XLVI. C. O. BURGE. 



The objections to the mono-rail (which ought really to 

 be called the penta-rail, as there five rails to each road), 

 as exemplified in the Manchester and Liverpool scheme, 

 seem to me, to be, as under : — 



First — Great expense in construction. 



Second — Practical difficulties in loading each side of the 

 car equally, without which unequal friction will take place 

 in working of guide wheels, leading to the next objection, 

 viz. 



Third — Dangerous interruption of contact between guide 

 wheels and side rails, and recontact at high speed, which 

 may not be effectively prevented by the springs. 



Fourth — Effect of centrifugal force on passengers with 

 omnibus seating. 



Fifth — Danger to workmen caught between the rails by 

 passing cars. • 



Sixth — Slack at one end of sleeper leading to dangerous 

 horizontal sinuosity in the bearing rail. 



Seventh — Unprecedented speed of chain gearing at nearly 

 2,000 feet per minute, double the maximum usually in 

 operation with similar gearing, probably dangerous, cer- 

 tainly noisy. 



Eighth — Costly maintenance. 



Notwithstanding that some of these objections were put 

 before the Committees, they passed the bill, guarding it, 

 however, with more stringent conditions than is usual with 

 railway bills, as to submission of plans etc., for approval 

 of the Board of Trade. The company have got an amend- 

 ing bill through Parliament this session as regards a small 

 deviation, and as a contract has been entered into for 

 construction, it is probable that the line will be shortly 

 commenced, and, though I have little faith in it myself, it 

 will be certainly interesting to watch its future. 



