File:The street railway review (1891) (14737073376).jpg

Identifier: streetrailwayrev07amer (find matches)
Title: The street railway review
Year: 1891 (1890s)
Authors: American Street Railway Association Street Railway Accountants' Association of America American Railway, Mechanical, and Electrical Association
Subjects: Street-railroads
Publisher: Chicago : Street Railway Review Pub. Co
Contributing Library: Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh
Digitizing Sponsor: Lyrasis Members and Sloan Foundation

View Book Page: Book Viewer
About This Book: Catalog Entry
View All Images: All Images From Book
Click here to view book online to see this illustration in context in a browseable online version of this book.

Text Appearing Before Image:
roceeding with AIR MOTORS NOT RECOMMENDED. After a thorough test of the Hoadley-Knight air motor onthe Eckington & Soldiers Home Railway, Engineer Comis-sioner Black handed a report to the Commissioners, in whichall the features of the motor are discussed. He does not antici-pate any trouble from explosions. The cars are comfortable,and the machinery operates with little noise. The wheelbase, to accommodate the air mechanism, is too long formedium sized curves and the cars are so heavy as to neces-sitate a reconstruction of the tracks. As the system wasplanned, trailers could not be used and the power to operatea car was greater by 23 or 24 h. p. than that required for anelectric car. While the motor possesses many good quali-ties yet its development is in such a stage that it would bebad policy to equip such a large system with experimentalapparatus. Z RAIL AS TRACK RAIL. Last month we mentioned the work being ilonc for theMarket Street road in San Francisco, bv the Falk Manufac-
Text Appearing After Image:
^l:^.. ,./0 the pending appeal to a higher court. I think the assess-ment should be struck out and the appeal allowed. TROLLEY VICTORY IN PENNSYLVANIA. The completion of the Philadelphia & Bristol railway isnow assured by a recent decision of Judge Yerkes. A per-manent injunction against the construction of the road wasrefused and also a rehearing in the equity suit dissolving thepreliminary injunction. The plaintiffs in the case were thePennsylvania Railroad Company and Henry Gaw, ownersof adjacent properly on the Bristol turnpike. The court inhis opinion stated that considering the apparent dispositionof the supreme court to hold that only the want of consentof intervening municipalties shall prevent the building ofall or any part of a street railway, this court is not warrantedin granting an injunction against the construction of theentire line, at this suit of a private complainant. This willnow allow the trolley people to complete the line at Croy-den station, which has been

Note About Images