AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

The Law as to Strap-hangers.

26th May 1910, Page 6
26th May 1910
Page 6
Page 7
Page 6, 26th May 1910 — The Law as to Strap-hangers.
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

By W. Joynson-Hicks.

The question of overcrowding is a matter which has received the direct attention of the Legislature with reference to such vehicles as omnibuses. tramcars and also steamboats; but, so far as railway carriages are concerned, there appears to he no direct statutory provision dealing with the subject of overcrowding, and the absence of penalties seems to have tempted cerfaiu of the Underground Tube Railway Cms to permit overcrowding in their carriages. Such overcrowding has a more-farreaching result than mere inconvenience to passengers: the dangers arising from the practice of permitting passengers to travel on the platforms between the carriages are, I think, quite obvious.

purpose considering the duty of railway companies with reference to the overcrowding of their carriages, whether the existing provisions are sufficient and whether any alteration in the law is desirable.

One has to consider not only the general Acts affecting railways, such as the Railway Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, and other Acts for the construction and regulation of railways, but also the special Acts under which railways are constructed, many of which I have perused.

I do not for one moment deny that overcrowding is a difficult matter for railway companies to prevent, but there can be no doubt that it should be prevented. It the companies are bound to accept all wouhl-be-passengers they are hound to provide, reasonable accommodation for them ; if they are only bound to accept those for whom accommodation is provided, then they can decline to accept others. In my opinion, at the present time, railway companies incur no penalties—nor. indeed, are they guilty of any infringement of the lawin permitting overcrowding. There appears to he no section in any of the general Railway Acts affecting the point. and I am not aware of any such provision in the various special Acts obtained by the railway companies.

Typical By-laws.

The matter is usually dealt with in this way : by sections 108 and 109 of the Railway Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, power is given to the companies to make by-laws and regulations for various purposes, including regulations for controlling the travelling upon or using and working of the railway, and such by-laws have to receive the approval of the Board of Trade. In pursuance of this power, by-laws are made by the companies, and, so far as the question of overcrowding is concerned, the by-lows made by the principal underground tube railways are in similar form. The provisions are as follow :—

" When a lift or a carriage or compartment of a carriage contains the full number of passengers which it is constructed to carry, no additional person shall enter or remain therein if requested by any passenger therein or by a guard of the train or any duly-authorized servant or agent of the company not -to do so : any person infringing or not observing this by-law and regulation shall be liable to the penalty prescribed by the by-laws (40s. in the ease of a first offence, and :25 for a second and subsequent offences), and, on failing

to quit such lift, carriage or compartment immediately on request by any such guard servant or agent, may, without prejudice to any such penalty, be removed therefrom by or under the direction of such guard servant or agent.

" No person except a servant or agent of the company in the performance of his duty shall mount on any railway engine or on the roof of any lift or any waggon carriage or vehicle using the railway, or travel or attempt to travel on or in any luggage or guard's van, waggon carriage Or vehicle not provided for -the conveyance of passengers, or on the step or footboard, or on any part of any lift waggon carriage or vehicle other than a part provided for the conveyance of passengers. Any person infringing or not observing this by-law and regulation shall be liable to the penalty prescribed by the by-laws (as above), and in ease of noncompliance with the request of a guard of a train or other servant or agent of the company to desist may, without prejudice to any such penalty, be forthwith removed from the lift wagon carriage or vehicle or the company's premises by or under the direction of any such guard servant or agent.

Gross Inadequacy.

The by-law dealing with the step, footboard or any part of a carriage other than is part provided for the conveyance of passengers appears, at first sight, to prohibit passengers from travelling thereon, but when it comes to be examined it amounts to nothing more than a prevision that the company's servant shall decide whether or not such parts of the carriage shall be used_ Although the guard or other authorized servant has power to eject an offender, the railway companies apparently do not desire their servants to exercise it. The companies' action with reference to their by-laws on overcrowding is deceptive; they frame by-laws to enable them to prevent it, and thereby create the impression that they are going to enforce them, but in practice they openly permit what their by-laws prohibit. Any person accustomed -to travelling on the tube railways cannot but observe that the companies' servants do persistently permit passengers botli to overcrowd the carriages and to ride on the platforrn,s between them. It is the use by passengers of parts of the carriages not intended for the accommodation of passengers that gives rise to the greatest dangers, and, if the Legislature thought that such provisions for safety of passengers in this respect might properly be left to the railway companies, then, in my opinion, the time has

arrived when Parliament should recognize that the companies can no longer be safely tru.sted with such duties. In my opinion, the existing general Railway Acts do not give to any authority suelt as the Board of -Trade or Railway Commissioners power to make regulations on the subject. in question. It seems, however, to have been recognized by the Board of Trade that some special supervision should be exercised in the ease of tube railways, and I find that by the Broinpton and Piccadilly Circus Railway Act of 1902 it is provided that the company shall from time to time submit for the approval of the Board of Trade plans, sections and other details of their proposals with respect to: (a) permanent way, tunnels, platforms, stairs, lifts and other connections; (h) rolling stock ; (c) lighting; and (di ventilation— also, that. the railway rolling ,tha and other works shall be constructed, reconstructed and maintained only in accordance with plans, sections and other -details as approved by the Board of Trade. In ray opinion, such a clause gives the Board of Trade power to compel the railway company to obtain their approval to the aecommedation provided for passengers, and gives the Board power to limit the number of passengers to be carried in ally particular type of carriage, but I believe that up to the present time the Board of Trade has more particularly concerned itself in the method of construction, and the suitability of the type of carriage proposed, as affecting the safety of passengers on railways using electrical power, and has not dealt with the carrying capacity of the carriages.

