a 
’ « 
. * 
238 DISCUSSION ON 
Mr. RENNICK was satisfied that narrow gauge railways for 
a national system would be a mistake. This was exemplified in 
America, where much money had been spent in converting the 
narrow gauge into the standard. In India, also, the metric 
gauge had not been a success. The capacity of a railway might 
be measured by the gauge, all other things being equal; thus, in 
coping with a certain amount of traffic, the capacity of a five feet 
three inches gauge to a three feet six inches gauge would be sixty- 
three to forty-two. For small traffic the effect would not be felt, 
but when the the traffic was fully developed the difference became 
very perceptible. The greater the number of trains required for 
a certain volume of traffic, the greater the working expenses 
would be, consequently any little saving in the construction of a 
narrow gauge line, would soon be more than balanced by the in- 
creased working expenses. Advocates of the narrow gauge seemed 
to overlook the fact that light rails and light rolling stock could 
be used as readily on standard as on narrow gauge lines, and 
would do more work because they would be better supported. In 
any ordinary country the increased cost of standard over narrow 
gauge lines would not be more than five or six percent. Certainly 
sharper curves could be used on narrow gauge lines, but the num- 
ber of places that it would be economical to adopt the sharpest 
curves possible would be but few, and would be a small proportion 
of the total cost. In America, curves as sharp as two hundred 
or three hundred feet radius were frequently adopted in rough 
country, and no difficulty was found in running over them, even 
with eight-wheeled coupled engines. So far as he was aware, 
curves sharper than that were never adopted for any gauge roads. 
In Australia, five chain radius curves were the sharpest in use. 
He considered that everywhere but in the most difficult country | 
the standard construction should be adhered to, the rails to be 
not less than sixty pounds, minimum curves ten chains, and grades 
of one in thirty, where necessary, to keep down the cost, and 
eight-wheeled coupled engines should be used for freight trains. 
In very difficult country, such as North Gippsland, it would be 
