsatisfacto- ry; the compressible character of the wood al- ways permitting the rails to sink into it more or less at their ends. The proved impossibility of ef- fectually sustaining the joints by increasedfcom- pactness of road bed and provision of additional bearing surface, has induced attempts to connect

the iron bars at their points of contact +o as to

form a splice, for the restoration of the strength lost at this point. But all such efforts have proved abortive, the effect of the quick passage of ‘oa trains being to shake and wear loose all the fast- nings constituting the splice, and it is now quite apparent that little more can be effected at the joints than to keep the rails, vertically and lateral- y, sufficiently in place to permit the wheel to pass safely from one bar to another—and not always safely indeed, for there are not wanting instances wherein disastrous accidents have been occasioned by the escape of the rail from what confined it at this point. The only real splice that has been thus tar applied to the joints of a line of rails, is the con- tinuous bearing timber; but this, in consequence of the yielding of the wood, is much impaired in its effect, as already observed. I make the preced- ing statements as well known facts, not denied by any one at all experienced in the construction and maintenance of railways, or an observant traveller upon them. I could give, were it necessary, a mass of detail upon the subject, collected in my own visits to various lines of railway, and in m correspondence with my professional brethern all over the United States. Saffice it to say, that the existence of the evil of bad joints, and the difficul- ty of dealing with it, is amply demonstrated by the variety of expedients to palliate what is conceded to be incurable. Upon one line, for example, are to be found two cast iron chairs weighing together 45 lbs., applied to each bar—and upon another line, no chairs at all, but the rails simply let into the sleepers at the ends and spiked down. U other roads a chair weighing from 15 to 25 ibs., with a wooden key to hold fast the rail in it. U others again, chairs weighing from 12 to 20 lbs. with a lip on each side to lap tightly over the. bot- tom flanges of the rail. On others a simple plate to support the ends of the bars and keep them side- wise in place, depending upon spikes to hold them down. On others the same plate with screw bolts in place of spikes, and lastly, upon one or two roads, two splice plates fitting on each side into the hollows of the rail and drawn tight by screw or cotter belts in a horizontal position. None of these modes of making the joints secure, operate as a splice, in effect, or but partially, at the first; for the violent blow ates to the end of the bar by ev- ery passing wheel, soon jars loose the firmest grip that these fastenings can take. The wooden keys, besides their swelling and shrinking as the atmos- phere changes, soon loosen, and the continual dri- ving of them up rapidly wears them out. The spikes break, the screw bolts either snap off or have eir thread stripped—and the keys of the cotter bolts become bent and broken from driving them up. The tight fitting clamp chair either breaks.or

wears loose in its lips, In short, no ing. can be applied at tbis point halts hayes oot

to stand, all'are rejected, and the railis.

and where, in despair of getting any contrivance nailed down upon the sleeper, the latter is,soon


| | |


deeply indented and rapidly worn away by the bars it s , These are of course most cvocdtabie in the lines of heavy traffic, and some

time in use. Upon the trunk line between

omy : _— ‘if 1842, the clatarie ts deaf when aver & in 1648, the Saivend of bars

ving become loose in their fit, from the wear of six or seven years, and on the same line large re- newals of had then, and are now, annually

taking place chiefly in consequence of the effect u n the ends of e bars of the blows received

essing the previous modes of fastening joints the form of rail is su to be one of the only two sections now n America, the T or Hi and the p or ae rail, each with a broad base, supporting itself. The plain T rail, or the double rail, (I) requiring a chair to support it at

every bearing, have been loag since discarded here —the latter indeed was never used in the United States, and I believe less in England now than for- merly—the bridge rail mags | to be, at present, the favorite pattern there. All that is said of the joints of the H and 4 rails, is, however, fully ap- plicable to the other sections. The tracks laid some twelve ago, in the United States, with the T rail, held in a chair by keys, became, before they ‘were superseded by another form of rail, the rough- est and most dangerous railways ever travelled over. A ge over them was indeed terrifying

