I wish this book was in more presentable condition but I’m glad it survived the years. https://archive.org/details/steamboatdisaste00howl
One of the reasons the railroad unions developed was to provide insurance for their members. Railroaders of that era couldn't get insurance through regular companies. The job was too risky.
Jeff
Did the railroads in 1900 have any type of compensation for the families of workers killed on the line, like a widows and children's fund? Or was it just "Sorry about the bad luck. You can pick up his last paycheck on Friday."?
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Another time is truly another place.
Writer/Director James Marsh's first feature, WISCONSIN DEATH TRIP, is an intimate, shocking and sometimes hilarious account of the disasters that befell one small town in Wisconsin during the final decade of the 19th century. The film is inspired by Michael Lesy’s book of the same name which was first published in 1973. Lesy discovered a striking archive of black and white photographs in the town of Black River Falls dating from the 1890’s and married a selection of these images to extracts from the town’s newspaper from the same decade. The effect was surprising and disturbing. The town of Black River Falls seems gripped by some peculiar malaise and the weekly news is dominated by bizarre tales of madness, eccentricity and violence amongst the local population. Suicide and murder are commonplace. People in the town are haunted by ghosts, possessed by devils and terrorized by teenage outlaws and arsonists......
http://www.wisconsindeathtrip.com/about.html
I read the book Wisconsin Death Trip years ago. The book evidentally inspired a film. One of the stories I remember reading was of a buggy nailed at a grade crossing in a blizzard. The crew did not know they had hit the buggy until they got to the next station.
The dead buggy driver and and the buggy were plastered frozen across the locomotive's smoke box. The book is a classic. I must someday get a copy the Wisconsin Death Trip.
Victrola1Carnage was common.
And extended well beyond railroads. From what I've read, exploding boilers in lumbering operations (including "on site" sawmills) wasn't exactly rare... Of course, those sawmills were often out in the woods and probably weren't maintained to the same standards as their urban cousins.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
I would suggest reading this book for how things were during the late 19th and early 20th century. "Workin' on the Railroad, Reminiscences from the Age of Steam" (Not to be confused with the similarly titled book "Working on the Railroad" by Brian Solomon.)
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4774539-workin-on-the-railroad
Carnage was common.
I was scanning microfilms from the 1880s of a local newspaper in a town still along a main railroad line. Almost every two, or three days you would read about a railroad employee killed, or maimed. Most were brakemen.
Early death itself was a more commonly reported item.
Farmer found dead by his well of natural causes. Several children in household die of diptheria. Team runs away on Main Street killing driver when carriage flipped over. Industrial accident kills local workman leaving a wife and five children. Etc.
Patent medicine ads claimed to cure everything from syphillis to tuberculosis to cancer. Patent medicine ads appeared to be no small source of the newspaper's profit base.
Artifical limb ads were not uncommon. Besides Civil War amputees, perhaps the town being a division point on the railroad provided a market.
The Grim Reaper's early arrival was everywhere more common than today. This may have made people more accepting of the Grim Reaper riding the rails.
ACY Schlimm, I don't pretend to know the history of the alcoholism-cirrhosis link. I understood that it was suspected for a long time, but not absolutely proven and accepted until a few decades ago. Something like the cigarettes-lung cancer link. I'm perfectly willing to accept your version. Tom
Schlimm, I don't pretend to know the history of the alcoholism-cirrhosis link. I understood that it was suspected for a long time, but not absolutely proven and accepted until a few decades ago. Something like the cigarettes-lung cancer link. I'm perfectly willing to accept your version.
Tom
You are correct, Tom, as the precise mechanism is still not completely understood. 40% of cirrhosis fatalities are caused by alcohol abuse, however. It only takes 10 years of abuse to start the inevitable.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
I would suspect that alcoholism and its effects might well have fallen into the realm of "normal," much like the missing digits of switchmen during the era of link and pin.
As Balt noted, alcohol was very much a part of the picture for railroaders.
Too - media then and media now are two different animals. A diagnosis of cirrhosis may not have made the splash it would today.
ACY Many years ago in a library I found records of life insurance payments to survivors of deceased railroaders for a period around 1900-1901. I don't recall details, but I was struck by the great number of men whose cause of death was listed as cirrhosis of the liver. I don't know whether the medical dignostic expertise of the day was accurate enough that we can take this at face value, but I think it shows that there was probably an awful lot of alcohol abuse going on. I believe the link between alcoholism and cirrhosis wasn't proved until later, although it may have been suspected. Tom
Many years ago in a library I found records of life insurance payments to survivors of deceased railroaders for a period around 1900-1901. I don't recall details, but I was struck by the great number of men whose cause of death was listed as cirrhosis of the liver. I don't know whether the medical dignostic expertise of the day was accurate enough that we can take this at face value, but I think it shows that there was probably an awful lot of alcohol abuse going on. I believe the link between alcoholism and cirrhosis wasn't proved until later, although it may have been suspected.
The condition was first described by Hippocrates in the 5th C. BCE and named in 1819. The connection with alcohol abuse has been noted for at least 200 years, if not longer.
