Joseph Tatlow - Fifty Years of Railway Life in England, Scotland and Ireland

J >> Joseph Tatlow >> Fifty Years of Railway Life in England, Scotland and Ireland

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19

[Edward John Cotton: cotton.jpg]

I have spoken previously of the _beaux_ I knew in the higher ranks of the
railway service but, strange to say, omitted to mention Edward John who,
in some respects outshone all others. His coat may not have been cut by
a west-end tailor, his hat may not have been a Lincoln Bennett, or his
necktie the latest production of Burlington Arcade, but who could wear a
tall white hat with a black band, with the least little rakish tilt, and
a light grey frock coat with a rose in the buttonhole, with such an air
and grace as he? He appreciated keenly all the good things that life can
give and loved his fellow men. _Pax vobiscum_, kind, warm-hearted Edward
John! You were an ornament to the railway world and always my friend.

It was Cotton and his Chairman, the Right Hon. John Young, who put in my
way my first arbitration case, to which I have in a previous chapter
alluded. This, as far as I remember, occurred in 1886. A dispute had
arisen between the Northern Counties Company and a small railway company
whose line they worked, concerning, I think, the payment for and use of
some sidings. I conducted the proceedings of course with the greatest of
care, attended, perhaps, with a little trepidation, summoned every
possible witness to appear before me, and visited in state the _locus_.
Edward John was, I think, a little amused. Much older than I he had long
since passed through these youthful phases. I issued my award, with the
usual result that while each party was fairly well pleased neither was
altogether satisfied. I was proud of my _debut_ as an arbitrator,
especially as it was rewarded by, what seemed to me then, a very handsome
fee.

In January, 1886, an incident that is worth narrating occurred. In my
office a new junior clerk was required. An advertisement in the
newspapers produced a large number of applications, and about a dozen of
the applicants were selected to be seen, one after the other, by Pinion
and myself. Before lunch one day we interviewed half a dozen or so.
Returning together from lunching in the city, as we neared the station,
Pinion drew my attention to a youth who was evidently making for the
railway premises. Said I to Pinion: "If that youth is one of the
candidates, I'll be surprised if he's not the boy for us." It was only a
back view we had of him, but he held himself so well, walked so briskly,
looked so neat, smart, and businesslike that he arrested attention. That
boy, Charles A. Moore, then fresh from school and just fifteen, is now
general manager of the railway!

It was in 1886, too, that I first met Walter Bailey, between whom and
myself a friendship sprung up which grew in depth and sincerity as time
went on, lasted for thirty years, and was only terminated by his lamented
death in January, 1917. The friendship thus formed yielded much pleasure
and happiness to me and, I think I may safely say, also to my departed
friend. Bailey, who was about my own age, came to Ireland from the South-
Eastern Railway, soon after my settlement in Belfast, to fill the
position of Accountant to the Belfast and Northern Counties Railway. Two
young Englishmen, landed in Ireland, engaged in the same sort of
business, in the same city, would naturally gravitate towards each other
but, more than this, what made us such intimate friends were, tastes in
common, similarity of views, especially concerning railway affairs, a
mutual liking for literary matters, and--well, other less definable
things that form the foundation of all true friendships. Throughout our
long intimacy we often took counsel together on subjects of mutual
interest, but it was I who sought his advice and help much oftener than
he sought mine, for he was cleverer than I. Indeed in the whole railway
world I never met an intellect so quick, or so clear and luminous as his.

Bailey was the most unselfish man I ever knew; the readiest to help
others. His pen, his remarkable stores of knowledge, and his spare time
too, were always at the service, not only of his friends, but often of
those who were scarcely more than mere acquaintances. The amount of work
which he cheerfully imposed upon himself in this way was astounding and
never was it done grudgingly or half-heartedly, but always promptly and
generously. It afforded him a pleasure that only one endowed as he could
feel. This part of him was often the subject of talk with those of us
who knew him well. But what charmed _me_ most, more even than his
brilliant mental gifts, were the sweetness of his disposition and his
quaintly quizzical and happy humour. Ambition was not strong in him, was
in fact all but absent, and he often rallied me on mine. He never in all
his life asked for any improvement in salary or position; but, in spite
of his inveterate modesty, rose high, became Chief Accountant of the
Midland Railway of England and, I should say, the leading railway
accountant in the United Kingdom. On railway matters he was a writer of
great skill, and all he wrote was enlivened with the happiest humour. To
the _Railway News_ he was a valued contributor, and in railway polemics a
master.

