Category Archives: The Railway Magazine

Uniformity of Gauge in Australia – A Case for 3ft 6in Gauge (Queensland) – The Railway Magazine, November 1899

Victoria’s and South Australia’s railways were 5ft 3in broad gauge. New South Wales’ railways were standard-gauge, Queensland’s were 3ft 6in gauge. And, as of 1899, the authorities were in no sense inclined to yield up their gauge to progress. [1: p417]

Perhaps we need a review of the historical context. Wikipedia provides a narrative which aids in understanding why Australia ended up with three different railway gauges.

“In 1845, a Royal Commission on Railway Gauges in the United Kingdom was formed to report on the desirability for a uniform gauge. As a result, the Regulating the Gauge of Railways Act 1846 was passed which prescribed the use of 4 ft 8 1⁄2 in (1,435 mm) in England, Scotland and Wales (with the exception of the Great Western Railway) and 5 ft 3 in (1,600 mm) in Ireland. … In 1846, Australian newspapers discussed the break of gauge problem in the United Kingdom, especially for defence [and] in 1847, South Australia adopted the 4 ft 8 1⁄2 in gauge as law.” [5]

“In 1848, the Governor of New South Wales, Charles Fitzroy, was advised by the Secretary of State for the Colonies in London, Earl Grey, that one uniform gauge should be adopted in Australia, this being the British standard 4 ft 8+1⁄2 in gauge. The recommendation was adopted by the then three colonies.[10][11][12] Grey notes in his letter that South Australia has already adopted this gauge.” [5] As at that time, Victoria and Queensland were part of New South Wales. It would seem as though this instruction should have settled the question of a suitable railway gauge for the Australian continent. However, communication with the UK took anything between 2 1⁄2 and 7 months before the installation of the Australian Overland Telegraph Line and under-sea cable communications in 1872 and debate over matters of consequence could be very protracted. In 1850, the NSW legislature sought a change of gauge to match the Irish standard gauge of 5 ft 3 in (1,600 mm). This was endorsed by the NSW Governor, and Colonial Secretary Earl Grey in London. That agreement was confirmed in 1851. In the meantime, a new engineer, James Wallace, was appointed by the railway company. He preferred the British standard gauge. “The government was persuaded to make the change back to 4 ft 8 1⁄2 in and in January 1853 they advised the company that the Act requiring 5ft 3in (1,600mm) would be repealed.” [5]

In February 1853, the other colonies (Victoria having separated from New South Wales in 1851) were sent a memorandum advising them of the pending change and it was recommended they likewise adopt 4 ft 8 1⁄2 in. IIn Victoria, the colonial government decided that it preferred the 5 ft 3 in (1,600 mm) gauge and an order for locomotives and rolling-stock was and placed.land communicated to suppliers in the UK.

“In July 1853, the Government of Victoria advised New South Wales that it would use the broader gauge and later appealed to the British Government to force a reversal of New South Wales’ decision. Subsequently, the Melbourne and Hobson’s Bay Railway Company opened the first railway in Australia in 1854, as a 5ft 3in (1600mm) a broad gauge line, and the South Australian Railways used the same gauge on its first steam-hauled railway in 1856.” [5]

Despite a request by the Secretary of State for the Colonies to reconsider the alteration to standard-gauge, in 1855, “the NSW Governor William Denison gave the go-ahead for the 4 ft 8 1⁄2 in Sydney to Parramatta railway, which opened in September of that year. … Concerns over the gauge difference began to be raised almost immediately. At a Select Committee called in Victoria in September 1853, a representative of the railway company which had not replied to Charles La Trobe’s earlier memorandum, reported a preference for 5 ft 3 in (1,600 mm), but when asked if Victoria should follow NSW he answered: ‘We must, I conclude of necessity, do so’. In 1857, the NSW railway engineer John Whitton suggested that the short length of railway then operating in New South Wales be altered from 4 ft 8 1⁄2 in gauge to 5 ft 3 in (1,600 mm) to conform with Victoria but, despite being supported by the NSW Railway Administration, he was ignored.” [5] At that time, there were only 23 miles (37 km) of track, four engines and assorted rolling-stock on the railway. “However, by 1889, New South Wales, under engineer Whitton, had built almost 1,950 miles (3,500 km) of standard gauge line.” [5][6: p186]

The problem was exacerbated when Queensland Railways opened their first line in 1865. They chose a narrow gauge, 3 ft 6 in (1,067 mm), on the supposition that it would be constructed more cheaply, faster and on tighter curves than the wider gauges. This line, between Ipswich and Grandchester, was the first narrow gauge main line in the world.

“South Australia first adopted this gauge in 1867 with its line from Port Wakefield to Hoyleton. The main reasons for choosing this were reduced cost, and the expectation that the narrow gauge would never connect to broad gauge lines. ‘Overbuilt’ English railways were criticised. The Wakefield line was also envisaged as a horse-drawn tramway. … Later narrow gauge lines went towards Broken Hill and to Oodnadatta and from Mount Gambier.” [5]

The Western Australian Government Railways adopted the narrow-gauge in 1879 for its first line from Geraldton to Northampton. [6: p186}]

“The Tasmanian Government Railways opened its first railway from Launceston to Deloraine in 1871 using 5 ft 3 in (1,600 mm) broad gauge, but converted to 3 ft 6 in (1,067 mm) narrow gauge in 1888.” [5][6: p186]

Queensland Railways train at Spring Bluff Station [1: p420]

Spring Bluff Railway Station in 2024. Spring Bluff is best known for its heritage listed Railway Station, in the Spring Bluff valley tucked into the ranges north of Toowoomba. Spring Bluff Railway State is a favourite day trip for visitors, with the landscaped gardens and steam train rides attracting thousands for the spring exhibit during Toowoomba Carnival of Flowers. [14]

“South Australia first adopted this gauge in 1867 with its line from Port Wakefield to Hoyleton. The main reasons for choosing this were reduced cost, and the expectation that the narrow gauge would never connect to broad gauge lines. ‘Overbuilt’ English railways were criticised. The Wakefield line was also envisaged as a horse-drawn tramway. … Later narrow gauge lines went towards Broken Hill and to Oodnadatta and from Mount Gambier.” [5]

The Western Australian Government Railways adopted the narrow-gauge in 1879 for its first line from Geraldton to Northampton. [6: p186}]

“The Tasmanian Government Railways opened its first railway from Launceston to Deloraine in 1871 using 5 ft 3 in (1,600 mm) broad gauge, but converted to 3 ft 6 in (1,067 mm) narrow gauge in 1888.” [5][6: p186]

The exterior of Brisbane Railway Station. [1: p148]

A view of the central portion of Brisbane Railway Station in June 2020, © Kgbo, and licenced for reuse under a Creative Commons Licence (CC BY-SA 4.0). [3]

“Until the 1880s, the gauge issue was not a major problem, as there were no connections between the separate systems. The focus of railway traffic was movement from the hinterland to the ports and cities on the coast, so governments were not concerned about the future need for either inter-city passenger or freight services. It was not until 1883 when the broad and standard gauge lines from Melbourne and Sydney met at Albury, and in 1888, narrow and standard gauge from Brisbane and Sydney met at Wallangarra that the break of gauge became an issue.” [5]

“The issue of rail gauge was mentioned in an 1889 military defence report authored by British army officer Major General James Bevan Edwards, who said that the full benefit of the railways would not be attained until a uniform gauge was established. Until the turn of the 20th century, the benefits of a uniform gauge were not immediately apparent, since passengers had to pass through customs and immigration at the intercolonial border, meaning that all goods would have to be removed for customs inspection. It was only with [the anticipation of] Federation in 1901 and its introduction of free trade between the states that the impediment of different gauges became apparent.” [5]

The November 1899 edition of The Railway Magazine engaged in the discussion with the first of a series of three articles on the subject.

Indooroopilly Girder Bridge, Queensland Railway. [1: p417]

The Indooroopilly Railway Bridge is still.in use in the 21st century. It now sits alongside a road toll-bridge. The railway bridge is undergoing refurbishment which started in 2022 and which is due to be completed by 2025. Eptec Services have been engaged to do the refurbishment work which will involve cleaning, sandblasting and repainting the bridge structure which is made up of steelwork fabricated in Italy. [15]

“All the aspirants for State rights and an Australian nationhood not unnaturally contend that the respective gauges now in use within their territorial boundaries are well adapted for their own requirements in the proposed Commonwealth.” [1: p417] So starts the first in a series of articles in The Railway Magazine (November 1899).

Despite the evidence tendered to those debating the formation of the new Commonwealth of Australia by accredited railway experts, the unification of railway gauges was “ultimately dropped as being beyond the grasp of Conventional solution.” [1: p418]

By 1897, the deliberations of the working group set up to address the difficulties brought about by the different gauges, resulted in a recommendation to their respective governments that the New South Wales standard-gauge be adopted at a probable cost of £2,400,000 to bring all of the colonies into line. (A better estimate of the cost, according to The Railway Magazine would be a minimum of £8,000,000). [1: p418]

Perhaps in the light of the expenditure involved in unifying the different gauges, the same working group met again in late 1898 to look at “several ingenious mechanical contrivances to overcome the break of gauge difficulties … [but these proposals] were deemed inadequate to the requirements of the proposed Commonwealth’s railway system.” [1: p418] The meeting endorsed the decision of 1897 with one dissenting voice, that of the Queensland representative, Mr R.J. Gray who reaffirmed his commitment to the 3ft 6in gauge.

In an article written in 1897, Gray’s deputy, Mr J.F. Thallon had indicated that no common gauge would, at that time, be agreed between the different jurisdictions. He proved “most clearly that the narrow gauge [had] been more cheaply constructed, worked and maintained than either the 4 ft. 8 1⁄2in. or 5 ft. 3 in., and that in Queensland, where the 3 it. 6 in. gauge [had] been adopted, the people [had] lower fares and freights than in New South Wales or Victoria; also, that the narrow gauge [was] capable of earning a revenue four times as great as the [then] present revenue of the Victorian railways and [was] therefore the best and cheapest gauge for a progressive Queensland.” [1: p418-419]

‘Rebus’ commented that “it will be readily admitted by all … that a uniform gauge throughout Australia would be a decided advantage. That need not be discussed, but a very pertinent question, if an alteration is to be made, is ‘Which is the best gauge for Australia?’ It is not the cost of conversion only we have to consider, but the extension of railways in the future, and the annual expenditure that will fall upon the generations yet to come. It is not a question of having one gauge from Brisbane to Sydney, or from Sydney to Melbourne, leaving the other lines in Queensland the same gauge as at present. Such a scheme would only perpetuate and intensify the evil, seeing that the traffic between Darling Downs and Gymple, Bundaberg, would all have to be transhipped in Brisbane. If a break of gauge is to remain anywhere, it could not be better placed than at Wallangarra, where there is little traffic. If a change of gauge is to be made it must … be complete, and include one and the same gauge for all Australia. Some have suggested a third rail between certain points, but the proposal cannot be treated seriously. To lay down a third rail in Queensland would cost more than to alter the gauge, and it would be much less satisfactory to all concerned.” [1: p419]

Wallangarra Railway Station at the end of the 19th century. [1: p419]

Wallangarra Railway Station, Queensland Platform in May 2008, © Cgoodwin and licenced for reuse under a Creative Commons Licence (CC BY-SA 3.0). [4]

He continues: “The cost of converting the Australian railways to one uniform gauge, whichever be adopted, would be stupendous, involving, as it would, the absolute necessity of discarding and replacing enormous quantities. of rolling-stock, as well as the reconstruction of the permanent way of the converted lines. So far as mileage is concerned, the 3 ft. 6 in. gauge already almost equals (and adding extensions now in progress in Queensland and Western Australia, will quite equal) the other two put together.” [1: p419-420]

By 1899, the lengths of each gauge open to public traffic were: 3ft 6in gauge, 5,280 miles; 5ft 3in gauge, 3,615 miles; and 4 f. 8 1⁄2in gauge, 2,531 miles. It was obvious to ‘Rebus’ that “to convert all lines to the 3 ft. 6 in. gauge would cost the community less in money, in time, and in public inconvenience than to adopt either of the other two. To alter the 4 ft. 8 1⁄2in. to 5 ft. 3 in. (which is the next important as regards mileage) would not be attended with insuperable difficulties, and it would have one substantial advantage, viz., that the rolling-stock of the 4 ft. 8 1⁄2in. gauge could be readily disposed of, whereas the 5 ft. 3 in. rolling-stock, if discarded would be a comparative drug on the market; but 5 ft. 3 in. as the uniform gauge would be decidedly objectionable, seeing it [was] all but obsolete. The question, so far as Australia [was] concerned, therefore reduces itself to 4 ft. 8 1⁄2in. or 3 ft. 6 in.” [1: p420]

Roma Street Yard, Brisbane, Queensland Railways. [1: p421]

Roma Street yards in the 1970s, © Robin Barron, 1975. [16]

Roma Street Station in 1983, prior to its refurbishment, This file is made available by its copyright holder under the Creative Commons Public Domain Mark 1.0. [17]

Roma Street Station in the 21st century. [18]

‘Rebus’ goes on to review how the different gauges compared with each other in regard to cost of construction, revenue and expenditure, rates, fares, etc. He used the average expenditure of previous years to estimate the cost of construction and equipment: New South Wales had by that time spent £37 million on its railways, an average cost of £14,560/mile; Victoria had spent over £38 million on its railways, an average cost of £12,206/mile; Queensland had spent over £17 million on the miles of its network, £6,947/mile. He argued that it was vital to minimise cost of construction as the interest burden on each of the colonies was at about 50% of all expenditure!

A view of the Blackhole Range from the North Coast Branch, Queensland Railways.[1: p423]

Bundook on the North Coast Branch in 2008 © Grahame, and licenced for reuse under a Creative Commons Licence (CC BY-SA 4.0). [20]

Whilst, the cost burden of government borrowing was a significant argument. ‘Rebus’ seems to ignore the great advantages of increased speed and loading capacity available to networks of the wider gauges. Perhaps this was not so apparent at the end of the 19th century as it would become in later generations. It is clear that, in ‘Rebus” world, speed is of little value, cost is seemingly far more significant, perhaps this is indicative of the predominant concern being the transport of imperishable goods, rather than passengers or perishable goods.

‘Rebus’ goes on to argue that the cost per head of population was not particularly relevant but it was “very much the same in all three colonies, ranging from £29 in New South Wales to£36 in Queensland.” [1: p421-422] The length of railway per head of population was perhaps of greater significance – close to 28 ft in Queensland; 10 1⁄2ft in New South Wales; and 14 ft in Victoria! ‘Rebus’ argues that it was important to keep this disparity in mind when comparing the relative merits of different gauges, “because it is length of railway, not width, which is required to open up and develop the resources of Australia.” [1: p422]

He further argued that if the cost of servicing loans, the cost of maintenance and working expenses were aggregated, then “the New South Wales railways must earn a gross revenue of about £1,200 per mile in order to pay their way, Victoria £984, and Queensland £563. Taking the latest published returns, New South Wales earned £1,114 per mile, Victoria £769, and Queensland £483. In this respect,” he said, “the colonies of Australia [were] far behind other colonies where a uniform gauge of 3ft 6in is in operation.” [1: p422]

‘Rebus’ provides this table to allow a comparison of the percentage of net earnings to capital spent. [1: p422]

In the table above it can be seen that the return on investment in the two colonies in South Africa was significantly higher than all the networks in Australia and New Zealand. ‘Rebus’ pointed out that narrow-gauge lines could live with much lower traffic levels than the wider gauges of New South Wales and Victoria.

