1).—4.

115

E. W. MACLEAN.

time. You have to assume that you are going to get trucks loaded with all sorts and kinds of loads from your main line to your tramway,, and vice vena, and if you have ito limit your rolling-stock to certain classes it simply means that you are going to burden yourself with all classes of expenditure at any point of the railway where the traffic is going to be drawn from (o that tramway, and expenditure that no Railway Engineer could recommend his Department ito agree to. :i'2. The Chairman.] I suppose you mean that the rolling-stock that now carries goods over the North Main Trunk line could not go on to this tramway uuless the load was reduced or there were different trucks?— Yes, that is so, your Honour—the load per pair of wheels, or what we call in railway parlance the " axle-load," for a rail of 281b. weight. You may take it at certainly not more than 6 tons —probably 5. Our wagons are loaded up to 10 tons per axle. •')■'). How would it do on a 40 Ib. rail —they say they are going to take the 281b. rails up and replace them with 40 Ib. rails?— Then it is only a matter of degree, because your 401b. rails might carry at the outside or !) tons. Now, some of our rolling-stock is very much heavier than that. We have an actual example of it. What was known as the Toko Branch — from Stratford to Douglas and Toko —was originally built as a light line with 40 lb. rails, and purposely built in a cheap way. We were put to all sorts of trouble, expense, and inconvenience because w<: had to limit not only the engine, but also the wagons which were allowed to go on the line. The consequence was that the loads which were offering for this branch had to be loaded into selected wagons, and sometimes those wagons were not available. Supposing at station " A " a load was offering for .this Toko line and there were no wagons of the particular kind at this station which could go on the line, then wagons had to be brought to that station in order to take the load. It means great expense in working. ,'34. Mr. J/minai/.] And many times wagons would be loaded that should not be loaded? — Yes, and then perhaps you find .there is a derailment and all sorts of trouble. •S5. Mr. Williams*] A reduction of speed would not make up for that? —No; there is a limit, of course, to speed on a rail thai will carry any load. In consequence of the Toko Branch being built in this way in a few years we had practically to rebuild that portion of the railway which was built as a light line —in about eight years after it was built. •'56. The C'hai/nnnii .] Were you here when .the Awamoko Railway was built? —No, I was not. The Awamoko Branch was a case in point where 28 lb. rails had been laid, and they simply could not tackle the business. The rails had to be taken up, aud were put down at Sanson. 37. Mr. Myers.] Would you from an engineering point of view agree to run Government trains on the Sanson line as it is? —We have already recommended the General Manager that there should be severe restrictions in regard to the running of rolling-stock on the Sanson Tram. 38. Do your objections ,to the junction at or near Marton apply whether the tramway belongs to the Government or the County Council?—lt is all the same. .'59. Apart from what you have already said, would the actual functioning of such a tramway as this at Marton cause any inconvenience or expense to the Railways?—lf it was laid as a railway 1 40. No, laid with 40 11). rails?— Yes; I have pointed out that there would be the expense of working the particular junction. That could be met by a special charge, but there is the question of expense which cannot be arrived at : the limitation of the rolling-stock and the limitation of the load passing from one place ,to another. ,» 41. But would there be any initial expense In the way of lay-out ?—Yes, certainly. There would have to be what we call interchange sidings dependent altogether upon the extent of the traffic. 42. Well, could you give the Commission a rough idea of the expense involved in that? — It depends on the extent of the traffic, but the expense would certainly not be less than £1,000, and probably .£2,000. It is a little difficult to make an estimate of that kind. T do not know what earthworks would be necessary, but I think there would be some fairly heavy earthworks at Marton, and I think property would have to be bought. Of course, the tramway people would have ito supply that. 4'i. Does that include interlocking? —Oh, no. 44. What would the expense of interlocking works be?—l think you may take it that that would be another £500, but that depends upon whether the interchange of sidings could be provided within the limit of the existing signal-cabins. If that were not so then the expense might be £1,500. It is impossible to say, because of the conditions, and you cannot, give an estimate of that kind until you know the actual conditions under which the siding would be put there. 45. Mr. SkerreM.] I understand .that your figures are approximate only?— Yes, absolutely purely estimates. 46. And you say they have been made without an accurate examination of the ground traversed by the railway?— That is so. 47. And they have been made upon two assumptions : the first is, I understand, the reconstruction of a new line from Himatangi to Marton, disregarding the existing tramway-line?— Yes. practically so. 48. The second assumption which you have made is that the Government line from Himatangi to Foxton will practically require reconstruction?— Yes, that is so —part of the way. 49. That railway is built according to Government standards?—No; that was a railway which was originally a tramway laid along the road. It was originally a tramway from Oroua Bridge to Foxton, and it is practically a reconstructed tramway. It is not built according to Government standard.