[Walter Bailey: bailey.jpg]

The Director on the County Down with whom I became most intimate was the
Right Honourable (then Mr.) Thomas Andrews. He was brother to Judge
Andrews; brother-in-law of Lord Pirrie; became Chairman of the Company;
was made a Privy Councillor; a Deputy Lieutenant of Down; High Sheriff of
that County and President of this and that, for he was a man of ability
and character, but simple in mind and manners as the best men mostly are.
Eloquent in speech, warm-hearted and impulsive, he found it difficult to
resist a joke, even at the expense of his friend. In April, 1890, he
wrote me: "I hope you were not at all annoyed at my pleasantries to Mr.
Pinion. I am not exactly one of those men who would rather lose a friend
than a joke, but I find it hard to resist a joke when a good opportunity
presents itself. I am bound to say that I would be sorry to annoy you,
by a jest or in any other way." His temper was lively but though quickly
roused soon subsided, and he never harboured resentment. At the
conclusion of the very first Board meeting I attended as general manager
at the County Down, he followed me into my room, complimented me on the
way I had discussed the business of the day, and added: "I'm sure you'll
be successful in Ireland for you have the _suaviter in modo_ combined
with the _fortiter in re_." It was a pretty compliment, and sincere I
knew, for no one could meet him without recognising his frank outspoken
nature. On the threshold of my new work such encouragement greatly
cheered me and increased my determination to do my best. Until his
death, not long ago, we often corresponded on railway and other matters,
and he was always my staunch friend. He had a taste, too, for poetry
which we sometimes discussed. The _Thomas Andrews_, who went down with
the _Titanic_ in the North Atlantic, on the 14th April, 1912, was his
son, the story of whose short but strenuous life, and its tragic end, is
told in a little book written by Shan F. Bullock. Sir Horace Plunkett
wrote an introduction to it, in which he says: "He was one of the noblest
Irishmen Ulster has produced in modern times, to whom came the supreme
test in circumstances demanding almost superhuman fortitude and
self-control. There was not the wild excitement of battle to sustain
him; death had to be faced calmly in order that others--to whom he must
not even bid farewell--might live." A few minutes before the end, so it
is recorded, on the boat deck of the _Titanic_, the grandest sight of him
was seen, as he stood with wonderful calm, throwing overboard deck chairs
to those who were struggling in the water below. He had no thought of
himself, but only of duty and of others. Then came the end: the
_Titanic_, with a low long slanting dive went down and with her Thomas
Andrews. He was only 39, but had attained the high position of a
Managing Director of the great firm of Harland and Wolff. I knew him as
a boy, manly, handsome, high-spirited, clever--"the father of the man."
That this terrible tragedy shortened the life of _his_ father is certain.

In 1887, and again in 1888, Bailey and I took our holidays together,
visiting Normandy, Paris, Belgium, Holland and the Rhine, doing a great
deal of walking, which he liked as much as I. He was the prince of
travelling companions, always gay and sprightly, and spoke French with
great fluency. His happy disposition, unfailing good humour, and keen
enjoyment of everything, even of the occasional discomforts that arose,
as in travelling discomforts will arise, especially when funds are not
too plentiful, made every hour of our holiday enjoyable. He had the
happy gift of seeing always the humorous and the best side of things. He
acted as paymaster on our tours and presented with great regularity
records of our joint expenditure with the neatness and accuracy of the
perfect accountant. Never a pipe smoker, he had no special interest in
pipes, but to me the happiness of our first holiday was increased by the
colouring of a new meerschaum. In this delightful art I was a disciple
of Samuel Swarbrick, though I needed not, as he did, the services of
another in the early stages of the colouring process. Whoever has been
the votary of a meerschaum will understand the pride with which I
frequently displayed my pipe and its deepening colour to Bailey, often to
his great amusement I must admit. In a hotel in the city of Antwerp,
where we stayed for several days, we occupied adjoining bedrooms having a
communicating door. One night, towards early morn, but before daylight
had dawned, I was suddenly awakened out of a sound sleep, and to my
astonishment saw Bailey with lighted candle standing by my bedside, with
a serious look on his face. "Great Scott! what's the matter?" I
exclaimed. "_My dear boy, I can't sleep; do let me see your pipe_," he
answered. With such like pleasantries he beguiled the happy times we
spent together.

