I can't. I'd just give false positives  

If I may come in here. That sounds remarkably like one of the PhD awards they dished out after the honourary degrees to showbiz types but before I received my second degree.

The initial trunk lines were constructed on the standard gauge of 5 feet 6 inches, which

was wider than the standard gauge of 4 feet 8 inches employed in much of the United States

and Britain. When Indian railways were constructed, the engineering community in Britain

favored the broad gauge because it was believed to lower the cost of operating high-volume

railways . Opinions changed by the 1870s and engineers began advocating the

metre gauge (3 feet 3inches), which was cheaper to build.

 

 

 

The GOI favored the metregauge for feeder lines connecting to the main trunk lines.

 

 

 

New metre gauge systems were

also constructed such as the Rajputana Malwa system in the northwest. By 1900, the metre

gauge lines comprised 41% of the network compared to 56% on the Indian standard gauge.

In yet another break of gauge, many of the small branch lines connecting to the main network

in the twentieth century were constructed on narrow gauges (i.e., less than 3 feet)

 

 

I actually made the title up, but I fear I may have been in the ballpark of locomotive engineering.

 

I have opened a can of worm haven't I 

 

Yes! The 1804 bit was a tad early.

Now if it had been the north west rather than the north east:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt00...?ref_=nm_flmg_act_36

set in 1905 and may be the film shown more often on television than any other over the years.

 

 

 

In my defence I was quite tired when I wrote it. 

 

But I'm pleased people have taken the time to research it further, I see this thread running and running.