The San Francisco call., 1905-08-21

LONDON, Aug. 20.-It is always as
sumed that railway travelling in England
is very much safer than in the United
States Englishmen soace themselves
with this reflection when grudgingy ad
mittiLg that the comforts and convent
ences of passengers are far better at
tended to on American trains. When
ever a big railroad accident in America
is reported in the English papers, edit
tcrial writer's jubilantly expatiate on the
vastly superior proteclon to. life and
limb which the English system affords.
The figures which are cited to- prove 1t
are supposed to be indisputabe. They
are commonly accepted as conclusive in
America, even by railway officials there.
And yet, after careful investigation, 1T
is easy to prove that this view is based
on an entire misconception Of the facts
with regard to English railway casual
ties. On any fair basis of comparison
railway travelling is actually safer i'll
America than in England. The statistics
which are supposed to afford such over
whelming proof to the contrary are based
on reports of the British Board of Trade,
i'm which figures are distorted in fashion
that would cause the most expert manip-
ulator of election returns i'll America to
turn green with envy.
STATISTICS UNRELIABLE.
British railways last year killed one
person for every eighteen and quarter
miles of track in the United Kingdom.
In the United States there was one person
killed for every, eighty-four and half
miles of track. This Shows that the rail-
ways of the United States are, roughly
speaking, four and half times safer than
those on the British Isles. Ii the COM
parison be made on the basis of the num-
ber of passengers carried on the rail-
ways of the two countries, the result is
still greatly in favor of the American
railways. In 1901, for instance, one per-
sen was killed for every 900 carried Oh
English railways, though the Board of
Trade reports actually made it appear
that not one passenger was killed on the
whole system by a railway accident
During the same year there was only one
person killed for every 2,129,3Sz carried on
American railways
Through the courtesy of high official
of the British Government | was per-
mitted TO SEE the preliminary report of
the Board of Trade statistics giving the
numbers of those who were killed or in
jured on British railways turing 1901. 1t
showed that the railway death roll last
year amounted to .15S and hat 1919 per-
sons we're more or less grievousy i'm
jured.
If the report had been allowed to go forth
without alteration everybody wound Know
the true situation, and little would be
heard about the alleged marvellous 1fn-
munity from danger enjoyed BY those
who tra-el In the antiquated, stuffy and
incommodious carriages of the British
railway companies. But before it could
be issued to Parliament, 1t had to Under
go some %dndrods changes at the hands
of expert statistical manipulators. have
seen the advance sheets of that report.
The original compilation has been cut
up into sections and the casualties. dis
tributed under various headings, devised,
no doubt, to relieve the railroads Of as
much responsibility as possible for them
and fool the public, and in the process
many of the killed and injured disappear
altogether.
FIGURES DOCTORED.
In the introduction this statement is
made: THE danger of railway travelling
has been reduced t6 such a point that in
1904 the chances against passenger be-
ing killed In The course of a given jour
ney were more than 200, 900 900 to l." That
statement will be quoted far and wide
as proof of the wondrous vigilance and
efficiency of British railway officials in
safeguarding the lives of passengers. 1t
will be compared with the mortuary rec
ords of American railways with results
overwhelming in favor Of the English
system of tfAnsft. But the statement is
absufdly false. 1t is based on .doctored''
figures. 1t is amazing that high sal
aried British official should have the au-
dacity to make it, and to ask Parliament
and the British public to believe 1t, when
the same report in which 1t appears fur
nishes conclusive proof Of it's mendacity
"A foundation fof.it is obtained by pro-
cess of elimination, which makes II APP
pear, as set forth in one of the tables,
that only six passengers we're killed
thru,,gh train accidents and only these
six ale allowed TO count in reaching the
comforting conclusion that a passenger in
an English railway train runs only one
chance in O0,O000O0 of being killed. But
there were 109 otner passengers killed. ac-
cording to the official report, by "acci-
dents from other causes" Nine of them,
for instance, lost their lives through 'spas-
senger trains or parts of passenger trains
leaving the rails Thirty-three were
killed by failing out of carriages during
the running of trains This is due to
the subdivision of cars British rail-
WAYS into small compartments with
doors on either side. Railway attend
ants bang them to as trains leave the
stations, but often they fail to close them
securely, and the luckless individual
who chances to lean against one
that hasn't been fastened finds
in every y9O00,000 runs the risk of being
killed in this way on an English railway.
But he doesn't figure among those who
are killed by train accidents" " What
are vaguely termed "other accidents ac-
count for the death of twenty-one of the
excluded 109.
The same method is adopted III dealing