In these years I had another pleasure: I learned to ride, taking lessons
in horsemanship at a riding school in Belfast. I soon acquired a firm
seat, and my good friend H. H. (who was a practised horseman, and then
lived in Belfast too) and I had many delightful rides in the beautiful
country around the city. For many years, so far as opportunity and means
allowed, I indulged myself in this best of all exercises.

CHAPTER XVIII.
RAILWAY RATES AND CHARGES, THE BLOCK, THE BRAKE, AND LIGHT RAILWAYS

Until the autumn of 1888 nothing occurred to disturb the even tenor of my
way, and I pursued in peace my daily work at the County Down. It was
interesting work and pleasant to become personally acquainted with the
customers of the company, many of whom lived in towns and villages some
distance from the railway, and to gain their good will. It was
interesting and also satisfactory to gradually establish an improved and
efficient train service and to watch the traffic expand. It was
exhilarating to engage in lively competition with carriers by road who,
for short distance traffic, keenly competed with the railway. It was
good to introduce economies and improvements in working, and gratifying
to do what one could to help and satisfy the staff--a thing, I need
scarcely say, much easier to accomplish then than now.

And so the time passed until August, 1888, when the railway world was
deeply moved by the introduction of the _Railway and Canal Traffic Act_.

This Act was the outcome of the Report of the Select Committee of 1881,
before which Mr. James Grierson gave such weighty evidence. One of the
most important measures Parliament ever passed, it imposed on railway
companies an amount of labour and anxiety, prolonged and severe, such as
I hope they may not have to face again.

The Act, as I have stated before, altered the constitution of the Railway
Commission, and also effected minor alterations in the law relating to
railways and canals, but its main purpose was the revision of Maximum
Rates and Charges. It ordered each company to prepare a revised
classification of goods and a revised Schedule of Maximum Rates, and
submit them to the Board of Trade, who, after considering objections
lodged against them, were to agree (if they could) with the companies
upon a classification and schedule for adoption; and if they failed, to
determine a classification and schedule themselves. Public sittings at
Westminster, Edinburgh and Dublin, occupying 85 days, took place, but no
agreement was reached; and in their Report to Parliament the Board of
Trade embodied a Revised Classification and a standard Schedule of
Maximum Rates for general adoption. The Schedule included Terminals. In
accordance with the Act, it then became necessary for this Revised
Classification and Schedule to be confirmed by Parliament. Against them
petitions were lodged by both railways and traders, and the whole matter
was referred to a Joint Committee of both Houses. This Committee sat in
1891 from April till July; but it was not until January, 1893, that all
was completed and the Revised Classification and the new rates brought
into force. Little time was afforded to the companies for their part of
the work. The whole system of rates was changed. New rates had to be
calculated on the new scale; thousands of rate books had to be compiled,
and millions of rates altered and revised. It was a colossal task;
impossible of fulfilment in the time allowed. The application of the new
Schedule forcibly reduced many rates, inflicting much loss upon the
companies, and because the companies advanced other rates (within the
limits of the new maximum powers of course) to meet this loss, or to meet
it to some extent, a storm of abuse arose and swept across the land. A
trader from Berwick-on-Tweed, more frank than most, wrote the following
"characteristic" letter as it was called at the time:--

"What we want is to have our fish carried at _half_ present rates. We
don't care a --- whether it pays the railways or not. Railways ought to
be made to carry for the good of the country, or they should be taken
over by the Government. That is what all Traders want and mean to try to
get."

