TRIUMPH OF MODERN RAILWAYS 353 



introduced at KiUingworth Colliery. Goods traffic only was at 

 first undertaken by the railway company. The conveyance of 

 passengers was left to private entraprise ; coaches drawn by one 

 horse ran over the rails, on payment of stipulated tolls, at intervals 

 when the goods trains were not running. It was not till 183^ that 

 the Companybought out the coach proprietors, and, a year later, 

 issued notices that they proposed to provide not only carriages for 

 goods, but " coaches " for the conveyance of passengers, drawn by 

 steam locomotives. 



Before this final stage was reached in the County of Durham, 

 the Liverpool and Manchester Railway had been opened (1830). 

 The project of the proposed fine originated in dissatisfaction with 

 the cost and delay of canaH;ransport. It was directly designed not 

 to feed but to rival the water way, and to break down a monopoly 

 in the carriage of heavy goods. Canal comjDanies aU over the country 

 became ahve toTEeir danger. So strong was the opposition that 

 the first BiU was defeated. A second Bill was introduced, and passed 

 in 1826. Like the Stockton and Darhngton Company, the projectors 

 hesitated over the choice of motive power. They were still undecided 

 when the new Kne was approaching completion. To solve the 

 problem they offered a premium of £500 for the best locomotive 

 engine which should satisfy certain conditions. It was not to exceed 

 £550 in price and six tons in weight ; it was also to draw three 

 times its own weight, at a speed of ten miles an hour on level ground, 

 The famous RainhiU trial (October 8, 1829), when Stephenson's 

 Rocket won the prize, sealed the fate of canals and inaugurated the 

 triumph of railways. Without their aid the modern organisation 

 of industry would have been impossible. The fac tory, the modem 

 farm, and the railway went hand in hand in development, and were 

 not dissimilar in their economic results. 



With the ground thus prepared for a new start, but in gloom and 

 depression, agriculturists entered on the new reign. In comparing 

 agriculture in 1837 with that of 1912, the most striking feature is 

 the general level of excellence which now pre_vails. If we leave on 

 one side the achievements of chemical science and the triumphs of 

 mechanical invention, there are few improvements in the methods 

 and practices of agriculture which had not been anticipated by 

 individuals seventy years ago. But the knowledge which was then, 

 at the most, confined to one or two men in a county is now generally 

 practised. The best farmers of that day could not have explained 



