Discussion of Dr. Charles B. Dudley's Papers on Steel Rails, Read at the Lake George Meeting, October, 1877.*

Remarks Of Mr. Robert W. Hunt, General Superintendent, Albany And Rensselaer Iron And Steel Company., Troy N. Y. - In discussing Dr. Dudley's two most interesting papers, I feel a natural hesitancy in disagreeing with conclusions formed after such careful and conscientious work. But I think he has made his deductions from too meagre premises. The analyses of but twenty-five samples are entirely too few to justify the establishment of so important a formula. When we consider that he indirectly proposes to regulate an interest amounting, even at the present low prices, to over $20,000,000 per annum, we may well hesitate before accepting a formula based upon the chemical and physical analyses of but twenty-five steel rails. Dr. Dudley touches the keynote in referring to the proposed labors of the Government Test Commission. They based their hopes of attaining success upon the chemical and physical analyses of a very large number of samples, and in the only branch of investigation which the short-sighted policy of Congress has allowed them to complete, i.e., chain cables, we find that a dozen, twenty-five or one hundred tests gave no satisfactory results. It was only after many hundreds that they were enabled to draw conclusions. There are so many circumstances bearing upon the life of a rail, that the task of extracting a correct result seems herculean. I presume I am right in stating that in our Northern latitudes early winter and spring months witness the breaking of the greatest number of rails, thus seeming to prove that an unstable road-bed has much to answer for. Then, again, broken and flattened wheels must be taken into account, but I am convinced that more rails have been broken by the treatment which they received before leaving the rolling-mill * The remarks of the participants in this debate have been written out by the speakers, and are here given without any attempt to retain the order of the dis¬cussion. While the report does not, therefore, preserve the vigor and spontaneity of the debate, it is believed that it gains in value by giving the matured views of the speakers. The continuation of this discussion at the Pittsburgh Meeting, May, 1879 (beginning with remarks of Mr. Cloud on page 401), is appended for convenience of reference.-T. M. D., Sec'y