‘at last, although when first laid down they were

‘pretty smooth, (vide the Columbia, the New Jer- sey, and the Eastern railroads before their recon- struction.) Not having had the good fortune, as baa Mad be wafted over an English railway, the un-

igned has no personal experience in regard to them—but he knows that they are subject to the same evil which he has described as affecting our American roads—and although the great attention paid in England to the adjustments of the track, together with the superior ease and comfort of most of the English first class carriages, and the fact that passengers are confined to the inside ot the cars, with the windows closed, during the jour- ney, and not allowed, as here, to stand at times up- on the outer platiorms; although these circum- stances have prevented travellers from noticing the shock and noise in passing the joints, it cer- tainly must and does exist, as is testitied by obser- vant persons who have travelled upon the rail- “ye of England.

t should be mentioned, while speaking af the difficulties of maintaining the joints of a track, that the endwise movement of the rail, under the blow of the wheel, is one of the most prominent.— The bars are not all operated on alike by this cause, and consequently, some being pushed far- ther than others, the operings at the joints become irregular, some being closed entirely, and others widely open. This movement of the rail is a very

us one, and unless watched, would soon

force the rails quite out of their chairs, especially

be sce double lines of railway, where the movement

the trains, on each track, is always in the same direction.

The evils have been now, perhaps, sufficiently descanted upon, and we will proceed to speak of their es pe

Instead of making the rails in solid or single bars, laid end to end, it is proposed to make them or gemerg to form the cross section of the

—these parts breaking joint with each other, and held together by rivets, so as to form, in effect, a continuous bar of compound structure—being as near an @ ch to an unbroken line of iron as it is physically possible to make. The necessity of providing for contraction and expansion, and for Tepairs to those ofthe rail, which, from the unavoidable inequalities in the texture of the met- al, will require to be renewed at different times, manifestly renders the welding of the bars togeth- er, at their ends, imoracticable We must then

the y of the iron into parts, which ma nk and dilate, and be removed or replaced independently of each other; and the question is, how this division of the mass shall be effected ?—

‘Hitherto it has been by simply cutting off the line at intervals—the mischiefs

of which mode have shown. The other mode, now proj ed, is to divide the mass not only cross but

pos-| bar, and the faste’

longitudinally—that is, not only in length but in odd, making the several parts, resulting from this sectional division, unite at different points in the length of the line—so that the wheel will al- ways be sustained by thé full strength of one por- tion of the rail, while paeing over the gap occa- sioned by the division of another portion. It is, in short, nothing more than the application of the “break joint” principle to rails, so long recogniz- ed, and so successfully used ih carpentry and fra- ming of every kind, and, indeed, in the railway itself by those who a the continuous bearing timber, to the cross sleeper or the stone block. By this division of the bar, a portion of its extreme length is relinquished, the compound bar being, at its strongest point, somewhat weaker than the sol- id bar, in the middle of its length. But as the max- imum of strength is less:in the compound bar, so the minimum is much greater, and thus that ap- proach to uniformity of strength is effected, which is the desideratum ; a structure presenting an al- ternation of very strong and very weak points, be- ing of all others the worst. It has been said, that the compound bar is somewhat weaker in its strong- est point, (which would be the point midway be- tween any two contiguous joints,) than the single bar in the middle of its length. But the difference would be less considerable than might be supposed. [ judge from an experiment made with a com- pound bar, of 50 Ibs. per yard, and a solid bar of similar weight, but of the bridge pattern. Thetwo bars with a clear bearing of three feet, and under a strain of three tons, applied to the middle of their lengths, exhibited the same deflection, although the compound bar had one of its joints, (in one of the under sections,) between the bearings. I do not quote the experiment as conclusive. It was but a single one, and may have been under the influence of some circumstance, not observed, which gave too favorable a result for the compound bar. But while conceding fully, that theie is a reduction of the maximum of strength, the more than corres- ponding increase in the minimum, already claim- ed for the composite rail, is an invaluable acquisi- tion. The loss of extreme strength, is, however, not the only objection that might naturally be urg- ed against the compound rail, and, if that com- ony principle has been already thought of in ngland, its roe application has been proba- bly prevented by the objection now to be mentioned. I refer to the supposed difficulty of connecting, in a substantial and satisfactory manner, the parts in- to which the bar is divided, so as to make them hold well together without shaking, or working, or breaking, or looseness of any kind, and so, also, as to permit them, at the same time, to yield freely to the effect of changes of temperature. In reflecting upon the subject, I am strongly impressed with the superiority of the compound principle, as to feel amazed that it has not, long ago, been adopted, and can only account for the fact that it has not, by this last consideration, which, I confess, operated awhile upon my own mind, so as to make me in the outset, not entirely confident of success in in- troducing the composite rail. My professional friends, indeed, nearly all hung back at first upon this ground—admitting that the idea in the abstract was a happy one; but fearing its defeat by the su posed impossibility of holding the parts property together. Nothing short of experimental demon-

