The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1901-10-15
''DOubIe .Headers.'


Portsmouth, October 18th, 1901.
To the Editor: Referring to my letter
October 9th in reference to running of
double header freight trains.
A bill was introduced into the Legisla-
ture OF Texas by railway employees in the
year 1900 forbidding the use of more than
one engine in the movement Of a freight
train. Action was taken thereupon by the
Legislature and the question embodied
therein was referred to the State Rail-
road commission for final disposition, with
power to act The decision of the COM
mission in this case as set forth on page
XIII of the Ninth Annual report of the
Railroad Commission of the State of Tex
as for the year 1900 was as below:
'One of these hearings involved the
question of the operation of double
header" freight trains on the railroads
Of the State and consumed more than two
weeks time of the commission in hear
ing evidence and arguments and consid-
ering the whole question before rendering
it's decision, which is as follows
Office of Railroad Commission of Texas,
Austin, Texas. May IA, 1900.
The Railroad Commission of Texas, act
ing under the authority of the act of the
Legislature, approved the goth day of
February, 1900, entitled, can Act author
izng the Railroad Commission of the
State of Texas to investigate into the
running and operating by any railroad in
this State, of more than one locomotive
on any one train at the same time, and
to authorize them to regulate or forbid
such practice either on all or a part of
such railroads, and to prescribe penalty
for the violation of the Commissions or
der; and to define an abuse, and to pro-
vide that railway employees shall not be
held to assume the risk of injury when
engaged in the operation of trains pro-
PEELED by two or more engines" and hav-
ing received a number of petitions from
railroad conductors, engineers and fire.
men, requesting such investigation, gave
notice of hearing by the commission on
that question, and having heard and con-
sidered the evidence in the case, and
having read and considered the written
arguments of counsel in favor of and
against the rror--' "~ors. it
is the unanimous opinion of this COM
mission that the evidence does not show
that the use of more than one engine
to propel train of cars causes an I'M
reasonable degree of hazard to the en-
ployes on them. They also find from the
evidence that there is no more, and per-
haps less, danger to such employees on
trains by more than one locomotive than
on trains propelled by single engine
They also find from the evidence that
there is a decided economy in the cost
of transportation in many cases in the
use Of more than one engine on train
of cars, and that the facilities of trans
portation are thereby greatly improved;
and unless some injury to the public
should result from the use of more than
one engine on train of cars, they believe
it would be unwise for this commission
to assume to control the management
of trains of cars.
The application of the petitioners is
not granted.
JNO. H. REAGAN, Chairman,
L. ]. STOREY,
ALLISON MAYFIELD,
Commissioners.
Attest
E. r. MLEAN, Secretary
In explanation of the action of the rail-
way employees l beg o>say that the sole
reason therefor was that the running of
double headers increased the tons hauled
number of trains run and the number
of men employed. / beg to add further,
that when the light engines employed in
the practice of running double headers
on some of the railroads in Texas, were
replaced with heavy engines weighing APP
proximately 10000 pounds on drivers and
the practice of dunning double headers
on such roads was in consequence dis
continued, the objection on the part OF
enginemen to running double headers
was absolutely withdrawn, because 1T was
found that the use of heavy engines IN
place of light engines run as double head
ers reduced the number of enginemen
employed. When a further attempt was
made by trainmen to secure legislative
action against the running of double
headers, the enginemen absolutely with
held their support thereto, thus demon
strating the correctness Of the state
ments above made.
1t will not be claimed, l think, that
the Texas Railroad Commission in rem
dering this decision was influenced there
in by any desire to favor the railroads
as it is commonly understood that it was
not created and does not exist for the
purpose of assisting them.
As a matter of fairness to us, and in
order that the public may be fully adj
vised, l beg to ask that you will kindly
publish this letter in your paper.
Yours, very truly,
J. M. BARR,
First Vice. President Genl Manager.
The one great virtue of Burnett's yanil.
10 Eyfro ic fu ic vanilla