As there seems to be much confusion with the Berry Hill Colliery locomotives on pages 234-235 of RECORD 10, I submit the contemporary manufacturers' records that I can trace.

AVONSIDE works number 1343 - this was a standard 0−4−0 saddle tank, 14in by 20in cylinders, 3ft 3in wheels, new to Henry Warrington & Son, at Berry Hill, no name recorded. A building date of 1890 (not 1892 as recorded in Pocket Book A) was recorded in what appeared to be a contemporary manuscript book. I have not noted any spares orders since 1899, which is the earliest date I have seen Avonside spares records.

BARCLAY order number 9857 - this was originally rebuilt to this order number in 1904, having been bought in from Wm Beardmore, Parkhead Forge, Glasgow, probably in part settlement for new locos. It was described as a Dick & Stevenson, 30 years old, and from the official photograph of the rebuild (reproduced herewith) there seems no reason to doubt this. The plate was dated 1904. 9857 was sold in 1904 to an unspecified customer, with no name or number, delivery to Fenton Station, which could well mean it went to Berry Hill Colliery.

    Where, then, does this leave us with BERRY HILL Nos 1 and 2?

BERRY HILL No.1 - illustrated on page 235, this loco has several Avonside features, and in the absence of definite evidence I suggest it is merely a battered rebuild of Avonside 1343. If no spares orders are received from a small concern it is often an indication that works plates have been removed and I suggest that a thorough overhaul, possibly incorporating parts of another loco, could well lead to tales of a 'new engine' being built. Mr Jones on page 308 says that 'Avonside records' give this loco as BERRY HILL No.2, but I am sure he is mistaken. The Avonside archives are among the trickiest of all modern builders to unravel and even in 1952 I found difficult points had been confused by inspired alterations from enthusiasts!

BERRY HILL No.2 - I think there is no doubt that this is a Dick & Stevenson loco built probably in the 'seventies'. The photograph on page 235 shows the following alterations, compared with the post 1904 rebuild condition:-

New cab in place of small spindly 'four-poster' affair.

Safety valve mounting extended to clear the roof.

Typical elegant Dick & Stevenson curved rear handrails removed.

Typical massive Dick & Stevenson chimney shortened.

Angled dumb buffers replaced by normal square ones.

Possibly some of these alterations were done in 1920 and the date on the plate changed. In conclusion, it seems to me that the nameplates of both locos are rather crude and similar in style, and consequently are probably later additions.

    May I add a few comments on Trevor Rowe's article? Like him I have visited the country several times, and can recommend the CFR narrow gauge branch line near Bucharest that he missed. This branch, which has a type of 0−8−0 side tank not seen on the other lines, runs through a wine region where it is possible to see wine wagons with the two enormous barrels as were modelled by Hornby in the early 1930's! I might also mention that the cement works at Turda has a narrow gauge shed in the works and uses CFR 764 class 0−8−0 side tanks. Whilst a footbridge passes the back of the shed, there are also guards with rifles.

    As Mr Rowe kindly loaned me the FACS magazine, I followed up two of the CFF lines. The Orastie shed is in the timber works by the CFR station and is close to the exit at the rear of the works. I do not accept that this is the most important CFF branch as there was nothing doing for three hours in the morning. Obviously the afternoon is a better proposition but the locomotives were back in the shed by 1600 hours. A busier branch is the 76cm line from Babeni (south of Rimnicu Vilcea) to Folesti. Laid with heavy rails, there is a lighter section branch going off at Tomşani, into the hills past Horezu. There was no sign of a shed at either of these two places, and it may possibly be at Băbeni which unfortunately I did not visit. 764−010 and 764−482, both Resita 0−8−0 side tanks, were noted and the latter is illustrated here.

    Of the remaining lines, I could see nothing from the train at Armenis, although observing from a packed train was not easy. Dormisoara is at the end of a branch line from Vatra Dornei, whilst Borca is way out in the wilds between Vatra Dornei and Bicaz with no CFR access. These two were not visited. Other industrial locos seen were a Borsig 0−4−0 well tank half way down the bank, south of Brasov, on the main line from Ploesti, and several in a steelworks at Calan, near Simeria.

    Mr Baker's article in RECORD 16 is indeed very interesting, but surely the discussion as to the type of articulation employed is quite off the rails. The marine box is certainly a distinctive feature which allows some reduction in distance between the bogies, but the actual articulation is quite simply the usual modification of the Meyer system in which the bogies are mounted on frame cross-members. Several small articulated locomotives have been built, without the circular box, notably by Barclay, who invariably described them as Improved or Modified Meyers. Mr Garratt would hardly have been amused at the statement that a loco having all the superstructure on a single (rigid) framework resembled his system of articulation! Please can we take a cue from Barclay and call MONARCH a 'Modified Meyer'?

    I enclose a photograph of the short-lived Bagnall 2544 at work, renumbered 6; its dilapidated condition is self-evident. The photograph was taken in 1945 by Lynn Acutt (Pty) Ltd, 343 West Street, Durban, South Africa; if any reader is able and willing to chase up these photographers I would be interested to learn of any other photographs of a like nature they may have.