| stration would be satisfactory in this, more than

in other cases. The fact that the fundamental principles, involved in the structure of the rail, were altogether in favor of what was aimed at, did not seem to me to make a dueimpression. Be- cause the tastenings, by which it was attempted to connect the solid bars at their ends, failed to per- form their intended functions, so must thej attach- ments of the compound bar! But, the distinction in the two cases, consists simply in the prevalence in the two plans of two opposite principles; in the solid rail the principle of concentration, and in the compound rail the principle of diffusion. In the former, the whole shock experienced in passing the point of separation of the bars, is concentrated at one point, the single joint—in the latter, the one t shock is divided into two or three very much esser shocks, and tnus is diffused with a greatly diminished gio over the whole le: of the gs being also similarly dis-

persed along the bar, the scattered and softened


concussions are effectually resisted by them, It would be difficult, indéed impracticable, to com- pare the different momenta of the mass which ex-

riences these shocks, in the cases of the two

inds of bars, as to do so, with precision, it would be necessary to know exactly the relative spaces through which the wheel of the carriage would fall, in passing the single joint of the solid bar, and the two or three joints of the compound bar. There can, however, be no doubt that the sum ot the mo- menta, in the latter case, would fall much within the single momentum in the former case, and that, therefore, the carriage and the rail would sustain much less injury from the shocks occurring in pas- sing over the compound bar.

But, leaving the mathematics of the matter, I will go to the more practical views to be taken of the subject, and to the light which the experience, which has happily been obtained, casts thereon. I have thus far discussed the of the com- pound rail in the general, and without reference to uy of the various forms it may assume. But I will now say, that notwithstanding the tardiness with which most of the engineers of this country, to whom the improvement has been submitted, have seemed disposed to yield their assent to its value, there is a growing feeling in its favor, suffi- ciently evinced, by the fact, that there have been already no less than four different forms ot com- pound rail, proposed by various parties connected with the making or management of railways. Of these several forms, three are double rails, com- posed of two parts, with splicing pieces at the joints, and the fourth, suggested by myself, consists of three parts, without other splicing. Now, if we admit that the composit rail is, in the abstract, the best form, we have then to choose between the pos- sible varieties of this form, that may be suggested. The reflection given by the undersigned to this se- lection, has led him toa preference of three parts, to any other number of parts, for the combination —although, if there were no other alternative, he would take the rail of two parts in preference to the single rail. It is sufficieutly evident that there would be no temptation to increase the number of parts to more than three.

