Volltext Seite (XML)
April 1, 1868.] THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT’S JOURNAL. 93 INTERCOMMUNICATION IN RAILWAY TRAINS. The question whether railway passengers should or should not he intrusted with some means of communicating with the officials in charge of a train in motion, is one which intimately concerns the public safety, and must therefore be ofinterest to all in this great railway country. It certainly seems a very reasonable requirement that some such means of communication should exist, and that railway passengers should not be exposed (in addition to other chances of accident) to the possibility of being locked-up, for several hours in a narrow compartment, with no means of calling the attention of anyone, if threatened by fire, outrage, or alarming illness. Accidents arising out of the motion of the train may be observed by the vigilance of the officials, without the intervention of a passenger ; but personal danger may threaten the passenger himself, either in the shape of murderous attack or fire originating in the interior of the carriage, or sudden illness, of which the guard or driver can have no possible cognisance without some communication taking place. Repeatedly, under the influence of especially- horrible railway murders or accidents, the public have ener getically taken up this subject, and forced its attention upon the authorities ; but the efforts then made have, for the most part, been attended with little result, and we are still very far from any practical solution of the question. Last year a select committee of the House of Lords con sidered the question, “ Whether it was practicable or desirable to give railway passengers the pow'er of communicating, in cases of danger, with the guard or driver of a train in mo tion?” but no very satisfactory conclusion was arrived at. It will perhaps be worth while if we endeavour to bring the whole subject under our inspection, so as to discover, if possible, what are the difficulties that stand so obstinately in our way, and how it has happened that, during a period of sixteen years, the public, parliament, and railway authorities have been working at a solution of this problem, without having yet solved it. On the Continent, as well as in England, a great deal of attention has been given to the question of applying some inexpensive mechanical contrivance to railway trains, which will afford an easy and certain means of intercommuni cation between passengers and officials, and will, at the same time, fulfil all the exigencies of a vast railway traffic, and this without interfering with existent public prejudices, or pro viding malicious, thoughtless, and timid persons with too easy an opportunity of endangering the lives of their fellow pas sengers by any unnecessary stopping of the train. A great many plans have been tried from time to time, with more or less success, and a great many more suggested, some of which we will refer to as we proceed; but we will first briefly glance at the history of the subject. Very soon after the first inception of railways the question of intercommunication of trains in motion seems to have attracted some notice; but it was not, apparently, until the year 184.7, that any decided step in this direction was taken. Towards the close of that year the then commissioners of rail ways issued a circular on the subject, and several proposals were exchanged between them and the various railway com panies. In the year 1851 they issued another circular, point ing out how desirable it was that “ the power of travelling along trains in motion should be given to the guards and servants of the company.” After some correspondence between the Board of Trade and the Railway Clearing House a sub committee was appointed by the latter, to consider some pro posals issuing from the Board of Trade, and the various opinions of all the railway companies in England were then obtained. This was in the year 1852. In 1853, in consequence of a serious accident on the Buckinghamshire Railway, the subject was again urged upon the companies, and the Railway Clearing House re-appointed a sub-committee “ with a view to ascertain whether any plan for establishing such a means of communication can be devised, which would not create greater danger than it is designed to guard against,” and an elaborate report was drawn up in March, 1853. In the same year the members of a select committee of the House of Commons, having this report before them, reported as follows:—“That provision should be made for enforcing the means of constant communication between all the servants to whom the safety of the passengers, in any train, is intrusted.” In 1854 another accident took place, and the attention of the railway companies was called to the resolution above quoted. Between this time and the year 1857 many systems were tried, and some little advance was made, particularly as regards the means of com munication between guards and engine-drivers. In December, 1857, the Board of Trade again addressed circular letters to all the railway companies, stating that twenty-six accidents had occurred in the previous four years, which might have been prevented, “ or some of the ulterior consequences avoided,” had some means of communication existed, and desiring to know how far the wishes of the legislature, as expressed in the recommendations of 1853, had been carried into effect. In 1858 a select committee of the House of Commons heard a good deal of evidence on this subject, and recommended as follows:—• “ That your committee is also of opinion that it should be imperative on every railway company to establish means of communication between guards and engine-drivers.” The matter now rested until the year 1864, when, principally owing to the murder of Mr. Briggs, and the letter written by the Queen, the public again seriously took up the question, and further letters were addressed by the Board of Trade to all the railway companies, calling attention to “ recent occurrences of a criminal nature, as well as to the complaints frequently urged on their attention of the danger existing, or apprehended (in case of accidents) from the want of means of communication between the different portions of a railway train while in motionbut, in the replies to these letters, nothing new was elicited. Last year “An Act to compel Railway Companies to provide an efficient Means of Communication between the Guards and Passengers of Railway Trains,” w r as passed in the House of Commons, but was withdrawn in the House of Lords, for reasons we shall see as we proceed; and in the latter part of the month of February, of this year, an exhaustive report was made by Colonel Yolland to the Board of Trade, on some experiments made during the winter, for the purpose of testing different systems of electrical communication. In France, in the year 1853, the law provided that “Les conducteurs gardes freins seront mis en communication avcc le mecanicien, pour donner en cas d’accident, le signal d’alarme,” and a commission of enquiry was appointed in 1857. In the year 1861, in consequence of the murder of M. Poinsot, on the Eastern Railway of France another dis tinguished commission was appointed, and in their exhaustive report of 1863, express opinions, almost identical with those already expressed by our English Companies. We have purposely abstained in the above historical sketch, from making any mention of the various opinions given from time to time, or of the systems and schemes proposed, or tried. It is with these that we have now to do. But we will first correctly understand, what it is, we really wish to accomplish, and for this purpose we will imagine a railway train in motion fulfilling every necessary condition. The conditions absolutely necessary ’on our English lines, we hold to be 6 in number. 1st, Complete privacy and isola tion of each separate compartment. 2nd, A repaid and easy means of summoning the guard of the train, when necessary, to the particular compartment whence the alarm has been given, whilst the train is in motion. 3rd, That the guard, when he shall have satisfied himself, as to the necessity of stopping the train shall be able to give his orders to the engine driver directly from the compartment to which he has gone. 4th, The guard at all times, from his own van, shall have the power of communicating from his engine to the guard. 5th, That in the event of any portion of the train breaking asunder from the rest, it shall automatically give an alarm to warn both guard and driver, 6th, That an Act of Parliament shall render compulsory the adoption of one and the same system, by all the railway companies throughout the kingdom, and impose very severe penalties on any person or persons, wantonly using the means of communication. We will now separat ely consider the question of the necessity of these conditions, and the difficulties experienced in the practical fulfilment of them. First, then, is it absolutely neces sary that the privacy and isolation of each separate compart ment shall be maintained ? In this country we think it is ; at „all events there would be a very strong feeling against destroy ing it, especially as it is a question whether greater danger than before might not arise out of the power of passing from one compartment to another. Passengers (especially when alone) would probably feel greater security in knowing
