Minimum Gauge Railways

by bart. Sir Arthur Percival Heywood

It would be well that our railway engineers should inform themselves more fully on the subject, as otherwise their valuable assistance, which would insure that narrow-gauge railways were constructed in a solid and reliable manner, will be thrust on one side by the requirements of the times, and the work will be wholly in the hands of the many manufacturers of narrow-gauge plant, whose designs, being chiefly of what is known as the portable class, are, for the most part, ill adapted for permanent locomotive traffic. If so, it is likely that, in the push that may very possibly be presently made for secondary railways, the results will not be so satisfactory as would be the case if the work were carried out under the direction of professional advisers.

Under the same head, attention may be directed to the fact that it is entirely unnecessary to urge the adoption of a standard narrow gauge. The circumstances of each case will decide the most suitable gauge, and it is only where there is a possibility, as in the North Wales district, of a wide ramification of connected narrow-gauge lines that the adoption of a particular standard is of any importance.

I am, Sir, your obedient servant,

ARTHUR PERCIVAL HEYWOOD.

B.

The annexed letter, published in The Times about two years ago, deals with possible difficulties to be met with by those who make a private line of railway. I brought to bear all the influence I could to obtain the insertion of a clause in the Act which would meet the “public road crossing” difficulty, but without success. The course which I took in the case of the Eaton Railway here detailed may be of service.

PRIVATE LIGHT RAILWAYS.
TO THE EDITOR OF “THE TIMES.”

Sir,—May I, through your columns, draw attention to a class of light railway which does not apparently come within the purview of the Bill now before Parliament—that of lines constructed by private individuals or firms for their own purposes? These will usually confer advantage upon the district in which they may be situate by relieving the roads of a more or less heavy traffic, and in some cases by offering facilities of transport to a section of the neighbourhood.

In a proposed route two difficulties may arise. In the first place, land not in possession of the projector may have to be invaded, and way-leaves obtained by a judicious tact in selecting the ground and in approaching the owners, since private interest is properly debarred from invoking compulsory powers. This problem, then, may frequently be satisfactorily solved. The second and more common impediment is the crossing or skirting of highways, and it is to this point that my letter is specially directed. The county and district councils are usually ready in their own interest to permit a private line to cross a road on the level—an over or under bridge is almost invariably impossible by reason of the expense—or to make use for a short distance of waste space by the road side. But—and here is the crux—no permanent agreement is obtainable, because councils have apparently no power to bind their successors in office, and without such guarantee the projector is naturally unwilling to risk his capital when the possible rescinding of the concession would render his entire outlay abortive.

The Light Railway Bill contains, apparently, no provision under which this disability can be remedied, for it is improbable that the Commissioners would take action in respect of a private concern. The above difficulty was lately met with in the construction of a private narrow-gauge line for the Duke of Westminster, which crosses a main road. The matter was ultimately compromised by the insertion of a clause in the agreement to the effect that, should the county council give notice to discontinue the crossing, the Duke should be entitled to appeal to the Board of Trade for arbitration. There is, however, no assurance that the Board would consent to appoint an arbitrator if called upon, but it is very certain that if a provision legalizing such an appeal could be incorporated in the Bill a serious hardship would be thereby removed, and some encouragement given to private persons to embark capital in enterprises of the kind.