Re: Port Elliot

[jshugg@westpac.com.au]

In article <3A8140AE.576F8305@enternet.com.au>,
  Chris Brownbill <cbrnbill@enternet.com.au> wrote:
> AFAIK there are claims from four States for the title of Australia's
> first railway - all of which have certain degrees of validity.
>
> 1.  SA for the Goolwa to Port Elliot line
> 2.  Tas for the Port Arthur convict line
> 3.  Vic for the Melbourne to Sandridge line
> 4.  NSW for the Sydney to Parramatta line
>
[snip]
> So, there is no correct answer, and where you stand will as often as
not
> depend on where you live.

Well, I am from Tassie originally, maybe I'm biased, but the PA covict
line did beat those other three by two decades.
>


The Kiwis also claim to have been the first to achieve powered flight.
[snip]
Yeah, like, who would believe that?


> Whatever the case - Port Elliot has as strong or stronger a case than
> the others...
[snip]

... as...

the mainland's first
> > railway, or Australia's first iron railed line, or Australia's first
> > railway not to use human propulsion - all quite worthy claims - but
it
> > was not Australia's first railway.

IMHO :-)   As you said in your original post, it depends on your
definition of railway.

By the way, why is the horse-tram reconstruction at Victor Harbour, if
the original 1853 line was between Goolwa and Port Elliot?

Maybe the locals will be inspired to do something for the 150th
anniversary in 2003.

Finally, interesting to note that the first railway lines in SA (Goolwa-
PE), Tas (Port Arthur and then Launceston-Deloraine) and West Australia
(Geraldton-Northampton) were outside of capital cities. Sydney and
Melbourne both claim their respective states' first lines, but where
was Queensland's (excuse my ignorance)?

Cheers... James


Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/