JULY 24, 1902] 
NATURE 
297 
the probable effect of the proposed new railways in 
relieving the congested London traffic. It will be | 
understood that it is assumed in the following article that | 
the Bills which have passed the House of Lords will also | 
pass through the Commons without any modifications | 
of the first importance. In all, no less than twenty- | 
four different Bills have come before Parliament this 
session relating to electric railways in London; of 
these eighteen were for new railways or extensions of 
which proposed to run the new line as a “circle” in 
conjunction with their existing route. This Bill was, 
however, rejected, the successful competitor being the 
London United Railways, which, working with the 
| London United Tramways and the Piccadilly and City 
and North-East London Railways, will provide a through 
route from the extreme west to the north-east of London. 
From the map which we publish in illustration of this 
article, the references to different railways will b2 easily 
understood. For the data for this map we are largely 
authorised routes, one was for power to run an existing | 
steam railway electrically, and the remaining five for 
extension of time for construction. 
| indebted to the excellent maps published from time to 
The extension of | time in the Electrician. 
It shows only those lines the 
time was in all cases granted, but it seems that the | construction of which has been authorised (or which are 
Na, HIGHGATE 
HAMPSTEAD 
‘ 
- 
=e on an ray ne 
WILLESDEN 
AKILBURN 
N 5 = - 
PADDINGTON 
SHEPHERDS 
4, 2. 
Bus eae 
<= x A 
zi \Genens =, 
g Pe oe a 
re 
a 
a? 
fur 
<—— e* 
O7sTR! 
ot 
~ 
| wacnam Green 
“BALTERSENS 
cal < 
a. 
a. 
BATTERSEA,<&° 
ngt 
Capes CLAPHAM 
Maeicliorn 
ie 
PUTNEY i 
| 
number of instances in which it was applied for had a 
notable effect on the decisions of the Committees with 
regard to other schemes. For it was the difficulty in 
extension of time necessary, and, as a result, where new 
railways were promoted the Committees required evidence 
that the promotion was financially well’ backed before 
sanctioning the lines. Of the eighteen Bills for new 
railways, many were directly in competition for the same 
route, so that it was inevitable that some should be re- 
jected. Thus there were three different companies pro- 
moting Bills for a railway connecting Hammersmith with 
the city, one of these being the Central London Railway, 
NO. 1708, VOL. 66] 
| “tubes.” 
— 
. 
i 
On S| 
HIGHBURY 
DALSTON 
10 Finspury Par 
os 
N te 
oom ie HAGGERSTON 
. 
CLERKENWELL 
ey Hi ebeane _-B- 
a ECHAPEL 
UL -~ 
ge ool Sigs eit ‘BOW RLY 
SHOREDITCH 
THE ELECTRIC RAILWAYS 
in London. 
RAILWAYS in OPERATION ..-- 
» under CONSTRUCTIOL 
n AUTHORISED .-- 
Steam Railways, being converted, with StOH ONS. == WB-= = 
Generating Stations - @ Main line Termint: 
in operation), and a different system of drawing has been 
adopted to indicate which railways are working, which 
under construction and which merely authorised. The 
raising the necessary capital which made application for | engineering details, so far as they are yet decided, showa 
remarkable uniformity, resulting partly from the decisions 
ofthe Board of Trade, the Vibration Committee, &c., which 
have recently been given in connection with different 
difficulties arising in the construction and working of 
“tube” railways. Most of the new railways will be 
The Hampstead-Edgware line, which is to be 
about 6 miles long, is to run in the open; it forms a con- 
tinuation of the Charing Cross, Euston and Hampstead 
Railway shown on the map; so also will a few miles of 