Of some interest may be the comparative figures ‘Rebus’ provides for revenue per head of population. The figures in Australia were:

New South Wales: £2 3s 10d

Victoria: £2 0s 10d

Queensland: £2 9s 4d

He compares this with revenue per head of population in the UK:

England & Wales: £1 18s 4d

Scotland: £1 16s 9d

He suggests that it would be unwise to assume an annual revenue higher than £2 10s per head of population.

He accepts that “gross receipts per mile of railway and per head of population may not prove a very reliable criterion of the practical advan-tage of one gauge over another, and it can without doubt be contended that the wider gauges, having more powerful locomotives and a larger population settled alongside, can carry at a much cheaper rate, and thus the residents of New South Wales and Victoria should gain indirectly a counterpoise to the very apparent disadvantage of the greatly increased initial cost in those colonies.” [1: p423]

He, therefore, compares a few rates and fares taken from the then latest published lists and in operation in 1899.

‘Rebus’ says that, “it will be observed that the ordinary fares in Queensland are very much lower per mile than in either of the other two colonies. In the case of holiday excursion fares the difference is even more favourable to Queensland, the figures being:” [1: p424]

Comparison of long-distance fares in Australia. [1: p424]

‘Rebus’ also provides a fare comparison for shorter distances based on the price of season tickets:

Monthly Season Ticket Comparison for 1899 in Australia shows that New South Wales prices are the highest. [1: p424]

‘Rebus’ continues to look at livestock transport costs and he demonstrates that the narrow-gauge of Queensland achieved cattle transport at about 75% of the cost in the other network areas. Sheep were again transported at lower rates/mile than on the other two networks. However, he seems to avoid drawing attention to the fact that cost per animal rather than per mile would not be as advantageous to his argument as the distances involved were much larger in Queensland.

This seems to be a weakness in each of the comparisons made by ‘Rebus’ for dairy products and grain as well.

Unfortunately, I don’t have access to the later articles which seek to put the case for the other two gauges. There are weaknesses in the arguments made by ‘Rebus’ and we have noted them in the text above. Possibly, however, as time went by and the 20th century unfolded, it increasingly became clear in many parts of the world that narrow gauge lines struggled with road competition and were handicapped by the longer transit times than possible on the larger gauges.

“With Federation in 1901 and the removal of trade barriers, the short sightedness of three gauges became apparent, [but] it would be 94 years before all mainland state capitals were joined by one standard gauge!” [2]

In those 94 years it became clear that the 3ft 6in gauge would, if chosen as the national gauge, have needed replacement with a wider gauge.

Warwick Station, Queensland Railways. [1: p425]

Warwick Station in around 1905, © Public Domain. [19]

Warwick Station passenger platform in 2015, © Kerry Raymond and used here under a Creative Commons Licence (CC BY 4.0). [21]

Warwick Railway Station in 2024. [Google Maps, September 2024]

“At the time of Federation, standard gauge was used only in NSW, but was favoured for future construction. Work on gauge conversion was assisted by section 51 (xxxiii) of the Constitution of Australia, which made specific provisions for the Commonwealth Parliament to make laws with respect to railway acquisition and construction. An agreement was made with the South Australian and Western Australian state governments for the Trans-Australian Railway from Port Augusta to Kalgoorlie, with work started in 1911 and completed in 1917. However, with the different gauges, to transport goods from Queensland to Perth required four transshipments!” [2]

The Wikipedia article continues: “In October 1921, a royal commission into uniform rail gauge recommended gauge conversion of large areas of the country and that:

the gauge of 4 feet 8 1⁄2 inches be adopted as the standard
no mechanical, third rail, or other device would meet the situation
uniformity could be secured by one means only, viz., by conversion of the gauges other than 4 ft 8 1⁄2 in.” [5][7]

“The subject was discussed at a conference of the Prime Minister with the Premiers in November 1921, when it was decided to adopt 4 ft 8 1⁄2 in as the standard gauge for Australia and it was resolved that adoption of a uniform gauge was essential to the development and safety of the nation.” [5] [8]

“By the outbreak of World War II in 1939, there were still 14 break-of-gauge locations, with upwards of 1600 service personnel and many more civilians employed to transfer 1.8 million tons of freight during the conflict.” [5]

Strikingly, in 1922, 273 inventions to solve the break-of-gauge were proposed, and none adopted. [9]

In 1933, as many as 140 devices were proposed by inventors to solve the break-of-gauge problem, none of which was adopted. [10]

Even dual gauge with a third rail for combining Irish gauge and standard gauge was rejected as too reckless, as the gap between these gauges of 6.5 inches (165 mm) was considered to be too small. [11] Dual gauge combining Irish gauge and narrow gauge where the gap was 21 in (530 mm) was also rejected. [12]

“After the Second World War a report on uniformity of railway gauges was commissioned from former Victorian Railways Chief Commissioner Harold Clapp for the Commonwealth Land Transport Board. The report produced three main recommendations:

Gauge standardisation from Fremantle and Perth to Kalgoorlie, all of South Australian and Victorian broad gauge lines, all of the South Australian south east and Peterborough division narrow gauge lines, and acquisition and conversion of the Silverton Tramway. Costed at £44.3 million.
A new standard gauge “strategic and developmental railway” from Bourke, New South Wales to Townsville, Queensland and Dajarra (near Mount Isa) with new branch lines from Bourke via Barringun, Cunnamulla, Charleville, Blackall to Longreach. Existing narrow gauge lines in Queensland would be gauge converted, including Longreach – Linton – Hughenden – Townsville Dajarra and associated branches. Costed at £21.6 million.
A new standard gauge line to Darwin, including a new line from Dajarra, Queensland to Birdum, Northern Territory, and a gauge conversion of the Birdum to Darwin narrow gauge line. Costed at £10.9 million.

The report wrote that if only main trunk lines were converted, it would introduce a multitude of break of gauge terminals and result in greatly increased costs. It also recommended abandoning part of the existing Perth to Kalgoorlie narrow gauge line, and build a flatter and straighter route using third rail dual gauge, as modernisation was just as important as standardisation.” [5]

Wikipedia has reconstructed the railway network changes proposed by the Clapp Report. This file is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication [2]

None of the states in Australia were happy with the report. It seems to have been shelved, but “gauge conversion continued, with the South Australian Railways’ Mount Gambier line from Wolseley to Mount Gambier and associated branches converted to broad gauge in the 1950s, on the understanding it would change again to standard gauge at a later date, which would have made it the first and only railway in Australia to have successfully been converted to all three gauges.” [2] But it closed in 1995. Standard gauge lines were also built, with the line between Stirling North and Marree opened in July 1957. [2][6: p188]

“In 1956, a Government Members Rail Standardisation Committee was established, chaired by William Wentworth MP. It found that while there was still considerable doubt as to the justification for large scale gauge conversion, there was no doubt that work on some main trunk lines was long overdue. Both the committee and the government strongly supported three standardisation projects at a cost of £41.5 million:

Albury to Melbourne (priority 1)
Broken Hill to Adelaide via Port Pirie (priority 2, built third)
Kalgoorlie to Perth and Fremantle (priority 3, built second).” [2]

The Wikipedia article continues to describe individual projects in the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, 1990s and on into the 21st century as late as 2018. [2]

As of 2022, there were 11,914 kilometres (7,403 miles) of narrow-gauge railways, 18,007 kilometres (11,189 miles) of standard gauge railways and 2,685 kilometres (1,668 miles) of broad gauge railways. [13]

References

‘Rebus’; Uniformity of Gauge in Australia – The Case for 3ft 6in Gauge; in The Railway Magazine, November 1899, London, 1899, p417-425.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_gauge_in_Australia, accessed on 8th September 2024.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_railway_station,_Brisbane, accessed on 8th September 2024.
https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wallangarra_Railway.JPG, accessed on 8th September 2024.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_gauge_in_Australia, accessed on 9th September 2024.
Philip Laird; Back on track: rethinking transport policy in Australia and New Zealand; UNSW Press, Sydney, 2001.
Railways – Break of Gauge Problem – Report of Royal Commission, Parliament of Australia. 12th October 1921, accessed on 9th September 2024.
“Standardisation of Railway Gauges“. Year Book Australia, 1967. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 25th January 1967, accessed on 9th September 2024.
“Break of Gauge“. The Daily News. Perth. 12th January 1922. p. 2. Retrieved 26th October 2013 – via National Library of Australia, accessed again, 9th September 2024.
“Break of Gauge”. The Brisbane Courier. Brisbane. 14th August 1933. p. 15. Retrieved 27th August 2011 – via National Library of Australia, accessed again, 9th September 2024.
“Great Western Railway”. The Argus. Melbourne. 11th March 1926. p. 7. Retrieved 26th August 2011 – via National Library of Australia, accessed again, 9th September 2024.
“Standard Gauge Plan Postponed”. The Argus. Melbourne. 17 February 1941. p. 5. Retrieved 26 August 2011 – via National Library of Australia, accessed again, 9th September 2024.
“Trainline 9” (PDF). Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics. Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications. 26 May 2022. Retrieved 27 May 2022, accessed again on 9th September 2024.
https://www.southernqueenslandcountry.com.au/destinations/spring-bluff, accessed on 9th September 2024.
https://www.facebook.com/100064423009995/posts/pfbid0hqKLHE2Ah6EQs8oJ3YfAJGtoEvGtU6VhQC5VtxEZEys3axQS1Ns15DepgfcP1YyMl/?app=fbl, accessed on 9th September 2024.
https://queenslandplaces.com.au/node/7774, accessed on 9th September 2024.
https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Roma_Street_Station,_Brisbane,_1983.jpg, accessed on 9th September 2024.
https://architectus.com.au/projects/roma-street-station, accessed on 10th September 2024.
https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Queensland_State_Archives_3078_Passengers_on_the_platform_at_Warwick_Railway_Station_c_1905.png, accessed on 10th September 2024.
https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:North_Coast_Line_at_Bundook.jpg, accessed on 10th September 2024.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warwick_railway_station,_Queensland#/media/File%3APassenger_platform%2C_Warwick_railway_station%2C_2015.JPG, accessed on 10th September 2024.

The Railway Magazine, November 1899 – Adverts

4 Replies

This is the earliest Railway Magazine that I have so far been able to view. A rather tatty copy with both front two and at least the back two pages missing.

The first thing to note is the four pages of advertising given over to removal and storage companies! …

First page of advertisements by Removal & Storage Companies [1: pIII]

Second page of advertisements by Removal & Storage Companies [1: pIV]

Third page of advertisements by Removal & Storage Companies [1: pV]

Fourth page of advertisements by Removal & Storage Companies [1: pVI]

The fifth page of advertising is headed by what appears to be a dubious cure for deafness. Perhaps a third of the page is given over to an advert for an Organette with the remainder of the page devoted to The Railway Magazine’s publisher’s needs/offers: cases for binding The Railway Magazine; a request for return to the publisher of early editions of The Railway Magazine; the second edition of G.A. Sekon’s ‘Evolution of the Steam Locomotive‘.

The fifth page of advertisements in my possession. [1: pVII]

Advertisements for J.H. Moore’s Deafness Aerial Medication were relatively common in periodicals in the late 19th century. The offer of three months free treatment was also frequently made. Here is a second example, this time from 1894. ….

1894 Advert for J H Moore’s Treatment – Deafness Aerial Medication. [2]

Searches online produce a series of references to these advertisements but no indication as to the veracity of the claims made in them!

The 4 Guinea Organette on the market for just 35 shillings was a relatively common place advertisement. Draper’s factory in Blackburn was claimed to be the largest such works in the world. The Journal The Music Box carries the story of the company. [3]

The next page of adverts focussed mainly on publications. ….

The sixth page of advertisement in my possession. [1: pVII]

The journals which appear on this page are a mixture of British and American publications. A couple of the adverts are for publications sold by F. Moore of Finsbury, London. As we have noted in an earlier article, ‘F. Moore’ was not the name of a real artist, but rather the name adopted by the Locomotive Publishing Company, which employed the services of the rather reclusive Edwin Thomas Rudd to do the actual painting. [4]

That sixth page of adverts is followed by a page of notices of in-house publications by the publishers of The Railway Magazine. A sister journal was the ‘Railway Herald’. It was a weekly journal published between 1887-1903 which “reported on the activities of the General Railway Workers’ Union, the Railway Clerks’ Association and the United Pointsmen and Signalmen’s Society (and criticised the rival Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants). The newspaper included branch and district news for unions and welfare societies; general reports on the railway industry, including technical developments and descriptions of working conditions; information about railway-related accidents (fatal and non-fatal) and criminal offences; ‘The women’s corner’ (including recipes and household tips); correspondence and advertisements (including for clothing and patent medicines).” [5]

The seventh of these images includes Railway Herald publications and a book by Rev R.W. Scott. [1: pIX]

Alongside its weekly publication, the Railway Herald also produced a series of illustrated albums of Locomotives and Stations.

The next page consists of two adverts for train services. The first for GWR winter services to Cornwall and Devon, the second for the new timetable for express services between Manchester and Liverpool provided by the Cheshire Lines Committee. …

The contents page for the journal follows with a number of interesting articles which may well feature on this blog in due course. This page includes an advertisement by W.S. Laycock of Victoria Works, Sheffield.

The ninth of these images includes an advert by W.S. Laycock Engineering Ltd. [1: pIX]

W.S. Laycock Engineering Ltd., was based in Sheffield. The company is covered in some detail by Grace’s Guide. [6]

The final page of adverts at the front of this edition of The Railway Magazine contains a full-page advert by the Linotype Company of Fleet Street, London.

