comparatively useless. Instead of this, is it not better to have a thing that you could easily renew, in the shape of a movable steel rail with an equal bearing and efficient attachment to a permanent longitudinal sleeper?

Mr. HEWSON: I should just like to point out, that the first cost of these works is not, I think, the true basis of comparison as to their cheapness. In judging whether a steel rail is or is not too expensive, compared with an ordinary wrought rail, you must have regard to the probable annual expenditure upon the two systems.

Mr. PLATT: There is one point, I do not know whether it is in the knowledge of the Members present that the North Staffordshire trams, which I believe are laid on the Vignoles system, have been found unequal to steam traction. At a meeting of the shareholders not long since there was a considerable amount of discussion and complaint that the lines had not been laid in such a way as to be suitable for steam traction. That is the great point to be borne in mind, especially in a system like this. You must get a good strong rail and a good foundation. It is a question of annual expense, after the first cost, especially as the Company has to keep the rails in order.

Mr. SPENCER: You, Sir, appear to be anxious to pass on to the next paper, which is a purely sanitary matter. But it must not be forgotten that besides being a society of sanitary engineers, we are a society of municipal engineers, and the question of trams is one which, if it does not affect every one present, certainly will affect the engineer of every local board throughout the country in time to come. Therefore it is to us a question equally important with sanitary matters. I have no wish to detain the meeting on this subject unnecessarily, but it is such an important one that at the risk of curtailing a little of the discussion on sanitary matters, which come up at every meeting we hold, I think a little discussion on this point will be useful with regard to the construction of trams. I observe that in this case you do use tie-rods. Now Mr. Gowan, whose rail, I hear, you are using, has lately been constructing trams without any tie-rods whatever; that is to say, he simply lays a rail on a strip of concrete without tie-rods at all. That is found to be equal to every requirement that arises. The weight of the rails, 93 lb. a yard, is a most important element. The continuous-girder system of rails is one which will be found to be absolutely necessary in my humble opinion (hear, hear). For any tram which may hereafter be constructed for steam power, any system of upper rails,

which may be taken off the bearing underneath, and any system on which steam is to be used that is dependent upon screws and bolts, when steam power becomes universal, as it is certain to, will be found to be inadequate. And so far as I can judge, the only system of rails which will be equal to the emergencies required of them is the continuous-girder system, everything of uniform and equal bearing through the whole system (hear, hear). Another very important question arises regarding the trams of the future. Is say future advisedly, as distinguished from what I may call the detached system of the trams of the past. That is the gauge. I think it is most unfortunate that a difference has arisen in the gauge of the particular trams that you have described. When trams were first commenced in this country it was thought earnestly that they were only necessary and would only be required, in the large cities and towns. If that were the case the gauge was practically an unimportant matter, because every town might adopt its own gauge, whatever that might be, at its discretion. But recent events have shown us that the development of trams is more to link all our towns and districts together, than merely to go through the crowded streets of any large city. That being so, it naturally tends towards uniformity of gauge. Now the 3 feet 6 inch gauge, I believe, is equal to every requirement so far as safety is concerned. But we have the 4 feet 8 inch gauge already adopted in most of the large towns and cities,—with the exception of the district of Birmingham, which has a great many lines under the 3 feet 6 inch gauge, practically every city throughout the country. Out of the 70 or 80 trams which at present exist, only about 20 have, I think, narrow gauge; the remainder have the 4 feet 8 inch gauge. The mileage, however, gives even a larger proportion than this. The mileage of 4 feet 8 inch tramways in the United Kingdom, speaking in round numbers, is something like 600 miles. The mileage of trams at a less gauge is about 220 miles. Then take again the applications to the Board of Trade and to Parliament during the present session. You will find,

out of between 50 and 60 applications, that 32 are on the 4 feet 8 inch gauge, and about 20 on a less gauge. But when you come to look further into it you will find that the proportion of mileage applications for the present session is about the same as the existing tramways throughout the country in the ratio of 5 to 2. You will then see that events at present point in favour of the 4 feet 8 inch gauge, and therefore this question of gauge is one which is