lt is not proposed tu djscuss, in detail, the rela- tive merits of the three forms of two part rail above indicated. Their suggestion sufficiently shows the tendency, of professional opinion, in this country, on the general subject. Were I compelled to choose between the three rails, I would take the simplest and most symmetrical of them. But over any form ofrail composed of two parts only, I con- sider the one of three parts possesses the following advantages: Ist. The rail at its weakest point, will possess nearly two-thirds of the strength of solid bar, while the two part rail cannot, (indepen- dently of the splice, which could as well be applied to the rail of three parts,) have more than half its tull strength at that point. 2nd. The pressure of the wheel is communicatad to each half ot the base of the rail more e oa through the cap or third part of the rail. 3d. This cap, by means of the dove-tailed rib upon its under side, adjusts the bear- ing rails so as to bring their tops always to the same plane, and many an inequality in their height is seen at their bottoms only, where it is of the least importance, 4th. The cap rail so connects the bearing rail by hanging them, as it were, upon each other, by means of the entrance of the lips of the latter, into the side grooves in the bottom rib of the former, as to apply no cross strain to the con- necting rivet, which is not the case with the two eb rails, unless by a tongue and groove in the

alves of the two part rail running their whole length, the bolt may be also relieved of cross strains or a filling-in piece, occupying the hollow . of the rail, would produce the same relief, provided it were possible to make the tongue and groove or the filling in piece, fit every where with precision. This, however, is impracticable, and hence, the advantage of the dove-tail rit, which, when the bearing rails are drawn together by the rivet, ad- justs the bearing of all the parts in contact, upon each other. 5th. The cap rail being separable from the bearing rails, may be removed and re- placed independently of them, and as the entire wear takes place upon the cap, which would never constitute more than from 4 to } of the entire rail, the remaining $ or 2 contained in the bearing rails,


may be regarded as enduring in perpetuity, ‘I'his roperty may, indeed, be realized to sme extent, jn a rail composed of two parts; but not to an equal degree—for in any two part rail, the upper or cap rail would, of necessity, have to bear a much lar- er proportion to the whole rail, in order to give it ly sufficient to ensure asafe connection with the bottom part. In the three part rail, the cap may be made as light as is consistent with its wear- ing well. 1 do not, however, after much reflection upon the forms of a two part rail, divided horizontally, perceive how a satisfactory and per- manent connection between the upper and lower halves can be effected, as the dependence must be be the resistance of the rivets, (or bolts or keys if substituted for rivets,) to a strain—which they cannot resist long, but will soon wear loose if they do not break.

An advantage may be claimed for the two part rail, in the feature which always presents (when the bar is divided vertically) an unbroken surface for one half of its breadth, to the tread of the wheel, while the cap of the three part rail is divided en- tirely across. It must, however, be recollected that if there is any inequality in the surface at the joints—the shock given tothe wheel will be the same whether this inequality occupies the half or the whole breadth of the bar; and it must not be forgotten that where the joint of the cap of the three part rail occurs, there is nojoint in the two bearing rails underneath.

It is obvious, th&t if there be a sufficient advan- tage in filling the hollow of the rail with wood or iron, it can be done in the rail of the three parts as well as, or better, than in that of two—but I doubt the utility of such an addition to the combination, which would be rendered more expensive and com-

lex thereby, without, probably, a corresponding improvement in the strength or stability of the structure. If wood, however, be introduced, it should be seasoned so as to shrink as little as pos- sible, and if protected against decay, by the kyan or other analogous process, it would be all the bet- ter. It should then be shaped to the section of the cavity, and made very slightly larger than that, so that when the rivets were inserted, they would, in shrinking, draw the bearing rails together, and the cap rail downwards, so tightly as to compress the wood both horizontally and vertically, and thus produce a very close fit in allthe parts of the com- bination. It will be apparent that a filling-in piece of iron or a tongue and groove, could as well be applied to the three part as to the two part rail— butI prefer depending on the self-adjusting action of the cap rail for the connection of the parts of the system. I think I have now discussed the subject upon theoretical principles at sufficient, and per- haps unnecessary length, and will give a brief statement of such facts relating to it, as are in my