“The Linotype Company was set up in 1889 by a group of British businessmen in order to buy Linotype and other patents from American interests. These men included the publisher Sir Joseph Lawrence, founder of the Railway Magazine, later Sheriff of London and an MP; Lord Kelvin, the famous scientist, and other well-known men of the time. In 1889, Lawrence and Stilson Hutchins, a representative of the American manufacturer, brought three experimental machines to England. These caused great interest amongst the printing and newspaper industries. In 1895 Lawrence became chairman of the Linotype Company and remained so until his death in 1919.” [7]

“Funding for the project did not come from British banks, but from the American Mergenthaler Company, which granted the Linotype’s licence in return for shares. (By 1909 Mergenthaler controlled the British company and by 1921 both the chairman and the managing director were American.) The British company’s head office was at 188-9 Fleet St, London until 1947 when it moved to John Street, London, WC1.” [7]

The UK company started life at “Hulme Street, Oxford Road, Manchester, where a factory for assembling machines and making some of the simpler parts was built. Manchester had an abundance of skilled labour and also had good rail and canal networks for transporting raw materials, such as iron and coal, and for distribution of the completed machinery. As the company became more successful, the Hulme Street factory became overcrowded. In 1896 the Linotype Company took land at Broadheath, Altrincham for a new factory, which was formally opened by Lady Kelvin on Friday 14 July 1899. The Altrincham plant was sited next to the Bridgewater Canal which brought coal for the furnaces directly from the Worsley mines to the works.” [7]

The works in Altrincham were accompanied by a large housing development for the company’s staff which included social amenities. Morning can be found out by clicking here. [7]

References

The Railway Magazine, November 1899, London, 1899.
https://www.periodpaper.com/products/1894-ad-j-h-moore-treatment-deafness-aerial-medication-original-advertising-076453-mun1-262, accessed on 7th September 2024.
Roger Booty; The Largest Organette Works in the World; in The Music Box Volume 21 No. 7, Autumn 2004, via https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:sc:EU:437e688b-85d0-43f2-ada3-88eebf5144b2, accessed on 7th September 2024.
https://culhamticketoffice.co.uk/bits/hidden-pages/fmoore.html, accessed on 7th September 2024.
https://warwick.ac.uk/services/library/mrc/archives_online/digital/unionjournals/railway_herald, accessed on 7th September 2024.
https://www.gracesguide.co.uk/W._S._Laycock, accessed on 7th September 2024.
https://exploringtraffordsheritage.omeka.net/exhibits/show/the-linotype-works–broadheath/the-early-day, accessed on 7th September 2024.

The Railway Magazine, August 1905 – Advertising …

2 Replies

The August 1905 edition of the Railway Magazine was the 98th issue. In preparation for its 100th edition, it carried this advert. …

A reminder to Railway Magazine Readers that the 200th edition will not have an unlimited print run. [1: p176]

The Railway Magazine had been established for over 8 years. … The above image can be read easily with the exception of the central portion which, in my copy, is damaged. As far as I can tell that portion reads:

“As a memento of this success of the RAILWAY MAGAZINE, we propose to make the 100th Number (October, 1905), a special issue, containing, in addition to the usual articles, several contributions by the leading experts in various phases of railway working, locomotive development, etc. A feature of these special articles will be the reference to improvements in train services, locomotive working and railway management that have taken place during the past 8 years. The RAILWAY MAGAZINE is entitled to the credit of suggesting many of these improvements. With the 100th Number of the RAILWAY MAGAZINE will be issued a Large Presentation Plate, specially drawn, showing the evolution of the steam locomotive from 1803 to the present time, by means of typical engines of various periods.” [1: p176]

The practice of modern railway magazine special supplements and celebratory issues clearly goes back right to the very earliest months of publication of railway magazines.

The August 1905 edition of the Railway Magazine contains a number of third party adverts which are interesting. ….

In addition to a good number of railway company adverts for particular train services and holiday destinations which are themselves worth looking at, are a number from companies which supplied the railway industry, provided services for railway passengers, or catered for the wider public. …

A. Hotel Cecil

The Hotel Cecil advertised itself as the only first class hotel in London with a garage on the premises. Tariffs included: a single room at 5 shillings, a double at 9 shillings, and a suite at 25 shillings. Food was equally inexpensive to modern eyes, breakfast, lunch and dinner could be purchased for a total of 11 shillings. A single person could stay full board for 16 shillings! (80 pence!)

A loaf of bread cost 5d in London in February 1905, [2] around 2p in today’s money. If we accept that supermarket prices for a 800g loaf are about £1.35 in 2024 we can make a simplistic comparison with modern day costs for full board in London. £1.35 would have bought close to 70 loaves in 1905. That factor of 70 would suggest that a comparable price for full board would be £56!

Five-star accommodation in 2024 at the Shangri-La at The Shard, London costs upwards from £602 which could include breakfast!

B. A Motoring Atlas

The British Motor Tourists ABC, published in the same premises as The Railway Magazine. [1: pIII]

The British Motor Tourists ABC, could be purchased as a paperback (limp) for 5 shillings – the same price as a single room at the Hotel Cecil! If you were using it as a chauffeur, then a special edition could be purchased far cheaper – just 1s 3d.

This ‘Indispensible’ volume included ‘Hints to Motor Tourists’, by S.F. Edge – 57 pages of clear Main Road Maps, Alphabetical List of Towns and Villages in Great Britain and Ireland. with Best Hotels, Garages, Spirit Stores, Charging Stations and Repairing Depots, Hints on Tyres. Customs Tariff and Regulations, Steamer Freights, Railway Regulations, re Petrol and Carriage of Motor Cars, Motor Car Act, Motor Signs, Racing Fixtures, Lighting-up Table, Yacht and Golfing Clubs, Automobile Clubs, Fishing and Hunting Centres.

C. Postcards

These Post Cards represented locomotives of the latest designs, they could be obtained at all railway bookstalls and through any newsagent, price 6d. per set/packet, or direct from the Railway Magazine office, post free, 7d. per packet. [1: pVI]

D. Railway Inspection Cars

Oldsmobile advertised two inspection cars. The first was a self-drive vehicle with space for 4 people. Weight: 800lbs. The second was a larger vehicle which could carry 6 to 8 people or carry tools and material. [1: pX]

Inspection Car, No. 1 was already in use by over 100 Railroads in the United States and other countries. for Bridge and Track Inspectors, Road-masters, and other officials. The Company claimed that it was economical to run and had a range of 100 miles.

Production was limited to only 127 units, the Olds Rail Road Inspection Car was built by the Olds Motor Works from 1903 to 1905 and sold exclusively by the Railway Appliance Company of New York and Chicago. [3]

Inspection Car No. 2 was a larger vehicle with a 7 hp engine. It weighed in at 1200lbs, was designed for standard-gauge track but could be reduced to a minimum of 3ft 6 in gauge. A top speed of 30 mph was possible. Its range was comparable to Inspection Car No. 1 at 100 miles. [3]

There were a number of converted road vehicles in use over time as inspection vehicles in the USA. More can be discovered here. [4]

Ford produced one which included its own turntable. A 1925 Ford Model T Railway Inspection Car was on display on a short 30m section of track outside the Collections Centre at the British Motor Museum at Gaydon on 16th July 2024.

A Ford Model T Rail Inspection Car with inbuilt turntable. [5]

E. A Mug or Two of Cocoa

Dr. Tibbles’ Vi-Cocoa was a popular energy restorative in the Victorian era. At its height it was one of the highest-selling cocoa-based drinks in Britain. [6]

Dr. Tibbles’ advert in the Railway Magazine. [1: pXI]

Adverts for Dr Tibbles Vi-Cocoa, which was a mixture of malt, hops, kola and cocoa, first appeared in 1893. He registered the company at that time and later re-registered as Dr Tibbles’ Vi- Cocoa (1898) Ltd in 1898. Tibbles retired soon afterwards.

“Land was purchased in North Watford to expand Vi-Cocoa production in 1899. A fire devastated the factory in 1903 but the site was rebuilt and became an important local employer making cocoa and chocolates.” [7]

The business was renamed the Watford Manufacturing Company in 1907.

“The Watford Manufacturing Company produced munitions during the First World War. Following the War, the company expected an increase in business and invested in the construction of a huge, new factory. However the business did not materialize. The new factory became a white elephant, was left unfinished and bankrupted the company in 1922.” [8]

In 1918, Lord Leverhulme became the largest shareholder. In 1922 the Company entered into liquidation and Lord Leverhulme purchased the Company. Virtually straight-away, Leverhulme sold up to Planters Products Ltd, a Lever Brothers subsidiary. Vi-Cocoa production continued, the factory was employing 400 people in 1929, and was one of the largest employers in the area. [6]

In 1930, the factory was sold and Unilever absorbed by Unilever, the new incarnation of Lever Brothers. Vi-Cocoa was still being advertised in 1945.

Dr. Tibble’s Vi-Cocoa “achieved remarkable success through a combination of innovative marketing techniques, including health claims, scientific endorsements, extensive print advertising, free samples, and targeted marketing. These strategies not only propelled Vi Cocoa to commercial success but also influenced broader trends in advertising and consumer culture in late Victorian Britain.” [9]

F. Thomas Firth & Sons Ltd.

Wikipedia tells us that, “In 1902, Sheffield steelmakers John Brown & Company exchanged shares and came to a working agreement with neighbouring company Thomas Firth & Sons, the companies continuing under their own management until they finally merged in 1930.” [10] At the merger they formally became Firth Brown Steels.

G. W.S. Laycock Ltd.

W. S. Laycock of Levygreave Road and Victoria Works, Gell Street, Sheffield were Railway Carriage Fittings and Appliance Manufacturers in 1901. First established by Laycock in Victoria Street, Sheffield in 1884. In 1893, the Company “introduced a system for train heating using steam from the locomotive with storage reservoirs in each compartment.” [11]

By 1900, the Company was incorporated as a limited company. Grace’s Guide tells us that the company “supplied equipment to every railway company in the world, the main specialities being carriage blinds, buckeye automatic couplers, vestibule gangway connections, and steam-heating equipment for complete trains.” [11]

In 1902, the Company opened new works at Millhouses, adjoining the Midland Railway. The Company produced munitions during WW1 and in time became Laycock Engineering Co. and later still Laycock Engineering. The company was still exhibiting at the Motor Show in the late 1980s.

H. Giant Motor Spirit

Motor Spirit is Petrol or Gasoline. Meade-King, Robinson & Co., of Liverpool place the advert below in the Railway Magazine. For more information about early Petrol-powered rail vehicles, click here. [12]

Meade-King Robinson [13] is still in business in 2024. “It is a privately owned chemical distribution company with over 140 years experience in the supply of a wide range of oils and chemicals.” [14]

I. Brown, Bayley’s Steel Works, Ltd.

Wikipedia tells that “Brown Bayley Steels was a steel-making company established in Sheffield, England in 1871, as Brown, Bayley & Dixon. They occupied a site on Leeds Road which was later occupied by the Don Valley sports stadium.” [15]

Brown, Bayley’s Steel Works had three main sites: Leeds Road, East Works, and Brighton Bar Shop.

Wikipedia tells us that “the Leeds Road site included: a spring shop, a hammer shop, a ring rolling shop with Telpher Crane, a machine shop for railway axles & tyres, an axle & railway tyre drop test plant, a heat treatment department, creep laboratories, a tyre blank press, a blacksmiths shop, a loco Shed, a drawing office, and a generator converter house creating direct current for cranes.” [15]

East Works: had “a sheet rolling mill, a sheet pickling plant, sheet polishing and guillotine shops and Steckel mills (slitting machines).” [15]

Bright Bar Shop: undertook “bar drawing, had centreless turning machines, centreless Lidkoping grinding machines, a 5 ton hammer, a 500 ton press and a railway tyre rolling mill.” [15]

NB: “A Steckel mill is also known as a reversible finishing mill, it is similar to a reversing rolling mill except two coilers are used to feed the material through the mill. One coiler is on the entrance side and the other on the exit side. The coilers pull the material through the mill, therefore the process is more similar to drawing than rolling. The material is fed back and forth through the mill until the desired thickness is reached, much like a reversing rolling mill.” [16]

NB: “The Lidkoping centerless grinder is designed and manufactured to meet practically any challenge in precision grinding. More details of the most modern form of this equipment can be found here. [17]

J. A Few Small Ads

The last page of adverts at the front of the magazine includes these four small adverts. [1: pXVI]

Goddard’s Plate Powder was developed by Joseph Goddard in the early 19th century and 180 years later Goddard’s is still a going concern. [18]

Real Devonshire Washing Serge was sold by G. Bale & Co. of Topsham, Devon. I guess they anticipated sales to railway companies subsequent to their advert. I have not been able to find out anything about the company.

Whelpton’s Purifying Pills “were supplied by G. Whelpton and Son, London. They were advertised as being able to arouse the stomach to action, promoting the flow of gastric juice, and giving tone to the whole system. Headache flies away. Biliousness, Kidney Disorders, and Skin Complaints disappear, while cheerful spirits and clear complexions follow in due course!” [19: p1325]

“The pills had an average weight of 21 grains. Chemical and microscopical examination showed the presence of aloes (apparently Socotrine), powdered colocynth, ginger, and gentian. The last-named ingredient being less positively indicated than the others. No evidence of the presence of mercury or calomel was obtained.” [19: p1326]

I could not find any convincing evidence either that they were effective, or that they caused any real harm.

The Railway Officers and Servants Association was, until 1974, a Friendly Society, it was removed from the Charity register in November 1974.

References

The Railway Magazine, London, August 1905.
https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1905/mar/08/comparative-prices-of-bread-in-london, accessed on 10th August 2024.
https://www.curveddasholdsmobileclub.com/railroad-inspection-car.asp, accessed on 10th August 2024.
http://www.trainweb.org/oldtimetrains/photos/inspection/gallery.htm, accessed on 10th August 2024.
https://stratfordobserver.co.uk/news/classic-fords-motor-to-gaydon, accessed on 10th August 2024.
https://letslookagain.com/2018/04/dr-tibbles-vi-cocoa, accessed on 10th August 2024.
https://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/news/19169433.watfords-history-50-objects-cocoa-drink-victorian-times, accessed on 10th August 2024.
https://cosgb.blogspot.com/2012/09/watford-manufacturing-company-limited.html?m=1, accessed on 10th August 2024.
https://binreminded.medium.com/dr-william-tibbles-vi-cocoa-marketing-techniques-and-success-cbb247451a42, accessed on 10th August 2024.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firth_Brown_Steels, accessed on 10th August 2024.
https://www.gracesguide.co.uk/W._S._Laycock, accessed on 10th August 2024.
https://rogerfarnworth.com/2024/08/08/petrol-railmotors-the-railway-magazine-september-1922.
http://www.meadekingrobinson.co.uk, accessed on 11th August 2024.
https://www.chemical.org.uk/members-directory/meade-king-robinson-co-ltd, accessed on 11th August 2024.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_Bayley_Steels, accessed on 11th August 2024.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steckel_mill, accessed on 11th August 2024.
https://www.uvalidkoping.com/machine/cl-630, accessed on 11th August 2024.
https://goddards.com/pages/all-collections, accessed on 11th August 2024.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2334043/pdf/&ved=2ahUKEwjb2uL3xe2HAxUia0EAHSOgMuoQFnoECBEQAQ&usg=AOvVaw3yNnhqTzcJKP7y2ejnXRMH, accessed on 11th August 2024.

Water Troughs, Major Works, Campbeltown & Machrihanish Light Railway, Welsh Highland Railway and other snippets from The Railway Magazine, January 1934

1 Reply

Water Pick-Up Troughs

Some superb diagrams showing the operation of water troughs were included on page 4 of the January 1934 edition of The Railway Magazine.

The effective operation of water troughs. [1: p4]

The Railway Magazine commented: “Long non-stop runs necessitate either the use of large tenders, such as are used in America … or the provision of track water troughs from which the tender can be replenished while the train is travelling. As long ago as 1859, … locomotive engineer, John Ramsbottom, … designed the type then and ever since used, with but minor modifications, such as the substitution of metal for wood in their structure.” [1: p5]

Figure 1 shows a typical cross-section. The length was been 0.25 and 0.5 miles and had to be on a completely level length of track.

