702 REPORT OP NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1889. 



with 58 miles of railroad, the track was laid with compound or continuous iron rail 

 riveted together. I have not a drawing of this rail, hut you are doubtless familiar with 

 the design. The rail was rudely similar to the present "J" rail divided in half vertically 

 through the weh, and these two halves riveted together broken jointed, so that the 

 end of one half rail did not come at the end of auother half rail. This made an 

 excellent track for the time heing, as the reports show, and indeed it was a very ex- 

 pensive track, for the rail weighed some 72 pouuds per yard and cost some $70 to $75 

 per ton. This compouud rail, however, soon began to show its defects, which I need 

 hardly explain here, and some two years later, when the Chicago, Burlington and 

 Quiucy by consolidation with the Central Military Tract Railroad became an im- 

 portant road with 138 miles of track, the X ra *il was adopted as standard and laid 

 with cast-iron chairs at the joints. Wrought-iron chairs I find were also used to a 

 limited extent at this time. 



In 1862 the construction of the road from Aurora to Chicago, a distance of 35 miles, 

 was beguu, and for this purpose 3,500 tons of "the best quality iron rail were pur- 

 chased of the Cambria Iron Company, of Pennsylvania, at a price of $65 per ton 

 delivered at Chicago." 



The chief engineer, in his report for that year, says that the compound rail was 

 being removed from track as rapidly as possible, and being replaced with new and 

 rerolled iron T rails of the ordinary pattern. These T rails had a maximum length 

 of 21 feet. 



In 18G4 the general use of fish-plates, a flat piece of iron fitting close to the web of 

 the rail between the head and the base, was. adopted. The chief engineer in his 

 report for that year says "the fish-joint splices make a smoother track, less liable 

 to get out of repair, and cost less than the ordinary rubber chair." This allusion to 

 the "rubber chair" rather puzzles me. I do not understand whether a piece of rubber 

 was introduced into the bottom of the ordinary cast-iron chair to obviate the trouble 

 from noise and stop the rattling, or not; but I presume that this was the case. At 

 this time quite a large proportion of the rail laid in each year was rerolled iron rail, 

 and I find that the cost of rerolliug amounted to over $35 per ton at Chicago, and a 

 good deal moie than that in 1865 and 1866, on account of the high prices for labor 

 and material following the war period. 



In the summer of 1867, 3 miles of experimental steel rails were laid in different 

 places in Illinois where they would receive very severe service. I can not learn the 

 exact section or weight per yard of this rail ; but, from what I can learn, I imagine 

 that the rail weighed between 56 and 60 pouuds per yard, and was very similar in 

 design to tbe old 60-pouud rail, shown in print No. 1, which I send you. This rail 

 was laid with fish-plates similar to the then recent practice with iron rails, and as 

 in the case of iron rails, it was laid with "supported" or " on-tie" joints, the ends 

 of the rails being notched to admit of spiking at that point and prevent the rail from 

 creeping. The first experience with this rail was not altogether favorable. Of 3 

 miles of track laid, seven rails broke in the first year; in each case, however, the 

 chief engineer tells us, where the holes in the splice bars had been punched instead 

 of drilled. In the next two years, however, there were no breakages and in 1870 it 

 was decided to adopt steel as standard for main track renewals or new construction. 

 During the year 72 miles of steel rails were laid, which with the 6 miles already in 

 track made 78 miles of steel rail out of 302 miles then in operation. The road then 

 consisted of a line from Chicago to East Burlington aud from Galeshurg to Quincy. 

 The steel rail then used was substantially the rail shown in blue print No. 1, which 

 I send you, with a plain fish-plate and not the angle-bar, which was adopted in later 

 years. 



In 1875 or 1876 an angle-bar was adopted for this rail, and this was slightly modi- 

 fied in 1879. This provided for a "supported " or " on-tie" joint. The only difficulty 

 with it was that the slot near the center of the angle bar was frequent cause for 

 breakage at that point. In 1879, therefore, the 66-pound rail for a suspended joint 

 was designed and made the standard. 