Perhaps they would not be happy if they got it! In his clear, and most
interesting book _Railways and Their Rates_, my friend Edwin A. Pratt
says this letter was quoted in the Report which the Board of Trade made
to Parliament after their 85 days' Inquiry. The railway companies
announced that the new rates were in no sense final, that the time
allowed them was insufficient for proper revision, that they would give
an assurance that no increase would be made that would interfere with
trade or agriculture or diminish traffic and that, unless under
exceptional circumstances, no increase would in any case exceed 5 per
cent. But all was in vain, and Parliament passed an Act which provided
that any increase whatever (though within the limits of the new statutory
maximum) if complained of, should be heard and decided upon by the
Railway Commissioners, and that the onus of proving the reasonableness of
the increase should rest on the railway company. Sir Alexander (then
Mr.) Butterworth, in his book on _The Law Relating to Maximum Rates and
Charges on Railways_, published in 1897, says this remarkable result is
presented: that Parliament, "after probably the most protracted inquiry
ever held in connection with proposed legislation, decided that certain
amounts were to be the charges which railway companies should for the
future be entitled to make, and in 1894 apparently accepted the
suggestion that many of the charges, sanctioned after so much
deliberation, were unreasonable, and enacted that to entitle a company to
demand them, it should not be sufficient that the charge was within any
limit fixed by an Act of Parliament." Thus Parliament, yielding to
popular clamour, stultified itself, and in feverish haste to placate an
angry and noisy public tied the hands of the railway companies, doing, I
believe, more harm than good. This legislation naturally made the
companies very cautious in reducing a rate because of the difficulties to
be encountered should circumstances require them to raise it again, and
railway rates thus lost that element of elasticity and adaptability so
essential to the development of trade. Many a keen and enterprising
business man have I heard lament the restrictions that Parliament imposed
and declare that such interference with the freedom of trade was short-
sighted in the extreme and bad for the country.

Immediately after the passing of the Act of 1888 the railway companies
vigorously attacked the work imposed upon them. A special meeting on the
subject was held at the Irish Railway Clearing House in Dublin for the
purpose of preparing a revised Classification and Schedule of Rates. This
was a rare opportunity for me and I eagerly availed myself of it. Before
I left Glasgow it will be remembered I had been entrusted with an
examination of the statutory charging powers of the Glasgow and South-
Western company, and with the drawing up of a suggested scale of maximum
rates. No similar work had yet been done in Ireland, and it was
altogether new to the Irish companies. I produced copies of the
statements which I had prepared in Glasgow, and they served as a basis
for what had to be done, saved much time and trouble and gained for me no
little _kudos_. But more than this resulted. As I have hinted before,
and as will hereafter appear, this bit of Glasgow work led to my
promotion to a greater charge than the busy little County Down, which
though I loved it well, I had begun to feel I was now outgrowing. Many
other meetings at the Clearing House followed in which I took part with
increasing confidence, and in which Walter Bailey also prominently
figured. He and I were hand and glove. Cotton, who soon discovered that
Bailey was an authority on the subject, as indeed he was on most railway
matters, was not slow to profit by his knowledge and ability. He brought
him to all our meetings, and valuable was the help that Bailey gave.

In 1889 there came into operation the _Regulation of Railways Act_. It
invested the Board of Trade with power to order any company to adopt
block working, to interlock all points and signals, and to use on all
trains carrying passengers automatic continuous brakes. Before issuing
the order the Board consented to hear any representations which the
railways desired to make. The smaller companies, upon which the
expenditure involved would press very hardly, and the circumstances of
whose traffic seemed scarcely to require the same elaborate precautions
for safety in working as the bigger and more crowded systems, banded
together and waited on the Board of Trade. Upon me devolved the duty of
presenting the case for the smaller Irish companies, and upon Conacher,
of the Cambrian, for the smaller English lines. How finely Conacher
spoke I well remember. He had an excellent voice, possessed in a high
degree the gift of concise and forcible expression, and his every word
told. But our eloquence accomplished little--some small modification
regarding mixed trains, and that was all. Many of the lines in Ireland
serving districts where population is scanty, traffic meagre, and trains
consequently infrequent, could well have been spared the costly outlay
which the Act involved. Three or four trains each way per day represent
the train service on many of these small railways, and some of the
sections of the larger lines warrant little more. Take, for instance,
the case of the Midland Great-Western. On 330 out of its 538 miles not
more than six trains each way in the 24 hours are required, and they
could probably be reduced without hurting anyone. These figures relate
not to the exceptional war time in which I pen these lines, when stern
necessity has sweepingly reduced the train service, but to pre-war days
when normal conditions prevailed. Half a dozen trains each way per day!
In England there are as many, or more, in the hour!