Figure 2 “shows diagrammatically the arrangements made for rapidly refilling a trough after a locomotive has taken water from it. The familiar ball-valve control is used to regulate the flow from a tank alongside the track to the trough. When the water in the trough reaches the correct level, the ball valve, in a small tank at rail level, rises and cuts off the supply. Steam heating has to be used to prevent freezing in frosty weather where traffic is infrequent and the troughs are in exposed positions.” [1: p5]

Figure 5: Section through a LNER eight-wheel tender which shows the arrangement of the water pick-up gear. [1: p6]

I love some of the diagrams in these early editions of The Railway Magazine. The one above is no exception, Figure 5 illustrates a typical form of water pick-up apparatus on a LNER eight-wheel tender. “The inclined delivery shoot will be seen to have a hinged foot-like scoop, curved to face the direction of travel and capable of being held clear of, or depressed into the troughs – which are centrally placed between the rails – by means of the system of rods, cranks and levers shown, these being under the control of the fireman. Warning boards are erected to enable him to be prepared to lower the scoop as the trough is approached, speed seldom being appreciably reduced over the troughs. The scoop is usually lowered before the trough is reached, a slight gradient being arranged in the track, by which the scoop drops below the water level, and is similarly raised at the far end of the trough, should the crew not have lifted it out earlier. To aid in raising the scoop when the tender gauge shows the tank in it to be full, steam or compressed air is often used.” [1: p5]

A speed through the toughs of 25 mph was sufficient to ensure the take-up of water, although higher speeds were more effective. But express speeds tended to waste water and could result in damage to the permanent way. Maintenance costs with the amount of flooding which occurred were high.

The LMS made use of a tender which had an observer’s compartment to study what happened at water troughs and, as a result, designed a simple device which significantly reduced the spilling of water. “Briefly, the passage of the scoop through the trough causes the water in it to pile up and overflow at each side, and to neutralise this a pair of slightly converging deflector vanes are fixed 1 ft. 4 in. in advance of the scoop, which force the water towards the centre of the trough and make it pile up there instead of at the sides (Figures 3 and 4). Some 400 gallons are saved every time these deflector vanes are used, and the quantity of water required is reduced by about 20 per cent.” [1: p5]

Figure 6: Water Pick-up Troughs on the East Coast Main Line (LNER) [1: p7]

Figure 6 is a map showing the distribution of water troughs along the main LNER. route to Scotland, and Figure 7, those on the LMS, both on the LNWR (West Coast) and the Midland routes.

Figure 7:The Water Troughs on the two LMS routes to Scotland. [1: p7]

The water troughs on these long distance routes obviated the need for larger tenders and the need for time-wasting water stops. 3,500 to 5,000-gallon tenders were more than adequate. It also appears to have been true that the use of water troughs generally meant that water purity was higher which minimised boiler maintenance and also reduced the need for water-softening plants. [1: p5]

The GWR Capital Programme

The Railway Magazine noted, “A special programme of extensions and improvements, involving a cost of over £8,000,000, was put in hand by the GWR under the Development (Loan Guarantees and Grants) Act, 1929, in anticipation of its future requirements, for the purpose of assisting in the relief of unemployment. … The Railway Gazette, issued on [8th December 1933] a profusely illustrated Special Supplement dealing comprehensively with these works. A notable feature of this supplement is the wealth of drawings, including a double-page map of the G.W.R. system, with inset detail plans of the new works.” [1: p74]

Earlier in the January 1934 edition, The Railway Magazine carried an advert over two pages from The Railway Gazette for the supplement to their magazine (which, when bought separately, cost the princely sum of 1s).

The first page of the advert about the GWR Capital works programme and the Railway Gazette supplement. [1: pXIV]

The second page of the advert about the GWR Capital works programme and the Railway Gazette supplement. [1: pXV]

The Campbeltown & Machrihanish Light Railway

The Campbeltown and Machrihanish Light Railway was one of only four 2 ft 3 in (686 mm) narrow gauge railways in the UK. The other three were/are in Wales: the Corris Railway, the short-lived Plynlimon and Hafan Tramway and the Talyllyn Railway. [3]

In its January edition, the Railway Magazine reported that “an Order dated [7th November 1933], by the Minister of Transport, appeared in The London Gazette of 7th November, declaring that the Campbeltown & Machrihanish Light Railway Company shall be wound up.” [1: p74] The line, which was closed about eighteen months earlier was 6 miles 29 chains in length and of 2ft 3in gauge. The rolling-stock comprised three locomotives, six passenger and and two goods vehicles. “The company was incorporated on 8th May 1905, and the line opened on [17th August 1906] of the following year. This isolated railway, in the Mull of Kintyre, suffered particularly severely from road motor competition,” [1: p74] and, a few years previously, an attempt was made to meet road competition with its own bus service, but that failed.

‘Atlantic’ was the last locomotive built for the Campbeltown and Machrihanish Light Railway. It was an Andrew Barclay 0-6-2T, built in 1907. Seen here in charge of a train of four coaches leaving Campbeltown for Machrihanish. [2]

A canal was first constructed to bring coal from pits close to Machrihanish to Campbeltown. It was in use from 1794. There were no locks as the canal traversed relatively flat terrain. It was three miles in length, running from Mill Dam in the West to Campbeltown. Only two barges plied its length which carried around 40 cartloads of coal each day to Campbeltown. However, “the extent to which the canal was used or cared for seems doubtful. … It had fallen into disuse and been virtually abandoned by 1856 and when, about 1875 the colliery changed hands, the new owners … found it choked with weeds and difficult to clear. … In the Company’s prospectus of 1875 it was stated that a railway was to be built.” [4: p7-8]

The new railway was a little over 4 miles in length at first, running between the pits and a coal depot on Argyle Street, Campbeltown. In 1881 the length was extended to 4.7 miles. “There were a number of level crossings, all originally gated but subsequently left open, protected only by cross trenches to keep cattle and sheep off the line.” [4: p8]

At first, only a single loco worked the line, an Andrew Barclay 0-4-0T engine named ‘Pioneer’. After the line was extended to a new colliery business “became so brisk that in 1885 a second locomotive was bought from Barclays, an [0-4-0ST initially, later altered to an 0-4-2ST] named ‘Chevalier’.” [4: p9]

In 1901 and 1902, two high-speed turbine steamers brought “increasing numbers of day trippers to Campbeltown where … many of them were conveyed to Machrihanish … by horse-drawn carriages.” [4: p11]

The railway saw significant changes as a result. Both to carry passengers and to enhance the delivery of coal to boats at the New Quay in Campbeltown, the line was extended East to New Quay and West to the Golf links at Machrihanish. A new company, the ‘Argyll Railway Company’, was formed to manage the line.

The new railway was to be close to 6.4 miles in length and was opened to passenger traffic in 1906. By “August 1913 there were seven trains each way daily. … The war naturally led to a curtailment of services, … until the early months of 1917 saw the line’s minimum service of one daily train in each direction. … After the war … the tourist trade soon picked up again and before long the summer months saw eight regular trains a day in each direction. … Although the 20s saw increasing competition from buses, the time tables continued to show eight trains daily in each direction right up until the withdrawal of services in 1931.” [4: p23]

Commenting on the closure of the line, A.D. Farr says: “When the railway finally closed the prime reason was the loss of revenue following the closure of the colliery in 1929, but a major factor was also the bus competition. To meet this second-hand buses had been bought by the railway, but the experiment was to no avail and they were soon sold to the competing road transport concern.” [4: p23]

The line owned a total of five locomotives at different times: ‘Pioneer’, a Barclay 0-4-0T; ‘Chevalier’, a Barclay 0-4-0ST which may have been converted to an 0-4-2ST; ‘Princess’, a Kerr-Stuart 0-4-2T; ‘Argyll’, a Barclay 0-6-2T; and ‘Atlantic’, another Barclay 0-6-2T. [4: p41]

Six passenger coaches were employed on the line, all built by R.Y Pickering & Co., of Wishaw, Lanarkshire. All were bogie ‘cars’ and “were externally very attractive models of the tramways type, 43 ft 6 in long and with two 4-wheel bogies, 30 ft centre to centre carrying 1ft 11in diameter wheels. At each end was a covered platform, guarded by a wrought-iron balcony and ‘telescopic gates’, and with steps on either side to within a foot or so of the ground.” [4: p43]

The coal company owned a series of wagons which carried the ‘C.C.C’ lettering. But it seems as though the railway company owned only a heavy goods brake van and one other wagon, although little is known about that vehicle. [4: p45]

The Welsh Highland Railway

The Railway Magazine reported that the “Joint Committee representing the local authorities with investments in the Welsh Highland Railway has decided to ask the debenture-holders to close down the line. Carnarvonshire County Council has £15,000 in the venture, Portmadoc Urban District Council £5,000, and the Gwyrfai, Glaslyn and Deudraeth Rural District Councils £3,000 each. At a recent meeting of the Portmadoc Council, Mr. Oswald Thomas said it was important that if the railway were closed, the rails should not be taken up, particularly between Portmadoc and Croesor Bridge, as it was hoped before long to see quarries in the district working again. Captain Richard Jones said it might be arranged for the Portmadoc Council to take over that part of the railway.” [1: p74]

West Monkseaton Railway Station Waiting Shelter

The Railway Magazine picked a rather modest platform building at West Monkseaton for praise.

West Monkseaton Railway Station, LNER – a new waiting shelter – January 1934. [1: p75]

“Here is precise repetition used rhythmically; the units are a nine-light window and a half-glazed door; the rhythm is 2-door-2-door-2-door-2. The designer is to be congratulated in that he has been careful to keep the horizontal glazing bars of doors in line with those of the windows; the horizontal effect of the windows; therefore unbroken. The portions of the window panes are The proportion good, being about 5 to 3. The key-note of the design is the restful cornice band running round the structure; unpretentiously it ties in the whole composition; its horizontality is repeated by the edges of the weather-boarding under the windows, and is balanced by the white base upon which the building stands; this cornice band also sets off, and is set off, by Mr. Eric Gill’s standard LNER lettering. Thought has evidently been expended upon the design of this shelter, and it gives us pleasure to illustrate such a satisfactory and pleasing little piece of station architecture, especially when we consider what the perpetuation of railway custom might have produced.” [1: p75]

Check Rails and Ramps

By 1934, it was common practice “to provide safety devices at viaducts and other important bridges to reduce to a minimum the risk of vehicles, which may have become derailed, falling over the edge. Special guard rails, fixed either inside or outside the running rails and usually at a slightly higher level, are laid across the viaduct, with some splayed arrangement at both ends to direct derailed vehicles from the edge toward the rails. An ingenious elaboration of this is shown in the accompanying illustration. It consists of converging rails with a steel ramp between them rising to rail level. Any derailed wheels would run up this and should automatically become re-railed at the top.” [1: p74]

The steel-ramp approach to a short viaduct at Midfield. [1: p74]

References

The Railway Magazine; Westminster, London, January 1934
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/353145047017?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-127632-2357-0&ssspo=VG76xMQ6St6&sssrc=4429486&ssuid=afQhrar7TGK&var=&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY, accessed on 6th August 2024.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campbeltown_and_Machrihanish_Light_Railway, accessed on 7th August 2024.
A.D. Farr; The Campbeltown and Machrihanish Light Railway; (First Reprint) Oakwood Press, Headington, Oxford, 1987.

Petrol Railmotors – The Railway Magazine, September 1922

2 Replies

The Railway Magazine of September 1922 carried two short articles about new petrol Railmotors. …

North Eastern Railway (NER) – Petrol Rail Motor Bus

The first short article was about an experimental vehicle used by the NER.

On certain portions of the NER network, the company realised that “there was room for a service conducted on lines as nearly as possible identical with those of motor buses on the roads. With the view of ascertaining, without much initial expenditure, whether the scheme is likely to prove financially successful, they have converted one of their ‘Leyland’ road motor ‘buses, formerly running on the road services in the vicinity of Durham, so as to make it suitable for running on the railway.” [1: p234]

The war resulted in a significant increase in railway working expenses which made it impossible to provide a train unit on some of the country branches, where the number of people travelling was small, “sufficiently cheap to cover its working expenses out of the small revenue available,” [1: p234]

The NER needed to devise a cheaper form of rail transport. As a first step, it decided to convert one of its own fleet of petrol-powered road buses. The company’s intention was to undertake a trial at low cost before developing a design specifically tailored to rail use.

The experimental unit entered service on 19th July 1922. If “the results of the working of this vehicle are encouraging, the company intend[ed] to build vehicles [capable of] carrying up to 40 passengers, and maintaining an average speed of approximately 30 m.p.h.” [1: p236]

The railmotor operated between Copmanthorpe, York, Strensall and Earswick, and was “manned by a motorman and a conductor exactly in the same way as if it were running on the highway. Single journey tickets [were] issued on board, so that passengers [did not have] the trouble of going to the booking office. It [had] accommodation for 26 passengers. It [ could] be driven from both ends, and run in either direction, and the motive power consist[ed] of a 35-h.p. Leyland engine of the standard type, supplied by the builders for their ordinary commercial road vehicles.” [1: p236]

The donor vehicle was one of three Leyland Motor Co. buses that the NER purchased on 21st July 1921. “With a long bonnet and a overhanging roof at the front, it was a typical design for that time. The conversion was completed at York Carriage Works. Initially No. 110 in the Road Vehicle fleet, it was renumbered as No. 130Y shortly after conversion because No. 110 was already occupied in the Coaching Stock list.” [2]

An “additional radiator and an additional driving position were located at the rear of the vehicle. Central passenger doors were fitted to both sides of the saloon. …. Folding steps were also added to allow access from rail level. These were later replaced with fixed steps, and eventually removed altogether. An electric headlamp was also fitted.” [2]

The LNER website continues: “the initial York duty involved a service to Haxby, Strensall, Earswick, and Copmanthorpe. NER Petrol Autocar No. 2105 took over this duty on 9th July 1923, and No. 130 was transferred to Selby. At Selby, No. 130 operated daily return trips to Straddlethorpe, York, Goole, Catleford, Goole, Market Weighton, Cawood, and Hemingborough. This resulted in a full timetable that started at 6:52am and finished at 7:44pm. No. 130 took part in the Stockton & Darlington Centenary celebrations, but continued these Selby duties until November 1926.” [2]

Railmotor No. 110, later No. 130. The fold-down steps can be seen clearly in this image. [2]

On 11th November 1926 the railmotor/railbus “caught fire whilst being filled up with petrol at Selby shed. The entire bus was reportedly gutted within 15 minutes. Reports also suggest that someone used a naked paraffin lamp to check the level of the petrol tank. Only the chassis remained, and it was eventually decided not to rebuild or replace the bus. No. 130 was officially withdrawn from stock on 9th April 1927.” [2]

It seems as though the initial experiment was successful enough to allow the NER to authorise the building of a further experimental petrol railmotor (No. 2105) in September 1922. A Daimler engine was purchased in October and “the remainder of the vehicle was built at York Carriage Works and was completed in July 1923. By this time, Grouping had occurred, and the autocar was given the LNER number 2105Y. It was later renumbered as No. 22105 in August 1926.” [3]

Railmotor No. 2105 (later renumbered 22105) [3]

It seated 40 in third class accommodation, seats were in pairs either side of a central gangway. “The distinctive wheel arrangement had a two axle bogie at the engine end, and a single fixed axle at the other end. The single fixed axle was powered from the motor via a clutch, three-speed gearbox, and propeller shaft with two universal joints. 40mph was reportedly possible. Radiators were fitted to both ends.” [3]

This Railmotor took over the service provided by No. 130 and continued to operate local services in and around York until 1930. By 1930, it had been renumbered 22105.Closure of a series of local stations that year led to it being reassigned to the Hull area. It is “known to have been given an extensive timetable in the Hull area from 1st May to 17th July 1932 when it worked a 14 hour timetable including Beverley, Thorne North, Brough, Willerby & Kirk Ella, and Hull. Reports suggest it was unreliable during this period and was often replaced by a Sentinel steam railcar.” [3]

Over the next two years, No. 22105 did not work any revenue-earning services. It was withdrawn from service on 19th May 1934.

