were enormously more severe. These figures tend to confirm the widely prevalent impression, that the Caledonian and Glasgow and South-Western Railways1 were dragged into the struggle with their men on account of the intolerable severity of the work on the North British system. The result was that when the other railways were gradually getting out of the mess, the North British was left alone to fight a gruesome battle with a body of men determined not to submit.2 The statistics of September, 1889, and March, 1890, by no means, however, represent the state of matters later. It was in the summer of 18903 that the strain of traffic over the new lines was most severe, and the work hardest. Although the North British Railway Company had largely extended its lines and increased its traffic, it had made a merely fractional addition to its staff, and thus some of the men were kept on duty for periods altogether beyond permanent human endurance.

In

(1) "Speaking at a social gathering of the employees of the City Union Railway (worked by the Glasgow and South-Western Railway Company), held last night, Mr. Q. Y. Lawson, the manager, said that things on their line had been going on smoothly until the strike began. He was sorry that a number of their employees had been drawn into it. The directors had met the employees in a most handsome way, and when the statements of the men were analysed it was found there was little to complain of. The whole programme of the society had actually been in operation on the Union Railway for some years. Their signalmen had an eight-hours shift, a clerk assisted in all the important cabins, and the men were paid time and quarter for overtime and time and half for Sunday work. The company had been doing that for years, and the directors were surprised some of the men should have struck."-Glasgow Evening Citizen, 25th January, 1891. As regards the Caledonian Railway, Sir James King, deputy chairman, in meeting the Glasgow Citizens' Committee, "Pointed to what the company had done during the last 15 months entirely with the view of relieving the staff. During the last year the company had put on 50 additional engines daily, and had employed 150 additional men in the locomotive department, 55 additional yardsmen and brakesmen, and 67 additional signalmen. All of this was done with the view of reducing the hours of labour, and it involved a very large additional expenditure. All through, the attitude of the directors towards their employees had been most conciliatory, and they had made great concessions in the different departments in wages, hours, holidays, premiums, and uniforms."-Evening Times, 14th January, 1891.

(2) See, however, page 40.

(3) "All classes of men in the North British service were unanimously of opinion that for long delays and congestion of traffic last year was the worst in their experience of 15, 20, and 25 years. This was clearly demonstrated in the vicinity of Edinburgh last summer, when it was no uncommon occurrence for a goods train to take seven hours to cover a distance of six miles "-Glasgow Evening Citizen "Inquiry," 4th Article.

(4) See table, page 66. Detailed statements of the work of individual men were given in the excellent series of papers, the result of the Citizen “Inquiry," Op. cit. A few instances are taken at random :

March, 1890-N.B engine driver. Daily runs for the month averaged 17 hours; maximum number of hours on duty, 21; minimum, 12. Hours on duty, 14, 17, 00, 20, Sundays are included. Hours on duty, 17, 20, 20, II,

8th till 20th December, 1890.-N.B engine-driver. 14, 18, 00, 20, 20 13, 17. 12, 20 Average, nearly 17 hours. 8th till 20th December, 1890.-N. B. engine driver. 21, 00, 13, 18, 16, 21, 16, 18. Average, 17 hours daily. Date not given.-N. B. engine driver. Hours worked, 19, 24. Ditto, 17, 16, 18, 24, 15.

consecutive days, 21, 21, 19,

order to provide for the cases of men who, while nominally on duty, are really not occupied during the whole of the time, as in the case of the servants at a country station, some elasticity in the arrangement of the number of hours is necessary. But no person can seriously maintain that the driver of a goods train between Edinburgh and Glasgow can possibly continue to work on consecutive days, 21, 21, 19, 19, and 24 hours for any considerable length of time. One of three things must happen-the man must die, or he must find some other employment,1 or he must combine with others to compel his employers to treat him better. The last course is the one he elected to adopt.

3

The claim of the men as made three months before the strike2 was for a universal maximum ten-hours day for all grades, with the abolition of the system of reckoning hours of labour by an aggregate fortnight's work, and, in the payment of wages, overtime to be calculated at time and a quarter. This remained as the leading issue of the strike until Mr. Haldane, in his desire to promote a settlement, succeeded in inducing the Executive to agree to a modification of this demand. The result of his negotiations was the narrowing of the controversy to a single point, and the abandonment on the part of the men of a very important position. It is necessary to understand clearly how the system of aggregates works in order to appreciate the extent of the concession which the men were prepared to make. Up till the strike the normal fortnight's work was 144 hours. This number of hours might be made up in any way that suited the service. Thus, a man might conceivably make up in eight days his tale of hours for a fortnight. He would then begin to earn overtime, should he be required—as in the normal case he would-to work for four or six days more.* A

(1) Cf. page 63. (2) See above page 10. (3) See page 38.

(4) By an arrangement effected in 1889, and applying to certain grades, the Caledonian Railway Company appear to have succeeded in increasing the number of hours of work without a proportional additional cost to the Company. This arrangement limited the payment of wages for overtime to payment for one day per fortnight above the aggregate of 144 hours, irrespective of the number of hours actually worked. As a quid pro quo, the rate of wages was increased about 12%. This plan may have been devised for the purpose

man might, however, be on duty for a spell of twenty-four hours thrice a week without earning any overtime at all. Under the new arrangements of the North Eastern Railway, the aggregate is not a fortnightly but a weekly one, the men being paid overtime after sixty hours per week. On the Midland Railway certain sections of the employees are paid not by the aggregate fortnight's work but by a daily reckoning.

