Wide v. Narrow Gauge in Japan.

Progress, Volume I, Issue II, 1 September 1906, Page 316

Wide v. Narrow Gauge in Japan.

Readers of the Railway Magazine have doubtless noticed the steps that are being taken in Japan to nationalise the railways of that empire. A Japanese contemporary, however, considers that the gauge question, in view of the expected development of commerce in the Island Kingdom, is much more important at the present time than is the nationalisation. The railways in Japan have made great strides of late years, and the total mileage, both of Government

and private lines, now aggregates 4,600. Adding to this the lines under construction or charter brings the total up to 6,000 miles. In comparison with the railways in Western countries the Jip recognises not only are Japanese railways far below them m most respects but the Japanese gauge is 3 feet 6 inches, whereas in foreign countries it is from 4 feet 8 inches to 7 feet, meaning a great difference in the transport capacity. Such being the case Japanese railways, in point of transport capacity, must be 50 per cent, inferior to Western railways. " There is much discussion in Japan," continues the Jtj'i, " over the question of wide versus narrow gauge, but the essential point to be determined is whether it is advantageous to alter the present width or make up for the inconveniences resulting from the present gauge by improvements in other respects. It is universally recognised that a wide gauge railway is more powerful in transportation and will stand a higher speed than the narrow gauge allows. " So far no serious inconvenience in traffic has been experienced, but m future, with the rapid increase of freight traffic, the disadvantages of the narrow gauge will become more keenly felt. It will not be long before the present volume of trade will be doubled or even trebled. There are people who argue that even if the volume of goods to be transported is doubled in the future no inconvenience would be felt if improvement is introduced in the locomotive engines, the number of freight cars increased, and the service made more frequent. Therefore it is held there is no necessity to carry out a wide gauge system at once, but it may be undertaken at a suitable opportunity later. Not only, however, is the increasing pressure on the railways rapidly growing, but

unless the change is undertaken as quickly as possible, the scheme will be all the more difficult of realisation in the future by the construction of new railways. The Seoul-Fusan and the SeoulWiju Railways are wide-gauge lines, and a transverse wide gauge railway from the Korean boundary to the East China Railway is shortly to be built. Of course, the railways m Korea and Manchuria are chiefly for commercial purposes, but m case of emergency requiring the dispatch of troops, the prompt supply of locomotives and carriages from Japan would be necessary. Now, so long es the Japanese railways are narrow gauge this cannot be done, with the result that it would probably be found necessary to alter the railways in Korea and Manchuria, as the East China Railway was partly rebuilt by Japan during the war. If there is to be another war in Manchuria it must needs be conducted on a more gigantic scale than the late war, and it would be inexcusable that Japan should be placed at a military disadvantage and even in national danger owing to the difference of railway gauges. Even from a military point of view alone, therefore, it is sufficiently important that the railways should be re-laid in Japan. According to the estimate of experts the cost of reconstructing all the Japanese railways would be from 200 to 300 million yen. Reconstruction, however, need not be undertaken

on all the lines at one time ; but the trunk lines traversing the country from Aomon to Nagasaki should be re-built to begin with. As to the funds required, they may be raised by the respective companies by means of foreign loans or some assistance might be given by the Government." From the above it is evident that Japan has a firm belief in an immediate and immense increase in her trade, and, consequently, of her railway traffic. If the events show that the policy of the wider gauge is the correct one for Japan, what becomes of the course adopted in India, New Zealand, and various parts of Australia, where the 3 feet 6 inches and metre gauges are being extended and the extension of wider gauge lines abandoned ? Are we to learn railway economicsfrom Japan ?