What is perhaps surprising is that these two experimental vehicles were not the first ones used on the NER network. The NER had experimented with petrol railmotors just after the turn of the 20th century. Two examples are worthy of note.

A. Petrol-electric Railmotors/Autocars

The NER were reviewing their operation of suburban passenger services on Tyneside. Alongside the introduction of electric trains on an urban network of lines which would later develop into the Tyne and Wear Metro, the NER ordered two experimental railcars/railmotors to work other, non-electrified, parts of the network.

“Both railcars were built at the York Carriage Works, together with the original Tyneside electric stock, in 1902-3 and numbered 3170 and 3171. They were 53.5 feet long and weighed around 35 tons. They had clerestory roofs, bow ends, large windows and matchboard sides. There were four compartments inside, the engine room with the principal driving position, a vestibule, the passenger saloon and a driving compartment. There was no guard’s compartment. The passenger saloon had 52 seats. These were reversible and upholstered in standard NER pattern. With curtains at the windows, radiators between the seats and electric lighting, the passenger accommodation was described as ‘cosy’ and seems to have been very popular with the travelling public.” [4]

These two railmotors were referred to as ‘autocars’ after the steam push/pull autotrain services already operated by the NER.

The Embassy & Bolton Abbey Railway comments: “These NER railcars were the first in the world to use petrol-electric technology. At that time, diesel engines were less advanced and not as reliable as their petrol counterparts. The concept of using internal combustion engines to power electric traction motors would later be developed into the diesel electric technology used to power many of BR’s ‘diesel’ locos.” [4]

One of the two NER petrol-electric railmotors. [5]

Initially the railmotors/autocars saw service “between West Hartlepool and Hartlepool stations (in direct competition with electric tramcars) and Scarborough to Filey (as a replacement of a steam service). Later, the autocars were transferred to the Selby – Cawood branchline to work the passenger services there. In 1923, no.3170 was fitted with a larger engine and new generator giving it sufficient power to pull a conventional carriage, thus increasing passenger capacity. It worked in the Harrogate area for a while before rejoining its twin on the Cawood branch. No. 3171 was withdrawn in 1930 and No. 3170 in 1931.” [5]

These vehicles had a petrol engine and a generator in their engine rooms, producing electricity for two Westinghouse 55HP traction motors which were mounted on the bogie underneath. A series of different petrol engines were used during the life of these vehicles. “In 1923, no. 3170 was given a third engine, a 225HP 6 cylinder ex-WD engine rumoured to come from a First World War tank. This new engine gave 3170 more torque and enough power to haul an autocoach as a trailer, though it seems not to have affected the maximum speed.” [5]

The LNER showed an interest in these vehicles and went on to test Armstrong diesel-electric railcars in the 1930s, but by then Sentinel steam railcars had been introduced. “These were not as reliable or popular, they had more seats and fitted better into the contemporary infrastructure.” [4]

No. 3171 was dismantled when withdrawn. When No. 3170 was withdrawn on the 4th April 1931 it was transported to Kirkbymoorside near Pickering, where the body became a holiday home. “Fitted with a tin roof and veranda it was well protected from the weather and survived there until September 2003 when it was sold to carriage restorer Stephen Middleton who moved it to the Embsay and Bolton Abbey Steam Railway.” [5]

B. A Petrol Directors’ Vehicle

Side elevation and Plan of NER Inspection Car [8: p460]

End elevation of NER Inspection Car. [8: p460]

The Engineer reported in early 1908 that “The North-Eastern Railway Company [had] recently built at its York carriage works and introduced into service a petrol rail motor inspection car designed for the use of its executive officers. The car [was] 17 ft in length by 7 ft in width, with a wheel base of 10 ft. It [was] arranged with a driver’s compartment at each end, and with an open saloon 10 ft. long in the middle. The saloon [was] entered through either of the driver’s compartments, and there [was] a permanent seating accommodation for six passengers, whilst two extra seats [were] provided on camp stools.” [8: p358]

It seems reasonable to ask why, with the experience gleaned in the very early years of the 20th century, the NER felt the need in 1922 to commission further experimental vehicles. Was it because the technology had developed significantly? Had the early experiments been less than satisfactory?

Weston, Cleveland & Portishead Light Railway

The second short piece in The Railway Magazine of September 1922 related to a Railmotor constructed by the Drewry Car Company Limited (Works No. 1252), to the instructions of Colonel H.F. Stephens, who, along with other roles, was Engineer and General Manager of the Weston, Clevedon and Portishead Light Railway.

The railmotor was powered by a 4-cylinder Baguley 35 hp petrol engine with a 3-speed gearbox and its oil consumption, on easy gradients, [was] 16 miles to the gallon. It had a maximum speed of 25 mph. It was 19ft long and driven by a chain drive from either end. It had 2ft diameter wheels. [1: p239][6]

A Drewry Railmotor at the Weston, Cleveland & Portishead Light Railway. [1: p239]

The vehicle had full visibility all round. Glazed throughout above waist height. Side widows were openable. The panels below the windows were of steel. Acetylene lighting was provided for travel after-dark. The unit carried a maximum of “42 passengers – 30 sitting and 12 standing. The car [was] provided with rails round the roof to enable light luggage and market produce to be carried outside, thus giving the passengers more accommodation.” [1: p239]

Colonel Stephens “was a pioneer of petrol traction. The WC&PR was the first of his railways to introduce railcars. … Due to low running costs [the Drewry Railmotor] was relatively profitable. … Originally the petrol tank was fitted inside the railcar together with spare cans of petrol. As smoking was then common, it was later realised that this was a hazard and a cylindrical horizontal petrol tank was fitted at one end above the buffer beam.” [6]

“A light four-wheel wagon built by Cranes was bought in 1925 for the railcar to carry extra luggage or milk churns.” [6]

The Weston, Clevedon and Portishead Light Railway’s first Drewry railcar at the Ashcombe Road terminus in Weston-super-Mare. It was built for the WC&P in 1921 and operated until the line closed in 1940, © Public Domain. [7]

References

The Railway Magazine, Westminster, London, September 1922.
https://www.lner.info/locos/IC/ner_petrol_bus.php, accessed on 8th August 2024.
https://www.lner.info/locos/IC/ner_petrol_autocar.php, accessed on 8th August 2024.
https://www.embsayboltonabbeyrailway.org.uk/oldsite/nerautocar.html, accessed on 8th August 2024.
https://electricautocar.co.uk, accessed on 8th August 2024.
https://www.wcpr.org.uk/Railcars.html, accessed on 8th August 2024.
https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ashcombe_Road_-_WCPLR_small_railcar.jpg, accessed on 8th August 2024.
The Engineer; 3rd April 1908, p358 and 1st May 1908, p460.

Advertising in the November 1929 Railway Magazine

The Southern Railway

The Southern Railway had a single page advertisement in the magazine which featured the Golden Arrow Pullman Service between London and Paris.

London to Paris in 6 hrs 30 mins! [1: pIII]

Wikipedia tells us that, “The Flèche d’Or was introduced in 1926 as an all-first-class Pullman service between Paris and Calais. On 15th May 1929, the Southern Railway introduced the equivalent between London Victoria and Dover while simultaneously launching a new first class only ship, the ‘Canterbury’, for the ferry crossing. The train usually consisted of 10 British Pullman cars, hauled by one of the Southern Railway’s Lord Nelson class locomotives, and took 98 minutes to travel between London and Dover. Because of the impact of air travel and ‘market forces’ on the underlying economy of the service, ordinary first- and third-class carriages were added in 1931. Similarly the first-class-only ferry, ‘Canterbury’, was modified to allow other classes of passenger.” [3]

It is not surprising that the train service ceased at the outbreak of the Second World War in September 1939. “It resumed after the war on 15th April 1946, initially running with the pre-war Pullmans and the Trianon Bar car, a converted twelve-wheeled Pullman. The Southern Railway flagship, the ‘Invicta’ replaced the ‘Canterbury’ from 10th October 1946. As of 1949, the all-Pullman train was scheduled to depart from London Victoria at 10:30, with the connecting train from Calais reaching Paris (Gare du Nord) at 17:30, and from Paris at 12:15, with the connecting train from Dover arriving in London at 19:30. This worked out to a scheduled journey time of 6 hours eastbound and 6 hours, 15 minutes, westbound.” [3]

Four Full-page Adverts from the LMS

The LMS had four full-page adverts in the November 1929 magazine:

The first advert was for a series of ‘Carriage Window’ books. …

The first page pointed to a series of ‘carriage window’ books which helped travellers to comprehend what they were seeing beyond the windows on their journeys. [1: p IV]

These ‘Carriage Window’ books were usually entitled ‘The Track of the …’. They covered a number of different main line routes.

The frontispiece from the edition of ‘Track of the Irish Mail’ issued in 1947. [4]

In the article about The Railway Magazine of November 1938 we noted that the LNER was supplying scripts and slides for talks about their network. In 1929, the LMS was offering a similar range of lectures. …

Lecture notes and slides, illustrating holiday places and places of general interest on the LMS, supplied free! There is also a suggestion that a lecturer may be available too! [1: p V]

The LMS also advertised the dining experience on their express services. …

The dining experience on LMS is celebrated in this advert. I wonder whether their customers saw the advertised service or had similar disappointments as people in later generations? The food on offer probably simplified preparation work. [1: p VI]

The use of containers on the LMS was clearly established by 1929. Mobile cranes in goods depots at railheads facilitated transfer from railway wagons to trucks and lorries. [1: p VII]

Four LNER Full-page Adverts

The first advert is for two books, a picture and a model celebrating ‘The Flying Scotsman’ and other LNER locomotives.

Two books, a ‘panel’ and a paperweight, all available direct from the LNER! [1: pVIII]

Pullman services provided by the LNER. The ‘Queen of Scots’, the ‘West Riding Pullman’, the ‘ Harrogate Sunday Pullman’. [1: pIX]

Ferry routes to Flushing (every day), to Hook of Holland (every night) to Antwerp and to Esbjerg (both nightly except Sundays). [1: pX]

LNER slides and lectures, available free of charge! It seems from this advert, and that from 1938, that this practice was normal during the interwar period. Some interesting subjects! [1: pXI]

Two GWR Adverts

The first GWR adverts seems to be endeavouring to extend the summer season in the West Country. …

The GWR encourages out-of-season travel to the West Country, and the purchase of travel books direct from the GWR. [1: pXII]

Their second advert focussed on their container service. …

Advertising the GWR container services, the photograph used shows a contemporary mobile crane and a GWR road-lorry. [1: pXIII]

Other Adverts

A regular feature is a full-page advert from the Railway Publishing Co. Ltd. [1: pXIV]

Adverts from ‘The Railway Club’ and Bassett-Lowke sit alongside an offering from the Press Bureau of London’s Underground of two new lectures, the first about London’s landmarks, the second about the building of the underground railways. [1: pXV]

The advert from St. Martin’s Engraving Co. Ltd. appears also in the November 1938 magazine. Fouled for Books is still a going concern in 2024. Edward Exley & Co. was founded in Bradford in about 1920 and the company is still in existence in 1924, undertaking repairs of Exley products from the past. [5] F. Moore was not the name of a real artist, but rather the name adopted by the Locomotive Publishing Company, which employed the services of the rather reclusive Edwin Thomas Rudd to do the actual painting. [6][1: pXVI]

The Central Argentine Railway [1: pXVII]

The Central Argentine Railway was one of four broad gauge (5ft 6in/1676mm) British companies that built and operated railway networks in Argentina. Established in the 19th century, to serve the provinces of Santa Fe and Córdoba, in the east-central region of the country, it eventually also served Buenos Aires, Tucumán, and Santiago del Estero. It effectively ceased to exist after nationalisation.

“British railway companies operating in Argentina, including the CA, were nationalized in 1948 by the Juan Perón administration. The CA took over the northern section of the Ferrocarril Rosario y Puerto Belgrano and then became part of the state-owned Ferrocarril General Bartolomé Mitre.” [7]

This final advert from the front pages of the November 1929 magazine promoted a publication by The Railway Engineer, the revised 6th edition of “Locomotive Management – from Cleaning to Driving” by Jas T. Hodgson and John Williams. [1: pXVIII]

‘Locomotive Management – from Cleaning to Driving’ was a standard text which went through regular revisions to keep it up-to-date.

Some LMS “Business” Posters

The LMS. sent specimen copies of an “admirable set of new posters recently issued by them depicting the various goods traffic facilities offered on their system. There [were] four posters altogether, all drawn by Mr. Norman Wilkinson, and these differ from the usual run of such things inasmuch as they are in black and white, with good bold red and black lettering beneath each picture.” [1: p412] Two were reproduced in the magazine.

Two of the LMS posters were reproduced in monochrome in The Railway Magazine. [1: p410]

One poster dealt with “‘Modern Equipment for Modern Loads’, and illustrate[d] the fact that the LMS. have modern cranes and specially constructed rolling-stock for dealing with loads of exceptional size and weight; another is mainly concerned with ‘Mobility’, and stresses the fact that containers reduce[d] packing costs and eliminate[d] risks of damage – besides expediting transportation of merchandise between truck and lorry. A third poster – a specially fine bit of work, this illustrate[d] the LMS. method of ‘rapid transport of goods from ship to dock’ – that is, by means of electric trucks – the contention being that modern LMS. steamers and handling appliances ensure[d] safe and expeditious transportation of goods between Great Britain and the Irish Free State and Northern Ireland. The last of the series also deals with ‘Speedy Handling’ by means of mechanically-propelled trucks, which ‘transfer goods expeditiously and safely in LMS. goods depots’.” [1: p412]

New GWR posters

“Two posters which have been issued by Mr. E. Ford, Chief Goods Manager, GWR. … They may be regarded as good examples of the modern tendency to recognise that there is almost as much scope for advertising goods traffic facilities as for those provided by the passenger department. The first emphasise[d] the fact that express freight trains provide[d] for rapid transit, usually on the basis of collection one evening and delivery early next morning, while it is quite appropriate that a first-class express engine should be shown at the head of the train, in that the latest express engines [were] quite frequently employed for running these trains, especially those on ‘registered’ service, with which the poster [was] particularly concerned. The poster itself [was] in colour, with lettering in black, white and amber on a blue ground. Pictorial portions [were] in full colour, while the arrow [was] in green, with amber shading, to emphasise ‘The Sign of the Green Arrow’.” [1: p 413]

The two GWR posters were reproduced in monochrome in the Railway Magazine. [1: p411]

“The second poster also use[d] the symbol of an arrow to indicate, in this case, speed and sureness. The train itself [was] utilised as the arrow, while the target [was] an outline map of the British Isles in green, the name of the principal centres served by the GWR. was indicated as arrow destinations. The poster in other respects [was] on a green ground, utilising also blue, red and amber to an effective degree.” [1: p413]

These two posters go some way towards addressing the veracity of different views about the commencement of the ‘Green Arrow’ service referred to in my article about the November 1938 edition of the magazine. These posters demonstrate that the GWR, at least, was offering a Green Arrow service by November 1929 and suggest that the service reached into Scotland and so into the territories of the LMS and LNER.