of the greatest importance to us as representatives of the various municipal authorities throughout the country. I think that a great inconvenience will be found from the indiscriminate introduction of fancy gauges, suited to the ideas of the individual engineer who happens to project the tramway. The mere question of cost is not sufficient advantage to the companies to warrant them in disjointing and disorganising the whole tramway system in the county or district. You have perhaps a saving of 2007. or 3007. a mile in the paving by adopting the narrow gauge, but I believe it will be found in the future that the uniform gauge will be 4 feet 8 inches. Of course we are bound to that gauge in consequence of its having been already adopted in so many large towns, and, as I say, in the proportion of 5 to 2 in the mileage. Therefore 4 feet 8 inches naturally tends to be the gauge which must be adopted throughout the country. I would just remark, before I sit down, on the question of motive power. The Wilkinson engine I believe to be a very good one, and on the trams on which I am at present engaged as engineer I have them now in progress, and hope to have them at work within the next two months. But I may just mention, as a guide to any engineer who has this question before his authority, that there is a very good type of engine now working at Dusseldorf. In this engine there is no fire in the motor, and it runs with a total absence of smoke and fumes. The cost of coal is to some extent saved. Of course coal has to be used in generating the steam at the central boiler, but at the trial-or rather I should not say trial, because it is running in the town of Dusseldorf in the ordinary way, on the tramways there-when I saw it the engine was charged with sufficient steam to carry it the whole journey of 7 miles out and 7 miles back. That is a journey of 14 miles. Now, if you can charge an engine with steam or superheated water sufficient to carry it for 14 miles, that is practically all that can possibly be required. I do not myself give any very strong opinion, because any gentleman here, who has an important tramway on hand, either as representing a company or as representing his own authority, can go to Dusseldorf and see it. There it is running regularly. The steam being taken from the stationary boiler, there is no smoke, and no fume from the water. I would recommend every Member of the Association to give his attention to that class of motor, which is one which is very likely to do away with many objections on the part of the town authorities.

Mr. MCKIE: I should like to say a word or two about the gauge, rather in favour of the 4 feet 8 inch gauge. That is the ordinary gauge of railways, and as that gauge of rail was adopted previously from the gauge of the old coaches, it naturally fits into the ordinary vehicles that run along ordinary roads more than any other gauge. The consequence of that is that when a tram is constructed 4 feet 8 inches in width, ordinary vehicles, when the car is not on the line, take to the line without doing it any damage and without doing the road any damage. If the gauge is less the majority of vehicles might take the tram-lines on the near side rail, and one wheel would be on the line while the other would be making a groove in the macadam. Of course, in a road which is paved right across from channel to channel, it does not make much difference, but where the tramways are laid in a macadam road it is a very serious cost to the ratepayers. Where a 4 feet 8 inch line is used there is no bother. The vehicles take the two lines, and there are very little repairs on the road. That does not make much difference to a company, where the lines belong to a company, but when the road and the lines belong to a corporation, then the repairs are very heavy. With regard to the cost of the rail, that struck me when I first saw it as being a very expensive item. No doubt the first cost of the tramway is a very serious consideration, and if that cost can be reduced by a small alteration in the pattern of the rail-simply a reduction in the cost of rolling-I think that ought certainly to be considered very carefully before deciding on the design of the rail. The mere alteration of the pattern would reduce the cost down from over 97. to something like 67., and it is certainly a question whether that could not be saved. I would just point out that the weight of the rail, 93 lb., is much heavier than even the heaviest rail used on railways. The majority of the main line of railways are about 80 lb. a yard, steel rails carrying engines 40 and 50 tons, and it seems to me rather an excessive weight for the rail of a tram, which is only for carrying light passenger traffic, to be 93 lb. On the other hand the wide flange of the rail, if imbedded in the concrete, would require no other fastening but fish-plates to make a good firm tramway, and would reduce the number of articles and the labour in laying the rails to the minimum.

:

Mr. ESCOTT In walking down from the Rochdale station this morning I noticed that the road was rather steep, and I believe that when the line gets to the bottom of Drake Street it leaves the

main street and goes along on the low level. Is that on account of the street opposite being too narrow, or on account of the gradient?

Mr. PLATT: The gradient of Drake Street is 1 in 16.

Mr. SPINKS: Have you tried the system of the Surveyor of Manchester, putting asphalte under the rail? The Manchester trams, everybody knows, are on a continuous sleeper, and when you ride inside them they are very noisy. There had been a suggestion that the City Surveyor should put down the lines on this pattern-a 14-inch base of concrete, instead of continuously across the road, and pull up the setts in between the rails.

Mr. VAWSER: As engineer for this line I am glad to find it excites sufficient interest to cause a little discussion. We usually devote our time at these meetings to sanitary matters, and I thought really to make this subject subordinate to the sanitary work, and only mentioned it incidentally to create a little additional interest. But if I had been aware that the Members would take so much interest in it, I would have given a much fuller description of it at the commencement. With reference to the questions that have been asked, you all know that the first cost of a tramway is a small matter compared with the future working cost and maintenance of it, and in this instance it has been thought advisable to consider the ultimate cost of repairs rather than the first cost. In constructing this work therefore, the most substantial form of rail has been adopted. I think I said before that the Barrow Steel and Iron Company is the only establishment that has laid itself out to roll this class of tramway rails, and although it has cost the Tramway Company a very great deal more money to put in this class of rail, they have preferred to do so rather than be saddled with additional cost for repairs hereafter. In dealing with steam traction we knew that whatever else was done we must have a continuous bearing for the rails, and consequently many types of tramway rails that have been adopted elsewhere were unsuitable for us. We were therefore somewhat limited in our choice from the first, but when we came to investigate the matter closely, and look to the various advantages claimed for each type of rail, we found the advantages the Gowan rail offered fully counterbalanced the additional cost it involved, because with steel at its present price, it costs only a small sum per mile more than other types of rail; that is to say, the Gowan rail constructed entirely of steel, as you see it on the drawing, costs at the present time very little