Up to this point I have merely detailed the particulars of the construction of my experimental railway and of the line at Eaton, giving at the same time the reasons that have led me to adopt certain methods and designs. I now propose, in conclusion, to offer a few remarks upon the application, in this country and abroad, of small railways of 2 ft. gauge and under to do work at present done by means of horses and carts.

The cases in which such lines can be profitably applied may be classed under two heads; the one, where, in a country possessing ports or a system of railways, large establishments, private, public, or industrial, might be connected therewith by a narrow gauge line so as to reduce the cost of transport below that which has to be paid for haulage by animal power on roads; the other, when no roads worthy of the name are available, and the choice is a light railway or nothing. The chief condition of success in both cases is a sufficient traffic between two or more definite points. Military railways, however, must be regarded from a somewhat different standpoint, as the object here is to supply a movable centre as expeditiously as possible with the vast commissariat requirements of an army rather than to study economy. It is not my intention to enter into the pros and cons of small railways for war purposes. Suffice it to say that some countries are ahead of us in the matter, which is one that has, in England, been allowed to drop rather into the background.

Returning to the consideration of cases where a fairly large traffic has to be delivered to a port or railway system, the first question that arises is that of transhipment. Material of any kind can be as effectively delivered on ship-board by narrow gauge railway wagons as by horses and carts, if not better. In reckoning up the cost of transhipment from small wagons on to a railway system—no great matter with proper appliances—it must not be lost sight of that, even if a branch of standard gauge were constructed to many establishments, the large wagons cannot, as a rule, be got up to the point where the material lies, and a preliminary transference in barrows or carts is necessary. With the little wagons it is usually possible to get right up to the place and to load direct, in which case there is clearly no additional expense incurred. It is, further, often forgotten that there is on the standard railways endless transhipment for the sake of economical transport, in no way connected with a break of gauge.

Again, a small line can be carried round curves, up gradients, and through confined premises, where a wider line would be inadmissible. In many places the unsightliness of the standard gauge would be objected to, nor can such a line be made very light if it has to carry, as it must, the 7 or 8 tons per axle of a full sized coal wagon (see Appendix A).

The narrow gauge has also the advantage in first cost, and by bringing the small wagons on to a level with the floors of the large ones, or, in the case of minerals, by erecting a simple shoot, the transhipment difficulty may be reduced to a minimum.

It is not well to have gradients steeper than 1 in 40 where avoidable, as difficulty will be experienced in slippery weather; but it is quite possible with suitable engines to work inclines of moderate length, as steep as 1 in 12. The diminution of the power of the locomotive on gradients is also a matter for consideration, the importance of which will be clear when it is stated that if an engine will haul, as it should, in addition to itself, ten times its own weight on the level, it will haul, speaking roughly, only four times its weight up 1 in 50, twice its weight up 1 in 25, and once its weight up 1 in 12. More work can be done if adhesion does not fail, but the above is an approximate working average.

The speed on small lines is not generally a matter of much moment, owing to their usually moderate length. A locomotive that is sufficiently powerful to start a given load, will without difficulty get it along at from 8 to 10 miles an hour. It has occurred to me that a very fair approximation to the reasonable running speed of which any gauge is capable is to be found in estimating that the speed of passenger trains is equal to as many miles per hour as the gauge is inches wide, and, for goods trains, to half that amount.

The permanent way should be made a thoroughly sound job, as it will then cost but little for repairs. Particulars of what is recommended will be found in Sections III. and IV. I am no advocate of portable railways, which may be well enough for hand trains, or even for horse traction, but a locomotive requires a solid and clean road if it is to work to advantage.

It is often possible to carry a narrow gauge railway by the roadside or, as at Eaton, over pasture lands without the necessity of fencing the line in. Fences can be crossed as described in Sections III. and IV., so long as arable land is avoided. Where the route is not wholly the property of the projector of the railway, the requisite way-leave may frequently be leased by paying an annual acknowledgment of from 3d. to 6d. per yard run.It now remains to show what traffic is required in order that a line of this description may repay the outlay upon it. This may best be effected by drawing a comparison between the cost of locomotive traction on rails and horse traction on roads. The cost of loading and unloading will not be included, as these are the same in both cases. (See also Section IV.)