References

The Railway Magazine, Westminster, November 1929.
https://rogerfarnworth.com/2024/07/20/advertising-in-the-railway-magazine-of-november-1938.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Arrow_(train), accessed on 29th July 2024.
http://www.britishtransporttreasures.com/product/the-track-of-the-irish-mail-euston-to-holyhead-l-m-s-route-book-no-1-anon-1947-ebook, accessed on 29th July 2024.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Exley_Limited, accessed on 30th July 2024.
https://culhamticketoffice.co.uk/bits/hidden-pages/fmoore.html, accessed on 30th July 2024.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Argentine_Railway, accessed on 30th July 2024.

Railway Staff – A 1929 Census

6 Replies

The Railway Magazine in November 1929 reported the breakdown of staffing across Britain’s railways in the week ending 9th March 1929. [1: p400]

The census of railway employees in 1929. [1: p400]

It is interesting, first, to note the relative sizes of the staff numbers of the Big Four railway companies. Significantly the largest employer was the LMS. The LNER had around 55,000 less staff than the LMS. Strikingly, the GWR had significantly less staff again, with the SR the smallest, with less than one third of the staff numbers of the LMS. I wonder whether these figures might have resulted in some careful thinking, particularly by the LMS about the efficiency of their organisation? It would have been helpful to see the relative levels of income to compare against these figures. …

Secondly, I was struck by the relative numbers of male and female staff: 619,000 men to 17,000 women. 10 years after the first world war, very few of the women employed on the railways at that time would still have been employed by the railway companies. … What might have been the figures in a census during WW1?

Hidden within those figures are other striking comparisons. …

There were 6,800 male carriage cleaners and only 675 female carriage cleaners.
It seems that male officers and clerical staff totaled just over 72,000, supplemented by over 2,700 technical staff. Women employed in these areas amounted to around 9,800. It is unlikely that many supervisory positions in these areas would have been open to women, perhaps head offices of the railway companies may have had female managers in typing pools?
The role of crossing-keeper seems to have been far more equitably staffed between men (1,400) and women (1,500). Often a station master’s wife (or the wife of another male employee) would be a crossing-keeper at a nearby crossing. One wonders whether there was a pay differential between men and women in this occupation?
Cleaning roles for carriages and engines were given to men (13,600). Office cleaners were set alongside charwomen (3,100) and it appears that all lavatory attendants and waiting room staff were women (660).
Shop and artisan staff are recorded separately. Men seem to have filled all supervisory roles (2,900) with 104,500 men in other grades (excluding watchmen and labourers). There were just over 1,000 women in similar roles.
There were 7,600 male hotel, refreshment room, dining car and laundry staff and 5,700 women.

I am sure that as you look at the figures other matters will come to light.

I wonder what heading wheeltappers would be recorded under? Probably ‘carriage and wagon examiners’.

It also seems that in 1929 there was a ‘profession’ that trainspotters could aspire to. Across the railways of Britain there were 2,408 ‘number-takers’!

And finally … There are two pictures below showing railway employees at work on the railways. I came across the second while searching for a wartime image of women at work on the railways. The first is the cover page from the booklet which included the second picture. The “booklet, [was] published for six old pence in the BR era, by J W Stafford, the President of the NUR with the evocative title ‘We See Ourselves’. J W Stafford was a lengthman on the Great Western Railway, and later British Railways, for 33 years before he was elected president of the NUR in 1954. He asserted that it was management’s view in the 1930s that the heavier the tool, the greater would be the output of work, and that this belief had not entirely died out in the 1950s.” [2]

The foreword by Frank Mosley notes that “Credit for building a cathedral is seldom given to the men who carefully and skilfully laid the stones. It is the same with a railway – in building it and keeping it in good order.”

Didcot Railway Centre comments: “This booklet itself is a comprehensive and very honest reflection of all aspects of Permanent Way staff employment, its challenges and its future prospects. Extending to no less than 21 sections on 23 pages, it includes ‘As Others see us’; ‘We were the Pioneers’; ‘Our Girls’; ‘A Dangerous Occupation’; ‘The Whitewash Train’ to ‘Airing our Grievances’.” [2]

The section entitled ‘Our Girls’ is a frank reflection that wartime shortages of men caused females to be employed on this work. Stafford, writing in the BR era, considered that given the arduous and dangerous nature of normal activities, it simply wasn’t a suitable environment for women!

I suspect that today that thinking would be seen as sexist, even if it wasn’t in the mid-20th century. Women clearly proved themselves effective railway employees in both world wars.

Women at work on the railways during WW2. [2]

References

The Railway Magazine, November 1929.
https://didcotrailwaycentre.org.uk/article.php/596/tuesday-treasures-march-2024, accessed on 30th July 2024.

Advertising in The Railway Magazine of November 1938

1 Reply

Following on from the short article about The Railway and Travel Monthly of July 1918 which can be found here, [1] this is a short reflection on the advertising which appeared in the November 1938 edition of The Railway Magazine, [2] twenty years after the magazine looked at from 1918 and only a few months before the outbreak of the Second World War.

Advertising included a series of adverts for:

New publications such as: A History of the Southern Railway (17s/6d); Gradients if the British Main Line Railways (5s); British Locomotive Types – 3rd Edition (5s); History of the Great Western Railway, Volume 1 (1833-1863)(£1/1s) and Volume 2 (1863-1921)(10s/6d);The Railway Handbook 1938-1939, 5th Annual Edition (2s/6d); a reprint of The Locomotive Stock Book (2s/6d), and its Appendix (1s/6d), bought together – 3s/9d.
Damaged books at low prices from The Locomotive Publishing Co. Ltd.
St. Martin’s Engraving Co. Ltd.
The Railway Correspondence & Travel Society membership and visits.
The Railway Club membership.
The LNER’s practice of loaning out slides free of charge accompanied by a set of lecture notes, enabling individuals, clubs and societies to put on talks about railway related subjects themselves.

Lantern Slide talks at minimal cost. A goodwill gesture from the LNER or perhaps a good publicity exercise! [2: pIV]

Sending Containered Loads & Liquids in Bulk by Rail

There were three full page adverts placed jointly by the Big Four railway companies. The first two pages related to the movement of prepacked loads – containers and tankers.

A joint advert in The Railway Magazine of November 1938 by the Big Four railway companies. [2: pV]

Containerisation on Britain’s railways can be traced back to very early days. “In the 1830s the Liverpool & Manchester Railway used simple rectangular boxes, four to a waggon, to convey coal from the Lancashire collieries to Liverpool, where they were transferred to horse-drawn carts by crane.” [3] This had some advantages, particularly the reduced handling of the cargo.

After the turn of the 20th century, “the London & North Western, Lancashire & Yorkshire, and Midland Railway companies were carrying ‘box coal’ on flat wagons, the coal being destined for use by steamboats.” [3]

The Great Central Railway “also played a part in the story of containerisation, being one of only three companies which provided special wagons for the conveyance of ‘fish tanks’.” [3] The wagons were classified as passenger stock.

The Midland and the Great Northern also followed this practice; in the case of the Great Northern Railway the containers were referred to as ‘cod boxes’ some of which lasted into the 1930s.

As early as the late 19th Century railways were using closed containers which resembled the bodies of wooden box vans, “these were initially known as ‘lift vans’ and were privately owned by several furniture removal firms. They were carried both on railway wagons and on flat road trailers drawn by horses or steam tractors.” [3]

The Advent of more effective road transport after WWI brought a challenge to railway companies. The biggest concern was that lorries could offer a door-to-door service which significantly reduced handling costs.

“The LMS launched its first container in 1926, and over the next few years all four of the pre-Nationalisation railway companies developed significant container traffic. Containers were soon to be found carrying all manner of goods, including bicycles, confectionery, castings, cookers, baths, machinery, boots, cloth, carpet, pianos, gramophones, sugar, shrubs, and of course furniture. Special insulated containers were soon developed for the conveyance of meat, dry ice bunkers being provided to maintain the temperature.” [3]

Containerisation worked best for high value items many of which required careful packing to avoid breakages. “This meant that a premium could be charged for a fast ‘door to door’ service, which justified the use of containers.” [3]

In the first instance a variety of different wagons were used to carry thesevstandardised containers. But “by the 1930s specialised container flat wagons or ‘conflats’ were built. In many cases these were converted from other wagons, for example the LNER converted a number of cattle trucks following a downturn in livestock traffic.” [3]

Early Road-Rail Tank Containers and Demountable Tanks. This full page advert in The Railway Magazine is on the following page to the ‘Containerisation’ advert above. [2: pVI]

This advert highlights a further, more recent, development in the movement of goods – sending liquids in bulk by rail. Road-Rail tank containers dispensed with the use of casks and drums, so reducing conveyance and handling costs. The rail companies sweetened the deal by only charging for transport of the contents of these tanks provided they were carried on privately owned railway vehicles – so no return charge for the empty tank/wagon!

A similar image from a leaflet produced at the time, entitled “Conveyance of Liquids in Bulk by Rail” jointly produced by the GWR, LNER, LMS and the SR in the 1930s. [4]

The Green Arrow Freight Service

The third full page advert placed jointly by the railway companies was for ‘The Green Arrow’.

“The sign of the Green Arrow was a double precaution for traders – a system of Registered Transit for merchandise or livestock by goods train, ensuring that goods were monitored effectively throughout their journey. A Green Arrow label was fixed to the consignment facilitating identification and advance notification of its arrival. A fee of 2s/6d per consignment secured this service.” [2: pVIII]

A BR western region poster advertising the Green Arrow service, framed and protected by glass. This image was shared on the LNER Forum by ‘1H was 2E’ on 3rd March 2015. It is made available for use by the Science Museum under a Creative Commons Licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). [6][7]

“In 1928 the LNER set up their officially named full wagon load ‘Green Arrow’ service, offering registered overnight transits.” [8] There is a confusion between sources – Atkins, Beard, Hyde and Tourret say that “the GWR ran an experiment with registered transit loads between 1927 and March 1929. This was a great success and became the ‘Green Arrow’ service. The other railway companies would not accept the principle until March 1933 when they at last followed suit.” [9]

However, by 1938, all four companies were clearly participating in the Green Arrow scheme.

Railhead Distribution – the GWR

The GWR advertised its road services in a full page advert in the November 1938 Railway Magazine as shown in the image below.

Although it is early morning the railhead fleet is ready for the road! [2: pVII]

Goods received in bulk at railheads in Birmingham, Bristol, Cardiff, Exeter and Swansea were, by early morning, sorted ready for distribution and had been placed in road vehicles ready for distribution. The GWR distributed goods to destinations within a radius of 30 miles from their railheads.

The scheme ensured that goods reached even the most isolated destinations by the day following their original despatch. This meant that customer’s orders could be fulfilled in a timely manner direct from the warehouse rather than needing to be pre-stocked in a company’s outlying branches.

A contemporary postcard image showing a Thornycroft van supplied to the GWR. This vehicle is dated as being in service in 1939. [10]

Famous Trains of the LMS

The LMS placed adverts across 3 full pages for three express restaurant car services: The ‘Lancastrian’; the ‘Mancunion’; and the ‘Centenary’. …………

References

https://rogerfarnworth.com/2024/07/18/the-railway-and-travel-monthly-july-1918-a-snapshot-including-advertising, accessed on 19th July 2024.
The Railway Magazine, November 1938; Westminster, London, November 1938.
http://www.conflat.co.uk/con_hist.html, accessed on 19th July 2024.
https://x.com/DidcotRailwayC/status/1508715315500396547?t=7rPufDVycZdMSMwsKtl2Zg&s=19, accessed on 19th July 2024.
https://archive.commercialmotor.com/article/21st-january-1930/68/gwr-goods-road-service-developments, accessed on 20th July 2024.
https://www.lner.info/forums/viewtopic.php?t=10450, accessed on 20th July 2024.
https://collection.sciencemuseumgroup.org.uk/objects/co229508/green-arrow-service-poster, accessed on 20th July 2024.
https://igg.org.uk/rail/7-fops/fo-traintype.htm, accessed on 20th July 2024.
Atkins, Beard, Hyde & Tourett; A History of GWR Goods Wagons Volumes 1 & 2 ; David & Charles, Newton Abbot, Devon, 1972.
https://files.ekmcdn.com/c8ed37/images/express-gwr-cartage-couriers-ww2-van-old-lorry-thornycroft-postcard-155198-p.jpg?v=357516B0-F987-4892-9C8F-1FDA4765FD9A, accessed on 29th July 2024.

The Caledonian Railway Rail-motor Car

2 Replies

In June 2024, I picked up a few copies of the Railway Magazine from the early 20th century.

In July 1909, the Railway Magazine noted that the Caledonian Railway had inaugurated a motor car service on its rails. Just a short journey was involved crossing the Connel Ferry Bridge and running from Connel Ferry to either North Connel or Benderloch.

In September 1909 the Railway Magazine carried a photograph of the rail-motor car.

The Caledonian Railway rail-motor car, with wagon attached. The wagon is carrying a road-motor car. It has just left the Connel Ferry Bridge. [1]

“The Caledonian Railway purchased an ordinary road-motor car, and under the superintendence of Mr. J. F. McIntosh, this was converted, at St Rollox Works, into the rail-motor car. … The car performs, daily, several journeys from Connel Ferry across the bridge to North Connel, and four of these trips in each direction are extended an additional 2.25 miles beyond North Connel to Benderloch, and it is on these longer journeys that road motor cars are conveyed on the carriage truck provided for the purpose, which is attached as a trailer to the rail-motor car.” [1]

The vehicle was a Durham-Churchill Charabanc. It originally operated as a road vehicle between Clarkston railway station and Eaglesham. It was converted to rail use in 1909 at the cost of £126!

The journey from Connel Ferry to North Connel took 5 minutes and the trip to Benderloch, 15 minutes in total.

Sunday trains were few and far between in Scotland but an exception was made for this service with 5 crossings of the bridge in each direction. Surprisingly more often than on weekdays!

The Railway Magazine notes that, “in the past, this portion of Argyllshire [was] somewhat of a closed district to motorists, owing to the long arms of the sea which intersect the land and the numerous ferries that have in consequence to be crossed. Access to the very charming district that lies between Loch Etive and Lochleven, has been particularly difficult, as the ferries have become unserviceable since the opening of the Ballachulish Railway, whilst the comparative infrequency of the trains upon the Ballachulish line, and the restrictions on the conveyance of motor cars by the ordinary trains made crossing at Connel Ferry both inconvenient and unreliable.” [1]

Motorists either avoided the area altogether or had to make a long journey via Tyndrum and Glencoe.

