254 DISCUSSION ON 
As a rule iron bark was the best timber to use, but in some 
parts red gum or even white box, which were very durable timbers 
might be employed with advantage. For the cheapest class of 
line there was no objection to a rough sleeper shaped like a fencing 
post but stouter, in place of a rectangular one. These would be 
much cheaper as they could be obtained in some parts of the 
country at the rate of about two shillings each delivered, in others 
they would cost more on account of carriage. The quantity of 
ballast the author mentions would no doubt be quite enough at 
the outset. He himself had proposed to use for this class of line 
one thousand two hundred cubic yards per mile, which did not 
differ much from the author’s quantity. The depth under the 
sleepers would be three inches, but this would have to be added 
to afterwards. In any case it would not be advisable to lay the 
ballast direct on the ground as had often been advocated. Such 
a practice would be contrary to all sound experience in railway 
or road making, as the formation required draining and it would 
only get into a state of bog unless a low embankment, even if 
only a few inches in depth was thrown up. He mentioned this 
because it had actually been proposed to lay the ballast on the 
surface over the plains in this country. Those who knew the 
black soil would never have suggested such a method. 
In country where the surface of the ground could be strictly — 
adhered to the cost of such a line would be about £2,000 per mile. 
He would be sorry to say a word which might lead anyone to 
think he would advocate the adoption ofa different gauge, but he 
thought that the disadvantage of a break of gauge had sometimes 
been overstated. There might be circumstances when it would 
be better to risk the difficulties and inconvenience likely to arise 
after twenty years, than not to have a railway at all. He was 
strongly of opinion however that to make any extension or branch 
of the present system on any other gauge than the standard one ~ 
would be a fatal mistake. In those parts of the country where 
light railways, that is cheap railways, were applicable there would 
be little necessity for curves sharper than, or even as sharp as 