Remedial Measures. •

In my opinion, the conductor of the carriage should be the person responsible fur overcrowding, whether in the .carriage itself OF on the footboards or platforms. With regard to overcrowding in carriages, it may he that soma 10 or 20 persons beyond the number for which accommodation is provided are riding in it, and if they refuse to leave when requested to do SO it would be necessary to issue 10 or 20 summonses in order to enforce the observances of the by-law. But how are they going to be summoned if they decline to give their names and addresses? If it is desirable to prevent overcrowding in omnibuses and trainc.ars. I cannot see why it should be less desirable to prevent it in railway carriages. As far as 'Metropolitan Stage Carriages are concerned, the Act of 5 and 6 Viet., Chapter 79, Sec. 15, provides that both the driver and conductor are liable to a penalty of £5 if the number of passengers at. any One time conveyed in, upon or about the carriage be greater in the whole, or upon Jr about the outside, or in the inside of the carriage, than it is constructed to carry, or than any particulars painted thereon specify. It is instructive to compare the by-laws made by the old London Tramway Ce.s under the powers conferred on them by the Tramways Act of 1870 with those made by the Tube Railways. The by-laws made hy (I think, I am right in stating) the whole of those Tramway Co.s include by-laws prohibiting a person from entering or remaining on any carriage which contained the full number of passengers, a by-law prohibiting the conductor from permitting any passenger beyond the licensed number to enter or remain in any part of the carriage, and a by-law compelling the servants of the company in ((barge of the carriage to enforce the provisions of the by-laws. In framing such by-laws, the Tramway Co.s showed their real desire to prevent the evils of overcrowding, and compelled their servants to enforce the provisions made by them. The omission by the Tube Railways of the reallyoperative by-laws is a matter which, I think, speaks for

The Beard of Trade appear themselves to have recognized the necessity of making provision on the point, and they have actually made provision with reference to the London Connty Council electrical tramways. By section 7 of the London County Council Tramcars Act, 1896, power was given to the Board of Trade to make by-laws or regulations, and on the 26th January, 1899, the Board of Trade made by-laws including one which reads as follows :—" The conductor shall not permit any passenger beyond the licensed number to enter or mount or remain in or upon any part of acarriage, and any person offending against or committing a breach of such by-laws or regulations is liable to a penalty not exceeding 40s. The conductor of each carriage shall enforce or prevent the breach of these by-laws or regulations to the best of his ability." In my opinion, it should not be left for the passengers to take the initiative in preventing overcrowding, It is a matter that ought to be seen te by the company itself, and their guards and conductors should be in the same position as the conductors of omnibuses and tramcars. The police have no jurisdiction over railway companies, and I do not think that the enforcement of any penalty in respect of overcrowding should be left to the " Common Informer." I think that the attention of Parliament ought to be called to this serious question, through the Board of Trade, that authority being one which is ever vigilant in making provision for the safety of persons whether using or working on the railways. In my opinion, the alteration in the law required is an Act prohibiting a, company from carrying a greater number of passengers than those for whom seats are provided, and from permitting the use of any part of the carriage other than that set apart for passengers, and containing penalties on both the company and its servants for infringement. No doubt, if an accident were to happen, through, say, the pressure on the gates and fastenings, caused by the "surging " of passengers upon the conductors' platform-spaces when the trains are rounding clirvi-Ns, the result would be that proper provisions would be taken to prevent the repetition of such a catastrophe; but, surely, it is unreasonable to delay making the necessary safeguarding provisions until such a thing happens!

Answers to Questions Submitted.

therefore, answer the questions submitted to me as fol low :-- Question.--(a) Whether the Metropolitan police have any comparable rights underground in respect of overcrowding to those which they possess in respect of publicpassenger transport on the surface?—Answer: No.

Question,—(b) Whether it is entirely left to the " common informer " to initiate prosecutions in respect, of the overcrowding of underground carriages?—Answer The company have ample power to prosecute, if they choose to exercise it.

Question.-• (c) The precise numbers of passengers who may stand in underground railway and tube carriages, if any such maxima are specifically laid down. in the several

Acts Answer : No such maxima. are laid down.

Question.—(d) What liability to prosecution and fine, if any, exists in respect of passengers who break any Acts or regulations by travelling when they are in excess of the maxima legally allowed P—Answer : Liability to fine not exceeding 10s. for a first offence or £5 for a second or subseq tient offence.

Question,—(e) Whether the Board of Trade or any other Government Department, or the Railway Commissioners, ore required to examine into the conditions which obtain in the underground and tube railways, and particularly in reference to the conveyance of passengers upon the conductors' platforms between the coaches, and the safe construction of these platforms for the purpose P—Answer : The Board of Trade have power to appoint Inspectors, for the purpose of inspecting and of making any inquiry With respect to any railway or into the cause of any railway accident which the Board of Trade are authorized to make or direct, and of enabling the Board of Trade to carry the provisions of a. General Act relating to Railways into execution or for any of suelt purposes.

Question.—(f) Whether Inspectors of the Board of Trade hove ever tested the strength of the gates and their fastenings, in relation to their capacity for resistance against pressure from within, such as may be thrown upon them by the " surging " of passengers upon the conductors' platform-spaces when the trains are rounding a curve ?—Answer: Not that I am aware of.


comments powered by Disqus