The Toronto and Nipissing Railway (T&N) was the first public narrow-gauge railway in North America. It chartered in 1868 to build from Toronto to Lake Nipissing in Ontario, Canada, via York, Ontario, and Victoria counties. At Nipissing it would meet the transcontinental lines of the Canadian Pacific, providing a valuable link to Toronto. It opened in 1871, with service between Scarborough and Uxbridge. By December 1872 it was extended to Coboconk, but financial difficulties led to plans of the line being built further abandoned at this point. The railway merged with the Midland Railway of Canada in 1882.
A series of mergers, bankruptcies and ownership changes eventually turned this right of way into the CN Uxbridge Subdivision, at least the portions north of the CN Kingston Subdivision at Scarborough Junction. Passenger service was offered to Markham and then Stouffville, before the service passed to Via Rail, and then to GO Transit in 1982. The lines are currently used both by CN in the southern reaches for freight, as well by GO for interurban rail service as their Stouffville line. The lines are still in place as far as Uxbridge, and the section between Stouffville and Uxbridge is used by the York-Durham Heritage Railway for tourist runs.
Early history
Early development of railways in the Province of Canada, which consisted of Canada East (Quebec) and Canada West (Ontario), was delayed by lack of capital and industrial infrastructure. The first major national railway development was the construction of the Grand Trunk Railway of Canada on a gauge of from Portland, Maine to Sarnia, Canada West via Montreal and Toronto, with a branch from Richmond to Levis near Quebec City. Investment funds for railways were scarce in the Province of Canada because the economy was mainly agricultural, and most capital was tied up in land. The line was constructed by the English contractors Peto, Brassey and Betts, who undertook to raise the capital required in London if they obtained the contract. As a result of the exorbitant cost of land and charters, overbuilding stone bridges and stations to English standards, and initial lack of traffic to support the capital cost, the line was soon insolvent. This failure, together with a severe recession and the American Civil War, meant that no more capital could be raised and almost no railways were built in Canada during the 1860s.
There was a return of confidence with the Confederation of the British North American colonies into Canada in 1867, and the political promise of a transcontinental railway to the Pacific. Merchants, industrialists, and politicians of Toronto, Ontario and surrounding counties began to look for ways of opening up the back country 'bush' north of the city to settlement and trade. Lakes and rivers had been the principal means of transportation, but they were frozen and unusable for 4–5 months of the year. Road construction was primitive; trees were cut down and laid side by side in swamps to form 'corduroy' roads. Most roads were passable in winter (hard frozen) and summer (hard baked), but impassable mud troughs in spring and fall. Railways were essential, but had to be built cheaply enough to serve a wild and unsettled region.
Choice of narrow gauge, promotion and financing
A charismatic Scots-born Toronto wharfinger and trader, George Laidlaw, took up the challenge. He was a business associate of the powerful Gooderham and Worts Distillery interests, and other Toronto bankers and merchants. Laidlaw advertised in newspapers in London, England for suggestions as to how railways might be built more cheaply in Canada. He received a reply from Carl Abraham Pihl, first managing engineer of Norway's Railway Construction Bureau. Pihl had worked on the construction, under Robert Stephenson, of the first Norwegian trunk railway – the Hovedbanen from Christiania (today Oslo) to Eidsvoll – which opened in 1854, where the same issues of overbuilding a line in a small farming and fishing economy had led to an unaffordable railway. He now advocated the use of the narrow gauge of with all major construction in wood, which system he had developed since the early 1860s. Pihl's ideas had been noticed in Britain where the smaller Ffestiniog Railway was also proving a success. After a visit to Norway, the 3 ft 6 in gauge was taken up by Sir Charles Fox and Sons, the firm founded by the eminent engineer and constructor of the Crystal Palace at the Great Exhibition of 1851. Fox had a very influential consulting practice throughout the former British Empire and Colonies and was instrumental in gaining acceptance for the gauge in Canada, New Zealand, Australia and South Africa.
The choice of the narrow gauge led to vigorous challenges in London, England and Canada. Zerah Colburn, the editor of the London technical journal Engineering, used its columns to violently criticise the advice of Douglas Fox, the elder son of Sir Charles Fox, to the promoters, and this was taken up by the Hamilton Spectator, which supported that town's claim to be the hub (rather than Toronto) of railway traffic for western Ontario. Abraham Fitzgibbon, the chief engineer of the Queensland Railways, came to the aid of the promoters with a speech in Toronto. The main opposition to the narrow gauge came from the Wellington, Grey and Bruce Railway in the west and the Port Whitby and Port Perry Railway in the east. Both lines were proposing to build competing lines on the "Provincial gauge", and claimed that the choice of the narrow gauge was a ruse to ensure that all the traffic of the districts would be exclusively trans-shipped at Toronto, rather than Hamilton and Whitby. The opposition narrowly failed to defeat the narrow gauge, and provincial charters were granted to the Toronto and Nipissing Railway and the Toronto, Grey and Bruce Railway on March 4, 1868.