It is upwards of four years since; after several previous years’ reflection upon the feasibility of constructing a track entirely of iron, without wood or stone supports, the form of compound rail of three parts, exhibited in the drawings hereto at- tached, suggested itself to me. I had, more than three years ago, an experimental piece of track, 200 feet in length, constructed of cast iron, and laid in the yard of the station at Mount Clare, in the environs of Baltimore. The cap rail, as well as the bearing rails, were of cast iron. The weight of ee was 17} and each bearing rail 42—total of the three 101} lbs. per yard. So were the cross ties of cast iron, and they weighed 37 lbs. each, and were 10 feet apart. The whole was held to- gether by screw bolts, 4 inch diameter, and two feet apart. The track was laid upon sand ballast, without any supportof any kind. 1t has been ever since daily passed over by the heaviest trains that come at slow speed into the yard, and has receiv- ed scarcely any attention in the way of adjustment. Yet it has held together perfectly, and although the cap rails, which were very light, and, like the rails, cast in length of 20 feet long, have crumbled down at the edge, as cast iron always wili under the. tread of railway carriage wheels, but one or two of the bearing rails have broken and but one cross tie. The success of this track en-

‘me to look to the general poe neers of the principle in rolled iron, to rails of any weight over 50 lbs, per yard, and with or without supports

of timber—as tHe size and weight of rail might make necessary. As I commenced with what I then considered the maximum of weight about 100 lbs. per yard, in th. rail, I make the next trial with the assumed maximum, = 50 lbs. per yard;) having anopportunity of getting the rail rolled in the neighborhood of Baltimore, I had enough made to lay a section of 600 feet, and afterwards other sections of 200; 900, and 4500 feet, upon different points of the line. It was laid upon cross sleepers alone, placed about 24 feet from centre to centre, and 7% feet long, and 5x6 inches in section. The ballast, broken stone and gravel. <A part of the first section was fastened by bolts, 4 inch in diam- eter, the remainder was rivetted. The bolts held very well, but required some occasional attention to make sure that they were tight. The rivets needed no such attention, and were, consequently preferable. The cap rails were prevented from moving endwise by small key plates put through the neck of the rib, and with their ends fitting in- to noches, cut in the tops of the bearing rails. For the manner in which these experimental sections of track have worn, and how they have carried the trade and travel, for different times, during the last year and a-half,I refer tothe accompanying copies of certificates, signed by various officers of the Bal- timore and Ohio railroad company. I need add notning more than to say, that every additional month which goes by, —_ adds to the favor in which the new track is held Wy those who have charge of it, or travel over it. I am, therefore, en- abled to appeal to that authority from which there is no further appeal—experience, and that acquired under circumstances so little favorable to the new track, that the argument is entirely a fortiori, when we reason about the results of future trials under more suitable conditions, for success.

In figure 1, of drawing appended, I have assum- ed a rail of maximum weight, with a view of its being laid directly on the ballast, without wood or other support. I consider this entirely admissible, on general principles, and as having been also tested by the experience of the iron track laid at the Mount Clare station, as already mentioned. The bearing surface of each line of rail upon the ballast is 8 inches in width, which is the same with that of the wood and iron track of the Baltimore and, Ohio railroad, the substructure of which con- sists of a longitudinal timber under each rail but 8 inches wide—while the iron track I propose, has vastly more strength and stiffness, and thus diffuses the pressure on the ballast much more lengthwise than the other. This consideration of longitudinal diffusion of pressure is not generally attended to sufficiently. If you havetwo tracks of equal bear- ing surface on the ballast, but one of which is twice as well connected and stiff as the other, you have virtually double the bearing surface on the former. If we compare the bearing surface of dif- ferent tracks, we find that they vary a good deal. In America, in tracks of 4 feet 84 inch guage, laid on cross sleepers only—there are generally 6 sleep- ers of 7} feet long, by about 7 inches wide, allowed to every 15 feet. This gives 1} square feet of bearing surface per linear foot of track. The tracks laid with longitudinal timbers are few in number here ; but their bearing surface per linear foot is from 14 to 2 square feet. In England larger pro- vision is made for bearing surface, and it seems generally to range from 24 to 3 square feet per lin- ear toot. It may be questioned how far we should go in increasing the surface, as the more extensive it is the more difficult and imperfect is the operation of packing under it. In this view I should prefer a very stiff rail with small bearing, to a flexible rail with a large bearing—and if I am right in “se that the rail of the model I pe. pose is nearly or quite twice as stiff as any of the strongest rails in use, (at least at andin the neigh- borhood of their joints) then my rail would be in effect, as well supported by the ballast as the others. It should in this connection also be noticed that the bearing surface of a track is effective in proportion toits proximity to the line of the rail—and thus the bearing obtained by lacy ees ams timbers is really worth more a_good deal than that of cross sleepers. The London and North-western, has 3 square feet perfoot run. The Great Southern and Western of Ireland has 3 4—the first is a 4 feet 84 inch

