Mr. Editor,--May I be allowed to call the attention of such of your correspondents as are interested in this railway to a matter which, it seems to me, must exercise an important influence on its future prosperity?

    The Great Western Company is in the unfortunate position of having a system, part of which is broad gage only, part narrow gage only, and part mixed, and of being obliged therefore to keep up two separate establishments of rolling stock, which can each be used only on a portion of its system. Now I have a strong impression that under any circumstances a broad gage could not be worked so cheaply as a narrow gage line, because in increasing the size of the carriages you increase their bulk and weight in a greater proportion than the number of passengers carried; and each carriage carrying a much larger number of passengers, you have at all times, and especially when the carriages are empty, a greater dead weight to carry. But, however this may be, it is quite certain that a system divided between two gages cannot be worked so cheaply as one on a uniform gage. More rolling stock must be required in the former case, and on those parts where three rails are laid down there must be more expense in repairs as well as more sunken capital.

    It is therefore, I believe, essential to the development of the full prosperity of which the Great Western is capable, that it should, as soon as possible, be put on an equality with other lines by getting rid of the broad gage altogether. With this end in view all new rolling stock should be constructed for the narrow gage (even if it were necessary for a time to adapt it to run on broad gage wheels), a third line of rails might be gradually extended on to the exclusively broad gage portions of the system, while at the same time the third rail might be taken away from those portions on which it now exists; and by working steadily with this object always in view it would certainly be possible in a very few years, and with a small extra expenditure, to establish a uniform narrow gage throughout the whole Great Western system.

    In order that the Proprietors (as well as the Directors) may form a correct judgment on this matter, and may really know what we are suffering by the present mixed gages, I submit that accurate returns should be made showing the comparative capital and working expenses of the distinct systems at present in use. To do this fairly we should require the following information:--

     (a). The average number of passengers per carriage, carried in broad and narrow gage trains respectively.
     (b). The capital cost of broad and narrow gage carriages and engines respectively.
     (c). The working expenses of broad and narrow gage trains.
     (d). The average duration and annual repairs of broad and narrow gage carriages and engines.
     (e). The cost of conveyance per passenger per mile on the two systems deduced from the preceding data.

     The capital cost of the existing third line of rail on the mixed gage, and the additional cost of repairs on that portion of the line.

     The total amount, the capital cost, and the cost of repairs and maintenance of the rolling stock of the Great Western system, compared with that of other Companies having approximately the same amount of traffic and length of lines.

     By combining the results given in these three returns we should gain some knowledge of what we really lose annually by the maintenance of the broad gage lines; and I think it probable that the amount would be very large, and that the saving which might be effected would very materially increase the dividends on the comparatively small quantity of Great Western unguaranteed stock.

     I trust that some energetic members of the Proprietary may take up this important question.

Alfred R. Wallace.
9, St. Mark’s-crescent, N.W.