That the data published by the Commissioners were often wrong, and in some cases led to the reverse of their conclusions. That greater economy was proved on the broad gauge. That the broad gauge was superior in the points of safety, speed, and conveyance of troops. That the experiments made in the presence of the Commissioners had demonstrated beyond all controversy the complete success of the broad-gauge system. For these and other reasons, a strong protest was made against any legislative interference with the broad-gauge system. A reply was published to these arguments; and during the controversy a large number of pamphlets, articles, and other publications appeared on both sides. * * * * * Mr. Brunel’s views on the whole question, about this time, are concisely expressed in the following letter, written to a friend in France, who asked for information on the subject of the broad gauge:-- August 4, 1845. I am just off for Italy, but write a few hasty lines in reply to Mons. ----’s queries, and which you must scold him for not addressing direct to me. Nobody can answer such questions but myself, and I am compelled to be very brief. In answer to the _first_, I send a drawing. _Secondly._ I see no reason why the ordinary construction of rails, chairs, and sleepers should not be equally applicable to the wide gauge as to the narrow. I have used them occasionally. I should think 75 lbs. per yard heavy enough for any purposes. _Thirdly._ Within all ordinary limits, certainly in curves of more than 250 metres [12½ chains] radius, the gauge does not affect the question of curves. The effect of a curve of larger radius than this appears, both from much observation as from theory, to arise merely from _two_ causes, the one centrifugal force, which is easily neutralised, and is independent of gauge; the other from the axles not being able to travel in the direction of the radius, and consequently the wheels not running in a tangent to the curve. This also is unaffected by the width of gauge. Practically I believe the conditions are not altered. _Fourthly._ The expenses of construction are not dependent on the breadth of gauge unless the total width allowed for the loads or carriages is thereby or for other reasons increased, which is not a necessary consequence of a seven-feet gauge. The wide gauge could be laid upon the London and Birmingham Railway without altering any of the works, but in constructing the Great Western Railway I thought it desirable to provide for carrying larger bodies, and I placed the centres of the two railways 13 feet apart, instead of 11 feet, and therefore my railway became _four_ feet wider in total width. The increased cost of this, including the cost of land, will vary from 300_l._ to 500_l._ per mile.