guage, the second 5 feet3, The Great Western of

and | third

land has uare feet per foot, andis of 7 be » The Midland Great Western of Irelaz Cot 5 feet 3 guage) has 2 7-12 square feet per foot.

he two first are laid. only on cross slsaperasine ird upon longitudinals, and the fourth upon a sombination the two, These lan have been obtiained from the July (1849) number of the Civil Engineer and Architects’ Journal, wherein is an article on the subject of ‘‘ Permanen' Way”—of which I shall presently make further use, and which seems to have been prepared and —- very opportunely for the present purpose. this article, the author, Mr. Dockray, proposes an improved track for the London and North-west- ern road, as the result of the investigations recent- -y made by him, under the instructions of his - pany, into the subject of Permanent Way” wi a view to the removal of the admitted defects ex- isting in their own and other roads. His report is a very interesting paper and is confirmatory of all the views I have expressed in relation to the faults of the present system of railway construction. The Se np plan which he proposes is a good one ; perhaps as good a combination of wood and iron as could be suggested: but it is a combination of two materials so different in their properties that they cannot be made to act in harmony with each other. All the changes which they undergo are different in their nature and degrees. While hot weather shrinks the wood, it swells the iron—and while damp weather swells the wood, it does not affect the iron. The wood is soft while the iron is hard, and flexible while the iron is stiff—conse- quently the weak points of the iron cannot be strengthened by the strong points of the wood, so as to effect a perfect compensation. The effect of these diversities in the materials will always in- evitably be to disarrange and ultimately to destroy the combination. On the other hand, the iron track is perfect within itself as a system and de- pends for a support only upon the ballast on which it rests, and which constitutes no element in the combination. And even if wood is interposed be- tween the iron and the ballast, it is in the way. of a rest only and not as a part of the system of the track.

(From the ‘London Railway Journal, for Nov. 1850) Remarks upon THE Cost oF Repairs or Loco- MOTIVE ENGiNes. (Written Jan. 1849.) Continued from page 82.

{ consider that with the above named hard. work an engine would require, at least, a new set of tubes every two years, or 60,000 miles} and a new fire-box, say at the end of every four years.t We have, therefore, todebit our engine with the cost of two new: fire-boxes in the ten years, and four sets of new tubes, viz: a set at the end of the se- cond, fourth, sixth, and eighth years, the last set of which would keep her going till the end of the tenth year, when we have assumed she sold. The account will then stand thus:—

2d. per mile upon 300,000 miles.......... Deduct 4 sets of tubes, ....

ve vv £12006 2 new fire-boxes,............ 360

£1560 Less by credit of old tubes...... £280)| . of fire-boxes,..... 180 —— 460 —_—— 1100 £1400

+ Few tubes do run this distance even with the best of coke.