    Mr Clayton's article in RECORD 16 was most interesting. I happen to have a copy made in 1880 (probably for Edward Walker) of part of Fox Walker's drawing office record book. The references to tram engines are illuminating in the light of the article and I quote the useful parts verbatim.

"362   to 367 Tram engines for Paris (Rouen) G.P.Harding 19 January 1878.

 362   (No special note)

 363    4 wheels, outside cylinders, 8" fitted with exhaust cock.

 364    4 wheels, outside cylinders, 8" exhaust cock.

 365    as 364

 366    4 wheels, 8" fitted with buffer beams and chimney cut 1.6 shorter.

 367    4 wheels, 7" left hand cylinder lined, right hand cylinder solid. Fitted with elliptical springs, other work as 362.

Note. All other engines afterwards altered to elliptical springs and brackets. The brake and blast pipe arrangement has also been altered.

 380 and 381 Order 1044 8" six wheeled tram engines, class SWTE.

 387 and 388 Order 1058 8" six wheeled tram engines. Class SWTE.

 412 to 415 Order 1158 8" SWTE Tramway engines for 4' 82" gauge.

 416 to 420 Order 1159 exactly as 412−5."

    The book includes a list of detail drawing numbers for each loco, and it is clear that all Fox Walker tram engines were built to only two sets of drawings, viz:-  362 to 367, 0−4−0 type, class TE; all others, 0−4−2 type, class SWTE.

    I think we may assume that the engine illustrated by Dr Whitcombe (and mentioned on page 149) is a trial of the 362-367 type, and that the Fox Walker official print which forms the illustration on page 147 is a standard SWTE. The drawing 2274 illustrated on page 148 is considerably higher numbered than any drawing for locos up to 420. This tends to substantiate Mr Clayton's conjective that it represents a proposed design.

    Loco 361, which is sometimes quoted as a tram engine, is given in the Fox Walker book as a standard B1 0−4−0 saddle tank supplied to Rietschetens & Hoovens, of Rotterdam. It also appears in a separate list of locos supplied to R & H. While I cannot lay hands on the details, I feel sure that there were some tram engines in Fox Walker's closing down sale.

    Whether all this helps much I hesitate to say - at least there are no 0−6−2 tram engines to explain away!

    The information on page 105, RECORD 15, concerning Drewry 2075 is not strictly correct, as this locomotive was a 4−wheel chain drive petrol unit, with Dorman 4JOR engine of about 50hp, plate clutch and two-speed fully reversible transmission; weight would have been about 72 tons. It was delivered to R. & A. Main Ltd in November 1933, having actually been built at the (then) E.E.Baguley works at Clarence Street, Burton-on-Trent, prior to their removal to the present site in Uxbridge Street around June 1934. The serial number (2075) is quite correct and would correspond with the Baguley serial number. At that time (1932 to 1939) any Drewry locos or inspection trolleys built at Baguley's works had their numbers allocated by Baguley. During the same period, and subsequently, any Drewry units built by English Electric at Preston, or by Vulcan, or by the Forth Bank (Newcastle) and Darlington Works of Robert Stephenson & Hawthorns had their numbers allocated by Drewry although they were also given serial numbers by the works themselves which did not always figure on the locomotives themselves.

    I am no authority on the industrial locomotives of the Far East and was never in French Indo-China (or Viet-Nam, as that unhappy country is known today) but the quotation from "Iron" of 18th September 1891 which was given on page 192 of RECORD 17 prompted a search of my French records. I cannot help with the identity of the three locomotives from England but the following details provide the basis of a stock list to which other readers may be able to make some additions.

The full title of the owning Company was Compagnie Francaise des Charbonnages du Tonkin, and amongst others, delivery was taken of:-

(a)  ex Brunner & Marchand, dealers, Bouray-sous-Juine, Essonne, France, Lv 122, 6/1924; originally French Government Artillery Railways.

(b)  ex Enterprise P. Frot, contractors, Meaux, S & M, France, 5/1926.

    Before adding to my article in RECORD 17 the Editors did not heed my last sentence (page 182) about relying on lists. One of the Manning Wardle locos said to be a "long boiler", number 140, is illustrated (fig. K120) in Part 10 of "The Locomotives of the GWR" (RCTS) as a perfectly normal 12in 0−6−0 saddle tank. Doubt is then cast on the other ten locos listed. The Editors would have done better to look at cylinder sizes for, unless they were at least 15in, the locos would not have been long boilered - there would be no need!

    I have just noticed a small error in my article in RECORD 16. In the last sentence on page 121 I stated that the last Bagnall narrow gauge steam locomotive was fitted with a "Bull Head" boiler. This is not correct as Bagnall 3052 to 3056, 3090 and 3126 had normal type boilers. Bagnall 3051 was the last to have the "Bull Head" type - it was a 2ft 5½in gauge 0−4−2 saddle tank for the United Africa Co Ltd, the lettering "H.C.B." suggesting it went to the "Huileries du Congo Belge" in the Belgian Congo.

