'། ༄། ། ། ། །
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
C.O. 882
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-
COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
252
I am of opinion that Tai Po Station would ultimately become the busiest way station on this route, certainly as regards first class passenger traffic, and express goods.
In this attractive locality there are plenty of fine building sites on Crown lands suitable for villa residences and bungalows, within easy reach of the station, which would undoubtedly bring forth their crop of houses in due season, were railway communication established with Kowloon.
In addition to the considerable fish and general trade that may be expected from Mirs Bay, considerable business might also be expected to be done in carrying supplies to such of His Majesty's ships of the China Squadron as might be anchored in Mirs Bay.
On leaving the station two rivers have to be crossed, one at 69,000 requiring a bridge of five spans of 40 feet, the other at peg 71,200 of five spans of 30 feet. From this to Lo Fu the line passes through paddy fields throughout its entire course, with the exception of a cutting at the fifteenth mile. This is the most thickly populated and extensively cultivated district through which the line passes.
At Fan Ling Station in the nineteenth mile, Railway No. 1 makes junction with Railway No. 3, which runs from there to Un Long as a branch line, some eight miles in length, to either Railway No. 1 or Railway No. 2, whichever may ultimately be adopted.
At Lo Fu provision has been made for a terminal station and repair shops, in the event of the line not being constructed beyond the frontier. Should it prove otherwise, under such circumstances, shops of considerable magnitude would be required, and it would then be desirable to locate them in Kowloon, say to the east- ward of the Cosmopolitan Dock, or failing that, about half way between the village of Ho Mun Tin and the sea, so that imported rolling-stock and materials could pass through the shops with the minimum amount of handling.
Railway No. 2.
This route commences at the same point as Railway No. 1 already described, and branches westward at peg 9,700. A high embankment has to be adopted and maintained up to peg 13,400, in order to provide headway for under bridges for a proposed 100 feet road at peg 11,800, and the existing frontier road at peg 13,400. From this to the fifth mile the work is very light, but between the fifth and seventh miles two tunnels occur in granite and trap rock, 750 and 287 yards in length respectively. In the eighth mile a station ground is provided at the village of Tsun Wau. Here there is a distillery of native wine (Sham Shu), and in the vicinity there are, I am told, some thirty wood pulp watermills pulping wood for the manufacture of "Joss sticks."
Pineapples are grown in considerable quantities, also vegetables and some rice, but there does not appear to be a large acreage under cultivation. A considerable trade appears to be done in pine firewood, which is sent in junks to Hong Kong.
From the tenth to the nineteenth mile the line hugs the coast line, which is extremely rugged and rocky, as closely as possible. In fact, after the Islands of Tsing I and Ma Wan have been passed, I think it is doubtful whether the line could be thoroughly secured against the action of the waves in places.
At 19 miles a station is provided at the market village of San Hue, at the head of Castle Peak Bay, which would supply a certain amount of passengers and goods, but not in encouraging quantities, as competition with existing, and perhaps improved, water communication with Hong Kong would have to be encountered and
dealt with.
From 19 to 20th mile there is no cultivation. At the 21st mile a watershed is reached, and from the 20 mile to the 25th, i.e.. the Long Station, the country is thickly populated, and the valleys highly cultivated, rice, sugar-cane, pea-nuts, and sweet potatoes being the chief crops.
At Un Long a factory for the manufacture of oil from pea-nuts, sham shu fin crackers, and joss sticks appears to do a good business, and at Ha Tsun, a neigh- bouring village, bricks and shell lime are manufactured in a small way. This station would serve the thickly populated and fertile valley of Pat Heung, with or without a branch line.
At the 26th mile the Pat Heung (Kane Tin) River is crossed by a bridge of three spans of 60 feet. This river is tidal, but not navigable at the crossing by
253
any craft at low tide. I am told no masted vessel ever passes there, so that a railway bridge would not interfere with any existing rights or privileges.
An alternative route is shown for this crossing on the plan, which shows better alignment, but would be more expensive, as it would require more bridge opening, preferably a screw pile viaduct of say twenty spans of 20 feet or thereabouts.
From the 19th to the 28th mile the work is all light. At the 28th mile the gradient is 1 in 100 for 4,200 feet, culminating in rather a heavy cutting of 50 feet maximum depth.
From 26th to the 30th mile the country passed through is cultivated, though sparsely populated.
At the 30th mile the village of San Tin is reached; population, about 1,500. A flag station and siding might possibly be instituted here with advantage, but the run between it and Lo Fu is too short, and the district too small, to admit of a main line station being provided.
All through the 32nd mile there is very little cultivation, but from there to Lo Fu the line passes through well-watered paddy fields of great extent.
COMPARATIVE MERITS OF ROUTES.
Route (A) and Railway No. 1.
Route (A). Maximum curve, 3 c; maximum gradient, 1 in 40; total rise and fall, 780 feet; total curvature, 900 c.
Railway No. 1. Maximum curve, 4 c.; maximum gradient, 1 în 100; total rise and fall, 258 feet; total curvature, 328 c.
Comparing these two routes between Kowloon and Sha Tin Stations only, these two points being common to both, and the rest, Sha Tin Station to Lo Fu, identical, I find that Railway No. 1 is three miles shorter than (A), and would cost $272,000 less to construct.
Comparing the cost of working, I find by reducing both to their equivalent lengths of straight level line, that the length of (A) becomes 15 miles, as against eight miles of Railway No. 1, the difference being seven miles in favour of Railway No. 1.
Taking the cost per train mile at $1 (which is about what it comes to in the United States of America; in the United Kingdom it is about $1.25), we have the value per annum per daily train mile $365, which, capitalised at 5 per cent.,
$7,300, which is the capital value of one train mile.
=
As the probable number of daily trains works out on page 17 (p. 255) as nine each way, for each mile of straight level line saved we have $7,300 × 9 × 2 $131,400. The total saving effected, therefore, by adopting Railway No. 1 in preference to (A) would be:-
Saving in working expenses Saving in cost of construction
Capital value of total saving
$131,400 × 7
Railways Nos. 1 and 2.
$919,800
272,000
$1,191,000
Railway No. 1. Maximum curve, 4 c.; maximum gradient, 1 in 100; total rise and fall, 396 feet; total curvature, 1,310 o.; total length, 215 miles.
Railway No. 2. Maximum curve, 6 c.; maximum gradient, 1 in 100; total rise and fall, 410 feet; total curvature, 1,732 c.; total length, 34 miles.
From the accompanying table of comparative costs of construction, we see that the total cost of constructing Railway No. 1 is $4,470,500, and of Railway No. 2 $4,764,150, a difference in favour of Railway No. 1 of $293,650.
Comparing the cost of working, we find by reducing both to their equivalent lengths of straight level line, that the length of Railway No. 2 becomes 38-65 miles, and that of Railway No. 1 2559 miles; difference in favour of Railway No. 1- 13:06 miles. Taking nine trains per day each way as being the probable number required (see page 17 [p. 255]) at $1 per train mile, we have, as before, the capital value of each mile saved $131,400, and $131,400 × 13′06-$1,716,084, which represents the capital value of the amount saved in working expenses by adopting Railway No. 1 in preference to Railway No. 2. Add to this the extra cost of