The charge for conveying motors across Loch Etive was 15 shillings.

Another view of the same vehicle and wagon. The rail-motor car was more of a charabanc having a number of rows of seats. [2]

This view shows the rail-motor car only offered passengers very rudimentary protection from the weather. The vehicle is entering one of the stations it served. Is this Connel Ferry, North Connel or Benderloch Railway Station? [3]

The Ballachulish Branch of the Caledonian Railway which crossed the Bridge at Connel Ferry is covered in other WordPress articles:

The Ballachulish Railway Line – Part 1

The Ballachulish Railway Line – Part 2

The Ballachulish Railway Line – Part 3

Revisiting the ballachulish railway………

References

Novel Traffic on the Caledonian Railway; in The Railway Magazine, September 1909, p195.
https://x.com/MrTimDunn/status/1042859151192477702?t=5hla6WJtvo1DnfZLPHflAw&s=19, accessed on 16th July 2024.
https://x.com/TurnipRail/status/1400768455012388865?t=W3rRakfcxeS6GIsPsfNayQ&s=19, accessed on 16th July 2024.

The Peak Forest Tramway – Part 1

8 Replies

Peter Clowes, in his article in the September 1963 edition of the Railway Magazine wrote: “Rolling down from the Derbyshire hills came the “gang” a train of perhaps 20 wagons, their rough iron bodies piled high with skilfully stacked lumps of grey limestone. They lurched and swayed on the flanged steel track and forced the brakeman in charge of the train to cling firmly to the leading wagon on which he perched. This is how the villagers of the High Peak remember the clattering, dusty Peak Forest Tramway, built by Benjamin Outram, that was part of the life of the district for 125 years.” [1]

He goes on to explain that the tramway was only ever used for goods, no passengers were carried except when company officials undertook tours of inspection. The line carried lime and limestone from Buxton’s quarries and kilns down to the Peak Forest Canal at Bugsworth for ongoing transport on barges to Lancashire and beyond.

Wikipedia provides a sketch map of the route of the tramway which is reproduced below.

*Sketch Map of The Peak Forest Tramway.* [2]

The next (adjacent) sketch map is more informative. It was included in a post about the line on the Peak and Northern Footpaths Society website. It shows the locations of a number of key features on the route of the tramway. [18]

Benjamin Outram’s original intentions were to build a canal from Ashton-under-Lyne through to Chapel Milton, now a ‘suburb’ of Chapel-en-le-Frith. [4] He sought and received and Act of Parliament to this effect, dated 28th March 1794. That Act authorised the construction of the canal, which would have been 22 miles long, and the construction of a feeder tramway/plateway from the canal to Load’s Knowle (Dove Holes), near Buxton. Gradients between Chapel Milton and Buxton were severe and unsuited to canal construction.

However, Outram decided to reduce construction costs by terminating the Peak Forest Canal at Bugsworth and building his tramway for the whole of the remaining six miles to Dove Holes. Clowes tells us that, “The line was opened on August 31, 1796, and was an immediate success. Hundreds of tons of stone were brought down to Bugsworth every day. Sometimes there were as many as 20 barges – each with a capacity of 20 tons leaving the village for Lancashire.” [1]

Wikipedia tells us that “the tramway was initially single-track, on a 4 ft 2 in (1,270 mm) gauge, constructed of stone sleeper blocks and L-section cast-iron rails that were fastened directly onto the blocks, in the same manner as [Outram’s] Little Eaton Gangway built for the Derby Canal. The rails, known as gang rails or plates, were provided by Benjamin Outram and Company who also supplied the mineral wagons.” However, in 1803, the significant traffic volumes on the line required the single line to be “made double-track, with the exception of Stodart Tunnel and below Buxton Road Bridge, using the same method of fixing the rails.” [2]

When Outram’s Peak Forest Canal Company was building the Peak Forest Tramway, between 1794 and 1796, it cut into a bed of gritstone by the hamlet of Lower Crist, about 380 yards to the east of the terminus of the Peak Forest Canal at Bugsworth. The stone apparently “had good non-slip properties and was easy to cut because it had no grain. … This bed extended south of the main line of the tramway at Lower Crist and a branch line was made into it. The Company also discovered another deposit of the same stone adjoining the nearby hamlet of Barren Clough, which is situated between Lower Crist and the canal terminus. Consequently, they purchased land there as well but it was another 56 years before Barren Clough Quarry was opened.” [3]

Clowes comments that a considerable trade in this gritstone developed as it was located so close to the Tramway and Canal. “Thousands of 6 in. square setts for the cobbled streets of the country’s growing cities were carried … to the wharfs.” [1]

“Bugsworth a sleepy little village, renamed Buxworth, … became a hive of industry.” [1] [5]

It was originally intended to extend the tramway to Buxton as and when demand for minerals grew. A further extension to Ashopton in the Hope Valley over the Rushup Moors by way of Sparrowpit , Mam Tor and Lose Hill was also planned. “These extensions never materialised and the plans were finally abandoned when the Cromford & High Peak Railway was built in 1830.” [1]

Clowes provided a vivid description of what travelling with the “gang” must have been like. A quite exhilarating experince! “Teams of horses pulled the loaded wagons from the Dove Holes quarries to the highest point of the line about a quarter of a mile away. Here the horses were unhitched. The brakeman gave the “gang” a push and then leaped onto the leading axle pin as the train of anything from 16 to 40 wagons gathered speed. At first the track curved gently through a long limestone cutting, then under the main Buxton to Chapel-en-le-Frith road by means of a stone arch bridge and down into the woods of Barmoor Clough between dry stone walls about 20ft. apart. This section of the line was closely followed by the London & North Western Railway when its spur was constructed from Stockport to Buxton, more than 50 years after the tramway was built. Until the tramway ceased operations in 1920, trains and “gangs” ran alongside each other separated only by a moss-covered wall.” [1]

As we will see in a future article about the line, “where the railway swings left into a tunnel, the tramway continued around the shoulder of a hill that shadows the birch and sycamore clad gorge which plunges down to Blackbrook. … The “gang” ran on down a steady 1-in-60 gradient to marshalling yards at the end of a 900-ft. ridge overlooking Chapel-en-le Frith. Here were workshops, stables, a permanent way store, and other buildings of the tramway company.” [1]

“An inclined plane, 500 yd. long and worked by a wire rope that ran around an 18 ft.-wide wooden drum, controlled the descent of loaded wagons to the foot of the slope. The rope was 2 in. in diameter and weighed six tons. No more than eight wagons were allowed in a run on the incline. The loaded vehicles would be balanced with an appropriate number of empties whenever possible. The weight of the descending wagons pulled the empties up the slope. Sometimes horses were harnessed to the driving drum to provide additional power. If the weight of the wagons became too great and the train started to run away, a lever-operated brake would be applied in the wooden control cabin that stood on stilts just beyond the top of the 1-in-7 incline. Sometimes, however, this proved ineffective. With an ever-increasing roar the wagons would race downhill, then jump the rails and scatter their loads far and wide.” [1]

Clowes narrative continues from the small town of Chapel-en-le-Frith: “After negotiating the plane the “gangs” were reassembled in the Townend sidings and were started again on the journey to Bugsworth under their own momentum. Soon they were clattering across Bowden Lane and through a copse of oak and elm.” [1]

“A mile west of Chapel was Stodhart Tunnel which the wagons entered through a steep sided cutting, the slopes of which were covered with ivy and rhododendron bushes. For 100 yards the “gangs” thundered in darkness. Then they were out into daylight and speeding along the fastest part of the track through Chapel Milton. There were sidings here across the road from the old Spread Eagle Inn-and two or three wagons of lime might be shunted off the main line to await the arrival of local farmers with horse and cart. The tramway continued through the pleasant fields of Bridgeholm, across the Whitehough road and along the banks of Black Brook to Bugsworth. The whole journey might take three hours, allowing for delays on the plane.” [1]

At Bugsworth, the tramway divided into extensive sidings and there were many loading berths. where limestone was tipped into large canal-side storage bays below the level of the track. Clowes tells us that “one of the most interesting features of this inland port was a simple yet ingenious tipping wheel which consisted of two vertical, spoked wheels about 16 ft. high attached to a frame which ran on a special rail track. The frame was pushed over a line of wagons which had been run on to a pier over the canal basin, and a hook was fastened to the end of each wagon in turn. A rope led from the hook over a drum which linked the two main wheels. A man would climb up the spokes of one of the vertical wheels, so making it turn like a human gin. This lifted one end of the wagon off the rails, its hinged end-plate swung open and the contents of the vehicle spilled into the hold of a barge below.” [1]

Bugsworth Basin was surrounded by merchants’ offices and warehouses. The offices housed a series of different merchants supplying limestone, lime, coal and general merchandise. Further buildings housed workshops for track and rolling-stock repair; and stables for a horses which were used to transport goods and wagons back up the line to Dove Holes.

Outram’s plateways used L-shaped flanged track on which the wagons ran. The rails were 4 ft. 2 in. apart and initially made of cast-iron. Each rail was 3 ft. long and weighed 56 lb. Clowes tells us that, “the inner flange was raised 2 in. above the 3 in. wide running surface on which the flat wheels of the wagons ground their way. The rails were secured at the joints by cast-iron chairs which sat on stone block sleepers, each one about 18 in. square. An iron spike with a tapering head was driven through the end of each rail into an oak plug seated inside the sleeper. The clatter of “gangs” passing over these primitive joints must have been fearful and, understandably enough, rail breakages were frequent.” [1]

It wasn’t until the five year period between 1865 and 1870 that the line was relaid with 9 ft. long steel rails. These were rolled at Gorton and fishplates, 1ft 6ins long were used to connect the rails. “Between the stone sleeper blocks was laid a cobbled path which enabled the horses to get a firm grip. The cobbles were raised well above the level of the sleepers, in fact about an inch higher than the rail flange. This arrangement might have helped to guide wagon wheels back on to the track following derailments.” [1]

Clowes explains that wagons used on the tramway were very crudely constructed: “Each weighed between 16 and 20 cwt. when empty, and carried about 2 tons. Three sides of the body were sheets of cast iron held together by iron bands and two large wooden chocks. The fourth side was a hinged iron gate which swung open when the vehicle was tipped to unload its cargo. The body was bolted in farm-cart style to wooden axle beams. The wheels – some were cast iron, others were of wood with wrought-iron tyres – ran loose on iron pins projecting from the axle beams. They were secured by large washers and cotter pins. The “gangs” were coupled together by two short iron chains fastened at each end of the wagon beds. There was no proper braking system. Until the last days of working, the running wagons could be halted only by a perilous practice on the part of the brakeman. He would leap from his perch on the leading axle pin and thrust iron sprags into the spokes of the spinning wheels. This would lock the wheels and skid the “gang” to a stop.” [1]

The Route from Bugsworth to Dove Holes

Peter Clowes has given us a description of the journey from Dove Holes to Bugsworth. [1] As we have already noted, it would have been an exciting ride for the brakesman/ brakesmen in charge of the trams. The journey back up the gradient from Bugsworth to Dove Holes would have been much more of a toil and would have relied on horsepower. The route will be covered in greater detail, illustrated, where possible by contemporary plans and maps. In addition, as many modern photographs as is practical will be included and the journey will probably need to be divided into at least two articles.

Bugsworth Basin is shown below on an extract from the 1898 25″ OS Map which was surveyed in 1896. The concentration of tramway sidings is remarkable and suggests that, in the years before the turn of the 20th century, this was a very dynamic, busy and noisy place!

Bugsworth Basin, the terminus of the Peak Forest Canal, was surrounded by a myriad of tramway sidings. This extract from the 1898 25″ OS Map shows the main basin just to the South of the Navigation Inn. The tramway is shown exiting the extract at the third point down on the right side of the image. The tramway running South-east and leaving the extract in tunnel was the line providing access to the Barren Clough Quarry. That service the Lower Crist Quarry left the Tramway mainline a short distance to the East of the edge of this extract. [7]

Approximately the same area in the 21st century. The renovated canal basin is clearly visible. The dual-carriageway visible at the bottom of the satellite image is the A6 Whalley Bridge and Chapel-en-le-Frith by-pass. [8]

“Starting in 1968, volunteers of the Inland Waterways Protection Society restored the canal and basins culminating in the re-opening to navigation in 2005. Now that restoration of navigation has been achieved, improvements and development continues” [9] under the auspices of the Bugsworth Basin Heritage Trust (BBHT). Their plan of the site is shown below.

*The BBHT plan of the Bugsworth Basin site. **Key:** Ground Panel Locations are shown by green dots; Welcome Panels are shown by orange dots; Observation Panels are shown by mauve dots.* [10]

A schematic model of the Bugsworth Basin at the East end of the Lower Basin. (My photograph, 11th June 2021.)

Bugsworth Basin from the East. [12]

Bugsworth Basin has been lovingly restored over a number of years. This image shows one of the information boards at the site and was taken in June 2021. The Lower Basin is a long thin canal arm on the North side of the Bugsworth site, to the West of the Navigation Inn. (My photograph, 11th June 2021.)

This ‘waggon’ was fabricated by the Bugsworth Basin Heritage Trust and sits on the island between the Lower Basin and The Wide. (My photograph, 11th June 2021)

The East end of the Wide in 2021. The bridge in the centre top of the image carries a public road over the access to the Upper Basin. The Navigation Inn can be seen in the top left of the image. (My photograph, 11th June 2021.)

*Bugsworth Upper Basin from the West. Some of the trams are visible in the foreground of this image from around 1900*. *Also to the left of the goods warehouse on the left side of the canal arm a frame of one of the original tipplers can be made out*. *To the rear of the image there seem to be a very significant number of loaded trams sitting in the tramway sidings*. [13]

*Bugsworth Upper Basin again, some loaded trams on the right side of the picture and the mobile tippler is again visible on the left, standing on top of the loading wharf.* [10]

The Upper Basin again, this time in 1920, a lot of empty trams appear in the foreground and the mobile tippler stands out well on the left of the picture. The view of the loading wharf structure that supported the tippler and carried it’s rails is much better in thus image than in the previous two, © J.R. Board. [16]

*Bugsw*orth *Basin at a later date. The mobile Tippler has now disappeared and there is no sign of the sidings beyond the end of the canal arm.* [17]

*Bugsworth Basin also looking to the West and showing the Peninsula on the last picture. The stone blocks which secured the tramway plates are featured.* [15]

Before heading east from Bugsworth Basin two particular things are worthy of note:

First, just beyond the Navigation Inn on the North side of the Upper Basin, there is a well-preserved example of a tramway wharf where goods were loaded and unloaded.
Second, the skew arch bridges which carry a branch tramway which served lime kilns.

The two skew-arch bridges which carrried the tramway branch to the lime kilns in 1976. These bridges carried the tramway branch over the Black Brook and a medieval packhorse road. The road bridge is in the foreground the river bridge is beyond. [20]

The skew-arch bridge carrying the tramway branch to the limekilns over the old packhorse road. The skew-arch bridge over the Black brook is off to the left of the picture. The tramway mainline ran across the right foreground of the image. (My photograph, 11th June 2021.)

