supported by many other M.P.'s, and even a duke sent a sympathetic letter expressing his regret for absence, as did several earls. Here is part of the statement made to the meeting by Mr. Fred Evens, General Secretary of the A.S.R.S.:—
"In the years 1874-5-6 there were 3,982 persons killed and 16,762 injured on the railways of the United Kingdom; 2,249 of those killed and 10,305 of the injured were railway servants who worked the traffic. The directors said the passengers were killed or injured by their own want of caution, but the public knew that if we had continuous footboards. then the number of injured would be greatly reduced The number of persons killed and injured at railway stations would have been saved if there were sub-ways and bridges. But continuous footboards, subways, and bridges cost money, and the companies were not responsible for such accidents; therefore there were no continuous footboards, subways, or bridges."
The long hours worked by railway servants were truly appalling at that time. Captain Tyler, in his evidence before the Royal Commission on Railway Accidents (1877), gave the case of a driver of a pilot engine who had been on duty forty hours, and his guard nineteen. A driver spoke of being on his engine "eighteen, twenty, or twenty-four hours," and finding "his faculties impaired and his energy abated towards the close of such a long day's work." Mr. Hargreaves, a stationmaster on the Manchester & Liverpool line, said "guards and drivers sometimes make ten hours overtime at a stretch, and four to five hours overtime is quite a regular thing," and this after a ten to twelve hours day, and often not a penny payment for the overtime.
Mr. Hanbury, inspector in the locomotive department of the Midland, was asked about drivers going to sleep on the engines owing to excessive exhaustion:—
"What is the longest time of a man being at work in any case that has come under your knowledge?—I have heard of cases this winter of men being on duty for thirty-five hours.