George Laidlaw sought to raise money to finance the construction of the narrow-gauge railways by the following means, in order of preference:
Bonuses approved by vote of taxpayers from each township and county on the route of the line Provincial government grants per mile of track built, under the "Aid to Railways Act" Sale of stock Sale of bonds Loans
Laidlaw and other directors fanned out through the townships, speaking at taxpayer meetings in support of bonuses for the railways. His messianic style at these meetings often generated so much enthusiasm that motions were immediately approved to grant large sums in support of the lines. On the morrow, the local politicians often had second and more sober thoughts and sought to control the process themselves, trying to dictate where and when the money would be spent, and on what. Long, drawn-out campaigns ensued, with businessmen and progressive farmers whose lots would be near the line advocating large unconditional grants, and those in more distant locations opposing the free bonuses of tax money. Generally, the response of the settlers, anxious to expand opportunities for trade and travel, was generous. But, when strongly opposed, Laidlaw's combative and insulting responses could generate such opposition that townships delayed contributing money for years, or refused entirely.
Contrary to the hopes of the promoters, the proceeds from bonuses, grants, and stock sales fell short of paying for construction of the roadbed and structures. This deficit, and the cost of purchasing iron and equipment, had to be made up by issuing bonds whose guaranteed interest payments were a heavy burden on the income of the T&NR, and ultimately were to prove fatal to its prospects. Gooderham and Worts had a vital interest in maintaining supplies of firewood for fuel and grain for its production processes, and for several years it was loans and other support from the distillery company which kept the T&NR afloat.
The Nipissing Act of Parliament was vague, and even the promoters were uncertain for some time as to the exact scope of the proposed railway. The T&NR Prospectus of April 1869 speaks of an ‘first section’ to Coboconk, with a branch of to the town of Lindsay. Such a branch was never built by the T&NR, although the connection was eventually made by the Whitby, Port Perry, and Lindsay Railway via a junction at Blackwater. The first objectives were the towns of Markham and Stouffville in York County, and Uxbridge in Ontario County. These could be reached on a direct line through the well-established villages of Scarborough Township. Once at Uxbridge (), Laidlaw's next objective was Lake Nipissing () and a junction with the future Pacific Railway. The provisional mainline terminus of the T&NR, on the way to Lake Nipissing, was to be Coboconk.
On the lower and longer settled part of the line, as far as Uxbridge, municipal bonuses were generally given freely and generously, but beyond that place townships were sometimes less enthusiastic. Whitchurch, Reach, and Mariposa accounted for of line, but gave nothing. Further north, some remote townships such as Bexley responded handsomely. The T&NR's main opponents were the Northern Railway of Canada in the west and the Port Whitby and Port Perry Railway in the east. Neither seriously blocked its territorial advance but were instrumental in persuading some townships not to vote bonuses.
Surveys of a line beyond Coboconk, and as far as Minden, Ontario, were made, but it was never found economic to blast a way through such rough uninhabited territory, and the line never did go to Lake Nipissing.
The lack of communications in that part of east York County lying between the line of the Northern Railway of Canada through Newmarket, and the Toronto and Nipissing Railway through Uxbridge convinced local politicians that a cheap narrow-gauge line connecting with the T&NR at Stouffville and running north to Lake Simcoe near Sutton would enhance the agricultural and forest trade in the area and tap the Lake Simcoe steamer traffic. The 26 mile, 3 ft 6 in gauge line was promoted as the Lake Simcoe Junction Railway.
Engineering The Toronto and Nipissing Railway and the Toronto, Grey and Bruce Railways were promoted at the same time, and with similar objectives, by an interlocking group of Ontario businessmen and politicians. It is not surprising that the group should decide to economise by employing one chief engineer who would apply the same design principles and choices on both lines. The first consulting engineer in Canada was John Edward Boyd of New Brunswick, who conducted the preliminary surveys over the ground to Uxbridge and Orangeville. Douglas Fox came to Canada several times in 1868 and 1869 to support the parliamentary campaign and verify the surveys. On his return to England in the summer of 1869, he made arrangements for an associate, Edmund Wragge, to come to Canada at once to take up the engineering of both lines. In August, Wragge visited Pihl in Norway to see his narrow-gauge lines, and arrived in Toronto in September 1869. The tenders for the first sections of line were immediately put out.
The engineering of the T&NR and the LSJR was of a much less substantial nature than on the TG&BR, with only one significant trestle over the Rouge River between Unionville and Markham. The ruling gradient was 2% or 1:50 between Goodwood and Uxbridge, and the minimum curvature was . Wragge appointed John Charles Bailey as his first resident engineer on the T&NR. When Wragge became general manager of the TG&BR in 1874, Bailey became chief engineer of the Toronto and Nipissing Railway. Bailey was also the chief engineer for the construction of the Lake Simcoe Junction Railway.
Construction