It was this daily reckoning system which the Scottish railway servants wanted the companies to adopt for all the grades. Such a system is not now in use on any of our railways, but its advantages over the aggregate systems, as a means of checking excessive spells of work, is obvious. On the suggestion of Mr. Haldane the men abandoned the claim for the abolition of the aggregate system, and offered to content themselves with reduction of the aggregate from a fortnightly one of 144 hours to a weekly one of 60 hours.

5

It has been suggested that desire for increased wages was the fundamental reason of the strike. The men deny this, and there is no reason to suppose that their denial is insincere. Assuming that the men really wanted more leisure more time with their families, as some of them put it-it is difficult to see on what lines they could have proceeded other than those upon which they actually did proceed. Had they demanded a rigid and indiscriminate fixation of maximum hours beyond which they would not work on any terms, such a policy would have been hopelessly impracticable. Thus they sought reduction of hours by demanding the imposition of a fine for overtime. The principle of overtime is probably a bad one, since it does not necessarily secure any diminution

of lessening the inducement to the men to work overtime, and it certainly tends to effect its purpose; but it is alleged by the men to result in practical compulsion to work two, three, or more days for which no payment is made whatever, excepting in the increase in the weekly rate. It is alleged that though the men accepted this arrangement in 1889, its acceptance was really forced upon them, and that the great increase of traffic and consequent increased length of the spells of work have caused the bargain to be greatly to their disadvantage.

(5) By the manager of the North British Railway Company (see page 8), and notably by Sir Michael Hicks-Beach. See report, House of Commons debate, Times, 24th January, 1891.

in the number of consecutive hours of duty or any increase in the public safety; it might be argued that, since overtime working would, on the adoption of the men's plan, involve higher pay, there would probably be less grumbling but more overtime than ever.1

It goes without saying that even had the demand of the men been made with increased pay as a motive, that of itself would not constitute an argument against its being granted. The diminution of the aggregate would involve the infliction of a penalty upon the companies for long spells of work, and thus tend to make these long spells less frequent, since it would be to the companies' interest to employ more men rather than to pay a less number 25 per cent. additional for overtime. The employment of additional men would probably be the effect of the proposed change; but so far as the new arrangement had not this effect, and assuming the amount of traffic to remain as it was prior to the strike, or to increase, it would be true, as the companies allege, that the wages of the men individually would be increased. The wages bill would also be increased by granting the demand of the men for a sixty-hours week, by so much as the difference between the cost of an aggregate fortnight of 144 hours and the cost of a period of 120 hours in two

(1) See, however, the statement of the Executive:

pay

"Full and fair opportunity is only wanted to clearly show the directors that it is a reduction of hours that is wanted, and that no satisfaction will be given unless such is conceded. When, through their manager, the North British Railway Board say"There is no doubt that the object of the present movement is to secure increased and not reduced hours," they are but adding insult to injury to their staff. Such a statement leads us to ask if they are really aware of the condition of work their men labour under to-day-that passenger, goods, and mineral men are working from 14 to 24 hours of duty, and if through this strain they demand ordinary rest before being called upon to do a similar stretch of hours, the arbitrary hand of the foreman or inspector is laid upon them, and they are, in some cases, told to remain at home until they are sent for (an easy method of suspension). or if, through their physical energy being exhausted, they fall sick, when they go to resume duty, they are informed their place is filled, but they can start in a subordinate position, or if not content with that there is no work for them. Are they aware of such acts being done in their name? If they are, it reflects a sad state of commercial morality; if they are not, they should not prejudge men's actions, but meet those who can clearly and fearlessly prove that such is actually taking place. In the circular issued by the North British Board it is clearly shown it would be useless to meet them, as they desire, in grades, as the Board's mind is made up that their men do not want reduced hours. What is the use of meeting men whose minds are made up, and the men's claims prejudged? Another very important factor must not be forgotten. that it was only after the strike of the Caledonian men in 1883 that the North British manager met the men at all at that time." - Report of Executive, Glasgow Herald, 24th November, 1891.

weekly aggregates. This difference is not a simple numerical one, as might at first sight appear, since the two sums are different in character. The experience of manufacturing industry goes to prove that, within certain limits, reduction of hours means increased human activity. It is thus questionable how far it is true that the working expenditure of the companies would be materially increased by reduction of hours, were this accompanied, as it probably would be, by increased efficiency of labour.1

Consideration of the figures in Tables I. and II.2 suggests a reason for the length of spells of work of Scottish as compared with English railway servants. Although exact comparison cannot be made owing to the disparity in the proportions of single and double lines in England and in Scotland respectively, the figures suggest that the Scottish lines are less amply supplied with locomotives than the English lines. 2 The number of locomotives on the English lines per mile open is nearly one per mile, while the Scottish lines have only a little more than half a locomotive per mile. The delays which occurred during last year were probably partly due to want of plant and want of station accommodation, but were also, it is alleged, partly due to the exhausted condition of the men. They were working really at a minimum instead of a maximum of efficiency. Since delayed traffic is more costly in its use of plant than expeditious traffic, it is hardly open to doubt that a sufficient staff, whose hours are not pushed beyond the limit up to which the men are efficient, is more economical than an insufficient staff which frequently falls asleep over its work from sheer exhaustion. Many of the detailed grievances narrated at the meetings of the men on strike, and in the newspapers, might no doubt be easily set aside by the managers; but the broad fact remains that the North British Railway has been for nearly twelve months unable to cope with its increase of traffic owing to the opening up of its extensions. Although this company has shown more enter