The first 25 years of railroading were relatively free of accidents with probably no more than 50 passengers killed. But it all changed in 1853 when a series of major railroad accidents killed 234 passengers.
That was a turning point that led to a prolonged period of gruesome train wrecks with large numbers of dead and injured which became something of a national scandal, and did not abate until around 1900 with the application of sufficient safety measures, and improved plant.
Many of the worst train wrecks during this period were made famous, and are well known today. Many more were documented in various publications which can be found in historical archives. Still many more became lost history, particularly in the case of freight train wrecks.
Author Robert Reed in his book, Train Wrecks, attributes the sudden onset of these disasters in 1853 to the fact that railroads were cheaply built with the thinking that improvements could come later as the business grew. But business took off and railroads expanded rapidly after 1850, often ahead of necessary adequate capital. The entire physical plant was thoroughly inadequate for the sudden increase in tonnage, speed, train length, and number of trains. Additionally, government financing through land grants was based only on mileage of track completed and not on quality of track.
Mr. Reed cites the statistic that in 1890, there were 6,335 people killed and 35,362 people injured on American railroads.
Murphy SidingI wonder if alcohol use/abuse in 1900 affected railroad operations and safety much. i've read where alcoholism was considered to be quite a problem back then.
When I hired out it was considered 3 things were needed for a railroader - nicotene, cafeene and alcohol.
Alcoholism was a prolem in the 60's - recreational pharmacuticals became more of a problem starting in the 70's to rival alcohol.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
I wonder if alcohol use/abuse in 1900 affected railroad operations and safety much. i've read where alcoholism was considered to be quite a problem back then.
Maybe in a generation or three from now people will say the same about the carnage on our roads. Some 30 thousand people die each year in traffic/highway accidents.
A century ago life was harder.. much harder. Injuries and death were a given in many vocations, if one of the many incurable illnesses of the day didn't get you first. As bad as the risk of death and injury on the railroad was, mining and construction were far worse, and in that context railroading was seen as a relatively safe good paying way to earn a living.
Even in our own lifetimes we've seen marked improvements in keeping people safe. Reflective vests, hardhats, and safety eye wear are a relatively recent development. In our grandparents' and great grandparents' time people were pretty much left on their own to cope with work related losses, including death and injury.
There were many contributing factors. Among them was the fact that the Safety Appliances Act wasn't adopted until 1909, nine years after the year you cite, and over 80 years after the opening of the first US railroad. The Act mandated uniform locations and standards for safety equipment such as ladders, grab irons, etc. Before that, some cars had wooden ladder rungs and stiles, which were prone to failure; and some of these were nailed in place, rather than bolted! Janney knuckle couplers were an important development, of course. So were air brakes. There were (and are) lots of ways to be hurt on the railroad. Safety begins with attitude, and is enhanced by rules and equipment improvements. But improvements are always gradual, and the rulebook is only changed as a result of bitter and bloody experience. It always takes time, and people die in the meantime.
Here is an account from the Railroad Gazette that gets into this area:
November 1896
1st, 1 a.m., on Baltimore & Ohio, at Philson, Pa., eastbound freight train 74 descending a steep grade became uncontrollable and collided with westbound freight No. 95, making a very bad wreck, four engines and 56 loaded cars being wrecked. Two trainmen were injured and 3 tramps were killed and 4 injured. The first 17 cars of the train had air-brakes, and the trainmen say that they were properly coupled and tested at Sand Patch, but on passing the summit the engineman discovered, though too late, that the valve was closed between the tender and the first car. The trainmen tell a thrilling story of this wreck.
The train left Sand Patch shortly after midnight. Sixteen cars next to the engine were equipped with air-brakes. Before starting into the tunnel, at the summit, which is a mile in length, the hand-brakes on three cars on the rear end were set. Two more were set after the brakemen noticed that the train was getting beyond control. By the time the east end of the tunnel had been reached, the heavily loaded cars had attained such a frightful velocity that it was impossible to check their speed on the wet rails. The brakemen and Conductor Harbaugh clung to the tops of the cars, making their way toward the rear end on all fours. Seeing that it was impossible to save the train, Flagman Geiger cut off the caboose two miles west of Bowman. Conductor Harbaugh and Brakeman Mickey uncoupled the three cars next to the caboose and stopped them. Brakeman Cornell stuck to his post on the front end of the train until the light in his lantern went out. Then he went back over the train with Fireman Owens. The collision came before they had gone two car lengths.
Engineer Zane hung to the steps of his engine for four miles. He said after the wreck that he had fully made up his mind to jump at Bowman Station, but his heart failed him, and he climbed back into the cab, resigned to meet what he thought was certain death. Bowman was the passing point for train 74 with westbound train 95. Engineer Zane knew that he was sure to crash into the ponderous engine hauling No. 95 up the mountain within a few seconds, and he hung to the whistle-lever until he saw the glimmer of its headlight. He scrambled over the tender and reached the first boxcar before the two engines came together. He knew nothing after this until Friday morning. Brakeman Cornell and Fireman Owens were likewise hurled from the top of a car over a hill to the left of the track. Both were severely cut and bruised, but managed to get among the wrecked cars first and help out the injured.