¢ A new tube plate is sometimes introduced. as)a temporary relief to fire-boxes, but considering the expense of taking out and-putting in, 1 think it the best economy to renew the whole box, as we have the old metal to our credit, and a really good job cannot be made of staying the sides of an old box the second time. :

§ Tubes are taken at the’ set of 200-in number, 11 feet 6 inches long, and twe inches outside diam- eter. These will cost at least 28s. per tube) de- livered at the company’s works, and. [ allow £20 per set for ferrules and putting in. Newofire-boxes are assumed at 26 cwt. of copper, at 1ld.. perdb.

making and || Old tubes are taken at one-fourth their original

the amount allowed for repairs of engine and der for ten aad Having 2 balance of only £1400 for general purposes. A moment's ctnsider-

ation of the costliness of many other specific items, viz. wheels and axles of ne and tender, cylinders, pistons, &c., besides the innumerable smaller matters which are involved in a thorough repair, tosay nothing of a due share of general charges, will render the utter inadequacy of the above sum too palpable to require any comment.** I will, therefore, (still giving her credit for do the above extreme amount of work, say 300, miles,) assume that 24d. per mile be allowed for repairs during ten years ; Prat she have a thorough every two years for eight years, and at the end of ten years she is to be offered for sale. The account in this case will stand as follows:

24d. per mile upon 300,000 miles....... £3125 Dr. fico bones ani tubes, as before.... 1100


Now, supposing that she actually runs twenty months at a time, and at the end of each period has a thorough repair, it will be necessary in the division of the above sum of £2025, to vote £100 or thereabouts, to be expended during each period of running for casualities.*

Taking a low allowance, let us say for the ten years This leaves a balance of +1600 to be divided into four thorough repairs for engine and tender, and at the end of the last two years she is to be unhooked fom her last load, drop. her fire and be offered for sale. If a purchaser be found at all, she might probably fetch £400, ,certainly not more,t and I appeal to any man experienced in such things, whether, after her great amount of work done and limited allowance for repairs, the above sum be not a handsome one.

Assuming this to be the result of ten years’ work at an allowance of. 24d. per mile for repairs, our account will stand thus:—

By sale of old engine.... ..0... 0+. seeeseee Reserve required of 14d. per mile beyond cur-

rent expenditure on 300,000 miles......... 187 Assumad bank interest on accumulating re-

serve fund at 2} per cent.t......


value, viz. half price, less diminution of weight of 33 per cent. or more, and the expense of taking out

back carriage. Old fire-boxes allowed half their original cost.

{ General indoor charges include stationary en- gine for driving machinery, repairs to machinery, tools, and buildings; rates, superintendence, fore- men and clerks, gas, &c.

** It is evident that, even if kept alive at all, she would work at a great sacrifice of power, &c., and be utterly unsaleable at last.

+t Be it remembered that being now, as it were, “used up,” any purchaser would be necessitated to out an extravagant sum to make her avail- able.

* These casualties are the ordinary small jobs which each working engine requires, and must have done, and for which the average time of one day per week is allowed. I have taken no account of serious accidents, which the whole world knows are often very expensive, and which must continue to occur occasionally to the end of time. I consi- der that the expenses of a serious accident to any one —— should be put to the account of ge- neral charges,” and Le proportionately borne by all. All are liable to-accidents, and all should help to relieve.

tI say this from having had some experience in the sale of worn out engines, and it is not unlike- ly she might have to wait many months before such a sum, or even a less sum, could be got for


¢ I fear few companies would be found to have been so prudent as to take advantage of this inte- rest on accumulating money.

Required to pay for the new engine which is to succeed the a on the Ist Jarf. 1859.

We therefore see that, under the most favorable circumstances,a sum of 4d. per mile must one way or other be nn open if old engines are to be periodically replaced by new pobery 9 or a,gross cost of £5000, taking advantage of interest on ac- cumulating money.

It being evident, therefore, that, with an extreme amount of mileage, a current charge must inevit- ably be made on revenue of at least 4d. per mile run, ifthe renewing system be adopted, let us see the demand on our revenue under the circumstan- ces, supposing it were our intention to maintain the same engine, and have her fully repaired and ready to commence a second ten years work on the 1st of January, 1859. “The specific