FIG. 43.—_Fish-plate._ ] It may easily be seen on looking at a line of rails that they are not laid with the ends quite touching each other, or, at least, they are not usually in contact. The reason of this is that space must be allowed for the expansion which takes place when a rise in the temperature occurs. If the rails are laid down when at the greatest temperature they are likely to be subject to, they may then be placed in actual contact; but in cold weather a space will be left by their contraction. For this reason it is usual when rails are laid to allow a certain interval; thus rails 20 ft. long laid when the temperature is 70°, are placed with their ends 1/20th of an inch apart, at 30° 1/10th of an inch apart, and so on. The neglect of this precaution has sometimes led to damage and accidents. A certain railway was opened in June, and after an excursion train had in the morning passed over it, the midday heat so expanded the iron, that the rails became in some places elevated 2 ft. above the level, and the sleepers were torn up; so that, in order to admit of the return of the train, the rails had to be hastily relaid in a kind of zigzag. In June, 1856, a train was thrown off the metals of the North-Eastern Railway, in consequence of the rails rising up through expansion. [Illustration: FIG. 44.—_Section of Rails and Fish-plates._ ] The distance between the rails in Great Britain is 4 ft. 8½ in., that width having been adopted by George Stephenson in the construction of the earlier lines. Brunel, the engineer of the Great Western, adopted, however, in the construction of that railway, a gauge of 7 ft., with a view of obtaining greater speed and power in the engines, steadiness in the carriages, and increased size of carriages for bulky goods. The proposal to adopt this gauge gave rise to a memorable dispute among engineers, often called “The Battle of the Gauges.” It was stated that any advantages of the broad gauge were more than compensated by its disadvantages. The want of uniformity in the gauges was soon felt to be an inconvenience to the public, and a Parliamentary Committee was appointed to consider the subject. They reported that either gauge supplied all public requirements, but that the broad gauge involved a great additional outlay in its construction without any compensating advantages of economy in working; and, as at that time 2,000 miles of railway had been constructed on the narrow gauge, whereas only 270 miles were in existence on the broad gauge, they recommended that future railways should be made the prevailing width of 56½ in. The Great Western line had engines, bridges, tunnels, viaducts, &c., on a larger scale than any other railway in Britain. The difference of gauge was after a time felt to involve so much inconvenience that lines which adopted the 7–ft. gauge have since relaid the tracks at the more common width. At the present day we find the Great Western Railway completely