SEPTEMBER, 1900. 



The usual monthly meeting of the 

 'Royal Society of Tasmania was held on 

 Monday at the Museum, Argy'e-street. 

 The Administrator of the Government. 

 Sir John Dodds, presided. 



LIGHT RAILWAyS FOR TASMANIA. 



A discussion took place on a paper pr3- 

 viousily read by Mr. G. E. Moore, M.I. 

 C.E., on "A system of light railways foi' 



Hon. C. H. Grant, M.L.C., said he did 

 not quite agree with all Mr. Moore s 

 views. With regard to his classification, 

 he thought it was somewhat artificial. 

 He thought the classification ought to 

 be one oi railways, irrespective of the 

 gauge, and that the term "standard" 

 should not be used. In Spain, the 

 gauge, was 9ft. 9in., and in Canada it 

 was 5ft. 6in., and these were thn stan- 

 dards in those countries ; 3ft. Gin. was 

 the gauge in South Africa, and in seve- 

 ral of the Australian colonies, including 

 Tasmania. There was a 3ft. 3in. gauge 

 prevalent on the Continent of Europe, 

 and it was also in use in India. The 

 term "standard" was only applicable to 

 localities. Steam tramways, he thought, 

 ought to be dealt with apart from rail- 

 ways. There were several steam tram- 

 ways on the West Coast, though Mr. 

 Moore seemed to say there were none 

 in this colony. Light railways could be 

 made important feeders of main lines, 

 and he preferred them to steam tram- 

 ways (which were not much cheaper) be- 

 cause they saved break of gauge. Mr. 

 Moore surprised him by his estimate of 

 the cost of transhipment. In Franc" 

 it was 4d. a ton, and here it would ' e 

 6d. or 7d. Light railways recommended 

 themselves if managers were not afraid 

 to manage them. The gradients and 

 curves, of course, ought to fit the na- 

 ture of the country, and they ought to 

 be worked with light engines, and at 

 low speed. The maintenance ought to 

 be in proportion to its capital cost. He 

 should very much prefer to see the rail- 

 way system of this colony extended by 

 light railways, and these improved as 

 time went on, and necessity arose. En- 

 gineers had acted on this principle, but 

 the managers, influenced by the public, 

 made the lines do more work than the 

 engineers had intended. Mr. Moore 

 spoke of people being rated along the 



line. That was tried in the Western 

 railway, but no politician would revert 

 to such a system. He preferred privat? 

 to State ownership of railways. In other 

 countries private enterprise had done 

 more for the community in the matter 

 of railways than the State. Tramways 

 should be devoted to special objects, and 

 the North-East Dundas "tramway" he 

 regarded as a railway. He urged that 

 special attention should be paid +o 

 surveys, and thus months of construction 

 might be saved. 



Mr. J. Fincham agreed with much that 

 Mr. Grant had said. The term "b'ghi" 

 railway was one of relative significance. 

 He did not like the word "light," because 

 it suggested flimsiness. "Light traffic rail- 

 way" would, perhaps, be more accurate. 

 The total cost of the Tas-manian railways 

 compared favourably with the cost of 

 the railways on the mainland of a cor- 

 responding character. To Mr. Nicholas 

 Brown was due the credit of having first 

 suggested the making of light railways 

 in Tasmania. But the system was op 

 posed by managers and others, and rail- 

 ways of a normal character were made. 

 He spoke disapprovingly of over-build- 

 ing for a limited traffic, and warmly ad- 

 vocated the making of light pioneer and 

 feeder lines (not suckers) at a minimum 

 cost. _He spoke of the conditions un- 

 der which a break of gauge might bo 

 made, and_ suggested how expense on 

 stations might be reduced. He esti- 

 mated the Tight lines, such as he advo- 

 cated, could te made at half the cost 

 of normal lines. All future develop- 

 ments of the railway system here ought 

 to be made with single goods lines, such 

 as he had spoken of. 



Mr. C. B. Target said there was the 

 question of making a railway by Go- 

 vernment agency, instead of by a com- 

 pany, involving a saving in directors' 

 fees and in the superior staff ; also a Go- 

 vernment could obtain money at a lower 

 rate than a company, and by employ- 

 ing small contractors, who would be paid 

 only for what they did, the speculative 

 profits, on risks, of a large contractor 

 would be eliminated. He gave examples 

 of the cost of companies' work compared 

 wi+h Government work in India. 



Mr. G. E. Moore replied to some of 

 the comments made. He said he was 

 glad that, in the main, the speakers 