The force of the collision sent the eastbound engine plowing through the westbound train a distance of 300 yards. The wreckage was piled into a miniature mountain, and the track for 300 yards was torn as if dynamite had been exploded every foot of the way.
Engineer Kauffman of No. 95, jumped as soon as he saw the headlight of the other engine.
…Immediately following the collision was an explosion. Several cars on train 74 were loaded with flour. The supposition is that is was the flour dust that exploded. The report awoke the residents of Philson Station and sent up a cloud of milky whiteness.
The cries of the injured tramps attracted the attention of the trainmen as soon as they regained their presence of mind, and the work of rescue began. A large number of these gentry were beating their way over the mountain on train 74. There were about fifteen of them in a boxcar about the middle of the train.
Murphy Siding jeffhergert If you read some of the stories, fiction or real memoirs, from that era by, train crews felt lucky if all the air equipped cars were next to the engine. Jeff Why is that?
jeffhergert If you read some of the stories, fiction or real memoirs, from that era by, train crews felt lucky if all the air equipped cars were next to the engine. Jeff
If you read some of the stories, fiction or real memoirs, from that era by, train crews felt lucky if all the air equipped cars were next to the engine.
Why is that?
The more air equipped cars next to the engine, the better the chances that the engineer could control speed or stop the train using the air brakes. The brakemen might not have to "deckorate" (I've seen a few different spellings) or go out on the roof walks and manually apply/release hand brakes. Made life much easier, especially in wintery conditions.
Add to all that a lot of just plain unsafe practices. I saw a video a while back of an engine change at a passenger station. A man was in between the tender and the first car even before the train came to a stop, and the engine was broken away almost immediately.
Even such practices as removing roof walks and lowering brake wheels so one doesn't have to climb to the top of the car to set/release brakes can contribute to a reduction of injuries.
Most, if not all, of those practices are now covered in the rules and regs now - as in "don't do that." Clearly written in blood.
SALfan Not trying to be a pain in the butt, but it's the Janney coupler. It was invented by Eli (I think) Janney, formerly a major in the Confederate army.
Not trying to be a pain in the butt, but it's the Janney coupler. It was invented by Eli (I think) Janney, formerly a major in the Confederate army.
Back in the day, the Air Pump, Reservoirs and the Brake Stand were on the locomotive and 'Air' could only go so far back as there were Trainlines, Glad Hands, Aux Reservoirs and Brake Equipments to avail the new technology, ergo, it would be to everyones' advantage to have as many or all Air Brake cars next to Locomotive, with Non-Airbrake Cars behind.
This freed up Brakesmen to concentrate on Non-Air cars, and would be almost pointless to have them Hand Brake an 'Air' car if it could be Air Braked on Air nearer to the front.
Special Instructions were still in effect on certain Divisions into 1950's to have Brakemen on top of train descending even with Diesels in event Dynamic not effective or other issues re Air, to reply instantly to the 'Down Brakes' whistle signal if required.
Not all Road Diesels had Pressure Maintaining when I Hired On, but, those Units were meant to be kept out of the Mountains.
D/B could be 'Sketchy' or not at all in mixed-builder combinations. Rear Headlight could NOT always be trainlined back to rear unit with mixed builders.
Locomotive Engineers had to be really cautious handling long trains once the Diesels came.
You could sense when he WAS worried if he had a hold of it, or not.
Thank You.
While link and pin couplers and a lack of air brakes were two factors accounting for a large number of deaths and injuries, there were also many people killed and injured in train wrecks in general, and they were caused by a stunningly large assortment of factors all having to do with speed and tonnage growing faster than the modernization of the physical plant throughout the last decades of the 1800s. I have some monthly tabulation describing the details of train wrecks published by the Railroad Gazette in the 1880-1900 period, and it is amazing to see how many things could go wrong.
Recall seeing one of those '100 years ago' snippets in either Railway Age or Progressive Railroading several years ago - that level of workers killed and injured sound about right for the time. I believe that even though air brakes and the janey couplers were the 'new' standard, older equipment had 'grandfather rights' and were still in use and had to be handled in the old manner. If you see knuckles from this period of time - the knuckle will have a hole down through the tip and a cut out mid way in the face of the knuckle to permit coupling with link and pin equipment. Non-air brake equipped cars would still have to be braked by brakemen with brake clubs dancing along the roof tops of the cars.
The law requiring automatic couplers and air brakes was passed in 1893. Full compliance took a few years. I believe I've seen a date in 1907 when, at least one railroad, wouldn't accept in interchange an unequipped car.
I read some statistics that said in 1900 there were 2500 railroad workers killed on the job and 39,000 injured. That works out to about 7 deaths and 107 injuries per day! I thought that by 1900 the era of brakemen riding the top of trains had passed. By then, weren't the Janney couplers in wide use? Was there any one thing in 1900 that would account for those types of statistics? And railroad jobs were considered good, sought after employment?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.