Taking the minimum distance apart of two points, between which haulage may be supposed to be required, as one mile, the smallest and cheapest gauge as 15 in., and allowing 2,000 yds. to the mile so as to include the necessary sidings, the cost of the line will be as follows:—

If laid with pitch pine sleepers a reduction of about £100 per mile would be effected, the cost of renewal being correspondingly increased.

The engine would be capable of hauling a gross load, exclusive of its own weight, of 12 tons up a gradient of 1 in 50, which may be taken as a fair ruling gradient for a surface line. This would be equal to an average paying load of about 8 tons; so that, supposing the engine to make one trip per hour, about 60 tons would be moved per day; although, with a double set of wagons and men, 100 tons would easily be handled.

If the engine worked two days a week, or say 100 days per annum, it would have hauled 6,000 tons one mile in the year. A less load hauled on the return journeys need not be taken into account, as this would make no difference in the comparison, such work being practically done without extra cost in both cases.

The cost of the line per annum would be as follows:—

This is equal to about 11d. per ton. Now the same haulage by horses and carts in Great Britain would usually cost about 1s. 3d. per ton, and in this case there is the advantage of being able to haul, if necessary, in other directions if required, which would somewhat reduce the financial advantage of the railway, but still leave it a distinct superiority.

It is probable that a traffic of 5,000 tons annually over a mile of line is the smallest amount that would repay the construction of a narrow gauge railway, for the estimate has been based upon the narrowest line which can profitably be employed. If the line were longer, the balance in its favour would be greater. This would also be the case if the traffic were greater, and with the maximum amount which the line, using only one, but a larger engine, could accommodate, say 40,000 tons, the concern would be very profitable, for the extra charge for renewals would not be heavy, and the cost per ton carried would be reduced to about 5d. or 6d.

No allowance has been made for way leaves or purchase of land. Should there be outlay under these heads, the cost of transport would be increased accordingly.

In concluding these comparisons, in which it may be thought that the railway is shown in a less attractive light than might have been expected from an enthusiast, I may explain that I am no advocate of ill considered schemes, planned without proper knowledge, cheaply constructed, and carelessly worked. My figures represent thoroughly sound and serviceable plant, kept in good repair. If it is not worth while to go to such expense, then it is not worth while to construct a railway at all. I have been fortunate enough to work my line for twenty years without the slightest injury to a single person of the many thousands that have been carried as invited guests for pleasure, as visitors interested in my experiments, or as workmen on the premises. None of the rolling stock has sustained more than the most trivial damage; and derailments, beyond an occasional mishap in shunting, are unknown. The working of the Eaton line has been equally satisfactory. This immunity from accident I attribute entirely to proper care having been taken to construct every part, not only of the best materials and workmanship, but also with a careful eye to the fitness of each detail for the purpose it has to serve.

That there are many openings for lines of 2 ft. gauge and under, is beyond dispute. But while, already, this mode of transport is largely made use of abroad and in our colonies, a deeply rooted prejudice has hitherto prevented it from gaining a footing in England and Scotland.

Admirable articles pointing out the advantages of light railways have appeared from time to time in the daily press with little or no effect. It is one of the strangest anomalies in the progress of civilisation in this country that Great Britain almost wholly refused till lately to countenance such lines. The reasons for this obstinacy are not readily discoverable. Probably the innate conservatism of every Englishman—for there exists here no such thing as liberalism out of the region of politics—has been the principal factor in determining this course of inaction.

Even now that the Light Railway Act has passed, there is little or no movement in the direction of making small lines such as I refer to, and not much in respect of larger ones. Whether, in the future, private individuals will, in their own interest and in that of their neighbours and dependents, lay out money in this way, it is impossible to foresee. But undoubtedly there are many openings for such installations, particularly on large estates, where the possession of the land gives the owner a free hand.