The relative locations of Barren Clough Quarry junction and the Skew-arch bridges. [21]

Leaving Bugworth Basin, the Tramway passed to the North of Lower Crist Quarry. Its branch tramway left the mainline to the East of the junction with the limekiln tramway branch as shown below.

25″ 1898 OS Map extract showning The Peak Forest Tramway to the East of Bugsworth Basin. Lower Crist Quarry and its tramways are shown on the South side of the Peak Forest Tramway. Barron Clough Quarry was further to the South and was served by its own tramway which passed through a tunnel as it left Bugsworth Basin. Lower Crist Quarry is, in the 21st century bisected by the A6 dual-carriageway. Little of consequence now remains. [11]

Both the Barren Clough Quarry and the Crist Quarry (and the tunnel which gave access to the Barren Clough Quarry are covered in detail in an article by Peter J. Whitehead, “Crist and Barren Clough Quarries, High Peak, Derbyshire.” [19] It seems as though Barren Clough Quarry was not opened until the Company believed that Christ Quarry was close to exhaustion. Barren Clough was opened 56 years after Crust Quarry. It was served by a single-track tramway branch. The branch “commenced at a point 80 yards to the east of the terminus of the Peak Forest Canal. At a distance of 145 yards from the main line, it entered the tunnel before arriving on the quarry floor. Although the tunnel was relatively short, a vertical shaft was first sunk at a distance of 76 yards from the north portal (just under half way) to enable it to be excavated from four faces at once rather than at each end. When the tunnel was completed this shaft became an airshaft, although this feature was probably unnecessary for such a short tunnel.” [19]

The two quarry branch tramways are shown on the map extract below.

*Barren Clough and Crist Qu*arries and their tramway branches. [11]

Tramway routes to the East of Bugsworth Basin, imposed on a recent satellite image. (Google Maps)

The location of *Barren Clough and Crist Quarries* in the 21st century, showing the A6 dual carriageway built in the later years of the 20th century. [Google Maps Satellite Image.]

This is how RailMapOnline shows the Tramroad and its various connections over the length we have been looking at. [20]

As the OS Map extract above shows, there was a group of cottages just to the West of the tramway access to Crist Quarry. Those cottages are still in use in 21st Century. The access route to them (shown on the OS Map) has been cut by the A6 Dual Carriageway. They can only now be accessed from Bugsworth Basin.

Further East, the Tramroad follows the South side of Black Brook….

The route is shown on the 6″ Ordnance Survey from the turn of the 20th century. [21]

The route of the old tramway is a well-paved/stoned footpath/bridleway for a distance to the East of Bugsworth Basin. [Google Maps]

The route continues on the 6″ Ordnance Survey. [22]

The route continued alongside Black Brook, although not following the meander around Harbour Cottage. [Google Maps]

Further along the line, it deviated South away from Black Brook so as to pass to the South side of Whitehall Mill.

Whitehall Mill is shown on this extract from the 25″ OS Map of 1898. It had its own tramway connection, with two separate accesses to the tramway. [22]

The same area, shown on modern ESRI satellite imagery as provided by the National Library of Scotland (NLS), the Mill has expanded significantly in size and is still in use. It’s site crosses the brook. [22]

Approaching Whitehall Mill from the West and looking along the old tramway route. [My photograph, 11th June 2021]

Continuing to approach Whitehall Mill from the West along the old tramway route. [My photograph, 11th June 2021]

Walking alongside Whitehall Mill from the West along the old tramway route. [My photograph, 11th June 2021]

Continuing alongside Whitehall Mill from the West along the old tramway route with part of the site screened from the path by a very tall Leylandii hedge! [My photograph, 11th June 2021]

Looking West-southwest back along the old tramway route towards Buxworth with the Whitehall Mill buildings screened by the Leylandii on the right. The Millpond is just off the image to the right. [Google Streetview, March 2021]

Looking East-northeast along the line of the old tramway with the Millpond which served Whitehall Mill on the left. [Google Streetview, March 2021]

The 25″ Ordnance Survey of 1898 shows the double track tramway continuing on the South side of Black Brook and curing round the village of Whitehough. [23]

The same area as shown on the OS map above, as it appears on the ESRI satellite imagery provided by the NLS. [23]

Looking West towards Whitehall Mill along the line of the old tramway. [Google Streetview, June 2016]

Looking East along the line of the old tramway from the same point as shown in the image above. [Google Streetview, June 2016]

The old tramway curved towards the Northeast for a short distance after crossing the minor road leading to Whitehough. [My photograph, 11th June 2021]

The old tramway then curved round towards the Southeast before crossing another minor road leading to Whitehough (Whitehough Head Lane). [My photograph, 11th June 2021]

Looking Southwest along Whitehough Head Lane towards Whitehough and showing the point at which the old tramway crossed the road at level. [Google Streetview, June 2011]

Looking Northeast along Whitehough Head Lane at the point where the old tramway crossed the road. [Google Streetview, June 2016]

This next extract from the 25″ OS mapping of 1898, shows the old tramway curving away from its crossing of Whitehough Head Lane. [24]

The same area on the ESRI satellite imagery in the 21st century. [24]

Along this length of the tramway the formation of the old tramway is exposed with some of the old stone blocks which secured the tramways rails in position visible. The next sequence of photographs show these blocks.

This sequence of photographs show exposed stone blocks which acted as sleepers for the tramway rails. The images are all taken facing along the tramroad towards Chapel-en-le-Frith. [My photographs, 11th June 2021]

The estate of new housing visible in these pictures is built on the site of Forge Mill. An information board provides details, although the protective Perspex cover to the board has begun to fog over the years.

The information board tells us that the stone blocks were quarried at Crist Quarry, near Bugsworth Basin. Originally, the basic L-shaped rails were laid directly onto the blocks as specified by Benjamin Outram, the engineer of the tramway, but rail breakages were a problem and so, by 1837 the tramway rails were relaid on iron saddles. This is shown in the picture at the bottom-left of the information board. [My photograph, 11th June 2021]

The site of Forge Mill appears on this next extract from the 25″ OS mapping. [27]

The same area as shown on the ESRI satellite imagery. [27]

Forge Mill has seen a variety of different uses over the years. The Derbyshire Historic Environment Record list these as:

BLEACH WORKS (Post Medieval – 1540 AD to 1900 AD)
MILL POND (Post Medieval – 1540 AD to 1900 AD)
WEIR (Post Medieval – 1540 AD to 1900 AD)
PAPER MILL (Post Medieval – 1540 AD to 1900 AD)
RAILWAY SIDING (Georgian to Victorian – 1800 AD? to 1900 AD) [25]

Information about the site was provided as part of the planning application for the new housing estate on the site of the Works . The document is available on High Peak Council’s website. [26] It confirms that the Forge Mill site was, before redevelopment, known as the Dorma Works. “The site was first developed in the early 1800’s as
a paper mill. By the 1900’s the site changed to the production of textiles, a dye and bleach works. The site was sold in the early 20th century to Dorma who produced bed linen and cotton prints.” [26] After the site was purchased in 2005 it remained unoccupied and was largely demolished in 2010.

A siding was provided to link the mill to the tramway. This can be seen on the OS map above.

The 25″ Ordnance Survey of 1898 again. Beyond Forge Mill the route of the old tramway deviates Southward still following Black Brook. By the turn of the 20th century a Sewerage Farm had been constructed between the tramway and the brook. [28]

The same area as shown on the 25″OS map extract above. The Sewage Farm is of a more significant size in the 21st century. [28]

The next extract from the 25″ Ordnance Survey shows the tramway crossing Charley Lane on the level before beginning to curve back to the Northeast. [29]

The modern ESRI satellite imagery shows the A6 dual carriageway embankments crossing the line of the old tramway. [29]

The view back along the old tramway route towards Forge Mill. [Google Streetview, March 2021]

Another view back along the old tramway route. The camera is sitting in Charley Lane. [Google Streetview, October 2022]

The route of the old tramway to the East of Charley Lane now lies under the embankment of the A6 dual carriageway. [Google Streetview, March 2021]

This is a convenient point to finish the first part of our journey along the Peak Forest Tramway. There is, of course, much more to come, but this will need to wait for a future article.

Just to round off details of the old tramway’s history, we return first to Peter Clowes’ article in the Railway Magazine and then to other sources ….

The Gradual Demise of the Tramway

“Fifty years after the line was opened, the owners leased the Peak Forest and Macclesfield Canals – and, of course, the tramway – in perpetuity to the Sheffield, Ashton-under Lyne & Manchester Railway. A Parliamentary Act of 1846 provided for an annuity of £9,325 to be paid to the Peak Forest Canal Company. The railway later became part of the Manchester, Sheffield & Lincolnshire Railway, and in 1883 the canals and tramway were transferred completely to the new owners. The old canal company was dissolved. The Manchester, Sheffield & Lincolnshire Railway became the Great Central Railway in 1897 and was absorbed into the London & North Eastern Railway in 1923.” [1]

A 1925 Act of Parliament led to the closure of both the Peak Forest Tramway and the canal basin at Bugsworth. Clause 54 of Act 15 & 16 George V cap 52, 31st July 1925 was entitled ‘Abandonment of Peak Forest Tramway’. The Act was to empower the London and North Eastern Railway to construct new railways, widening others and to acquire land. It extended the time for the completion of certain works and it permitted the compulsory purchase of certain lands. Clause 54 stated: “The Company may abandon and discontinue their Peak Forest Tramway extending from Chinley to Dove Holes and may hold, sell or dispose of, or apply to the purposes of their undertaking the site and soil of any part of the said tramway so abandoned and discontinued.” [6]

After closure in the mid-1920s, records “made at the Marple Toll Office show that between 17th April 1928 and 12th February 1931 there were 30 deliveries of scrap iron from Bugsworth Basin to Prince’s Dock on the Ashton Canal at Guide Bridge. The total quantity of scrap was 523¼ tons, which averaged 17½ tons per boatload. …. At Prince’s Dock the scrap was transhipped onto the railway and from there it was taken to Sheffield for subsequent melting down. The scrap merchant who dismantled the tramway was T W Ward Ltd of Sheffield and it was melted down by Edgar Allen & Co Ltd, steel manufacturers of Sheffield.” [6]

As we have seen above, it was not until 1968 that work really began on recovering the industrial archaeology of the site and bringing the basin and canal back into navigable use. [9] The BBHT are proud of the replica wagon that they have relatively recently completed. The chassis of which “has been produced by members using traditional techniques, utilising timber cut from redundant oak lock gate balance beams, courtesy of the Canal & River Trust. The body steelwork has been produced by modern laser cutting, again from drawings by one of our volunteers. We have assembled this “kit” and mounted it onto the chassis.” [9] The replica wagon is now on display on the peninsula on the South side of the lower basin arm.

Further Reading

There is some excellent coverage of the Tramway and Bugsworth Basin available both online and in print form. This material includes:

Grahame Boyes and Brian Lamb; ‘The Peak Forest Canal and Railway; an Engineering and Business History’; The Railway & Canal Historical Society, 2012, (ISBN 948 0 901461 59 9). £30.00
The Industrial Archaeology of the Peak Forest Tramway; http://archive.bugsworthbasin.org/pages/tram.htm

References

Peter Clowes; The Peak Forest Limestone Tramway; in The Railway Magazine, Volume 109, September 1963, p611-617. This article can be accessed via a subscription to The Railway Magazine archives which is available as an add-on to a regular subscription to the magazine.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_Forest_Tramway, accessed on 3rd June 2021.
http://www.pittdixon.go-plus.net/quarries-gritstone/quarries-gritstone.htm, accessed on 3rd June 2021.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chapel_Milton, accessed on 3rd June 2021.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bugsworth_Basin, accessed on 3rd June 2021.
http://www.pittdixon.go-plus.net/pft/$pft.htm, accessed on 3rd June 2021.
https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=17&lat=53.33580&lon=-1.96833&layers=168&b=1, accessed on 3rd June 2021.
https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=17&lat=53.33580&lon=-1.96833&layers=170&b=1, accessed on 3rd June 2021. This is an extract from the ESRI satellite imagery which forms the base layer over which various NLS OS Maps are overlaid.
https://bugsworthbasin.org, accessed on 3rd June 2021.
https://bugsworthbasin.org/the-basin, accessed on 3rd June 2021.
https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=17&lat=53.33559&lon=-1.95887&layers=168&b=1, accessed on 3rd June 2021.
https://youtu.be/g91uwioVV4o, accessed on 3rd June 2021.
https://narrowboatworld.com/7254-memories-of-bugsworth-basin, accessed on 3rd June 2021.
https://www.countryimagesmagazine.co.uk/featured/bugsworth-canal-basin, accessed on 3rd June 2021.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bugsworth_Basin_4.jpg, 3rd June 2021.
https://www.wondersofthepeak.org.uk/facts/wanders-through-the-industrial-peak-bugsworth-basin, accessed on 3rd June 2021.
https://collections.canalrivertrust.org.uk/themes/the-history-of-bugsworth-basin, accessed on 3rd June 2021.
Ian Salvage (Publicity Officer) & Ian Edgar MBE (Chair of Bugworth Basin Heritage Trust); http://www.peakandnorthern.org.uk/newsletter/1702/07-peak-forest-tramway.htm, accessed on 3rd June 2021. (NB: the same sketch map can be found in: Peter J Whitehead; The Peak Forest Tramway, High Peak, Derbyshire (including a Walking Guide to the Tramway Trail); http://archive.bugsworthbasin.org/pages/pft.htm)
http://archive.bugsworthbasin.org/pages/quarries/quarries.htm
https://www.railmaponline.com/UKIEMap.php, accessed on 16th January 2023.
https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=16.8&lat=53.33623&lon=-1.95773&layers=6&b=1, accessed on 16th January 2023.
https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=16.8&lat=53.33602&lon=-1.95500&layers=6&b=1, accessed on 16th January 2023.
https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=18.0&lat=53.33658&lon=-1.94378&layers=168&b=1, accessed on 28th February 2023.
https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=18.0&lat=53.33604&lon=-1.93857&layers=168&b=1, accessed on 18th February 2023.
https://her.derbyshire.gov.uk/Monument/MDR485, accessed on 28th February 2023.
http://planning.highpeak.gov.uk/portal/servlets/AttachmentShowServlet?ImageName=145422, accessed on 28th February 2023.
https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=18.0&lat=53.33561&lon=-1.93349&layers=168&b=1, accessed on 28th February 2023.
https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=18.0&lat=53.33449&lon=-1.92832&layers=168&b=1, accessed on 28th February 2023.
https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=18.0&lat=53.33267&lon=-1.92589&layers=168&b=1, accessed on 28th February 2023.

	Roger Farnworth on The Uganda Railway – Par…
	Qui-gon Tim the Rand… on The Uganda Railway – Par…
	Rails up the Tanat V… on The Shropshire and Montgomerys…
	Rails up the Tanat V… on Ford Railmotors on Colonel Ste…
	Rails up the Tanat V… on Gazelle’s Trailers