The Act of 1889 also dealt with the working hours of railway men whose
duty involved the safety of trains or passengers, and required each
company to make periodical returns of those employed for longer hours
than were to be named from time to time by the Board of Trade; and it
contained further a useful clause to the effect that the fares were in
future to be printed on passenger tickets. I should not be surprised if
this simple little clause has not brought more real satisfaction to the
minds and hearts of the people of the British Isles than all the laboured
legislation on railway rates and charges.

In the year 1889 a great fillip was given to the extension of railways in
Ireland by the passing of the _Light Railways (Ireland) Act_. It was
familiarly known as "Balfour's Act." Mr. Balfour was then Chief
Secretary of Ireland, and it was due to him that it was passed. The Act
was designed "to facilitate the construction of Light Railways in
Ireland," and embodied various recommendations of the Allport Commission.
It was the first introduction of the principle of State aid by free money
grants. Such aid was conditional upon the light railway being
constructed or worked by an existing railway company, except in cases
where the Baronies guaranteed dividends upon a portion of the capital.
The amount which the Treasury was authorised to grant was 600,000 pounds.
In 1896 this was increased by a further sum of 500,000 pounds, and both
were, in addition to a capital sum, represented by 40,000 pounds per
annum which had been granted under previous legislation. Under this Act
and Acts of 1890 and 1896, over 300 miles, comprising 15 separate lines,
were constructed at a total cost, exclusive of what the railway companies
contributed, of 1,849,967 pounds, of which the Government contribution
was 1,553,967 pounds. Although the lines were promoted under Light
Railway Acts, and the Government grants were based upon light railway
estimates, Parliamentary power was obtained to construct, maintain, and
work them as other than light railways. This was taken advantage of by
some of the working companies who, in eight instances contributed
themselves a considerable amount of capital, in order that the lines
should be made sound and substantial, of the usual gauge, and such as
could be worked by the ordinary rolling stock of the company. The
Midland Great-Western, for instance, so expended no less than 352,000
pounds of their capital on "Balfour Lines" in the west. It was a
spirited thing to do.

Of the 309 miles of "light" railways, made under the 1889 and subsequent
Acts, 194 were constructed on the ordinary gauge of the country, 5 feet 3
inches, and the remainder on a 3-foot gauge.

Several Light Railway or Tramway Acts were passed in Ireland between 1860
and 1883, under which 295 miles of light railways at a cost of 1,389,784
pounds were constructed. With the exception of the small sum of 144,804
pounds, the interest on the whole of this capital was guaranteed by the
Baronies, the Treasury repaying the Baronies one-half but not to exceed
two per cent.

The lines constructed under "Balfour's Act" are situated mostly in
Connemara, Kerry, Mayo and Donegal, serving districts remote and thinly
populated, where as commercial ventures they could not have been
projected. That they have proved to be of great benefit to the country
is beyond question. They have developed fishing and agriculture, and
have brought the tourist into districts little visited before. Live
stock and farm produce are able to reach their market, and places before
isolated are in touch with the outer world.

One of the first of the railways made under the 1889 Act was a short line
of 8 miles from the County Down line at Downpatrick to the little fishing
village of Ardglass. It stood first on the list of lines recommended for
construction in the Report of the Allport Commission. Primarily it was
intended for the development of the herring traffic which for years had
abounded on the coast, but no sooner was the line opened, than that
perverse migratory fish sought other seas, and did not return to Ardglass
for I don't know how long.

The promotion of the Ardglass railway, and the steps necessary for
obtaining an Order in Council for its construction and working,
familiarised me with the Light Railway Legislation of Ireland, with which
in subsequent years I was often concerned.

In the autumn of 1889, in company with Mr. Jackson (afterwards Lord
Allerton), then Secretary of the Treasury, Mr. Andrews and other
directors of the County Down, I visited Ardglass. Under the new Act the
Treasury, in connection with the projected railway construction, held the
purse strings, and the Treasury, so far as we were concerned, was Mr.
Jackson. We of the County Down were keen on getting the line sanctioned,
and were very anxious concerning Mr. Jackson's visit. He was a man who
drove a hard bargain, so it was said. Certainly he was an able man, and
I greatly admired him that day. Later in life, when he was Lord
Allerton, and Chairman of the Great Northern Railway of England, I met
him again and liked him well.

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19