    According to my records, Bagnall 1446 MOUNTAINEER was ordered in 1894, and delivered in 1895 (not 1896 as stated on page 176 of RECORD 17).

INDUSTRIAL LOCOMOTIVES OVERSEAS (6) ROUMANIA

    I was interested in Trevor Rowe's article in RECORD 16 and having visited Roumania in September 1967 can add a little from my observations. The following locomotives were noted on CFR 760mm lines:-

PRAID - LECHINTA :   IVK 148, 4001, 4002, 4006, 396.002, 397.001, 764.003, 764.156, 764.157, 764.159, 764.160, 764.207, 764.209, 764.403, Only the last seven appeared to be operational, and IVK 148 (a Meyer 0−4−4−0 tank) was derelict.

SIBIU - AGNITA :   2.3621, 3.3763, 388.002, 389.001, 764.006, 764.013, 764.015.

ALBA - ZLATNA :   395.104, 764.412, 764.413.

BISCAD - SATU MARE - SOMCUTA :   764.052, 764.054, 764.059. 764.103, 764.113, 764.152.

Most of the above were Resita 0−8−0 side tank or 0−8−0 tender locomotives, a few possibly being "new" observations. 388.002 is an 0−6−0 tender loco with an extended smokebox; 764.013/014/015 are Resita 0−8−0 side tanks, 013 being Resita 380 of 1937; 764.152/160 are 0−8−0 side tanks by "Uzine 23 Aug" of Bucuresti, works numbers 505 and 517 of 1949. (Further details of CFR locos may be found in "Continental Railway Journal" No.10.)

I noted the following industrial systems:

1. At Gavojdia (between Caransebes and Timisoara) a line runs north. Two 0−8−0 side tanks (one being 764.369, built Resita) and a 0−6−0 well tank (with balloon stack) were seen, with "C.F.F." plates. Green coaches, and wagons laden with stone, were marked "U.C.N.".

2. At Armenis (between Caransebes and Bails Herculane) one 0−6−0 well tank was seen mounted on blocks, whilst not far away, at Crusovat, another 0−6−0 well tank was standing with some wagons.

3. At Praid a diesel was moving wagons up an extensive industrial line from the south-east, and performing shunting duties at a works there. Connection was made with the CFR narrow gauge. At the first halt outside Praid (Valea Iuhodului) a lightly-laid line (the same one?) passes underneath the CFR narrow gauge line; connection is also made here.

4. At Cimpul Cetatii a long line through the woods makes connection with the Praid narrow gauge line. A tank loco was observed on this line.

5. At Zlatna a coal fired power station was seen to have two tank locos, one being Resita 0−8−0T ZLATNA 1. Connection is made with the CFR.

6. At Satu Mare a park outside the station has a miniature line of about 600mm gauge with a Polish diesel loco and converted mine cars.

7. At Izvorul (near Bicsad) a line runs east, at least as far as an industrial establishment. I noted one working and three apparently derelict tank locos.

8. At Bicsad a line from a woodmill appears to cross the CFR line outside the station and run into the forest. One 0−6−0 well tank was observed.

9. At Voislova (between Caransebes and Boutari) Resita 0−8−0 tank 764.005 was seen with a train of blue coaches; wagons containing stone (apparently marble) were also seen. The narrow gauge line runs parallel with the standard gauge for some distance on the south side towards Caransebes crossing it on the level at one point.

10. At Calan (between Subcetate and Simeria) a narrow gauge tank loco was seen dumped at an industrial plant - possibly a steelworks.

11. At Simeria Triaj freight yard a narrow gauge tank loco and some wood wagons were seen.

Branches from CFR lines were noted as follows -

12. At Aghnita the line on to Sighisoara appeared to have been used

13. A long rusty line at a lower level runs parallel to the line from Praid into Tirgu Mures. This may be the line to Band.

14. At Negresti Satu Mare a line runs from a junction facing Bicsad, parallel to the standard gauge goods yard. This may be a freight line.

WINDSCALE WORKS

    My records show that the small Peckett loco (ex Admiralty) had gone to Thos W. Ward Ltd, Barrow, by 1952. I have it recorded as built in 1912, and a possible is Peckett 1266 of 1912 (10in by 15in cylinders) which was new to the Admiralty at Dover. When I saw this loco at Ward's Wishaw yard in July 1936 I was told it had come from some Admiralty depot in 1935/1936.

    If the Windscale loco was not built in 1912, it may have been Peckett 1326 of 1915 (10in by 15in cylinders) which was at Ward's yard at Longtown, Cumbs, by April 1961; this was originally at Hilsea WD Depot, but must obviously have moved about during the intervening years.

    Messrs Ganz & Co have completed an electric tramway for the North Hungarian Coal Mining Company from the John Mine to Uiyserfa, the loading station. The line is a little over a mile in length, has a gauge of 2ft, and the general speed is 10 miles an hour. The locomotive is of 6 h.p., and capable of hauling about twenty trucks.   ("The Railway Engineer", August 1893. - K.P.P.)